“These terminated babies had problems, defects … doctors said they were going to die anyway. Sure, I think it should have happened on its own, and maybe the Down’s (syndrome) babies would have lived decent lives … but some people don’t want babies that aren’t perfect and `normal.’” – Employee of BC Women’s Hospital (BC Catholic: April 19, 1999)
Left wing narcissist bloggers are in a literal tizzy over the debate, raging in Canada, over abortion.
This “settled” issue seems to keep popping up in Canada quicker than one of those “Hit a Mole” games at an amusement park.
The latest nightmare to hit them is over late term abortion. More specifically, the discussion over babies that survived their abortion, were born, breathed, became “legal” persons, and then at some point died shortly after.
Canada’s abortion cabal, who never met an abortion they didn’t like, shrieked.
The shrieking abortaholics such as Dr. Dawg, and the every truthful and friendly Frau fernhilll (and the Borg Collective over at Dammit Janet), are up in arms over the discussion.
Their shrieking headlines:
Amateur Statistics and Pro Grandstanding
Demonizing Late-Term Abortion Must Stop
If you repeat a lie often enough …
How many ways does the National Post get it wrong?
Jonathan Kay Explains Lying
More Mansplaining on Superb Owl Day
Jonathan Kay to the rescue of patriarchy!!!
Jonathan Kay Still Ignoring Women
Wow…8 stories…so far…on one issue…and it’s only Monday!
Me thinks that thou dost protest too much. Really.
A sore spot has been touched. A weak link. The key card in the house of cards.
Even Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett says she is ” fed up with ‘lawyered’ assertions that totally misrepresent the facts.” (Although Bennett DOES appear to be backtracking and might allow for some reasonable restrictions, or at least have some dialogue)
Bennett insists: “No physician in Canada can terminate a pregnancy over 24 weeks without serious indications: the life of the mother at risk, or the fetus has very serious malformations.”
The only problem, is just not true.
A REAL ethicist, not the narcissistic bloggers at Dammit Janet, has publicly stated that late-term abortions in Canada have INDEED been done for “social” reasons.
In other words, for “non-medical” reasons:
No life of the mother was at risk.
The “fetus” did NOT have serious malformations.
It was for social reasons, plain and simple.
Of course, abortaholics don’t want you to know that.
Shrieking and shrieking, they don’t want ANY questioning of abortion in Canada.
Because you won’t like what you find.
REAL ethicist Margaret Somerville writes:
In discussion of abortion in classes in the Faculty of Medicine at McGill University, taught by faculty with relevant knowledge, no one challenges statements that there is a special clinic for post-22- weeks gestation abortion in downtown Montreal and that there is one designated hospital for abortion of 20- to 22-week gestation pregnancies. It’s also been reported in the media that the Quebec government sent a specialist obstetrician to the United States for training in late-term abortion. Although these facts are only circumstantial evidence, they hardly make it seem likely that late-term abortions are truly rare – at least in Quebec.
Anecdotally, as an ethicist, I have been consulted in a professional capacity on two late-term abortions, both of which were carried out. One involved a 34-week gestation pregnancy, where the mother was an unmarried graduate student from a foreign country; the other a 32-week gestation pregnancy, where the married parents did not want to have a “defective child” – the baby had a cleft palate (a relatively minor physical deformity that can be largely corrected with surgery). (Margaret Somerville: Busting the Abortion Myths: Special to National Post | May 11, 2011)
In another comment by Somerville, she describes a late term abortion done because:
I’ve also been consulted on late term selective reduction of multiple pregnancy in which one or more fetuses are killed in utero with a lethal injection of potassium chloride into their heart and the dead fetus(es) delivered at term with the living one(s). In two cases I know of involving twins, one twin was killed. In fact, I wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine on an early case in which this was done because the woman did not want to have twins and said she would abort both babies unless one was killed. (“Margaret Somerville on late-term abortion” March 26, 2008
Cleft Palate abortion?
An “inconvenient” twin?
Wow…such noble reasons for taking a life.
But to the abortoholics, you can kill any fetus, for any reason, at any time.
Remember they themselves said:
“As fern hill said, there is no LAW regulating abortion but there are medical protocols, procedures and RESTRICTIONS that our public health care system has established with regard to the termination of gestation.”
Yes, protocols that allow abortion for cleft palate.
Yes, protocols that allow for abortion for in inconvenient twin.
Abortion for Down Syndrome? There’s a protocol for that!
In a 1997 UBC Medical Symposium on Abortion, Vancouver Doctor Jonathan Cope stated some of the reasons why women have late term abortion in Canada:
“women are awaiting results from genetic testing, women don’t know they are pregnant, woman are abandoned by the father which is a common reason, particular areas (of British Columbia) give women difficulty getting referrals (for an abortion), (there is) fear of parental retribution, or that the husband (of the pregnant mother) wants a boy.”
“…in British Columbia tend to be concentrated in just a few hands because late-term abortions are physically unpleasant. They aren’t popular among surgeons” because, as he described in his symposium presentation Secrets for a Successful Evacuation, infants are almost fully developed, clearly look like babies, and can survive outside the womb.”
Ah, yes….the results of “…medical protocols, procedures and RESTRICTIONS that our public health care system has established with regard to the termination of gestation.”
Canada’s abortaholics are either naive, evil or just plain incredibly stupid.
Frau fernhill writes: “It is a woman’s decision. Not anyone else’s, whether elected or unelected.”
Babies aborted because they have a cleft palate? “It is a woman’s decision. Not anyone else’s, whether elected or unelected.
Babies aborted because they have Down Syndrome? “It is a woman’s decision. Not anyone else’s, whether elected or unelected.”
Babies left to die after their abortion for less than savory reasons? “It is a woman’s decision. Not anyone else’s, whether elected or unelected.”
But we started this essay with a quote about how some abortions are being done in Canada for less than savory reasons.
Wikipedia’s definition of eugenics is:
“Eugenics is the applied science of the bio-social movement which advocates practices that improve the genetic composition of a population, usually a human population. It is a social philosophy advocating the improvement of human hereditary traits through the promotion of higher reproduction of more desired people and traits, and reduced reproduction of less desired people and traits”
Who knew that in their literal frenzy to support any and all reasons for abortion in Canada, the abortaholics would be advancing another failed social experiment where that nations’ medical community also had lots of “medical protocols, procedures and RESTRICTIONS.