The War Room

DOSSIER # 23: PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION

Within every culture there are topics that one is not supposed to talk about. Things that you are not supposed to question, truths that you are not supposed to deny. Even the most ‘open’ of cultures has things that they are not supposed to say. Similarly, no culture considers itself ‘closed minded’.

In modern day vernacular these terms are synonymous with been ‘left’ or ‘progressive’ or ‘liberal’ in your outlook. But these terms as employed by the left are really just words and rhetoric from the 1960’s generation who were reacting to the ‘conservative’ culture of the 1950’s. When young people born post 1970 use them, they have very little meaning.

In our culture, ‘open minded’ usually translates to ‘think like me’ and ‘tolerance’ usually means ‘you better affirm my sexual lifestyle’. In truth, open mindedness means that you should be able to see the world from outside of your own box.

Tolerance is both sides allowing the other to live without the other pushing their views legally onto the other.

Sadly, this has not existed in Canada for decades. Nowhere is this true more than in the question of abortion or as this essay will deal with, partial birth abortion. It is the one topic you are not allowed to discuss in polite company. Even amongst people I know who support it and have had abortions, they do not discuss it or the effect that it had on them. It is something we are all supposed to implicitly endorse, but we are not supposed to think about it too much lest we break down our cultural assumptions on it.

To be blunt, Canada now needs to have a debate on partial birth abortion. It is a topic that will not go away. Canada is the only country in the modern West that has absolutely no restrictions whatsoever on abortion.

Think about that for a second.

Canada is the only country in the modern West that has absolutely no restrictions whatsoever on abortion.

That means exactly what you think it means. A woman can go into a hospital, 8 months, 3 weeks, 6 days and 23 hours into labour, with a fully formed baby in her body and order the doctor to kill it. So long as half the child is in the womb, the procedure is legal. Now many doctors will not perform this procedure this late in a pregancy, but in cases where the woman persists, doctors have been known to come up from the States to perform it. Most people are not aware of this.

This ‘late term abortion’ or ‘partial birth abortion’ is a process that many find tantamount to infanticide.

In the Partial Birth Abortion Act that President George W. Bush signed in November of 2003, the process was defined as (courtesy of Wikipedia) :

an abortion in which --

(A) the person performing the abortion deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and

(B) performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus

Now in this terminology the term used was fetus.

Let’s ask a question regarding Canada’s lack of restrictions. In those few moments right before a healthy baby is born into a new mother’s arms; is this ‘creature’ still a fetus, or is it a fully breathing, human baby?

Here’s another example for the patriarchy obsessed feminist set;

Let’s say a woman is pregnant and she is in an abusive relationship; her husband beats and abuses here brutally and physically. One day in the eighth month of her pregnancy, while her stomach is full; while she knows what sex the baby is and she is already buying clothes, let’s say her husband beats her viciously until she is within an inch of her life and is unconcious. He makes her body look like a jigsaw puzzle. Let’s say say she survives the attack…but her baby does not.

Does aggravted assault seem like the only thing the husband should be charged with?

Should the mother have a say or ‘choice’ as to whether or not he is charged with murder of the child if she was committed to having the baby at this late date?

Should the spouse be charged with murder of the unborn baby at 8 months as well?

In Canada, he would not and the brutalized woman would have no 'choice' in the matter. And that is the way the feminists want it.

This is Canada’s dirty little secret, the one that we are not supposed to talk about. Radical secularists and feminists do not want this discussed. It is obvious why. On any moral level it cannot be justified that a baby in the womb this late in pregnancy has no rights at all. But, once we give a child in the womb rights at this late stage of pregnancy, then the whole debate of when life begins starts…and a debate about the morality of abortion begins.

Radical feminists and secularists know they are on the losing side of this debate and when the grisly details of the procedure are known (complete with the crushing of baby skulls and the dismemberment of baby limbs) there is very little they can do to justify it.

It is why they would rather focus on the Charter and not on the child.

This is where the debate on abortion in Canada must begin. Right now we have no laws whatsoever governing it. That is unheard of for a civilized country. It is unheard of for a country that says it believes in social justice.

I do not blame Stephen Harper for not wanting to instigate this debate. It is a scary one; one the left wing establishment in this country does not want to have, therefore they demonize, vililfy and lie about those who want to have it. But I believe it is coming.

And it is one that I will be glad to partake in once it arrives.

posted by Nicol DuMoulin @ 12:24 PM