CBC’s Wish: Mum On The Topic
June 19, 2007 · By Matthew
Many of you have probably already heard about The Great Canadian Wish List, a programme put together by the CBC in conjunction with Facebook (after this alliance between two of the most evil forces in the universe, I’ve now started an Apocalypse watch!) to gauge the desires of young Canadians with respect to what they would change. With the contest now in its final days, it has become obvious that abortion will be the winner, although it’s not so clear now as to whether the pro-life or pro-status quo side will win (incidentally, how does keeping the status quo on a legal situation qualify as a change?). The wish to ban abortion has hovered around a 600 vote lead over the wish to keep abortion laws non-existent (I say this because they aren’t technically legal; we have no law on abortion currently). It’s also obvious by now that this is an exercise in proving which side is more organized in getting their supporters out to add their endorsement on the social networking site.
While I would personally like to see the pro-life side win, I’m under no illusion that this would dramatically change the non-debate we’re having on abortion in this country. Instead, I really want to see the CBC squirm as they have to put a documentary together on the pro-life movement that isn’t obviously negative. From the get-go though, the CBC has had a tint of queeziness towards having certain wishes winning the contest. In fact, the story they did on the contest on the CBC evening news last week highlights just how much they are trying to send a wake-up call to the “pro-choicers” who have seriously dropped the ball on this contest up until last week. The CBC blog on the contest is also biased, giving the full-length opinion of a pro-choice group’s spokeswoman. It’s almost like the CBC is following the attitude of the first few comments on the abortion topic’s forum on Facebook: this issue does not merit debate since *I * determined that abortion is a right for women. Not surprising when you consider most pro-abortionists have little more to say in support of the procedure outside of a few catch phrases, all of which contain logical holes, straw men, red herrings and so on. Yet I might have already gotten my personal wish as I watch the CBC try to narrow the gap between the two leading groups in this, the second-last week of the contest. Gotta admit, it’s nice watching the other side squirm so publicly, and show their argument’s lack of depth so richly…
Cbcers would rather walk through a furnace in a gasoline suit than consider the possibility that Canadians would be pro-life.
For a time I was the most outspoken poster and debater for the pro-life - and against the pro-choice - positions. Aside from the fact that I have a life, the ignorance and idolatry of the pro-choice fruitloops basically wore me out.
Not one of the thousands of pro-lifers could could give me a justification as to why it would be legal for a pregnant woman to terminate her healthy pregnancy in the 39th week simply as a matter of “choice”. They were either unaware of the issue (and many conceded it was wrong when fully informed) or they simply avoided addressing my posts.
There was one punter whose position was that a)women’s choice would only be exercised incorrectly in a small number of cases and b)the cost of enforcement was inefficient in light of other social needs.
My counter was that the infrequency or irrationality of something - like mass murder (although I hesitate to directly compare abortion to murder) - has no bearing on whether it should be illegal. Secondly, I added that countries with abortion laws (ie, every other nation in the world) do not necessarily experience a higher incidence of other social ills due to lack of funding.
I would also add that western democracies spend hideous amounts of money to prosecute crimes, not because it is efficient, but simply because it is correct, so my friend’s argument begs the question.
I didn’t actually log on as a supporter of this wish. In any other nation in the world I would probably consider myself prochoice (certainly in South Dakota). If It’s close then I will, so it is not a case of “darkness prevails”.
I meant “pro-choicers” in the second paragraph.
Directions at http://www.bigbluewave.ca :D
Rape….
Rape….