We’ve mentioned a few times already (see here and here) that it was somewhat odd for someone like Ujjal Dosanjh to be in favour of the abortion status quo yet against sex-selection abortion. Here he is again explaining his position, in today’s Ottawa Citizen.
While we firmly support a woman’s right to choose as paramount, there is a clear distinction to be drawn between supporting access to safe abortions, which we vigorously defend, and the abortion of fetuses solely to prevent the births of female babies due to biased socio-cultural norms, which we abhor.
I don’t see the “clear distinction”, and I sure don’t think it’s OK to see choice as “paramount”. I believe it’s wrong to discard “inconvenient” babies, regardless of the reasons why such babies are considered inconvenient. But hey. Better oppose some abortions than none at all.
[cross-posted to PWPL]
insightful post
Thanks for the sharing really usefull. I would like to bookmark this site.
Thank you for another fantastic blog. Where else could I get this kind of info written in such an incite full way? I have a presentation that I am just now working on, and I have been looking for such information.
I hate to sound like a nitpick, but your grammar is just…deplorable. I want to be interested in this, I really do. But it seems you spent so much time on the design (which, I will say, is amazing) that you forgot that people actually have to read your blog. Clean this up…PLEASE. It could be so much bigger if you just did some work.
I tried to subscribe to your rss feed, but had a problem adding it to google reader. Could you please check this out.