Man going to try and stop government funded abortions!

[Iollain]

http://www.proudtobecanadian.ca/blo...y_taxes_if_govt_uses_money_to_fund_free_abor/

This feller will need our prayers and support.

 

[draper]

Going to be interesting to see, nonetheless.

I have absolutely no idea how to go about this legally. Reeferdum? Too many shades of gray. Charter? Okay, but where do tax dollars come it?

Heh. Should be interesting.

 

[Avatar]

IMHO, abortion should not be government funded. Its an elective procedure and should be billed to the user accordingly.

 

[selfintercession]

IMHO, abortion should not be government funded. Its an elective procedure and should be billed to the user accordingly.

Agreed... but hey, at least OHIP and the like won't be paying for Viagra like american Medicare is now

 

[Breetai]

Good for him!

This is supposed to be a democracy that we live in and so many bills get passed which the majority of the populous does not support. That includes abortion and gay marriage; which if they do have majority support it is not known, and gun registration; which is not even close to having majority support. Why do our taxes go to idiotic programs which do not have majority support? This is not democracy that we live in, this country is a dictatorship masked as a democracy. It's a damned shame.

 

[.Mikha'el.]

I know that the Supreme Court is very liberal, but I do not see him winning if the case should get that far.

 

[Alexander Nissi]

I don't think he'll win either but still it is worth a shot.~Alec

 

[Iollain]

http://nb.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=nb-little20050202

Here is the latest news.

 

[Iollain]

I think i'll make a big sign that says 'Go David!', and put it out by the mail.

 

[Iollain]

Good for him!

This is supposed to be a democracy that we live in and so many bills get passed which the majority of the populous does not support. That includes abortion and gay marriage; which if they do have majority support it is not known, and gun registration; which is not even close to having majority support. Why do our taxes go to idiotic programs which do not have majority support? This is not democracy that we live in, this country is a dictatorship masked as a democracy. It's a damned shame.

Hey! I noticed that too!

 

[Breetai]

Hey! I noticed that too!

A lot of people are noticing that.

We're having a youth retreat today and I was helping to cook/serve breakfast with the men's Christian breakfast group (a group of men who meet every Thurs. for breakfast/Bible study). Most of the conversation revolved around how our MP is not representing his region's desires and how he's just going with what the PM tells him to do. DOESN'T ANYONE IS OUR GOVERNMENT HAVE THE BACKBONE TO STAND UP FOR WHAT THEY BELIEVE IN??? The majority of the people in our region don't agree with gay marriage and gun control(the two hot issues here) and yet he still votes for whatever Paul Martin tells him to, much to our dismay. He's not the only MP without any dignity in that area either. Our government is full of a bunch of spineless puppets who do whatever their superiors tell them to do, our of fear of reprimandation.

Welcome to the wonderful world of living under a dictatorship. All of those brave men who fought in past wars to secure our freedom must be rolling in their graves. Our government is turning into something very similar to what we were fighting against in the great wars. That goes for the US government too. What's next? Invading Polland? Oh ya, the Iraq thing. Nevermind. Are those two the same thing? Of course not, but they do share a lot of simularities.

I think I'm going to move to North Korea. At least their government isn't hypocritical about what kind of government they are.

 

[Iollain]

I don't know, i don't even pretend to understand the government, they just seem to be posessed of the devil or somethin'.

 

[Breetai]

I don't know, i don't even pretend to understand the government, they just seem to be posessed of the devil or somethin'.

Hmmm...that just might be the best explainations that I've ever heard!

 

[Nitoah]

I totally disagree with this man's action. Stopping to fund abortion means yet another sources of inequality in our society. The poor won't be able to afford them, but that won't stop them from getting abortions. They will try to do it themselves or turn to cheaper, clandestine abortions. Either way, their health may be jeopardized and they could even die. Anyone who has ever read about African countries knows that even though abortion is illegal in many of these countries (for example Cameroon), there are high numbers of clandestine abortions each year. The number of deaths following these interventions are pretty disturbing: for example, in sub-Saharan Africa, 680 per 100,000 interventions in 1999 resulted in the death of the mother (according to the Alan Guttmatcher Institute, 1999).[font=&quot][/font]

 

[selfintercession]

I totally disagree with this man's action. Stopping to fund abortion means yet another sources of inequality in our society. The poor won't be able to afford them, but that won't stop them from getting abortions. They will try to do it themselves or turn to cheaper, clandestine abortions. Either way, their health may be jeopardized and they could even die. Anyone who has ever read about African countries knows that even though abortion is illegal in many of these countries (for example Cameroon), there are high numbers of clandestine abortions each year. The number of deaths following these interventions are pretty disturbing: for example, in sub-Saharan Africa, 680 per 100,000 interventions in 1999 resulted in the death of the mother (according to the Alan Guttmatcher Institute, 1999).

Why should I fund other people's abortions? It's not inequality... some people can't afford cars... so they steal them or by stolen ones. If the Canadian government funded everything for everyone who couldn't afford it, then that would make Canada 100% socialist and that's not what Canada is about.

 

[Nitoah]

Why should I fund other people's abortions? It's not inequality... some people can't afford cars... so they steal them or by stolen ones. If the Canadian government funded everything for everyone who couldn't afford it, then that would make Canada 100% socialist and that's not what Canada is about.

The fact that some people are richer than others IS inequality. Here is a definition of inequality:

in·e·qual·i·ty
n. pl. in·e·qual·i·ties

1. 1. The condition of being unequal.
   2. An instance of being unequal.
   3. Lack of equality, as of opportunity, treatment, or status.
   4. Social or economic disparity: the growing inequality between rich and poor.

Of course, you'll find inequality in every human society (even in socialists ones) and it's fair to think that the Canadian government can't fund everything for everyone in order to prevent inequalities (nor should it!). However, when it comes to inequalities, one can't compare a medical procedure (a matter of health and in this case, of life and death) to the purchase of a car. In Canada, we have a social safety net that tries to prevent inequalities when it comes to citizens seeing their basic needs met. As Canadian citizens, we have a right to health, and the health care system assures that right.

It's a very dangerous thing to bring religious beliefs and moral judgements in the system because you never know where it's going to stop. For example, will you stop funding treatment to drug addicts? How about the newborns of drug addicts? After all, one could say that it's their parent's fault if they are born with an incapacity, so the parents should pay for healthcare, and if they can't well they should have thought about it before getting involved with drugs! How about people that get lung diseases from smoking? How about teenagers who get AIDS from unsafe sex? And the list goes on...

 

[selfintercession]

The fact that some people are richer than others IS inequality. Here is a definition of inequality:

in·e·qual·i·ty
n. pl. in·e·qual·i·ties

1. 1. The condition of being unequal.
   2. An instance of being unequal.
   3. Lack of equality, as of opportunity, treatment, or status.
   4. Social or economic disparity: the growing inequality between rich and poor.

Of course, you'll find inequality in every human society (even in socialists ones) and it's fair to think that the Canadian government can't fund everything for everyone in order to prevent inequalities (nor should it!). However, when it comes to inequalities, one can't compare a medical procedure (a matter of health and in this case, of life and death) to the purchase of a car. In Canada, we have a social safety net that tries to prevent inequalities when it comes to citizens seeing their basic needs met. As Canadian citizens, we have a right to health, and the health care system assures that right.


It's a very dangerous thing to bring religious beliefs and moral judgements in the system because you never know where it's going to stop. For example, will you stop funding treatment to drug addicts? How about the newborns of drug addicts? After all, one could say that it's their parent's fault if they are born with an incapacity, so the parents should pay for healthcare, and if they can't well they should have thought about it before getting involved with drugs! How about people that get lung diseases from smoking? How about teenagers who get AIDS from unsafe sex? And the list goes on...

Actually it depends on which aspect you're looking at... they may be financially unequal to me, but that doesn't make them my inferiors in general. All canadians are equal under the law and I object to my tax dollars going to something that:

a) Is usually not medically-necessary and
b) Is against my personal religious beliefs.

 

[Iollain]

Perhaps the government should send out a booklet that explains the birds and the bees to people, then they wouldn't need to fund abortions.

 

[Breetai]

Perhaps the government should send out a booklet that explains the birds and the bees to people, then they wouldn't need to fund abortions.

Heh, heh.

If people drank less, had greater self respect, actually bothered with condoms and kept their heads on straight, then there wouldn't be so many unplanned pregnancies.

 

[Diagoras]

Heh, heh.

If people drank less, had greater self respect, actually bothered with condoms and kept their heads on straight, then there wouldn't be so many unplanned pregnancies.

If People ate less junk food, smoked fewer cigarettes, exercised, drove more fuel efficient cars, obeyed the speed limit, walked on the sidewalk .... etc

Then we wouldn't need government at all. Fact is we are all human. Get over it.

As to abortion in Canada, it's a non-issue. It has already been through the mill right up to the supreme court. Canada is not a theocracy. It is a secular western democracy. 'Render unto Casaer' and accept the ruling of the highest court in the land. If you personally object to abortion the state will not force it upon you. For all you libertarians out there - If for religious reasons a woman does not terminate her pregnancy but cannot look after the child, who should pay for the mechanism that will allow that child to be adopted? The state? The parents? The church? Me?