This is just sick...

The_Valeyard · 11-02-2015 11:08am

Pretty screwed up person there. Wonder what her views would be on families who abort because the baby will be female.

One eyed Jack · 11-02-2015 11:10am

Morag wrote: »

She is not a feminist, it sounds like she has issues and if that is the case she needs them sorted before becoming a parent.

The thing is, she can identify however she chooses, and if she considers herself a feminist, and she considers her behaviour is justified by her aim of furthering the cause of feminism, then we have to accept that. Otherwise you're just using the no true Scotsman fallacy. She is a feminist, just not your idea of feminism, but the thing is, there are plenty more people like her out there.

She has issues of course, clearly, but it's not up to us who deserves to become a parent or not, because as is already evident in this thread, we have people pointing out that if we support a woman's right to choose, then how is that any different to determining who does and doesn't deserve to become parents? That's the same argument is used by people who object to same sex parenting.

At least let's be consistent rather than suggesting that we have a right to apply our own standards to other people when it suits us, because that's no different from other people who want to apply their standards to a woman's right to choose.

Into The Blue · 11-02-2015 11:10am

There are no words .

Oryx · 11-02-2015 11:11am

Pregnancies are deliberately ended for all kinds of spurious reasons, all the time. Vanity. Inconvenience. A form of backwards contraception.

BUT. Pregnancies are also ended for very real valid reasons, by very scared women who feel they have no other choice. Unless we have stared down that decision in those circumstances who are we to judge? This woman appears an unstable fool, not typical of all who choose abortion.

And people have children all the time who don't care, don't raise them right, or indoctrinate them into their own warped view of the world. This is no more right than aborting a foetus based on its gender but it goes on everywhere. Once a child is born it seems you can mess with it however you see fit.

Morag · 11-02-2015 11:12am

Saying abortion should not be allowed due to her action is like saying, cars should not be allowed cos people crash them.
She has issues she needs professional help not to be splashed about on newsites.

The way to stop gender selection abortions is to fight sexism but it's not an easy thing to do, and in the mean time women esp in certain countries will be abused, beaten, thrown out of their home, abandoned for having a girl.
That needs to be tackled not access to abortion. Because stopping access to safe and legal abortion does not stop abortions, it means women resort to risk taking which puts their lives at risk.

floggg · 11-02-2015 11:16am

RobertKK wrote: »

Really?

Abortion is one of the areas most abused with sexism, and is causing population imbalances in places like China and India, rising incident of sex selective abortions in the UK.

Then what is the man wants to keep the baby when the woman is pregnant and she doesn't, sexism there too by pro-choice advocates who say 'its her body', yet if the man doesn't want it, he could very well still be pursued for payment when the child is born.

It is a sexism paradise for both the adults and the unborn.

I agree. If the man is willing and able to carry the foetus to term he should definitely be able to veto any termination.

Of course as long as it's the woman required to carry the foetus to term, and all the health risks, restrictions etc that go with it then he's opinion really is a distant second to hers.

jimgoose · 11-02-2015 11:21am

I don't think that young one is quite right in the head, to be perfectly straight about it.

sbsquarepants · 11-02-2015 11:21am

She sounds like a total cúnt. But what is really the difference between not wanting the child because it's a boy and not wanting it because you want to travel the world, or focus on a career, or you don't feel "ready" or any of the million other reasons people give for having abortions?
To be honest it sounds like a lot of not very well thought out outrage to me.

floggg · 11-02-2015 11:25am

conorhal wrote: »

The face of abortion that those on here with the 'champagne on ice' for day they manage to push through abortion on demand would rather nobody talked about and the papers won't publish because it would perhaps cause people to question the wisdom of their nhillistic culture of death.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Jennings_Hill

On July 29, 1994, Hill approached a Pensacola, Florida abortion clinic, the Ladies Center, with which he was familiar. When he spotted clinic doctor John Britton and his bodyguard, Lieutenant Colonel James H. Barrett, USAF (Ret.),[6] outside, he shot them both at close range with a shotgun. Both Britton and Barrett died; Barrett's wife, June, was wounded. Following the shots, Hill laid his shotgun on the ground and waited to be arrested.

The face of the "pro-life" movement that those on here with the 'champagne on ice' for day they manage to secure complete control over women's reproductive choice would rather nobody talked about and the papers won't publish because it would perhaps cause people to question the wisdom of their nhillistic culture of death.

oh look, we can pick extreme examples in order to try to discredit everybody of opposing views and paint them as amoral too

jimgoose · 11-02-2015 11:26am

sbsquarepants wrote: »

She sounds like a total cúnt. But what is really the difference between not wanting the child because it's a boy and not wanting it because you want to travel the world, or focus on a career, or you don't feel "ready" or any of the million other reasons people give for having abortions?
To be honest it sounds like a lot of not very well thought out outrage to me.

I completely agree. It's just that reading that article it struck me that she's probably not the full bob. :pac:

floggg · 11-02-2015 11:28am

Oryx wrote: »

Once a child is born it seems you can mess with it however you see fit.

It would be every interesting to see statistics on the number of "pro-life" advocates who support the death penalty.

I know in the US it would be rather high, though we can't draw any conclusions from that here.

Gael23 · 11-02-2015 11:29am

Sterilisation at birth should be the policy for the likes of her

RobertKK · 11-02-2015 11:29am

Shrap wrote: »

I completely disagree with you. See my comment about societal inequalities between the genders.

Plus, I have no particular sentimentality regarding the "unborn", but I do think it's a massive problem in China for their gender balance - all down to their cultural classing of one gender as preferable to another and of course their massive over-population problems. Not at all applicable to a country where one gender isn't seen as preferable to another, so it doesn't really count in Ireland at all.

It is a rising problem in the UK where numbers are on the rise.

Safe and legal...yet in the UK legal services seem to also provide illegal...but sure we heard with the Irish legislation for the X case from some prochoice that women wouldn't lie to obtain an abortion.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/the-lost-girls-illegal-abortion-widely-used-by-some-uk-ethnic-groups-to-avoid-daughters-has-reduced-female-population-by-between-1500-and-4700-9059790.html

The illegal abortion of female foetuses solely to ensure that families have sons is widely practised within some ethnic communities in Britain and has resulted in significant shortfalls in the proportion of girls, according to an investigation by The Independent.

The practice of sex-selective abortion is now so commonplace that it has affected the natural 50:50 balance of boys to girls within some immigrant groups and has led to the “disappearance” of between 1,400 and 4,700 females from the national census records of England and Wales, we can reveal.

sbsquarepants · 11-02-2015 11:30am

jimgoose wrote: »

I completely agree. It's just that reading that article it struck me that she's probably not the full bob. :pac:

She sounds nuts - but there's a lot of them out there!

conorhal · 11-02-2015 11:30am

floggg wrote: »

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Jennings_Hill

The face of the "pro-life" movement that those on here with the 'champagne on ice' for day they manage to secure complete control over women's reproductive choice would rather nobody talked about and the papers won't publish because it would perhaps cause people to question the wisdom of their nhillistic culture of death.
oh look, we can pick extreme examples in order to try to discredit everybody of opposing views and paint them as amoral too

strawman nonsesense. The VAST majority of people that are pro life would not applaud this. The vast majority of people that are pro choice however have no problem with abortion as a lifestyle choice and thus can have no argument with her actions.

sbsquarepants · 11-02-2015 11:31am

Gael23 wrote: »

Sterilisation at birth should be the policy for the likes of her

Indeed.
Could you maybe flesh out how that might work, I'm having a little trouble with the practicalities of it?

Caliden · 11-02-2015 11:34am

Just as well.

Imagine how messed up that kid would've been if he had been born? High chance she would've attempted to force him to be more feminine.

It's sad that there isn't some sort of test people have to pass before they can get pregnant.

charlietheminxx · 11-02-2015 11:34am

How did she get knocked up by a man if she considers them so detestable? I really hope this story is a fake.

niamh.foley · 11-02-2015 11:34am

This is Wrong not SICK

know what i find SICK is that feck Enda and Joan whip there back benchers to vote NO on abortion for Children with fatal diagnosis forcing parents and women to travel to the UK, or force them to have the baby only having to place it in a grave it total sick of this back wards country.

My mother had a child that lived 1 hour and still to the moment of her death she still cried over that baby, she would have wished she could have ended it i would image if the option was there for her.no parent should have to go through anything like That.

lertsnim · 11-02-2015 11:37am

conorhal wrote: »

The face of abortion that those on here with the 'champagne on ice' for day they manage to push through abortion on demand would rather nobody talked about and the papers won't publish because it would perhaps cause people to question the wisdom of their nhillistic culture of death.

That's todays absolute horse**** quota reached already. Nice.

Shrap · 11-02-2015 11:38am

RobertKK wrote: »

It is a rising problem in the UK where numbers are on the rise.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/the-lost-girls-illegal-abortion-widely-used-by-some-uk-ethnic-groups-to-avoid-daughters-has-reduced-female-population-by-between-1500-and-4700-9059790.html

The illegal abortion of female foetuses solely to ensure that families have sons is widely practised within some ethnic communities in Britain and has resulted in significant shortfalls in the proportion of girls, according to an investigation by The Independent.

The practice of sex-selective abortion is now so commonplace that it has affected the natural 50:50 balance of boys to girls within some immigrant groups and has led to the “disappearance” of between 1,400 and 4,700 females from the national census records of England and Wales, we can reveal.

And how are you not getting that this is a cultural problem, not an abortion services problem? You do realise that the above quote exactly supports what I was talking about, yes?

One eyed Jack · 11-02-2015 11:38am

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Indeed.
Could you maybe flesh out how that might work, I'm having a little trouble with the practicalities of it?

Neutering for boys, spaying for girls, because we don't like other peoples standards imposed on us, but it's perfectly acceptable to impose our standards on them. After all, we're right and they're wrong...

/sarcasm

super_furry · 11-02-2015 11:40am

conorhal wrote: »

The face of abortion that those on here with the 'champagne on ice' for day they manage to push through abortion on demand would rather nobody talked about and the papers won't publish because it would perhaps cause people to question the wisdom of their nhillistic culture of death.

Parklife!

jimgoose · 11-02-2015 11:40am

This just in. According to Snopes, this is "probably false":

http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/abortedboy.asp

'Tis true for Judy Sheindlin - if it don't make sense, it ain't happening!

AudreyHepburn · 11-02-2015 11:41am

Shrap wrote: »

I believe that you can't legislate for people's reasons.

I believe that each case should be assessed individually and that in a case like the above there should other options presented to the woman in question.

I also believe that "not liking the gender of your potential child" factors very very low for women who have crisis pregnancies and have abortions to end them.

I agree with this and never said otherwise to be fair.

spurious · 11-02-2015 11:43am

jimgoose wrote: »

This just in. According to Snopes, this is "probably false":

http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/abortedboy.asp

'Tis true for Judy Sheindlin - if it don't make sense, it ain't happening!

There's a surprise.

Shrap · 11-02-2015 11:46am

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I believe that each case should be assessed individually and that in a case like the above there should other options presented to the woman in question.

I agree with this and never said otherwise to be fair.

No, I realise you didn't say otherwise! I'm just of a different opinion to you on the terms and conditions under which women could access abortion services (say before 12 weeks). I personally think one foetus's life is as important as another (ie. not very in an objective sense, and very in a subjective sense), therefore why make women jump through hoops to prove their reasons are somehow "worthy" in a moral sense? There's no saving them all, nor any point in trying.

If a woman is properly counselled and supported in her decision making and still decides to end a pregnancy, who are we to say her reasoning and decision isn't valid?

AudreyHepburn · 11-02-2015 11:49am

Shrap wrote: »

No, I realise you didn't say otherwise! I'm just of a different opinion to you on the terms and conditions under which women could access abortion services (say before 12 weeks). I personally think one foetus's life is as important as another (ie. not very in an objective sense, and very in a subjective sense), therefore why make women jump through hoops to prove their reasons are somehow "worthy" in a moral sense? There's no saving them all, nor any point in trying.

If a woman is properly counselled and supported in her decision making and still decides to end a pregnancy, who are we to say her reasoning and decision isn't valid?

I suppose if you just can't get the woman to change her mind then there is nothing you can do.

But to me a child's gender is not a valid enough reason to abort it, and I make no apologies for that.

Shrap · 11-02-2015 11:51am

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

But to me a child's gender is not a valid enough reason to abort it, and I make no apologies for that.

Well clearly it wouldn't be valid enough for most of us, but then again, I don't run the risk of being shunned and thrown on the street for not producing a boy. I make no apologies on behalf of the women who take these decisions under such societal and cultural pressures.

newport2 · 11-02-2015 11:58am

jimgoose wrote: »

This just in. According to Snopes, this is "probably false":

http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/abortedboy.asp

'Tis true for Judy Sheindlin - if it don't make sense, it ain't happening!

The story about her on the flight gave it away when I read it. Heading to Wall Street to protest, gets called a name and shouts assault and then starts talking about being verbally raped. Very difficult to believe. Even if anyone was stupid enough to do this, they'd hardly be publishing it for all to read afterwards.

This is just sick...

Comments