Turn on thread page Beta

Abortion watch

  • View Poll Results: Should we change the current abortion limit of 24 weeks?
    Abortion should be illegal under all circumstances!
    16
    5.08%
    Abortion should be illegal, except in certain cases such as rape, a threat to the mother's life and etc.
    65
    20.63%
    It should be reduced to 12 weeks
    44
    13.97%
    It should be reduced to 20 weeks
    48
    15.24%
    The current 24 week limit is fine!
    91
    28.89%
    Abortion should be legal should up to 28 weeks!
    20
    6.35%
    Abortion should be legal throughout the entire pregnancy!
    27
    8.57%
    Not sure!
    4
    1.27%

    Offline

    0
    (Original post by Libertin du Nord)
    If you will make an exception for one, but not the other, then I will cast your posts into the fiery pit of nonsense.

    Please do.

    Nonsense is to sense, as shade to light; it heightens effect
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yawn)
    The NHS also fulfils the role of providing terminations of unwanted pregnancies, but that doesn't stop the private clinics doing likewise.

    They should accept responsibility for the post-abortion effects on their clients and provide the emotional support that is required.

    I have highlighted the two words that make what you say nonsense.

    They are private clinics. So long as they are honest about the service they provide, and that service is legal, then they can do whatever the hell they want. If they said to people 'we will provide post-abortion counselling', and then they don't, that is a problem. But if people are honestly informed of what a service is, and choose to use it anyway - who are you to say 'you should do this'? It's a PRIVATE transaction for christ's sake.

    Mcdonald's don't have to provide treadmills for customers after use. They publish nutritional data about their food, and if people choose to eat it with that information available, then that's their problem.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kizer)
    I have highlighted the two words that make what you say nonsense.

    They are private clinics. So long as they are honest about the service they provide, and that service is legal, then they can do whatever the hell they want. If they said to people 'we will provide post-abortion counselling', and then they don't, that is a problem. But if people are honestly informed of what a service is, and choose to use it anyway - who are you to say 'you should do this'? It's a PRIVATE transaction for christ's sake.

    Mcdonald's don't have to provide treadmills for customers after use. They publish nutritional data about their food, and if people choose to eat it with that information available, then that's their problem.
    Despite being anti-abortion, I agree with that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    who are you to say 'you should do this'? It's a PRIVATE transaction for christ's sake.
    Ah, but Christ would not approve of such abortion activities...:ninja:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Adarshster)
    Ah, but Christ would not approve of such abortion activities...:ninja:
    Yeah, well, he's dead.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I mean't to click the option stating that I think the current limit is fine but I accidently clicked the 28 weeks option.

    One thing that really annoys me in any thread concerning abortion is a popular opinion that any woman who has, or even considers, an abortion is assumed to be a slut, never uses contraception, just got pregnant for the sake of it etc. Obviously there are women who don't use contraception but you can't tar everyone with the same brush. Accidents do happen. People say "if you can't support a baby then don't get pregnant" but I'm pretty sure in most cases that women wanting abortions didn't actually WANT to get pregnant. Unfortunatly you can do everything you can to stop yourself from getting pregnant but it can still happen.

    There is no point in making abortion illegal because it will still happen but in those cases two lives may be lost rather than just one. Women are still going to get pregnant and not want to keep their baby, banning abortions isn't going to change everyone's opinions of it. At the end of the day it is the woman's choice whether she wants to carry a baby to full term and either bring it up and give it up for aoption. The only people affected are the woman, the father, the "baby" and possibly immediate family. It has nothing to do with all the people who judge that woman for not wanting a child at that particular time in her life.

    It seems you can't win really. Young women get criticised for being a young, single mothers but then they also get criticised for having abortions.

    It's very easy for others, especially men, to say "give it up for adoption" but the woman still has to be pregnant for 9 months and go through the pain and trauma of giving birth to an unwanted baby. I personally think, in the long run, aborting a 'bunch of cells' early on in a pregnancy is a lot better than giving a baby up for adoption. The months babies that are available to be adopted lessens the chances of an older child being adopted. Everyone wants cute little babies that they can pretend are their own rather than a 6 year old kid that has been moved from family to family.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kizer)
    Yeah, well, he's dead.
    You have to be born to die, dont you?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    ^^ Great post, just to support it with some evidence:

    (Original post by http://www.stanford.edu/group/SHPRC/ch6_bar.html)
    Effectiveness (failure rate): 3%-14%. In 100 users who use a condom correctly and consistently, the lowest estimated failure rate would be 3 pregnancies in one year. In 100 typical users however, the estimated failure rate is 14 pregnancies in one year.


    One thing I disagree with though. When you say:

    "There is no point in making abortion illegal because it will still happen but in those cases two lives may be lost rather than just one. "

    That is not necessarily convincing. Making abortion illegal will presumably drastically reduce the total number of abortions - the number of legal ones will drop from about 200 000 a year to 0, and I find it extremely unlikely that there will then be 200 000 backstreet abortions. It is safe to assume that far less abortions would take place. If you were a person who believes that a bundle of cells should be afforded the same moral importance as a woman (I'm not but some people are), then even if two people did die on some of those new illegal abortions, overall a lot of 'lives' would be saved.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RK89)
    You have to be born to die, dont you?

    Jesus Christ was a real historical figure. There is just no good reason to believe he was in any way supernatural.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kizer)
    Jesus Christ was a real historical figure. There is just no good reason to believe he was in any way supernatural.
    Oh you have to go the whole hog really, and say he was never born. A man named Jesus may have existed, but it doesnt mean he was a Christ.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RK89)
    Oh you have to go the whole hog really, and say he was never born. A man named Jesus may have existed, but it doesnt mean he was a Christ.

    Wasn't his surname Christ? I thought that's where the word Christ in that context came from.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kizer)
    Wasn't his surname Christ? I thought that's where the word Christ in that context came from.
    It means the annointed one. Now do you agree with me... :p: , fellow atheist.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kizer)
    ^^ Great post, just to support it with some evidence:





    One thing I disagree with though. When you say:

    "There is no point in making abortion illegal because it will still happen but in those cases two lives may be lost rather than just one. "

    That is not necessarily convincing. Making abortion illegal will presumably drastically reduce the total number of abortions - the number of legal ones will drop from about 200 000 a year to 0, and I find it extremely unlikely that there will then be 200 000 backstreet abortions. It is safe to assume that far less abortions would take place. If you were a person who believes that a bundle of cells should be afforded the same moral importance as a woman (I'm not but some people are), then even if two people did die on some of those new illegal abortions, overall a lot of 'lives' would be saved.
    Of course there wouldn't be as many abortions but my point was that women, who does not was a child, will still seek a way to terminate her pregnancy even if abortions are illegal.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kizer)
    ^^ Great post, just to support it with some evidence:





    One thing I disagree with though. When you say:

    "There is no point in making abortion illegal because it will still happen but in those cases two lives may be lost rather than just one. "

    That is not necessarily convincing. Making abortion illegal will presumably drastically reduce the total number of abortions - the number of legal ones will drop from about 200 000 a year to 0, and I find it extremely unlikely that there will then be 200 000 backstreet abortions. It is safe to assume that far less abortions would take place. If you were a person who believes that a bundle of cells should be afforded the same moral importance as a woman (I'm not but some people are), then even if two people did die on some of those new illegal abortions, overall a lot of 'lives' would be saved.
    Of course there wouldn't be as many abortions but women who do not want to keep their child will try to find some alternative way to terminate her pregnancy if abortions are illegal from going to a dodgy surgeon to trying overdoses. The whole two lives thing is really a question for the pro-lifers. Would they rather abortion be illegal and a woman risking her life to try to abort a foetus illegally? Isn't a current life more important in this situation than a potential life?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CheesyBeans)
    Of course there wouldn't be as many abortions but women who do not want to keep their child will try to find some alternative way to terminate her pregnancy if abortions are illegal from going to a dodgy surgeon to trying overdoses. The whole two lives thing is really a question for the pro-lifers. Would they rather abortion be illegal and a woman risking her life to try to abort a foetus illegally? Isn't a current life more important in this situation than a potential life?

    My point is that their answer to the question in bold is 'no'. Therefore since there will be far fewer abortions, more lives will be saved even if some women die trying to illegally abort.

    Besides, if you see abortion as murder, then presumably you have very little sympathy for people who harm or kill themselves while trying to commit it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    First off, I want to know who these pro-life organisations are (the ones who are "actively involved in caring for 'unwanted' children" etc). Are you part of one, or are you just an active pro-life individual? Are you or do you plan to adopt and raise some unwanted children? I'm not going to imply that you, personally, sit on your backside and do nothing, but a lot of pro-lifers I have encountered do just tend to sit there all high and mighty, preaching about the sanctity of life, without actually going out there and caring for all of those unwanted kids you didn't want terminated. There's a Bill Hicks quote on that one actually, but I couldn't track it down on Google.

    I've mentioned some sources, now you bring out yours.

    (Original post by yawn)
    Since I have never said that they did, I am puzzled why you implied I did - and I want an answer to that point, please.
    All right, I'll back down here. Force is too strong a word. But you DO imply that abortion clinics are like some corporation, or a car dealership, with a product to sell, and therefore there's no chance they'd offer the other side of things.

    (Original post by yawn)
    organisations that offer abortion at a cost to a woman who cannot see an alternative at that time because of her panic
    The clinics offer the abortion, they don't offer the counselling. See, you were right, nobody is FORCED to go to an abortion clinic. So before they even step over the threshold of a clinic, they've got other means of support to help them decide: doctors, nurses, counsellors, family, friends. They might even talk to some pro-life groups, I don't know.

    (Original post by yawn)
    Furthermore, I don't remember a post of yours where you mention "that dude" and tbh, I haven't read all your posts so that probably explains why.
    I've only made two posts in this thread (this one is the third) and since you quoted my first one you clearly skipped over the chunk where I stated the following:

    (Original post by Absinthe)
    I read about a guy who protested outside abortion clinics and persuaded and helped a pregnant girl who was struggling financially to bring her child into the world and provide for him. Now that is generous. But the child was otherwise wanted: the only reason its mother had considered abortion was for financial reasons. This does not apply to everyone. And can this one man, overwhelmingly generous though he was in his support, do this with all the other poverty-stricken single mothers? Do some women even want such assistance?
    That's a sizeable chunk of my post, too.

    I have met many women who have suffered in this way and hence my greater knowledge of potential deleterious effects of abortion on the mother. I have made it quite clear in all my contributions to the many identical debates on TSR about abortion that I am pro-life - and have given all the reasons, with corroboration for my stance.
    Oh right, so because you know of people who've suffered mentally, we should a) blame the abortion clinics, when the NHS offers free counselling services for a variety of different reasons, and b) we should deprive other women abortions, because everyone gets an abortion for the same reason, right? So they must all go through the same trauma!

    Are you a guy, by the way?
    Offline

    13
    (Original post by kizer)
    I have highlighted the two words that make what you say nonsense.

    They are private clinics. So long as they are honest about the service they provide, and that service is legal, then they can do whatever the hell they want. If they said to people 'we will provide post-abortion counselling', and then they don't, that is a problem. But if people are honestly informed of what a service is, and choose to use it anyway - who are you to say 'you should do this'? It's a PRIVATE transaction for christ's sake.

    Mcdonald's don't have to provide treadmills for customers after use. They publish nutritional data about their food, and if people choose to eat it with that information available, then that's their problem.
    You cannot compare McDonalds products to the provision of medical services - that is a complete nonsense...unless McDonalds products cause food poisoning or somesuch, in which case they will be culpable and liable to litigation.

    Any provider of medical attention that is legalised has a responsibility for any necessary after-care for their patient that results from the service they have provided. If a person suffers from any condition (physical or emotional) that was brought about by the operation, then the provider is culpable.

    Makes no difference whether the service is provided by state or private organisation. The mere fact that it was a private provision does not alter the responsibility of providing necessary after-care to their patient.
    Offline

    13
    Are you a guy, by the way?
    What relevance does my gender have to this debate? Unless you are wanting to make a sweeping generalisation...
    Offline

    13
    Isn't a current life more important in this situation than a potential life?
    Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live.

    The right to live doesn't increase with age and size, otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.

    The comparison between baby's rights and mother's rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother's lifestyle, as opposed to the baby's life.

    It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.

    But you DO imply that abortion clinics are like some corporation, or a car dealership, with a product to sell, and therefore there's no chance they'd offer the other side of things.

    Those who are truly prochoice must present a woman with a number of possible choices, rather than just selling the choice of abortion.

    Would they rather abortion be illegal and a woman risking her life to try to abort a foetus illegally?
    For decades prior to its legalisation, 90 percent of abortions were done by physicians in their offices, not in back alleys.

    A law that allows for the killing of human life should never be enacted for 'exceptions' - and those who died in back alleys were exceptions, rather than the main.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    For decades prior to its legalisation, 90 percent of abortions were done by physicians in their offices, not in back alleys
    How do you know this?

    I also notice you completely missed the part where I asked you if you planned to adopt any unwanted children, or do work to assist in such causes, since you're so pro-life. But no, you just continue to trot out the usual agenda. Okay.

    What relevance does my gender have to this debate? Unless you are wanting to make a sweeping generalisation...
    What sweeping generalisation would that be? Yes, a man is entitled to and capable of feeling empathy. But he cannot, and will not, go through the same as a woman does during pregnancy. My ex-boyfriend stated that if his girlfriend at the time ever became pregnant, he'd just up and leave. Yes, so, he's a nonce, but still...talk about an easy way out.
 
 
 
Poll
Are you chained to your phone?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.