Sex selection abortions

[Goober]

What is it that you want me to say, that its a vast left wing conspiracy?

No- I ask that you consider why Hospitals record every goddam visit- no privacy rights violated- yet when it comes to abortion they do not. Fairly simple - A political flashpoint- neither Libs or Cons will mandate they be recorded - why- they do not want to go down a political shxt hole.

Simple as that.

 

[petros]

Even Roe V Wade noted the privacy right. No one will want to bow down to a bunch of politicians, just because they are naive and should be in a museum.

What is Norma McCorvey(Roe) up to these days?

 

[Kreskin]

No- I ask that you consider why Hospitals record every goddam visit- no privacy rights violated- yet when it comes to abortion they do not. Fairly simple - A political flashpoint- neither Libs or Cons will mandate they be recorded - why- they do not want to go down a political shxt hole.

Simple as that.

Do they gather stats on why men get vasectomies?. I can't seem to find them.

 

[gerryh]

Do they gather stats on why men get vasectomies?. I can't seem to find them.

Very good.... you are now comparing vasectomies to the murder of innocent babies. What a man.

 

[Kreskin]

Very good.... you are now comparing vasectomies to the murder of innocent babies. What a man.

I'm just part of a conspiracy. Top secret and evil.

But you know, I suspect some get vasectomies so they don't have to be responsible. They want to make a splash, and mazimize sexual enjoyment, without risking a pregnancy. A completely elective surgery, some might say is for selfish reasons, that doesn't require approval from old politicians. No spanish inquisition. Their choice. The woman can't veto the decision. No mandatory questionaire that pries into motives.

 

[gerryh]

I'm just part of a conspiracy. Top secret and evil.

But you know, I suspect some get vasectomies so they don't have to be responsible. They want to make a splash, and mazimize sexual enjoyment, without risking a pregnancy. A completely elective surgery, some might say is for selfish reasons, that doesn't require approval from old politicians. No spanish inquisition. Their choice. The woman can't veto the decision. No mandatory questionaire that pries into motives.

That's right, they made a decision that effects only them. They have made the RESPONSIBLE choice because they don't want to have kids. Unlike these "women" and their supporters who choose the selfish path and "choose" to participate in an act that can result in getting pregnant and then kill the baby because it is too inconvenient. They "choose" to be irresponsible and not take responsibility for their actions and choices. Instead they make an innocent pay with it's life for their own selfish choice.

 

[Kreskin]

That's right, they made a decision that effects only them. They have made the RESPONSIBLE choice because they don't want to have kids. Unlike these "women" and their supporters who choose the selfish path and "choose" to participate in an act that can result in getting pregnant and then kill the baby because it is too inconvenient. They "choose" to be irresponsible and not take responsibility for their actions and choices. Instead they make an innocent pay with it's life for their own selfish choice.

Sperm killer. Murderer. Life is trying to flourish and you're just being a selfish prick.

That's right, they made a decision that effects only them. They have made the RESPONSIBLE choice because they don't want to have kids. Unlike these "women" and their supporters who choose the selfish path and "choose" to participate in an act that can result in getting pregnant and then kill the baby because it is too inconvenient. They "choose" to be irresponsible and not take responsibility for their actions and choices. Instead they make an innocent pay with it's life for their own selfish choice.

If you don't like her choices then don't get her pregnant. Unless you plan to carry the baby yourself your advice, opinion, rules, whining and general bull**** means nothing.

 

[DaSleeper]

Sperm killer. Murderer. Life is trying to flourish and you're just being a selfish prick.


If you don't like her choices then don't get her pregnant. Unless you plan to carry the baby yourself your advice, opinion, rules, whining and general bull**** means nothing.

Now you're blowing smoke.....You can't seriously validate your arguments after being shown stats and then you start start quoting Roe vs Wade an American decision.
Add to that, that in Canada hospitals have to report every aids case and also every other procedure but in the case of abortion while they do report allabortions, only half of them report the approximate age of the fetus....
What's the matter.....afraid of the repercussions if the general public knew the complete stats?
So keep blowing your smokescreen .......comparing abortions to vasectomies:roll:

 

[Kreskin]

Now you're blowing smoke.....You can't seriously validate your arguments after being shown stats and then you start start quoting Roe vs Wade an American decision.
Add to that, that in Canada hospitals have to report every aids case and also every other procedure but in the case of abortion while they do report allabortions, only half of them report the approximate age of the fetus....
What's the matter.....afraid of the repercussions if the general public knew the complete stats?
So keep blowing your smokescreen .......comparing abortions to vasectomies:roll:

StasCan has plenty of abortion stats, certainly more than vasectomy stats. They aren't further broken down by thought of the treated.

Canada and the US are common law countries. Common law systems draw precedent from other common law systems. That is the foundation of common law, the rule of precedent. When there aren't enough cases to draw on it's completely relevant to look externally. And as I pointed out, the issue of patient privacy was a major component in that landmark ruling. That's not to say we write our laws based completely on foreign decisions but rights are rights and one of the major common law systems hilited privacy as a crucial right. That gets the attention of constitutional justices.

Additionally

Role in subsequent decisions and politics

Opposition to Roe on the bench grew when President Reagan—who supported legislative restrictions on abortion—began making federal judicial appointments in 1981. Reagan denied that there was any litmus test: "I have never given a litmus test to anyone that I have appointed to the bench…. I feel very strongly about those social issues, but I also place my confidence in the fact that the one thing that I do seek are judges that will interpret the law and not write the law. We've had too many examples in recent years of courts and judges legislating."[77]

In addition to White and Rehnquist, Reagan appointee Sandra Day O'Connor began dissenting from the Court's abortion cases, arguing in 1983 that the trimester-based analysis devised by the Roe Court was "unworkable."[78] Shortly before his retirement from the bench, Chief Justice Warren Burger suggested in 1986 that Roe be "reexamined";[79] the associate justice who filled Burger's place on the Court—Justice Antonin Scalia—vigorously opposed Roe. Concern about overturning Roe played a major role in the defeat of Robert Bork's nomination to the Court in 1987; the man eventually appointed to replace Roe-supporter Lewis Powell was Anthony M. Kennedy.

The Supreme Court of Canada used the rulings in both Roe and Doe v. Bolton as grounds to find Canada's federal law restricting access to abortions unconstitutional. That Canadian case, R. v. Morgentaler, was decided in 1988.[80]


Read more: Roe v. Wade: Definition from Answers.com

 

[DaSleeper]

More smoke....
Privacy means not making the patients names public......not incomplete stats.
Besides that...it doesn't answer the question of sex selection in abortion....
Maybe that is something that statscan should keep track of and there is no privacy infringement in doing that since the name of the patient is kept out of it.

 

[Kreskin]

More smoke....
Privacy means not making the patients names public......not incomplete stats.
Besides that...it doesn't answer the question of sex selection in abortion....
Maybe that is something that statscan should keep track of and there is no privacy infringement in doing that since the name of the patient is kept out of it.

Privacy is the treatment itself. What other medical procedures requires a patient to disclose all of their personal thoughts?

 

[DaSleeper]

Privacy is the treatment itself. What other medical procedures requires a patient to disclose all of their personal thoughts?

When the identity is not disclosed?
You gotta be kidding:roll:

 

[Kreskin]

When the identity is not disclosed?
You gotta be kidding:roll:

Don't act dumb. When someone gets a vasectomy they don't have to have their thoughts reviewed.

The identity is already established based on an ultrasound techs or radiologists disclosing the information (or obgyns/geneticists). Now it comes down to what the knowledge of the pregnant woman, so you're suggesting she be interrogated for 'what she knows'? Ridiculous. Great if you're in the Taliban.

 

[DaSleeper]

Don't act dumb. When someone gets a vasectomy they don't have to have their thoughts reviewed.

The identity is already established based on an ultrasound techs or radiologists disclosing the information (or obgyns/geneticists). Now it comes down to what the knowledge of the pregnant woman, so you're suggesting she be interrogated for 'what she knows'? Ridiculous. Great if you're in the Taliban.

Why do you keep blowing smoke....we are talking about ((stats)) They don't report on the identity or the thoughts of the patient.
Who the hell says anything about interrogating the patient....you just keep sidetraking, bobing and weaving
Quit moving the goal posts will ya .

 

[Kreskin]

Why do you keep blowing smoke....we are talking about ((stats)) They don't report on the identity or the thoughts of the patient.
Who the hell says anything about interrogating the patient....you just keep sidetraking, bobing and weaving
Quit moving the goal posts will ya .

Well try to make some sense. What stats are you looking for? How do you intend to enforce your laws?

 

[DaSleeper]

Well try to make some sense. What stats are you looking for? How do you intend to enforce your laws?

What the hell laws are you talking about?
The original question: the question of sex selection in abortion....you know? the OP? the Poll question? you just keep going off on tangents
You're the one who started asking for stats...which were provided for you...then you keep moving about...are you sure you're not Cannuck in disguise?...what is the next dance about?

 

[JLM]

For or against??????

Which "right" trumps the other....
Woman's right to choose....or....sex discrimination???

Battle looms over Langley MP’s motion on sex-selective abortion

OTTAWA — A Conservative backbencher’s motion on sex-selective abortions caught the ire of opposition parties Wednesday, with the NDP and Liberal leaders claiming it was another attempt to outlaw abortion, while the MP behind the proposal called it a stand for human rights.
The volleys over Tory MP Mark Warawa’s motion are part of an ongoing tug-of-war between anti-abortion MPs who want to claim the motion for their cause, and advocates who want to keep the proposal distanced from the politically controversial abortion debate.


Read more: Battle looms over Tory MP

Even if late term abortions are legal in Canada, I put the third option to satisfy everybody.http://www.canada.com/Battle+looms+...ive+abortion/7656602/story.html#ixzz2EJVA02TR

Hobson's choice!

 

[DaSleeper]

Hobson's choice!

With three options?????

 

[Kreskin]

What the hell laws are you talking about?
The original question: the question of sex selection in abortion....you know? the OP? the Poll question? you just keep going off on tangents
You're the one who started asking for stats...which were provided for you...then you keep moving about...are you sure you're not Cannuck in disguise?...what is the next dance about?

The laws some idiots in parliament are trying to strike up. That was this is about, some naive belief that you can wrap this up into a measure of knowledge and thought on the pregnant woman.

I voted conservative last time but if they go down this path I will never again for them. I will campaign loudly against them.

 

[Goober]

Don't act dumb. When someone gets a vasectomy they don't have to have their thoughts reviewed.

The identity is already established based on an ultrasound techs or radiologists disclosing the information (or obgyns/geneticists). Now it comes down to what the knowledge of the pregnant woman, so you're suggesting she be interrogated for 'what she knows'? Ridiculous. Great if you're in the Taliban.

Still looking I see.