Abortion – rights and wrongs.

Posted on by Opher

Who should have the right to decide on an abortion?

The mother?

The father?

The foetus?

The family?

The government?

The religious body?

Nobody – it should be illegal?

The case against abortion.

a. By 12 weeks the foetus is nearly fully formed with all organs in a rudimentary form – a heart, lungs, brain, eyes, ears, limbs, fingers. It can even move. But it is tiny – about the size of a lime. But it very much like a small baby even if it cannot live outside the uterus.

b. The foetus is alive

c. Only god has the right to end life.

d. Having an abortion has a lasting psychological effect on the mother, family and father.

e. The foetus has rights.

f. Some foetuses in late abortions live for a while outside the uterus.

g. It is distressing for medical staff to perform abortions.

h. The father has rights.

I. Women can be pressured into having abortions when they don’t want one.

l. Abortion is immoral.

m. Unwanted babies can be given up for adoption.

The case for abortion

a. the foetus is not able to think or feel.

b. The foetus is growing inside the mother’s body and she has the right to decide what to do with her own body.

c. Desperate women resort to desperate measures – backstreet abortions carried out by amateurs or self-induced abortions – and endanger their lives or health.

d. Every child should be a wanted child.

e. Children born into families that can’t or won’t care for them properly are severely disadvantaged.

f. Pregnancy and birth endangers the mothers life and health.

g. Pregnancy can ruin a mother’s career or relationships.

h. Some foetuses have inherent genetic problems or major health problems.

I. Financial, social or domestic situations might preclude having a baby or another baby. The mother’s health or mental health may be at risk.

l. Morality is a personal issue. The mother decides her morality not the state.

m. There are more than enough babies in the world. We need to reduce populations.

The Choices

a. Abortion should be illegal.

b. Abortion should be available in certain circumstances – rape or danger to mother’s life or if the baby is severely handicapped.

c. Abortion should be freely available for all. It is the mother’s choice.

d. Abortion should be available if mother and father agree to it.

e. The state should decide case by case.

My view

I think that it is the woman’s right to decide what to do with her body.

I do not think that abortion should be decided lightly. I think women contemplating abortion should receive counselling and reasons for her decision looked into. It should be a well thought through decision and is a very serious one.

I think that contraception is the way of controlling fertility. Women and men should take responsibility for their actions.

I think the morning after pill should be freely available to cover for accidents.

I don’t think the church or state have any rights whatsoever. Religion is a personal choice and the state should follow the will of the people.

I do not think the foetus is developed enough to have rights.

I would hope the foetus would be considered in the decision and father and family consulted before the decision is made.

I think the abortion should take place as early as possible.

I think counselling should be available for the mother.

I do not think it is the role of the state to interfere with the morality of the mother.

I think abortions should automatically be offered if there is concern for the mother’s health or the baby is handicapped.

I do not believe that many people ever opt for abortion without thoroughly considering it. They should not be harassed.

35 thoughts on “Abortion – rights and wrongs.”

  1. In case you didn’t hear, but DUP or no DUP, it will be going to a public vote.
    Considering 80% of Northern Ireland are Protestant, it’s very doubtful indeed that it would not have a huge majority Yes vote.
    I think you’ll notice that every political party has it’s fair share of very backward nutters in its ranks. I could list off some 40-50 members of the Labour Party, if that would be of interest.

    1. I hadn’t heard that it is going to a vote. That is great news. It needs bringing in line.
      I’ll forego the list. I doubt 40 or 50 though.

      1. I underestimated. I could do the 50 off the top of my head. It wouldn’t take me too long to find another 50.
        I’ll hold it back for another time, for maybe “comedy corner”.

  2. At least the Tories passed some exams at school. They’re not there because they have a “regional accent” and tick all the “diversity” boxes.
    In your heart of hearts I know for a fact that you must be cringing at the thought of some of these Labour clowns ever running government. Dianne Abbott, Naz Shah, Angela Raynor, Rebecca Long-Bailey, Emily Thornberry (“put the cake down for once, Emily”), Seema Malhotra, Dawn Butler, Sarah Olney, Sarah Champion.
    I don’t think their combined IQ’s would even come close to Jacob Rees Mogg’s.

  3. What you say has no foundation. You don’t get to be a barrister like Emily or a chief executive like Sarah Champion without qualifications or intelligence. You allow your personal dislike to cloud your judgement. I have no problem with them. The main problem with a lot of the Labour party is that they have too many highly educated people who are career politicians like the Tories. We need people with principles and convictions who will represent ordinary people – not career Eton types.
    I do have a problem with Mogg though. I don’t doubt he is very clever despite my dislike for what he stands for. I don’t like his principles, arrogance, elitism or reasoning. He needs to move out of the 19th Century. His attitudes and sensibilities are part of the thinking of a class of people I dislike intensely. He’s greedy and intelligently stupid in my opinion. I’d love him to lead the Tories. He’d probably sink them forever. His toffee-nosed attitudes would not resonate with the electorate at all. He’s worse than Boris.

    1. I’m afraid that for obvious reasons it would be very difficult to agree with you.
      To become a Barrister is to pass an exam. So bloody what. That does not make her by any stretch a good barrister.
      If Sarah Champion, who I agree is a few degrees smarter than the rest of the pack, is such the business expert, then why the hell is she not the shadow business manager instead of the painfully stupid Rebecca Long-Bailey, she of ex-running a pawn shop, working in a call centre and preparing documents for property conveyancing?
      What’s that about?

      Then you say you have no problem with Naz Shah? What with her public statement exclaiming that the raped and abused girls from Rotherham need to shut up for the sake of diversity?
      And you have no problem with that?
      Or did you infer that it was just the fat cake scoffer Thornberry and Champion that you have no problem with, but not the rest?

      Corbyn sacked Champion for speaking out about Shah’s appalling behavior.
      And you have no problem with that?

      Seriously, I believe that you have not got a smithereen of knowledge as to what’s going on in the Labour Party.

      Btw, Rees Mogg is an extremely popular fellow and if you care to take note whenever he appears on TV, the viewing ratings % shoot right up. But why would you know that anyway?
      If he was greedy he would be working as a fat cat somewhere else. He’s isn’t doing that, is he?
      I suppose you would prefer someone who speaks like John Prescott or Roy Hattersley with half a pie in his mouth and wipes his nose on his sleeve.
      Pure class. A born leader.
      Rees Mogg possess a command of language that most people could only dream of having and I think you are definitely one of them. You’re actually a bit jealous of him.
      His wit is brilliant and his turn of phrase to utterly non-offensive on the surface, but actually he’s just taken the royal piss and people on the receiving end don’t immediately notice until after and it’s all too late as the moment has passed.
      I actually don’t think you like intelligent people, plural. You have a real problem with anybody with a better education, better qualifications, more personal attributes and this shines through like a new day peppered through everything you say.
      It’s astonishing. You must hate a vast proportion of people.

      His toffee-nosed attitudes are extremely popular with the electorate. It’s only the hard-boiled far lefties that may have a problem. Women like him a lot and that makes him an instant winner especially in politics.
      You need to wake up and get yourself into the 21st century. ASAP.

    2. No I don’t have a problem with them even though I do have a problem with some of the things they say. I certainly don’t share your views on Emily Thornberry or your rudeness to her. Seemingly they have to pass your level of education. Any old person can become a barrister.
      Bit strange that. One set of qualifications count and one lot doesn’t? You pick and choose.
      You mean you don’t think that Mogg is doing his own business? He’s a multimillionaire and he didn’t get that just through inheritance or his politician’s pay.
      I have to laugh at you trying to make out he’s a great 21st century leader. He’s a twerp. A lot of people, like me, tune in to laugh at him and his pompous attitudes and manner. I’d love him to become leader.

      1. What he doesn’t do Opher, is point fingers at people.
        OK, so you have a class insecurity problem. I don’t.
        I spent my life with all sorts. I had loads of bosses from public school backgrounds and what a bloody good laugh we had. It’s the smitten, pinched-face under-classes that were for me a friggin’ nightmare to communicate with. In some cases I couldn’t use words with more than three syllables.
        I sometimes got back-chat “hey mister, why you talk so posh like”.
        I don’t, but can join up a sentence of words all at once when speaking without stopping.
        The under-classes do appall me. I was always so uncomfortable around them and you could almost feel their frisson of violence. Very unpleasant.

      2. I don’t have a class insecurity. I just think that the wealthy have fixed the system. It gives them a much greater advantage. That sort of privilege stinks. I prefer fairness.

      3. Fairness, yes I agree.
        Advantage, yes I agree.
        But it also gives them a much greater responsibility, too.
        Responsibility always comes at a price or with a price.

      4. Yes they have had great responsibility and history clearly demonstrates that the wealthy and powerful have not acted responsibly towards the rest of the population. They have given grudgingly and had to be dragged screaming to make improvements or give franchise. Nothing is given freely it has to be fought for. While they have lived in unbelievable luxury they have been more than happy to see everyone else live in misery.

      5. I see that your knowledge of British industrial culture and philanthropy is not up to much at all. A pity as you would have a somewhat broader scope of thought were it otherwise.
        Suffice to say that you are closeted to the advents of emancipation and altruistic endeavours that were prevalent during the Enlightenment period which in turn expanded into the Victorian era and later Edwardian.

        The First World War brought the class system into a level playing field where the Officer class had an expected lifespan of just eight hours.

      6. There were a number of notable altruistic acts carried out by various philanthropists but they were the exception rather than the rule. The majority were greedy, selfish bastards not willing to give away a penny or provide better conditions for their workers.

      7. I see, more wanton generalist spurts of arrogant and ignorant expression.
        What built our cities and industries Opher. Hot posh air?
        Sorry, fail. Go to be early with no supper.

  4. No – an exploited working class who worked for a pittance. Who do you think? You do talk shit sometimes.
    All that money that came from slavery abroad, exploitation of natives around the empire and what amounts to slavery in our mills, mines and factories.
    Read some history! You think that ordinary people have ever been treated fairly? They had to fight for it!

    1. Why are you always scraping barrels looking for a lost penny?
      All that money went places and to good uses. Remember it was blacks that sold the slaves. We shipped them and sold them on. A centuries old custom employed by every nation who ever won a war. We shouldn’t stand as the only guilty partners.

      Read some history and understand that we were nothing like as bad as many, many other countries had been. Nobody’s denying what happened, and quite how the likes of you thinks he should lecture me is a fucking laughing donkey.
      Look what came out of it. As a matter of fact you are quite wrong about the treatment of skilled workers. I’m not speaking for the non or semi, but the skilled received very acceptable pay. This mentality to reward the skilled went right back to the 12th century.
      Why do leftie-libtards always harp on about the distant past? Neither you or I can do anything about that except be bloody thankful that we weren’t around then.
      How about today and the sort of money that’s paid to ordinary people in highly skilled jobs in factories run by Rolls Royce? I’m much more interested in that.
      There are today multitudes of businesses offering their workers profit share and fair wages across the board. In my business even our early morning pre-office opening cleaning staff got a cut of our action.
      You’re out of date regards the private sector. I can’t speak for the public sector as I never worked in it, but the private sector was streets ahead.
      Perhaps some education on that area would be beneficial to you.

      1. I thought you might be in favour of slavery and exploitation. All those little kids in the cotton mills were paid a handsome wage weren’t they? The women in the match factories got a great deal. It’s no wonder you support the Tories and don’t think they’re the nasty party. They probably seem quite nice to you.
        I don’t need education but your obviously need a morality implant.

    2. I really don’t think there were that many girls making matches. The whole world employed child labour and three quarters of it still does.
      The nasty party is Labour, matey. The dirty, squalid, racist, anti-Semitic Labour party.

      And since it’s yourself who persists in travelling around all these poor backward third and fourth world countries, it’s the likes of you that is exacerbating the continuance of the child labour in this day and age.
      Think about that please.
      I don’t visit any of these countries anymore and haven’t done for some time. I saw them. Done that. They’re almost all the same. I saw the abuses first hand and really couldn’t be party to that. So, no it’s you who is the exploiter. It’s you who looks at the financials and pipes up “oh look dear, it’s really cheap there, let’s go there!”. Isn’t it? That’s how you operate. There’s millions of you. A never fucking ending queue of exploitative tourists on the cheap and nasty at the expense of child labour. Righty.
      And you’ve the fucking cheek to question me about morals?

      1. You have no morals Andrew. You are just out to cause trouble. There weren’t that many girls were there? The kids in the factories don’t matter. The Tory slave trade – all fine and dandy.

      2. Opher, and again you do it. Every time the same process with you, the same defense mechanism. The same paranoia with the same guy. Wonderful! I could write a thesis on it.
        I don’t dwell on the past, just the present. I decided some time ago that it really isn’t too good to go to these historic tourist spots because people are exploited because of that and a whole sub-industry on nothing money having to sweep up after you. Perhaps you were too busy taking snaps to even give that a second thought.

      3. I am well aware of the tourist industry thanks. I am also aware of the income for people on the poverty line who need the tourist dollar.
        I avoid the child labour industry and tourist tat like the plague thanks. I don’t need a lecture from you on something I am fully aware of thanks. You are scraping the barrel.

      4. No, matey, it’s you who scrapes the barrel by going on these trips to these places,
        Were you a member of a different social circle you wouldn’t be near that stuff.
        We were talking about child labour exploitation, not your bloody taxi driver.

  6. “I think that contraception is the way of controlling fertility. Women and men should take responsibility for their actions.” I think THAT is the entire answer. I worked at a crisis pregnancy clinic for two years and was floored by how cavalier girls were about abortion. But how do you force someone to be responsible in such a me. me, me culture?

    1. I think good education with a really meaningful discussion about abortion is the only way. They need educating. Abortion isn’t contraception. It may be the woman’s right but it should never be taken lightly.

  8. Very neatly layed out Opher: a new possibility has raised its head as the sex of a baby can now be determined at 8 weeks. Some women are aborting if they don’t like the sex of their child ; males seem to be preferred. Of course it had to come as science marches on , the next step maybe to mature a few fetuses outside the womb and take your choice. The problem is nature seems to keep a balance and we are developing the tools to upset the balance. It the one thing we are expert at , upsetting the balance of nature.

Comments are closed.