Abortion in Canada

[Riku3220]

If you go into an abortion clinic, you'll notice its employees will never, ever, EVER refer to it as a child, a baby. They'll always say its a "ball of cells", "bit of tissue", "Blastocyst", "fetus". Most of those terms are completely incorrect for the time frame being discussed. If you look at pictures of human development, after week 3 the baby looks nothing like a "ball of cells".

They don't call it a child or a baby because it isn't a child or a baby. Pro-lifers calling them children and babies are just fear mongering it up to discourage women from aborting because babies are cute and cuddly and fetuses are ugly little parasites..

[Kiriyama]

Sees_All, I'll address the final part.

 

The reason they don't call it a child in abortion clinics is to cause less mental stress on the woman. Do you think she wants to be constantly reminded whilst going for the procedure that she is basically killing her child? What mother wants to go through that?

 

She's made her decision, it's going to be hard enough on her without making it any worse. Do you really want to emotionally scar these women? From the looks of it, you do.

[Skeptical]

Sees_All, I'll address the final part.

 

The reason they don't call it a child in abortion clinics is to cause less mental stress on the woman. Do you think she wants to be constantly reminded whilst going for the procedure that she is basically killing her child? What mother wants to go through that?

 

She's made her decision, it's going to be hard enough on her without making it any worse. Do you really want to emotionally scar these women? From the looks of it, you do.

 

Exactly. No woman wants an abortion: she doesn't want to make that choice. She's forced into it (yes, she may have made poor, even horrible decisions in the past, but she's still being forced into it.

[Iamdan]

You are wrong because I say so and I boycott pro choice yogurt

 

Sorry, try again.

 

Don't talk about absolute morals against suffering when you contribute to our consumer culture.

That's hardly what I said, and it isn't the point I'm trying to convey. Your discussion about a "consumer culture" is better suited to a different thread, because its irrelevant in my humble opinion. What is it you want out of society, a brave new world?

What are you doing to stand up against the "consumer culture" ? Or is it because you embrace abortion that its OK that you live in the "consumer culture" ? It seems that the only thing I could do that would make my stance on life acceptable to you would be to go naked into a forest, and live from the trees.

 

Seems to me what you said. You dodged the question and told me I was wrong. Now you're dodging the question again, and resorting to reductio ad absurdum.

 

Why not just explain what you're doing to preserve life that you cherish so much? Other than by standing on the sidelines telling people how to live their life I mean.

How much spending do you do that isn't necessary for your survival? Why don't you use it to save lives?

 

It's because it's not as convenient as just 'being pro life.' (read: doing nothing)

 

What type of life is it? Oh, human? How else are you going to characterize it? When a woman aborts her child, she isn't killing a monkey, she isn't killing a dog, she isn't killing a goldfish. Its human because of the baby's genetic make-up.

 

It's a fetus, hence why we call it a fetus.

 

baby [ˈbeɪbɪ]

n pl -bies

1.

a. a newborn or recently born child; infant

 

 

And if you "don't think anybody will oppose laws telling doctors to 'inform' before they perform an abortion", you're not very informed. If you take a look at the laws we've tried to enact, you'll find that anything similar to it has always been opposed by Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and NOW.

 

It's still a separate issue entirely. Abortion being allowed does not effectively control what doctors don't/have to do.

 

If you go into an abortion clinic, you'll notice its employees will never, ever, EVER refer to it as a child, a baby. They'll always say its a "ball of cells", "bit of tissue", "Blastocyst", "fetus". Most of those terms are completely incorrect for the time frame being discussed. If you look at pictures of human development, after week 3 the baby looks nothing like a "ball of cells".

 

See riku's response.

[Skeptical]

If you go into an abortion clinic, you'll notice its employees will never, ever, EVER refer to it as a child, a baby. They'll always say its a "ball of cells", "bit of tissue", "Blastocyst", "fetus". Most of those terms are completely incorrect for the time frame being discussed. If you look at pictures of human development, after week 3 the baby looks nothing like a "ball of cells".

 

What the fetus resembles has nothing to do with anything in the discussion. (If a lump of semen affect anything? No, but it's still a "clump of cells" with the potential to be a person - a very similar paradigm in early-stage abortion.)

[magekillr]

Has anyone who wants to force women to watch an ultrasound of their fetus before they abort ever thought of the women who's child WILL die if they don't abort? Getting rid of a dead fetus from her uterus is an abortion.

I wish you could understand how stupid your logic is. Their child will die if they don't abort... so instead of letting something natural happen, they intervene and kill it quicker? Wha?

 

NO! It's going to die, so rather than be put through the torment of giving a still birth, or having a dead fetus flushed out, they remove it before that happens.

 

My logic is stupid? Listen, son, you're the one forcing a woman to carry a parasite that she may or may not want, which is bad enough. Now you're saying that she doesn't have the freedom to remove the fetus that's already dead? She must be forced to look at the ultrasound? That's sadism.

Removing a dead baby isn't an abortion.

If you think it is, you're sadly mistaken.

 

You've really shown your ignorance. Yes, it is an abortion. I already went over this in one of my first responses to this thread. What you pro-lifers call "partial birth abortion," medical people call "intact dilation and extraction" or IDX. In 2003, Bush passed his Partial-Borth Abortion Ban Act. Thus, mothers whose fetuses have already died (or WILL inevitably die) cannot be removed, and they're forced to give birth to a stillborn.

 

Thanks for putting your ignorance on full display. And I will continue to call a spade a spade, in which I believe that anyone who thinks that women's bodies should be controlled are indeed misogynistic [wagon].

[sees_all1]

Sees_All, I'll address the final part.

 

The reason they don't call it a child in abortion clinics is to cause less mental stress on the woman. Do you think she wants to be constantly reminded whilst going for the procedure that she is basically killing her child? What mother wants to go through that?

 

She's made her decision, it's going to be hard enough on her without making it any worse. Do you really want to emotionally scar these women? From the looks of it, you do.

If her decision is "I have no other choice," society hasn't done its job properly.

Sometime she'll have to face the cold hard truth that abortion kills a human being. I'd rather her face the truth before she makes another bad decision, rather than afterward. Your position is you want the woman to make a choice. How can she do that without being completely informed, and only being told half-truths? Call the unborn what you want, a picture is worth more than a name. How can a representative from Planned Parenthood, or any other abortion clinic say with a straight face that their organization is pro-choice, when only 3% of the pre-borns going in there are coming out alive. They're not looking out for women, they're looking out for their bottom line. Its an ugly truth when you first learn these things.

 

 

If you go into an abortion clinic, you'll notice its employees will never, ever, EVER refer to it as a child, a baby. They'll always say its a "ball of cells", "bit of tissue", "Blastocyst", "fetus". Most of those terms are completely incorrect for the time frame being discussed. If you look at pictures of human development, after week 3 the baby looks nothing like a "ball of cells".

 

What the fetus resembles has nothing to do with anything in the discussion. (If a lump of semen affect anything? No, but it's still a "clump of cells" with the potential to be a person - a very similar paradigm in early-stage abortion.)

Fine, when is it a human life? I've identified a very distinct point, one which is easy to identify. You want to disagree with me on that point? Fine. Substitute your own definition, and let me know it so I can debate you on it.

[Iamdan]

How can a representative from Planned Parenthood, or any other abortion clinic say with a straight face that their organization is pro-choice, when only 3% of the pre-borns going in there are coming out alive

 

Maybe because the women do their research and weigh their options before they go in?

 

Nobody is pretending it is an easy solution. Quit acting like it.

[tortilliachp]

we can't save everyone, but i'm saving more people than you are, following an even more basic moral tenet: applying yourself where it matters most. My argument does, however, demand that you believe that the value of human life is equal.

I can can show many different people that will tell you that if it wasn't for a sidewalk counselor, they wouldn't be here today. From one campaign, I can point to 2,811 verified individuals that are here on earth only because of the efforts of sidewalk counselors, and their mothers having a change of heart at the last second.

 

Ever hear the story of the starfish on the beach? This is the exact same thing, except these are human's lives. I'm not in a contest with you to see who can make the biggest difference (and if we were, I'd hope you win: I plan on having a huge impact). But this is something that is happening locally which I have to power to influence. I also have this space that I can explain and defend my position.

 

this does NOT reduce down to the starfish problem. These are human lives. I would like to save as many as possible, per unit time i spend saving lives. I'd say throwing the starfish effectively back into the sea so you save more of them is of greater value to everyone involved. Even those individuals why invariably die, whose deaths have saved more than a single life. this is about efficiency, not about spending more time saving more starfish.

 

3000 people is nothing in the grand scheme of things. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starvation#Hunger_mortality_statistics cites:

Hunger mortality statistics

On the average, 1 person dies every second as a result, either directly or indirectly, of hunger - 4000 every hour - 100 000 each day - 36 million each year - 58 % of all deaths (2001-2004 estimates).[10][11][12]

On the average, 1 child dies every 5 seconds as a result, either directly or indirectly, of hunger - 700 every hour - 16 000 each day - 6 million each year - 60% of all child deaths (2002-2008 estimates).[13][14][15][16][17]

 

 

Ah thanks for that bold statement. you can influence this local phenomenon, but you can also influence the global phenomenon more. therefore you are (again indirectly, you don't seem to want to admit it outright) saying that the lives you see locally are more valuable to you than the lives you can save globally. Now i would call that valuing human life unequally. Do you defend that belief, or apply it only selectively? either way, i find it morally despicable, quite simply racist in the denotation of the word.

[Kiriyama]

Sees_All, I'll address the final part.

 

The reason they don't call it a child in abortion clinics is to cause less mental stress on the woman. Do you think she wants to be constantly reminded whilst going for the procedure that she is basically killing her child? What mother wants to go through that?

 

She's made her decision, it's going to be hard enough on her without making it any worse. Do you really want to emotionally scar these women? From the looks of it, you do.

If her decision is "I have no other choice," society hasn't done its job properly.

Sometime she'll have to face the cold hard truth that abortion kills a human being. I'd rather her face the truth before she makes another bad decision, rather than afterward. Your position is you want the woman to make a choice. How can she do that without being completely informed, and only being told half-truths? Call the unborn what you want, a picture is worth more than a name. How can a representative from Planned Parenthood, or any other abortion clinic say with a straight face that their organization is pro-choice, when only 3% of the pre-borns going in there are coming out alive. They're not looking out for women, they're looking out for their bottom line. Its an ugly truth when you first learn these things.

 

She already knows what an abortion is, she's already dealing with the consequences of her action.

 

Why should we torture her any further when she goes for it?

 

You think these woman as despicable? I say you're worse than them for wanting to put any woman through that sort of psychological torment.

[obfuscator]

If you go into an abortion clinic, you'll notice its employees will never, ever, EVER refer to it as a child, a baby. They'll always say its a "ball of cells", "bit of tissue", "Blastocyst", "fetus". Most of those terms are completely incorrect for the time frame being discussed. If you look at pictures of human development, after week 3 the baby looks nothing like a "ball of cells".

They don't call it a child or a baby because it isn't a child or a baby. Pro-lifers calling them children and babies are just fear mongering it up to discourage women from aborting because babies are cute and cuddly and fetuses are ugly little parasites..

Oh ok, since a fetus is ugly, it's ok to kill it off.

[Bouwzie]

If you go into an abortion clinic, you'll notice its employees will never, ever, EVER refer to it as a child, a baby. They'll always say its a "ball of cells", "bit of tissue", "Blastocyst", "fetus". Most of those terms are completely incorrect for the time frame being discussed. If you look at pictures of human development, after week 3 the baby looks nothing like a "ball of cells".

They don't call it a child or a baby because it isn't a child or a baby. Pro-lifers calling them children and babies are just fear mongering it up to discourage women from aborting because babies are cute and cuddly and fetuses are ugly little parasites..

Oh ok, since a fetus is ugly, it's ok to kill it off.

 

I love it when people completely miss the point.

[Azvareth]

Like a Swedish comedian once said, this would be a non-issue if it was men that gave birth. We'd have drive-thru abortion clinics.

[Saru Inc]

[hide=quote]

EDIT: (saves a double post)

Medical Dictionary

 

abor·tion definition

Pronunciation: /ə-ˈbȯr-shən/

Function: n

1 : the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus:

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Abortion

 

Enjoy the definition, Sees_all.

Cool beans, you stuck me on a definition. But that's completely ignoring the context that we're discussing this in.

If that's what he really wanted to talk about, then his fault for not being clearer.

From now on I'll refer to it as "induced abortion" because you guys refuse to stick to the topic on hand.

[/hide]

 

I'm sorry, but what? Your whole post in which I was aiming that at was just you claiming that a removing a dead fetus is not an abortion, when by definition it is, and you saying you're just going to ignore a user.

 

So how is that ignoring a context, when I reply to a relevant part? Or do you just dislike being corrected?

 

Also, you claimed to have looked extremely deeply into the pro-life side, have you actually looked as hard into pro-choice? Or is your opinion based on a lack of information?

 

What? It's common sense. Assuming the fetus died naturally, of course you'd remove it. That isn't abortion, and it's merely a glitch in the definition.

[magekillr]

[hide=quote]

EDIT: (saves a double post)

Medical Dictionary

 

abor·tion definition

Pronunciation: /ə-ˈbȯr-shən/

Function: n

1 : the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus:

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Abortion

 

Enjoy the definition, Sees_all.

Cool beans, you stuck me on a definition. But that's completely ignoring the context that we're discussing this in.

If that's what he really wanted to talk about, then his fault for not being clearer.

From now on I'll refer to it as "induced abortion" because you guys refuse to stick to the topic on hand.

[/hide]

 

I'm sorry, but what? Your whole post in which I was aiming that at was just you claiming that a removing a dead fetus is not an abortion, when by definition it is, and you saying you're just going to ignore a user.

 

So how is that ignoring a context, when I reply to a relevant part? Or do you just dislike being corrected?

 

Also, you claimed to have looked extremely deeply into the pro-life side, have you actually looked as hard into pro-choice? Or is your opinion based on a lack of information?

 

What? It's common sense. Assuming the fetus died naturally, of course you'd remove it. That isn't abortion, and it's merely a glitch in the definition.

 

If what you said was true, then women in America wouldn't be forced to give stillbirths due to the ban on the IDX procedure. Of course, men never take these moments into account because, you know, they don't have uteri. This is why even though you can claim there are women who are "pro-life" that most of these pro-life women still empathize far more.

 

Azvareth, well said.

[obfuscator]

I have absolutely nothing against an "abortion" to remove an already dead fetus. It's if it's alive that I object.

[Saru Inc]

[hide=quote]

EDIT: (saves a double post)

Medical Dictionary

 

abor·tion definition

Pronunciation: /ə-ˈbȯr-shən/

Function: n

1 : the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus:

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Abortion

 

Enjoy the definition, Sees_all.

Cool beans, you stuck me on a definition. But that's completely ignoring the context that we're discussing this in.

If that's what he really wanted to talk about, then his fault for not being clearer.

From now on I'll refer to it as "induced abortion" because you guys refuse to stick to the topic on hand.

[/hide]

 

I'm sorry, but what? Your whole post in which I was aiming that at was just you claiming that a removing a dead fetus is not an abortion, when by definition it is, and you saying you're just going to ignore a user.

 

So how is that ignoring a context, when I reply to a relevant part? Or do you just dislike being corrected?

 

Also, you claimed to have looked extremely deeply into the pro-life side, have you actually looked as hard into pro-choice? Or is your opinion based on a lack of information?

 

What? It's common sense. Assuming the fetus died naturally, of course you'd remove it. That isn't abortion, and it's merely a glitch in the definition.

 

If what you said was true, then women in America wouldn't be forced to give stillbirths due to the ban on the IDX procedure. Of course, men never take these moments into account because, you know, they don't have uteri. This is why even though you can claim there are women who are "pro-life" that most of these pro-life women still empathize far more.

 

Azvareth, well said.

 

What? It's hygenic common sense to remove a dead fetus -- and any prolifer who's not trolling knows that. And thats why I really don't like the pro life-pro choice type debates. I, along for most pro life people have no problem having a dead fetus removed.

 

 

I however, do think it's ok to abort a baby if its confirmed to have Anencephaly, or complete vegetation without any hope of self awareness.

[sees_all1]

If what you said was true, then women in America wouldn't be forced to give stillbirths due to the ban on the IDX procedure. Of course, men never take these moments into account because, you know, they don't have uteri. This is why even though you can claim there are women who are "pro-life" that most of these pro-life women still empathize far more.

 

Azvareth, well said.

IDX isn't much different than giving birth, except rather than headfirst, the baby is forcibly removed feet first (a big no-no in normal pregnancies).

IDX isn't used to remove a dead fetus, its used to kill it. Get your facts straight.

 

[hide=Step-by-step description of IDX]

Partial-Birth Abortion

 

Five steps to a partial birth abortion:

 

1. Partial Birth Abortion (click for larger image)Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's legs with forceps.

 

2. The baby's leg is pulled out into the birth canal.

 

3. The abortionist delivers the baby's entire body, except for the head.

 

4. Partial Birth Abortion (click for larger image)The abortionist jams scissors into the baby's skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the skull.

 

5. The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child's brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed.

[/hide]

 

Saying that "forcing a woman to see an ultrasound of her dead baby is sadistic" is stupid - she would've had an ultrasound to confirm it anyway. I'd assume the only reason they didn't abort their baby two months earlier is because she had no intention of killing it.

After five months the baby is big enough that the woman pretty much has to give birth anyway. Other methods include a saline injection that literally burns the baby's skin, then delivering it when its dead.

After five months its barbaric to induce abortion, because the baby feels pain, and generally would survive outside the womb.

 

Ever hear the stories of Gianna Jessen, Ana Rosa Rodriguez, Heidi Huffman, or Sarah Smith? As miraculous as it sounds, these are people that survived induced abortions. They are living proof that abortions kill human beings.

Don't tell me I'm a misogynist when 75% of the victims of abortion are women.

[Faux]

You have to be one stupid [bleep] to want a freedom to be taken away from you.

 

It's one thing to not want abortion to be publicly funded, it's on another level of stupidity to want it to be illegal.

[Skull]

Ever hear the stories of Gianna Jessen, Ana Rosa Rodriguez, Heidi Huffman, or Sarah Smith? As miraculous as it sounds, these are people that survived induced abortions. They are living proof that abortions kill human beings.

Err, actually they aren't seeing as they're not dead. Just so you know.

[Saru Inc]

This woman called an abortion center yesterday I answered for... She was hyperventilating and she said she just had a procedure done on the weekend, and now she was bleeding uncontrollably from the "you-know-what." And she said she was cramping so bad she could hardly move -- but here's what I don't get, I told her to call 911, she refused to. Wtf?

 

 

Anyways, just thought this would be a more appropriate place to post.

[Romy]

This woman called an abortion center yesterday I answered for... She was hyperventilating and she said she just had a procedure done on the weekend, and now she was bleeding uncontrollably from the "you-know-what." And she said she was cramping so bad she could hardly move -- but here's what I don't get, I told her to call 911, she refused to. Wtf?

 

 

Anyways, just thought this would be a more appropriate place to post.

 

Why would she call 911? Shouldn't she call a doctor, or a gynecologist?

[Saru Inc]

Oh sorry I left that part out. I had to tell her her call would be returned after 8am today. And I mean if she's bleeding uncontrollably for 12+ hours? So I was like

"ma'am I'm instructed to tell you you'll receive a call after 8am tomorrow, ok?"

"WHAT?! I can't wait that long! This is your fault! Your fault! I wanted him!"

"Ma'am, if the bleeding gets too bad I would recommend calling 911"

"Whats the point?! Your [bleep]ing fault" -click-

I was gonna say "uhhh you're calling for an abortion center in New Jersey... I'm in a messaging center in Virginia" but that'd just be a douchebag thing to say. And I imagine if the pain was that bad then she wasn't thinking clearly.

[Distracted]

This woman called an abortion center yesterday I answered for... She was hyperventilating and she said she just had a procedure done on the weekend, and now she was bleeding uncontrollably from the "you-know-what." And she said she was cramping so bad she could hardly move -- but here's what I don't get, I told her to call 911, she refused to. Wtf?

 

 

Anyways, just thought this would be a more appropriate place to post.

 

Why would she call 911? Shouldn't she call a doctor, or a gynecologist?

 

911 would be able to send an ambulance, which would be useful since she can't actually move herself.

[meb]

If you're pro-life then don't have an abortion. Don't force your [developmentally delayed]ed views on others.