UK Abortion Law

[HM-2]

InitialDave said:

HM-2 said:

If presence or absence of a heartbeat can't be used as a universal indicator of whether something is living or dead, it cannot logically be used to define when life begins.

You don't even need to have that debate.

The "hearbeat" being used in this argument isn't a heartbeat, so it's irrelevant whether a heartbeat is an appropriate indication of start of life.

Also a valid point given the "heart" doesn't bear any structural resemblance to a heart until around 10 weeks.

[InitialDave]

HM-2 said:

Also a valid point given the "heart" doesn't bear any structural resemblance to a heart until around 10 weeks.

Yep, it's just layers upon layers of bullst to try and support an emotive, and wrong, "people are killing babies" argument.

[BobsPigeon]

InitialDave said:

HM-2 said:

Also a valid point given the "heart" doesn't bear any structural resemblance to a heart until around 10 weeks.

Yep, it's just layers upon layers of bullst to try and support an emotive, and wrong, "people are killing babies" argument.

At some point between initial conception and birth a baby comes into being.... I think we would all consider termination at 36 weeks to be a horrific tragedy for all concerned and definitely discouraged in law.

So why can't both sides of this argument present considered opinion when that is, I have said for me it's before 24 probably after 12... For some its conception, which I find extreme but at least they're honest or brave enough to put their opinion forward, for some its just a case of waiting for someone else to say something and then attacking it ...

Maybe we should have just had a poll and been done with it, it does seem to be the crux of the matter.

[Gweeds]

[Jonny Wishbone]

BobsPigeon said:

At some point between initial conception and birth a baby comes into being.... I think we would all consider termination at 36 weeks to be a horrific tragedy for all concerned and definitely discouraged in law.

So why can't both sides of this argument present considered opinion when that is, I have said for me it's before 24 probably after 12... For some its conception, which I find extreme but at least they're honest or brave enough to put their opinion forward, for some its just a case of waiting for someone else to say something and then attacking it ...

Maybe we should have just had a poll and been done with it, it does seem to be the crux of the matter.

We have had a poll of sorts; abortion is not and, in my lifetime at least, has never been a mainstream political issue in this country. That is absolutely ample evidence that the laws and conventions we have surrounding abortion are agreed upon, or at least accepted, by the vast majority.

[InitialDave]

BobsPigeon said:

So why can't both sides of this argument present considered opinion when that is,

OK, my opinion is it's when a woman and her doctor agree on it.

[BobsPigeon]

InitialDave said:

BobsPigeon said:

So why can't both sides of this argument present considered opinion when that is,

OK, my opinion is it's when a woman and her doctor agree on it.

I think that would yield very variable outcomes. Certainly not a basis for good law. Doctors are people too, with varying opinions I suggest. As are women so I've been told.

[InitialDave]

BobsPigeon said:

I think that would yield very variable outcomes.

Yes. I would intend it to be so. The outcome should be variable, as there are huge variables in individual circumstances.

[Skyrocket21]

Jonny Wishbone said:

BobsPigeon said:

At some point between initial conception and birth a baby comes into being.... I think we would all consider termination at 36 weeks to be a horrific tragedy for all concerned and definitely discouraged in law.

So why can't both sides of this argument present considered opinion when that is, I have said for me it's before 24 probably after 12... For some its conception, which I find extreme but at least they're honest or brave enough to put their opinion forward, for some its just a case of waiting for someone else to say something and then attacking it ...

Maybe we should have just had a poll and been done with it, it does seem to be the crux of the matter.

We have had a poll of sorts; abortion is not and, in my lifetime at least, has never been a mainstream political issue in this country. That is absolutely ample evidence that the laws and conventions we have surrounding abortion are agreed upon, or at least accepted, by the vast majority.

When that is? Depends how you define that, so if it was consciousness it would go like this:

"When does consciousness begin? For most people it is a functioning brain that defines a human being, as this is where our thoughts, feelings, and conscious minds come from. Some people are concerned with abortions after six weeks of pregnancy because that is when a basic spinal cord and nervous system first develop, but it is not until week eight (six weeks post-fertilisation) that the first rudimentary brain activity – the kind that is observed in organisms as simple as insects – can be observed. The very beginnings of our higher brain structures only start to appear between weeks 12 and 16. Crucially, the co-ordinated brain activity required for consciousness does not occur until 24-25 weeks of pregnancy."

I am personally pro choice, this should always be a women's choice, it's their body, their decision, religion or otherwise trying to control womens bodies is very much misogyny, as if the world isn't over populated enough! It's their choice. Lot's of fertilised eggs are actually ejected during a period, yes they are fertilisied, so you know must be mass murder having a period or something.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

kylos27 said:

A heartbeat=life so that should be the cutoff point. End of story.

I hope your medical records have been noted accordingly. "If kylos27's heart stops, throw in the towel. No heartbeat, no life, end of story".

[AJL308]

BobsPigeon said:

InitialDave said:

HM-2 said:

Also a valid point given the "heart" doesn't bear any structural resemblance to a heart until around 10 weeks.

Yep, it's just layers upon layers of bullst to try and support an emotive, and wrong, "people are killing babies" argument.

At some point between initial conception and birth a baby comes into being.... I think we would all consider termination at 36 weeks to be a horrific tragedy for all concerned and definitely discouraged in law.

So why can't both sides of this argument present considered opinion when that is, I have said for me it's before 24 probably after 12... For some its conception, which I find extreme but at least they're honest or brave enough to put their opinion forward, for some its just a case of waiting for someone else to say something and then attacking it ...

Maybe we should have just had a poll and been done with it, it does seem to be the crux of the matter.

Ireland has just legalised it and set it at 12 weeks. That appears to be the correct point to me if you are arriving at a decision after a rational assessment of actual medical evidence. The broad argument seems to be that 12 weeks is the earliest point at which there could be any trace of a brain or nervous system so there could be no argument as to there being any sort of self-awareness or perception of pain. It is human, obviously, but clearly not a human.

If you don't want to base your stance on anything scientific or rational then just be honest about it and say that you are basing it on your religious zealotism or the fact that you simply don't like the idea of it or that you find it immoral. Don't try to dress it up like the Texans are doing in some pseudo-scientific clothing which is clearly nonsense and makes you look a bit like a fool and definitely like a hypocrite.

[hidetheelephants]

Cold said:

Surely it comes down to one very simple application of beliefs? If you don't like the idea of abortion, then don't have one.

There's not really a need for any further discussion.

But there is though; a load of pasty white guys have a firm belief that they have the right to tell poor women that they must carry unwanted pregnancies to term, even if they are the result of rape. Women of means will continue to avail themselves of abortion services as they have done previously, out of state and out of mind. No extra assistance is forthcoming to look after the issue, nor funding for prophylaxis or family planning generally, but strenuous effort toward forcing poor women to have babies they don't want and can't care for. This is naked misogyny.

BobsPigeon said:

At some point between initial conception and birth a baby comes into being.... I think we would all consider termination at 36 weeks to be a horrific tragedy for all concerned and definitely discouraged in law.

So why can't both sides of this argument present considered opinion when that is, I have said for me it's before 24 probably after 12... For some its conception, which I find extreme but at least they're honest or brave enough to put their opinion forward, for some its just a case of waiting for someone else to say something and then attacking it ...

Maybe we should have just had a poll and been done with it, it does seem to be the crux of the matter.

Pew Research have carried out regular polls on the subject; in the last 20 years or so support for Roe V Wade being left in place has been steady around 60%.