Canada Stands Alone On Anti-abortion

[Liberalman]

Canada Stands Alone On Anti-abortion

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/03/30/13411076.html

After the hissy-fits of the Conservative MPs at airports Canada got to watch a hissy-fit from the iron lady herself U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton

"You can not have maternal health without reproductive health," Clinton said during a news conference with G8 foreign ministers. "And reproductive health includes contraception, and family planning and access to legal, safe abortion."

I always thought family planning was to prevent a pregnancy.

Abortion has nothing to do with reproductive health in fact it can damage reproductive health.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is clearly showing that she is a loose cannon and a liability to the Democrats and she should be put into a less public role but I can’t really say that because I am not American but she has to respect the Canadian point of view that abortion is a contentious issue like it is in America.

Canada has a government that ran on and anti-abortion and anti-gay rights platform and won a minority government.

The Conservative base is the bible belt of the prairies including the Christian right Albertans.

Stephen Harper is the David who is protecting the Canadian fetuses from the international Goliaths that just want to kill babies and feel good about it.

 

[JLM]

As far as I'm concerned the only thing that supercedes the right of the fetus is the life of the mother.

 

[wulfie68]

I always thought family planning was to prevent a pregnancy.

Not necessarily. Family planning deals with planning how to cope with the size of family. It asks questions like can you care for and support more children? If not, how do you prevent pregnancy? What are the options if you have a pregnancy that is beyond your means to support and care for? It looks at ALL options, be they contraception, adoption (both as adoptees and giving up children), and things like abortion. Its not just a one-stop abortion shop like its portrayed by some politicos.

Abortion has nothing to do with reproductive health in fact it can damage reproductive health.

If its done improperly, sure it can, just as any improperly performed surgery has its risks. Not having an abortion in some cases can also have long lasting effects on the mental health of a woman, particularly a victim of rape/incest.

Canada has a government that ran on and anti-abortion and anti-gay rights platform and won a minority government.

Partially false at best. The Conservative party threw the social conservatives a bone and said they would re-examine gay marriage, and I happen to believe that there are alternatives (such as making marriage and civil unions equal and both types of social partnerships that have equal legal rights, as opposed to getting the religious zealots worked up about nothing). Nothing was said about abortion.

The Conservative base is the bible belt of the prairies including the Christian right Albertans.

Again with the baseless Alberta slamming, when other posters have presented stats and articles attesting to Alberta's level of religion (lower than Ontario's) and tolerance (one of the greater ones in the nation) in other threads. At this point I am forced to conclude that your demonstrated lack of grammatical skill is accompanied by a lack of reading comprehension as well.

Stephen Harper is the David who is protecting the Canadian fetuses from the international Goliaths that just want to kill babies and feel good about it.

More baseless and unfounded hysteria from the Loony Left. Go back to bowing at Trudeau's grave and worshipping the most divisive prime minister to ever try and ruin the country.

As for me, I believe the rights of the mother come first, even if I find abortion to be something distasteful. Its not my body, or the government's to regulate/decide things for.

 

[JLM]

"As for me, I believe the rights of the mother come first, even if I find abortion to be something distasteful. Its not my body, or the government's to regulate/decide things for."
I think it's presumptuous to make decisions about the fetus, when the fetus doesn't get to have a say.

 

[wulfie68]

I think it's presumptuous to make decisions about the fetus, when the fetus doesn't get to have a say.

If the fetus was capable of surviving on its own, I might agree with you but it can't: it is essentially a parasite. Thats a pretty cold way to look at it, I know, but its true none the less. I think its presumptuous to deny a woman the right to get rid of it. In cases of rape, that would mean that genetic material from a violent criminal has more rights than his victim does. Thats wrong on far too many levels for me.

I'm not a fan of abortion as a means of birth control but I don't think anyone has the right to remove control of their body from a capable adult.

 

[JLM]

If the fetus was capable of surviving on its own, I might agree with you but it can't: it is essentially a parasite. Thats a pretty cold way to look at it, I know, but its true none the less. I think its presumptuous to deny a woman the right to get rid of it. In cases of rape, that would mean that genetic material from a violent criminal has more rights than his victim does. Thats wrong on far too many levels for me.

I'm not a fan of abortion as a means of birth control but I don't think anyone has the right to remove control of their body from a capable adult.

I think you make a good case in the event of rape, but I think that is where I'd have to draw the line. The "convenience" of the mother just doesn't cut it.

 

[YukonJack]

"I'm not a fan of abortion as a means of birth control but I don't think anyone has the right to remove control of their body from a capable adult."

How about being a capable adult controling your body BEFORE your act creates another life that you are so ready to snuff out for nothing but convenience?

 

[Kreskin]

I think you make a good case in the event of rape, but I think that is where I'd have to draw the line. The "convenience" of the mother just doesn't cut it.

Who decides if it is rape? How long does that process take?

 

[JLM]

Who decides if it is rape? How long does that process take?

That is a damn good question- obviously with time being of the essence, there's not a court in the land that could decide it- which I suppose kind of puts the whole issue at a theoretical level.

 

[foukay]

I'm definitely against abortion, except in the case of rape. I also think that there should be an acception for teen Mothers. Of course, they shouldn't even be getting pregnant in the first place, so they wouldn't even have to consider abortion as a possibility. All in all, it's hard to completely go against abortion.

 

[selin]

"As for me, I believe the rights of the mother come first, even if I find abortion to be something distasteful. Its not my body, or the government's to regulate/decide things for."
I think it's presumptuous to make decisions about the fetus, when the fetus doesn't get to have a say.

i agree with you.

 

[AnnaG]

I am against abortion even in the case of rape. A child can always be given over to adoption.
I am also against abortion as a convenience.
I am against abortion in cases of contraceptive failure. (Adoption is a better alternative).
I am for abortion if pregnancy threatens the life of the mother or if the child will only lead a life of misery such as in the case of anencephaly, Tay-Sachs, etc.
In the vast majority of cases there are viable and better alternatives to abortion.

 

[TenPenny]

I figure that it's up to the woman and man involved to make decisions about abortions.

Not up to me, or the PM, or the local priest, or anybody else.

 

[AnnaG]

I figure that it's up to the woman and man involved to make decisions about abortions.

Not up to me, or the PM, or the local priest, or anybody else.

That, too.

 

[coldstream]

Who does Hilary think she is. Abortion is the great holocaust of our times.

An entire generation, 50 million children have been murdered in the U.S. alone in the last 40 years. The arrogance of the U.S. Obama administration, with its intent entrenching abortion and homosexuality (as a 'right'), not only on its own population.. through its health care and military enlistment agendas.. but in the rest of the world as well is overwhelming.

Hilary is proving herself to be the 'Ugly American'.. the diplomatic front for an aggressive and imperial U.S. world strategy. It used to be the Cold War, now its the abased policies of post-structural social agendas, and the disastrous Liberal Economics of Free Trade and monetarism.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

"As for me, I believe the rights of the mother come first, even if I find abortion to be something distasteful. Its not my body, or the government's to regulate/decide things for."
I think it's presumptuous to make decisions about the fetus, when the fetus doesn't get to have a say.

It would be presumptuous if fetus were a human being. There is no evidence that it is.

Anyway, I don't understand the title of the thread. How is Canada alone on anti-abortion?

 

[TenPenny]

The whole G8/health thing had nothing to do with abortion, except in the minds of those who want to create an issue where there is none.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I think you make a good case in the event of rape, but I think that is where I'd have to draw the line. The "convenience" of the mother just doesn't cut it.

That is the classical conservative position, JLM. I know you don’t like to be called a conservative, but it is not my fault that you take conservative positions on issue after issue.

Why is rape different from any other pregnancy? The woman must have the full freedom to decide whether any pregnancy will go to completion, whether as a result of rape or not.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

"I'm not a fan of abortion as a means of birth control but I don't think anyone has the right to remove control of their body from a capable adult."

How about being a capable adult controling your body BEFORE your act creates another life that you are so ready to snuff out for nothing but convenience?

It is only the Pope and other religious extremists who claim that life begins at conception. There is no scientific evidence for it. When it comes to science, I much perfer to believe scientists, rather than believe religious extremists.

 

[AnnaG]

It would be presumptuous if fetus were a human being. There is no evidence that it is.

And yet more ignorance of the facts, but in Canada in the legal sense, you are right. Section 223 of the Criminal Code says babies are only humna after emerging from the mother. So test tube babies are human from day one, preemies are human, and the rest aren't. This is ridiculous, but what can you expect from politicians but ridiculous POVs and laws?
In the other contexts, you are dead wrong. Human life starts from first cellular division, according to geneticists, and the rest consider babies to be human as embryos, fetuses, etc.