The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Let's speak about, not shout about, abortion > Comments

Let's speak about, not shout about, abortion : Comments

By Murray Campbell, published 2/12/2016

Partly due to the recent American Presidential election and also because of a Queensland Parliamentary vote, abortion is being talked about once more.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. All
".... so why do the rights of a child that hasn't even been born yet extend beyond those of a child that has been born?"

We cannot legally kill the born, so the rights of the unborn do not exceed the rights of the born.

This one simple point trumps any argument the abortionist comes up with. It is the bottom line.

At what point does the killing of the child remain legal?

Can it be said to be born until the umbilical cord has been severed and tied?

Perhaps, AJ, you can answer the problem of the late term abortion by knitting needle (or similar) driven into the brain when the head is in sight but has not yet emerged.
Posted by Is Mise, Sunday, 4 December 2016 5:56:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A very emotive issue. I am anti-abortion, but I concede a woman's right to choose, in certain instances.

Sometimes it's the right thing to do, and sometimes it isn't.

Abortion as birth control is abominable, I have no sympathy for these women, you feel guilty? Good! Although, in the case of young girls, they do have the right for the adverse affects of a birth at such a young age to be taken into consideration when deciding.

When my son was born the hospital informed us that they no longer tell parents the sex of their child during pre-scanning, we didn't want to know anyway. The reason for this was, mostly South Asians, aborting females. This practice is disgusting, there is no reasonable excuse, they got pregnant deliberately, then abort when the foetus is old enough to show it's sex.

I will just state that I am an atheist, so please don't think my opinions have anything to do with religion.
Posted by Billyd, Sunday, 4 December 2016 6:10:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
My preference is that the choice is purely the choice of the mother and father (if he is not already excluded). This is basically already the case in all private consultations and should be the case in all public-funded ones as well. If accused of procuring an abortion, the answer should be that the accuser is charged with breach of medical privacy.

A conceptus is not an enbryo yet, an embryo is not a fetus, and a fetus is not a baby yet. They all have potential, as does a baby, but realising that potential depends on various conditions being met. Many who would force children on others would also decline any responsibility for the costs of meeting the conditions to reach potential, so I see no problem with the *only* people directly liable for the consequences having the *only* significant say in the matter.

Rusty.
Posted by Rusty Catheter, Sunday, 4 December 2016 7:23:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Is Mise,

I never claimed that the rights of the unborn exceed those of the born.

<<We cannot legally kill the born, so the rights of the unborn do not exceed the rights of the born.>>

But if one is of the opinion that the unborn have the right to use someone else’s body for their survival against their will, then they believe that the unborn have more rights than the born. (c.f. My point about not forcing mothers to donating a kidneys.)

<<At what point does the killing of the child remain legal?>>

You’ll want to check your state’s laws with regards to that.

<<Can it be said to be born until the umbilical cord has been severed and tied?>>

How about we go by when the foetus, sorry, beautiful unborn human child (emotive terminology makes no difference) is viable outside the mother’s body without too many health complications? That’s what the laws of the various jurisdictions tend to base the limit on.

<<Perhaps, AJ, you can answer the problem of the late term abortion by knitting needle (or similar) driven into the brain when the head is in sight but has not yet emerged.>>

Yes, I can. It’s not much of a problem. As I said earlier, the abortion debate is actually a really easy one. See above. In other words, I personally would disagree with doing that if the unborn human baby, so innocent and sweet, were viable outside the mother’s body.

Here’s a much trickier thought experiment: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem

Sorry, Is Mise, but anti-abortionists haven’t a leg to stand on. I have provided reasoning as to why the will of the mother trumps the innocent life of the beautiful unborn human child every time, and no one has managed to invalidate it.
Posted by AJ Philips, Sunday, 4 December 2016 7:38:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
the usual callous hearts who know quite well that their are far more people waiting for adoptions than babies available. Their hatred of their Creator is ultimately what leads them to barbaric conclusions. And to think they have the audacity to claim science is on their side. How pathetic.
Posted by runner, Sunday, 4 December 2016 7:53:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AJ Philips, you have shown no such thing. You just sit there and boringly spout the same opinion. At what point does the woman accept responsibilities for their actions? What is your view on abortion over 23 weeks, the gestation period of triplets born recently? Or the record for a live birth at 22 weeks? How do you justify 28 week abortions, where the only two ways of removing the foetus is for the woman to give birth, or the abortionist to enter the womb and crush the skull? To say anti-abortionists don't have a leg to stand on is ignorant and arrogant, and it is intended to crush debate.
Posted by Billyd, Sunday, 4 December 2016 8:13:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy