Join May's progressivish pranti-choice movement!

remind, not sure what you are referring to, re: the doctor.

[url=http://aprilreign.breadnroses.ca/blog/wordpress/?p=112]Nuance it’s the new black![/url] - April Reign

Leonard Stern at the Ottawa Citizen has written, "There’s much to like about Elizabeth May, the new leader of Canada’s Green party, and high on the list is her status as persona non grata in some quarters of the establishment Left. Anyone whom Judy Rebick declares public enemy No. 1 can’t be all bad." Anyone able to track down the full text? It's behind a subscription wall online.

[url=http://cmmgreens.blogspot.com/2007/01/canadas-green-party-new-canadian.h...'s[/url] a blog post about it, which links to the Citizen editorial board [url=http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/features/editorialboard/index.html]i....

Thought I'd revive this thread, in light of later discovery of the audio linked to above.

Here's Tehanu's partial transcript:

quote:

---

Q: For me, the nastiest things that I've read that have been said about you have come from the left. I wanted to ask you specifically what went through your mind when you received the letter from Judy Rebick.

EM: Well the first thing was I wish that Judy had phoned me, and in my public response to her it's no exaggeration to say that I think of her still as a friend. I think that somebody put her up to it, I think someone put a particular slant on what I said, contacted her, and said you've got to do something, because she opened her letter with 'I'm sorry I haven't acted sooner, but I was away' so I suspect that she had some pressure from somewhere to say something. I would have appreciated it if she'd phoned me first, because I don't think we're all that different in our views.

I think it's very odd, you know, actually, to have attacks because I was explaining to a roomful of wonderful Sisters of the Holy Order of St. Joseph's in London, I was explaining to a room that I knew would not agree with my position that is in fact that we must have access to legal and safe abortions in this country. Explaining to that group why that was the case, I've been attacked by people who essentially are on the same side as me but don't like my reasons. [laughs] So I find that very interesting. And I hope that it's gotten some perspective, and I really do like Judy, and I hope ... and the other funny thing that went through my mind was the headline that she was withdrawing support, of course came as something of a surprise because we didn't know we had her support! So I would love her support and I still hope to have it. I don't think that it's an irrevocable breach and I'm still very fond of her."

Q: Well, that you consider her a friend, I mean she said she tore up the cheque, I mean, this is, it's an unfriendly letter.

EM: It is unfriendly. But friendships can go through rough patches, don't you find, so I'm not prepared to write her off. And I never had a cheque made out to Rabble that I could tear up in retaliation, so I can only imagine that she really had a cheque to the Green Party because I didn't ever know she was going to support us. But she's given me ... we last saw each other when we were at a rally this summer, a rally of concern in Toronto about the bombing of Lebanon -- and of course the Hezbollah bombing of Gaza. I think she's very brave as a prominant member of the Jewish community to be outspoken about that issue. And the two of us met there had a good chat, and she was supportive, but I never would have called her a public supporter. And I think that she misunderstood what I was saying.

But context is everything, and if I'd known that every -- now I'm learning -- every single word you say can be pulled out of context. If you [want?] one word by itself without the previous context, you can draw an adverse conclusion. But I never in a million years as a feminist would have derided the achievements of the women's movement. Period. But I really object to slogans, that are distorting and oversimplified. And I probably was influenced in -- not probably, definitely influenced in my answer by the fact that last semester I was taking a course in moral existance at St. Paul which dealt directly with this issue and others, and Professor Kenneth Melchion [?] who's quite marvellous, class discussion also focussed on the fact that in our society we seem to have rejected issues of moral complexity. That everything has to be down to you're for us or you're against us, and it's black and it's white. And I determined that in my political life, now that I have a political life, I would attempt on many issues to deal with them fully.

And my first, I shouldn't probably bring it up again, I'm going to get back in trouble, the first one I got in trouble was by trying to contextualise the seal hunt issue. And immediately I had people in the animal rights movement saying that I'd gone soft. [Saying] no, the Green Party is against the seal hunt. But I'm from the Maritimes, I know seal hunters, I have friends who are seal hunters, and I don't think that we deal well with an ecosystem-wide issue by focussing on this one aspect, when in fact the people in Newfoundland have larger issues, and I was contextualising it around the collapse of cod stocks, the way in which the seals are used as a political scapegoat for the effect of draggers on the cod fishery.

So it's interesting, and I may not be suited to politics, because I will persist in contextualised, full, responsible, detailed responses, where I think they're warranted. And in this issue I think it's a mistake to draw battle lines, because what it does is it alienates, it creates the impression, a chasm, that people who are concerned -- and you do have, we do have ministers in this country who preach to their congregation don't vote for anyone who's for same-sex marriage. Don't vote for anyone who defends a legal right to an abortion. And I think that's wrong. And I think there are moral issues in this country that are never -- the fact that the so-called moral issues are reduced to same-sex marriage and abortion is a big mistake. Poverty is a profoundly moral question. The climate crisis is a profoundly moral question. And I'd like to create some space for people who feel that because they have a sense of, a discomfort with abortion that they need to think about the right to life side of the issue from the point of view of what happens if abortions are illegal, and we end up going back to that dreaded world, where women would seek out illegal abortions and die for no reason. When legal abortion is perfectly reasonable, it's a woman's right, it should be accepted, and even those people who see it as an issue of morality, morality is not [at all one size? side?], is all I was trying to get across.

Q: But reading some of the comments after you responded to her letter, and reading the forum where people responded to what you wrote, again, some of the comments made the original letter that Judy Rebick wrote to you seem positively friendly and I gathered that their issue was that you acknowledged that even though a woman should have a right to an abortion, the fact that it is a moral decision and a morally complex one, they felt was a dangerous thing to admit.

EM: I think that again what I said in my letter to Judy, if I can reconstruct what I said, was that I didn't think it should be a thought crime to admit that this is an issue of moral complexity. It seems dead obvious to me. [Laughs] And so if you can't speak truth out loud, for fear that you've somehow given the so-called enemy some kind of ammunition, you just discredit yourself. And the Green Party of Canada, the resolution from our conference is very clever -- I mean, not, I don't mean clever in the way of being sneaky -- but I mean I was thrilled when I, to find, because I wasn't part of that resolution, to find a resolution that was pro-choice and life. Interesting [interested?], well-constructed, speaking to the very issues that I've always -- so I feel that the Green Party is my home in lots of ways, and one of the things is that it's not just me within the party that's prepared to say what kind of society do we want, let's not have this whole issue defined by the sloganeering.

And I will say I'm very glad from your last comment that I never went back to that website to see what else was posted. [Laughs] That's just from a lack of time, in my empty hours I'll go back and find the blog sites where I'm attacked the most.

Q: But again, coming from the left. Which is interesting.

EM: I'm sure. Well the NDP, let's face it, strategically, this was the, the NDP seized on this during the London campaign, the candidate for the NDP, because it wasn't just with St. Joseph's and the sisters in which I gave that kind of response, I gave it in the public debate on women's issues in the city library, and in a high school. I said look, this is our position, but this is where slogans I think create such a polarised issue that it's not healthy for society. Let's find ways to dialogue. Yes, we're going to have legal abortions. Now let's talk. Not reopening the debate, legal abortions are a right, that's important, let's talk about what kind of society we want and how we could actually reduce the numbers of unwanted pregnancies. And Megan Walker who was the NDP candidate, and her people in the audience, were kind of salivating because they thought, now we got her. You could see the attack approach that came out right away. So I know that some of the attacks on websites are NDP-inspired. And that's okay, that's part of politics.

[url=http://enmasse.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?p=95080&highlight=#95080]enmasse[...

---

[ 28 January 2007: Message edited by: writer ]

As long as they understand the mandate of this forum. And respect it.

On another note, I'm thinking about writing a rabble commentary titled "Inducing Judy" to respond to May.

Thoughts?

[ 28 January 2007: Message edited by: writer ]

[url=http://politiquevert.wordpress.com/2007/04/07/is-elizabeth-may-crazy-lik... Elizabeth May Crazy Like A Fox?[/url]

quote:

---

In a letter to the National Post, April 19, 2007, Elizabeth May reacted with fury at having her views on abortion variously characterized as regressive, conservative, and, most incendiary, “anti-choice.” So strong was May’s indignation that she thought it worse than being associated with a nominated candidate who described the 9/11 attacks as “beautiful”.

[url=http://actsofcitizenship.blogspot.com/2007/04/elizabeth-may-not-anti-cho... May Not Anti-Choice but Not Pro-Choice Either[/url] Spurs

---

Still confused about the pranti-choice position? Help is on the way!

[url=http://www.greenparty.ca/en/node/1513#comment-909]Pro-Life or Pro-Choice?[/url] Green Party of Canada website:

quote:

---

... good heavens, surely we have an obligation to strive as a society to seek to limit their numbers to the greatest extent possible! It is not to be a free-for-all. We must as a civilized people have the theoretical goal of eliminating abortions altogether, and the practical and realizable goal of reducing their numbers to the greatest extent possible. Are we humans or not?

Pro-life or pro-choice?

I myself am both. I want a Canada where there is freedom to make a choice that never has to be made.

---

See also: "Science cannot demonstrate to us when life begins, therefore we MUST assume it beings at conception just IN CASE it really does. Again, the pro-choice crowd have no refutation. They are forced to admit that for all they know, abortion may be the taking of a life." [url=http://www.greenparty.ca/en/node/1499#comment-902]Debating the Science[/url]

[ 01 May 2007: Message edited by: writer ]

quote:

---

[b]M:[/b] Last year, you made some comments on abortion that attracted attention - namely that you would never have an abortion, “not in a million years," and that “nobody in their right mind is for abortions.” Is there a conflict between you and your party on this?

[b]EM:[/b] The party has the same position. The party’s position is called "pro-life, pro-choice." What we’re saying as a party, and what I’m saying as an individual leader, is that any civilized society must provide safe legal access to any woman who needs or wants an abortion. But it’s not something someone is for, in the same way that no one is for chemotherapy. I think Bill Clinton probably said it best - we’d like a society where abortions are safe and legal and rare.

I would never change a thing about the current abortion laws; we must have them. All I was trying to say was that abortion is never viewed by anyone as a societal good. Access to legal and safe abortions, yes. But being in favour of having a legal right to a safe abortion doesn’t mean you are "pro-abortion." I gave a very long, nuanced answer to a group of Roman catholic nuns and it was distorted by people over e-mail and websites and that’s just the way it is to be a politician.

[url=http://www.macleans.ca/homepage/features/article.jsp?content=20070607_14... Macleans.ca Interview: Elizabeth May[/url]

---

remind, I'm pretty sure she said that women were crazy if they were for abortion, not if they had an abortion.

No, no, she wouldn't be as judgmental as that about women who had such a terrible decision to make. A decision she's talked other women out of following through on. A decision she would never be reduced to make, not in a million years.

Yes, May is far more nuanced than to say women are crazy if they've had an abortion. Just that she cannot possibly imagine the circumstances that would lead them to do such a thing.

Via B'n'R:

quote:

---

[url=http://www.redfez.net/thoughtinterrupted/?p=148]Have they taken over?[/url]

What is up with all these fetus fetishizers in the Green party? In addition to Lizzie May’s insults and histrionics, my local provincial Green candidate’s pamphlet (this would be Glen Argan, Edmonton Mill Creek) natters on about “unborn children”.

---

Anybody have a copy of this pamphlet? Care to share?