Ooooh.... a contest!

Buckets is holding a witty caption contest in celebration of KLR VU Bothering People Having Dinner Polling Company and the rousing success of their MASSIVE POLL on the intertoobz this week.

Go!

Emma the Embryo on the Massive New Poll

Or as Fern Hill put it : 90% Don't Give a Shit

The Massive New Poll, as Campaign Life Coalition proudly calls it, was carried out via an automated demon-dialer which, according to the brand new website of the polling company CLC employed to bother people eating their dinner, "plays a pre-recorded message on a customer's answering machine, voicemail service, or even to a "live" person" :

"Do you believe abortionist Henry Morgentaler deserves the Order of Canada Press 1 for Yes Press 2 for ...."

*click*

Less than 5%, guys. You should have stuck with freeping the G&M poll.

JJ and Big City Lib investigate the various anti-choice ReformaTory relatives associated with the polling company.
And deBeauxOs at Birth Pangs explains why we should care about those associations in a chilling piece about what Operation Rescue has been up to lately.

Finally, here's a little BC history moment on Campaign Life Coalition's links to Operation Rescue :
Anti-Abortion Cop Uses Police Computer to Track Clinic Workers

Cross-posted at Creekside

Update : Buckets posts screen shots of a page from the one-day-old KLR Vu polling website -

and it's a word-for-word copy of a US polling website, which is fitting really, given that our anti-choice websites up here are often also mirror images of U.S. ones. I suppose the inability to spell "Canadians" properly should have tipped me off.

Andrew Coyne fails democracy.

Andrew Coyne has come out with one of the thinnest arguments ever produced for initiating a national political debate on abortion: It's undemocratic to have a country without an abortion law.

Luckily, Dr. Dawg does a complete dissection of Coyne's strange theory and shines some light in corners young Andrew didn't quite cover.

There is something which attracted my attention, however and it is how Coyne views the current situation. That of Dr. Morgentaler being appointed to the Order of Canada.

The furor over Henry Morgentaler's appointment to the Order of Canada, on the other hand, now that is about abortion. There may be some who object out of a disinterested concern for fairness, on the principle that an honour bestowed on behalf of all of the people of Canada should not be given to a man whose life's work is, still, so profoundly upsetting to so many Canadians. But for most people, it's about abortion. In honouring him, we are honouring it, normalizing it, stamping it with the seal of approval.

Or rather not abortion, as such, but the legal void that surrounds it, which Morgentaler did so much to bring about: the extraordinary fact that, 20 years after the Supreme Court ruling that bears his name, this country still has no abortion law of any kind. It isn't that abortion — at any stage of a pregnancy, for any reason, and at public expense — is lawful in Canada. It is merely not unlawful. When it comes to abortion, we are literally a lawless society: the only country in the developed world that does not regulate the practice in any way.

Perhaps the members of the Order's advisory council thought the continuance of this legal void, after so many years, signalled a consensus had formed in its favour. Perhaps they thought, by naming Morgentaler, they could impress one upon the country. Either way, the decision was revealing — as was the reaction. The letters pages of the country's newspapers were filled for days with passionate denunciations. Members of Parliament spoke out against it by the dozen. Several members of the Order returned their pins.

Stop right there, Andrew, old boy.

Firstly, the furor you speak of is a very small group of very loud people. And you're quite right: among them are virulent racists, woman-haters and unrepentant bigots. The problem is that the only people we're hearing from are those people and those who are promoting their favourite religious agenda. The truth is, despite the hyperbole of newspapers filled with letters of protest and "dozens" of members of parliament making their usual flatulent noise, the majority of Canadians are not opposed to Dr. Morgentaler's appointment. Letters to the editor are not representative of public opinion when it's an organized campaign by one side.

Who has returned their decoration to Rideau Hall? A couple of people have said they are going to do it but to date, the Honours and Awards secretariat has reported that none have actually been returned. The initial "return the gong" movement started with a Catholic group announcing they were returning the Order of Canada insignia of the late Catherine de Hueck Doherty.

Guess what, Andrew. When you die, so does your Order of Canada. It doesn't get handed down. The medal itself is a legacy item - not a perpetual honour. Which puts at least one other award supposedly "returned" into the same category. And if you're at all feeling brave you can read LifeSite news (look it up yourself) where they announce that three other previous recipients of the Order of Canada are "returning" their awards but wish to remain anonymous. I'll bet they do too, because they're hoping to play into the emotions of their religious constituency, have this whole thing quickly blow over and then attend the next major cocktail party with that familiar piece of hardware hanging from their neck.

The remainder of your argument, Andrew, is specious at best. Democracy has worked this through, as Dr. Dawg has pointed out, and the result is that we need no law. We have a Charter of Rights and Freedoms which would supersede any law which imposed the will of a minority on over one-half the population as a form of subjugation.

And that is, whether you choose to recognize it or not, what this is all about. You say the anti-abortion noise machine has been effectively silenced. What utter hogwash. They're noisier today than they ever were in the past and they continue to represent a minority of the population.

What is really interesting though, Andrew, is your take on how all this works. That somehow democracy demands that the government get to work introducing some form of legislation and then we, the unwashed masses, get to hear all sides of an argument, including the loud minority side for whom the legislation was placed in front of us in the first place.

Quaint, but wrong. That is democracy turned on its head. The politicians work for us; not the other way around.

How is it "democracy" when we only get to choose from a menu produced by a political class? Yes, I realize that is the conservative view of democracy, but most of us don't adhere to the dogma of conservative politics. That being, "I will direct you. You will comply. In return I will guarantee to protect you from (fill in the blank)." Honestly, Andrew, the cost of such a deal is just too high. And it still boils down to putting over one-half of the population of this country on trial for the freedoms they are guaranteed.

Politicians are like dogs. They constantly think of their own survival, no matter how comfortable they are. In that we elect them, they are all too aware that inflaming the people with a debate in which they do not want to engage, to satisfy a minority group whose position is borne out of some religious doctrine, would be guaranteed political suicide.

It isn't a brave politician that will start such a debate; it is a stupid one.

Democracy says the people will decide; not the politicians, the pundits or the columnists. The people have decided that there is no need for a law, either way. I know that's a hard pill for a conservative to swallow.

Try not to choke on it.

Oh. And Andrew... take a look at this and tell me it would be an intelligent debate.

Yeah, fine. Who cares?

Let's get something clear Finn. You were an obligatory appointment anyway. Toss it in the garbage if that makes you feel good.

A former New Brunswick lieutenant-governor says he'll return his Order of Canada in protest of Dr. Henry Morgentaler being named to the order.

Gilbert Finn, 87, who served as the province's lieutenant-governor from 1987-94, said he doesn't hold the same values as Morgentaler, a leading abortion rights advocate in Canada.

A former rector at the University of Moncton and a leading Acadian businessman, Finn became a member of the Order of Canada in 1974 and an officer in 1979.

It's funny isn't it. I mean when even you're made a member or an officer of a senior Canadian order it can means you get to use it to promote your "Old Testament" bullshit.

I would never do that. I am Canadian. And I could do almost the same thing as Finn if I were as closed-minded as him.

Yeah. Suck on that for a while.

Hat tip Canadian Cynic

Priest returns his Order of Canada in a huff

Father Lucien Larre of Coquitlam says he will return his Order of Canada award rather than be associated with abortion rights activist Henry Morgentaler.
CBC :

"Father Lucien Larre said elevating Morgentaler to the Order of Canada "degrades" the award for those who believe in the sanctity of human life.
Morgentaler is best known for taking his fight to the Supreme Court, which struck down the country's abortion laws 20 years ago. He was named to the Order of Canada earlier this week."

Father Larre, on the other hand, is probably best known for being convicted in 1992 on two counts of physically abusing children in his care at Bosco Homes in Saskatchewan: slapping and choking a female, and forcing another to take pills to teach her a lesson about drug abuse.
Nine other charges including one of sexual assault were overturned.

In 1998, Larre registered as a psychologist in B.C., but the B.C. College of Psychologists suspended his registration because it felt he posed "an immediate risk to the public."

I'm wondering why Larre didn't return his OC then.

Cross-posted at Creekside

The OOC never makes controversial appointments? Never?!

I was going to join Dr. Dawg and just give this a pass but it's difficult to do when "national" publications seem so bent on making a point with such dull pencils.

Outrage brews as Ottawa set to honour Morgentaler

Really. And then the question is raised, how did that information find its way out of the Honours Secretariat before the recipient was informed? The honours list is sealed after selections have been made and not made public until the head of state releases it. Leaks such as this are done with a purpose and in this case it looks like the Prime Minister's Office is the culprit.

The Conservatives sent out talking points to MPs on Friday that did not name Dr. Morgentaler, but were clearly in preparation for a controversial appointment. They emphasized that Order of Canada recipients are not chosen by the cabinet, but rather a panel whose nine members include only two government appointees.

And then the pack of howling Hyenas started.

Maurice Vellacott, a Conservative MP from Saskatchewan who has been a long-time opponent of abortion, said the honour normally goes to someone who is the unanimous choice of the advisory council. Mr. Vellacott said he has heard this was not the case with the selection of Dr. Morgentaler.

Now there's someone to lead a Conservative charge. If the so-con religious authoritarians ever wanted their highly tenuous position diminished further than it already is, pick an embarrassing, public nuisance like Vellacott to be their voice. And what Vellacott heard can be taken with a grain of the proverbial salt since he's not beyond spewing out imaginary words and scenarios as fact.

Then we get some other voices stacking up. (Emphasis mine)

But Joanne McGarry, executive director of the Catholic Civil Rights League, said that if Dr. Morgentaler is named to the order, "it would be a most unfortunate choice."

"As Canadians we would like to see the Order of Canada given to people whose contributions to such initiatives as charity, education, culture, the environment, things of that kind that are uniformly viewed as positive and tend to unite people," she said. "With this choice, the one thing that everybody really agrees on about Morgentaler is that he is a very divisive figure."

Really, Joanne? We'll keep those attributes in mind as we move along here.

Liberal MP Dan McTeague said Dr. Morgentaler is a very controversial person and if he is admitted to the order, it will polarize Canadians.

The Governor-General and the committee advising on appointments to the Order of Canada have always been careful in the past not to choose people who were controversial or who would not be unanimously celebrated by all Canadians, Mr. McTeague said.

Really, Dan? Have they always been that careful? All Order of Canada inductees are unanimously celebrated by all Canadians?

So, Maurice, Joanne and Dan, if an Order of Canada appointment requires unanimous approval of the advisory board;
and the criteria for such an appointment, (as viewed by the Catholic Civil Rights League), is contributions to charity, education, culture, the environment and things that are uniformly viewed as positive and unite people;
and the advisory board has been careful not to choose people who would not be unanimously celebrated by all Canadians...

explain this.

UPDATE: It's official! Congratulations Dr. Morgentaler. (h/t JJ)

David Frum puts a new coat of paint on his hypocrisy

David Frum needs to gather his carcass in front of a mirror. The National Post, according to Frum, invited writers to submit their comment on the R v Morgentaler case, the outcome of which invalidated Canada's anti-abortion statutes, and discuss the legacy of the case.

David Frum, you will recall, was the author of the line in the 29 January, 2002 State of The Union address in which George W. Bush declared Iraq, Iran and North Korea an Axis Of Evil. Frum had been assigned the task of painting Saddam Hussein as the greatest living threat to US security. And so, Frum joined in the conspiracy of lies which led to the unprovoked attack on and the invasion of Iraq.

He's doing it again. In the National Post article Frum states this:

Late-term abortions remain legal in Canada. When it was reported that no Canadian doctor would perform them, the Quebec government acted to create a new clinic in Montreal specifically for this purpose. All this is the legacy of the Morgentaler case — even if Morgentaler himself condemns late-term abortion as ethically offensive.

Yes, Dr. Morgentaler has some concerns, but he has not condemned them.

Further, Frum is trying to make a case against abortion of a fetus by providing the most graphic case possible - late term abortion. What he doesn't tell you is that over 97 percent of abortions in Canada are performed before the 16th week of pregnancy.

Third trimester abortion is not something a pregnant woman would take lightly. A woman doesn't carry a pregnancy through to a late term and then suddenly decide, "Oh. I don't want to have this baby."

It normally involves severe medical complications and neither David Frum nor any other individual not involved in the health of the mother or the fetus have any right to interfere with or know what those complications entail.

Frum is simply repeating an oft heard line from his ilk that rare late-term abortions are common.

If there is anything in Frum's article which should be wound up and stuffed firmly up his ass it is the title:

David Frum: The Morgentaler decision cheapened the worth of human life

Really?!

And I wonder how Frum, who was an active participant in the lies and manipulation which resulted in the Bush administration's attack on Iraq, considers that he, who bears equal responsibility for hundreds of thousands of deaths of Iraqi civilians, children included, feels he has any credibility suggesting that anyone other than himself has cheapened the worth of human life.

Frum has blood on his hands and has no room to comment.