Abortion: yay or nay?

This is the case for you but I bet you if it was found that aborted foetuses were being used for human consumption, by however means, and was reported in the media there will be an outcry; many of whom will be very relaxed with the idea of abortion. I just find that point a tad hypocritical. It's not something I'd try and people would seek criminal action if this happened on the grounds of 'not being nice' but I don't think slaughtering animals is very nice either. It's like this group on Facebook. A petition against the use of dogs as live bait for sharks whilst simultaneously enjoying big, fat juicy burgers and sausages. Because pigs and cows aren't cute and fluffy they're not deemed in the same light. All the same to me, but legalising farming of dogs for meat would be political suicide.

And since when is the killing of innocent humans not murder?

Or is it not murder because it's convenient to say that it isn't murder, because it makes people feel better when they get abortions?

That is because they have gotten to the point of needing to be siezed from their birth parents. These children have been left with detrimental parents for so long that they have severe problems, and people who want to adopt do not generally feel they can handle these children. There are no printed statistics on the exact number of people who would like to adopt, however there are statistics should give us some guidance:
http://www.hfea.gov.uk/679.html

1 in 7 couples has fertility problems. Seeing as the overwhelming majority of people want children, it is fair to assume that many of these couples would adopt if there was a large amount of 'unharmed' babies available.

Ok then, what about a baby in a coma for a short period of time? Or a premature baby that the parents don't want?

I did find and post a definition earlier on, i will post it again incase you overlooked it. Murder, is defined as the unlawful killing of a human. Abortion is legal in the UK, therefore it is not unlawful, and i don't regard a fetus as a human.

So when Joseph Stalin killed tens of millions of Russian citizens during the 1930s, was that not murder? The government did it, so it was lawful.

If it was lawful, under my definition it wouldn't be murder. However, it would still be killing, and not once did i argue that killing humans was justifiable or morally right.

And do you think that abortion is morally right?

Is your statement that there would be an outcry from those supporting abortion hypothetical and without supporting evidence or has it actually happened?

Well there was a prosecution of an artist who used two aborted foetuses in his work. It was concluded by the courts of law that it was outraging public morals, whatever that was supposed to mean. The artist did this for the same reason with the starving dog, people only gave a **** when exposed to it in their work but loved sticking their heads in the sand for the rest of their lives. Shock tactics like this from artists are not new, though this occured before other artists work such as splitting a cow in two or starving a dog. I'll try and find the case and see if it's reported in the media. If so, then I will look for forums and comments on newspaper sites if you like. I've known people to react against 'lesser' things. For example, there's a stigma of veal being 'cruel' in this country, or so the wife of the PM think so. Judging by that, I'd imagine there would be a reaction if some nutter decided to sell or consume aborted foetuses. The problem if I posted pictures of the situation, people will easily dismiss it as fake because that's what they want to believe. If I showed American military abusing Iraqis there would be more belief, even if a picture was fake.

In the case whereby the artist used aborted fetuses in his work, there was a clear public outcry from those especially pro choice?

Sometimes, some of the chicken eggs we buy have been fertilised, they only haven't grown into chicks because they haven't been kept warm, i haven't seen any public outcry there.

Detrimental parents? According to http://www.afteradoption.org.uk/page.asp?section=0001000100020011 around 40% of the children in care will return home. The parents cannot be that detrimental if the authorities think it viable to return them home.
What if the babies which would have been aborted are born and given up for adoption, and the number or babies outweighs the amount of infertile couples? What if infertile couples don't want to adopt but want to go down a different route ie surrogacy? Also, not all infertile couples will get a baby. Surely adoption is about matching parents with children, and finding the children the most suitable parents and homes, which may not always be with infertile couples.

An unwanted premature baby in a coma where the parents don't want it and it has no ability to think or have any memories? I don't really see the problem in letting it die, especially if it can only exist at someone else's expense.

I'm pro choice.

It my body, its my decision. I take my pill everyday, i am responsible. So if i did get pregnant by accident i feel i should have the option of an abortion if i felt that was the right thing to do.

Right now would be a really bad time to get pregnant as have no job and am mentally unwell, so wouldn't be able to cope with a pregnancy and it wouldn't be fair to bring a child into this world in these circumstances.

I realise that many children go back, why do you think they are 6x more likley to have children who will also be in care? I have yet to meet anyone in my life who has told me they regret having their children. Pregnancies have not increased in this country but the birth rate has gone down, so all I see is a lot of perfectly healthy babies being flushed down the toilet by parents who would be perfectly happy to have a child. You don't even need to assume that 100% of infertile couples will adopt because most people wouldn't put their children up for adoption, and on top of that people would be more careful about getting pregnant if they had their exit strategy taken away.

So can I presume you're ok with abortions all the way upto full term? Pretty sickening to be honest.

Going by the numbers game yes I'd say there were some.



People don't give a monkeys about chickens though. That's why KFC is so popular. If this country legalised dog and horse meat there would be trouble.

I'm wanting pure facts here, not flimsy assumptions.
What's the difference between chickens and dogs or horses? Why are horses more important? Why do you view a fertilised chicken egg as unequal to a fertilised egg in a female dog, yet a fertilised human egg is equal to the mother?