Evangelical Harper

[Canuck E Stan]

Stephen Harper just can't quit his inner-Evangelical

Stephen Harper, our newest Prime Minister, is an evangelical Christian. Over the course of the election campaign, certain media outlets, Liberal Party supporters, and members of Canada's intelligentsia have suggested that that makes him different from the rest of us ... us being "average Canadians."

Read any of the policy or position papers written by Harper from the time he was a grad student at the University of Calgary, to his days as a Reform Party MP, to his stint as head of the National Citizens' Coalition and you will be surprised to find that the only time he talks at length about values is when he is discussing the value of the dollar and how to maximize its potential. Conservative social values, while I'm sure they are important to him, are not what get his motor revved.

People often forget (or perhaps in the case of his Liberal opponents, they choose to ignore) that Harper quit as a Reform MP because his party colleagues often made social issues, and not economic and political reform, their primary focus. After his resignation a report in the Toronto Star referred to Harper as a "moderate." Yes, Canada's national voice of the left, called him a moderate.

So the truth about scary Harper finally comes out:

But as I said at the outset, in some ways Harper's faith does make him different from the rest of it. Specifically, if Harper is a typical evangelical then chances are he is more prone to be honest than the population-at-large.

God Bless Canada.

[shoop]

Good article Stan.

Quite interesting that even the Star is willing to give Harper a chance and look at him with an open mind. Now that he will become Prime Minister tomorrow...

[sharkman]

After all, both Martin and Chretien are Catholics and the media gave them a free pass on their religious affiliation, for the most part. Canada seems to have survived the experience, although we got a little banged up with all the scandals. Obviously, a person's character is more important than religious affiliation. I think Harper can eclipse their scandal ridden records quite easily.

[Slavik44]

Yes it is important to note that Harper quit the reform party because of the emphasis and movement towards social conservatism fair enough. But do you not think that it is also fair to note that a number of CPC'ers are easily described as social conservatives and that Stephen Harper, will not be able to ignore the heavy faction of the Religous right in his own party. It is important to note that Stephen Harper Quit the Refrm party, it is even more important to ask if he couldn't stop extreme Social conservatism then, what makes you think he can easily succeed now? It might be easier amongst a united right party that is trying to soften its image, but easier is not easy. If you were to ask me to move a mountain I would say I can't do it, if you were to give me a few sticks of dynamite i still couldn't move the whole mountain, it might be easier but still not entirely do able.

[gerryhatrick]

Interesting spin/opinion piece.

As you your own spin, the "Liberals" only pointed out that Harper would seek to go after same sex marriage, which he admittedly will do.

Beats me why a simple statement of fact is considered "scare tactics" or "fear mongering" by all the Harperites!

[Concerned]

Yes it is important to note that Harper quit the reform party because of the emphasis and movement towards social conservatism fair enough. But do you not think that it is also fair to note that a number of CPC'ers are easily described as social conservatives and that Stephen Harper, will not be able to ignore the heavy faction of the Religous right in his own party. It is important to note that Stephen Harper Quit the Refrm party, it is even more important to ask if he couldn't stop extreme Social conservatism then, what makes you think he can easily succeed now? It might be easier amongst a united right party that is trying to soften its image, but easier is not easy. If you were to ask me to move a mountain I would say I can't do it, if you were to give me a few sticks of dynamite i still couldn't move the whole mountain, it might be easier but still not entirely do able.

Harper really needs to be honest about his views on abortion so that Canadians can quit the guess work and speculation. Too many women are turned off by the Conservatives because he refuses to come out and state his opinion on the matter. If the following is true: "A 2004 Environics poll showed that more than two-thirds of the population wants greater restrictions on abortion" ... as the poll suggests.... what are those restrictions and certainly women do not want to have their choices taken away completely? Particularly city dwelling women who have to work to support the high price of real estate and no $100 per month daycare solution is going to help that one.

We females need more female representation in government and if the CPC's want to earn more seats in the city come next election, he must confront this issue.

[geoffrey]

Harper really needs to be honest about his views on abortion so that Canadians can quit the guess work and speculation. Too many women are turned off by the Conservatives because he refuses to come out and state his opinion on the matter. If the following is true: "A 2004 Environics poll showed that more than two-thirds of the population wants greater restrictions on abortion" ... as the poll suggests.... what are those restrictions and certainly women do not want to have their choices taken away completely? Particularly city dwelling women who have to work to support the high price of real estate and no $100 per month daycare solution is going to help that one.

We females need more female representation in government and if the CPC's want to earn more seats in the city come next election, he must confront this issue.

Sorry I forgot we to have the ability to kill our children when we can't afford them... these are the reasons that abortion should be prohibited.

Selfish greed is a ridiculous goal. There are some real reasons where I think freedom of choice could be acceptable, I'm not an anti-abortion radical. But when women choose to kill their children because they don't want the financial burden, well, that sickens me.

I'd love to see the CPC come out with a policy that requires the father's consent for an abortion to occur, as long as the father has the finacial resources to take responsibility for the child (otherwise the ma would get the choice as too many fathers would agree and then poof, be gone).

Won't happen though. Responsibility for ones actions is something thats escaped the feminist movement.

[fixer1]

Yes it is important to note that Harper quit the reform party because of the emphasis and movement towards social conservatism fair enough. But do you not think that it is also fair to note that a number of CPC'ers are easily described as social conservatives and that Stephen Harper, will not be able to ignore the heavy faction of the Religous right in his own party. It is important to note that Stephen Harper Quit the Refrm party, it is even more important to ask if he couldn't stop extreme Social conservatism then, what makes you think he can easily succeed now? It might be easier amongst a united right party that is trying to soften its image, but easier is not easy. If you were to ask me to move a mountain I would say I can't do it, if you were to give me a few sticks of dynamite i still couldn't move the whole mountain, it might be easier but still not entirely do able.

Harper really needs to be honest about his views on abortion so that Canadians can quit the guess work and speculation. Too many women are turned off by the Conservatives because he refuses to come out and state his opinion on the matter. If the following is true: "A 2004 Environics poll showed that more than two-thirds of the population wants greater restrictions on abortion" ... as the poll suggests.... what are those restrictions and certainly women do not want to have their choices taken away completely? Particularly city dwelling women who have to work to support the high price of real estate and no $100 per month daycare solution is going to help that one.

Funny how it always seems to be the Liberals that seem to bring up the position on abortion. I have heard Harper say many times that he and his party have no immediate plans to talk about abortion, one way or another. So whay is it so important for him to have a position on it when he has no plans for anything to do with it. If he does as he said he will on all issues of social values, have free votes on the issues. That would mean that the MP's should vote to represent the wish of each of their electorates. Now I do believe unless there are people in the other parties that intend to bring up these matters before parliament, then there is no pressing need to seek out each persons position.

After this long time of abortion rights being granted to prochoice, I would find it hard to think it will need to change, or rather have a reason to change anytime soon. This is much like Martin's fighting a vote on sovergnity when there was no issue on it in the last election.

We females need more female representation in government and if the CPC's want to earn more seats in the city come next election, he must confront this issue.

Why do we need to address this issue when Harper has said many times that his party and himself have no plans to visit this any time soon. The only people you hear this from are the Liberals. So it seems plain to me that unless the liberals plan to bring this up in parliament, we have nothing to fear .

[newbie]

Why do we need to address this issue when Harper has said many times that his party and himself have no plans to visit this any time soon. The only people you hear this from are the Liberals. So it seems plain to me that unless the liberals plan to bring this up in parliament, we have nothing to fear .

Well, we'll see what the first free vote is that comes up.

[betsy]

Harper really needs to be honest about his views on abortion so that Canadians can quit the guess work and speculation. Too many women are turned off by the Conservatives because he refuses to come out and state his opinion on the matter. If the following is true: "A 2004 Environics poll showed that more than two-thirds of the population wants greater restrictions on abortion" ... as the poll suggests.... what are those restrictions and certainly women do not want to have their choices taken away completely? Particularly city dwelling women who have to work to support the high price of real estate and no $100 per month daycare solution is going to help that one.

I am not in favor of abortion, but that is because of my religious belief. Religion-aside, I still would like a very strict restriction on abortion.

With all the sex education and tools of prevention from getting pregnant, there should not be so many unwanted pregnancies. We must take responsibilities for our actions. Parental responsibilities should not be dumped on the shoulders of taxpayers.

[Shady]

As you your own spin, the "Liberals" only pointed out that Harper would seek to go after same sex marriage, which he admittedly will do

Stephen Harper never said he would "go after" "same sex marraige" (which by the way is an oxymoron), he simply said he'd allow a free vote on the issue. Something that has never been done. Why are people so afraid of free votes? Why are people so afraid of democracy?

[tml12]

As you your own spin, the "Liberals" only pointed out that Harper would seek to go after same sex marriage, which he admittedly will do

Stephen Harper never said he would "go after" "same sex marraige" (which by the way is an oxymoron), he simply said he'd allow a free vote on the issue. Something that has never been done. Why are people so afraid of free votes? Why are people so afraid of democracy?

I dunno Shady...

[tml12]

Harper really needs to be honest about his views on abortion so that Canadians can quit the guess work and speculation. Too many women are turned off by the Conservatives because he refuses to come out and state his opinion on the matter. If the following is true: "A 2004 Environics poll showed that more than two-thirds of the population wants greater restrictions on abortion" ... as the poll suggests.... what are those restrictions and certainly women do not want to have their choices taken away completely? Particularly city dwelling women who have to work to support the high price of real estate and no $100 per month daycare solution is going to help that one.

We females need more female representation in government and if the CPC's want to earn more seats in the city come next election, he must confront this issue.

Sorry I forgot we to have the ability to kill our children when we can't afford them... these are the reasons that abortion should be prohibited.

Selfish greed is a ridiculous goal. There are some real reasons where I think freedom of choice could be acceptable, I'm not an anti-abortion radical. But when women choose to kill their children because they don't want the financial burden, well, that sickens me.

I'd love to see the CPC come out with a policy that requires the father's consent for an abortion to occur, as long as the father has the finacial resources to take responsibility for the child (otherwise the ma would get the choice as too many fathers would agree and then poof, be gone).

Won't happen though. Responsibility for ones actions is something thats escaped the feminist movement.

Really if a woman can't decide in the first two months whether or not she wants to have an abortion, then we have a problem. I used to know someone who performed abortions. He used to tell me about having to crack a baby's skull, etc because a woman spent three months dithering.

I am sorry to all those left-wing feminists out there. That is disgusting and disturbing. Legal abortion for the first month. After that, it's murder. Cracking a baby's skull is murder...

[geoffrey]

Really if a woman can't decide in the first two months whether or not she wants to have an abortion, then we have a problem. I used to know someone who performed abortions. He used to tell me about having to crack a baby's skull, etc because a woman spent three months dithering.

I am sorry to all those left-wing feminists out there. That is disgusting and disturbing. Legal abortion for the first month. After that, it's murder. Cracking a baby's skull is murder...

Finding out how thats actually performed was the worst thing that the pro-choice movement could allow me to do.

[Hicksey]

Really if a woman can't decide in the first two months whether or not she wants to have an abortion, then we have a problem. I used to know someone who performed abortions. He used to tell me about having to crack a baby's skull, etc because a woman spent three months dithering.

I am sorry to all those left-wing feminists out there. That is disgusting and disturbing. Legal abortion for the first month. After that, it's murder. Cracking a baby's skull is murder...

Finding out how thats actually performed was the worst thing that the pro-choice movement could allow me to do.

If you're going to tell the story, tell it all.

First they induce delivery and deliver in breach with the baby's head still inside the mother. The baby's head is held in forceps, pierced with a scalpel and a vacuum inserted to suck the baby's brain from its head. Once the doctor completes that he crushes the baby's skull and finishes the delivery with the baby obviously stillborn.

Tell me that's not the most inhumane thing one human has done to another.

[betsy]

Really if a woman can't decide in the first two months whether or not she wants to have an abortion, then we have a problem. I used to know someone who performed abortions. He used to tell me about having to crack a baby's skull, etc because a woman spent three months dithering.

I am sorry to all those left-wing feminists out there. That is disgusting and disturbing. Legal abortion for the first month. After that, it's murder. Cracking a baby's skull is murder...

Finding out how thats actually performed was the worst thing that the pro-choice movement could allow me to do.

If you're going to tell the story, tell it all.

First they induce delivery and deliver in breach with the baby's head still inside the mother. The baby's head is held in forceps, pierced with a scalpel and a vacuum inserted to suck the baby's brain from its head. Once the doctor completes that he crushes the baby's skull and finishes the delivery with the baby obviously stillborn.

Tell me that's not the most inhumane thing one human has done to another.

And from what I heard, they sometimes do this to a close to full-term baby. The doctor who would participate in this heinous murder ought to be hanged.

This is a classic example of the twisted views of the liberal-thinkers.

[geoffrey]

If you're going to tell the story, tell it all.

First they induce delivery and deliver in breach with the baby's head still inside the mother. The baby's head is held in forceps, pierced with a scalpel and a vacuum inserted to suck the baby's brain from its head. Once the doctor completes that he crushes the baby's skull and finishes the delivery with the baby obviously stillborn.

Tell me that's not the most inhumane thing one human has done to another.

And from what I heard, they sometimes do this to a close to full-term baby. The doctor who would participate in this heinous murder ought to be hanged.

This is a classic example of the twisted views of the liberal-thinkers.

In Canada, its legal until the baby is coming on out. Even during labour they can change their mind and kill the kid right away.

[Hicksey]

If you're going to tell the story, tell it all.

First they induce delivery and deliver in breach with the baby's head still inside the mother. The baby's head is held in forceps, pierced with a scalpel and a vacuum inserted to suck the baby's brain from its head. Once the doctor completes that he crushes the baby's skull and finishes the delivery with the baby obviously stillborn.

Tell me that's not the most inhumane thing one human has done to another.

And from what I heard, they sometimes do this to a close to full-term baby. The doctor who would participate in this heinous murder ought to be hanged.

This is a classic example of the twisted views of the liberal-thinkers.

In Canada, its legal until the baby is coming on out. Even during labour they can change their mind and kill the kid right away.

Really? I was unaware of that. That's just scary.

[tml12]

If you're going to tell the story, tell it all.

First they induce delivery and deliver in breach with the baby's head still inside the mother. The baby's head is held in forceps, pierced with a scalpel and a vacuum inserted to suck the baby's brain from its head. Once the doctor completes that he crushes the baby's skull and finishes the delivery with the baby obviously stillborn.

Tell me that's not the most inhumane thing one human has done to another.

And from what I heard, they sometimes do this to a close to full-term baby. The doctor who would participate in this heinous murder ought to be hanged.

This is a classic example of the twisted views of the liberal-thinkers.

In Canada, its legal until the baby is coming on out. Even during labour they can change their mind and kill the kid right away.

Really? I was unaware of that. That's just scary.

That is vile.

[Concerned]

Harper really needs to be honest about his views on abortion so that Canadians can quit the guess work and speculation. Too many women are turned off by the Conservatives because he refuses to come out and state his opinion on the matter. If the following is true: "A 2004 Environics poll showed that more than two-thirds of the population wants greater restrictions on abortion" ... as the poll suggests.... what are those restrictions and certainly women do not want to have their choices taken away completely? Particularly city dwelling women who have to work to support the high price of real estate and no $100 per month daycare solution is going to help that one.

We females need more female representation in government and if the CPC's want to earn more seats in the city come next election, he must confront this issue.

Sorry I forgot we to have the ability to kill our children when we can't afford them... these are the reasons that abortion should be prohibited.

Selfish greed is a ridiculous goal. There are some real reasons where I think freedom of choice could be acceptable, I'm not an anti-abortion radical. But when women choose to kill their children because they don't want the financial burden, well, that sickens me.

I'd love to see the CPC come out with a policy that requires the father's consent for an abortion to occur, as long as the father has the finacial resources to take responsibility for the child (otherwise the ma would get the choice as too many fathers would agree and then poof, be gone).

Won't happen though. Responsibility for ones actions is something thats escaped the feminist movement.

All right then all you right wing anti-abortionists. How many of you will stay home to take care of that baby, giving up your salary to do it? (please, answer the question).

The average Canadian women's salary in this country is somewhere under 20K per year. And suppose that woman already has two children to support. And suppose that woman is single (in which case her income is somewhere under 14K per year), and has one of those tax evading husbands that show as little as possible on the bottom line so as to avoid child support for the two children that she already has? Now how about the baby being diagnosed mentally handicapped. And the risk of autism which cannot be detected prior to birth, this problem is not even supported by government funding or social programs. You are all ok to have women living in poverty and take care of this child under these circumstances, while you go off to work and criticize.

I'm not saying at all that I am pro abortion for birth control. I am saying that woman deserve the right to choose and the circumstances, and her doctors advice, will help her with that choice. There are many women out there that would go through with the pregnancy if she had the support of the father, and she does not. As far as the dithering is concerned have you guys thought about that one? The guy that says ah, lets have it, then offers little or no emotional or financial support? If women are dithering, you are so quick to blame the woman !! How about the abusive husband?? She loves him, she wants to have his baby, and suddenly she finds herself pregnant and vulnerable to his violent rages. Men that are violent are often bullies, and the worst of it comes out when the woman is pregnant.

Your attitudes represent precisely why women didn't run for the CPC and why Canadian women now do not have adequate representation in parliament.

If the Canadian population wants reformed abortion policy and regulation, let's hear about it now, put it on the table, so that we can all cast our votes without speculation at the next election.

[tml12]

Harper really needs to be honest about his views on abortion so that Canadians can quit the guess work and speculation. Too many women are turned off by the Conservatives because he refuses to come out and state his opinion on the matter. If the following is true: "A 2004 Environics poll showed that more than two-thirds of the population wants greater restrictions on abortion" ... as the poll suggests.... what are those restrictions and certainly women do not want to have their choices taken away completely? Particularly city dwelling women who have to work to support the high price of real estate and no $100 per month daycare solution is going to help that one.

We females need more female representation in government and if the CPC's want to earn more seats in the city come next election, he must confront this issue.

Sorry I forgot we to have the ability to kill our children when we can't afford them... these are the reasons that abortion should be prohibited.

Selfish greed is a ridiculous goal. There are some real reasons where I think freedom of choice could be acceptable, I'm not an anti-abortion radical. But when women choose to kill their children because they don't want the financial burden, well, that sickens me.

I'd love to see the CPC come out with a policy that requires the father's consent for an abortion to occur, as long as the father has the finacial resources to take responsibility for the child (otherwise the ma would get the choice as too many fathers would agree and then poof, be gone).

Won't happen though. Responsibility for ones actions is something thats escaped the feminist movement.

All right then all you right wing anti-abortionists. How many of you will stay home to take care of that baby, giving up your salary to do it? (please, answer the question).

The average Canadian women's salary in this country is somewhere under 20K per year. And suppose that woman already has two children to support. And suppose that woman is single (in which case her income is somewhere under 14K per year), and has one of those tax evading husbands that show as little as possible on the bottom line so as to avoid child support for the two children that she already has? Now how about the baby being diagnosed mentally handicapped. And the risk of autism which cannot be detected prior to birth, this problem is not even supported by government funding or social programs. You are all ok to have women living in poverty and take care of this child under these circumstances, while you go off to work and criticize.

I'm not saying at all that I am pro abortion for birth control. I am saying that woman deserve the right to choose and the circumstances, and her doctors advice, will help her with that choice. There are many women out there that would go through with the pregnancy if she had the support of the father, and she does not. As far as the dithering is concerned have you guys thought about that one? The guy that says ah, lets have it, then offers little or no emotional or financial support? If women are dithering, you are so quick to blame the woman !! How about the abusive husband?? She loves him, she wants to have his baby, and suddenly she finds herself pregnant and vulnerable to his violent rages. Men that are violent are often bullies, and the worst of it comes out when the woman is pregnant.

Your attitudes represent precisely why women didn't run for the CPC and why Canadian women now do not have adequate representation in parliament.

If the Canadian population wants reformed abortion policy and regulation, let's hear about it now, put it on the table, so that we can all cast our votes without speculation at the next election.

For the record, I never stated that I was anti-abortion, etc.

Abortion should be legal but not after the first month or so. I worked with a woman who had an affair and wanted to keep it a secret. Soon she found she was pregnant (about two weeks after the sexual encounter). She said she was afraid to have an abortion but I encouraged her to have one because I told her that she did not want to get into trouble with her husband.

She had one, came back, and told me the baby was like "a drop of water."

So before the first month, OK. After that, sticking needles into a baby deliberately born prematurely is vile and sinful and most certainly is murder, regardless of financial circumstances. If you takes you more than a month to decide, put the baby up for adoption...

[Concerned]

Harper really needs to be honest about his views on abortion so that Canadians can quit the guess work and speculation. Too many women are turned off by the Conservatives because he refuses to come out and state his opinion on the matter. If the following is true: "A 2004 Environics poll showed that more than two-thirds of the population wants greater restrictions on abortion" ... as the poll suggests.... what are those restrictions and certainly women do not want to have their choices taken away completely? Particularly city dwelling women who have to work to support the high price of real estate and no $100 per month daycare solution is going to help that one.

We females need more female representation in government and if the CPC's want to earn more seats in the city come next election, he must confront this issue.

Sorry I forgot we to have the ability to kill our children when we can't afford them... these are the reasons that abortion should be prohibited.

Selfish greed is a ridiculous goal. There are some real reasons where I think freedom of choice could be acceptable, I'm not an anti-abortion radical. But when women choose to kill their children because they don't want the financial burden, well, that sickens me.

I'd love to see the CPC come out with a policy that requires the father's consent for an abortion to occur, as long as the father has the finacial resources to take responsibility for the child (otherwise the ma would get the choice as too many fathers would agree and then poof, be gone).

Won't happen though. Responsibility for ones actions is something thats escaped the feminist movement.

All right then all you right wing anti-abortionists. How many of you will stay home to take care of that baby, giving up your salary to do it? (please, answer the question).

The average Canadian women's salary in this country is somewhere under 20K per year. And suppose that woman already has two children to support. And suppose that woman is single (in which case her income is somewhere under 14K per year), and has one of those tax evading husbands that show as little as possible on the bottom line so as to avoid child support for the two children that she already has? Now how about the baby being diagnosed mentally handicapped. And the risk of autism which cannot be detected prior to birth, this problem is not even supported by government funding or social programs. You are all ok to have women living in poverty and take care of this child under these circumstances, while you go off to work and criticize.

I'm not saying at all that I am pro abortion for birth control. I am saying that woman deserve the right to choose and the circumstances, and her doctors advice, will help her with that choice. There are many women out there that would go through with the pregnancy if she had the support of the father, and she does not. As far as the dithering is concerned have you guys thought about that one? The guy that says ah, lets have it, then offers little or no emotional or financial support? If women are dithering, you are so quick to blame the woman !! How about the abusive husband?? She loves him, she wants to have his baby, and suddenly she finds herself pregnant and vulnerable to his violent rages. Men that are violent are often bullies, and the worst of it comes out when the woman is pregnant.

Your attitudes represent precisely why women didn't run for the CPC and why Canadian women now do not have adequate representation in parliament.

If the Canadian population wants reformed abortion policy and regulation, let's hear about it now, put it on the table, so that we can all cast our votes without speculation at the next election.

For the record, I never stated that I was anti-abortion, etc.

Abortion should be legal but not after the first month or so. I worked with a woman who had an affair and wanted to keep it a secret. Soon she found she was pregnant (about two weeks after the sexual encounter). She said she was afraid to have an abortion but I encouraged her to have one because I told her that she did not want to get into trouble with her husband.

She had one, came back, and told me the baby was like "a drop of water."

So before the first month, OK. After that, sticking needles into a baby deliberately born prematurely is vile and sinful and most certainly is murder, regardless of financial circumstances. If you takes you more than a month to decide, put the baby up for adoption...

TML,

If a woman is over 35 years of age it is recommended that she get something called a triple screen to see if she is at risk for 3 problems that can severely affect a baby's life: Spinal bifida, Trisomy and Down Syndrome. This screen test is done at about 22 weeks. If the test comes in "high risk" the doctor will often recommend amniocentesis. In order to ensure that a healthy baby is not put a risk by the amnio, it is recommended that the woman wait until at least 15 weeks, however the triple screen doesn't normally get done until 22. So then the woman goes for the amnio and has to wait another 2 weeks for results. Then if severe abnormalities are found, the woman could be faced with an abortion decision and by the time she is booked to have the procedure, she is almost 5 months pregnant.

Very scary, but those are the medical facts, and this is procedure for pregnant women over 35, which as we know, is growing to be a very high ratio of women today. Doing things any earlier in the pregnancy causes undue risk to a healthy fetus.

I have never had an abortion and would never wish it upon anybody, but having just been through this (healthy baby due in March)...I know the emotional trauma that it can cause a woman. However many of us are not fit to bring up a child who is severely handicapped, I being one of them, would have been forced with a very difficult decision.

The example of your friend is only one. There are so many cases of why abortion should or could have to be performed and to me the decision has got to be left to the individuals who are directly responsible for that child's life.

Education, information and guidance, as well as community support are all requirements of supporting a women to "choose-life"...and unfortunately with governments downsizing and programs being slashed and underfunded, this is not going to happen in a way that could possibly support all women under every circumstance.....(oh, and did I mention that 100 bucks per month daycare won't help either ?????)

[geoffrey]

TML,

If a woman is over 35 years of age it is recommended that she get something called a triple screen to see if she is at risk for 3 problems that can severely affect a baby's life: Spinal bifida, Trisomy and Down Syndrome. This screen test is done at about 22 weeks. If the test comes in "high risk" the doctor will often recommend amniocentesis. In order to ensure that a healthy baby is not put a risk by the amnio, it is recommended that the woman wait until at least 15 weeks, however the triple screen doesn't normally get done until 22. So then the woman goes for the amnio and has to wait another 2 weeks for results. Then if severe abnormalities are found, the woman could be faced with an abortion decision and by the time she is booked to have the procedure, she is almost 5 months pregnant.

Very scary, but those are the medical facts, and this is procedure for pregnant women over 35, which as we know, is growing to be a very high ratio of women today. Doing things any earlier in the pregnancy causes undue risk to a healthy fetus.

So eugenics are our future Concerned?

Any child with defects should be terminated? Why even allow parents that could pass on diseases to have children? Shouldn't we just sterilize people and save us money in the long run?

When my mother got the pre-screening test, it came back positive that I would have mental and physical problems. The doctor recommended my mother terminate her pregnancy. My family is very Catholic and anti-abortion so my mother made the responsible choice to have me even knowing the risks. It turned out that I am a completely healthy adult, extremely intelligent (99 percentile on two intelligence tests) and I have no mental or physical disabilities at all.

Killing your children based on a test that isn't always accurate is a very very dangerous road to follow. I would be dead if my mother subscribed to that point of view.

Justify my death please.

[Concerned]

TML,

If a woman is over 35 years of age it is recommended that she get something called a triple screen to see if she is at risk for 3 problems that can severely affect a baby's life: Spinal bifida, Trisomy and Down Syndrome. This screen test is done at about 22 weeks. If the test comes in "high risk" the doctor will often recommend amniocentesis. In order to ensure that a healthy baby is not put a risk by the amnio, it is recommended that the woman wait until at least 15 weeks, however the triple screen doesn't normally get done until 22. So then the woman goes for the amnio and has to wait another 2 weeks for results. Then if severe abnormalities are found, the woman could be faced with an abortion decision and by the time she is booked to have the procedure, she is almost 5 months pregnant.

Very scary, but those are the medical facts, and this is procedure for pregnant women over 35, which as we know, is growing to be a very high ratio of women today. Doing things any earlier in the pregnancy causes undue risk to a healthy fetus.

So eugenics are our future Concerned?

Any child with defects should be terminated? Why even allow parents that could pass on diseases to have children? Shouldn't we just sterilize people and save us money in the long run?

When my mother got the pre-screening test, it came back positive that I would have mental and physical problems. The doctor recommended my mother terminate her pregnancy. My family is very Catholic and anti-abortion so my mother made the responsible choice to have me even knowing the risks. It turned out that I am a completely healthy adult, extremely intelligent (99 percentile on two intelligence tests) and I have no mental or physical disabilities at all.

Killing your children based on a test that isn't always accurate is a very very dangerous road to follow. I would be dead if my mother subscribed to that point of view.

Justify my death please.

I think your mother is commendable. Unfortunately we don't all have the ability to deal with the risks as your mother may have. The point I'm trying to make is that the situation is very personal and each individual will have their own set of circumstances surrounding their decision.

[Riverwind]

My family is very Catholic and anti-abortion so my mother made the responsible choice to have me even knowing the risks.

The point is your family had the choice and decided they could live with the risks. Other families may not be able to live with the risks of caring for a severely disabled child. The gov't has no business taking this choice away from families. The fact that the doctors were wrong in your family's case does not alter the fact that the doctor's are right in most other cases when they predict a child will be severely disabled - especially with the technology available today.