Monday, October 10, 2005

A Pro-Life Conference in Montreal : We Have To Do Something!

English translation:
A Pro-Life Conference in Montreal : We Have To Do Something!
Montreal, October 7th 2005

A few weeks ago a number of groups and individuals came together to form a coalition against the « Canadian National Pro-Life Conference 2005 » being held at St-Joseph’s Oratory between November 17th and 19th in Montreal (see Bringing together a number of politicians, journalists, academics and of course clergy, this conference situates itself within the rise of the conservative right, and as such will be putting forward an anti-choice, ant-feminist and homophobic agenda.
Our Coalition is putting out a broad call to all organizations and people who refuse to let a small group of reactionary ideologues dictate what women are allowed to do with our bodies, our sexuality, our sexual identity and our health.
If you would like to be a part of our mobilization, to make a statement in support of our Coalition, to provide us with financial assistance, or if you would like more information, we are available to meet with you (at your convenience) or to send us our documentation.
On behalf of the Coalition,

- Marjolaine
To reach us : On the web :

Let’s Abort Their Conference!
A March on the Oratory followed by a RallySaturday November the 19th, meet at noon at Jean-Brillant Park (métro Côte-des-Neiges) Festive Welcoming Committee
Thursday November the 17th, meet at 6pm at métro Côte-des-Neiges These actions are organized by the Coalition to Abort Their Conference, against the “Canadian National Pro-Life Conference 2005” which has as its theme “Life an Famly: Source of Hope”, which is being organized by Campagne Québec-Vie between November 17th and 19th. From Stockwell Day (former head of the reform Party) to Adam Exner (Archbishop of Vancouver), the far-right, its backwards and conservative ideas have no place at Saint-Joseph’s Oratory or anywhere else.

Organized by a coalition of groups and individuals, amongst others the Comité des sans emploi/CLAC-logement, NEFAC-MTL, ASSÉ, Réseau de solidarité des travailleurs et travailleuses, DIRA, Cyprine... For more information, please visit:

Expose Their Lies!
When they say: “The Family is sacred”
What they mean is: Send the women back to the home. Keep families together despite conjugal violence, rape, incest…
When they say: “The culture of death”
What they mean is: Ban abortion and contraception. Abolish sex education.
When they say: “Quebec’s demographic crisis.”
What they mean is: Racism and white supremacy. Putting a stop t immigration.
When they say: “Marriage is under attack.”
What they mean is: Homophobia. Excluding pleasure from sexuality.

When they say: “Life at any price.”
What they mean is: Therapeutic butchery and suffering. Banning euthaniasia.
We Are For Autonomy and Freedom In Regards To :

  • Our bodies: we demand free, safe and accessible abortion and contraception, here and elsewhere. Motherhood is a choice!

  • Our sexuality: We defend a free and liberatory sexuality, we don’t care if it is homosexual, bisexual, heterosexual…

  • Our gender identity: We want the power to define our sex, our gender and uor appearance.

  • Our health: We want to learn about our bodies. We want the freedom and knowledge to be able to make informed decisions about our lives and deaths.
Our lives belong to us. This is no priest, politician, doctor, psychiatrist, boss, parent, or partner or anyone else who can tell us what to do!


Blogger Vek said...

Your post is so retarded, it's full of propaganda, you say what the prolifers "might" be saying", and you give your own opinion to what they mean without even backing it up.

Pro-lifers hold the right to life of one individual over the right to convenience to another. Your crackpot extreme socialist ideals are a thing of the past, they're slowly collapsing as critically minded people see past your ideas without valid arguments.

November 18, 2005 12:29 AM  
Blogger name displayed said...

how come is it that you, a so called "pro-choice" advocate can voice your opinion and think of yourself as being so open minded and accepting when you can't accept someone elses right to disagree with your standpoint. Is it just me or does that seem a little bit hypocritical. Sure, you can force your opinion on someone else and it's called social reform, but if someone else tries the same to you they're a biggot, or anti-feminist, or homophobic. You can't have it both ways

November 20, 2005 3:07 AM  
Blogger kersplebedeb said...

Actually, i am not "forcing" my opinion on anyone - if you don't like it, just don't visit my blog!
Nor do i stop you from exercising your "right to disagree" - witness the fact that you are allowed to leave a comment, as you did.
But please be honest: if you say homosexuality, or abortion, or contraception, or immigration, should be made illegal, this is different from merely holding an opinion. You are actually proposing that the State impose - by means of police, courts, and prisons - a set of behaviours, and forbid another set. Your "opinion" is thus a threat, not merely to my "opinion", but to my life as i choose to live it.
Nobody is proposing that Christians be forced to engage in queer sex, or be forced to use contraceptives, or be forced to have abortions, or be forced to immigrate. If you want to live a heterosexual monogamous "Humanitae vitae" lifestyle, go right ahead. The "demands" and "opinions" of "so-called pro-choicers" in no way infringe on any of the rights or lifestyle of the more devout Christian. I am very happy to leave you alone to live your life as you see fit, providing you are not hurting or oppressing anyone else.
Campagne Quebec Vie - which calls for legislation against abortion, contraception and homosexuality - holds "opinions" and makes "demands" which are qualitatively different from the "pro-choice" demands, as they would leave others no opportunity to make their own choice (i.e. follow their own conscience) on what we all agree are important decisions.
Such an aggressive programme leaves us with no choice but to resist.

November 20, 2005 10:40 AM  
Blogger Vek said...

I believe this discussion was surrounding abortion. That is how your argument is flawed. Every time someone has an abortion, they are forcing their decision on another individual. Every time someone has an abortion, that individual looses his/her life. The right of convenience should not supercede another's basic right to live. Abortion deny the right of the unborn to live, it is that simple, that's what this is about and that is why pro-life people reject it. Pro-lifers have sound scientific and philosophical arguments surrounding their side of the debate. Perhaps that is why it's making such a gain in the US where free speech isn't stifled by the socialist reich.

November 20, 2005 2:46 PM  
Blogger Vek said...

I see you deleted the pro-life sites I posted. Are you afraid of the truth getting out? No lies are made on these sites, only valid arguments. People who can stand up for their arguments will give their own, those who can't will hide the arguments of others.

November 20, 2005 2:48 PM  
Blogger kersplebedeb said...

No Vek, your "word" can get out anytime anyone googles "pro-life" - it doesn't mean i choose to link to your sites through my blog.
The argument is about abortion, and about contraception, and about homosexuality - the organization that was holding the conference in Montreal is on record opposing all three, and wanting access to them either severely restricted or outright criminalized.

If one believes that there is no difference between a human embryo an a human baby in that case Campagne Quebec Vie's positions may indeed appear as stopping people who are trying to infringe on the freedom of other humans - the only thing is that the "human beings" you wish to protect could not normally survive without the actual human women whose bodies you would like to control. If I need a kidney transplant and you are a potential donor, it may be your right to choose to donate one of you kineys to me, but you should not be forced to do so, even though your "freedom" to not donate a kidney may infringe upon my freedom to continue living. It should be a matter of personal conscience.
Indeed, if the people who give birth were not the same people who have suffered sexist discrimination, exploitation and oppression for centuries, I doubt anyone would see abortion the same way. It is the idea that a woman may choose to to prioritize her own wellbeing or life choices above those of her embryo of foetus that maddens people - I mean for a man to put his needs first would be natural (guys, including "pro-life" guys, do it all the time...) but a woman - how unmotherly! how dare she!

November 20, 2005 3:39 PM  
Blogger Vek said...

Yes, my arguments can be found anytime someone googles "pro-life", but I decided to present my arguments in a comment on your page. You decided to delete them, stifling debate. I'm not surprised though, this is the kind of thing left-wing supporters do on the internet, debate is HEAVILY stifled by anyone who tries to oppose the political left on

The conference was a pro-life conference, thus surrounding the issues of abortion, euthanasia... etc. You decided that you would include everything else that the right traditionally stands for, when this is not what the conference was about. You can have a pro-life homosexual and as can be seen with Feminists for LIfe, pro-life feminists. What you are doing here is rallying groups of other social issues that are unrelated to pro-life issues and attempting to side them against a topic that has little to do with what their issues stand for.

You could argue that their is a difference between a born baby and an unborn one. You could also argue that there is a difference between a newborn baby and a teenage adolescent ... or a fully developed adult ... or an aged elderly person. The fact that remains is that they are all individual human beings at different states of development. How you function in environments is also no reason to discriminate against a human individual. A prematurely born child can survive outside of his/her mother's womb and be protected under Canadian law, but the same child who is not born prematurely is not protected and can legally be killed at any time. All human beings are limited by their environments, I cannot survive if kept under water for an extended period of time, I cannot survive if I'm removed from the earth's atmosphere, I likely wouldn't survive if put in the frigid arctic for an extended period of time.

Unless you did not consent to having sex, you are consenting to have a child every time you do it. You know that your methods of contraception are not 100% perfect. I know that, I take the risk and am willing to put up with the consequences if contraception doesn't hold up. You cannot say that you "didn't know" that there was a small possibility of getting pregnant each time you have sex. Even if your partner tells you he/she is protected, you never know that this is ultimately for certain. So by acknowledging that you're aware of the possible outcome of sex, you are consenting to the fact that you may become pregnant.

The same people who sufferent sexist discrimination for centuries? Excuse me, but you haven't been around for centuries. Women today who haven't suffered under discrimination shouldn't be awarded for the suffering of others. The same should go that men of today shouldn't be discriminated against because of the wrong doings of men who came before them. We should not victimize those who are innocent of any crime. I take this personally myself, I am left-handed. People who were left-handed have been discriminated against in the past for which hand they use. I cannot see how someone should be punished and I benefited for the wrong-doings that have occurred to lefties in the past.

Anyone has an instinct to preserve their well-being, and we should always respect that. When this instinct is confused with convenience of an individual being compromised, it leads to dangerous situations. No mother should ever be put in a situation where she feels that she needs to take her baby and throw it in a garbage bag and leave it in a park. No woman should ever feel that she needs to kill her child, no matter what its stage of development is.

November 20, 2005 9:31 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

eXTReMe Tracker