Bite me, Barbara

Shit-on-toast, what the holy hell is going on at the National Post this week, a meeting of Zygote Zealots Unanimous? I had to spank David Frum this morning for his imbecility, now Barbara Kay? Well hey, line 'em up -- my paddle's up to the task.

Barbara Kay, a woman who's obviously not particularly appreciative of her rights, clutched her pearls in one hand and took a swing at the Morgentaler Decision with the other today:

"Whether one sees him as a great humanitarian (that is certainly how he sees himself) or a monster -- in The Beaver magazine's poll of the "worst Canadian," he ranked "worse" than Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka -- one of Henry Morgentaler's achievements cannot be gainsaid: He effectively eliminated abortion as an issue for public policy debate in Canada."

Wait a minute, hold the phone: The Beaver magazine's poll? Are you fucking kidding me?! This Beaver's "worst Canadian" was an online poll (not very credible to start with) that was so well and truly freeped by anti-choicers that it lost even the dubious credibility given un-freeped online polls. Cite something so purposely and ludicrously skewed as supporting evidence to any argument and wave bye-bye to your journalistic credibility as it swirls in the bowl.

That more or less sets the tone of the article, which as it rolls along offers up the usual anti-choice fare, starting with a heaping helping of tsk-tsking, finger-wagging self-righteous moralizing:

"1) Young women today are more careless about becoming pregnant, indicating an increasing psychological desensitization to the creation of new life. For example, in 1988, 16% of pregnancies in Quebec, Canada's most abortion-friendly province, resulted in abortion. Today, 30% do. Girls are using abortion -- tax-funded and easily available -- as an alternative form of birth control. No morally aspirational society should feel complacent abetting this trend."

Of course girls are using abortion as birth control. Invasive medical procedures are so much more convenient than contraception. Hey - ya think maybe the overwhelming presence of contracepti-phobic Catholicism in Quebec might be contributing to this phenomenon? But never mind that, because we also get a typically stupid anti-choice straw man laid on us by Ms. K:

"2) A less predictable outcome (in Canada, at any rate) was, with access to early and improved ultrasound technology, the use of abortion for gender selection -- a popular strategy amongst cultural groups that privilege male children..."

Um, yeah sure... Just because it's something that's never happened and never would, it sounds pretty goddamn scary, so why not use it? Why not?! (EDIT: And see skdadl's comment here, pointing out that Kay ends this paragraph with "Yet it remains perfectly legal", insinuating that it's something that actually happens. "Legal" does not equal "actually happens".)

There's no need to go any further down this road -- the bottom line is, it's none of your business, Barb, so bite me. It's not your, or Stephen Harper's, or Lifesite's, or the Canadian Tire guy's, or my cousin from Calgary's business. It's nobody's business but a woman and her doctor. And no amount of pearl-clutching, swooning and taking to the fainting couch will be changing that any time soon.

UPDATE: PSA does a better fisk of Kay's execrable excuse for an article than I ever could. Go. Read.

Bite me, Frum

It's Bizarro-World... one of the Bush Administration's chief warpig propagandists, David "Axis of Evil" Frum, pontificated recently in the National Post about how a legal decision giving women the right to abortion "cheapened the worth of human life". Typing was no doubt difficult with hands still sticky from the dried blood of Iraqi children, but nonetheless Frum managed to peck out a screed against the Morgentaler Decision, saying:

"On January 28, Canada marks the 20th anniversary of what may be the most astounding decision in the nation’s legal history: R. v. Morgentaler, the case that struck down Canada’s abortion laws.

The Morgentaler case was followed the next year by Daigle v. Tremblay, which clarified and amplified the Morgentaler ruling.

The result of the two decisions was to give Canada the western world’s most radical abortion regime. The mother’s ownership of the pregnancy is absolute and final, and she may end it at any moment, for any reason. Neither the father of the child-to-be, nor the government, nor the child itself has any rights in the matter at all."

"The western world's most radical abortion regime" -- gee Dave, you say that like it's a bad thing.

In fact, that radical freedom of choice is something many women, including myself, take as a point of pride. "Most radical?" -- in a world of repressive, sexually-twisted authoritarians who'd gladly dictate every aspect of our personal lives, maybe so. But one could also characterize Canada's "abortion regime" as the western world's most respectful of a woman's right to privacy and self-ownership. Thanks to Dr. Morgentaler, we have unrestricted reproductive choice. Thanks to Chantal Daigle, nobody can fuck with that choice by using (abusing) the legal system to force women to be unwilling incubators. Remember "freedom is on the march" and "let freedom reign" and "they hate us for our freedom"? Freedom is good!

Frum went on to damn late-term abortions -- no zygote zealot worth his salt will forget to give disproportionate time and space to the less than 1% of crisis abortions performed late-term. He ended:

"... the answers offered by R. v. Morgentaler will look more and more inadequate, shallow, short-sighted, and obsolete."

On that much we can agree. A woman's right to reproductive self-determination, including the choices of contraception and abortion, should be explicitly enshrined in the Constitution. Maybe then the Frums and the other anti-choice nitwits of the world will finally mind their own business and... (you know what's coming) get their snouts out of our crotches!

(h/t TGB)