If her baby was pro-choice, it would be dead, but she is too stupid to realize that.
Free speech for them, but none for the presenter. Within 2 sentences of this pro-life speech, anti-free speakers rose up and disrupted a speech.
WHY? It was in support of death. Don't bother watching more than 2 minutes of the whole two hours. It was about some juvenile protesters subverting the rights of a speaker on pro-life. Anyone remember this photo?
Take my hand, not my life.
The parents did everything they could to save their baby. The baby reached out it's tiny little hand to grasp the surgeons fingers. This is a stunning and inspirational picture. A tiny little life is saved.
Those protesters on Youtube want death and their fifteen minutes of fame. They want women to choose, but not life. Abortion good, baby bad. I "suspect" like global warming is "maybe" happening, that most women who support abortion have had one themselves. A BABY is not a maybe happening in 2050. It is a fact, and lefties just can't handle facts. That's why they still scream about abortion, even though Canada allows women to kill their babies up to and including birth. Why are they protesting, they have EVERYTHING THEY WANT!!!!!
These little hussies are free to have all the sex they want, and they can have all the TAXPAYER paid abortions they want. SO, why are they disrupting this lecture? Why do they need to even bother? THEY HAVE WON YEARS AGO!! If they want their baby killed at 40 weeks, it's legal in Canada, so why try to suppress free speech on the issue? GUILT!
We are the only developed country I know of that allows full term 40 week old babies to have their brains bashed in, sucked out and dumped into a bin. That is just so sickening that the pro-choice idiots don't want us to see it. They want us to think that abortion is just a minor inconvenience. Freedom of speech, only for these a&&holes, not for the actual speaker.
Funny McGill gets federal government funding, my tax dollars, to operate, maybe I should withdraw my tax dollars because I think this "institution" is in need of medical and educational reform. Free speech? My tax dollars say go ahead, speak all you want, just not on my dime. Oh, if you little McGill flakes don't like that, how about you come work in the oil patch in Alberta? HA!
These little "my body, my right to kill" idiots, think they have something to do with equality for women, when they themselves are advocating killing the most innocent of all, babies. They yell about seals being killed with a bullet, but, a human baby chopped into pieces, is okay with them. Sickos. Seriously, it has nothing to do anymore with woman's rights, they could have the baby and give it up for adoption if they wanted, but that is just too "inconvenient" for them. The ones who yell loudest are those who are most guilty.
Here is their evidence of why women need to kill their babies....
In Remembrance: Women Who Died from Illegal and Unsafe Abortions
Clara Bell Duvall
Dec. 23, 1896 - March 27, 1929
Ruth Irene Friedl
Aug. 24, 1901 - Aug. 21, 1929
Vivian Campbell
December 12, 1925 - May 6, 1950
Geraldine Santoro
August 16, 1935 - June 8, 1964
Rosie Jimenez
1950 - Oct. 3, 1977
Becky Bell
August 24, 1971 - Sept. 16, 1988
Wow, so back in 1988 as the last example, a women died from a back street abortion. Ladies, it's 2009, soon to be 2010, time to find a new cause. Feminists are just sooo 1980's.
Look ladies, you have the PILL now, it is 99.98% effect at preventing pregnancy, or you have the Morning after pill...that you can take it the morning after if you aren't too lazy to get your sore butt out of bed. Are you too STUPID to understand the instructions? You have no excuse to have an abortion. This is not 1929 or even 1988, even if you get pregnant there is no social stigma anymore.
These McGill protesters are stuck on stupid, are they your children? Maybe it is time to cut them off of child welfare, parent style. They are so immature, they think they are important and making a point. They sadly have no point to make, except hate for a position they do not agree with. They silence free speech, and think they have won. What intellectual dumbbells, maybe McGill should rethink these students eligibility.
Next they will be protesting a bad mark from their professor. They are just that limited in their thinking.
6 comments:
Those women who chose to restrict free speech were not interested in his rights or anyone else's.
They could have chosen to protest outside the room and hand out flyers but prevented others from hearing a dissenting opinion.
What has the university done?
Freedom of choice ends when the woman chooses not to keep her legs closed. And if that sounds too chauvanistic for the resident sissies, cry me a river, I could care less.
I have to interject here and be the voice of reason:
Not all women who support abortion have had, or would necessarily choose, an abortion for themselves. Some of the supporters of abortion are legitimately principled people (many of them men) who recognize the value of a woman's right to choose over her own body.
There are, of course, militant lunatics as well (JJ, Fern Hill, Antonia Zerbisias -- we're looking in your general direction).
And while disrupting a speech at a university simply because they're going to say something you don't want to be said is entirely wrong, it's not fair to paint an entire movement with the fascistic nature of a few crazed protesters.
(Although, I agree that people attributing their political attitudes to their pets, unborn children, or toddlers is facetious at best, and disengenuous at worst.)
McGill and many other universities in Toronto and Montreal are the breeding ground for Canadians who will be our MPs and lawgivers in the coming years.
Do you see any hope for Canada with such trash in Ottawa ?
I am open for free speech and debate, my objection was the women who disrupted the charter rights of other Canadians to allow only their views.
Every group has their extremists fringe elements.
The university should refund give them the semester off and suggest China may be a better choice for place that limit free speech.
Wow I was enjoying your blog until I came across this post. I have not heard of 40 week abortions taking place ever. What is the statistic on that?
I also think it's a little bit harsh, as is the harsh reality that when you're young and uneducated, or even educated you act irresponsibly.
How can anyone possibly judge. If you're against it fine, don't have one. I'm pro choice, i don't belive they should be done after 12 weeks, and i think they should be available but not tax payer funded.
I'm not on the protesters side, in fact i haven't even watched it. I guess my outrage is more at your view on abortion. I can say most women do not walk away from abortion without scars. They say if i would have had my baby they'd be blank years old. That is their cross to bear so who are you to add further to their pain. There are exceptions to this of course, but aren't those the ones that maybe you're glad didn't procreate?
I'm still going to continue on reading because i got pretty far before i read this. I can always agree to disagree.
I really have enjoyed your blog thus far.
Post a Comment