Return PolishForums LIVE
  PolishForums Archive :
Archives - 2005-2009 / News  % width 273

Abortion - how is the Polish government going to deal with this issue?


joepilsudski 26 | 1,389  
25 Apr 2009 /  #121
Abortion is not a governmental problem, and in my opinion, governments should not get involved in 'abortion rights' issues...Except in dire circumstance, abortion is murder...The issue must be dealt with by the man and woman engaging in the sexual act that leads to conception...They must be aware of their responsibilities: responsibility of producing a human life...There are ways to prevent this, i.e. birth control, many methods, if they so choose...If an individual doctor wishes to perform abortions, than a woman can go to him/her, if she chooses...But, although I am not familiar with the Polish legal position on this issue, if Poland refuses to fund this, good for Poland...I would not favor punishing doctors who do abortions: Rather I would discourage them from doing it on any kind of large scale, and the way to do this is by recognizing 'casual abortion' or 'abortion of convenience' as murder, this way applying a moral standard...Do you know what goes on in 'abortion clinics'?...I have never been in one, but I had a girlfriend who worked in an abortion mill in my city in the US...She actually lasted there for about 6 months, but then she became so sickened that she just quit...They were actually aborting viable 'fetuses' or children, up to a term of 8 months, and throwing them in the garbage can....In addition to the 'early term' procedure, where a 'vacuum device' is inserted into the woman's vagina, and the contents of the womb are 'cleaned out'...This procedure leads to internal damage, causes scarring, and may eventually lead to the need for a hystorectomy, or cause a type of cancer.
Nathan 18 | 1,363  
25 Apr 2009 /  #122
Where is your human spirit for enduring suffering to bring about something better?

How many children would come to tell me that? How many children would be able to come up to me on gangrenated legs, swollen from hunger bellies covered in flies, or those who were tortured by their parents and these kids "succeded" in what? I don't want to take nobody's right to live, but as part of the society I consider a kid a part of its mother and she should have complete right to do with it as she wishes until the kid is born. After that she can't do anything. I don't think that existence is a pleasure. There are things in life that make this existence worthwhile and pleasurable, but in itself it is empty and senseless. You say of me that I am a misanthrope. Maybe. But maybe you never felt hunger and disease caused by lack of food and medical treatment, never saw death of bodies and minds, sufferings beyond your imagination of sitting in front of TV and watching a documentary and letting a tear run down your face and then running to pick some ice-cream from the fridge because the movie changed the balance of nutrients in your pampered body. There is no right answer to this question and each one of us is feeling the way we learnt to feel through experience.
lesser 4 | 1,311  
25 Apr 2009 /  #123
I personally consider that, for the sake of not parents but child, abortion should be allowed.

I wonder whether you will stick to your flawed logic when somebody else will want to kill YOU for your own sake. Judging from your posting on this forum, your existence must be pretty miserable, wanna be helped?
Nathan 18 | 1,363  
25 Apr 2009 /  #124
Don't say "flawed" when you don't present a contra-argument to what I said. Read also my #128. My existence is Ok, but thank you for attention.

I don't want to take nobody's right to live, but as part of the society I consider a kid a part of its mother and she should have complete right to do with it as she wishes until the kid is born. After that she can't do anything.

freebird 3 | 532  
25 Apr 2009 /  #125
I wonder whether you will stick to your flawed logic when somebody else will want to kill YOU for your own sake. Judging from your posting on this forum, your existence must be pretty miserable, wanna be helped?

Killing? My a** > You're nothing but a religious fanatic just like the freaking Muslims. You need help not him.
lesser 4 | 1,311  
25 Apr 2009 /  #126
Don't say "flawed" when you don't present a contra-argument to what I said. Read also my #128. My existence is Ok, but thank you for attention.

You propose murder in prevention and back this providing silly slogan of radical feminist groups. You discredit yourself enough.

Killing? My a** > You're nothing but a religious fanatic just like the freaking Muslims. You need help not him.

I think that many Muslims have more reason than you, they are not science deniers. You are typical product of public education, a complete ignorant.
freebird 3 | 532  
25 Apr 2009 /  #127
typical product of public education, a complete ignorant.

look in the mirror next time you say it

Following blindly religion is IGNORANT
SamenessLove 1 | 33  
25 Apr 2009 /  #128
How many children would be able to come up to me on gangrenated legs, swollen from hunger bellies covered in flies, or those who were tortured by their parents and these kids "succeded" in what?

You're drawing up these very horrible scenarios from "If they cannot take care of the future child"? That's a huge leap. It's a far cry from not being able to take care of a child and the suffering you propose. You're looking at the exception to the rule and then making a rule for everyone so that the exception does not occur. Scenarios like you present are rare in Western nations. These are not wide spread problems for Western man. You're talking mostly about third world problems.

After that she can't do anything.

Others can do something. Can't they?

I don't think that existence is a pleasure. There are things in life that make this existence worthwhile and pleasurable, but in itself it is empty and senseless.

I can appreciate what you're saying here. I don't know how much philosophy you get into but maybe your issue is to simply become Nietzshe's superman. Or maybe Kierkegaard's leap to faith might be your deal. How much of our value in existence is rational? But then the other thing that you have to ask yourself is what is it about the "existence" of things that make our existence worthwhile and pleasurable? Is it just the hedonistic value?

You say of me that I am a misanthrope. Maybe. But maybe you never felt hunger and disease caused by lack of food and medical treatment, never saw death of bodies and minds, sufferings beyond your imagination of sitting in front of TV and watching a documentary and letting a tear run down your face and then running to pick some ice-cream from the fridge because the movie changed the balance of nutrients in your pampered body.

I sense guilt here for being in a position where you're not suffering while others are. This will tear you up inside. Some things are just not your fault. You have to let go. I don't feel guilt because I've never felt starvation hunger or because I have never been ravaged by disease. Think about the alternative. Would suffering as much as those in your scenarios remove your guilt or make things better? No it wouldn't. It would just add to the problem. Your a SUCCESS. You want a world with people who suffer less right? You're one of those people. Letting go of that guilt doesn't mean you are indifferent to it, can't do something about or don't care though. It's just not productive to have that yoke around your neck.
lesser 4 | 1,311  
25 Apr 2009 /  #129
Following blindly religion is IGNORANT

There are some atheists in this forum that I respect. They know one thing about my posting. I never refer to religion debating about various issues. If you learned somehow about myself being Catholic, congratulations. However your claim is baseless or perhaps you will provide quote of mine which would say otherwise. If you don't, it means that you are a liar incapable to defends its own statements and trying to skip on personal argument because of that.
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
25 Apr 2009 /  #130
Lesser, that wasn't a retort to the main man, freebird. What he said was right if you pay attention to the word 'blindly'. You can't fault that!!
freebird 3 | 532  
25 Apr 2009 /  #131
There are some atheists in this forum that I respect.

OK so what is abortion to you? Clear answer.

I'll back after a while, you all have a good 1
Torq 32 | 2,897  
25 Apr 2009 /  #132
Following blindly religion is IGNORANT

You either follow religion or not.

You can't be a little bit pregnant, or a little bit Catholic :-)
lesser 4 | 1,311  
25 Apr 2009 /  #133
Lesser, that wasn't a retort to the main man, freebird. What he said was right if you pay attention to the word 'blindly'. You can't fault that!!

This was already third time that he suggest my supposed religious fanaticism discussing about abortion, of course he cannot provide any statements of mine that would confirm this claims. Perhaps you will help him to provide some quote?

OK so what is abortion to you? Clear answer.

It is murder and anybody who have mere idea about biology must agree with me. Beside of that those who speak in favour of abortion cannot agree among themselves when human life start "in fact"! (I refer to abortion laws in different states) Why?? Simply because they are all wrong.
SamenessLove 1 | 33  
25 Apr 2009 /  #134
This was already third time that he suggest my supposed religious fanaticism discussing about abortion, of course he cannot provide any statements of mine that would confirm this claims. Perhaps you will help him to provide some quote?

The other thing I see is that people can be "fanatically" against abortion even as atheists. This focus on religious fanaticism is arguing past the issue. Even if you would get through religious fanaticism you haven't really dealt with the source of the issue. The source is simply strong moral feeling. But why do many feel abortion is wrong? Why do so many logical arguments against or for abortion not change people's minds? That's the real question.
Nathan 18 | 1,363  
25 Apr 2009 /  #135
I sense guilt here for being in a position where you're not suffering while others are

Complete misunderstanding. Sorry I made you miss my point. I don't have the guilt you are talking about.

Is it just the hedonistic value?

Where did I say that the life's worth in the hedonistic values?

You're looking at the exception to the rule and then making a rule for everyone so that the exception does not occur.

Who knows that better parents or society? I don't make one rule for all. You are actually making it. I am just saying that each parent has a right to decide, not society making a law.

Others can do something. Can't they?

I don't know exactly what you meant here, but if you say that child can be killed after the birth, I consider it wrong.

You propose murder in prevention and back this providing silly slogan of radical feminist groups. You discredit yourself enough.

Why do you rip off a pice of my conversation and spill it with some baseless thoughts?
Radical feminist groups? Murder in prevention? I said woman has a child in her body, it is a part of her and let her decide whatever she likes to do with it.
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
25 Apr 2009 /  #136
Torq, you completely missed the point. Such a simple statement which can hardly be misinterpreted and you/lesser managed it.

Freebird was talking about exercising your own judgment, without the need to follow the dictates of religion.

The Czech Republic is over 1/4 Roman Catholic yet they are the country which support abortion the most. Maybe they are just more tolerant and actually practise Catholicism more.
Nathan 18 | 1,363  
25 Apr 2009 /  #137
I think that many Muslims have more reason than you, they are not science deniers. You are typical product of public education, a complete ignorant.

Ignorant? Haha. What product are you? Religious, private school or something else. Saying ignorant just because you don't agree is funny.
Why do you stick Muslims here? If I am a product of public education than

anybody who have mere idea about biology must agree with me.

I learnt biology and I understand it and I don't agree with you. Life starts when the organism begins to function on him/herself. It is when a person takes in first breath. Until then it is a part of a woman and her body. The rest you know what I will say.
Torq 32 | 2,897  
25 Apr 2009 /  #138
The Czech Republic is over 1/4 Roman Catholic yet they are the country which support abortion the most. Maybe they are just more tolerant and actually practise Catholicism more.

Erm... I'm confused, Seanus. Czechs support abortion the most, so maybe they're
more tolerant and actually practise Catholicism more???

Anyway, I've nothing against "exercising your own judgement, without the need
to follow the dictates of religion". All I said is that you can either follow a religion
or not.

Saying "to follow religion BLINDLY" is like saying "to be pregnant TOTALLY".
SamenessLove 1 | 33  
25 Apr 2009 /  #139
Complete misunderstanding. Sorry I made you miss my point. I don't have the guilt you are talking about.

Ok, so why are you drawing up these scenarios? Why even bring it up as a reason why not to bring another human into existence? My understanding is that you're trying to avoid the suffering that may be placed upon a human because they will be thrust into one of these scenarios you're talking about.

Where did I say that the life's worth in the hedonistic values?

I'm not saying you did. I'm asking. The reason is that you mention that there are moments where existence is worthwhile and pleasurable. So what is it about these moments that make it so?

Who knows that better parents or society?

You're kind of getting to the heart of the matter here. Who should make laws that go to the heart of ethical issues? It could be said US society condemns hitting a child as punishment. You can get in trouble for that. But who knows better? Parents or society how to discipline a child? It's really about individuals who have a strong sense of ethics and then go on to make the laws.

I don't make one rule for all. You are actually making it. I am just saying that each parent has a right to decide, not society making a law.

Ok, point taken about making the one rule. But why should abortion be this one thing that parents should have a right to but society can't deny it? And you use the word parents, but does that include the father as having a right to stop an abortion or to initiate one? What about having a law that says parents have a right to a choice to whip their children? What exactly is it about abortion that there should be a choice?

I don't know exactly what you meant here, but if you say that child can be killed after the birth, I consider it wrong.

I meant that if a child is born into suffering, others can help if the mother can't. As far as the birth thing, there are laws right now that if you are a robber and you kill a mother and her 4 month fetus in the course of a robbery, you will be charged with two murders. Do you agree with this? Shouldn't the charge be a civil one like "taking away the right to choose"?
LAGirl 9 | 496  
25 Apr 2009 /  #140
This is disgusting you dont kill a human being thats life that God put in this earth why the **** kill a baby ITs WWRONG ITS MURDER dont want a baby dont have sex or protect yourself. it should be outlawed good on Poland if they bann it.Abortions are done mostley by umarrieed selfish women who dont want the responsabilities thats sad. there are people out there that are married and classy people who tried for years to have a baby but no thses selfish women get knocked up pretty dam unfair.thats my opionion.
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
25 Apr 2009 /  #141
And what if the condom bursts, LAGirl, what then? What about rape cases?

Torq, I meant to say that they are maybe more tolerant as people but practise other facets of the RCC, without taking a hardline.

Not at all with your comment on religion. In English we say that sb follows a religion blindly at the expense of using their own judgement. That's all freebird was trying to say. It's a question of degree and he was right, trust me on that.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346  
25 Apr 2009 /  #142
And what if the condom bursts, LAGirl, what then? What about rape cases?

Women were created to bear children, that is their sole purpose, if a woman aborts a child she forfeits her right to live as a human being.
osiol 55 | 3,922  
25 Apr 2009 /  #143
Sokrates

and man was just made with the sole purpose of producing sperm?
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
25 Apr 2009 /  #144
Who are you to define a woman's sole purpose? Any good human being should be free to live a life of adventure, full of experiences and rich in different purposes.

Should I be calling you Brian right about now? ;) ;)

What kind of education did you get, Sokrates? For starters, getting rid of an embryon is not murder as there is not mens rea to murder and it's a kid to be, not even a baby yet.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346  
25 Apr 2009 /  #145
and man was just made with the sole purpose of producing sperm?

Man was made

Who are you to define a woman's sole purpose?

To define a womans purpose, so there!

as there is not mens rea to murder and it's a kid to be, not even a baby yet.

How do we know? On a serious note though i believe that a woman is NOT the mistress of her own body if she carries a child since her child is not her possesion, i'm pro abortion if there's a rape pregnancy or a risk of life but barring extreme cases i'm against letting women abort out of convenience.
LAGirl 9 | 496  
25 Apr 2009 /  #146
well if it breaks still Id still have the baby and if a women is attaceked she should go to the hospital and get emergancy the day after pill so she dont end up pregnant. thats fine.
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
25 Apr 2009 /  #147
First point, Sokrates. Do you know the difference between ownership and possession?

Second point, ever heard of the Hippocratic Oath? How about the Helsinki Code?

I also tend to move towards the anti-abortion side but my judgements would likely be more flexible than yours.
freebird 3 | 532  
26 Apr 2009 /  #148
To Nathan
Ignorant? Haha. What product are you? Religious, private school or something else. Saying ignorant just because you don't agree is funny.
Why do you stick Muslims here? If I am a product of public education than

I learnt biology and I understand it and I don't agree with you. Life starts when the organism begins to function on him/herself. It is when a person takes in first breath. Until then it is a part of a woman and her body. The rest you know what I will say.

Thanks Nathan. Not much more to add to it. :-)
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
26 Apr 2009 /  #149
This is also the legal position in America, freebird. I studied the law of foetal homicide and I remember that to be the case, the first breath thing.
freebird 3 | 532  
26 Apr 2009 /  #150
Hey Seanus, :-)
thanks

Archives - 2005-2009 / News / Abortion - how is the Polish government going to deal with this issue?Archived