Bring on the dry mustard

An elderly relative of mine recently contracted a very bad cough and congested chest. I asked him what I could do to help him. His response: buy me some dry mustard so that I can make a mustard plaster.

I was a little concerned about this for a couple of reasons. Firstly, I had heard that mustard plasters, like many old wives' tales, weren't actually effective. Relying on one could forestall the use of something efficacious. Secondly, I understood that it could be dangerous to use them on children and elderly people. I checked this out on the Net, and my concerns were verified.

I raised these issues with the old gentleman, but he dismissed them out of hand. "I don't think that I need to worry about any of that," he said. "We always used them as kids and we were fine." Of course, he was a kid 80 years ago.

In other words, no debate was necessary--the matter was settled and no evidence to the contrary would affect his decision.

While this is not uncommon with older folks, it bothers me when the same stubborn and illogical resistance is displayed by younger people in, literally, life and death situations.

Yes, they're at it again! I have repeatedly expressed my mystification at so-called pro-choice people trying to muzzle one of the choices.

I have not yet seen a professed representative of the pro-choice side accuse anyone of being anti-choice because of the way they describe the process for having an abortion as an aid to women who think that they might want one. You can look at several websites, for instance, where what an abortion entails is listed, although typically with certain details omitted that could suggest that abortions carry substantial psychological or physical risks.

Women are more likely to suffer breast cancer if they have abortions. Some women have died as a result of botched abortions. Incredibly, some children have survived abortion procedures. Many women suffer depression, drug addiction, and suicidal feelings for years after having been through the surgery. In addition, many fathers of aborted children go through emotional hell. But while you won't find any of this mentioned on the abortion websites (hunt through Planned Parenthood's, for instance), never are they condemned for endangering a woman's right to a fully informed choice.

It's an incredibly patronizing and dangerous road to take, isn't it?
1. You have a right to choose the life v. the abortion option.
2. Any information that suggests that abortion may have negative consequences is, by definition, hate speech against women.
3. Women and abortion-providers should be sheltered from any debate as to whether abortions can be a wrong or dangerous choice for a woman.
4. Therefore, we are willing to suppress information in the interests of upholding a hard-earned ideology. Debate is unnecessary as the case (medically, psychologically, legally and morally) is closed.

Am I exaggerating? Please view the exchange below between two prominent Canadian women who are both, by most definitions, in the pro-choice camp.

[I am indebted to blogger Scott Gilbreath, aka StatGuy, for this information.]

Recently asked about her position on abortion, Canadian Green Party leader Elizabeth May put forward what many would call a moderate position. Although she supports legal abortion, she views life as “sacred” and would never have an abortion herself.

I think there's been a moral dimension to this debate that's quite complex, and I think deserves respect. So I respect people who say, "I'm against abortion because there is a right to life, and the fetus is sacred."

I respect that, because I think all life is sacred. So, where do I come to thinking we should be able to have - and must have - access to therapeutic abortions in Canada?

It's the other side of a moral dilemma: If we make them illegal, women will die. We know this. It happened for hundreds and hundreds of years, that women would seek out whatever butcher they could find to cause an abortion to happen, and they would die horrible deaths, and the baby would die too.
. . .
[W]hat I'd like to do in politics is to be able to create the space to say, "Abortions are legal because they must be to avoid women dying. But nobody in their right mind is for abortions."

I've talked women out of having abortions. I would never have an abortion myself, not in a million years. I cannot imagine the circumstances that would have ever induced me to.

Radical leftist and über-feminist Judy Rebick went apoplectic when she heard about that. In a scathing open letter, she practically accuses Ms May of shilling for the pro-life movement.

[Y]ou have questioned the most important victory of the women's movement of my generation.

If you had said that you personally oppose abortion but you support a woman's right to choose, I would have been fine with that. Instead you said that a woman's right to choose, something tens of thousands of Canadian women fought for for decades, was trivializing an important issue. It felt like a slap in the face.

Since you have so little respect for me or for the women's movement which mobilized for so long to win this hard-earned right, I hope you will understand that I ripped up the cheque I had written to the Green Party and you can no longer rely on me for support.

We had a debate on abortion in this country for decades. Raising the need for further debate as you have done is a serious error in judgment and in the unlikely possibility that Stephen Harper wins a majority in the next election, you could have done irreparable harm.

I wonder if Judy Rebick also recommends mustard plasters.