+ Reply to Thread
Page 26 of 51 FirstFirst ... 16242526272836 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 260 of 507
  1. #251
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Hobart, Tasmania
    Posts
    5,946
    Thanks
    1,973
    Thanked
    2,080
    Reviews
    16
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    And again, why were the GBH laws not sufficient? Others have pointed out that it still had a potential of 14 years prison. Why do we need a specific law, when existing laws, even with more tweaking, offered punishment?

  2. #252
    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 misskittyfantastico View Post
    In all cases, or just for you?
    Of course in all cases. I dont agree with it. But I cant nor wouldnt force that opinion on others. Why is that hard to understand.

    Its like saying I dont agree with smoking during pregnancy. I think its wrong and I wouldnt do it nor do I think others should - because it doesnt sit right with me. But that doesnt mean I think they should be "forced" to stop. I understand its still their choice.



    Sent from my GT-I9305T using The Bub Hub mobile app

  3. #253
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,839
    Thanks
    6,199
    Thanked
    16,883
    Reviews
    10
    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
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    The idea of the GBH charge in this situation is that the sentence should be at the higher end of the scale to reflect the damage to or loss of the foetus.
    I know we may think of the foetus as a baby prior to birth but the fact is that it isnt- it's a foetus. Namely because it isnt an independent entity from the mother. If you change the legal definition things get really murky. I do see the emotional side- I really do. I'm just worried about the further implications iykwim.
    But these are your thoughts. Yes it's medically termed a fetus. To me it's a baby. And to many women it is. What I find difficult to process is that an unwanted child is a fetus, a wanted child is a baby. I've seen many pro choicers discuss abortion and say it's a fetus, but then when pg on the forum will call it a baby, give it a name, rub their belly.

    I actually don't have a problem with others considering it not a baby. But I think some need to understand some of us do. Yes I support choice. But for me, it's a baby. I realise what I consider it to be shouldn't factor into legislation or what a woman chooses to do. She has to decide herself. But as I said, does fighting this take women's right to consider their child a baby?? As pro choicers are we doing the very thing we are fighting against??

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to delirium For This Useful Post:

    KaraB  (26-11-2013),Mokeybear  (26-11-2013),snowqu33n  (26-11-2013),SoThisIsLove  (26-11-2013)

  5. #254
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    17,747
    Thanks
    5,085
    Thanked
    8,691
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Awards:
    Past Moderator - Thank you
    100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by SoThisIsLove View Post
    Of course in all cases. I dont agree with it. But I cant nor wouldnt force that opinion on others. Why is that hard to understand.

    Its like saying I dont agree with smoking during pregnancy. I think its wrong and I wouldnt do it nor do I think others should - because it doesnt sit right with me. But that doesnt mean I think they should be "forced" to stop. I understand its still their choice.



    Sent from my GT-I9305T using The Bub Hub mobile app
    I deleted my post, I'm not up for an abortion debate today. Peace out.

  6. #255
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,839
    Thanks
    6,199
    Thanked
    16,883
    Reviews
    10
    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
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Lillynix View Post
    And again, why were the GBH laws not sufficient? Others have pointed out that it still had a potential of 14 years prison. Why do we need a specific law, when existing laws, even with more tweaking, offered punishment?
    I suspect bc the crime is deemed as solely against her. And since the baby/fetus/cells lost it's life bc of a crime, their mother may want that recognised. I believe she has a right to that.

    As long as this doesn't merge into abortion and other areas women should have the right to lay charges against the death of their child. I believe very specific and strict rules to stop any interpretation in the courts could mean everyone gets what they want.

    Maybe I'm being naive though? I dunno...

  7. #256
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,226
    Thanks
    3,790
    Thanked
    2,210
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by delirium View Post
    I always tend to fence sit in these debates, as of all the things discussed on this forum, this topic I am the most conflicted in.

    I get the point that bringing in this law may take women's rights away (and if kept to the letter I hope it isn't). That pro lifers are forcing their own opinions on others bodies. But I think we need to keep in mind that fighting this law is also forcing your own opinions and removing the right of women who are victims of crime to seek justice. Some women don't consider it as fetus, they consider it a living real baby. Now I know a woman can currently charge a man with assault and GBH for bashing her to the point she loses her baby. But does she not deserve justice for that baby bc SHE considers it more than cells??

    I guess I'm more just mulling it over.
    This is me.

    To me, this law allows justice for a woman who has lost a baby in a criminal scenario, to me it's not GBH, it's murder and should be treated as such.

    To me it's got NOTHING to do with abortion, it's intended to be a way of grieving mums get some justice for their dead children.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Mokeybear For This Useful Post:

    Amiedoll  (26-11-2013)

  9. #257
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    10,012
    Thanks
    14,124
    Thanked
    7,612
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    I see what you are saying, but the changing of the definition to mean that a 20 week old fetus has the same rights as a person is dangerous, no matter how you look at it. Why would groups like the NSW Bar Association, the Australian Medical Association NSW, and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists oppose it if it really were for the best?


    I suspect bc the crime is deemed as solely against her. And since the baby/fetus/cells lost it's life bc of a crime, their mother may want that recognised. I believe she has a right to that.

    As long as this doesn't merge into abortion and other areas women should have the right to lay charges against the death of their child. I believe very specific and strict rules to stop any interpretation in the courts could mean everyone gets what they want.

    Maybe I'm being naive though? I dunno...[/QUOTE]

  10. #258
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,839
    Thanks
    6,199
    Thanked
    16,883
    Reviews
    10
    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
    Awards:
    Bubhub Blogger - Thanks100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by beebs View Post
    I see what you are saying, but the changing of the definition to mean that a 20 week old fetus has the same rights as a person is dangerous, no matter how you look at it. Why would groups like the NSW Bar Association, the Australian Medical Association NSW, and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists oppose it if it really were for the best?
    Yes I have considered this, and I understand the concern, that it may morph into encroaching on other areas. It's a valid point.

    I guess I just feel like women should have the right to charge someone that kills their baby. And deeming it not a life is placing a value judgment on this, which is what we are fighting against. We want women to be able to define what grows in their uterus according to what they think. Not what others think. We take offence to pro lifers defining it a baby when many believe it isn't. Yet by being against this new law we are effectively telling these women that bc we don't consider it a baby, then it isn't.

    Geez I find this subject so difficult, I have so many conflicting emotions.

  11. #259
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    2,051
    Thanks
    8,078
    Thanked
    1,258
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by FiveInTheBed View Post
    If I wish to call someone a liar - I would simply call them a liar.

    Personally I think obtaining an abortion post 25 weeks would take more than casually wandering into a place or picking up the phone, using the line, "I can't afford it and think it would be a risk to my mental health".


    KaraB decided to put her experience in the thread.
    It sounds like a definite sh!tty situation - and I believe women should not be coerced by their partners.

    I know of someone who didn't 'find it that easy' and who ended up having the baby as a result... So I just wants to know more details.
    That's fine. I didn't just pick up the phone. It was more complicated than that. But why should I go into details when you seem hell bent on discrediting me? And I don't even see the point ofyou doing that. I didnt even try to burst your pro abortion bubble geez. This is still a painful memory for me. I have no desire to share my personal details for you to pick apart at your leisure.

  12. #260
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    10,012
    Thanks
    14,124
    Thanked
    7,612
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    A few things worry me about this proposed law;

    1) It was introduced into parliament by a vocal anti-abortionist, and like all the other vocal anti abortionists - I wonder what their true intentions are by passing this law.

    2) Abortions are not actually legal already and that is the end of it, the laws are complex and different in each state, if a 20 week old becomes a fetus, then what exactly will that mean in relation to abortions if they aren't legal. This is what it says on Family planning NSW;

    in NSW, an abortion is only lawful if the woman’s doctor believes on reasonable grounds that it is necessary to avoid a serious danger to her life or her physical or mental health, taking into account economic and social factors as well as medical ones, and the risks of the abortion are not out of proportion to the danger to be averted (Skene, 2004).
    Women are not entitled to abortion on demand.

    3) What will this mean in terms of medical intervention and childbirth?

    4) Why are almost many state medical, law and family groups against this bill? What aren't they thinking may happen?

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to beebs For This Useful Post:

    Lillynix  (26-11-2013),RobinSparkles  (26-11-2013)


 

Similar Threads

  1. Passed-down family recipes?
    By ~ElectricPink~ in forum Recipes & Lunchbox Ideas
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 15-11-2016, 17:12
  2. *Possible trigger* Zoe's Law
    By 1234Guest in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-09-2013, 15:13

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
Springfree Trampoline
Give the Ultimate Christmas Gift Springfree Trampoline
The World's Safest Trampoline™ is now also the world's first Smart Trampoline™. Sensors on the mat detect your every move and your jumps control fun, educational and active games on tablet. Secure the Ultimate Christmas Gift today!
sales & new stuffsee all
The Health Hub
Give a new mum a fitness boost for Christmas & New Year. Studio-based, small group training sessions - cardio, strength, core, Pilates & boxing. Choice of 16 hrs per week, flexible-arrival feature - bubs & kids welcome! Gift vouchers available.
featured supporter
Hunter Women's Health Centre
Hunter Women’s Health Centre care for women of all ages, in the full spectrum of their gynaecologic and obstetric health.
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!