Jump to content

The death industry for the disabled, mentally ill, and poor is ramping up in Canada


Recommended Posts

Just now, TreeBeard said:

So a doctor and/or police, as long as the woman tells them she was raped would be enough for her to get an abortion?

Do you give the woman a lie detector test?  
 

Your moral viewpoint equates to: murdering babies is ok sometimes.  
 

Murdering babies just because a woman is raped…. How do you people live with yourselves?  That’s no excuse to murder babies!  Next you’ll be allowing abortions on demand!  It’s a slippery slope, y’know…. 

Nope.  It’s never fine.  It’s an understandable choice people make when in distress and after being violated.  You won’t even draw a line of a time limit on the development of a fetus into a viable baby.  I definitely consider your position to be in support of murder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Answer the question….  Does a rapist need to be found guilty before an exception can be made and the woman can abort?

Stupid question.  A woman knows when she’s been violated.  I don’t rely on courts to define that for a woman.  You’re the guy who lets government define morality for you.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Nope.  It’s never fine.  It’s an understandable choice people make when in distress and after being violated.  You won’t even draw a line of a time limit on the development of a fetus into a viable baby.  I definitely consider your position to be in support of murder. 

I don’t care…. It’s between a woman and her doctor.  There are plenty of medical “restrictions “ already in place in Canada on when and how to perform abortions.  I certainly have nothing of value to add to a medical procedure any more than my opinion on when to amputate a leg.  
 

6 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Stupid question.  A woman knows when she’s been violated.  I don’t rely on courts to define that for a woman.   

Then rapes will go up 4000%.  Do you give them lie detector tests? 
 

It’s like you give zero thought to how any of this would work in the real world. 

Edited by TreeBeard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Stupid question.  A woman knows when she’s been violated.  I don’t rely on courts to define that for a woman.  You’re the guy who lets government define morality for you.  

If it is rape, the law should force the guy to pay all expenses to raise the child until it reaches 21 years of age or be sent to the gulag for 21 years of labour.  The money from forced labour could be used to pay the expenses. But no abortions.  It is time the law toughened up in these cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

So a doctor and/or police, as long as the woman tells them she was raped would be enough for her to get an abortion?

Do you give the woman a lie detector test?  
 

Your moral viewpoint equates to: murdering babies is ok sometimes.  
 

Murdering babies just because a woman is raped…. How do you people live with yourselves?  That’s no excuse to murder babies!  Next you’ll be allowing abortions on demand!  It’s a slippery slope, y’know…. 

You said in other posts that the law will protect you, I'm sure after an investigation, has proven it was a rape, then yes an abortion could be approved...

No my moral view point is this, Abortions should not be preformed because most cases women failed to or were to lazy about taking precaution's , why should a fetus be punished with death becasue a couple were careless or stupid. 

Like i said there is exceptions to every rule, Rape or being to young then yes, then termination is acceptable. I'm sure the women does not want to be reminded everyday of her rapist. what is no excuse is the amount of abortions every year in this country becasue it is convenient. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

I'm sure after an investigation, has proven it was a rape, then yes an abortion could be approved...

How long do you think it takes for charges to be pressed and these trials take?  Months at a minimum?  Years?  So you want to wait years before a woman can abort?  As I said earlier….  You’re missing any sense of how this could ever apply to the real world.

Edited by TreeBeard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

Answer the question….  Does a rapist need to be found guilty before an exception can be made and the woman can abort?

A person who rapes someone has raped someone, whether or not found guilty in court.  It’s an impertinent question.  Rape is wrong.  A woman who is raped has the right under the law to an abortion (whether or not rape is established by the court) and that isn’t what’s being debated here.  You don’t think there should be any limits on abortion no matter how far along a pregnancy is.  I disagree strongly with that.  My position is clear.  Abortion is wrong because it falls short of ideal morality, but I can understand how in exceptional circumstances women would seek an abortion and I don’t judge the woman who makes that decision.  The discussion was around the question of limits, both on the timing of an abortion and on the question of whether active euthanasia is acceptable, including for people with mental health problems.  You have avoided defending your carte blanche position on these issues by talking about exceptional situations like rape.  I’m not fooled for a second.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

I don’t care…. It’s between a woman and her doctor.  There are plenty of medical “restrictions “ already in place in Canada on when and how to perform abortions.  I certainly have nothing of value to add to a medical procedure any more than my opinion on when to amputate a leg.  
 

Then rapes will go up 4000%.  Do you give them lie detector tests? 
 

It’s like you give zero thought to how any of this would work in the real world. 

Nope.  You have a foolish trust of government and court decisions.  Government policies and laws don’t define morality.  So if a woman is raped and the court doesn’t convict and decide it’s rape, then a rape never happened?   There’s legal authority and moral authority.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

You have a foolish trust of government and court decisions.  Government policies and laws don’t define morality.  So if a woman is raped and the court doesn’t convict and decide it’s rape, then a rape never happened?   There’s legal authority and moral authority.   

No, I would leave it between the woman and her doctor.  No need for any government intervention whatsoever.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TreeBeard said:

No, I would leave it between the woman and her doctor.  No need for any government intervention whatsoever.  

Yet you trust human authorities to discern when it’s fine to kill a person (MAID) and place zero limits on when a doctor can perform abortion, including up to the day of the expected delivery date (full term 9 months).  You give outsized rights to a pregnant mother and zero rights to the unborn.  You trust that legislation that allows the mentally ill to be put down won’t be abused or lapse into the unethical, even though there are already cases of this and the more lenient euthanasia legislation hasn’t gone into effect yet.

Just remember that you support these positions.

I know that we’re on the wrong track with these policies because the opportunity for abuse is too great and the protections for the vulnerable are too weak.

You’re very trusting of doctors with this power to kill, a recent phenomenon in medicine that contradicts the Hippocratic Oath to help prevent illness.

I understand that government, courts, and doctors lack moral authority and we’re in the realm of the less than ideal, but don’t pretend that it is ideal and that these authorities possess great virtue.

This is why many people didn’t trust the judgment of the authorities to discern public health policy that imposed extreme restrictions and mandates during the pandemic, and it’s why constitutional rights matter. All individual rights matter, not just the rights of your preferred groups.

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Maybe.  Not sure about you, Eyeball.  

It's strictly your own mind tricking you. You're like yzermandious where totalitarianism is always the end result no matter what.

It reminds me of the dilemma some physicists are faced with when their equations keep yielding the answer infinity.  They need to face the reality that it's not their answer that's wrong it's the questions they're asking and calculating that are wrong.    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, eyeball said:

It's strictly your own mind tricking you. You're like yzermandious where totalitarianism is always the end result no matter what.

It reminds me of the dilemma some physicists are faced with when their equations keep yielding the answer infinity.  They need to face the reality that it's not their answer that's wrong it's the questions they're asking and calculating that are wrong.    

 

No I think you’re a one trick pony with the ban on in camera lobbying and your pass for all other bad policy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

You mischaracterize what MAID is insinuating that it is some bureaucrat deciding who dies.   That’s simply stupid.   

You assume that people can’t be influenced and that people won’t try to influence people to do themselves in.  I’ve got some property you might be interested in in Tuktayuktuk…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

You assume that people can’t be influenced and that people won’t try to influence people to do themselves in.  I’ve got some property you might be interested in in Tuktayuktuk…

If you want perfect legislation where there can never be any mistakes, then I can’t help you.  You’re beyond discussing the topic with.  I think the legislation is better than no legislation.  
 

If you want to discuss not allowing it, then fine…. That’s your opinion, but it is against the Charter and against what most Canadians want as well.  Good luck with that.   Canada has moved beyond regressive opinions like that.  

Edited by TreeBeard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

If you want perfect legislation where there can never be any mistakes, then I can’t help you.  You’re beyond discussing the topic with.  I think the legislation is better than no legislation.  
 

If you want to discuss not allowing it, then fine…. That’s your opinion, but it is against the Charter and against what most Canadians want as well.  Good luck with that.   Canada has moved beyond regressive opinions like that.  

You don’t understand that Canada is an extreme outlier on euthanasia.  We’re seen internationally as morally repugnant in this file.  The Netherlands was the radical jurisdiction on this.  Not anymore.  Canada is also radical on abortion.  The US is looking morally superior.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...