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
2) Not at this moment in time
3) Birth.. Once, at the point of birth it no longer resides in the woman's body, it's its own person in its own right. Kind of makes all the, "Would you think it's ok to kill a 2 year old then" a bit redundant
Should be made easier at the early stages.
(2) Would you support a reduction in the 24-week time limit that currently exists?
see question 3
(3) At what point do you believe personally that a foetus becomes a baby?
Around about 20-24 weeks, though given I'm not a Doctor I'm open to persuasion either way. Its at that stage (whenever it is) abortion becomes more difficult - I'm not saying abortion shouldn't happen beyond this stage but we need to balance the needs and rights of the mother against that of the unborn child.
1) They're almost there.
2) No.
3) I'd say, like go_away, when it can exist independently of its mother.
(I'm predicting contention here, because of course a lot of happily pregnant women would refer to their 12 week curavture of the stomach as their "baby". I think in those cases that's because it's what it is to become. I don't think that by definition it is a "baby" but a foetus.)
But going by what you probably meant as gestational age, procedures change at about 14 weeks whereby a D&E would be needed. It doesn't make it anymore difficult to do from a surgical perspective if the professional is skilled but it's slightly longer and involves preparation of the cervix. Surgical abortions at this stage would require a general, so it doesn't matter if it's 14 weeks or 23, the foetus would be knocked out as the woman is too.
But if foetuses are going to be awarded rights, it's not just abortion that's an issue. There have been cases where women have been forced to undergo unwanted medical intervention i.e. forced c-sections in order to preserve the foetus.
Yes, it can. I'm sure they can't fully understand it, as they haven't experienced it.
Well, the woman would obviously make an attachment if it were a wanted pregnancy. If someone's determined to terminate, no scan picture, foetal movement etc will change their mind.
Quality of life is very subjective though, and not one that really stands for me in the abortion debate. For me, it's about the woman and the woman only. If she wants to terminate because she believes the infant won't have a good quality of life, it's up to her, but primarily for me it would be letting her exercise her right to bodily integrity.
It can also be non-existent. Whats your point?
Just my 2 cents.
Good response as usual. Want me to translate? OK.
You're basing your argument on the fact that "The bond between a mother and her unborn child can be very strong" (even though, as a bloke, you cannot understand it). I'm pointing out that this "bond" doesn't always exist so its a useless thing to base your argument on, thus negating your argument entirely. See? Simple.
SG is saying that a human is a human, no matter what stage of their growth.
Your just off down pedant avenue again because arguing is all you really know how to do.
If he was talking about a human being a human at any "age" then what relevance does the father's lack of understanding of the bond have to do with the price of fish?
This is one step away from someone pedalling that old chestnut about "maternal instincts" out again, isn't it? Some women don't have them, some women don't feel "the bond" that's raved about. I mentioned how much I despise this argument in one of my first posts on this thread.
Nothing that's the whole point. It's just something else he brought up during the debate. Using it as a way around his basic fundamental point is a bit flimsy, imho. It's a good debating tactic I guess, but not very honest.
I find it helps to have klintock on ignore. Although I occassionally take him off it if I want a good laugh.
What was your last little sulk about again?
Oh yeah you asked me for some peer reviewed stuff and went back into paddyland when I produced some.
You'll notice I addressed both of his points, since he so clearly stated that we're all somehow questions and issues in this thread.
What was his basic, fundamental (apt wording there!) point again?
DId you read the whole thread?
Of course.
Though my attention wavered a bit when it turned into a choice/life debate, as I don't think that's actually the real issue here.
1. Don't know what they are, so no comment.
2. No
3. Birth
Me either.
SG's initial point that humans are humans no matter their stage of growth seems perfectly valid to me. Theres a lot of renaming going on, a sure sign of bullshit.
I made my own view clear enough and very oddly for me it sems to be something like the consensus view.
Well we agree on something. :P
"Humans" are humans no matter what stage of growth they're at - adolescence, middle-age, death's-doorness. I wouldn't say that an embryo/foetus/zygote/cluster of cells/twinkle in its father's eye was, though.
All that renaming and hesitancy to define what "it" is could be indicative of bullshit, I'm not so sure myself.
Where you draw that line though is only a matter of personal opinion. I am never in favour of using force to impose one woman's opinion on another.
Theres an element of rationalisation in there too. If abortions get rid of some "collection of cells" or a "foetus" or whatnot it's a different thing from killing my son/daughter. It's a common thing in people to seperate themselves from acts they don't like but feel are needed in this way.
In this forum, you need to back up your sources, I have read the entire bible, and do not recall a passage that says anything to the effect of what you have said. Unless you can provide a reference, then you will have to retract your statement.
It wiould be expected with any other claim, and it is just as valid when you are making a claim from the bible.