User talk:Turntabling

Abortion in Canada
Hello Turntabling, I agree, we do not need to describe partial-birth abortion on the "abortion in canada" page, since this procedure has it's own page. however, that said procedure is legal in canada up to full term is relevant to the "abortion in canada" page, so please, instead of removing the entire paragraph, leave the bit about how it is relevant in canada. i understand that people want to minimize thinking about things they do that they hate, but this is an encyclopedia right? the government of canada doesn't control it, thankfully, unlike the cases in stalin russia and nazi germany. kind regards, Totoro33 (talk) 12:51, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Are there reliable sources that establish whether or not this type of abortion is done, or has ever been done, in Canada? Without sources like this, the procedure's status in Canada is unknown, and trying to determine its status based solely on current Canadian law is original research. If sources can be found, it would probably be more appropriate to put the information in the "Access..." section, under the paragraph about RU486's status. Turntabling (talk) 01:33, 10 April 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not about "whether it has been done," it's about whether there are any laws to (not) reference. There aren't. This section is about the legality of abortion in Canada, not about statistics. There are zero laws banning any type of abortion in Canada; therefore, there are zero references to cite. Am I able to upload recorded phone calls to various ministries in Canada? P.S. "Are they really killing Jews at Auschwitz?" [What do you need, a signed confession from an SS abortionist?] If you care about humanity, perhaps you can spend some time doing some "research." We can all get busy dealing with the present infanticide. Do you live in a theoretical bubble, or are you a practical human being? Please fix what you want to deny. Totoro33 (talk) 06:47, 10 April 2010 (UTC)


 * This discussion has strayed into purely ideological territory. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a forum. Discussions on Wikipedia shouldn't take the form of political debates, but remain focused on building articles, like how to present information, where to find suitable pictures, etc. I'd also advise against future fulfillment of Godwin's law; drawing comparisons of this nature on Wikipedia tends to greatly reduce the chances of one's proposals receiving serious consideration. Turntabling (talk) 07:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Your personal talk page is not part of the encyclopedia. It's purpose is for discussion not appropriate to the encyclopedia. You can call it ideology if that eases your conscience. I leave it with you now. You either love the truth or you hate it, and you've shown well enough where you stand. The "legal" section of an article on "abortion in Canada" would rightly point out this matter, but you win... Show your version of love. Totoro33 (talk) 10:15, 10 April 2010 (UTC)