toggle
wobbly
as well as the aritificial dichotomy between woman as vulnerable victim for whom I can sympathise, and other women who would rather not be pregnant. what names does he use for those I wonder?
Abort 67 "intimidating protests" outside Blackfriars/London clinic
- Thread starter cantsin
- Start date
as well as the aritificial dichotomy between woman as vulnerable victim for whom I can sympathise, and other women who would rather not be pregnant. what names does he use for those I wonder?
Well i suppose this one could be a better one:
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/eastenders-bizarre-and-shit.204757/page-105
I would still vote to outlaw it in most cases. But in the meantime it's legal so I don't believe people should be harassed when they are going to a clinic, because for starters, I or anyone else who shares my views, wouldn't know the circumstances of the women involved.
The religious nutjobs don't believe in ANY circumstances in which an abortion is permissible, which probably explains why they don't have any qualms with making a nuisance of themselves outside an abortion clinic.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
to my mind it's a greater pity their parents did not believe in contraception. or at least did not use it at the appropriate time.
toggle
wobbly
the result of outlawing abortion will not be fewer abortions. just like legalising abortion was not to allow abortions to happen. it was to make them safe, to stop women being killed by quacks with knitting needles and coat hangers. by people who remembered the alternative was baby farms and overlaying epidemics. and if you don't know what those are, then you need to educate yourself on that.
people with money will still be able to access abortion, unless you plan to pregnancy test every woman leaving and then returning to the country. people with less money and some level of education will be able to access medications online, others will go for herbal options. many herbswidely advertised as helping induce labour in overdue pregnancy will cause an abortion, if taken in early pregnancy. i've said before, I know several options, and that was without having intentionally gone looking for them. bvut for others, basically almost kill yourself with posion, from the sounds of things there's a large variety of options that will work. a slightly sub lethal dose to the woman will kill the foetus.
not as safe as chatting to your GP. but you've still got the option of turning up to the hospital if things go wrong. Just as women did before legal abortion. at least these days a lot will have options that aren't risking having their uterus perforated with a rusty coathanger.
the only people who will be effectively prevented from aborting are those who can't access the above options. people who don't have money or access to information. IE, the most vulnerable in society.
aren't they the women you were feeling sorry for?
people with money will still be able to access abortion, unless you plan to pregnancy test every woman leaving and then returning to the country. people with less money and some level of education will be able to access medications online, others will go for herbal options. many herbswidely advertised as helping induce labour in overdue pregnancy will cause an abortion, if taken in early pregnancy. i've said before, I know several options, and that was without having intentionally gone looking for them. bvut for others, basically almost kill yourself with posion, from the sounds of things there's a large variety of options that will work. a slightly sub lethal dose to the woman will kill the foetus.
not as safe as chatting to your GP. but you've still got the option of turning up to the hospital if things go wrong. Just as women did before legal abortion. at least these days a lot will have options that aren't risking having their uterus perforated with a rusty coathanger.
the only people who will be effectively prevented from aborting are those who can't access the above options. people who don't have money or access to information. IE, the most vulnerable in society.
aren't they the women you were feeling sorry for?
They certainly are the woman I *am* feeling sorry for. There is a balance - I'm not for a second saying that all abortion should be outlawed, but certainly for convenience. Provisions can be made for all those heartbreaking circumstances, teenage pregnancies etc.
Anyway, I don't claim to have all the answers on this one...I've never wanted a blanket ban on abortion, but I'm not comfortable with the current setup.
Any changes in the law, would spark a debate and I would think very carefully before I decide where I draw that line. I've always admitted that there's a big grey area to this - it least that's the way I see it.
toggle
wobbly
you're not addressing my points. you're either not understahnding or choosing not to address the fact that restricting access to abortion will only impact the vulnerable - the people who you claim you don't want to restrict access for.
the only way to reduce abortion numbers without fucking over vulnerable women is to reduce the need for abortion. to get the 'moral majority' bullshit out of the equation when you discuss contraception and relationships in schools. to end the opt out. and the bullshit taught in some faith based institutions.
you then need contraception that is fully effective for all women. with minimal side effects. this dosen't exist atm. you need to change NHS prescribibng policies to look at the latest and best options, not the older cheaper ones with more side effects.
then you need to prevent rape.
and spousal abuse.
and fix the welfare system so women aren't bearing the brunt of the cuts. and stupid cunts aren't whining that single mums are responsible for all society's problems.
and make it so women are treated with more respect in the workplace, where pregnancy isn't considered a career killer. where low level employees aren't pushed to work extreme hours to prove their worth in a way that is incompatable with pregnancy and childraising. and fuck off the attitudes that pregnancy and parenting kills women's intelect. Not men's of course. just women.
the only way to reduce abortion numbers without fucking over vulnerable women is to reduce the need for abortion. to get the 'moral majority' bullshit out of the equation when you discuss contraception and relationships in schools. to end the opt out. and the bullshit taught in some faith based institutions.
you then need contraception that is fully effective for all women. with minimal side effects. this dosen't exist atm. you need to change NHS prescribibng policies to look at the latest and best options, not the older cheaper ones with more side effects.
then you need to prevent rape.
and spousal abuse.
and fix the welfare system so women aren't bearing the brunt of the cuts. and stupid cunts aren't whining that single mums are responsible for all society's problems.
and make it so women are treated with more respect in the workplace, where pregnancy isn't considered a career killer. where low level employees aren't pushed to work extreme hours to prove their worth in a way that is incompatable with pregnancy and childraising. and fuck off the attitudes that pregnancy and parenting kills women's intelect. Not men's of course. just women.
I'm not really addressing your points, because I'm not on this thread to promote pro-life, or win any arguements. My first post on this thread, I was pointing out that demonstrations outside abortion clinics is not really helpful, even though my views are pro-life leaning.
I very quickly pointed out, that I wasn't really up for a debate on whether abortion should be legal or not. I even told you that if there was a vote on it anytime soon, there would be a debate, which I would listen to, before I decide where that legal line should be.
I'm a single bloke. Of course I'm not going to be aware of all the issues that pregant women, single mothers etc face. All I can do is promise myself that I would research as best as possible, listen to as many people, before making my mind up which way I vote.
All I know is, I would like to see real positive work done to see the number of abortions cut down, without being absolute fuckers and ruining peoples lives etc.
Does that sound reasonable enough to you?
toggle
wobbly
you have however claimed you wish to limit access to abortion. why then refuse to address the consequences of that?
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
toggle
wobbly
and this false dichotomy between acceptable and unaccpetable abortions. who is in a position to judge whether it's the right decision to abort other than the woman making that choice for herself? why should she have to prove she fits someone else's arbritrary standard of vulnerable? and what if she'[s too vulnerable to be able to evidence that?
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
who, when it comes down to it, enacts legislation, has the debates surrounding it and sees to the enforcement of it? Not working class women, thats for sure
toggle
wobbly
innit.
male dominated legislature. that's proven it dosen't have a fucking clue about being poor.
Because the whole thing has the potential to derail the thread, which is more about the balance between the right to protest and peoples right to conduct their lawful business without harassment.
toggle
wobbly
you derailed the thread already by coming on here and claiming to support the principle behind this nutcase group's actions, if not their methods. you're now being asked to explain your comments and dodging doing so left right and center.
why do you not want to address the consequences of and inconsistencies contained within your statement?
is that because you know there's no logical premise behind your moralising judgements of which women are victims and which women are consequence avoiding strumpets? why should a woman's medical decisions be controlled by your moral judgement, rather than her own? why is your moral judgement superior to hers?
Athos
Well-Known Member
You're either trolling or you haven't bothered to read my posts.
The above claim by you in bold is absolutely outrageous.
Scroll back and read my posts.
No one is when they are quoted out of context.
Anyway, for the 3rd time. The only point I was trying to make on this thread, was about the right to protest versus the right for people to go about their legal business.
Besides, I'm not out to change anyone's minds on this thread concerning abortion, so I don't have to make watertight arguements etc.
. And if some people want to shape my mind about anything, they ain't doing a good job of it.
Athos
Well-Known Member
You weren't quoted out of context.
I understand the point you were trying to make about lawful protest. But you also made the point that you would outlaw abortion, and you made the point that some abortions are simply for convenience.
You certainly haven't made watertight arguments; your position has shifted in the space of a handful of posts.
I don't suppose anyone hopes you'll change your mind.
Athos
Well-Known Member
I don't agree with him, but surely there's no greater logic behind either the pro- or anti-choice positions? It all comes down to differing moral positions, doesn't it?
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
You'll need expand on that pls. If we are coming from the point where a persons body is their own and the choices they make regarding it are theirs, then the argument reducts to 'where does life begin' and so on.
outside of debate space the reality is that anti-abortion laws lead to all sorts of ills, including infanticide. Infants stuffed in septic tanks by irish nuns etc, it getss really ugly very fast
Well, please mate, go and look at my posts again. It's obvious, that the actual subject matter is not really high up on my agenda, that I'm really not out to change minds and more to the point, what I really think on the subject matter of abortions v pro-life really isn't that important.
Some people are so passionate about their causes close to their hearts, they end up being awful advertisements for their cause, rather than reaching out to people, they go on the absolute offensive to the point where it's real personal.
Athos
Well-Known Member
I've read (and reread) your posts. You made points in addition to the one about lawful protest. And much of what you said was inconsistent.
Athos
Well-Known Member
Simply that the starting point - that a person's body is their own etc. - is, of itself, ultimately a moral position, rather than a matter of logic.
For the record, I am pro-choice, not least of because of the real harm that flows from denying abortion.
So before all of that inconsistency....
what part of "I'm not interested in a debate about abortion" don't you get?
I couldn't a fuck whether my posts on this subject are consistent or not, considering that right from the start, I said I wasn't out to change anyone's minds on any of it!
Are you really bored or what?
Have your debate on abortion rather than about right to protest etc because I'm not that interested in abortion or pro-life or whatever, it's not something I'm passionate about!
I was only interested in the protest v right to be free of harassment bit.
Some feminist thinks I'm some kind of cunt and I won't be on her Christmas card list, even though I wasn't on it anyway.
What a surprise!
Athos
Well-Known Member
You were interested enough to make the points; not interested enough to defend them. Or, more likely, can't.
That's handy.
So dispassionate that you'd vote to outlaw it. Though, in fairness to you, you'd resiled from that position within just a handful of posts.
Clown.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
I don't see it as a moral position- that meat machine in your head that generates a sense of personhood is housed in your body- if a person doesn't have control of their own body then why not justify slavery? I'll grant you we act when someone is incapcitated and needs treatment they might refuse consciously, that MH patients can be force drugged, children are medicated neccesarily over their vocal protests sometimes. But those are not the same as denying an adult woman the right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy are they? Except perhaps similar in the case of forced drugging of patients under section- thats a violation of itself.
Slade, You're not consistent enough.
It's worse than that, he's a judgmental, nutcase supporting, moralizing cunt!
FFS pick on someone else will you?
Athos
Well-Known Member
There are religious people who believe that their bodies belong to God; that's the philosophical justification for the Christian proscription of suicide. The idea of bodily autonomy is an alternative moral position. One I share, but moral position nonetheless.
People exercising their vote given the chance, isn't an indication of passion.
The anti-abortionist's argument is presumably what is a woman's right to bodily autonomy next to a child's right to live?
The two arguments are based on moral positions, surely. You might not recognise the legitimacy of one position, but it's there sure enough.
Similar threads
