The Poor Choicers over at the CBC’s Great Canadian Wish contest on Facebook look like they are going to win, but we’re not giving up until July 1. It appears that they pulled in enough pro-abort Americans to jump ahead in the contest. They certainly don’t see anything wrong with it.

Anti-choice groups in the lead on CBC’s Facebook stupid thing Jun. 13th, 2007 at 11:54 AM
Do people know about the CBC Facebook thing? I’ve not read a ton about it because I tend to ignore things that seem to involve making social change through joining facebook groups, BUT. BUT. The Top Wishes are being written about and reported on, and right now they are: Top Wishes By Membership Abolish Abortion in Canada: 2996 For a spiritual revival in our nation: 1374 I wish that Canada would remain pro-choice: 1349 Restore the Traditional Definition of Marriage: 946 It’s pretty gross. I’d like to bump the social conservatives down on the list, so I’m asking folks to to join the Pro-Choice group. I don’t care if you’re in Canada. I don’t know if Facebook or the CBC cares. And pass around the link. I think it’s stupid to have to put any effort into things like online polls and petitions, but I think the optics on this are bad, and I think it matters. Only a bit, of course, but it’s only a bit of effort to sign on as a supporter of the pro-choice group. And also lots of other progressive groups, too, please. (Source)


Despite who eventually wins, the contest has been a wonderful success and a strong encouragment for the pro-life community in Canada. It has certainly inspired me to focus my attention even more on the abortion issue in this country. Our efforts and the networking within our tight-knit community is going to pay off in spades in the near future.

Here are a few reasons why we won this battle and will eventually win the war:

1) Got the Devil on the Run: It goes without saying that it took the pro-aborts a lot of effort to pull in their numbers (a good swath no doubt from the U.S., judging by the sporadic jumps in the last few days). This means that, despite what the CBC and the death peddlers say, abortion is hardly a “settled issue” in Canada. If it were, they wouldn’t have had to sweat so much in getting their vote out. In point of fact, according to an Environics poll conducted in October, 2006, 64% of Canadians want to ban abortion after six months. Hardly Judy Rebick country.

This scenario reminds me of an old race horse who manages to squeak by one last victory over the up-and-coming buck who is hungry for the top prize. After the race, both horses look at each other and know that their respective fortunes are sure to reverse in the future. The pro-aborts might not know it, but they are that old horse – coming up on 40 years in 2009 to be exact. It’s just a matter of time until it’s time to put the old mare out to pasture.

2) Incoherence 101: Unlike the pro-life vote where the near unanimous understanding is that life begins at conception, the pro-abort side is all over the map. They want “choice”, but they don’t have any kind of consensus what “choice” means. Whether it’s the term of the abortion, the sex selection of the abortion, or an abortion for sexual orientation purposes, they are simply a tower of babel. You might even see – even among the fundamentalists who voted in the contest – a good 10% who have the small decency to wince at an abortion past 6 months. Regardless of what the zealots might think, however, we know that the majority of Canadians want some protection for the unborn According to the same poll cited above, 54% want to ban abortion after three months!

Why is this relevant? Simply to point out that for the pro-abort wish: “I wish that Canada would remain pro-choice” means different things to different people. Therefore, it is quite useless in terms of assessing in what circumstance Canadians think abortion should be legal. On the other hand, the pro-life wish is very specific and direct: “Abolish abortion in Canada.”

3) The Pro-Abort Wish Necessarily leaves rooms for exceptions. According to the information section of the wish…

Abortion is an issue concerning a private individual and their body. Canada’s
legal system is based on the concept that individuals are rational, self-interested dignified human beings which is reflected in the Morgantaler case. In addition, given that a fetus is not considered to be a child until the second or third trimester there can be no claim that it’s murder. This is a forum who disagree with the alternative wish of making abortion illegal. You don’t have to be pro-abortion to be pro-choice, agreeing with pro-choice means that a woman has the right to choose what happens to her own body, even if you wouldn’t do it yourself. Source

The fetus is not considered to be a child until the second or third trimester? It seems that Ms. Van Houten, the author of the wish, needs to get her facts straight on abortion in Canada. There is currently NO legal protection for unborn children in this country until they have been completely separated from their mother. That means it’s open season right up to the moment of birth.

So, if you were a person who was voting to “add support” to this wish, you might agree with abortion up to the second trimester but not after. The way the wish is framed suggests that voting for the wish allows for restrictions on abortion. That kinda favours our side, more than theirs, n’est pas?

4) We are the future, demographically speaking.

Two rhetorical questions here:

Dot a) If we were to estimate the number of children each side was expected to have in the course of their lives, what side do you think would win?

Dot b) How will this affect the laws concerning abortion in Canada?

c) Connect Dot a —> Dot b. Draw picture. This is the future.

5) Abortion is a dead end for a society – There will be very severe socio-economic consequences for a dying populution. Canada is a dying nation. It averages 1.48 children per couple. Replacement level is 2.2. When health care costs balloon, labour shortages result, and pension liabilities fly through the roof, the only thing that will save a nation is a healthy birth rate. If things get bad enough, and according to demographers and StatsCan, it will, the pressure is going to rise to curtail abortions. Count on it. Money talks, honey.

6) Science & Technology. One word – sonograms.

This is a picture of a seventeen week old unborn child – the same child the author of the so-called “pro-choice” wish thinks is protected under the law and therefore would not be “murdered” (as she says).

7) Abortion has lead to the enslavement of women around the world because of so-called “sex selected” abortions. The dearth of girls in China results in a ‘marriage squeeze’ in young adulthood: too few women for the number of men wanting wives (Tuljapurkar, Li, and Feldman 1995; Das Gupta and Li 1999). Does this shortage of potential wives raise the status of women? In some Chinese cities and some rural areas today, shortage of wives has raised their status at least with regard to mate choice. Poor, rural and illiterate men are disproportionately the losers in the competition for available wives. For millennia, however, China has had a major shortage of women while both men and women have tried to practise universal marriage, and yet this extreme dearth of women never raised the overall status of females in Chinese society. Today, the dearth of potential brides leads to abductions, rape, forced marriages, and bondage of hundreds of thousands of women; the status of kidnapped women is lowered by the shortage of females, not raised (Economist 1998; MacLeod 1998; Rosenthal 2001).

Even the most dull feminist does not want to see other women in the world enslaved because of her selfish choices and pro-abort philosophy that she is propagting around the world. One would hope that the light dawns on them.

FD Thread

____________________________
Join Social Conservative United’s Facebook Group and get connected!

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2508896268

9 Responses to “Why the Poor Choicers Will Lose”
  1. SUZANNE says:

    Nice post.

    I’m stealing that graphic from you. :D

  2. John Pacheco says:

    go for it.

  3. Anonymous says:

    When you grow a uterus and are capable of becoming pregnant, then you can have a say in what I do with mine. Until then you can kindly piss off.

  4. John Pacheco says:

    Thanks for such an intelligent answer.

    It’s not your body that I particularly concerned about. It’s about the other body that you find no problem in dismembering.

  5. Anonymous says:

    You seem an effective advocate, this is a good thing we need all the people we can get to stir change in this world.

    However, if you really care about the well being of children in our society I think you should spend more time on the ones that are already born. Children’s social services is one of the most underfunded agencies in our country, and there are a lot of suffering kids RIGHT NOW. I don’t see a single wish in the top 100 about that.

    Also, by outlawing abortion it will put even more strain on the current system.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Oh right, it’s dismemberment when it’s nothing more than a few cells…

    What if that blob of cells was born, grew up, became pro-choice, and one day had to make the choice of whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term? I guess, by then, you would not be “particularly concerned about” it.

    You’re such a misogynist, you disgust me.

  7. John Pacheco says:

    >>Oh right, it’s dismemberment when it’s nothing more than a few cells…

    Nothing more than a few cells? Obviously the blinders have not come off.

    Wake up, madam:

    http://www.prolifeamerica.com/4D-Ultrasound-pictures/

    >>What if that blob of cells was born, grew up, became pro-choice, and one day had to make the choice of whether or not to carry a pregnancy to term? I guess, by then, you would not be “particularly concerned about” it.

    + Huh? No one who is truly pro-life is truly unconcerned about the mother. All we are saying is that you don’t show your genuine concern by killing a child. There are other ways.

    >>You’re such a misogynist, you disgust me.

    You need to grow up, stop parrotting feminist twaddle and learn to think and see for yourself.

    It’s a child not a choice.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Sorry, I’ve seen those pictures of the bloody tissues juxtaposed with nickels. How would you like it if I showed you a picture of a woman’s corpse after she bled to death from attempting to abort herself in a motel room?

    You are pro-pregnancy, not pro-life. And you need to take a good look at yourself and recognize your male privilege.

  9. John Pacheco says:

    >>Sorry, I’ve seen those pictures of the bloody tissues juxtaposed with nickels.

    + Sorry. But you need an education on fetal development.

    http://www.webmd.com/content/tools/1/slide_fetal_dev.htm

    So, you’ve got no problem with abortion at 36 weeks then? Is that a nickle size for you? Some nickle. I bet that’s very difficult to carry around in your pocket.

    >>How would you like it if I showed you a picture of a woman’s corpse after she bled to death from attempting to abort herself in a motel room?

    + I would feel the same way if she simply took out a gun and shot herself in the head for some other reason. Sad. Blaming laws protecting an unborn child for an act of ***self inflicted violence*** is pretty absurd.

    >>You are pro-pregnancy, not pro-life.

    + Yep. That’s it. You sure make a lot of sense there. Why is it that life only starts when a feminist says it does, irrespective of the independent biological reality that we must all respect?

    >>And you need to take a good look at yourself and recognize your male privilege.

    + Oh, I recognize my male privilege alright. I have four beautiful young daugthers and hope to have many more. They will be representing the new look of feminism in Canada. You’ll be old, barren and so will the scourge of your ideology in about 20 years time.

    The problem with your side is that it has not understood that hoaring around has huge consequences for both men and women. Or are you completely ignorant of the consequences of abortion as well?

  10.  
Trackbacks
  1.  
Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>