Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Fasting for Darfur and the just-in-time-for-summer Morgentaler Diet | Main | Think of the children, dismantle the schools »

Thursday, July 17, 2008

Shame on the YWCA

Anyone know how long it's been since YWCA Canada ceased to refer to itself by its full, historic name? The "Our History in Canada" page on its website makes absolutely no reference to the organization ever having been called anything but the YWCA–modern feminists obviously not wanting anything whatsoever to do with the word "Christian."

I raise this issue now in response to the sad news, which appeared in my inbox today, that YWCA Canada has announced its support of Henry Morgentaler's appointment to the Order of Canada. I can't help but think that the Y's taking of this position is a gross insult to the memory of the remarkable Christian women who founded the YWCA more than a century ago. A sad day, indeed.

Posted by Terry O'Neill on July 17, 2008 in Current Affairs | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e553c229f48834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Shame on the YWCA:

Comments

Beyond their support for Morgentaler's appointment to the Order of Canada, in the same press release the Young Women's Christian Association came out against Bill C-484:

"Bill C-484, 'The Unborn Victims of Crime Act,' which passed second reading in Parliament on March 5 and is now under review by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, seeks to grant fetuses (which are non-persons under the law) a type of legal personhood, posing a serious danger to abortion rights."

Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2008-07-17 3:28:23 PM


The YWCA was hijacked by dykes back in the '60's after Turdeau said it was OK to be queer.
YMCA same thing.
An insult to good Christians everywhere.

Posted by: Atric | 2008-07-17 3:38:47 PM


Does that mean they won't play that song anymore?

A wedding without "YYYYY M C EHH" just ain't no wedding.

Posted by: Epsilon | 2008-07-17 4:54:46 PM


The key phrase: "more than a century ago". Back before women were persons. Back before the concept of Christianity was hijacked by intolerant goons.

Good on the YWCA for realizing that looking out for young women in this century includes giving them reproductive freedom and control of their own bodies.

Posted by: Voice of Reason | 2008-07-17 10:26:18 PM


In the late sixties I payed in advance for a month stay at the Y in vancouver. There were so many fudge packers there that i left after 4 days and rented a small basement suite. Have never had respect for that institution since.

Posted by: peterj | 2008-07-17 11:28:52 PM


If I am not mistaken, criticism of the YMCA/YWCA has been a tradition of the Roman Catholic Church. Too bad that the YWCA opens its arms to this tradition.

Posted by: dewp | 2008-07-18 12:01:12 AM


Oh yeah, Voice of Reason (a misnomer if there ever was one): "the YWCA's looking out for young women...[by] giving them reproductive freedom and control of their own bodies" ??????

Abortions disfigure young women's bodies (not to mention annihilating young females' lives which never have the opportunity of enjoying the freedoms you refer to, seeing as they've been denied the first and foremost freedom, which is the right to life).

Because abortion very often results in irreparable harm to the reproductive systems of young women (bones embedded and ossified in the uterus, perforated uteruses, etc.) they often are not able to conceive later in their lives.

This is "control of their own bodies"? I guess it is, if you figure that their "reproductive freedom" to have an abortion has resulted in the negative consequence of infertility for the rest of their lives. But, somehow, I don't think that's the "freedom" you were referring to.

Get a life, VOR. Feminists' Utopian--actually, Dystopian--Agenda for young women (that is, lives of "power" without men and children), masquerading as concern for their freedoms (sic), is a fool's game. It's a dark, deceitful deception, swathed in the language of rights and freedoms.

Too bad you've been duped, as so many are. And very sad for young women if they think that a perverse group like the feminists and dykes who've taken over the YWCA defend their freedoms. If they follow their Dystopian path to "freedom" they're going to find heartache and disappointment, certainly not the pot of gold at the end of the Rights Rainbow.

Posted by: batb | 2008-07-18 7:43:34 AM


And one more thing:

Who's getting rich off young women's "reproductive freedom" (sic and sick)?

The abortionists like Henry Morgentaler, who is a multi-millionaire off the avails of abortion, paid for by the hapless taxpayers of Canada.

Mr. Morgentaler was also, more than once, disciplined by the Quebec Medical Association for botched procedures. I wonder what kind of reproductive freedoms the recipients of Mr. Morgentaler's inexpert medical "expertise" are enjoying?

Follow the money.

1. Abortionists make a heap off young women's reproductive "freedoms," defended by the cadre of man-haters at the YWCA;

2. So do countless therapeutic social, pyschological, educational, medical, workers in networks/social safety nets set up to "help" unfortunate young women who experience "unwanted pregnancies" and/or who contract one of over 50 STDS now rampant and epidemic in our youth population.

3. Pharmaceutical companies are making gazillion$ off the reproductive "freedoms" of young women in the form of the pill, condoms, spermicidal foams and medications prescribed before, during, and after abortions and to deal with the symptoms of the myriad STDs young women are contracting, possibly the most serious one being HIV/AIDS.

It's hard to see how the feminists who have taken over the YWCA are "giving [young women] reproductive freedom and control of their own bodies."

It's also difficult to fathom how on earth Henry Morgentaler can be considered a champion of women's rights, when his whole life has been devoted to ripping unborn children from their mothers' wombs, thus contributing to lifetimes of both physical and psychological dysfunction (PAS), which he never has to deal with.

'Talk about hit and run.

Posted by: batb | 2008-07-18 9:14:41 AM


I choose life.

Posted by: set you free | 2008-07-18 10:23:02 AM


YWCA has been irrelevant for years. This just proves it. Let's not lose sleep over it. Better to move on and support something with real Christian values.

Posted by: TM | 2008-07-18 10:35:06 AM


The thing is, TM, who in Canada knows that the YWCA has been taken over by a cadre of lib-left, pro-gay, pro-abortion feminists and dykes?

I'll bet most Canadians are totally unaware. So I'm grateful for a post like this, although there are few uninformed Canadians who will be checking this comment out.

Canadians are way too complacent, way too uninformed, and way too uninterested in being informed--which goes back to the post above about public education.

Jeesh.

Posted by: batb | 2008-07-18 10:51:41 AM


I commend the YWCA's announcement of it's support for Dr Henry Morgentaler. He is a courageous man who endured imprisonment and unending harassment from those who reject equality of the sexes.
There is no doubt in my mind that full, legal abortion is a basic human right. Women are not breeding machines for the state or church. I trust them to make the most intelligent reproductive decisions entirely on their own without any interference from the state or church or any other group.
If you don't like abortion then don't have one. But don't force women to have babies they don't want. Every parent a willing parent, every child a wanted child.

Posted by: Bruce Elniski | 2008-07-18 10:55:10 AM


Indeed.

Posted by: TM | 2008-07-18 10:57:40 AM


I commend the YWCA for their courageous stand in supporting Dr. Henry Mortentaler.
Women are entitled to make their own reproductive decisions without any interference from the church or state of any other group.
If you don't want an abortion then don't have one and by all means have all the kids you wish.

But don't judge others' decisions to control their own fertility. Women have every moral and legal right to make their own private personal reproductive decisions as free persons.
And don't give me any crap about the fetus being a person. If a fetus is a person so is a sperm and and egg. Do we start imprisoning young christian males every time they ejaculate outside a fertile woman's vagina?

Posted by: Bruce Elniski | 2008-07-18 10:59:10 AM


Bruce:

Such elegant imagery.

I choose life.

Posted by: set you free | 2008-07-18 11:21:20 AM


Bruce, the order of Canada is not normally given to controversial figures I am told. That's one reason to be at least surprised by this.

When is a person a person by the way? If the moment after leaving the birth canal then you would have us believe the moment prior, they are not people? You draw the line somewhere too Bruce, and that is probably your line. Those who disagree with you draw it earlier.

Black's were not people. Women were not people. We all know they are. The unborn are as much a separate and unique person as you and me in my mind, and the minds of many others.

Abortion isn't even about Christianity. If I believed killing new born babies was fine, you would try to stop me I am sure, whatever your beliefs about Christianity.

Posted by: TM | 2008-07-18 11:21:39 AM


Bruce your ideas are so old its sickening. The fact is there is no difference between abortion and what that recently released lebanese Hezbollah terrorist did when he smashed the 4 year old girls head on the rocks.
They welcomed that man back to Lebanon the same as you welcome Henry.
People like you use the term fetus and abortion like its nothing,yet you cant define what abortion is.
Your father should have ejaculated in the bowl the sperm that was you as to make it into a baby was a waste of air.

Posted by: M | 2008-07-18 12:29:09 PM


Who are these people?

Posted by: s | 2008-07-18 1:58:07 PM


s:

They are people whose parent chose NOT to abort.

Thank God for that.

Posted by: set you free | 2008-07-18 3:00:59 PM


s:

Who are YOU?

Posted by: batb | 2008-07-18 4:22:20 PM


Bruce, please respond to points I have made above about the damage abortion all too often inflicts on women, young and old--and those who benefit financially from their abortions.

There's also the issue of when women choose to have children after abortion, they are often unable to conceive and end up in fertility clinics: more gazillion$ for the pharmaceutical companies and the clinic owners.

You think your enlightened views (sic) are all about "equality" for women. Well, you're wrong. You're just one of the many exploiters of women.

And, BTW, once the egg and sperm have joined together, there IS a child unless the pregnancy is terminated. You know? Nine months, or so, later, the woman will give birth to A BABY. That's not rocket science.

And the DNA of that baby is that of BOTH the mother and the father. So, don't give us that nonsense about a woman, alone, having
"the right" to make the decision about her pregnancy. Many more people are involved, first and foremost the father.

I feel like I'm teaching a kindergarten class.

Posted by: batb | 2008-07-18 4:31:12 PM


batb: "I feel like I'm teaching a kindergarten class"

...not so much a Kindergarten class, but a "me only, me first" generation of thinking.

Many Western women are marrying later and having kids later - gotta get careers first.

Then they face they can't have kids because of age, and a direct result of work load and stress.

I don't think women were built to handle that kind of stress, enough at home with kids.

Tell me which guy can have a baby in arm, another one grabbing her skirt screaming at the top of its lungs, and she's on the phone with the school principle discussing the oldest one poor math grades and detention from being in a fight.

Guys, we'd have a meltdown in 2 seconds.

Posted by: tomax7 | 2008-07-19 1:57:27 PM



The comments to this entry are closed.