Aid Groups Told to STFU About Abortion or Face Increasing Backlash

[nicky10013]

Disgusting

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/803859--aid-groups-advised-to-shut-the-f-up-on-abortion?bn=1

[Shady]

Disgusting

Disgusting is right. Canada should not be forcing other countries into the practice of abortion. Especially if those countries and cultures consider the action to be abhorrent. It's also disgusting how the Liberals are trying to use this as a political issue in an effort to garner support. Epic fail.

This is cultural imperialism at its worst. Shame on all of you. :angry:

[nicky10013]

Disgusting is right. Canada should not be forcing other countries into the practice of abortion. Especially if those countries and cultures consider the action to be abhorrent. It's also disgusting how the Liberals are trying to use this as a political issue in an effort to garner support. Epic fail.

This is cultural imperialism at its worst. Shame on all of you. :angry:

That's not the disgusting part because frankly, we're not forcing abortion on anyone just making funds available for them if women chose to go ahead with them. Anyone who presents this as such is being purposefully dishonest.

No, the disgusting part is about the attitude of this government towards agencies whom the government thinks it can control. To make it abundantly obvious that there will be harsh consequences for, god forbid, holding Canada to it's international obligations is cronyism at it's worst.

The Liberals aren't the one using this as a political football because if we're to be frank, the Liberals aren't the ones who have changed our foreign policy without the least semblence of debate.

[Shady]

The Liberals aren't the one using this as a political football because if we're to be frank, the Liberals aren't the ones who have changed our foreign policy without the least semblence of debate.

There's no debate required for this particular policy. If you want a Canadian federal government cheerleading for abortion to countries around the world that need our aid, vote for a new one at the ballot box. I for one, am quite proud our country is finally doing the moral and honorable thing. Many of these countries consider abortion to be an abhorrent practice. We shouldn't be providing aid with abortion strings attached.

[nicky10013]

There's no debate required for this particular policy. If you want a Canadian federal government cheerleading for abortion to countries around the world that need our aid, vote for a new one at the ballot box. I for one, am quite proud our country is finally doing the moral and honorable thing. Many of these countries consider abortion to be an abhorrent practice. We shouldn't be providing aid with abortion strings attached.

There are no abortion strings attached. As I said, the money is there to be used if it needs to be. No one is being forced into anything. The purpose of the policy is to ensure that women don't have to seek unsafe methods for abortion. It's an essential part of maternal health.

[Shady]

As I said, the money is there to be used if it needs to be.

Well, I don't think Canada should be paying for the killing of unborn babies around the world. That's just my opinion.

It's an essential part of maternal health.

Nonsense. It's not an essential part of maternal health. It's only an essential part of radical liberalism. Serious mental and physical trauma can be the result of abortion procedures.

[waldo]

There's no debate required for this particular policy. If you want a Canadian federal government cheerleading for abortion to countries around the world that need our aid, vote for a new one at the ballot box. I for one, am quite proud our country is finally doing the moral and honorable thing.

you're content to let the Harper Cons backdoor their ideology pursuits through the G8... but... you seemingly won't press them to open up the national abortion debate to allow Conservatives to highlight their/your favoured brand of anti-abortion, as you say, "cheerleading". You must be in perpetual distress over this obvious Harper Conservative failing to do the, as you say, "moral and honorable thing", on a national level.

[Shady]

you're content to let the Harper Cons backdoor their ideology pursuits through the G8... but... you seemingly won't press them to open up the national abortion debate to allow Conservatives to highlight their/your favoured brand of anti-abortion, as you say, "cheerleading". You must be in perpetual distress over this obvious Harper Conservative failing to do the, as you say, "moral and honorable thing", on a national level.

Well, I'd definitely like to see some type of abortion legislation. In particular, partial-birth abortion, and late-term abortion. Both are abhorrent practices.

[M.Dancer]

So if a woman who has never given birth, but has had an abortion....is that abortion part of maternal health?

...cause it sure ain't no part of fetal health....

[Jack Weber]

Well, I'd definitely like to see some type of abortion legislation. In particular, partial-birth abortion, and late-term abortion. Both are abhorrent practices.

Sadly...agreed....

[waldo]

Well, I'd definitely like to see some type of abortion legislation. In particular, partial-birth abortion, and late-term abortion. Both are abhorrent practices.

what's your definition of late-term abortion and how many have been/are being performed in Canada... and for what reasons? Accepting to your use of the misnomer 'partial-birth abortion', just what is your definition of 'partial-birth abortion' and how many have been/are being performed in Canada... and for what reasons?

is that it? Is your rejection of a full/complete maternal health G8 position by the Conservatives based upon your concerns over late-term and "partial-birth" abortion?

[Keepitsimple]

The government is simply following the will of Parliament. The Liberals raised a motion in March to include abortion in Family Planning. It was defeated......or does the "will of Parliament" only apply when the opposition defeats the government?

[waldo]

The government is simply following the will of Parliament. The Liberals raised a motion in March to include abortion in Family Planning. It was defeated......or does the "will of Parliament" only apply when the opposition defeats the government?

oh my! ... simply following the will of Parliament? Hey now, what's that 2 week deadline thingee all about?

But I digress - let's properly frame your revisionism - hey? First we have the Harper, Cannon and Oda backtrack over contraception... then we have the vote that spoke to including a broader range of family planning programs... including contraception. Take revisionist comfort in realizing the (botched) vote results reflected a 6 vote difference against a dozen+ missing members from the House. You can presume to negate your favoured Conservatives position that from the onset didn't include a full range of family planning programs... strangely, I thought you would be 'loudly and proudly' for that position, rather than diminishing it against the backdrop of a botched vote and your ludicrous statement that Conservatives were simply 'following the will of Parliament'. Ya, right... does your following the 'will of Parliament' only apply when the Conservatives deem it so?

[Keepitsimple]

Take revisionist comfort in realizing the (botched) vote results reflected a 6 vote difference against a dozen+ missing members from the House.

I wonder why those dozen+ members were missing...

Edited May 3, 2010 by Keepitsimple

[CANADIEN]

Disgusting is right. Canada should not be forcing other countries into the practice of abortion. Especially if those countries and cultures consider the action to be abhorrent. It's also disgusting how the Liberals are trying to use this as a political issue in an effort to garner support. Epic fail.

This is cultural imperialism at its worst. Shame on all of you. :angry:

I approve of the new government policy.

But to claim that the previous policy was forcing abortions is not only untrue, it's also either ignorant or dishonest. You pick.

And no matter what one thinks of the new policy, it is unacceptable that anybody in a position of power says to opponent of the policy that shut up or else. If she wasn't speaking on behalf of the government, then the Government should distance itself from her. If she was speaking on behalf of the government, then we have yet another sign of a trend of government inolerence towards contrary opinions.

[Smallc]

But to claim that the previous policy was forcing abortions is not only untrue, it's also either ignorant or dishonest. You pick.

Ooh, ooh, can I pick?

[Argus]

That's not the disgusting part because frankly, we're not forcing abortion on anyone just making funds available for them if women chose to go ahead with them. Anyone who presents this as such is being purposefully dishonest.

No, the disgusting part is about the attitude of this government towards agencies whom the government thinks it can control.

What planet are you visiting us from?

You take out ads against the government, speak out against them on the news, hold demos against them, and then go cap in hand asking them for money? You think that was the way things worked under the Liberals!? Guess again!

[Argus]

There are no abortion strings attached. As I said, the money is there to be used if it needs to be. No one is being forced into anything. The purpose of the policy is to ensure that women don't have to seek unsafe methods for abortion. It's an essential part of maternal health.

The United Nations appears to disagree with you. It seems to think abortion is a rather low on the list of importance for maternal health.

[Argus]

what's your definition of late-term abortion and how many have been/are being performed in Canada... and for what reasons? Accepting to your use of the misnomer 'partial-birth abortion', just what is your definition of 'partial-birth abortion' and how many have been/are being performed in Canada... and for what reasons?

Are you aware that we are the only western nation which has NO laws whatsoever governing abortion?

[Argus]

And no matter what one thinks of the new policy, it is unacceptable that anybody in a position of power says to opponent of the policy that shut up or else. If she wasn't speaking on behalf of the government, then the Government should distance itself from her. If she was speaking on behalf of the government, then we have yet another sign of a trend of government inolerence towards contrary opinions.

If you want the government to give you money, don't pick fights with the government, don't try to embarrass the government in public. That has been the rule for probably as long as there's been a government. You think Chretien tolerated trouble from groups seeking government grants? You think Mulroney did? You think Trudeau did? You think MacDonald did?

[nicky10013]

If you want the government to give you money, don't pick fights with the government, don't try to embarrass the government in public. That has been the rule for probably as long as there's been a government. You think Chretien tolerated trouble from groups seeking government grants? You think Mulroney did? You think Trudeau did? You think MacDonald did?

So their wrongs make Harper's wrong right? What are you on?

[Argus]

So their wrongs make Harper's wrong right? What are you on?

I'm pointing out this is the way the world works and has always worked. The fact you never paid any attention to it until there was a conservative in power you hated is on you, bub.

[nicky10013]

I'm pointing out this is the way the world works and has always worked. The fact you never paid any attention to it until there was a conservative in power you hated is on you, bub.

I've never liked it. Please, keep trying to justify it.

[Argus]

I've never liked it. Please, keep trying to justify it.

Riiiight. You must have been outraged during Chretien's term in office, presuming, of course, you were old enough to know who he was back then.

[waldo]

Well, I'd definitely like to see some type of abortion legislation. In particular, partial-birth abortion, and late-term abortion. Both are abhorrent practices.

what's your definition of late-term abortion and how many have been/are being performed in Canada... and for what reasons? Accepting to your use of the misnomer 'partial-birth abortion', just what is your definition of 'partial-birth abortion' and how many have been/are being performed in Canada... and for what reasons?

is that it? Is your rejection of a full/complete maternal health G8 position by the Conservatives based upon your concerns over late-term and "partial-birth" abortion?

Are you aware that we are the only western nation which has NO laws whatsoever governing abortion?

what are the circumstances for which you advocate the need for laws? My understanding is that late term abortions are a most rare event in Canada... only some 0.4% of all abortions performed occurring after 20 weeks gestation - so called late-term abortions (a somewhat dated 2003 figure... if you have a more recent update to that figure, please provide). Within this rare 0.4% of all abortions category, just how many actual 'D&X techniques' are even performed within Canada - the so-called, "partial-birth" abortions?