Abortion still under control in Poland

That's a point, same as freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech is not about hearing what you want but about people being able to say what you don't want.

And if the mods are handing out vacations, A ticket to Bali would suit me just fine :)

I think her body is hers and hers alone. Of course, she should be provided with all the impartial support she needs by trained professionals (and not priests or anyone else with an agenda) - but it is still her decision to make.


Indeed. These guys will never, ever understand it because they'll never be in the position.


I don't think half of them even wanted democracy and free choice - they just wanted their morality forced on others.


It's just quite ironic that people were agitating for democracy and free choice - then they immediately started agitating to change the law on abortion to reduce the free choice given to women. No surprise, of course.

Surely if the sperm has breached the egg thats the earliest of pregnancies, does the morning after pill not destroy the fertilized egg?

and yet, it has nothing to do with killing babies to be.

Hmmm... I don't know.

I'll have a look and see, I presume it has breached the egg... but what happens then?

Edit*

You can get the morning after pill in Ireland and Poland, so presumably it's not considered an abortion.


I guess the sperm is still swimming.

Would it make a difference to any of you how far into her pregnancy she was?

ohh yes, i dont believe the life has a soul for while. I believe personally that an early trmination is the disruption of forming cells.

im not about to start researching but im under the impression the morning after pill would have a similar effect if taken two or three days after a possible fertilisation.

SeanBM,you brought up a very good point up earlier and that's a really tough one.

I just imagined a Polish-type scenario of Babcia doing most of the work ... ; ) And for sure every kid in that situation knows Babcia is Babcia, and Mama is Mama.



Aren't those two scenarios contradictory?
Anyhow, the 'all alone in a council flat' idea is not the norm ... difficult to get a council flat nowadays ...


I would physically restrain her from having an abortion after 6-7 weeks.

I think you guys don't understand that a pregnant woman who wants to abort, is not just making making decision about her own body, she's making decision about getting rid of another human being inside of her and this is the problem.

Tell me, why is that a problem to use contraception? Think before you act is all I'm saying. When you sleep with someone, you have to be aware of the consequences of it.

And what exactly baby did, to deserve being killed off?

No, not at all. If the mother in question is talking to the child whome she had as an unplanned pregnancy she'll need to chose her words carefully. parents need to make their children aware of the pitfalls in life. As much as the mother loves her child more than anything on this planet she will still be acutely aware of the restrictions it places on young shoulders.


Thats like telling an alchohic he should never have started drinking or a soldier that killed to not have joined the army. Shite happens all the time.

Sex is frequently an in the moment act with passion usually winning over ratoinal thought.

You know what my next question is, right?

What would be your cut off point?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beginning_of_human_personhood#Biological_markers


it is a tough topic, there's no doubt.

For myself it would be fertilisation - i.e., abortion just not an option.

For those who have to have an abortion, ideally it would be before the hear starts to beat, so before 6 weeks.

Strange how Wiki says
- fertilization, the fusing of the gametes to form a zygote
- implantation, the start of pregnancy, occurring about a week after fertilization

I don't have all the answers and this thread has made me look at things I didn't know before.
Why the heck wasn't I thought this in school or even discussed it properly in school?

night folks.

I was going to say dont make me expand on it. Im still thinking about it, but dont expect a definitive answer anytime soon, its from a spiritualist viewpoint - not scientific or religious.

Keith Campbell passed away recently - the scientist that cloned Chloe the sheep? Youve just reminded me to research that, should be interesting and most probably quite disturbing.

another reason why I'm talking about caring the consequences of it (both sides). However, a decision about life or death of a baby shouldn't be an option. Make the father pay child support if there's no chance for them to live together.

Again, contraception before abortion!


my words (if it really has to be)

Delphiandomine,if you go by the logic of choice,then the guy should have a choice as to whether or not he wants to take care of the baby if he can't decide either for or against having the baby.

whatever ... WB identified the categories ... so if you aren't pregnant before implantation, then ok, implantation would be the stage for me - the earliest stage at which it is not ok! Because for me I wouldn't have an abortion, because I don't agree with it (in case hadn't got that across ; ).


At our school we talked about it several times, and even had debates about it ... and the whole thing was always about 'choice'. Then I experienced the reality of it and realised that was a load of bollocks and that what was being done was, sorry to sound emotive, but actually murder. The shock of it nearly finished me off, and certainly was far far more effective at ruining my life than having a baby would have been.

So talking at school doesn't really help. You don't know what you're dealing with until you face the real situation. We also debated capital punishment in an earnest, sixth-former type way - but I bet we might have felt differently had any of us sat in the public gallery while it took 10 mins to electrocute someone ...

One that troubles me is (and of course there are thousands of circumstances), Are girls getting pregnant to audition for MTV's 'Teen Mom'?

WB's circumstance was too 'nice',
Lets say a teen gets pregnant for the audition for MTV's Reality-TV show, for fame and the $60,000.
She doesn't get the part and then decides to have an abortion,

Of course I am not suggesting that she be forced to have the baby out of revenge for her stupidity.
It's really messed up and this "glamour factor" and pure unadulterated vanity is pushing it too far for me.

MTV should really get the law suit kicked out of them for their irresponsibility because they are the adults and should know better.

I bring this up because I was thinking of the age thing and these days people seem to mature much later (not 100% but it appears that way).


Well this to me is the crux of the whole thread.
Different people believe that human personhood begins at different times, some as early as sperm, some as late as after the baby comes out but it's the grey middle that is the interesting problematic questionable part.

I assume most of us would agree that it doesn't happen as early as sperm or as late as actually being born.

We're on thin ice.


So the biological mother should have to have a baby she doesn't want on the request of the father?

It should of course be discussed but jezz, that could be open to all sorts of interpretation, forcing the mother to have a baby.


Fair point but at least it would be in people's minds rather than the fire and brimstone outlook I got at school.

Depends if you think it's human or not.

For me, if it's not able to live unassisted outside of the body (with the intervention of modern medicine - you're looking at around 20 weeks) - then it's not a human, end of story.


I think that's far worse than abortion.

It was a turn of phrase ; )

This thread keeps reminding me of a scene from Born on the 4th of July.

Baby killers from 3:40.

SeanBM,I'm referring to a specific situation as I have described all through this thread,I think they have to be on the same page when you're talking about a life.It's one thing if no one wants to care for the child,but if you have the father willing where she isn't.......

Then she be forced against her will to have the baby?

Just out of curiosity, how would we force a woman to have a baby, in practice?

It would be near impossible to ascertain whether he wanted a child before sex and she didn't.

I have met women who think getting pregnant would keep "her" man by her side.
This sounds like a similar kind of manipulation in reverse, except she has to bear the child.

As I said, it is open to interpretation.

I personally think it is much more the woman's choice but the man should have the right to state (not do) his opinion.

SeanBM,you can make it a criminal offense if she doesn't have the baby.He would have to assume 100% responsibility for the child or he would face some stiff time.If the idea is to avoid responsibility,this would absolve her of it.If she carried a baby to term it's a very good possibility she would change her mind.It's not like she would be bringing an unwanted child into the world,which is one of the biggest arguments for abortion.

That is in essence what they are doing in Ireland and Poland.

Reminds me of Felo de se.


I think that's your whole argument.
And I can't answer that, I mean it's easy to be philosophical when it's happening to someone else.

Is it me, or are the people against abortion living in countries that it's legal and people for are living in countries where it is not? on this thread?

SeanBM,I know it's easy to be philosophical when it happens to someone else and this is why I don't judge people in these situations.It's a very touchy issue.I would just hope that people would opt for life,when because of their carelessness they brought a child in this world.I can tell you if I got a woman pregnant without taking care then I would want to have the baby,even if she didn't want to.I would be very hurt and angry if she deprived me of a life that I helped create.

I am not for abortion,but if it's allowed;then I think that both should be on the same page at least.My argument is not based on the fact that some woman may change thier mind,that's my belief only.I base my argument on the fact that a man should have a say in the lfe that he helped create under those circumstances.That's my whole argument.

What about old people who can't walk and/or eat alone anymore or some mentally ill people DD, do you suggest to exterminate them too because they're unable to live on their own?

end of story?.... is it really so easy, DD?

Wow! Im glad you were not present when I drowned. You'd have told the crowd 'so tragic- lets move on' with a hand wave at my corpse!

The combat medic that abalone diving earlier refused to give up because my dog tags showing a fellow soldier. He busted a heart beat and gave me mouth to mouth for TWO HOURS non stop while awaiting paramedics . I would not have lived unassistedfor that time. And I had been under and missing long enough to safely presume dead (over 15 minutes- I was so lucky.... and those of us with faith would say blessed.. my wooden crucifix floated my dog chain out of the collar of my wetsuit and a fishing hook caught it and I was drawn up. Ft Ross region of coast 1991. There is more to story, but not my point here)

But I do so get your point. Life is precious. If someone has just jumped onto the float and caught it, as that tiny flame of new life has done, then we need to cherish it, in the same way that if there is a moment when someone here could be lost, we have to fight for them while we can, because eternity is a hell of a long time, and there is no coming back. It is just blank. So we fight the darkness.

And that is why I love babies, and new life. They have actually come out of the darkness. They are a total gift. And the idea that someone could trash that ... you know what? I'm kind of not even interested in those people. Not at all.

It seems to me that some of us know, and understand, and get it, and some just don't. I could make a list here ...

The ones who get it:
p3undone
4 foreigner
Rysavy
Kondzior
Grzegorz
and the lady who told us about the dreadful gun business, out-of-state clinics, etc.

The ones who, sad to say, don't:
WB (sometimes actually does, but only intermittently)
Delphiandomine
Gabi (not through lack of co-operation - almost by being too 'fair')
Rozumieniec (probably does get it, but too shy to admit it)
Jon357 (deliberately doesn't get it)

And SeanBM is just provocative on purpose : )

But don't hold me to that list. It meant nothing. It was just an observation, and no offence to be taken ...

Will say, though, that slightly disappointed by the female contribution. We have had mostly women who have had neither children nor abortions, saying how the woman has a right to do what she wants with her body, and how an unborn child isn't alive. And then just a couple of us who actually have children, saying whe-hey - hang on a second here - you got it all wrong ...

The guys, on the other hand, have mostly been way more balanced and intelligent and feeling about this. Not so hormonal, I guess ; )