Remove this Banner Ad

Abortion

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

A bit of hypocrisy here !!

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3602472.html

After seven days of unrest, Lord Mayor Robert Doyle dispatched riot police on the 100 or so protesters - swept away by the US-spawned 'Occupation' zeitgeist - who were squatting in the town's City Square. The Council claims its decision to break up the disturbance was based on a handful of complaints from businesses in the square, along with the possible safety risks involved in a mass gathering.

Doyle has commended police for the haste eviction process, adding that he will continue to place civic order high on the Council agenda.

"The careful strategy to move police through the City Square incrementally, reclaiming the square... brought normality very quickly to what was an eyesore and public health hazard," he said in The Herald Sun on Sunday.

While one 'eyesore' has been removed from the public's gaze, another glaring irony remains. The Lord Mayor maintains his age old blind spot for the ongoing right-to-be-heard battle fought outside a lawful institution on the city's eastern fringe.

Anti-abortion protesters have staked outside the East Melbourne Fertility Control Clinic since its doors first opened to the public in 1972, and have rooted themselves firmly in the ground ever since.
 
A rather obvious difference in that those protestors are not there overnight and have not set up tents, for starters.
 
A despicable procedure, should only be carried out when the health/safety of the Mother or the Fetus is at serious risk. I am not a Catholic.
 
Of the three sites I looked at, all had a disproportionate catholic look about, and input to, them. The other dead giveaway is the litany of other physiological and psychological byproducts of abortion they quote. It may be there is unbiased evidence about this somewhere, but I can't be bothered looking for it through all that hate-filled dross.

I did your google search and found that every website claiming your statement to be fact was linked to anti-abortion groups or services. I'm not buying your story and I doubt anyone else is, so try and find another way to convince yourself, because the one your using now is crap.

It is difficult to imagine how you'd react to somebody who wasn't in furious agreement with you.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Mississippi voters reject anti-abortion initiative:


http://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/09/politics/mississippi-election/index.html

Jackson, Mississippi (CNN) -- Mississippi voters rejected an amendment to the state constitution that would have defined life as starting at conception, and outlawed abortion and many forms of birth control if passed.

"Life begins at conception"

Critics say the amendment was a restrictive attempt to outlaw abortion -- even in the case of mothers who are the victims of rape and incest.

Personhood USA uses the amendments in an attempt to maneuver a direct challenge to the Roe v. Wade ruling. "We will establish a culture of life," said Dr. Freda Bush, a Yes on 26 spokeswoman. "This is a cultural war from the womb to the tomb and we will be back."


Defeated....for now......you know it won't them conservatives won't stay away for long......methinks to get it over the line next time they will exclude rape and incest cases.
 
Mississippi voters reject anti-abortion initiative:


http://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/09/politics/mississippi-election/index.html




Defeated....for now......you know it won't them conservatives won't stay away for long......methinks to get it over the line next time they will exclude rape and incest cases.

Which would just make a mockery of their whole position.

Once you make that exception, you acknowledge that a a foetus =/= a baby, because nobody would advocate killing a baby just because its conception occurred in a rape.

Once you have made that distinction, you've accepted that a foetus does not have the same rights as an actual baby you are almost all the way to being pro-choice.
 
I think that about 24 weeks is when it's really towing the line.

Even then each specific case should be assessed individually and in regard to the situation of the parent/parents and societies ability to act as benefactor for the entire life of the resultant human.
Such as a fetus which may survive to live yet not as a viable human being.
Modern medicine has done away with many of the natural mechanisms which saw spontaneous abortion, still birth and very early childhood mortality plummet in the 19th & 20th centuries, with the accompanying skyrocketing in population growth.
 
Personally I consider "viable" to mean "able to maintain life" unassisted by machinery, constant intervention and/or chemical regime after childhood.
Maybe callus, but actually inline with nature and natural selection.
The ability to "contribute to society" has nothing to do with being a viable human. Firstly there are many, many thousands of viable humans who don't contribute anything whatsoever to "our" society" and second "society" is a fluid construct at the best of times.

I don't see any link between society and physical survival.
The entire concept of "contribution to society" seems to assume humans as commodities.
 
I agree except "viable human being" is subjective. Not sure if you mean it in the physically healthy way given your following sentence, or in a "contributing member of society way", or both?

That's still our problem. Definitions masking logic.
When we still don't understand what life is, then we do have a problem.
 
I am for the choice of the mother. Her body , her decision. I however like the way it is run where I live, there are 3 inidcations, and if any one is given and one had councelling three days before than it can be done.
In countries where it is outlawed they are putting the lives of women at risks, especially in medical cases.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

I am for the choice of the mother. Her body , her decision. I however like the way it is run where I live, there are 3 inidcations, and if any one is given and one had councelling three days before than it can be done.

I am for the choice of life. We either respect it or we don't.
Let's not massage ourselves by saying it's O.K. in e.g. 69 days and 23 hours but not in 70 days.
We're full of shit and have no understanding of life itself, be it good or bad.
 
We're full of shit and have no understanding of life itself, be it good or bad.

If this be so, does that merely mean none of us human understands life, or are you suggesting there are other beings or objects that enjoy such understanding?
 
If this be so, does that mean nobody understands life, or are you suggesting there are other beings or objects that enjoy some understanding?


We're still fumbling around as to where we came from and why we're here and we can tag our answers any way we want to, but the truth is that we just don't know.
Our views on abortion will also swing about through the course of our lives and to some degree to suit our needs, dependant to what situation we may have found ourselves in.

My view for now?
It's O.K. to abort anothers life but it's not O.K. to euthanize your own?
Just doesn't sound right to me.
 
Uh Oh:

A HEALTHY 32-week-old fetus was accidentally terminated in a botched procedure at the Royal Women's Hospital in Melbourne.

A Victorian mother, pregnant with twin boys she had already named, had made the agonising decision to abort one of the babies on doctors' advice, the Herald Sun reported.

She had been told that one twin had a congenital heart defect that would require years of operations, if he survived at all.

An ultrasound clinician had checked the healthy baby, who was in a separate sac to the sick baby, before the termination.

But just after 2.30pm on Tuesday the wrong baby was injected, terminating the healthy pregnancy.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/medical-bungle-at-royal-womens-hospital-kills-healthy-fetus/story-e6frf7jx-1226204318838
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Very blurry line too to abort a 'sick' baby at 8 months. I'm pro 'abortions for all', but at 8 months, that's effectively a baby, and aborting it because it is sick is effectively euthanasia. What an terrible situation.
 
I feel sorry for the parents as much as I would with any parents who had their child die late term. Hopefully they can still have children and are able to move on with life.

I feel especially sorry for the person who carried out the procudure who will no doubt live with this for the rest of their lives and probably lose their job and livelihood. Such a simple, devastating mistake.
 
Very blurry line too to abort a 'sick' baby at 8 months. I'm pro 'abortions for all', but at 8 months, that's effectively a baby, and aborting it because it is sick is effectively euthanasia. What an terrible situation.

Yeah, for sure. I wonder if it will be a malpractice lawsuit or something more? In any case it will set a legal precedent that was not there before, as far as I'm aware. An improbable 'if', but if it WAS ruled a form of euthanasia then the parents would be culpable for ordering it in the first place.
 
People should have a right to have or not have a baby its as simple as that. People would say its killing and all, but if these people are so concerned, ask them to take the baby and take a good care of them. If the law makes it illegal to abort, then imagine the plight of a girl or lady who was r*ped and can't abort the unwanted baby.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom