Jacob Rees-Mogg

[Jinx]

Derek Smith said:

You are perfectly entitled to believe what you believe of course. You have put your point of view and there is logic in it.

However, what about those who do not feel the same as you, who believe that everyone is special but a foetus is not conscious and so is different from people? Should your beliefs override theirs? R-Mogg takes his guide from the political leader of another country and religion. Fair enough, but we have no way of democratising various sects and religions. I don't want sahria law or similar from any religion.

It is easy enough to destroy any religiously held belief by the use of logic. R-Mogg's total rejection is weird but he's entitled to believe that n angels dance on the head of a pin, and good luck to him. But there must be some reason for rejecting a woman's right to abort a foetus other than 'I've been told, and it's in my special book'.

It would be wrong to force an abortion on any woman. If a raped woman conceives then R-Mogg should keep his religious views to himself. It is the woman's decision.

Opinions are like aholes and rights are merely societal constructs and therefore mutable. I would not expect everyone to feel the same as me but if you need society to provide the means for your care then you should respect the rules of that society. Abortions require society to pay for them - is it not reasonable for society to decide which rules to apply?

[gooner1]

gadgetmac said:

Jinx said:

Are we? Certainly not when we are unconscious.

You say ‘Certainly’ which is not true.

I was awoken from my sleep just a week ago when my wife was standing over me silently at 4am whilst I slept. Although unconscious I was still self aware enough to at some level register a possible threat and quickly wake up.

If I were you, I'd be far more concerned with my wife than with my conscious state.

[otolith]

Breadvan72 said:

You are in a room that is on fire and there are also present (1) a six month old baby, and (2) a box of viable but un-implanted human embryos. You can't carry both to safety. Which do you leave behind?

Since I was about to post exactly this, and since the point has been completely ignored, I shall bump it.

Any of the "life begins at conception" care to answer it? Let's make it easier, the box has 1000 viable but un-implanted embryos in it. Or one actual live, sentient baby. You do the maths, and tell us the outcome of your moral beliefs.

[craigjm]

Jinx said:

Opinions are like aholes and rights are merely societal constructs and therefore mutable. I would not expect everyone to feel the same as me but if you need society to provide the means for your care then you should respect the rules of that society. Abortions require society to pay for them - is it not reasonable for society to decide which rules to apply?

So if your wife got raped you would be blissfully happy for her to give birth to a child and the pair of you raise it because society pays for abortions and someone like RM has therefore made them illegal?

[anonymous-user]

gooner1 said:

If I were you, I'd be far more concerned with my wife than with my conscious state.

Depends what she was doing, really.

[Derek Smith]

Jinx said:

Opinions are like aholes and rights are merely societal constructs and therefore mutable. I would not expect everyone to feel the same as me but if you need society to provide the means for your care then you should respect the rules of that society. Abortions require society to pay for them - is it not reasonable for society to decide which rules to apply?

The state does decide the rules that apply for abortions. There are offences relating to abortions outside the law. The problem with R-Mogg's point of view is that it is dictated by a pope. Indeed, he's said something along the lines of regarding the pope as his whip, that's the leader of a religion where the teachings go against much of accepted morals in most, but by no means all, areas of the UK. And that's not to mention him being the leader of another state.

If, for instance, an MP reckoned that they took their whip from Maduro, then it is probable that many people would be concerned.

Be fruitful and multiply, taking no account of the morrow is not, I would suggest, a sensible edict to run by.

[gooner1]

desolate said:

gooner1 said:

If I were you, I'd be far more concerned with my wife than with my conscious state.

Depends what she was doing, really.

Such as?

[gadgetmac]

desolate said:

gooner1 said:

If I were you, I'd be far more concerned with my wife than with my conscious state.

Depends what she was doing, really.

Sadly its not the same as I’m doing when the roles are reversed.

[anonymous-user]

gooner1 said:

Such as?

I refer you to the next post!

[Sylvaforever]

Derek Smith said:

You are perfectly entitled to believe what you believe of course. You have put your point of view and there is logic in it.

However, what about those who do not feel the same as you, who believe that everyone is special but a foetus is not conscious and so is different from people? Should your beliefs override theirs? R-Mogg takes his guide from the political leader of another country and religion. Fair enough, but we have no way of democratising various sects and religions. I don't want sahria law or similar from any religion.

It is easy enough to destroy any religiously held belief by the use of logic. R-Mogg's total rejection is weird but he's entitled to believe that n angels dance on the head of a pin, and good luck to him. But there must be some reason for rejecting a woman's right to abort a foetus other than 'I've been told, and it's in my special book'.

It would be wrong to force an abortion on any woman. If a raped woman conceives then R-Mogg should keep his religious views to himself. It is the woman's decision.

I actually go along with the (I'm not btw) Church of Scotland's fairly pragmatic viewpoint..

However certain sections of society look upon pregnancy as a starting point to wealth and property ownership (sic)..
In which case why should the unborn life be made to pay the ultimate sanction for moral destitution Derek?

Edited by Sylvaforever on Wednesday 25th October 12:58

[anonymous-user]

Sylvaforever said:

However certain sections of society look upon pregnancy as a starting point to wealth and property ownership (sic)..

What do you mean by that?

[Boydie88]

A couple of questions to the pro-'choice', when do you draw the line on how many are permissible on the NHS?
Are you happy women using an abortion as birth control?

Everyone is quick to point out extreme situations, for which I agree there should be extenuating circumstances, but the majority of the time, this isn't the case.

[anonymous-user]

Boydie88 said:

A couple of questions to the pro-'choice', when do you draw the line on how many are permissible on the NHS?
Are you happy women using an abortion as birth control?

Everyone is quick to point out extreme situations, for which I agree there should be extenuating circumstances, but the majority of the time, this isn't the case.

Dunno,
No.

Doesn't your last point render your questions irrelevant?

[Angrybiker]

Derek Smith said:

Jinx said:

Opinions are like aholes and rights are merely societal constructs and therefore mutable. I would not expect everyone to feel the same as me but if you need society to provide the means for your care then you should respect the rules of that society. Abortions require society to pay for them - is it not reasonable for society to decide which rules to apply?

The state does decide the rules that apply for abortions. There are offences relating to abortions outside the law. The problem with R-Mogg's point of view is that it is dictated by a pope. Indeed, he's said something along the lines of regarding the pope as his whip, that's the leader of a religion where the teachings go against much of accepted morals in most, but by no means all, areas of the UK. And that's not to mention him being the leader of another state.

If, for instance, an MP reckoned that they took their whip from Maduro, then it is probable that many people would be concerned.

Be fruitful and multiply, taking no account of the morrow is not, I would suggest, a sensible edict to run by.

Really? Pray tell. Especially considering the UK used to be Catholic before H.VIII and derives most laws from the principles taught there?

And, if his views were not 'dictated by a Pope' (capital P please it is a formal recognised role even if you're not part of the faith) you'd think they were valid views?

[otolith]

Boydie88 said:

A couple of questions to the pro-'choice', when do you draw the line on how many are permissible on the NHS?
Are you happy women using an abortion as birth control?

Everyone is quick to point out extreme situations, for which I agree there should be extenuating circumstances, but the majority of the time, this isn't the case.

1. How much do you think an abortion costs the NHS?
2. How much do you think a pregnancy taken to term costs the NHS?
3. I'm not happy with anyone going through an abortion if they can avoid getting pregnant, it's an invasive medical procedure, but frankly st happens and it's none of my damn business.

[Boydie88]

desolate said:

Boydie88 said:

A couple of questions to the pro-'choice', when do you draw the line on how many are permissible on the NHS?
Are you happy women using an abortion as birth control?

Everyone is quick to point out extreme situations, for which I agree there should be extenuating circumstances, but the majority of the time, this isn't the case.

Dunno,
No.

Doesn't your last point render your questions irrelevant?

I'd say no because to my knowledge, most abortions are being used as birth control. Would happily be proved wrong here but what I can see, a lot of the most common reasons would have been present before the pregnancy so birth control should have been used in the first place.

I guess I wouldn't call myself entirely anti abortion, I'm just entirely anti not taking responsibility for your actions and having others foot the bill.

[anonymous-user]

Boydie88 said:

I'd say no because to my knowledge, most abortions are being used as birth control. Would happily be proved wrong here but what I can see, a lot of the most common reasons would have been present before the pregnancy so birth control should have been used in the first place.

I guess I wouldn't call myself entirely anti abortion, I'm just entirely anti not taking responsibility for your actions and having others foot the bill.

All the stats are here
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...

The cost is a different argument than that put forward by JRM, and probably one for a different thread.

Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 25th October 13:52

[craigjm]

Boydie88 said:

I'd say no because to my knowledge, most abortions are being used as birth control. Would happily be proved wrong here but what I can see, a lot of the most common reasons would have been present before the pregnancy so birth control should have been used in the first place.

I guess I wouldn't call myself entirely anti abortion, I'm just entirely anti not taking responsibility for your actions and having others foot the bill.

It depends on what you call birth control. Black and white cold hard facts then yes abortion is a form of birth control as it prevents a birth. It is not, however, in the same league as condoms, the pill, implant or even the morning after pill. Calling it “birth control” trivialises a very invasive and mentally damaging procedure. Any man that thinks that women have abortions frivolously needs to talk to a few and see the mental anguish that they often cause and impacts that go on for many years beyond the operation.

Edited by craigjm on Wednesday 25th October 13:51

[Boydie88]

otolith said:

1. How much do you think an abortion costs the NHS?
2. How much do you think a pregnancy taken to term costs the NHS?
3. I'm not happy with anyone going through an abortion if they can avoid getting pregnant, it's an invasive medical procedure, but frankly st happens and it's none of my damn business.

1. I guess, a lot.
2. I guess, a lot more.

I guess you'd hope the child contributes to society, offsetting that cost.

But yes, as above, agree we've gone off of why Mogg isn't a fan.

[Zod]

desolate said:

Sylvaforever said:

However certain sections of society look upon pregnancy as a starting point to wealth and property ownership (sic)..

What do you mean by that?

I think he's confusing the fact that single mothers have to be housed by councils, hence rightly getting priority in social housing allocation with their being given a property to own. He is easily confused.