• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

CPC Leadership Discussion 2020-21

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
75
Points
480
I don’t follow the political threads too often, so please forgive if this has already been covered.

But in the Canadian context - I do feel strongly that we do, and should, live in a free country.

And by that, I mean that a woman should have the freedom to choose what medical procedures are in her best interest, abs she should have the freedom to pursue medical procedures regardless of how some other people feel about them.

It’s fine to be pro life, and not personally support the idea of abortions. People have the freedom to think and feel that way.

However, those people’s beliefs and opinions shouldn’t trump those of others.

Using abortion as the main example here - it’s fine for a political party to be pro life, or for a party / individuals to believe abortions are unethical. However, in a free country - people have the right to pursue gender changes, abortions, etc etc - regardless of whether others support it or not.

Isn’t this one of the reasons why it’s so important to seperate church & state?
 

LittleBlackDevil

Full Member
Reaction score
8
Points
230
See for example Article 62 which purports to protect faith based health care providers from refusing to provide abortions, assisted suicide and euthanasia but also for refusing to refer the patient seeking it (which contradicts the physician's duty to refer when he can't or won't provide a service)

Thin wedges, my friend; thin wedges.

Just going to zero in on this; despite me being a SoCon I don't think you and I are too far apart. But I think that this particular issue is a tricky one. I would argue that the "thin wedge" argument goes both ways, and forcing physicians who believe abortion is murder to recommend someone else to do the job, is a very short step away from forcing those physicians to provide abortions, assisted suicide, etc. We can agree that outlawing abortions outright is not appropriate, but in my view at the very least people should be allowed to do their jobs without violating their conscience. Declining to provide a reference is not the same as preventing someone from accessing the service especially in the age of google and where abortions are readily available.
 

LittleBlackDevil

Full Member
Reaction score
8
Points
230
Unfortunately, I don't see the party had much choice. Can you imagine the mileage that would have been gained should that have come out during an election? Remember, in politics it doesn't have to be true, it just has to be believable. Was the decision unfair? Yes. Was it necessary? Also yes.
I'm not sure it would have made much difference. Conservatives will always be savaged by the Canadian media regardless of what they do, so might as well act in fairness and if there's a legitimate reason to can Mr. Sloan do it then, but in the mean time don't do things out of fear of the media. Do what's right, not what you think will mollify the media, because the media will never be mollified if you're "right of centre".

In my view the CPC practice of always acting out of fear of the media is a losing tactic.
 
Top