Closed Thread
Page 24 of 58 FirstFirst ... 14222324252634 ... LastLast
Results 231 to 240 of 579
  1. #231
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    2,478
    Thanks
    179
    Thanked
    784
    Reviews
    8
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Lillynix View Post
    Which is why I said that they cannot and should not be ABLE to, because yes, currently they do.
    THANKFULLY there are laws in place

  2. #232
    lambjam's Avatar
    lambjam is offline Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    7,177
    Thanks
    2,062
    Thanked
    4,956
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    I think perhaps people confuse exactly what being pro-choice entails.

    It dictates that a woman has the right to terminate a *pregnancy*, yes? To evict a foetus from her body, because it's her body and she should be able to choose what she does with it.

    It does not necessarily follow that she should be allowed to choose the fate of that foetus. So... If a woman is 30 weeks pregnant, a pro-choice stance could allow her to induce labour, but not to kill the foetus or to deny it medical assistance after birth.

    As for how this logic applies to the OP, a 19 week old foetus cannot live outside the womb, therefore if I'm to be pro-choice I have to respect that not all choices will sit well with me :/
    Last edited by lambjam; 29-04-2013 at 20:08.

  3. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to lambjam For This Useful Post:

    babyla  (29-04-2013),gonnabeaGR8mum  (30-04-2013),Kirst33  (29-04-2013),Lillynix  (29-04-2013),Sonja  (29-04-2013)

  4. #233
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,290
    Thanks
    2,377
    Thanked
    903
    Reviews
    72
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Deleted.
    Last edited by RobinSparkles; 29-04-2013 at 21:05.

  5. #234
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,290
    Thanks
    2,377
    Thanked
    903
    Reviews
    72
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by lambjam View Post
    I think perhaps people confuse exactly what being pro-choice entails.

    It dictates that a woman has the right to terminate a *pregnancy*, yes? To evict a foetus from her body, because it's her body and she should be able to choose what she does with it.

    It does not necessarily follow that she should be allowed to choose the fate of that foetus. So... If a woman is 30 weeks pregnant, a pro-choice stance could allow her to induce labour, but not to kill the foetus or to deny it medical assistance after birth.
    That is a very good point.

  6. #235
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    At the beach
    Posts
    10,495
    Thanks
    1,430
    Thanked
    9,003
    Reviews
    3
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 17/10/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by lambjam View Post
    I think perhaps people confuse exactly what being pro-choice entails.

    It dictates that a woman has the right to terminate a *pregnancy*, yes? To evict a foetus from her body, because it's her body and she should be able to choose what she does with it.

    It does not necessarily follow that she should be allowed to choose the fate of that foetus. So... If a woman is 30 weeks pregnant, a pro-choice stance could allow her to induce labour, but not to kill the foetus or to deny it medical assistance after birth.

    As for how this logic applies to the OP, a 19 week old foetus cannot live outside the womb, therefore if I'm to be pro-choice I have to respect that not all choices will sit well with me :/
    Thank you. It has been presented a bit more black and white than that.

  7. #236
    Busy-Bee's Avatar
    Busy-Bee is offline Offending people since before Del :D
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    11,183
    Thanks
    3,664
    Thanked
    4,704
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    Past Moderator - Thank you
    I have an issue with pro-choice being defined as being able to choose an abortion at any stage of a pregnancy. I get that we are talking miniscule numbers (if any) but in theory this means that a woman who is due to give birth (so the baby is full term) can opt for an abortion for no medical reason, she could abort purely because she has now changed her mind. I can't agree with this. I don't know where that line should be drawn but I think it's ok to want to draw a line somewhere. That might be something like after 24 weeks an abortion can only be obtained if it meets certain criteria.

  8. #237
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    townsville
    Posts
    2,816
    Thanks
    1,570
    Thanked
    1,277
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    Sassymummy has explained being pro choce Very well and it's exactly my feelings on the subject. I will never feel comfortable with everyone's reason for terminating at any stage in pregnancy and sometimes a story pops up like this whole gender thing that makes me go huh say what! But in the end it her body her choice it's not my body or my baby therefore my feeliñgs on the matter count for nothing IYKWIM

    And yes being pro choice (though I myself would never and I want to make that VERY clear) If a woman wanted to evict that baby from her body for any which reason at 30+ weeks then that should be here decision to do so. (My personal choice would be not to but that's MY choice for ME) and this would be hers.
    This might make others uncomfortable and please don't shoo me down in flames. Tbh for myself I would not abort ever unless medically necessary but why should my choice be Made to be other woman's choices.


    Sent from a magical mobile bubhub device in a galaxy far far away
    Last edited by MonsterMoosMum; 29-04-2013 at 20:28.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to MonsterMoosMum For This Useful Post:

    HowCrazyCool  (29-04-2013),RobinSparkles  (29-04-2013)

  10. #238
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Qld
    Posts
    26,930
    Thanks
    2,736
    Thanked
    6,743
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 postsDiamond Star - 20,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirst33 View Post
    So does that mean if you're staunchly pro-choice that there is no time during a pregnancy where you feel a baby's life and right to life should be considered? Even if it is at a gestation that is viable outside the mother?

    I am understanding everyone's argument now and very unsure where I now stand. But curious about this part. Does it never reach a point where the baby has a right to life? (I'm not talking about if the mother's life is in danger).
    I believe the mother's life should ALWAYS take precedence over an unborn baby in the eyes of the law.

    You know what happens when that isn't the case? Women are imprisoned for their birth choices if someone else deems that those choices MAY be detrimental to the baby (and this is all a matter of opinion - nobody can foresee the future, so whether or not it's harmful or not can only be seen after it's already happened).

    A woman is not an incubator, and she should never ever be treated like one.

    Because a baby is INSIDE a woman, because it relies on her to continue living, then there is no way that BOTH can have equal rights. So... one has to lose some rights in order for the other to be given rights. If we take away the rights of a pregnant mother in preference of her baby, what we're saying is that women are lesser if they fall pregnant... because we are stripping them of rights they otherwise had to their own body, just because they have a baby in there. We're saying pregnant women do not deserve the same rights as anyone else has to their own bodies. That, to me, is revolting.

    It would be nice if we could grant rights to the unborn, but the only way to do that is to decide that a grown, existing woman is worth less than it is... and that's never going to be okay. It makes women little more than incubators.

    The MOMENT that baby takes its first breath, it gets all the rights in the world... but until that point, it is inside another's body, and the owner of that body deserves to decide what happens with it.

    Don't think for a second that this means I am happy when I hear of late-term abortions, "just because." I don't understand it. I don't understand why anyone would just go, "yeah, I'd rather not after all actually..." and abort at that stage. There are instances where it makes sense - medical issues with either mother or baby, severe circumstances, etc. But mostly, to me, if you're having a late term abortion, you're still having to have that baby removed from your body... so you still need to give birth to it, so why not just give birth to it and give it away to someone who wants it? If it can survive outside of the uterus and you're going to have to give birth to it anyway, I don't understand why people wouldn't do that instead... but I'm NOT someone who has ever considered a late-term abortion. I haven't experienced the things others have. I don't have their ethics and morals and values. Therefore, I acknowledge that while it makes no sense to me, and I believe there's a better alternative, not everyone is me, with my way of thinking... and expecting everyone to live according to what I deem acceptable is just as stupid as everyone living according to the way the Westborough Baptist Church deems acceptable, the way Sharia Law deems acceptable, the way oppressive China deems acceptable.

    It's not really my place to tell everyone how they should live, and what they should do with their bodies, regardless of how I feel on the matter... and likewise I don't want anyone else thinking they have the right to decide what I do with my own uterus or its contents either.

    And it is so very hard to talk about when life "begins," especially when you're talking with women who have lost babies. There's no way you can say, "life before birth doesn't matter," when you've seen women's hearts break for going through a miscarriage, or having a stillbirth. To me it's not about that... when or not life actually begins. It's about the fact that for the unborn to have all these rights, then the pregnant woman has to lose rights that she would otherwise have (the right to make decisions regarding her own body and its contents) at any other stage in her life.

    It's just never going to be something I think is right or fair or just... so instead, I acknowledge that women are going to use the pro-choice sentiment to do horrific things to their bodies, to the contents of their bodies... but that this stance is still important regardless, because without it, we have condemned many women who WOULDN'T do things even staunch pro-choicers would feel sick at the thought of... there are so many more women who use abortions "properly," (for want of a better word) than there are who abuse the right by doing things most others would call heinous.

  11. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to SassyMummy For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (29-04-2013),bugsy  (30-04-2013),dancingchipmunk  (29-04-2013),Elijahs Mum  (29-04-2013),HowCrazyCool  (29-04-2013),Kelly8329  (29-04-2013),Lillynix  (29-04-2013),MonsterMoosMum  (29-04-2013),onionskin  (30-04-2013),RobinSparkles  (29-04-2013),Rose&Aurelia&Hannah  (29-04-2013)

  12. #239
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    I'm just confused as to if you can even 'abort' a healthy baby that is old enough to live outside your body? Once you reach a certain gestation your only choice is to be induced or a c-section, so if the baby is healthy enough and old enough to live outside the mothers body then it would survive the birth and be born alive... And then if the mother didn't want it she would sign over her rights??? How can you abort a baby that is old enough and healthy enough to live outside you? I am sure a dr has a responsibility to protect the baby's life at that point? Am I being naive?

  13. #240
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,953
    Thanks
    3,680
    Thanked
    1,949
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Janesmum123 View Post
    I thought pro choice is when a person has full control over what happens with their body no matter what the circumstances so in theory a person who is truly pro choice would believe that a women could terminate a pregnancy at 38 weeks if she wanted to.
    That was my understanding of someone who is truly/fully pro choice but I could be wrong.
    Same.

    I mean if you say your pro choice up to 12 weeks i dont get that either. So an abortion at 11 weeks is ok but not at 12 weeks? Or 13 weeks? I find that reasoning hard to comprehend personally.


 

Similar Threads

  1. Curious about gender selection
    By Lozie in forum General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-01-2014, 09:21
  2. Xanax + alcohol *possibly distressing*
    By AndrewTheEmu in forum Battling addiction?
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-08-2012, 21:46

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
WaterWipes
Give your babies bottom a gift this Xmas! They are the only wipe made using just water and a drop of grapefruit seed extract and may help avoid nappy rash. Check out the great reviews on bubhub and see our website for more info and availability.
sales & new stuffsee all
CarmelsBeautySecrets
Growing your own natural nails is easy. Years ago, I devised a simple and very effective technique which really helps boosts the nails' growth in as little as three days! And most importantly keeps them that way.
featured supporter
Mini Maestros
Nurturing Confident Learners. Mini Maestros offers music classes for children 6 months to 5 years of age. It is the longest running and most successful Australian business of its kind.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!