Recently I was chatting with my hair stylist as she tried yet again to do something with my unruly mop. Another very pregnant employee had just finished her shift, and was waiting for her husband to pick her up from work so that they could keep an ultrasound appointment.
She was looking forward to this experience, and showed us pictures from her previous pregnancies. I was in awe. Ultrasounds have come a long way from the grainy images done when my son's first baby pic was done many years ago.
The newest thing now is to get 3-D ultrasounds done. Of course, this is at an extra cost. I think she said around $200 for their package - but well worth it, it my opinion. Apparently you can get CD's, DVD's, videos and all kinds of options.
If you look at the sample photos on this Canadian site, you can see the amazing images of these unborn infants at the top right and left of the page. If you keep watching, they morph into the pics of the babies after they emerge from the safety of their mothers' wombs.
It struck me at the time, that there is such a dichotomy between the fate of unborn children whose mothers want them versus that of the unwanted child.
Designer photos for the chosen! Death for the unwanted. How is this fair?
When I mentioned to the two hair stylists that I couldn't understand how some women and doctors could see fit to kill such a beautiful living being, they agreed.
My own hairstylist said, "Well, at least they don't abort in later stages", or something to that effect.
I told her that she was incorrect - that in Canada there is no abortion law, and it is legal to end an unborn life at any stage; even in the cases of partial-birth abortions.
She was in shock, and asked another stylist in the shop if she was aware of that. She said no, she had no idea. They had all been operating under the misconception that Canada had some kind of late-term abortion law.
It made me wonder how many other Canadians are so poorly informed. This is an issue that the Pro-choice movement wants to keep quiet. If you even bring up the subject, you are a bigot, which I am sure I will be labelled today (as usual).
My point is, don't give into the pressure to remain quiet. Talk to everyone you know and tell them the truth. Tell them about the slaughter that is happening in Canada.
Ask them to look at those 3-D baby pics and ask if they still feel comfortable about allowing that baby's life to be ended.
Would you ignore an abused child's cry?
We are all responsible.
* * * *
Check out Dr. Roy for an awesome post, and a very scary story about a woman who shot her full term fetus in the head with a pellet gun. Baby died after birth. Woman walks free.
Only in Canada.
Another good read at The Black Kettle - "When the death merchants come..."
Update: And now I will link to another excellent post on this topic (Mark Peters). But feel free to ridicule and obfuscate. It's a democracy here - unless you happen to be a fetus.
Another Important Update: Please read Vek's blog - Canada's view on abortion. It ties in very nicely with what I have been trying to say, which is that Canadians really don't realize that we have no abortion law at all!
Only in Canada.
Another good read at The Black Kettle - "When the death merchants come..."
Update: And now I will link to another excellent post on this topic (Mark Peters). But feel free to ridicule and obfuscate. It's a democracy here - unless you happen to be a fetus.
Another Important Update: Please read Vek's blog - Canada's view on abortion. It ties in very nicely with what I have been trying to say, which is that Canadians really don't realize that we have no abortion law at all!
55 comments:
I never knew myself until I met you. Even pro choicers thought it was. It is wrong not to have it!
Those cute little pics jason are to show parents what it is like in the womb. Joanne wasn't showing you because of the abortion issue she was showing how technology has moved up since she was a young mom. I didn't have the 3-d pics but my sister did and I saw them online they were AMAZING...
A fetus in only part of your body it is not an independent existence (if it was, it could live on it's own if you ripped it out).
With that comment I can sooo tell you are a man!
I usually stay out of the pro-life debate as I can't relate to it as I have no uterus. I have studied biology extensively but htat provides an emotionless answer. To me I view these matters on a population scale which cuts me off from the individual emotional experience of having a life inside you.
I do have a story from experience. My mother had a child between me and my younger sister. The child went full term and when born the sex could not even be identified due to deformities. It died shortly there after. She went full term even though they said there could be issues. We were Catholic so she had to go full term. T
hat birth resulted in years of therapy for my mom and dad and my brother and I were quite disturbed by not having a sibling after 9 months of excitement. Kind of took the joy out of the entire situation.
It also set a an atmosphere of dread and fright when she got pregnant with my sister. My mother lost weight while carrying her and was actually the thinnest she had been her entire life and mom is not a big woman. The anxiety of going full term with a fetus that should have been aborted seriously put my sister at risk due to stress as well as my mothers well being.
This issue is not black and white which tends to be the only way to discuss things here. There are situations that warrant a different approach than complete bans.
My mom is much more to me than a birthing vessel to be expendable for a fetus or a piece of religious dogma.
I don't think you could be labelled a bigot for being pro-life as you are only relaying feelings about all unborn children. If you felt it necessary to stop aborting white fetus' I would be the first to label you a bigot though.
Those 3-D ultrasounds are way cool! I saw some prior to being my friends birthing partner.
BTW, I am shocked and appalled that in general abortions are available up to so late in the prgnancy. It seems to be all or nothing on both sides of this issue and setting a restriction on when you can no longer abort is going to be impossible as it will require these two groups conceding a little on both sides.
I for one am not holding my breath.
Cherniak_wtf said:
"There is no soul or life until later on in the pregnancy."
and:
"A fetus in only part of your body it is not an independent existence (if it was, it could live on it's own if you ripped it out)."
I have a really hard time trying to figure out when exactly people think a baby is supposed to magically acquire a "soul" during gestation that makes it A-OK to kill beforehand (if your belief system is informed by religious notions of the soul, etc.). Either it's an inherent property of the first cell from the moment of conception (makes sense to me), or it is supposed to be magically conferred upon exit (which makes little logical sense to me, but OK), or some random point in the middle (which, um, wtf - how is that chosen?). Believe me, the little guy who is about to be evicted from my womb has had a personality of his own for quite awhile, so I guess that means I subscribe to the first option. My personal beliefs are based more on science than religion... in my view, different DNA for my not-yet-born child means he is a separate entity from me. One that depends on me, yes, but the same could be said of any child under one year old... they depend on others to feed and clothe them, without which they would not survive. If that's part of your belief as to why abortion is alright, does it also mean infanticide is OK because an infant could not live on its own?
BTW, I am shocked and appalled that in general abortions are available up to so late in the prgnancy.
Jay, I'm with you on that one! I think this all-or-nothing argument has been an amazing bit of propaganda.
Tamara, I hear you, but to have any hope of saving even late-term babies from being exterminated, we need to be able to compromise.
I think there is common ground for a majority of Canadians on that issue at least.
It's like saying well, we can't save all those victims in the New Orleans flood, so we won't try to save any because that wouldn't be fair.
Souls wow, scientists can't even prove they exhist so how can they say that the fetus gets one later.. what makes a scientist discuss this issue with no proof. Oh wait they believe it, well some people believe lots of things. Scientist and doctors are supposed to go on facts not spirits.
I believe we have one and most do, no matter what religion but their is no proof. So if they base their abortion tactics on when the soul existed then they have no argument and we should start again.
All or nothing is a hard thing but one side believes it is murder and the other believes it is freedom... good vs evil but which side is which? They both believe they are doing good. Who knows anymore but Joanne has a major point there should be regulations.
Jay,
I don't believe most men feel like cherniak. Some get very involved and bond before the baby leaves the womb. Women are bonded very quickly due to the fact it is inside us. Mind you some women never bond but that is a small percentage, yet it happens.
I'm a bonder heck all I have to do is look at a baby and I melt. I've trained myself to walk away though because I find it painful to face them. I have a great urge to have more children, I just fight it.
I'm sorry about your sibling, maybe it would of been easier on your guys for not knowing about it. But I keep thinking of that child, he or she got to know you for a short time and that would of been a good thing as far as I am concerned.
I went to a funeral in Feb for a 4 year old girl. She was born with major problems and every day she lived was called a miracle by her doctors. Her parents were just grateful they had her for 4 years. They made the time they had with her count even though it almost killed their marriage. They feel blessed (in every way not just a religious one). Even at the funeral there was a calm atmosphere of the parents being grateful for the little time they had with her.
There is no slaughter, that's the truth.
There is no soul or life until later on in the pregnancy.
So if you are an athiest, does that mean there is no such thing as murder?
By the way Joanne, you're a bigot! (seven comments and nobody else has stepped up).
Thanks for that great story, Sara.
Yes, how do we have the right to decide which life has value, and which one should be snuffed out?
I know someone very close to me who has found his soul-mate in a beautiful young woman who happens to have cerebral palsy. She is whole in every sense of the word, except that she has some motor issues. She has a wonderful, sunny personality, she is getting excellent marks in school, and she is a pleasure to be around.
If her birth mother had chosen to get rid of this wonderful human being, so many people in this world would have been deprived of the joy of knowing and loving her.
By the way Joanne, you're a bigot! (seven comments and nobody else has stepped up).
lol!!! Thanks, Brian. They would have been calling me a liar too, if not for you. ;)
cherniak_wtf said..."But like most Cons, you prefer emotion to dictate your actions and thinking."
Considering most lefties accuse the right of being heartless & emotionless, you must have giggled when you wrote this and then went on to write a post designed to be insulting and disrespectful to Joanne's beliefs. There's a certain name given to those who make deliberately provocative posts. Can you guess what that name is?
Abortion is an emotionally charged issue which polarizes people. There is no middle ground and that won't ever change which is why there'll never be a satisfactory resolution to this issue.
Joanne, as you know, I don't like abortions but I believe there are circumstances where abortion is appropriate. According to the "rules" of this black/white subject, I am therefore pro-choice so let me attempt to put the issue into terms which are respectful of you.
Abortion is a choice. No-one is ever forced to have an abortion. Never.
Doctors may recommend abortions in certain circumstances where the pressures of childbirth might endanger the mother but that is still only a recommendation. The final choice rests with the mother and, to a much lesser degree, the father.
Choice is the hallmark of a free society where personal liberties are respected. Despite the best efforts of the Liberals since Trudeau, we are a free society.
Choice, like truth, is a double-edged sword. No-one can force you to change your choice not to have an abortion. Likewise, no-one can force those who choose abortion to change their choice.
It would be inappropriate for government to try to force choices onto you but likewise, it is inappropriate for you to impose your choices on others.
mac,
you are right it is our choice, mine is not to but when people hear that they jump on me and say why not. Well hell I don't believe in getting rid of my children for any reason not even my own life. Yet, I do see why a 14 year old girl of rape would do it, but I also see why she would keep it. There is beauty is life but we are told it is a burden.
I was 23 with my first child and a lot of people thought I should of waited, we ruined our lives etc...
I WAS 23! Not 15, why would someone not step up and tell me I made the right decision for me and let me know the good stuff as well as the bad. No one did, so I learned it myself, I think that was the hardest part.
Childbirth is no joy anymore, society thinks that at the most it is a burden unless you are financially stable.
Just to let you know that we made $18,000 a year when we had our first child, and that was together.
Abortion is a choice. No-one is ever forced to have an abortion. Never.
Maybe not in Canada.
Then again
I don't know in her case because their is no real facts on it but.... a friend of mine was pushed into having her tubes burned because of her mother. Her mother told her for years how bad it would be if she had more kids (she has a 13 year old now) her mother adopted her and she was an unruly child (as her mother tells the story) her mother also handed her back to group homes whenever she couldn't handle parenting. Just because her adopted mother was a fucking idiot doesn't mean she was.
Her daughter right now is 13 and a beautiful child! She really is sweet... she would of made a wonderful mother to other children as well..
This is not a case of it being forced by doctors but it was mentally by her so called mother.
Sara, it sounds like your friends/family were trying to run your life for you. Typical, well-intentioned interference... like your friend's mother. I'm glad you were strong enough to make your own choices! It's too bad your friend wasn't.
Joanne, are you saying forced abortion is a general policy in Canada based on an alleged incident which, according to the author, took place in 1971?
Think about my words and you'll recognize the truth in them. I would much rather see unwanted children being adopted to loving families but freedom of choice is paramount.
A Statistics Canada survey of abortions in 2001 showed 96.7 per cent were completed before 16 weeks of pregnancy.
Mac, I hear what you're saying.
When you said nobody is ever forced to have an abortion, I had to point out that there are always exceptions. Of course, in China that type of thing is much more common.
Red, thanks for those stats. I find abortion statistics difficult to pin down. I do think that even one baby's life taken days before birth is too many.
Joanne,
I am pro-choice myself, but an educated choice. I think stories like this are important for the general public. As more detailed information about fetus' evolves I think it will be hard for people not to think about the consequences.
A woman should choose, but she should choose with all the information available. Sometimes Pro-Choice people treat the act of an abortion as "not a big deal" but we should treat life with respect. We need more stories like this to come out in the public sphere Joanne. It certainly raises some interesting questions.
ok so we know a lot about young women having abortions and even for their own sense of worth can we not teach in school the sex = children. Without being mean about it?
Thank you, Riley. I appreciate how you, Sara, Mac and others have different views than I do, but still remain respectful in this debate.
I think we can all agree at the very least, that late-term abortions should be avoided at all costs, unless the mother's life is in jeopardy.
can we not teach in school the sex = children.
Sex doesn't necessarily mean having kids of it's gay sex. ;)
You got me on that one I don't know why I said schools,
I will be teaching my children that if they do the act then they will know what can happen. I'm not big on waiting for marriage but I'm not big on 12 year olds getting preggo either. We gotta do something.
just to let you know I"m listening to McSquishy right no on 580 CFRA and OMG what an idiot.
He says about the health tax we pay, that is was invested in medicare or he would of had to raise school tax???? why would one have to do with the other... he says he invested it back into the system. Well I've had 2 children and a gallbladder operation since he was in and it was bad. The health care in ON is getting worse not better since he has been in.
Abortion should never be a decision arrived at in a casual manner or something to be taken lightly in any way whatsoever. As someone who has come down in the most practical of terms on the “pro-life” side of the debate (four times for goodness sake!), but who acknowledges the other side of the argument and accepts its fundamental legitimacy for various reasons, I resent the willful mischaracterizations of those who are “pro-choice” by right-wing fundamentalists.
Joanne, you state that “even one baby's life taken days before birth is too many.” Again you seem to be focusing debate on late-term abortions that most, if not all, would agree are extremely painful to deal with and are usually the result of exceptional circumstances involving medical complications and unusual health issues. As the statistics would indicate the vast majority of abortions do not fall into this category.
While I don’t subscribe to the notion that “life” begins at conception, I am acutely mindful of it (legacy of pseudo-Catholic guilt) and my wife and I have made decisions accordingly. That said, I respect the decision of those who feel otherwise and really don’t comprehend why this has to be such a bitterly divisive issue.
Joanne -- Sex doesn't necessarily mean having kids of [sic] it's gay sex. ;)
Say what you want about gays, but when they partner in a relationship and want kids (and please don’t make any cheap jokes here), they want them for all the right reasons. There’s kind of a perverse irony here. Whereas many heterosexual couples reproduce by accident, incident or some thoughtless sexual misbehaviour, in a homosexual relationship the process is, by nature, quite a bit more deliberate and requires not only the consent of the individuals involved but of others too who are willing to donate of themselves. I think “straight” people could actually take a page from their book in this regard when it comes to the matter reproduction.
But as to your original point and Sara’s observation, abstinence is the best form of birth control without a doubt. That shouldn’t rule out various means of prevention as prone to occasional fallibility as they may be.
Extremists on both sides, basically that is what it boils down to.
I met an advocate while I was in Halifax and she was an extremist. I cut ties with her because her causes were just too personal and emotional for her. She had no way of letting go, you know the difference between a tree hugger who finds creative ways to help the forest and one that chains himself up to the tree with a gun to his head if anyone tries to bulldoze it.
Thats what I see, people let their emotions get involved.
I've done that a few times, but I am trying not to.
Amazing photos!
It is hard to deny when confronted with the truth of reality, seeing the little fingers and toes, arms and legs of fully formed human “Babies” those so called “blobs of tissue”.
But hey we live in the age of denial of what we can actually see because it does not fit in with our “political agenda.” So fully formed babies like you can see there will continue to be aborted right up to the “moment of delivery” as “fetuses” by a deft stab with the doctor’s instrument into the neck of the so called “fetus”, draw out the brain matter, to deliver a dead fetus into a pail set for emptying into the garbage.
Wow! Now that disposed of a “problem pregnancy.” And the Mother does not have to suffer the pain of seeing someone else getting her Baby or “Fetus” to raise and nurture.
“See no evil” in it, therefore it doesn’t exist as a problem. I guess Morgantaller gets to see a lot of "blobs of tissue" with little hands, fingers, toes, and legs thrown into the bucket for disposal or are there some uses for “recycling fetuses” spare parts?
He says about the health tax we pay, that is was invested in medicare or he would of had to raise school tax????
Sara, that's ridiculous!
Red, that was a very sincere and well thought-out commentary. Regarding the fact that late-term abortions are rare, should we therefore de-criminalize any behaviour that could hurt others, but is not considered statistically relevant?
I think if that is the case, we should probably decriminalize people murdering their parents because it doesn't happen that often to be a big issue.
Thanks, Mary. I can almost hear the reaction now. ;)
Joanne wasn't showing you because of the abortion issue she was showing how technology has moved up since she was a young mom.
As someone who has come down in the most practical of terms on the “pro-life” side of the debate (four times for goodness sake!)
Sara, Red, I think this thread got a little derailed. I originally posted first of all to showcase the awesome new technology available to prospective parents these days, but also to underscore the possiblity that many Canadians may be misinformed regarding the current abortion situation in Canada - that many people may be under the false assumption that there is some kind of law, when in fact there is none.
Joanne – You are throwing up a strawman. To paraphrase: “So I guess because late-term abortions are quite rare we should allow kids to kill their parents given that’s statistically insignificant as well.” Yeah, that’s certainly what I’m implying and it makes perfect sense doesn’t it? (And with an added bonus twist of irony!) And we should actively encourage builders to make shoddy bridges that collapse on people because that doesn’t happen all that often either.
Given that according to StatsCan (that you have a “problem” with) almost 97% of abortions are performed within the first trimester, without any formal regulations, so where is the problem here? With the 3% that are due to medical complications or health issues?
As I’ve said before, if you have zero-tolerance for abortion, then just say so and stop playing this silly game where you pretend to just throw it out there for discussion and then dance around the issue, back-patting the pro-lifers and sniffing at any kind of dissenting opinion.
Yes, babies are wonderful, marvelous, quite miraculous things. As someone who’s been in a delivery room four times and nervously cut each of their umbilical cords I can personally attest to that, but please don’t be disingenuous about the issue as it does you no great service when it comes to such an important matter.
Red, I thought I was being quite straight-forward about where I stand on this. I wouldn't want to see any abortions, but I accept that it is not a realistic POV, so I would at least prefer to see some kind of limit.
If you think you can read my mind, feel free to try to do so. But trying to tell me what I think is rather presumptuous and controlling.
Riley Hennessey said...
Sometimes Pro-Choice people treat the act of an abortion as "not a big deal" but we should treat life with respect.
Sorry, but I have to take issue with this. Who exactly are these pro-choice people that act as if abortion is "no big deal"? This is just the perpetuation of the conservative straw-man caricature.
Mary said...
Amazing photos!
It is hard to deny when confronted with the truth of reality, seeing the little fingers and toes, arms and legs of fully formed human “Babies” those so called “blobs of tissue”.
What utter nonsense. Out of curiosity I went to the site to get an idea of how far along these fetuses were for taking the pictures and guess what information I found in one of their packages:
Golden Package $299
. First 3D visit between 18-25 weeks
. Second 3D visit between 25-32 weeks
Well outside the first trimester that RT so handily pointed out comprises 97% of the abortions taking place.
Joanne -- I'm not being presumptuous and controlling, but merely pointing out that you seem to be a bit all over the map here when it comes to the issue of abortion. If you are in favour of limits, then what do you think is appropriate? If you have a zero-tolerance outlook, well I can respect that. I just want you to come down with a definitive position. I've made my feelings quite clear on the matter and I think you should do so also.
Well outside the first trimester that RT so handily pointed out comprises 97% of the abortions taking place.
CC, so what? It's all moot anyway, isn't it? There are no laws.
I just want you to come down with a definitive position. I've made my feelings quite clear on the matter and I think you should do so also.
Red, I shouldn't have to do anything I don't want to unless it is a moral or legal obligation.
However, whether or not I personally have a zero-tolerance outlook is beside the point. I feel that there should be some kind if law; restricting abortions at some arbitrarily-defined time in the pregnancy that we can agreee upon as a nation.
Joanne (True Blue) said...
CC, so what? It's all moot anyway, isn't it? There are no laws.
I guess my "what" would be that you're not presenting your views on abortion as a "moderate" one. Whereas you present an argument against abortion, but then take a moderate tone when questioned in the comments section.
This post is a good example of the ambiguity that you tend to present. On the one hand you give an anecdote about these "baby pictures" and make a somewhat valid point about late term abortion. Then you link to sites like LifeSite or The Black Kettle (who draws a completely inane parallel between abortion and Teri Schiavo of all things) and label them a "good read", while they are clearly NOT moderate sites but advocate an all-out ban on abortion.
CC - Your underlying assumption then would be that I should never link to anything unless I absolutely agree with it in totality.
Just because it is interesting is not good enough.
Well, sorry but I don't buy that argument. Start your own blog and operate that way if you like.
almost 97% of abortions are performed within the first trimester,
Rt,
what about the other 3%,, that is a lot of babies
what about the other 3%,, that is a lot of babies
Good point, Sara! We're talking human lives here; not cold statistics. Thank you for that.
I believe that would translate into about 3,000 per annum across Canada. Out of population of 35 million that would equate to about .01%. Statistically speaking, a number of almost complete insignificance. Also, as I said, but you carefully chose to ignore, these are primarily due to medical anomalies or health complications. Counter-Coulter is right when he points to your two-faced nature on this issue. You come out all strident in the post to get things fired up and then equivocate and waffle in the comments, backslapping the pro-lifers who support you, dismissing those who disagree and refusing to take a stand. Fine, you think there are limits; then what should they be? And why? You simply cannot talk about a difficult, highly problematic issue like this and just chuck shit at a wall and see what sticks. I’m sorry, but that is unacceptable. Please either have the courage of your convictions or STFU.
And God forbid, don’t bleat to me about how much you, Sara, Suzanna and the rest of your coterie of fundie pro-lifers value the precious innocents when every single day more than 16,000 children around the world die from starvation and disease (that’s one child every five seconds!) Instead of rattling on about abortion, how about instead you adopt one of these kids through a foster program if “life” is such a paramount issue. Now there’s a cold hard number you can actually do something about changing!
You come out all strident in the post to get things fired up and then equivocate and waffle in the comments,
Let me try this again, real slow now, so you and CC can follow. I believe there are a lot of Canadians who are under the mistaken notion that there is some kind of abortion law in Canada. Now that isn't so hard, is it?
Joanne -- Even slower now… Yeah, we get that. There are many Canadians who are unaware of this rather curious fact. But again, allow me to point out that, notwithstanding any regulation on the matter, 97% of abortions are conducted within the first trimester and that the remainder are due to medical complications and health issues. What part of THAT don't you understand ?
I can’t speak for CC -- he’s more than capable of voicing his own opinion, but I stand by what I said. You talk the talk, are more than happy to back-slap the pro-lifers, but will not come out with your own position regarding the issue of abortion. If you’re in favour of limits, where are the markers set on this, and why? It’s a difficult question, I know, and you keep dodging it.
Johanne: no pictures to back up your "unruly mop" statement?
:P
laroche -lol!! Let's just say that thin hair has never been a problem for me!
If you’re in favour of limits, where are the markers set on this, and why?
I believe I've stated this before. I feel that after there is a heart beat we should not be allowing abortions. I don't know exactly what stage that is. Perhaps Suzanne or Dr.Roy know.
At the very latest, we should not allow abortions when the preborn child can feel pain. How barbaric is that? Stick a scissors in the back of the skull...
Joanne (True Blue) said...
CC - Your underlying assumption then would be that I should never link to anything unless I absolutely agree with it in totality.
Not true. You can link to anything your heart desires. My point was that you consistently link to militant pro-life sites and identify with them by stating things like "good read" or "great article" and then add in some "me too" comments.
For example, what particularly did you identify with in the Black Kettle "article" that made you label it as "another good read"? Was it was his not-so-subtle comparison of pro-choicers to Hitler? His slippery slope argument that the killing of the elderly or infirm couldn't be too far behind? Or perhaps the bizarre reference to Terri Schiavo?
Well, sorry but I don't buy that argument. Start your own blog and operate that way if you like.
Ahh the old "I'm taking my ball and going home" meme. Obviously, if you didn't want opposing comments you could have either disabled comments or deleted comments you disagree with, which hasn't been the case with you.
My gut feeling, for what its worth (I know, I know...very little), is that maybe you're not as militant as some of your other pro-lifer friends out there and you don't want to run the risk of running afoul of them. Either that or really don't have the courage of your convictions to stand behind a particular position regardless of consequence.
My point was that you consistently link to militant pro-life sites and identify with them by stating things like "good read" or "great article" and then add in some "me too" comments.
Sometimes I link to Liberal blogs too. That doesn't mean I necessarily endorse the content.
On the other hand, when I recommend a post as a "good read", it can be on the basis of suggesting something as particularly thought-provoking. In the case of Black Kettle, I think the slippery-slope argument has some merit when you consider that abortions are already being performed on the basis of gender selection, or a slight imperfection or minor handicap such as a cleft palate, etc. I think therefore that the concern is very relevant indeed.
if you didn't want opposing comments you could have either disabled comments or deleted comments you disagree with, which hasn't been the case with you.
The only comments I delete or disallow are ones that use extreme vulgarity or are particularly vindictive against a particular person. You can suggest I put out my opinion and it is my right or choice to decide whether or not I wish to comply.
However, it amuses me that I am constantly asked this question, because I have not tried to hide it.
I am sympathetic to people on both sides of this debate, but I feel that if we are ever to move forward on this issue we need to reach some kind of compromise. I do not fear my more "militant" collegues. I have many times suggested that this can't be an all or nothing argument.
I am flattered however, that you and Red seem to value my opinion so much. Or is it that you're trying to trip me up, or cloud the real issue that nobody seems to want to address?
Red Tory, do you have a link handy for the StatsCan study that shows the second- and third-trimester abortions are primarily for medical reasons? I would be interested to see that. With so many possible medical interventions these days, I have a hard time believing abortion would be a neccessary course of action after 25 weeks or so, but hey, I still do need to learn my one new thing for the day! :)
Joanne - I do recognize the need to compromise on time limits... also, I recognize that not everyone has the same definition of when life begins as I do (thus the reason for compromise). And I recognize that I can make my own moral choices within the framework of the laws (hence, no abortions for me).
Still, it is so strange to think about two cases, both totally plausible... one baby who is born at 25 weeks, who doctors fight for and save, and one who is aborted in the womb. How can we as a society reconcile the different values placed on the lives of these infants?
Tamara, many great points there. On your last one, it seems the whole matter is dependent upon the whim of the pregnant woman. Now that is power!
Joanne -- I believe I've stated this before. I feel that after there is a heart beat we should not be allowing abortions.
There you go ladies and gentlemen. No abortions after 28 days of conception. Now the interesting thing here is that there’s no reason given for why this rather arbitrary date is set other than it quite literally appeals to the heart. I’m not going to split hairs over the number of days or the validity of the argument that the presence of a functional heart is the determining factor of what can be regarded as “life” or the acceptability (or not) of abortion, but as I’ve said many times before, this does point to the “angels dancing on a head of a pin” difficulty when discussing this issue. As for the sticking scissors in skulls thing, once again you’re doing a classic bit of legerdemain here with that. Distort, divert, distract...
No abortions after 28 days of conception.
Glad you haven't abandoned me altogether, Red!
Where do you get your information from re: heartbeat? Just wondering.
That was just a suggestion. We could pick the first sign of brain waves or whatever. It would have to be something that everyone could agree on, or at least a majority.
Why does "personhood" commence the moment the child has exited the mother's body? The child was just as viable two minutes ago in terms of being able to sustain his own life, and having his own DNA, etc.
It was an arbitrary decision made by a court.
Joanne -- Where do you get your information from re: heartbeat? Just wondering.
It seems to be thrown out there on a number of pro-life websites. Evidently, this is when the heart becomes fully formed and functional in the “pre-born” fetus. I have no reason to doubt this, but found it rather curious that’s what you used as your marker for the acceptability of abortion. To me it just points out how arbitrary the nature of the argument is. I think that those who attempt to equivocate and trim over when “life” begins and base their arguments accordingly are in dire straights, logically speaking.
See, here’s the problem. Personally speaking, I’m pro-life, (I hate that term) as a matter of principle and would draw the line much further back, but I’m not fanatical about it. I also recognize that others hold differing opinions, that there are matters of practicality, medical situations, etc. involved that can cloud the issue.
You are doing the exact same thing that you appear to be accusing the courts of doing. “Personhood” and “viability” and all of those things are arbitrary constructs. Is a fetus a “person”? I haven’t a clue. That seems like a false premise to me. Depends on how you define a “person.” The “viability” aspect is a bit more clear-cut but given the advanced state of medical technology, seems kind of beside the point.
it would be when a fetus can survive outside of the womb without any medical intervention?
I think that's an arbitrary marker that at least makes some kind of sense. I guess then you have to decide what exactly is "medical intervention" though.
Cherniak, what would you propose as a reasonable compromise in this debate, if you could draw up the legislation?
Joanne,
Thanks for linking my post regarding people's lack knowledge of abortion in Canada.
My pleasure, Vek. It was a great post. Lots of good information and well thought out.
Post a Comment