Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

This forum is for non aviation related topics, political debate, random thoughts, and everything else that just doesn't seem to fit in the normal forums. ALL FORUM RULES STILL APPLY.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

. ._
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7374
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 5:50 pm
Location: Cowering in my little room because the Water Cooler is locked.
Contact:

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by . ._ »

I think it's cool for Morgentaler to get the Order of Canada. He made it a lot easier for guys to dodge a bullet.

-istp :smt023
---------- ADS -----------
 
2R
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4318
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: left coast

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by 2R »

CID wrote:2R, IMHO comparing Nazi death camps to abortion in general is pretty extreme. I think most Canadians understand the difference.
Not really extreme at all .The numbers of humans exterminated must be getting up there in numbers .

But do yet get the Joke ??? A little nazi inspired death camp in your neighbourhood brought to you by a former resident of the death camps .If you do not laugh you might cry,so you might as well laugh about it

Cannot wait for the Dr.Kevorkian inspired death terminlals .I do hope they do not put them next to the bus terminals as some old senile people might wander in there before their time is up by mistake and get killed by a kindly old doctor ending their existence .Thus further reducing the travels needs of the general population.Less travel less pilots needed
So fewer people mean less flying for pilots .Less flying means less need for pilots so we could under the new regime be off to the terminal sooner rather than later .

Was i the only one who heard Moergentaler on the CBC refer to the abortions as " Children that who would have grown into crime "
He called them children .So lets not deny them that they would have been children .If the guy killing them calls them Children .We can drop the facade that they are souless clumps of cells.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Siddley Hawker
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3353
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2004 6:56 pm
Location: 50.13N 66.17W

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by Siddley Hawker »

Is it just me, or has anybody else noticed that none - I think - of the females on this board has posted anything on this thread?
---------- ADS -----------
 
CID
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3544
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:43 am
Location: Canada

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by CID »

Didn't you just write comparing Morgentaler with Mandela?
Funny how you can analyze someone else's poor comparison but not your own.
Context is everything when you make "comparisons" John Bull. I didn't actually compare Morgentaler with Mandela. I was calling attention to the fact that some of our modern heros did time in prison.
---------- ADS -----------
 
AUGER9
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 9:28 pm
Location: YXL

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by AUGER9 »

Until a man has to endure 9 months of pregnancy and labour at the end of it, and everything else that goes with it, im on the "it's her body, her decision" train.

Im +1 with icebound.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Sheila
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 486
Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 4:56 pm

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by Sheila »

But you would probably never get an abortion! And when you tell the woman "You leave it up to her", you are encouraging her and so you are guilty too.


1973 Private Letter to Trudeau Suggests Abortion Crusader Morgentaler Used Blackmail

Exclusive Commentary to LifeSiteNews.com by Terry O'Neill

May 8, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Pro-lifers have long known that the Canadian political elite of the 1960s and 1970s was strongly in favour of abortion, at least in principle. After all, it was a Liberal government-supported by a liberal media-that first legalized the practice in 1969. But Canadians now know that those elites supported abortion, not just in principle, but in practice, as well. And our source for this information is none other than Canada's arch-abortionist, Henry Morgentaler himself.

As revealed in this week's Maclean's, Henry Morgentaler wrote a letter to then-Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau in 1973 in which the abortionist disclosed that friends, family and lovers of many leading Canadian politicians were taking advantage of his then-illegal services. The letter is important, not only because it paints a fuller picture of the turbulent times, but also because it reveals important features of Morgentaler's character - not an inconsequential consideration given the annual attempt to have him awarded with the Order in Canada.

On this latter topic, it seems to me that last February's futile agitation for inclusion of Morgentaler into the Order of Canada represented yet another frantic grasp for legitimacy and respectability by the 84-year-old abortionist and his followers. The most telling moment in the campaign came when Cathie Colombo, a woman described as a long-time assistant to Morgentaler, told a reporter that to deny her boss the honour "is blasphemy" and "a national embarrassment."

One can almost see the beads of sweat forming on the woman's brow as she mouthed these words, which at once reveal both a lack of familiarity with reason (unless, of course, one considers Morgentaler to be a sacred figure) and an unbecoming desperation. But one should not be surprised at the zealousness and self-righteousness displayed by Colombo; after all, she apparently learned from the best, Morgentaler himself. Indeed, the Montreal abortion-rights crusader has long appealed more to passion than reason in his quest to turn Canada into a free-fire zone against the unborn.

Abortions were illegal in Canada until the Trudeau government passed the 1969 law allowing the procedure to take place, but only if a three-doctor hospital committee determined the pregnancy would endanger the mother's life or health. Yet, even this broad liberalization was not enough for Morgentaler, who defied the law by operating a private abortion clinic in Montreal, a dramatic move that led to a series of arrests, charges and trials, while also allowing him to wrap himself in the garb of a martyr-a misunderstood and persecuted reformer whose cries for justice were not being heeded.

Even after the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the country's abortion law in 1988, leaving the procedure completely unlimited by law, Morgentaler continued crusading for more funding and better access for abortions.

Moreover, as revealed by Maclean's, Morgentaler's penchant for portraying himself as a holier-than-thou victim is evident even in the details of the letter, marked "personal and confidential," that he wrote to Trudeau on August 28, 1973. The missive was discovered by George Egerton, associate professor of history at the University of British Columbia, while he was researching documents in the newly opened Trudeau archives. The letter ended up in my hands because of my long public record of opposition to abortion, and I gave it to Maclean's in order to ensure the document received national coverage in a mainstream publication.

The letter reveals much about Morgentaler, not only because of what he wrote but also because of the impressions left by what he did not write. In other words, there is much to be read between the lines. Not inconsequentially, the letter also raises questions about the extent to which the Liberal cabinets of the day in both Ottawa and Quebec City had a vested interest in the abortion debate.

Morgentaler begins the two-page, typed, single-spaced letter with the salutation, "Dear Pierre," after which he informs the prime minister that, "On August 15 the Montreal police raided my clinic; they also had a search warrant for my home and found the correspondence with you which I have kept confidential according to your expressed wishes."

He continues, "My reason for writing you is to advise you that this correspondence is now in the hands of someone in the Montreal police department . . . I do not think there is anything embarrassing to you in it since we mainly discussed changing the laws on abortion, but thought I should advise you of what had occurred in the event this correspondence might be misused by them."

His putative reason for writing the letter now dispensed with, Morgentaler then devotes the rest of the document to getting something "off my chest," that being his contention that he is being persecuted, that he does not receive the official support he deserves, and that the lack of such support is hypocritical.

"I am not a masochist by nature and do not relish the prospect of spending additional time in Canadian prisons after 5 years lost in German ghettos and concentration camps," he tells Trudeau, "so I am going to fight this fight until the bitter end - firmly convinced not only of the moral rightness of my course of action, but also of the hypocrisy, injustice and, indeed, unconstitutionality of the laws under which I am being tried. Please do not misunderstand. I am neither complaining nor looking to you for help. . ."

Maybe so, but Morgentaler then drops a bombshell. "Do I have to convince you really of the hypocrisy of the present laws?" he asks. "Do you know that in my clinic, I have helped wives, daughters, mistresses and relatives of members of the Federal and Provincial Cabinet, including some relatives of yours?

"Do you know that Dr. Leon Trudeau, a cousin of yours, has been referring cases to me? Do you know that Quebec ministers who officially came out against abortion, have had relatives treated in my clinic and helped there? Do you know that a relative of [Quebec health minister] Claude Castonguay (who refused to recognize my clinic as requested by me) has had an abortion in my clinic just the day before I was raided? If she knew she would be safe there, does he not know that all patients would be? Or does he not want to know?"

Morgentaler continues with an unsympathetic examination of the difficult political situation in which he believes Trudeau has found himself over the abortion issue. "Would it be wrong to conclude that the rights of women have been sacrificed on the altar of political expediency?" he writes. "And do you not carry moral responsibility for the suffering of women resulting from lack of access to safe abortions by your decision not to amend this law?"

He concludes, "I hope you will forgive me the expression of frank and sometimes critical opinions. I do it, I assure you, without any malice whatsoever. I also want to assure you that if I refer to prominent people having had safe abortions in my clinic it is not with the intention of embarrassing anyone but only to bring into stronger focus the hypocrisy and absurdity of the law.

"I must say I do not really know what this letter to you can accomplish except, perhaps, that if you read it as a message from one man of goodwill to another, written honestly, though with some passion, possibility you will give it some thought."

We do not know the nature of Trudeau's immediate response to this letter, but we do know his long-term response: he did nothing to further liberalize the abortion law. It was the Supreme Court of Canada which, in a case involving Morgentaler himself, ruled in 1988 that the 1969 law was in breach of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

It is perhaps a testament to the strength of Trudeau's character that he refused to budge from his position, even though Morgentaler's letter could be viewed as a none-too-thinly-veiled threat that, failing to amend the law, names would be named and alleged hypocrites exposed.

Could it really be true that Morgentaler did not appreciate the impact his revelations would have on Trudeau? Could it really be that, while on one hand declaring that he sent his letter without malice and had no intention of embarrassing anyone, that, on the other hand, he did not recognize that his protestations of purity existed in the long shadow of an implied threat of exposure? Blackmail is certainly too strong of a word to use here, but there is, nevertheless, something sinister about the dark facts Morgentaler marshaled in his extraordinary letter.

Of course, it may well be true that Morgentaler's zealousness and self-righteousness prevented him from appreciating the menacing nature of his letter. In other words, his view of himself as a martyr could have distorted his judgment. We are left, then, with a choice about Morgentaler, either option of which does not flatter him: either he was a sinister plotter or he was a foolish zealot.

One imagines that both pro-choicers and pro-lifers will have much to say about this letter: pro-choicers that it shows what a resolute man Morgentaler was (and is); pro-lifers that the hypocrisy it reveals helps explain how abortion became legal in the first place, and how it is able to continue today, utterly unfettered by regulation.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
tellyourkidstogetarealjob
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 389
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 12:11 am
Location: Cascadia

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by tellyourkidstogetarealjob »

AUGER9 wrote:Until a man has to endure 9 months of pregnancy and labour at the end of it, and everything else that goes with it, im on the "it's her body, her decision" train.

Im +1 with icebound.
On behalf of the hundreds of thousands of fathers in this country who have been fu*ked over by a family court system that is completely female biased and has relegated men to the position of sperm donors and support payers: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, ARSEHOLE.

It's hard enough to get custody or even visitation rights in this country without some dink who thinks his responsibility is enshrined in the 4Fs to open his yap.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Doc
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 9241
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 6:28 am

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by Doc »

Truer words have seldom been spoken. Good point, tellyourkidstogetareajob.
---------- ADS -----------
 
spartacus
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 1:10 pm

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by spartacus »

Hedley wrote:
Do many men here feel strongly about brands of tampons?

*snort*

exactly.
---------- ADS -----------
 
When a free man dies, he loses the pleasure of life. A slave loses his pain. Death is the only freedom a slave knows. That's why he's not afraid of it. That's why we'll win.
Sulako
Rank Moderator
Rank Moderator
Posts: 2374
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:01 pm

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by Sulako »

How about mandatory vasectomies for men who don't pay child support? I mean, let's suppose we ban abortion, giving the gov't the official right to control people's bodies. Next thing you know, we all have RFID tags inserted at birth, complete with kill switches and behaviour modifying electric shocks.

Just puttin' it out there...

Anyway, if you don't want an abortion then never have one. But for those that do make that choice, free access to abortion is an essential service.
---------- ADS -----------
 
grimey
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2979
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: somewhere drunk

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by grimey »

2R wrote:
CID wrote:2R, IMHO comparing Nazi death camps to abortion in general is pretty extreme. I think most Canadians understand the difference.
Not really extreme at all .The numbers of humans exterminated must be getting up there in numbers .
You haven't demonstrated that a fetus is a human being.
---------- ADS -----------
 
no sig because apparently quoting people in context is offensive to them.
2R
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4318
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: left coast

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by 2R »

There is no need for any demonstration of what defines where life begins.If the man who has performed so many abortions calls them children .All be it a fraudian slip .Then he knows in his heart that they would have grown into viable humans.
There is a time for all things ,at one time the chief rabbi in europe blessed pork so that his people would not starve to death in WW2 .The exeption not the rule.
But even the Roman Catholic Church has allowed medical procedures to mothers exposed to high levels of pollution.When the medical community and the church agreed that it was necessary .It was done in Seveso ,Italy after the spillage of Dioxins that caused massive birth defects causing the fetus to mutate into something non-viable and in some cases endangering the mothers.This is the only time that i am aware of the Catholic Church has officially condoned this medical procedure to my limited knowledge.It was the exception not the rule.

Abortions are not free .Most are done in private money making clinics.Where the doctors are well paid to do the deed.

I wonder if i will live long enough to see the other death clinics set up .Dr.Kovorkian drive thru emporiums of death .Why stop at unwanted inconvenient babies.Why not other humans as well ??? The first will be the old as most of them want to die anyway. And the old will not put up much of a fight.So the big question will be ;Who will be next after the old ???

Not so strange when the exeption becomes the rule.Fashions change and what may seem an abhorance and abomination today may become the situation normal in a hundred years from now.They may have to change the Doctors oath as well from "doing no harm" to "we will follow orders "so that if fashions change again they can say they were only following orders.And perhaps they could give those doctors nice new uniforms and shiny new big boots as well :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
When they get new hats watch out something bad always follows severe changes in hat design.
---------- ADS -----------
 
xsbank
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5655
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: "The Coast"

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by xsbank »

I think that most of you who decry the Morgentaler thing are afraid that somebody, somewhere, is getting away with something?

Shouldn't you be praising him for confronting a very difficult societal ill and be praising him? Wouldn't it be great if others rose up to confront prostitution, drug addiction, biker gangs, racism?

Yes, there frequently is a motive of personal gain, but so what? Doesn't he deserve our respect for confronting the issue that many of you posters still argue as if it was the 50s?

And for the poster that compared/contrasted him to the nazi thing, that was beneath contempt. Specious.
---------- ADS -----------
 
"What's it doing now?"
"Fly low and slow and throttle back in the turns."
grimey
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2979
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: somewhere drunk

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by grimey »

2R wrote:There is no need for any demonstration of what defines where life begins.If the man who has performed so many abortions calls them children .All be it a fraudian slip .Then he knows in his heart that they would have grown into viable humans.
But we're no longer talking about Morgentaler, we're talking about abortion in general.
Abortions are not free .Most are done in private money making clinics.Where the doctors are well paid to do the deed.
So it's immoral because someone profits from it? That's your criteria?

The difference you seem to ignore is that jews didn't exactly volunteer to go to death camps. Morgentaler and Kevorkian weren't breaking into people's houses to preform abortions or euthanasia against their will.
2R wrote: Not so strange when the exeption becomes the rule.Fashions change and what may seem an abhorance and abomination today may become the situation normal in a hundred years from now.They may have to change the Doctors oath as well from "doing no harm" to "we will follow orders "so that if fashions change again they can say they were only following orders.And perhaps they could give those doctors nice new uniforms and shiny new big boots as well :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
When they get new hats watch out something bad always follows severe changes in hat design.
Maybe you should actually read the Hippocratic oath before using it as an example. The number of people who would die today if it were strictly adhered to is somewhat large. Doctors technically can't perform surgery, according to the oath. It was written at a time of limited medical understanding, and that has improved over time.

But no, lets keep doing what religious texts and other documents written 1900-6000 years ago say. There's no way they could be wrong.
---------- ADS -----------
 
no sig because apparently quoting people in context is offensive to them.
mcrit
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1973
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 9:01 pm

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by mcrit »

You haven't demonstrated that a fetus is a human being.
Nobody has demonstrated that it isn't. Doesn't it deserve the same benefit of doubt that the legal system affords accused criminals?
---------- ADS -----------
 
____________________________________
I'm just two girls short of a threesome.
grimey
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2979
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: somewhere drunk

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by grimey »

mcrit wrote:
You haven't demonstrated that a fetus is a human being.
Nobody has demonstrated that it isn't. Doesn't it deserve the same benefit of doubt that the legal system affords accused criminals?
According to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Quebec Charter or Human Rights and Freedoms, and the Supreme Court of Canada, they are not.

http://csc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/1989/1 ... 2-530.html
A foetus is not included within the term "human being" in the Quebec Charter and, therefore, does not enjoy the right to life conferred by s. 1. The Quebec Charter, considered as a whole, does not display any clear intention on the part of its framers to consider the status of a foetus. It is framed in very general terms and makes no reference to the foetus or foetal rights, nor does it include any definition of the term "human being" or "person". This lack of an intention to deal with a foetus's status is, in itself, a strong reason for not finding foetal rights under the Quebec Charter. If the legislature had wished to accord a foetus the right to life, it is unlikely that it would have left the protection of this right in such an uncertain state. As this case demonstrates, a foetus' alleged right to life will be protected only at the discretionary request of third parties.
If you want to re-define that, go to court.
---------- ADS -----------
 
no sig because apparently quoting people in context is offensive to them.
User avatar
JakeYYZ
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1293
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 6:24 pm

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by JakeYYZ »

Historically, birth was not necessarily viewed as a transition to life. Common law in England presumed that a child was born dead. According to early Jewish law, an infant was not deemed viable until it was thirty days old. During the 1950s the chief rabbi of Israel, Ben Zion Uziel, said that if an infant who was not yet thirty days old was killed, the killer could not be executed because the infant's life was still in doubt. In Japan, a child was not considered to be a human being until it released its first cry, a sign that the spirit entered its body. Scientists and ethicists continue to disagree about when life begins, fueling the moral debate surrounding abortion and infanticide. The twenty-first-century moral philosopher Michael Tooley contends that neonates are not persons and as such neonaticide should not be classified as murder. Tooley has suggested that infanticide should be allowed during a brief (e.g., thirty-day) period after birth.

http://www.deathreference.com/Ho-Ka/Infanticide.html

And now that we know that the brain isn't fully formed until the age of 20 or so, just think of the possibilities.
---------- ADS -----------
 
grimey
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2979
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:01 am
Location: somewhere drunk

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by grimey »

2R wrote:Then he knows in his heart that they would have grown into viable humans.
Also, if we're going to accept a freudian slip as the definition of life, then surely it follows that we should accept your definition of a human being. By saying that they will eventually grow into viable humans, you strongly imply that they arn't humans when they are fetuses.
---------- ADS -----------
 
no sig because apparently quoting people in context is offensive to them.
fantome
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 27
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 3:21 am
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by fantome »

Thanks Hedley for providing the link to -

I'm a Roman Catholic,
And have been since before I was born,
And the one thing they say about Catholics is:
They'll take you as soon as you're warm.

You don't have to be a six-footer.
You don't have to have a great brain.
You don't have to have any clothes on. You're
A Catholic the moment Dad came,


Cut to -

"Get that one, will you, Deidre?"

Cut to -

"Too silly! Too silly for words!" (Graham Chapman playing a military stuffed shirt.)

And thanks Cat Driver.

It would be interesting to know how many men were thinking " this load is to make a baby that I want " just as they come.


Brings to mind many a seminal moment, many years ago. (Aahhh . .. the imagery. Aahh . . . the intimacy, and ahhhh . .. . the sweet nostalgia of never to be forgotten moments. Sorry . . . .bit carried away there.)

More to the point . . . did the man deserve the gong? And did the father instruct the son, handing over frangers - dicks for the containment of?

Cop pulls over woman driving Mini with ten kids crammed inside. "Madam, are these children all yours?" "Oh yes, officer, everyone." "Well all I can say is your husband deserves a knighthood." "Oh I know. I got him one but the bugger refused to wear it."
---------- ADS -----------
 
just another pilot
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:05 pm
Location: Edmonton

Re: Morgentaler Get the Order of Canada??? WTF??

Post by just another pilot »

Jonathan Swift had a Modest Proposal.

Dr. M. got the award for advancing (equity not equality) women's rights. The abortion debate will always be...well debated. Ethical quandries are tricky notions - when you view them from a consequentialist (the most good for the most people) and non consequentialist perspective (rights of individuals). An unborn child has no rights in Canada, only the mother (sentient being).
As far as the medical oath "do no harm" goes, one must consider the consequence of not conducting surgery; will the physician be doing greater harm? Ah, ethics...
---------- ADS -----------
 
Locked

Return to “The Water Cooler”