Last Thursday a few thousand people clogged Parliament Hill for a “National March for Life.” It was a call to all those who are against abortion, and who believe the current Harper Administration is the best chance they will have to achieve their goal of outlawing the procedure.
A dozen MPs sat on the stage, ten of them Conservatives, lending their support to the cause. In fact, it is estimated that at least half, if not more, of the national Tory caucus are in favour of re-criminalizing abortion. Many right-to-lifers believe that if Mr. Harper obtains his cherished majority, that both anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage legislation will be tabled, and pass.
The video below shows scenes of the march, including banners with the “Canada” logo clearly visible on them. This is the official wordmark of the national government, and suggests the event received federal funding. If so, it is an interesting indication of the sentiments of the Conservatives in Parliament. If not, then the organizers may have done an un-Christian thing in ripping off the symbol.
(Sample guidelines for use of the “Canada” wordmark are here.)
143 comments ↓
Isn’t it great to see people marching for “life” What better cause could you be marching and supporting !!!
Garth,
Shame on you for bringing up the subject of abortion on Mother’s Day. What kind of moral depth does this show? not much.
Support for Right to Life will excuse many sins but those who are in any way complicit in abortion have two feet firmly planted in hell and are just hanging on to the rim with their finger tips. I won’t condem them but I firmly believe that they have condemed themselves by condoning such evil.
I have a problem with the Conservative government financing special interest groups like this. Is it legal?
They represent ALL Canadians and should be acting as such.
There are lots of good causes to march for like your right to decide about your own body.
This is such a volatile and sensitive issue and divides Canadians. Personally, I don’t think government should be dealing with it.
So, why do Islamofascists “march” for death? Death to America, death to gays, death to lesbos, death to non-muslim religions, death to non-seventh century civil societies, death, death, death. They even sacrifice their own children to advance their death “causes”. Why do our “liberal society” promoters cozy up to groups like that for, while snidely slagging those who promote the anti abortion or “life” crowd?
Thanks for picking up on this Garth. I think it’s likely the second option — a bunch of over zealous people using the logo without permission.
I,d rather see people marching for the right to choose what’s best for them.
I have enough reasons not to vote for Harper without bringing these two up again.
People should be putting more effort into asking our government things like.Why all the secrecy about this North American Union and why Alexander Panetta of Canadian Press had to get details on the next meeting between Canada,The US and Mexico in Quebec City,Aug 21-22 from officials in the US and Mexico.
Another issue more important is why have 600 Canadian companies been sold to foreign interests since 2006?
Why is the US putting more pressure on for more oil from Alberta without any regard to the issue of Global Warming?
I say we should put more energy into sustaining the life that’s already here and leave pregant women and gays alone.
To the house of commons in parliament assembled
We, the undersigned residents of Canada, draw the attention of the House to the following:
THAT every living cell is life; and
THAT a genocide of cells occurs nightly;
THAT every cell is sacred, even haploid cells; and
THAT this harms the public good;
THEREFORE, your petitions call upon Parliament to enact the Monty Python Act and criminalize the killing of living cells.
–
25 signatures + 1 mp [I suggest the save-the-sasquatch introducer] and it demands an official response.
The political ads are already drafted too. You can watch one here.
*hopefully this post will be taken with a sense of humor*
Garth are you saying people should not be free to their opinion without the threat of harassment? Of course you are or you wouldn’t have made this post harassing them. I’ve heard there are more than a few Liberal MPs who are also against abortion. Most minority MPs are deathly against abortion.
Democracy is supposed to be healthy and alive in Canada, why do you want to suppress people from demonstrating their views. No one who doesn’t wish to need listen. Mr. Harper has given no indication that he personally wished to visit either of the issues you mentioned. Are you just making things up now or what?
Personally I’d like to see late stage abortion revisited as an issue. The very least outcome should be anesthesia for the fetus after 12 weeks gestation…in the name of humanity!
L
Another reason why I’d never want to see this socially regressive government ever attain majority status.
I wonder – would Harper fund pro-choicers? He should be fair to all with OUR taxpayer money don’t you think?
My money, and I do mean my money, is on federal funding. I would not mind so much if SWC had not had it’s funding “rearranged”. Hell, I’d not mind if Oda would be fired from from that ministry. She is a sad sad joke.
The other thing I would have liked to have seen at the march is signs saying “All Killing is Bad”, ” War is Killing” ” How many babies died in Afghanistan/Iraq/Darfur today?” and similar to that. Otherwise, all those nice catholic schools and Life groups are hypocrites. Screaming hypocrites, and how difficult is it to make a sign, especially if the Gov. is giving you money for it?
Geo
If the Pro-lifers and there supporters would’nt be so hypocritical it would be easier to stomach.
I think being able to “keep your child” is the best possible outcome!
But we live in a democracy and that means we respect peoples right to make choices about there lives and bodies!
Pro-lifers should concentrate on helping the living and offering genuine support for people that are looking for the opportunity to keep there child!
Instead they vote for lower taxes to enrich themselves …Instead of helping the poor and helpless!
They “demonize” single moms as “evil” and use religion as a tool of “hate” and not “love” …
They even support and carry out the murder of doctors that have a legal right to perform abortions… and go on to justify that they are protecting innocent lives… Only the truly delusional can see that killing is “ok” murder is murder! Jesus himself talks about loving your enemies!
But these folks are like all funda-MENTAL-ists … They cherry-pick there own truth to justify there actions. Sounds “Middle East” familiar!!
Pro-lifers are not about “Life” they are about a religious dogma!
Shame on all pro lifers … The Taliban of Christianity carring out there Jihad!
Isn’t it great to see people marching for “life†What better cause could you be marching and supporting !!!
No,it is not .
The abortion issue was settled in Canada long ago .
1926 to 1947: 4,000 to 6,000 Canadian women die as a result of bungled illegal abortions.
1967: A federal committee considers amendments to the Criminal Code on abortion. The committee hears from many groups and individuals on both sides of the issue, including Dr. Henry Morgentaler, who urges repeal of the abortion law and freedom of choice on abortion. Around this time, an estimated 35,000 to 120,000 illegal abortions are taking place every year.
1988: On January 28, the Supreme Court of Canada strikes down Canada’s abortion law as unconstitutional. The law is found to violate section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because it infringes upon a woman’s right to life, liberty, and security of the person.
Today, Canadian women in most major centres have access to abortion. Medicare pays for abortion in hospitals, but some provinces refuse to pay for abortions in clinics. Rural women still have difficulties with access.
Women have the right to choose. Period .
Men have no business even being a part of the debate .
So, if the current government funded this rally, would they also fund a pro-choice rally? Who decides?
Why does it seem those that support abortion causes are the ones always wanting to fight in wars, too?
It’s great to March for life while also being the cause of death and destruction.
Isn’t it Canada logo a trademark and isn’t using it unless authorized against the law? I hope someone from the Justice Department is looking into this. If they allow it to happen in this case it opens the door for other close-minded groups who want to decide what I do with my uterus on my behalf to use it as well.
Better causes to be marching and supporting?
In no particular order:
1. Child poverty in Canada (and elsewhere)
2. Homelessness
3. Social Policies regaarding our most vulnerable i.e.: elderly, physically, mentally disabled, deeply disadvantaged, etc.
4. Canadian Sovereignty
5. Environment
6. Literacy
7. Health
8. Education, early and post secondary
9. War (against)
10. Choice, Privacy
Feel free to add to the list.
Geo
This is serious and questions need to be asked. I’ve written to my MP. If permission was given by the Treasury Board (since the guv’s official position is pro-abortion) than that is even more disturbing than if the CLC stole it. Oh and btw, it was in both official languages.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysdjQLj-PRI
Oh and David, go park it, only a woman has total autonomy over her own body!
One more thing.
I noticed on the video is that they seemed to be preaching to the converted.
Other than a small handful of people on the sidewalk with the rainbow banner and some signs I couldn’t make out (I’m guessing they disagreed with the march:) there were no spectators. No one on the sidelines cheering them on, booing, or simply watching. No one.
Good size crowd on the hill but I don’t think they recruited anyone new.
I was wondering too who the guys in the capes and the Pirate hats were. I know that Pastafarians (who like to dress up as pirates) believe in Choice, so it’s not them. But, funny hats!
And I’m sure some of the guys in the march following some of the girls (the loud bunch) where hoping to get lucky later on. I’d but money on it. And then there were the usual loners where it’s simple never going to be an issue for them one way or another so they might as well march for everyone and anyone simply as filler.
mmm, maybe that was sean p. and his sidekick Foreman.
Geo
Interesting that it is mostly men that lead the anti-abotion movement.
Support for Right to Life will excuse many sins but those who are in any way complicit in abortion have two feet firmly planted in hell – Papa Bear.
What’s your name…Henry or Benedict?
Just who give you, or the afore mentioned Bishop and Pope, the right to determine who is destined for hell?
Remember, “Let he who hath no sin, cast the first stone!”
Its one thing to be anti-abortion, as am I. It is another thing to tell someone they’ve got both feet in hell!
Exactly JS. Here is a partial list of attendees from You-Know-Whose-site.
Here is who I have heard was there:
Conservatives
Bev Shipley (ON)
Cheryl Gallant (ON)
David Anderson (SK)
Dean Del Mastro (ON)
Harold Albrecht (ON)
James Lunney (BC)
Jeff Watson (ON)
Mark Warawa (BC)
Maurice Vellacott (SK)
Myron Thompson (AB)
Pierre Lemieux (ON)
Rod Bruinooge (MB)
Liberals
Paul Steckle (ON)
Paul Szabo (ON)
NDP
None
Bloc Quebecois
None
Tom Wappel (ON) and Andrew Scheer (SK) were stuck in Parliament at the time and intended to go.
Why does it seem those that support abortion causes are the ones always wanting to fight in wars, too? – Tania
Not me!
But I can see your point. The right wing cons are anti-abortion but pro-death penalty and war. I guess they pick and chose their interpretation of “Thou shalt not kill!”
And don’t give me the “eye for an eye” speech. That’s a statement of the maximum penalty not the required one.
True Christians are anti-abortion, anti-dealth penalty and anti-war unless it is absolutely necessary. Don’t get them confused with the likes of christians such as Dub’ya!
Personally I’d like to see late stage abortion revisited as an issue. The very least outcome should be anesthesia for the fetus after 12 weeks gestation…in the name of humanity! – Leasa
Well said.
I suspect many pro-abortion supporters don’t even know how abortions are performed. I suggest they investigate and find out how this barbaric act is conducted.
Did you know a nurse has to count every part to ensure everything of what’s left came out? The operative word is “part.” If this shocks you, so it should!
Re: Kevin on 05.13.07 1:55 pm
If the Pro-lifers and there supporters would’nt be so hypocritical it would be easier to stomach. Whoa- that’s a very big brush your using there!
I think being able to “keep your child†is the best possible outcome! – I agree wholeheartedly, but there are other options as well. Adoption for one!
But we live in a democracy and that means we respect peoples right to make choices about there lives and bodies! – The choise should be made before the child is concieved. (I know rape is an exceptional case!)
Pro-lifers should concentrate on helping the living and offering genuine support for people that are looking for the opportunity to keep there child! – They do.
Instead they vote for lower taxes to enrich themselves …Instead of helping the poor and helpless! – As I said, broad brush. Not all of them. Those that have a social consciousness are not only anti-abortion, but anti poverty as well. They don’t fit neatly into the political spectrum being on the right for some, the left for others.
They “demonize†single moms as “evil†and use religion as a tool of “hate†and not “love†… Only the ultra right wing wacko’s.
They even support and carry out the murder of doctors that have a legal right to perform abortions… and go on to justify that they are protecting innocent lives… Only the truly delusional can see that killing is “ok†murder is murder! – Again only the wacko’s. As you say murder IS murder!
Jesus himself talks about loving your enemies! – How very true.
But these folks are like all funda-MENTAL-ists … They cherry-pick there own truth to justify there actions. Sounds “Middle East†familiar!!
Pro-lifers are not about “Life†they are about a religious dogma! – Many are but not all.
Shame on all pro lifers … The Taliban of Christianity carring out there Jihad!
- I think I’ve just been insulted along with many like minded people. I know I have.
Sad, sad that this issue keeps coming up isn’t it? It’s been settled, or so we thought.
So, the one complaining about the procedure is a man – interesting. Guess what guys – women can think for themselves, have rights now and really don’t need men telling us what to do.
I’m sure we can find horrible things about any surgery if we choose to.
I don’t like abortion. But, there are instances where it is necessary. It’s not a black and white issue.
“We’ve come a long way baby” and had to fight hard for it – being recognized as a person, getting the right to vote, being able to have careers and yes, deciding about our own bodies. You don’t like it – too bad.
This reminds me of past Liberal scare mongering in the 2004 election. It seems that Garth has started his scare mongering election tactics already for the next one.
Garth all I can say to you is get a life and stop this crap.
Hi everyone, as always, i’ll start this discussion with a Quote, “My money, and I do mean my money, is on federal funding. I would not mind so much if SWC had not had it’s funding “rearrangedâ€. Hell, I’d not mind if Oda would be fired from from that ministry. She is a sad sad joke.
The other thing I would have liked to have seen at the march is signs saying “All Killing is Badâ€, †War is Killing††How many babies died in Afghanistan/Iraq/Darfur today?†and similar to that. Otherwise, all those nice catholic schools and Life groups are hypocrites. Screaming hypocrites, and how difficult is it to make a sign, especially if the Gov. is giving you money for it?
Geo”
In addition, I believe James correctly pointed out that if people are going to be pro-life, they ought to be pro-life on every issue (instead of cherrypicking issues).
In my opionion, I believe that this current “anti vs pro abortion debate” is dividing our society. Instead, we ought to be finding ways to REDUCE the number of abortions (and by that, I don’t mean shutting down abortion clinics). By that, I mean answering these questions: what social circumstances exist that led some women to get abortions? Do low-income women, those in poor and other minorities make up a disproportionate number of those who have abortions due to financial limitations?
Although the pro-life claims that the issue of abortion is only about morality, it’s also about equality and justice. For instance, it wouldn’r surprise me if they were some women who are against abortion but due to financial and social circumstances, they feel pressured to get an abortion because they’re afraid their child won’t get the support it needs.
I think if the pro-lifers really want to make a dent on this issue, they ought to be advocating reforming our Adoption system (as i’ve heard a big reason many women get abortions is because they fear if they put their child up for adoption, they’ll spend most of their life wandering from foster home to foster home).
Second, we need to figure out if there’s a lack between financial and social inequality and one’s chances of getting an abortion. If as I suspect women from low-income, single mothers, teenage mothers et all are more vulnerable to getting an abortion due to lack of supports, then we need to find a way to invest in more social supports for these people so that they don’t have to abort their children for financial reasons.
Third, we’re experiencing a demographic trend now whereby the Canadian population as a whole is rapidly aging (because people today usually only have 1 to 2 children, yet in the days of our parents and grandparents, they probably had 3-6 child. But in NL, families used to be even bigger than that sometimes).
So ya, if we don’t provide the supports that disadvantaged groups need and they feel that for financial reasons they must abort their children, what will happen 10-30 years from now when there isn’t enough young people left to replace the older segment of our population?
So ya, on the issue of abortion, it’s not just a moral issue, but also a justice and social inequality issue. And I mean, like James and others have said, what good is it to be anti-abortion (“pro life”) if one doesn’t realize that the issues of war, poverty,etc.. are also life issues?
So ya as a Christian, it really annoys me now the Religious Right in Canada (and the neighbouring US) have hijacked the issue of same-sex marriage and abortion as a way of dividing society, instead of providing moral leadership.
In fact, many Christians fail to acknowledge that the Bible actually says it’s the job of the Church to care for the poor and sick, and yet, how often do you see the Church doing that?
In conclusion, I think that all people of faith and all Canadians need to learn instead of just taking one side on an issue, we all need to learn to assess the merits (or lack thereof) of each side. Once we’ve done that, we need to find some common ground (i.e. the social justice aspect of this issue).
And then from there, we need to aim for higher ground: reducing the number of Abortions by reforming the adoption system, providing better social aid to disadvantaged groups and a Stronger Community.
If and when we can do that, this issue will become less of a ‘us-versus-them’ issue and more of a ‘us/we’ issue: how best can all Canadians correct the social injustices in society that contribute to abortions.
And from there, we need to ask ourself what kind of society we wish to live in!
So, the one complaining about the procedure is a man – interesting. – SLG
Interesting that the one person really fighting for abortion rights is Dr. Morgentaler … that’s right…a man!
Yes women can make the choice,but I don’t want my taxes to pay for a surgical procedure that being used as a cure for a social problem.
Men – control you labido, and women just say no!
The problem is that the Charter of Rights does not recognise a fetus as having rights. But I find it ironic, even hypocritical, that a women can have an abortion, but if she does anything to harm her fetus, (taking drugs etc.) the social workers can have her charged for endangering her unborn baby!
Time to log off this soap box! I’ve already forgotten to put supper in the oven!
So you anti-abortionists want to return to the days of ‘coke bottle ‘ and wire hanger abortions that caused a small holocaust amongst our women in the flea-bag hotels and back alleys of our nation .
No thanks .
Any man (?) who would march in an anti- abortion rally is a nut less wonder .
Women fought hard for these rights and no one,especially a man, has the right to decide a womans fate .
Garth is a politician, a shrewd one to say the least.
First of all he never said that the government funded the event. He only implied it knowing full well that some people would take it as gospel and run with it that it was indeed funded. They didn’t disapoint.
Now if my memory serves me correctly, the current government cut funding to all special interest groups including NAC which made it fairer than before under the previous government as NAC was supported while mother, groups were not.
Thirdly, This is a free country and groups are allowed to protest and to have a politician to single out one group and malign them for exercising their right for free assembly is beneath contempt.
Finally, I agree with the writer that to bring up the abortion topic up on Mother’s day was bad move and in poor taste on Garth’s part.
I didn’t plan the event or pick the timing. I merely observed it. — Garth
I believe there is no law re abortion, so wouldn’t that mean that abortion is not settled.
2nd: “A woman has a right to her own body”. True, but the baby developing in her body, he/she is not the woman’s body. After a baby is born, the baby continues to grow until adulthood is reached. Why is it OK to kill this development before birth, but not after?
Support for Right to Life will excuse many sins but those who are in any way complicit in abortion have two feet firmly planted in hell and are just hanging on to the rim with their finger tips. I won’t condem them but I firmly believe that they have condemed themselves by condoning such evil.
By Papa Bear on 05.13.07 1:07 pm
You sir, are a laugh !
Who told you that,being, pro abortion was a mortal sin the pope ?
Those that would deny a woman a therapeutic abortion are in much more danger of condemnation as they are jeopardizing not one but two lives .
Papa Bear
Rather than lash at Garth consider this.
It would appear that the March for Life group, not Garth, would be the ones who very conveniently and deliberately chose to bring up the issue of abortion on Mother’s Day weekend.
Do you have an issue with commentary or discussion of said event? That would be called democracy in action. Or should we stifle all speech that does not agree with you? That would be called something else entirely.
I understood it was my MP, Liberal Paul Steckle that was bringing forward the abortion bill to Parliament. I don’t think many in the Huron-Bruce riding would be in favor of this.
What an issue to get people going.And it’s such a simple issue.The real question to be anwswered is when is a fetus a human being?As soon as we can agree on that,then we will determine at what stage,if any, is abortion legal.
Until then,all the illogical arguements will continue to be rehashed.Such as:
“For late term abortions give them anesthesia!!”Duh-if they are not alive,then who cares?
“It’s soley a woman’s choice”But if she chooses to keep the baby,the father’s on the hook for financial support!
This is not an issue about women’s rights-it’s an issue of when a fetus is considered a living being.If that doesn’t matter,then the elderly,mentally handicapped and sick had better look out!
When is it acceptable to kill them off? Of course those that have been birthed get better protection by society than those in the womb.
As a human race,we have tough choices and not always all the answers.
I believe that if Harper had a majority he would appease these social conservatives who are such hypocrites. They love war and the death penalty, don’t support welfare but they are Christian and they hate women and abortions
The videos of the march show at least two very large signs with the Government of Canada logo, which implies that the Government of Canada sponsored the event. So the question is, did the Government of Canada provide the signs or any funding or support whatsover for this march?
Remember that this government cut funding from Status of Women Canada; at the same time they changed the mandate of SWC so that it could not advocate women’s equality; and they changed the funding requirements so they could give money to religious groups.
We already know that Bev Oda has funny ideas on what to spend her Department’s funding on, things like midnight madness sales. So is it possible that she provided those signs or paid for them with our tax money?
I would really like to see this government state that it will support women’s equality and women’s rights over their own bodies; and to see it repudiate any support for marchers who want to take away my rights.
Why you would post such a video condeming pro-lifers on mother’s day is beyond me.
I can’t believe I once respected you Garth.
You might want to ask the organizers why they picked the timing they did. — Garth
People, people, people. How easy you are led astray. Garth has posted here and made this into some kind of Conservative Harper thing.
This group has marched on Parliament Hill as well as amny provincial Parliament buildings over the years, including those led by Liberal’s, Conservative’s, and NDPer’s.
My opinion is i think the laws in place now work well, and a women should have the right to choose. With that said i see nothing wrong with this group or any group voicing an opinion on the hill, provided that opinion violates no laws.
As for the comments of the Canadian emblem being used, i believe i saw that same emblem used in a Quebec rally for Hezbollah attended by Denis Coderre, so i guess anyone is free to use it.
Yes Garth how DARE you bring to light something that affects all of us on Mothers day!Why couldn’t you go over to those protesters and tell them to wait till Monday! Man, you politicians just cant get anything right can you?
Good thing I have my microscope out, otherwise I would have NEVER found fault in you on this!
/sarcasm
I am virtually certain that no one in that crowd got a dime from the government.
That logo has been there since I can remember, and no one has said anything yet.
The logo was probably put there for patriotic reasons, not to say the government endorsed it.
I know this because I attend Campaign Life meetings in Ottawa, and we get a financial report every meeting, and there is never any mention of government sponsorship, nor, to the best of my knowledge does Campaign Life seek government grants of any kind.
Copyright and trademarks are things that are regularly violated by a large number of people. Really, this is a tempest in a teapot.
` People, people, people. How easy you are led astray. Garth has posted here and made this into some kind of Conservative Harper thing.
This group has marched on Parliament Hill as well as amny provincial Parliament buildings over the years, including those led by Liberal’s, Conservative’s, and NDPer’s.
My opinion is i think the laws in place now work well, and a women should have the right to choose. With that said i see nothing wrong with this group or any group voicing an opinion on the hill, provided that opinion violates no laws.
As for the comments of the Canadian emblem being used, i believe i saw that same emblem used in a Quebec rally for Hezbollah attended by Denis Coderre, so i guess anyone is free to use it.
By jccs on 05.13.07 6:03 pm
JCCS is the only voice of reason here. You explained it well my friend. All the liberal luddites tried to make this march into something that it wasn’t. There is no shred of evidence that this march was funded by this government.
Thanks so much for picking this up, Garth! Way too many questions and not enough answers about this (yet).
For those bleating about their right to protest, stop whining and re-read the post: that is not what is at issue here. The dishonest use of government property is the issue — and the possibility that the government may have given financial support to a group whose objectives are counter to the government’s position (pro-choice)… not to mention the position of 80% of Canadians.
Yikes. This subject certainly does get heated.
That said, as I read Garth’s post, the concern is the Canada logo seen on a number of signs, implying that the government supported the event.
I do not know if they did or not, but we should know. No matter what side of the issue you are on, don’t you want to know if your tax dollars are supporting this movement? Don’t you want it to be clear on where the government stands? I do.
To discuss whether or not abortion should be legal, is not the point here.
Oh and to those who question the timing of the post, I think Garth’s comment is important. Why would these activists choose this time of year?
As for the comments of the Canadian emblem being used, i believe i saw that same emblem used in a Quebec rally for Hezbollah attended by Denis Coderre, so i guess anyone is free to use it.
Really? Do you have a link to an image or did you just have a desire to slag a Lib?
Yabbut, even if it were simple ignorance, which while entirely possible has not been proven, it is certainly misleading. Imagine the fundie frothing if the logo appeared on a Pride Day banner or a Take Back the Night banner.
Any man (?) who would march in an anti- abortion rally is a nut less wonder .
Women fought hard for these rights and no one,especially a man, has the right to decide a womans fate . – JCLH.
“This bout is scheduled for one fall!”
For myself, its not about a woman’s rights or taking them away, its about the rights of the unborn child and I would and have led the march!
I don’t want to go back to the days of coat hangers etc..so as a society we need to support these women and give them options. Only telling them abortion is wrong, that those who are pro-abortion have two feet in hell or that a government is going to make abortion illegal is too easy and just won’t do.
If a woman makes a mistake, then they should have to live with it. Its the same throughout society, you have to take responsibility for your actions. But society needs to give them options and not leave them to fend for themselves.
In the dark ages, this was not the case and, apart from the right wing fundamentalist nutters or those with an olde fashioned mentality, I think society is more open minded.
All I can say is a thank you to two women who chose not to have an abortion. I have two wonderful kids!
There is no shred of evidence that this march was funded by this government.
By THE SHADOW KNOWS on 05.13.07 6:37 pm
Same as there is no evidence you are an intelligent sentient being .
First off, I think it’s disgusting that Garth or his 17 year olds choose Mother’s Day to air this wedge issue.
Second, while I think that a woman who chooses an abortion, it is not an easy one for her. So yeah, her decision should be respected.
Third, if people could stop their extremism, then maybe a healthy debate can occur. Such as when an abortion is not permitted – after 20 weeks, after 24 weeks, after 30 weeks, after 36 weeks; or permitted until 40 weeks.
Fourth, in a democracry, people should be able to demonstrate to voice their opinion without being threaten to shut down their voice.
But, my first point is the most strongest today. Garth, you have really stoop low today on this universal Mother’s Day celebration. I would love to say – typical man, but, I won’t because I don’t want to stoop to your level.
Did you miss the previous comments about the organizers chosing the timing, not me? And, ‘scuse me, did you actually say you’d have ‘to stoop’ to get to the level of a typical man? Lady, you need retooling. — Garth
BTW, Garth, this march is their tenth anniversary of their march – 8 of those years were under the Liberal Party of Canada regime.
Did they have Government of Canada logos on their banners in years past? Can you provide a picture? — Garth
Garth, I have zero proof, but it seems to me that that logo has always been there. Maybe someone at Campaign Life has some pictures. I tried looking online but didn’t find any. It seems that that banner is there every year.
My, how some people read into what they think they see. To answer someone who earlier asked who the tri-cornered hats and capes belong to – it is the Knights of Columbus – and CWL represents Catholic Womens League – both organizations are Catholic affiliates. I saw the entire video and have two personal conclusions to state.
First of all, the march was peaceful, well organized and seemed to be perfectly legal. For that, and any other legally organized march held in Canada – good news. Whether or not any person agrees or disagrees with the purpose for the march – we have to admit – a legally organized march is a freedom enjoyed in Canada.
BUT, the use of the official Canada logo is an entirely different kettle of fish. I was horrified to see it used for what should be a non-governmental march – this march was based on the personal beliefs of organizational members, or individuals who are marching against abortion. They have the right to march, they have the right to their opinion, but they do NOT have the right to use the official Canada logo without permission. The use of this logo was either done improperly, if not illegally, or there was governmental permission to use it. In either case – this is wrong. I would have the exact same opinion if the march had been a pro-abortion march. I am not stating my opinion on abortion one way or the other – but I definitely believe that the division between church and state must be maintained at all costs – and most of the people that I viewed were strongly associated with particular religious groups, including the young ladies wearing uniform skirts required by Catholic or private schools. I confirm their right to march peacefully, to disagree with others who are not followers of their philosophy, but if the use of the Canada logo was used with governmental sanction as an official means of supporting their agenda – I have a serious problem with that. Before anyone jumps in here with nonsense about me caring more about a logo than the life of a fetus – stop right there – I believe that civil rights come with a responsibility and I would not have commented on this issue except for the fact that it appears that governmental trademarks were used to support what should not or was not, a governmental march on Parliament Hill. Pure and simple.
universal Mother’s Day
Catherine, check your facts.
Suzanne, if that is true, it’s still wrong. I do hope someone will bring that info forward.
Hey! No deletin’ posts! Where did mine disappear too?! I bet Dion told you to stop it from showing up. Damn those overpowering libs!
There was no deletion. — Garth
This is a democratic country, Garth.
Using the word “clogged” shows that you don’t really respect the opinions of other people. How derogatory.
I thought you were complaining about being muzzled when you were a Conservative, or was that in a past life?
It’s hard to keep your political life straight, because there are so many confusing twists and turns.
You insult the electorate every time you make comments such as the above. Silly.
Marchers clogged the Hill. They clogged Wellington Street. I was there. Were you? — Garth
I don’t think anyone at Campaign Life is deliberately trying to break the law. You have to admit, violations of intellectual property are pretty common in this day and age, and I’m sure the logo was placed there with positive, non-partisan intentions.
So, if any organization cares to march in protest against government policy, they are allowed to use the Canadian Governments official logo?
It would follow then that no one would mind if anti-war protesters, pro-Palestinian demonstrators, anti-American protesters, etc etc also used the Official Government Logo??
To me, the use of the logo implies endorsement.
Yeah, Judy. Government logos for all!
‘Violations of intellectual property’ being so common and all. What the heck , eh?
Dear Mr. Turner,
Get to back to the point you made in your this post. GOOD QUESTION
It just got lost in the mass postings. I was just kidding. A little jab at the others who think you delete all dissenting voices on here.
That and I was just trying to get a reply out of ya! You seem so selective, I just wanted to be one of the cool ones!
[...] rally. The highest profile blogger to take up this cause is maverick MP Garth Turner (here), however JimBobby has a really good piece on this (here) as does the Unrepentant Old Hippie [...]
Did you miss the previous comments about the organizers chosing the timing, not me? And, ’scuse me, did you actually say you’d have ‘to stoop’ to get to the level of a typical man? Lady, you need retooling. — Garth
They didn’t demonstrate on Sunday, Mother’s Day, did they?
And you, of course, did! It shows your insensitivity to the issue. There are many young women, who were still going to school and who chose to have the procedure. Later, they became mothers, and many of them do have a painful experience that they could have had another child. It’s the same feeling for some mothers, who gave up their child to adoption.
You, sir, showed that you will do anything to get your constant bashing of your previous leader.
BTW, Garth, how do you feel about clogging of the streets, when we have the gay pride parades, or when we have Santa Claus parades, or when we have “stop the war” demonstrations, or when we have “Hezbollah support” parades?
By your reference that the pro-life demonstration is clogging, you have exposed yourself as a non-democratic politician.
All large demonstrations clog stuff up. It is a non-subjective word, and you know it. And it seems to me the Right to Life organizers wanted their message to be heard on mother’s day, hence the timing as close to the date as posible (media is not there on Sundays). Finally, it is time for you to explain your outrageously sexist remark, or apologize for having made it. That was uncalled for. Comments like that underscore a weak argument. — Garth
I am not the ‘assistant Holy Spirit’ in anyone’s life, nor do I think God puts a degree on sin.
It’s a free country. Anyone can protest or march or present their cause. I choose not to judge. We all have our pet peeves, mine happens to be poverty.
The issue here is the use of the logo. That’s a matter of law, not morality.
James, Chatham – Morgentaler is a doctor, are you?
universal Mother’s Day?
Did you know in the UK. Father’s day is the same day as in Canada? But, reversing the calander to put father’s day first, mothers day is 9 months after father’s day! No I’m not making this up.
But given we’re in Canada, I think Mother’s Day is the perfect day to bring forth this issue. After all these women would be mothers!
To suggest that a CPC majority would enact anti-abortion and anti-gay legislation is a sign of a desperate and thoroughly unplugged mind.
Get a life and start doing something positive with your position as an MP.
It is their stated hope, not my suggestion. At least be accurate. — Garth
Hey Garth, nice photo. What a bunch of amateurs these “Pro Lifers” are. Don’t they realize the predicament they have put the Federal Government in?
I contacted Treasury Board and its president, Vic Toews to see if supporting anti-abortionists is a new government program or if the anti-abortionists are breaking the law by using the Canada wordmark on their publications. As far as I know, the Federal Government can pursue legal action when the Canada wordmark is abused.
I await the answer. If supporting pro lifers is a new program, I’m sure the CPC does not want it publicized too loudly. If the pro lifers are breaking the law, then I expect the RCMP to arrest someone.
I’ll let you know what the response is.
-R
Lady, you need retooling. What a delicious and appropriate double entendre. Congratulations, sir.
I remember about three years back, some site being sued by the gubbermint for being too ugly, and thus confusing visitors who might think they were on an official GoC website. Other cases also make me think they take their marks very seriously (as the law requires of them), I can’t believe they were out marching around the hill bearing the logo without permission, and no one stopping it. I sure would like to hear about prior years if anyone can dig up photos.
Oops, I also forgot to let you know that I contacted some media, too. I know how desperate some journalists are for a lead on a good story.
Could be an interesting week.
-R
R. I’ve said repeatedly: I am virtually certain Campaign Life did not get any money.
I am against abortion except in extenuating circumstances. I believe the choice to abort should be between both the mother AND the father. Currently there are approx. 110,000 abortions per year in Canada. At the same time we are opening immigration rules to try to get our population numbers up. Do the math folks…how many potential Canadians, leaders, teachers, doctors etc., are we aborting to our own detriment?
Regardless, the fact is that whether abortions are legal or not, they will be done. So I will certainly concede that it is best if they are done in a regulated and safe as possible manner.
Is there still room for argument and change on this topic. Absolutely. However, neither side will ever win an all out victory.
Let’s try and make abortion a very last resort and to examine and talk about all other options FIRST.
Our country is going to hell in a hand basket and the only person that is man enough to save it is Stephen Harper.
Give Mr. Harper his majority and, God willing, Christian values will be restored.
It’s time to end abortion and send those flaming, deviant, homosexuals back to the closet where they belong.
Next we’ll get rid of them blacks, arabs and the Jews too. Remember they killed Jesus.
Fially, we’ll stop women from voting and get those uppity bitches back in the kitchen where they belong.
Vote for Stephen Harper he’s the man for the job.
Suzanne wrote: I’ve said repeatedly: I am virtually certain Campaign Life did not get any money.
OK, Suzanne, then let’s get it all out in the open instead of telling us ‘move along, nothing to see here’.
Let’s be 100% certain instead of ‘virtually’ certain.
Whoever made teh cliam in regards to teh Lebanon protest and Coderre.
Well, look here. Lots of Quebec flags, but I don’t see any Government of Canada wordmark
(from a friend’s photoset taken that day)
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2olezd
Whooee! Well, I gotta hand it to the pro-lifers. They got everybuddy talkin’ about abortion again.
The logo thingy is the issue.
I reckon somebuddy who’s got some title (like CLC chair or Treasury Board Chair) oughta be settin’ things straight with some sorta official statement sometime soon. Like FrankieFrink sez, let’s be a hunnert percent’s worth on this.
With all them MP’s onstage and the logo bein’ used, it sure looks like they either got gummint support or want it to look like they got gummint support.
I reckon Garth could ask Vic Toews about it. How ’bout that, GarthFeller?
JimBobby
Wow, the whole issue of abortion goes unwritten by Garth but they’ve used the Canada logo. Way to miss the point of the March, Garth.
Read the post. By the way, I favour no change in th existing situation. — Garth
May 14, 1969 was the date of the change in our law that allowed abortion. Therefore, the dates of the rally coincide with this date. They even said so during the speeches.
I did read the post. I understand very clearly what you’re trying to point out. I know you don’t favour any restrictions on abortion, that’s why you didn’t address the issue on your post, rather, you addressed the CPC government possibly supporting the rally. As a pro-lifer, I do not have any faith that a CPC majority government will re-visit either of these issues. Harper has been very clear about this Garth and you know it. So, you’re either deliberately misleading us or you really haven’t followed Harper’s position on the 2.
So you anti-abortionists want to return to the days of ‘coke bottle ‘ and wire hanger abortions that caused a small holocaust amongst our women in the flea-bag hotels and back alleys of our nation .
No thanks .
Any man (?) who would march in an anti- abortion rally is a nut less wonder .
Women fought hard for these rights and no one,especially a man, has the right to decide a womans fate .
By Jackie Chan’s Left Hand on 05.13.07 4:51 pm
This small holocaust, how many is this? I’m curious to see what number you choose here.
I believe that if Harper had a majority he would appease these social conservatives who are such hypocrites. They love war and the death penalty, don’t support welfare but they are Christian and they hate women and abortions
By Margaret Bedore on 05.13.07 5:49 pm
I’m curious here, there were thousands of women on the Hill, so, do they hate women??? As well, what about Pope John Paul II, who stated that the war in Iraq was wrong and that Catholics are against the death penalty? So, whom are you referring when you state Christians? What about those women on the Hill who stated that they regret their abortion? Do they hate women too?
Sometimes, ridiculous statements by people need to be questioned and with questions that show how wrong they are.
Garth, what the heck was sexist in Catherine’s post? Please quote it exactly as I don’t see it at all.
Regardless, the fact is that whether abortions are legal or not, they will be done. So I will certainly concede that it is best if they are done in a regulated and safe as possible manner.
Reg, many things are done whether they’re illegal or not, do we then condone the illegal? How do you make abortion “safe”, if it is illegal? I’m interested in your proposal.
Wow, the whole issue of abortion goes unwritten by Garth but they’ve used the Canada logo. Way to miss the point of the March, Garth.
Read the post. By the way, I favour no change in th existing situation. — Garth
By Sean P. Hogan on 05.14.07 10:51 am
Oh, I’m pretty sure Garth, and everyone else in Canada “got the point”. Obviously though, YOU didn’t get the point of this topic. A re-read might do you some good. Nice try though.
Abortion truly does need to be left alone. There will never be consensus on who’s right and who’s wrong, and there are already laws in place to address it. March all you want, but bringing up something so divisive isn’t going to help this issue anytime soon.
And to use the GoC’s logo? Pretty stupid move. Either on the part of the protesters, OR the government. Let’s hope it’s the protesters…. cause I do not want my government picking sides on such a volatile issue.
The other thing I would have liked to have seen at the march is signs saying “All Killing is Badâ€, †War is Killing††How many babies died in Afghanistan/Iraq/Darfur today?†and similar to that. Otherwise, all those nice catholic schools and Life groups are hypocrites. Screaming hypocrites, and how difficult is it to make a sign, especially if the Gov. is giving you money for it?
So Georgine, how is this a balanced difference of opinion? You’re going to be eating your accusations to others if you’re going to keep posting, as I don’t think you have any idea what balance actually means.
But let me ask you one question, do you call the anti-war people hypocrites when they don’t have signs that say that their pro-life or that abortion kills children? Of course not, you’re against the Pro-life movement and since you can’t put forth an argument, you look at other issues which are not the same issue as this one.
You see, its a 2-way street here and so far, you’re only going one way, to a dead end I might add.
And I’m sure some of the guys in the march following some of the girls (the loud bunch) where hoping to get lucky later on. I’d but money on it. And then there were the usual loners where it’s simple never going to be an issue for them one way or another so they might as well march for everyone and anyone simply as filler.
mmm, maybe that was sean p. and his sidekick Foreman.
So Georgine, how is this a balanced difference of opinion? Ooops, guess it isn’t, again. But that’s alright, you go right ahead accusing others of doing the same thing and I’ll just sit here and laugh at each post you make that demonstrates your hypocrisy.
“Let’s be 100% certain instead of ‘virtually’ certain.”
Be my guest.
I noticed on the video is that they seemed to be preaching to the converted.
Other than a small handful of people on the sidewalk with the rainbow banner and some signs I couldn’t make out (I’m guessing they disagreed with the march:) there were no spectators. No one on the sidelines cheering them on, booing, or simply watching. No one.
On the other hand, there were over 6,000 people protesting. But don’t let that big number stop you from trying to minimalize the event. But here’s a fact that old Georgine Dear is not presenting. Downtown is government workers, the time was 1:30pm, therefore, they would all be at work. I saw many people sitting outside watching, and you can bet your sweet bippy that the government workers were watching from their offices. But ignore me, I’m not offering a balanced difference of opinion, just facts.
SJ, I did get the point of the topic, that was exactly my point. Wow, do you read other’s posts before you post? Yoo-hoo??? McFly???
My point was and is, that he missed the point of the rally and the reasons for it. Instead, he commented on a sign and then attacked the CPC for it. SJ, if you actually know Harper’s position on abortion, you would call Garth on his ridiculous statement about what they would do if they had a majority.
Abortion needs to be restricted. Right now, a baby can be killed by partial-birth abortion and there’s nothing we can do about it. Polls have indicated that Canadians want some restrictions. We are one of the few countries in the world who haven’t any restrictions whatsoever, this is very wrong.
SJ, previous governments have taken sides on this issue. They’ve stated unequivocally that they do not support any changes. How can you make such a statement when the truth proves you wrong?
Back in April, I wrote a post about how the government was cracking down on copyright/trademark infringement. This situation ought not be treated any differently than these cases:
To date, the coat-of-arms police have gone after websites (Sex Trade Workers of Canada), an immigration advice service, a shady online university, patriotic coffee mugs, someone selling model RCMP cars on eBay, the Transhuman Church of Enlightenment, a Canadian lawyer advertising in Korea, a fitness club, 40,000 baseball caps sold at Zellers, and Little Sister’s Book Store.
Yes, Big Brother went after Little Sister. And many more.
Ottawa Citizen
According to that article, the Treasury Board is responsible for going after offenders. I’d suggest a complaint be filed with them.
The federal government is spending nearly a quarter of a million dollars a year chasing down people who take Canada’s name in vain, and making them stop.
If you use our country’s coat of arms without permission, the Treasury Board will tell you to cease and desist. Same thing with the “wordmark” — the “Canada” with the little flag over the final letter.
SJ, another thing, you’ve stated that laws already address abortion. Please tell me what laws we have in Canada in regards to abortion. This ought to be good.
May 9-10, 2007 – Canadian National March for
Life, Ottawa
Every year, thousands of Canadians gather on Parliament Hill to mark the passage of the 1969
Omnibus Bill, which opened the door to legalized abortion. They will march through downtown Ottawa, calling for an end to abortion in Canada.
Seems to be a yearly occurance. So why the outrage?
Channelling Horshack
Oooh Ooh Mr. Sean P. Hogan pick me.
There are no laws in realtion to abortion in Canada as the previous law was found to be in contravention to the Charter of Rights (1988).
No subsequent government has moved to introduce any laws regarding a woman’s reproductive rights.
And nor should they. Appprox. 80% of the Canadian population is fine with the current situation – i.e. no law on the matter.
But the other approx. 20% sure would love to be able to dictate to the rest of us.
“Seems to be a yearly occurance. So why the outrage?”
The outrage is with the misuse of intellectual property belonging to the GoC (that’s you and me).
I don’t think anyone is contesting anybuddy’s right to protest — just their right to make it appear that they have official government support for their cause when, in fact, they don’t. Do they?
JB
I don’t see the point of all this! Turner throws out the idea the rally may be funded by the Conservative government when he know full well that is absolutley not true. Then the partisans and others get all fired up and start defending and accusing. It is all based on a unfounded unsubstantiated gossip thought. Later today or tomorrow Turner will start another one of these rumour fed feuds.
Rumour? What rumour? They carried signs with the Canadian government logo on it. We’re not making this up. — Garth
1926 to 1947: 4,000 to 6,000 Canadian women die as a result of bungled illegal abortions.
JCCS – So why the outrage
Just so we’re clear, even though several people have pointed it out I’ll do it again.
They can march and protest anywhere anytime they like. No one has a problem with that. No one is trying to stop any marches. Get over your ‘victim complex’.
The issue is the use of the copyright protected Government of Canada wordmark on their banners. Are they authorized to use it? If not, they should cease immediately as the use of the wordmark ‘suggests’ (as Garth put it) an endorsement, sponsorship or financial contribution by the Government of Canada.
That’s what it means when you see it at a festival or other event, in a publication, or in film and TV credits.
As several others have pointed out, the Treasury Board has ‘gone after’ a number of different groups, organizations and individuals to ‘cease-and-desist’ the illegal and unauthorized use of the wordmark.
If they don’t do the same here we then have more evidence of their harpocricy (sic).
Got it now? Or should I repeat again in about 5 or 6 posts down?
Abortion in Canada is not limited by law. While some non-legal obstacles exist, Canada is one of only a few nations with no legal restrictions on abortion, and access there is still among the most liberal in the world.
just their right to make it appear that they have official government support for their cause when, in fact, they don’t.
Anyone who draws this conclusion is terribly, terribly confused. Any attempt to clear up their confusion is doomed to failure. The “wordmark” is idiotic in theory and unenforceable in practice. A few commercial entities have been intimidated into believing that they need the government’s permission to display the flag but – in all cases – this is a idiotic garbage. It’s a tissue-thin fig leaf that moralistic prigs use to attack people with the “wrong” opinions.
Lawrence
Rumour? What rumour? They carried signs with the Canadian government logo on it. We’re not making this up. — Garth
Not every organization can afford lawyers to scrutinize all their banners to ensure they conform to trademark and copyright laws. It is unlikely this organization received federal funding.
Many right-to-lifers believe that if Mr. Harper obtains his cherished majority, that both anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage legislation will be tabled, and pass. –Garth
And won’t the supreme court strike down this legislation as unconstitutional? Or do you have little faith in the judiciary Garth? Or are you just having fun with some fearmongering?
Clean your glasses. I did not say such legislation would pass, I said many right-to-lifers believe it would. And they do. Accuracy, please. — Garth
Channelling Horshack
Oooh Ooh Mr. Sean P. Hogan pick me.
There are no laws in realtion to abortion in Canada as the previous law was found to be in contravention to the Charter of Rights (1988).
No subsequent government has moved to introduce any laws regarding a woman’s reproductive rights.
And nor should they. Appprox. 80% of the Canadian population is fine with the current situation – i.e. no law on the matter.
But the other approx. 20% sure would love to be able to dictate to the rest of us.
By Frank Frink on 05.14.07 2:06 pm
I thank you for proving SJ wrong. Much appreciated bud.
The Supreme court has stated that there can be an abortion law, just as long as there is a clause in regards to the health to the mother.
“Reg, many things are done whether they’re illegal or not, do we then condone the illegal? How do you make abortion “safeâ€, if it is illegal? I’m interested in your proposal.”
Mind pointing out where I stated we should condone the illegal?
GGF, the thing is, Pro-lifers do not believe this at all. If you check CLC, Campaign Life Coalition, they request that people vote for pro-life candidates, irregardless of their party affiliation, unless they’re NDP. I don’t know where Garth gets this assumption that we think that Harper will push this through, but I do believe as you do, fear-mongering. Harper has stated his position on this and pro-lifers do not depend on him whatsoever.
Clean your glasses. I did not say such legislation would pass, I said many right-to-lifers believe it would. And they do. Accuracy, please. — Garth
This implies that you don’t believe the Conservatives would table or pass such legislation. So what is the point in bring this up? To teach people about proper use of the Canada trademark? Relevancy, please.
The real reason you brought it up is to perpetuate the stereotype that Conservatives are anti-abortion extremists.
It was an accurate statement. Period. — Garth
GGF wrote “…The real reason you brought it up is to perpetuate the stereotype that Conservatives are anti-abortion extremists.”
How many Conservative MPs took part in that rally? Was it 10? How about Vic Toews, the president of the Treasury Board, which controls the wordmark? Is he not vehemently anti-abortion? How many other current cabinet ministers are anti-abortion but did not attend the march because they are cabinet ministers? Is it a stereotype if it is largely true?
Many right-to-lifers believe that if Mr. Harper obtains his cherished majority, that both anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage legislation will be tabled, and pass. –Garth
Please point us to a fact substantiating this assertion, Garth.
Because they say so. Check out a few pro-life web sites. — Garth
All large demonstrations clog stuff up. It is a non-subjective word, and you know it. And it seems to me the Right to Life organizers wanted their message to be heard on mother’s day, hence the timing as close to the date as posible (media is not there on Sundays).
Then I would expect you to write about the gay pride parades in Toronto, Ottawa, and Montreal.
If they use the Government of Canada logo to suggest funding, you betcha I will. — Garth
You mean to tell me that no news accurs on Sundays? Or is it that you are implying that our news media is too lazy to cover anything on Sundays?
Sunday on Parliament Hill is a no-news zone. Just the way it is. — Garth
Seems to me that our news media covered some mothers celebrating their Mother’s Day protesting against wars.
You can spin your insensitivity any which way you want to, but, we know why you did it.
And I’m still waiting for the sexist Catherine to apologize. — Garth
but I do believe as you do, fear-mongering.
Without a doubt. It’s cartoon-based fear-mongering that’s as insulting to pro-choicers as it is to pro-lifers. Specifically, it’s very insulting to women that Turner-style Liberals think they can cow women into voting their way by threatening them with the Big Bad Wolf; the misogynist zealot who’s going to drive them and their daughters into back alley abortions.
It’s disgusting frankly. The cheapest kind of politics.
I didn’t plan the event or pick the timing. I merely observed it. — Garth
No you didn’t plan it or pick the timing but your observations were biased to say the least in other words it is not what you said but how you said it and you in fact picked the timing to air your comments. Hopefully you get my point.
My words were without bias. You have no point. — Garth
Holly asks: Is it a stereotype if it is largely true?
Yes Holly, that is exactly what it is. If you believe that you can generalize the characteristics of an individual based on the characteristics of others in the group, then you are stereotyping – by definition.
That’s why it’s racist to say black males are criminals. That’s why it’s sexist to say that women are better parents or worse drivers. That’s why it’s bigoted to say that homosexuals are more prone to pedophilia, or better at decorating. Individuals have the right to be judged on their own merits rather than on the (perceived) merits or faults of the collective. That’s what Martin Luther King Jr. was talking about when he made his famous speech about his dream, the one that his children would be judged on the content of their characters rather than on the colour of their skins.
Conservatives are as individual as anyone else and some of us are getting damn tired of the lazy, bigoted slurs that get thrown around here and elsewhere.
Lawrence Garvin,
Another one who wilfully misses teh point.
Let me get your attention
IT”S NOT ABOUT ‘THE FLAG’.
They can hang 3 million Canadian flags on their banners and around their stages for all I care. No one needs permission to raise the flag.
It’s about the use of the Government of Canada trademark. Go ahead and ask the folks at your local cultral festival, be it a Children’s Festival, Jazz or Folk Festival or Cultural exhibit and ask those organizers if they would slap the Gov’t of Canada trademark on soemthing if they didn’t have approval. See what their answer would be.
When the wordmark is used by those people it denotes permitted use by the Gov’t of Canada due to endorsement, sponsorship and/or financial contribution. How many times does this need to repeated to yahoos like yourself.
I enjoy debate and discourse, but I have no patience for intellectual laziness, disregard for facts, and uncritical thinking.
Garvin, your post was guilty of all three.
Reda this and learn something.
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/fip-pcim/index_e.asp
Official symbols of the Government of Canada are protected against unauthorized use in Canada under Section 9(1)(n) of Canada’s Trade-Marks Act, and protected internationally under article 6ter of the Paris Convention.
Presently, the Knowledge Exchange Service of Public Works and Government Services Canada is the distributer of these symbols. Approved electronic copies of the “Canada” wordmark, Coat of Arms, and Government of Canada corporate signature may be obtained by calling 819-956-0790.
Sounds pretty clear.
And what do Canadians think?
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/fip-pcim/can_e.asp
85% of general public respondents and 83% of small business respondents agreed with the statement: “When I see this symbol on information I have more confidence in the information because I know it is from a credible source.”
Hogan, I’m not your ‘bud’ and never will be, so don’t ever call me ‘bud’ again.
I don’t respect you in the least but I do respect the truth. And I didn’t post it to ‘prove SJ wrong’.
Did you miss the point that approx. 80% of Canadians are fine with things are they are currently?
It was an accurate statement. Period. — Garth
Accurate, but not particularly relevant. I’m still waiting for your Guaranteed Income article… yet you waste your time on this.
Garvin, your post was guilty of all three.
I know the rationale and I reject it completely. Full stop. It’s my opinion that the government has no right to restrict free speech to protect it’s “brand”. I think it is bloody surreal that the government even has a brand. And I say, unequivocally, that I refuse to recognize their right to that brand. If I had the time and the money I would slap the brand on my business and fight the idiots to the Supreme Court.
Don’t make such arrogant presumptions about what other people know or don’t know. I know about this issue and I still disagree with you, and the government, and the law, and your utterly pointless polls about what everyone else thinks.
Is that clear enough, Frank? Intellectually honest enough?
Critical enough?
Our would you prefer that I criticize your blustery bullshit instead?
BTW Frank, look into the FORCES Canada issue and you’ll discover that you (of all people in the whole wide world) are wrong about the issue being a specific wordmark only. But I don’t want to embarrass you or anything so I’ll let you do all the legwork yourself. You wouldn’t want to be accused of being lazy, after all.
“Because they say so. Check out a few pro-life web sites. — Garth”
I know that there are some grassroots pro-lifers who think Harper is a closet pro-lifer.
But I can’t think of any big name pro-lifer or any pro-life group who thinks Harper will introduce fetal rights legislation. His actions and words speak to the contrary.
And I’m still waiting for the sexist Catherine to apologize. — Garth
Uh Garth, you actually addressed her – in a disrespectful way – as “Lady” after you completely misrepresented what she’d said. Perhaps you should apologize to Catherine since that usage is commonly understood as a sexist put-down. Just for your background info…
Holly Stick,
How many Conservative MPs took part in that rally? Was it 10?
10 out of 125. So less than 10%. And they likely represent their constituents on this issue.
How about Vic Toews, the president of the Treasury Board, which controls the wordmark?
Nice spin. The Canada wordmark is distributed by the Knowledge Exchange Service of Public Works and Government Services Canada. So Vic Toews has little to do with that since Michael Fortier is the minister of PW.
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/fip-pcim/index_e.asp#a4
How many other current cabinet ministers are anti-abortion but did not attend the march because they are cabinet ministers?
Probably the same number as Liberal cabinet ministers who voted to redefine marriage.
Is it a stereotype if it is largely true?
You base your assumptions on 100% of people based on what 8% of those people do. I call that a stereotype.
And what do Canadians think? –Frank Fink
Most Canadians have little knowledge about how trademarks work. It is up to the gov’t to enforce their trademarks. If this group didn’t receive permission to use it, they will be getting a letter shortly discussing proper use of trademarks and telling them to cease using it.
Conservatives are as individual as anyone else and some of us are getting damn tired of the lazy, bigoted slurs that get thrown around here and elsewhere.
By Lawrence Garvin on 05.14.07 4:46 pm
Then you are invited to bugger off Garvin .
No one needs your input on anything you biased bastard .
I questioned my M.P. Gary Schellenberger on this issue. His assistant replied that the government did NOT supply funds for this rally.
BUT he did not reply to my second question which was ” Will the government lay charges against this group for using the governments wordmark? Because the use of the wordmark implies endorsement of the rally by the governing party.
And if that many M.P.’s were in attendance did not one of them question the logo and the implication it made?
By Judy on 05.14.07 11:09 pm,
so then, why didn’t the Libs lay charges when they were in power – too busy talking and talking and talking and doing nothing?
[...] Turner has some footage of the the March for Life held May 10th in Ottawa. He has some video, and perhaps it is just me, but in the approximately 3 [...]
HI Holly, just want to clarify something for you ‘cuz GGF sent you to the wrong section of the Federal Identity Program by accident.
The Canada Wordmark is used as a complement to other symbols as part of the Canadian FIP (Federal Identity Program). The application and management of the the FIP is the responsibility of the head of communications of each federal Department. Thus, the Department that funded the anti-abortion marchers is responsible for the use of the Wordmark on their publications.
BTW, Treasury Board, the Department who manages the Communications Policy of Canada, and therefore, the Department that is ultimately responsible for the FIP, has opened an investigation into this abuse of the Wordmark. I am confident that, the head of the Department, Mr. law-and-order himself, Vic Toews, will ensure the abusers are dealt with accordingly.
Violation of the Canadian Trade-Marks Act is a criminal offence. Read about the TM Act, here
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/T-13/index.html
Follow this link to better understand who is responsible for the FIP.
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/fip-pcim/index_e.asp#a3
Best,
-R
Reg, you’ve avoided the questions and the point. You’ve stated that abortion will happen anyway whether legal or illegal and then you stated that it should be safe. I’ve asked you, if it was illegal to have an abortion, how do you plan on making it safe?
Then you are invited to bugger off Garvin .
No one needs your input on anything you biased bastard .
By Jackie Chan’s Left Hand on 05.14.07 6:37 pm
Garth, if a poster were to type the exact same post as Jackie Chan just did here, would you ban that person? If so, why then do you allow it?
I’m waiting for you to post this Garth.
Garvin wrote “Boo f**king hoo” in a post last night, which I have just edited. Do you support that? Will you censure him? — Garth
Certainly, I didn’t read that but absolutely 100%. I do not support that. At the same time, did he use that word to describe someone as Jackie Chan so often does with other offensive insults?
But now that I’ve replied to you, why don’t you answer my questions while you’re at it? You see Garth, here is the thing. You’ve stated that you have a policy against insults and so forth and yet, you only act when the person doesn’t hold your political views. An even hand is what is needed, not a biased one.
Hey Frank Frink, why don’t you like me calling you bud? How about buddy, is that better? I’m sorry that you have to be so partisan here. Oh well, your loss not mine. As well, your post about 80% is wildly inaccurate and untrue. You need to find some accurate polls which would tell you that most Canadians want some restrictions on abortion. See you later bud.
just want to clarify something for you ‘cuz GGF sent you to the wrong section of the Federal Identity Program by accident. –Rob W
Thanks Rob. I copied the wrong link.
But now that I’ve replied to you, why don’t you answer my questions while you’re at it? –Sean P. Hogan
Sean, you won’t ever get an answer about Jackie from Garth. I suspect Jackie is one of Garth’s own cronies and thus will never be banned for this behaviour.
Never met the person, actually. — Garth
You’re right GGF, I didn’t. All I got was accusatory questions from Garth.
Here’s another thing, I’ve been here before Garth became an Independent. These other people gravitated over here once they found out Garth was anti-CPC, anti-Harper. At that time, there wasn’t this constant belittling and insults from other posters. Then Garth stated that he was going to do something about this. Time went by, nothing, then he stated he would have a 3 strike rule. Time went by, nothing. I don’t know who these people are that constantly insult, and I don’t pretend to know, unlike they, who think that anyone who has an opposing opinion works for the CPC. What I do know is that Garth supports their postings but yet tries to distance himself at the same time.
Never met the person, actually. — Garth
Then why are these abuses allowed to continue? Yes, I know that you get thousands of messages per day and you miss some. I accept that. But I have yet to see a post where Jackie Chan’s Left Hand actually contributes to the topic of discussion. I can disagree with someone and respect their opinion if they base it on some reasoning. But when they just come back and call me a b*st*rd or a twit or a retard, what does that add to constructive debate? How does that win anyone over to the Liberal brand?
You have absolutely how many posts I delete outright, or edit to remove offending material, including from this visitor. — Garth
You have absolutely no idea? how many posts I delete outright, or edit to remove offending material, including from this visitor. — Garth
I think you should delete offensive posts, editing them is a waste of your valuable time.
At what point does Jackie Chan’s Left Hand become so annoying to you that you just ban him? I’ve seen you do it to offensive posters with a conservative slant.
Garth,
I have voted for Liberal, Green and NDP in the past. But I have never voted for Conservative since I have always suspected that they are not progressive enough for me.
Being socially progressive is as important as being environmentally friendly in my book. I always check every party’s platform for these two issues before I vote. Tax cut is nice but it comes third.
Garth, I hope the Liberal will champion these two issues so I will be able to vote for them in the next election. I like Monsieur Dion simply because I think he is an intellectual who is socially progressive and who will put environment as a priority. I like him so much that this year I actually support the Liberal Party financially (something I have not done before). Keep up the good work.
I support the right of women to decide what they would like to do with their bodies. I support the right of two consenting adults to marry no matter what gender they are.
At the moment I am not interested in getting involved in politics. I am content in just reading about it, cast my vote at every opportunity and maybe donate to a party of my choice whenever the mood strikes. But I will personally march for the right to choose movement if the day ever comes when this right is to be challenged. I will give up my cushy corporate job and become an activist. And I will never, never vote for a party who even entertains the idea of making abortion illegal.
Grace
The story hits MSM, CP to be precise. Feds are investigating. Bloggers win.
Doubtful this changes anything. Babble.ca did this last year and nothing came of it. Just more pro-abortion hatred showing.
I support the right of women to decide what they would like to do with their bodies. I support the right of two consenting adults to marry no matter what gender they are.
Grace, what if 2 consenting adults are brother and sister? You did say an absolute here so is it absolute as you meant it or do you discriminate?
Here’s an interesting fact from Jim Hughes, head of Campaign Life Coalition. The banner has been used for the past 5 rallies.
5 rallies. Doesn’t that include the Liberals tenure? Of course it does, so why is that pro-aborts are upset now??? Mr. Hughes also states that a volunteer must have created that themselves. Issue over.
Rob W., thanks for the links. I suspect the reason the fuss happened this year is the existence of Youtube: people posted videos of the march and the signs were clearly visible. I see that babble members did send queries about the signs in 2005, but there is no information on whether the government at the time did anything about it.
So Bev Oda can’t be blamed this time; but since her department’s funding policy has been changed, what is to stop her from funding anti-choice marches or anti-equality groups like R.E.A.L. Women? Who is watching how our money is spent – the Auditor General?
GGF, actually 12 Conservative MPs are said to have attended so that’s 10%, plus some cabinet ministers who probably were told not to go.
I notice that Jackie Chan’s Left Hand actually produced some facts and figures; more useful than many of the posts here.
As for the anti-choice woman-haters who want to ban what they call “partial-birth abortions”; these procedures are done on the rare occasion that they are needed in order to save women’s lives. If you banned them, you would kill women; so much for claiming to be “pro-life”.
Garth, thanks for the soap-box; the MSM is learning to pay attention to the blogosphere.
Holly Stick,
GGF, actually 12 Conservative MPs are said to have attended so that’s 10%, plus some cabinet ministers who probably were told not to go.
Still doesn’t change the fact that you are stereotyping a whole group based on 10% of a group’s population. Even if you include cabinet ministers, you are basing it on 25%.
I notice that Jackie Chan’s Left Hand actually produced some facts and figures; more useful than many of the posts here.
He makes most of his facts up. If you bothered to check some of them, you would know that.
Tell you what GGF, when the “Conservative” Party goes back to being “Progressive Conservative”; when they purge the anti-choice, anti-environment 10% or so, instead of making some of them cabinet ministers; when they stop screwing up committees and learn to govern like an open, democratic government for the people not for corporations; when they quit selling us out to the US through SPP and other actions (these apply the Liberals too); then maybe they will live down the stereotype you object to; and then they might be fit to form a government.
Holly Stick,
Tell you what GGF, when the “Conservative†Party goes back to being “Progressive Conservativeâ€; when they purge the anti-choice, anti-environment 10% or so, instead of making some of them cabinet ministers;
So the anti-choice, anti-environmental Canadians have no say in gov’t? Nice inclusive attitude you have there. Where do you draw the line? BTW, there are quite a number of anti-choice, anti-environmental Liberals out there as well.
when they stop screwing up committees and learn to govern like an open, democratic government for the people not for corporations;
Like the Liberals? The ones that relied almost solely on corporate donations for decades.
then maybe they will live down the stereotype you object to; and then they might be fit to form a government.
So who do you think is fit to form gov’t? You have the Liberals which are infighting and seem to stand for ‘talk and no action’, and the NDP which seems to have dropped off the political map lately.
BTW, Holly, John Diefenbaker prefered the name ‘Conservative’ without the progressive name and he created the Bill of Rights. The Liberals aren’t the only political party that defends the rights of Canadians.
Here’s a bit of news; in the 2005 march, some signs used the wordmark, as discussed by babble at this link Some of them wrote to the Treasury Board about it.
In the 2006 march the sign in French definitely did not have the wordmark on it as shown here and here in this earlier post.
Oh, and maybe we need to spread the word about the Conservative government working against women’s equality; check out One Woman Army
“Federal Government Cuts Funding to Women in Science and Engineering
Women in Science and Engineering, Newfoundland & Labrador (WISE NL) was
dismayed to learn late yesterday that all federal funds from the St. John’s
and Corner Brook offices have been cancelled for their award winning Student
Summer Employment Program (SSEP)…”
“…Says Dr. Halfyard, “We were shocked that after 17 years of strong support
from Service Canada, our 2007 funding application has been denied without
explanation.”…”
The picture was not from the 2006 march. I took pictures at the 2006 March, and the wordmark was there:
http://pages.ca.inter.net/~sfortin/MarchForLife2006/MarchforLife2006.html
The picture was probably from a much older March, judging by the other pictures in the same album.
Macleans.ca coverage of the event. No mention of government wordmark in this piece. Maybe next week.
http://www.macleans.ca/homepage/features/article.jsp?content=20070510_175904_9532