DrTyore
I like how this part
Milo;394697 wrotePerhaps, but not smart enough to be a Judge. Sorry, Mark but the Supreme Court of this Country . . . the one charged with interpreting and upholding our Laws, has stated that the Government MUST come up with a Law that BALANCES the Rights of the woman with the Rights of the unborn child in her womb.
In plain English, that means that the CURRENT situation is a violation of our Constitution, as it allows unfettered abortion. That our government (of WHATEVER stripe) is too cowardly to address this issue is a tragedy.
Further, NOTHING you can post, say, or link to will change the FACTS of this post.
Contradicts these parts.
Milo;394723 wroteThe Court went beyond the mere striking down of the previous Law to state that certain protections for the unborn would be in the National interest. This step, beyond a mere decision in the case before them, is unusual. Your point about this comment not forcing Parliament to enact such a statute is moot, as the Court has no such power to "force" Parliament (separation of powers) to do so in the first place. It is the "going the extra mile" that is significant. the impolication is that the unborn child DOES have Rights worthy of protection under our Constitution. The cowardice of successive Governments in not enshrining those protections in Law is shameful.
As stated, the Justices have no power to state that such a Law MUST be enacted. That they took the step of commenting on the Rights of the unborn to those same protections of security of the person IS significant, and to think otherwise is folly.
You're right.. nothing I say can change anything you post... maybe your own posts will do?
#Milofacts
Mark
[deleted]
Milo;394723 wroteAs stated, the Justices have no power to state that such a Law MUST be enacted. That they took the step of commenting on the Rights of the unborn to those same protections of security of the person IS significant, and to think otherwise is folly.
I agree it's significant. I don't agree that it's significant for the reasons you say, and I also don't agree that they made any statement regarding the "rights" of the unborn being in the national interest. You've done nothing to change my belief that the intent of the court was to ensure that the scope of their decision was clear.
You've repeatedly avoided answering my request that you provide specific evidence that supports your interpretation of the decision.
Please note that I'm not even saying you're wrong... though I think that you are almost always wrong. I'm just saying that you've repeatedly failed to prove that you're right. Unless one considers insisting that you're right as proof, and I don't. That in a nutshell is why we clash on this forum. That in a nutshell is why I assume you clash with human beings everywhere you encounter them.
Also, see Mark's post regarding your blatantly contradicting yourself. It's worthy of your attention.
DrTyore
[ATTACH=CONFIG]2082[/ATTACH]
From a photoplasty on cracked.com called "18 Subtle Tricks the Media Uses to Fool You"... also used by religion.
Mark
Milo
Used by more folks than the religious . . . but fuck it, kill all the unborn you want. the Province is going to be giving away IVF treatments to anyone who wants it, so I am sure it will be just fine in the end.
DrTyore
Even in retreat..
Still inconsistent. People seeking IVF aren't likely to be the people seeking abortions. Your main stance was protecting the rights of (what you considered) people not yet born. Are you now saying your main draw the entire time was quantity of people being born and it's a wash because of better access to people wanting to have kids but experiencing trouble? Not to mention said treatment is a scientific advancement - wonder how the reaction would be if the government just assigned a group of people to pray for them?
Mark
Milo
DrTyore;394737 wrote
Still inconsistent. No
People seeking IVF aren't likely to be the people seeking abortions. Agreed
Your main stance was protecting the rights of (what you considered) people not yet born. Agreed
Are you now saying your main draw the entire time was quantity of people being born and it's a wash because of better access to people wanting to have kids but experiencing trouble? Not at all . . .
Not to mention said treatment is a scientific advancement - wonder how the reaction would be if the government just assigned a group of people to pray for them?
Mark
IVF is a wonderful advancement in medical science. My wife and I struggled for a few years before being fortunate enough to have our one healthy child. Others are not so lucky. That said, I think Government has no business funding it.
DrTyore
It's like you don't even read what you post...
What is someone supposed to take away from "kill all the unborn you want. the Province is going to be giving away IVF treatments to anyone who wants it, so I am sure it will be just fine in the end." given the context of abortion?
And as for the government funding of IVF? I honestly don't care to get into it... I don't have many thoughts on it, since it only came up / into my awareness as an issue recently after hearing it on the news. I'll wait to hear the merits.
Mark
Milo
DrTyore;394739 wroteIt's like you don't even read what you post...
What is someone supposed to take away from "kill all the unborn you want. the Province is going to be giving away IVF treatments to anyone who wants it, so I am sure it will be just fine in the end." given the context of abortion?
And as for the government funding of IVF? I honestly don't care to get into it... I don't have many thoughts on it, since it only came up / into my awareness as an issue recently after hearing it on the news. I'll wait to hear the merits.
Mark
Take away a certain level of frustration . . .
Milo
I would add both abortion AND IVF to that list, among others.
DrTyore
.... is this where we bring up white male privileged, wage gap / poor punishment, and general access to said facilities (remember, no clinics in New Brunswick?). Try seeing things from someone who isn't a middle-classed, majority raced, penis-possessing's point of view instead of your own - all you seem to be looking at is your own prostate.
At least the model in the picture is accurately cast.
Mark
*and yes, your $30 test for screening should still be covered by OHIP
DrTyore
And I got to thinking...
Dealing with mental health difficulties, working through trauma, working through layoff / job losses, dealing with assisting a loved one who has lost the capability to care for themselves, dealing with your own physical disabilities, or trying to escape an unfortunate situation such as abusive relationships, and any numerous other reasons people need assistance. This isn't even getting into the benefits of paid education, birth control, etc...
The problem with that pic isn't because she (and you are) Conservative, it's because you're an adult lacking empathy too concerned with showing off their own brilliance to think of someone else for half a second.
Mark
Milo
I am fine with the Government providing a certain level of basic service, as we already do in this country/province.
But, given the demographics, we need to have a serious discussion about what we expect our Government to pay for and provide to we the citizenry, and how much of a tax load we are prepared to shoulder in order to cover the costs.
I am firmly in the "less is more" camp. I feel that by limiting our expectations of what the Government will pay for, we will free up more revenue for those services to be applied quickly and efficiently. Fewer dollars to pay for IVF, (or whatever) means more dollars for NPs to look after old folks, or guys like you to work with youth in crisis. Hell, there are Government programs that my own family have made use of that I would axe, too.
But people do not want to talk about this sort of crap. Once the Government starts to pay for something, they will never be allowed to STOP. So I think we should look long and hard at each item BEFORE we start writing cheques.
That is not a lack of empathy, it is a recognition of reality.
DrTyore
And yet...
That picture you posted, chortling at your own cleverness does not convey that slightly less offensive viewpoint. Perhaps if you'd consider that a bit more? And I highly doubt you have spent much time and effort considering the numerous and varied considerations to things government programs pay for. I'm not saying that's a particular fault, from what I know of you, you don't have any particular issues relating to financial, physical, mental, or other difficulties (outside of the average household). Good for you! But for (your) Christ's sake, you should be giddily thankful for that, not posting shit like "women who need / want abortions can pay for it themselves".
Mark
Milo
To be honest, my family HAS availed themselves of one service the Government pays for that I personally think is something that should be self-financed. The one thing I will say in defence of the program is that it has a VERY strict qualification program and it must be accompanied by a recommendation from your family doctor. And you can only get it once. If you fuck it up, you're on your own.
Is that hypocritical of me? Perhaps, but it was not my decision to make. And yes, I thank God every day for the personal success resulting from that decision.
I have never had to use EI, except for a brief 6 week stretch many years ago. doesn't mean I begrudge those payments every payday. But some of what the Government pays for is just wasteful and unnecessary.
Big Mike
Wait, what are we currently fighting about? Abortion, or the government funding of important things (including abortion)?
Milo
Yes. Though I question the use of the word "important".
DrTyore
Missing the point..
Try harder.. you're so close to accepting the idea that not all people are so privileged....
Mark
Milo
I understand that being born where I was, in the era that I was born in, was indeed a fortunate happenstance. Does that mean I should simply accept that the money forcibly taken from me by the State is to be squandered in ways that I find frivolous, while other areas of need go wanting?
No, Mark. I can sympathize with couples who struggle with infertility, as I count my wife and I fortunate to have conceived and given birth to a happy and healthy child. We would have loved to have had a second, but it was not to be, for whatever reason. But I did not expect you (as a taxpayer) to foot the bill for that possibility, and certainly not when so many other areas of our healthcare system are in need of funding. the Government is cracking down on Family practitioners, giving them the same "cupboard is bare" speech being used on the Teachers, but they can find the millions needed for this in the proverbial couch cushions? Give me a break.
DrTyore
Milo;394794 wroteI understand that being born where I was, in the era that I was born in, was indeed a fortunate happenstance. Does that mean I should simply accept that the money forcibly taken from me by the State is to be squandered in ways that I find frivolous, while other areas of need go wanting?
No, but it does mean you probably shouldn't shame / blame the people less fortunate or in other circumstances than you - which that pic you posted callously does, and your general mindset / input on topics such as abortion does. Abortion and its unfettered access is being touted as a financial windfall, and often credited with an increase in general quality of life not just for those utilizing it, but to society as a whole. It is a positive thing to have overall, and saves money for everyone (I did the math earlier in this thread). Also, NOBODY likes abortion as an experience. When you pull the magic wizard and his kid card, or when you say things like "tough for you and your growing fetus" (which isn't a quote, but you're said as much in this very thread), you're being a privileged, entitled dick.
No, Mark. I can sympathize with couples who struggle with infertility, as I count my wife and I fortunate to have conceived and given birth to a happy and healthy child. We would have loved to have had a second, but it was not to be, for whatever reason. But I did not expect you (as a taxpayer) to foot the bill for that possibility, and certainly not when so many other areas of our healthcare system are in need of funding. the Government is cracking down on Family practitioners, giving them the same "cupboard is bare" speech being used on the Teachers, but they can find the millions needed for this in the proverbial couch cushions? Give me a break.
Wrong thread. This is the abortion one, not the IVF one.
Mark
Milo
So, you don't like my attitude? Too fucking bad . . . I don't like abortions, though I can recognize their necessity.