Abortion still under control in Poland

dtaylor5362, I'm referring to after the child is born,as I said please read my prior posts and then I'll debate if you still want to.I don't want to have to repeat it again,as I have outlined it all through this thread.If you don't mind,I'd appreciate it...

Even the science hasn't determined beyond any doubt when a baby is alive in mother's womb but you believe to know it better, huh?


WRONG! No one has the right to decide about who's to live and who's to die. She can decide about her own life, that's all.


by supporting his wife or gf who's pregnant with his baby, simple as that.

Foreigner4,if the baby is alive,then it is for us to say what's what.Just as society decides a lot of things.As for some of the things you've said about death in.this world.It wouldn't be for us to decide that that was wrong either.

Foreigner4,Here's what I'm getting and correct me if I'm wrong.On the one hand you're saying that you agree that the unborn is alive and therefore considered a life,but because of the unique relationship this life(a seperate entity btw) has with it's host that the host being a woman in this case;has the right to eliminate this unborn child.Though a male who helped create this life would want the unborn child to live,this should have absolutely no bearing on what this woman may decide as to the destiny of said unborn child.So if the woman is allowed to abort in other mitigating circumstances and also under the circumstance I just described,This would give the impression that you are pro abortion.You are saying not to impose your morality on the woman(which by the way is an accepted view when it comes to extinguishing ones life)because you don't oppose war.And therefore you're saying that people are wrong to suggest that a woman should not be able to take a life.How else could you view this as not being a pro abortion stance?I'm referring to your debating techniques;Are you for abortion or not?Can you see how I could get this impression?

No.


No it isn't.
It's not in your body therefore not your decision. What can't you understand about that?

foreigner4,Neither is the baby's body in regards to the mother,what can't you understand about that.Why do you say no to the Unique relationship and how it gives her the right to decide,is that not what you said?If you didn't;then you need to articulate better.What gives anyone the right to say anything about any thing.You imply all these things and then you say no.People have every right to say something about a defenseless life.It's not your place to tell people that they can't according to your logic,but you very well have the right to and I wouldn't try to stop you either.So what's your answer;are you or are you not pro abortion?

Well said. Does the baby not have a say?

WeilkiPolak,or the father as well?

Unfortunately a lot of people think not since they say, it is the woman's body so she gets to make the final choice. The baby on the other hand is not given a choice as to whether its life is terminated or not.

On a side not, I actually found some interesting statistics that show there were over 130 000 legal abortions in Poland in the 1985, per year. Over 59 000 in 1990. These were under the rule of communism. Closer to the present the figure is closer to 200 to 300 per year.

why can't you understand that even though the baby isn't born yet but it is alive (you even admit it) and no one has the right to end its life (mother included). It's not her life that she wants to end by aborting a child.

Poland: 'Abortion tourism' reflects restrictive law
abortionreview.org/index.php/site/article/824

Hahahaha.

If you believe that, you're about as naive as it gets. Bearing in mind that abortions are routinely carried out under the guise of private medicine - yes - even in hospitals.

See for yourself

infoplease.com/ipa/A0004397.html
and remember I said closer to present times, not this year.

Those figures are way, way off. They might represent the ones that are 100% legal in accordance with the law - but I'd trust a vice-speaker of the Sejm over those figures any day of the week.

What you'll find is that in Poland, you can easily get an abortion provided you can pay for it.

And you are struggeling to set any line... that's why in my opinion "it" is a human since an egg is fertilized... unless aborted, it would most probably develop into a grown up person therefore it is a human, just in the very early stage of development... some are pointing out that "it" isn't a human becasue "it" can't do this or that but one could "prove" the same way that a recently born baby is not a human either, after all "it" can't even speak or walk.

Grzegorz_,good point.

Mostly, the woman isn't overtly told she is 'ending' a life. She is told she is 'terminating a pregnancy'. She specifically is told, if she asks, that the 'fetus' (note no use of words such as baby, unborn child, etc.) isn't alive like you and me and can't feel anything. She is also specifically told nothing about the stage of development he/she is at when the termination will take place.

Basically, everything is done to make her feel she is just having a sensible procedure to halt, at an early stage, a process that might eventually down the line have resulted in her having a baby. She is distanced in every way possible from the reality.

Then after the operation, when in many cases it hits the woman what she has allowed to be done (she has the rest of her life to reflect on it), the abortion company are well gone and not interested - they have cashed their cheque.

That is how it works. So all this 'choice' propaganda has been encouraged and perpetuated to facilitate abortion. Anybody who dares to say that isn't right is tarred as some kind of crazy extremist - which just isn't true. It is, to my mind, one of the biggest and most harmful con-tricks in modern society.


Yes, totally agree. It is unmitigated nonsense to suggest that because a human being starts out tiny that at that stage it isn't a human being because it can't, e.g., see yet. Of course it is a human being - just in the early stage of development. Unfortunately, any creature in the fetal stage is incredibly vulnerable - one would have thought that with our level of civilisation and intelligent 'society', that we would prioritise protection of the unborn to the highest level. How sad that we do not - that quite the opposite - we use the very vulnerability of new life as an excuse to extinguish it, should it not have been created intentionally or at a convenient moment. How shameful of us.

I definitely have doubts, it's the one thing I can be sure of.


I'm not sure how me having doubts makes your opinion?

The thing about my doubts are that I really can't say you are wrong, I can give my opinion but I'm not certain.

I'm pretty sure the beginning is not just sperm ( Pre 1677 Preformationism was believed to be true) and I'm pretty sure that it's a baby that women give birth to.

And based on that, I can't tell you or anyone else that they are wrong, I can only form opinions for myself on the information at hand, which this thread is helping me to do.

I am interested in hearing people's opinions on this and how they came about their opinion.


And still others believe the act of sex should only be for re-procreation and that that, if not hindered, will certainly cause more humans to be born, it's just at a very early stage.

Natasia ,I agree with you 100%,and give it a name like planned parenthood.

I suppose you mean this crap ?


Well, common sense should tell you that "estimates" coming from somone, who based all her pitiful "career" on pushing pro-abortion agenda, are not really reliable.

And as I said, I trust a vice-speaker of the Sejm far more than someone on the internet.

You trust a radical lefist then, not really surprising.

Radical? She's about as a dull leftist as they come.

Not much experience in politics, have you? Nowicka is anything but a "radical".

I think we all have our doubts and a very nice post.

The moment of conception is the exact opposite to the moment of death? Its not a process but a big bang.

The morality of ending a life (or potential life) is in the gift of the person charged with bringing the new life into the world with limitations. Not having the pro choice option is just not right. You can only tie yourself in knots trying to think it out...

It's simple really, you don't seem to have any agenda on this issue, you just wanted to find out when the new life begins... and you failed, so If we are not sure if it is already a human or not, it's safer to assume it is...


One more evidence that you have totally no clue about Polish politics. Why don't you start a new thread on her and ask PF members if she is a radical lefist or not ?

Prochoice should be called ProDeath unless 1)rape 2)incest 3)life is endangered.

Legend,I agree,because if she was going to always choose life other than in those mitigating circumstances ;then there would be no need for a "right to choose".Grzegorz,well said.

Absolutely. How anyone can think otherwise I find very difficult to understand, apart from in the context of people arguing otherwise because they feel they should be allowing 'choice' to the woman over 'what happens with her body', and therefore they equivocate to give the notion of abortion the chance of not actually being killing a life.

Funny, isn't it, that those pro-'choice' are also the ones who can't agree when life begins, but are fairly certain it doesn't being at conception. Well, not really funny.


Yes, of course, because this is what it is.

But any of us who say that are 'extreme'. I am because I am 'damaged' by having been forced into a termination in my early 20s. You all are because you are just ... stupid? Illiberal? Mad Catholics? Only those who tread the 'middle way' and are 'pro-choice' are the realistic, moral, sensible ones.

Apparently. Or maybe it is as black & white as we say - there is life, there is death/non-life. Nobody argues when a person dies over whether they are really dead or not. It is obvious they are dead. So go watch a 6-week ultrasound scan, see the little bean jumping up and down with life, and say it isn't alive. It is black and white, dead or alive. You terminate it, it isn't alive any more, isn't jumping any more, is gone. That isn't something that can be debated.

Nobody doing ultrasounds talks about life not beginning at conception. There is a heartbeat or not. If there isn't, tough - there is no debating. It just isn't there. And the weirdest thing is, you have people doing ultrasounds and saying 'look - there's the baby! Can you see it? It's tiny!' in one room, and next door practically along the corridor they are handing out abortion pills and not mentioning anything about a life ... 3m makes the difference between whether that baby is a baby, or just something that needs to be got rid of. Now tell me that isn't crazy, double standards ...

I would count myself among the pro choice people, its such a difficult area. I dont believe there are hard and fast rules that can apply in any individual situation let alone all situations.

Natasia,extremely well said.

Is it a little bean or a little baby?
I don't want to trawl through pages and pages of emotional breast-beating again so I may have missed the anti-choice lobby's views on IVF, a procedure in which some fertilised eggs are discarded.

Yes, the embryo has life, and I believe it's the woman's right to choose what to do with her own body, including terminating that life. Anything else puts a bundle of cells over the rights of a woman.