We just celebrated 20 Years of Choice.
Now, hard on the heels of that, we’ve got to roll up our sleeves again. But this time is no celebration. This is dead serious.
Birth Pangs covered the ‘Unborn Victims of Violence’ bill here and here.
This is a private member’s bill that has already had some debate and is scheduled for more on February 29, Sadie Hawkins Day, the day women are allowed to ask men to marry them, dance with them, and/or respect their human rights. A vote on it is expected on March 5.
While pretending to ‘protect’ pregnant women, what this bill really is is a backdoor attempt to create ‘personhood’ rights for fetuses — a necessary first step in re-criminalizing abortion.
Private member’s bill, you say? Pish. They never go anywhere.
Think again. The Bloc and the NDP intend to whip their members to vote against it. The Cons, well, they’re hopeless. But the Libs do NOT intend to whip their members. And we know how very squishy some Libs are when it comes to women’s rights.
In other words, fans of freedom, this stinking piece of fetus-fetishist crap may well pass.
Its proponents are the USUAL SUSPECTS. And they are working their corner hard. They’re using the families of the murdered women. Here’s a recent example:
The sister of slain teacher Manjit Panghali is seeking support for proposed federal legislation that would make it an offence to harm or kill unborn babies during attacks on their mothers.
Jasmin Bhambra wants people to sign a petition to Edmonton MP Ken Epp, who is advocating for the Unborn Victims of Crime Bill, which she said is scheduled for debate on Feb. 29.
The petition,at www.manjitpanghali.org, calls for unborn babies who are injured or killed in attacks on their moms to be recognized as separate from their mothers and for two charges to be laid against an offender, rather than one.
In response, we at Bread and Roses and Birth Pangs are launching a campaign we’re calling ‘One body. One person. One count.’
We’re calling on all progressive bloggers — and especially ones with Liberal connections — to blog against this bill on Monday, February 25. We hope that thousands of blog readers will be moved to contact their MPs to tell them what they think of this sneak attack on women’s rights.
Go and be motivated by pale’s powerful vid.
We hope that bloggers and their readers will inform themselves by visiting the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada to read Joyce Arthur’s excellent article on the bill here and the talking points against it.
In the meantime, you can further this action by visiting and directing your readers to Birth Pangs’s Activist Page to send an automatic message to Stéphane Dion demanding that he whip his MPs into line on this.
We’re calling out Bread and Roses members:
A Creative Revolution
April Reign
Bastard Logic
Broadsides
Canuck Attitude
Choice Joyce
Creekside
Hope and Onions
Marginal Notes
Miss Vicky
One Woman. One Blog.
pogge
politblogo
Politics’n'Poetry
Red Jenny
The Galloping Beaver
Thought Interrupted
Unrepentant Old Hippie
Verbena 19
In the House and Senate
Lilith Attack
Antigone Magazine
RP.
Suburban Safari
Underwater Moonllight
Scott’s DiaTribes 
And we’re calling out friends and allies:
Dark Daughta
Into the Cavern
Dr Dawg
Canadian Cynic
Rational Reasons
And anyone else who cares about full human rights for women.
We cannot allow the fetus fetishists to gain one nanometre on this.
Who’s in?
UPDATE: There is now an on-line petition to sign. Go.
I’m in. Look for a post tomorrow.
I’m in too. I had no idea this bill even existed, I bet they were hoping to keep this one quiet.
IN!
Post up by tomorrow latest.
Count me in – I’ll have something up by Monday at the latest.
Done
Done and done (although this is only the beginning…)
I don’t get it, I thought libs were progressives!
You’re painting the actions of one Liberal MP who was formerly a Reform MP as an attitude indicative of the entire Liberal Party and its supporters? That’s even more hyperbole then usual from you, Jan.
If anyone follows my politics, pre or post joining the Liberal Party, they would know I do not support this type of a bill, nor this specific bill.
Hiya, Scott. Nice to see you.
What we at Birth Pangs would like to know is — why isn’t the Liberal Party whipping the vote against this scurrilous back-door attack on women’s rights?
I’m very glad to hear your opposition to this Bill, Scott. I trust that you will be addressing your concerns to your like-minded confrères in the Liberal Party of Canada, then. We need all the support necessary to ensure that it does not get passed.
Fern: You’re asking a lowly only recently new Liberal Party member and an even lowlier Liberal blogger to speculate the reasons why. I can only hypothesize since I don’t get fed official Liberal Party policy that it’s felt to be an issue of conscience; ie. such as what would happen if the Death Penalty ever came up again in Parliament.
BTW, thanks for the uh, membership here, sarcastic or not. I’m honoured to be put on here even in sarcasm ahead of such Liberal blogging luminaries as Jason Cherniak.
You mean Jason “let me tell you how real feminists behave” Cherniak?
Yeah, uh. He’s right at the top of the list
Well, Scott, you’re a member of Bread and Roses and you blog. So I included you when calling out blogging BnR members. And it wasn’t sarcastic. It was merely, um, prodding.
As deBeauxOs more politely puts it — if you are opposed to this sort of bill and this bill in particular, why not blog about it and open a discussion among your Liberal colleagues as to whether women’s rights are a matter of individual conscience?
I’m considered a member of Bread and Roses? I figured with the uh.. controversy the past month or so (over issues I don’t intend to delve into again) that I’ve had with some of the B’n'R membership (including some of you who I am talking with right now) I’d be more likely to be persona non grata over there, then considered a member.
Your date for blogging against this bill is Feb 25. You will see a blogging post about this opposing this bill at my site on or before Feb 25. Perhaps a day or 2 before, to give it better exposure, particularly to the Liblogs aggregate crowd.
Great! We at Birth Pangs look forward to it.
Srsly, Scott, thanks.
ETA: You edited after I commented. Yeah, you’re a member. You didn’t get booted.
As for persona non grata. . . We have great hopes for you. We just have to work on you some more.
Good fellow, that Scott. Capital young chap. Tally-ho.
And eat your vegetables, Scott.
I can understand why Manjit Pangani’s sister would want this kind of legislation. Manjit was pregnant with a baby she wanted to have and raise and was murdered, her killer than tried to burn her body. I can understand the grief, horror, and rage a sister would feel. I think I would probably feel much the same way. And I cannot think of one single way we could ensure Choice for all women and still punish those who take the life of a pregnant sister beyond the present law against foul murder. I can understand the entire family wanted that baby. And when Majit was killed , so was her wanted child.
And I’m all for locking up those responsible and keeping them locked up until six days after Rapture.
But not at the expense of Choice. I would suggest to Manjit’s family that a more fitting memorial to their loved one would be to agitate and work to support Choice. because Manjit did not choose to be slaughtered. She had no Choice in her death.
Too many women have died , too many others will die if Choice is whittled away. Amazing how there is always munny for yet another very expensive space programme experiment and nobody has yet come up with a birth control pill for men. The burden of contraception is still on women. And that is wrong.
Ooh! Called into action! I’m all goose pimply, I am!
Seriously, I’m honored to have been remembered. I don’t comment here often (although I’ve racked up a few frequent reader points), so I wouldn’t have been surprised to have been overlooked.
I’ll make some time soon and do a post on this. I’d really like to say something in a way that doesn’t make me sound like a mere echo chamber (although being an echo for the kind of talent that gets pubbed here would be an honor, as well).
The Petition: I synd it!
I’m also in, and I posted at my blog today about this. I stand by my belief that abortion is morally wrong, but I am even more opposed to back-handed tactics like those of Ken Epps. If one wants to present a bill restricting abortion, then one should clearly do that. Weasel words such as those in C-484 won’t fly.
Hiya, Blast Furnace. Scott Tribe drew our attention to your post here.
It’s good that rational people can agree that a bad law is a bad law no matter what their positions on other matters may be.