Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Is OK with Abortion Choice?

If not, I suggest a speedy correction to this headline if possible.

Referring to Andrea Mrozek, founding director of, the story notes

“She tells CFRA's Madely in the Morning the group does not seek to make abortion illegal in Canada.”

But I presume Ms. Mrozek is referring here only to the mission of and indicating that the scope of their activities does not include a component of actively advocating for a change in the legal status of abortion in the nation.

But surely she believes that the killing of unborn children in Canada ought to be illegal.


I listened to the radio interview.

Ms. Mrozek says that her group

“is looking to eradicate abortion in Canada…but not by legislation...legislation is not always a particularly effective way of addressing problems…”

They are “not looking at legislation to force anyone to’s not the solution, to make it illegal…”

Why not? We do it with other immoral acts such as murder, rape, and theft. It works—better than anything else, despite what Brigitte Pellerin said in the interview. It’s a deterrent. In the end—and as much as possible—people are protected from the evil that others would do to them.

Was it the wrong approach taken by the US Supreme Court recently to uphold the ban on partial-birth abortion? That decision made the current practice illegal.

This new group is confused and certainly not of one mind. It seems their greatest weakness is a failure to understand the role of law in forming public morality. This is a fatal flaw. Their approach might be likened to a campaign to educate men not to beat up their wives because it’s never a good choice and suggesting the focus ought not to be on stricter laws and law enforcement because these hold no solutions.

I don’t think anyone will seriously buy it.

If killing innocent, defenseless, children—at any stage of preborn life—is heinous and murderous, then it demands a law protecting the innocent and punishing the guilty.

This is the starting point for any effective pro-life work.

It sounds as though this group aims for increased dialogue on the subject of abortion with the goal of convincing women that it’s always a bad choice. Perhaps that’s a positive thing but until they are ready to assert the most basic pro-life statement, I really wonder what they will be able to accomplish and I can’t think of them as pro-life.

Are they at least pro-woman then? Let the reader judge...

50% of all aborted children are women. Their lives MUST be protected by law—as well as the other 50%.

This group needs to be unambiguous in stating this.

Labels: , ,


At 12:10 AM, Blogger SUZANNE said...

I thought they were a bit wishy-washy on fetal rights, too. But maybe the point is to focus on the social and cultural aspects of abortion, not the legal one.

It is stated on their blog:

ProWomanProLife believes that the fetus is deserving of protection.

Hm, that can mean a lot of things.

Still I do think that they contribute to the Culture of Life in a major way. They're definitively demolishing feminist argumentation, and that can only be a good thing.

At 10:50 AM, Blogger ELA said...

I agree with you Suzanne that this group is exposing some wrong thinking and making a contribution to the discussion on abortion.

Hopefully that contribution won't be limited to the fact that abortion, to certain degrees and under certain circumstances, is simply a bad decision for various reasons.

Aren't smoking and poor diet also in that category?

At 11:05 AM, Blogger SUZANNE said...

I think that's precisely what they'll focus on. It won't expose abortion as the unjust slaughter of an equal human being. It will expose abortion as a procedure that profoundly wounds a woman.

It's incomplete, but I still think it's a good start and will help get people thinking.


Post a Comment

<< Home