How do Pro Life campaigners want women who have abortions punished?

PucaMama wrote: »

There will never be a reasonable debate on here about abortion because it's always so heavily slanted towards pro choice and no mod will pull people up on the petty digs thrown at the pro life side. It started in the opening post. This thread will turn into a thread for pro choicers to pat each other on the back

And no comment from you on the vile posts which stated that we were in favour of women getting raped ?

Heavily slanted and always petty digs thrown at the pro side; indeed; although you might be right, as that was far from "petty".

Donald Trump

Widdershins wrote: »

Not at all but you are misunderstanding my comment. Regardless of the reason for the rules around married women adopting out a baby, they are there, and your suggestion was that she should 'simply' tell the state that she's an unfit mother so as to circumvent these rules and have the baby adopted. The sex offenders part is a joke, but you are again missing it. It's realistic to you that a woman would go through all that pregnancy and birth entails and then declare herself unfit and ASK for the baby to be taken from her care on those grounds. It's as if that's no more than an inconvenient couple of hours in court to a woman. In that case why couldn't a man tell the court he's a sex offender-but (by your logic)-he doesn't think he's a risk to existing children, only the unwanted baby. And that'll be fine.

Don't lie.

I never said that.

You said I said it but I never did.

Now you continue to repeat it.

Fell free to quote my post where I said that a woman should declare herself unfit

PucaMama wrote: »

There will never be a reasonable debate on here about abortion because it's always so heavily slanted towards pro choice and no mod will pull people up on the petty digs thrown at the pro life side. It started in the opening post. This thread will turn into a thread for pro choicers to pat each other on the back

What is a reasonable position to take? A pro-life supporter feels that the potential person-hood of a developing fetus takes primacy over the wishes of the woman carrying it.

There's no shades of grey or area for compromise with a pro life supporter. It's all or nothing.

Widdershins

I already did. ''We can't look after it'' =Unfit.

Donald Trump wrote: »

Even if they were there is nothing stopping a married couple saying "we don't want this child and won't/can't look after it". The child will be put into care.

Donald Trump

Widdershins wrote: »

I already did. ''We can't look after it'' =Unfit.

Lol.

No it doesn't :pac:

"We already 10 kids. We can look after those but can't afford to take care of another one. We can't look after this one"

Widdershins

Donald Trump wrote: »

Lol.

No it doesn't :pac:

"We already 10 kids. We can look after those but can't afford to take care of another one. We can't look after this one"

And the court will just shrug and say, what can you do. They won't be frowned upon in the least. And in the case of women in less obvious financial situations, do they have to detail every aspect of their reasons and if it is a financial issue why they won't just accept state support?

Yup. So they can choose not to choose abortion. It's not like the repeal affects them in any way whatsoever.

How many people who'll never avail of gay marriage voted in favour of it last year ? How many of those would view it as "a bit weird" but decided "ah feck it, who am I to prevent someone doing it - it's not like it'll affect me" ?

Decent Skin wrote: »

Yup. So they can choose not to choose abortion. It's not like the repeal affects them in any way whatsoever.

How many people who'll never avail of gay marriage voted in favour of it last year ? How many of those would view it as "a bit weird" but decided "ah feck it, who am I to prevent someone doing it - it's not like it'll affect me" ?

This is the crux of the issue and why there can be no reasonable debate.

The pro-choice side is not forcing their moral stand point on anyone, they simply want the ability to choose.

The pro-life side would push their morals on everyone, regardless of opinion and circumstance.

feargale

A question for all of you:

Up to what stage of pregnancy would you say abortion should be legal?

feargale wrote: »

A question for all of you:

Up to what stage of pregnancy would you say abortion should be legal?

Given the choice I'd play safe and have it 0-10 or maybe 0-12 weeks

Discodog

Decent Skin wrote: »

It's born at that stage, so it falls into the same category as the mother who was forced to carry it.

An ill or fatally deformed fetus may be suffering for months. Why don't the Pro Life lobby care about this ?

feargale wrote: »

A question for all of you:

Up to what stage of pregnancy would you say abortion should be legal?

Independent fetal viability, whatever a general medical standard for such would be determined at.

A Little Pony

Im an Atheist and hate the concept of abortion. Morally wrong.

Murder affects others.

There is no "unborn child", as in any other discussion a "child" comes after being a baby, which comes after being a foetus.

You'd never hear someone saying "unborn adult" for some reason, because it doesn't sound as emotive.

And there are a few stages before that foetus too.

Anyway - this is miles off-topic.

Cancelling a date could affect an unborn child; because it doesn't exist either and won't.

How can you affect something that doesn't exist and won't ?

To go back to the point of the thread, do you think women who have abortions should be punished?

Decent Skin wrote: »

PucaMama wrote: »

There will never be a reasonable debate on here about abortion because it's always so heavily slanted towards pro choice and no mod will pull people up on the petty digs thrown at the pro life side. It started in the opening post. This thread will turn into a thread for pro choicers to pat each other on the back

And no comment from you on the vile posts which stated that we were in favour of women getting raped ?

Heavily slanted and always petty digs thrown at the pro side; indeed; although you might be right, as that was far from "petty".

if you think this forum is not heavily slanted (or heavily in favour of) pro abortion then you are very wrong

PucaMama wrote: »

if you think this forum is not heavily slanted (or heavily in favour of) pro abortion then you are very wrong

So?

eviltwin wrote: »

PucaMama wrote: »

if you think this forum is not heavily slanted (or heavily in favour of) pro abortion then you are very wrong

So?

And what impact does that have on people looking for discussion? The place is full of people echoing the same stuff back at each other

martingriff

Decent Skin wrote: »

As long as it's a reasoned discussion without the extremists from both sides getting to hog it, it's long overdue!

Good opening question btw.

Personally I'd guess they're partially covered given their reliance on the "thou shalt not kill", therefore ruling out capital punishment, but given that - how do they want them dealt with ? Jailed for the 7 years that passes for "life" in this country ?

Unfortunately the message you quoted is highly inflammatory as if it is a conspiracy from a certain organisation and if you are not part of it you must be for it. As you so conform to as the "thou shall not kill" comment.

As for the question I am sure they will go with what the country decides as that democracy

Widdershins

Decent Skin wrote: »

Some support their stance by claiming that women are born liars and cannot be trusted to not claim suicidation.

So lying re being unfit should be no bother to all those untrustworthy females, right ?

* Emphasis : not my view!

Sounds like that might be the mentality.

martingriff

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Because their arguments and beliefs ultimately stem from religious faith.

Not sure if you are been sarcastic or not but I know non religous people that are pro life

PucaMama wrote: »

And what impact does that have on people looking for discussion? The place is full of people echoing the same stuff back at each other

Boards has always been very liberal on this issue. What do you expect? Do you want people to lie about their opinion? There are other abortion threads in the religion forums, you'll find plenty of conservative voices there who share your views.

martingriff wrote: »

Arcade_Tryer wrote: »

Because their arguments and beliefs ultimately stem from religious faith.

Not sure if you are been sarcastic or not but I know non religous people that are pro life

I'm not a particularly religious person, my lifestyle wouldn't fit with a lot of religious rules, my stance on abortion is completely my own

eviltwin wrote: »

PucaMama wrote: »

And what impact does that have on people looking for discussion? The place is full of people echoing the same stuff back at each other

Boards has always been very liberal on this issue. What do you expect? Do you want people to lie about their opinion? There are other abortion threads in the religion forums, you'll find plenty of conservative voices there who share your views.

What do I expect from a thread when posters say they want reasoned debate on it? I expect the insults to be left out and the high and mighty "I'm such a liberal" attitude of pro choicers to be left at the door.

PucaMama wrote: »

And what impact does that have on people looking for discussion? The place is full of people echoing the same stuff back at each other

Again, what level of discussion can a pro life supporter put forth? It's an all or nothing position.

You're pro life. Your posts will consist of stating that fact and your moral opposition to the termination of a fetus. How much debate can be generated from that?

martingriff wrote: »

Unfortunately the message you quoted is highly inflammatory as if it is a conspiracy from a certain organisation and if you are not part of it you must be for it. As you so conform to as the "thou shall not kill" comment.

Have to say that the last line has me lost.

As for the question I am sure they will go with what the country decides as that democracy

In order for the country to decide there would have to be a referendum, and some don't want that.

PucaMama wrote: »

What do I expect from a thread when posters say they want reasoned debate on it? I expect the insults to be left out and the high and mighty "I'm such a liberal" attitude of pro choicers to be left at the door.

What's the point in debating at all? Are you going to change your mind?

If you allow a referendum, there will be the same controlling behaviour from the repeal side as there was from the yes side in the same sex marriage referendum. Although I voted yes I was disgusted at the no sides posters being ripped down etc and don't tell me it didn't happen because o had a family member who took part in it. All "no" opinions will be stamped down. You will not be let talk how you want.