British Expats

British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)
-   Take it Outside! (https://britishexpats.com/forum/take-outside-67/)
-   -   After birth 'abortions'??!! (https://britishexpats.com/forum/take-outside-67/after-birth-abortions-750005/)

moneypenny20 Feb 29th 2012 12:28 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by Sally Redux (Post 9926566)
It's certainly not straightforward. Abortion at 40 weeks is legal in some situations (at least in the UK, not familiar with the law here). The difference between that and infanticide becomes a technicality. Discussion of the point at which we deem someone to have become human is worthy of debate.

Seriously? I have never heard that. :confused: As for those two ****wits, where does it stop, my baby is butt ugly, he's going to ruin my life, let's terminate him now? Bullshit.

fatbrit Feb 29th 2012 12:32 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by moneypenny20 (Post 9926604)
Bullshit.

So you're against abortion, as well?

moneypenny20 Feb 29th 2012 12:34 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by fatbrit (Post 9926612)
So you're against abortion, as well?

Not at all.

fatbrit Feb 29th 2012 12:34 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by moneypenny20 (Post 9926614)
Not at all.

So does your inconsistency trouble you?

Sally Redux Feb 29th 2012 12:36 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by moneypenny20 (Post 9926604)
As for those two ****wits

Who's that?

fatbrit Feb 29th 2012 12:38 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by Sally Redux (Post 9926622)
Who's that?

I presume it's the two ethicists. Shades of we don't need no education, I'm afraid.

moneypenny20 Feb 29th 2012 12:40 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by fatbrit (Post 9926617)
So does your inconsistency trouble you?

What inconsistency would that be? Abortion has it's place with regard to a 'non viable' fetus. Murder of a child has no place in any society. My opinion only of course.

kimilseung Feb 29th 2012 12:50 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by fatbrit (Post 9926617)
So does your inconsistency trouble you?

My own simple way of determining if abortion is ethical is to consider the foetus as a person, on the outside, a person clinging on and refusing to remove themselves for 9 months; and do I consider it ethical to kill them if that is the only way to remove them. I do
It all falls in deciding at what time should be considered a cut off point, as I hear the imagined voice 'hang on, I'll get off in ten more weeks, honest!'

fatbrit Feb 29th 2012 12:52 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by moneypenny20 (Post 9926631)
What inconsistency would that be? Abortion has it's place with regard to a 'non viable' fetus. Murder of a child has no place in any society. My opinion only of course.

So you only support abortion where the fetus is so malformed that it cannot enjoy any quality of life? You, wouldn't, for example, support an abortion where a 13 y.o. was raped but was carrying a healthy fetus?

fatbrit Feb 29th 2012 12:54 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by kimilseung (Post 9926641)
My own simple way of determining if abortion is ethical is to consider the foetus as a person, on the outside, a person clinging on and refusing to remove themselves for 9 months; and do I consider it ethical to kill them if that is the only way to remove them. I do
It all falls in deciding at what time should be considered a cut off point, as I hear the imagined voice 'hang on, I'll get off in ten more weeks, honest!'

Singer would see your attack on P2 as a convenient fiction.

moneypenny20 Feb 29th 2012 1:27 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by fatbrit (Post 9926643)
So you only support abortion where the fetus is so malformed that it cannot enjoy any quality of life? You, wouldn't, for example, support an abortion where a 13 y.o. was raped but was carrying a healthy fetus?

You don't understand English? I said regard to a 'non viable' fetus which quite obviously means rarely after 24 weeks. A 13 year old girl who'd been raped would hardly be waiting until the fetus became 'viable' before considering termination. It's highly unlikely that any woman would consider terminating a pregnancy once the fetus becomes 'viable' unless they discover major health issues to either the fetus or the mother.

fatbrit Feb 29th 2012 2:06 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by moneypenny20 (Post 9926681)
You don't understand English? I said regard to a 'non viable' fetus which quite obviously means rarely after 24 weeks. A 13 year old girl who'd been raped would hardly be waiting until the fetus became 'viable' before considering termination. It's highly unlikely that any woman would consider terminating a pregnancy once the fetus becomes 'viable' unless they discover major health issues to either the fetus or the mother.

I love the ambiguous qualities of the English language. The downside is that you sometimes need to ask questions to get to the real meaning.

So we have the convenient fiction again. I know Islam puts a precise figure on being human, so we have a convenient religious argument for those of the faith. The Catholics and many Christians believe it starts at conception. But the paper here is philosophy, I suppose, and I'm not a beliver in either of these religions.

Your argument appears more medical than anything else. It's a human being at 24 weeks, but before that it's not....I presume.

I'm afraid I'm still siding with that bloody Singer here. Irritating man!

SultanOfSwing Feb 29th 2012 2:18 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by fatbrit (Post 9926706)
I love the ambiguous qualities of the English language. The downside is that you sometimes need to ask questions to get to the real meaning.

So we have the convenient fiction again. I know Islam puts a precise figure on being human, so we have a convenient religious argument for those of the faith. The Catholics and many Christians believe it starts at conception. But the paper here is philosophy, I suppose, and I'm not a beliver in either of these religions.

Your argument appears more medical than anything else. It's a human being at 24 weeks, but before that it's not....I presume.

I'm afraid I'm still siding with that bloody Singer here. Irritating man!

Medically, I believe it it's generally considered the earliest point in the pregnancy where the foetus can survive if delivered. Now, I'm not 100% but that is my interpretation. That would suggest that it is a flexible point in the term, for example, if sufficient numbers of babies were delivered premature at 22 weeks, perhaps this would be the new magic number.

The problem only arises when people see abortion as a method of contraception, when it clearly is not. In cases of rape or incest, as mentioned, any abortion would be carried out very early on in the pregnancy. An abortion for medical reasons would be carried out later but in cases like anencephaly - is it really right to force the mother to carry a baby to term only to experience either a stillbirth, or a baby who dies very soon after the birth.

Ultimately, it will probably always remain an unsolved issue. It's not something I'd want my wife to do, for example, unless as an absolute last resort but who am I to suggest that someone else shouldn't at least have that option? Not least because I will never be pregnant so I will never understand what it is like to be in that position.

moneypenny20 Feb 29th 2012 2:25 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by SultanOfSwing (Post 9926716)
Medically, I believe it it's generally considered the earliest point in the pregnancy where the foetus can survive if delivered. Now, I'm not 100% but that is my interpretation. That would suggest that it is a flexible point in the term, for example, if sufficient numbers of babies were delivered premature at 22 weeks, perhaps this would be the new magic number.

Indeed. I know nothing about what various religious groups say, I'm simply going by the current medical view. 24 weeks is generally considered the 'cut off' period but it's not laid in stone.

TheEmperorIsNaked Feb 29th 2012 2:38 am

Re: After birth 'abortions'??!!
 

Originally Posted by Uncle Ebenezer (Post 9925733)
I really wish the url had been from another source, so I see Leslie's problem with it, though I do believe it is factually correct. I had never actually heard of "The Blaze" before - having now read some of the comments on this article, made by its subscribers, all I can say is :scaredhair:.

Me neither, and I'm their side of the pond.

I haven't read posts from this point, but wonder if anyone had trouble with the link?
It sent my computer haywire! I couldn't do anything and finally unplugged the damn thing.

I know this isn't a considered well thought out response, but I consider these two (if this is kosher) - a pair of bleedin' feckwits!


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:25 pm.

Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.