Buscaraons

14.9.04

Abortion and women's bodies: rights are always relative

Over the weekend, I came across this article reporting on a statement about Ellen Barkin. Acording to the report, she would force her 12 year old daughter to have an abortion. I sent the link to Dawn; she wrote back and indirectly asked me what I opined on the matter. Women's right to do whatever they want to their bodies is an absolute right according to the pro-abortionists.

And yet, they relativize this absolute right when it's their daugthers that become pregnant. Ellen Barkin exposes the profound antinomy that such proponents advocate. On the one hand, they undermine parental authourity in compelling legislation and court decisions that allow 12-17 years girls to procure an abortion without parental permission much less notification... but don't let those girls drink beer at a bar.

Furthermore, the proabotionists are such suckers to their ideology; it never, ever occurs to them the correlation between sexualizing children at ever young ages and the increase in teen pregnacies. Also, the proabortionists never suggest adoption as an option; to do so would undermine the entire rationale for abortion which is too kill kids 'cause mommy, the parents, the boyfriend...hell society, don't want to be bugged about their responsibilities towards the defenseless. Better to go on consuming, fornicating, living the beautiful carefree life. Responsibilities are for the poor, the weak the religious.

Barkin's assertion also highlight a deep class prejudice among the elites: better that the baby die than to be given up for adoption. Imagine the embarrassment if the kids were adopted, not just in any loving home, but in a religious 'fundamentalist' one of the Christian variety. So it's no wonder that ordinary people regard the entertainment elite with disdain, ignore their pronouncements and react in revulsion towards them.

L'Insigne rouge: un drapeau caduque

Hier, j'ai visité un nouveau carnet et l'article de ce jour-lÃƒÂ lamentait le changement de l'Insigne rouge pour ceul-ci avec le feuille 'ÃƒÂ©rable et en faisant le lien que le Canada est comme l'Union europÃƒÂ©enne. Quelle bande de nostalgics tannante! Comme si on rÃƒÂ©introduisÃƒÂ®t l'ancien drapeau que tout les maux du pais disparÃƒÂ®tront. L'Insigne rouge est un drapeau cadque et comme un nÃƒÂ©o-Canadien il ne rÃƒÂ©present pas le pays qu'il est devenu. En effet, on doit rapprocher les PÃƒÂ¨res constitutionnels pour leur paresse hÃƒÂ©raldrique d'avoir choisi le drapeau de la marine marchande britannique et clouer l'armoire du Canada. Quelle originalitÃƒÂ©! Ceux qui prÃƒÂ´nent pour l'Insigne rouge ignorent l'histore de ce pays qu'il rÃƒÂ©prochent aux autres. MÃƒÂªme le Monarchist league of Canada ne s'y oppose pas ÃƒÂ la feuille d'ÃƒÂ©rable. En effet, il avait mÃƒÂªme consacrÃƒÂ© un article dans sa revue qui traÃƒÂ§ait l'incorporation de cette feuille comme symbole du pays depuis la colonisation europÃƒÂ©enne. En outre, même son héraldrie l'incorpore! Donc, laissez l'ancien drapeau dans le textes d'histoire d'oÃƒÂ¹ il appartient.

¶ 15:55