Woman uploads abortion video - goes viral

ryan101 wrote: »

I don't understand why a women who has been raped or a child conceived as a part of rape should carry any stigma in society. They did nothing wrong, I would have thought in a modern progressive society it's high time to address this stigma, rather than kill a child, who is guilty of no crime.

Oh wow.

You really think that the big concern here is the "stigma" attached to it?

Nothing to do with the woman herself and the permanent effect on her physical and mental wellbeing?

Just seriously, wow. It's interesting (and a little bit crazy) to see how a mind like yours works.

If I got pregnant following a rape, f*cking hell, the possible stigma attached would probably be the very furthest thing in my mind, when it came to considering the option of an abortion!

Dan_Solo wrote: »

THERE IS NO CHILD.

Ah but there is.

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

The word parasite hints at something that is out to do us harm

No, it doesn't. That's just what you think it hints at. That's not what the word means at all

If someone refered to my unborn baby as a parasite I'd abort them tbh

GrayFox208 wrote: »

If someone refered to my unborn baby as a parasite I'd abort them tbh

what if they referred to it as an organism unable to survive without deriving nutrients from the mother, without the mother having a say in the matter?

ryan101 wrote: »

Why are some sections of society still promoting the mindset that people should feel this way about an innocent child that committed no crime ?

No child is responsible for the crimes of someone else.

An abortion will not make someone forget anything.

The woman is not responsible either, so it comes down to who is more important - foetus or woman? Imho, the woman.

It might not make her forget, but it will prevent her from living her life knowing that out there, a part of her and her rapist are molded and joined forever.

COYVB wrote: »

Okay. So who want's to tell Boombastic that the morning after pill, if the woman was actually impregnated prior to taking it, is technically an abortion?

My wife and I had an automatic natural abortion last year. In that her body rejected the pregnancy and triggered a miscarriage, completely without our input or knowledge until after the fact. For the religious folk out there, doesn't that make god the most prolific abortion technician in history?

no ones needs to tell boombastic thanks - you have made no great revelation to me. if you actually read posts, you might understand better, you thought you were on to something, but you're not

A question that should be asked is

if everyone knows no one form of contraception is 100% safe, what kind of an idiot would rely on one if a baby would be so detrimental to their lifestyle?

green_screen wrote: »

So, adults who don't want kids should never have sex? Hardly a realistic option.

am I writing in a foreign language or something? where do I say that?

Boombastic wrote: »

am I writing in a foreign language or something? where do I say that?

You'll find common tactic here is to pretend what a poster said and then attack that.

Boombastic wrote: »

wasn't it yourself who gave me a run down of your contraceptive use yesterday?

why do you use 2?
why do you not have sex for a week if tummy upset etc?

how many abortions did you have?
how much did it cost?
did you know who the father is? (the one from bb didn't)


define what a psychopath is

Who dragged you up with manners like that?

green_screen wrote: »

I use two because I'd rather not risk an STD. Pill for pregnancy prevention, condoms for infection prevention. The two together are still not foolproof.

I don't have sex if I have a sick stomach because my pill won't work at all.

I haven't had an abortion. If I have one, it'll cost me 550 plus flights with BPAS.

I know everyone I've had sex with, although why that's relevant is beyond me.

I never called you anyone a psychopath or even implied anyone was one, so not relevant.

My point is, no combination of contraception is foolproof. There is always a chance. So since you say relying on one contraception isn't enough for people who do not want children, why is two? Two together isn't foolproof either. Only abstinence is. w

wow you mean as someone that takes a mature responsible attitude to their sexual health, you haven't ended up in an abortion clinic? that surprises me

550 + flights for an abortion 600 for sterilisation, I was led to believe abortion was the financially sound option

statistics, do a t- test or a ztest on the figures, someone more knowledgeable of statistics might fill us in.


re the psychopath- a psychopath is able to detatch emotion from actions. It came up yesterday...and the day before, I was just wondering have I got the terminology right.

green_screen wrote: »

You think I wouldn't have already had a sterilisation if I could? No surgeon will do it because of my age.

You haven't addressed my point, though. If you say people shouldn't rely on one form of contraception, why should they rely on two when that is not foolproof either? What's the other option?

Also, I'd love a link to the clinic offering sterilisations for 600 euro, I was quoted much more than that

When we get the statistics we'll talk about why

Boombastic wrote: »

wow you mean as someone that takes a mature responsible attitude to their sexual health, you haven't ended up in an abortion clinic? that surprises me

Just ... what? Why would that surprise you? The vast vast majority of those who take a mature responsible attitude to their sexual health will never end up in an abortion clinic, yet some do, through no fault/neglect of their own. Most methods of contraception are 90-99% effective, and anyways there are only a few days of the month when conception is possible. One in four couples have trouble conceiving. Given all those odds, someone using contraception correctly is SO unlikely to ever end up needing an abortion - however the option should be there, if they're unlucky enough to need it.

Boombastic wrote: »

550 + flights for an abortion 600 for sterilisation, I was led to believe abortion was the financially sound option

Right, what about when a couple definitely want kids in the future, but just not right now? Or a single person, for that matter. Sterilisation isn't exactly an option! You reckon everyone should abstain entirely from sex "just in case" until they're ready to have a child?