CanPol - Fall election: Do we have an issue yet?

[KrazyHorse]

Did you reverse the facts to suit yourself or is thre red bit incorrect

I see you've never met Ben before. Welcome to Poly!

[Flubber]

And the majority, 51 percent do not support the status quo. They want abortion restrictions, either permitting abortion in the case of rape or incest, or banned outright. 51 percent, flubber 11 points higher than what the Conservatives need to win a majority.
.

Ok so you are taking a poll that is saying 49% want unrestricted abortions to mean 51% want it banned outright ot only allowed for rape and incest. Where do you put people like me?? I would say unrestricted abortion up to a point but not after the fetus is viable outside the womb-- this balances a woman's choice to abort if she makes it in a timely fashion with some concept of respect for or rights of the fetus

Since I am not in the 49% thats wishes unrestricted abortion you would place me in your 51%. Yet, even though I have been a conservative voter in the past , you would lose my vote if you put forth that position-- and I suspect there are lots more like me-- depending on how it was presented you might even incentivize people like me to get more politically involved

Thats how hot this issue is Ben -- people that who might normally vote Conservative might go full circle and fight this issue tooth and nail-- If you think this has a chance in hell you are seriously deluded

[ShaneWalter]

I see you've never met Ben before.

OH SNAP!

[notyoueither]

Flubber, you're up.

[KrazyHorse]

OH SNAP!

[ShaneWalter]

Ok so you are taking a poll that is saying 49% want unrestricted abortions to mean 51% want it banned outright ot only allowed for rape and incest. Where do you put people like me?? I would say unrestricted abortion up to a point but not after the fetus is viable outside the womb-- this balances a woman's choice to abort if she makes it in a timely fashion with some concept of respect for or rights of the fetus

Since I am not in the 49% thats wishes unrestricted abortion you would place me in your 51%. Yet, even though I have been a conservative voter in the past , you would lose my vote if you put forth that position-- and I suspect there are lots more like me-- depending on how it was presented you might even incentivize people like me to get more politically involved

Thats how hot this issue is Ben -- people that who might normally vote Conservative might go full circle and fight this issue tooth and nail-- If you think this has a chance in hell you are seriously deluded

I'm in the same position. I've voted CPC before. If I was polled, I would say I'd support some restrictions on abortion.

If the CPC actually attempted to pass the restrictions Ben is proposing, they would absolutely lose my vote. Not only that, but I would never ever vote CPC again until I felt there was a complete purge at the top levels of the party.

[Flubber]

This was part of the old system and was one of the reasons the SCC ruled the system violated Charter rights in R. v Morgentaler. Access to these Boards was arbitrary depending on where you lived (with women in remote communities not having equal and timely access). Additionally, these Boards could be arbitrary depending upon the communities they were in (with some Boards refusing virtually all that came before them).

We've been there Ben.

Ditto


Waiting for someone other than the woman's own doctor to determine a risk to life could equal dead women.

ben do you think there are easy decisions on this . A woman hears she has a complication. 85% chance she will be fine-- 15% chance that x will happen in which case she will die--- can she abort? What if its 98% chance she will be fine?


Ben your system would be nuts-- All you need is one doc who recommends an abortion to a woman because her blood pressure is too high and have some board rule its not life threatening-- Then as medical things often do, something happens and she strokes out and dies. Or do you think that complications come in neat boxes called "threatens life " and "does not threaten life"

Ben I have seen some real life complications and its not pretty and having been there you can just go **** yourself if you think I would have some board tell me what risks I and my wife can and cannot take with respect to my wife's "health" as you call it.. I am a law abiding person generally but I would flout such a law and then confess everything to the media and dare the prosecution to come after me. If some party goes there they would lose my vote for life and I would fight them forever.

Ben on a personal level I find abortion repugnant but I place my wife's health above all.

[ShaneWalter]

I don't get it. You're supposed to say "You got told!" and then say "Oh snap!" Isn't that the purpose of saying "Oh snap" in the first place?

[KrazyHorse]

I can't believe it's too complex for you.

[ShaneWalter]

It's because I'm Canadian I guess.

[KrazyHorse]

[Ben Kenobi]

This was part of the old system and was one of the reasons the SCC ruled the system violated Charter rights in R. v Morgentaler. Access to these Boards was arbitrary depending on where you lived (with women in remote communities not having equal and timely access). Additionally, these Boards could be arbitrary depending upon the communities they were in (with some Boards refusing virtually all that came before them).

You've completely misunderstood me. Completely.

I'm not talking about health boards. I'm talking about if a pregnant woman comes into the ER or into the hospital with a serious lifethreatening complication. The last option, when there is nothing else that works should be to kill the child through abortion. The options that should be considered before it would be a c-section.

I'm not talking about having to go through a board or anything. Anything that is not lifethreatening to the mother would not be grounds for abortion.

I hope this is clearer now.

[Wezil]

So you give ER doctors the decision making role?

Same problem.

[Wezil]

If the condition is discovered before it is an "emergency" does the woman get to sit in the ER and let it fester until it becomes an emergency?

[Ben Kenobi]

Waiting for someone other than the woman's own doctor to determine a risk to life could equal dead women.

She would be admitted as quickly as possible.

ben do you think there are easy decisions on this . A woman hears she has a complication. 85% chance she will be fine-- 15% chance that x will happen in which case she will die--- can she abort? What if its 98% chance she will be fine?

Name some complications. It's easy to create moral dilemmas out of theoretical problems, but what is the reality? The reality is even if there is a complication arising from pregnancy, that the woman will be in the ER before something really bad happens.

The only relatively common complication before viability is an ectopic pregnancy, which will get picked up in the ultrasounds in almost all cases. In this case, there is no other option than abortion, which is necessary to save the life of the woman.

In cases after 20 weeks or so, the option is an emergency c-section to save the life of the mother and the child. I'm not aware of any fairly common complications which arise during pregnancy which fall into one or the other category. If you do, than please, bring it up for discussion.

Ben your system would be nuts-- All you need is one doc who recommends an abortion to a woman because her blood pressure is too high

At what point in the pregnancy is she, how far along? I've heard of this occurring late in the pregnancy, not before.

Or do you think that complications come in neat boxes called "threatens life " and "does not threaten life"

If a serious life-threatening complication arises in the late term, there should be a c-section done to save the life of the mother and the baby. Do you agree with this point?

I am a law abiding person generally but I would flout such a law and then confess everything to the media and dare the prosecution to come after me. If some party goes there they would lose my vote for life and I would fight them forever.

So if your wife were 30 weeks along and she had a serious complication, you would choose to kill your baby rather than attempting an emergency c-section? I'm curious, what complications have you witness and when did they occur?

Ben on a personal level I find abortion repugnant but I place my wife's health above all.

Well I'd like you to specify more as to what you were dealing with early on.