2wsxcde3 wrote: » The simpler you can keep life the better. But we live in a culture that is hell bent on making life as complicated for people as possible.
WhiteRoses wrote: Once again, why the obsession with other people’s bedroom activities?!? Sex is to be enjoyed. It’s a very important part about of any healthy relationship. Why are you trying to control what kind of sex other people have? Why do you care?
2wsxcde3 wrote: » Women travelling to the UK for abortions in a way are victims as much as anything else of the media and leftist pushing people into having sex. Young people nowadays feel like there is something wrong with them if they are not having sex. They then have sex and of course things go wrong and they end up pregnant. We've gone from one extreme (with no sex allowed) to the other extreme (you're weird unless you're having lots of sex). The older you get, the better and better an idea only having sex inside marriage seems. No STIs, no cancer causing HPV, no unwanted pregnancies, no timewasters (of men who are only after one thing) ...and you know the person you're dating is genuine as they are willing to wait till marriage.
2wsxcde3 wrote: No. I'm just saying it is a good idea. It keeps life simple.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » For simple people maybe
2wsxcde3 wrote: » No. I'm just saying it is a good idea. It keeps life simple.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Ha ha ha!!! Are you serious? Do you think older people (30's/40's/50's) dont have sex fir fun/pleasure and wait for marriage?
2wsxcde3 wrote: » Women travelling to the UK for abortions in a way are victims as much as anything else of the media and leftist pushing people into having sex. Young people nowadays feel like there is something wrong with them if they are not having sex. They then have sex and of course things go wrong and they end up pregnant. We've gone from one extreme (with no sex allowed) to the other extreme (you're weird unless you're having lots of sex).The older you get, the better and better an idea only having sex inside marriage seems. No STIs, no cancer causing HPV, no unwanted pregnancies, no timewasters (of men who are only after one thing) ...and you know the person you're dating is genuine as they are willing to wait till marriage.
Andrew Beef wrote: » 20% of pregnancies in the UK end in abortion; are they all rape and incest cases?! That’s abortion as a form of contraception.
Andrew Beef wrote: The Rape Committee solutions stands; my only ancillary observation is that looking at the maths of it, only circa 14 babies are born as a result of rape each year so that’s the scale of the issue. On that basis, there’s no way that 14 cases should be the trojan horse for abortion on demand.
Andrew Beef wrote: » One of the most shocking stats is that 1 in 5 pregnancies in the UK ends in abortion; do we really want a society like that where abortion is a method of contraception?
Andrew Beef wrote: » That’s semantics; it can be used as a form of retrospective contraception.
Andrew Beef wrote: » bubblypop wrote: » Andrew Beef wrote: » The Rape Committee solutions stands; my only ancillary observation is that looking at the maths of it, only circa 14 babies are born as a result of rape each year so that’s the scale of the issue. On that basis, there’s no way that 14 cases should be the trojan horse for abortion on demand. One of the most shocking stats is that 1 in 5 pregnancies in the UK ends in abortion; do we really want a society like that where abortion is a method of contraception? Your rape committe idea of putting women on trial so they could get an abortion is disgusting. You still haven't answered the question why a pregnancy from rape has less of a right to life than any other pregnancy? And where does it say that abortion in England is used as contraception? Any idea how many Irish pregnancies end in abortion? You do know what contraception is right? By definition, abortion cannot be a contraceptive. 20% of pregnancies in the UK end in abortion; are they all rape and incest cases?! That’s abortion as a form of contraception.
bubblypop wrote: » Andrew Beef wrote: » The Rape Committee solutions stands; my only ancillary observation is that looking at the maths of it, only circa 14 babies are born as a result of rape each year so that’s the scale of the issue. On that basis, there’s no way that 14 cases should be the trojan horse for abortion on demand. One of the most shocking stats is that 1 in 5 pregnancies in the UK ends in abortion; do we really want a society like that where abortion is a method of contraception? Your rape committe idea of putting women on trial so they could get an abortion is disgusting. You still haven't answered the question why a pregnancy from rape has less of a right to life than any other pregnancy? And where does it say that abortion in England is used as contraception? Any idea how many Irish pregnancies end in abortion? You do know what contraception is right? By definition, abortion cannot be a contraceptive.
Andrew Beef wrote: » The Rape Committee solutions stands; my only ancillary observation is that looking at the maths of it, only circa 14 babies are born as a result of rape each year so that’s the scale of the issue. On that basis, there’s no way that 14 cases should be the trojan horse for abortion on demand. One of the most shocking stats is that 1 in 5 pregnancies in the UK ends in abortion; do we really want a society like that where abortion is a method of contraception?
JDD wrote: » I call troll. Or, a pro-choice poster taking just enough of an offensive pro-life view so as to swing undecideds lurking on the thread. I don’t agree with your tactics mate.
Andrew Beef wrote: » There’s a saying that hard cases make bad law; never has that been truer than in relation to abortion. The outliers (e.g. rape and incest) cannot dominate the agenda. And there will be stories (like that woman burying the foetus in her garden) that will melt hearts and make us throw logic out the window.
drkpower wrote: » January wrote: » I'm not demeaning anyones experience. She could not have identified an embryo on a pad at that stage of gestation. As Neyite said its the size of a sesame seed. This person was obviously devastated by what happened to her but there's no way she knew what she was burying was an embryo but if it brought her some peace to think that she was burying her miscarried baby then she should be left to do what she felt she needed to do. She may have had an early pregnancy scan, so wouldn't have needed to have identified anything visually. The story posted came from a thread about pregnancy loss in IVF when people know - very very early - when they are pregnant, and - surprise surprise - can be devastated with such losses. You don't need to see humanoid features to suffer such loss. You have rightly decried people for judging you and your choices. You shouldn't be so quick to judge the experiences of others.
January wrote: » I'm not demeaning anyones experience. She could not have identified an embryo on a pad at that stage of gestation. As Neyite said its the size of a sesame seed. This person was obviously devastated by what happened to her but there's no way she knew what she was burying was an embryo but if it brought her some peace to think that she was burying her miscarried baby then she should be left to do what she felt she needed to do.
Andrew Beef wrote: » No we shouldn’t, because the life of the unborn takes precedence over the whim of a woman, unless there is a medical issue or she has been raped. Rape cannot be proven within the relevant timescale, hence my Rape Committee solution.
....... wrote: » This post has been deleted.
WhiteRoses wrote: » Andrew Beef wrote: » It’s designed to protect the unborn child and deal with the time-lag between conception in a rape scenario and the actual rape trial. And add further stress and suffering to the already traumatized woman carrying that unborn child. Or.... here’s a mad idea... We could take all women at their word, not make them prove themselves to a panel of strangers and trust them to make the best decision for themselves by offering unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks??????
Andrew Beef wrote: » It’s designed to protect the unborn child and deal with the time-lag between conception in a rape scenario and the actual rape trial.
WhiteRoses wrote: » Andrew Beef wrote: » The Rape Committee solutions stands; my only ancillary observation is that looking at the maths of it, only circa 14 babies are born as a result of rape each year so that’s the scale of the issue. On that basis, there’s no way that 14 cases should be the trojan horse for abortion on demand. One of the most shocking stats is that 1 in 5 pregnancies in the UK ends in abortion; do we really want a society like that where abortion is a method of contraception? Your rape committee is up there as one of the worst ideas to manage abortion I’ve heard to date. Absolutely appalling idea, it doesn’t have the best interests of women at heart at all and would do nothing but add further distress and suffering at an already extremely vulnerable time.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dcc54fc0153c491ede3e66aef098573d.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6b0748b4741870baaad828fe92174b3c.svg)
