If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Well, even with infanticide I haven't made my mind up there, babies are strange little alien things when they're born- hardly human and certainly not capable of living without aid. If we can advocate termination at certain stages of pregnancy, ther is still the issue of a legal cut off- you say before 24 weeks, I say maybe even after birth? Are your reasons for wanting the date to be before 24 weeks becasue after this you feel the feotus(sp?) is more 'human' and therefore has rights?- This is where I would be interested to debate.
Hadn't seen it, that's why.
Just a thought, and the two should never really be linked but is there ever a suggestion that Doctors should be jailed/stuck off to taking part in executions in the US?
On a tangent to the origonal post, because most sex is for fun and not intentional procreation, plenty of people have sex at a time when they're not ready or prepared to raise a child, presumably and hopefully in these circumstances, with contraception. I think it's more fair to encourage reasonable precortion against unwanted pregnancy by contraceptive method than to say "don't do it unless you're willing to raise a child"- that just ain't gonna happen! Contraception failure isn't the only reason for abortion though so advocating abstinance (sp??) before one is ready for parenthood doesn't completely cover the users of legal abortion.
I was talking generally...
That is a very good argument! :thumb: 10/10
The motivation behind anti-abortion campaigns seems to be more down to inflicting your own moral views on someone else. You (not you personally) don't consider abortion acceptable, and therefore you don't believe that anyone else should be able to carry out the procedure.
If abortion can be carried out all stages surely at some point it infringes on the unborn baby?
IMHO after about 22 weeks it ceases to become a cluster of cells and becomes a baby
In fact I've heard it argued that Roe Vs. Wade should be challenged and removed so that there can be a proper debate about what the country wants and get something better in place. This isnt a proper law, its one judgement on one case, thats rubbish.
But, I dont think challenges will get to the Supreme Court any time soon so there will be a state by state solution, with some banning it in all but extreme situations and other states making it easier.
1)Something that can move on it own, has brain functions and a different DNA than the (hopefully to be) mother is NOT simply "a part of her body". Transplants are an exception.
2)The only reason I disagree with abortions being illegal is that there are some desparate souls (often with good reason to be desparate) who's try and do it at home, with bad results.
3)(Kind of a continuation to 2) Instead of attacking those who get abortions people should attack the reasons they do. Attack the partents who'd throw their daughter out of the house for getting pregnant. Attack the people who didn't inform the kids about contraception enough. Attack the values that make it so difficult for (relatively) young people to raise children today (financial or not). DON'T attack someone who probably will do it anyway, just with more guilt afterwards etc.
You’re a pretty sick person if you haven’t made your mind up that infanticide is murder.
whilst it's in the mothers body, it's almost entirely her choice whether she keeps it or not imo and the current limit legally for non medical reasons is perfectly adequate, as so few abortions are carried out after 20 weeks anyway, mainly due to health risks on the woman, and the fact that most of these are abortions carried out because of the results of embryo screening only picking up certain conditions after 18 weeks (minumum)
whats her name on here who works in a clinic should be able to back me up here
exactly my sentiments really
if it weren't legasl, they'd still be done
it isn't a nice moral choice, however in life these sort of choices have to be made every so often
and promoting good contraception and good RESPONSIBLE attitudes to sex would reduce numbers of abortions more than making them illegal would ever do
Isn't it seperate from murder because it is infanticide? I can imagine situations where I would rather allow or cuse the death of my offspring, it might actually be different if those situations arose, but sitting here now, I can imagine infanticide being the best option. Thinking as I type, a severe disability would be an example of a situation I'd consider.
Disturbing. Infanticide is murder, the former merely refers to murder of a human at a particular stage of life. Your original post -
You seem to be suggesting that because a baby is dependent upon others and lacks human attributes – presumably meaning the ability to communicate coherently and the ability to reason it ‘maybe’ okay to murder a baby.
What about disabled people incapable of living without aid? What about the elderly in care homes? Are they ‘human’ in your opinion? Are you a Nazi sympathiser?
So long as the zygote/embryo/foetus is in her body, she gets the final say over gestating or terminating choices. The foetus can kick, move, sing, find a cure for the cold, it doesn't matter to me: I side with the woman each and every single time.
Well with technological advances, some are surviving just after 20something weeks. However, a lot of them currently have disabilities or die in neo-natal care. There was a table with stats on this a while ago, I don't know where it is now. In the UK, abortion used to be legal up until 28 weeks, but the laws were adjusted accordingly as more and more foetuses were surviving birth at earlier gestations.
In cases where the woman's life is at immediate risk or there's a case of severe foetal abnormaility, abortion is legal up until birth.
Read the post I was replying to. I wasn’t talking about abortion – I was responding to katralla who says
You say that you think ‘only the mother should have the right to decide’ – presumably therefore you wouldn’t have a problem with abortions past the present 24 week limit? As you can see for yourself we're not even talking about 'potential life' - from a pretty early stage abortion is quite clearly a life taken. As I said before – I wouldn’t advocate banning abortion as I think it’s a personal ethical decision for women in that situation to make but the pro-choice side needs to be honest about the facts of abortion. Seeing those pictures and others except at a very early stage it’s factually incorrect to write-off a foetus as a ‘collection of cells’ and something as disposable as a wart.
I've only been skimming the whole thread as I'm very sleep deprived/highly worked/highly strung but did anyone actually say that?
The only time I've ever really heard of the 'collection of cells' thing are from anti-abortionists and their websites.
ETA: I just read comments on Page 2. Despite whatever intrinsic value we place on the foetus, like I said, I'd still side with the woman every time, despite the stage of development the foetus is at. I mean, the woman went through that once herself and she can do a whole lot more to boot if we're just looking at things on the basis of a few simple reflex actions.
I reckon that the cut-off point is the point at which the foetus could realistically be removed from the mother and survive. Even then, however, the mother's welfare must come first up until the point that the baby is born.
I view it more like an extension of abortion than 'murder'. If we take infanticide to be up to 12 months after birth- I would be as repulsed by causing/allowing the death of a 12month old as you appear by my post-birth suggestion. Again, thinking as I type, only new borns fit into my idea of ethical infanticide/ extension of abortion.
When I think about how dangerous it would be to ethically accept infantacide, I also question the ethics of abortion. Underlying this is my uncertainty of when a feotus/baby is human and has rights, or even if it needs to be 'human' to have rights - here I appear to differ from the majority by thinking babies are little alien things.
Different issue in my mind, that goes more into euthanasia etc.
No. :impissed:
Like you I’d side with the woman every time in that I don’t think abortion should be illegal. However – I believe that honesty is required, dehumanising a foetus as a collection of cells or whatever is simply false.
I’d agree, until the baby is born I think the mother’s welfare is of primary importance. (From a religious pov that is clearly the case in Jewish thinking and I’d guess it is too among Christians, I don’t see how anybody could oppose abortion where the mother’s life is threatened).
Fair point.
wouldn't it be even more cruel to bring a child into the world that couldn't/wouldn't be looked after?