The Globe and Mail's chief abortion correspondent Gloria Galloway (type "Gloria Galloway" abortion into Google...see what I mean) does her best to confuse the english language in today's column. (Hat-tip NealeNews)
First the title, "Right wing Tories". Are there any Tories who are not right wing? If there are kick them out! I will forgive this as a touchy-feely way of saying social conservatives. The other redundancy is just bizzare.
"partial-birth abortions in the third term of pregnancy"
"third-term partial birth abortions"
"third-trimester partial-birth abortions"
Partial birth abortions are performed in the third-trimester, by definition. This is nothing more that trying to cater to both sides of the issue simultaneously. To pro-choice anti-life people the perferred term is late-term abortions. For pro-life anti-choice voters (see I can be as redundant as well) it is partial-birth abortions.
She does bring up one interesting point.
...While there are no figures to suggest it is even performed in this country, Ms. Wilkins said Ontario paid $400,000 last year to send women in their last term of pregnancy to a clinic south of the border to have it done. The Ontario Health Ministry does not deny that but says, in each case, the procedure was deemed medically necessary by the women's doctors.
Kim Luton, president of the Canadian Abortion Rights Action League, said the case against partial-birth abortions is being made to demonize all abortions. In Canada, said Ms. Luton, 97 per cent of abortions occur in the first trimester and the all but a tiny fraction of the rest take place in the second.
Considering public opinion is against such abortions and that they do not occur (or if they do, are rare) in Canada it should not be that controversial to pass a law banning them as law as their is a provision that allowing such a procedure if the physical health is at risk.
But Andrew Coyne has already provided the explanation as to why even this is not allowed.
