Something for libs to celebrate...

Have you seen the video showing Planned Parenthood helping the young women with questions regarding the termination of her pregnancy due solely to the gender of her baby?
So, how does abortion due to gender fit into the liberal narrative when defending a mothers right to kill her baby?

 

Especially silly since you don't need a reason to have an abortion. You can have an abortion based on the astrological sign of the eventual birth. Or whether or not you just don't want to be parent. However, if a relative like your father rapes you or you are raped in some alley by a stranger, the Cons believe that you should be forced to carry your rapist’s child to term and then raise that child. Hum? Maybe the old Brietbart/O’Keefe wannabes will make a video of some young girl being raped and forced to carry the child to term. Nah!

 

I love the left's answer to this. It is a Brietbart type of film. As if when someone they do not like catches them doing something wrong it does not count. What on earth difference does it make if Brietbart himself films it, I film it, or Joe Blow films it? Wrong is just as wrong even if no one films it. BTW, I heard this same BS on TV

 

If you listen to the libs who advocate baby murder you'd think every single abortion was due to rape or incest....there's not a single one who will admit abortion-as-birth-control or killing a baby because it isn't exactly the type they want is what the sane detest.

I simply cannot believe someone would come on this forum & actually defend this sort of thing...if memory serves, Hitler & the Chinese have been the other leading proponents this sort of thing.

 

If a woman decides she does not want to have a child and decides within the legal limit (24 weeks I think it is here in the UK) to abort it what business of anyone else's? As long as she meets the requirement of the law, ie Section 1(1) of the Abortion Act 1967

Subject to the provisions of this section, a person shall not be guilty of an offence under the law relating to abortion when a pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner if two registered medical practitioners are of the opinion, formed in good faith -
(a) that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family; or
(b) that the termination of the pregnancy is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman; or
(c) that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant woman, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated
(d) that there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped.

In R v British Broadcasting Corporation, ex parte ProLife Alliance, Lord Justice Laws said:
There is some evidence that many doctors maintain that the continuance of a pregnancy is always more dangerous to the physical welfare of a woman than having an abortion, a state of affairs which is said to allow a situation of de facto abortion on demand to prevail.

I do know that until the last few years at least one of our local hospitals refused to tell you the sex of the unborn child maybe to stop people of certain cultures aborting the child if it was female who knows?. How ever the section regarding the mental health of the pregnant woman could be used as a cover all excuse as well. My view is it is the woman's body and she should really be given the choice as to what happens to it. HER choice, not her family's of even her partner, although he should be allowed to give his view.

 

No matter how you try and disguise your response, you are still responding to my post because you just can't resist. BAD! BAD Davy! You are not allowed to respond to my posts!

 

You cannot respond to my posts either BAD!!! BAD!!! BAD!!! Now go sit in the corner. Davy and Coiny are very mad at you.

 

Careful Vladd! You're crossing the line into allowing a woman to choose whether or not she has a child. You communist socialist baby killing Lefty you! That isn't going to win you any favor with our local Right-wingers. They believe that they should choose whether a woman has a choice not the woman.

 

The question actually is whether or not someone should have the right to snuff out a life. "Choice" "Reproductive rights" "A woman's body..." and so on is nothing more than noise. What it boils down to is a decision to end a life.

 

Lets just say that politics in the UK is a little more fluid than in the US, being pro choice is not just a left wing thing, neither is believing in social medicine, sometimes the American left just comes across as the left wing of the Conservative party, do you have true socialists in the US or is that word just used as an insult for more liberal Democrats? (That is Democrats who are liberal not The Liberal Democrats Party, who received a tiny minority of the vote, 57 of 650 seats, were asked to form a coalition and now seem to be under the assumption they actually won the election, still with a lib dem like Cameron as PM it's hardly surprising.)

 

If it is done early enough it is not 'a life' it is just a collection of cells. Would you ban the pill and other forms of contraception as these end the possibility of life?

 

They are working on that! They don't seem to mind making the choice for the woman based on their personal religious views but they really hate letting the woman make her own choice. Apparently, all these old white guys know better than any woman. They claim to be protecting unborn children. How pompous and arrogant they are to decide that their interpretation of when life begins should be forced on all women. Medical science can't even make that call but based on their religious beliefs, they somehow know. Based on my religious beliefs, they are all brain-dead and I should get to decide whether they live or die. Convenient when you make decisions for others eh?

 

Culture is one reason, typically for the following reason:

...particularly where dowry's are still a custom.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-selective_abortion

 

There are very few true Socialists anywhere, I'd imagine, and even fewer here...but yes, it is derogatory in nature to call a liberal or Democrat a Socialist.

It's my belief it stems from fear of what Socialism represents to some, as well as a somewhat overactive patriotic spirit.

It's one thing to be patriotic, to love your country...it's another to be overly patriotic and let fear rule your life. IMO, that fear is baseless considering the fact that, Socialism is the basis for society...without it, no communities could be formed.

 

That is basically the argument I made for contraceptives in another thread. I attempted to explain that contraceptives prevent the sperm from reaching the egg, which means fewer unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

Some confusion exists in people's minds as to the definition of contraceptives, probably due to funding for abortions being included in the same legislation as funding for contraceptives. One is arguable, the other...not so much.

It doesn't help that a lot of people only listen to people (on the radio, television or internet) who have a political agenda that doesn't include passing on any real information on the subject.

It also doesn't help to include funding for abortions in with funding for contraceptives, but all legislation here is packed with unrelated bs amendments that grant favors (usually funding for projects in the legislator's home district) in order to secure their vote for the legislation...so it's not unusual, but it creates a lot of corruption issues on top of the standard difficulties in making law.

 

When abortions are illegal, this will be Right-wing Utopia.

 

The abortions these sick lefties want so much to protect is gender-based abortions...meaning at this point they know what the sex of the baby happens to be. Is that enough evidence that we're talking about a human life here?

 

Sex can be determined as early as 6-7 weeks. Determining the sex is NOT a factor in whether it is a viable life Nimrod. “Human life” in YOUR opinion. Not too judgmental are you.

 

Please excuse my cutting your post Vladd but what I want to ask pretains to the legal limit of abortion in the UK. You stated that the legal limit is now 24 weeks. If a doctor can detect a baby's heart beat inside the mother at six weeks, is that fetus so to speak, still just a collection of cells or is it already life since those cells have formed organ systems? Any answer you give me be it agreed upon or not will be respected I am just wondering how people who are pro-choice accept a government number on when and when it is not ok to commit abortion.