mikemac Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 We've had universal health care long before abortion was legalized here in Canada. With the recent health care bill concerns in the US centered around tax payer funded abortion the question needs to be asked. Should there be tax payer funded abortion here in Canada? The Canadian law allows a mother to have an abortion in the last trimester, even the day before the baby is born. This certainly is not health care for the unborn child. The mother may have physical problems after the abortion. A lot have emotional scars that last for years. This is not health care. Even some fathers have emotional problems after the fact. Statistics show that there were 100,763 abortions performed in Canada in 2004 with only 6% due to health problems and only 1% because of rape or incest (source). These numbers do not include any abortions performed in the Manitoba abortion clinic as it did not release data to Statistics Canada. So over 94,000 (93%) of these abortions were performed for convenience. A form of contraception. This clearly is not health care. And it is putting pressure on our health care system. Unborn babies deserve human rights in Canada too. Do you want to be amazed? Then watch this short video to see an unborn baby stretch, suck it's thumb, bounce, rub it's shoulder, scratch, open it's eyes, yawn, pout, stick it's tongue out and smile. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1uKCchuIjM If you believe the time has come for our government to extend full legal protection to every human being from their biological beginnings to natural death then please sign this petition. http://www.personhood.ca/ Quote Unborn babies should have human rights too. http://www.personhood.ca/
Bonam Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 If you believe the time has come for our government to extend full legal protection to every human being from their biological beginnings to natural death then please sign this petition. http://www.personhood.ca/ Where is their biological beginning? Quote
Mr.Canada Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 I've been clear on ths issue and don't wish to wade in at this time. I hate to disappoint my fans but sometimes restraint shows true strength. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
dizzy Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 The solution is simple. If you don't believe in abortion, then organize to repeal the law that allows it. Until then, know that abortion is legal, so it should be free, accessible and widely available. Quote
mikemac Posted April 4, 2010 Author Report Posted April 4, 2010 (edited) Where is their biological beginning? At conception. Long before the last trimester. I don't think tax payers should have to pay for it. Why should they? Edited April 4, 2010 by mikemac Quote Unborn babies should have human rights too. http://www.personhood.ca/
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 The solution is simple. If you don't believe in abortion, then organize to repeal the law that allows it. Until then, know that abortion is legal, so it should be free, accessible and widely available. Is it legal...yes. Is it free...no. Is it widely available.....depends on where you live. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Mr.Canada Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 At conception. Long before the last trimester. I don't think tax payers should have to pay for it. Why should they? I don't know if the posters here have the appetite for another abortion debate. I'm sure when some of the socialists see this they'll be posting up a fury. Good luck. Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
mikemac Posted April 4, 2010 Author Report Posted April 4, 2010 The solution is simple. If you don't believe in abortion, then organize to repeal the law that allows it. Until then, know that abortion is legal, so it should be free, accessible and widely available. Why should it be free? It's not health care. If you think it should be free then why don't you volunteer to pay for it all. I certainly don't want to. Quote Unborn babies should have human rights too. http://www.personhood.ca/
Smallc Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 Why should it be free? It's not health care. According to many, it is. It's performed in a health facility. Quote
Bonam Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 At conception. Why at conception? What is so special about conception? Why not protect the individual sperms and eggs? Or why not set an arbitrary date such as, for example, 6 months after conception? If you think it should be free then why don't you volunteer to pay for it all. I certainly don't want to. There are many much more distasteful and less necessary procedures paid for by taxpayers, such as for example gender change surgery (I really don't wanna hear the arguments of people who think it can be "necessary", if we have any of those on this board). Campaign against that first will you? Quote
mikemac Posted April 4, 2010 Author Report Posted April 4, 2010 According to many, it is. It's performed in a health facility. When it's used for convenience, a form of contraception for stupid people then tax payers shouldn't be made to pay for it. Quote Unborn babies should have human rights too. http://www.personhood.ca/
Guest TrueMetis Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 At conception. Long before the last trimester. Why? At that point it is completely unable to survive on it's own. It just a bit of DNA. I've heard people compare it to a tumour or a parasite (not that I agree with that definition) why not go with when it could actually survive on it's own? (Around 7 months IIRC) Quote
mikemac Posted April 4, 2010 Author Report Posted April 4, 2010 (edited) Why? At that point it is completely unable to survive on it's own. It just a bit of DNA. I've heard people compare it to a tumour or a parasite (not that I agree with that definition) why not go with when it could actually survive on it's own? (Around 7 months IIRC) "When it could actually survive on it's own?" That would be about the age of 17, wouldn't it. Edited April 4, 2010 by mikemac Quote Unborn babies should have human rights too. http://www.personhood.ca/
Dithers Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 I don't know if the posters here have the appetite for another abortion debate. I'm sure when some of the socialists see this they'll be posting up a fury. Good luck. Keep drawing your ovals. Quote DEATHCAMPS BLARG USA! USA! USA!
Guest TrueMetis Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 "When it could actually survive on it's own?" That would be about the age of 17, wouldn't it. I would have thought it would have been obvious that I ment when it didn't have to exsist inside the body of another, and was able to breath on it's own. Quote
dizzy Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 Is it legal...yes. Is it free...no. Is it widely available.....depends on where you live. Agreed. I chose the words 'should be' not 'is'. Quote
Bonam Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 Being able to survive on its own is also a somewhat arbitrary definition. For one, survival on its own can vary by some time between different specimens. Additionally, different levels of technological and medical support can allow survival from different times. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 Being able to survive on its own is also a somewhat arbitrary definition. For one, survival on its own can vary by some time between different specimens. Additionally, different levels of technological and medical support can allow survival from different times. ...but the same is true for "safe and legal" abortion procedures, even with abortafacients. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
dizzy Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 (edited) Why should it be free? It's not health care. If you think it should be free then why don't you volunteer to pay for it all. I certainly don't want to. It is a service delivered in a healthcare facility. The thing that sucks about living in civic society is that you sometimes have to support the notion that you must either pay for things you don't agree with or work hard to change them. Based on these rules, I don't have to do anything, as I support access to abortion. I'm guessing from the framing of your post that you don't. So, using your logic, feel free to refuse to pay for the portion of your healthcare taxes and premiums that goes toward this legal medical procedure. Edited April 4, 2010 by dizzy Quote
Guest TrueMetis Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 Being able to survive on its own is also a somewhat arbitrary definition. For one, survival on its own can vary by some time between different specimens. Additionally, different levels of technological and medical support can allow survival from different times. Well that's true we could go with an average, without the addition of medicine or technology. (Both of which would mean it is not surviving on its own) In the end I don't care it doesn't affect me. Quote
Bonam Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 ...but the same is true for "safe and legal" abortion procedures, even with abortafacients. Sorry, I don't follow. What same is true? Well that's true we could go with an average, without the addition of medicine or technology. (Both of which would mean it is not surviving on its own) In the end I don't care it doesn't affect me. Why an average? Why without the addition of technology? The point I am trying to make is any such "cutoff" that can be made is completely arbitrary, sufficiently so to make it meaningless. Either you go all the way and protect everything, starting right from the individual sperms and eggs, because they each have the potential to one day be part of the creation of a human being, or else you protect nothing. Anything in between, including picking "conception" as the start point, is completely arbitrary. Quote
Guest TrueMetis Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 The point I am trying to make is any such "cutoff" that can be made is completely arbitrary, sufficiently so to make it meaningless. Either you go all the way and protect everything, starting right from the individual sperms and eggs, because they each have the potential to one day be part of the creation of a human being, or else you protect nothing. Anything in between, including picking "conception" as the start point, is completely arbitrary. Well then we would have to go with protect nothing. As anything with human DNA has the potential to become a human being. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 Sorry, I don't follow. What same is true? The idea of a "safe and legal" abortion is supported by not only the medical technology to do so, but the labor and skill of others willing to do so. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Bonam Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 The idea of a "safe and legal" abortion is supported by not only the medical technology to do so, but the labor and skill of others willing to do so. Ok. And... ? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 4, 2010 Report Posted April 4, 2010 Ok. And... ? ...so it's a wash when comparisons are made to fetal or infant survival. Medical technology and skills make both possible. Lacking this, we are left with natural childbirth after zero neo-natal care or intervention. The entire "abortion rights" movement is flawed by an utter dependence on technology and another's labor. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.