kairos Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 Christian fundamentalist lunatics in the conservative party equate Abortion with Murder. Its sad the Cs would have to go to such a low denominator for political gain. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tory-mps-ask-rcmp-to-investigate-post-abortion-killings/article8095284/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 Actually, this is a very legitimate issue. If a baby survives an abortion, what becomes of them? It has little to do with Christian fundamentalists or so-called lunatics. You're just seeking to silence people with those characterizations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 PM Harper better get that genie back in the bottle, real quick. But still, what to do with this problem? If true, it surely constitutes homicide by the definition of our laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 Good idea religious nutbar backbenchers.... You'll be your party's demise and most Canadians will thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kairos Posted February 1, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 Lets see what do you do with a half botched abortion? Let it lead a short life in misery? Get real here, these fundamentalists are nuts. It would be nice if they just stayed south of the border. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 Lets see what do you do with a half botched abortion? Let it lead a short life in misery? Get real here, these fundamentalists are nuts. It would be nice if they just stayed south of the border. Think about it though kairos. Even if you believe the definition of human means not yet born, that's like saying once it passes out the mothers uterus, it's a human with human rights. But if not, anything goes? I mean, there's no major physical changes happening to the fetus just before and just after birth. Its the same thing, aside from that it came out. But now this thread is saying even after that happens, its acceptable to kill the baby because the parents wanted to abort it. There's an assumption it would die anyway, how do you know for sure? How long are they allowed to wait before they do it. What if they wait until an hour later, then decide to kill it? Or a day. Or a week. Where do we draw the line Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 Lets see what do you do with a half botched abortion? Let it lead a short life in misery? Get real here, these fundamentalists are nuts. It would be nice if they just stayed south of the border. Funny, but some wish they would just stay north of the border...in the Land of the Magic Vagina. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 Actually, this is a very legitimate issue. So legitimate that Stephen Harper, yet again, announced that abortion is legal in Canada and that his government would not be changing that.... ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuckistani Posted February 1, 2013 Report Share Posted February 1, 2013 It's a non issue, with just a few nutbars trying to get attention. I actually favor restrictions on abortions the way all other developed countries have, but with nuts like these loos, I'd rather go with the status quo. The CMA has stepped up and given clear guidelines to docs about what's acceptable and what's not. In effect there is a law in place - no doc is going to risk being denied his licence to perform an abortion outside those guidelines. Also, what does healthcare say about abortions - surely they will only fund ones deemed medically necessary in the first place? The CMA's position on induced abortion is as follows: Induced abortion is the active termination of a pregnancy before fetal viability. The decision to perform an induced abortion is a medical one, made confidentially between the patient and her physician within the confines of existing Canadian law. The decision is made after conscientious examination of all other options. Induced abortion requires medical and surgical expertise and is a medical act. It should be performed only in a facility that meets approved medical standards, not necessarily a hospital. http://policybase.cma.ca/dbtw-wpd/PolicyPDF/PD88-06.pdf Canada sets fetal viability at 21 weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunrutz Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 So the middle ground on this issue between the nuts on the right who want to ban it period, and the nuts on the left who don"t believe a child exists until it"s out of the womb is the idea that a child doesn't exist until it's out of the womb unless it's in the process of being aborted, but it's still a fetus. Thats compromise for the hardcore. I am pro choice, but it bothers even pro choice people that there are no laws governing the practice. Combine that with the hardcore on the left who truly believe that even at 8 months it's nobodies business but the mothers what happens to that perfectly viable human being and it's difficult to determine who the bigger nuts are. When you hear feminists discuss children in terms of them being parasites you will know you have found the true nuts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 I'm with Cartman's Mom! [unplanned Parenthood Clinic] Mrs. Cartman: I want to have…an abortion. Receptionist: Well, we can do that. This must be a very difficult time for you Mrs.... Mrs. Cartman: Cartman, yes, it's such a hard decision, but I just don't feel that I can raise a child in this screwy world. Receptionist: Yes, Ms. Cartman, if you don't feel fit to raise a child, an abortion probably is the answer. Do you know the actual time of conception? Mrs. Cartman: About eight years ago. Receptionist: I see, so the fetus is.... Mrs. Cartman: Eight years old. Receptionist: Ms. Cartman, uh, eight years old is a little late to be considering abortion. Mrs. Cartman: Really? Receptionist: Yes, this is what we would refer to as the fortieth trimester. Mrs. Cartman: But I just don't think I'm a fit mother. Receptionist: But, but we prefer to abort babies a little earlier on. In fact, there's a law against abortions after the second trimester. Mrs. Cartman: Well, I think you need to keep your laws off of my body! Receptionist: Hmm, I'm afraid I can't help you Ms. Cartman. If you want to change the law, you'll have to speak with your congressman. Mrs. Cartman: Well, that's exactly what I intend to do! Good day! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 Let me bring something to your attention, perhaps the PM says he doesn't want it open because right now he has SIX women Premiers. I also, think Harper is being smart about this by saying what he saying but on the hand , he's letting his MP's do the "dirty" work on this. I believe he's really against it. So if abortion is murder, is taking something like the morning after pill murder or the birth control pill too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 Let me bring something to your attention, perhaps the PM says he doesn't want it open because right now he has SIX women Premiers. Or maybe he really doesn't want it opened. Get a bit of perspective once in a while. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 He may not have any choice. Seems to be a little dissention in the ranks lately. But anyway, Mr. Harper won't be PM forever. If he's all there is holding back the floodgates, what next? Who's next in line Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 He's not all that's holding back the flood gates, sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortlived Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 (edited) Christian fundamentalist lunatics in the conservative party equate Abortion with Murder. Its sad the Cs would have to go to such a low denominator for political gain. http://www.theglobea...article8095284/ Well it is a problematic issue. It is more or less murder the only difference bewteen a new born and an unborn is how developed. Its not like its not alive and kicking or having nueral development while in the womb. I think that 1st trimestre may be more cellular,.. but after about 8 weeks you enter the gray area.. and definately by 8 months it is pretty much murder. If kicking a woman in the womb and killing her wanted baby doesn't carry a murder charge it is just offensive. Edited February 2, 2013 by shortlived Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 the nuts on the left who don"t believe a child exists until it"s out of the womb You have no idea what people on the left believe, nor are their beliefs homogeneous, so give your head a shake. It doesn't matter whether you consider a fetus a child from the time it's an embryo or even at the moment of conception when it becomes a zygote. No person has the right to use another person's body against their will. If the mother doesn't want to be hooked into another human being, keeping it alive for 9 months, she has every right to be disconnected from that person, whether it's in her uterus or in a hospital bed. It's completely unethical to require someone to use their body to keep another person alive when it is against their wishes. This is why we don't harvest organs from people, ie, you can't be forced to give up a kidney or even give blood and bone marrow. Refusing to keep someone alive with your body is not the same thing as murdering someone. If you can't understand the conceptual difference between those two things then the entire abortion debate is lost on you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortlived Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 (edited) You have no idea what people on the left believe, nor are their beliefs homogeneous, so give your head a shake. It doesn't matter whether you consider a fetus a child from the time it's an embryo or even at the moment of conception when it becomes a zygote. No person has the right to use another person's body against their will. If the mother doesn't want to be hooked into another human being, keeping it alive for 9 months, she has every right to be disconnected from that person, whether it's in her uterus or in a hospital bed. It's completely unethical to require someone to use their body to keep another person alive when it is against their wishes. This is why we don't harvest organs from people, ie, you can't be forced to give up a kidney or even give blood and bone marrow. Refusing to keep someone alive with your body is not the same thing as murdering someone. If you can't understand the conceptual difference between those two things then the entire abortion debate is lost on you. So you are saying it should be legal for a siamese twin to murder their other half, because their life is more valuable than the one they want to kill. My gosh i'm stuck in the world with people doing things.. I geuss it makes it ok for me to kill them right because I want to be disconnected from them, they are breathing my air afterall. Edited February 2, 2013 by shortlived Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 Or maybe he really doesn't want it opened. Get a bit of perspective once in a while. I believe he doesn't, but I also believe he's going to suffer the fate of Preston Manning, as the social conservatives in his ranks get restless having a majority and being neutered by Harper's pragmatic approach. I've been saying it for awhile now and it bears repeating. This party will not be brought down by the opposition. It's going to be brought down from the inside. When the social conservatives realize that they only need a handful of them to band together to hold the balance of power, the CPC and more importantly the cabinet will be staring down the barrel of a .45 and Harper will need to make some tough decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 So you are saying it should be legal for a siamese twin to murder their other half, because their life is more valuable than the one they want to kill. My gosh i'm stuck in the world with people doing things.. I geuss it makes it ok for me to kill them right because I want to be disconnected from them, they are breathing my air afterall. Where did this crazy reasoning come from? No where is cyber's post did he say anything like that. I know that might be the argument you want to have but it is not the argument we are having. Women have every right to decide what happens to their body deal with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 So you are saying it should be legal for a siamese twin to murder their other half, because their life is more valuable than the one they want to kill. My gosh i'm stuck in the world with people doing things.. I geuss it makes it ok for me to kill them right because I want to be disconnected from them, they are breathing my air afterall. I'll let you figure out why your post doesn't even warrant this as a response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 (edited) kairos let me get this straight...You're saying that people with strict Christian beliefs are lunatics? For the record, I'm 100% pro-abortion. That's nobody's business but the woman's. Saying people who disagree with this on religious grounds are lunatics, however, is the sort of brainless rhetoric that dumbs every political debate. A religious person's beliefs are as often as not irrational, illogical and impossible to prove. It's faith. If you're going to call it lunacy then you're calling the Muslim facing Mecca crazy for doing it, or a Hindu is bonkers for believing cows are sacred. Have some respect for religious beliefs. You don't have to believe in it yourself, but people with faith are generally brought up that way and know no other way to live. We can be thankful that our legislative system has evolved towards the practical and tangible and away from religious intangibles, and that our legal systems are based purely on logic and reason instead of belief. Edited February 2, 2013 by Moonbox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 (edited) cybercome let me get this straight...You're saying that people with strict Christian beliefs are lunatics?i think you're confusing me with the op because not once in this thread did I call "people with strict Christian beliefs" lunatics. Edited February 2, 2013 by cybercoma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortlived Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 (edited) Where did this crazy reasoning come from? No where is cyber's post did he say anything like that. I know that might be the argument you want to have but it is not the argument we are having. Women have every right to decide what happens to their body deal with it. see: no person has the right to use another person's body against their will. If the mother doesn't want to be hooked into another human being... ... she has every right to be disconnected from that person, Edited February 2, 2013 by shortlived Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 2, 2013 Report Share Posted February 2, 2013 Your stupid analogy falls apart when you realize that the position you hold is that it should be illegal for doctors to separate twins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.