you cannot express any meaningful opinion on a law before legislation process is completed.
I cannot say whether that law will be passed or not, my personal feeling is that it won't be, but if it is, the writing is on the wall. All abortion for whatever reason will be banned. Therefore an operation to remove the foetus in an ectopic pregnancy would be banned, and the lives of women would be put at risk. That is not my opinion, that will be a fact, and it is why all these demonstrations are taking place.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
The case I linked to earlier about the woman who gave birth to a severely deformed baby without a brain. The baby died a couple of days after it was born.
Putting the child's life before that of the mother would be wrong and illogical as going against sanctity of life.
Nobody forces no one in Poland to have children.
Not sure whether you read the link I supplied before concerning this woman, but I will outline the case, and prove that this woman was indeed forced to have her baby, and that her child's life was put before that of herself.
The woman concerned after being told by her own doctor that her child would be born severely deformed, contacted a doctor, Bogdan Chazan, requesting an abortion. He refused on the grounds of a conflict of conscience. Now in Polish law there is some leeway for this, but the law also requires the doctor to direct the patient to a doctor who will perform the termination. Instead of doing this, according to the subsequent inquiry after his sacking, he also failed to inform the woman that abortion would be illegal after 24 weeks, and ordered unnecessary tests which made the woman miss that deadline.
He was fired from his position by the Mayor of Warsaw.
I can understand the conflict of conscience and his not wanting to perform the abortion, but no-one was forcing him to do that against his will.
What he did was to force his will upon her, his deliberate actions ensuring that abortion would be an impossibility after that deadline was missed. So yes, Iron, she was indeed forced through total lack of options to have that baby, and that doctor certainly put her child's life above that of her mother.
That doctor was playing god when he has no right to do so.
Additionally, that child took 2 days to die, a prolonged death, but that's unimportant so long as it was born in the first place, right? Unnecessary suffering for both child and mother.
It also brings into play whether people in his position should really be doing that job. If he felt due to his faith that he could not perform an abortion, then clearly gynaecology was the wrong specialisation for him to have taken. He signed the Hippocratic Oath, part of which states that, " above all, I must not play at God ", yet that was exactly what he did.
Incidentally, the RCC condemned his dismissal.
Sanctity of human life is a simple concept, easy to grasp with which your either agree or not,
It is, but that sanctity of life doesn't seem to extend to the mother in the same way that it does to the child and it is this I have issue with.
If there is one change on 1000 that those major disabilities are just a medial error and are not that major
I understand what you are saying, but doctors know through scans etc when a child is going to be born severely disabled these days, they would not want to give a mother false hope and wrong information. Their knowledge comes from data not guesswork.
"I'm right and you're stupid!"?
If he thought I was stupid he wouldn't say
is making a good argument
even if he doesn't always agree with what I say.
actually is making a good argument
Some of what I write is sinking in then ;)
is a joy to debate with.