Gerry T wrote: » Why does she have to rear it, if she doesn't want to she can put it up for adoption. There's a very long list of couples waiting for a baby to love and care for.
So you think the baby would prefer to be aborted than born and adopted.
The best interest of the child. There's that word again "want" the mother doesn't want to be pregnant. Well tough luck, your want is trumped by the baby's need. Luckily for women, equality rights movements have secured great protections for working women. They can exit the workplace and have a baby, taking months out, full in the secure knowledge that their job is waiting for them. This should rule out many a reason given for abortion.
Its relevant if you expand on your point,it becomes a question as to when is a baby not a baby. As far as I'm concerned, its a baby straight after conception, and that will continue to develop for 18yrs (+/- some years) before it becomes an adult. What has survival outside the womb got to do with it, silly argument. It can't survive alone outside the womb after a natural birth either. It doesn't change the fact that given a couple of months the baby will develop and remain a baby. At leat be honest and call it what it is, termination of a babys life.
fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: » I would advise you to listen to me, as time is short.
fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: » I'm afraid that the time has come.
Gerry T wrote: » When your pregnant your a guardian for another person, that responsibility carries a duty of care. If you want to "rename" that person as a lump of meat, fine, if that's how you reason putting the mothers wants above another persons needs fine. It doesn't change the face your arguing for a want above a need.
Gerry T wrote: » It was an example, and the childs needs are more important that the mothers wants. I do think if it came to endangering the mothers health, physically or mentally then that is a need and would in my opinion take priority over the babys.
WhiteRoses wrote: » Actually domestic adoption in this country is pretty much non existent, what we actually have is long term foster care. You can only adopt in Ireland after long term fostering, and unfortunately the care system is such a mess that by the time the child has been fostered long enough, the majority of children have social, emotional and behavioral issues and become very hard to place. Nobody wants to adopt them then. That’s why you’ll find the majority of parents looking to adopt do so internationally.
WhiteRoses wrote: » I believe the opinion/wants/needs of a living, breathing woman are far superior to that of a clump of cells that has potential to be human. I don’t feel forcing motherhood on someone is fair on the woman or the child.
WhiteRoses wrote: » What about women who don’t have a job? Or women who are experiencing domestic violence? Or women who can’t cope or afford any more children? I agree equality rights have improved in recent years but that’s not the issue here. The issue is that there simply isn’t enough support from the government to justify forcing a woman to stay pregnant.
WhiteRoses wrote: » Survival outside the womb has everything to do with it.
WhiteRoses wrote: » When it can survive outside the womb, the baby can be passed into state care/social services to be cared for by foster parents. In the early stages of pregnancy, removal of the baby will result in a termination, because the baby simply cannot survive without the woman. You are entitled to believe it is a child from the moment of conception but that doesn’t mean that you are right. Develop is a key word in your reply here - it can develop into a baby.
NuMarvel wrote: » I fail to see how any of this supports your argument that the father's wants should be a factor in a woman's decision. In fact, I notice you've completely cut the father out of the picture in your comments above. I think you need planning permission to move the goalposts that far.
Gerry T wrote: » I haven't moved the goal post, if a woman needs an abortion because of risk to her life (physical or mental), then yes that in my book is a priority. But if a woman only wants an abortion and the father wants the child then she should be compelled to carry it and let the father have sole custody.
Delirium wrote: » just to be clear, you want to outlaw sex outside of marriage to avoid the requirement for abortion?
WhiteRoses wrote: » So you are in favour of taking away free will from grown adults?
eviltwin wrote: » Cause no married couples ever have abortions
NaFirinne wrote: » To cut down the amount of unwanted babies yes. It's a start.
NuMarvel wrote: » In 2016, 49% of the Irish women who had abortions in Britain were married or in a civil partnership. So any kind of suggestion that making people marry would eliminate or reduce the incidence of abortion is completely unrealistic. (Aside from the fact that suggesting we should make people marry for any reason is itself preposterous.)
NaFirinne wrote: » How many of those people abstained from sex until married or in that partnership?
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » How would you go about implementing and enforcing this ridiculous law?
wrote: Originally Posted by WhiteRoses I believe the opinion/wants/needs of a living, breathing woman are far superior to that of a clump of cells that has potential to be human. I don’t feel forcing motherhood on someone is fair on the woman or the child.
J C wrote: » Can we please talk about reality ... a 12 week old unborn child is unmistakably Human ... complete with functioning Brain, Heart, blood circulation system, arms, legs ... the works!!! Its just a tiny tiny fully formed baby ... and all it needs to do is to grow ... exactly like all a newborn baby need to do is to grow.
NaFirinne wrote: » How is any part of the constitution enforced? The amounts of deaths happening in the world is almost doubled by abortion. Wars , famine, disease, old age all kill less then abortion does. The world would benefit with more christian focused people in the world who follow the ways that Christ has thought us. The amount of abortions in the world is a disgrace. This whole do anything you like as long as it doesn't hurt others is destroying society's. Abortion is murder to a Christian - Asking a christian do you support abortion is asking them to support murder. A Christian cannot support murder.
J C wrote: » Can we please talk about reality ... a 12 week old unborn child is unmistakably Human ... complete with functioning Brain, Heart, blood circulation system, arms, legs ... the works!!! Its just a tiny tiny fully formed baby ... and all it needs to do is to grow ... exactly like all a newborn baby need to do is to grow.It is no more a 'clump of cells' than you or I are a 'clump of cells'.https://www.babycenter.com/fetal-development-week-by-week
WhiteRoses wrote: » You clearly persist in posting that cartoon in an effort to emotionally blackmail me into feeling guilt for my position. It won’t work. I am not pro abortion, I am pro women having bodily autonomy and control over their lives. If the result is abortion then so be it. I care about living women more than potential humans.
WhiteRoses wrote: » Are you suggesting we punish women who have sex for pleasure outside of marriage? And punish those who get caught or get pregnant? Because we actually used to do that for many years. They were called the Magdalene laundries and they actually destroyed more families than we’ll ever be able to comprehend. Taking people’s civil liberties from them and going back to this prehistoric notion that people can only have sex while married would be a huge mistake. I’d like to think as a society we’ve moved on a long way since those types of attitude were socially acceptable.
NuMarvel wrote: » We don't enforce our current abortion laws. We haven't prosecuted anyone for an illegal abortion since the 60s or 70s. And even though the penalty has been reduced, there's no political or public appetite to bring another prosecution. We even went so far as to change our constitution to make sure we couldn't prosecute anyone who travelled. So presumably, you'd want us to enforce your suggestion in the same way.
WhiteRoses wrote: » Survival outside the womb has everything to do with it. When it can survive outside the womb, the baby can be passed into state care/social services to be cared for by foster parents. In the early stages of pregnancy, removal of the baby will result in a termination, because the baby simply cannot survive without the woman. You are entitled to believe it is a child from the moment of conception but that doesn’t mean that you are right. Develop is a key word in your reply here - it can develop into a baby.
NuMarvel wrote: » It's like you read the Handmaid's Tale and thought "This is a good idea" :rolleyes:
WhiteRoses wrote: » You clearly persist in posting that cartoon in an effort to emotionally blackmail me into feeling guilt for my position.
WhiteRoses wrote: » It won’t work. I am not pro abortion, I am pro women having bodily autonomy and control over their lives. If the result is abortion then so be it. I care about living women more than potential humans.
Gerry T wrote: » Have you a point to make or are you just throwing sarcastic comments about
NaFirinne wrote: » Have a listen to this very Interesting interviewhttp://www.spiritradio.ie/louises-story/
