olpfan1 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Is Santorum the guy that said to raped and pregnant women "make the best out of a horrible situation" and keep the baby? whos gonna vote for this guy? Quote
Smallc Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Does that matter? Is it ok if it's infrequent? Yes, it does matter, actually. Quote
Smallc Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) The only place that doctors will perform abortion that late is China That didn't prove what you were saying, actually. That said, despite conflicts in the information, there are websites that agree with what you are saying, so it seems to be true. Edited February 22, 2012 by Smallc Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Agreed....a bitch and her puppies get more legal protections than an unborn baby in Canada. We treat our pets better than ourselves its true look at how we put down our beloved animals when they are dying but humans have to suffer Quote
Shady Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Yes, it does matter, actually. Why? Quote
Smallc Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Why? Because it really isn't broken. There are very few circumstances under which a pregnancy will have gotten that far if it's going to be terminated. Quote
guyser Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Name them Ive only read one country allows it up to date of birth (though no doctor would perform them THAT late) and that is Canada Bahrain Iceland Finland (de facto) Sweden (- 2 weeks) Most of E Europe allows, Albania,BelarusHungary Latvia, Luthuania and so on. Seems I may have jumped the gun Over thirty allow it, but most of those have restrictions of some sort, some as innocuous as meet 2 doctors. Quote
guyser Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Agreed....a bitch and her puppies get more legal protections than an unborn baby in Canada. Apples to oranges. One is alive and kicking outside, the other is not and therefore ios not, in our laws, a person with rights. (but then again, you know that ) Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) That didn't prove what you were saying, actually. That said, despite conflicts in the information, there are websites that agree with what you are saying, so it seems to be true. They have that one child policy I know they also do the selective abortions due to having a son is more "honourable" than a daughter (so i read) if they force abortions on women who have a child i can see how theres no laws against having abortions during any trimester Edited February 22, 2012 by olpfan1 Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Because it really isn't broken. There are very few circumstances under which a pregnancy will have gotten that far if it's going to be terminated. Well hell, why didn't you say so! Those few unborn babies don't mind at all. Screw them! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Shady Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Because it really isn't broken. Is absolutely is broken if it's allowed to happen, even infrequently. There are very few circumstances under which a pregnancy will have gotten that far if it's going to be terminated. Frequency has nothing to do with whether or not something is wrong. That's a very specious argument. Quote
Shady Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Well hell, why didn't you say so! Those few unborn babies don't mind at all. Screw them! Exactly. Babies that survive abortions and are born alive is something that happens infrequently too. I guess it's best we turn a blind eye and pretend that it doesn't happen. Quote
Smallc Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) Frequency has nothing to do with whether or not something is wrong. That's a very specious argument. There are cases where it could be okay, and I'm not in favour of restrictions. There's no reason for government to get involved. This is something between a woman and her doctor. Edited February 22, 2012 by Smallc Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Apples to oranges. One is alive and kicking outside, the other is not and therefore ios not, in our laws, a person with rights. Sorry....I meant a bitch and her puppy fetuses. Woof-woof! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
olpfan1 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) lets make a deal, pro lifers must accept assisted suicide and make it law and we'll agree to allow abortions only up until the 24th week unless shes in danger/ raped sounds like a good compromise to me Edited February 22, 2012 by olpfan1 Quote
guyser Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Sorry....I meant a bitch and her puppy fetuses. Woof-woof! Well , now the dog carrying puppy fetus' would have less rights than a woman carrying a fetus. Animal cruelty vs murder X's 2 . You...back to the drawing board. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Well , now the dog carrying puppy fetus' would have less rights than a woman carrying a fetus. Animal cruelty vs murder X's 2 . But killing a human fetus in Canada is not murder (not a person). You...back to the drawing board. Well, it was still fun to type "bitch and her puppies". Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 lets make a deal, pro lifers must accept assisted suicide and make it law and we'll agree to allow abortions only up until the 24th week unless shes in danger/ raped No deal unless the sexual assault is proven at trial! In other words, no killing "rapist babies" unless we have a real gosh darn rapist. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Guest American Woman Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 They have that one child policy I know they also do the selective abortions due to having a son is more "honourable" than a daughter (so i read) Actually, if the first child is a girl, they can have another. The desire to have a son produced a nation of males with not enough females - I guess the value of a female became pretty obvious once there was a lack of females. Quote
Guest American Woman Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 An unborn baby can be aborted right up until the estimated delivery date. Source please. If you provided it already and I missed it, I apologize. But I'd really like a source for this claim. Quote
Shady Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 There are cases where it could be okay, and I'm not in favour of restrictions. Well, you're definitely out of the mainstream, pretty extreme actually. Other than if the mother's life is in danger, an abortion should never take place any where close to a deliver date. There's no reason for government to get involved. This is something between a woman and her doctor. Of course there's a reason for the government to get involved. It's called infanticide. You don't get a pass just because you're a woman or a doctor. Once agin, very specious argument. There's very little logic and reason to your defense of a barbaric practice. Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Actually, if the first child is a girl, they can have another. The desire to have a son produced a nation of males with not enough females - I guess the value of a female became pretty obvious once there was a lack of females. So if they have a boy and pregnant with another boy they are forced to have an abortion? but if its a girl its okay.., mighty nasty problem they made for themselved Quote
olpfan1 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Source please. If you provided it already and I missed it, I apologize. But I'd really like a source for this claim. Theres no restrictions on abortion in Canada but good luck finding a doc who'll perform an abortion past 5 or 6 months Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 Source please. If you provided it already and I missed it, I apologize. But I'd really like a source for this claim. If I may, the source is derived from the definition of a person in Canadian statute specifically designed to avoid any conflict with abortion. Canada is considered to be amongst the least restrictive nations in the world in this regard. As discussed in many other threads, Quebec doctors refuse third tri abortions unless the life of the mother is at risk. Patients seeking such abortions are sent to....wait for it...Kansas! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
guyser Posted February 22, 2012 Report Posted February 22, 2012 But killing a human fetus in Canada is not murder (not a person). Well, it was still fun to type "bitch and her puppies". Guess I am wrong, I thought the Unborn Victims of Crime Act was passed. I shall heas to the drawing board now Quote
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.