Poland marching for life and family

No, Chemikiem I believe it is a purposeful distortion on the part of those illogically biased people who are ready to tell all kinds of lies just to sway people to their side. (take it back - they're so dumb sometimes that might even believe it) This law is aimed to ban abortion on all grounds true but is doesn't mean that it proposes to put life of a child over life of a mother. Both lives are equally precious. In practical terms if doctors efforts in trying to save mother's life would result in the death of a child they would still do it.

Pregnancy is no an illness.


You don't understand. . You agreement states that child cannot survive on its own. I'm have been giving you examples when babies or adults wouldn't be able to survive on their own. Like in the case when a victim of an accident wouldn't be able to survive without apparatus supporting his breathing.

Why not abort all them people that are unable to survive on their own? If that is an indication of being alive or being human in your book. Would you explain it to me?


Wow, that was rude.
Listen, it was you that chirped in into a debate I was having with others, so at least a basic courtesy and common sense would dictate that we FIRST talk about what I'm talking about.

Once we finish talking about pregnancies( 99,9% )that occurs due to a consensual sex, we can by all means talk about exceptions and those very rare instances when woman is impregnated due to a crime. Sound fair?

Seems like your argument is based around exceptions and hence isn't very strong anyway.


Still few days are better than nothing.


The point was in the baby being alive for a few days and in parents not having to live with blood of their child on their hands.


Arbitrary decision in matters of life and death. Maybe you could explain to me what was the point in killing that child earlier?


Wow? In what way doctors inflected them on anyone? It was no fault of the doctor, those things happen. Are you telling me that parents would be happier killing that child earlier? That abortion would spare them grief, sadness or loss? How do you know that?


You really don't know what cruelty is do you? Nothing cruel in letting your child live for a few days.
Cruelty would be in killing it just because it might be convenient for parents or that was what they thought.


Why not? Should we regress to the Twelve Tables law? At least that laws were more logical and consistent that what you and people like you are proposing.


It is!


Nope.

There you go again, talking about a cluster of cells as if it's a person...

Excuse me? We agreed to disagree on that issue and while talking to you I didn't say anything about person or religion. It doesn't mean though that I'm not entitled to MY view on the issue.

In fact it was Lenka that first started talking about a child in the context. Not that I need justify myself to you as our debate on the subject is pretty much ended. Even though that you hold to the ridiculous notions that life is not life or is not somehow alive I'm not chirping in into your convo with Polo or whomever and ridiculing you for that. So pretty please return the favor.

So 'agreeing to disagree' means that only one opinion is heard? Don't be so silly.


Same here.


Important to be precise about language. A non-sentient cluster of cells without a brain or other neural network is not a child, not a person. If a woman wishes to have it flushed out, it is her decision and nobody else's...

Important to be precise about language.
spot on

is not a child, not a person.
but is a living life

to have it flushed out
to have that life killed

it is her decision and nobody else's...
not even the life that was murdered ?

very very important to be precise on language

No. It is not 'a life'. It is a cluster of cells and part of the women.

Amazing to see some of these posters getting all worked up about abortion - a very common procedure in Poland albeit under the radar due to pressure from religious people.

In Europe as a whole it is (unlike in the Americas where women are routinely persecuted) quite normal.

On medical matters I trust the medical profession above clergy.

really well that is strange i thought it was more or less illegal.

It is - though it happens. Here, doctors advertise in the newspapers and if an ob/gyn places an ad offering "full range of services" it means a full range of services.

And then there are the adverts for 'guaranteed menstruation dates'.

No, it mean that you shouldn't shout over me while I'm expressing my opinion to somebody else on the very subject we agreed to disagree on. That's bulling and bulling is rude. I'm more than happy to talk to you if that is what you want. This time around however I'll not accept slogans and monosyllabic comebacks for an answer.


Never said you are not entitled to your opinion.


Like you are precise refusing to admit that 'cluster of cells' is alive? That ridiculous. .


It is however a separate life. The same life that will develop all the necessary trappings of a child and a person. Even a five yours old kid knows that that particular 'cluster of cells' in its mother belly is/or going to be his or her sibling.


That is a very totalitarian point of view.


Hmm... if you suspect any criminal activity it is your duty as a Polish citizen to report it to do the authorities.
Not that it has anything to do with the topic.

If you want to hold a private conversation with someone, there is always the option of doing it by PM. If you want to take part in an open conversation, you have no grounds whatsoever to complain that others are there.


It is dependent on the woman, is not sentient, has no brain or neural network and is not a person.

Unless you know something the doctors don't.


And the other 40 million Polish citizens who read the newspapers?

I don't care about others. I thought we had an understanding not to debate this subject. You let me on to such a conclusion. I'm only pointing out that it was rude on your part to let me believe it and then chirp in.

By the same token I wasn't chirping in into your convo with Pol3.
Don't take me wrong I'm more than happy to talk about it. My point being don't suggest that you're done with a topic if you're not because that is rude.


toddlers, old people, mentally or physically disable people, injured or ill people - all those people are totally depending on others for their physical survival. Literally they would die without others, some will remain dependent their whole lifespan whereas a child became independent in time.

Honesty that 'argument' is not even a real argument.


Some posters here are not sentient what about them? Seriously though, how does it work? We know that child its alive and IF we hold human life sacred (do you?). That particular stage of human life when it cannot communicate properly shouldn't give us excuse to terminate it.


What doctors have to do with it? Pregnancy is not illness.


How do you know? Science claim otherwise.

WTF? It's a discussion forum!


A cluster of cells is not 'people'.


Nor a 'child' either.


Hard to believe you actually asked that question.


Religion perhaps. The overwhelming majority of doctors have no issues with that medical procedure.

Yes, that's true. Poland does have a niche segment of sluts, macho thugs and assorted slimeballs.


Too bad your mum didn't have that clusters of cells from which you evolved scraped out!

"Too bad your mum didn't have that clusters of cells from which you evolved scraped out!"

See how repellent these so-called Christian Conservatives really are. No wonder nobody likes PiS.

It doesn't mean that you need to discus with everyone about everything. Agree to disagree pretty much ends discussion at last in my book.


In a sense you are also a cluster of cells.


Really? How do you know? When exactly is the line that divide 'clusters of cells' and a human being?


I'm asking it again - what doctors have to do with pregnancy if mother and child are healthy?


Ever heard about DNA?

Interesting that you appear to believe that a foetus possibly becoming a gay person is acceptable grounds for an abortion. How do you propose to change Polish law so it reflects your beliefs? How would a pregnant woman prove the foetus was going to become a gay person? Although given that you're a man and so never would have needed to make the choice, perhaps we should ask if you yourself would have instructed your wife to have an abortion if you had known a foetus she was carrying would become a gay person?

Yes, so do you, so why do you continuously play devil's advocate to provoke flaming with it.
Why are you so immature on such a topic jon ?


Do you desire to have a twin that bad jon ?


At the moment the sperm has contact with the egg.
Scientists have even watched this happen by magnifying it and have taken pictures of it when an actual "spark" happens.
That is the moment life begins.
And we think we know everything..............erg !

For those who are not familiar with Polish law and to put the discussion in the right prespective,
Women in Poland can have abortion legaly in three instances:
-the pregnancy threatens the women life or health
-the pregnancy is the result of a crime (rape, incest)
-the foetus is very sick.
Other than that you have illegal underground and trips abroad but in this disscussion that part is irrelevant.
Our pro life movement wants to ban abortion on any grounds.

Now.


I know what you meant however I don't think your analogy is useful. The difference between such cases and pregnancy is that ppl that need medical help don't require another human being body to do that. It's 9 month of putting women's body through enormous strain topped up with labour that, again, is not nothing.

If we look at it from your perspective why we don't take organs from ppl that didn't agree to donate? It saves lifes and, unlike with pregnant women body, they are not using them. We recognise this ppl right to decide about their body even though they will just rot in the ground or be burned.


Polish law allows only exceptions and that's why I mention it. We can talk all day about woemn who just sleep around, abort any time they get pregnant and all that but it's not about such cases,is it? They do it illegaly if they want to however that part won't be affected by the new proposal. Pro life ppl want to ban this three exceptions listed before.





The mother knew the baby in her belly will never smile, she will never hug it or feed it. It will never survive. She had to go many months in a state that should make her crazy happy knowing that that's not the case. Having ppl congratulate her, and all that. Than at the end of it she had to go through a labour (that is dangerous on it's own) just to give the pro life ppl the chance to say they saved a life. If at least the baby had a chance to survive somehow I would say that at least there was some point (even if I still believed she had the right to choose) but not like this.


I don't know, YOU don't know and the doctor didn't know either. However the parents decided that's what they wanted to do.


Me and people like me are not proposing anything at all- we are looking at the Polish law and see that if doctors refuses to do the abortion(when it's legal of course) he has to put the women in contact with a doctor that will.


We are not talking about situation where mother developed some disase and she is treated even if it harms the baby. That was never the point. We are talking about a situation when the pregnancy itself threatens mother's life. Will they abort then? What about ectopic pregnancies- will they be aborted or will the doctor wait for the homeorage? What about other conditions? What when the babies heart stops beating? Will they abort or wait for the (dangerous) miscarriage?


For one the 5yo knows what parents tell him and second it may or may not develop 'all the necessary trappings of a child. According to NHS up to 30% pregnancies are miscarried in the first tree month. Plus all the others pathological pregnancies... It's not like the foeatus has to be born. Nature itself plays many tricks on that view.

Doctors have everything to do with medical matters and no 'child' is involved. Just a few cells in a woman's body. It is her decision to continue with a pregnancy or not.


And this is everything.


Don't tell the anti-abortionists, they may well blame the woman for that.

And you have to find a doctor willing to perform an abortion which is not always easy, even in the above cases.

I mean that you are arguing /reasoning that the real test of being a person is its ability of surviving on its own. So I have given you all those examples of people that are not able to survive on their own. Your reasoning suck.


Ah, so it is not an ability to survive on its own but the fact that a child is inside woman womb. Hey, that normal, that is the way things are and always were. Why such an obvious thing give anyone right to arbitrary decision about life and death of an unborn child? On what ground? Law?


Child is not the part of a woman body, its a separate organism.


Fair enough - good argument (congrats).


There is always a chance, it wouldn't be the first or the last time that doctors were wrong.


So thing that matter most is her comfort. What I don't understand is why killing a child on the spot would bring her a comfort? Unless she want believe a lie and think its only cluster of cells. Even then.


See, I don't buy this story. There is no way a doctor can force parents not to kill their child. They could go to other doctor or even to court, unless there is something else in that story we don't know and what changes everything about it.


According to Harry and jon those are not that difficult to find on your own. Failing that they can check on the internet unless they are unable to function on their own in the modern society. Either parents are retreaded or they are just cooking up story case somebody told them they can sue and win some money, or some people pay them for rising the rucks.


Highly theoretical, almost never happens nowadays.


Geez.. it mean that is an obvious fact of life that everybody know about it.


Why do you think it matters? Its garbage logic. In the same way a murderer could said that people are mortal, doesn't have to live and he is just speeding the process - what the harm?


No is not. On what ground?


Doctors are divided on the issue furthermore they're not here to tell people what is right or what is wrong. They are suppose to cure illness and as you should know pregnancy is not an illness.

Ever heard about doctor Mengele?

Again you are minimizing jon.
Those "few cells" are what is called a LIFE.


There is a LIFE involved jon.
Life begins at the moment of conception even if it is "just a few cells" it is still life.


Yes and that everything of taking a life is called murder.

And what happens after a woman is forced to go full term? That's right:

I think they call it responsibility and accountability.
Two words that have been lost in the last couple of generations.

Interesting that nobody's pointed out that the long anti-abortionists on that March were massively outnumbered by those Polish women who marched in favour of easy availability of terminations.

Now you're saying one can choose to become a homo, so it's a lifestyle option. You used to say it was a genetic thing -- some unfortunates are born that way and can't help it. Make up your mind.


See how repellent these so-called democrats are -- they favour pre-natal infnaticide for others but no for themselves.


Sure, cloak it in nice-sounding or vapid euphemisms. But no matter what it's called it boils down to pre-natal baby butchery -- the dismemberment of tiny arms and legs, a suction pump that sucks out the brain... Too bad graphic documentaries are not shown on TV so everyone would know exactly what's involved step by step.


So you're saying there are more pro-infanticidr sluts than decent Catholic women?
You're probably right. Decent Catholic women are not prone to marching in the streets as they are too busy caring for their families.

Non-sentient clusters of cells don't have arms and legs.


That one word says so much about you.

What do you call female sleep-arounds, girls with peanut-butter legs (easy to spread), ladies of ill-repute? Tarts, sluts, wh*res? Every language must have words to describe every situation. Euphemisms are actually lies if they distort or sugar-coat the truth.

What 'truth'? That women should adhere to the standards you want them to because they're somehow infantile and can't make up their own minds about their bodies?