Tuesday, January 16, 2018

The Liberal Way and What The Justin Believes is Right and Just


The one, the only JT has managed to mix reproduction rights and acquiring federal grants for institutions. What his advisors were thinking and the net benefit of the media attention maybe we will discover in due course.  Does this further enforce his "feminist" image?  A few selections from the above article as appeared in the Financial Post 

"...The latest controversy involves a new Canadian policy — when applying for federal grants for student jobs, organizations are now required to sign a form attesting that neither their core mission, nor the job being funded, opposes human rights, including reproductive rights. Pro-life activists are suing the federal government over it..."



"...Trudeau is unmoved, and unwilling to accept that fellow Canadians who hold views different from his own shouldn’t be treated as lesser beings, ineligible for public funds to which they contribute, and to which all other Canadian organizations are welcome to apply..."

"...Neither Trudeau or Hajdu appear to understand that there is no wording in the Charter that offers a constitutional right to abortion. Nor is there anything in the law, since there is no abortion law in Canada. The Supreme Court’s 1988 ruling on abortion threw out the legislation that existed at the time, but left a vacuum in its wake, which no government has had the nerve to fill. Suggesting Canada has “hard won rights and freedoms” that protect the right to terminate unborn children is simply not true. What it has is a total lack of rules, and a public unwilling to confront the commotion that would surely arise from any effort to re-open the matter..."

And of course the Liberal way just involves saying an untruth often enough until the population at large starts to believe it...

"...This allows people like Trudeau to pretend that Canada has undergone a fierce debate over the issue, and “pro-choice” emerged victorious. He seized on this falsehood in his remarks in Hamilton, in which he used the term “rights” three times to describe a situation in which no rights have been codified. Simply because pro-abortion organizations habitually refer to “a woman’s right to choose” doesn’t mean it exists; women in Canada have the ability to choose — simply because there is nothing to stop them — but that’s not the same as a right. In fact, the 1988 decision indicated that the mother’s rights should be balanced against the child’s. People and organizations can oppose abortion and still be respectable, law-abiding citizens. It’s not clear whether the Prime Minister understands this distinction, or prefers to ignore it in favour of a less honest approach..."

No comments:

Post a Comment