Monday, May 17, 2010

Cultural War: Abortion Funding, Overpopulation Myth

The angry, vile abortion debate that most (I believe) Canadians hoped and believed had been put to rest 20 years ago is back on the national political agenda. And it’s there because Stephen Harper and his Conservatives want it there. They’ve decided that pandering to the religious right is good politics.


No one seriously believes that the Harper government cares deeply about whether desperately poor women, who already have more children than they can raise, have — or do not have — access to safe abortions.


The only person who could preserve that peace is Prime Minister Harper, who controls (or tries to) everything within his ken. Harper could call off his dogs. -The Record Editorial May 17, 2010
Why are some people preoccupied with talking about abortion, the "March For Life" is an annual event that has taken place in the public square for years without any coverage. Liberal and Conservative MPs attend and share their views. Why the attention now?
Is tax funded abortions in Africa worthy of debate for months in the mainstream? Is providing tax funded abortion going to save the most lives should be the highest priority of every government?  Is it the responsibility of Canadians to demand Africans stop having babies as part of our aid? Is Africa over-populated with too many Africans?


So if overpopulation is not the most pressing problem why the obsession by some in demanding it we fund abortion in Africa at the exclusion of debating other ideas or solutions to saving lives?
Tax-payers money strategically for  widest benefit:
Lack of access to modern toilets and proper sanitation is a major contributor to water-borne diseases that have killed an estimated 4.5 million children under the age of five in the last three years.
This has taken place with the work in Afghanistan. A small group turned it into a witchunt to smear the government. They don't discuss reconstruction, the exit plan. Why the obsession and refusal to discuss a larger number of alternative ideas or solutions?
Has this Government has increased Internation Aid during a recession, has demanded the NGO's become more accountable in the delivery of their services?
Why the open hostility about this Government not caring about the poorest? Does the author have a political bias against the Conservatives being in power?
Development experts, both inside and outside Canada, tend to agree that Canada is likely to be able to make a real difference in three areas: governance, health care systems, and education (Greenhill 2005). -How Canada Can Improve Its Development Aid
The priorities of this government seem to be around making sure the tax dollars are well spent and we save more lives in Africa and elsewhere. I don't understand why it is fair comment to suggest this government through its increased funding to international aid is being targeted and branded as a danger to women and children by the media.
I believe the author gets it very wrong and allows his personal views to make factually incorrect statements. I don't share your fears of some right wing religious danger in Canada or the United States or Africans are having too many babies.
The author suggests Harper calls off his dogs. Perhaps we should ask the author to identify these dogs. Are they trying to silence the "social conservatives" from participating in our democracy?
Does our Charter not extend to everyone? This is not a healthy debate of ideas or different priorities. Geoffery Stevens is not adding insight or facts for debate of those different priorities.
It looks like he is interested in shutting down the debate or conversation through fearmongering. It won't work.
Please let Mr. G. Stevens know you don't share his views. I don't.
Contact Information
Geoffery Stevens
Email: gstevens@wlu.ca
geoffstevens@sympatico.ca
Phone: home office 519-621-4822 ext.519-884-0710 x 2946
Other Phone: 519-241-8859 if urgent
Fax: 519-621-3990
Enhanced by Zemanta

4 comments:

Ardvark said...

Lefties are all for womens "rights", right up until they reach the borders of Islamic countries.

CanadianSense said...

This is getting tiresome to creepy how the MSM are calling this government anti-women and racist over different priorities.

From my point of view the pillow cases should be worn by the left-socialist-marxist proponents.

They want less brown babies, increase in costs, taxation in used of fossil fuel, increased regulation and control of food.

That will make the poorest even poorer.

Handouts are not working, we need to change our funding so they can become self-reliant.

I don't see the evidence of the perpetual motion machine or benefit of funding a nation in conflict for 100 years.

We need to be selective and give our charity to best chance for success.

HitEleven said...

Overpopulation isn't the main problem with reproductive health...it's the transmission of STDs, particularly AIDS.

This is why W. Bush's pushiness with abstinence-only education was so harmful -- it's ineffective and unrealistic.

At least the Conservatives will be promoting and funding contraception. I don't agree with them about the abortion funding, but, as you say, the "letting the dogs out" comment is carelessly alarmist.

CanadianSense said...

I disagree, conflict of burning crops, killing opposition, destroying a free press, education, extorting billions by the corrupt regimes is the largest problem.

If we don't have the political will to stop the corruption the aid does not get to the people in need. The medicine ends up sold by those in power.

Setting up benchmarks for the NGO's in delivering the aid is key. Measuring real progress. The NGO's are the groups that administer the aid.
See Oil for Iraq etc as a problem with greed/corruption.