Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Should Canada Continue to Allow Full-Term Abortion?


Should Canada Continue to Allow Abortion at Full Term (Up to 9 months Pregnant)?  

12 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

There are currently zero restrictions on when an abortion can take place in Canada, including up to the expected birth date.  Most countries/states set the limit as the first trimester (first three months), or at the very least, the week beyond which the fetus could survive outside the womb (viability).  In Canada a woman can have a fetus destroyed one day before the expected date of birth, a viable baby that would survive outside of the mother. 

https://nationalpost.com/news/as-abortion-debate-becomes-increasingly-polarized-poll-shows-the-views-of-many-canadians-are-more-complicated

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

So, a woman is going to endure 9 months of pregnancy, only to decide at the last possible moment "No"?  Seems exceedingly unlikely, as in never gonna happen.  In fact, its a pretty misogynistic idea t

Who hurt you?

Here are the stats on rate of abortion by gestation stage: https://www.arcc-cdac.ca/backrounders/statistics-abortion-in-canada.pdf https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/canadian_abortion_statis

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

In Canada a woman can have a fetus destroyed one day before the expected date of birth, a viable baby that would survive outside of the mother. 

So, a woman is going to endure 9 months of pregnancy, only to decide at the last possible moment "No"?  Seems exceedingly unlikely, as in never gonna happen.  In fact, its a pretty misogynistic idea that women are interested in having healthy and viable fetuses aborted within a few weeks of their due date.  

Maybe do some research on why women have abortions, and when, before making stupidly misogynistic posts that essentially accuse women (and their doctors) of being casual murderers. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, dialamah said:

So, a woman is going to endure 9 months of pregnancy, only to decide at the last possible moment "No"?  Seems exceedingly unlikely, as in never gonna happen.  In fact, its a pretty misogynistic idea that women are interested in having healthy and viable fetuses aborted within a few weeks of their due date.  

Maybe do some research on why women have abortions, and when, before making stupidly misogynistic posts that essentially accuse women (and their doctors) of being casual murderers. 

 

To abort a baby that is especially so close to birth is just plain murder. If anyone has ever watched an abortion take place and watch as an abortion doctor starts to take apart an unborn fetus in the womb they would never want to support abortion again. I watched as an abortion was taking place on a fetus and it was not a very pleasant thing to see. I watched as the fetus was being torn apart piece by piece and actually fighting for it's life. I can see that maybe in the first few weeks an abortion can take place,, but not very much time after that. A doctor takes an oath to save life. Those doctors that do take an unborn baby's life in the womb should not be called a doctor at all. A butcher doctor would be more appropriate to call them. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dialamah said:

So, a woman is going to endure 9 months of pregnancy, only to decide at the last possible moment "No"?  Seems exceedingly unlikely, as in never gonna happen.  In fact, its a pretty misogynistic idea that women are interested in having healthy and viable fetuses aborted within a few weeks of their due date.  

Maybe do some research on why women have abortions, and when, before making stupidly misogynistic posts that essentially accuse women (and their doctors) of being casual murderers. 

 

Who hurt you?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Who hurt you?

People who suggest women having nearly full-term abortions are doing so for no better reason than they changed their mind about having a baby at 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 months along.  It's a ridiculous assumption and anyone who thinks that clearly has no regard or respect for women generally.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dialamah said:

People who suggest women having nearly full-term abortions are doing so for no better reason than they changed their mind about having a baby at 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 months along.  It's a ridiculous assumption and anyone who thinks that clearly has no regard or respect for women generally.

What?  Men and women come in all form of morality.  Why are you generalizing?  Are you trying to say that all women are always ethical?   It’s just as ridiculous to say the same of men.  If you can justify the legal termination of a pregnancy within days of the expected date of birth, that’s all I need to know about you.  The poll doesn’t ask whether you think abortion should remain legal, but whether there should be a legal limit to stage of pregnancy.  Have some perspective.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the stats on rate of abortion by gestation stage:

https://www.arcc-cdac.ca/backrounders/statistics-abortion-in-canada.pdf

https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/canadian_abortion_statistics/

Z am I wrong..I get the idea from your thread you believe that because an abortion is no longer a criminal offence,  late term pregnancies are simply a matter of asking for one. Its not the case at all:

 https://maggiegordon.wordpress.com/2011/08/11/gestational-limits-on-abortion-in-canada-disproving-anti-choice-rhetoric/

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

We need something on the books.  Canada’s abortion laws might as well be China’s. 

Yep.  Full term abortions are an abomination and are tantamount to murder.  Anyone that supports this practice is a supporter of infantice.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

We need something on the books.  Canada’s abortion laws might as well be China’s. 

It's a non-existent problem.  Why make a law to address a problem that doesn't exist?  Late-term abortions, on the extremely rare occasions they happen, are because the baby is already dead or will not survive being born by more than a few minutes.

Anyway, if any of you had read Rue's links, you'd realize that women in Canada who want abortions after 24 weeks often have to go to the States because most of our medical institutions will not do them past the second trimester.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dialamah said:

It's a non-existent problem.  Why make a law to address a problem that doesn't exist?  Late-term abortions, on the extremely rare occasions they happen, are because the baby is already dead or will not survive being born by more than a few minutes.

Anyway, if any of you had read Rue's links, you'd realize that women in Canada who want abortions after 24 weeks often have to go to the States because most of our medical institutions will not do them past the second trimester.

Serial killing also represents a small percentage of overall homicides.  Nevertheless, serial killing should remain illegal.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

No abortion should be allowed only when it is a fetus which scientifically proven to be the first few months and must NOT be allowed the last 3 months of pregnancy. It is a women's choice up to a point. If the women cannot make up her mind till the final 3 months when the fetus is a living baby with heartbeat then it is not her body anymore to have a control over. It is a separate entity in her body and someone else's body and life. Her baby.

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Late term abortions are almost non-existent.  Serial killers are not.

If they’re almost non-existent than it won’t be a big deal making them illegal then.  There can always be an exception made for the life of the mother.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Shady said:

If they’re almost non-existent than it won’t be a big deal making them illegal then.  There can always be an exception made for the life of the mother.  

Do you consider yourself "conservative", and in favor of "smaller government" and "less government interference"?   If so, why would you support a law that will cost money to implement and isn't even needed?   Even if you aren't a conservative, why would you support implementing a useless law?  

But hey, you guys can go ahead and assume women are murderers and need more 'laws' to control them, I don't care.  Thank goodness for our liberal, progressive and feminist government; you religious fanatics can go suck rocks.

Edited by dialamah
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Do you consider yourself "conservative", and in favor of "smaller government" and "less government interference"?   If so, why would you support a law that will cost money to implement and isn't even needed?   Even if you aren't a conservative, why would you support implementing a useless law?  

But hey, you guys can go ahead and assume women are murderers and need more 'laws' to control them, I don't care.  Thank goodness for our liberal, progressive and feminist government; you religious fanatics can go suck rocks.

Trudeau won’t allow anyone who opposes abortion in the Liberal party.  His government has even required pro choice support on applications for student summer jobs.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dialamah said:

 

But hey, you guys can go ahead and assume women are murderers and need more 'laws' to control them, I don't care.  Thank goodness for our liberal, progressive and feminist government; you religious fanatics can go suck rocks.

The last thing I am is religious or worse fanatic. I am also as per my posts a very strong Liberal supporter.  Though I am also a very reasonable person while I believe in total Women's rights, freedom of choice and equality and very hard campaigning for all them especially in regions where a certain religion suppresses them however, it is not part of a women's right to control the life and death of an entity which is no longer a part of her body. This is scientifically proven that in the last 3 months of a women's pregnancy the fetus is now a baby with a heart beat and a separate entity than a women;s body. It is NOT a women's right to kill a baby just because it happens to be in her body anymore than it is her right to kill that baby after she was born.

Edited by CITIZEN_2015
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dialamah said:

Do you consider yourself "conservative", and in favor of "smaller government" and "less government interference"?   If so, why would you support a law that will cost money to implement and isn't even needed?   Even if you aren't a conservative, why would you support implementing a useless law?  

But hey, you guys can go ahead and assume women are murderers and need more 'laws' to control them, I don't care.  Thank goodness for our liberal, progressive and feminist government; you religious fanatics can go suck rocks.

You’re argument against such a law makes no sense at all.  You can’t argue against the merit of the law, so you’ve moved on to the supposed cost.  How could the cost be very high if it barely ever happens?  Besides, any minimal cost would be worth ensuring that this brutal act never takes place unless it’s absolutely necessary.  I’ve heard of gun nuts before.  But I’ve never heard of abortion nuts, until now.  You’re an abortion nut.  Against any common sense abortion law.  I don’t understand why.

I don’t oppose late term abortion based on religion.  I’m not a religious person.  I oppose it based on science.  You’re immediate knee jerk religious reaction tells me you’re not used to examining the issue with any scientific eye.  You’re just used to name calling.  That’s very sad.

Edited by Shady
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, dialamah said:

People who suggest women having nearly full-term abortions are doing so for no better reason than they changed their mind about having a baby at 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 months along.  It's a ridiculous assumption and anyone who thinks that clearly has no regard or respect for women generally.

According to the source document below there are women who abort after 21 weeks in fact they number more than  1000, and of those the majority are due to no complication at all. Even if just one was aborted that would make your statement false but here we have more than a thousand....

 

Abortion clinics that are not affiliated with a hospital do not perform abortions past 21 weeks (often stated as 23 weeks from last menstrual period, “LMP”). About one-third of reporting hospitals don’t report details on gestational ages, presumably all in Quebec, but we can assume that the proportion of 21+ week abortions are similar for that one-third. Therefore, taking into account the total estimated numbers of abortions for 2018:  85,795*– the estimated percentage of abortions at 21+ weeks including Quebec is one percent (659 + 220 for Quebec = 879 abortions at 21+ weeks). 
(If we add a rough estimate of about 150 women a year travelling to the U.S. for an abortion at 21+ weeks, that changes the percentage to 1.16%. This estimate is based on about 25 women a year from Ontario who are funded to go down to the U.S., adding in estimated numbers for women across Canada, whether funded privately or by government.) 
* Adding in estimated missing 2018 numbers from New Brunswick: 600, based on past numbers and email communication with the clinic. 

https://www.arcc-cdac.ca/backrounders/statistics-abortion-in-canada.pdf

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/proof-of-third-trimester-abortions-in-canada

 


 

Edited by Army Guy
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think any abortions should be allowyed beyond the first trimester, unless the health of the mother is at risk... Even then... I was the procedure to be painless for the baby... Like having a needle injected to put the fetus to sleep.

I'm generally against abortions, but i'm not an extream conversative on the issue.

I think more compansion should be shown towards women who have been raped, and want an abortion. But I would encourage those women to make up their mind in a week, not wait a few months to think about it.

I have no compasion for being who think an abortion is an altnerative to practising safe-sex. I had a friend who said... my GF doesn't like condoms, and she doesn't enjoy birth control... so I just do the pull-out method... and we have a mutual agreement, that she must have an abortion, If she gets pregnant by accident.

This is how many mellenials think.

Edited by ProudConservative
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not only should it be legal to have an abortion in the 3rd trimester, but it should be legal for a transman to choose to abort a designer-baby fetus in a private clinic and then sell the fetus to buy crack cocaine!

 

I am very very pro-freedom and pro-choice.

Edited by -1=e^ipi
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, -1=e^ipi said:

Not only should it be legal to have an abortion in the 3rd trimester, but it should be legal for a transman to choose to abort a designer-baby fetus in a private clinic and then sell the fetus to by crack cocaine!

 

I am very very pro-freedom and pro-choice.

Your views are scary and homicidal.  Nevertheless, you’re not the only one who has them.  Dialamah is comparably disturbed.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By Anthony
      Over the past few years I have learned that some pregnancies were accidental and not entirely preventable. But I have also learned that a lot of those accidents ended in full term pregnancy and birth with the intent of only the woman. 
      For example : We have a man and a woman, they agree to have sex with each other for the sake of pleasure, thus a strong birth control is used. However due to potential statistical birth control failure it turns out two months later she finds out that she is pregnant.  Now legally speaking she has a few options, she can abort the pregnancy or allow a full term pregnancy with post birth options. 
      However, in this case the man has no options, in fact the woman forces actions upon him, infringing on his freedoms as a would be father or none father. Given that the man and woman do not stay together as a family,  If the would be “mother “decides to raise the child, the would be “father” would have to pay child support. If the “mother” decides to get an abortion the “father” has no rights to deny the abortion. 
      (Now I am not going to say the “father” should have a right to force the “mother” to give birth to a child she does not wish to have, although some arguments could be made for such cases. For instance, if she does not wish to have the baby and wishes to abort, then she would be liable for compensation to the “father” as  he has lost the ability to have that child, “denial of child” support. So basically if the woman wants to abort she would have to pay the man “denial of child support for the next 18 years, a reverse of the situation. ( again this is too extreme and would never happen))
      Lets look at a different option, say the woman wishes to have the baby, however the man does not wish to have the baby (he does not wish to become a father). Could a system be in place where when accidental pregnancy happens and the woman wishes to have a child, the man can optionally pay the abortion equivalency financial amount or give a certain amount of time so that he is released of all liabilities to the baby after birth as a father/caretaker? In other words, the would be father pays a certain amount equivalent to an abortion, to ensure that he is not legally the father and he has no duty to pay child care. This gives semi rights to both parties involved vs a system were all decisions are made by the woman. 
       
      Current system:
      Sex               Abortion?               Accepting pregnancy?                     agree?                                        Result?
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            
      Woman>       yes/no                              yes/no                                they both agree                      equal, mother/none, success
      Man >            yes/no                              yes/no                                they both agree                       equal, father/none, success
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
      Woman>         no                                       yes                                           NO                            Mother, gets child support +18
      Man >             yes                                      no                                             NO                      Forced fatherhood, forced child support +18 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
      Woman>        yes                                       no                                            NO                         She has abortion, no further action
      Man >             no                                        yes                                          NO                 He has no father rights, no ability for further action 

       
      Amendment recommendation:
      Sex             Abortion?                   Accepting pregnancy?                     agree?                                                                                   Result?
      Woman>       no                                         yes                                             NO                              Mother gives birth to the baby, accepts abortion financial aid equivalency
      Man >          yes                                          no                                               NO                             He has no fatherly rights to the baby, pays financial abortion aid equivalency
       
      Thoughts?
       
    • Guest Derek L
      By Guest Derek L
      I’ll admit, for most of my adult life I’d have considered myself “agnostic” concerning the abortion “third rail”, tending to fall on the side that it is none of my business and something “other people do”……. But now with this criminal case involving Dr Kermit Gosnell’s abortion clinic in Philadelphia, I’m truly starting to reconsider my “stance” on moral grounds. Now I’m fully aware that there are many instances surrounding legal abortion that more then morally absolve such practices (In my opinion) like rape or health concerns for the mother………..But this case or other late term abortions for that mater have really forced me to reconsider my stance on the issue: http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/04/why-dr-kermit-gosnells-trial-should-be-a-front-page-story/274944/ I just can’t square this circle and help to feel this practices is approaching Josef Mengele type levels………utterly disgusting:

      So my question, if “bad abortion” is considered anything past 24 weeks, is a child aborted at 23 weeks ok? Where is the moral “cut-off”? And for the record, I’m not a religious person but I am parent.
  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...