Rona Ambrose doesn’t have a right to choose … how to vote?

- September 27th, 2012


There’s been a fascinating reaction to Status of Women Minister Rona Ambrose’s choice to vote in favour of a motion that calls for a study of whether human life begins before full birth. Some media have labelled her choice a “shocker.” Politicians have begun to give her grief. The long and short of it is, many of Ambrose’s political opponents have said Ambrose shouldn’t have a choice in the matter of how to vote on a private member’s motion because of the feared implications for abortion. Here’s a sampling of reaction:

“It’s shameful that the minister in charge of the status of women and in charge of moving forward on women’s equality today stood up int he House to roll back, to essentially attack, a woman’s right to choose,” said NDP MP Niki Ashton.

Ashton even took to Twitter after Wednesday’s vote to call for Ambrose to be replaced in the status of women portfolio.

Bloc Quebecois MP Maria Mourani has apparently also agreed Ambrose should think about stepping down.

“Because if she doesn’t fight for women’s rights, I don’t know what she does in this place,” Mourani is quoted as saying in the Globe and Mail.

Even the YMCA is on the record questioning Ambrose’s ability to continue in her job because of the choice she made.

Picture 4

So, are we to take from all this that Ambrose doesn’t have a right to choose how to vote?

Categories: Bloc Québécois, Conservatives, General, Government, NDP, Politics, Social issues

Subscribe to the post


  1. Frances says:

    But she is thinking of women’s rights – those of very, very young women to be born.

  2. Libby says:

    Who says abortion is a requirement for women’s rights? Women have choices, and the right to choose between life or death of a future being should not be one of them. Accidents and errors in judgement are not valid reasons. Where does this this end? Do not assume you speak for all women.

  3. Jen says:

    I am not surprise, Rona is a Conservative therefore is subject to ridicule and mockery for expressing her own personal feeling on a sensitive matter.

    The whipped NDP are like robots they talk talk talk all day of the on subjects which they later refuse to vote on.

    Surely Daniel, you can think of many issues the NDP profess to care about then vote against.

    Are you going to tell me that the entire NDP have no mind of their to vote on a free vote?

  4. Angry Mac says:

    I was upset and mad when I saw the headline saying Ambrose doesn’t have the right to chose how to vote. What bulls__it that is. She certainly does have a right to vote the way her conscious tells her to. She should be applauded for voting the way she did. Why? She doesnt want to kill little unborn (but alive) boys and girls. Those wanting to have abortions to get rid of a product of unwise sex don’t have the right to tell her she was wrong to vote the way she did.
    Oh, If only we had more politicians with morals and the guts to go with it, we would have a far more honest parliamentary system and some politicians would earn a lot of respect for voting the way they believe and not the way the Prime Minister and the Leaders of the other parties tell them how to vote.
    My hat is off to Rona Ambrose.

  5. Elaine Murray says:

    It doesn’t make sense that feminist believe you can’t be an advocate for women if you haven’t had an abortion, or are in favour of them. How does killing one’s offspring equate to female empowerment?

  6. E Penner says:

    I totally agree 200% with ‘Angry Mac` in the comments.
    I believe the majority of Canadians do NOT agree with killing unborn babies”because they cant afford another mouth to feed!”
    I believe in the choice of women but,remember,they made the choice 9 months before.Now the choice belongs to the child.

  7. James says:

    I believe that none of us have any right whatsoever to morally judge or condemn anyone regarding their own personal choices, including the choice of whether or not to continue an unwanted pregnancy. Accidents happen, and suffering the consequences of a mistake for the rest of your and someone else’s life (the child) is not something that can be decided by anyone other than the person that is pregnant.

  8. Anita says:

    Go Rona! >> a woman in a ‘man’s realm’ who is courageous enough vote her conscience despite pressure from Harper and the hypocritical so-called feminists of the NDP.
    Bill 312 called for a committee to research and discuss updating our current 400 year old definition of humanity. What do you think – has science progressed in the past 400 years? Has society?

    It was less than 100 years ago that 5 Alberta women challenged the law and won the right to be ‘persons under the law’. Emily Murphy was the first woman appointed as a Police Magistrate in 1916. Alberta’s Supreme Court decided she was in fact a person but it took another 12 years for the Supreme Court of Canada to agree.

    On October 18, 1929, Lord Sankey, Lord Chancellor of the Privy Council, announced the British Privy Council decision that “yes, women are persons… and may become Members of the Senate of Canada.” The Privy Council also said that “the exclusion of women from all public offices is a relic of days more barbarous than ours. And to those who would ask why the word “persons” should include females, the obvious answer is, why should it not?”

    Rona Ambose said ‘Yes, Canada should dialogue about whether preborn women (and men) are human.’ If you agree that the term “human” should not include the unborn people, why should it not? And why should Rona, a person under the law with the legal right to vote, not be allowed to exercise her right to choose to vote Yes?

    Let’s hope it is not another 12 years before we decide that parliament is a place where human rights can be upheld and we can even discuss who in fact is human.

  9. Ryan says:

    I am pro choice but it is astounding to me that we are not even suppose to discuss fetal rights. Is there a point in pregnancy where the current rules of abortion on demand should be altered slightly? maybe, maybe not. Can we not even have the discussion without being labelled haters of women? While we are at it can we please eliminate this nonsense position of “Status of Women Minister”

  10. Henry says:

    Why shouldn’t we have a 2012 scientific definition of when life begins?

    What are these murderers afraid of?

    In a Democracy you can’t complain she has no right to vote how she wants to!

  11. angelo says:

    It amazes me how people line up for population control, As women we champion this as a victory for our rights, when in fact it is a tool used to oppress us. Not only are they keeping the population at “manageable” levels for ease of control, but they devalue us as women, Sex selection abortion should have been enough to show everyone that we are becoming second class citizens again. I am both sad and dismayed that it seems women are the strongest supporters of abortion. growing up I always believed it was an invention of Men to keep women worthless, but as an adult I see it is so far from the truth.

  12. JFJ says:

    The Canadian left continues to flaunt the attributes usually associated with a bunch of fascists.

  13. Daniel says:

    We need to start standing up for the rights of our smallest, most defenceless citizens.

    “A person is a person, no matter how small.” -Dr. Seuss

  14. Fetusesesss says:

    If this option is taken away from women, there will be 1,000′s of unwanted children in the world. If the Rona belives that aborted fetus’ are babies then tell me this, why are the removed peices thrown away with garbage and not deliverd to the morgue of the hospitals where these procedures are performed? If it is life that is ending when why when removed from the mothers womb is it not alive…becuase its undable to live on it’s own it’s not alive. Would it be better to birth a baby and then kill it, becuase that’s what we’re being asked to do as women. No abotion, kill the babies then. I see an increase in infanacide in the this furture thats being voted for.
    (PS not all abortions are performed on 16 year olds who made a mistake one night, over 80% are 30+ year old women who are married and already have children who we already can’t afford to feed, cloth and house, why add another? so more can suffer?)

  15. Bzzytoday says:

    Why shouldn’t we get to discuss when life begins? Is their something pro-choicers don’t want to face perhaps? Some scientific proof which might alter their views ?

  16. Paul Delaney says:

    Being told how to vote defeats the whole idea of democracy and freedom. The idea of womens rights and equality doesn’t mean all women have to do what a few women have decided they should do in the light of feminism. If a woman decides to be a nurse instead of a doctor, or a stay at home mom instead of an office exec, some women would criticize her for not going for the highest position, that somehow this is wrong to have “lower” goals. Freedom of choice is just that. Your freedom, not what someone else decides is your freedom.

    So if Rona believes for religious or scientific or whatever reason to take a stand on any issue, that is her right, and people should be thankful that she and they have that right, and you can judge her by that, and you need not agree. By the seems of it some people would prefer that you only get rights if THEY say so. The media should be chastising these fascists and leftists rather than someone who chooses freedom.

  17. Brett Mann says:

    Rona will and should resign. Disgraceful.

  18. Jen says:

    This has nothing to do about Abortion; it is to have a committee to DISCUSS when the fetus become a HUMAN BEING.

    David Ruthford explained it yesterday on his show at 9am mst.

    I notice that the SNN are listening and accepting every word the NDP and the Libs say without doing a background check first to their outbursts.

  19. L89 says:

    She voted in favour of appointing a committee to conduct a study on when human life begins.

    I’m wondering what the others were so afraid of…what the study would discover??

  20. Anita says:

    Rona Ambrose’s response that she wanted to raise awareness of sex selection abortion does nothing to answer why she voted in favour of this bill. I wasn’t aware that sex selection abortion was a huge social issue in Canada! I’m not disputing her right to vote whatever way she likes for her personally, but while you are minister for women, you better be working FOR women. ALL women. How about resolving the REAL issues that a huge population of women face in Canada like poverty, domestic violence, discrimination & rape, Rona? Oh, and leave my body alone!!!!!

  21. Wendy says:

    I think a better question is “why shouldn’t Rona vote as she chooses?” Why should we try to take her rights away just because a group of individuals wish to silence this belief system? Is Canada a dictatorship? As a member of a democratic society Rona has the right to vote with her conscience.

  22. Angel B says:

    I agree with James! None of us have the right to condemn or control anyone regarding their own body, consequences of biology, and subsequent choice whether or not to have a baby. This issue is not something that can be decided by anyone other than the person that is pregnant. Safe and legal access to abortion must be made available to all women in all provinces in Canada.

Comments are closed.