Henry Morgentaler receives Order of Canada

[LChoy]

My sentiments are similar to Russic's, and I'll look at just the choice aspect, not the medical part (which I'm qualified to talk about as well)

There are "zealots" on both specturms and I feel I'm more in the middle (favouring choice). It is important that there is a choice available of women. Perhaps it is a medical complication that would seriously harm the mother if she carries to term (heart condition or cancer), cases of rape or child rape, incest (would a woman really want to carry her father's baby?). In some cases, some woman just feel it was a mistake, and just aren't ready for such a life changing commitment. For a pregnant teen, it could be a mistake that could ruin their ability to get an education, a career, or radical change her life forever. As a male, we can't fully understand the implications if we impregnate a woman. It's almost unfair that guys are given the slack for being "players", but woman are suppose to live with the consquences if they get knocked up.
Furthermore, even if a woman goes with the adoption route, there is no guarantee that the child will have a good life (although, life is better than not being born). It's good to think that there will childless couples or good quality adoption homes where the child could be given to, but what about in areas of lower socioeconomic conditions with similar high pregnancy rates and reduce access to social services?
I'm not sure how the whole process works, but I'm pretty sure that woman that go through the legal medical abortion process will get counselling first, and I'm hoping that it is there that she'll get the proper information on all of her options, and that she is making the best choice.
In closing, I'm in favour of abortion if there is a compelling reason behind it (and preferably done before the end of the 1st trimester). I don't believe many Canadian women are getting abortions for contraceptive purposes, that's not the reason why it's legal (although I'm sure some women have had it done for less than genuine reasons). It's there for the woman that truly feel that they need it, and by going to real medical facility, they can get the counselling and information they need to make their decision and protect their health.


oh yeah, almost forgot the point of the thread. Ballsy move to nominate Morgentaler. I think he does deserve it for making a difference for Canadian women, but this being Canada, a conservative governement, and for a controversal issue, I don't think he should recieve it.

[Kipper is King]

The guy's a mass murderer and he gets our highest award??? The Order of Canada has now become a pointless token.

[Gozer]

Some other winners clearly aren't pleased, and are even rejecting their honours: Father Lucien Larre of Coquitlam, who founded the Bosco Centres for emotionally disturbed and addicted adolescents, said he'd rather return the honour than be associated with Morgentaler. http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarp...9-c4c3374d68c8

[Burninator]

So I take it that everyone who is against abortion is also against the Plan B pill? It is essentially doing the same thing but much earlier. How come no one is calling pharmacists mass murderers?

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Gozer

I do not think putting a drill bit through an unborn child's skull is worthy of the Order of Canada.

It isn't? Dang, I guess I'm going to have to expand my "Activities to get me the Order of Canada" list then. I want that medal.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Some other winners clearly aren't pleased, and are even rejecting their honours: Father Lucien Larre of Coquitlam, who founded the Bosco Centres for emotionally disturbed and addicted adolescents, said he'd rather return the honour than be associated with Morgentaler. http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarp...9-c4c3374d68c8

I wonder if anyone returned their Order of Canada when that guy was awarded his. I wouldn't want to be associated with him either.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I wonder if anyone returned their Order of Canada when that guy was awarded his. I wouldn't want to be associated with him either.

Why, what did HE do? Outside of helping people in need?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

Why, what did HE do? Outside of helping people in need?

Did you read the article?

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Azure

Why, what did HE do? Outside of helping people in need?

The linked article says this:

Larre is not immune to controversy.

In 1992, a Saskatchewan jury convicted him on two counts of physically abusing children in his care at Bosco Homes and acquitted him on nine other charges.

Larre was sentenced to one day in jail and paid a $2,500 fine for one charge of common assault and one charge that he forced pills down the throat of a teenager to teach her a lesson about drug abuse.

The National Parole Board of Canada pardoned him five years later and erased the charges.

In 1998, Larre registered as a psychologist in B.C.

His work, however, has prompted a number of complaints to the B.C. College of Psychologists in recent years, court documents show.

There were no allegations of abuse, but individuals and other psychologists have questioned his methods and the quality of his work. Last November, the college held an extraordinary hearing and suspended his registration pending a disciplinary hearing because it felt he posed "an immediate risk to the public." The public, however, was never told of that at the time.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Did you read the article?

Gaaah.

I must have missed that. Point conceded.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Gozer

You should read up on what your buddy Gandhi thought of abortion.

Ghandi didn't think his plan through all the way.

Practicing abstinence both in and outside of marriage plus not being able to use birth control under any circumstances under the guise of higher morality? Only having sex for procreational purposes? Seriously?

So, a man and woman shouldn't have sex if the only reason they are doing it is to express their emotions to each other. If their aim isn't to have a child then Ghandi would be the first to throw the cockblock.

Now, consider the insanity of those thoughts and tell me that he should be an authority on anything.

You should also read up on what he thought of Blacks, too. If you need any more examples of his "off-thinking."

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Azure

Gaaah.

I must have missed that. Point conceded.

Aah, it was just a throwaway cheapshot anyway. I've never even heard of the guy.

This Morgentaler business is kind of tough to figure. On the one hand, he somewhat heroically put his ass on the line for something he believed in and in the end changed the country. On the other hand, a lot of Canadians don't like his beliefs and think he changed the country for the worse.

They should maybe try to avoid controversy when giving out these essentially meaningless accolades. With this pick it's like they are actively trying to court controversy or "pick a fight".

[ONE NOSED JACK]

Next thing you know he'll be making the cover of Rolling Stone, eh to go Dr. Hook.

[evman150]

Good to see.

Just a little prouder to be Canadian on this day.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by evman150

Good to see.

Just a little prouder to be Canadian on this day.

I deduce that you approve of (or at least condone) abortion. I find that a hypocritical when juxtaposed to your opinion of the unassailable right to live of child rapists.

Originally Posted by evman150

What this whole thing boils down to is the opinion of some that child molesters surrender their rights by virtue of having molested children (or murdered, raped etc).

This is a morally repugnant view IMO.

I find abortion morally repugnant, and this "highest degree of merit to Canada and humanity" being awarded to him exponentially more so.
For the record, I also condemn any violent act on behalf of my beliefs.

I also find morally repugnant your contention that the unborn have lesser rights than child rapists.

These thoughts are contingent on you approving of abortion, which you may not but approve of this distinction for another reason. I'd hate to be subjected to your "logical fallacy" venom.

[Thor]

I'm very surprised by this move, I mean as a pro choice supporter I think he has done a lot of good for Canada but boy did they ever pick 1 topic to bring out the ire and anger of the pro life movement.

[Gozer]

Originally Posted by Reaper

Ghandi rant

I don't believe everything Gandhi believed.

I did like his general guiding principle of respect for life.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by Gozer

I don't believe everything Gandhi believed.

I did like his general guiding principle of respect for life.

Like lots of Enema's and sleeping naked (not sex) with lots of naked young women?

[evman150]

Originally Posted by Gozer

I deduce that you approve of (or at least condone) abortion. I find that a hypocritical when juxtaposed to your opinion of the unassailable right to live of child rapists.

I find abortion morally repugnant, and this "highest degree of merit to Canada and humanity" being awarded to him exponentially more so.
For the record, I also condemn any violent act on behalf of my beliefs.

I also find morally repugnant your contention that the unborn have lesser rights than child rapists.

These thoughts are contingent on you approving of abortion, which you may not but approve of this distinction for another reason. I'd hate to be subjected to your "logical fallacy" venom.

I approve of abortion.

Child rapists are human beings. Unborn fetuses are not. Child rapists have rights, unborn "babies" do not.

My view is at least logically consistent. Yours however, is not. You find it perfectly acceptable to kill some humans, yet find it morally repugnant to kill "others". How do you reconcile this inconsistency? And remember, abdication of rights by virtue of having done wrong is not an acceptable response, since the right to life is unassailable.

So in other words, yes, you fail to grasp simple logical concepts once again.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Gozer

I find abortion morally repugnant, and this "highest degree of merit to Canada and humanity" being awarded to him exponentially more so.
For the record, I also condemn any violent act on behalf of my beliefs.

Do you find it morally pugnant to tell other people how to live there lives?

I don't like abortion any more than anyone else, but it's not up to me. I can't tell another person that they have to carry the fetus to term, no matter what and even if they don't want to. It's not my decision. It's not for the government to decide. It's not for you to decide either.

Do you think it should be outlawed and that the government should insist private citizens have babies?