The Abortion Debate... (1 Viewer)

[inasero]

I mean do you remember pain when you were in the whomb? Do you?

Do you remember being breastfed? Do you remember shitting your nappies? If you do then I'll gladly concede my argument.
Now who's shooting themselves in the foot?

 

[superbird]

People's views on abortion and their religious experience go hand in hand

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

I think its wrong to not look for logic and to explain it away with passages from the bible that are so wide they would bew interpreted to fit anything...

Relgion answers because it provides easy answers. The reason why the bible is so great is because it is mostly written in a borad sense...

there is a reason that the bible is in a broad sense.. is that if it werent.. it would be about the same length as the books that comprises all of Aust. law.. which would be out of the reach of most ppl..
this then leads to misintepretations/manipulation too.. think wars in the name of God
but then even with the law there is misintepretations/manipulation too..
OF ALL the sad truth is NOONE can 100% kno when a child is regarded as alive...
meiosis, cell profileration, formation of limbs, brain formation, heartbeat, pain formation, 10 weeks, 20weeks, 30 weeks, birth?
atm 10 weeks is the earliest we can put a child on life support ouside the womb.
with a reasonable chance of survival (~30%)

actualli wats the rationale behind abortion and child destruction laws asgy?
im asking this as a med student.. cos for the life of me i cant figure why child destruction in States lik Vic starts at sumfin lik 28 weeks whilst NSW has no such law..

inasero: had my preg attachment.. today^^ ultrasound @ 16 weeks very kewl muahaha

 

[Not-That-Bright]

The only parts of the bible that make logical sense are the more humanist parts, which are afterall fairly logical. If you were moses and you recieved commandments saying 'don't kill, don't lie, don't commit adultory' you would go 'Well duh.', i believe these sorts of things are a part of human nature... However the weird ones like 'don't worship false idols, don't take the lords name in vein', are not natural.

Then you get things like 'gays are evil, people that sleep with their wives before marriage are evil', etc...

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

The only parts of the bible that make logical sense are the more humanist parts, which are afterall fairly logical. If you were moses and you recieved commandments saying 'don't kill, don't lie, don't commit adultory' you would go 'Well duh.', i believe these sorts of things are a part of human nature... However the weird ones like 'don't worship false idols, don't take the lords name in vein', are not natural.

Then you get things like 'gays are evil, people that sleep with their wives before marriage are evil', etc...

im anglican.. we hav a celibate but gay priest.. i.e he likes guys but he doesnt hav homosexual sex.. i think its the most appropriate thing..

I believe that gays are good ppl.. the religion does allow good ppl.. its the homosexual sex that it objects to...

btw about the weird ones.. they have relevence to maintain religous integrity..

ummm the adultory one and lying one dun necessarily come normally.. lying is advantageous in aspects of life and adultory in a scientific sense would spread ure genes ensuring maintainence of ure traits... {hence horny teenage boys lolz}..

commandments are rules to live a fulfilling life.. to get sumfing that is very difficult to quantify.. our emotions.. this is why psychiatry is so difficult.. in IMO a load of BS

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

1. Abotion laws are in place so as to give the female a CHOICE.

2. Did you just ignore all the last points.

which pts the one where u n inasero tried to hav a decent pt each?
ummm yes.. i read it.. but i honestly think both of u still hav no clue bout wat u are arguin about..

and ill rephrase just for u.. Wat is the rationale behind the dates used in abortion laws and child destruction laws?
realise im pro-choice.. but im talking about those damn dates.. wat is the logic..?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Umm... all med students i know have shocking handwriting it's like they teach them it.

 

[ur_inner_child]

WHAT EXACTLY does the law state about abortions in NSW?

Anyways, here's an excerpt, just thought I'd throw it in, for no reason at all.

About 100 000 abortions are performed each year in Australia — more than one for every three livebirths. Less than 2% of these abortions are for fetal abnormality,4 the others being for social or economic reasons. And Australians support access to abortion — for two decades, opinion polls have consistently shown that the majority of Australians support women’s right to choose5,6 and believe that forcing a woman to have an unwanted child is worse than allowing abortion.5 Prenatal screening is virtually universal. If a problem that is likely to lead to serious handicap is detected, most Australian women will seek an abortion, and the community overwhelmingly supports such decisions.5

However, many Australian abortions, including many of those for severe fetal abnormality, occur without legal clarity. In Victoria and New South Wales, for example, even a “lethal” fetal abnormality is not sufficient grounds for abortion. To be lawful, the abortion must be necessary to preserve the woman from serious danger to her life or physical or mental health.

Late abortion is a more controversial, but nevertheless accepted, part of medical practice. A survey of Australian clinical geneticists and obstetricians specialising in ultrasound showed that about 75% believed that termination for fetal dwarfism should be available as a clinical option at 24 weeks.7 In 1998, the RCOG reported a termination of pregnancy for dwarfism diagnosed at 28 weeks in a pregnant woman who was a dwarf herself. The termination was prompted by “the mother’s compelling description of her own life and suffering and her genuine repeated request”.1 The RCOG has also reported terminations for Down syndrome and for spina bifida at 34 weeks. The RCOG Ethics Committee documented over 100 terminations of pregnancy performed after 24 weeks in England in 1996. It stated in 1998 that late termination has become “a standard management option in tertiary referral centres for serious abnormalities diagnosed after 24 weeks”.

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

there arent .. i checked a couple of books .. to us they are fairly arbitrary becos all states use different dates.. so wheres the logic?

this is an old one.. but im not sure how much is still relevent
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/1998-99/99rp01.htm

btw u can bite me on the typing cos its a forum not an actual report..
my writin is illegible.. according to a couple of doctors.. but then i had to get another doctor to tell me that.. cos couldnt actualli read their comment .. :|

 

[inasero]

If you suggest a living thing becomes a unique human being when they are conscious of pain then there would be nothing stopping an aborotion in the last trimester...I mean do you remember pain when you were in the whomb? Do you?

Your own arguments shoots inself in the foot

Originally Posted by inasero
Do you remember being breastfed? Do you remember shitting your nappies? If you do then I'll gladly concede my argument.
Now who's shooting themselves in the foot?

no ...and therefore based on your argument that something is alive when they can 'feel' something...all you are doing is justifying infanticide as something cant be alive until it can 'feel'...you just justfied killing infants

I think you misunderstood me there, or I could have misunderstood you? Anyhows, the reason I said what I did was because you justified abortion on the grounds that babies can't remember pain in the womb, therefore they can't have experienced it, therefore they don't constitute a life. Then by the same rationale, say your mother found you a burden as a baby she could just choose to abort you yeah? Meaning to say that, just because one does not remember an incident, does not mean it didn't happen.

 

[Ribbon]

hmmn I know I am entering this a bit late (actually i am glad when i got to page 11 that i hit last page' to see how many there were! as a result i have skipped quite a few pages so forgive me if i miss something)

Personally, I would rather have never been born than live with a sever disability, or be in an unhappy family, not wanted by my parents ect.

My personal experience of abortion and teenage pregnancy is that I have two friends who have been pregnent during thier teens, one got pregant when she was 16, decided to keep the baby and gave birth to her daughter 3 days before her 17th birthday, she dropped out of school, has had a string of jobs which she could not keep, is living on social security and is now 1 week away from the due date of her second child. The other got pregnant when she was 18 and decided to have an abortion. It was a pretty difficult decision (I thought she was going to keep it to start with) and although I know she had a few times when she was really upset afterwards she doesn't regret it at all, finished school and now has an apprenticeship and likes things the way they are compared to our other friend who has trouble going out, no money and to be honest, no prospects and a pretty crappy life

I also personally think growing up poor is really hard on kids, it sortof puts them into a poverty cycle, adds to depression, low self esteem ect.

 

[Lexicographer]

Did either of your friends consider adoption? Not to pressure the life issue in this case, I'm just wondering.

 

[thejosiekiller]

giving a child that u have given birth to would be very hard i imagine

considering under the adoption information act 1990 (nsw) only after the child truns 18 are they allowed to be able to contact thier biological mother and vice versa....at this point either the mother or child can ask for a contact veto to prevent the information being shared

why did i bother studying that for my family law essay? stupid excel study cards

neways adoption is a whole other issue in my opinion- u dont know a lot about it at all really....whats going to happen to the child, will u ever see them again or even if u dont want to, will they have a good life ...........was it the right decision

 

[Lexicographer]

I've always considered it better than just killing them off. At least this way they have a shot at life without "destroying" your own. What's more, it's not uncommon for an adoption to take place because the child is almost certain to have a higher quality of life than if s/he'd stayed with the biological parent/s.

 

[LadyBec]

the point is CHOICE...id hate to see women loose that CHOICE...but you know we live in a capitalist society, we will pick on those who cannot defence themselves.

you could argue that the feotus is unable to defend itself.

Although i agree, the point is that women should be given the option, it doesn't mean that they'll all run out and have abortions, it means they can if they chose too.
Beside with adoption they still have to deal with the pregnancy

 

[Lexicographer]

the point is CHOICE...id hate to see women loose that CHOICE...but you know we live in a capitalist society, we will pick on those who cannot defence themselves....i HATE people who put the rights of an unborn child as more important than the rights of the mother...like females DONT have any rights when they are pregnant and MAN KNOWS BEST!

Im sure if preganacies affected men in the same way as women there would be many more pro choice people out there

Now you are assuming that only men are pro choice.

About two months ago I went to something called "Life WeeK" at USyd. From what I saw there was an even balance of men and women debating for the defence of life, but not on the pro-choice table. Why is it that whenever there is a congregation of abortionists, the most prominent speakers are always those awful pan-femme-supremacists! I tried to find one sensible person to discuss the issue with, but all I got was a faceful of "WE ARE SICK OF BEING OPPRESSED GET YOUR OWN BODY MEN THIS ONE IS MINE RAR". I've never met someone in support of abortion with a balanced, meditated, and informed opinion - only extremists.

What's more, I argue that women shouldn't have that choice in the first place. Why should a mother, by virtue of being a mother, have the right to eliminate another human being? No other person in the world (bar the various governments, but that's another story) claim to have the right to execute people without consequence. Just because the child happens to be connected, dependent on you, does not mean that you can pull the plug at will. They will always be a seperate entity, beyond your right of action. Yes, mothers have rights over their children that no others possess (sometimes even the fathers) but those rights have NEVER morally included the intended death of the child.

 

[Lexicographer]

you could argue that the feotus is unable to defend itself.

Although i agree, the point is that women should be given the option, it doesn't mean that they'll all run out and have abortions, it means they can if they chose too.
Beside with adoption they still have to deal with the pregnancy

And with abortions they don't? The point of abortions is that the mother is already pregnant, and thus will forever carry the burden of having been pregnant. However, this differs from adoption in that rather than knowing their child is safe and well looked after, through abortion they have cut that life short.

The scariest thing is that people have no qualms killing off their children because unborn children have been dehumanised in our society. Unwilling mothers are led to believe "a foetus is not a person" or "a foetus doesn't feel anything". To a certain point in time, it is true that the foetus is unable to "feel" to pain of abortion as it has not yet developed the necessary receptors. However, in the case of the late term abortions we were discussing, the child is already capable of feeling pain, as well as having well developed limbs and sensory organs. The process of abortion is not a swift and painless procedure but an act of violence, especially the commonly used "evacuation" method - this method literally dismembers the child and sucks their limbs from the wound.

I don't know if these abortive mothers are unwillingly misled by society, or they simply use these views to comfort themselves, but neither option is prettier than the other.

 

[LadyBec]

i meant the whole pregnancy, as in 9 months then giving bith.
I'm sorry, but i don't believe a foetus is a person... untill they are able to survive outside the womb by themselves, i just dont think of them as a baby.
There's a simple soloution to your worries about the pain, its called a painkiller. I doubt any doctor would refuse to administer it to bother the mother AND the foetus if it was requested.

 

[Jezzabelle]

I am against abortion because I am a Christian and the bible is very clear on the issue....

However, i am highly aware that not everyone in Australia shares my beliefs.

So i think women should have the right to choose. I know i would never have an abortion, but it doesnt mean its ok for me to force others not to when they have different values and beliefs to me.

 

[Jezzabelle]

Verygood ...women should have the right to choose! you as a christian can do whatever you like...

shock horror! Asquithian didnt try and cut me down for once

Maybe your not such a bigot afterall...