So lets not worry ourselves about the millions who die needlessly each year from completely preventable causes due to poverty but lets do worry about abortions because it's a waste of potential life. I don't get it. Some life is more important that others?
Happy to live in a dog eat dog sort of world where the strongest survive and thrive but having abortions is wrong? Damn you're a mixed up individual...

Why even worry about the terminology?
I consider myself anti-abortion - but I also consider myself pro-choice. I can personally be against whatever I like, but it`s not my place to cast judgement on, or to control what other people do with their lives. It is their choice to make. Me choosing another option is no different.

I`d personally prefer that people didn`t make irresponsible choices, but I`d rather a choice be available... Not because I want them to make a choice I don`t like, but because in denying someone else the ability to make their own choices there is little I could say should someone deny me the ability to make my own choices.

One cannot assume that their choices and opinions are "right" for anyone but themselves. You also never know what will happen and how your outlook will change.

While I consider myself anti-abortion, I was put in a situation where I ended up choosing to abort a pregnancy. It was inevitable, we were given pretty much no hope of the pregnancy being viable - but the doctors wanted to wait for there to be a clear danger to my health so that it would be completely covered by insurance (abortion when there is hope of survival for the child, however low the chances may be, is elective).
I`m not religious, but would prefer not to actively "kill" something with a beating heart... We opted for the elective procedure very early in the pregnancy so that I could feel better about not having stopped a heart.

Even though I do not like abortion, still can`t say I approve of abortion as a way to prevent an unwanted child... And do not think I could or would ever be able to bring myself to have one to get rid of an unwanted pregnancy... I am very glad that the choice was available.

Go Native, I said that because us "helping" isn't helping the situation. We spend billions a year on preventable disease, billions more on food an rebuilding areas devestated by who knows what. It doesn't change the core problem of why most of these third world nations are full of starveing, poverty stricken people. It's the warlords, crime bosses, dictators, slavers and pirates that rule these area's that are the problem.

Now unless you want the west to just go invadeing all those places willy nilly in the name of "the greater good" fine. But be ready for the world backlash, I mean really, if they are mad about a couple country's the US is in now, I'm sure they would really be upset if it was half the third world. Besides, last time we tried to feed starveing people we ended up with world condemnation and 2 downed blackhawks....

Also, I can't do anything about Africa, so why bring that up as an arguement? Sure it's unfortunate what happens there but I'm 12,000 miles away. It doesn't mean I don't hold thier lives any less valuable, life is life, it's either all precious or none of it is. However, worrying to death over 10,000 children I can't help, over perhaps saveing one I can, is wasteing time.

Missmisa; I had a friend in Highschool who Survived an abortion..tell me, was she alive? because she was aborted before birth, so technically never was born and thus never became "alive". as your seeming to say. Would it be ok for her orginal birth mother to come back and "complete" the abortion she had 17 years before? because afterall..she was never "alive" anyway?

Not MissMisa, but...

For your friend to have survived, it would have had to have been a very late term abortion.
I have yet to see ANYONE here support late term abortions. That is a completely different thing, and not what people who say they support choice are talking about. (At least any I have met.) I don`t think there is any doubt that at that stage it is a baby and very much alive.
I am not MissMisa, so cannot say 100%, but I believe that what she meant by "not alive" is the VERY early stages of pregnancy. Before there is anything really "human-like". Before a nervous system has developed, and before there would be any awareness of pain. (Or awareness of anything, really.)

So Ryzorian I assume you would like to see the law changed to make abortions illegal? What exactly would that accommplish beyond having abortions go back underground? One of the main reasons they were made legal in the first place was women will seek out abortions regardless of the law and often end up turning to backyard practioners to get the job done. Like prohibition of anything really, it never works. Look how successful the US's war on drugs has been! ;)

In the case of a human fetus the heart begins to beat around the 18th day, the central nervous-system 'appears' around the 6th week.
Most countries allow abortion up to the 12th week which means almost fully developed heart and nicely developed brain.
Sure we can say there are still so many things to develop, but if you compare new born humans to new born animals(for example most mammals) you can see that human newborns are way too undeveloped, but no one would say they're not alive...

In my opinion when someone aborts a baby it means the end of a life and not that some bacteria(-like-thing) dies or some undeveloped thing comes out of someone, it means the end of one life. The 12 weeks old baby surely can feel pain and aware of many things(it has brain, eyes, ears, hands and feet...), but even after the 18th day there is a heart which beats so I think the fetus is pretty much alive, and most of the abortions happens after that time.

What I mean to say is that in many countries the laws are too easy along with the stance of the society. It's hard to draw the line but is necessary to keep things sanely. So there wouldn't be cases when young couples were experimenting, if they could get pregnant or not, and when they succeeded they just went to do the abortion.

And yes there are the natural cases of abortion, along with (for example)the (natural) genetic diseases which can cause the natural death of an adult (or a fetus as well). And no one would say they shouldn't fight for their lives because it's natural for them to die... hold this in mind when you defend abortion with the reason of: 'nature does it too'.

I honestly don't know how could be the prevention more effective, so there would be less unwanted babies, but for me it'd be the only solution. If you don't want a baby than don't hazard with it, and if you were so stupid that you're already pregnant than bear the consequences... and don't say abortion does not mean the end of a life to ease your heart, cause that's just ignorant and selfish.
In other words: it's OK that women can chose weather they want the child or not, but when they do it shouldn't be an easy choice, they shouldn't lie themselves that it's just a simple operation, and it's almost nothing and it's far away from killing a human being...

I'm not saying you're comparing anything. I just pointed out that it seems you're applying rules for dog breeding onto women pregnancy, because it's very common for a female dog to have complications if she's not ''meant'' to pass her genes on.

I'm not saying that I know best. This is a forum with threads in which you discuss your opinions and compare them to what other people think. I'm simply presenting my pov. Has nothing to do with me ''knowing best''.

Will people stop bringing up after birth abortions, there is no such thing, there never will be, it has no relevance on what happened before birth and is just hypersensitive knee-jerk reaction, aggravation causing sensationalism with no benefit to any discussion.

She was not alive legally(and also in my own morals alive at all as a separate entity) until she was born, then she was. Killing after they are separate, "alive" people is murder, what happens before then isn't.

It doesn't matter if there were 6 failed abortions, it was just a not-alive thing they were trying to remove and failed. Once born it becomes a person, a she with rights and anything that happened before this point cannot be retrospectively applied.

tl;dr

she was alive the moment she was born and the cord cut, what happened before failed or not cannot be applied afterwards.

Your friend was obviously not aborted, it was attempted-abortion.
Would you say someone who survived attempted-murder should be killed afterwards because if something is attempted and didn't happen it must be done later on? Or this makes them not alive because they were attempted-murdered?

No.

She was born, so she is alive. How ridiculous to think that anyone, including miss misa was saying that if someone tries to abort you, even if it fails, you should no longer exist if you managed to be born anyway.

surely it is alive when the heart is beating etc. its nonsense to say its not alive until its born.that is pie in the sky.

It could not develop at all if was dead. I am sure many miscarriages are when a baby has died inside the womb

It sounds Miss Misa as though you will have to be very careful with contraception if you do not wish to have a pregnancy. At least you know what you want or do not want.

its never easy.

Until you face the situation you will not know what it is like.

sorry but Princess I think your conception of what is alive or not is seriously flawed.

without doubt the baby is alive while its heart is beating.

we all die when our heart stops beating.

premnature babies are born early but many survive if they get the correct treatment.


If their heart hadn't been beating they would have been dead already.

do you think you were not alive when in your own mothers womb? If so then you are a miracle. Is there a magic spell that causes a baby to be alive at birth but not before?

Of course not--that would be nonsense. what do you think the umbilical cord is for?

I am not comparing dogs with humans at all.


Yes the baby is smacked to help it to breathe--and a weak pup can be helped to take its first breath by moving it in a certain way but I am not comparing women to dogs at all

actually bitches will often absorb puppies when there is something amiss with them

I take it that You are familiar with the technique with puppies-- so what is your experience of that. I have helped bring many pups into the world but Never a human being.

Having my own first baby took way too long and my baby died. I was petrified and left all alone-- it was scary.

However you are wrong to say I am comparing humans with dog breeding.

I said legally and in my own morality (i.e opinion) not alive.

Seeing as people are calling abortion murder and talking about post birth killing, then yes the legal definition of what is and isn't "alive as a person" needs to brought into this.


I dislike the word alive being used too much in this discussion, because people get mixed up. I take it here we use alive to mean, is a person, has the same rights as other people(not to have the life ended, to be more than just a part of the mother)

Obviously any cell is alive if we are talking biologically about the use of mitochondria respirating.

What is this idea that heart beating = any more or less alive than any other organ functioning or not functioning.

Heart beating = biology, no relevance to anything here. A bug has a beating heart of somekind but has no legal right not to be squished and not many people have moral objection to this either

(in before people miss my point and think I am comparing people to bugs - I am not, I am saying if you think heart beating=right to life, then I hope you never in your life killed a bug)


When it is alive in terms of having the right to its own life and such =opinion/mortality/law

don't mix them up.
If it is your opinion that a certain organ starting to work has massive significance to you, then it is just an opinion and in my opinion, such stuff is far more "pie in the sky"

One baby in 30 left alive after medical termination | News

fighting ignorance eh?

Yeah and obviously not doing a great job with you.

Why have you linked me something about failed abortion?
I said I know some abortions fail :confused:

Is it because they use the word alive in the biological sense in that sentence and you still miss the subtleties of it's meaning there?

Usually bitches know if they're not supposed to be bred on, so to speak. It's common that they will get VERY vicious towards the male, growl, bite and generally try to snap at him if he comes too close. However, this isn't what I was referring to. I was brought up in a kennel, lived my whole life with dogs, brought up several litters that I took care of with my mom.. I know the drill.
Among breeders it's not the dogs that get to decide who gets 'paired' with who. It's all about health, genetics, relations etc. EVERYTHING is managed and 'under control', meaning that the breeder should hopefully know wth they're doing. However, many females miscarry to the mere fact that they were never supposed to be bred on.

Nowadays we have so many technologies, hormone injections, fertility clinics etc. that can help women get pregnant. I believe that there's a reason for people if they cannot get pregnant and carry the baby all throughout pregnancy.
I agree with you that nature knows best - all the way.

I'm sorry that your child died. I'm surprised they didn't do a c-section, though, to help you deliver. When births take too long (at least where I live), the woman will get a c-section or there will be done something to help the child out. However, it's very sad to hear that you had such an incident and was then left alone.

It's just my opinion, can't I have one? I'm not upset or anything, I just think many times it's misinterpreted as a minor issue and I also think it shouldn't be.

It's a good thing that you're aware of these things, and that surely you do everything necessary to prevent your pregnancy. But many women don't...
I don't know how they deal with it though, and I cannot possibly tell them not to do it, I don't even desire to.

I don't want to offend you, actually I think it's really nice that you can hold on to your opinion, so please don't be mad or anything but when you say it's an easy choice for you, I can't help but think about the differences between those who can kill easily in war times (I'm not saying you are one) and those who can never shoot a gun, not to mention firing it when pointing at another person.
In the first case it's an act for the sake of the country they live in and for the people they love so much... I cannot imagine how would I react in this situation, cause there are so many pros to use violence for my people's sake(and it scares me that I might be able to kill others to protect my family...), therefore I would never act to provoke another nation, and would do anything to not enter the war in the first place... Not sure if my analogy is appropriate, and not of-topic but even if I might get some blast for it, it's what I think... And I don't think that I'm near to understand what would protecting my people mean, and how far I'd go for it... I'd only know that if I had to chose.

Also I'm wondering if the law said that you cannot have an abortion, would you do it anyway? For what you have said it appears to me, that you don't even accept the law's term that a women cannot have an abortion after a certain time limit. You only accept the babies to be alive, who 'survive' on their own, every others are just a bunch of cells? What do you think? I'm really curious. From when is a fetus alive? From when would you not allow abortion?

Well, I think I understand your stance now.
And for I believe that no one can be changed if not from the inside, I really didn't and don't want to change your opinion.
I just have a different one, and I wanted to defend it...

ah well---------------subtleties. Is that what you call so damned convenient isn't it

anyway you think what you think an dI'll think what I think and you were alive in your mothers womb. You did not suddenly become alive when you exited her womb.

there can be circumstances why some pregnancies go on too long. There can be many reasons why it carried on too long.


Each person has many other things to consider and so for each they have their own reasons.

personally I hate the thought of a baby being aborted as late as 24 weeks but it happens.

who is telling you you couldn't have an abortion-- you are already stating that you would-- but sometimes a woman does not always know she is pregnant-- don't ask me why or how but what about these surprise births where the mother swears she didn't even know she was pregnant.
maybe you will know immediately after all there are plenty of tests that can be done which has not always been the case.

THE THING!!!!once upon a time You were a THING in your mothers womb.

I'm sorry that your child died. I'm surprised they didn't do a c-section, though, to help you deliver. When births take too long (at least where I live), the woman will get a c-section or there will be done something to help the child out. However, it's very sad to hear that you had such an incident and was then left alone.[/quote] thanks-- it was the fault of the staff.

maybe but as my baby was born in 1965-- being all alone was no joke. the baby lived for just 48 hours. she was wanted. Kirsteen Helen Cameron was her name.



the hospital in scotland was where Stirling University now stands.

I don't just aim this at you, - but to anyone who's lost a child - but I wonder if perhaps the loss of a young child in the immediate family does influence a person's feelings on the matter of abortion? Its just I think anyone who has lost a child knows how devestating and traumatising it can be, and its impossible for those who haven't endured it to perhaps fully comprehend its impact . . . I wonder if the loss of a child leads to more of a sensitivity for life, pregnancy and the child itself.

I guess what I mean is this: would your opinion on abortion be the same if you hadn't lost a child? It just seems that when someone has lost a child it seems incomprehensible for anyone else to willingly choose to end its life, I can see why it'd perhaps be so upsetting or infuriating. So perhaps this biases one to the issue? That one can't seperate the idea of 'terminating a pregnancy' with that feeling of grief and pain.

why pretend it is not alive when it patently IS. Otherwise it would have died naturally inside the womb and been aborted.

I think those who try to pretend a developing foetus and baby is not alive is kidding themselves because it suits them to believe that.

It has to be alive to continue developing. nothing to do with opinions at all.

It is not some substance that has no life about it it is growing and changing constantly. No way could that happen if it was DEAD

it is disgusting to call a living child within the womb just a THING and it has nothing at all to do with whether i have lost a child or not.

It is disgraceful to refer to something so amazing and miraculous as simply A THING or a bunch of cells/

we all were those once-- do we like to think that we were thought of as a THING.

I believe it is all so convenient for those who believe that when they conceive a child that is is not at all special or important but just a damned nuisance of a THING.

NO it is totally wrong.

we all were in a womb-- so maybe we were just things. so many attitudes here are SHOCKING.

Well you think what youlike MISS MISA. You are wrong.

as you have such a phobia about something that should be Natural-- you had better make sure that you never do conceive


I am sure you will be careful but I still disagree about when a baby is ALIVE.

however everyone else think what suits them. creation and birth is miraculous.

dogsbody70 - PLEASE stop double-posting. You're flooding the thread. Just use the 'edit' button. Super easy and much more space-saving than you posting entry after entry.. ^^v Thanks


ALSO.. I'd like to add that I agree with MissMisa. I'm, however, convinced that it's not actually "alive" to the extent where it's an actual PERSON until it's been born. Until it's OUTSIDE of the momma's belly - it's not alive to me.

Ok serious point...

There seems to be a lot of debate on wether the foetus is alive or not at the time of abortion and then a moral fall out depending on which side you believe. However i would like to say that even if the foetus is alive SO WHAT? i dont see it as such a great crime to abort it, especially if it saves it from a life of shit or the like?

if you detach yourself from the emotion, you see a clearer picture - look at nature when for example lions eat the new born of another male before breeding etc. - natures 100 times more cruel and we are in the end a part of that nature.

Humans kill shit everyday!

come on.
yes. foetus is alive like all cells and their combinations.
still - it's nothing more than an empty shell. it has no experience, no ideas, no concept of life. even Robins beloved Dolphins are more sophisticated and when it comes to choosing - i say that something that has actually experienced the world, has seen it...well then it has more right to stay in it than something that hasn't.

dogsbody. ahh..your BS about every child is special. well if everyone is special then it means everyone is the same!
and human life has become long since expendable. just take a look at this clock: World Clock
year just started and already 8 million have been born. child born isn't any wonder any more (in a generalisation to the world, families think different, i hope so)
world just might be a better place if there weren't so many unwanted children born and actually had more abortions.

P.S look. there is even a number for abortions. this year - 2.6 million. imagine now 2.6 million unwanted children walking around...would it make you happy? or even anyone?

i say - first figure out how to take care of those who are already born, then worry about the upcoming.

My thought on the whole alive or not debate...

Alive is not necessarily a life. There is a difference between the two terms, and I am taking the liberty of interpreting the people saying that a fetus is "not alive" as saying that it is not "a life".

A life is something that is capable of living independently (on a physical level - as in with a functional internal system allowing it to survive.)

My leg is alive. My hand is alive. If I scrape myself on something, I lose an incredible number of living cells. There is no doubt that those things are living. But they are not "life". They are entirely dependent upon my body functioning properly to survive. No amount of support could keep them living - or bring them to a point where they could live without me - should they be removed from my body. As alive as they may be, I could never take my leg and say that it is a life all its own.

I believe that most people will agree with me on this.

Now - move on to the components involved in reproduction.

The thousands of "egg" cells women carry in their bodies, and the countless sperm cells continually produced by men are all living cells. But they are not individual lives. They are nothing more than living cells at that point. If they were each a life - every month a woman would be letting a person die... Every time a man ejaculated, he would be letting millions of people die even if he were to get someone pregnant.

Putting these two living (but not independent life) cells together makes a new type of cell. The new cell isn`t yet something that could be considered a life, as there is no possible way for it to remain in a living state without the body keeping it that way... Just like the egg and sperm cells it was formed by. It has the potential to become a life, but that is about all that makes it different from a toe. Cut off from the body, neither has any chance whatsoever of surviving.

As to when be developing fetus ceases to be simply alive and becomes a life... That is a huge debate. But scientifically, until there is a functioning system in place to sustain the state of living... Alive it is, but "life" it is not.
This is generally interpreted as somewhere around 24 weeks, as that is the edge of viability.

It is often cited that abortion is legal up until 24 weeks... But I don`t believe that most (any?) country allows elective abortions after 12 or so weeks. Abortion after that point is done for medical reasons, usually a risk to the mother`s life. After 24 weeks, the same sort of thing can happen - ie. end the pregnancy to save the life of the mother - but the fetus is legally recognized as an individual, and efforts must be made to save that life along with that of the mother.

The real issue is that the line between being alive and being a life is very fuzzy and open for interpretation. Legally, it tends to be 24 weeks, which is why the "natural" death of a baby in the womb before 24 weeks is a miscarriage, and after is a still birth.

Missmisa; I actually understand that phobia idea. It may be sub concious aspect of realizeing that the featus, wether you think it's alive at that point or not, is still seperate from you. That may creep you out sub conciously.

It is something folks need to understand though, a featus is a seperate entity from the mother, that's why you have a womb in the first place. It seperates the two because if the blood of either mixed they could become hostile to each other. ( It's called the RH factor)

I'm not going to try and tell anyone what to believe here, cause that's useually wasted time anyway. I will point out that we have to be careful culturally about these sorts of things, it becomes a slippery slope when life as a whole looses it's value.

Princess; The atempted murder aspect doesn't work as a arguement in this case because murder itself is against the law, where as abortion isn't. I suppose you could debate when does an abortion become an atempted murder.

There is another tack to consider, some make the case that it's the woman's body and there fore her right to do what she wants. This sets up the idea that the unborn child is her property, as I recall we had an issue with people being property before. So if that's the case, when does the unborn child become it's own owner? At birth? 2? 12? 18? That was even a law I believe in centuries past, where children really were considered property of the parents until a certain age.

Gonative; I debated someone at work about this today and I kinda think his conclusion was correct, you can't legislate a moral code, the culture itself has to have such structures built in as a framework allready. So maybe it should be "legal" so that it stays safe but perhaps the culture should attach a stigma to it. Like smokeing around children or driveing drunk. While it may be legal, it should be seen as something people don't consider as a first choice.

My concern is that far too often it's seen as a convience and as a convience it begins creating a culture of disreguard.

Pumpum, if you consider Humans as nothing more than animals I can concede that point. However, even humanist's who don't believe in God at all, try to attach a greater aspect to humanity than just "Monkey learned to walk upright, yippy skippy"

Male lions kill newborns cause they want the females to go into heat so they can inpregnate her with their cubs. They don't want to waste time raiseing the last kings brat. While humans do act that way sometimes, particularly royalty. Most of us are above that.

[quote=NanteNa;847714]dogsbody70 - PLEASE stop double-posting. You're flooding the thread. Just use the 'edit' button. Super easy and much more space-saving than you posting entry after entry.. ^^v Thanks

you have a cheek telling me what I should be doing.

I usually am responding to others messages---

Well maybe if she asked me in a decent way rather than dictating to me. I do actually need advice how to separate certain quotes as other members do.

Many of your generation have grown up using computers. You know a lot more than I do. so how about someone helping me to learn how to take quotes as most of you do on here so well.

I do not know how to do it, but there are waqys of asking people. if you are a moderator you need to know how to speak to members without dictating.

ANyway I was replying to later messages.

So please tell me how I can pick separate quotes an dplace into one message as you do.

My point with the attempted murder thing doesn't matter if it is legal or not I was just trying to make the point that saying someone should be killed at 16 because they were tried to be aborted at minus x months old, has no sense to it, no one would think this it is totally illogical.
Just the same as if you try to do anything and it fails, it doesn't automatically follow that the action must be completed years later.
Attempted murder was the closest example I could think of to illustrate this.


I too thought that was the case we were leading onto, regarding one becoming their own entity, in line with my other opinion I feel that you become your own at birth.

The reason abortion isn't illegal can pretty much come down to when the law considers someone their own entity, so have the right to live which I believe, in the UK at least is birth although I may have to check that, because it doesn't explain why late term abortions are illegal (unless it is for health reasons)
The way I see it,until birth it is part of the mothers body, and although I don't like the word property I will go with it is the same as any other part of her body, hers to do with as she wishes.
I am sure many will disagree which they are fine to do as long as they don't go overboard with personal scathing remarks about me :rolleyes:


No one else here was taught how to use forums.
The reason people are OK with technology is not because "they were brought up around it" as if every command entered their brain by osmosis.
They used a thing called experimentation and initiative.

When you press quote notice how in your reply there is a bit of code like

copy and paste that into the reply you are writing. you can also manually type it out, without the string of numbers after the name, and it will still work just not link to that post.

Don't include spaces if you type it out, I just put spaces in it so the code would show and not just turn into a quote block.

Well, I was about to make a detailed post on how to quote different sections of a post, but since you've already undertaken the task, I'll just leave the images I made here if dogsbody70 would like illustrations on how to quote people.

Image 1 - These are the 4 parts we're going to divide your post into.

Image 2 - you'll need to press the reply button to begin.

Image 3 - you'll need to understand how to use opening and closing tags as well as tag properties.

For example [ ] is an open tag and by placing a back slash in it like so: [ /] makes it a closed tag.
For the sake of quoting, we're going to place the word QUOTE inside an open tag to mark the beginning of a quote like so: [ QUOTE] if you want to include the name of the person you're quoting, then include the following in the opening tag: [ QUOTE = *person's user name*]
then mark the end of the quote by inserting the closed quote tag: [ /QUOTE]

It may sound jarring at first, but BB code is very simple and a standard in most online messaging boards. I recommend reading a few of the many articles on it on the web to develop a basic familiarity...

Image 4 - here, I've inserted quote tags in your post to show you how it's done. Image number 5 will show you how the quote tags will divide your post.

Image 5

Image 6

I think the last two pictures are pretty self-explanatory but, if you have any more questions dogsbody70, feel free to ask me via private messaging in order to avoid derailing the thread too much.
--------------------------------------------

And, in order to stay on topic, I'll state that I'm not against abortion in the most dire of cases (risk of death to mother, rape, etc.) aside from dire cases, it's a no-go for me. All in all, I've known a few people who have aborted for one reason or another and if there is something I've learned from these individuals -- no matter what their reasons were -- it's that whether you like it or not, and whatever your mentality is at the point before/during abortion, after it happens, it's a cross to bear and it haunts them.

I'm not saying this feeling is universal, there may be some people out there I have yet to meet who have had an abortion and couldn't care less, but I can only speak for the people I've known and all of them have told me there are those moments of deep regret.

The whole Idea of abortion is a scary thought to be honest. Especially when it's abused. Places in India where they figure out the sex of a baby and eliminate it if it happens to be a girl just to avoid paying some sort of dowry...

Blah...

Too many factors, negative/positive lie within the pro/ anti abortion sides, but if I had to vote, I'd vote for an extremely regulated pro-abortion option.

thank you very much for theuseful advice. I will print it out and try it. I am a very slow learner-- so thanks., Domoarigotogozaimasu

PS Princess did you enjoy trying to make me look me look foolish.

thanks for your help but not the uncalled for comments.

when you help people usually its done in a kind way. but thank you anyway.

thank you Modus Operandi.

I have actually tried different ways usually using the QUOTE button but separating the various sections never seemed to work for me.


I'll try later to see if I can master what seems simple for everyone else but me.

Believe you me, you manage that well enough yourself.

thank YOU your highness.

Hopefully I'm not pulling the topic too far away from the current train of discussion, but I had to ask, what are everyone's thoughts considered the time-limit to abortions?

It's just after reading through the posts about the speed a baby develops, about the survival rates and so forth, I was curious - for those that support abortion - how they feel about the 'deadlines' in their respective countries, and what they think the 'deadlines' should be? Like in England, for example, I think we can legally have abortions up to 24 weeks, and there's been a lot of debate in the past few years because a lot of babies can survive around that time, and some people believe the 'deadline' should be a lot lower. I think in some countries you can only have an abortion up to twelve weeks, as some have said? So yeah - I was just curious as to what people thought really . . .

I think it is dangerous to make abortion illegal after any point because then people will start to have backstreet abortions, or travel to countries it is legal in.

Also what if past the maximum week the mothers life was in danger, if abortion has become illegal whos life gets priority, and do we have to have lots of exceptions to the rule, that will just be abused anyway?

As science improves in theory the baby could survive outside the womb with medical intervention at earlier and earlier stages, if the current trend it to put the stopper where the child can survive alone. Does this mean in 10-20years abortions will be illegal after say 6weeks if science has developed an artificial womb?

If it is 24weeks currently this seems a compromise on enough time to allow the mothers realisation she is pregnant, her decision, and to deal with waiting lists and such for the operation. Any sooner and I worry that there will be no time to make the decision, get on the waiting list and have the operation in the 12weeks.

(Remember it isn't counted from the day you get pregnant, it is counted from the last day you had a real period, so you are often in the way it is measured 4weeks pregnant before you even realise.)
My own mum didn't know she was pregnant with me till after she had 2 period-like-spottings whilst pregnant and didn't really put on much weight.
This means in the way it was counted, by the time she found out she was pretty much out of time to make the decision if it was a 12week rule, if she had wanted to.

She was in her 30s, but young girls getting pregnant will have even more erratic cycles and always changing weight and feeling moody so might not notice till much later.

As I said I think the date should be until birth, theoretically. Although this is not really possible, and will have such strong opposition, that 24weeks seems a good compromise, and is not a decision that will have been made lightly by the authorities. If it was up to me I would push it back a little further really.

I actually have two cheeks. And as a mod of JapanForum, I'm part of the crew making sure that rules are being 'obeyed' so to speak. So yeah..

Missmisa, Becareful with "survive on it's own". A newborn would be seperate as an individual and certainly surveing on it's own as to breathing, but it's completely helpless with out the mother to care for it. I would also contend that a child is pretty much helpless to survive on it's "Own" for the first several years of it's life.

Princessmarisa; I'm not going to berate you for haveing an opion contrary to mine. I will offer idea's as to why I think how I do and your free to decide wether you agree or not.

I may come across as bombastic sometimes as I tend to exspress things in a blunt, straight forward manner, seldom considering secondary aspects to any given discussion. However, my bark is worse than my bite.