+ Reply to Thread
Results 271 to 280 of 507
26-11-2013 19:24 #271
26-11-2013 19:28 #272-
- Join Date
- Apr 2012
That's all we have on here, our opinions. There is no overarching right or wrong with this issue. Just a bunch of opinions.!
While we are on the topic of opinions....In my opinion any act to harm a baby over 20 weeks (where the act is not being done to protect the mothers/bubs life) is wrong. In my opinion having specific laws to protect a baby is very right.
The Following User Says Thank You to VicPark For This Useful Post:
26-11-2013 19:29 #273
The Following User Says Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:
26-11-2013 19:31 #274
26-11-2013 19:32 #275Senior Member
- Join Date
- May 2006
26-11-2013 19:36 #276
It may be the very beginning of life, but its still life.
I know what u mean, and I understand we all have passionate feelings on this subject. For me its my religious views and belief in God that cement the view that its not just the womans choice to do as she pleases - I believe we are accountable for the choices we make. And I dont believe taking anothers life is our right, just because that other person is growing in our own body
Just my opinion. I know many dont agree but its how it is for me.
Sent from my GT-I9305T using The Bub Hub mobile app
26-11-2013 19:39 #277
Have I conversed with you on this subject before?
I have no idea why you are going off like this.
You said it was "remarkably easy"
I doubted it was "remarkably easy", based on my understanding of the current laws in place.
I personally wouldn't call having my case assessed by more than one doctor, or a panel of doctors - "remarkably easy".
eta. or yes, travelling interstate.
I acknowledge people may be able to 'play' the current guide lines.
If we can leave personal attacks out of it (because I'm definitely not trying to attack you).
Last edited by FiveInTheBed; 26-11-2013 at 19:48.
26-11-2013 19:42 #278
The Following User Says Thank You to BigRedV For This Useful Post:
26-11-2013 19:42 #279
26-11-2013 19:43 #280
When I read this article way back when at the start of this thread, I interpreted the bill as being for the rights of BOTH mother and unborn child, allowing parents to get justice on behalf of their unborn otherwise healthy baby that is (fatally) injured due to another.
This bill is not related to abortion in any way! And although I understand the arguments presented and am entirely pro-choice, I just don't see how it relates to this bill, and surely most of the supporters of this bill would NEVER agree to it if it in any way threatened women's rights of bodily autonomy!
They way I see it, this bill allows for criminal charges on behalf of an unborn child if the parents choose that avenue. This is not about a mothers bodily autonomy at all and I see a clear distinction between that and criminal behaviour of another human causing injury or death. Two different things entirely
Hunter Women's Health CentreHunter Women’s Health Centre care for women of all ages, in the full spectrum of their gynaecologic and obstetric ...
LATESTToilet training: when is the best time to start?Why it is OK for your child to be differentWhat is a blessing way? How is it different to a baby shower?
POPULARWhen can I start giving chores to my children?New baby nursery checklist – a guide to newborn essentialsWhat to pack for labour and hospital – a checklist
FORUMS - chatting now ...
Chickenpox after being immunised?Pro-Vaccination
Am I the only thread killer??General Chat
Mixed slumber partyGeneral Chat
Primary IVF SydneyConception & Fertility General Chat
Pokemon go. Chat #2General Chat
Selling your house privately...General Chat
Cashless society - all for it, or disagree?General Chat
Suspected endometriosis with no symptoms?Endometriosis Chat
Same sex parents or parents to be chat!Same Sex Parents
Career change - good idea?Working Hubbers - Employed