A Writing on Abortion... Share Your Thoughts

[Tete123]

The moral of the story is don't break the law, at least in my part of the country.

Thank you for the background information.

You are correct in your assertion that generally Europeans neither have the desire nor the right to defend ones property; in fact in many case charges have been brought upon an individual acting in self defence, when violence either perceived or actual is committed. I for one would like to see a cultural change to occur in Britain, allowing those victims of crime to act in any manner deemed necessary to prevent the criminal from either perpetrating their criminal behaviour or indeed escaping in such an event as a criminal act has been committed.

I do not understand why, particularly at this time, when belief in the British legal system seems at an extreme low and police are struggling to respond to all be the most serious crimes why those with a liberal mind feel it is unreasonable to protect property, family and person. If a criminal has rights - then surely it stands to reason the victim also has rights?

Now, I understand this has gone somewhat off-topic, so I will input my views on abortion.

I have no strict opinion on the legal issue as to when a foetus is considered life. It does seem that whilst we often speak of the womens rights to abort or not as the case may be, little consideration is given to the choice of the male involved. Now, considering that if a child is born the male will be legally required to provide maintenance to support the costs of raising the child, I feel it is somewhat unfair that he has no say in the decision. He must accept the final decision of the female. I would like a system that accepts that the act in which the creation of the pregnancy was consensual and that any decision must take into account the feelings of both partners. I will admit not fully considering the full implications of this; and I would like to hear other members thoughts on the issue - in short should the male have any leverage in the decision process?

[The Untalented Mr Ripley]

I've never said, or even implied, that "a growing developing foetus as not constituting being alive or not being a 'human life'". What I have said is that up to 24 weeks or thereabouts (not 30 weeks) a foetus is not able to sustain its own life outside the mother's womb without significant medical attention, and even then with only very limited success right at the end of that 24 week period. Up until that time it is a potential human life. Please don't twist my words.

I don't believe that I how done anything like twisting your words - that was my understanding of what you had written and is still my understanding re: if you believe that a foetus is a potential human life how can it constitute a human life?

We'll just have to disagree then. I put a mother's well being, regardless of what constitutes that well being, way above the life of a foetus which cannot sustain its own life and which might otherwise be born into a life of misery for both it and the mother.

Then disagree we will. I also disagree with your assumpotion that the child would be born into a life misery, particuarly considering the number of people wishin to adopt babies.

There might be a positive and loving future for a few of those potential children. However there are just too may ifs, buts and maybes along the way for a woman who doesn't wish to have a child but who finds herself pregnant for whatever reason to do other than what she and she alone considers right for all concerned.

Being blunt if men and women do not wish to create life through sexual intercourse, they are ways of avoiding getting into that situation, albeit given that the UK has such a terrible record on unwanted pregnancies it appears that many are either unaware or simply can't be bothered to learn.

[Midas]

LOL I quoted the whole thing a while back

Not in this thread you haven't, nor have you linked to where you might have said it previously. All you did was quote an extract.

This is all part of the red herring I was referring to. You are killing a life - doesn't really mater what you call it - legal definition is not the issue here as obviously in law abortion is not murder.

Says he, having just specifically said "...i think abortion probably is murder of sorts" and "The fact remains the real issue here is not whether or not it is murder but whether it is justified murder!"

Whether or not it could survive outside of the womb also seems beside the point - if it is alive it is alive. The issue is when is it OK to kill coz sometimes it probably is. Calling something murder or not murder is a distraction (my original point). The key poiint is murder or killing or whatever is not always wrong. The premise that killing is always wrong seems to underscore most anti-abortion debates and is a flawed one IMO.

Whether or not it could survive outside of the womb is certainly not besides the point, at least not as far as the Law Lords ruling is concerned, nor as far as the legal defining point for all those countries which have a law which allows abortion up to that point are concerned. As far as your latter point is concerned though, at least we agree on something.

[Midas]

I don't believe that I how done anything like twisting your words - that was my understanding of what you had written and is still my understanding re: if you believe that a foetus is a potential human life how can it constitute a human life?

I wasn't the one who first mentioned 'human life' though, those were your words in this post. I have always said either 'living', 'alive' or 'potential human life'.

Then disagree we will. I also disagree with your assumpotion that the child would be born into a life misery, particuarly considering the number of people wishin to adopt babies.

Ifs and maybes again, not to mention what the mother might go through during a pregnancy that she doesn't want. You will never convince me that abortion is wrong should the mother not wish to be pregnant for whatever reason.

Being blunt if men and women do not wish to create life through sexual intercourse, they are ways of avoiding getting into that situation, albeit given that the UK has such a terrible record on unwanted pregnancies it appears that many are either unaware or simply can't be bothered to learn.

Perhaps in an ideal world, however I'm sure you know as well as I do, that we don't live in one. I will quite agree though that the record here is terrible, obviously something is wrong, a large part of which I think must be blamed on the fact that there are so many social benefits available to pregnant mothers, married or otherwise, that many of them at the poorer end of the social spectrum in particular can be better off financially by having a baby than having an abortion.

[Barry]

There is an awful lot of reliance on the point at which a foetus becomes a living human entity in its own right, which I understand.
However, it is the natural course of events for a foetus to be nurtured and looked after until full term, so that the child will become a significant and unique person in society. We can all be thankful that we were not aborted.

When people say that a foetus could not live without its mothers support from say 22 or 24 weeks gestation, that is no reason to kill it.
If I were involved in a car accident and was bleeding to death and unconscious, I would expect help from the medics. I wouldn't expect people to say, "He's got no chance without medical treatment - let him die".

Unfair analogy? Maybe, but who is going to speak up for the rights of the unborn child - if no one else does, I will!

[The Untalented Mr Ripley]

I wasn't the one who first mentioned 'human life' though, those were your words in this post. I have always said either 'living', 'alive' or 'potential human life'.

I recall you commenting that "There's a big difference between potential life and actual life." which, and perhaps I am mistaken here, I took as your inference that the developing foetus could not be considered as being alive or constituting a form of human life. As Barry has stated, a foetus is an unborn child and nothing will convince me that it is not.

Ifs and maybes again, not to mention what the mother might go through during a pregnancy that she doesn't want. You will never convince me that abortion is wrong should the mother not wish to be pregnant for whatever reason.

I don't seek to persuade or convince you that abortion is wrong, I will though argue my viewpoint that a foetus is a life and as such unless for extenuating reasons and circumstances, taking that life is a terrible moral wrong. Again, if the mother does not wish to be pregnant, in most cases the pregnancy could have been avoided; its all about personal responsibility and accepting that there are consequences for your actions, something sadly lacking these days. There is virtually no excuse for an unwanted pregnancy in the UK these days.

Perhaps in an ideal world, however I'm sure you know as well as I do, that we don't live in one. I will quite agree though that the record here is terrible, obviously something is wrong, a large part of which I think must be blamed on the fact that there are so many social benefits available to pregnant mothers, married or otherwise, that many of them at the poorer end of the social spectrum in particular can be better off financially by having a baby than having an abortion.

The welfare state, laudable as its aims undoubtedly are, can act as a trap for many; I have seen first hand how for many teenage girls from poor families getting pregnant is a career choice. Again, this is a matter of personal responsibility.