babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » anti-racism news and initiatives   » Bill C-13: "Persons who seek ... reproduction ... must not be discriminated against"

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Bill C-13: "Persons who seek ... reproduction ... must not be discriminated against"
Free Slave
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10249

posted 04 October 2005 07:47 AM      Profile for Free Slave        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Ok this is probably the wrong forum for this but it’s the best match for my topic I could find.

Federal law enacted in 2004, Bill C-13, states: “Persons who seek to undergo assisted reproduction procedures must not be discriminated against, including on the basis of their sexual orientation or marital status.”

Is this law saying there can be no distinguishing among candidates for IVF surgery?

If so, then doesn't Bill C-13 fail to take into account what is best for the children? Should not a female repeatedly convicted of raping her 6 year-old nieces be ineligible for IVF?

If so, then isn't this law a case of "anti-discrimination" being so important that it forces lawmakers to make insane laws who's chief consequences are the harm of children?

There used to be a rigorous screening process for couples going for adoption/IVF/anything linked to assisting in the acquiring of children, obviously for the well-being of the child. Has this screening process been now realized to be a discriminatory violation of the equality of all?

One more rhetorical question. How do the lawmakers propose to ensure non-discrimination against males seeking IVF? Do they seek now to change the biological structure of humans to fit the perfection that is equality?


From: Canada | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 04 October 2005 08:08 AM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Free Slave:
Ok this is probably the wrong forum for this

This is the wrong forum for you, period. Go back to Freak Domindumb where you came from, and where they will be more than happy to feed your delusions.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 04 October 2005 08:14 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
What on earth is this crap doing in the anti-racism forum?

audra(at)rabble(dot)ca. As she would say, "Live it! Live it!"


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ephemeral
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8881

posted 04 October 2005 09:54 AM      Profile for ephemeral     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
i have never seen a post riddled with so many illogical conclusions.
From: under a bridge with a laptop | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
thwap
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5062

posted 04 October 2005 09:58 AM      Profile for thwap        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Morning ephemeral!
From: Hamilton | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 04 October 2005 10:03 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Aww. You two are so cute.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ephemeral
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8881

posted 04 October 2005 10:09 AM      Profile for ephemeral     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
hi sweetie... getting off computer soon... not good for head and eyes today. not good at all. going, going, gone.
From: under a bridge with a laptop | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014

posted 04 October 2005 10:09 AM      Profile for Hinterland        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
If so, then isn't this law a case of "anti-discrimination" being so important that it forces lawmakers to make insane laws who's chief consequences are the harm of children?

quote:
How do the lawmakers propose to ensure non-discrimination against males seeking IVF?

Canadians don't use the term "lawmaker" and Free Slave's postal code is invalid.

...some days, it's just that easy.


From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 04 October 2005 10:10 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
One more rhetorical question.

Maybe we should have a forum for rhetorical questions.

Just one nutty rhetorical question after another -- that's all anyone would be allowed to post.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ephemeral
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8881

posted 04 October 2005 10:17 AM      Profile for ephemeral     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
where are the snows of yesteryear?
From: under a bridge with a laptop | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 04 October 2005 10:25 AM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
So, is this a rhetorical question or what?!

-- Steven Wright



From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Free Slave
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10249

posted 04 October 2005 12:42 PM      Profile for Free Slave        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
RealityBites, Hinterland, if you’re not going to address the topic then there’s no need for you here.

Michelle, this is in the anti-racism forum because the law which I am challenging is one of the anti-discrimination laws. Anti-racism and anti-discrimination are very closely related, and there was no other forum that seemed to match to my topic.

ephemeral, the post consists of questions you can answer yes or no to, if you would do so it would illustrate where my illogic is far better than if you make unspecific comments.

Again, for all the rest of you skilled debaters who feel the need to paste snide remarks without actually addressing the topic, get lost, and you have too much time on your hands.

I understand that most people here have differing opinions from myself, that shouldn't stop us from having a meaningful conversation.


From: Canada | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Stargazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6061

posted 04 October 2005 12:44 PM      Profile for Stargazer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Bah! Blow off! Not interested in your 'debate' asshat.
From: Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 04 October 2005 12:46 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Free Slave:
RealityBites, Hinterland, if you’re not going to address the topic then there’s no need for you here.

You have a lot of nerve telling Hinterland he doesn't need to be here. I think most people would agree that we would much rather have Hinterland here than someone who posts off-topic whining about protection from discrimination for people based on their sexual orientation.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 04 October 2005 12:55 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:

You have a lot of nerve telling Hinterland he doesn't need to be here.


[pout]Does this mean he doesn't have a lot of nerve telling me I don't need to be here?
[/pout]

By the way, when I tell him to get back to FreakDumbinion, it is because when he's not worried about being polite he posts garbage like this:

quote:
It is reasonable to believe that for a given gay person, if they were to get "married," their expected promiscuity would reasonably be a little lower.

Of course this does nothing to show how homosexual coupling is a valid lifestyle.

It also does not address the consequences of the acceptance of gay sex and so-called homosexual marriage to society, freedom of speech, religion, adopted children, concepts of right and wrong...

It also ignores the fact that "proud gays" thrive on deviating from norms, which lessens the magnitude of GQ's result, and that social liberalization of culture (which SSM of course promotes) begets itself, one of the results (which can already be seen) being the ever increasing rejection of monogamy in any relationships (including marriage), which lessens GQ's result some more.

It also ignores the fact that acceptance of gay marriage would imply more people would be gay, which is a practice that is known to have a generally increased promiscuity, so while the promiscuity per homo person might go down with SSM, the promiscuity per any person overall might go up with SSM, lessening GQ's result still more if not negating and reversing it.


A bigot AND and idiot. Your parents must be so proud.

[ 04 October 2005: Message edited by: RealityBites ]


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 04 October 2005 01:30 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
A bigot AND and idiot. Your parents must be so proud.


Heyyyyy.... If he fucks himself, will he give birth to a BigIdiot?

From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca