The War on Women by the Ridiculous Numbers. Talk about the war on women, how about a war on young women? I’m a student at Stuyvesant High School, which has been in the papers and on blogs a lot of late. Yesterday, June 6, hundreds of Stuy students protested what we deem to be the unfair enforcement of our recently instituted dress code. The new regulations were announced in the fall, but things have come to a head now that in the summer months students are being singled out unfairly and shamed for what they wear. The Spectator, Stuyvesant’s school paper, ran a story that details some of our experiences. ([stuyspectator.com]). One girl was told she’d have "plenty of time to ‘show off [her] curves.’ " Male students are treated as if they need to be shielded from the "distracting" influence of girls’ shoulders and thighs—suggesting that they have no self-restraint and that it falls to us girls to protect ourselves and themselves.
By the way, we understand that there needs to be a dress code. "They want to look like hoes. This: Tory backbench upset with PMO over abortion motion | Canada. OTTAWA — Tory backbenchers are bristling at an all-party parliamentary subcommittee decision to kill a motion that would have condemned anti-girl discrimination through sex-selective abortion. Despite hearing expert testimony that Conservative MP Mark Warawa's motion met all criteria to proceed to the House of Commons, the subcommittee unanimously declared it non-votable Thursday.
The decision was allegedly quarterbacked by the Prime Minister's Office, angering many Tory MPs. “Aren't MPs' rights directly being impacted when their bills do meet the necessary criteria and then are made un-votable?” Said MP David Anderson in an e-mail to colleagues. The decision could also rile up Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose. As status of women minister last April, she issued a statement “unreservedly condemning the practice of sex selection through the use of in vitro technology for the clear intent to perpetuate discrimination against girls.” "I've seen it take almost no time," he said. The Denial, Witholding and Obstruction of Access to Reproductive Health Services, including Access to Safe and Legal Abortion, is Violence Against Women | Women's Global Network for Reproductive Rights. Violence against women constitutes “any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life.”
And that it includes “physical, sexual and psychological violence perpetrated or condoned by the State” (A/RES/48/104, article 1 and 2 C)) States parties have committed to the elimination and prevention of all forms of violence against women and girls in all their spheres of their lives (E/CN.6/2013/3 paras.3, 4, E/CN.6/2013/4 para.4, Beijing Declaration and Platform Action), recognising that violence against women “violates and impairs or nullifies the enjoyment by women of their human rights and fundamental freedoms”, - including their sexual and reproductive rights- and “[it] is one of the crucial social mechanisms by which women are forced into a subordinate position compared with men.
Transforming Our Culture. The theme of this year’s National Pro-Life Conference was “Transforming our Culture” and was sponsored by LifeCanada and hosted by Alliance for Life Ontario. It was attended by nearly 300 people. This was the first national conference the WeNeedaLAW.ca campaign participated in. Throughout the three-day event there were innumerable references to the amount of youth joining the pro-life movement. I’m 36 years old and don’t consider myself young, but as those of you who have been attending these type of events for years can attest to, the grey hairs have certainly formed the majority...until now. As LifeCanada President, Monica Roddis referenced in her opening remarks, the pro-life movement has experienced a resurgence this past year due to the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform’s “New Abortion Caravan” and also the launch of the WeNeedaLAW.ca campaign to restrict abortion to the greatest extent possible.
Conferences are great for networking as well as inspiring one another. Canadian pro-life fueled by U.S. lobbyists. Last May in Ottawa, 20 Conservative MPs participated in the March for Life, an annual anti-abortion protest that mirrors its namesake in Washington, D.C. The march commemorates a 1973 U.S.Supreme Court ruling that abortion is a private decision and not a crime.
One of Canada’s most active pro-life groups, the Campaign for Life Coalition (CLC), organized the Ottawa march, mobilizing thousands of protesters to raise awareness on what they believe to be the moral problem and dangers of abortion. In 2010, the CLC said the March for Life had attracted 15,000 young protesters from all backgrounds and ethnic groups. But in 2012, their numbers had grown: 19,500 marchers came out. Conservative MP for Kitchener Centre Stephen Woodworth spoke to the crowd, stating his belief that the current Canadian “definition of human being is dishonest and wrong” and that “human rights are an inherent and inalienable gift” which Parliament cannot rescind with Section 223 of the Criminal Code. Rona Ambrose should be fair to Canadians. The October 8 issue of The Varsity contained an article by Carter West entitled “Be fair to Rona Ambrose.” Ambrose, West proposes, did not vote to reopen the abortion debate, but rather to investigate the question of when life begins.
Pro-choice organizations and media outlets calling for Ambrose’s resignation, by this argument, are misguided. How exactly, West asks us, has Ambrose violated her responsibilities as Minister for the Status of Women? The notion that Motion 312 was not aimed at reopening the abortion is erroneous. The outrage over Ambrose’s vote is rooted in the realization that, ultimately, the Minister for the Status of Women voted in favour of reopening the abortion debate. Women and men are not physically the same: women get pregnant, and men do not. The problem with Ambrose’s decision to vote for Motion 312 is that the Minister for the Status of Women voted against the very equality she is supposed to protect. Letter from UN Women Canada to Minister Rona Ambrose. RAmbrose-DIDNT get UN Award. Ryan would force some women to choose between their health and jail. The Republican position on abortion is to oppose nearly all of them, a position that Mitt Romney’s running mate, Paul Ryan, voiced during the vice-presidential debate Thursday night.
“The policy of a Romney administration will be to oppose abortions with the exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother,” Mr. Ryan said. It’s a troubling position on a number of levels, even if it is slightly less extreme than his personal opposition, in principle, to abortion after rape or incest. Mr. By comparison, the Canadian abortion law that was struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1988 permitted abortions when a woman’s “life or health” was at risk. The 1973 U.S. ruling known as Roe v. Mr. How MPs voted on M-312. When does human life begin? - life - 29 October 2008.
An international poll has shown there's a wide range of opinion about when human life "begins" biologically. The results foreshadow voting on a controversial constitutional amendment next week in Colorado to confer legal rights on embryos at the point of fertilisation. A "yes" vote could make it easier to outlaw abortion in that state, and encourage similar amendments to be tabled elsewhere in the US.
But in the international poll, only 22.7% of voters selected fertilisation as the point when human life begins. Detection of fetal heartbeat came highest, polling 23.5% of the 650 or so votes. Implantation of the embryo in the womb lining came third, with 15%. Respondents were given a dozen possible tick-box answers, and and asked to tick the one they agreed with. 'No right or wrong' Friedman also stresses that the poll question asked respondents when human life began in a biological sense of being an original entity. "We didn't ask when it's a person," she says. Varied views More from the web. Tim Harper: As Stephen Woodworth’s 15 minutes on abortion end, who will pop up next?
Zoom OTTAWA—Stephen Woodworth will lose his bid to form a committee to study the Criminal Code definition of human life when it is put to a Commons vote Wednesday. But you can’t help but wonder whether he has already won a victory of some sort. For months, we have been told that the abortion debate in this country is settled, that no such debate will be restarted at the national level and that Woodworth’s back door attempt to reopen that debate is irrelevant. Those three assertions may be true, but last Friday afternoon, MPs did spend another hour debating abortion in the House of Commons and the usual suspects lined up across the great Twitter divide to make the Woodworth motion the top trending issue on social media. On Wednesday, he will have a moment in the spotlight to restate his case yet again.
Woodworth has sparked a flood of petitions — pro and con — and op-ed articles and commentaries on abortion. Mississauga South MP Stella Ambler tried to turn the argument for debate on its head. Parties clash over abortion. Sarah Silverman Mocks Voter ID Laws With 2012 Election PSA. On M312, Abortion, Women’s Rights, and My Penis. « Quill to the Anvil. Before I get started, I figure it should be made clear, I have a cock. Now, that doesn’t mean it does my thinking for me (all the time), or anything else. What it DOES mean is there is a certain subset of health concerns I have to worry about that my peni-lacking counterparts do not. (Testicular Cancer for example) The reason I bring this up first is because I find that often those of us WITH a penis, don’t seem to get the fact that there are parts of a woman (referred to as “lady parts” by those who either lack a basic biology class, or have the mentality of 12 year olds) that we do NOT have, and come with concerns we DO NOT face.
I could sit here and tell you all about how myself, and my macho balls would handle an unwanted/unexpected pregnancy, how I would OBVIOUSLY choose life, or how after a long and bitter debate with myself, I would terminate. But I won’t. Which brings me to M312, and its effects on womens rights. I am not a doctor. So lets keep this simple. Like this: