Paul Martin on Abortion and Same Sex Marriage
DerbyX @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:11 am
Why haven't we heard of these candidates:
$1:
Martin accuses Harper of hiding candidates
Jan. 20, 2006. 02:16 PM
CANADIAN PRESS
ST. JOHN’S — Liberal Leader Paul Martin is accusing Tory rival Stephen Harper of keeping his socially conservative candidates out of the public eye.
In a last push before Monday’s election, Martin warned a room full of boisterous supporters today that Canadians aren’t getting the full story about the front-running Conservatives.
He named Tory hopefuls like Cheryl Gallant, Rob Anders, Rob Merrifield and Harold Albrecht as candidates who have a hidden social agenda — and who themselves have been conspiciously silent throughout the campaign.
And he made hay with reports yesterday of Albrecht, known for his staunch opposition to same-sex marriage, being hustled away from reporters at a Conservative campaign event and into a banquet-hall kitchen, where handlers said he was in a “meeting.”
“Candidates who (made) Canadians so uncomfortable with the Conservatives in the last election . . . they haven’t gone; they’re still there. They’re just in hiding,” Martin said.
“I don’t know where they are. Maybe they’re all in some kind of a safe house, biding their time, watching Jeopardy.”
Martin accused the Tories of muzzling their candidates to avoid turning off voters with controversial remarks about abortion and same-sex marriage.
“What’s going to happen after the election? Are these social conservatives going to stay in hiding, or are they going to come out for the spring thaw? If they come out, are they going to start pressing their views, advancing their causes?”
Martin said voters who want a government that will protect Charter rights such as same-sex marriage and a woman’s right to choose should cast their ballots for the Liberals.
After his speech, Martin told a news conference that Harper tipped his hand about his plans last week when he raised the issue of Liberal-appointed judges on the Supreme Court.
“He basically talked about the courts as his political adversaries, as opponents to what he wanted to do,” Martin said.
“The courts are the one body that can stand in between the position that so many of his MPs have taken on Charter rights.”
Martin, for his part, has promised to eliminate the federal government’s ability to invoke the notwithstanding clause to rescind certain Charter rights — a move Harper has said he opposes.
Jan. 20, 2006. 02:16 PM
CANADIAN PRESS
ST. JOHN’S — Liberal Leader Paul Martin is accusing Tory rival Stephen Harper of keeping his socially conservative candidates out of the public eye.
In a last push before Monday’s election, Martin warned a room full of boisterous supporters today that Canadians aren’t getting the full story about the front-running Conservatives.
He named Tory hopefuls like Cheryl Gallant, Rob Anders, Rob Merrifield and Harold Albrecht as candidates who have a hidden social agenda — and who themselves have been conspiciously silent throughout the campaign.
And he made hay with reports yesterday of Albrecht, known for his staunch opposition to same-sex marriage, being hustled away from reporters at a Conservative campaign event and into a banquet-hall kitchen, where handlers said he was in a “meeting.”
“Candidates who (made) Canadians so uncomfortable with the Conservatives in the last election . . . they haven’t gone; they’re still there. They’re just in hiding,” Martin said.
“I don’t know where they are. Maybe they’re all in some kind of a safe house, biding their time, watching Jeopardy.”
Martin accused the Tories of muzzling their candidates to avoid turning off voters with controversial remarks about abortion and same-sex marriage.
“What’s going to happen after the election? Are these social conservatives going to stay in hiding, or are they going to come out for the spring thaw? If they come out, are they going to start pressing their views, advancing their causes?”
Martin said voters who want a government that will protect Charter rights such as same-sex marriage and a woman’s right to choose should cast their ballots for the Liberals.
After his speech, Martin told a news conference that Harper tipped his hand about his plans last week when he raised the issue of Liberal-appointed judges on the Supreme Court.
“He basically talked about the courts as his political adversaries, as opponents to what he wanted to do,” Martin said.
“The courts are the one body that can stand in between the position that so many of his MPs have taken on Charter rights.”
Martin, for his part, has promised to eliminate the federal government’s ability to invoke the notwithstanding clause to rescind certain Charter rights — a move Harper has said he opposes.
the difference is that the Libs have proven they will pursue a free agenda over these Liberal "Non-entity" candidates whereas Harper will extoll their beliefs as Canadian law and virtue.
OnTheIce @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:19 am
DerbyX DerbyX:
the difference is that the Libs have proven they will pursue a free agenda over these Liberal "Non-entity" candidates whereas Harper will extoll their beliefs as Canadian law and virtue.
Really, is that fact or just an assumption on your behalf?
Derby, all the 'extremists' from the CPC, Liberal and NDP have been quiet. In fact, two of the MP's I mentioned, Wappel and Longfield have been ducking all candidate meetings during the campaign.
The Liberals have proven they will muzzle their MP's in the house. It'll be interesting to see what happens when these MP's are on the other side without the leash on.
OnTheIce @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:25 am
Poisson Poisson:
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Poisson, the Liberals have been taking quotes from CPC candidates from a long time ago. If Liberals are allowed to change and broaden their views, why can't CPC candidates. Liberal hypocrisy.
I'm not a Liberal, or a member of any party for that matter.
I never said that CPC members cannot broaden their views. Don't put words in my mouth.
Poisson, you commented on the quotes being old. I didn't call you a Liberal, I was referring to "Liberals" in general.
The Liberal Party has been using old quotes from CPC candidates during this whole election. It's only fair that we CPC supporters return the favour.
DerbyX @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:26 am
$1:
Really, is that fact or just an assumption on your behalf?
The evidence exists in our current legislation. Feel free to investigate.$1:
Derby, all the 'extremists' from the CPC, Liberal and NDP have been quiet. In fact, two of the MP's I mentioned, Wappel and Longfield have been ducking all candidate meetings during the campaign.
The CPC extremist are more mainstream the any parties. Their views are a standad con value.
$1:
The Liberals have proven they will muzzle their MP's in the house. It'll be interesting to see what happens when these MP's are on the other side without the leash on.
Muzzle them to further our freedom? Pretty smart.
harper will hold "a free vote" where he can "coerce" weak members to get tha vote he wants and present 1 of 3 speeches.
Cowardly.
OnTheIce @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:30 am
lily lily:
$1:
The Liberals have proven they will muzzle their MP's in the house.
Really? I guess someone forgot to tell these guys before they cast their dissenting votes.
What about all his Ministers that are openly against SSM? Why did they vote for SSM?
Why did some of the MP's have to leave their cabinet posts in order to have a free vote?
OnTheIce @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:33 am
DerbyX DerbyX:
$1:
Really, is that fact or just an assumption on your behalf?
The evidence exists in our current legislation. Feel free to investigate.$1:
Derby, all the 'extremists' from the CPC, Liberal and NDP have been quiet. In fact, two of the MP's I mentioned, Wappel and Longfield have been ducking all candidate meetings during the campaign.
The CPC extremist are more mainstream the any parties. Their views are a standad con value.
$1:
The Liberals have proven they will muzzle their MP's in the house. It'll be interesting to see what happens when these MP's are on the other side without the leash on.
Muzzle them to further our freedom? Pretty smart.
harper will hold "a free vote" where he can "coerce" weak members to get tha vote he wants and present 1 of 3 speeches.
Cowardly.
So all you have is assumptions to instil fear into Canadians?
I didn't see the legislation where it says the PM must listen to it's extremist MP's and follow through with their every request.
hwacker @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 12:41 am
Prime Minister Paul Martin on abortion:
"The Prime Minister must immediately recall parliament to introduce new abortion legislation" - Paul Martin (Halifax Daily News, July 20, 1989)
Also, Paul Martin on abortion laws and judicial activism:
"It's very clear that we are going to have 10 different [abortion] laws and that we are going to have these laws made by judges" (Halifax Chronicle-Herald, July 20, 1989)
Joe Fontana said that abortion should be limited to "exceptional extenuating circumstances" involving rape or incest (London Free Press, October 12, 1988). Joe Fontana is the current Minister of Labour
Minister of Veterens Affairs Albina Guarnieri on abortion and judicial activism and a woman's choice: "The decision as to which life merits protection cannot be left to judges, doctors, or even women themselves. The issue must be dealt with on a national level by Parliament so that we as elected representatives may once and for all establish the supremacy of life and the protection of the unborn as would befit a civilized society. We must not be condemned by a future Parliament for legitimizing the termination of hundreds of thousands of unborn Canadians" (Hansard, November 23, 1989)
"Bill C-43 is abortion on demand with red tape...In effect, the legislation makes it possible for women to seek and obtain abortions for reasons that may have more to do with lifestyle considerations than with actual physical endangerment" - Albina Guarnieri (Hansard, November 23, 1989).
"In fact, the health clause will operate as nothing more than a rubber stamp condonement of abortion on demand. It will allow women to abort their unborn child based on a fleeting notion of immediate convenience" - Albina Guarnieri (Hansard, November 23, 1989).
"To imperiously determine which life should be afforded protection of the law and which should not would leave our society extremely susceptible to the social decision-making characteristic of the genocidal policies of certain Third World nations" - Albina Guarnieri (Hansard, November 23, 1989).
Joe McGuire, the current Minister of ACOA called abortion "the murder of another human being" (Hansard, November 27, 1989)
Consider Minister of Immigration Joe Volpe's comments on abortion: "The government has contented itself with casting the issue in the context of abortion, a context which invariably favours the rights of those who are present against those who are silent, a context which too often is seen as purely a woman's issue" (Hansard, November 22, 1989)
Tom Wappel quotes?
"There is no legal right to abortion in this country, according to the Supreme Court of Canada." - Tom Wappel, former Martin Liberal MP
According to Wikipedia: In his nomination speech, Wappel called for abortion to be made a criminal offense with a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
Here are some more quotes by Liberal MPs:
Maurizio Bevilacqua:
"Hon. members, everything I believe, everything that I hold dear, my social and cultural make-up, my personal beliefs as a human being, tells me that abortion is wrong. I feel within myself, passionately, that abortion is against the natural order. It negates the essence of our being" - Maurizio Bevilacqua (Hansard, November 27, 1989).
"I do not understand how any of us can accept giving the responsibility and the right to anyone to decide on who will live and who will not" - Maurizio Bevilacqua (Hansard, November 27, 1989).
Paul Szabo is a current Liberal MP and gave his opinion on what choice he believes women have:
"Last year there were over 110,000 abortions in Canada with a cost to our health care system of over $10 million. That is over 300 abortions each and every day. It says that each year 110,000 mistakes are made at the expense of all Canadians by those who fail to act responsibly. Is it too much to ask Canadians just to be responsible for their actions? We do have a choice and that choice should be made before we act, not after we have failed to act responsibly" - Paul Szabo (Hansard, November 27, 1998).
Alan Tonks (another current Liberal MP):
"Generally speaking, I opt on the side of life. I don't support carte-blanche abortion," Mr. Tonks said. "If there was a motion that was presented to review and send to committee, whatever the nature of the change being asked, I would always support it going to the committee" (Globe and Mail, January 14, 2006).
Wullu @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 6:39 am
Looking for recent examples? How about from the debates from the last election? Martin stated he did not support SSM. That ultra conservative Sheila Copps pointed this out in one of her columns at the beginning of this election. That and that he was considering putting boots on the ground in Iraq and Missle Defense seemed like a good idea. Come time to sit in the house and he reverses himself on all three for political expediancy. Is there anything he truely believes in?
hwacker @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 7:16 am
Wullu Wullu:
Looking for recent examples? How about from the debates from the last election? Martin stated he did not support SSM. That ultra conservative Sheila Copps pointed this out in one of her columns at the beginning of this election. That and that he was considering putting boots on the ground in Iraq and Missle Defense seemed like a good idea. Come time to sit in the house and he reverses himself on all three for political expediancy. Is there anything he truely believes in?
He believes that he's going to win this election.
Drunk Canuck @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 9:06 am
DerbyX DerbyX:
Thanks for coming out OTI.
It isn't that the Liberals don't have pro-life and anti-SSM candidates in their party, its that they won't let those views taint the party . Despite the Liberals candidates who oppose said policies the Liberals have seen that Canada is a bastion of those freedoms. harper gives every indication he won't uphold those freedoms.
Nice try. It takes more courage to promote SSM and freedom of choice over hysterical religious harague then any amount of toadying that harper does to placate his right wing supporters.
It isn't that the Liberals don't have pro-life and anti-SSM candidates in their party, its that they won't let those views taint the party . Despite the Liberals candidates who oppose said policies the Liberals have seen that Canada is a bastion of those freedoms. harper gives every indication he won't uphold those freedoms.
Nice try. It takes more courage to promote SSM and freedom of choice over hysterical religious harague then any amount of toadying that harper does to placate his right wing supporters.
So let me get this straight. MP's elected who ran an election on certain values that their electorate voted for, are not allowed to voice their opinion on issues they were infact elected for?????
Wow, we really have moved past socialism and jumped in the deep end with communism. Sounds like a dictatorship to me then.
Alta_redneck @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:40 am
Suddenly, Paul Martin has a crystal ball that reveals everything Stephen Harper will do.
Did Martin not have these same "powers" to help him ascertain what the Liberal party was up to when he was cut out of the loop by Jean Chretien and his cronies? "He knew nothing" about what HIS government was doing with AdScam, but knows everything about the future plans of all the other party leaders?
I saw a picture of Martin the other day playing with pre-school kids in what looked like a MacDonlds, i believe Martin was telling them of the hiden agenda the Hamburglar had to steal their burgers.
PluggyRug @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:01 am
lily lily:
My kids use the same logic.
Out of the mouths of babes.
Mika @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:04 am
Well if Martin had nothing to do with the ad scandle then he did not, as stated by Judge Gomery. Anyways abortion is a very personal issue as well as same sex marriage, but the fact is that same sex mariage exists, and unless you plan to go out and kill all gay people then live with it. While abortion is an issue where the situation must be taken into context. I find that under the situation where the mother was raped, the child will be a vegetable and if the family is very poor and if a child is born it may even die due to conditions, then abortion should be legal, like I have said before, we do not want another Algeria in Canada. As for same sex marriage, well these people are all part of society, they contribute to societ hence should recieve the same rights as everyone. Add to that, marriage is nothing great, it is simply a document saying you are togethere, but it is just a document, marriage is completly fake, its just the publics permission for people to screw privatly.
As for what Martin said 16 years ago and so on, well what does that have to do with what he is saying now. I still cannot understand attacking someone on the grounds of the past even if he says something different now. It would be like me saying that Harper would be a bad leader because when he was 8 he hurt a family member, it has nothing to do with what is being said now.
hwacker @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:09 am
$1:
family is very poor and if a child is born it may even die due to conditions
please post an example, and not from India Today.
FYI if you add "and if, and if, and if " to any situation it can enhance the cause.
Mika @ Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:22 am
hahaha, hwacker I have no idea what you just said nor can I make sense of what I wrote, none the less I just woke up so I might get back at you with that one,
Shit I messed that one up, yeah that was not a great example, actually a terrible example. But if a child is born into a poor family, it may result in the child living a bad life, and it could possibly lead to crime for thats where poverty often leads.
Anyways I am pruposing this for seriously poor families, ones that will result in the childs life turning to shit hence wrecking his existance, and possibly making him a nuissance.
A and hwacker I believe that a few years back there was a case where a mothers child died due to her condition of being poor, where she lived on the street and so on. I don't remember fully, yet I know it happened.