CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1808
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:02 am
 


RUEZ RUEZ:
Heavy_Metal Heavy_Metal:
i'm sure all the sexual assault victims who he helped are in complete agreeance with you nay sayers... :roll:

call me crazy but i would think that a clean death before birth sure beats the hell out of dying in a garbage can somewhere...

So it all boils down to a matter of opinion then?


doesn't everything?

perception = reality to that person


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1808
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:07 am
 


lily lily:
Heavy_Metal Heavy_Metal:
i'm sure all the sexual assault victims who he helped are in complete agreeance with you nay sayers... :roll:


I believe abortion was always available to victims of sexual assault.

Besides... are you suggesting that sexual assault is that epidemic here in Canada? If so, is abortion really the answer? Perhaps we'd be better to look elsewhere to address the problem.


was it? really don't know, i know there's the 72 hour pill, guess it's pretty much the same...

nope no suggestion at all....but if that's what you think well who am i to say your wrong :roll:


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1808
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:10 am
 


lily lily:
You don't know, but feel free to spout your opinions regardless.

Nice job.


gawd your such a tool...


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:13 am
 


DerbyX DerbyX:
herbie herbie:
There's nothing "dirty" about profit. You imply that because Al Gore makes money promoting a cause, that cause is invalid. Or that Bill Gates shouldn't promote his charities.
Restate your opinion, eliminating the fact Morgentaler made any personal benefit.

Did he do something worthy of recognition? You're the only female responding, so your opinion carries some weight.


Brenda hasn't chimed in yet and neither has Novachick or any of other CKA women posters here who believe its their right to choose.


I had never heard of Morgentaler before :oops:, so I read this topic just yet...

I think anyone who is pro choice (and thus pro-abortion) and fights for that right is doing all women a favour. That the womans choice is to not abort, is a choice too.

From what I read from the article, and from the reactions here, he helped legalize it, and did abortions before it was legal. Kudo's to him.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:18 am
 


Where did Lily's post go??


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1808
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:21 am
 


lily lily:
I deleted it because it didn't make sense with HM's post on the previous page.

He called me a tool, so I said at least I had a use. ;)


XD nice ROTFL


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 20460
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:26 am
 


lily lily:
$1:
Yes you are. You are acting like a giant hypocrite. You are opposed to abortion and are allowing your personal feelings to interfere with your judgement which is why you can't accept that he was doign what he felt was right.

Faulty logic, Derby.

You claimed that Morgentaler did a service to every Canadian woman because even if we were against abortion, should we ever change our mind, it would be available to us.

Why would a woman change her mind, do you suppose? If she got pregnant and suddenly it was personal?

What other option were you thinking of?


Not faulty logic in the least.

You yourself even said you believe it should be a right if it were medically necessary. What makes your personal choice justified when somebodies else isn't?

By ensuring the right of every women to obtain an abortion she wants in Canada he therefore did a service to every women in Canada.

Its almost identical to the fight Larry Flint fought. He fought for the freedom of expression and did a service to every American even if those Americans were disgusted by his magazine and opposed to pornography in every way.

Just because somebody won't get an abortion doesn't mean that being allowed the freedom to choose it isn't a service to them.

Thats actualy almost perfect logic.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 20460
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:30 am
 


lily lily:
Heavy_Metal Heavy_Metal:
i'm sure all the sexual assault victims who he helped are in complete agreeance with you nay sayers... :roll:


I believe abortion was always available to victims of sexual assault.

Besides... are you suggesting that sexual assault is that epidemic here in Canada? If so, is abortion really the answer? Perhaps we'd be better to look elsewhere to address the problem.


You are in error.

$1:
Abortion was completely banned in Canada in 1869. As in other countries, illegal abortions were still performed, leading to the deaths of many women every year. An early example received much attention during the abortion trial of Emily Stowe (1879). Another such case, Azoulay v. The Queen, reached the Supreme Court in 1952. In 1892, abortion and the advertisement and distribution of contraception were made illegal in Canada.

The movement to liberalize Canada's abortion laws began in the 1960s. Then Justice Minister Pierre Trudeau introduced a bill in 1967 (amendment to Section 251 of the Canadian Criminal Code). The bill, known as the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1968-69, was passed on May 14, 1969, and provided for abortions when the health of the woman was in danger as determined by a three-doctor hospital committee. However, abortion still remained in the Criminal Code of Canada, unlike the U.S. law where, after Roe v. Wade in early 1973, abortion was no longer illegal. This same bill also legalized homosexuality and contraception, and would be the subject of one of Trudeau's most famous quotations: "The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation."

While many Canadians opposed the liberalization of abortion laws, others believed that the law did not go far enough, and that the rulings of the three-doctor committees were inconsistent and often untimely (taking perhaps several weeks). A Montreal doctor, Henry Morgentaler, not wanting to break the law, initially turned away women seeking abortions from his practice. Soon, however, the harsh circumstances he perceived such women as facing brought about a change of mind, and he began performing safe abortions in his clinic in contravention of the law. In 1973, Morgentaler stated publicly that he had performed 5,000 abortions without the permission of the three-doctor-committees, even going so far as to videotape himself performing operations.

The Quebec government took Morgentaler to court twice, and both times juries refused to convict him despite his outright admission that he had performed many abortions. The government appealed one acquittal, and the appeal court overturned the jury's verdict. Morgentaler was sentenced to 18 months in jail. Public outcry over the appeal court's decision caused the federal government to pass a law (commonly known as the Morgentaler Amendment) preventing appeal courts from overturning a jury's not-guilty verdict. Morgentaler was again acquitted at a third trial, causing the Quebec government to declare the law unenforceable.

Morgentaler's struggle prompted a nation-wide movement to reform Canada's abortion laws. In 1970, 35 women, chained themselves to the parliamentary gallery in the House of Commons, closing Parliament for the first time in Canadian history.

Upon his release from prison in Quebec, Morgentaler decided to challenge the law in other provinces. Over the next 15 years, he opened and operated private abortion clinics across the country in direct violation of the law. Following a fourth jury acquittal in 1984, the federal government appealed the decision, and the appeals court reversed the decision.

Morgentaler, in turn, appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada. In a landmark decision, the Court declared in 1988 the entirety of the country's abortion law to be unconstitutional. The court noted that "[f]orcing a woman, by threat of criminal sanction, to carry a foetus to term unless she meets certain criteria unrelated to her own priorities and aspirations" and that the law "asserts that the woman's capacity to reproduce is to be subject, not to her own control, but to that of the state" were essentially a breach of the woman's right to security of the person, which is guaranteed under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Court also found that the procedural requirements to obtain an abortion, as set forth in the law, were especially troublesome. Only accredited or approved hospitals could perform abortions, which imposed a barrier to local access. The law also specified that women wanting an abortion were required to consult a "Therapeutic abortion committee" (TAC), a committee of at least four physicians appointed by the hospital's board of members. The court found that the TAC was deeply flawed, in part because of the long delays caused by the TAC and that in many hospitals, the TAC were merely committees on paper and did not actually approve abortions.

In its decision (Morgentaler et. al. v. Her Majesty The Queen [1988] (1 S.C.R. 30) at 37), the Court stated:

"The right to liberty... guarantees a degree of personal autonomy over important decisions intimately affecting his or her private life. ... The decision whether or not to terminate a pregnancy is essentially a moral decision and in a free and democratic society, the conscience of the individual must be paramount to that of the state."

A large part of why the Supreme Court of Canada ruled against the abortion law in 1988 had to do with how amendments to the criminal code that allowed abortions (amendment to Section 251) worked. In order to have an abortion, a woman had to first have a doctor who was willing to give her information on the topic and refer her to another doctor, or to take the case him or herself. The abortion then had to be approved by a hospital's Therapeutic Abortion Committee (commonly known as a TAC), which was composed of three doctors. Pro-life groups attempted at times to have their members become the members of the TAC so that the hospital would no longer perform abortions.

The court noted that it was mostly always men that were deciding if a woman should have an abortion. Also, because some pro-life doctors would not take any case to a TAC, or would only take a very severe case, and because some of these doctors would not even refer a women to a doctor who would present the case to the TAC, there were barriers to women who wanted to have their applications considered by a TAC. It could take a long time for a woman to find a doctor that would take her case to the TAC. Finally, the TAC had to decide on each request for an abortion. These factors resulted in a time lag that meant that abortions were being performed much later than they could have been.

The Court also recognized that the rules resulted in varying levels of abortion availability, depending on the city, province or territory. The law also resulted in middle class and affluent women having better chances to obtain an abortion. The existence of private clinics meant that women who had enough money could bypass the TAC system completely.

The court did, however, encourage the government to introduce a new and improved abortion law, which it attempted to do in 1989. This new bill, which threatened doctors with a two-year jail term if they approved an abortion when the woman's health was not in danger, was widely and loudly condemned by the country's doctors. While the bill was approved by the Canadian House of Commons, it was defeated in the Senate by a tie vote. This failure prompted the government to give up on legislating abortion entirely, leading to the unique situation of Canada having no abortion law whatsoever. Between the time the law was passed in the House of Commons and the time it was defeated in the senate, a 20-year-old student at the University of Waterloo bled to death after trying to perform an abortion on herself, the first such case in years.

Some of the private abortion clinics that have been set up by Morgentaler since the Supreme Court decision were opened to challenge provincial law on the medical financing of abortions in private clinics.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 20460
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:35 am
 


lily lily:
$1:
You yourself even said you believe it should be a right if it were medically necessary. What makes your personal choice justified when somebodies else isn't?


Abortion was already available in those circumstances, so Morgentaler's "service" here is moot.

$1:
Just because somebody won't get an abortion doesn't mean that being allowed the freedom to choose it isn't a service to them.

I think NAMBLA uses a similar argument.


You are error that it was always available and your NAMBLA BS is just rhetoric.

There are more then enough people out there who beleive that pregnancies from rape are not grounds for abortion either and then there are those who also believe that health endangerment isn't a reason to "kill a child" also.

NAMBLA argues the same argument that parents often do when it comes to the right to discipline.

Abortion is about upholding a womens right to choose what she wants for her own body not to do what they want with somebodies elses.

Thats the definition of faulty logic.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:41 am
 


Which has no right to decide about life and death until they are of a certain age.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 20460
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:44 am
 


lily lily:
$1:
Abortion is about upholding a womens right to choose what she wants for her own body not to do what they want with somebodies elses.


Some of us aren't forgetting that there is another body involved in the equation.


That same body is involved for every circumstance you can name where you support a women getting an abortion and the exact same right to life argument applies equally.

My argument can be applied equally, can yours?

All it really seems is that you are arguing that the only acceptable reasons for a women to have the right to choose are the ones you personally approve of.

Guess what? You don't get to make that decision for another women. Only she does and thanks to Dr. Morgentaller she can exercise that choice.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15102
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:55 am
 


DerbyX DerbyX:
Guess what? You don't get to make that decision for another women. Only she does and thanks to Dr. Morgentaller she can exercise that choice.

I thought this thread was about the order of Canada or something? I don't think anyone is trying to reverse abortion rights. Some people just feel there are people that deserve it more.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 11:59 am
 


lily lily:
Brenda Brenda:
Which has no right to decide about life and death until they are of a certain age.


There was a time when women were in the same position.


I'm done on this topic. I think there are more deserving people of this honour than Dr Morgentaler.


And that is your right to think that. It is kinda sad this thread became a pro- vs anti- abortion thread. I guess we all know where we stand on that...

There are still countries btw where women cannot speak. Nor abort.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 15102
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:00 pm
 


Brenda Brenda:
There are still countries btw where women cannot speak. Nor abort.

There's a country where women cannot speak?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:02 pm
 


RUEZ RUEZ:
Brenda Brenda:
There are still countries btw where women cannot speak. Nor abort.

There's a country where women cannot speak?

Speak up, speak out, stand up for themselves, be on the streets by themselves without a man chaparoning...


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 839 posts ]  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6 ... 56  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.