Author Topic: Abortion Watch Thread  (Read 138587 times)

lagatta

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13080
    • View Profile
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #750 on: August 04, 2010, 07:25:34 PM »
Somerville is a nasty old sadist. She wants to persecute us unto death with her hateful "medical ethics", not to mention her silly bigotry against "barren" same-sex marriages, although she is well past menopause (I'm old enough to say that without accusation of ageism). She is a hypocritical so-and-so and one who takes pleasure in the suffering of others, while claiming a halo of sainthood.

Why does there have to be a law against everything nobody in their right mind would do?
" Eure \'Ordnung\' ist auf Sand gebaut. Die Revolution wird sich morgen schon \'rasselnd wieder in die Höhe richten\' und zu eurem Schrecken mit Posaunenklang verkünden: \'Ich war, ich bin, ich werde sein!\' "
Rosa Luxemburg

Antonia

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
    • View Profile
    • http://thestar.blogs.com/broadsides/
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #751 on: August 04, 2010, 08:04:25 PM »
I caught her act at ideaCity. It made no impression. I don't get what gives her any legitimacy to comment. She's a rent-a-quote when you want somebody who is not a Lifesite nutter to pronounce on abortion or euthanasia or whatever.
It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity. It is when we all play safe that fatality will lead us to our doom. It is in the "dark shade of courage" alone that the spell can be broken.
-- Dag Hammarskjöld

skdadl

  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32874
    • View Profile
    • http://www.pogge.ca
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #752 on: August 04, 2010, 08:21:40 PM »
I know a judge who groans at the very mention of Somerville's name. It's a kind of "Noooo -- not again" groan.

sparqui

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7420
    • View Profile
    • http://resettlethis.blogspot.com/
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #753 on: August 04, 2010, 08:42:10 PM »

Why does there have to be a law against everything nobody in their right mind would do?

I absolutely agree. I think Canada should be the standard bearer on this front. There is no need for laws just like there is no need for laws legislating any medical procedure. All we need is to maintain laws that give people equal access to medical care.
If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a tractor. -- Gilles Duceppe

pogge

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4285
    • View Profile
    • Peace, order and good government, eh?
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #754 on: May 10, 2011, 08:21:56 AM »
South Dakota Banning Abortion Without Banning Abortion?
Quote
... South Dakota may have just managed to ban abortion without actually banning abortion outright.  They did it by pushing the “undue burden” restriction way past the “undue” part and into the “impossible” territory.

Alison

  • Senior Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2858
    • View Profile
    • http://creekside1.blogspot.com/
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #755 on: February 06, 2012, 01:30:57 PM »
Con MP Stephen Woodworth's private member's bill/motion to reopen the abortion debate today :

Quote
That a special committee of the House be appointed and directed to review the declaration in Subsection 223(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada which states that a child becomes a human being only at the moment of complete birth and to answer the questions hereinafter set forth;
 
that the membership of the special committee consist of twelve members which shall include seven members from the government party, four members from the Official Opposition and one member from the Liberal Party, provided that the Chair shall be from the government party; that the members to serve on the said committee be appointed by the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs and the membership report of the special committee be presented to the House no later than 20 sitting days after the adoption of this motion;
 
that substitutions to the membership of the special committee be allowed, if required, in the manner provided by Standing Order 114(2);
 
that the special committee have all the powers of a Standing Committee as provided in the Standing Orders; and
 
that the special committee present its final report to the House of Commons within 10 months after the adoption of this motion with answers to the following questions,
 
      (i)          what medical evidence exists to demonstrate that a child is or is not a human being before the moment of complete birth?,
 
    (ii)          is the preponderance of medical evidence consistent with the declaration in Subsection 223(1) that a child is only a human being at the moment of complete birth?,
 
  (iii)          what are the legal impact and consequences of Subsection 223(1) on the fundamental human rights of a child before the moment of complete birth?,
 
  (iv)          what are the options available to Parliament in the exercise of its legislative authority in accordance with the Constitution and decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada to affirm, amend, or replace Subsection 223(1)?


From his ridiculous statement to the press :


Quote
Don’t accept any law, including Section 223, that says some human beings are not human beings. It’s an important principle! No Member of Parliament should remain silent in the face of any law that says some human beings are not human beings.


which immediately received the obligatory squish from Nicholson but hey, just as long as the base is roiling like pet maggots, Steve's happy.


 ::)



« Last Edit: February 06, 2012, 01:38:19 PM by Alison »

Debra

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11215
    • View Profile
    • April Reign
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #756 on: February 06, 2012, 04:53:42 PM »
why are they wasting time on this when real issues need to be addressed?


Like how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
What evidence exists that they can at all or that angels even exist?
What are the consequences of finding out?


stupid idiots that is to say enquiring minds want to know..
“Damaged people are dangerous. They know they can survive.” —  Josephine Hart

sparqui

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7420
    • View Profile
    • http://resettlethis.blogspot.com/
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #757 on: February 06, 2012, 07:45:28 PM »
Epps' "Pity the pregnant women victims of crime" private member's bill went pretty far in a minority government. What's to stop this POS bill from getting passed by both houses with CONservative majorities.  :popcorn
If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a tractor. -- Gilles Duceppe

Berlynn

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6362
    • View Profile
    • http://politicsnpoetry.wordpress.com
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #758 on: February 06, 2012, 10:53:48 PM »
Honestly can't see them allowing this to go forward.  It's another of PMS's dog-whistles.  He's been doing it for a month now, pacifying all kinds of angst, I think.
Never retreat, never explain, never apologize--get the thing done and let them howl.  -- Nellie McClung

Toedancer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13953
    • View Profile
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #759 on: February 08, 2012, 10:35:04 AM »
Can we do this in Canada, in case Woodworth comes out swinging? About time the women in the U.S.A. are speaking up. Hee.


Undaunted by the monumental failure of Personhood USA's push to declare fertilized human eggs exactly the same as grown ass adults in Mississippi, conservatives in Oklahoma have pushed forward with their own Personhood Bill. But one Democratic smartass isn't having it, and she finds the whole thing so absurd that she tacked on an amendment of her own that would outlaw the spilling of semen in any location other than a woman's vagina.
-snip-
That means no masturbating. No wet dreaming. No blow jobs or facials or pulling out and coming on your lady's stomach, dudes. No gay sex, unless a vagina's around to catch the precious seed. No Boston cream pies.
A male Democrat put forth something a bit more common sensical, altho at the moment there is a gov't war on common sense.
Another pro-choice legislator, Democrat Jim Wilson, attemptedto add an amendment to the bill that would require the father of the child to be financially responsible for the woman's health care, housing, transportation, and nourishment while she was pregnant. The amendment failed, because obviously if those whoreladies didn't want to have to be responsible for using their bodies to incubate another human life for nine months and then push it out of a tiny hole between their legs, they shouldn't have had sex in the first place.http://jezebel.com/5883026/brilliant-democratic-state-senator-tacks-every-sperm-is-sacred-clause-to-oklahomas-personhood-bill


If Woodworth even gets this in a debate, which NDP MP do you think will introduce similar bills?
« Last Edit: February 08, 2012, 10:37:32 AM by Toedancer »
"Democracy is not the law of the majority, it's the protection of the minority." -Albert Camus 1913-1960

Antonia

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5008
    • View Profile
    • http://thestar.blogs.com/broadsides/
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #760 on: February 08, 2012, 06:55:41 PM »
I hope none. The men's rights nutballs would love that.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2012, 06:55:50 PM by Antonia »
It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity. It is when we all play safe that fatality will lead us to our doom. It is in the "dark shade of courage" alone that the spell can be broken.
-- Dag Hammarskjöld

Toedancer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13953
    • View Profile
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #761 on: February 08, 2012, 07:08:34 PM »
"Democracy is not the law of the majority, it's the protection of the minority." -Albert Camus 1913-1960

Toedancer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13953
    • View Profile
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #762 on: February 09, 2012, 03:53:00 PM »
Who they gonna choose? Duh! This is Toronto-Danforth.
http://www.globaltoronto.com/profile/6442577280/story.html
"Democracy is not the law of the majority, it's the protection of the minority." -Albert Camus 1913-1960

Alison

  • Senior Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2858
    • View Profile
    • http://creekside1.blogspot.com/
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #763 on: February 16, 2012, 01:38:16 PM »
Fern Hill recalls that the Ontario Knights of Columbus were looking for an anti-choice MP point man :
Quote
At their 108th Ontario State Convention in Toronto on May 22nd, the Ontario Knights unanimously passed a resolution “to work with a Member of Parliament to introduce a Parliamentary Bill seeking the restoration of full legal protection for the lives of the unborn.”

Stephen Woodworth is a KOC. Is he their guy?

Toedancer

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13953
    • View Profile
Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #764 on: February 16, 2012, 01:51:30 PM »
Interesting.
"Democracy is not the law of the majority, it's the protection of the minority." -Albert Camus 1913-1960

Bread & Roses Forum

Re: Abortion Watch Thread
« Reply #764 on: February 16, 2012, 01:51:30 PM »

 

Return To TAT