Hey, Faith. Really loved the interview you did at the March For Life in my hometown, Ottawa. Some things you should note: your interview was a one-sided news coverage advocating pro-life, while completely skewing the arguments for pro-choice. Here are a few things you probably, if more educated or less biased on the subject, could have informed viewers. Canada's top judicial court, which basically keeps all power in the nation in check by analyzing the law, ie. statute law, constitutional law common law (precedence). After a very rigorous process, the highest check/balance system in Canada ruled for pro-choice. Section 7 of the Charter states, "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice." Precedence plays a huge role in this, as the topic of abortion rights is a legal issue. Canada has a longstanding position on refusing state intervention regarding the sexual regulation of the self. This was outlined in Pierre Elliott Trudeau's 1968-69 massive amendments to the Criminal Code. However, this legislation preceded a decade of mass youth social movements and demonstrations against contraception bans, which shows how abortion rights really came from a bottom-up power source. So you can thank your parents' generation for the legal precedence here. Also, like most shortsighted thinkers, you cite science as a binding form of 'fact', which supports a scientific hegemonic view of truth. However, all sects of society (whether it be political, economic, social, cultural, environmental, technological, scientific, etc.) are interconnected and affect the other. For an example, the scientific knowledge you presented neglects the Canadian social setting, where society actually favours the empowerment of a woman's choice on what she does to her body. You may have your opinions on how that is immoral, but I think you should treat the other side (ie. everything but science and religion) with a bit more respect and integrity because as I saw in your news piece, you deprived viewers of a critical analysis on the issue.
↧