Should pubs ,shops be allowed to sell drink to pregnant women?

Reku · 06-02-2008 02:27PM

EamonnKeane wrote: »

I really doubt that; spermatozoa are very simple cells.

No more so than egg cells, each is a single cell with only 23 chromosomes, in fact sperm are probably more complicated due to the tail and how it has to function. Faulty sperm is one of the common reasons for problems when a couple tries to concieve.

And since you didn't bother to read beyond the first page of this thread I will repeat myself:
Enter:

effect of man's age on genetic disorders in children

into google and you'll see just how many diseases in children are linked to increased age of the paternal DNA donor (the father).

Sam Vimes · 06-02-2008 02:33PM

djpbarry wrote: »

Well, I never argued that, but seeing as you've mentioned it, if a woman has an abortion, she has clearly shown that she has no intention of having the child, for whatever reason.

In the case of a pregnant woman who, say, drinks a bottle of wine a day, in the knowledge that she is pregnant, her intention is to have the baby, yet she is knowingly endangering her baby's health, possibly fatally, and in all likelihood, causing far more suffering. In my opinion, such a person is not fit to be a mother. Bear in mind that there comes a point during the pregnancy when the baby has developed into far more than just a clump of cells.

The difference is the intent. If you intend to have a child then you should do your utmost to ensure that the child is healthy and certainly not knowingly put the childs heath at risk.

so its not ok to hurt the baby if you intend to keep it but its fine if you're trying to kill it. Fair enough so. If i'm ever in court for beating the crap out of a child i must tell the judge that i was trying to kill him and all will be forgiven

and at what point does it stop being a clump of cells that she can do what she wants with? When it grows a head? When the arms form? When it kicks? When its born? When it learns to read? On its first day of school? When it graduates from college? At what point does it become a complete person?

Virgil° · 06-02-2008 02:36PM

Commander Vimes wrote: »

so its not ok to hurt the baby if you intend to keep it but its fine if you're trying to kill it. Fair enough so. If i'm ever in court for beating the crap out of a child i must tell the judge that i was trying to kill him and all will be forgiven

Well now your taking for granted that abortion is the same as murdering a fully grown child. Which is fine if your arguing against pro-choice, but alas thats not the topic at hand.

Sam Vimes · 06-02-2008 02:44PM

Virgil° wrote: »

Well now your taking for granted that abortion is the same as murdering a fully grown child. Which is fine if your arguing against pro-choice, but alas thats not the topic at hand.

well we're talking about denying women the choice to harm something while on the other hand supporting her right to kill it if she so chooses. Seems contradictory to me

Virgil° · 06-02-2008 02:49PM

Commander Vimes wrote: »

well we're talking about denying women the choice to harm something while on the other hand supporting her right to kill it if she so chooses. Seems contradictory to me

Well ive not read the entire thread line for line but so far ive not seen any sentiments supporting that its fine to abort or if so at which stage it is fine.You were the one who brought that up.

Sam Vimes · 06-02-2008 02:51PM

here's a thought: what if you came across a pregnant woman in a pub downing shot after shot. You ask her what she's doing and she says "i don't want my baby so i'm trying to kill it". Would you buy her a few shots to support her right to choose?

Sam Vimes · 06-02-2008 02:54PM

Virgil° wrote: »

Well ive not read the entire thread line for line but so far ive not seen any sentiments supporting that its fine to abort or if so at which stage it is fine.You were the one who brought that up.

i brought it up because i consider the two views contradictory and now people are disagreeing with me

djpbarry · 06-02-2008 02:56PM

Commander Vimes wrote: »

so its not ok to hurt the baby if you intend to keep it but its fine if you're trying to kill it.

Key word there. Prior to about 16 weeks old, the nervous system of a human foetus has not developed sufficiently for the foetus to experience pain.

Commander Vimes wrote: »

and at what point does it stop being a clump of cells that she can do what she wants with?

See above. The development of the nervous system is regarded as a crucial factor in determining the legal cut-off age for abortions.

Anyway, this is all way off-topic and I'm not discussing it any further in this thread.

Virgil° · 06-02-2008 02:57PM

Commander Vimes wrote: »

here's a thought: what if you came across a pregnant woman in a pub downing shot after shot. You ask her what she's doing and she says "i don't want my baby so i'm trying to kill it". Would you buy her a few shots to support her right to choose?

Again you're encroaching on the subject of whether or not its ok to abort, just in a different way,ie drinking yourself to bits instead of an abortion clinic.

Whats being discussed here is mothers who WANT to have their babies but refuse to stop drinking either because they dont know the dangers or just dont care enough to stop. Should they be sold alcohol?

djpbarry · 06-02-2008 02:59PM

To be honest, if I was working behind a bar, I would have serious reservations about selling alcohol to a pregnant woman if I thought she was drinking it herself.

Virgil° · 06-02-2008 03:08PM

Mmmm i made the mistake once of suggesting to a pregnant friend that she consider stop smoking 6 joints a day while pregnant. She bit my head off something fierce and i ended up just realising it wasnt my place to interfere.
Every time i see her light up all i can do is bite my tounge and hope for the kids sake that she doesnt reap what she sows.

Sam Vimes · 06-02-2008 03:43PM

djpbarry wrote: »

Key word there. Prior to about 16 weeks old, the nervous system of a human foetus has not developed sufficiently for the foetus to experience pain.

i'm not talking about causing pain, i'm talking about causing harm

Virgil° wrote: »

Should they be sold alcohol?

no. When a woman is pregnant she's responsible for another human life and she shouldn't be allowed to harm it whether she does it down the pub or in a clinic

Orlee · 06-02-2008 03:47PM

Imagine refusing to serve someone on the grounds that she was pregnant only to realise that the look on her faces means that she is most certinly not preggers

It's a good idea in theory but I don't think it would work in practice

Virgil° · 06-02-2008 03:57PM

Commander Vimes wrote: »

no. When a woman is pregnant she's responsible for another human life and she shouldn't be allowed to harm it whether she does it down the pub or in a clinic

Again with the abortion thing, it isnt on topic.Its directly ending the process on purpose in full knowledge of what will happen. Whether thats right or wrong isnt the debate atm.

With respect to causing harm, some might argue that its not ok for a woman to be served drink while pregnant.
Tommorow medical research might show that certain types of cheese are bad, and again some might disagree with said cheese being sold to a woman with child.
Going out for a walk could result in the woman being injured and the baby being killed. Its an extreme example admittedly but where does the cycle end?

djpbarry · 06-02-2008 04:15PM

Orlee wrote: »

Imagine refusing to serve someone on the grounds that she was pregnant only to realise that the look on her faces means that she most certinly not preggers

That alone is worth such a law being put in place!

faceman · 06-02-2008 05:18PM

Orlee wrote: »

Imagine refusing to serve someone on the grounds that she was pregnant only to realise that the look on her faces means that she is most certinly not preggers

It's a good idea in theory but I don't think it would work in practice

the same was said about the enforcement of the smoking ban

Terry · 06-02-2008 05:31PM

Commander Vimes wrote: »

well we're talking about denying women the choice to harm something while on the other hand supporting her right to kill it if she so chooses. Seems contradictory to me

No. We're talking about refusing women the right to drink alcohol. Nothing else.

Take your anti-abortion rant to Humanities. It doesn't belong here.

Also, take note: You are not unbannable.

jam_mac_jam · 06-02-2008 05:41PM

I went to nine months and only put on half a stone, when I was wearing loose clothes I looked plump not pregnant as I was very small, I could have been drinking my head off and it would have been very hard to tell I was pregnant so this is a stupid suggestion. The other thing is most damage from drink is done in the first three months when you cant tell if somebody is pregnant. The people who drink a lot when they are pregnant will find other ways to drink, the person who is having an odd glass of wine or who is buying drink with their shopping (which may not even be for them)will be the ones who are inconvienienced by this. People are adults and there must be some limit.

Are you going to refuse to servie a pregnant woman shell fish or soft cheese as well, which are both also advised against eating.

Hydroquinone · 06-02-2008 06:44PM

faceman wrote: »

the same was said about the enforcement of the smoking ban

The smoking ban is complied with because you can look at a person and instantly see, with 100% accuracy whether or not they are smoking.
You cannot instantly see if any woman you clap eyes on who is drinking or smoking is pregnant.

Sam Vimes · 06-02-2008 07:03PM

Terry wrote: »

No. We're talking about refusing women the right to drink alcohol. Nothing else.

Take your anti-abortion rant to Humanities. It doesn't belong here.

Also, take note: You are not unbannable.

fair enough so. My answer to the question is yes but such a law could unfortunately never be enforced unless pubs were supplied with pregnancy tests to be used on all customers prior to purchase

Poxyshamrock · 06-02-2008 08:27PM

They could pretend they're just fat!

and what if they have a small bump?

Nevyn · 06-02-2008 08:36PM

Commander Vimes wrote: »

i find it interesting that the american government will allow women to go to a doctor to have their babies sucked out with a hoover and thrown away with the medical waste but they won't allow them to have a few pints, lest they harm the baby

I find it intresting that the pro lifers in america are all for the unborn but don't care when the child is born as there is no child care, welfare or preschool or medicare for kids.

06-02-2008 10:52PM

Why not ban people from passing remarks at pregnant women?

One friend of mine who's pregnant now is heartily sick of randomers
a) telling her she shouldn't be eating that
b) coming up and touching her bump (WTF is that about? Why do people think it's OK to touch someone without asking? She's thought about grabbing a bloke's genitals in response to see how he reacts)
c) telling her how HUGE she is (er, she knows. She has mirrors in the house and isn't exactly feeling superfine at the moment)

She's enjoying pregnancy but not being public property for arseholes who give their unasked-for opinions.

TequilaMockingBird · 06-02-2008 11:11PM

I can remember standing outside the Maternity hospital, after about 8 hours of labour (I had another 8 to go) with all the other labouring women who smoked, and if someone had offered me a slug of vodka I and they, would have gladly grabbed it and sunk it.

Bring on the fire...

RosieJoe · 07-02-2008 10:47AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Why not ban people from passing remarks at pregnant women?

One friend of mine who's pregnant now is heartily sick of randomers
a) telling her she shouldn't be eating that
b) coming up and touching her bump (WTF is that about? Why do people think it's OK to touch someone without asking? She's thought about grabbing a bloke's genitals in response to see how he reacts)
c) telling her how HUGE she is (er, she knows. She has mirrors in the house and isn't exactly feeling superfine at the moment)

She's enjoying pregnancy but not being public property for arseholes who give their unasked-for opinions.

Funny because it is true!

I wouldn't want to ban people from passing remarks. I would be more in favour allowing the Mum to be to resort to violence without fear of being done for it:D

Then again, what if a barman passed remark on her condition and refused her drink? Feck, back to square one!

Cathmandooo · 07-02-2008 11:17AM

sueme wrote: »

I can remember standing outside the Maternity hospital, after about 8 hours of labour (I had another 8 to go) with all the other labouring women who smoked, and if someone had offered me a slug of vodka I and they, would have gladly grabbed it and sunk it.

Bring on the fire...

I can well imagine that! I havent given birth but stress in work gives me the urge to sink a vodka...I'm sure being in labour would up that urge a million fold! It's better for both mother and baby if the mother is a bit more relaxed.

Despite the risks and warnings its the mothers choice whether she drinks or not during pregnancy, personally I don't approve of it but you can't possibly enforce it. I'm no expert but is it the start of pregnancy that's the most important for a woman not to drink? She wouldn't even be showing then, so it's all down to her own choices.

syklops · 07-02-2008 11:59AM

rb_ie wrote: »

Yes, it should be illegal to serve them alcohol or cigarettes. It may turn things into somewhat of a nanny state, as mentioned above, but there are far, far, far too many retards in this country who'll ignore the facts and still have the odd drink or cigarette due to their own f*cking selfishness.

Either that or we should make it entirely legal to go around slapping or spitting on pregnant womens faces should we see them drinking or smoking. Whichever suits really.

I have a better idea then. Surely these people due to their own selfishness should not have children at all. So what we do, is we make all men sterile at birth. Then when a man and a woman are in a stable financial position, with their own house, and they dont smoke or drink, and have no history of mental health or cancer in their family history, they apply to the government for a child license. The man then gets treatment to unsterilise him, and they try for a baby. If after 6 months they have not conceived, they get a 3 month extension, and after the extension, thats it. There must be something wrong with him, which could harm the future child, so the license is rejected.

Anything we can do to prevent this nation turning into a nanny state like the US is and Britain is becoming, we should do it. Otherwise 1984 will be around the corner.

ztoical · 07-02-2008 12:59PM

There loads of things your not meant to do while pregnant are we going to start cracking down on all of them?

People who have a history of mental illness, genetic conditions, addiction etc in their families, should we just stop them from breeding altogether? Cus thats were a law like this leads. Genetic testing for all and anyone carrying a gene which may lead to illness with the baby should be banned from every having children cus after all they would knowingly putting the child in danger.

Also women do more damage passing infection via breast milk to their child then in the womb so we should be stopping new mums from drinking/smoking/eating certain foods or should we assume they will keep doing so just ban breast feeding?

Bring on mass sterilization that will sort the issue out - only the people the nanny state approves shall be allowed to breed.

Sam Vimes · 07-02-2008 01:28PM

Thaedydal wrote: »

I find it intresting that the pro lifers in america are all for the unborn but don't care when the child is born as there is no child care, welfare or preschool or medicare for kids.

what an odd statement to make. Firstly the us government has legalised abortion so its a pro choice government that aren't providing these things, not pro lifers as you claimed. And secondly, just because you don't want someone to die doesn't mean you have to provide them with free schooling and health care

@the mods, i don't mean to bring it up again. Just pointing out the holes in the statement

djpbarry · 07-02-2008 01:55PM

ztoical wrote: »

Also women do more damage passing infection via breast milk to their child then in the womb so we should be stopping new mums from drinking/smoking/eating certain foods or should we assume they will keep doing so just ban breast feeding?

I would have thought it was common knowledge that women should not drink while breastfeeding?

Should pubs ,shops be allowed to sell drink to pregnant women?

Comments