The question in question is, “if a woman is raped, do you support her right to an abortion?”
Woodworth’s the guy that’s trying to reopen the abortion debate as a private member proposal despite Harper’s campaign promise that the present abortion laws would not be revisited yet again. So, with tacit approval from his party — who, while they aren’t backing him explicitly, certainly are more than willing to allow the debate to happen, and with their steamroller house numbers would almost certainly win if they voted in lockstep with their party — here we go again. Expect no engagement on the topic in parliament, since that’s well out of fashion these days. But expect at the same time some heavy trolling on the internet to make it seem like there’s popular support. Not that the populace brought this forward, or are encouraging it.
Oh sure, he’ll engage personally with people like Steve Thoms (SomeCndnSkeptic) on Twitter for weeks on end, getting science wrong, getting the law wrong, getting simple words wrong, and smearing opponents as being like Bashar al-Assad, dictator of Syria.
Some highlights from Thoms’ post:
By now, the whole country knows that Stephen Woodworth, my MP, has persuaded his party to let him push his private members’ bill, that would launch a parliamentary committee seeking the best scientific evidence as to when a human life begins. Currently in Canada, a human is a human when it has completed live birth. On the surface, this is a sensible action. But underneath this very thin veneer of truth-seeking, is a sinister consequence:
It would, by necessity and default, make any woman who gets (and any doctor who performs) an abortion a murderer. In the truest legal sense of the term, Woodworth wants to grant full human rights to unborn fetuses (without first waiting to see the results of his Parliamentary committee), and therefore, criminalize abortions.
A government so small it fits in your uterus.
Woodworth, a sitting member of Parliament, an accomplished lawyer who is calling for the latest scientific data, doesn’t understand the difference between gender and sex (and this is putting aside the antiquated binary definition of gender). Compounding this, Woodworth did not even address the comment: that laws can’t discriminate on the basis of sex. By expanding human rights to include fetuses, only women would be subject to criminal liability.
Woodworth claimed that over 500 abortions are performed each year after viability. I was not able to confirm this statistic (and Woodworth did not disclose his source), but it may very well be true. Even if the 500+ number is accurate, Woodworth is implying that women who get abortions after viability are murderers.
I am horrified that so many of the folks I know personally who voted Conservative have done so without any sort of knowledge of the sweeping social changes they would effect — almost every one of them contra their best interests. If any of the 22% of eligible voters who gave Harper his steamroller majority are women, congratulations, you’ve voted for a government that will ensure if you ever get pregnant under any circumstances you’re consigned to baby-factory status. Even if you were raped. Even if it’s medically necessary because you might die, or the baby will certainly miscarry. You will be, legally, consigned to slavery to a “person” that doesn’t even have a nervous system. Blastocysts have more rights than you.
Hope you got the government you really wanted!