ALBERTA: Provincial Elections!

[PRC]

I'm not sure that being "anti-abortion" is extreme either.

Depends what "anti-abortion" means.

Does it mean that you look askance at anyone you know had an abortion, and wouldn't want one yourself?
Does it mean that you want to prevent everyone from having an abortion, ever?
Does it mean that you think it's okay to shoot abortion providers and publicly shame women who are known to have had an abortion?
Or does it mean something else?

Exactly.

Does it mean you think abortions are okay if performed 24 hours before a natural birth would occur?
Does it mean you think abortion can be used as another form of birth control, like condoms or the pill?
Or does it mean something else?

[Jacob]

Exactly.

Does it mean you think abortions are okay if performed 24 hours before a natural birth would occur?
Does it mean you think abortion can be used as another form of birth control, like condoms or the pill?
Or does it mean something else?

Well, anti-abortion probably doesn't mean either of those two as there's very little "anti-" about them.

I tend to assume that anti-abortion in this country means attempts to legally limit access to abortion, and I consider that extremist (and thankfully likely to be politically self-destructive). If it's anything weaker than that, then I don't think it's extreme, but then I don't think that'd be called "anti-abortion".

[Jacob]

Yeah, but who cares about that?  The only people who get worked up about bigotry aren't worth knowing anyways.

I like to think I have other redeeming qualities, but if you don't agree then you don't.

[crazy canuck]

I'm not sure that being "anti-abortion" is extreme either.

Depends what "anti-abortion" means.

Does it mean that you look askance at anyone you know had an abortion, and wouldn't want one yourself?
Does it mean that you want to prevent everyone from having an abortion, ever?
Does it mean that you think it's okay to shoot abortion providers and publicly shame women who are known to have had an abortion?
Or does it mean something else?

Exactly.

Does it mean you think abortions are okay if performed 24 hours before a natural birth would occur?
Does it mean you think abortion can be used as another form of birth control, like condoms or the pill?
Or does it mean something else?

More significantly does it mean a woman would choose not to have an abortion herself because she does not believe in it or does it mean she would use the coercive power of the law to prevent another woman from having an abortion.

That former is, I agree, not extreme.  The latter - yes, it is.  That is why we always call the Conservative right to life backbencher a wingnut:P

[Sheilbh]

But what about providing increased funding or government support for, say, charities that counsel against abortion?  That's socially conservative but it's neither so coercive nor so crude as the other options you've suggested

I think BB's got a point that you seem to be defining social conservatism by positions you consider extreme and unpleasant.  Any position that's moderate isn't capable of being socially conservative.

Or does it mean something else?

What about disagreeing with abortion in principle, thinking it generally happens because of social failure and trying to put policies in place to discourage that social failure while encouraging women thinking about abortion to choose another option like adoption.  That would be my application of what BB said on drugs to abortion.

[crazy canuck]

I think BB's got a point that you seem to be defining social conservatism by positions you consider extreme and unpleasant.  Any position that's moderate isn't capable of being socially conservative.

I think legislation that makes abortion illegal is extreme and unpleasant.

That is what social conservatives, at least here, are advocating for.  There may be a kinder gentler version that you or BB might envision but until I see social conservates actually advocate for those positions I will continue to view them as I do.

[Neil]

Yeah, but who cares about that?  The only people who get worked up about bigotry aren't worth knowing anyways.

I like to think I have other redeeming qualities, but if you don't agree then you don't.

You just need to calm down a little bit is all.

[Sheilbh]

I think legislation that makes abortion illegal is extreme and unpleasant.

Yeah but that's only one way of being anti-abortion, another is to use social policy to try and prevent or reduce abortions in the way I described.

Similarly in this country it's different because abortion's an issue of conscience but there's MPs who are staunchly anti-abortion, they want it banned.  Then there are others who want abortion available for less time (I think from 24 to 20 weeks was a recent push) or for the circumstances in which it's available to be a bit narrower.  All of those positions are anti-abortion and socially conservative (as are the examples I gave) but only the most extreme and unpleasant would seem to count for you.

In the same way as I think you can have pro-gay, or even gay, social conservatives (we've a few in the Tories) I think you can have social conservatives who are anti-abortion, not necessarily that they want it banned but that they want the number, or the availability reduced.  Which is again not necessarily crude or extreme but still socially conservative.

[Maximus]

I think legislation that makes abortion illegal is extreme and unpleasant.

That is what social conservatives, at least here, are advocating for.  There may be a kinder gentler version that you or BB might envision but until I see social conservates actually advocate for those positions I will continue to view them as I do.

I think the point is that your definition of a social conservative is something like that of a true scotsman.

[Barrister]

I think legislation that makes abortion illegal is extreme and unpleasant.

Yeah but that's only one way of being anti-abortion, another is to use social policy to try and prevent or reduce abortions in the way I described.

Similarly in this country it's different because abortion's an issue of conscience but there's MPs who are staunchly anti-abortion, they want it banned.  Then there are others who want abortion available for less time (I think from 24 to 20 weeks was a recent push) or for the circumstances in which it's available to be a bit narrower.  All of those positions are anti-abortion and socially conservative (as are the examples I gave) but only the most extreme and unpleasant would seem to count for you.

In the same way as I think you can have pro-gay, or even gay, social conservatives (we've a few in the Tories) I think you can have social conservatives who are anti-abortion, not necessarily that they want it banned but that they want the number, or the availability reduced.  Which is again not necessarily crude or extreme but still socially conservative.

I think of myself as anti-abortion, but I subscribe to the Bill Clinton formulation - that abortion should be legal, safe, and rare.

I've commented before that I think Canada ought to have an abortion law - currently we have none.  I don't think that law needs to be, or should be, a complete ban on the procedure, but I think some level of federal guidelines and restrictions ought to be put in place. 

I think I've told Jacob and CC several times that it is a continuum.  They keep mentioning a certain stereotype of a "social conservative" and say they do not approve of that stereotype, but there are those who are on "that side" of the spectrum who are more moderate.

[crazy canuck]

I think legislation that makes abortion illegal is extreme and unpleasant.

Yeah but that's only one way of being anti-abortion, another is to use social policy to try and prevent or reduce abortions in the way I described.

Similarly in this country it's different because abortion's an issue of conscience but there's MPs who are staunchly anti-abortion, they want it banned.  Then there are others who want abortion available for less time (I think from 24 to 20 weeks was a recent push) or for the circumstances in which it's available to be a bit narrower.  All of those positions are anti-abortion and socially conservative (as are the examples I gave) but only the most extreme and unpleasant would seem to count for you.

In the same way as I think you can have pro-gay, or even gay, social conservatives (we've a few in the Tories) I think you can have social conservatives who are anti-abortion, not necessarily that they want it banned but that they want the number, or the availability reduced.  Which is again not necessarily crude or extreme but still socially conservative.

You sniped out the relevant part. You and BB may come up with all kinds of wonderful ways in which social conservatives might define themselves.  I am addressing the way in which social conservatives define themselves right now, in Vancouver.

It doesnt matter to me that social conservatism is potentially more enlightened.  Right now it is not.  For every BB (and who couldnt like BB) there is many more like the goofball that BB voted for.

[derspiess]

So is social conservatism a big problem in Vancouver? 

[Jacob]

But what about providing increased funding or government support for, say, charities that counsel against abortion?  That's socially conservative but it's neither so coercive nor so crude as the other options you've suggested

I think BB's got a point that you seem to be defining social conservatism by positions you consider extreme and unpleasant.  Any position that's moderate isn't capable of being socially conservative.

Sure. But I've never heard such policies proposed by anyone and have them labelled as socially conservative prior to this thread.

I'm really interested in A) hearing some of these moderate socially conservative positions outlined (because they're new to me); and B) understanding who holds them in political arenas I'm familiar with (especially in Canada, but elsewhere as well).

I don't dismiss moderate social conservatives at all, I just haven't heard about them before, at least not labelled thus.

What about disagreeing with abortion in principle, thinking it generally happens because of social failure and trying to put policies in place to discourage that social failure while encouraging women thinking about abortion to choose another option like adoption.  That would be my application of what BB said on drugs to abortion.

Sounds reasonable to me (depending on exactly what is meant by "discourage that social failure" and "encouraging ... another option", but in principle it's reasonable). It's a position I've heard before, but not from people who describe themselves as socially conservative. If this is the socially conservative position on abortion, I'd like to hear a bit about how to discourage the social failure, and how to encourage alternatives to adoption.

I'd also like to hear about other moderate socially conservative positions (as distinct from the extreme ones I associate with the term social conservative). But, like I said, it's because I'm curious and interested, not as part as some knock-down-drag-out clash of ideologies (that can always come later ).

[Sheilbh]

Well you weren't specific enough that you meant as they are right now, in Vancouver. 

You said that 'the social conservative agenda is to warp issues like support for families into nonsense like no sex education, no abortion and no gay rights.  I see nothing but bad policy coming out of any social conservative agenda.'

I disagree and I'm not proposing some mythic social conservative platform but describing the varieties of social conservative - gay and straight - that we have in the Tory Party here.  I'm not going to start chastising them for being insufficiently staunch in their views. 

I'd note right now our welfare minister is Iain Duncan-Smith.  He was a disastrously right-wing Tory leader.  He's old army, strong Catholic and very socially conservative.  But all of that motivated his interest and work in welfare policy.  He founded a think tank, the Centre for Social Justice, and is a big one for pushing support for marriage because he thinks as well as pro-family policy (like tax cuts) being good in itself that family breakdown's the cause of a lot of social and economic problems.  I'd argue that's an example of thinking beyond gays and abortion.  It comes from the basic ideas of social conservatism and it's not an analysis you'll normally get from a left-wing perspective.

I think BB and Oex are right when they say the focus is on the social.  They're interventionist, so they want pro-family policies, interventionist drug, alcohol and smoking programs and so on.  The one's you know may be only about the gays and abortion but that doesn't mean that that's all social conservatism is about. 

[crazy canuck]

My beef with the social conservative movement in Canada is that they advocate for making abortion illegal and removing the legal protection for gays and only teaching abstinance in sex education.

To the extent you think social conservatism has other attributes, that is all well and good. But I must deal with the reality of the poltical positions social conservatives are actually taking.  If they are more enlightened in your country that is wonderful.  Perhaps you could export a few of them here.