Considering the British Isle’s and perhaps the planet is already overpopulated are you suggesting we should take a route that would lead to an increase in the birth rate?

How about killing old people as an aging population appears to be the problem in the British Isles ?

Or if that sounds a bit extreme how about not treating anyone who develops cancer ? We would save money too.

How about killing old people as an aging population appears to be the problem in the British Isles ?

Or if that sounds a bit extreme how about not treating anyone who develops cancer ? We would save money too.

I actually believe in a government mandated age based cut off point before you have to pay for treatment yourself. What I’m not sure is what that age should be.

Besides abortion doesn’t hold the moral equivalence of condemning someone to death that has self awareness.

abortion doesn’t hold the moral equivalence of condemning someone to death that has self awareness

OK to kill people when they lose consciousness then ? How about people in a deep sleep ? ….. they don’t know what’s happening.

It’s a matter of personal philosophy when a foetus becomes a life. For some it’s the moment of conception. For some it’s at the point if birth when it first takes a breath on it’s own. For many more its somewhere in between. Thus, any “cut-off” point will be too early for some, too late for others. The existing legislation, which in itself is a compromise, has been working fine for years. Hunt has more important things to be going on with instead of divisive shite like this. Leave well enough alone.

What I’m not sure is what that age should be.

I see what you’ve done there… 😈

Abortion – an extremely intimate and personal subject – therefore nothing to do with anyone other than the person carrying the foetus.

What gives you the right to even think you have the right to pass opinion…

OK to kill people when they lose consciousness then ? How about people in a deep sleep ? ….. they don’t know what’s happening.

Yes, if they’re never going to regain consciousness. Fetuses are not yet functioning individuals with memory or self awareness – in effect they are non-people.

How about killing old people as an ageing population appears to be the problem in the British Isles ?

I’m right up for that.. where’s my chainsaw..?

What does old biddy marinated in wee and lavender taste like..?
A bit stringy I expect but I’m sure you could tenderise ’em with a strict diet of sherry and Werthers Originals..

Name one useful thing that an old person does.. If we just bumped everyone off at 70 we’d save a fortune..
NHS, Winter fuel allowance, RTAs, free bus passes..
with the money we’d save we could double my benefits and still have enough left over to make every other week christmas..

and think of all that cheap meat.. how old are you ernie..?
you’re getting on a bit aren’t you..?

omnomnomnomnom

c’mon, show us your bus pass

Fetuses are not yet functioning individuals with memory or self awareness – in effect they are non-people.

There is no noticeable difference in memory or self awareness between immediately before birth, and immediately after birth, so presumable the “non-people” stage lasts for quite some time.

There is no noticeable difference in memory or self awareness between immediately before birth, and immediately after birth, so presumable the “non-people” stage lasts for quite some time.

Yup…..and?

I guess I’m committing genocide if I **** into a sock, after all every sperm is a potential person.

Yup…..and?

And therefore if you apply your logic it has to be applied beyond the moment of childbirth. I would have thought that point was obvious.

Your “**** into a sock” comment has absolutely no relevance to the point, and I presume that you have thrown it in in an attempt to steer away from what see as dodgy ground.

And therefore if you apply your logic it has to be applied beyond the moment of childbirth. I would have thought that point was obvious.

Your “**** into a sock” has no absolutely relevance to the point, and I presume you have thrown it in an attempt to steer away from what see as dodgy ground.

I think you can guess my opinion on the first point. It’s something along the lines of so what?

I think it has relevance, why is a human fetus any different at 24 weeks than a human sperm cell. It has a heartbeat but not much else. Do you think that killing it is wrong because it might go onto become a person if it doesn’t undergo natural termination? A sperm might go on to become a person if I stick it in the right person. The only difference is statistical probability but I don’t see how that has anything to do with the field of ethics.

A sperm might go on to become a person if I stick it in the right person.

I can see that you are still trying to divert attention away from your original point, which was :

“Fetuses are not yet functioning individuals with memory or self awareness – in effect they are non-people.”

That comment can equally apply to a new born child. Lack of memory or self awareness is not a recognised basis for ending a human life. You can talk about **** and shagging as much as you like bwaarp, but it won’t change that fact.

That comment can equally apply to a new born child. Lack of memory or self awareness is not a recognised basis for ending a human life. You can talk about **** and shagging as much as you like bwaarp, but it won’t change that fact.

You still don’t get it, I’m in total agreement with Richard Dawkins on the point of infanticide from an existential ethical standpoint.

However I’m not sure infanticide has any public health benefits, so from a medical standpoint I think it is perhaps unethical from a utilitarian perspective.

Still think you’ve cornered me, be warned, intellectually I’m like a greased pig.

It’s a matter of personal philosophy when a foetus becomes a life.

Not really.
We could have very different opinions on whether the same foetus is alive, but that doesn’t change the fact of whether it is or not.
Your or my “personal philosophy” do not determine another life’s existence, only how we personally interact with it.

Not really.

No, yes, really. I probably could have been clearer though.
Let me clarify. It’s a matter of personal philosophy when the foetus becomes something which one feels can be terminated or not.

We could have very different opinions on whether the same foetus is alive, but that doesn’t change the fact of whether it is or not.

Can you clarify what you mean by this? I didn’t mention anything about something being “alive”. Merely whether we view it as a life or not.

Can you clarify what you mean by this? I didn’t mention anything about something being “alive”. Merely whether we view it as a life or not.

A single cell is life, such as human sperm or eggs. Life just becomes increasingly complex in humans until the age of full adult maturity. If pro-lifers aren’t involved the abortion debate revolves around how complex that life can be when it is terminated.

Here’s a question to throw in for all of you blokes commenting on this topic –

If you were the one who had to carry an unplanned, unwanted baby to term, with the weight gain, stretch marks and permanent, irreversible changes happening to YOUR body due to it, would your view be different?

Thanks bwaarp, but I’d rather loum answered the question I asked of him.

Else, can we agree on a term for that point at which a person feels he or she can terminate a pregnancy? That’s what I mean by “life”. Apologies if its a rather crude usage, but it’s late and I can’t come up with anything cleverer this evening.

Personally I have always felt that a sensible approach to deciding your version of ‘life’ is brain activity, can the fetus feel pain or not. Ethically I feel that any pain caused by termination of pregnancies or the execution of prisoners cannot be justified ethically for a variety of reasons, except under certain circumstances. This to some researchers puts the abortion limit at 35 weeks.

loum, I’ll rejoin tomorrow if you’ve answered. I’m done for this evening.

A lot of the posts above she discussing “social” abortions. A 12 week limit wouldn’t stop these – you’ve pretty much decided whether you want a baby or not by the time you’ve been pregnant for 3 months.

The abortions after this time tend to be for serious medical conditions, often picked up at the anomaly scan at 18-20 weeks. How would you feel if you were told at that time that your unborn child didn’t have a head (don’t google anencephaly, it’s heartbreaking) and that you would have to give birth to it several months later and watch it die within minutes?

That’s why we have a 24 week limit.

If you were the one who had to carry an unplanned, unwanted baby to term, with the weight gain, stretch marks and permanent, irreversible changes happening to YOUR body due to it, would your view be different?

I’m not sure how you managed it, but that’s almost as good an argument against abortion as it is for abortion: a few stretch marks vs a foetus’ life

but what about killing and eating grannies…?

This to some researchers puts the abortion limit at 35 weeks.

Being a father to a 27 weeker, frankly those researchers are wrong.

That’s up in the Lords next week Yunki.

Soon mate, soon………. 😆

A lot of the posts above she discussing “social” abortions. A 12 week limit wouldn’t stop these – you’ve pretty much decided whether you want a baby or not by the time you’ve been pregnant for 3 months.

The abortions after this time tend to be for serious medical conditions, often picked up at the anomaly scan at 18-20 weeks. How would you feel if you were told at that time that your unborn child didn’t have a head (don’t google anencephaly, it’s heartbreaking) and that you would have to give birth to it several months later and watch it die within minutes?

That’s why we have a 24 week limit.

Don’t quote me on this (I am not an obstetrician and thus it’s not my area of expertise), but I think current legislation allows termination up to 28 weeks in this situation.

Andy

No limit if there are severe abnormalities. Lowering the limit would not affect terminations for conditions incompatible with life.

Why should I be surprised that there are so many in the pro camp regarding the murdering of babies on stw.

Why should I be surprised that there are so many in the pro camp regarding the murdering of babies on stw.

I don’t see this anywhere – are you looking at the same thread? This is a thread about the termination of pregnancies, not infanticide. Perhaps you’d better find your reading specs?

stevewhyte – Member
Why should I be surprised that there are so many in the pro camp regarding the murdering of babies on stw.

So you think that there is no case for abortion, ever?

Why should I be surprised that there are so many in the pro camp regarding the murdering of babies on stw

As with all things, termination of pregnancy is an issue with many shades of grey. With all due respect, if you’re capable of seeing it in that degree of black & white, I would suggest you’re oversimplifying.

Andy

deadlydarcy

Let me clarify. It’s a matter of personal philosophy when the foetus becomes something which one feels can be terminated or not.

IMHO, this is a different point to the statement you originally made and probably not one which I would have replied to disagree with. To me, this statement concerns one’s personal philosophy determining one’s personal actions within a given situation. Fair enough.
However, it’s not the same as:

It’s a matter of personal philosophy when a foetus becomes a life.

I still can’t agree that the underlying facts of the situation are related to anyone’s individual personal philosophy. IMO, there’s a fact there. Through time, the foetus is a life or it is not a life. I’m not claiming to know the answer as to when that life begins: my point is that my (or your) “personal philosophy” has no effect on when that is – only on when we treat it as a life or not. To me, it’s a subtle but important difference. Possibly this is closer to what you said second time concerning “whether we view it as a life”.

Can you clarify what you mean by this? I didn’t mention anything about something being “alive”. Merely whether we view it as a life or not.
POSTED 8 HOURS AGO # REPORT-POST

If it’s important to you to make the distinction between “a life” and “alive” then I’ll reword my original phrasing. I had no intention of opening up a debate as to the difference between the two, and it’s only distracting from the actual point. It was late, so please accept an apology for my laziness in the precision of my wording.
“We could have very different opinions on whether the same foetus is alive a life, but that doesn’t change the fact of whether it is or not. Your or my “personal philosophy” do not determine another life’s existence, only how we personally interact with it.”

IMHO, this is a different point to the statement you originally made and probably not one which I would have replied to disagree with. To me, this statement concerns one’s personal philosophy determining one’s personal actions within a given situation. Fair enough.

Aye, as I said, I should have been clearer with my post with which you disagreed. 🙂

If it’s important to you to make the distinction between “a life” and “alive”

As I said later:

Else, can we agree on a term for that point at which a person feels he or she can terminate a pregnancy? That’s what I mean by “life”. Apologies if its a rather crude usage, but it’s late and I can’t come up with anything cleverer this evening.

But getting back to what you were saying…you think that there is a definite point at which it becomes a life – but we may disagree on when that point is. But from what I’ve read this week, even medical professionals can’t agree at what that point is. As a society (meaning, for what we’ve legislated), we’ve decided that we can terminate up to 24 weeks electively, with special cases being allowed up to 28 weeks? Apologies if this is incorrect, but it could be 12 and 16, 16 and 20, etc etc for the sake of discourse. So, doesn’t it come down to what one believes that moment to be – which then influences how we as a society deal with it if it’s unwanted. So the two are intrinsic.

It was late, so please accept an apology for my laziness in the precision of my wording.

No need to apologise – you raised some interesting points from mine and got me to think a little more precisely about what I was saying. There’s the good side of STW for ya. 🙂

Apologies if this is incorrect, but it could be 12 and 16, 16 and 20, etc etc for the sake of discourse.

hmmm.. I was hoping it was around 9 months old after the morning I’ve had.. 🙁

iirc the Romans did infanticide but it is generally frowned upon these days

Why should I be surprised that there are so many in the pro camp regarding the murdering of babies on stw.

Its because we have not let Jesus into our hearts iirc 🙄

Its a very complicated issue and whilst i remain pro choice I am more in favour [ in general] of the rights to life than the right to have an abortion

As others have said it is a huge shade of grey and not a black and white issue and it often depends on the actual circumstances rather than an iron clad rule.

hmmm.. I was hoping it was around 9 months old after the morning I’ve had..

The little shit !
No belt, no insurance I bet, and clearly not looking at the road ahead

As a society (meaning, for what we’ve legislated), we’ve decided that we can terminate up to 24 weeks electively, with special cases being allowed up to 28 weeks? Apologies if this is incorrect, but it could be 12 and 16, 16 and 20, etc etc for the sake of discourse

Well, no. There are good practical reasons for the 28 week limit. Chief among these is that the big antenatal scan is done at 20 weeks; there needs to be time for other tests (eg. CVS) that may result from an abnormal screening scan and still allow time for the parents to weigh up what is a major decision.

As before, I am only a humble gasman, and not therefore an expert in fetal medicine, but I assume there are reasons why the screening scan can’t be done sooner.

hmmm.. I was hoping it was around 9 months old after the morning I’ve had…

I do occasionally wonder why the limit isn’t up to two years postpartum 😛

Andy

The little shit !
No belt, no insurance I bet, and clearly not looking at the road ahead

not only that, but he’d four pints of mild before I was even out of bed this morning.. he could hardly walk on his way out to the car.. 😐

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/mother-jailed-for-eight-years-after-1329207

😯