[andyt]

That was abortion on demand, commander. For medical reasons I don't support a limit. Valid medical reasons, reviewed by other doctors.

[N_Fiddledog]

Wanna see some more "interruptions?"

Don't get too comfortable this guy's in it.

[commanderkai]

andyt andyt:

That was abortion on demand, commander. For medical reasons I don't support a limit. Valid medical reasons, reviewed by other doctors.

I put that exception in there. I agree with your opinion on voluntary and medical necessity abortion. Medical necessity is medical necessity.

[andyt]

guess I'm not fulfilling my role here if somebody actually agrees with me.

[Khar]

commanderkai commanderkai:

Khar Khar:

N_Fiddledog, a stance held most firmly by only 6% of the population (half the population says no restrictions at all) that abortion should not be allowed (27% in 2010 considered themselves some level of pro-life)

I'm going to nitpick here. From the study you provided, half the population consider themselves pro-choice, not pro-choice with absolutely no restrictions. Kind of a big difference there.

If you had nitpicked your way a whole sentence later ( ), you'd see the Ipsos Reid version where the 6% value is cited (showing how I distinguished it from the 27% value from later), as well as further evidence of the 50% (49%) of Canadians not wanting any restrictions (ie whenever a woman decides she wants one). In that source, the additional 45% who want some restrictions on abortion, but not complete banning of abortion, are also accounted for, rounding off the remaining sample size. Of those people in the group wanting access to restrictions, at least some identify as pro-life but want to allow abortions for things like rape, potential death of the mother, incest, and so forth, leading to the 27% value from the Ekos value comes from.

andyt andyt:

Only half are pro-choice? Canada is evenly split between pro and anti-abortion vies? I would doubt that. I find Khar's posts just too much to read, can you point me to where it says that?

49% are for access at a women's choosing, 45% are for abortion with some restrictions (such as during the first 20 weeks only as you've mentioned, when most abortions in Canada are done), and the remaining 6% want none whatsoever.

Of those, it further breaks down as 27% identify as pro-life (complete ban or mostly ban with some reasons to allow) while 52% identify as pro-choice (on demand, some restrictions), while the the remaining 21% who likely end up in the some restrictions camp identify as neither but have thoughts. Give or take some wandering across the polls and groupings.

How I interpreted it anyways.

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

As I've said in the past when this topic has arisen,pro choice doesn't mean pro abortion. It means that the woman should be allowed to choose. Many who are pro choice would never choose to have an abortion, but would not deny that choice to someone else. It's not some monolithic block that believes in killing a fetus.

Yep, and I'm betting a lot of both the abortions on demand and the abortions with restrictions group have a lot of people who believe along these lines as well. I don't really have a stance, but I support the concept at large. Well said.

[fifeboy]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

As I've said in the past when this topic has arisen,pro choice doesn't mean pro abortion. It means that the woman should be allowed to choose. Many who are pro choice would never choose to have an abortion, but would not deny that choice to someone else. It's not some monolithic block that believes in killing a fetus.

Thank you, I was going to post but you said it first.

[MeganC]

I know I would never have an abortion and that's my choice.

[andyt]

Yeah, but would you go topless?

[Zipperfish]

I thought the morning after pill would deal wiht a lot of the ethical issues. Guess not.

[N_Fiddledog]

I've always gone back and forth on this issue.

At one time the conclusion that felt clever to me was, 'Let the women figure it out. It's their issue. It's probably good that it should be debated, but let the ones with skin in the game decide."

But then, because politics in general started to interest me and I discovered I was a right winger, I found the issue intermittently being thrust in my face, so I was called upon to fabricate an opinion.

The pro-life people always seemed so much more pleasant, and the girls were prettier, so I oriented to that side, but once you admit to an opinion there are spoil sports who demand you justify it, so I found I had to investigate the issue.

So I did and my opinion fluctuates now demanding on what day it is, but last I remembered I'd come to the conclusion late term abortions were morally wrong, because after about five months the baby is a human and that's all there is to it.

So I was pretty pleased with myself there, but just now I was watching a video where Brian Lilley is interviewing this woman who was at the protest today. She used to be an abortion provider, but she switched sides.

http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.ca/2014/0 ... r-who.html

Now we seem to believe it's 3 weeks, so that's where I am this evening. Could change in the morning though.

[PostFactum]

martin14 martin14:

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Probly not the good topless kind either.

I guarantee it.

No Ukrainian girls.
Only angry leftish SJW feminists.

Femen can't be everywhere.

[DrCaleb]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Probly not the good topless kind either.

Meh, not bad. Definitely not 'Olga' from the Russian Shotput team.

The video is on The National, if anyone cares.

[Brenda]

MeganC MeganC:

I know I would never have an abortion and that's my choice.

Would you deny someone else to have one though?
Would you hold your friends hand when she is having one?
Would you help her raise the child she does not want if she is not allowed to have one?
Would you help her get through the stress of childbirth and then adoption?

Those are all questions that matter.

[commanderkai]

Khar Khar:

If you had nitpicked your way a whole sentence later ( ), you'd see the Ipsos Reid version where the 6% value is cited (showing how I distinguished it from the 27% value from later), as well as further evidence of the 50% (49%) of Canadians not wanting any restrictions (ie whenever a woman decides she wants one).

In that same article (the National Post one) that you cited, 60% of Canadians would also support a law that would place restrictions on abortion. A bit of a contradiction, there. If you add up the "some restrictions" and "no abortion at all" only gets you 51% of the population, and yet, a small, but significant chunk of the population that believes in "unrestricted" abortion also want a law restricting abortion.

[BartSimpson]

MeganC MeganC:

I know I would never have an abortion and that's my choice.

My estimation of you just improved by about 1,000%