[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by the truth

Great post. Aborting a child is the cowards way out.

Spoken like a truly ignorant man who'll never know what it's like to be pregnant. Don't judge someone for their actions when you'll never be in their situation.

[coffee]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Spoken like a truly ignorant man who'll never know what it's like to be pregnant. Don't judge someone for their actions when you'll never be in their situation.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Spoken like a truly ignorant man who'll never know what it's like to be pregnant. Don't judge someone for their actions when you'll never be in their situation.

spoken like a truly ignorant person who doesnt care about the mass murder of millions of healthy babies, in addition to the pressure put on women to have abortions and the lack of time taken to offer them and the fathers time , counselling and support to show them all the options open to them, including adoption, shame on you

[Redway]

the truth should be banned from threads like this

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Redway

the truth should be banned from threads like this

yey lets have fascism...typical radical liberal, free speech for all unless you disagree with me, what a sick joke

yes ban the truth, without the truth all thats left is lies and millions of dead innocent babies

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by the truth

spoken like a truly ignorant person who doesnt care about the mass murder of millions of healthy babies, in addition to the pressure put on women to have abortions and the lack of time taken to offer them and the fathers time , counselling and support to show them all the options open to them, including adoption, shame on you

At the point of being allowed to have an abortion, it isn't a baby, it hasn't got any sustainable advancement.. and the 'pressure' put on women to have abortions? I'm pretty sure no-one is pressured into having abortions.
The point of having an abortion is to put a stop to an unwanted pregnancy, so why would adoption be a better option for someone who doesn't want to go through with one?

[the truth]

Originally Posted by LiamPRW

At the point of being allowed to have an abortion, it isn't a baby, it hasn't got any sustainable advancement.. and the 'pressure' put on women to have abortions? I'm pretty sure no-one is pressured into having abortions.
The point of having an abortion is to put a stop to an unwanted pregnancy, so why would adoption be a better option for someone who doesn't want to go through with one?

pretty sure? you havent got aclue what your etalking about , tens of thousands of women complain they felt pressured and rushed into having abortions and felt that no one took the time to explain all the other options available. the pressure can come from the medical staff, the her parents, her family, her partner , her new partner etc etc vast numbers of women regret it forever, so too do many fathers

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by the truth

pretty sure? you havent got aclue what your etalking about , tens of thousands of women complain they felt pressured and rushed into having abortions and felt that no one took the time to explain all the other options available. the pressure can come from the medical staff, the her parents, her family, her partner , her new partner etc etc vast numbers of women regret it forever, so too do many fathers

Please don't tell me i don't know what I'm talking about, that is beyond patronizing.
Yes, some people may live to regret it and some may feel pressurized by people to go through with an abortion, but that doesn't mean that it's a bad thing over all, some woman have abortions early on in their teenage years because they wouldn't be able to cope with a baby or they weren't supported by their family or the father, or they weren't financially stable, but in the future turn their life around and find that they could have dealt with keeping the baby.. but most of the time when someone has an abortion, at that time it would have been the right thing to do, for the woman and for the sake of the child that could have been.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by LiamPRW

Please don't tell me i don't know what I'm talking about, that is beyond patronizing.
Yes, some people may live to regret it and some may feel pressurized by people to go through with an abortion, but that doesn't mean that it's a bad thing over all, some woman have abortions early on in their teenage years because they wouldn't be able to cope with a baby or they weren't supported by their family or the father, or they weren't financially stable, but in the future turn their life around and find that they could have dealt with keeping the baby.. but most of the time when someone has an abortion, at that time it would have been the right thing to do, for the woman and for the sake of the child that could have been.

complete and utter nonsense. the sake of the child that could have been? the child is dead , killed forever , silently temrinated and never given a split second of life on earth to fulfill their potential.

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by the truth

complete and utter nonsense. the sake of the child that could have been? the child is dead , killed forever , silently temrinated and never given a split second of life on earth to fulfill their potential.

It is not a child, it is an embryo without any development, you can say 'kill the child/baby' all you want, guilt tripping people won't get them to change their minds.. If we go by that logic and every single doctor told women with unwanted pregnancies that they shouldn't have one because they are killing a baby, then not only would we have a whole lot more people in the world, when we're already overpopulated anyway, but there would also be children in the world who weren't wanted and that could lead to them being neglected or abused because women have been forced to keep a baby that they didn't want and couldn't connect or bond with.. If an embryo is terminated before it starts developing into a baby, then it doesn't suffer, it has no knowledge that it ever existed, so how would it suffer?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by LiamPRW

the 'pressure' put on women to have abortions? I'm pretty sure no-one is pressured into having abortions.
The point of having an abortion is to put a stop to an unwanted pregnancy, so why would adoption be a better option for someone who doesn't want to go through with one?

There is pressure, often from family or the "father" but also the pressure of societal exectation.

There are many women who have rushed (or been rushed) into choosing abortion who go on to regret it for the rest of their life. There are women who regret it almost instantly after it's too late and go on to suffer from depression or even post-traumatic stress disorder. To try to claim otherwise is just false... and grossly offensive to anyone who has chosen, and later, regretted, abortion.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by the truth

spoken like a truly ignorant person who doesnt care about the mass murder of millions of healthy babies, in addition to the pressure put on women to have abortions and the lack of time taken to offer them and the fathers time , counselling and support to show them all the options open to them, including adoption, shame on you

Shame on you for your wilfull ignorance and your continued misogyny. Once again, Embryos are not babies, they are a collection of non-sentient cells. They are about as close to being a baby as your fingernails are. Calling them babies just makes you sound like a fool.

Stop trying to sound like you care about the women in these situations, we all know that you don't. You have no understanding of this situation and it's obvious by how blindingly moronic your posts are.

[Anaesthesia]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Shame on you for your wilfull ignorance and your continued misogyny. Once again, Embryos are not babies, they are a collection of non-sentient cells. They are about as close to being a baby as your fingernails are. Calling them babies just makes you sound like a fool.

Stop trying to sound like you care about the women in these situations, we all know that you don't. You have no understanding of this situation and it's obvious by how blindingly moronic your posts are.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Once again, Embryos are not babies, they are a collection of non-sentient cells. They are about as close to being a baby as your fingernails are.

I'm sorry but this is only true at the early development stage... beyond 12 weeks gestation you're simply incorrect. Abortions are legally carried out until 20+ weeks.

By implication, in terms of morality, aborting at say 16 weeks is logically no different to drowning a baby at birth. It is no more or less human, and a newborn has no more or less "life experience". If you're defining sentience as consciousness, then a 16 week old fetus is sentient. If you're defining sentience as having a concept or fear of mortality, then you might as well advocate the postpartum abortion of toddlers, because they have neither.

Incidentally... bucket-drowning was a fairly common method of "birth control", up until a hundred or so years ago...


Anyway, all I'm saying is, you are perfectly entitled to define your own moral stance on the issue of abortion... but, I find it really grating when people use the (completely inaccurate) "bundle of cells" justification. It's true for a couple of weeks, but throughout the majority of a pregnancy, it's just a completely false statement.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I'm sorry but this is only true at the early development stage... beyond 12 weeks gestation you're simply incorrect. Abortions are legally carried out until 20+ weeks.

By implication, in terms of morality, aborting at say 16 weeks is logically no different to drowning a baby at birth. It is no more or less human, and a newborn has no more or less "life experience". If you're defining sentience as consciousness, then a 16 week old fetus is sentient. If you're defining sentience as having a concept or fear of mortality, then you might as well advocate the postpartum abortion of toddlers, because they have neither.

Incidentally... bucket-drowning was a fairly common method of "birth control", up until a hundred or so years ago...


Anyway, all I'm saying is, you are perfectly entitled to define your own moral stance on the issue of abortion... but, I find it really grating when people use the (completely inaccurate) "bundle of cells" justification. It's true for a couple of weeks, but throughout the majority of a pregnancy, it's just a completely false statement.

Abortions after 12 weeks must be recommended by a doctor. I'm aware that there is some manipulation of that law, and I would like to see that ended. Only for serious medical complications should abortions be carried out after 12 weeks. But I still agree with abortion up to that point if that's the choice of the woman because I believe every child should be a wanted child.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I'm sorry but this is only true at the early development stage... beyond 12 weeks gestation you're simply incorrect. Abortions are legally carried out until 20+ weeks.

By implication, in terms of morality, aborting at say 16 weeks is logically no different to drowning a baby at birth. It is no more or less human, and a newborn has no more or less "life experience". If you're defining sentience as consciousness, then a 16 week old fetus is sentient. If you're defining sentience as having a concept or fear of mortality, then you might as well advocate the postpartum abortion of toddlers, because they have neither.

Incidentally... bucket-drowning was a fairly common method of "birth control", up until a hundred or so years ago...


Anyway, all I'm saying is, you are perfectly entitled to define your own moral stance on the issue of abortion... but, I find it really grating when people use the (completely inaccurate) "bundle of cells" justification. It's true for a couple of weeks, but throughout the majority of a pregnancy, it's just a completely false statement.

The majority of abortions take place during the embryonic stage so for the most part it's a true statement.