Why is it that when someone says?

People who support abortions don't make a lot of sense very often.

I'm going for the all-time thumbs down record on this one.

Ugh. You can be against abortion and still be pro-choice.

Make sense?

I would never have an abortion. I don't go around telling knocked up women, "Hey, you know what you should do? Get an abortion!" I don't like the idea of women using this as a method of birth control (which I do know of several women who do this).

However, I don't like the idea of a woman NOT being ABLE to get an abortion if she wants one. It IS her body...not the government's. It's therefore HER choice....not the government's.

I'll admit, I don't know very much about C-484 (though my interest is now perked up a bit). It does sound somewhat pro-life....a woman is pregnant and wants to keep the baby. Ok. So what. That's about 99% of pregnant women out there for ya. I don't understand what the bill is "protecting" the pregnant mothers from....Big Brother going to snatch the kiddies away? Doesn't make sense from a pro-choice standpoint, which is probably why they're against is.

ADD:

Thanks for the additional info. So basically it's calling an unborn child a human being. Which means if this unborn child gets killed, it's murder.

Well of course pro-choicers are going to have an issue with that. They want women to be able to have abortions (ahem, get rid of unborn child...sorry to be blunt, but let's get real here). If a law is passed saying that an unborn child accounts as a human, then that opens the door to END pro-choice...simply by stating that women who are getting abortions are murdering their OWN children.

I'd be against this too, obviously.

When someone says "You can't live your own life, but have to do what _I_ think you should do, however wrong I am, or however messed up it will make your whole life" people get very PO-ed, because people generally feel THEY should make their own decisions, and people who tell them what to do with their own lives should STFU.

You probably feel this way when people tell YOU to do things when you feel they're the wrong decision for you and would completely mess up your life.

The bill you describe doesn't "protect" mothers -- no one is saying that pregnant women aren't allowed to carry the pregnancy to term if that's what they want.

There are already laws on the books about harming people. Thus, it's already illegal to kill a pregnant woman, or to beat her up, stab her, shoot her, etc.

The reason people call the law a scam is that it's a back-door way of getting the zygote defined as a full-blown person, as a way to take the right of abortion away from women.

Yes, pro-choicers are really pro-choice. The bill has nothing to do with choice. Fighting it doesn't force anyone to abort a pregnancy they want to carry to term.

Why would there ever be a bill necessary to protect the rights of a woman to give birth to a child when this is the mainstream stance?

The only reason an abortion bill has ever been considered or passed is because it contradicts this mainstream view, which people seem to think is set in stone. No women ever had to face abuse or be called a murderer because she wanted to keep a child.

I think they are worried that this is the first step to outlawing abortion. This law would be somewhat of a precedent for the unborn baby being alive. Form there it's just a hop, skip, and a jump to calling abortion murder.

I don't believe this law will reduce attacks on pregnant women, simply open up a slippery slope towards abortion eventually being criminalised, and the woman seen as a container for a baby, rather than a person in her own right :-)

Ummmm....Canada doesn't have a congress.

Legal precedent:

In the 1989 Canadian case Tremblay v. Daigle the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that a fetus was not found to have a right to life under either the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedom or the Canadian Charter.

So this bill cannot be passed into law because it flies in the face of the Canadian Charter and that precedent setting Supreme Court ruling.

**If the bill were passed it would be challenged on the grounds that it was unconstitutional (which it clearly is) and the Supreme Court of Canada wouldn't even bother to hear the case because they've already ruled on it so they would simply strike it down. Finito la musica.

Its a flightless bird. It can't fly.

They're not attacking the mother's right to have her child, for crying out loud. They're worried that this bill will pose a risk to the right to abort. I've heard that they have nothing to worry about, though, because the bill includes a provision protecting mothers who intended to abort.

By the way, Canada has a House of Commons, not a Congress. Brush up on your civics. Also, your research skills.

I'm confused. There is a law forcing women to have abortions? I thought a pregnant woman always had to choice to have her baby. It's the choice to terminate that is more fragile.

EDIT: I'm pro-choice, and this sounds like a great law to me. If a woman does want her child, then she and her unborn baby should have added protection.

Could you explain what the bill actually states? You know, for those of us not in Canada?