Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
A Female's Abortion Decision (Read 2383 times)
Jasin
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 55130
Gender: male
Re: A Female's Abortion Decision
Reply #15 - Mar 12th, 2025 at 5:54pm
 
Their refusal to give a firm answer is a NO against such a law.
They just didn't want the responsibility of such a decision on their names.
More political performance than Medical integrity.
Back to top
 

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 56446
Gender: male
Re: A Female's Abortion Decision
Reply #16 - Jun 19th, 2025 at 6:35pm
 
Frank wrote on Mar 12th, 2025 at 10:41am:
Would you support a law giving abortion rights to a woman up to the time of birth?

A yes/no question these women are unable to answer.

https://x.com/CNviolations/status/1899282880582635566



It’s surely time we dropped our cynicism and got behind the government’s National Abortion Drive, another noble attempt to kickstart our floundering economy.

The United Kingdom has made great strides of late in this area, recently overtaking France in the number of abortions performed annually, the figures showing the largest increase since this sort of stuff was legalised. The door, then, is already ajar. All we need to do is push a little.

Our elected representatives were intent on doing just that this week by voting for an amendment that will now decriminalise abortion right up to the day of birth. I don’t wish to seem churlish, but to me this demonstrates a marked lack of imagination and ambition. Why not extend the period at which abortions are legal to several months, or even years, after the birth of the child?

I understand that technically this would be known as ‘infanticide’ rather than ‘abortion’, but terminology should not stand in our way. There are plenty of left-wing ethicists, such as Aussie Pete Singer, who believe that infanticide is justifiable in many cases, using broadly the same arguments as those used to justify late-term abortions – that the foetus, or child, could not exist independently without its mother.

Yes, I hear you cry, this is the same Pete Singer who thinks it’s OK to shag dogs. But, as ever, you are missing the context and the caveats. Dr Singer believes that you may give your dog one only if it is part of a rich and caring relationship and does not involve coercion. I understand that it is sometimes a tricky issue to obtain written consent from a Dobermann Pinscher and that given the limited intellectual capacity of many dogs, they may not fully understand what they’re getting themselves involved in. But Dr Singer is, as I have said, an ethicist, so I do not feel sufficiently qualified in challenging his jurisdiction on this issue.
Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 56446
Gender: male
Re: A Female's Abortion Decision
Reply #17 - Jun 19th, 2025 at 6:38pm
 
Frank wrote on Jun 19th, 2025 at 6:35pm:
Frank wrote on Mar 12th, 2025 at 10:41am:
Would you support a law giving abortion rights to a woman up to the time of birth?

A yes/no question these women are unable to answer.

https://x.com/CNviolations/status/1899282880582635566



It’s surely time we dropped our cynicism and got behind the government’s National Abortion Drive, another noble attempt to kickstart our floundering economy.

The United Kingdom has made great strides of late in this area, recently overtaking France in the number of abortions performed annually, the figures showing the largest increase since this sort of stuff was legalised. The door, then, is already ajar. All we need to do is push a little.

Our elected representatives were intent on doing just that this week by voting for an amendment that will now decriminalise abortion right up to the day of birth. I don’t wish to seem churlish, but to me this demonstrates a marked lack of imagination and ambition. Why not extend the period at which abortions are legal to several months, or even years, after the birth of the child?

I understand that technically this would be known as ‘infanticide’ rather than ‘abortion’, but terminology should not stand in our way. There are plenty of left-wing ethicists, such as Aussie Pete Singer, who believe that infanticide is justifiable in many cases, using broadly the same arguments as those used to justify late-term abortions – that the foetus, or child, could not exist independently without its mother.

Yes, I hear you cry, this is the same Pete Singer who thinks it’s OK to shag dogs. But, as ever, you are missing the context and the caveats. Dr Singer believes that you may give your dog one only if it is part of a rich and caring relationship and does not involve coercion. I understand that it is sometimes a tricky issue to obtain written consent from a Dobermann Pinscher and that given the limited intellectual capacity of many dogs, they may not fully understand what they’re getting themselves involved in. But Dr Singer is, as I have said, an ethicist, so I do not feel sufficiently qualified in challenging his jurisdiction on this issue.

There are a few reasons for the huge rise in abortions recently. First, they are much easier to come by, as the medical clergy have become far more indulgent than used to be the case. Second, there has been the lessening of stigma regarding the procedure, especially now that we have banned those God-bothering dinosaurs from standing silently near abortion clinics praying and what have you. And third, because we have long since jettisoned the archaic principle that sexual intercourse is in some way related to having a child and that women (and men) who do not want a child would be best minded to refrain.

Oddly – and this is truly mysterious – although we have got rid of that old dictum and ensured that everybody, everywhere, can get hold of contraceptive devices in myriad forms at any time of the day or night, this has not resulted in a reduction of unwanted pregnancies. Quite the reverse. Those silly old things, morals, seemed to have exerted a certain influence back in the day. Luckily, today we know it is a human right to behave without a vestige of morality.

I should end with an apology to all the women readers who believe that men should not delve into the subject of abortions because it is something which doesn’t concern them. It is, after all, a woman’s body we are talking about, and she has a right to do whatever she wants with it. My only excuse is that as a columnist I very frequently write about things which have nothing to do with me directly, such as those rape-gang people. And at least the feminists urging decriminalisation know that I’m on their side.
Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 56446
Gender: male
Re: A Female's Abortion Decision
Reply #18 - Jun 19th, 2025 at 8:20pm
 
Well, it’s hello to prenatal infanticide in the UK now that MP Tonia Antoniazzi’s amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill has passed the Commons after all of two hours’ debate with 379 MPs voting in favor. Can we get our heads round what that means? Nothing a woman does in relation to her own pregnancy can make her liable to prosecution. At the same age of gestation when premature babies are admitted to neonatal wards with a very good chance of survival, less fortunate fetuses can be killed with impunity by their own mothers. So anyone like Carla Foster, who aborted her baby Lily at 32 weeks’ gestation, will now get off free. There are, in other words, no sanctions for those who kill a fetus at any time right up to birth, so long as it’s your own fetus you’re killing.
https://thespectator.com/topic/british-mps-open-door-infanticide/
Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 56446
Gender: male
Re: A Female's Abortion Decision
Reply #19 - Feb 7th, 2026 at 8:03am
 
Frank wrote on Jun 19th, 2025 at 8:20pm:
Well, it’s hello to prenatal infanticide in the UK now that MP Tonia Antoniazzi’s amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill has passed the Commons after all of two hours’ debate with 379 MPs voting in favor. Can we get our heads round what that means? Nothing a woman does in relation to her own pregnancy can make her liable to prosecution. At the same age of gestation when premature babies are admitted to neonatal wards with a very good chance of survival, less fortunate fetuses can be killed with impunity by their own mothers. So anyone like Carla Foster, who aborted her baby Lily at 32 weeks’ gestation, will now get off free. There are, in other words, no sanctions for those who kill a fetus at any time right up to birth, so long as it’s your own fetus you’re killing.
https://thespectator.com/topic/british-mps-open-door-infanticide/



There are more abortions in the UK annually (277,000) than net immigration.
Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print