It Isn't That the Matter Is Settled ...

 ... it's that no one wants to talk about it:

Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole was hounded this week by journalists seeking his reaction to a private member’s bill tabled by one of his MPs that would ban sex-selective abortions. It did not go well, to the delight of Liberal strategists and horror of Tory ones who fear Mr. O’Toole may have to campaign with the same smelly bird around his neck that made Andrew Scheer’s 2019 election campaign such a stinker. ...

(Sidebar: no, Justin the groper made that an issue, not Scheer.) 

Mr. O’Toole claimed what increasingly looks like a Pyrrhic victory. Unlike Mr. Scheer, Mr. O’Toole has declared that he is pro-choice and would vote against any private member’s bill that limits a woman’s right to choose, but he would not stop members of his caucus from tabling such legislation. And on Monday, he refused to say whether he would require members of his shadow cabinet to vote against Saskatchewan MP Cathay Wagantall’s bill to ban sex-selective abortions, which was tabled last year but was only debated in the House of Commons this week.

(Sidebar: free Derek Sloan.) 

Ms. Wagantall’s bill would make it a crime punishable by up to five years in prison for any medical practitioner to perform an abortion “knowing that the abortion is sought solely on the grounds of the child’s genetic sex.” Ms. Wagantall, who supported Ms. Lewis during the Tory leadership race, has called sex-selective abortion “antithetical to our commitment to equality.”

Indeed.

Now, there are no abortion laws in Canada nor is the matter settled, despite what those who love it to bits say:

The polling group One Persuades found that political parties have much to gain when it comes to supporting a law against sex-selective abortion. According to the poll, 52 per cent of Canadians would be more likely to vote for a party that opposed sex-selective abortions, while only 10 per cent said they would be less likely.

Surprisingly, the numbers were highest among Bloc Québécois supporters, with 61 per cent of them responding that they would support restricting this form of abortion. Even among Liberal voters, a majority said they support taking action against sex-selective abortions, with 51 per cent answering yes to the question, “Would you be more likely to vote for a political party that promised to legally restrict sex-selective abortion in Canada?”

Even physicians, if not directly stating it as some have, find this particular aspect troubling:

Easy access to abortion and advances in prenatal sex determination have combined to make Canada a haven for parents who would terminate female fetuses in favour of having sons, despite overwhelming censure of the practice, economists and bioethics experts say.

Arguing that Canadian lawmakers’ silence on the issue is undermining the status of women, they’re calling for federal legislation to uphold societal and professional values opposing sex-selective abortion, either through a direct ban or restrictions on the disclosure of fetal gender. They also contend that sex-selective abortion is forcing physicians to compromise between their ethical obligations to discourage sex selection and legal obligations to respect their patients’ autonomy.

 

To wit:by embracing cultural and moral relativism, the pious bleaters of women's rights, which include abortion for some reason, are silent in condemning or even questioning the embrace of this practice at the expense of personal beliefs and taxpayer money that could be diverted to more life-saving measures.

That's a lot to talk about.