Politic?

This is a blog dedicated to a personal interpretation of political news of the day. I attempt to be as knowledgeable as possible before commenting and committing my thoughts to a day's communication.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Politicizing Charity

"Instead of pushing forward in support of an initiative that could benefit millions, we're allowing the potential for hope and opportunity to be swallowed up by a political debate about abortion that is stifling the potential for progress." (signed) CARE Canada, World Vision Canada, Plan Canada, RESULTS Canada, Save the Children Canada and UNICEF Canada; NGOs involved in convincing Prime Minister Stephen Harper to take up the cause of third-world maternal and child health.
This is mealy mouthed but yet honourable and explicable:
"We want to make sure our funds are used to save the lives of women and children and are used on the many, many things that are available to us that frankly do not divide the Canadian population. Frankly, there is not enough money to do all the things we want to do, even in those areas. We will concentrate our efforts on areas where the Canadian people are united and want to see progress ... highlighting the wide range of initiatives to be funded: training health-care workers treating and preventing disease such as malaria and pneumonia, screening and treating sexually transmitted diseases, immunization, clean water, sanitation and family planning."
BUT NO ABORTIONS!

This is inflatedly portentous:
"This is going to produce a major problem in pursuing a comprehensive strategy for women's health and children's health. I think he's made a grave error."
AND WE'RE GOING TO CLEAN UP ON THIS ONE!

And this is politically, opportunistically divisive:
The government is "in the ridiculous position of failing to defend overseas the rights that Canadian women have here at home."
AND I STOUTLY DEFEND THE RIGHT OF INDIGENT WOMEN TO ABORTION!

The proposed G8 health-care initiative to address the horror of preventable maternal deaths and infant mortality in developing countries due to lack of nutrition, clean water, medicines, health services, education, hygiene and sanitation proposed by the Government of Canada is a noble and needed one. That this government finds itself uncomfortable with providing funding for access to abortions abroad as part of the package is unfortunate.

It does not, however, devalue or degrade the larger move to alter the dreadful statistics on maternal mortality and child deaths that substantially as to account for the opposition parties in Parliament mounting a vociferous assault on the government. This divisive parliament owes its current status to the ongoing attempts by the opposition to diminish the Conservative-led government's accomplishments and status in public opinion.

For the very clear and unfortunate need to burnish their own, sadly lacking in originality and initiative and, truth to tell, honesty. The proposed move to commit to pursuing this agenda within the G8 for the greater good of humanity is one that morally and ethically should be supported without reservations from the opposition benches. The trouble is that the leaders of the opposition parties are so busy opposing everything they've lost their grip on ethical behaviour.

Michael Ignatieff desperately attempts to ingratiate himself with women voters by insisting the government "respect a woman's right to choose", in a situation where the women involved desperately need basic, fundamental, functioning health care. Safe abortion procedures do not exist in Africa; they may begin to, with the assistance of such a program, but it will be funded (how to keep it separate?) by other G8 countries.

Mr. Ignatieff's stertorous condemnations of the government are misplaced and under the circumstances, illogical - compellingly self-interested. This is nasty mischief writ large. Even members of his own party do not agree with him on this issue. As for Mr. Layton; he never did see an opposition band wagon he would hesitate to scramble on.

What do they make of the coercion involved in the United Nations and signal NGOs tying medical and humanitarian aid to contraception use? It may seem like a good idea, but it does impinge upon what cultural groups may very well feel is their right-of-reproduction. If we're going to be ultra-sensitive to all nuances, include that one.

The initiative as it stands, regardless of Canada's position on abortion funding is one welcomed by aid agencies and certainly by the others in the G8, all of which applaud it for the greater good of its intended purpose. The efforts of the opposition, and particularly those of Michael Ignatieff to sully and divert attention from the main project; a rescue mission, are deplorable.

Politics muck-raking compassionate efforts to ameliorate third-world horror scenarios. Shameful!

Labels: , , ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

() Follow @rheytah Tweet