Keepitsimple Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 (edited) Here's a summary of Abortion Laws in all 27 countries of the European Union. Many of these countries are viewed by Canada's Left as being "progressive" countries. Instead of going back and forth with our polarized debate, lets take a look at those countries that have had substantial and open debate on Abortion Laws. If the future holds a debate on the subject, do you think that one of these countries could serve as an example that would be acceptable to Canada - or at least be a good place to start - or are we simply too polarized to consider joining the rest of the civilzed world on this subject? AUSTRIAAvailability: On request Gestational limit: First three months - in practice often before 12 weeks Conditions: Must have medical consultation. May be performed after 12 weeks if necessary to avoid serious danger to the woman's physical or mental health; if the child is at risk of being born with a serious physical or mental defect; or if the woman is under 14 years of age. In practice, the ability of a woman to pay for an abortion is an important factor. It is difficult for women to get an abortion outside Vienna and other big cities. Few doctors perform abortions in private practice in rural areas. BELGIUM Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: Woman must say she is in a "state of distress". Abortions allowed at any stage later in pregnancy if two physicians agree there is a serious risk to the health of the mother or that the child has an "extremely serious and incurable disease". The woman must receive counselling at least six days prior to procedure, which must be performed by a physician under good medical conditions in a healthcare establishment with the proper information resources. BULGARIA Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: Between 12 and 20 weeks, abortion is permitted only if the woman is suffering from a proven, documented case of a disease that could endanger the life of mother or child. After 20 weeks, abortion is permitted only if the woman's life is in danger or evidence is found of severe foetal impairment. CYPRUS Availability: Under certain conditions Gestational limit: 28 weeks Conditions: Allowed to save a woman's life, to preserve her mental or physical health or in cases of rape or incest and if the child is likely to be born with serious disabilities. The UN says that although not specified by law, in practice abortion is performed within 28 weeks of gestation. Certification by two doctors is required for all grounds except rape - when certification by a police authority is necessary. Free of charge for patients eligible for free medical care. Anyone caught performing an unlawful abortion is liable to seven years' imprisonment. A woman inducing her own abortion is liable to the same punishment. In practice, terminations are often carried out for social and economic reasons. CZECH REPUBLIC Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: Requires consent of the woman and authorisation by her gynaecologist. After 12 weeks, pregnancy can be terminated only if the woman's life or health is endangered or in the case of suspected foetal impairment. The procedure must be authorised by a medical commission and performed in a hospital. Therapeutic abortion is permitted up to 26 weeks. Women who have had an abortion are not allowed another within six months unless they have had two deliveries, are at least 35 years of age or the pregnancy was the result of a rape. The number of abortions in the Czech Republic dropped by about two-thirds in the 1990s mainly due to the increasing availability of the birth-control pill and other types of contraception. DENMARK Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: After 12 weeks, if the pregnancy does not pose a risk to the woman's life or of serious deterioration to her physical or mental health, the abortion must be approved by a committee of four people. The procedure must be performed by a physician in a state or communal hospital or in a clinic attached to a hospital. No cost, part of the public health system. Abortion for non-residents is not allowed unless they have some special relationship with Denmark. FAROE ISLANDS: Availability: Under certain conditions Gestational limit: 16 weeks Conditions: If there is a risk to life of woman, in cases of rape and severe risk of foetal malformation. If married, consent is required from the husband. ESTONIA Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: After 12 weeks, a woman must undergo a consultation with doctors and the reason for the abortion has to be stated in writing. Abortions are permitted until 22 weeks for health reasons and certain other reasons, including pregnancy at a very young age (under 16) or over 45 years of age. A woman choosing to have an abortion must pay a larger cost of the abortion than she would if it should be performed on medical grounds. FINLAND Availability: Under certain conditions Gestational limit: 24 weeks Conditions: Abortions permitted up to 12 weeks to save the woman's life, to preserve her mental health, for economic or social reasons or in the cases of rape or incest. Available up to 20 weeks if there is a risk to the physical health of woman or if she is younger than 17. The procedure can be performed up to 24 weeks if the woman's life is at risk or there is a risk of foetal malformation. An abortion must be authorised by one or two doctors up to 12 weeks, or by the State Medical Board up to 20 weeks. Abortion is free of charge under national health insurance but women must pay hospital fees. The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) says that in practice a woman can get an abortion on demand, but illegal abortion is rare. FRANCE Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: The woman must claim to be in a "state of distress" because of her pregnancy. After 12 weeks, abortions are allowed only if the pregnancy poses a grave danger to the woman's health or there is a risk the child will suffer from a severe illness recognised as incurable. If this is the case, two doctors must confirm the risk to the health of the woman or foetus. A pregnant girl under the age of 16 may ask for an abortion without consulting her parents first. But she has to be accompanied by an adult of her choice. Conscientious objection allows professionals to decline involvement in procedures, but they must inform the patient without delay. GERMANY Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: The woman must receive proper counselling three days before the procedure. The state-regulated counselling is required to inform the woman that the unborn have a right to life and to try to convince her to continue her pregnancy. The procedure is not covered by public health insurance except for women with low income. The law includes penalties for people who force a pregnant woman to obtain an abortion or who induce a pregnant woman to have an abortion by maliciously withholding support payments. GREECE Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: Abortions are allowed up to 19 weeks in the case of rape or incest and 24 weeks in cases of foetal abnormality. Abortions must be performed by a practising physician in a private clinic or hospital. A minor must obtain the written consent of her parents or guardian. The United Nations says the public is still not fully aware of the new laws and illegal abortions are still common. HUNGARY Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: The woman must obtain counselling. A consultation with a nurse is compulsory to inform the pregnant woman on issues of contraception, as well as to provide assistance if the pregnancy is carried to term. Before 1953 abortions were illegal except for health reasons. The 1992 law stressed respect for the foetus, but it allowed abortions. If the pregnancy endangers the life of the woman, or the foetus shows malformation that renders any form of postnatal life impossible, the abortion can be performed at any time during pregnancy. IRELAND Availability: Strict conditions Gestational limit: No set limit Conditions: Allowed only allowed if woman's life is at risk (including the risk of suicide). Ireland has voted five times in the past 20 years on its abortion laws, most recently deciding to continue to allow women to have an abortion if they say they are suicidal - a loophole the government and Catholic Church wanted closed. Women can have counselling and advice on options, and can leave the country to have the procedure elsewhere - more than 6,000 a year go to the UK for a termination. ITALY Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: A one-week reflection period is imposed unless the situation is one of urgency. A certificate confirming the pregnancy and the request for termination must be issued by a doctor and signed by the woman and the doctor. Parental authorisation is required if the woman is under 18. After 12 weeks, abortion is allowed only if the foetus has a genetic deficiency or to preserve the physical and mental health of the mother. An abortion must be performed in a public hospital or authorised private facility - if there are staff willing to perform the procedure. The influence of the Roman Catholic Church - and the threat of excommunication for anyone performing an abortion and any woman obtaining an abortion - means the majority of physicians and other healthcare professionals invoke a conscience clause allowing them to be exempted on moral or religious grounds. LATVIA Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: After the first three months, special authorisation is required but non-medical reasons can include the death of the husband during pregnancy; imprisonment of the pregnant woman or her husband; divorce during pregnancy; pregnancy following rape; and history of child disability in the family. The laws were liberalised during the Soviet era. Procedures must be performed in a hospital or other authorised health-care facility. LITHUANIA Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: After 12 weeks, special authorisation is required. The laws are similar to Latvia, the countries having been a part of the former Soviet Union. Abortion laws have changed little since independence. LUXEMBOURG Availability: Under certain conditions Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: Allowed during first 12 weeks to save a woman's life, to preserve her mental or physical health, for economic or social reasons in the cases of rape or incest or foetal impairment. A one-week reflection period is required and the pregnant woman must be given an information booklet in which options other than abortion are explained. After 12 weeks, the law allows abortion only if there is a very serious threat to the health of the woman or the unborn child. Two qualified doctors must confirm in writing that a serious threat exists. A doctor is not required to perform an abortion except when the life of the pregnant woman is in imminent danger. The UN says there remains a reluctance among doctors to perform abortions, partly because of the country's religious conservatism. MALTA Availability: None Conditions: Abortion is prohibited in all circumstances. Anyone performing an abortion - or a woman who performs one on herself or consents to the procedure - can be jailed for between 18 months and three years. A physician, surgeon, obstetrician, or pharmacist who performs an abortion faces a jail term of 18 months to four years and a lifelong ban from exercising his or her profession. The government and bishops on the island objected strongly to moves in 2000 to perform abortions on a ship in international waters off Malta. THE NETHERLANDS Availability: On request Gestational limit: 13 weeks Conditions: A five-day waiting period is required between the initial consultation and the performance of an induced abortion. The procedure must be performed in a licensed hospital or clinic. Abortion is allowed after 13 weeks (up to 24 weeks) if she claims to be in a state of distress. Since November 1984, women in the Netherlands have been able to obtain abortions free of charge under the government-sponsored national health insurance system. Foreigners may have abortions in the Netherlands, but they have to pay. POLAND Availability: Under certain conditions Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: Allowed to save a woman's life, to preserve her mental or physical health or in the cases of rape or incest or foetal impairment. The procedure must be performed by an obstetrician or gynaecologist who has passed the national proficiency tests. After 12 weeks, abortions are allowed only if continued pregnancy would endanger the life or health of the pregnant woman. It must be performed in a hospital or clinic with the consent of the pregnant woman or her parents or guardian if she is a minor. PORTUGAL Availability: Under certain conditions Gestational limit: 16 weeks Conditions: Allowed within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy to save a woman's life or to preserve her mental or physical health. Abortions are allowed within 16 weeks in the cases of rape or another sexual crime and up to 24 weeks if there is a risk that the child will be born with an incurable disease or malformation - which must be certified by a doctor other than the one performing the procedure. Portugal's laws will now be liberalised to allow abortions on request within the first 10 weeks of pregnancy, after a referendum which saw almost 60% of voters back the move. It was not legally binding, because less than half the electorate voted, but Prime Minister Jose Socrates said "the people spoke with a clear voice" and the law would be changed. ROMANIA Availability: On request Gestational limit: 14 weeks Conditions: Must be carried out with the woman's consent in an approved medical institution or surgery. Abortions may be performed later in pregnancy if absolutely necessary for therapeutic reasons, according to legal provisions. A doctor who performs an illegal abortion faces suspension. SLOVAKIA Availability: On request Gestational limit: 12 weeks Conditions: Woman must request procedure in writing. It is allowed only if at least six months have elapsed since a previous abortion, except in the case of a woman who has had two other births or is 35 years of age or older, or in the case of rape. A woman must receive counselling before an abortion is performed. Parental consent is required for women under 16 years of age; for minors between 16 and 18 years of age, the physician must inform the parents following the abortion. Abortions after 12 weeks are only allowed for medical and genetic reasons and in cases of rape or other sexual crimes. SLOVENIA Availability: On request Gestational limit: 10 weeks Conditions: After the first 10 weeks of pregnancy, special authorisation by a commission composed of a gynaecologist/obstetrician, a general physician or a specialist in internal medicine and a social worker or a psychologist is required. If the woman is a minor, approval of her parents or guardian is required, unless she has been recognised as fully competent to earn her own living. SPAIN Availability: Under certain conditions Gestational limit: 22 weeks Conditions: Abortions are allowed to avoid serious risk to physical or mental health of the woman within the first 12 weeks. If the pregnancy is a result of rape, the rape must first be reported to the police and the procedure carried out within 12 weeks of pregnancy. In case of foetal impairment, two specialists, other than the doctor performing the abortion, must certify that the child would suffer from severe physical or mental defects. The procedure must be performed within the first 22 weeks. All abortions must be reported to the national health authorities. SWEDEN Availability: On request Gestational limit: 18 weeks Conditions: Between 12 and 18 weeks of gestation, the women must discuss the procedure with a social worker. After 18 weeks, permission must be obtained from the National Board of Health and Welfare. Abortions must be performed by a licensed medical practitioner and, except in cases of emergency, in a general hospital or other approved healthcare establishment. Abortion is subsidised by the government. The country says illegal abortions have been eradicated. UNITED KINGDOM Availability: Under certain conditions Gestational limit: 24 weeks Conditions: Abortion is allowed in England, Wales and Scotland to save a woman's life, for health, economic or social reasons. Two registered medical practitioners must certify that the required medical grounds have been met. The procedure must be carried out, except in emergency, in a National Health Service hospital or in a nursing home, private hospital or other approved place. The consent of the spouse is not a prerequisite of the medical termination. In Northern Ireland, the woman's health must be at risk. The difference between the British mainland and Northern Ireland occurred in 1967 when the Westminster parliament let the then Ulster authority decide not to adopt the new laws. Hundreds of women each year cross the Irish Sea to get abortions in England. Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6235557.stm Edited May 15, 2010 by Keepitsimple Quote Back to Basics
waldo Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 Here's a summary of Abortion Laws in all 27 countries of the European Union. Many of these countries are viewed by Canada's Left as being "progressive" countries. Instead of going back and forth with our polarized debate, lets take a look at those countries that have had substantial and open debate on Abortion Laws. If the future holds a debate on the subject, do you think that one of these countries could serve as an example that would be acceptable to Canada - or at least be a good place to start - or are we simply too polarized to consider joining the rest of the civilzed world on this subject? Link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6235557.stm you reprint the entire article... really? you appear keen to open "the debate". Why not start with your premise that there is a polarized debate in Canada? Please elaborate on the sides, respective positions, and degrees of support for each/all... that you would presume to cast as representative of a polarization - a polarization you use to infer that Canadians are not a part of the "civilized world" on this subject? That's quite a grandiose statement/assessment... one would think you could provide a foundation for such grandiosity. I haven't the time/inclination to weed on through your entire cut/paste; however, when looking at the linked article's summary map of countries positions, I do not a preponderance of purple colour associated with "Available on Request". Is this the reference point you would presume to use in comparison to your stated Canadian polarization on the subject... to which Canada isn't a civilized part of - "Available on Request"? you ask "if there is to be a debate on the subject"... I would ask you, what prompts you to give consideration to the question itself. There is a status quo position to the legality/regulations concerning abortion in Canada... who/what would bring forward a desire to debate on the status quo within Canada? Simple, where are you coming from? Quote
Keepitsimple Posted May 15, 2010 Author Report Posted May 15, 2010 (edited) you ask "if there is to be a debate on the subject"... I would ask you, what prompts you to give consideration to the question itself. There is a status quo position to the legality/regulations concerning abortion in Canada... who/what would bring forward a desire to debate on the status quo within Canada? Simple, where are you coming from? I'm not really "keen" to re-open the debate at all, but seeing as almost all Western countries seem to have settled the issue, it seems likely that Canada will have to address it at some point in the future. While that may still be 15 or 20 years from now, it's informative to see what other countries have decided on.....many of which are hailed as being very "progressive". It seems that whenever an opportunity arises to demonize the Right on abortion in Canada - as we've seen from the Maternal Health initiative - polarization sets in, re-igniting a debate. It stands to reason that one day - again, perhaps 20 years down the road - a serious debate will occur - something that has already happened in what I referred to (tongue-in-cheek) as the civilized world. So that's where I'm coming from. But Waldo, as is your usual bent, you seem to have no position at all. You really should scan each country's abortion legislation....I find it surprising that these countries have been able to sucessfully navigate such a sensitive topic and arrive at what in their eyes, must be a reasonable bridge between pro-life and pro-choice factions. Oh that we could be so reational in Canada. Waldo.....do you actually have any position on any of this or are you just blathering on again? Edited May 15, 2010 by Keepitsimple Quote Back to Basics
bloodyminded Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 I'm not really "keen" to re-open the debate at all, but seeing as almost all Western countries seem to have settled the issue, it seems likely that Canada will have to address it at some point in the future. While that may still be 15 or 20 years from now, it's informative to see what other countries have decided on.....many of which are hailed as being very "progressive". It seems that whenever an opportunity arises to demonize the Right on abortion in Canada - as we've seen from the Maternal Health initiative - polarization sets in, re-igniting a debate. I think the information you posted is interesting, Keepit. But I do disagree with your assessment of the polarization here. It's the pro-lifers--including some on this board--who like to use terms like "babykillers" and "genocide." Now that's demonization. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Guest TrueMetis Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 I'm not really "keen" to re-open the debate at all, but seeing as almost all Western countries seem to have settled the issue, it seems likely that Canada will have to address it at some point in the future. I was under the impression that it was already adressed. Quote
Smallc Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 I was under the impression that it was already adressed. I was under the same impression. This is some people trying to open the debate...for no reason. Quote
myata Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 (edited) No but that's the problem with these folks, isn't it? They aren't going to tell you where they are coming from - it's mild suggestions and insinuations: abortions aren't right for Africa; but no, we aren't going to reopen the issue here, no!; look somebody else controls it; no god forbid to think I'm suggesting us doing the same too. Unless of course we listen to what they are saying at one of their rallies, and that is in as plain words as can be, state enforced prohibiion of all abortion. "Africa" and "gestation period" and "coercion" only come into picture as a gentle, gradual way of getting us there. "Coercion" btw is the interesting one; so coercion to not have an abortion, i.e go through unwanted pregnancy with possibility of mental and physical harm, is somehow better than coercion to have it? I thought that all "coercion" is wrong and in equal way. But maybe not with some folks; take child abuse for example; things look - and are treated differently, depending on who's doing the act. So why not, let's have that discussion here and now, rather than 15-20 years later? Why not saying it out clear? We want to prohibit abortion, i.e to impose state control over what free individuals could do with their own bodies because: ... No, I don't think it's for "no reason". The reason is the same old one: power and control over another human being. Edited May 15, 2010 by myata Quote If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant
Argus Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 (edited) Hypocrisy here or what? Let's face a few facts. The government never dealt with abortion. It let the supreme court find the previous abortion law unconstitutional, and since that time it's been afraid to even talk about developing any replacement laws with regard to abortion. This is true of both sides. But as the polls have repeatedly shown there is absolutely no consensus on abortion other than a general agreement that it should be legal, at least, in some circumstances, at least in the early going. However, once you get past that many, if not the majority of Canadians feel there should be some law restricting abortions, probably along the lines of what we see in Europe. And the majority of Canadians seem to feel that abortions should not be paid for by the state except in medical emergencies. So why is it an issue now? Because Ignatieff has no policies or ideas, and so he's been trying to raise abortion as an issue in order to demonize the Tories and show how "unprogressive" they are, while of course, basking in his own progressiveness for all to see. It's quite likely the Tories would have put forth a generalized policy on maternal health care in the third world which didn't even mention abortion. But by demanding they endorse abortion Ignatieff forced them to take a stand - against it. Now in the rest of the world, abortion is either illegal, or restricted by law, as we've seen above. Canada stands alone, so far as I can see, by having no laws whatsoever. So how is it all those very progressive nations still have laws restricting abortion, and yet anyone who suggests similar laws in Canada is portrayed as a some kind of wild eyed crazy from the far religious right? Because abortion is one of things the Left in Canada has seized upon as a morality issue. Either you're for it or you fail some kind of big important test of moderation and progressiveness similar to gay marriage and immigration. If you're not in favour, you're evil, and the enemy, and you probably hate women. That is why Ignatieff keeps raising it. He figures this will reinforce his support among the Left, adn that he hasn't got much to lose from among those who oppose abortion anyway since they're unlikely to be voting Liberal. Of course, the 16 Liberal MPs who refused to support him on the issue apparently feel differently. Edited May 15, 2010 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 So why not, let's have that discussion here and now, rather than 15-20 years later? Why not saying it out clear? We want to prohibit abortion, i.e to impose state control over what free individuals could do with their own bodies because: ... No, I don't think it's for "no reason". The reason is the same old one: power and control over another human being. Like all those nasty right wing governments in Denmark, Sweden, France and Norway, right? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Smallc Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 (edited) Some of those countries though, are officially Christian. This one is secular. Edited May 16, 2010 by Smallc Quote
Argus Posted May 15, 2010 Report Posted May 15, 2010 Some of those countries though, are officially Christian. This one is non secular. Oh please. Regardless of official designations those European nations are, if anything, less religious and more secular than Canada is. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 Some of those countries though, are officially Christian. This one is non secular. Do you mean "secular" or "non secular"? How do you reconcile either with 1867 constitutional provisions for Roman Catholic and Protestant schools? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
myata Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 If you want a law restricting abortion in this country, it's fine to say no need to beat around the bush. You only need to explain one thing: Why? What problem is it going to address and who is in the need of it? Unless it's not about a problem, but about some individuals seeking ways to control private choices i.e. private lives of other individuals? Funny how we want to control women in what they would do with their own bodies, then next day go half world away to liberate them from wearing "burka". But of course, there can be no logic in desire to control and dominate another, or it usually comes down to trivial "because I'm right and I can". Quote If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 If you want a law restricting abortion in this country, it's fine to say no need to beat around the bush. You only need to explain one thing: Why? What problem is it going to address and who is in the need of it? Well, for starters, it would address the refusal of doctors in Quebec to perform third term abortions except to save the life of the mother. Such abortions are sent to New York or Kansas (of all places!). Canada's binary definition of a person affords no protection for any fetus, even in the case of assaults or murder of a pregnant mother. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bloodyminded Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 Canada's binary definition of a person affords no protection for any fetus, even in the case of assaults or murder of a pregnant mother. If this is true, it's right, because it's the only rational approach. Otherwise, whether or not a person is convicted of murdering the unborn would depend entirely on the victim's declaration (honest or otherwise) as to her her decision about reproduction: murder if she were planning to keep it, not murder if she wasn't. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 If this is true, it's right, because it's the only rational approach. So is Canada the only rational nation when it comes to abortion? This is very unlikely. Otherwise, whether or not a person is convicted of murdering the unborn would depend entirely on the victim's declaration (honest or otherwise) as to her her decision about reproduction: murder if she were planning to keep it, not murder if she wasn't. Correct....and it sets up additional absurdities concerning fetal health, OBG/YN malpractice, multiple live birth permutations, etc. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 you ask "if there is to be a debate on the subject"... I would ask you, what prompts you to give consideration to the question itself. There is a status quo position to the legality/regulations concerning abortion in Canada... who/what would bring forward a desire to debate on the status quo within Canada? Simple, where are you coming from?I'm not really "keen" to re-open the debate at all, but seeing as almost all Western countries seem to have settled the issue, it seems likely that Canada will have to address it at some point in the future. While that may still be 15 or 20 years from now, it's informative to see what other countries have decided on.....many of which are hailed as being very "progressive". you are personally, quite literally, chomping at the bit to have "the debate" reopened. Why do you project a timeline around that presumed re-opening... why the 15 or 20 year futures reference? What transpires in 15-20 years from today to necessitate a delay in reopening your longed for debate? If you've determined such a polarization exists, what's stopping that debate from occurring - today? What are the Harper Conservatives waiting for? So that's where I'm coming from. ....I find it surprising that these countries have been able to successfully navigate such a sensitive topic and arrive at what in their eyes, must be a reasonable bridge between pro-life and pro-choice factions. Oh that we could be so rational in Canada. you presume the status-quo in Canada has problems... presumed problems you can't substantiate - or can you? You've sought to compare to Europe, while offering a back-handed jab with your repeated "progressive" labeling. You've obviously taken some effort to review the European condition... perhaps you could actually step up and take a real position over your sought after comparison with Europe. Is there a single country in Europe you feel is representative of the whole... or is there a broad-brush European condition you would use as a benchmark reference point to compare with Canada's status-quo position? How is one/either different from Canada's status-quo position... more precisely, most pointedly, outside of the formal 'letter of the law' instrument, just how is abortion access in Canada - today, as practiced within Canada - different from the European condition you would foster? Quote
Remiel Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 While I would prefer the status quo, if we were looking to follow the lead of one of those countries, I would choose Sweden. It has no hard, fast end of the line, and because it does not need to make exceptions it does not fall afoul of inconstinency. Most of those laws are like, " We sort of think abortion needs to be limited because babies lives have some sort of consideration, but they are definitely worth less if a, b, or c, " where those tend to be if the child is the product of rape or " malformed " whatever that means. I am firmly pro-choice, but I can say that when I see those sort of distictions made by people who purport to be against abortion, I am repulsed by their hypocrisy. Quote
myata Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 Well, for starters, it would address the refusal of doctors in Quebec to perform third term abortions except to save the life of the mother. Such abortions are sent to New York or Kansas (of all places!). ??? If somebody can't serve me somewhere for some reason, we would need a law to prohibit it for everybody? What a bizzare logic, maybe in the land of the free things work that way. Canada's binary definition of a person affords no protection for any fetus, That's right, because there's no rational reason to think that it ("fetus") can be a person. It exhibits no characteristics of one, including the fact that it cannot exist on its own. Quote If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 ??? If somebody can't serve me somewhere for some reason, we would need a law to prohibit it for everybody? What a bizzare logic, maybe in the land of the free things work that way. The abortion equation includes more than mother and fetus, unless one is very skilled with hand tools. That's right, because there's no rational reason to think that it ("fetus") can be a person. It exhibits no characteristics of one, including the fact that it cannot exist on its own. Of course it can....that's what the "viability" protocol is all about. Surely if you wish to rely on modern medical procedures and pharmaceuticals for safe and legal abortions, you must also face the same technology that facilitates fetal survival. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
kimmy Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 Here's a summary of Abortion Laws in all 27 countries of the European Union. Many of these countries are viewed by Canada's Left as being "progressive" countries. Instead of going back and forth with our polarized debate, lets take a look at those countries that have had substantial and open debate on Abortion Laws. If the future holds a debate on the subject, do you think that one of these countries could serve as an example that would be acceptable to Canada - or at least be a good place to start - or are we simply too polarized to consider joining the rest of the civilzed world on this subject? Why do we need to "join the rest of the civilized world"? Are we so unsure of ourselves that we must emulate others rather than make our own choices? Why does it matter that many of these countries are considered "progressive"? Are you under the impression that the left will agree to anything if you say "but that's how they do it in Sweden"? I'm not necessarily opposed to some sort of restrictions along these lines... but you seem to be leading with some really weak material here. I'm not really "keen" to re-open the debate at all, but seeing as almost all Western countries seem to have settled the issue, it seems likely that Canada will have to address it at some point in the future. (...) You really should scan each country's abortion legislation....I find it surprising that these countries have been able to sucessfully navigate such a sensitive topic and arrive at what in their eyes, must be a reasonable bridge between pro-life and pro-choice factions. Oh that we could be so reational in Canada. And ... how sure are you that this issue has been "settled" in the countries you listed? Do you think imposing a similar restriction (say, 12 week limit) here in Canada would "settle" the issue? I doubt it. I doubt it would be any more settled than it is right now. If I believed a fetus was a person, how could I accept rules like the ones you've listed here? How could any committed pro-lifer accept a compromise like that? How is 12 weeks be any better than 25 weeks? How could a committed pro-lifer agree to exceptions like "except in cases of rape or incest..."? Do you think that if Canada had regulations like the ones you've listed here, do you think pro-lifers would be satisfied that justice has been achieved? Fat chance. They'd look at it as the first step and keep lobbying to make it tougher. There's no compromise that can "settle" this issue. Ever. -k Quote (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Friendly forum facilitator! ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)
bloodyminded Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 (edited) So is Canada the only rational nation when it comes to abortion? This is very unlikely. I certainly never said so; nor hinted at it; nor vaguely suggested it in any way. I don't know how many other countries take the rational, sane approach, that a person cannot be convicted of murder based on the stated whims of his or her victim. Edited May 16, 2010 by bloodyminded Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Keepitsimple Posted May 16, 2010 Author Report Posted May 16, 2010 And ... how sure are you that this issue has been "settled" in the countries you listed? Do you think imposing a similar restriction (say, 12 week limit) here in Canada would "settle" the issue? I doubt it. I doubt it would be any more settled than it is right now. If I believed a fetus was a person, how could I accept rules like the ones you've listed here? How could any committed pro-lifer accept a compromise like that? How is 12 weeks be any better than 25 weeks? How could a committed pro-lifer agree to exceptions like "except in cases of rape or incest..."? Do you think that if Canada had regulations like the ones you've listed here, do you think pro-lifers would be satisfied that justice has been achieved? Fat chance. They'd look at it as the first step and keep lobbying to make it tougher. There's no compromise that can "settle" this issue. Ever. -k Just goes to show how the choice of words, if not done carefully, can inflame people - no matter where they stand on the issue. And I agree - if Canada ever re-opened the debate, the issue would not be completely settled. I hope that Canada can keep the status quo - which puts its trust in the morality of physicians. Sometime in the future, that morality will likely be challenged by physicians who might have diferring views - and what is to stop them from performing what many consider late-term abortions? It would only take a couple of sensationalized cases to create an impetus to put our "unwritten laws" into legislation. There was a doctor in Spain who gained notoriety for performing late-term abortions for 4000 euros for dubious reasons. Perhaps we'll be just fine with our hands-off approach - I hope so.....but I think we should be prepared with knowledge of what the rest of the world has gone through. I'm sorry but I just got tired of hearing that any restrictions on abortion was not "progessive" if not neanderthal. We seem to use European countries as examples of being progressive for things like drug policies, legalizing prostitution, labour issues like working hours and vacation - and lately coalition governments......so I think the use of abortion regulations across all European countries should also be a valid example for discussion. Canada is just fine - as usual - but in the long term, ignorance of the rest of the world is not a good thing. Quote Back to Basics
Guest American Woman Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 (edited) Here's a summary of Abortion Laws in all 27 countries of the European Union. Many of these countries are viewed by Canada's Left as being "progressive" countries. Instead of going back and forth with our polarized debate, lets take a look at those countries that have had substantial and open debate on Abortion Laws. What does what the EU is doing have to do with the price of tea in China? If the future holds a debate on the subject, do you think that one of these countries could serve as an example that would be acceptable to Canada - or at least be a good place to start - or are we simply too polarized to consider joining the rest of the civilzed world on this subject? Why do you see being a "joiner" as a good thing? Why not strive to be a leader? In other words, why not feel as if those "progressive" nations could look to Canada as an example? Why do you presume what they are doing is better than what Canada is doing? Do you see sheer numbers as 'proof?' If 'everybody's doing it,' that means it's the right thing to do? Edited May 16, 2010 by American Woman Quote
myata Posted May 16, 2010 Report Posted May 16, 2010 (edited) If I believed a fetus was a person, how could I accept rules like the ones you've listed here? How could any committed pro-lifer accept a compromise like that? How is 12 weeks be any better than 25 weeks? How could a committed pro-lifer agree to exceptions like "except in cases of rape or incest..."? That's another good one. So, is it OK to kill "a person" if it came to be certain way? You'll hear that idea from quite different people. But somehow I think that it's only about "gestation period" and "coersion" as a first step to getting us to full and unconditional prohibition. Becase in the big picture of how these folks think, gentle and partial restrictions and limitations don't really solve anything, and only serve as the first stepping stone on the path where?.... to a society where the state and/or a powerful group could control what individuals do with their own bodies; what they wear; who they marry; what they read; and so on. They had that power deep in the night of civilized times and they want us all to go back there. Edited May 16, 2010 by myata Quote If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant
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.