From the Canadian Center for Bioethical Reform.
Excerpt:
Last month, Member of Parliament Dr. Hedy Fry was reported in a CBC article as saying she was ready to debate abortion with anyone. When one of her former patients, international pro-life speaker Stephanie Gray, took her up on her offer, Dr. Fry declined….
Here is the actual voice mail backing out of the debate:
The pro-lifer debater comments:
“It’s disappointing that a member of parliament who has been so vocal in support of abortion won’t publicly defend her views in a forum where they will be challenged,” said Gray, executive director of the Canadian Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (CCBR). Gray pointed out that it’s not likely abortion will be debated in the House any time soon given the political hot potato the topic is. Gray continued: “If Dr. Fry is so confident that she’s correct, why not air her views against mine? Those on the side of truth should have nothing to fear. I don’t. I welcome the opportunity to engage her or any abortion advocate in examining the issue.”
Yeah, because the abortion position has nothing to do with reason – it has to do with selfishness. A man and a woman conspire to pursue pleasure and to then kill an innocent child in order to avoid being inconvenienced in their careers or finances. That’s what abortion is. It’s slavery, only worse, because you actually kill the innocent person for money, rather than just making them work.
Children are the natural consequence of having sex. If the man and the woman are BOTH not ready for a baby, then they should not be having sex. A baby has the best chance of surviving and thriving with two married parents who have kept a home for a couple of years. So grown-ups have the responsibility to take care of providing the environment for children who are the natural result of the sexual act. It’s no use complaining about unexpected babies – if you have sex, you need to be ready for a baby. And it’s no use caterwauling about how recycling makes you a good person if you cannot love the helpless innocent people that you create with your own selfish choices.
Imagine you were trimming your hedge and you noticed a baby bird with a broken wing on the ground. You don’t ignore the bird and you certainly don’t kill it. You take it to a vet, you pay to splint the bird’s wing, and you take it home and nurse it back to health. Because it’s small and it’s weak and it needs you and it’s on your property and it’s your responsibility and that’s all there is to it. There isn’t any decision to make once you find it – you just deal with it. Because you have moral character and you don’t care that much about being happy – you care a lot more about being good. You desire for happiness is irrelevant. You want to be good. Whatever it takes.
UPDATE: This story was picked up by Canada’s National Post, the best national newspaper in Canada.
WINTERY KNIGHT 
And of course she gets someone else to phone and turn down the debate for her. Cowardly is indeed the word.
LikeLike
If there is one theme that has been emerging lately it is that the left’s connection to reality is rather tenuous. Call this The Rhetoric vs. The Reality.
The rhetoric of “I’ll debate anyone” vs. the reality in which this woman has no intention of debating anyone.
The rhetoric of global warming pronouncements vs. the reality of falsified data, political spin, obfuscation, and weather that, er, refuses to cooperate with climate prognostications.
The rhetoric of BP – Beyond Petroleum “we’re the greenest of green”, and, ‘it’s just a minor spill” (in the early days) vs. the reality.
The rhetoric of the State of Washington opposing Arizona’s law vs. the reality of illegal immigrant crime in Washington State.
The rhetoric of Obama causing the oceans to recede vs. the current, ahem, problem with the ocean in and around the Gulf of Mexico.
The rhetoric of altruistic socialism vs. the reality of socialism’s inherent selfishness and de-moralizing decadence.
The rhetoric of abortion rights and reproductive choice vs. the reality of unborn humans obliterated like twigs under a lawn mower.
The rhetoric of peaceful, gentle, dignified Islam being hijacked by anomalous extremists vs. the reality of Islam being an inherently violence-oriented religion from the get-go.
The rhetoric of multicultural equivalence and equality vs. the reality that cultures are most certainly not equally moral, just, functional, viable, or successful. (Just why is Mexico such a disfunctional failed-state that citizens believe they have the right — the right — to illegally emigrate into the US?)
The lesson?
Beware of leftists bearing rhetoric.
[corrected open parenthesis — would not compile!]
LikeLike