Globe & Mail: Right-wing Tories gear up for convention

[Osama bin Layton]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050310.wrwtories0310/BNStory/Front/

Right-wing Tories gear up for convention
By GLORIA GALLOWAY

Thursday, March 10, 2005
Updated at 10:55 PM EST

Globe and Mail Update

Ottawa — Anti-abortionists and opponents of same-sex marriage who revelled Thursday in their successful scuttling of a Conservative plan to keep those issues from being debated at the party's policy convention are now turning their thoughts to the convention itself.

“We are going to have to hit the ground running when we get to Montreal and get information to the delegates and talk to people and do our lobbying before we actually get to that point (where abortion is debated),” said Connie Wilkins, a Conservative from Kingston who is the author of a resolution to ban partial-birth abortions in the third term of pregnancy.

“By the time people get to the plenary session where they are going to be faced with the choice of the two different abortion resolutions, they are going to have a pretty strong idea already of what they want to do.”

The first resolution on abortion to be debated at the meeting next week will say that a Conservative government will not support any legislation to regulate the procedure.

If that passes, Ms. Wilkins' resolution will not be debated. So she and other anti-abortion activists are going to do their best to ensure that it fails — just as a massive telephone and e-mail campaign earlier this week convinced the party brass to abandon plans to prevent debate on what it calls issues of moral conscience.

While Ms. Wilkins is lobbying the Conservatives to prevent the controversial third-term partial birth abortions, Craig Chandler and his group, Concerned Christians Canada, will be make a strong pitch against same-sex marriage.

“We're pushing the agenda. We won the first round. (But) we understand that the convention next week is the main battleground,” said Mr. Chandler. “This is going to determine what this part is. Either we are going to become the old Progressives which, last time I looked, we dropped that word from our name. Or we're going to be a Conservative party.”

The battle highlights problems Leader Stephen Harper will face as he tries to reconcile competing values from the old Progressive Conservative and Canadian Alliance arms of the amalgamated entity.

But Ms. Wilkins does not understand why anybody would oppose a ban on third-trimester partial-birth abortions.

“Really it's infanticide,” said Ms. Wilkins.

While there are no figures to suggest it is even performed in this country, Ms. Wilkins said Ontario paid $400,000 last year to send women in their last term of pregnancy to a clinic south of the border to have it done. The Ontario Health Ministry does not deny that but says, in each case, the procedure was deemed medically necessary by the women's doctors.

Kim Luton, president of the Canadian Abortion Rights Action League, said the case against partial-birth abortions is being made to demonize all abortions. In Canada, said Ms. Luton, 97 per cent of abortions occur in the first trimester and the all but a tiny fraction of the rest take place in the second.

Those that occur late term are conducted because mother's life is in danger or the doctor has detected a gross fetal anomaly with tests that can't be done until the 18th week of pregnancy, she said.

“We don't need to make these women and their lives any more emotionally upsetting,” said Ms. Luton. She termed attempts to regulate late-term partial-birth abortions “the slippery slope or a back door way to start attempting to control or limit abortions.”

But Ms. Wilkins said that is ridiculous. “That's like saying setting a speed limit to banning all driving.”

© Copyright 2005 Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. All Rights Reserved.

[littleharbour]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050310.wrwtories0310/BNStory/Front/

Right-wing Tories gear up for convention
By GLORIA GALLOWAY

Thursday, March 10, 2005
Updated at 10:55 PM EST

Globe and Mail Update

Ottawa — Anti-abortionists and opponents of same-sex marriage who revelled Thursday in their successful scuttling of a Conservative plan to keep those issues from being debated at the party's policy convention are now turning their thoughts to the convention itself.

“We are going to have to hit the ground running when we get to Montreal and get information to the delegates and talk to people and do our lobbying before we actually get to that point (where abortion is debated),” said Connie Wilkins, a Conservative from Kingston who is the author of a resolution to ban partial-birth abortions in the third term of pregnancy.

“By the time people get to the plenary session where they are going to be faced with the choice of the two different abortion resolutions, they are going to have a pretty strong idea already of what they want to do.”

The first resolution on abortion to be debated at the meeting next week will say that a Conservative government will not support any legislation to regulate the procedure.

If that passes, Ms. Wilkins' resolution will not be debated. So she and other anti-abortion activists are going to do their best to ensure that it fails — just as a massive telephone and e-mail campaign earlier this week convinced the party brass to abandon plans to prevent debate on what it calls issues of moral conscience.

While Ms. Wilkins is lobbying the Conservatives to prevent the controversial third-term partial birth abortions, Craig Chandler and his group, Concerned Christians Canada, will be make a strong pitch against same-sex marriage.

“We're pushing the agenda. We won the first round. (But) we understand that the convention next week is the main battleground,” said Mr. Chandler. “This is going to determine what this part is. Either we are going to become the old Progressives which, last time I looked, we dropped that word from our name. Or we're going to be a Conservative party.”

The battle highlights problems Leader Stephen Harper will face as he tries to reconcile competing values from the old Progressive Conservative and Canadian Alliance arms of the amalgamated entity.

But Ms. Wilkins does not understand why anybody would oppose a ban on third-trimester partial-birth abortions.

“Really it's infanticide,” said Ms. Wilkins.

While there are no figures to suggest it is even performed in this country, Ms. Wilkins said Ontario paid $400,000 last year to send women in their last term of pregnancy to a clinic south of the border to have it done. The Ontario Health Ministry does not deny that but says, in each case, the procedure was deemed medically necessary by the women's doctors.

Kim Luton, president of the Canadian Abortion Rights Action League, said the case against partial-birth abortions is being made to demonize all abortions. In Canada, said Ms. Luton, 97 per cent of abortions occur in the first trimester and the all but a tiny fraction of the rest take place in the second.

Those that occur late term are conducted because mother's life is in danger or the doctor has detected a gross fetal anomaly with tests that can't be done until the 18th week of pregnancy, she said.

“We don't need to make these women and their lives any more emotionally upsetting,” said Ms. Luton. She termed attempts to regulate late-term partial-birth abortions “the slippery slope or a back door way to start attempting to control or limit abortions.”

But Ms. Wilkins said that is ridiculous. “That's like saying setting a speed limit to banning all driving.”

© Copyright 2005 Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Connie, I can't wait to see you being interviewed at the convention by Mike Duffy and Peter Mansbridge This could get expensive. We may have to hire a team of consultants to ensure you look fabulous darling in front of those cameras

[Dronebuster]

Connie for Leader of the CPC!

[Mark Fournier]

But Ms. Wilkins said that is ridiculous. “That's like saying setting a speed limit to banning all driving.”

Good article by Gloria Galloway, but Connie's rebuttal of the argument by Kim Luton, that a ban on partial birth abortion "is the slippery slope or a backdoor way to start attempting to control or limit abortions" was quoted slightly wrong. What Connie actually said was, "That's like saying setting a speed limit is the first step to banning all driving."

[Connie Fournier]

Connie, I can't wait to see you being interviewed at the convention by Mike Duffy and Peter Mansbridge This could get expensive. We may have to hire a team of consultants to ensure you look fabulous darling in front of those cameras

Funny you should say that, littleharbour...the CBC cameras are coming this morning and I am being interviewed by Eric Sorenson. I will let you all know when it will be airing.

[Connie Fournier]

Those that occur late term are conducted because mother's life is in danger or the doctor has detected a gross fetal anomaly with tests that can't be done until the 18th week of pregnancy, she said.

“We don't need to make these women and their lives any more emotionally upsetting,” said Ms. Luton. She termed attempts to regulate late-term partial-birth abortions “the slippery slope or a back door way to start attempting to control or limit abortions.”

Fortunately, there were Senate Judicial Hearings on this issue recently in the United States, so we have a lot of information about how and why this procedure is performed.

During those hearings, over 300 physician-specialists (including former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop) issued a statement that said, "partial-birth abortion is never medically necessary to protect a mother's health or her future fertility."

Also, in an interview with American Medical News, Dr. Martin Haskell of Dayton, Ohio, who has performed over 1,000 partial-birth abortions, said, "I'll be quite frank: most of my abortions are elective in that 20-24 week range. . . . In my particular case, probably 20% are for genetic reasons. And the other 80% are purely elective."

[_Patrick_]

But Ms. Wilkins said that is ridiculous. “That's like saying setting a speed limit to banning all driving.”

Good article by Gloria Galloway, but Connie's rebuttal of the argument by Kim Luton, that a ban on partial birth abortion "is the slippery slope or a backdoor way to start attempting to control or limit abortions" was quoted slightly wrong. What Connie actually said was, "That's like saying setting a speed limit is the first step to banning all driving."

That jumped out at me. I know Connie is far more articulate. Shame on the Globe's editors - the Globe is really slipping, as most of us know.

[Muddy]

I would also make it clear that a lot of members supported your fight against P-90 because of the attempt to stop democratic debate on policy, not neccessarily just supporters of of your particuler policy concern. It was the democratic process that was in question.

[VliBull]

Way to go Connie!! You're also showing a good ability of not giving anything much that they can twist. That's IMPORTANT and sometimes hard to do. Way to go.

[Connie Fournier]

I would also make it clear that a lot of members supported your fight against P-90 because of the attempt to stop democratic debate on policy, not neccessarily just supporters of of your particuler policy concern. It was the democratic process that was in question.

I know that, Muddy, and I have tried to make that clear in talking to the media. Unfortunately, you can't pick and choose what quotes they include in the final product.

[Muddy]

I should know I don`t have to coach you Connie! I can`t help it I was a border collie in my last life. Another suggestion anyway. If you put it in writing what you say and give it to the reporter it does help get quoted properly.
Thats it! I won`t say any more! well maybe.......

[Mark Fournier]

I should know I don`t have to coach you Connie! I can`t help it I was a border collie in my last life. Another suggestion anyway. If you put it in writing what you say and give it to the reporter it does help get quoted properly.
Thats it! I won`t say any more! well maybe.......

There is a chance Connie misspoke on that quote, but a copy editor should have caught it.

[Enn]

karadjos wrote:

Entropy Squared wrote:

GLORIA GALLOWAY wrote:

But Ms. Wilkins said that is ridiculous. “That's like saying setting a speed limit to banning all driving.”

Good article by Gloria Galloway, but Connie's rebuttal of the argument by Kim Luton, that a ban on partial birth abortion "is the slippery slope or a backdoor way to start attempting to control or limit abortions" was quoted slightly wrong. What Connie actually said was, "That's like saying setting a speed limit is the first step to banning all driving."

That jumped out at me. I know Connie is far more articulate. Shame on the Globe's editors - the Globe is really slipping, as most of us know.

This is not the first time that Gloria Galloway has done shoddy reporting. She once admitted to me she made a statement (that was in error) she was unsure of - hurriedly pulling it off an internal database without question to meet a deadline, but the Globe's chief editor Ed Greenspon doesn't seem to care too much about that. They simply print corrections if they get caught mis-reporting, as was the previous case.

[Enn]

If someone wishes to inform Gloria Galloway of the error, and get a correction statement published, this is her email address:

GGalloway@globeandmail.ca

[Connie Fournier]

I think it was simply a typo, Enn...I'm not too concerned about it. I thought she wrote a pretty balanced article, and that is the most important thing.

Keep giving me advice, Muddy. I appreciate all I can get. BTW, are you going to be well enough to come to the convention? I sure hope so!