« Friday Night - Seven Days in May | Main | Margaret Thatcher (1925-2013) »

Monday, April 08, 2013


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


"when a baby is breathing, crying and fully out of the womb it is a human being."

Is it? My dog is no less human than an infant and I'm not granting rights to it. I don't know where to place the cutoff but it's not the prerogative of the pro-choice side to prove it's inside the mother. It's the anti-choicers prerogative to place it at birth. As ever, all anti-choice arguments boil down to emotional reactions and 'gut feeling'.


"It's not the prerogative of the pro-choice side to prove it's inside the mother."

If that statement is true, then there is no, and there was never a 'cutoff' in the mind of the pro-choice 'side'. Since labelling your opponents emotional bigots is an effective way to silence the required adult discussion about this, we'll never know.

The Great Waldo Pepper

"My dog is no less human than an infant"

What kind of idiocy is this? Of course a human infant is infinitely more human than a dog. Only a monster would think otherwise.


But the situation isn't one of 'free debate'. The situation is that those who debate, on both sides, want one conclusion and that conclusion to be made into law. That's why Harper doesn't want the subject debated in parliament because parliament exists to make conclusions from a debate and transform that conclusion into a law.

As for the comment about a 'dog being a human', that's biological and moral nonsense. Both are living beings but beyond that, there is no comparison.

And since when does a human have the ultimate authority to 'grant rights' to another human? We humans are born with 'natural rights' and I think that the statement of 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' expresses those natural rights. No human has authority over natural rights.

John Chittick


Parliament doesn't always have to function as a dictatorship of the majority party. The issue could be raised as a private member's bill with an accompanying free vote. If the poll is accurate, there is a clear majority across all party lines, that if translated into legislation could amend current law for example, to restrict, de-fund, or outlaw third trimester and sex-determined abortions.

When the eco-feminist media witches mount their brooms and circle the PM all he has to say is that he takes no position other than to free-up his party members to vote according to their consciences. He's not supposed to be their eunuch is he?


“both sides, want one conclusion and that conclusion to be made into law”

That’s exactly why this is such a political third rail. Because we have the most extreme position on abortion in the world (we have no law at all) therefore any new law will infuriate both sides ...it will be too much new law for one side or not enough for the other.

Wente had good advice for PMSH


The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

June 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30