Pro Life? Then Don't Run Under Liberal Banner

[bush_cheney2004]

You said earlier than it's because of our waiting periods and subpar services. You're simply wrong. There are NO waiting periods and every major city has several available clinics.

Give it up.

No....there are waiting periods in some parts of Canada. Every major city is not Canada.

[overthere]

There are no waits in Alberta, you just phone in for an appt and show up. No money required either.

Oh, and unlike Amerikkka, your physician is unlikely to get shot in the parking lot.

[bush_cheney2004]

There are no waits in Alberta, you just phone in for an appt and show up. No money required either.

Oh, and unlike Amerikkka, your physician is unlikely to get shot in the parking lot.

OK...so now we're going to play that game ? "Amerikkka"......like "KanaDUH" ?

Canadian women still go to the U.S. for abortions, for several reasons, just like the many thousands who have gone before. Deal with it....

Edited May 26, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[bush_cheney2004]

Interesting observation from British Columbia's Women’s Hospital and Health Centre (POS) that sought to improve access to services and overcome barriers experienced by women seeking abortion. Looks like the need for a passport may have slowed travel to the U.S. for abortions:

...Another situation illustrating the POS’s sentinel function occurred in 2007 when the United States immigration regulations changed to require a valid passport for entry [10]. Until this time many who required abortion services for pregnancies beyond 20-week gestation had received care at American clinics. Women in this situation frequently include those living with substance use and mental health issues, experiencing interpersonal violence and poverty, and having lower education levels [11–13]. The POS immediately detected that a significant portion of women requiring this service did not have a passport; the time sensitive nature for this procedure would not allow sufficient time to acquire one.

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ogi/2014/913241/

Mr. Trudeau probably can't change that either.

Edited May 26, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[On Guard for Thee]

For a while, there was a fuss over Canadian women from certain ethnic groups going to the US for a gender determining ultrasound, then possibly an abortion. Dunno what came of that, the furor died down.

I know that in some provinces and at some clinics, the info from an ultrasound such as gender, isn't given directly to the patient but rather sent to their doctor. Not long ago in BC they passed a law in BC which requiers that info to be given direct to the patient as it is deemed as a medical diagnosis. You probably heard there was also a Con. backbencher who tried to table a bill to ban gender specific abortions, but that didn't get far.

[guyser]

Canadian women still go to the U.S. for abortions, for several reasons, just like the many thousands who have gone before. Deal with it....

Must live in a vacuum....cuz no Americans ever come north to get freebies.

All those Drs in Windsor and area muct be wrong

All those nurses and Drs who could tell the people lining up for the flu shots as far from the border as Peterborough were American. Hard to blame them, they couldnt get the same shots stateside.

Yup, keep on with the vacuum. Keep parading that same old stuff.

[monty16]

Ok, keep embarassing yourself in ignorance.

Well done...golf clap...

That sounds like you're telling him he's ignorant and so is embarrassing himself. Can you get away with that? And if so then can you come right out and call him ignorant? Being relatively new to this forum I would like to know.

[bush_cheney2004]

No, he is being very careful not to cross that line. One can post that a statement or position is ignorant. Attacks or insults are not permitted per forum rules. Cites from Canadian sources demonstrating that Canadian women still sought abortions in the U.S. are also problematic for such assertions.

[cybercoma]

Yup, keep on with the vacuum. Keep parading that same old stuff.

Don't respond to it.

[bush_cheney2004]

Don't respond to it.

They can't help it, because talking smack about abortion limits in the U.S. is the natural Canadian way to define a political issue, even when it is shown to be laughable given the number of Canadian women seeking and getting abortions in the US of A.

[guyser]

They can't help it, because talking smack about abortion limits in the U.S. is the natural Canadian way to define a political issue, even when it is shown to be laughable given the number of Canadian women seeking and getting abortions in the US of A.

Nice attempt to frame it a certain way.

I could give a rats ass about american abortion limits. If Americans can't give total freedom to women, then thats their problem to take it up with the uber obnoxious christian dickwads in both aisles.

The number of CDNs getting an abortion down there means nothing to me. Lots of reasons why , none of which you are privy to, but will gloat and glee with juvenile posts. Numbers are hard to come by respecting American women coming here so hard to say its in droves or not. But it happens, unless one lives in their little protected world and believes a vacuum exists.

A smart person would realize the easier road is the one most would take when faced w a problem that cant be solved easily, go where its difficult......and maybe get caught up in some abortion doctor protest/killing , or cross over where its easiest. Prob best they take the hard route....

And your earlier post is right, you revel in something yet opine you know the reasons, and frankly , you know jack shit but get bu** hurt at the thought of smack talk and some other idiot laughing at americans.

But thats ok, americans are aborting at huge numbers compared to CDNs. Id worry more about your own ridiculous numbers.

Edited May 26, 2014 by Guyser2

[jacee]

Don't respond to it.

Ya I see the troll has sucked people with his usual anti-Canadian blather.

<yawn>

[Argus]

Yeah, if only women could understand what it's like to have their life choices dictated by their gender.

Everyone's life choices are, to some extent, dictated by their gender, women no more than men.

[Argus]

Guess he should have wrapped it up if he didn't want to face the possible consequences of his own actions.

.

So you agree, then, that women are not required to take any responsility for having sex or for any children they might have?

Edited May 26, 2014 by Argus

[cybercoma]

It's a false equivalency to argue that financial autonomy is the same as bodily autonomy.

[On Guard for Thee]

That sounds like you're telling him he's ignorant and so is embarrassing himself. Can you get away with that? And if so then can you come right out and call him ignorant? Being relatively new to this forum I would like to know.

How does that old saying go, something like "if the shoe fit's"?

[jacee]

So you agree, then, that women are not required to take any responsility for having sex or for any children they might have?

Don't be ridiculous Argus.

[Keepitsimple]

Here's Justin's deep, thoughtful response to a reporter's recent question. Again, this is not about abortion - it's about Justin's judgement - his ability to understand the depth of issues - his ability to think on his feet:

Semkiw: A woman comes to you. She says she’s pregnant with a girl and she wants to terminate the life of the child because it’s a girl. What would you say to her?

Trudeau: My position has been very clear. The Liberal Party is the party standing up for people’s rights. And the Liberal Party will always be the party of the Charter. So we will continue to stand up for people’s rights and not legislate them away.

Semkiw: So, to be clear, you wouldn’t discourage her from having an abortion because it’s a girl?

Trudeau: My role as the leader of the Liberal Party is to make sure that Canadian legislation respects people’s rights and that’s what I will continue to do.

Semkiw: Yesterday you said you were happy with the status quo on abortion. But right now the status quo is that it’s perfectly fine to abort a child because it’s a girl. Do you have no qualms with that?

Trudeau: I will leave discussions like that between a woman and the health professionals that she encounters. I don’t think the government should be in the business of legislating away people’s rights. And that’s why the Liberal Party is steadfast in this position.

On cue, his handlers jumped into the fray to remove Justin's foot from his mouth yet again:

A day later, objecting to Sun News’ coverage — apparently reporting what Trudeau says is upsetting to Liberals — a party spokesperson explained by email what Trudeau apparently meant to say.

“Mr. Trudeau and the Liberal Party do not condone sex-selective abortion ... the Canadian Medical Association (has) stated clearly they do not condone sex-selective abortion and we of course support that.”

Why couldn't he say that the first time? It's become quite obvious.

Link: http://www.torontosun.com/2014/05/26/justin-time-a-day-late

[Guest]

So JT's changed his mind? He's pro choice, so long as he agrees with the choice.

[Argus]

Don't be ridiculous Argus.

How am I being ridiculous? A woman can throw her child away at any time, simply wash her hands of it, and be off. Men can't do that. The state won't allow it. It's their kid and they're responsible for it for the next 18 years of its life. period. End of story. No matter the circumstances.

[Argus]

It's a false equivalency to argue that financial autonomy is the same as bodily autonomy.

But women don't even have financial responsiblity for any children they produce, even though they can choose not to produce them.

Edited May 27, 2014 by Argus

[monty16]

Here's Justin's deep, thoughtful response to a reporter's recent question. Again, this is not about abortion - it's about Justin's judgement - his ability to understand the depth of issues - his ability to think on his feet:

On cue, his handlers jumped into the fray to remove Justin's foot from his mouth yet again:

Why couldn't he say that the first time? It's become quite obvious.

Link: http://www.torontosun.com/2014/05/26/justin-time-a-day-late

Why would anybody be fooled and think Justin Trudeau is in favour of aborting girls? It's ridiculous US style politics of trying to make him say something he didn't. I doubt any of the Canadian people will be fooled by it but it probably resonates with rabid righties who are already frothing at the mouth.

[guyser]

But women don't even have financial responsiblity for any children they produce, even though they can choose not to produce them.

In what country?

Certainly not here.

[cybercoma]

But women don't even have financial responsiblity for any children they produce, even though they can choose not to produce them.

That's categorically false.

[Argus]

In what country?

Certainly not here.

A woman can give up her child at birth with no financial consequences. Heck, she can give the child up any time. A friend of mine was given up by her mother when she was four because she was going to marry a man who didn't want her. Mom just dumped her at childrens aid and went off to get married.