The Centre vs. Stephen Woodworth


The Sun and Globe report that the Prime Minister’s Office is working to defeat Stephen Woodworth’s motion on the definition of life.

MPs are privately being reminded that support for fellow Conservative Stephen Woodworth’s motion would be considered a vote against Mr. Harper’s wishes. Word being spread in the Commons lobby recently by senior Tories – not the PMO – went even further, saying a vote for Mr. Woodworth’s motion is a vote against Mr. Harper … Mr. Harper is said to be determined to ensure motions or bills such as Mr. Woodworth’s never come forward again.

Sources tell the Sun that the Prime Minister wants the motion defeated before the House breaks for the summer, but Kady O’Malley notes that Mr. Woodworth has actually moved back in the order of precedence, meaning his motion likely won’t be debated again until the fall.

I wrote about Mr. Woodworth and the looming abortion debate for the magazine in February. My interview with Conservative MP Brad Trost is here.


The Centre vs. Stephen Woodworth

  1. Gandhi ~ the more helpless the creature, the more that it is entitled to protection by man from the cruelty of man

    PM Harper is a paper tiger Conservative, a vote against Harper would mean Cons voting against left wing policies Harper and his minions have gleefully embraced.

    If life doesn’t begin at conception, I think we should eliminate sex ed and myriad other health policies to save public money and let teenagers shag like rabbits because condoms and pill are pointless, apparently.

    Statistics Canada tables show a recorded total of 2,822,293 abortions between 1969 and 2005. Assuming an annual average of 100,000 abortions for 2006 and 2007 (and recognizing that reported numbers since 2000 reflect about 90 percent of abortions) the total number of abortions is more than three million.

    • Your post would make sense if anybody refused to acknowledge fetuses, but of course we do acknowledge them.

      • Just what do you mean by “acknowledge”? I don’t have a clue what you’re trying to say here.

        • You had to take it in context with TonyAdams, who appears to be saying that unless we say a human being exists at conception, there’s no point in trying to avoid an unwanted pregnancy. I’m saying that it doesn’t have to be an unwanted human being. It can be an unwanted fetus.

  2. Hidebound Conservative old men should keep their noses out of other peoples business. This is, was and always will be a matter between a woman and her doctor.

    • If it’s all up to the woman anyways, what point is there for a man to comment?

Sign in to comment.