Bruinooge’s coerced abortion bill

When I read about the latest bit of proposed legislative flatulence blatted out by anti-abortion MP Rod Bruinooge, my initial feeling was that it had to be an election year dog whistle to the base.  A bill banning “coerced” abortion is about as likely to pass as a bill banning coerced pregnancy (even though the latter probably occurs with greater frequency).  But regardless of how transparent the bill’s real purpose might be and how imminently unlikely it is to pass, the Glurge Index suggests that Bruinooge is serious about trying to make it happen:

If this scenario looks familiar, there’s good reason.

The terrible story of a young woman’s murder, re-purposed to sell a bill meant to curtail womens’ rights, will be a pretty familiar theme to anyone who’s followed anti-choice activism and subterfuge in our parliament over the last few years.   Exhibit A:  the doomed Bill C-484, the “Unborn Victims of Crime/Kicking Abortion’s Ass” bill, and the extended battle that raged over it two years ago.  Ultimately the bill was aborted by an election call, but wow: thanks to the Glurge Factor, that was one Late Term abortion.

This new bill is even worse, a potential nightmare of slippery slopes — one person’s “friendly advice” might be another’s “coercion”.   This CTV-Winnipeg poll seems to indicate that about half of Canadians get that already…

…so hopefully this one will be put to sleep a little more expeditiously than C-484 was.

UPDATE: It seems that truth is, well, truthier than the fetus fetishists’ melodramatic fiction.  Fern Hill explains.

15 Responses to “Bruinooge’s coerced abortion bill”


  1. 1 fern hill Friday, April 16, 2010 at 2:45 pm

    Good to see you’re on this, fellow Vicious Abortion Crusader™! ;)

    We were caught napping on C-484 and let it get too far. Not again.

  2. 2 deBeauxOs Friday, April 16, 2010 at 2:48 pm

    In real life – not their ‘political life’ Bruinooge, Vellacott and those other smarmy christofascists wouldn’t have contributed a single dime to help Roxanne Fernando get the help she desperately needed. She didn’t need to be coerced by a Crisis Pregnancy Centre to choose to continue with her pregnancy. That is what she decided and thus the staff of a CPC might have thrown a second-hand layette in her direction and concentrated their support instead on “abortion-vulnerable” women.

    But now that she’s dead and her killers convicted, the odious Bruinooge and his abortion-criminalizing Con job cronies can spin her story for their purpose, in the classic rightwing tactic exposed by your post, JJ.

  3. 3 JJ Friday, April 16, 2010 at 3:10 pm

    fern hill :lol: When it comes to this issue, I’m like Shaw Cable — “Always On”.

    What a coincidence though, I was just updating with a link to DJ. Great work, top drawer. This stuff will all add up down the road.

    PS – Would you mind putting a link to that CTV poll at your place? (You don’t have to link to me, just to the poll.)

  4. 4 JJ Friday, April 16, 2010 at 3:16 pm

    deBeauxOs

    She didn’t need to be coerced by a Crisis Pregnancy Centre to choose to continue with her pregnancy.

    Maybe, maybe not. I wonder if anyone gave her advice that helped change her mind.

    Obviously that’s not coercion, it was still her choice no matter what a CPC might advise. But it would sort of turn this case on its head just enough to make it really interesting.

  5. 5 fern hill Friday, April 16, 2010 at 4:55 pm

    I had a link to the poll as a uppity-date to my most recent. But it’s changed already to something about seat belts. The final vote on the necessity of a coerced abortion law was 53% yes, 47% no.

  6. 6 Phatbiker Friday, April 16, 2010 at 5:32 pm

    I guess thats how the anti-choise assholes work. If they can’t get a big bill banning abortion outright, they try and pass a bunch of “little” bills that makes it almost impossable to get one. It’s what they are doing in the US with limited success.

  7. 7 Bleatmop Friday, April 16, 2010 at 11:18 pm

    Phatbiker – I wouldn’t call the anti’s success in the US limited. They’ve been very successful both legislatively and domestic terroristly.

  8. 8 ck Saturday, April 17, 2010 at 4:52 am

    Good post JJ.

    I don’t think c-510 will pass as Brother Steve is in campaign mode. I believe we’re going to the polls come September.

    However, this should serve as a warning for us; a prelude as to what we can expect from a Brother Steve majority should we let him loose with one.

    C510 will fall, but some other Evangelical in that party will come up with some other hideous anti-choice bill.

  9. 9 JJ Saturday, April 17, 2010 at 7:26 am

    Thanks fern hill.

    Not a bad outcome since it was being freeped from their facebook page.

  10. 10 JJ Saturday, April 17, 2010 at 7:29 am

    phatbiker

    they try and pass a bunch of “little” bills that makes it almost impossable to get one.

    That nails it. They call it “incrementalism”, and when they succeed in passing these nitpicking little bills, it works. Limiting access is the next best thing to an outright ban — the end result is the same, women can’t get abortion care.

  11. 11 JJ Saturday, April 17, 2010 at 7:36 am

    Bleatmop

    They’ve been very successful both legislatively and domestic terroristly.

    Their terrorism success goes without saying, but they’ve had limited success with their end game, which for the last 35 years has been to stack the Supreme Court and overturn Roe v Wade.

    But as I said above, limiting access is the next best thing. If this new bill in Nebraska stands up to a Supreme Court challenge, it will put Dr.Carhart right out of business.

    Why do fetus fetishists hate the Free Market?

  12. 12 JJ Saturday, April 17, 2010 at 8:05 am

    ck – September/October sounds good for an election. The CPC is electing a new candidate for this riding in August — conveniently, his billboards will have been up for over 6 months by the time the election rolls around.

    As for Harper and social issues, I think he hates shit like this. I frankly doubt that he’d do anything wrt social issues even if he won a majority in the next election. The idea with winning a majority is to keep it that way, not win it and then let it crash and burn over social issues.

    Not that I want to give him a chance to prove me wrong…

  13. 13 Bleatmop Saturday, April 17, 2010 at 10:41 am

    JJ – That’s my point in saying that they’ve been successful legislatively. Heck, even the recent health care bill was a massive success, where women have to take out a second premium to get abortion coverage. I find it unlikely that most women will get said policy, nor be able to afford it when it’s not bundled with other health services. They’ve basically made having an election abortion unaffordable for the vast amounts of women in the US. I’d call that a huge success in my books, if I were an anti choicer.


  1. 1 Anti-Choice is Anti-Awesome: The First Weekly Reader Trackback on Saturday, November 24, 2012 at 12:03 pm
  2. 2 The “not-about-abortion” abortion bill « unrepentant old hippie Trackback on Saturday, November 24, 2012 at 12:04 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




Mac Security Portal
Rose's Place
Blogging Change

Incoming!

  • 617,773
[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

Archives


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 55 other followers

%d bloggers like this: