betsy

Like what arguments for example? I do not follow animal rights people....therefore I'm not familiar with their "battle-cry".

Why is that? How did it come about that this so-called "everyone" agrees that a fetus is not human?

The first priority for any teen in our society is to get an education that will allow them to support themselves as adults. Statistics show that teens who try to raise babies are much more likely to end up living in poverty and have kids which have problems. That said, I will take back part of what I said: giving up the baby for adoption would also be a responsible choice. That said, a teen who wants to have an abortion is still making a responsible choice. "A teen getting an abortion who does not want to tell her parents is likely dealing with parents that might force her to carry the baby to term. No teenager in our society should be having children. A pregnant teen that wants an abortion is making a responsible choice in the circumstances and her parents should not be allowed to prevent her from making that choice." But if parents are likely to force their daughter tp carry the baby to full term...it's also more likely that they (the parents) would help in raising the baby, or have other plans for the baby. I've seen that scenario several times. Grandparents are the ones raising the baby! What's wrong with that? If the daughter is going to have help anyway...then how can that interfere so much? Sure there is still some interference...but hey, you've gotta face some consequences. Figuring out the best course of action for EVERYONE (that definitely includes the baby, first and foremost...since it didn't have any choice at all in being placed in this despicable predicament), and doing just that. THAT, is being responsible. Irresponsibility cannot be corrected by more acts of irresponsibilities. Terminating a life just for the reason of being an impediment in one's lifestyle or education is not a responsible act...it is merely taking the easiest way out at the expense of another (this one being the infant's right and chance to live life). Call it a selfish choice or a new lifestyle choice, or whatever....but it cannot be called a "responsible" choice. ESPECIALLY when there are other options and support from parents!

Come to think of it...Latimer...and the death penalty. And now abortionists. Why do liberal thinkers support murderers?

A fetus is not a human life - you may think so but that is your religious belief. If you don't want an abortion - don't have one. And that my friend is a typical liberal way of deflecting. Saying repeatedly that "a fetus is not a human life..." like a mantra does not make it so. It is not considered a "human life" simply because some judges declared it legally so....and we know some decisions can be biased. So there you go...full circle we come. It's not 100% a sure thing.

The entire abortion question comes down...not only to a religious belief....but also to what is moral. Pro-choice loved to neatly package it as the sole product of religious belief...somehow that gives them the justification they need (in their own minds). But it is more than just religious belief. How can one think of an unborn as some form of cancer that has to be removed? Knowing that it is a human life....struggling just like you and me to make it to this world, the only difference is that it is totally dependent on me for survival. Maybe it just should be that women who can coldly terminate their own offsprings lose their capacity to bear any more children.

We kill animals for food or simply because they are inconvenient. Do we kill unborn for food? So just because some kill animals because they are inconvenient....that makes it okay to kill unborn? For inconvenience? Inconvenience. That's why the "progressives" were supportive of that father who killed his disabled child. They sympathized and emphatized with the INCONVENIENCE that poor suffering father must've felt....caring for that child 24 hours a day/7 days a week. Watching her drool.....having to feed her...change her...bathe her... Who else could possibly cause us this terrible inconvenience? Anyone could. I'm healthy today, I'm suddenly a veggie tomorrow...just hope my spouse isn't one of those self-centered individuals who would suddenly look at me and decide I'm such an inconvenience to his lifestyle... Wow, a mom-to-be wouldn't even give that baby 9 months of her life to give him/her a chance at life. Nine months is considered a huge set-back! Just get rid of it like a wart. Again....it only supports what some of us have pin-pointed all along. This is mostly just for selfish reasons.

No contraceptive is 100%. So? Just for a fluke here and a fluke there…we opt to hand down the death penalty instead to all unwanted unborn? Gee….isn’t that basically the same reasoning for opposing the death penalty to criminals? Isn’t there a twisted and sickening feeling to it when the “progressives” deem it just right to defend murderers…and yet so gungho in supporting the slaughter of the vulnerable innocents?

"Organ donation is a very serious topic in not only the United States but also the rest of the world. Ms. Eaton relates this topic to the United Kingdom where a new system for organ donation is being proposed. In the current system a donor is required to opt-in to donation by carrying a donor card or having a sticker on the license. With the proposed system everyone is a donor unless otherwise going to a legal building and officially opting-out and choosing not to be a donor." http://www.memorial.ecasd.k12.wi.us/Depart...rencritique.htm

An 11 year old is the youngest pregnant girl. She's carried it and set to deliver soon. From what I gathered it was the result of rape since a 17 year old was charged with that. Now, for a girl this young...this might be one of those rare cases when a person is endangered giving birth. However, why would you say a teen that wants an abortion is making a "responsible" choice? Why is it automatically a "responsible" choice?

Necessary to make difficult choices of what? Taking precaution or to hell with precaution! "Unnatractive" alternatives of what? Taking a cold shower? Sleeping alone? No score? Choices were there BEFORE a woman reaches the state of getting pregnant! Choices and Alternatives...that WE, the taxpayers had paid for! Education. Information. Propaganda. Condoms and contraceptives. And what about the simple aspirin-method of precaution??? And what about alternatives when you are pregnant? Have you heard of "adoption?" I guess carrying the baby for 9 months is too much of a burden...so it's easier to just kill it. The only thing logically sound is the acknowledgement that yes, the pro-choice arguments mostly centers on SELF -gratification...and shirking from the consequences and responsibility attached. Pro-choice can name it and justify it in anyway they need to....but in the end, it just all boils down to that. Which is hypocritical. And lethal. So who pays for the consequence? Surely it is that baby in that womb whose life is snuffed!

But what guarantees this procedure is only used in those rare circumstances, falling precisely under the category of medical necessity?

Perhaps Cindy Sheehan ought to show being "neutral" in spreading her gospel. Okay, she already told the US and Canadian government to "get out of people's way." Now, she should go to the Middle East, Zimbabwe and everywhere all over the globe and tell them of this practical advice.

Even though I don't agree with abortion, I still think that it is here to stay. But I would like to see some protective measures for the unborn, especially for late-terms. The Liberals were smart in getting around the issue and establishing it as a "woman's right ". It will take a strategist of a different kind to tackle and counter-act and make it into a winning platform. Of course, it will need the help of the media to sell and sway society to a different way of thinking.

The pro-life protest was attended by 8 or 10(?) Conservatives and 3 Liberals. The Conservative party was quick to re-affirm that it has no plan to re-open Abortion. Some supporters are women who have had abortions, and have now come forward to tell of the pressures they felt from those around them, feeling that there were no other options. It had been noted on MDuffy that Canada is the only country that offers no protection whatsoever for the unborn child. And as someone pointed out... protection of the seals, the whales are being bitterly fought for...and yet, it's an open season for the unborn child. Some voted for the Harper government thinking that there IS a hidden agenda...and that re-opening abortion is one of them. I HOPED for a hidden agenda (not only on abortion....but on SSM as well). No politcal party wants to have that A-word mentioned...it is considered a taboo subject...for it means political suicide. It may mean political suicide....but with the proper handling and proper "presentation"....it need not be. A party who will courageously tackle this can be seen in an entirely new light. Someone who can rise well above others. I still think....(and hope)...that sometime down the road, Harper will revisit this controversy again.

Polling does help...otherwise, why would they bother? I would bet CPC...or any other major parties do their own. Would Harper gone through digging his heels and challenging the others with the budget? Would Diuseppe support the budget to prevent an election if the polls didn't show how the Tories surged in Quebec?

According to MDuffy, there's rumour that Harper will grant amnesty to all illegal workers next week. I agree with a critic that that move will only encourage more to come. What about those who had followed the proper procedure to enter Canada....waiting in line for years? A lot of whom are relatives of bonafide citizens in this country? If the illegals can beat them in...well, looks like sneaking to Canada in an illegal way is much better. So do we end up granting amnesty every 5 years or so? What about screening? Might as well dismantle the immigration department.

No sense crying over Belinda. She's a has-been. There's Hedy Fry. She's colored. She's a woman. And who knows, she might even be gay.

Let me continue the rant! And have you noticed the kinds of game shows/reality tv that's so popular? They're all based on humiliating contestants. Stripping them off their dignity...watching them grovel and shame themselves for money! I've seen a segment of American Idol (it was unavoidable....we were guests and the host is a fan...so he tuned in and wanted us to see this amazing show). As the obnoxious game show host (what's-his-name) started to flay the tearful contestant with demeaning and debasing criticisms....our host was laughing his head off! That's comedy??? So for all the anti-American culture bashing we dish...what do we do? We copy-cat! Say hello to Canadian Idol! For all this society's posturing on the importance of building self-esteem....don't you think it's more than just hypocritical to be encouraging this kind of ENTERTAINMENT? It's like the people in a coliseum watching gleefully as humans were pounced on by lions! This is becoming a very sick society. Shallow!

Maybe because it's never that easy for the protagonist to succeed. Please refer to The Good Guys 101. He has to overcome obstacles and hardships set out by the bad guys....and boy, by the looks of it the Liberals and NDPs are throwing anything and everything to block his way.

Finding dirt is quite easy. I think "dirt-digging" is being extreme. No need to put a lot of muscle into it actually. Thirteen years had gotten the Liberals quite sloppy. All it takes is a little "rug-lifting."

Didn't the Liberals do just that? Dirt-digging in the past of Harper or any Conservatives they can lay their hands on? Now the shoe is on the other foot. So? Don't tell me dirt-digging is purely the exclusive entitlement of the Liberals.

Obviously there are different ideas out there, but it's pretty inflammatory to call it brainwashing. And a plot to brainwash children regardless of the benefits/costs to society ? It's pretty ridiculous. Is it ridiculous? Is it just paranoia? This is a very interesting read. "In Toronto schools the lesson plans for every subject are saturated with sexualized language and ideas. Heterosexism as an oppressive archetype is systematically attacked throughout the curriculum. Students are assigned literature critical of heterosexism as the hegemonic paradigm 4 in our culture. When the plan was introduced by the Toronto Board - after being developed without consultation from the broad public, including faith-based groups - it elicited violent opposition from parents. Fistfights broke out at one meeting. Parents who object to lessons are now banned from school property. The Board has failed to recognize broad opposition to the curriculum, including many ethnic and cultural groups whose faith and cultures vehemently oppose homosexual behaviour. 5" http://www.hamiltonfamilyaction.org/Educat...rticleJan05.htm

Obviously there are different ideas out there, but it's pretty inflammatory to call it brainwashing. And a plot to brainwash children regardless of the benefits/costs to society ? It's pretty ridiculous. Well it does seem ridiculous to think this way. But what could be more ridiculous than the Liberals/NDP's determination to put this universal daycare plan into place even when: Universal daycare in Quebec is failing. Research findings indicate children do not fare that well. It will serve only small segment of society...and that is not the segment that needs it most. It is not popular among parents. There is a real question whether there is indeed lack of space! Yeah, there are different ideas out there. But there are "ideas" that starts within the family: the values and the belief of the family. Surely you could easily imagine how the school board's philosophy, values and ideas could easily be integrated in the program and can easily be passed on. It is not the kind of brainwashing you can imagine in the likes of James Bond movies. This is just practically "teaching" and getting the child used to the ideas. Just the kind of reading materials they could read to these children is a good example.

Wheras the Liberal caucus is made up entirely of intelligent, capable, honest individuals like its present temporary leader, who is still shyly hiding his homosexuality from the public, though not from his party, and who still has rumours swirling about a 15 year old boy prostitute he allegedly kept at a Sussex St apartment. And Hedy "burning crosses" Fry, who hopes to be the next leader, and Scott "pst, want a stock tip" Brison, who jumped from the Tories and abandoned all his alleged beliefs except the sanctity of being santimonious, not to mention Brenda "see my pretty shoes!" Stronach who betrayed her party on the eve of a crucial vote for a cabinet position with the other team. And these are the LEADERS!? We don't even know what kind of losers are in among the rank and file because the media pays no attention to them. Don't forget Carolyn Bennett and her recent prison-badly-needed prediction.