Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Ignatieff wants me to pay for foreign abortions?

I have a strong suspicion that Donolo and Ignatieff were sitting in a closed door strategy session deciding how they could possibly get conservatives talking about abortion. Iggy suggests "I have a great idea, let's demand that the government spend Canadian tax dollars on foreign abortions during an economic recession!" Then comes the fist pumps and self adulation. I don't care if you are pro choice or pro life, is it now our role to pay for foreign abortions?

"If you're going to invest in women, you've got to invest in the full gamut of reproductive health services,"  Ignatieff said

There is a very high probability that the entire purpose of this Ignatieff statement and press release is to goad certain people into making loud public statements about their beliefs on a divisive issue. Don't take the bait. The appropriate response to the direct challenge that we advocate the western tax payer funding of third world abortions, whether you are pro choice or pro life, is the rejection of the idea that this is something we should be spending money on. I know how excited Iggy is to spend money if he could attain power; yesterday with the national day care, today with subsidized foreign abortions, tomorrow who knows?

With each passing day, his statements grow more familiar to those of the NDP. Iggy is beginning to sound like the NDP in his policy statements, which strongly suggests that he is preparing a legislative coalition with Layton when Parliament resumes. He is lining up their freaking talking points! The difference between the two parties is blurring, either because Iggy wants to repeat Dion's mistake and woo the NDP's right flank; or they are merging agendas ahead of a possible seizure of power to smooth the synergy.

I can be pro choice and not want my tax dollars to pay for abortions in foreign countries. My own feeling on abortion is that I am pro choice, but I am more uncomfortable with the idea the larger the fetus grows. How did I come to my opinion? My mother is pro choice, and having grown and birthed four children in her belly, I defer to her expert opinion on the subject of lives in belies. My mother and my sisters have given birth to 8 children between them, and they are all pro choice. Is the baby brother with no children going to tell them that they are wrong?  I also do not believe that a woman who is raped should be forced to have the child, and if you make rape a pre-condition to abortion you are creating a moral hazard similar to Pandora's Box.

But it is a belief, and I have no objection to people who believe it is wrong to kill a living human being, regardless of whether or not it has attained consciousness. What you believe is a choice, and I would not object to having a national referendum on the matter to settle the argument. My only apprehension is that the left would exploit it as an opportunity to attack the Tories alleging a secret agenda to remove freedom of choice.

To all my fellow Tories looking at polls, there are a lot of people who are pro choice who don't want to subsidize foreign abortions. Focus on that when responding to Iggy's goading statement today. He might have over-swung on this one, sneak in a quick upper cut. Team Igg are trying to enflame divisions in beliefs among Canadians on a divisive issue at a time when they sense an opportunity. They are throwing out all these NDP policies because they sense an advantage, even if just the vague outline of an oasis in a hot difficult dessert.

"Life isn't fair. It's just fairer than death, that's all."

-William Goldman, "The Princess Bride"


  1. That's funny, right after I posted to my site, Craig Smith had posted on the BT site a similar story at virtually the exact same time. I was inspired by the National Post article that I linked above. You will also notice to your left my Tweet to Iggy at 10:30-11pm before I started writing. If you read the two posts, they have nothing in common other than a similar title structure.

  2. "@M_Ignatieff So you would like my tax dollars to fund foreign abortions in an economic recession?"

    about 2 hours ago from web in reply to M_Ignatieff (11pm)


    Ignatieff wants me to pay for foreign abortions?

    Posted by The_Iceman at 12:11AM

  3. It just shows that Iggy and Donolo are very desperate - they are spraying 360 degrees and hoping that something catches. Let Iggy and the Liberals implode!

  4. I don't know if it is desperation. I think they are trying to exploit what they perceive as an advantage.

  5. Ice:

    I concur.

    The only response to this is ridicule.

    Here's my contribution.

    Iggy is being absurd. He and his "advisors" obviously didn't think this through without realizing some of the countries he wants to fund abortions do not legally allow it. The problem that will plaugue this attempt to socially engineer independent countries is that we cannot unilaterally force changes to other countries laws.
    And here we where suppose to believe Iggy was up on his game when it came to foreign affairs.
    What a fool.

  6. I suggest you are right but I suggest we do not comment further on this topic


  7. I didn't expect this to happen but to play games with the life of a babe simply to goad the prime minister so that they can return to power over the death of babes is without a doubt the lowest you can go. God will see to IGNATIEFF and his parties for inciting this. The National media supports everything the liberals did do and plan to do. They too will pay for what they have created. their lies, their manipulations you name it will be on their heads for good.

  8. And then will Mr I expect us to fund the cancer care because their is a link between abortion and breast cancer?

  9. Very good post! I would label myself pro-life, but can see your side of the argument too. I just run into difficulty when I look at abortion as people deciding who lives and who dies.
    And why is it completely a woman's choice? Two people have sex, and if she keeps the baby and they aren't in a relationship, she can then go after the man for financial support. If they do stay together, or are amicable after a break up, they share the responsibility. If she doesn't keep it, neither have to take any responsibility - but they will both have to live for the rest of their lives knowing that a decision was made to snuff out a life - for convenience. What a strange dichotomy, and how is it fair to anyone, including the child - to leave that choice up to one person when there are three involved? Nine months is not the world's longest inconvenience, and how many people are currently looking to adopt?

    And you're right - Rape is a touchier aspect to this subject.

    Sorry, guess I took the bait!

  10. Excellent analysis. Do you sleep?