[Metrobeans]

I DID NOT WRITE THIS BILL, IT DOES NOT REFLECT MY VIEWS ON ABORTION

B473 - Abortion Bill 2012, tufc

An Act ending the rights of mothers to kill unborn babies


BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

1. Abortion

(1) It is no longer legal to have an abortion


2. Exceptions
(1) If carrying a foetus to term would pose a significant risk to the mother’s life, or would pose a significant risk of long-term, severe damage to her physical health, she may have an abortion performed by a qualified abortionist. This service must be provided by the NHS, and be performed by a doctor in the employ of the NHS, at an NHS facility
(2) To be eligible for this, the pregnant individual must gain written agreement from three NHS-employed doctors that carrying the foetus
to term would either:
(a) Pose a direct and significant threat to the life of the pregnant individual
(b) Pose a direct and significant threat of severe damage to the long-term physical health of the pregnant individual.
(3) Bribing doctors to provide agreement, or obtaining such agreement through any fraudulent means will be a committal of the offence
detailed in 3(1)(a).
(a) Any doctors found to have been complicit in supplying such agreement for fraudulent reasons will be tried under the offence detailed in
in 3(1)(a).



3. Enforcement
(1) This Act will create a new civil and criminal offence
(a) This offence is entitled, “Providing Access to Abortion”
(b) The criminal offence will carry a maximum sentence of 14 years’ imprisonment
(c) The criminal offence will carry a minimum term of 3 years’ imprisonment
(d) Any doctor found guilty of the criminal or civil offence will be banned from practising
(e) Where committal of this offence has resulted in an abortion taking place, the criminal offence will be used to try the guilty parties, as
detailed in 2
(f) Where committal of this offence has not resulted in an abortion taking place, the civil offence will be used to try the guilty parties, as
detailed in 2
(2) Should 1 be breached:
(a) The mother of the aborted foetus will not be punished (except in accordance with 2(3)
(b) The provider(s) of the service which breached 1 will be tried for the offence detailed in 3 (1)(a)


4. For the Purposes of this Act:
(1) ‘Abortion’ refers to any deliberate attempt, successful or not, to terminate a human foetus'
(2) 'Foetus’ refers to a human life for the entire period of time between the start of the zygotic stage, and birth
(3) ‘Provider(s) of the service’ is defined as any person found to have had professional complicity in a breach
of 1.

[Norton1]

Oh dear.

[Morgsie]

FFS, A woman has a right to choose.

What about women who are raped and sexually abused?

[xiyangliu]

What !


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[Ocassus]

No TUFC, this is stupid.

[Norton1]

(Original post by Morgsie)
FFS, A woman has a right to choose.

But if you believe that life begins at conception then allowing that life to be ended is tantamount to murder. It's actually the logical position to take that abortion should be illegal if, as I say, you believe life begins at conception. This would even be the case if it was rape or incest, the damage done by that is less than murder, surely?

[cl_steele]

no...

[xiyangliu]

(Original post by Norton1)
But if you believe that life begins at conception then allowing that life to be ended is tantamount to murder. It's actually the logical position to take that abortion should be illegal if, as I say, you believe life begins at conception. This would even be the case if it was rape or incest, the damage done by that is less than murder, surely?

The thing at what stage of mitosis can be defined as "human"? I am sure murder is killing another human but not exterminating life. So abortion should be allowed at early stages.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[Norton1]

(Original post by xiyangliu)
The thing at what stage of mitosis can be defined as "human"? I am sure murder is killing another human but not exterminating life. So abortion should be allowed at early stages.

From the sperm meeting the egg? My point is that for the person who believes that life begins at that point the bundle of cells is just as much a human as a seconds old baby.

[kimprovising]

Just why.

[xiyangliu]

(Original post by Norton1)
From the sperm meeting the egg? My point is that for the person who believes that life begins at that point the bundle of cells is just as much a human as a seconds old baby.

Sperms meets egg really is that how you define human?
I agree life begins at that point, but to call these two cells at that stage human I can not. So my point is
Abortion should be allowed at the early stage.



This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[xiyangliu]

Then again our debate here is absolutely pointless, like the government is going to listen to any of this stuff here -_-


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[Norton1]

(Original post by xiyangliu)
Sperms meets egg really is that how you define human?
I agree life begins at that point, but to call these two cells at that stage human I can not. So my point is
Abortion should be allowed at the early stage.
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Personally, I find it very difficult not to see a fetus as human. It's not religion or science or anything like that, I just feel that something which - if left alone- will become a baby is alive. If it were my decision and everyone had to abide by it I think I probably would allow abortion; women will procure it anyway and it's probably better to not have them dying from drinking horrible abortifacients or going to back alley abortionists.

[xiyangliu]

(Original post by Norton1)
Personally, I find it very difficult not to see a fetus as human. It's not religion or science or anything like that, I just feel that something which - if left alone- will become a baby is alive. If it were my decision and everyone had to abide by it I think I probably would allow abortion; women will procure it anyway and it's probably better to not have them dying from drinking horrible abortifacients or going to back alley abortionists.

I can see your point and I agree with your view on reason to allow abortion. Some females just does not understand the word responsibility. They just do "it" without think abt the consequences and what their obligations are as a mother. I have seen mothers that has 3 to 4 children at home and still go out clubbing every night, So actually on the other hand instead of ruining ones life, just don't give birth or go for abortion.

Oh and I apologise abt that earlier thread(Kingston uni 1)




This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[Birchington]

Absolutely not.

[Morgsie]

NO way.

The 1967 Act was a PM Bill by a Liberal, David Steel

[Redheaded_Dancer]

Is this real?
If so it won't pass because it's not taking into account women who were raped or forced into sex as well as foetus' which have fatal defects or illnesses.

[Democracy]

(Original post by internetguru)
xxx

I have no idea how Metrobeans runs things around here, but stop acting like a psychopath please. The usual TSR rules apply here too, engage with the topic at hand: don't troll.

[thunder_chunky]

A complete no from me.

(Original post by Norton1)
But if you believe that life begins at conception then allowing that life to be ended is tantamount to murder. It's actually the logical position to take that abortion should be illegal if, as I say, you believe life begins at conception. This would even be the case if it was rape or incest, the damage done by that is less than murder, surely?

Since different people has different opinions on when it start being a life it's pretty difficult to rule on such a thing.

[MacDaddi]

No way Jose.