We have been told time and again that unborn babies under 24 weeks have no chance of survival and so the legal limit in the UK for killing an unborn child is 24 weeks - however - we know from the story below that the 24 week limit is a lie - but who told it and why?
Together they weighed about the same as a bag of sugar and could fit snugly into each of their father's palms. Amelia Hope Burden and her brother Arthur are the youngest premature twins to survive in the UK. One was even born before the 24-week legal limit for abortion.
I believe the youngest to survive is 21 weeks, 5 days. However babies born that young can often have severe disabilities etc.
What I don't understand is two mothers at the same gestation (one getting abortion one having miscarriage). The wanted child is a baby, the unwanted one is a foetus.
If you think abortion is horrible at a young age look at third trimester abortions...
Abortion may equate to murder in your mind, but it doesn't under the law in most civilized countries. Using such inflammatory language doesn't lead to civil discussion or reasonable solutions.
But implying that anyone who disagrees with YOU is uncivilized does "lead to civil discussion or reasonable solutions"?
Murder is murder if RD thinks that using the WORDS are inflammatory how about the ACTS! The Nazi's said the Jews weren't human and people in this country called slaves 4/5ths human; people who think that the unborn are the same as the aforementioned.
Comparing abortion to the Nazi holocaust is even more inflammatory, not to mention completely innacurate.
I have heard the fraction 3/5ths from the 3/5ths compromise of 1787
and i have seen 1/3rd bandied about, but never 4/5ths.
Not at all. I'm not suggesting that everyone who disagrees with me is uncivilized. I merely stated a fact that the majority of advanced (perhaps a better word than civilized) countries have legalized abortion and done away with capital punishment. I might better have said that using inflammatory language like murdering unborn babies or children does not lead to a civil discussion of the issues.
just because it is a law does not mean it is correct. There is a verdict the jury can pass down that is rarely used because of it is highly unknown by the general population. They verdict can be guilty by the law, but they can dissent as to that the law is unjust and let the person go free. As for the holocaust, I agree- it is inflammatory and it should be- American abortions over the past FEW decades have numbered more than those who died in the holocaust, and the babies *pardon* fetuses have suffered terrible torture just as those in the Nazi prison camps did. Research what an abortion procedure is, and then we can have an intelligent discussion here. Thank you, sir.
What an interesting observation, and well put. It's so strange that people believe what they want to, even if they are wrong, or even they don't care. I had a boyfriend tell me he didn't care if it was murder or not, it was his choice to do what he wished~ if he was involved........Well that just proves to me that being an agnostic or athiest like he is , is just terrible for he feels we are animals and not above animals and when you go THERE.....anything is the limit.
Truth is truth. No matter whether you are spiritual or not, but I find spiritual people SEEK the truth more often ...............
You've gotten a very intense and intellectual discussion going here. Great job!
There are thousands of scenarios surrounding abortion, also to some referred to as murdering. Then put them in jail. Yet don't stop there as any accomplice to a murder is grounds for incarceration. So if truly a murder we best get some unbiased juries prepared for many a trial.
Surely there is a solution where both sides [for and against] can come together and rid of opinions and judgements and stand as one
Fact; There will always be opposite beliefs.
Fact; There will always be abortions and at different stages.
Fact; Abortion is legal
Most importantly, who are we, any one of us, to judge others choices, having never walked in there shoes.
And who are we to post how many weeks, what that woman is like, and to have the balls to call someone a murder, when you are no judge
And never here about opinions you have and answers you seek to the doctors
FACT: This will never change
It's disgusting and sad to hear and now expect the hate post after post
and thread after thread
i will not judge nor offer an opinion, as i don't judge any woman's choice, regardless of how dramatic we and the media all make it out to be. Would we consider, knowing the ignorance of the media that maybe, just maybe we don't know all the facts, and it's none of our business anyway.
But, it's just my feelings and sadly posts will follow and judge me now.
It's expected, FACT.
This is really sad.. They are also humans and have the right to live.
I read this story in the papers and am very hurt that we in the UK have been lied to about what babies can and cannot feel before 24 weeks, if a baby can survive before 24 weeks then I think we are committing mass murder every year, I think the Feminazi campaign for such things as abortion simply because they need to justify what they have done in their own lives, shame on them all.
(As I stated) people just don't care really.
It's sad isn't it, that people feel ok about baby murder. Do you know what else they don't care about? Elder murder and then comes any murder.
Govts are known (as in communism) to desire to control.
I believe the only hope is prayer.
In Ireland Abortion is illegal - however - the reality is that approx 7000 women and young girls travel to the UK each year to have abortions - this is the Irish Government's way of remaining big buddies with the Catholic Church but also getting rid of its unwanted children - When I was about 17 years old I had to listen to a friend of mine tell me about her experinece of abortion when her 'good' Catholic parents forced her to go to England and terminate her unborn child's life - it was horrowing - this was before they had the injection in the arm and all those other modern day easy methods of ending the life of the unborn - I just dont know the answer - but I think there are many lies being told
This is how things worked in the United States prior to Roe v. Wade. Nearby countries like Puerto Rico were a popular destination for teenage mothers looking to have an abortion. Those that couldn't afford the trip would often have "back alley" abortions and risked serious complications and even death. The pro-life crowd rarely acknowledges the fact that Roe v. Wade did not increase the number of abortions performed on pregnant American women, but it did decrease the number of American women dying from abortions, as it made it easier to find real doctors to perform the procedure in their own country.
I agree. many lies are being told and that is why many 'conspiracy thoughts' do not faze me at all.
they say history repeats itself and history is chock full of ' crap'
Irish, I don't often promote my own work but the photograph collection here is amazing. Look at the one of the perfect 12 weeks foetus, plus there is a baby born at 21 weeks and another at 24 weeks. hxxp://hubpages.com/hub/Normal-Pregnancy-and-Childbirth
Oh and not a live link - replace the xx with tt.
Lovely hub. So cute! My husband was always worried I'd go into labor early or have problems (I'm a very small person). However I went to 41 weeks.
So where's your 41 week photos, huh? huh?
On a side note I remember reading an article somewhere online about a hospital that allowed the parents to hold their aborted baby and have some kind of religious ceremony if they chose. That just sickened me. Is that meant to make them feel less guilty? How could you hold your own dying child knowing you did that to them?
I can see that being therapeutic in the case of a mother aborting her baby because it has severe abnormalities not compatible with life. She is grieving just like any other mum who loses a baby.
Sorry about not having the photos of the 41 week pregnancy - then again I could use the photos of my own babies - except for the twins, I was always late - usually about 2 weeks overdue. My last baby was 3 weeks overdue and when she was born her skin was all dried out.
Well technically gestation is mean to be 38-42 weeks however most doctors seem to freak out if you go a day over 40 weeks.
My baby came out a perfect 8lbs4oz! Four hours and no drugs and almost perfect apgars. I'm never that lucky in life which means I don't want to know how bad my next labor will be! (Castor Oil ftw!)
Second baby is always easier. You did great with your first - don't be surprised if your second drops when you go to the loo or something! Most first labors are 10 - 14 hours or longer, second about half of that. My first was 10 and half hours, second only 2 hours. Third was 2 and half DAYS, 4th and 5th were about 5 hours, and 6th was about 3 hours.
Thanks IzzyM on this occassion your work is greatly appreciated as it adds to the discussion
IzzyM - I haev looked at your slide show and it is unbelieveable - what in God's name are we doing
The foetus's of under 16 weeks are babies in miniature. So cute! I'm anti-abortion and always have been and not for religious reasons. I was delighted when the UK reduced the limit from 28 weeks to 24 weeks.
In reality, women are always going to seek abortion.I'd prefer to see all being granted one up to a maximum of 14 weeks or so, then NONE after that except where the baby is severely disabled or the mother's life is in danger.
I was unable to determine the age of the baby in the black and white photograph - but that photo is incredible. So tiny it sat in its daddy's hands! Must have been around 24 weeks I'd guess.
Incredible and these babies are being disposed of like they had no rights
May be off topic but female infanticide cases in India are high.The government has issued orders not to disclose the sex of the unborn baby.Still there are instances in rural areas where people go against law and the baby is aborted if known to be female.The cruelty just moves you more when fully mature, just born female babies are abandoned in hospitals.......parents just escape.
How can any mother kill her newborn child? Where is the love? China too has high rates of female infanticide or abandonment due to the one child policy.
In a few years their population will fall drastically because there won't be enough brides to go round.
Its not just the mother's decision but there is the whole family involved most of the time.Sometimes these things happen even without the mother's knowledge....so sad.
Not exactly true Izzy. The one child policy did not result in one child per couple as there are many ways of increasing the number of children allowed. Declining Minority groups are allowed two or more, in some areas two children are allowed if the first is a girl, being rich in any country allows avoidance of the law and it is no different here; also childless aunts and relatives are sometimes registered as the parents - this all adds up to an average of just under two kids per couple. At the moment there are enough brides to go around, despite the fact that I have stolen one for myself, it is predicted that the student population will start to decrease about now due to the policy and the ratio will be something like 1.2 guys to each girl in about five years time.
Interesting insight, China man. I saw a televised documentary about the one child policy which affected me deeply at the time (although I did understand the problems China faced due to over-population). However, this program must have been made 20 years ago (Horizon - BBC production I believe) and so things will have changed. It sounds a bit more humane now. At the start, families were penalised financially if they had more than one child, and of course girls were dumped or otherwise disposed in favor of boys - to carry on the family name and all that.
There was a period where baby girls were dumped - mostly in the poorest villages and usually up the road in the slightly better off areas in the hope of it finding a new home. The one-child policy impacted a people that prize sons for very practical reasons, it is the son who looks after the parents in old age, the daughter looks after her husbands parents and so in economic terms must be raised for someone elses benefit. Don't think the people are in any way heartless, they love their children exactly the same as we do, maybe more in fact, but economics are more harsh the poorer you are.
Nowadays there are more people trying to adopt than available children, and still most people agree that teh one child policy is the right way to go, but personally they would like many children.
Thanks for that link, Brie! I guess we all foresaw something like this happening 20 years ago. We'll just have to wait and see how it all pans out.
I read it - amd it is speculation not fact.
The writers are kite flying (in 2005) and show a one sided view of their own projected numbers and consequences - and with such a blinkered view of Chinese culture as to be laughable. They are putting the issue of extra males as though they were in a western country where the consequences they imagine may be accurate, in fact have already happened in many places.
It's already like that in China...thousands of young men with no chance of ever getting married or having a family...it's inhuman.
Ralph the intention is to get discussion going and as you know sometimes it takes strong language to get peoples attention
That may be true but the discussions frequently aren't very civil and using those inflammatory words sometimes gets the attention of nutjobs like the guy who murdered the abortion doctor in his church in Kansas last year.
i like the trespasser solution to abortion rights. It goes something like this:
The real problem with abortion is that we equate "if we don't want to have the already conceived child" to "we have to murder it"
The idea of the trespasser is to simply point out that we wouldn't have to murder the child if we could find another home for it, and others were willing to take care of the child.
for example: if we just simply take the embryo out of the mother, and hook it up to some sort of "Synthetic Womb", then the baby can just be delivered normally and no one loses, and then the child could be raised just like an adopted child.
THe only real problem is that modern technology can only do this for 8-9 month old fetuses. And in conclusion, the mother DOES have a right to expel a trespasser, and thus should be allowed to remove the fetus whenever.
Sab has already commented on this by saying "It sounds good, unless you value human life" (or something like that...), but at the very least it would be a compromise between the two camps.
Why keep repeating this science fiction over and over again? I know you think it is just a brilliant notion, but since you admit it is not not now possible what's the point of repeating it so often?
So until your sci-fi 'solution' becomes a reality (likely never) you support killing the unborn at any time for any reason?
It could become possible if the Will is there. No-one is looking in that direction at the moment, that's all.
sab - this is like the 19th abortion forum that has sprung up in the last week.
you were a creator of an abortion forum recently, If I'm not mistaken
... so why am I repeating the same "science fiction crap"?
why the hell does everyone -including yourself - keep bringing up the question if no one wants to hear different points of view?
... cuz they're trolls? oh, ok.
"Hey, let's make a forum about abortions! and then ridicule people who disagree with me! That's the way to find out the best way to handle things!!"
I"m actually completely shocked and flabberghasted by your statement!! This is like the 5th time that I've edited my once-short post!!!
Sab, why do YOU keep repeating YOUR views on abortion?
!!! You even have this quote higher up on this forum making fun of people who just make fun of others: " But implying that anyone who disagrees with YOU is uncivilized does "lead to civil discussion or reasonable solutions"? "
argh!!! you make no sense Sab!!!
"why the hell does everyone -including yourself - keep bringing up the question if no one wants to hear different points of view? "
That's the problem, you keep repeating the same point of view and it is by your own admission impractical. It's like saying we can somehow resolve the issue of pollution on Earth by building a city on Mars. Well, ok, but we can't do that and won't be able to for a very long time if ever, so what's the point of bringing it up over and over again?
That's all I was trying to say.
Evan, I agree with you completely on this. In fact I wrote a hub about it called An Alternative to Abortion. It bombed so I guess folk aren't that interested in what could futuristic-ally be an ideal solution.
I heard the argument first from Walter Block in a free lecture online from the mises institute.
There are many facets to be considered in this debate (although this thread is not really debating anything, as we all seem to be in agreement). It is a debate I have struggled with all my life, because it is really three separate debates under one heading:
1. ending life, no matter how developed the life was
2. allowing legalized abortion as a means of achieving the above (and as an alternative to illegal, back street coat hanger horror stories)
3. women's rights pertaining to their health and the foetus's continued development.
So it is entirely possible to agree or disagree with one or two of the debates, and be left automatically labelled "pro" or "anti" abortion.
And, in that light, here are some thoughts which I have tried to make as reasonable as possible:
1. the process of aborting a foetus is essentially either an invasive and violent procedure, or the inducing of a miscarriage.
2. allowing young girls (and boys) to be better educated about sex would help to stop at least some unwanted pregnancies.
3. where such education and contraceptive aids are readily available, and indeed freely distributed, the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases should be lower, as well as the number of unwanted pregnancies.
4. respect for life does not always mean continuing it at all costs; sometimes a dilemma really is a dilemma: choosing between two impossibly difficult alternatives, which would here, for example, both save one life while ending or destroying another, or even another several lives, through illness, drug addiction, poverty, abuse, consequences of a natural disaster, whatever. I'm really not sure how I would feel, if I had the chance to let someone go rather than condemn her to a life of extreme pain or hardship. Other pro-lifers will say that life is sacred and that we can not judge how any one life might endure misery to achieve some sort of grace or to help someone else become enlightened, and I understand that point of view (I consider myself pro-life, pro-choice, and pro-women's rights; please don't say that I must choose one or another, and that I certainly can't be all three, as that is denying the possibility that other circumstances might one day force even a hard-liner to change her mind).
5. where abortion is illegal, women either go to other countries where it is, or resort to home remedies or back-street clinics--i.e. the abortion will happen where it is deemed necessary or advisable, whether or not it happens in the safety of a clean and supervised medical facility. This has always been the case and always will be.
6. women's rights should be protected. This is a sensitive area, as we can't choose which rights should be protected, and which ones should be taken away. The right to receive professional health care (physical or mental) should never be denied to a woman. Whether she is pregnant or not, or insane or not, or a drug addict or not. Being pro-women's rights has led to my being labeled pro-abortion, and this is a misinterpretation of my beliefs, just as it is of the beliefs of many women who could not ever imagine themselves deciding to end a pregnancy or a life; who could not ever imagine themselves encouraging someone else to choose to end a pregnancy or a life. Until the unimaginable happens.
7. it is entirely possible to be pro-life and pro-women's rights AND concede that it is not one individual's place to prevent a woman from choosing to terminate a pregnancy (and a potential life); that decision is between the woman and her beliefs or her doctor or family or her parents or her church or whomever she chooses to consult. Allowing her access to an adoption service, say, and encouraging her to consider giving birth and helping another family fulfill their wishes for a child is an admirable course of action; however, if in the process she is not allowed access also to a medical professional or to proper education in preventing unwanted pregnancies seems unreasonable, and even cruel.
8. much anti-abortion activism is extremely counterproductive because it disgusts rather than educates
9. life is either sacred, or it isn't: all life. You don't even have to be religious to agree with that one. It is therefore necessary to examine life in all its guises; it becomes obvious that if the idea of life itself is worth protecting, then all of it is worth at least respecting. We don't have to be extremist vegan tree-huggers to notice the symbiotic interactions of different forms of life on the planet, or the distillation or formation of other substances from the remains of plant or animal life that we use on a daily basis.
10. It is admirable, but simplistic, to think that if we could only educate young people, or supply them with contraceptives, or encourage women to give their babies up for adoption, that this would radically lessen the number of abortions, confining them mostly to medical emergencies. If we concede that the protection of women's rights is at least as desirable as, say, doctor/patient confidentiality--which we all take for granted as adults--then it is unwise to condemn a private citizen who just happens to be a pregnant woman and who just happens to be visiting a health clinic to discuss her options, when her particular circumstances are not known; likewise, it is murder to kill her doctor for monitoring her health.
11. I don't know why I'm numbering these points. There are many more that I haven't thought of, and that others can contribute--If we were to list individual cases where different circumstances led to either adoption or miscarriage or termination or putting small children into a car and letting the car roll into a lake, we could continue for a few years, at least.
But the belief that life is sacred (or to be respected, or that it is preferable to death) is a responsibility, as well. Protecting the living may not always be subordinate to protecting the unborn, just as protecting the community might very well one day entail causing the death of one of its members, no matter how reluctant that decision or how unexpected that circumstance may be.
From the moment I was pregnant my baby was alive and I was really excited , couldnt wait to meet him or her .
We started getting things ready for our new baby .
The day we planned to go a new pram I started bleeding and ended up in hospital .
I lost our baby , It was 12 weeks and I cried as I was going through the pain of the miscarriage . I cried for my baby , I wanted to have had the chance to love him or her.
It happened again years later .
I would have had an 8 year old now .
However I am fortunate to have had 3 beautiful daughters .
I occasionaly wonder what they would have been like ,my lost babies
When anyone here can tell me EXACTLY how many times you can cut an 8.5 x 11" sheet of paper in half..then I will believe that person has the knowledge to unequivocally determine what is life and when it starts.
Unless you are God you can't speak for God.
Until then you are doing nothing more than taking sides based on your own personal beliefs.
Women... and Doctors should be making their own decisions and then God... whatever God they believe in can sort the rest out.
Odd that's how i thought this whole thread came to be. First god said "treat sex responsibly" then god said "abortion is murder". So actually if we were listening to god in the first place this thread and discussion would not exist.
'treat sex responsibly' means, the hymen stays unbroken until marriage.
'abortion is murder'. Luke 1:41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:
I read that here in Ireland there are 10% of married couples cant have children of their own and we dont have enough children to adopt - is there some way these unborn babies that are being aborted could be given life and new homes to meet the needs of infertile couples - I am just asking.
yes there is a way but people won't stand for it, women are selfishly terminating their pregnancies. It will always happen, It is sad that this even has to be debated.
The sad thing is, most women have abortions because there is some reason why they won't continue with the pregnancy - perhaps they are schoolgirls, or adult women who had an elicit relationship, or victims of rape - there could be loads of reasons. The actual baby is an end result that is too far ahead for them to consider it. They simply don't want to be pregnant, so they won't continue with it to deliver a live baby at the end of it.
Very very few women give their babies up for adoption nowadays - even if they'd planned to. When the baby is born they fall in love with it and end up keeping it. They prefer to think of a pregnancy as being 'only a bundle of cells' and no-one tells them any different because they don't want to hear it.
That makes sense to me. Nothing wrong with encouraging unwed pregnant women to have their babies and allow them to be adopted into good homes. Considering alternatives to abortion should be something everyone can agree on.
Diane - I agree - but I think like most subjects that are difficult - many people prefer to bury their head in the sand - this for me has been a good discussion
I propose a solution. I say if a mother doesn't want a baby, it's transplanted into an adoptive mother.
Absolutely! Hey that's three of us think this solution is workable, come on scientists - make it possible!
Ralph - thanks for your comment - some times - out of difficult subjects - good ideas can come
You guys weren't listening. This has been advocated for years and those women do not want to carry the babies to term..end of.
IzzyM - but has it really been tried or simply discussed by people perhaps viewed as simply being 'Christians' and therefore not very helpful
It's been pushed on women for years and years, but with very few takers because women who don't want to be pregnant, really don't want to be pregnant. They don't think about the baby so much - but the carrying of it would be too much for them, and also I said before even women who do carry to term with the idea of giving it up for adoption, end up keeping it. It's just not a solution.
"and also I said before even women who do carry to term with the idea of giving it up for adoption, end up keeping it. It's just not a solution."
That makes it sound like a pretty good solution then! A woman ends up recognizing the value of her baby and their bond and decides to keep and raise her baby rather than having killed it weeks before?
You are missing the whole point of the abortion debate. Listen, where it is illegal to have an abortion, many women do go on to give birth to their child, but many women also end up at back-street abortionists and lose their life.
We have to find an alternative IMO. Even if early abortions were made legal, those who wanted a late abortion would still end up at a back-street abortionist.
I don't agree especially with late abortions - but I don't think a woman should be condemned to die because she wanted a late abortion.
A false womb, a surrogate womb, a baby cocoon that can support that life is preferable.
It just hasn't been invented yet.
If it hasn't been invented yet then it is irrelevant to a discussion of the current problem, isn't it?
No, it is through discussion such as ours that viable alternatives are thought of.
Why do you think Alexander Graham Bell 'discovered' the telephone or Logie-Baird 'discovered' television. It is human nature to find a way of doing new things.
If someone were sitting in the dark in the 1400s wondering what to do when he ran out of lamp oil, imagining a light bulb might be have been a great idea but it wouldn't have made his home one bit brighter. Or his children's or their children's.
So you're saying that it may take 500 years before the technology is there to transplant human embryos?
You might be right.
It might take only 50 years or it might never happen. The point is that it doesn't do anything for us in addressing the issue right now.
We could do it now assuming the tissue types matched. Not a very practical solution though. Pregnant girl in New York matches girl in D.C. You are going to pay - right? Pretty sure the anonymous Sab Oh will object to more taxes.
Far more likely when we have finally gotten better at organ transplants is to use them to harvest replacement parts for the wealthy.
Read "A Gift From Earth" by Larry Niven.
Actually no they can't do it now. It's not a problem of matching tissue types so much, because as you then pointed out, babies have stem cells which they are already experimenting on to cure all sorts of ailments. Correct me if I'm wrong, but stem cells can go on to become any type of cell, and can be used to grow any body part or organ.
The main problem lies with the placental tissue. It comes with the fertilised egg (as in, it is not a part of the mother), and it can't be transplanted even with a tissue match if there was such a thing.
Oh - I thought they could do it - but you are right - not yet. I remember reading ten years ago that it would be possible in two years. Still - by the time they can our population will probably be rather on the largish side.
I was more thinking that they would keep them and grow them in vats as donor organ supplies.
You know, they are working on this so that they can grow replacement parts for the rich, as you pointed out. Maybe a side effect of this technology will allow whole babies to be grown in a kind of artificial womb and when they perfect that technique they might look at transplanting fetuses from one mother to another.
Hey I know the world is overpopulated but that didn't stop them developing test tube babies.
Well - sooner or later we are going to have to deal with the overpopulation thing. I would prefer it if we actually decided to do something about it ourselves instead of waiting until the Government Inc inflicts it on us.
We do not have a lot of unwanted pregnancies in France. Sex is widely talked about and discussed - and unlike the ridiculous hypocritical garbage spouted by people like Sab Oh - Sex is not something to be swept under the rug and pretend is "sinful" - this is where the problem lies. If it was openly discussed and accepted - young people would be better educated. The US has a very high unwanted pregnancy rate largely down to poor education. And in England - we pay young girls to get pregnant.
Now that is interesting - perhaps other countries would like to input here? What is the sex education program in your country? And how many of your youngsters are having abortions or babies..
Here in Spain (I'd to ask my partner because sadly I didn't have a clue) girls can have an abortion without their parents consent from aged 16 and over...teenage pregnancy rate is high but he doesn't know the percentage rate...and schools provide sex education which apparently no-one is listening to.
I don't think it is "sex education" per se - more a cultural acceptance that young people are going to have sex, and their parents should talk to them about the ramifications.
And you are wrong about Spain having a high teenage pregnancy rate. It is one of the lowest in Europe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_inc … by_country
Interesting link, ta:)
Pity its 14 years old so maybe not statistically accurate anymore? Also remember Spain has a high distrust of authority and a lot of things go unreported.
Like the cases of brucellosis in this village which the authorities here say didn't happen....
Pretty sure there are not many births that do not get reported. And no - Spain still is much, much lower than the US and UK, but not as low as it was.
Of course - I trust Government statistics not a lot and - there is surprisingly little current data available. I wonder why.
"You know, they are working on this so that they can grow replacement parts for the rich"
They are working on medical advancements for the ill, not the rich.
Medical advances are first for the rich - then when any procedure becomes a commodity it is sold to the consumers in society, those who not rich. The financial advantage in humanitarian procedures is such that they are rare or do not last - as any medical procedure to exchange or otherwise prolong the life of a foetus - as a cash crop there is huge money involved - the record shows that the cash crop will win hands down every time.
Unwanted pregnancy due to poor education - The standard of education in the US is one of the lowest in the 'developed' world - mainly because so many schools are teaching ridiculous religious dogma as scientific fact. The problems with US society that result in the division of the poor into grades of trailer trash and slum is rooted in poor education.
The world is overpopulated as a calculation of population versus sustainable resources, if the resources were better managed then we may not be overpopulated.
"Hey I know the world is overpopulated but that didn't stop them developing test tube babies."
The world is not overpopulated.
"The US has a very high unwanted pregnancy rate largely down to poor education"
NO, not "down to" poor education.
not opening your mind to anything might be a great idea but it won't make your home one bit brighter.. . . Or his children's or their children's.
Running interference because you disagree with the subjectmatter in a discussion about possible future alternatives is moronic in the extreme - imagination and invention are the ways to the future, like most of your posts you want to go back to medieaval times when christians ran everything and a slave knew his place.
Gosh how clever
Maybe try reading the posts instead of just jumping in to cast insults at me personally and imagining a religious argument where there wasn't one. As for slavery, I'll caution you to choose your words more carefully before even implying any such thing in my comments. I understand that neither of your screen names likes me and that's fine, but there is a line and that $#*! is offensive and inappropriate in the extreme.
Slavery is offensive to you - well - so what ? it is just another fact of life to many people.
I see you don't like being 'trolled' perhaps it may make you think twice about trolling newcomers to these forums in future, as you did to me and have carried on doing since I have been here.
"Slavery is offensive to you - well - so what ? "
SO DON'T ASCRIBE ANY SUPPORT FOR IT IN MY REMARKS WHERE THERE IS NONE. HAVE A LITTLE CLASS AND SHOW A LITTLE SELF CONTROL.
You clearly stated that you support slavery and are in favor of abortion in other threads and seem to be here for the sole purpose of provoking people into attacking you and then complaining about it.
In the meantime please do not shout so. It is offensive to all of us.
"You clearly stated that you support slavery and are in favor of abortion in other threads"
NO I DID NOT AND I'LL THANK YOU FOR NOT BLATANTLY LYING AND MISREPRESENTING MY VIEWS.
Aren't you a little old for this kind of nonsense? Shouldn't we all be as I believe one must be at least 18 to join?
Once again the race is on to drag another thread down into to lies, insults, and irrelevance.
I have never ascribed any such thing as slavery to you - you attacked me for using the words in a context in a reply to someone that was nothing to do with you - as usual. And, of course, you were trying to divert the thread as you had no answers to the questions and thoughts being put forward, as usual.
"I have never ascribed any such thing as slavery to you"
Don't compound the offense by lying about it. YOU posted THIS directed toward me:
"you want to go back to medieaval times when christians ran everything and a slave knew his place."
Just be more responsible and choose your words more carefully instead of looking for opportunities to insult me and you can avoid this kind of error in the future.
I just dont know folks - I can think of lots of people I would rather see gone from this planet before an unborn child
Just noticed you stirring again. Now convinced you are just another troll.
What are your medical credentials again? Or are you just looking for a fight? Religionists - disgusting. Which religion did u kill for again?
Well, aren't you the conversation killer?
We were just having a nice non-religious discussion and you had to add this! Pissed off with the religious threads, was that it? I stay away from them mostly because I have no interest in religion. This thread, if you took the time to read it, was a friendly discussion, and where did Irish put forward religious views, eh? There are millions of people out there who have views against abortion who are not religious in the slightest.
IzzyM I read your hub on an alternative to abortion, very interesting I left a comment. I think even if the alternative was already in place there would be many who still would rather just get an abortion. Because they do not view the baby as a baby just a bunch of cells, which we both know is wrong. But people believe what they want. I still like the idea, or transplanting a fetus to another woman, I think that would work too. Anyway I'm glad to read your views.
Sometimes I think people just don't get that anti-abortions can have nothing to do with religions.
I think some people who have an irrational fear of religion see it as the boogey-man behind any position they disagree with so they assume it is part of every discussion even when no one but themselves brings it up.
Hey you are right - this IMO has NOTHING whatsoever to do with religion and everything to do with ...I dunno...just loving babies? We all love babies; the best loved cartoon characters have big heads, they remind us of babies.
I honestly don't believe any woman feels comfortable about her decision to have an abortion.
I think if the clinics all offered to take her baby away from her womb, she would be happier knowing that it wasn't killed. I honestly believe that. Women aren't built to be killers; there might be the odd one but she is few and far between.
When the technique is perfected, it won't matter how far along the pregnancy has gone, the clinic will cope.
But just who is going to put the money into making this a reality?
Here in Ireland - sex is a moral quagmire - we have wall to wall soaps showing young people engaging in homosexual sex - hetrosexual sex and so forth - but I never hear contraception mentioned - we have a society whose social policy is dictated by the tabloids - the same tabloids that make their bread and butter exploiting sex - we have a Church that has lost its way - and a political administration with its head in the sand - in County Donegal 22 men have been convicted for having sex with the same 13 year old girl - we have at least 7,000 women and children going to England each year to terminate their pregnancies as abortion is illegal in Ireland - I am lost.....
No need to be lost - religous interference in society has always produced a shedful of inconsistencies because dogmatic morals can never fit a new society as it changes. Then of course there is the constant you must not !! while the preacher is doing it behind closed doors - protected by the same religion.
Are children so easily disposed of as society believe that children are the property of adults?
I was finding this thread very informative - can we get focused once more
Hey Kimberley - read the whole thread. There was no hate spouted (except where the trolls posted) and the thread is looking for a viable solution to the problem of abortion - not putting women down because of it.
Kimberly - the thread was to draw discussion and for the majority of posts as IzzyM says the discussion was good and constructive - I was not making the Judgement - but rather starting the discussion - thanks for your contribution but you will find that this was a worthwhile/honest and constructive discussion
Are children really being aborted because of their gender?
Quads born in England three months before their due date - experts said they would not survive but they have and are doing well
My ancestors are from Ireland, maybe I should move back, I like that abortion is illegal there sounds like a good country that still goes by morals and values.
Go for it. Guess you don't read the news huh?
The got some great values in Ireland - Irish here was just telling us about 20 or so men convicted of raping the same 12 year old girl recently, and the recent Catholic child sexual abuse scandals have pretty much destroyed what little respect the church had left.
Nonetheless - good Christian values. They hardly ever kill each other for being the wrong type of Christian either. Well - that depends - Irish can tell you more about that. Sounds like you will fit right in, what with your morals and stuff. Plus - you are probably too old for the Catholic priests to be interested in you, so you should be safe.
Yes I know what you think are morals and values. Every place has good and bad. France is no place of emaculate conscience I'm sure. Mark you sure have a way of attacking somebody, trying to belittle them in everything I have ever seen you comment on. Then to top it all off you try to drag Irish in on it to gang up on me.
That is so not cool!
Wait a minute - you think telling everyone that Ireland has morals and values because abortion is illegal is not saying that anyone who thinks abortion should be legal has no morals or values?
I was not trying to drag Irish in to gang up on you. He can illuminate you as to the "morals and values" you so admire in Ireland. So much so that you said you were considering moving there because you admire them so greatly.
You over-dramatize everything, I was just making an oservation that it is nice that a country such as Ireland still goes by the notion that abortion is murdering babies. Thus makes it illegal to perform abortion there. And yes it is morally wrong to commit murder. Wouldn't you agree.
I'm sorry Mark, I realize that you are a successful hubber and many people have a lot of respect for you because of it. But you are being a bitter man when go on the attack another persons beliefs. And presume what they feel, I am not Catholic and do not agree with the way the Catholic church handles their scandals. Yet I do not believe all Catholics are ageeing with it either.
I have never once told you what to believe or not to believe, or put you down for you stance.
However you seem to feel free on telling me that I will fit right in, suggesting that my beleifs are just as corrupt as you think theirs are.
Your attitude is very hurtful. And down right mean.
No - I do not agree that abortion is murdering babies. Please do not twist what I say. Thank you. Nice? Why is it "nice" that Irish women are not free to choose what to do with their own bodies?
I am not over dramatizing anything. You said:
What did I get wrong? You say right here that you are considering moving to Ireland because abortion is illegal. Don't you? I mean - did I read this wrong?
What has that got to do with anything? So - systemic, chronic child sexual abuse does not affect the morals and values of Ireland? But illegal abortion does? How does that work exactky?
So - you thinking and saying that people who think abortion should be legal have no morals or values is not putting them down for their stance?
Why is it mean? You tell me that I have no morals or values and I point out the hypocrisy of that. Yet I am being mean?
How does that work exactly?
No I did not tell you, that you have no morals and values. I only stated that these are where my moral and values lie.
You take everything so literal.
And unfortunately, child sexual abuse is not limited to just Ireland, or the Catholic church. I would venture a guess to say it is most likely in every country on earth. Yet that was not the topic of this forum. I did not address it.
So by your standards my confession about where my moral and values lie, is tantamount to being a hypocrit. So name calling is okay too.
You know just because I don't agree with you, does not mean that I say you have no morals or values. That is you putting words in my mouth.
Well - in that case - I apologize.
I thought you meant being for abortion being legal meant I had no morals or values.
I am glad you recognize that I do have morals and values, and being in favor of abortion being legal is a moral standpoint you can respect.
It is different to your morals and values, but just as valid and morally correct.
And now you no longer think that I advocate murder, because abortion is not murdering babies after all.
My mistake. Sorry.
Okay I know scarcasm when I see it.
but Oh well an apology from you is probably rare so I accept.
Have a nice day.
No - I meant it. If you genuinely did not mean to say that I had no morals and values because I think differently about some things than you do - then I apologize. But that was the impression I got.
Then Thank you for the apology I accept.
I think murdering babies is morally wrong.
You think denying a womans right to choose,is moraly wrong.
We definately disagree there for sure. But that does not mean a don't respect your decisions or beleif in the matter.
I can not have children so it cuts very deep for me, and you may have reasons why you are deeply passionate about your stance as well.
On a side note, Pedophiles should be castrated and thrown under the jail, priest or not. But hey thats a whole nother can of worms.
Given that we are both so passionate about our beliefs it probably is a good thing we are seperated by an Ocean and several countries. Ha Ha just kidding.
Not having a problem cutting the testicles off of child molesters.
But - I think the way you say "murdering babies" is part of the problem here. I think it is morally objectionable to murder babies also - and you are putting words into my mouth when you say that I do not object to murdering babies.
An early term abortion is not murdering a baby. It is certainly preventing a potential life from coming to pass, but - that is it - potential being the operative word.
Between 10-90% of all pregnancies result in a spontaneous abortion or miscarriage, depending on the age of the mother, and there are numerous reasons why this happens.
But the 24 week limit seems to be a watershed point - before this there is very little chance of the fetus surviving outside the womb - although - as Irish points out - it does happen occasionally. So - "potential" seems an appropriate description.
I do not think that aborting an early term fetus is murdering a baby, and I do not think using such emotive language helps anyone. I am sure it is great for laying a guilt trip on any women who have had to make this difficult decision - but apart from that - what purpose is served? It certainly puts me on the defensive when I am accused of condoning baby murder.
I am sorry you are incapable of having your own baby, but I wonder if it might not be a good idea to offer yourself as a potential adoptive mother to some one considering an abortion instead of accusing them of "murdering a baby"?
See there you go again, so literal.
Sorry I should have said I believe abortions is morally wrong.
In any case I would love to adopt a baby, but that takes money which we don't have alot of unfortunately. Believe me if I did I would have adopted two or three by now, if at all possible.
But if any woman out there were to say to me they would like to give me their baby rather than have an abortion, I would be thrilled.
But the fact of the matter is they still would want an abortion, because there is already an option to give up a child to adoption, which many women decline and just get an abortion, for reasons of their own.
There are so many sides to this issue that is hard to comprehend all of it. I could no more imagine having an abortion than cutting off my hand but I do realize that in some situations, it is 'necessary' as in the health of the mother. I also have a friend who had a baby knowing that the child would have SEVERE birth anomalies (as in needs 7 different organ transplants and it will be a miracle if she survives to age 2). But they went ahead rather than aborting and she is a beautiful child. It is just SO sad. My own middle son was born without an eye and a significantly damaged other eye; I was told that I should have had an abortion - and the same theory when I was pregnant with my daughter after that (my last baby).
Again, I could not more have done that than amputate a body part. I shudder to think what my life would have been like without the gift of my son AND my daughter!
For a frightening account of how girl babies are treated/disposed of in many parts of the world, read Half The Sky - it will make you cry. I can only say that there is much to think about when it comes to fetuses and abortion and in my humble opinion, there are often more answers than one and I only hope and pray that most folks make the right choices. Any life is a terrible thing to waste but then there are circumstances sometimes we know nothing about I suppose? And lastly, I go by the saying 'judge not lest ye be judged'. Again, hoping folks are aware of the repercussions sometimes in the decisions they DO make.
The big news story thsi week was that a French women had murdered eight of her new born babies - whats the difference between this and murdering them a few weeks earlier in the womb?
Selective Gender Termination was discussed on a programme the other evening - it would appear that even in the UK people are aiming for a family made up of one boy and one girl - anything that doesnot fit the Bill is getting terminated
Dear me. What utter garbage.
You seem very comfortable making lies up in order to cause a fight. And yet you bitch about lack of morals in your country with multiple men raping children.
Irish religious murder is on the rise again I see as well. Post natal abortion seems just fine for you guys huh?
The programme discussed a private clinic which had helped couples achive the much desired 2.5 children by way of artificial insemination and early termination - It was a science program and simply discussing the use of private clincis for Selective Gender Termination
"anything that does not fit the bill gets terminated"?
Shouldn't that be "viciously murdered in cold blood"?
How do you have half a child? I mean if the clinic is helping them to have 2.5 children, one must be a half, right?
2.5 children is the socialogical description of the perfect family unit (average) I did not invent the term
a woman should give birth to at least one daughter to replace her, so that the population will replenish itself
ideal in many societies is 2 children per woman. In more developed countries it approximates this but then in less developed countries it is 3 and above total fertility rate per woman
I guess as the world's population contiues to grow this will become an even bigger problem
In the Irish Republic abortion is illegal except in exceptional circumstances - i.e. if the Mother is in danger.
by peter45 4 years ago
how can i terminate a 6 weeks old pregnancy?
by Tom Cornett 8 years ago
Because.....If liberal progressives are for abortion and gay marriage, then it makes sense that mostly progressive liberals will most often enact those rights...far more than conservatives.Which means...there will be far less progressive liberals in the future. Wouldn't it make sense to give...
by LailaK 7 years ago
The 2012 presidential election is approaching! Do you think that the new presidential candidates should support or ban abortion for women of all ages? Why?
by Jackie Lynnley 3 months ago
I read this was true and I just have to know if it is, please! Please provide links to prove what you say. Surely we are not going to be aborting babies ready to come into the world fully developed and healthy?
by Prophecy Teacher 9 years ago
According to the Saddleback Debate - Obama doesn't "know" when a baby should be given rights as a human. In Chicago, Illinois there was a great debate over this when Obama was an Illinois Senator - at different points he chaired the committee: What do you think about what this article...
by Scott S Bateman 2 years ago
The abortion debate is dominated by two extremes. On the one side, "pro life" extremists insist that abortion is murder. On the other side, "pro choice" extremists insist that abortion is a personal choice.I have met quite a few people who think they belong to one or the other....
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|