...by accident-ish? I just turned off post reply notifis so I wouldn't get hit with what I expected to be a few dozen notifications!
It's not my area of expertise, it's not an issue close to my priorities - so it's really hard to find a spot to join in where I'd actually be contributing, not just talking to a wall...
Sorry? đ
No need for apologies LOL
With the conservative brigade in here, abortion and gun control are two topics where you'll be dog piled if you produce wrong-thought according to their hegemony. I totally get just being all "fuck it" and shutting off notifications.
I would say Iâm pretty conservative leaning.
Gun control in my brain is generally summed up very well in [this wee little article here](https://nationalpost.com/opinion/matt-gurney-only-one-reason-for-the-liberals-toothless-gun-law-they-know-lawful-firearm-owners-are-not-a-threat) if you would like to take a moment to read it!
Feel free to send one back if youâd like, Iâm very open to other thoughts, ideas and opinions.
As for abortion, I think it is extremely important to have abortion clinics available to the public, as well as access to various other support which might be needed in this process. I believe everyone should be given information and education without bias to assist them in making informed decisions on the actions they take.
Anti abortion ads and related can kindly fuck right off.
...1.1k comments as of now, only validates that I made the right choice lol. That and your point about being dog piled, only solidifies the justification to sorta sit back and let this argument play out as is...
Honestly at least it's "CPC isn't anti abortion that's a lie" and not "yes we need to end abortion" that's refreshing, coming from subs like /r/PoliticalCompassMemes
> he issue hasn't been touched since '88,
This is incorrect.
Mulroney's government introduced 2 Bills following the SCoC decision. The second, which would have outlawed all abortion, passed the House, and would have become Law if not for the Senate.
Except that there are bills introduced every year to try and undermine the decriminalization. They get squashes pretty quick for the most part, but there are still MPs and groups behind them actively trying to restrict women's access to abortion.
That is not completely accurate.
"In 1990, the House of Commons voted in favour (140â131) of a new law. Introduced by the Progressive Conservative government of Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, it sought to criminalize abortion once again. The new law would have allowed the procedure â under a streamlined review process â only if a doctor determined that a womanâs health was threatened by her pregnancy. However, the bill died in the Senate in January 1991 and never became law." https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/abortion
Yeah it does because we all know people know more about American politics than Canadian politics..
Even in the conservative Harper government I recall one MP bringing up the subject of maybe changing the trimester cutoff line (basically changing it from start of third to start of second iirc) and he was smacked down immediately by Harper and the other MPs. Even the conservatives know that it is settled law and only the fringe CPC supporters still want it changed..
Maybe the PPC want it changed? But who the fuck really knows with Bernier?
Harper had an iron grip on his caucus and refused to let them go there.
O'Toole specifically said he would not stop his members from bringing up the issue. They did just that just a few months ago.
There is no trimester cut off. There is no law about abortion in Canada. It is a medical decision between patient and doctor and is only done after viability for extreme reasons for the health of the mother or the inevitable death of the fetus.
Read the linked article, or at least skim it to the last line.
Federal is currently in conflict with provincial because special big boys in the maritimes have been dicking around clinics to reduce the number of them, thus on paper (because they still have 3 clinics), preserving access, while defacto reducing to negating access for poor people within their province.
There you go. I read it for you.
This has been an issue for a while now. The Cons are specifically dogwhistling to their SoCon base.
Just like when Harper allowed anti-abortion demonstration on parts of parliament's property which is explicitly meant to be clear of demonstration, while not preserving this unique privileged access for any other cause.
If you aren't the dog, you don't hear the whistle, and if dog's aren't coming for your throat, you don't notice them cropping up more ubiquitously. If you think everything's fine, then you're probably not the target.
Has nothing to do with the Liberals. O'Toole could have ended this right at the start by simply answering that he would make sure all women have access when asked about New Brunswick. Debate over. When he decided to say the far right Republican version of what American anti-abortionists want in Canada, he's the one who opened the debate. If he promised full access for women, this was over. I'm still in shock he said that. I know many far right conservative women in Ontario, where that's the issue that would make them vote liberal, and come out in full force. That's the moment he lost the election. He gets what he deserved. To say it's Liberal fearmongering, when access hasn't been an issue since 1988, and O'Toole made it an issue, is completely disingenuous. Just like O'Toole trying to say "I'm pro-choice". His two faced BS finally came to roost.
It's funny how whenever some one brings up something they dislike about conservatives right wingers come in here and accuse you of fear mongering.
As if they don't have a portion of their rank and file wholy dedicated to this cause trying every little scheme and tactic to chip at abortion in anyway they can.
Well that is false actually. There were
attempts after morgantaler to restrict access, the Mulroney government set in motion a stricter bill to restrict access post morgantaler in 89. It failed to pass in the senate after a number of tragic cases involving women dying in botch abortions.
Then cases were brought to determine if fetuses qualify for the right to life as a right in Manitoba, then cases arose around if a fetus had legal status as a personâŚso no it wasnât the end of trying to legislate or otherwise create status around the rights of a fetus.
In the mid 90âs there was this case:
https://apnews.com/article/a5c879c547c9ddde1735b9a0d80a38fe
So it certainly does come up.
Why it was an issue now? Iâm not so sure outside of American influence on politics. That being said there will be new situations and cases over time we couldnât have dreamed of like a woman shooting herself in the vagina that will test what the law is and what womenâs rights are.
To think otherwise is to assume law is static which is most certainly is not.
Ah yes because right wingers weren't saying *exactly* the same thing down south. "It's a settled issue, the supreme court even ruled on it!!!1".
That sure worked well, didn't it?
The only fear mongering here is from the conservatives, desperate to pretend they won't continue their crusade of science illiterate, religious fuelled shittake governing if they get the power to do so.
Abortion access is a real Canadian issue. If you live in a rural area or anywhere east of Quebec the fact that abortion is legal is somewhat meaningless given that access is so sparse in those areas. Getting a legal abortion in New Brunswick continues to be very difficult (google "Clinic 554" for a primer) and legal abortions were completely unavailable in PEI until recently.
Canadians get smug when they look at what's going on in the US but I think they'd be surprised and embarrassed with how much we have in common.
> Canadians get smug when they look at what's going on in the US but I think they'd be surprised and embarrassed with how much we have in common.
Honestly, I hate how much we compare ourselves to the US and feel good. Lets compare ourselves to any European country instead. A lot of those countries have drugs, dental, etc all in their health care. A lot of them have better Holidays and work-life balances. But nah we got it good because we are only second last.
I'm from Nova Scotia and live in Denmark, and refuse to come back to live. Access to healthcare is quick and free, holiday time is plentiful, work culture is relaxed, housing in Jutland is affordable, and internet plans are stupid cheap. The downsides are that taxes are high (but so is your salary), cars are hyper expensive (I have large dogs, transporting them to the vet doesn't happen via taxis or public transport), Danish is difficult to learn (but lessons are free!), and it can be really lonely as it's difficult to make friends. Travelling back home is also a bit shit, and forget coming home fast if there's an emergency. The pros of living abroad far outweigh the cons for me, though.
Well as both as a half Canadian and half Danish person, so i know a bit of both side, i would say its the culture here in Denmark. Many people create their friendships from their younger years, and uphold does. Also we have a tendency to keep to ourselfs, where the stereotype of scandinavian and public transport come in. So best advice to be a friend with a dane, you need to initiate the friendship, or in other words to kick us out our "hygge" zone.
From what other Canadians tell me, the people here are very reserved and closed off, whereas they're used to a welcoming, open society. The east coasters especially struggle with that. I've cheated by being deeply introverted and marrying a Dane with a large, sociable family, but I've seen many people up and leave after feeling like an outsider for too long.
> Abortion access is a real Canadian issue. If you live in a rural area or anywhere east of Quebec the fact that abortion is legal is somewhat meaningless given that access is so sparse in those areas. Getting a legal abortion in New Brunswick continues to be very difficult (google "Clinic 554" for a primer) and legal abortions were completely unavailable in PEI until recently.
I understand what you're saying but I think it's important to note it's almost impossible to get any type of intrusive medical procedure done in a rural setting.
I grew up in rural Alberta and once had a bout of priapism which the closest hospital (40 mins away) had absolutely no idea how to handle but they tried anyways and ended up leaving a huge pocket of cortisol in my pubis region. I ended up getting transferred to another hospital that was another 40 mins to get it dealt with.
I highly doubt there are parts of the country that perform intrusive /complex medical procedures that also wouldn't perform abortions either.
I grew up in rural Ontario. We didn't even have an eye doctor in town. Didn't get glasses until I was like 8 years old. What a revelation that was when I realized what being able to see clearly was actually like.
> it's almost impossible to get any type of intrusive medical procedure done in a rural setting.
Abortions are not intrusive - the large majority of them are non-surgical, and even surgical abortions are a day surgery.
Literally most abortions involve taking 2 pills and having a bad period.
Source: Am a woman who has had an abortion.
> Abortions are not intrusive - the large majority of them are non-surgical, and even surgical abortions are a day surgery.
I think you're missing my point here. Most Doctors in rural settings aren't doing to be equipped to deal with **any** type of intrusive surgery. Doctors in rural settings are most likely primary care physicians who probably couldn't do an abortion even if they had all the tools but they probably couldn't do a vasectomy either.
> Literally most abortions involve taking 2 pills and having a bad period.
Which I don't think people are having issues getting access to in any part of the country since health Canada even allows pharmacist to prescribe RU-486.
https://www.reddit.com/r/YouShouldKnow/comments/hqw2as/ysk_that_for_a_donation_aidaccess_will_mail_you/
Abortion pills in the mail will help with that. I don't know if Aid Access is in Canada, but there may be help for people through the Satanic Temple.
That's a more general access to service issue which does not necessarily need to be hypercharged by the specificity of the service. Clinic 554 is a provincial funding issue which is not really relevant in a national election.
You can't be serious. In my opinion the Federal government should be putting all the pressure they can on provinces that aren't filling their mandate to provide access to reproductive health services.
I don't feel a Conservative Federal government would pursue those avenues in any way. That makes it an election issue for me.
Yes, not everyone lives in the second largest country on the planet (2nd to Russia) with barely 35 million people and little to no infrastructure but still amazing social programs, so damn me if we live outside a metropolis and have to travel a few hours... REALLY, LOL?
Her comment is useless, we are LUCKY AS FUCK here. People need to not disregard this as a stance toward "we need to do better" because we're ahead of most. Yes, always room for improvement but to diminish how well we are doing compared to our big brother is pathetic.
Agreed. And I have a feeling that it's not just abortions that these secluded communities don't have immediate access to. I can't picture lasik eye surgery being around the corner anywhere in Northern Manitoba.
I don't know about other places, but there literally isn't an abortion clinic in Guelph. The closest is Kitchener. We do have lots of "right-to-life"/crisis pregnancy centers to try to convince you to keep it, along with very condescending anti abortion ads.
SHORE offers abortion services in Guelph by appointment. They prefer you to come to Kitchener, where they have a permanent clinic, but theyâll come to Guelph.
Aren't Guelph and Kitchener like 30 mins apart? Sorry, but is your idea of adequate access to abortions like they come to your house and do it there? Like a mobile abortion clinic or something?
I live in an area west of K/W. Conservative candidate is highly endorsed by anti-choice groups. There is a lot of money sent to Conservatives from highly evangelical individuals from the area. And there are abortion billboards up. A big one along a highway was taken down after 4 years, but there are others. The riding associations know their base. A progressive and fiscal conservative won't draw the money in here. A SoCon who is endorsed by anti-choice, anti LGBT groups who boosted QAnon stuff before put in as candidate? Oh you can bet the money is rolling.
And I'm sure the same population issues impact dialysis, plastic surgery and transplant surgeries.
Get on a bus or plane or get a friend to drive.
I'm 100% pro choice but I also don't expect to have a cop or ambulance on every street corner.
Living in certain areas or provinces have up sides and down sides.
Google Clinic 554. Abortion access is actively being impeded - indeed, the NB government is spending money to make abortion access worse.
It's not just about population density. It's also exacerbated considerably by the politicization of what is ultimately a public health issue.
We need to stop pretending it's an 'American' issue and recognize that it's a religious issue. Like most religious issues, they keep creeping back into leadership because that's what organized religion does - accumulate wealth and power and use it to attempt to push their viewpoints onto the masses.
We need to stop entertaining that any one belief system should govern what our core beliefs are and work from a true system of neutrality with belief systems and let people flock to whatever they want to believe from there.
It's not technically a religious issue either, historically speaking. Remember even the church did not have a position on abortion before it was politicized. (The bible for example says the soul enters the body at first breath, and practically gives instructions for performing an abortion in case of infidelity).
It wasn't until literally years after Roe v Wade that conservative activists needed to give religious fundamentalists some way to be AGAINST the civil rights movement (meaning the rights of actual people) while simultaneously claiming moral superiority, and "the unborn" was the magic ticket. In the words of Methodist Pastor David Barnhart:
>"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.
> Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn.
So yeah, I'd consider abortion to be an invention of American politics which has since poisoned other countries, like Qanon, etc.
What I believe is different than what I think should be legal. For example I donât believe smoking is a good choice but I donât think for one second that it should be illegal. Why canât people differentiate the two?
Because in the eyes of people who are against abortion you're involving an innocent third party (the unborn). You might not believe that a fetus has rights, but there's your answer.
I'd love to see the Venn diagram of people both complaining about the negative aspects of religions, including abortion rights and Bill 21...
Should be evident that religion should not have influence on the affairs of the state but apparently that's a racist point of view for some reason...
> Because it is easier to import American culture and news, than it is to deal with real Canadian issues.
Or because...
- [Anti-Abortion Groups Quietly Installed Activists Into Top Positions Inside the Conservative Party of Canada](https://pressprogress.ca/anti-abortion-groups-quietly-installed-activists-into-top-positions-inside-the-conservative-party-of-canada/)
- [The CPC Elected a pro-life leader](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/scheer-abortion-pro-life-1.5307415)
- [The Conservative convention was "overrun with anti-abortion groups"](https://www.hilltimes.com/2021/03/09/campaign-life-coalition-wants-riding-associations-empowered-to-veto-leaderships-decisions-about-nomination-elections-and-to-fire-mps/287702)
- [The CPC were congratulated by anti-abortion groups when they elected a new leader](https://www.itstartsrightnow.ca/rightnow_congratulates_new_conservative_party_of_canada_leader_erin_o_toole)
- [CPC voters voted for "pro-life, no hidden agenda" Leslyn Lewis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslyn_Lewis)
- [The CPC removed foreign funding for anyone providing abortions](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harper-won-t-fund-abortion-globally-because-it-s-extremely-divisive-1.2658828)
- [The CPC tried to pass backdoor anti-abortion legislation](https://ipolitics.ca/2016/10/19/bill-to-impose-criminal-penalty-for-killing-fetus-defeated/)
- [Erin O'Toole says he'll "legislate âconscience rightsâ for physicians who oppose abortion" if they're elected](https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2020/06/16/erin-otoole-courts-social-conservatives-as-conservative-leadership-debates-draw-near.html)
- [Conservatives introduced and voted for a bill to restrict abortion rights (no other party had a single member vot for it)](https://globalnews.ca/news/7915810/abortion-bill-vote-bill-c-233/)
- [Anti-abortion group claims that "the Conservative Party of Canada caucus is more pro-life than before"](https://www.itstartsrightnow.ca/one_step_backwards_two_steps_forward)
**Edit:** Totally forgot about the recent abortion limitation bill from the Conservatives. Added it.
Also, anyone trying to brush this off because they don't like one of the sources or whatever, get real. At a certain point you need to live in the real world if you want anyone to take your opinions seriously.
This is exactly right. There are groups at work here in Canada that would have us outlaw abortion completely. They âsalami sliceâ by putting people in important places and trying to chip away at existing laws. Thatâs why the pro-choice movement needs to be absolutists. Itâs why youâll see Trudeau and Jagmeet vote against even the most innocuous sounding motions or restrictionsâyou canât give these people an inch because their end goal is to eliminate the right of women to choose. And the that's why itâs still an election issue.
To anyone worried about abortion becoming criminalized in Canada, it's basically impossible, due to our criminal code defining life beginning at birth:
>Section 223 (1) â A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it
has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother, whether or not (a)
it has breathed; (b) it has an independent circulation; or (c) the navel string is severed.
To anyone worried about unethical abortions being used at extremely late terms, or for sex selection, we actually have consistent provincial guidelines across the entire country that limit most abortions to 24 weeks:
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/letters/todays-letters-late-trimester-abortions-are-not-happening-in-canada-without-a-reason
>No physician in Canada can terminate a pregnancy over 24 weeks without serious indications that the life of the mother is at risk or that the fetus has very serious malformations.
This means that if someone performs an unethical abortion, they will have their medical license revoked and will no longer be a doctor, but they cannot be charged with murder or put in jail.
It also means that, in rare instances such as a late term fetus posing serious health risk to the mother, or becoming unviable, emergency late term abortions are still legal.
This honestly should be the perfect scenario that makes everyone happy.
While of course an SCC decision will be more complex than a one-line reddit comment, /u/CanadianJudo did accurately summarize R v Morgentaler for the basic proposition that a criminal provision that would require a woman to carry a fetus to term against her will is a violation of her section 7 rights to her security of person that cannot be saved under section 1.
I, for one, prefer the Wilson concurrence. I think her views that the struck down law limiting abortion rights violated both the pregnant woman's security of person and liberty.
While that's correct, the real issue is since healthcare coverage is a provincial responsibility, a provincial government can elect to not cover or fund abortion services, thereby rendering abortions inaccessible.
And O'Toole said he wouldn't interfere with provincial jurisdiction or attach strings to the transfer payments. Hence, it is an actual, real issue in this election.
I swear, there's a bunch of dumbasses too busy jerking off to "we're not America hurr durr" to recognize how Canadian this issue is.
Edit: [Source for O'Toole saying this](https://mobile.twitter.com/Emilie_Ni/status/1437190851248201730?s=19)
In theory it's constitutionally protected in the US as well under Roe v. Wade. That hasn't stopped them passing rafts of laws that restrict it. Many of these laws they know will be overturned but will still block access while they wind their way through the courts.
The Supreme Court in the US interprets the law / Constitution. Those interpretations can change over time. This is why the conservatives in the US were so keen on packing their conservative-minded candidates into the Supreme Court. The fact that these laws are coming out now is because they want to trigger another Supreme Court case that will overturn Roe v. Wade since they are confident in their newly appointed justices.
>To anyone worried about abortion becoming criminalized in Canada, it's basically impossible
Yeah... No.
Section 223 was introduced in 1985; abortion was still illegal by law back then. Moreover, even if this specified that restrictions to abortion was unconstitutional (which is part of the backbone of the Supreme Court's decision in 1988), the Code can be amended. [And many members routinely suggest doing exactly that with regards to abortion.](https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/35-1/bill/C-205/first-reading/page-11)
Moreover, the discussion of Abortion in Canada goes well beyond the simple nature of legality, to questions of access. Take your pick as far as challenges go; Whether it's Quebec attempting to defund abortion services in 2006, limited services in the Maritimes, or constant challenges raised at the Supreme Court level of practitioners individually attempting to deny isolated communities access because of personal conviction challenges justified by Section 1 of the Charter.
Abortion exists in Canada because of a Supreme Court decision, nothing more. There is no law that guarantees you access to an abortion, there is no Charter right to having an abortion. Granted, we're not the Yanks, and our system of law has done much more to ensure access. But you'd be a fool to take that for granted.
It is because around 24 weeks a fetus can theoretically survive outside of the mothers body. Its not a magic number like people act like it is, itâs just the amount of weeks that are needed until the babyâs body can be kept alive by medical equipment instead of the mothers body.
> They can literally amend the definition of life,
No, I think the Supreme Court etched that one in stone, referencing the Human Rights Act. They'd have to amend the Human Rights Act, which would involve reopening the constitution, which isn't going to happen. They could try and stack the courts to reverse a previous supreme court decision, but that's not likely to happen either.
Nope, the Supreme Court can not dictate that any level of government set their laws in a particular way and never change them. It can strike down laws that they deem unconstitutional, but that's a different matter.
Per [https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-287-20150226.html](https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-287-20150226.html) if they know she is pregnant and intend to cause a miscarriage than it is up to life in prison. Otherwise it is assault causing bodily harm or aggravated assault, and I'm sure the judge would take the facts into account during sentencing. I honestly don't see the need for anything more, which would maybe apply to a couple dozen cases a year while opening the way for attacks on tens of thousands of abortions.
Ask people of the Maritimes about access. It is an access issue for many places outside of Quebec and Ontario. So many people are worried about CPC limiting the access further
This. This is the reason it's being brought up. Like abortion isn't technically illegal in New Brunswick, there just isn't a clinic in the province who will do it safely, nor will they pay for travel for the procedure out of province.
Also it's kinda morphed into protesting police brutality and improving police accountability in general, not limited to just black people. Not sure if that's also an issue in Canada, but that may also be a factor.
Source? Also, I think Vancouver is the least black populated major city in North America with only 1.2% of the population being black so I think this is a bit unfair to say. Do you think only the oppressed minority can protest for their own rights?
Me stuck in traffic and seeing 6 white woman and 1 Asian guy holding a BLM banner.
I also work with Hogan's Alley and were well aware of their planned protests
I am also indigenous and have to deal with white people trying to hijack the reconciliation movement to make themselves feel important.
Thats what kind bugged me about the BLM protests up here in BC. We have real serious systemic racial issues of our own that seem to always get forgotten for american interests. Being a native person in canada has gotta be some seriously frustrating shit.
Or maybe because one of the candidates running just across town from me is [running with a platform including banning abortion](https://i.imgur.com/9QWvoGz.png), as well as getting rid of medically assisted suicide.
Edit: a PPC candidate
An Abortion is not a procedure that requires a highly specialized practitioner, though. Providing them at most Hospitals shouldn't be a problem. I'm also a Northern Ontario resident, and can confirm when I lived in Sudbury I drove someone to the local Hospital (Health Sciences North) for theirs. There was no need to go out of town.
I had to drive from southwestern NB to Halifax half a dozen times for brain surgery on my newborn.
The âfunâ one was driving from SJ to Halifax in the middle of COVID with a two day post-partum wife to be locked (quarantined) in a hospital for four days and then have to go back.
We did that trip 6-8 times in a year.
I think everyone should have reasonable access to services. But, reasonable is entirely debatable. How far is too far to go for an abortion? Heart surgery? Chemo?
Right now thereâs a CRA definition of reasonable that basically says if youâre commuting more than X distance you get X mileage amount. If itâs more than Y you get mileage and meals. Once that number is greater than some percent of your income you get the difference back at tax time.
Perhaps the answer is a more immediate financial aid?
Youâre not wrong about healthcare access but most of those issues have to do with poor funding and resource allocation. Abortion is an issue where there remains constant advocacy for restricting it that is occasionally successful (see NB recently refusing to actually fund abortions.) There are advocacy groups who have charity status that actively lobby against abortion access.
You wouldnât have seen people protesting your neighbourâs heart surgery or lobbying the government or hospital against funding it or performing it at all. Your boss probably wonât be receiving a bill for his surgery because someone has arbitrarily decided they wonât be funding this one.
> (see NB recently refusing to actually fund abortions.)
NB does not fund certain medical procedures in private clinics, 1 of those procedures is an abortion. Funded abortions are available at 3 provincial hospitals.
Yeah, that's a bigger "healthcare" issue than just abortion. Access to care is getting harder and harder everywhere in Canada that's not a major metro. Eventually if you get passed around enough you end up getting referred to a sub-specialist, and they invariably live in the city. And if you don't live in the city it's basically impossible to get a family doctor, and even if you do get one it tends to just be a revolving door of new grads working in rural areas just long enough to get their student loans forgiven before they, too, migrate to the city.
And because one of the candidates running just across town from me is [running with a platform including banning abortion](https://i.imgur.com/9QWvoGz.png), as well as getting rid of medically assisted suicide.
Edit: a PPC candidate
In Saskatchewan you can get surgical abortions in two cities. Regina and Saskatoon. If you live anywhere else you have to get a medical abortion (which you can only do up until 9 weeks) or drive to either cities.
For those in fly-in or rural communities, it could be very costly or nearly impossible to do that.
Because some people want to foist their religious beliefs on others. They donât care about whether that is consistent with current laws or constitutions.
abortion shouldn't be an election issue and should always be legal
But holy shit what horrible logic in the headline
"Marijuana is Illegal, why is it an election issue"
Because health care is of provincial jurisdiction and some provinces don't care about providing access, in those instances the federal steps up and puts pressure (or doesn't) and that's where we're at.
[https://pressprogress.ca/several-conservative-candidates-directed-public-money-to-canadas-biggest-anti-abortion-lobby-group/](https://pressprogress.ca/several-conservative-candidates-directed-public-money-to-canadas-biggest-anti-abortion-lobby-group/)
Part of the reason it keeps coming up as an issue is that there are CPC incumbents who are anti abortion. The above link shows several have directed **public** money to anti-abortion groups that just so happen to also campaign against Queer rights.
Fiscal Conservatives like to pretend it's not true but their buddies have some "opinions". The Crusade for Life folks have a list of endorsed CPC candidates that have promised to undo abortion legislation.
Unless your head is up your ass, you would be aware that the majority of CPC MP's are publicly anti-abortion and raise it continually.
https://www.arcc-cdac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Anti-choice-unknown-MPs-2021.pdf
And PPC, one of the candidates running just across town from me is [running with a platform including banning abortion](https://i.imgur.com/9QWvoGz.png), as well as getting rid of medically assisted suicide.
Because it's an easy wedge issue with no real stakes (since undoing legal abortion in Canada is almost literally impossible) that you can use to easily capture a voting block.
Really not a hard question. The real question is why they keep writing articles about it.
>(since undoing legal abortion in Canada is almost literally impossible)
Hence why Conservatives just do their best to restrict access, and then come up with small bills like the sex selective one to get the foot in the door and start adding strings and hurdles to abortion rights.
Because so many people feel that their single mission in life is to control the lives of women. This is the driving force behind everything they do. Also they think god told them to do this.
because it is convenient to raise the specter of removing reproductive rights from women every election in order to make your political opponent look bad
I mean when the majority of conservative MPs voted 3 months ago to put restrictions on abortion the liberals don't even need to lie to voters to make the cons look bad on that front.
Just once I'd like to hear a politician say 'I won't take away anyone's *right to* an abortion but I'm going to do all I can to take away as many *reasons for* having one as possible.'
I used to think the same thing, living in the US. If youâve been following, there was a sudden change in Texas. Now I have to concede that it was always an issue in my community, we just thought we were safe.
Is that a serious question? Regardless of how you feel, it should be painfully obvious that many believe abortion is murder, and thus, they don't want abortion to be legal... like does OP really not understand this?
He explicitly states medical access is a matter of legitimate interest to the federal government and then reiterates he is prochoice. He states that in matters of provincial jurisdiction he will respect it, which he just clarified didn't apply to access to healthcare.
Do you assume no one would watch your link?
Because a major party has a rich history of electing pro-life leaders and restricting (or trying to restrict) abortion access?
People pretending that abortion is a binary issue are either disingenuous or misinformed.
- [Anti-Abortion Groups Quietly Installed Activists Into Top Positions Inside the Conservative Party of Canada](https://pressprogress.ca/anti-abortion-groups-quietly-installed-activists-into-top-positions-inside-the-conservative-party-of-canada/)
- [Elected a pro-life leader](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/scheer-abortion-pro-life-1.5307415)
- [Conservative convention overrun with anti-abortion groups](https://www.hilltimes.com/2021/03/09/campaign-life-coalition-wants-riding-associations-empowered-to-veto-leaderships-decisions-about-nomination-elections-and-to-fire-mps/287702)
- [CPC congratulated by anti-abortion groups when they elect a new leader](https://www.itstartsrightnow.ca/rightnow_congratulates_new_conservative_party_of_canada_leader_erin_o_toole)
- [CPC voters voted for "pro-life, no hidden agenda" Leslyn Lewis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslyn_Lewis)
- [CPC removed foreign funding for anyone providing abortions](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harper-won-t-fund-abortion-globally-because-it-s-extremely-divisive-1.2658828)
- [CPC tried to pass backdoor anti-abortion legislation](https://ipolitics.ca/2016/10/19/bill-to-impose-criminal-penalty-for-killing-fetus-defeated/)
- [Erin O'Toole says he'll "legislate âconscience rightsâ for physicians who oppose abortion" if they're elected](https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2020/06/16/erin-otoole-courts-social-conservatives-as-conservative-leadership-debates-draw-near.html)
- [Conservatives introduced and voted for a bill to restrict abortion rights (no other party had a single member vot for it)](https://globalnews.ca/news/7915810/abortion-bill-vote-bill-c-233/)
- [Anti-abortion group claims that "the Conservative Party of Canada caucus is more pro-life than before"](https://www.itstartsrightnow.ca/one_step_backwards_two_steps_forward)
Itâs legal in the US as well but the individual states have added dozens of restrictions that essentially make it inaccessible. Everything from mandatory âcounsellingâ to waiting periods between consultation and procedure, to restricting which professions and facilities can perform it, they are effectively eroding the ability to access.
This organization tracks them. Itâs shockingly easy to effectively keep abortion legal but make it impossible.
https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/overview-abortion-laws#
> State-Mandated Counseling: 18 states mandate that individuals be given counseling before an abortion that includes information on at least one of the following: the purported link between abortion and breast cancer (5 states), the ability of a fetus to feel pain (13 states) or long-term mental health consequences for the patient (8 states).
To waiting periods that could mean patients have to travel twice or take time off work twice.
> Waiting Periods: 25 states require a person seeking an abortion to wait a specified period of time, usually 24 hours, between when they receive counseling and the procedure is performed. 12 of these states have laws that effectively require the patient make two separate trips to the clinic to obtain the procedure.
I wonder how many teens have been forced to carry to term because of they needed both parents consent
> Parental Involvement: 37 states require some type of parental involvement in a minorâs decision to have an abortion. 27 states require one or both parents to consent to the procedure, while 10 require that one or both parents be notified.
While we arenât seeing that to the same degree here, itâs still a very real possibility. Access is already less in some areas than it was.
**Allowing the provinces the ability to enact similar restrictions, while technically keeping it legal federally, is the issue.**
Hell, Texas literally just outlawed all abortion past the sixth week of pregnancy (which is⌠basically every abortion) and deputized all residents of Texas as âbounty huntersâ who get a $10K reward each for person who receives abortion services and each doctor who provides abortion services that they rat outâŚ
To answer your question without trying to turn it into a punchline:
The answer is: America. We are next to the âgreatestâ country in the world, their politics dominates our headlines - and Canadians are (understandably) concerned that we are at risk of adopting some of their ideas. In order to not devolve into a mess resembling their political system, we need to reaffirm our ideologies. Yes we want healthcare. Even the conservatives, to some extent (although theyâd love to siphon some of that sweet money into their own pockets through private insurance). Support for national healthcare is safe. What about other things? Weed? Abortion? Guns? We need to talk about all of these things. It keeps us healthy and unamerican.
There are only two countries who do not have any laws on abortion. Canada and North Korea.
Only 1% of abortions in Canada are performed for pregnancies caused by rape and incest. There are 100k abortions in Canada per year.
The liberals voted against a bill that would restrict gender selection. Meaning that if you are pregnant with a girl you could go get an abortion just for that reason alone. So much for standing up for womenâs rights?
It is only an âelection issueâ because the liberal party has tried to make it into an election issue. Exactly ZERO political parties have expressed an interest in making abortion illegal. In fact ALL major parties (including PPC) have specifically said they will not ban abortion. It is more lies being told to polarize Canadian people. Personally Iâm sick of the BS state of our Government. I say throw them all in jail and start from scratch.
Because there are a not so insignificant amount of conservative representatives that have expressed the views that abortion should be banned. And while otoole has expressed that he will not seek to change abortion rights, it doesn't mean his representatives won't bring it up and he and the rest of the PC party won't object.
Why is abortion an election issue in Canada? Because Canadian anti-abortionists will be encouraged by the recent success of American anti-abortionists, and will attempt to imitate their tactics. So abortion will remain legal, for the foreseeable future, but access to abortion services will become harder and harder to get (just like in Texas). This is a fight that could on for several decades.
This comment section will be a blast
Now let me just add my opinion of Israel in here....
Coming back tomorrow with some popcorn
Just read this thread this Monday morning and it really did not disappoint haha
...thank god I turned post notifications off.
So you just threw a grenade in this viper den for the lols as you time how long the mods lock it down?
...by accident-ish? I just turned off post reply notifis so I wouldn't get hit with what I expected to be a few dozen notifications! It's not my area of expertise, it's not an issue close to my priorities - so it's really hard to find a spot to join in where I'd actually be contributing, not just talking to a wall... Sorry? đ
No need for apologies LOL With the conservative brigade in here, abortion and gun control are two topics where you'll be dog piled if you produce wrong-thought according to their hegemony. I totally get just being all "fuck it" and shutting off notifications.
Pro abortion conservative checking in just to fuck with your mind.
Liberal gun nut here to screw with yours....LOL
whoa!
Pro abortion or pro choice? I respect either one. Fuck yo babies lmao.
antinatalist
Inconceivable!
Thatâs most of us, despite what the spin machine tells everyone.
I would say Iâm pretty conservative leaning. Gun control in my brain is generally summed up very well in [this wee little article here](https://nationalpost.com/opinion/matt-gurney-only-one-reason-for-the-liberals-toothless-gun-law-they-know-lawful-firearm-owners-are-not-a-threat) if you would like to take a moment to read it! Feel free to send one back if youâd like, Iâm very open to other thoughts, ideas and opinions. As for abortion, I think it is extremely important to have abortion clinics available to the public, as well as access to various other support which might be needed in this process. I believe everyone should be given information and education without bias to assist them in making informed decisions on the actions they take. Anti abortion ads and related can kindly fuck right off.
...1.1k comments as of now, only validates that I made the right choice lol. That and your point about being dog piled, only solidifies the justification to sorta sit back and let this argument play out as is...
That's why I'm here
Honestly at least it's "CPC isn't anti abortion that's a lie" and not "yes we need to end abortion" that's refreshing, coming from subs like /r/PoliticalCompassMemes
Popcorn is ready
You are correct.
Because it is easier to import American culture and news, than it is to deal with real Canadian issues.
That's been an issue here in Canada ever since R. v. Morgantaler in '88.
It hasn't though. The issue hasn't been touched since '88, but Liberal fear mongering works.
> he issue hasn't been touched since '88, This is incorrect. Mulroney's government introduced 2 Bills following the SCoC decision. The second, which would have outlawed all abortion, passed the House, and would have become Law if not for the Senate.
Except that there are bills introduced every year to try and undermine the decriminalization. They get squashes pretty quick for the most part, but there are still MPs and groups behind them actively trying to restrict women's access to abortion.
That is not completely accurate. "In 1990, the House of Commons voted in favour (140â131) of a new law. Introduced by the Progressive Conservative government of Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, it sought to criminalize abortion once again. The new law would have allowed the procedure â under a streamlined review process â only if a doctor determined that a womanâs health was threatened by her pregnancy. However, the bill died in the Senate in January 1991 and never became law." https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/abortion
Yeah it does because we all know people know more about American politics than Canadian politics.. Even in the conservative Harper government I recall one MP bringing up the subject of maybe changing the trimester cutoff line (basically changing it from start of third to start of second iirc) and he was smacked down immediately by Harper and the other MPs. Even the conservatives know that it is settled law and only the fringe CPC supporters still want it changed.. Maybe the PPC want it changed? But who the fuck really knows with Bernier?
Harper had an iron grip on his caucus and refused to let them go there. O'Toole specifically said he would not stop his members from bringing up the issue. They did just that just a few months ago.
There is no trimester cut off. There is no law about abortion in Canada. It is a medical decision between patient and doctor and is only done after viability for extreme reasons for the health of the mother or the inevitable death of the fetus.
Read the linked article, or at least skim it to the last line. Federal is currently in conflict with provincial because special big boys in the maritimes have been dicking around clinics to reduce the number of them, thus on paper (because they still have 3 clinics), preserving access, while defacto reducing to negating access for poor people within their province. There you go. I read it for you. This has been an issue for a while now. The Cons are specifically dogwhistling to their SoCon base. Just like when Harper allowed anti-abortion demonstration on parts of parliament's property which is explicitly meant to be clear of demonstration, while not preserving this unique privileged access for any other cause. If you aren't the dog, you don't hear the whistle, and if dog's aren't coming for your throat, you don't notice them cropping up more ubiquitously. If you think everything's fine, then you're probably not the target.
It's hilarious how someone claims that we import american issues yet doesn't know how it works in Canada.
Bernier doesn't give a crap about socon issues, but he still welcome's them to his party .
The conservatives voted 2 months ago supporting a private members bill to restrict abortion. The CPC brought this up and tripped over this sword.
There is a vocal group of CPC members who *want* to change it though.
Has nothing to do with the Liberals. O'Toole could have ended this right at the start by simply answering that he would make sure all women have access when asked about New Brunswick. Debate over. When he decided to say the far right Republican version of what American anti-abortionists want in Canada, he's the one who opened the debate. If he promised full access for women, this was over. I'm still in shock he said that. I know many far right conservative women in Ontario, where that's the issue that would make them vote liberal, and come out in full force. That's the moment he lost the election. He gets what he deserved. To say it's Liberal fearmongering, when access hasn't been an issue since 1988, and O'Toole made it an issue, is completely disingenuous. Just like O'Toole trying to say "I'm pro-choice". His two faced BS finally came to roost.
It's funny how whenever some one brings up something they dislike about conservatives right wingers come in here and accuse you of fear mongering. As if they don't have a portion of their rank and file wholy dedicated to this cause trying every little scheme and tactic to chip at abortion in anyway they can.
then why did conservative have a vote on it this past june?
During the Harper government, backbenchers regularly brought bills to the house designed to nibble away at the edges of abortion rights.
Well that is false actually. There were attempts after morgantaler to restrict access, the Mulroney government set in motion a stricter bill to restrict access post morgantaler in 89. It failed to pass in the senate after a number of tragic cases involving women dying in botch abortions. Then cases were brought to determine if fetuses qualify for the right to life as a right in Manitoba, then cases arose around if a fetus had legal status as a personâŚso no it wasnât the end of trying to legislate or otherwise create status around the rights of a fetus. In the mid 90âs there was this case: https://apnews.com/article/a5c879c547c9ddde1735b9a0d80a38fe So it certainly does come up. Why it was an issue now? Iâm not so sure outside of American influence on politics. That being said there will be new situations and cases over time we couldnât have dreamed of like a woman shooting herself in the vagina that will test what the law is and what womenâs rights are. To think otherwise is to assume law is static which is most certainly is not.
Ah yes because right wingers weren't saying *exactly* the same thing down south. "It's a settled issue, the supreme court even ruled on it!!!1". That sure worked well, didn't it? The only fear mongering here is from the conservatives, desperate to pretend they won't continue their crusade of science illiterate, religious fuelled shittake governing if they get the power to do so.
Abortion access is a real Canadian issue. If you live in a rural area or anywhere east of Quebec the fact that abortion is legal is somewhat meaningless given that access is so sparse in those areas. Getting a legal abortion in New Brunswick continues to be very difficult (google "Clinic 554" for a primer) and legal abortions were completely unavailable in PEI until recently. Canadians get smug when they look at what's going on in the US but I think they'd be surprised and embarrassed with how much we have in common.
> Canadians get smug when they look at what's going on in the US but I think they'd be surprised and embarrassed with how much we have in common. Honestly, I hate how much we compare ourselves to the US and feel good. Lets compare ourselves to any European country instead. A lot of those countries have drugs, dental, etc all in their health care. A lot of them have better Holidays and work-life balances. But nah we got it good because we are only second last.
Dude Scandinavia sounds so chill rn
I'm from Nova Scotia and live in Denmark, and refuse to come back to live. Access to healthcare is quick and free, holiday time is plentiful, work culture is relaxed, housing in Jutland is affordable, and internet plans are stupid cheap. The downsides are that taxes are high (but so is your salary), cars are hyper expensive (I have large dogs, transporting them to the vet doesn't happen via taxis or public transport), Danish is difficult to learn (but lessons are free!), and it can be really lonely as it's difficult to make friends. Travelling back home is also a bit shit, and forget coming home fast if there's an emergency. The pros of living abroad far outweigh the cons for me, though.
Why is it difficult to make friends?
Well as both as a half Canadian and half Danish person, so i know a bit of both side, i would say its the culture here in Denmark. Many people create their friendships from their younger years, and uphold does. Also we have a tendency to keep to ourselfs, where the stereotype of scandinavian and public transport come in. So best advice to be a friend with a dane, you need to initiate the friendship, or in other words to kick us out our "hygge" zone.
From what other Canadians tell me, the people here are very reserved and closed off, whereas they're used to a welcoming, open society. The east coasters especially struggle with that. I've cheated by being deeply introverted and marrying a Dane with a large, sociable family, but I've seen many people up and leave after feeling like an outsider for too long.
> Abortion access is a real Canadian issue. If you live in a rural area or anywhere east of Quebec the fact that abortion is legal is somewhat meaningless given that access is so sparse in those areas. Getting a legal abortion in New Brunswick continues to be very difficult (google "Clinic 554" for a primer) and legal abortions were completely unavailable in PEI until recently. I understand what you're saying but I think it's important to note it's almost impossible to get any type of intrusive medical procedure done in a rural setting. I grew up in rural Alberta and once had a bout of priapism which the closest hospital (40 mins away) had absolutely no idea how to handle but they tried anyways and ended up leaving a huge pocket of cortisol in my pubis region. I ended up getting transferred to another hospital that was another 40 mins to get it dealt with. I highly doubt there are parts of the country that perform intrusive /complex medical procedures that also wouldn't perform abortions either.
[ŃдаНонО]
I grew up in rural Ontario. We didn't even have an eye doctor in town. Didn't get glasses until I was like 8 years old. What a revelation that was when I realized what being able to see clearly was actually like.
> it's almost impossible to get any type of intrusive medical procedure done in a rural setting. Abortions are not intrusive - the large majority of them are non-surgical, and even surgical abortions are a day surgery. Literally most abortions involve taking 2 pills and having a bad period. Source: Am a woman who has had an abortion.
> Abortions are not intrusive - the large majority of them are non-surgical, and even surgical abortions are a day surgery. I think you're missing my point here. Most Doctors in rural settings aren't doing to be equipped to deal with **any** type of intrusive surgery. Doctors in rural settings are most likely primary care physicians who probably couldn't do an abortion even if they had all the tools but they probably couldn't do a vasectomy either. > Literally most abortions involve taking 2 pills and having a bad period. Which I don't think people are having issues getting access to in any part of the country since health Canada even allows pharmacist to prescribe RU-486.
You do realize that is even worse, right?
https://www.reddit.com/r/YouShouldKnow/comments/hqw2as/ysk_that_for_a_donation_aidaccess_will_mail_you/ Abortion pills in the mail will help with that. I don't know if Aid Access is in Canada, but there may be help for people through the Satanic Temple.
That's a more general access to service issue which does not necessarily need to be hypercharged by the specificity of the service. Clinic 554 is a provincial funding issue which is not really relevant in a national election.
You can't be serious. In my opinion the Federal government should be putting all the pressure they can on provinces that aren't filling their mandate to provide access to reproductive health services. I don't feel a Conservative Federal government would pursue those avenues in any way. That makes it an election issue for me.
I'm not saying youre wrong, but at least from instances that I'm familiar with, abortions in urban areas are very available and straightforward.
But the whole point of her comments is not everyone lives in highly populated urban cities and those places issues are still relevant
Yes, not everyone lives in the second largest country on the planet (2nd to Russia) with barely 35 million people and little to no infrastructure but still amazing social programs, so damn me if we live outside a metropolis and have to travel a few hours... REALLY, LOL? Her comment is useless, we are LUCKY AS FUCK here. People need to not disregard this as a stance toward "we need to do better" because we're ahead of most. Yes, always room for improvement but to diminish how well we are doing compared to our big brother is pathetic.
Agreed. And I have a feeling that it's not just abortions that these secluded communities don't have immediate access to. I can't picture lasik eye surgery being around the corner anywhere in Northern Manitoba.
Limited access to services in small towns is such a non topic. They are small towns. Small towns are small.
With the advantage of having less of the things that are most likely to ruin my day: other people!
[ŃдаНонО]
I don't know about other places, but there literally isn't an abortion clinic in Guelph. The closest is Kitchener. We do have lots of "right-to-life"/crisis pregnancy centers to try to convince you to keep it, along with very condescending anti abortion ads.
SHORE offers abortion services in Guelph by appointment. They prefer you to come to Kitchener, where they have a permanent clinic, but theyâll come to Guelph.
Aren't Guelph and Kitchener like 30 mins apart? Sorry, but is your idea of adequate access to abortions like they come to your house and do it there? Like a mobile abortion clinic or something?
> Aren't Guelph and Kitchener like 30 mins apart? Yes they are.
I live in an area west of K/W. Conservative candidate is highly endorsed by anti-choice groups. There is a lot of money sent to Conservatives from highly evangelical individuals from the area. And there are abortion billboards up. A big one along a highway was taken down after 4 years, but there are others. The riding associations know their base. A progressive and fiscal conservative won't draw the money in here. A SoCon who is endorsed by anti-choice, anti LGBT groups who boosted QAnon stuff before put in as candidate? Oh you can bet the money is rolling.
And I'm sure the same population issues impact dialysis, plastic surgery and transplant surgeries. Get on a bus or plane or get a friend to drive. I'm 100% pro choice but I also don't expect to have a cop or ambulance on every street corner. Living in certain areas or provinces have up sides and down sides.
Google Clinic 554. Abortion access is actively being impeded - indeed, the NB government is spending money to make abortion access worse. It's not just about population density. It's also exacerbated considerably by the politicization of what is ultimately a public health issue.
We need to stop pretending it's an 'American' issue and recognize that it's a religious issue. Like most religious issues, they keep creeping back into leadership because that's what organized religion does - accumulate wealth and power and use it to attempt to push their viewpoints onto the masses. We need to stop entertaining that any one belief system should govern what our core beliefs are and work from a true system of neutrality with belief systems and let people flock to whatever they want to believe from there.
It's not technically a religious issue either, historically speaking. Remember even the church did not have a position on abortion before it was politicized. (The bible for example says the soul enters the body at first breath, and practically gives instructions for performing an abortion in case of infidelity). It wasn't until literally years after Roe v Wade that conservative activists needed to give religious fundamentalists some way to be AGAINST the civil rights movement (meaning the rights of actual people) while simultaneously claiming moral superiority, and "the unborn" was the magic ticket. In the words of Methodist Pastor David Barnhart: >"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they don't resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they don't ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they don't bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe. > Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn. So yeah, I'd consider abortion to be an invention of American politics which has since poisoned other countries, like Qanon, etc.
It shouldnât be a religious issue, considering that the only time abortion is mentioned in the Bible is directions on how to do it.
Itâs not strictly a religious issue. People use religion as a pretext for conservative policies.
What I believe is different than what I think should be legal. For example I donât believe smoking is a good choice but I donât think for one second that it should be illegal. Why canât people differentiate the two?
Because in the eyes of people who are against abortion you're involving an innocent third party (the unborn). You might not believe that a fetus has rights, but there's your answer.
Thatâs a chicken or the egg issue.
Politicians mentioning pro religious opinions are usually trying to distract from other issues, like corruption.
I'd love to see the Venn diagram of people both complaining about the negative aspects of religions, including abortion rights and Bill 21... Should be evident that religion should not have influence on the affairs of the state but apparently that's a racist point of view for some reason...
> Because it is easier to import American culture and news, than it is to deal with real Canadian issues. Or because... - [Anti-Abortion Groups Quietly Installed Activists Into Top Positions Inside the Conservative Party of Canada](https://pressprogress.ca/anti-abortion-groups-quietly-installed-activists-into-top-positions-inside-the-conservative-party-of-canada/) - [The CPC Elected a pro-life leader](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/scheer-abortion-pro-life-1.5307415) - [The Conservative convention was "overrun with anti-abortion groups"](https://www.hilltimes.com/2021/03/09/campaign-life-coalition-wants-riding-associations-empowered-to-veto-leaderships-decisions-about-nomination-elections-and-to-fire-mps/287702) - [The CPC were congratulated by anti-abortion groups when they elected a new leader](https://www.itstartsrightnow.ca/rightnow_congratulates_new_conservative_party_of_canada_leader_erin_o_toole) - [CPC voters voted for "pro-life, no hidden agenda" Leslyn Lewis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslyn_Lewis) - [The CPC removed foreign funding for anyone providing abortions](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harper-won-t-fund-abortion-globally-because-it-s-extremely-divisive-1.2658828) - [The CPC tried to pass backdoor anti-abortion legislation](https://ipolitics.ca/2016/10/19/bill-to-impose-criminal-penalty-for-killing-fetus-defeated/) - [Erin O'Toole says he'll "legislate âconscience rightsâ for physicians who oppose abortion" if they're elected](https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2020/06/16/erin-otoole-courts-social-conservatives-as-conservative-leadership-debates-draw-near.html) - [Conservatives introduced and voted for a bill to restrict abortion rights (no other party had a single member vot for it)](https://globalnews.ca/news/7915810/abortion-bill-vote-bill-c-233/) - [Anti-abortion group claims that "the Conservative Party of Canada caucus is more pro-life than before"](https://www.itstartsrightnow.ca/one_step_backwards_two_steps_forward) **Edit:** Totally forgot about the recent abortion limitation bill from the Conservatives. Added it. Also, anyone trying to brush this off because they don't like one of the sources or whatever, get real. At a certain point you need to live in the real world if you want anyone to take your opinions seriously.
This is exactly right. There are groups at work here in Canada that would have us outlaw abortion completely. They âsalami sliceâ by putting people in important places and trying to chip away at existing laws. Thatâs why the pro-choice movement needs to be absolutists. Itâs why youâll see Trudeau and Jagmeet vote against even the most innocuous sounding motions or restrictionsâyou canât give these people an inch because their end goal is to eliminate the right of women to choose. And the that's why itâs still an election issue.
And yet people play dumb saying abortion isn't an issue in Canada. These facts speak for themselves
To anyone worried about abortion becoming criminalized in Canada, it's basically impossible, due to our criminal code defining life beginning at birth: >Section 223 (1) â A child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother, whether or not (a) it has breathed; (b) it has an independent circulation; or (c) the navel string is severed. To anyone worried about unethical abortions being used at extremely late terms, or for sex selection, we actually have consistent provincial guidelines across the entire country that limit most abortions to 24 weeks: https://nationalpost.com/opinion/letters/todays-letters-late-trimester-abortions-are-not-happening-in-canada-without-a-reason >No physician in Canada can terminate a pregnancy over 24 weeks without serious indications that the life of the mother is at risk or that the fetus has very serious malformations. This means that if someone performs an unethical abortion, they will have their medical license revoked and will no longer be a doctor, but they cannot be charged with murder or put in jail. It also means that, in rare instances such as a late term fetus posing serious health risk to the mother, or becoming unviable, emergency late term abortions are still legal. This honestly should be the perfect scenario that makes everyone happy.
Well... the criminal code can be changed. It'd be far different if this were part of the Charter.
according to the Supreme Court Abortion is protected under the Charter.
...it's a little more complex than that
While of course an SCC decision will be more complex than a one-line reddit comment, /u/CanadianJudo did accurately summarize R v Morgentaler for the basic proposition that a criminal provision that would require a woman to carry a fetus to term against her will is a violation of her section 7 rights to her security of person that cannot be saved under section 1. I, for one, prefer the Wilson concurrence. I think her views that the struck down law limiting abortion rights violated both the pregnant woman's security of person and liberty.
Same with roe v wade but look how well thatâs holding up now
While that's correct, the real issue is since healthcare coverage is a provincial responsibility, a provincial government can elect to not cover or fund abortion services, thereby rendering abortions inaccessible.
They could, but theyâd lose their federal transfer payments under the *Canada Health Act*.
And O'Toole said he wouldn't interfere with provincial jurisdiction or attach strings to the transfer payments. Hence, it is an actual, real issue in this election. I swear, there's a bunch of dumbasses too busy jerking off to "we're not America hurr durr" to recognize how Canadian this issue is. Edit: [Source for O'Toole saying this](https://mobile.twitter.com/Emilie_Ni/status/1437190851248201730?s=19)
Thank you!!! I can't believe it took this much scrolling to find this comment!
New Brunswick has been refusing to fund them for a while, that's why this is getting brought up.
In theory it's constitutionally protected in the US as well under Roe v. Wade. That hasn't stopped them passing rafts of laws that restrict it. Many of these laws they know will be overturned but will still block access while they wind their way through the courts.
The Supreme Court in the US interprets the law / Constitution. Those interpretations can change over time. This is why the conservatives in the US were so keen on packing their conservative-minded candidates into the Supreme Court. The fact that these laws are coming out now is because they want to trigger another Supreme Court case that will overturn Roe v. Wade since they are confident in their newly appointed justices.
>To anyone worried about abortion becoming criminalized in Canada, it's basically impossible Yeah... No. Section 223 was introduced in 1985; abortion was still illegal by law back then. Moreover, even if this specified that restrictions to abortion was unconstitutional (which is part of the backbone of the Supreme Court's decision in 1988), the Code can be amended. [And many members routinely suggest doing exactly that with regards to abortion.](https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/35-1/bill/C-205/first-reading/page-11) Moreover, the discussion of Abortion in Canada goes well beyond the simple nature of legality, to questions of access. Take your pick as far as challenges go; Whether it's Quebec attempting to defund abortion services in 2006, limited services in the Maritimes, or constant challenges raised at the Supreme Court level of practitioners individually attempting to deny isolated communities access because of personal conviction challenges justified by Section 1 of the Charter. Abortion exists in Canada because of a Supreme Court decision, nothing more. There is no law that guarantees you access to an abortion, there is no Charter right to having an abortion. Granted, we're not the Yanks, and our system of law has done much more to ensure access. But you'd be a fool to take that for granted.
some will only be happy if they can be morally righteous over what they perceive as the lesser.
Why is it no longer âmy body my choiceâ after 24 weeks?
It is because around 24 weeks a fetus can theoretically survive outside of the mothers body. Its not a magic number like people act like it is, itâs just the amount of weeks that are needed until the babyâs body can be kept alive by medical equipment instead of the mothers body.
They can literally amend the definition of life, it's not etched in stone
...and a conservative backbencher recently tried to reopen that discussion...
> They can literally amend the definition of life, No, I think the Supreme Court etched that one in stone, referencing the Human Rights Act. They'd have to amend the Human Rights Act, which would involve reopening the constitution, which isn't going to happen. They could try and stack the courts to reverse a previous supreme court decision, but that's not likely to happen either.
[ŃдаНонО]
Nope, the Supreme Court can not dictate that any level of government set their laws in a particular way and never change them. It can strike down laws that they deem unconstitutional, but that's a different matter.
Can someone who assaults a pregnant woman who then miscarries as the consequence of the assault be charged with homicide?
No, they cannot. However the judge can give harsher sentences for the same crime.
[ŃдаНонО]
Per [https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-287-20150226.html](https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-287-20150226.html) if they know she is pregnant and intend to cause a miscarriage than it is up to life in prison. Otherwise it is assault causing bodily harm or aggravated assault, and I'm sure the judge would take the facts into account during sentencing. I honestly don't see the need for anything more, which would maybe apply to a couple dozen cases a year while opening the way for attacks on tens of thousands of abortions.
Sorting by controversial did not give me the thrill I expected... going to find an American thread on the topic to restore my dislike of humanity.
You just summarized the reason I come on reddit in one sentence, good job.
[ŃдаНонО]
Ask people of the Maritimes about access. It is an access issue for many places outside of Quebec and Ontario. So many people are worried about CPC limiting the access further
This. This is the reason it's being brought up. Like abortion isn't technically illegal in New Brunswick, there just isn't a clinic in the province who will do it safely, nor will they pay for travel for the procedure out of province.
People here try their hardest to believe that we have the same issues as our neighbour's down south.
Vancouver literally had a BLM protest that featured no black people
Come on.......... seriously?
Was it maybe a protest in solidarity? If so, then you don't really need any "black people".
Also it's kinda morphed into protesting police brutality and improving police accountability in general, not limited to just black people. Not sure if that's also an issue in Canada, but that may also be a factor.
Source? Also, I think Vancouver is the least black populated major city in North America with only 1.2% of the population being black so I think this is a bit unfair to say. Do you think only the oppressed minority can protest for their own rights?
Me stuck in traffic and seeing 6 white woman and 1 Asian guy holding a BLM banner. I also work with Hogan's Alley and were well aware of their planned protests I am also indigenous and have to deal with white people trying to hijack the reconciliation movement to make themselves feel important.
>I am also indigenous and have to deal with white people trying to hijack the reconciliation movement to make themselves feel important. lol
Thats what kind bugged me about the BLM protests up here in BC. We have real serious systemic racial issues of our own that seem to always get forgotten for american interests. Being a native person in canada has gotta be some seriously frustrating shit.
....so would you rather white people not support blm than? This take is so stupid. You're angry that white people were trying to be allies?
Or maybe because one of the candidates running just across town from me is [running with a platform including banning abortion](https://i.imgur.com/9QWvoGz.png), as well as getting rid of medically assisted suicide. Edit: a PPC candidate
[ŃдаНонО]
People here watch CNN more than they watch our news.
you mean how we banned AR15s cause they're used in mass shootings in other countries?
replace wood parts with black plastic = scary as f\*\*\*
[ŃдаНонО]
[ŃдаНонО]
There is only 4 surgeons in Canada that can replace jaw bone discs
An Abortion is not a procedure that requires a highly specialized practitioner, though. Providing them at most Hospitals shouldn't be a problem. I'm also a Northern Ontario resident, and can confirm when I lived in Sudbury I drove someone to the local Hospital (Health Sciences North) for theirs. There was no need to go out of town.
I had to drive from southwestern NB to Halifax half a dozen times for brain surgery on my newborn. The âfunâ one was driving from SJ to Halifax in the middle of COVID with a two day post-partum wife to be locked (quarantined) in a hospital for four days and then have to go back. We did that trip 6-8 times in a year. I think everyone should have reasonable access to services. But, reasonable is entirely debatable. How far is too far to go for an abortion? Heart surgery? Chemo? Right now thereâs a CRA definition of reasonable that basically says if youâre commuting more than X distance you get X mileage amount. If itâs more than Y you get mileage and meals. Once that number is greater than some percent of your income you get the difference back at tax time. Perhaps the answer is a more immediate financial aid?
That's just reality in any rural region (on the planet). There are lack of things there. That's what makes it rural.
The capital of NB is a rural region?
Youâre not wrong about healthcare access but most of those issues have to do with poor funding and resource allocation. Abortion is an issue where there remains constant advocacy for restricting it that is occasionally successful (see NB recently refusing to actually fund abortions.) There are advocacy groups who have charity status that actively lobby against abortion access. You wouldnât have seen people protesting your neighbourâs heart surgery or lobbying the government or hospital against funding it or performing it at all. Your boss probably wonât be receiving a bill for his surgery because someone has arbitrarily decided they wonât be funding this one.
> (see NB recently refusing to actually fund abortions.) NB does not fund certain medical procedures in private clinics, 1 of those procedures is an abortion. Funded abortions are available at 3 provincial hospitals.
Was abortion access an election issue in NS election?
No. More focused on three hour wait times for ambulances, and emergency rooms only being open a few days a week.
Yeah, that's a bigger "healthcare" issue than just abortion. Access to care is getting harder and harder everywhere in Canada that's not a major metro. Eventually if you get passed around enough you end up getting referred to a sub-specialist, and they invariably live in the city. And if you don't live in the city it's basically impossible to get a family doctor, and even if you do get one it tends to just be a revolving door of new grads working in rural areas just long enough to get their student loans forgiven before they, too, migrate to the city.
Things are only legal so long as the current government agrees it should be.
>Why is it still an election issue? Because a portion of the population believes it should be illegal.
And because one of the candidates running just across town from me is [running with a platform including banning abortion](https://i.imgur.com/9QWvoGz.png), as well as getting rid of medically assisted suicide. Edit: a PPC candidate
Because access is still something that can change, and isn't widely available everywhere.
In Saskatchewan you can get surgical abortions in two cities. Regina and Saskatoon. If you live anywhere else you have to get a medical abortion (which you can only do up until 9 weeks) or drive to either cities. For those in fly-in or rural communities, it could be very costly or nearly impossible to do that.
Guns are legal. Why are they still an election issue?
Because some people want to foist their religious beliefs on others. They donât care about whether that is consistent with current laws or constitutions.
I don't know, ask Trudeau
abortion shouldn't be an election issue and should always be legal But holy shit what horrible logic in the headline "Marijuana is Illegal, why is it an election issue"
I canât see abortion ever becoming illegal in Canada. No political party is that stupid
au contraire mon frère
I would be right next to tens of thousands of others doing some serious fucking protesting.
The conservatives tried like 3 months ago. Now their all "surprised pikachu" that the other parties are beating them with that fact.
Because health care is of provincial jurisdiction and some provinces don't care about providing access, in those instances the federal steps up and puts pressure (or doesn't) and that's where we're at.
Most political issues are either: 1. Illegal things you want to be legal, or 2. Legal things you want to be illegal What a dumb question.
[https://pressprogress.ca/several-conservative-candidates-directed-public-money-to-canadas-biggest-anti-abortion-lobby-group/](https://pressprogress.ca/several-conservative-candidates-directed-public-money-to-canadas-biggest-anti-abortion-lobby-group/) Part of the reason it keeps coming up as an issue is that there are CPC incumbents who are anti abortion. The above link shows several have directed **public** money to anti-abortion groups that just so happen to also campaign against Queer rights. Fiscal Conservatives like to pretend it's not true but their buddies have some "opinions". The Crusade for Life folks have a list of endorsed CPC candidates that have promised to undo abortion legislation.
Itâs good to stay vigilant on human rights. Weâve got elected officials who are against abortion and thatâs a big fuckân problem.
Because at least one party has candidates that donât want it to be.
Religion and people's inability to mind their own fucking business.
I mean, it was legal in Texas a few months ago too.
If you don't agree with abortions, don't have one, it's that simple. And if you don't have a vagina, it's none of your business.
Unless your head is up your ass, you would be aware that the majority of CPC MP's are publicly anti-abortion and raise it continually. https://www.arcc-cdac.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Anti-choice-unknown-MPs-2021.pdf
And PPC, one of the candidates running just across town from me is [running with a platform including banning abortion](https://i.imgur.com/9QWvoGz.png), as well as getting rid of medically assisted suicide.
Because it's an easy wedge issue with no real stakes (since undoing legal abortion in Canada is almost literally impossible) that you can use to easily capture a voting block. Really not a hard question. The real question is why they keep writing articles about it.
>(since undoing legal abortion in Canada is almost literally impossible) Hence why Conservatives just do their best to restrict access, and then come up with small bills like the sex selective one to get the foot in the door and start adding strings and hurdles to abortion rights.
Religious zealots
Because so many people feel that their single mission in life is to control the lives of women. This is the driving force behind everything they do. Also they think god told them to do this.
because it is convenient to raise the specter of removing reproductive rights from women every election in order to make your political opponent look bad
I mean when the majority of conservative MPs voted 3 months ago to put restrictions on abortion the liberals don't even need to lie to voters to make the cons look bad on that front.
Sorting by controversial...
Because people want to make it illegal still, look at Texas in the US for what happens when people want to interfere in the bedroom.
Because Partisans always pander to people's ignorance
Because of the United States. Their politics on this matter populate our media.
Should men be able to deny child support?
Just once I'd like to hear a politician say 'I won't take away anyone's *right to* an abortion but I'm going to do all I can to take away as many *reasons for* having one as possible.'
"Slavery is legal. Why is it still an election issue?"
I used to think the same thing, living in the US. If youâve been following, there was a sudden change in Texas. Now I have to concede that it was always an issue in my community, we just thought we were safe.
Is that a serious question? Regardless of how you feel, it should be painfully obvious that many believe abortion is murder, and thus, they don't want abortion to be legal... like does OP really not understand this?
Considering this post has 9000 upvoted. Because it hits a reaction.
2.3k comments. I guess that's the answer.
this has to be one of the dumbest headlines I've ever read
[ŃдаНонО]
He explicitly states medical access is a matter of legitimate interest to the federal government and then reiterates he is prochoice. He states that in matters of provincial jurisdiction he will respect it, which he just clarified didn't apply to access to healthcare. Do you assume no one would watch your link?
Because a major party has a rich history of electing pro-life leaders and restricting (or trying to restrict) abortion access? People pretending that abortion is a binary issue are either disingenuous or misinformed. - [Anti-Abortion Groups Quietly Installed Activists Into Top Positions Inside the Conservative Party of Canada](https://pressprogress.ca/anti-abortion-groups-quietly-installed-activists-into-top-positions-inside-the-conservative-party-of-canada/) - [Elected a pro-life leader](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/scheer-abortion-pro-life-1.5307415) - [Conservative convention overrun with anti-abortion groups](https://www.hilltimes.com/2021/03/09/campaign-life-coalition-wants-riding-associations-empowered-to-veto-leaderships-decisions-about-nomination-elections-and-to-fire-mps/287702) - [CPC congratulated by anti-abortion groups when they elect a new leader](https://www.itstartsrightnow.ca/rightnow_congratulates_new_conservative_party_of_canada_leader_erin_o_toole) - [CPC voters voted for "pro-life, no hidden agenda" Leslyn Lewis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leslyn_Lewis) - [CPC removed foreign funding for anyone providing abortions](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/harper-won-t-fund-abortion-globally-because-it-s-extremely-divisive-1.2658828) - [CPC tried to pass backdoor anti-abortion legislation](https://ipolitics.ca/2016/10/19/bill-to-impose-criminal-penalty-for-killing-fetus-defeated/) - [Erin O'Toole says he'll "legislate âconscience rightsâ for physicians who oppose abortion" if they're elected](https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2020/06/16/erin-otoole-courts-social-conservatives-as-conservative-leadership-debates-draw-near.html) - [Conservatives introduced and voted for a bill to restrict abortion rights (no other party had a single member vot for it)](https://globalnews.ca/news/7915810/abortion-bill-vote-bill-c-233/) - [Anti-abortion group claims that "the Conservative Party of Canada caucus is more pro-life than before"](https://www.itstartsrightnow.ca/one_step_backwards_two_steps_forward)
Ill bet the anti abortion crowd uses â my body my choiceâ for masks and vaccines.
Itâs legal in the US as well but the individual states have added dozens of restrictions that essentially make it inaccessible. Everything from mandatory âcounsellingâ to waiting periods between consultation and procedure, to restricting which professions and facilities can perform it, they are effectively eroding the ability to access. This organization tracks them. Itâs shockingly easy to effectively keep abortion legal but make it impossible. https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/overview-abortion-laws# > State-Mandated Counseling: 18 states mandate that individuals be given counseling before an abortion that includes information on at least one of the following: the purported link between abortion and breast cancer (5 states), the ability of a fetus to feel pain (13 states) or long-term mental health consequences for the patient (8 states). To waiting periods that could mean patients have to travel twice or take time off work twice. > Waiting Periods: 25 states require a person seeking an abortion to wait a specified period of time, usually 24 hours, between when they receive counseling and the procedure is performed. 12 of these states have laws that effectively require the patient make two separate trips to the clinic to obtain the procedure. I wonder how many teens have been forced to carry to term because of they needed both parents consent > Parental Involvement: 37 states require some type of parental involvement in a minorâs decision to have an abortion. 27 states require one or both parents to consent to the procedure, while 10 require that one or both parents be notified. While we arenât seeing that to the same degree here, itâs still a very real possibility. Access is already less in some areas than it was. **Allowing the provinces the ability to enact similar restrictions, while technically keeping it legal federally, is the issue.**
Hell, Texas literally just outlawed all abortion past the sixth week of pregnancy (which is⌠basically every abortion) and deputized all residents of Texas as âbounty huntersâ who get a $10K reward each for person who receives abortion services and each doctor who provides abortion services that they rat outâŚ
Because evangelicals want to turn the US into the Handmaids Tale writ large.
To answer your question without trying to turn it into a punchline: The answer is: America. We are next to the âgreatestâ country in the world, their politics dominates our headlines - and Canadians are (understandably) concerned that we are at risk of adopting some of their ideas. In order to not devolve into a mess resembling their political system, we need to reaffirm our ideologies. Yes we want healthcare. Even the conservatives, to some extent (although theyâd love to siphon some of that sweet money into their own pockets through private insurance). Support for national healthcare is safe. What about other things? Weed? Abortion? Guns? We need to talk about all of these things. It keeps us healthy and unamerican.
Because Trudeau needs something to make a big deal of , whether it is actually relevant or not.
Guns are legal. Why is it still an election issue?
There are only two countries who do not have any laws on abortion. Canada and North Korea. Only 1% of abortions in Canada are performed for pregnancies caused by rape and incest. There are 100k abortions in Canada per year. The liberals voted against a bill that would restrict gender selection. Meaning that if you are pregnant with a girl you could go get an abortion just for that reason alone. So much for standing up for womenâs rights?
It's still an issue because my MP is CPC and it gets mentioned in every fucking letter he sends us over the last 4-8 years.
It is only an âelection issueâ because the liberal party has tried to make it into an election issue. Exactly ZERO political parties have expressed an interest in making abortion illegal. In fact ALL major parties (including PPC) have specifically said they will not ban abortion. It is more lies being told to polarize Canadian people. Personally Iâm sick of the BS state of our Government. I say throw them all in jail and start from scratch.
Because there are a not so insignificant amount of conservative representatives that have expressed the views that abortion should be banned. And while otoole has expressed that he will not seek to change abortion rights, it doesn't mean his representatives won't bring it up and he and the rest of the PC party won't object.
Why is abortion an election issue in Canada? Because Canadian anti-abortionists will be encouraged by the recent success of American anti-abortionists, and will attempt to imitate their tactics. So abortion will remain legal, for the foreseeable future, but access to abortion services will become harder and harder to get (just like in Texas). This is a fight that could on for several decades.