This does not stop Rachel Harder from holding her views, it is simply saying since abortion is a fundamental right for woman, the chair should be pro-choice.  You wouldn't put a supporter of tobacco advertising as chair of health committee, an anti-free trader as chair of international trade committee, so why is this different.  Now if she personally opposes abortion on a personally level but still supports the right of a woman to choose then she should be allowed to be chair, but if she favours restricting it then no.  Being chair is not just about personal opinion, it is about representing the majority of Canadians and parliamentarians who are pro-choice.  And note I am a small c conservative too.