WestCoastRunner Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 Finally, the RU-486 pill is available to (some) women in Canada: "RU-486 has been approved in the United States since 2000 and in France since 1988, and it’s available in nearly 60 countries, including Australia, where no prescription is required. The drug’s cost in the U.S. is between $300 to $800, according to Planned Parenthood." Canada has finally approved it. What took so long? And it has been suggested that this has come at a bad time for the Conservatives: Health Canada's approval of Mifegymiso, a drug used to end pregnancies, may come at a tricky time for the Conservatives — just days ahead of their expected election call. The New Democrats and Liberals have made their pro-choice policies clear, with Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau in particular taking heat for promising all MPs in his causus will vote to maintain a woman's right to choose how to handle a pregnancy. NDP Leader Tom Mulcair maintains no MPs in his caucus are anti-abortion. With the NDP and Liberals officially opposed to setting legal limits on abortion, the Conservatives may be the only party susceptible to political pressure by groups that want limits imposed on the drug." A bit of a background on the pill: This pill will allow for termination of pregnancies up to a gestational age of 49 days. Canadian women will need to obtain a prescription from a doctor to purchase the combination drug. University of Toronto ethicist Kerry Bowman expects that will increase access to abortion for women who live in rural and remote places. "The hope is that with time it will enter into further out there areas. Maybe even midwives, even nurse clinicians. I don't know. I'm not saying that now, but over time." This is a much needed service for women in Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 Seems like a good thing to have available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 Is this thread supposed to create a discussion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 Is this thread supposed to create a discussion? Presumably the part that's supposed to create a discussion is the jab at the conservatives. Fortunately, in Canada, no major party opposes abortion or access to abortion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 Is this thread supposed to create a discussion? You don't think abortion is worthy of discussion? I would have thought it would be a topic you could create an even lengthier screed to post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 (edited) Fortunately, in Canada, no major party opposes abortion or access to abortion. you mean "formally" opposes it! Harper Conservatives, as a party, are anything but pro-choice... the only reason Harper hasn't moved on it over all these years is it won't gain him any votes and is a most polarizing issue so as to potentially cause him/the party a loss of votes. why there's a guy here in recent days railing on about Trudeau stating all NEW candidates for election will be expected to vote pro-choice on any related bills. Meanwhile, we have Harper repeatedly talking up his parties supposed all-inclusiveness of both pro/anti-choice members... yet Harper has moved in the past to prevent Conservative caucus members from bringing forward abortion related motion or bills within the House of Commons! Notwithstanding Harper has been careful to ensure his maternal health initiative and even his funding of Planned Parenthood avoids funding for abortion. Apparently, this is what passes for claimed Harper Conservative inclusiveness and recognition of pro-choice views/positions. . Edited August 1, 2015 by waldo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freddy Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 Sweet, even more ways to screw arround on Madison.com without any real consequences. What a life of easy conveniences we enjoy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 (edited) You don't think abortion is worthy of discussion? I would have thought it would be a topic you could create an even lengthier screed to post.Euler's an asexual pangender person, so xe doesn't care about the topic of abortion and doesn't think you should either. Edited August 1, 2015 by cybercoma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 This surprised me, because I'm pretty sure, Harper is against it , so they must be pretty desperate for women's votes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 (edited) It was a Chetien/Martin conspiracy that kept it off the market for so long! Edited August 1, 2015 by Shady Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 This surprised me, because I'm pretty sure, Harper is against it , so they must be pretty desperate for women's votes. Harper Conservative Health Minister, Rona Ambrose, was quick to distance the government from the decision... saying it was a decision made by Health Canada... "The decision does not rest with me. It's out of my hands." Rona Ambrose denies role in RU-486 abortion pill approval Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 Fortunately, in Canada, no major party opposes abortion or access to abortion. Exactly, everyone is just going to agree with each other on this topic, so there isn't much to discuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 You don't think abortion is worthy of discussion? No, I think that this topic isn't likely to create much discussion. Euler's an asexual pangender person Agender, not pangender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 Exactly, everyone is just going to agree with each other on this topic, so there isn't much to discuss. ya ya... cause abortion is a topic that's never been discussed around here... because there are no MLW members vehemently opposed to it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 Agender, not pangender. no genderflux... no genderfluidity? Never... ever? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 because there are no MLW members vehemently opposed to it! A pill that terminates pregnancies during the first 49 days? I'm skeptical you will find someone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIP Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 A pill that terminates pregnancies during the first 49 days? I'm skeptical you will find someone. If this was a US conservative forum, it would be all about abortion all the time! According to most extreme womb-watchers, fertilized egg cells need to be considered fully human and guaranteed full rights....which they are attempting to put into law in a number of southern states. Back during the Bush years, America was the only country in the developed world that wouldn't allow stem cell research on discarded frozen embryos from fertility clinics. Needless to say that they are trying to ban RU486 and then move on to banning all other oral contraceptives because they claim they have "abortifacient" properties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 (edited) .... Back during the Bush years, America was the only country in the developed world that wouldn't allow stem cell research on discarded frozen embryos from fertility clinics. Patently false of course...as several "developed" nations had/have bans and restrictions on human embryonic stem cell (hESC) research. hESCs position groupings: A (Prohibition): Italy, Slovakia, Tunisia. B (Restrictive Compromise): USA – use of federal funds under President Bush. C (Permissive [Compromise]): numerous countries including Australia, Canada, China (Hong Kong), Denmark, France, Iran, Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland, Taiwan, USA – use of federal funds under President Obama. D ([Very] Permissive):Belgium, Israel, Japan, UK, Singapore, South Korea, Sweden, certain states in USA using private funds. Restrictive by Default: New Zealand, Romania, Turkey. Unlegislated: Austria, Ireland, Luxembourg, Poland. https://www.nzma.org.nz/journal/read-the-journal/all-issues/2010-2019/2014/vol-127-no-1399/6236 Nice off topic try....and deflection from why a backward Canada didn't get RU-486 until now. Edited August 1, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 It was a Chetien/Martin conspiracy that kept it off the market for so long! I'd like to see you back that one up since the application that was just approved was submitted in 2012. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poochy Posted August 1, 2015 Report Share Posted August 1, 2015 We have abortions, we should have access to them, now it's even easier, and can be done so early on that even the ethical questions about when a human is human aren't a factor, seems like a win win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 If this was a US conservative forum Except it's not. I still don't see one person opposing this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 Except it's not. I still don't see one person opposing this. Why would Rona Ambrose "distance herself and the gov't" from this decision then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 So what took so long....Liberal Party was in power before Harper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 So what took so long....Liberal Party was in power before Harper. Ask Health Canada... doesn't seem to be a political decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted August 2, 2015 Report Share Posted August 2, 2015 So what took so long....Liberal Party was in power before Harper. Good point. Under Harper's watch, women finally get access. 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.