Anti-debate extremism

Watching the debate on M-312 does not inspire confidence in Canadian parliamentary democracy. Those who spoke in favour of Stephen Woodworth’s private member’s motion were eloquent in their defense of why the Criminal Code definition of human being, based on a 400-year-old law, needs to be re-examined. Sadly, the opposition MPs were hysterical in their criticism of M-312 which they believe rolls back “hard-fought” “women’s rights” on abortion.

M-312 does not mention abortion, but that did not prevent the opposition MPs who spoke on Sept. 21 from raising the issue or rambling on about what other things Woodworth or the Conservative government – the latter has distanced itself from M-312 – could do to improve the lot of women, including the funding of aboriginal programs. But M-312 does not purport to address women’s issue.  M-312 only asks that Parliament re-examine Section 223 (1) of the Criminal Code in the light of modern scientific knowledge. Who can oppose that?

Those opposed to examining the scientific evidence as to whether the child in the womb is a human being are anti-debate extremists who are afraid that their pro-abortion position will look barbaric if science were to help inform the moral debate on abortion. We guess that if we supported killing children in the womb, we wouldn’t want Parliament spending too much time thinking about it, either.

Copyright © 2018 The Interim. All rights reserved.   |   Developed by TrueMedia   |   Subscribe RSS