Saturday, April 12, 2008

Canadian Cynic: still not happy,

Canadian Cynic says that I did not address the issue that he put forward.

The challenged he put forward was this:

Given the constant yammering about how the Knuckle Draggers Party of Canada is really, really after a majority in the next election, here's what I want to know: If you got that majority and could rewrite Canada's laws on reproductive rights any way you wanted, what would you do? ...

He asked. I answered.

He didn't like that answer, so he put forward this add-on:

If you could criminalize abortion and force women to carry unwanted fetuses to term, what would you propose as their precise legal obligations the instant after that child is delivered?

And my answer: there would be no change in legislation.

You will not find those quoted passages in any blog post of mine -- Suzie All-Caps has now descended to simply making shit up and attributing to me stuff I've never written. Somehow ironic, wouldn't you say, coming from someone who just accused me of twisting words.

How about it, Suze? Don't you think it would be only civil to either link to those alleged words of mine, or publicly retract your claim that I wrote them? Hmmmmmmm? Yeah, not holding my breath here. Onward.

Regular readers of my blog know where that quote comes from: it's from Joyce Arthur, the leading spokesperson for legalized abortion in Canada, and who nicely sums up the abortion-free-for-all crowd's attitude towards the unborn child. I did not attribute the words to Canadian Cynic. I only cited them as representative of what the abortion-free-for-all crowd thinks. You know, because, it really loves "Teh Precious Fetuses".

If you want to criminalize "feticide" and force unwilling mothers to carry their fetus to term, then the instant that child is delivered in the hospital room, does the new mother have the legal right to say, "Well, it's all yours now, I'm outta here, good luck." Yes or no?

And I answered that question right here, in the update:

It seems pretty straightforward to me: if you do not want the child, then you can terminate parental rights. If you keep the child, it is your moral obligation to love that child.

I also wrote it here, in the update:

A baby is your responsibility. If you keep that baby, he is your responsibility. If you cannot undertake that responsibility, you can relinquish him to Child Protection.

And then he writes:

When challenged on how she would rewrite the Criminal Code of Canada with respect to very specific questions I've posed, she falls back on tear-jerking inanity regarding morality and so on, none of which has a shred of value from a legal perspective.

They were never a response to his challenge. They were a response to a comment in the comments section.

I'm guessing that Suzie doesn't understand what it means to propose legislation.

Or maybe Canadian Cynic is engaging in more glib smearing, as the answers were in my blog all along, but he just didn't bother to read it.

she genuinely believes that her heart-wrenching, personal biases have the necessary structure to be codified into law.

Take Lulu's advice. Don't assume you know my mind better than I do. I guess it's okay when you do it.

For more social conservative news check out