+ Reply to Thread
Page 43 of 51 FirstFirst ... 334142434445 ... LastLast
Results 421 to 430 of 507
  1. #421
    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
    As you say, it is all about the stigma, it is so frowned upon in Ireland, that even though 360+ plus Irish women go to the UK every week for an abortion. They still voted it down in the referendum. It makes no sense to me, one can only conclude that they feel so "evil", "dirty", whatever about even having it done in the first place that they won't vote for any part of it to be decriminalised.

    Regardless of if a pro life person likes it or not, there are many valid reasons why terminations happen. And what might be valid for some, may not be valid for others. At the end of the day, people don't have the right to tell someone to terminate a severely disabled child, even though that child may need full time care for the rest of its life costing the health system loads. And so they shouldn't, if someone decides they want to raise a severely disabled child, then that is their choice.

    I just don't get why the same respect can't be shown to the other side, the side that chooses that they can't raise a severely disabled child. The whole thing is really disrespectful.

    Quote Originally Posted by Freyamum View Post
    I agree. And there would not have been such a fuss in Ireland if her death was in no way connected to the fact that abortion was illegal in any circumstances. The law is I believe being amended but just for extreme medical emergencies - but if you read some comments on Irish news sites you'd think abortion was going to be on demand at any stage of pregnancy. I know the abortion side of this debate is going off topic but it is interesting. In Ireland any form of birth control was deemed wrong as couples should only be having sex to try and get pregnant. Deciding when life starts is subjective. Morning after pill is wrong for some and even contraceptives as they prevent a potential person being conceived. So we need laws that make secular objective decisions about availability of abortions. Subjective ideas about when life starts shouldn't come into it in the legal sense.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to beebs For This Useful Post:

    HollyGolightly81  (29-11-2013)

  3. #422
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    7,848
    Thanks
    5,064
    Thanked
    4,446
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 17/4/15100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    Just on this sentence-
    A- many abortions are performed because that foetus (yes, it's unborn, it's technically a foetus, though you may choose to think of it as a baby) is NOT healthy. I would guess this applies to many later term abortions (I point this out because many people are less comfortable with later term abortions) You have no way of knowing how many "healthy" foetuses are aborted vs unhealthy. It's just a classic example of prolife emotive language designed to guilt.

    B- men can indeed have an opinion. But that's all it is. They do NOT have the right to legislate their opinions. These "opinions" are dangerous. If you don't believe me, google what happens to you if you suffer an ectopic pregnancy in El Salvador. No, I'll save you the trouble. You die. Because abortion is illegal there, no matter what. It doesn't matter that the pregnancy isn't viable. Because that foetus is granted personhood and a status above the pregnant woman.
    So what if only women could vote and they by majority, ruled that abortion should be criminalised? Is that okay for women to legislate on it? If a man shouldn't be able to legislate their opinion on this topic, then neither should women.

    For the record, I only believe in abortion in these circumstances:

    1. Medical cases where the foetus is not viable (trisonomy 18, ectopic, no heart beat, missing organs or limbs etc) AND the mother decides to terminate.

    2. Baby is a product of rape or incest AND the mother doesn't feel they can carry a product of that.

    3. If a mothers life were at risk if she went through with a pregnancy that would kill her.

    That is all. That is my opinion.

    But back to the original point, I think men and women as equals in this world should be able to legislate on this law.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to A-Squared For This Useful Post:

    VicPark  (29-11-2013)

  5. #423
    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 hate all the extreme attitudes to termination, it really annoys me - the lists, the silly lists!
    Terminations are should only be allowed under these circumstances 1), 2), 3) etc.

    What if it were the other way.

    You should only be allowed to carry a baby to term if;
    a) the child has no major health disabilities that will impact on the health system
    2) the child should only be able to be carried to term if it will have no major learning difficulties that impact on the education system
    3) the child should only be abled to be carried to term if the parents can provide for it
    4) the child should only be carried to term if said parents don't have too many kids
    5) The child should be terminated if the mother has a condition that will cause her to die during pregnancy thus leaving the already existing kids without a mother....

    etc. Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? See that is the major difference between Pro life and pro choice. Pro choice people don't go around telling people when they should and shouldn't continue a pregnancy, because it isn't our place to say such things.

    I don't agree with my examples above, I don't think anyone should be be telling anyone what they can and can't do with their own body and own pregnancy.

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to beebs For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (29-11-2013),HollyGolightly81  (29-11-2013),Rose&Aurelia&Hannah  (29-11-2013)

  7. #424
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    7,848
    Thanks
    5,064
    Thanked
    4,446
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 17/4/15100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by beebs View Post
    I hate all the extreme attitudes to termination, it really annoys me - the lists, the silly lists!
    Terminations are should only be allowed under these circumstances 1), 2), 3) etc.

    What if it were the other way.

    You should only be allowed to carry a baby to term if;
    a) the child has no major health disabilities that will impact on the health system
    2) the child should only be able to be carried to term if it will have no major learning difficulties that impact on the education system
    3) the child should only be abled to be carried to term if the parents can provide for it
    4) the child should only be carried to term if said parents don't have too many kids
    5) The child should be terminated if the mother has a condition that will cause her to die during pregnancy thus leaving the already existing kids without a mother....

    etc. Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? See that is the major difference between Pro life and pro choice. Pro choice people don't go around telling people when they should and shouldn't continue a pregnancy, because it isn't our place to say such things.

    I don't agree with my examples above, I don't think anyone should be be telling anyone what they can and can't do with their own body and own pregnancy.
    I'm not telling people how it should be nor should the above be legislated against, these are circumstances that would lead me to having an abortion, I should have worded it differently. I'm just staying my opinion on abortion as I hadn't done so yet.

  8. #425
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    6,718
    Thanks
    3,789
    Thanked
    3,838
    Reviews
    17
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 14/11/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Lillynix View Post
    Exactly, Beebs.

    It's one thing to have an opinion based on your personal beliefs, but it is another story entirely when those opinions and beliefs are sneaking into politics, especially when those opinions and beliefs stem from religious morals and are impacting on the lives of women in our country.

    Ultimately, there are ALWAYS going to be women who want to terminate their pregnancies for a variety of reasons. Criminalising abortion (which I might add it was still a criminal offence here in Tasmania until this very week. Tasmania's bill was based on the one they now want to remove from VIC), is dangerous territory.

    Whilst criminalising abortion isn't the same as making it illegal, it still has pretty big ramifications. It makes it a lot harder for women to access safe abortion practices as well as reinstating and reinforcing the stigma around abortion, and when something is stigmatised, women who are wanting/needing an abortion, for their variety of reasons, are less likely to seek out the safe, medical procedure, and instead opt for more dangerous options.

    Shouldn't we, as a society, accept (though not necessarily agree with) that abortion is something that happens, and therefore, make it safe, legal and non-criminal, so those women who DO seek it out, can be safe? Do we really want a society that shuns abortion so much that women feel forced into unsafe practices, putting themselves at great risk, and the unborn at even greater risk?

    It all comes down to humanity. Is it more humane to provide a safe medical procedure for those who want/need it, and which has little risks of complications for the woman and the unborn. Or more humane to try and deny these safe practices and stigmatise them even further, and risk women opting for more dangerous scenarios with much, much greater risks to herself and the unborn?
    Can I ask what the difference between being criminalised and being illegal is? I thought it was the same thing.

  9. #426
    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 wasn't singling you out at all! It seems to be a very common theme on BH with Pro lifers to put these lists together.

    Quote Originally Posted by Allie Pallie View Post
    I'm not telling people how it should be nor should the above be legislated against, these are circumstances that would lead me to having an abortion, I should have worded it differently. I'm just staying my opinion on abortion as I hadn't done so yet.

  10. #427
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    12,708
    Thanks
    9,558
    Thanked
    12,691
    Reviews
    0
    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 9/1/15Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 7/11/14Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 3/10/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    VP what planet do you live on? If you honestly think that banning abortion is not a women's rights issue I suggest you do some further reading on the subject. I say this with respect- this is a MUCH bigger issue than you seem to think.
    You keep siting suicide as an example- I work in law enforcement and I can tell you, people that attempt suicide are not dealt with as criminals, they are dealt with under the mental health act.
    I agree with euthanasia and want to see it legalized. The other two examples aren't comparable as nudity and masturbation ARE legal in your own home.
    Well it appears I am living on a planet where I have an opinion that is not 100% inline with the BH feminist majority ....and that's something some people seem to have a great deal of difficult in understanding (How dare a female have a point of view that isn't 100% supportive of women doing whatever they want with their bodies! Shock, horror!).

    I never said its not a woman's rights issue. I believe it's a baby issue too and that the right to life outweighs the woman's right to abort. I get this has implications on a 'woman's right' and it does not worry me simply because I do not think a woman should have the right to abort for non medically necessary reasons. That's how I feel, that's my opinion, I know it's different from most on BH and I am 100% ok with that.
    I think men have a right to an opinion on the value of a babies life. I think it is impracticable to say a man can not introduce legislation on something that involves a woman. And sometimes I agree with those penis wielding beings against the views of other women (again, shock! Horror!).

    I agree with the slants you put on the examples I mentioned. My point was simply that society has determined in many cases that someone can not do whatever they want whenever they want with their own body. 100% bodily autonomy does not exist, people are in denial if they expect it, and are distorting the truth if they are using it as an argument in advocating against Zoe's law.

    I am supportive of Zoe's law. I am not supportive of abortion for non medical reasons, although I am not necessarily advocating a ban.
    - if people disagree fair enough but that's my opinion so ....get over it already
    Last edited by VicPark; 29-11-2013 at 17:03.

  11. #428
    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
    Quote Originally Posted by DesperatelySeekingSleep View Post
    Can I ask what the difference between being criminalised and being illegal is? I thought it was the same thing.
    I'm no expert, but my personal understanding is this:
    Whilst abortion is legal in Australia, it is a criminal offence in some states/territories to make use of the medical procedure. So, medical practitioners who perform medical terminations aren't doing anything wrong - because abortion is legal in Australia, the woman seeking out the procedure can be charged because it is an offence to seek out/have the procedure.

    It is a bit more complex than that, and it does vary from state to state as to what the specific regulations are. If there are any criminal law buffs hanging around, please feel free to correct me, though but I could very well be wrong!

  12. #429
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,806
    Thanks
    7,267
    Thanked
    9,720
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Allie Pallie View Post
    True, but again men can't have babies which hanged things whether you like it or not.

    I mean damn those pharmaceutical companies for not giving women access to prostate cancer drugs!

    And damn those sports equipment companies who make cricket 'cups' only for men!

    Not to mention condom companies! Those things just don't fit my finger!
    Quote Originally Posted by Allie Pallie View Post
    So what if only women could vote and they by majority, ruled that abortion should be criminalised? Is that okay for women to legislate on it? If a man shouldn't be able to legislate their opinion on this topic, then neither should women.

    For the record, I only believe in abortion in these circumstances:

    1. Medical cases where the foetus is not viable (trisonomy 18, ectopic, no heart beat, missing organs or limbs etc) AND the mother decides to terminate.

    2. Baby is a product of rape or incest AND the mother doesn't feel they can carry a product of that.

    3. If a mothers life were at risk if she went through with a pregnancy that would kill her.

    That is all. That is my opinion.

    But back to the original point, I think men and women as equals in this world should be able to legislate on this law.
    So which is it- men are equals, or men are totally different?

    Fact is, men do not have the same investment in this issue as women do, because it is not their bodies on the line. It is not they who go through the surgery or medical induced abortion- it's women. They can have an opinion, sure, but it's not an equal one. So no, they should not be the ones legislating it- not without SIGNIFCANT consultation with women- because it is WOMEN affected primarily. I do not believe that a cabinet made up primarily of men will adequately interpret, understand or represent the interests of women without significant female input. And yes, the reverse is also true.

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

    beebs  (29-11-2013),Stiflers Mom  (29-11-2013)

  14. #430
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    6,718
    Thanks
    3,789
    Thanked
    3,838
    Reviews
    17
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 14/11/14100 Posts in a week
    Quote Originally Posted by Lillynix View Post
    I'm no expert, but my personal understanding is this:
    Whilst abortion is legal in Australia, it is a criminal offence in some states/territories to make use of the medical procedure. So, medical practitioners who perform medical terminations aren't doing anything wrong - because abortion is legal in Australia, the woman seeking out the procedure can be charged because it is an offence to seek out/have the procedure.

    It is a bit more complex than that, and it does vary from state to state as to what the specific regulations are. If there are any criminal law buffs hanging around, please feel free to correct me, though but I could very well be wrong!
    Ok I think I get it. :thumbup:


 

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
Mother and Baby Shop
Save $$$ during our Christmas Sale Mother and Baby Shop
Great prices on Schoenhut kids pianos, toys, baby clothing as well as big brands like Pigeon, NUK, Cherub Baby and many more. Sale starts on 1 November 2016 and ends on the 27 December 2016. Hurry! Place your order today!
sales & new stuffsee all
Pea Pods
Buy 2 Award Winning Pea Pods Reusable One Size Nappies for only $38 (in your choice of colours) and receive a FREE roll of Bamboo Liners. Don't miss out, we don't usually have discounts on the nappies, so grab this special offer!
Special Offer! Save $12
featured supporter
Hills Swimming Kenthurst
Located in the beautiful suburb of Kenthurst and boasts a heated 25m pool. We conduct world-leading Baby and Parent Classes, Preschool Classes, School Age and Squad Training. Our classes are small, our service personal and our quality of the highest.
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!