NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/prochoicepress/05spring.shtml#conservative

According to them, the conservative party isn't going to try to legislate abortion should they get in power. This is pretty reassuring.

I love living in Canada.

*hugs Canada*

I was too lazy to read the article, so I can't agree or disagree with you.

I was too lazy to read the article, so I can't agree or disagree with you.
I was basically saying that the conservatives (the only party in Canada that's remotely anti-choice) will not try to legislate abortion, and how happy this makes me as a canadian, to live in a country where sanity prevails.

hmmm... not sure. But it was a good step.

Oh, thanks for clearing that up.

Allow me to ask you a question that has been nagging my mind and eating away at my soul for the last 16 years of my life:

What is the status of abortion in Canada? Here, (US) a woman can abort only during the first trimester, and a minor must have permission of the parents.

There's no abortion law in Canada I believe.

What is the status of abortion in Canada? Here, (US) a woman can abort only during the first trimester, and a minor must have permission of the parents.
Canada has absolutely no laws regarding abortion. A woman can get an abortion at any time for any reason and she doesn't need to answer to anyone for it either.

Although apparantly no third trimester abortions are preformed in Canada, despite the fact that one could get one done electively. (Perhaps the fact that the risk from an abortion increases as the pregnancy progresses is why everyone gets them done early)

The only way things could improve is if RU486 is legalized here, really.

Canada has absolutely no laws regarding abortion. A woman can get an abortion at any time for any reason and she doesn't need to answer to anyone for it either.

Although apparantly no third trimester abortions are preformed in Canada, despite the fact that one could get one done electively. (Perhaps the fact that the risk from an abortion increases as the pregnancy progresses is why everyone gets them done early)

The only way things could improve is if RU486 is legalized here, really.

Yay social progress! :D

Yay social progress! :D
Indeed. :D

And I thought the Americans were the free ones! :confused:

And I thought the Americans were the free ones! :confused:
Yeah, I don't get why they claim that still. I mean, we've got gay marriage, unrestricted abortions, the cops don't really care about pot... plus we've got health care. It's nice. :)

Where does Canada rank on the police state meter? I may need to escape the UK if Ingsoc, I mean, Labour goes too far.

And I thought the Americans were the free ones! :confused:

No, that's just the image they sell.

Where does Canada rank on the police state meter? I may need to escape the UK if Ingsoc, I mean, Labour goes too far.
I don't know much about this police state meter you speak of so I can't really tell you.

I don't know much about this police state meter you speak of so I can't really tell you.

I was being metaphorical... my bad.

Yeah, I don't get why they claim that still. I mean, we've got gay marriage, unrestricted abortions, the cops don't really care about pot... plus we've got health care. It's nice. :)

SO how long is the list to get in?

[url
I love living in Canada.

*hugs Canada*

You're patroitism is commendable, but how can you hugs a whole damn country?

And I thought the Americans were the free ones! :confused:

Well, at least in America the President doesn't get to decide when elections will be held. :p

Well, at least in America the President doesn't get to decide when elections will be held. :p

Owned.

SO how long is the list to get in?
Well, you just have to meet some qualifications. If you're a certain age (21-44 I think) speak english, have lots of work experience, a university degree, and finda job for when you get here, you're set.

I was being metaphorical... my bad.
Well, I kinda got what you meant... but I'm not really sure what makes a place a police state. I tend to not violate laws (except the pot thing... but cops don't care if you only have a little on you anyways) so I rarely interact with the cops anyways.

Well, I kinda got what you meant... but I'm not really sure what makes a place a police state. I tend to not violate laws (except the pot thing... but cops don't care if you only have a little on you anyways) so I rarely interact with the cops anyways.

Well, I'm exaggerating when I say "police state", but here is the wikipedia entry: Police state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_state)

What is wrong with you people?

Abortion is murder! Abortion is killing a life!

If you dont think so, see what a fetus can do yourself http://www.guilfoy.org/journey.html

Now please dont tell me "oh this child is (too small, cant walk, cant breathe, isnt physicaly intependent or whatever bullshit reason you have fori tn ot being a life), therefore the fetus is not a life. Guess what? We cant judge if someone is or is not a life based on their size or independency, thats just WRONG!. Is Yau Ming any more a human then a midget because he's tall? No! Is a child who is dependent on his mother any less a human then a grown, working, business man? No!

I still cant see how people think abortion is right :headbang: , I mean, come on, WHAT THE HELL! The thing is obviously a life, and the sooner the people see this, the BETTER.

You're patroitism is commendable, but how can you hugs a whole damn country?
Like this:
*hugs Canada again*

What is wrong with you people?

Abortion is murder! Abortion is killing a life!

If you dont think so, see what a fetus can do yourself http://www.guilfoy.org/journey.html

Now please dont tell me "oh this child is (too small, cant walk, cant breathe, isnt physicaly intependent or whatever bullshit reason you have fori tn ot being a life), therefore the fetus is not a life. Guess what? We cant judge if someone is or is not a life based on their size or independency, thats just WRONG!. Is Yau Ming any more a human then a midget because he's tall? No! Is a child who is dependent on his mother any less a human then a grown, working, business man? No!

I still cant see how people think abortion is right :headbang: , I mean, come on, WHAT THE HELL! The thing is obviously a life, and the sooner the people see this, the BETTER.
Most abortions happen when it's not even a fetus yet. And no matter what, while it's in the uterus, it's not a child. Nor is it a life.

Well, I'm exaggerating when I say "police state", but here is the wikipedia entry: Police state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_state)
Yeah, I would say our police state factor is nil.

There's more at stake than re-opening the wounds of the abortion issue. A lot more.

No sale. Not even close.

Most abortions happen when it's not even a fetus yet. And no matter what, while it's in the uterus, it's not a child. Nor is it a life.

LOL!
Fetus
an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind

I believe a child in a womb fits "an unborn or unhatched vertebrate", dont you?

And I love you dont back up your statement when you say "its not a child or a life." Did you not even READ what I had said, or do you just know your wrong and are too afraid to admit it ;).

What is wrong with you people?

Abortion is murder! Abortion is killing a life!

I still cant see how people think abortion is right :headbang: , I mean, come on, WHAT THE HELL! The thing is obviously a life, and the sooner the people see this, the BETTER.

And apparently you will never be PM of Canada, because the rest of us have realized how crackheaded we would sound spouting that.

The state obviously has no right to force a person to give their vital fluids to another, and the sooner people see this, the BETTER.

Yeah, I would say our police state factor is nil.

Our government is trying to do things like compulsory ID cards, tracking devices in all cars ("to measure road usage for tax :rolleyes: "), attempts to have indefinite house arrest for suspected terrorists...

LOL!
Fetus
an unborn or unhatched vertebrate especially after attaining the basic structural plan of its kind

I believe a child in a womb fits "an unborn or unhatched vertebrate", dont you?

And I love you dont back up your statement when you say "its not a child or a life." Did you not even READ what I had said, or do you just know your wrong and are too afraid to admit it ;).
When most abortions happen, it's an embryo. It's a different stage of development, learn some biology.
I read your post, it's full of pointless blather and it's not true. The only way you've argued it's a life is through a poorly thought out emotional argument with no backing that really fails to convince anyone who isn't already on your side.
Furthermore: It's still not a child if it's in the womb.

And apparently you will never be PM of Canada, because the rest of us have realized how crackheaded we would sound spouting that.

The state obviously has no right to force a person to give their vital fluids to another, and the sooner people see this, the BETTER.

Well, you consent to give your vital fluids to another?

When?

When you decide to go out and have sex without a comdom, or birth control, or whatever.

And lets take this scenario.

Turn back time. Say you are 15 years old, and your mother all the sudden decides it was boneheaded to give birth to you in the first place. She all the sudden decides to burn all your stuff in a bonfire, and shove you out the house with nothing at all. You demand an explaination, but you get none. She completly ignores you.

Should that be illegal too? People, when you start a life consentualy, you are OBLIGATED to keep that person or thing alive at all costs.

Our government is trying to do things like compulsory ID cards, tracking devices in all cars ("to measure road usage for tax :rolleyes: "), attempts to have indefinite house arrest for suspected terrorists...
I hadn't heard about that stuff. Do you have any news articles?

When most abortions happen, it's an embryo. It's a different stage of development, learn some biology.
I read your post, it's full of pointless blather and it's not true. The only way you've argued it's a life is through a poorly thought out emotional argument with no backing that really fails to convince anyone who isn't already on your side.

embryo
1 a archaic : a vertebrate at any stage of development prior to birth or hatching b : an animal in the early stages of growth and differentiation that are characterized by cleavage, the laying down of fundamental tissues, and the formation of primitive organs and organ systems

It's not "blather". I just stated how the child devlopes and how your wrong. You just cant think of a response.

Well, you consent to give your vital fluids to another?

When?

When you decide to go out and have sex without a comdom, or birth control, or whatever.
I think the poster was referring to blood as a vital fluid... In that you cannot be forced to give blood or organs to another person if you do not want to give them.

And lets take this scenario.

Turn back time. Say you are 15 years old, and your mother all the sudden decides it was boneheaded to give birth to you in the first place. She all the sudden decides to burn all your stuff in a bonfire, and shove you out the house with nothing at all. You demand an explaination, but you get none. She completly ignores you.

Should that be illegal too? People, when you start a life consentualy, you are OBLIGATED to keep that person or thing alive at all costs.
A 15 year old is unarguably an independant life. By the definition of life, an embryo and a fetus up until about 24 weeks is not a life as it fails to respond to stimulus as an organism. A woman has no more obligation to sustain an unwanted embryo than you do to give a stranger (or hell, even a family member) one of your kidneys.

embryo
1 a archaic : a vertebrate at any stage of development prior to birth or hatching b : an animal in the early stages of growth and differentiation that are characterized by cleavage, the laying down of fundamental tissues, and the formation of primitive organs and organ systems

It's not "blather". I just stated how the child devlopes and how your wrong. You just cant think of a response.
?
I pointed out that most abortions are carried out in the first trimester, when it is an embryo, not a fetus and you respond with a definition of embryo and an insult.

Have you actually been reading my posts or are you just launching back the most stupid insults you can conjure up?

I hadn't heard about that stuff. Do you have any news articles?

Let's see...
First article for googling "britain police state": http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1400584,00.html
Couldn't find anything about tracking devices as such, but found this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/15/vehicle_movement_database/
Not very up to date (Apr 2004), but ID cards: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/02/blair_puts_compulsory_id_card/

Let's see...
First article for googling "britain police state": http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1400584,00.html
Couldn't find anything about tracking devices as such, but found this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/15/vehicle_movement_database/
Not very up to date (Apr 2004), but ID cards: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/02/blair_puts_compulsory_id_card/
Well, I haven't heard about our government doing any of those things, so I geuss we're less of a police state.

See, I'd wondered if this thread was going to focus on the Conservative party of Canada or on fetuses. Looks like this'll become another undead-zombie abortion thread monster.

Flibble.

I think the poster was referring to blood as a vital fluid... In that you cannot be forced to give blood or organs to another person if you do not want to give them.

Did you not read my post? You consented to have a child when you did the act of sexual intercourse! YOU bought the child into the world, and YOU have to keep him healthy.


A 15 year old is unarguably an independant life. By the definition of life, an embryo and a fetus up until about 24 weeks is not a life as it fails to respond to stimulus as an organism. A woman has no more obligation to sustain an unwanted embryo than you do to give a stranger (or hell, even a family member) one of your kidneys.

Life 1 a : the quality that distinguishes a vital and functional being from a dead body

A fetus is "vital and functional", therefor, it is a life.

It doesnt matter if the life is independant. You cant say "your not al ife and you are simply because you are not physicaly independant.". Is a child with a pacemaker or a man with an oxygen tank or wheelchair any less a life because they are not physicaly independant? No!

Independancy is not a good factor of if a being is a life or not a life.

?
I pointed out that most abortions are carried out in the first trimester, when it is an embryo, not a fetus and you respond with a definition of embryo and an insult.

Have you actually been reading my posts or are you just launching back the most stupid insults you can conjure up?

I am stating that no matter a fetus or embryo, it is still a life, therefor, it is still wrong.

Did you not read my post? You consented to have a child when you did the act of sexual intercourse! YOU bought the child into the world, and YOU have to keep him healthy.
No, consenting to sex does not mean consenting to a pregnancy.

Life 1 a : the quality that distinguishes a vital and functional being from a dead body

A fetus is "vital and functional", therefor, it is a life.
It isn't viable until 24 weeks.

And this is my last response to you on the subject, you will not ruin my thread about how great Canada is if you want to make your own thread, go ahead.

See, I'd wondered if this thread was going to focus on the Conservative party of Canada or on fetuses. Looks like this'll become another undead-zombie abortion thread monster.

Flibble.
Well, let's fix it then.

In response to your earlier post about how this doesn't make things much better.... well, at least if they do get elected, they'll be a minority and unable to do much. Not that they will get elected anyways, due to the fact that they're still somewhat scary. I just find this a little comforting that they won't go after my right to choose.

No, consenting to sex does not mean consenting to a pregnancy.

[
It isn't viable until 24 weeks.

And this is my last response to you on the subject, you will not ruin my thread about how great Canada is if you want to make your own thread, go ahead.

Actualy, consenting to sex does mean consenting to pregnancy. Sex was not created for pleasure, pleasure is just a side effect from it. Sex was created for the main purpose of reproducing and creating life.

Yea, it is viable. It grows and devlopes before 24 weeks.

I agree - Canada is a pritty cool country, but, your reasons for it being cool are wrong. Your saying Canada is great because it allows people to kill their children. That is simply wrong.

Of course I won't be voting conservative in the next election, I much prefer the NDP. Their platform is much more appealing and I really don't trust the conservatives to not try to tear back the gay marriage legislation either.

Well, you consent to give your vital fluids to another?

When?

When you decide to go out and have sex without a comdom, or birth control, or whatever.

And lets take this scenario.

Turn back time. Say you are 15 years old, and your mother all the sudden decides it was boneheaded to give birth to you in the first place. She all the sudden decides to burn all your stuff in a bonfire, and shove you out the house with nothing at all. You demand an explaination, but you get none. She completly ignores you.

Should that be illegal too? People, when you start a life consentualy, you are OBLIGATED to keep that person or thing alive at all costs.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

When you consent to have sex you consent to have sex, nothing more. If a girl consents to give you head, and you try putting it in anywhere that isn't her mouth, you've raped her. For that matter, if half way through she changes her mind, if you try to force her, that's rape. A person has full rights to their body at all times.

A fetus has no right to parasite off of a unsharing host, yes the mom might of had sex without a condom, however that is beside the point, it's still her body and she has every right to control over what is living inside of it. If she doesn't want a fetus up in there, then no one can rightly tell her she has to keep it in there.

?
I pointed out that most abortions are carried out in the first trimester, when it is an embryo, not a fetus and you respond with a definition of embryo and an insult.

Have you actually been reading my posts or are you just launching back the most stupid insults you can conjure up?

Well, seems as if we're at an impasse. Is abortion morally right or socially strengthening? In most cases, no. I could explain that to all end, but what seems to be the issue is the legality and the idea of life.

1) The definition of life, according to Wikipedia, is that it possesses the capacity for:
- Growth, full development, maturity
- Metabolism, consuming, transforming and storing energy/mass; growing by absorbing and reorganizing mass; excreting waste
- Motion, either moving itself, or having internal motion
- Reproduction, the ability to create entities that are similar to, yet separate from, itself or consisting solely of entities that exhibit the quality of reproduction.
- Response to stimuli - the ability to measure properties of its surrounding environment, and act upon certain conditions. This property is also called homeostasis.

It depends, then, on the moral objectivity of the term life. If we refer it as the strictly biological definition, then the embryo (it seems to me) is considered alive at a relatively early stage. However, the primary opposition to abortion seem to give the impression that they are against it because it is 'murder' of conscious or aware life. It seems as if that the logical idea underpinning this argument is the possession of sentience. Such characteristics have not been observed until the third trimester, I believe. Feel free to correct me if I am incorrect.
A simple introduction of a law governing abortion and restricting it to the non-sentient trimesters would accomplish several things. Firstly, it would assuage public opinion regarding the concept of 'murder' surrounding the abortion debate. "A Gallup poll in December 2001 asked respondents: "Do you think abortions should be legal under any circumstances, legal only under certain circumstances or illegal in all circumstances and in what circumstances?" The results showed that 32 percent of Canadians believed abortion should be legal in all circumstances (down from 37% in 2000), 52 percent believed abortion should only be legal in certain circumstances and 14 percent thought abortions should be illegal in all circumstances, (up 9 percent from 2000)." The main concern with this is that a subsequent poll, "52% of respondents say they would like to see Canadian abortion laws "remain the same," 20% say they would like the laws to be "less strict," while 24% say they would like the laws to be "more strict.""
This doesn't stem from a change in public opinion on abortion. It rather stems from the ignorance of the majority of Canadians as to the current state of the abortion laws (or lack, thereof). A state of ignorance seems to be no longer sustainable on its own, as information regarding this is steadily increasing. Rather than face a widespread pro-life movement which may become an anti-abortion movement, the government should act pre-emptively.
As well, this law would have minor negative impact on Canadians personally. Dakini was correct in stating that the vast majority of such operations occur before sentience. "Approximately 90 per cent of abortions are performed in the first trimester, with just 2 to 3 per cent performed after 16 weeks." In fact, it may aid Canadian women in having more reliable and safer access to such medical services. At the moment, the status of Canadian abortion clinics is poor. "While the provinces are required by the federal government to fund abortion clinics fully, Quebec and Nova Scotia provide only limited funding, and New Brunswick and Manitoba provide no funding for clinics." Having a law that appeases moderates on both sides of the debate and codifies the government's position on abortion would aid the expansion of health services in Canada. Provinces are free to choose how much funding to provide. With a government definition on this, subsequent Supreme Court rulings on it, such as the one being undertaken by Dr. Morgentaler, will be easier to examine.

Although I believe that God does not look kindly upon abortions (steming from the condemnation of adultery, etc.) I also realize that He has not given me a mandate to force others to do His will through the use of government. I am free to proclaim what I believe to be the dangers of abortion, the people in this country are free to listen to me, they are then free to make up their minds as to whether to obtain an abortion or not, and (should a minimally restrictive law be passed to clot the outpour from this divisive issue) the immediate sanctity of life is protected. With a possible expansion of abortion services, the already miniscule number of people who obtain third-term abortions would have no need, and the provinces would be forced (if need be) to expand their services to cover all Canadians. When life is not in jeopardy, the government must allow people to make their own decisions. First and Second trimester abortions are a conscientious choice and are up to individuals to decide. For all the freedom I am given, I thank God for placing me in a wonderful country like Canada. God Save the Queen!

Of course I won't be voting conservative in the next election, I much prefer the NDP. Their platform is much more appealing and I really don't trust the conservatives to not try to tear back the gay marriage legislation either.
I think we might not even be seeing anywhere near the entirety of the actual policy of the Conservative party if elected. Hell, I don't even think Peter McKay is privvy to that. I think you'd have to be wilfully naive not to recognize the strong tendency and drive in the new Conservative caucus towards 'turning back the clock' on a number of fronts.

You can't cork the Genie.

*snips*
Who do you like in the PMO for the first trimester of 2006?

Who do you like in the PMO for the first trimester of 2006?

Personally, I'm working for the Liberal Party come election day. I liked Sheila Copps more than Martin, but I'm willing to compromise in the name of party unity (something that we have shamefully been lacking the past couple of years).

It's nice to see the old PC party flexing some muscle in the new Conservative Party. I never liked the PC party, but only for their fiscal agenda (I'm a long-time NDP supporter). From a 'social progress' viewpoint, I saw them as being identical to the Liberals, i.e. taking a position based on what would get them the most votes, which isn't that bad. In comparison, the new Conservative party is woefully regressive in their social agenda. According to a Globe and Mail article I read a few months ago, 0ver 60% of Canadians do not want to revisit the same-sex marriage debate, regardless of their views on the subject.

I'm glad that this has been decided once and for all for abortion.

Canada. A wonderful land of people who mind their own business!

Edit: sorry,. that was 55%, and here's a link:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Page/document/v4/sub/MarketingPage?user_URL=http://www.theglobeandmail.com%2Fservlet%2Fstory%2FRTGAM.20050718.wxsamesex18%2FBNStory%2FNational%2F&ord=1133104964440&brand=theglobeandmail&force_login=true

I was basically saying that the conservatives (the only party in Canada that's remotely anti-choice) will not try to legislate abortion, and how happy this makes me as a canadian, to live in a country where sanity prevails.


Lucky, our conservative party, including more than half of Congress and the President himself, are conservative and they HATE sex, freedom of rights, and all that other non-religious stuff.

Canada got lucky, we got pissed on from 2000 until now and the pissing will end in 2008.

http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org/prochoicepress/05spring.shtml#conservative

According to them, the conservative party isn't going to try to legislate abortion should they get in power. This is pretty reassuring.

I love living in Canada.

I feel the same way about Ireland. Even the most economically liberal (i.e. right-wing) parties support universal access to education at all levels!

Canada has absolutely no laws regarding abortion. A woman can get an abortion at any time for any reason and she doesn't need to answer to anyone for it either.

Is this really a good thing? Do women have to pay for abortions? (They don't in England.) Are there no laws regarding health and safety in abortion hospitals?

RU486? Hasn't that killed a few people? It's not safe.

Is this really a good thing? Do women have to pay for abortions? (They don't in England.) Are there no laws regarding health and safety in abortion hospitals?

RU486? Hasn't that killed a few people? It's not safe.
Yes, it is a good thing.
No, women don't have to pay for abortions in most provinces. In New Brunswick and until recently Manitoba, women who had abortions in clinics rather than hospitals had to pay their way.
Of course the prodecures are safe.
RU486 isn't legal in Canada, and it has the same death rate as a traditional abortion, which is significantly less than the death rate for childbirth. It's pretty safe so long as there's medical supervision. Most deaths happen when the embryo isn't expelled and begins to rot in the uterus, a doctor can catch this and get the embryo out before it causes damage.

I feel the same way about Ireland. Even the most economically liberal (i.e. right-wing) parties support universal access to education at all levels!
Yes, it is nice when nobody's going to try to overturn issues that matter to you. :)

Yay Conservatives!!!
Ralph Klein for PM!!!!

Yay Conservatives!!!
Ralph Klein for PM!!!!

Don't give me nightmares. :(

Keep your drungo, we want the guy who looks like Lenin. :D

Don't give me nightmares. :(

Keep your drungo, we want the guy who looks like Lenin. :D

He's probably the best politician ever. I don't think he drinks that much anymore but he did some pretty hilarious things. Plus Alberta is Debt-Free and we are all getting $400 from the Government in the New Year.

Canada has absolutely no laws regarding abortion. A woman can get an abortion at any time for any reason and she doesn't need to answer to anyone for it either.

Although apparantly no third trimester abortions are preformed in Canada, despite the fact that one could get one done electively. (Perhaps the fact that the risk from an abortion increases as the pregnancy progresses is why everyone gets them done early)

The only way things could improve is if RU486 is legalized here, really.


Why the focus on RU486?

Canada HAS approved the sale over -the-counter (no prescription) of Plan B (http://www.go2planb.com/ForConsumers/Index.aspx) for a while now, after all, and it seems to be a safer and equally effective alternative.

He's probably the best politician ever. I don't think he drinks that much anymore but he did some pretty hilarious things. Plus Alberta is Debt-Free and we are all getting $400 from the Government in the New Year.

Alberta also has a suddenly very hot commodity, and that's no thanks to anyone.

He's probably the best politician ever. I don't think he drinks that much anymore but he did some pretty hilarious things. Plus Alberta is Debt-Free and we are all getting $400 from the Government in the New Year.

One of the most hilarious being the time he went into a homeless shelter all liquored up and started yelling at everybody to 'get a job'.

:p

Actualy, consenting to sex does mean consenting to pregnancy. Sex was not created for pleasure, pleasure is just a side effect from it. Sex was created for the main purpose of reproducing and creating life.

See... Canada is not under the control of a right wing religious fundamentalist regime... And hence they do not legally view sex as either something that was "Created" or something that is for the sole purpose of making babies.

Of course I won't be voting conservative in the next election, I much prefer the NDP. Their platform is much more appealing and I really don't trust the conservatives to not try to tear back the gay marriage legislation either.

Yes, just because the Conservatives say they won't try to legislate the abortion issue, does not make them less scary. It just means if elected they would not touch something that is not even at issue in Canada. However, after all the hard work the Liberal party did to give equal rights to everyone (gay marriage) the Conservatives would most likely try to tear that law back without doubt. A vote for the Conservatives is still a scary thing and a vote for the NDP is still a vote for the Conservatives in my books. The NDP don't take votes away from the Conservatives or the Bloc, they take them away from the Liberal party.

We seem to be in the same situation the Americans found themselves in not long ago. Ralf Nador took votes away from the democrats and handed the elected to the republicans, certainly true in 2000. It would appear the NDP are braced to do the same thing in Canada by taking votes away from the Liberal party and handing the election to the Conservatives.

Strategic voting may not be popular, but sometimes it's the only way to ensure that your fate will be a little better. I mean if the NDP actually stood a chance of forming even a minority government, I might see the point in voting for them, but they don't. Just look at the polls. In fact since they have signaled that they will aline with the Conservatives to bring down the government they have lost 6 points in the polls.

I know who I'm voting for, the Liberals. All this BS talk of them being corrupt is just that, BS no one in the current Liberal party had anything to do with Ad-Scam. Paul Martin has been cleared, yet people still call him corrupt, boggles the mind really, especially when the current Liberal government is doing such a great job in our country. It would be a crying shame to see the Liberals fall and not win back the government. They are the best government Canada has had in many years. Bar, none.

I wonder when the pro-choices will realize they share more with the pro-lifers than they think. They're both moral absolutists. The only difference is that one group embraces it and the other pretends to be relativist.

Yeah, I don't get why they claim that still. I mean, we've got gay marriage, unrestricted abortions, the cops don't really care about pot... plus we've got health care. It's nice. :) Freedom Is Slavery. (but health care is good)

Yes, just because the Conservatives say they won't try to legislate the abortion issue, does not make them less scary. It just means if elected they would not touch something that is not even at issue in Canada. However, after all the hard work the Liberal party did to give equal rights to everyone (gay marriage) the Conservatives would most likely try to tear that law back without doubt. A vote for the Conservatives is still a scary thing and a vote for the NDP is still a vote for the Conservatives in my books. The NDP don't take votes away from the Conservatives or the Bloc, they take them away from the Liberal party.
Unless you happen to be living somewhere other than Ontario.

We seem to be in the same situation the Americans found themselves in not long ago. Ralf Nador took votes away from the democrats and handed the elected to the republicans, certainly true in 2000. It would appear the NDP are braced to do the same thing in Canada by taking votes away from the Liberal party and handing the election to the Conservatives.
My goodness. You actually swallowed that line? No wonder you're so petrified. Nader had nothing to do with Gore's loss, that can only be attributed to Gore (and some might say the Supreme Court). Had he listened to the people who turned from the Democratics party because it was trying too hard to appeal to the Republican minded voters, the Republicans would have been claiming Brown lost the election for Bush, with just as much validity.

Strategic voting may not be popular, but sometimes it's the only way to ensure that your fate will be a little better.Bullshit. How you can claim this and at the same time not acknowledge the amount of strategic voting that went on in the US (they even had websites set up to enable it for goodness' sakes) and how it made absolutely no difference is beyond me.

Besides, with the corruption of the liberals (and no, I'm not referring to adscam, I'm referring to their blatant ignoring of the rules of process in order to get their election goodie-budget on to the table), at this point I liken them to a slowly growing disease. I'd rather take the quick cut of an ineffectual conservative government (assuming it even occurs) than the slow slide back to the end of the Trudeau years. Yeah, Mulrooney came in and made things a lot worse in his short time, but the impetus for it going that way to start with really did start with Trudeau's economic policies.

I mean if the NDP actually stood a chance of forming even a minority government, I might see the point in voting for them, but they don't. Just look at the polls. In fact since they have signaled that they will aline with the Conservatives to bring down the government they have lost 6 points in the polls.You've never heard of a coalition, have you?

especially when the current Liberal government is doing such a great job in our country.Yes they are, on the backs of conservative financial policy tempered with NDP policy controls. The Liberal's biggest contribution to this country - Goodale's lies about the size of the surplus, the GST, and the infamous Redbook promises.

It would be a crying shame to see the Liberals fall and not win back the government. They are the best government Canada has had in many years. Bar, none.I'm not necessarily going to argue with that, but I just say I think Canada deserves even better -- it deserves to have the actual originators of the policies in power, rather than those who have no ideas of their own.

But personally, I'm just tired of being afraid of the big conservative boogey-man. Hell, the worst thing that can happen to the Conservative Party is to be elected. Last time that occurred, they were nearly wiped out in the next election. A minority conservative government will have to choose between alienating its own members and collapsing. If making the NDP more prominent on the federal stage requires that sacrifice, I'm willing to make it.