Pro Life? Then Don't Run Under Liberal Banner

[segnosaur]

Which part of my vile comment? I've pretty well proven that Alberta is the province that's most into brother/sister luuuvvvvv. And Alabama is too. Hillbilly mean anything to ya all?

You seem to have ignored the fact that 1) your "source" for that statistic is questionable, and 2) it lacks any sort of statistics to back it up.

So, Alberta has the most incest... does it involve 0.0000001% of the population or 99%? How does it compare with the national average? More importantly, what is the majority opinion in the province... do they look down on incest as negatively as everyone else?

Simply taring the province as "hillbilly" is idiotic.

Its like me saying "black people are all criminals" because they happen to make up the highest percentage of the prison population, because it ignores context, and also ignores the fact that the vast majority of black people are actually decent hardworking people.

[overthere]

If you don't accept that Alberta is extreme right politically then perhaps you can accept that Alberta is 'more' right politically than other provinces. And again, if you don't accept that then show evidence to say otherwise.

No, I do not accept that Alberta is extreme right, by any measure.

Both major cities are led by progressive mayors, one of them a brown Muslim. The young mayor of Edmonton is hardly right wing. The last longterm mayor of Edmonton was Jewish and likely the best mayor in generations. A previous mayor(Jan Reimer) was somewhere to the left of Mao. The last premier was a centrist woman. All the final three candidates for the PCs in the last leadership campaign were centrist Red Tories. The leader of the provincial Liberals is another brown man, likely Hindu but I'm not sure and nobody cares.

Alberta is a centrist province politically. They spend gobs of money on right wing programs like public health, public education and public infrastructure programs.

Your turn.

[WestCoastRunner]

Which part of my vile comment? I've pretty well proven that Alberta is the province that's most into brother/sister luuuvvvvv. And Alabama is too. Hillbilly mean anything to ya all?

Are you posting here just to get a rise out of people?

[WestCoastRunner]

The fact is a sizable majority of Canadians do not agree with Trudeau's Abortion on Demand. Of that majority, many are outright pro-choice who understand that there are situations that require a little deeper thought than "drive me to the clinic".

Do you have anything to back this up? What is a 'sizable majority'? Do they vote liberal? If not, they can vote for another party. How many are outright pro-choice?

[Keepitsimple]

Do you have anything to back this up? What is a 'sizable majority'? Do they vote liberal? If not, they can vote for another party. How many are outright pro-choice?

Here's a fairly detailed survey that puts the sizable majority at 79%...........can't say how they voted though.....

An Environics survey that looks at Canadians’ attitudes toward abortion was conducted by telephone on behalf of LifeCanada between September 13 to 25, 2011. The survey, which included a sample of 2,000, has a margin of error of 2.2 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. The survey found that 72% of Canadians feel that there should be some form of legal protection for human life before birth, with 28% in favour of a law protecting human life from conception on (compared to 20% who think human life should be legally protected only from birth on). An overwhelming majority (92%) of Canadians think that sex-selection abortion should be illegal. Here are some of the major findings from the 2011 Environics Research Group survey on Canadian’s attitudes to abortion (from the reports Executive Summary, which can be found at www.lifecanada.org):

Link: http://abortionincanada.ca/facts/what-do-canadians-think-about-legal-abortion/ Edited May 12, 2014 by Keepitsimple

[segnosaur]

Do you have anything to back this up? What is a 'sizable majority'? Do they vote liberal? If not, they can vote for another party. How many are outright pro-choice?

Its releatively easy to find statistics on this, although I suspect how people answer the survey depends on how the question is asked.

From: http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07/04/new-poll-shows-most-canadians-support-abortion-with-some-restrictions/

People supporting SOME restriction on abortion (e.g. such as in 3rd term): 60%

Strangely, the same poll states that 49% of Canadians think a woman should be able to get an abortion "whenever she wants one".

So, not sure how the 11% say they want "full" access to abortion, but with restrictions.

[WestCoastRunner]

Its releatively easy to find statistics on this, although I suspect how people answer the survey depends on how the question is asked.

From: http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07/04/new-poll-shows-most-canadians-support-abortion-with-some-restrictions/

People supporting SOME restriction on abortion (e.g. such as in 3rd term): 60%

Strangely, the same poll states that 49% of Canadians think a woman should be able to get an abortion "whenever she wants one".

So, not sure how the 11% say they want "full" access to abortion, but with restrictions.

That is the problem with these stats. They can be used to support anyone's argument.

[overthere]

StatsCan info on sexual assaults in Canada, which include incest:

According to police-reported data, in 2007, there was considerable variation in the overall rates of sexual

offences reported to the police across Canada (Chart 2). Among the provinces, Saskatchewan (138 per

100,000 population) and Manitoba (113) had the highest rates, while Ontario (61) and Prince Edward

Island (58) had the lowest. Total sexual offence rates for Quebec (69) and Alberta (70) were also below

the national average of 73 sexual offences per 100,000 population. Overall, rates of sexual offences were

highest in Nunavut (746), followed by Northwest Territories (518) and Yukon (203).

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85f0033m/85f0033m2008019-eng.pdf

[WestCoastRunner]

28% in favour of a law protecting human life from conception on (compared to 20% who think human life should be legally protected only from birth on).

-----

Those percentages don't sound like a large majority to me.

[WestCoastRunner]

StatsCan info on sexual assaults in Canada, which include incest:

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85f0033m/85f0033m2008019-eng.pdf

And these stats are not just incest. The comments quoted earlier with regards to Alberta are just disgusting.

[segnosaur]

That is the problem with these stats. They can be used to support anyone's argument.

In this case, I do think its safe to say a significant majority of Canadians support with some restriction on abortion (as opposed to "any time/anywhere/for any reason"), since that question was fairly unambiguous.

Now, whether that support actually translates to actual votes is unknown. Its possible that many of Canadians support adding restrictions but not enough to influence how they vote. Its also possible that some might favor restrictions on abortions, but recognize that there are already mechanisms in place to prevent "any time/anywhere/any reason" from occurring.

[WestCoastRunner]

Its also possible that some might favor restrictions on abortions, but recognize that there are already mechanisms in place to prevent "any time/anywhere/any reason" from occurring.

Right, JT is simply supporting the status quo and ensuring that future candidates will not vote to remove a woman's choice and safe accessibility.

[segnosaur]

28% in favour of a law protecting human life from conception on (compared to 20% who think human life should be legally protected only from birth on).

-----

Those percentages don't sound like a large majority to me.

That would also imply that 52% of people (i.e. the remainder who aren't "conception on" or "birth on") are pro-choice, but with restrictions (e.g. believe abortion should be available, but not in 3rd term. Yes, I know in a practical sense those are typically only done in rare circumstances, but there are no LAWS regarding that.) And Trudeau's Pro-choice platform doesn't really address that 52%.

So, 20% (those opposing all abortions) + 52% (those opposing SOME abortions) = 72%.... a pretty substantial majority.

[WestCoastRunner]

That would also imply that 52% of people (i.e. the remainder who aren't "conception on" or "birth on") are pro-choice, but with restrictions (e.g. believe abortion should be available, but not in 3rd term. Yes, I know in a practical sense those are typically only done in rare circumstances, but there are no LAWS regarding that.) And Trudeau's Pro-choice platform doesn't really address that 52%.

So, 20% (those opposing all abortions) + 52% (those opposing SOME abortions) = 72%.... a pretty substantial majority.

52% opposing some abortions (after 18 months) is not an issue as these cases need to be approved (and are miniscule). The majority of abortions occur before 18 weeks.

[segnosaur]

Right, JT is simply supporting the status quo and ensuring that future candidates will not vote to remove a woman's choice and safe accessibility.

But that's the thing... he's not "just" supporting the status quo.

Canadians may be completely comfortable with the way the system works now, but in theory a doctor could set up a practice allowing "abortion on demand right up to the 9th month" (assuming it was supported by the medical establishment) or allowing "abort children of the wrong sex". (both practices a large number of Canadians would likely oppose).

The problem is, abortion is such a hot-button topic that saying "Don't oppose abortion" might come out as suggesting you actually have no problem with either of those cases.

Edited to add:

I want to make it clear... I have no problem with the "status quo" or abortion law as it sits in Canada. I have no problem with Trudeau requiring members of his party to adopt certain principles (although given the fact that the status quo was unlikely to change, the move seems useless in the best case, dictatorial in the worst case. My main criticism was the idea was the contradiction of claiming the Liberals were "open" when they are not.

Edited May 12, 2014 by segnosaur

[Argus]

A woman's decision for abortion would absolutely never be questioned. Period! It is our social responsibility to educate both women and men on effective birth control methods that prevent unwanted pregnancies. As well as being socially responsible in other areas that don't only prevent abortions. We are NOT the united states.

And we are not going to allow Harper and his ghouls to turn us into that sort of sick sideshow.

No, we're not the United States, which I take it, for you, is sort of like Satan and Hitler rolled into one. But I've already pointed out that laws restricting abortions exist in every western nation, including the ones which are far more socialist/left wing than Canada.

Never questioned? Even if she wants an abortion at 8 1/2 months?

[Argus]

Be that as it may: what restrictions would you think could be imposed to prevent such a thing?

A number of jurisdictions struggle with that question. In some, they won't provide gender information. I suppose one way would be to ask the woman why she wants an abortion, even though that goes against the grain for some people, who think there shouldn't be any questions whatsoever.

[Argus]

I'm not asking JT's Liberals, am I?

No, you're not, but you're falling into the same trap of discussing abortion. This thread isn't about abortion. It's about JT's decision that the matter is entirely settled, and that only evil people would even want to discuss whether there ought to be some regulation of it. It's about a would-be prime minister who has so little respect for individual freedoms and conscience that he's blithely decided to simply ban anyone whose conscience differs from his own -- without, as I've said already, even bothering to consult his caucus, or even inform them about his decision.

Edited May 13, 2014 by Argus

[WestCoastRunner]

Never questioned? Even if she wants an abortion at 8 1/2 months?

It would be very, very difficult (probably impossible) for a woman to get an abortion at 8 1/2 months.

[segnosaur]

52% opposing some abortions (after 18 months) is not an issue as these cases need to be approved (and are miniscule). The majority of abortions occur before 18 weeks.

I never claimed that those cases (late term abortions) are common... Only that a majority of Canadians support a law guaranteeing that they would continue to be rare, and a blanket "don't oppose abortion" policy may exclude the opinions of a majority of voters.

[Argus]

52% opposing some abortions (after 18 months) is not an issue as these cases need to be approved (and are miniscule). The majority of abortions occur before 18 weeks.

Well then, if they have to be approved (by someone) you shouldn't object to the idea of it being approved by some kind of government medical board..

[WestCoastRunner]

This thread isn't about abortion. It's about JT's decision that the matter is entirely settled, and that only evil people would even want to discuss whether there ought to be some regulation of it. It's about a prime minister who has so little respect for individual freedoms and conscience that he's blithely decided to simply ban anyone whose conscience differs from his own -- without, as I've said already, even bothering to consult his caucus, or even inform them about his decision.

JT is making sure that future candidates do not vote to remove safe and accessible access to abortions for canadians. Period!

[segnosaur]

JT is making sure that future candidates do not vote to remove safe and accessible access to abortions for canadians. Period!

Given the fact that any future leader can reverse his decision, or that a future post-Trudeau Liberal government could (in theory) bring in anti-abortion legislation, no he's not.

At best its a symbolic act (since the law was unlikely to change anyways, even if the Conservatives remain in power). At worst, its a crass political move.

[Argus]

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_province_in_Canada_has_the_highest_incest_rate?#slide=2

Guyser, thanks for that. I've never had to deal with that little box on any forum before.

I regard your cite as entirely inadequate. As I stated earlier, a wiki cite is questionable at best. A wikianswer, which does nothing to explain where the information came from, is even worse. You know where the answer comes from? From whoever last edited it - you, for all I know.

But in point of fact what I was really looking for was information the extreme right wing positions held by Albertans. I'd kind of like to know what you believe those are.

[Argus]

You can't tell the gender until it is past the 18 weeks, which means it would have to be approved. Doctors will not perform abortions based on gender.

All doctors? I'm sorry, but I lack your faith in the universality of medical ethics.

And if it has to be approved anyway, why not universalize the rules on whether it gets approved. Why should hospitals in New Brunswick have different rules on approving such things than doctors in BC or Quebec?