Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« None of the Above? | Main | Mark Levin gets too dizzy spinning for Romney (Part I) »

Thursday, January 31, 2008

The cost of abortion: John Williamson

John Williamson, federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, looks into the surprising costs to taxpayers of abortion in "A not-so-private matter of abortion."

Posted by Matthew Johnston

Posted by westernstandard on January 31, 2008 in Western Standard | Permalink


Pregnancy is not an illness nor other misfortune which prevents a woman from working; it is a normal result of the act of procreation and it can be expected to occur some of the time. There is no good reason for taxpayers to pay the salary of one who chooses to end that pregnancy.

Since we are told over and over that we need new immigrants, it would make more long-term sense to generously fund pregnancy, not abortion.

Re: "benefits are paid out under the EI maternity program despite there being no mother or child."

This is illogical, as well as ridiculous.

Re: "Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) -- funding to the United Kingdom-based International Planned Parenthood Federation for activism", a political pressure group

CIDA has not a mandate to spend taxpayers' money for pressuring politicians here or elsewhere and, from a personal point of view, it is offensive that they would be involved in this. Most Canadians probably have little knowledge of just where their tax dollars go through CIDA, the Court Challenges Program and other agencies funded by government. They and their budgets have grown too large and are not transparent.

It is time to end taxpayer funding of agencies such as CIDA, the Human rights Commissions (out of control), foundations (e.g. PET Foundation, the Aga Khan Peace Centre in Ottawa - They become politicized.) and largely unaccountable, unelected NGO's which claim to speak for taxpayers internationally, at the UN for example. Dismantle the CBC which uses tax money promoting the left and social engineering Canadians to "correct think, correct speak", as they have been lately over abortion and Dr. Morgenthaler. They are now gearing up to get taxpayer money to support the poor nationally and globally, along with developing in Canadians a softer attitude toward illegal immigrants (e.g. CBC's The Fifth Estate: Run for Your Life). Why should those with other ideas have to pay for this?

Let taxpayers choose with their own dollars what they wish to support. I do not believe governments are better at determining where to spend taxpayers' money--except in limited areas such as defence, security, infrastructure, and the like--than individuals. This holds true particularly where people differ in what they view as worth funding, and especially, in cases of charitable endeavours, politics, and advocacy.

Posted by: tedi999 | 2008-01-31 5:54:55 PM

tedi999 - hear! hear! Excellent comments, much better put than I would have been able to do.

Posted by: Alain | 2008-01-31 6:20:14 PM

CHOICE is the word that Pro Abortion lobbyists picked to describe their movement. It is a wonderful all inclusive word. Encompassed in ‘pro choice’ is everyone from the hugely profitable abortion provider industry, needy women in desperate circumstances, to people who personally and morally abhor abortion but would not want to force their morals on anyone else. You see the many people believe that abortion is just plain wrong, but they have been convinced that interfering with some one else’s moral decision is an even greater wrong; thus the pro abortionists gain the majority opinion. “Choice” sifts the onus solely upon the woman and her Doctor; meanwhile the nation stands guilty of shedding innocent blood.

Woman’s Choice? The guarantee of anonymity to the women who have had abortions keeps records so secret that we can’t even study the consequences of abortion on this nation. The words post abortion are not used in reporting subsequent infection even death as it would interfere with that anonymity. Who is being protected the woman or the abortion provider? How many women die, or are left infertile from legal abortion complications (Infection or malpractice)? What is the statistical rate of suicide after abortion? What protection is there for the pregnant child or woman from coercion on the part of parents, husbands or boyfriends; who is making the choice? Is it an informed choice? Is there a safety net for the coerced woman? We do know there is statistically more violence against pregnant women, is abortion used as a form of hidden violence? No one knows the answer to these questions; the questions are not politically correct, the statistics don’t exist and we as a nation have no laws to protect or inform the women involved.

Posted by: Jeanette Dennis | 2008-02-01 12:18:24 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.