Abortion still under control in Poland

As mentioned the project got shot down, with Jarosław personally saying to the pro-life organisations representative that he does not believe their project is a good solution.

Corporate media is spreading rumours that PiS is preparing its own project and some of their members have hinted as much. It would probably ban "eugenic abortion", as these seems to be a popular buzzword being repeated by PiS during this latest abortion debate/mudslinging. If they actually go for it I expect that they will avoid adding any kind of prosecution mechanism, in cases some woman engages in pre-natal manslaughter of their down's syndrome fetus. That way nobody will really care about the ban besides the pro-choice agitators.

Hindus are behind much of the anti-Christian terror in Asia including murder of Christians and destruction of their churches. Buddhists have remained faithful to their ideology of tolerance and non-violence.


PM Szydło has announced plans for a programme of financial compensation to parents who choose to raise children with Down's syndrome or other deformities rather than having them scraped out in the foetal stage.


The lying feminists twisted their propaganda to make it seem PiS were behind the abortion ban. That actually led to violence in Poznań when the hysteriical female agitators decided to march on PiS headquarters after the demonstration had ended.

Do you touch people with those lyin' fingers?

PiS took the crackpot abortion ban petition _far_ more seriously than there was any need for. It could have considered it for 30 seconds and rejected it (as any normal government would). But it decided to play for what it hoped were crowds of religious crazies. It reaped what it sowed.

Your repeated attempts to make PiS look less incompetent in this whole debacle aren't taken seriously by anyone.

PiS screwed up on its own initiative. They finally realized that and backed down and no amount of inept spin doctoring from you will change that.

i merely tries to suggest a way.

If young one is educated well, it won`t even come to situation for abortion. Joy of sex, all obligations and consequences of it, as well as erogenous zones, should be studied, not considered a shame. Its all in the book.

I think it's a shame that to you the only important thing is that the child is born, with no thought given as to the quality of life the child will have.

It doesn't make sense to me, but of course you are entitled to your opinion.


Ha! It is presumptuous of you to believe that I consider pro-lifers to be ignorant of medical matters. I made that statement to point out, albeit indirectly, that the likelihood of risk to mothers' lives would increase as a consequence of new laws, because those conditions I mentioned are not rare.


Then please explain why when both the pro-choice and pro-life groups collected far in excess of the 100,000 signatures needed for parliament to debate their proposals, was the pro-choice group proposal immediately struck out, but not that of the pro-life group? You are correct in that PiS itself did not put forward proposals to change current legislation, but many within the party are pro-life and that proposal had the backing of the RCC. That proposal could have been immediately struck out too, but the fact that it wasn't speaks volumes.

Anyway, thankfully common sense has prevailed :-)


Then you fit your own description, because you bash PO to the same extent others bash PiS. Funny how you don't see this.

I thought collecting at least 100,000 signatures obliges the Sejm to process the motion. The Pro-lifers got 450,000 sigs, the abortionits half as many, but
both were over 100,000. Does the law state that such petitons can be rejected in commitee and then by the full Sejm?

There was no rational reason to give the anti-woman petition any more consideration than the pro-woman petition got. Instead the pro-woman petition got the bum's rush and the misogynistic petition got the VIP treatment. That's why so many women were out on the street protesting.

A big false step by the ruling party which was reduced to damage control (which is not their strong point).

To be honest we have seen democracy in action, something many try to pretend does not exist in Poland but it clearly does.

Yes the government took this idea of a complete ban on abortion to the next step, and the people protested on the streets. The voice of the people was heard and now it looks like it won't be going forward and the law is likely to remain as it is.

I remember PO not having their ears open to people's objections to things they did in quite the same way.

What's the issue?

You must have a very low opinion of females if you think they all are gung-ho advocates of prenatal murder. The pro-abortion faction is but a fraction of Polish womanhood.


Dunno if all Serbs share the Slavic obsession you are constantly articulating, but Poles, Czechs, Ukrainians, Slovaks and probably Croats as well do not think of themselves as "we Slavs". They think of themselves as "We Slovaks, we Poles, we Ukrianians...." No-one else on this forum is constantly spouting your style of pan-Slavism, equating with Scythians and other extinct tribes and pointing up the Slavs' alleged superiority to other ethnic groupos. Yes, Slavs constitute one branch of the Indo-European language, but that's the end of it. You are the only person I have ever met that is obsessed about re-Slavicising Europe. repopulating the world with people of Slavic blood. Slavs are not only no better than Germanic or Latinic peoples, they are wrose, having contributed far less to the treasury of human achievements.

No, the most important thing in here is to establish ground rules. Either we agree that society has the right to dispose/kill a human being or not. That is the real issue here not creating some extenuated circumstances that would make such a practise acceptable on a personal level.


I would think that you could worry about quality of life if you would have a life in the first place. Otherwise it is a pointless exercise. Sounds like an excuse to me.


I suppose that you're under impression that your point of view is reasonable and practical at the some time. Whereas I can see consequences looming on the horizon.

It is the point of no return, once you agree that society or individual women have the right to kill, there is no way back. You might set a very strict conditions under which an abortion would be possible. Yet, it wouldn't matter one wit as it is only an arbitrary decision that hasn't been based/founded on any higher principle.

Such a law would and will be modified as to broaden "acceptable" conditions to dispose a human being.
It's only useful as a political compromise in a society that is divided in their views on that issue. A Mexican standoff.


Good point.:)


On the other hand I wanted to point out that their medical state will surely be monitored by their doctors and hence in all circumstances when such a life threatening condition would appear there'll be an appropriate response made be a responsible medical team. All those unspecified legal obstacles that would put the mother's life in jeopardy as a less worthy are in my opinion a figment of overactive imagination.


I would hardly call it backing. You seems to be obsessed by the RCC. In my opinion hierarchy of the CC done nothing to back it up. Not to mention they could if they had balls excommunicate all those politicians that are voting in favour of pro-abortion legislation.

Its not a Church as it should be, there is not backbone of the Inquisition, they're soft and in bed with liberals and a pro-gay lobby.


Because PiS politicians are crude costumers when it comes to the art of politicks and anytime they want to do something 'clever' it backfire into their faces. Not because most of them are pro-life as you imply.

Don't use words you yourself don't believe. If abortion is murder, do you want women who get them to go to prison?


There is no societal consensus on the moral status of fetuses, especially in the early stages of pregnancy. The question is does one segment get to force their opinion on people who don't share their moral judgements or not?

By all means try to convince people to not have abortions, but what right do you have to make decisions _for_ them in an area where there is no broad agreement on the moral ground rules?

Well Macierewicz already said that PiS will pass the changes but in slower, more quiet way that won't start such opposition from citizens. So we may not take his word (quite a lot of ppl consider him a bit crazy) but he is part of the government.

was murder always agreed upon as morally unacceptable? - look at the WW 2nd if you don't want to go any deeper - In Hitler Germany it was no offence to kill a Jew - so the notion of what is moral and what is moral was not universal even for murder

btw you know what democracy is? - it's the rule of the majority - if a majority decides that something is unacceptable and should be punished in this way or another then it is the law - end of dispute

irrelevant to the question of abortion unless you want to retroactively lock up any woman who says she had an abortion.


and a majority of the country wants no changes to the current law as the ruling party finally figured out...

-Polish law allows now for children with suspected Down syndrome to be aborted - PiS will probably work on banning such eugenic abortions - do you think a person with a Down syndrome doesn't have the right to live - what do you think about the quality of life of a person with Down syndrome?


PiS are bad with PR - if they were better they would already be showing children with down and preparing the ground for the law which they intend to pass which will ban most eugenics abortion

IME, people with Downs vary a lot in their capabilities. Some are quite capable of semi independent living, working and managing their own money. Others require a lifetime of care.

I met a girl once who had Downs (a friends sister) who told me that the only reason she and her sister were born was 'so that they could love each other' which kind of melted my heart a bit.

Also back in the early 80s when such children were routinely institutionalised, a group used to come for riding lessons at the riding school I worked at. They were delightful children for whom horse riding was a fantastic thing to do, for their posture and for their confidence. The afternoon that they came they would come steaming out of their minibus all laughing and shouting and excited. We all had a such a great time.(three helpers each).

So no, I do not agree that a person with Downs does not have the right to live. They are people like the rest of us.

Not necessarily. You know there is involuntary manslaughter, first degree murder and other qualifications for terminating dsomeone's life.

So you're in favor of letting those who hire hitmen off?

Or do you simply not regard women as moral agents capable of making their own moral decisions?

All I know is that the pro-life petition was sent to committee by parliament for further consideration, whereas the pro-choice petition was struck out immediately. If PiS were not in favour of a change in legislation, why was the pro-choice petition not subject to the same treatment and binned at the outset?


You are trying to simplify something that is not that straightforward. On those grounds one could also say that you have no right to kill someone in self defence either, that would be an extenuating circumstance in much the same way as a decision being made to terminate the pregnancy of a mother whose life would be put at risk if the pregnancy continued, yes? That is the problem you have in trying to enforce a set of rigid ground rules, real life situations are never that simple.

Also, how can you justify that statement when you have already said that you are in support of the one out of three situations currently allowed by law, that of saving of the mother's life?


You mean abortion for whatever reason. I can't say it would never happen in Poland, as it did under Communism, but I think it unlikely in the near future. It hasn't happened in Ireland either.


But there wouldn't if the new laws had been passed!!! Yes, of course someone with an ectopic pregnancy would be monitored, but if the foetus is alive and implanted in the fallopian tube, what would you consider to be the appropriate response? Under new laws, a doctor would refuse to remove the foetus. If he doesn't, that tube would rupture as the foetus grows. The appropriate response would be to remove the foetus before a medical emergency occurs, not wait for one to happen and hope the mother doesn't bleed to death!


Not at all, but the proposal was backed by the RCC, as was stated in the politico link I supplied in an earlier post. Am I supposed to not mention this then? How can we have a debate on abortion without mentioning the RCC, when its views on abortion are very clear?


I don't agree with a Downs child not having the right to live. My step daughter has Downs, and for many years she spent the school holidays living at my house, about 3 months out of every year. Her care was mostly down to me, as this was the time when I wasn't working. My step daughter has a very good quality of life, she loves listening to music, dancing, she goes to concerts, is football mad and goes to see her favourite team play when they are at home. I cannot imagine a world without her in it. I love her to bits and she will always be a part of my life.

Roz was spot on however, with her statement


My step daughter really enjoys reading and loves her Harry Potter books, but she cannot count money, and it took us over a year to teach her how to tie the laces on her trainers. She also has very little sense of danger and will always require care, she is not capable of independent living.

Women are free to do with THEIR own bodies as they see fit -- self-mutilate with piercings and tongue studs (yuk!), get tattooed form head to toe, get a facelift, chop off their right hand, gouge out the left eye, even commit suicide. They are not free to deicde the fate of a separate, sovereign being which by the laws of nature (or God) she carries beneath her heart.

if you decide to murder someone it is a moral decision - should the society be restrained for punishing you for that?

Written like a member in good-standing of the He-man Woman Haters Club.


There is no society-wide consensus on the moral status of a fetus, especially in the first half or so of pregnancy. That's the argument that you're trying to short circuit. Make a cogent, non-religious argument on fetuses as moral agents and then we'll talk. Instead you want everybody to accept your argument by assertion. Not gonna work.


So you want to charge doctors who perform abortions with murder and women who receive abortions accessory to murder? Would this be retro-active?
If this is a moral position for you why are so reluctant to make it clear what punishments you want for those involved in abortions?

punishing women for abortions is a sure vote sinker - we need to make compromises in life


what was hateful in what Polonius stated - I don't get it - self mutilation and suicide are not punished by Polish law

Either it's taking human life (of course it isn't) or you compromise, not both.

Actually very damaging rhetoric for the almost invariably muddle-headed right-wing. Scream loudly that it's "murder" and then 'compromise'.

when does human life start then - with the birth, ten hours before birth? ten days before birth? ten weeks before birth? when?

That has been discussed ad nauseam in this thread. Interesting though that politicians who are very vocal about a termination being 'murder' are very willing to compromise on that 'murder'.

I wonder what other things they believe to be very serious crimes are in fact things they're willing to compromise on for political expediency...

I haven't been part of the discussion in this thread so far - and I ask you personally - cause you are sure abortion is not ending of a human life

Just read the thread, (and the various others) much easier that Groundhog Day.

it's easy - abortion would not be banned and lifes would be lost if we demanded that women should be punished for having them which in itself is a very unpopular notion amongst women


easier for you sure - if you don't want to determine yourself publically - not for me: the thread has more than 1000 answers now

So in fact a ban.