nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Abortion

LilyCricket

Should it be available here?

Regardless of circumstance?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

LorraineMcFly

Seachmall wrote: »

Pro-life is a term used to imply the opponent is Anti-life. This is called political framing.

Pro-choice is a term used to imply the opponent is Anti-choice. This is relatively sincere.

The terms i prefer to use are the realistic ones
anti abortion
pro abortion

smash

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

no its pro abortion, pro choice is a diluted word used to make you feel better about the abortion.

I know someone who had an abortion a few months ago. She has 2 children and her marriage was on the rocks and she didn't want to bring another child into the world with him as the father. They've since broken up and he doesn't contribute a thing. She works her ass off to pay for her house and her kids and is left with nothing for herself. I think it was definitely the right decision for her to make. Do you?

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

The terms i prefer to use are the realistic ones
anti abortion
pro abortion

Not realistic at all.

Seachmall

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

The terms i prefer to use are the realistic ones
anti abortion
pro abortion

Pro-abortion would suggest that whoever is in favour of abortion.

Which is stupid.

prinz

Seachmall wrote: »

Pro-abortion would suggest that whoever is in favour of abortion.Which is stupid.

Are people pro-death penalty, or are they pro-choice in that the courts should have the choice to impose the death penalty or not?

nozzferrahhtoo

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

The terms i prefer to use are the realistic ones
anti abortion
pro abortion

But it is not realistic. The "pro" in your use of the term indicates that the target of the term actually actively wants people to have abortions. This is actually the exact opposite of most of the pro choice side.

For example if you have a heart defect I would like you to have the choice for a bypass operation. Clearly however it would be better if you did not require such a thing and any ways to avoid it would be best. So calling me a "Pro Bypass" person would be false. I certainly want the procedure to be an option for you but I never want you to actually have to take it.

Similarly while I currently argue that the choice of abortion should be there, I am also "anti abortion" in that I would want to do everything to ensure people would not require that choice. Better sex education, VAT free status on contraception, less promiscuity in our society and much more.

The "pro abortion" term is designed to make it look like people actually want abortions, even on some sites to the point of suggesting they want to force them unasked for on some women. This is not so and it really just is a political move to paint the pro choice side in a false light because their ACTUAL position... that of wanting the choice but wanting to ensure people never have to make it... is relatively too rosy for their liking.

LorraineMcFly

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Yes. Surviving and feeling pain are not synonymous. At all. Just because using modern technology we can help the fetus to survive from every earlier times outside the womb this does not allow us to make any leaps to suggesting they experiencing anything in the way of pain at that stage.

As I said it is just clever word play by the propaganda that you have been reading. They never actually say in your links that the fetus feels pain. They just list things that are present (so what) and "functioning" (but not to what degree). It is what they do not say, rather than what they do, that shows just how dishonest the selective text actually is. You are being played by people who know the science better than you do and are systematically wording that science to garner maximum effect from you emotionally.

It is indeed a grey area as to when exactly the ability to experience pain DOES start. What is less of a grey area is defining times when the ability is not there. What you are doing is what I would call overextending the doubt. As I see it at 9 to 12 weeks... which is the time period you indicated in the posts I replied to... there simply is no risk of note at all.

There is simply no reason on offer to my knowledge to think there is ANY chance that a fetus at that age feels pain. None. Throwing out phrases like "risk" and "grey area" and "doubt" does not magically mean there is any such thing at that age.

I am more than willing to entertain good arguments against abortion if they are made, but when false facts are invented... clever wording used to make something sound other than how it is... or arguments from doubt and emotion are made... or using terms like "pro abortion" to make it look like people actually want abortions rather than just want people to have the choice.... these just fail to wash with me. Plus they show just how weak the anti side must actually be to have to resort to that.

I had a miscarriage 3 years ago at 12-13 weeks. the pain that ripped through my womb was immense. I was doubled over in pain for close to a week. Eventually after alot of bleeding and pain I passed my baby which did not resemble a chunk of cells. You could make out the eyes and the shape of his/her head and arms. I truly believe when that baby died inside me that we both felt the pain. im actually crying now a bit remembering it. No medical opinion will convince me otherwise. Instinct goes along way and i know we both felt it. No man will ever know what it is to carry a baby and feel it growing and moving. No dismissing mens opinions because i actually believe a man has a right in the choice of abortion too and women should not have the final say. Insofar as if a man wants his child and the woman does not the man should be able to raise the child alone.

Seachmall

prinz wrote: »

Are people pro-death penalty, or are they pro-choice in that the courts should have the choice to impose the death penalty or not?

Pro-death penalty would suggest that whoever favours the death penalty above other options, which isn't necessarily the case.

So you can be pro-death penalty in some instances and anti in others. This would make you pro-choice (in that the courts should decide).

Similarly with abortion.

nozzferrahhtoo

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

I had a miscarriage 3 years ago at 12-13 weeks. the pain that ripped through my womb was immense. I was doubled over in pain for close to a week.

While you have my sympathy for losing a baby, and for going through such pain, this is a complete non sequitur. You are talking about the pain YOU felt now. Not the pain the fetus felt.

I can assure you... and I hope it goes some way to making you feel better about the experience... that there is currently no science support whatsoever to even suggest that the baby you lost felt or experienced even a modicum of displeasure... let alone actual pain... and your own maternal empathy which is leading you to think it might have is just emotional with no basis in fact whatsoever.

If you want to continue believing it anyway, despite the entire lack of any reason to think it is true whatsoever, then that is your choice and not one I can influence. But you are achieving nothing by engaging in that false faith other than torturing yourself emotionally over something that actually appears to be entirely untrue.

LorraineMcFly

smash wrote: »

I know someone who had an abortion a few months ago. She has 2 children and her marriage was on the rocks and she didn't want to bring another child into the world with him as the father. They've since broken up and he doesn't contribute a thing. She works her ass off to pay for her house and her kids and is left with nothing for herself. I think it was definitely the right decision for her to make. Do you?

Not realistic at all.

no sorry but i think she is wrong and selfish. she should have been on the injection or bar at the time of having sex with a man she didnt actually love anymore. adoption is the only option i would agree with in her case. she is a perfect example of an irresponsible person getting pregnant stupidly and then opting for abortion. also your friend should be pursuing her ex through the courts for maintenance.

[Deleted User]

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

no sorry but i think she is wrong and selfish. she should have been on the injection or bar at the time of having sex with a man she didnt actually love anymore. adoption is the only option i would agree with in her case.

The injection etc is not 100%.

Married couples cannot adopt out their kids afaik

LorraineMcFly

Seachmall wrote: »

Pro-abortion would suggest that whoever is in favour of abortion.

Which is stupid.

pro abortion suggest to me that a person agrees abortion is ok, not necessarily menaing they would have an abortion themselves. is that a wrong assumption to make?

LorraineMcFly

bluewolf wrote: »

The injection etc is not 100%.

Married couples cannot adopt out their kids afaik

sorry why cant they get kids adopted? is it because they would be ashamed? so thereforfe go the easy abortion route? plus this couple were seperating so the mother is now single mother

Seachmall

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

pro abortion suggest to me that a person agrees abortion is ok, not necessarily menaing they would have an abortion themselves. is that a wrong assumption to make?

"Pro" is a prefix that means "in favour of".

So "pro-abortion" would mean "in favour of abortion", which is wrong. In many circumstances people would favour alternatives over abortion, but would still support the mother's right to choose.

In some cases a pro-choicer may even oppose a mother's right to have an abortion. It would vary from person to person and situation to situation.

nozzferrahhtoo

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

pro abortion suggest to me that a person agrees abortion is ok, not necessarily menaing they would have an abortion themselves. is that a wrong assumption to make?

Not "wrong" exactly, just grossly misleading.

The whole point of the term "pro abortion" is to gloss over the fact that just because someone thinks a certain procedure should be an available option... this does not mean they favor that option at all.

While many people argue that abortion should be a choice available to women, I think if you actually stop and listen to such people... rather than rush to tell them what you think they think... you will find that they actually also support most of the initiatives that are aimed towards reducing unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

For some reasons however, not all of them religious, being anti abortion appears to be a little too often for my liking found hand in hand with being against contraception and sex education and the like.

Morag

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

sorry why cant they get kids adopted? is it because they would be ashamed? so thereforfe go the easy abortion route? plus this couple were seperating so the mother is now single mother

Legally in this country a married couple can not put up their child for adoption they can not terminate their parental rights.

[Deleted User]

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

sorry why cant they get kids adopted? is it because they would be ashamed? so thereforfe go the easy abortion route?

will you stop talking nonsense

I mean legally

Children Eligible for Adoption

Usually, these Adoption Orders are made with the consent of the birth mother. Under the Adoption Acts, 1952 - 1976 an adoption order can be made only in respect of a child:

who is an orphan, or
whose parents are not married to each other, or
whose parents married each other after the child's birth but whose birth has not been re-registered

prinz

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

sorry why cant they get kids adopted? is it because they would be ashamed?

Some odd quirk in Irish law which doesn't really make much sense looking at the past.

smash

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

no sorry but i think she is wrong and selfish. she should have been on the injection or bar at the time of having sex with a man she didnt actually love anymore.

She was on the pill!

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

adoption is the only option i would agree with in her case.

Why should she have to go through with it? Plus if she had gone down that route then the father could have brought her to court, plus she would have massive loss of earnings and would not have been able to afford her house or to cater for her children!

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

she is a perfect example of an irresponsible person getting pregnant stupidly and then opting for abortion.

You know nothing of her situation.

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

also your friend should be pursuing her ex through the courts for maintenance.

She's just glad he's gone.

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

sorry why cant they get kids adopted? is it because they would be ashamed? so thereforfe go the easy abortion route? plus this couple were seperating so the mother is now single mother

Father's rights, read above. and she is not a single mother. Read up a bit would you.

LorraineMcFly

bluewolf wrote: »

will you stop talking nonsense

I mean legally

Apologies i wasant aware married couples could not giove children up for adoption, seems strange as there must be plenty of deserted wives from years ago who gave babies up.

Duggy747

That Bodies exhibition from a few years back was a fascinating insight to the stages of foetal development.

They had a closed off area with foetuses at different stages, you could have a good clear visual grasp of what becomes functional at certain times (When brain activity starts, full formation of bones, nervous system, etc) with labeled jars starting from week 1 right up until third trimester.

A bit morbid, maybe, but it was highly educational, especially when comprehending a touchy subject like abortion.

LorraineMcFly

smash wrote: »

She was on the pill!

Why should she have to go through with it? Plus if she had gone down that route then the father could have brought her to court, plus she would have massive loss of earnings and would not have been able to afford her house or to cater for her children!

You know nothing of her situation.

She's just glad he's gone.

Father's rights, read above. and she is not a single mother. Read up a bit would you.

Again smash sorry i just dont feel sympathy for her. She is an adult. Its the aborted child i feel sorry for. Sorry but its just my opinion.

girl2

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/9221420/BBC-to-broadcast-programme-live-from-abortion-clinic.html

Maybe this will make for an interesting debate.

LorraineMcFly

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

Apologies i wasant aware married couples could not giove children up for adoption, seems strange as there must be plenty of deserted wives from years ago who gave babies up.

actually whether ur married or not ur asked in the maternity hospital if your keeping the child or giving it up for adoption. Its a form you fill out each time your pregnant.

prinz

girl2 wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/9221420/BBC-to-broadcast-programme-live-from-abortion-clinic.html
Maybe this will make for an interesting debate.

That's just wrong.

LorraineMcFly

prinz wrote: »

That's just wrong.

Even worse contained in the article

Abortion has been at the centre of controversy recently after a Daily Telegraph investigation found women were being granted terminations on the basis of gender

smash

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

Again smash sorry i just dont feel sympathy for her. She is an adult. Its the aborted child i feel sorry for. Sorry but its just my opinion.

So even though I said "would not have been able to afford her house or to cater for her children" you still still feel she did the wrong thing? :rolleyes:

Morag

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

Apologies i wasant aware married couples could not giove children up for adoption, seems strange as there must be plenty of deserted wives from years ago who gave babies up.

There is a big difference between putting a child in care to be fostered and giving a child up for adoption.

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

actually whether ur married or not ur asked in the maternity hospital if your keeping the child or giving it up for adoption. Its a form you fill out each time your pregnant.

Really got a link to prove that?

I have never seen or heard of such a thing, I was never asked that.

Pace2008

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

pro abortion suggest to me that a person agrees abortion is ok, not necessarily menaing they would have an abortion themselves. is that a wrong assumption to make?

Pro-abortion sounds like you are in favour of gratuitous abortions just for the sake of it. Each side has adopted its own euphemistic label, pro-choice and pro-life, and the terms are universally understood. Referring to someone's stance as "pro-abortion" or "anti-choice" is a petty act of one-upmanship.

LorraineMcFly

smash wrote: »

So even though I said "would not have been able to afford her house or to cater for her children" you still still feel she did the wrong thing? :rolleyes:

If she acted as a responsible mother and pursued her ex partner for maintenace she would be in a better situation. Being a mother leaves no place for pride if your children are going without . sorry smash but if she did the right thing she would pursue him.

hooradiation

LorraineMcFly wrote: »

If she acted as a responsible mother and pursued her ex partner for maintenace she would be in a better situation. Being a mother leaves no place for pride if your children are going without . sorry smash but if she did the right thing she would pursue him.

Well, good thing your the arbiter on what constitutes being a mother.