Bill C-484 Challenge

by matttbastard

crime scene!

Fern Hill (seconded by JJ) throws down the gauntlet:

You supporters of Bill C-484, ‘An Act to Amend to Amend the Criminal Code (injuring or causing the death of an unborn child while committing an offense)’, insist that the bill has nothing to do with women’s rights (i.e. zip zero nada nuttin’ to do with abortion). You keep carping repeating that it is all about PROTECTING pregnant women.

OK. So. Here’s the challenge. Find one reputatable, established organization working against violence against women that publicly endorses this bill and we’ll shut up.

Thus far, the silence from the ‘pro’ side has been thunderously deafening. I for one am shocked, absolutely SHOCKED, I tell you!! Yep, am utterly flabbergasted that anti-VAW organizations haven’t fallen over each other trying to jump aboard Kenny-boy’s pro-lifewoman bandwagon.

Guess the poor ladies really do need a man (or an honourary man) to tell them what’s best for ’em.

Related: pogge detects the sickening stench of rotten Danish seafood:

There are lots of people who will swear on a stack of Bibles, as it were, that this bill has nothing to do with abortion. Funny thing though: all of those people are well-known for opposing abortion. All of the highly vocal supporters of this legislation who have previously stated public positions on abortion and choice — at least that I’m aware of — are all in the same group. And it ain’t the group that supports a woman’s reproductive freedom.

I don’t believe in coincidences like that.

Recommend this post at Progressive Bloggers

15 thoughts on “Bill C-484 Challenge

  1. I am so happy to see that you are proud hippocrates and use the nazi type selective speech in your agenda-I am pro choice I believe most woman are smart enough to make the CHOICE to sell their body anytime they want lets legalize prostitution!!!!, do you have the same faith in woman? also why did scott peterson get charged with killing his wife and UNBORN baby?? please show you are woman enough to discuss this with the big boys as equals


  2. Haha! j white’s message is CRYSTAL clear. He/she is saying that women are defenseless passive victims, and incapable of making decisions on their own. So the state needs to control and regulate women’s lives, which is the only way to protect women from themselves and from others (and of course, to protect everyone else from women’s immoral or stupid decisions).


  3. Huh. I thought he was saying we the heirs to the father of Greek medicine (I wonder if one could find “nazi-type selective speech” in the Hippocratic Corpus), and that US criminal law also applies in Canada (all your base are belong to Scott Peterson).

    Of course, there’s also my alternative theory: a highly illiterate variation on YHBT – HTH HAND!

    Ah, well–let the wack-a-troll contest commence!


  4. come on joycey you can do better ,forget about the church and state! why dont you decide if ,when and what a woman can and cannot do with her body, be it sell, mutilate or have an adult sexual relationsip with a relative?. never mind decide -how about an opinion instead of mis interp blah blah blah

    oh and matt i am new 2 this what isYHBT HTH HAND


  5. Odd assumption, that someone needs to decide what women can do with their bodies. And why only women? Who decides what men can do with their bodies?

    Actually I don’t think doing ANYTHING to your own body is illegal, including killing yourself. It’s nobody’s business, ultimately. It’s only when you use your body to hurt another (e.g., assault) that it becomes illegal or immoral. But before you say that a woman should not be allowed to “assault” her fetus, it’s actually the fetus that is assaulting her, in a very real physical way. So unless she consents to her pregnancy, she has the right to abort it in self-defense. That holds true even if a fetus is a person with rights (which it is not).

    For the record, I support the full decriminalization of adult sex work. Because it comes down to the same issue – control over one’s body and one’s life. Laws against prostitution violate the rights of women and endanger their health and safety, just like laws against abortion do.


  6. Awww. The troll got banned.

    “Smart enough to sell their bodies”? “Most women”? Que?

    Apparently, I have yet to get that smart, and prostitution is actually legal here. Communication for the purposes of, not so much.

    As for why did SP get charged with two murders – BECAUSE THAT’S THE UNITED STATES, jackass. This is Canada. Different country, different laws.

    Different world outlook, too.

    Shouldn’t we get different trolls?


  7. You should see the moderation queue, Gigi.

    Did you know that us hairy-legged man-haters could care less about women in Muslim counties?

    More lazy feminazi hippocracy [sic].


  8. That’s odd, in 1991 didn’t seem to get many right winger takers even on the discussion of women under the Taliban.

    In 1999 when the Taliban started talking about destroying the Buddhas of Bamyan, not a peep from the right wing.

    All of a sudden, they’re a bunch of art appreciateurs and defenders of Muslim women everywhere.

    Lying shitheads.


  9. This bill is just as much pro-choice as it is pro-life. If not more. The only thing pro-lifers get is that unborn WANTED babies are protected. This bill only gives value to wanted life. This bill protects the womens right to have children. If the women wants to have a child what right does anyone who attacks her have to take her WANTED child that she has been waiting for months to hold away from her?

    Isn’t it stupid of our society that the minute someone says ‘you shouldn’t have an abortion’ half the people around will (figuratively) jump on them and protest. But as soon as the choice is threatoned the other way no one cares EXCEPT those who cared about the unborn to begin with?


  10. No, Hailey: this bill explicitly contradicts a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada about who is a person. Backdoor Man Epp wants to see that definition changed.


  11. Hailey is not a troll, it is a construct, a fabrication designed to bait and silence us with the overwhelming stultifying output of its oh-so-nice verbosity.


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s