Abortion

[HenrySwanson]

I don't understand why this is meaningful to you.

At the moment we have a cutoff of 24 weeks for a healthy foetus without much reason as to how this was reached and why it is still present. My proposition is a point between the two extremes based on a scientific criteria.

 

[Danoff]

At the moment we have a cutoff of 24 weeks for a healthy foetus without much reason as to how this was reached and why it is still present. My proposition is a point between the two extremes based on a scientific criteria.

I acknowledge all of that. My question is why you picked that criteria. Specifically, why is this where the right to life begins? You picked a very problematic spot from the perspective of the mother's rights.

 

[TenEightyOne]

At the moment we have a cutoff of 24 weeks for a healthy foetus without much reason as to how this was reached and why it is still present.

Those with more of an interest in medical matters may be aware of the passionate, learned arguments at the BMA conference where the decision to continue to support the 24-week cutoff was taken.

The opinions of the many doctors who contributed don't (in my view) constitute views that are "without much reason".

 

[HenrySwanson]

I acknowledge all of that. My question is why you picked that criteria. Specifically, why is this where the right to life begins? You picked a very problematic spot from the perspective of the mother's rights.

I picked it as a compromise between two extremes, and one borne out of a scientific landmark

Those with more of an interest in medical matters may be aware of the passionate, learned arguments at the BMA conference where the decision to continue to support the 24-week cutoff was taken.

The opinions of the many doctors who contributed don't (in my view) constitute views that are "without much reason".

Care to summarise, with regards to the time limit?

 

[Rallywagon]

I picked it as a compromise between two extremes, and one borne out of a scientific landmark


Care to summarise, with regards to the time limit?

24 hour work weeks. Finland is looking to give it a go. Given normal office space productively numbers, something like only 3 out of 8 hours in a work day actually worked, might as well. I know personally I really hate being at work for more hours in a day than I spend with my family.

 

[Sander 001]

"And it so happened that conservative political activist Paul Weyrich had been looking for ways to harness the political power of white evangelicals to grow the Republican Party.
..
So they went all in on making abortion a wedge issue that could marry the Christian right and the GOP. They founded the Moral Majority in 1979, a political organization that essentially used abortion to deny President Jimmy Carter a second term, and made reproductive rights the political rallying cry it is today.
..
Jane Roe McCorvey confesses on her death bed in 2017 that her change of heart was “all an act” that Evangelicals and anti-abortion groups had paid her nearly half a million dollars to perform.
..
The clearest sign that your movement is built on a house of cards is having to repeatedly lie to your supporters to keep them around. In reality, roughly two-thirds of Americans support abortion rights and would like to see Roe upheld."

https://www.gq.com/story/jane-roe-anti-abortion-lies/amp?__twitter_impression=true

 

[UKMikey]

"And it so happened that conservative political activist Paul Weyrich had been looking for ways to harness the political power of white evangelicals to grow the Republican Party.
..
So they went all in on making abortion a wedge issue that could marry the Christian right and the GOP. They founded the Moral Majority in 1979, a political organization that essentially used abortion to deny President Jimmy Carter a second term, and made reproductive rights the political rallying cry it is today.
..
Jane Roe McCorvey confesses on her death bed in 2017 that her change of heart was “all an act” that Evangelicals and anti-abortion groups had paid her nearly half a million dollars to perform.
..
The clearest sign that your movement is built on a house of cards is having to repeatedly lie to your supporters to keep them around. In reality, roughly two-thirds of Americans support abortion rights and would like to see Roe upheld."

https://www.gq.com/story/jane-roe-anti-abortion-lies/amp?__twitter_impression=true

I bet anti abortionists will try and counter with "she could have been paid to say that as well".

 

[HenrySwanson]

Reminds me of Abby Johnson's "conversion"

Please remember that you can be "anti-abortion" but still believe in a woman's right to an abortion. You need look no further than one of the evangelical leaders featured in the documentary for an example

 

[UKMikey]

Reminds me of Abby Johnson's "conversion"

Why? Was she paid to flip as well?

Please remember that you can be "anti-abortion" but still believe in a woman's right to an abortion. You need look no further than one of the evangelical leaders featured in the documentary for an example

I can't get past the paywall on this site but suspect that the evangelical leader singled out in the article is in no way representative of the majority of anti-abortionists or "anti-abortionists" and that said majority still doesn't believe in a woman's right to bodily autonomy.

 

[HenrySwanson]

Why? Was she paid to flip as well?

Not that I know of, but she was held up by Pro-Lifers as a high profile convert from "the other side" who made money from telling her experiences and this was all built on certain untruths.

I can't get past the paywall on this site but suspect that the evangelical leader singled out in the article is in no way representative of the majority of anti-abortionists or "anti-abortionists" and that said majority doesn't believe in a woman's right to bodily autonomy.

I'm not sure how widespread it is - I actually thought Ron Paul subscribed to the same view but reading up about his position I may be mistaken.

 

[Danoff]

This prompted me to do some more digging since I'm not exactly up and up on Roe v. Wade. I guess the whole argument is around when a fetus becomes a "human" and thus when their human rights begin? There seem to be responses all over the board about it. I guess my hold up with it is why are people who are legal experts determining when life begins, which should be a medical and science based questioned? This is one of those things I have a legitimate difficult time understanding.

It's not really a question of when life begins. Lots of life doesn't have a right to life, including some people (vegetative). Including some sentient people (death row). So it's not a question of the beginning of life, or even the beginning of human life. It's a question of the beginning of rights. Where does the right to life begin? So you can see how the topic gets taken down spurious paths regularly.

 

[TexRex]

Oh, and I'm gen-x as well, so that has nothing to do with it at all.

Generation buddies!

"We're the cleanup crew for parties we were too young to attend." -- Kevin Gilbert, "Goodness Gracious," Thud (1995)

anti-abortionists or "anti-abortionists"

*snickering softly*

 

[Liquid]

As George Carlin said, the "pro-lifers" want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers.

 

[Carbonox]

As George Carlin said, the "pro-lifers" want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers.

No.

So that the unwilling parents can take on all the work and responsibility in raising them into dead soldiers.

 

[TexRex]

This is a couple months old but I've just learned of it. I'm not particularly tuned in to goings-on in Brazil.

Ten-year-old rape victim doxxed by anti-abortion activist

There has been outrage in Brazil after the personal details of a 10-year-old rape victim were published online.

The girl's name was posted by an anti-abortion activist seeking to stop her from having a termination.

Following the online post, abortion opponents gathered outside the hospital where the girl was due to have the procedure.

The girl had become pregnant after being raped. Police arrested a man suspected of raping her on Wednesday.

The case has caused widespread anger in Brazil and a judge has ordered Google, Facebook and Twitter to remove the personal details of the 10-year-old from their sites.

Judge Samuel Miranda Gonçalves Soares ruled that the companies had 24 hours to remove the information or face a fine of 50,000 reais ($9,000; £6,900) a day.

Brazil has strict laws on abortion, but terminations are allowed in cases of rape, when the mother's life is at risk or when the foetus has the birth defect anencephaly - a rare condition that prevents part of the brain and skull from developing.

Even though the girl had been given legal permission to have her pregnancy terminated, anti-abortion activists tried to stop it from being carried out by holding a noisy protest outside the hospital.

They shouted at hospital staff, calling them "killers", and at one point tried to force their way into the building, but were dispersed by military police.

The girl was smuggled onto the hospital's premises in the boot of a car and entered the building by a side door, pro-choice activists said.

The BBC's South America correspondent Katy Watson says the girl's personal details appear to have been initially released by far-right activist Sara Giromini, better known under her alias of Sara Winter.

It is not yet clear whether Sara Giromini will face charges for making the name of the girl public, but legal experts have told BBC News Brasil that she could be charged with incitement to violence.

Ms Giromini is one of the leaders of the "Os 300 do Brasil" movement, an extreme right-wing armed group which supports President Jair Bolsonaro.

She was briefly detained in June for carrying out "anti-democratic actions" in Brasilia, where she led a torchlit march towards the Supreme Court.

 

[UKMikey]

Thank god they still have people who up hold the rule of law despite those bolsonarista bastards. Looks like he hasn't yet stamped out everything decent over there.

I hope tomorrow doesn't belong to them as the Cabaret song puts it and this chilling BBC account referenced by @Rex's article suggests.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-43414315

I'd be interested to see if @HenrySwanson would support their right to protest outside the hospital in which the child rape victim's termination took place given his apparent support of anti-abortion protesters to demonstrate wherever they want to.

 

[Brett]

This is a couple months old but I've just learned of it. I'm not particularly tuned in to goings-on in Brazil.

Ten-year-old rape victim doxxed by anti-abortion activist

This has to be absolutely terrifying for the girl. I can only imagine how isolated and alone she probably feels because of these awful people and what has been forced upon her unwillingly.

 

[Imari]

This has to be absolutely terrifying for the girl. I can only imagine how isolated and alone she probably feels because of these awful people and what has been forced upon her unwillingly.

It's pretty easy to imagine that the world is against you when there's so much real evidence that it's the case.

 

[UKMikey]

It's pretty easy to imagine that the world is against you when there's so much real evidence that it's the case.

On the other hand, the outpouring of support for this little girl from the Brazilian public and condemnation of the doxxers seems very much counterevident to this to me. The monsters haven't taken over completely.

 

[Imari]

On the other hand, the outpouring of support for this little girl from the Brazilian public and condemnation of the doxxers seems very much counterevident to this to me. The monsters haven't taken over completely.

Oh, certainly. But the human brain tends to focus on the negative much more than the positive. I think from the outside it's easy to see how much support there is, but I wouldn't be that surprised if it feels pretty different in her shoes. After you've just been through a rape, an abortion and someone trying to make you a target for violence it's not a big leap to "well you support me now when it's too late but where the 🤬 were you all when I actually needed you?!"

And I'm not saying that's necessarily rational, but emotions aren't rational and just a slight change in viewpoint can make even kindnesses look like part of the conspiracy to do you harm.

 

[Daz555]

Anyone know why this issue is a particular obsession in the USA?

Most democracies dealt with this during the women's movements in the 50s and 60s and it rarely forms a significant part of political discussion today.

 

[Scaff]

Anyone know why this issue is a particular obsession in the USA?

Most democracies dealt with this during the women's movements in the 50s and 60s and it rarely forms a significant part of political discussion today.

Evangelicals

 

[Famine]

Anyone know why this issue is a particular obsession in the USA?

Most democracies dealt with this during the women's movements in the 50s and 60s and it rarely forms a significant part of political discussion today.

It's far more contentious in far more countries than you might think. Northern Ireland, Ireland and New Zealand have all had significant movement on the legality of abortion in the last couple of years, and Italy, Greece and Finland in the last 40 years - though technically legal in Italy, doctors have a right to refuse to carry it out... Malta still has a total ban on abortion.

The common theme here is - with New Zealand as an outlier - significant influence from organised religion on politics. That also covers the USA.

 

[HenrySwanson]

I'd be interested to see if @HenrySwanson would support their right to protest outside the hospital in which the child rape victim's termination took place given his apparent support of anti-abortion protesters to demonstrate wherever they want to.

I don't know.

Do I think it's wrong to protest like that? Yes.

Should it be unlawful? I don't know.

 

[UKMikey]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-europe-54716994

 

[HenrySwanson]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-europe-54716994

In 2016 Jarosław Kaczyński, the PiS leader, said: “We will strive to ensure that even in pregnancies which are very difficult, when a child is sure to die, strongly deformed, women end up giving birth so that the child can be baptised, buried and have a name."

What.

The.

****.

 

[Scaff]

In 2016 Jarosław Kaczyński, the PiS leader, said: “We will strive to ensure that even in pregnancies which are very difficult, when a child is sure to die, strongly deformed, women end up giving birth so that the child can be baptised, buried and have a name."

What.

The.

****.

Lovely....

And people sometimes wonder why I have issues with the more extreme end of pro-life supporters.

The mans an authoritarian, white nationalist scumbag.

 

[TexRex]

In 2016 Jarosław Kaczyński, the PiS leader, said: “We will strive to ensure that even in pregnancies which are very difficult, when a child is sure to die, strongly deformed, women end up giving birth so that the child can be baptised, buried and have a name."

What.

The.

****.

Yes, it's horrible that someone would use their own beliefs as justification for preventing another from having a foreign body removed from theirs, including by denying them reasonable access to medical professionals who aren't prohibited from performing procedures to remove such foreign bodies with a reasonable expectation of safety for the individual having said foreign body removed.

 

[Liquid]

Poland is super Catholic. Zealous, controlling, religious poison unfortunately permeates a few European countries.

 

[HenrySwanson]

Interesting opinion in the Sunday Times today

Taboo or not taboo, that is the question. I am speaking about eugenics. Last week Marie Stopes International, one of Britain’s biggest providers of NHS-funded abortions, declared it was changing its name to MSI Reproductive Choices. The excising of the Stopes name is expressly designed to distance the charity from its founder. Marie Stopes was a passionate eugenicist who corresponded warmly with Hitler on the matter and disinherited her son for marrying a short-sighted woman (“I have the horror of our line being so contaminated and little children with the misery of glasses”).

Earlier this year a 27-year-old Downing Street adviser, Andrew Sabisky, was forced to resign after it emerged that as a student he had advocated various forms of genetic selection (“Eugenics are about selecting ‘for’ good things”). The uproar this caused — though the young man was a junior analyst, not a policy-maker — was instantly terminal to his career.

So, taboo? On the contrary: the medical profession in this country is an enthusiastic proponent of terminations of pregnancies when it has been established that the unborn child will be “subnormal”. This is the “screening programme” for, overwhelmingly, Down’s syndrome: the condition in which a person has three copies of the 21st chromosome, rather than the normal two.

Since the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, the law has drawn a sharp distinction between two types of unborn child. In most cases, termination is illegal after 24 weeks, more or less the point at which the child would be viable if born. But where there is “a substantial risk ... of such physical or mental abnormalities as to be severely handicapped” termination up to the end of the pregnancy is legal. So an unborn Down’s baby can be terminated when viable. A 25-year-old married woman with Down’s, Heidi Crowter, has just succeeded — along with the mother of an 11-month-old baby with the condition — in bringing a test case to the High Court: they are challenging the law on grounds of discrimination against disability.

But instead of taking guidance solely from ARC, Emmerdale might have bothered to consult the organisation Positive About Down Syndrome (PADS). It recently conducted a survey of 1,231 mothers of children with Down’s syndrome born over the past 20 years, and the accounts of their experiences of how the NHS deals with this are very different.

Roughly half of them spoke of insidious pressure to have “the tests” even when they had indicated they didn’t want to. And, if the tests did prove positive for Down’s, the pressure to terminate was persistent. A film recently put out by PADS interviews a number of mothers: what they record of their encounters with doctors and nurses is shocking, and far from the Emmerdale version. There is Lorraine Buckmaster: “I said no, we wouldn’t be interested in having an amnio, and her words to me were, ‘Women like you make me sick. Why bother to have screening if you’re not going to bother doing anything about it?’” There is Emma Mellor: “We must have been offered about 15 terminations ... at 38 weeks they made it really, really, really clear that if I changed my mind on the morning of the induction, to let them know, because it wasn’t too late until the baby had started travelling down the birth canal — I could still terminate.” And there is Nicola Sparrow: “She sat us down and told us all the negative things about having a child with DS, and she said: ‘You’re only 28. You’re both so young — you should terminate and start again.’”

These brought back some 25-year-old memories, to the time when our daughter Domenica was born with Down’s. The prognosis we were given by the medical profession was unremittingly bleak — she might well never talk or even walk — and, as it turned out, completely wrong. When I revealed that we had not had “the tests”, the nation’s most popular ex-nurse, Claire Rayner, wrote an article for a national newspaper in which she said: “The Lawsons will not be paying the full price of their choice” and that “society” would have to bear the “misery” of Domenica’s life. There could not have been a clearer expression of the eugenic argument: Rayner, in her clumsy way, had merely blurted out publicly what was and is the prevailing attitude in the NHS.