Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Women made to wait too long for abortions

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 21 October 2007
By KATE FOSTER
WOMEN seeking abortions are facing harrowing waits depending on where they live, Scotland on Sunday can reveal.
Patients in Highland, Lothian, Grampian, Lanarkshire and the Islands face the worst inequalities with hundreds of women not treated within the recommended time limits.

Draft guidance issued this year by the NHS standards watchdog Quality Improvem
ent Scotland states that 70% of women who want an abortion should undergo the procedure before they reach the 10th week of pregnancy.

The watchdog describes this as "essential" for health boards in providing adequate care with minimal delay.

But the latest figures for 2006 show just four out of Scotland's 12 health boards are on target.

In the worst performing area, NHS Lanarkshire, just 51% of women were treated within 10 weeks. Experts agree that fast access to abortion is essential once a woman has made up her mind.

The revelations come as Westminster's Science and Technology Committee investigates abortion legislation, including late terminations, amid growing calls for the time limit to be reduced from 24 weeks given that some babies born at that time can survive.

MPs are also considering relaxing the law requiring women to have the permission of two doctors before they undergo the procedure.



Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 20 October 2007 10:27 PM
  • Source: Scotland On Sunday
  • Location: Scotland
  • Related Topics: Abortion
 
1

GW,

Aberdeenshire 21/10/2007 00:31:30

This article confuses two issues - waiting times for medical care and the stage in pregnancy at which abortion should not be allowed on grounds of the viability of the baby.

Unless the article is trying to suggest that waiting times are becoming so long that reducing the upper limit for abortions could pose problems, I see no point in introducing this information.

2

,

21/10/2007 00:43:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 1073110, Article id was mapped to record!
3

49th State,

in the dog house again 21/10/2007 00:47:32

Adoption over abortion. For goodness sake you population is already in decline and you're begging Muslims to come and pick up the slack. This is a no brainer. With abortions, and other issues, you are giving your nation, independence and culture away. Got over the abortion matter and love these kids instead.

4

Charles Linskaill,

Chairman for the 'Babies-Union' 21/10/2007 00:51:29

~1 GW, I couldn't agree more with what you said, this is a twisted article, wanting a deviant solution for 'Joe-public' to agree on!
Nothing-more, Nothing-less!
In other words why DONT they 'just' say it!
They want the upper limit to stay at 24weeks, and to be extended to 28-30weeks!
Problem for them is, unless you are 'TOTAL-GREEN' we can all see right through, this POLITICAL-CORRECTNESS'!!!!

5

somerferg,

oz 21/10/2007 01:30:16

Well #3 its been a long time since I read such a simplistic view of this highly emotive and complex matter. All I can say is thank goodness you are not in charge of policy making in this matter!

6

49th State,

in the dog house again 21/10/2007 02:13:28

# 5

It is a simple matter. Abortion is nothing but human sacrifice to the spirit of the Age.

7

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 21/10/2007 02:33:00

~3. 49th State, by the way, your remark is of great intelligence, problem is, some People are just to 'Thick' to see what you said is the TRUTH!!
Or don't want to believe the 'TRUTH', rather,
Bury-their-heads-in-the-sand', because it is their'
'Comfort-Zone'

8

49th State,

in the dog house again 21/10/2007 03:16:38

# 7

Charles

It's really about the West becoming absorbed with selfihsness and convienience, and the loss of thier Christian bearings. The East may one day over take the West because of this.

9

,

21/10/2007 04:38:09
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
10

Guga II,

Rockall 21/10/2007 06:36:31

The matter is quite simple. Make the upper limit 20 weeks as a foetus is not viable before that time (and it is a foetus, not a living person). Then make it one doctor; having to get the permission of two doctors is archaic.

If it is against some sort of religious principle to allow abortions, tough. Nobody is forcing anyone to have or do something which is against their particular mythology.

While we are at it, it is also time they legalised euthenasia. We say it is against the law to make an animal suffer. It should also be against the law to make a human animal suffer against their will.

And Archie #9, nobody has the right to make a woman have a kid if she doesn't want it. It is her body. Nobody is forcing you or yours to have an abortion. What gives you the right to try and force other people to have a kid? Keep your mythology, and emotive terms like murder, to yourself.

The world seems to have an increasing number of religious fundamentalists/totalitarians. Do your own thing and you can dream about going to your particular Nirvana. The rest of us want to be able to do our own thing without our minds being clogged up with bulldust.

11

Boy Wonder,

21/10/2007 06:47:45

I was doing fine until 49th threw in the old Christian schtick! (post #8).

Keep religion out of everyday issues and you'll get a good listening to (reading in this case). Start bringing it in and your bum goes oot the windae. It only serves to confuse the issue and skews the discussion (argument) away from the original intention. Some people (like me) do not want religion to come up because it already polarises opinions unfavourably! And the pro/anti abortion lobbies don't need any further additions to obfuscate things!

A woman knows best about this, not us men (I assume we all are so far) who like to argue about it here. She'll know (along with her doctor) when it's best to terminate.

Personally, I believe abortion is okay IF it's caught early and in cases of rape or the mother's health being compromised. My partner and I think 20 weeks is more than enough time to terminate. And hospitals should factor this in when the decision is made.

12

jj,

21/10/2007 06:55:28

The rest of the NHS queue is six months - and only then with some figures fiddling. How does the abortion queue manage to be so short? Let the abortion team run the rest of the NHS.

13

49th State,

beside myself with mirth 21/10/2007 06:56:05

# 11

Boy Wonder

But where do morals come from? Are there absolute truths other than death and taxes? Why bother with morals at all then? We must have some line in the sand that keeps us healthy on one side and harmed on the other - is there no right or wrong, only shades of grey?

14

49th State,

beside myself with mirth 21/10/2007 06:57:37

We ahd to about one that died in my wife's belly. It's not an easy matter for men either.

15

49th State,

beside myself with mirth 21/10/2007 06:57:52

er, had to abort

16

thinking,

Scotland 21/10/2007 08:01:56

I am a woman and with, or without, religion, I do not agree with abortion.
Any act has consequences. If you choose to have a sexual relationship there is a great possibility that you will conceive as that is the main purpose of such an action (although the modern world would have us think differently)
If you do conceive then it is your responsibilty to care for the child (for child it is) so conceived.
When we choose to kill that child (abortion is killing by another name) then we become less than the animals.
Should you choose a sexual relationship and conceive and cannot look after or do not wish to look after the child you have born, then what about adoption. There are many people who are unable to have children who would give that child a loving home.
Ask anyone who was adopted if they would rather have been killed instead of adopted.

17

Guga II,

Rockall 21/10/2007 08:13:47

#17 More emotive claptrap. In any event, if you think having sexual relationships to have children is the main purpose of that action, you are in a small minority. The greater majority of people have sex because they enjoy it.

A foetus is a foetus until it is born, and it is not even viable before 20 weeks. Nobody is killing or murdering anything, despite your use of that deliberately emotive term.

Why not ask anyone who was "killed" if they would rather have been adopted? That is as silly a statement as yours; as yours is like asking someone whether they would rather be dead or alive.

Get back to your bible studies and your New Labour pamphlets woman, and leave the rest of us in peace.

18

Guga II,

Rockall 21/10/2007 08:18:04

#13 49th State. Re your question on morals, do you think that the Christians hold the high ground on morality? Don't you think it is perfectly possible that Humanists, Atheists and Buddhists, among others, can have morals too?

I wouldn't go too deeply into Christian moral values if I were you. The Christians, on their own, have managed to slaughter hundreds of thousands of people in the name of their religion. They even managed to burn over 17,000 people as witches in Spain alone.

19

eric,

Lothian 21/10/2007 08:25:30

The sooner The DIY kits are in full swing the better.Save the women time and money.

20

Helen,

21/10/2007 08:38:26

It's not about Christianity....
I've never had children, nor do I want to have them. I therefore don't feel qualified to pass judgement on anyone who makes the difficult decision to have an abortion. I cannot imagine what is going on in a woman's mind when she makes that decision. No-one has an abortion lightly, and a bit of Christian compassion wouldn't go amiss.

21

Boy Wonder,

21/10/2007 08:40:10

#13. One man's morality is another man's immorality. Didn't you know?

And morality in a given civilisation has been around for centuries.

The Ancient Egyptians had the concept of Ma'at ... order, law, morality and justice, a good three thousand (and more) years before the Nazarene turned up!

In the Fertile Cescent (the area surrounding the Tigris and Euphrates) there was the Code of Hammurabi (also known as the Codex Hammurabi and Hammurabi's Code), created circa 1760bce and is one of the earliest extant sets of laws, and one of the best preserved examples of this type of document from ancient Babylon. It was created by the sixth Babylonian King, Hammurabi. Earlier collections of laws include the codex of Ur-Nammu, king of Ur (ca. 2050bce), the Codex of Eshnunna (ca. 1930bce) and the codex of Lipit-Ishtar of Isin (ca. 1870bce).

True, these codes were somewhat more visceral than today's laws ... but I suspect when humanity began to group together to form larger family units and tribes, they had the intellect back then to impose some sort of moralistic order on each other. Otherwise, how could they co-operate as hunter-gatherers! It's probably a genetic imperative of our survival mechanisms.

Hope that helps! :)

22

Boy Wonder,

21/10/2007 08:42:00

#21. Helen ... Christian compassion is a myth.

Nothing wrong with human compassion is there?

23

49th State,

beside myself with mirth 21/10/2007 08:53:36

Guga and Boy wonder

You are missing the boat. I only ask why we should be moral at all.

24

inter alia,

21/10/2007 09:02:56

Boy Wonder: #11, #22, #23: Couldn't agree more with thought through positions. Problem is - as always - there are too many out there who have opinions without doing the work necessary to hold that opinion. And there always has been.

25

Biker,

Ayr 21/10/2007 09:04:24

#23 Boy Wonder. I agree with you that human compassion and humanity is more important. Christian (and come to that any other religious) moralirty is tainted at best and should in my opinion be avoided.
The whole abortion (of live fetus) issue is one which applies only really to women and not to anybody else. To presume that us guys have the answer and ability to understand is presumptious at best.
49th State. My heart goes out to you and you wife for your loss, and I am sure it was difficult. But please dont allow your grief to cloud the full picture.
I personally dont view abortion as murder and to call it such is over immotive and callous.

26

JG,

Fife 21/10/2007 09:14:23

Maybe this delay is why yesterday's board about the late abortion figures is there in the first place!

27

ochone ochone,

21/10/2007 09:17:56

No-one can make sweeping judgements on this issue - each individual is exactly that, an individual in unique circumstances. Personally, I think the morning after pill should be advertised on TV so that teenagers and others who get caught out at least are aware of that option.
#21 Christians do not have a monopoly on compassion - how arrogant.

28

WKKB,

21/10/2007 09:26:22

Guga #10 You say "nobody has the right to make a woman have a kid if she doesn't want it." If a woman doesn't want kids she should have her tubes tied. Abortion always seemed to me as trying to erase a mistake before anyone knows you made it. If we plant a flower seed in the garden we referred to as a flower. It doesn't even have to look like flower from the start to be called one. We say, "I planted a flower in my back garden" But we conveniently don't say "I planted a baby in my girlfriends womb" because if we said that we'd have to acknowledge that it is a baby, no matter what stage of growth it happens to be at. A flower begins growing from the smallest seed but it is no less a flower, so with a baby, it begins growing from the smallest seed but because it doesn't look like the finished product when it begins that doesn't make it any less a baby. Most women want abortions before it begins to look like what it is--- A Baby! Most women, the minute they know they're pregnant, they begin planning the babies room, buying clothes, maybe even open a college fund for his/her future. Most parents of the pregnant woman are trying on the name Grandma and Grandpa to see how it sounds. (Just a little food for thought)

A woman says, "it's my body I can do with it what I want" But, if she tries to cut herself or throw herself off a building someone is there to try and stop her. If she doesn't want a bump to mess with her figure, again, have her tubes tied. Stop her being pregnant BEFORE she gets pregnant.

Here's another solution to cutting down the waiting time for an abortion. We could eliminate thousands of abortions if we would simply teach morals to our young people, equiping them with a little intelligence before they make the mistake. Or, they could go the adoption route and do something positive with the mistake they made. I heard a wise woman say once, "Don't punish the future for your carel

29

JimC,

21/10/2007 09:26:32

#13 is there no right or wrong, only shades of grey?

Welcome to the real world.

30

JG,

Fife 21/10/2007 09:53:56

#29 WKKB
Here's a better idea - give the guys the snip! It's cheaper, easier and whereas a woman can have only one baby in a nine month period, men can be out spraying babies all over the place. SOME THEM DO!! And another thing, when the guys who DO have all of these unwanted children actually start to pay a realistic price for their upkeep, maybe then they could have a say in what happens. Pregnancy doesn't happen by osmosis.

You are right about one thing though - young people should be taught and advised properly. I wonder how many people were conceived through too much alcohol!!!

31

celticsnowdrop,

greenocl 21/10/2007 09:56:36

way to go Archie bet you cant wait for men to get pregnant........he who is without sin..........

32

Charles Linskaill,

Chairman for the 'Babies-Union' 21/10/2007 10:18:46

NO religion comes into it, the FACTS should say it all, anyone watch the Dispatches programme on TV recently? 12weeks max was the suggested limit, I can see why, perfectly formed Babies being aborted live in front of you, tiny hands/feet/ it wasn't nice to see,.(babies aborted in question 15weeks)
But where do you 'draw a line'? is there any?
I personally have to agree with ~10.Guga II, 20weeks, but I have doubts, after seeing perfectly formed Babies, being scraped out the Womb!

33

WKKB,

21/10/2007 10:58:35

a#34, and not just scraped out in one tidy little piece, the pieces come out in just that... PIECES. Tiny hands and feet, a head and a body. It isn't a site either because then those tiny hands and feet are just tossed into a bin! No respect and no regard to what those tiny hands and feet might have done had they not been stopped in their wee tracks. People weep, entire families cry when a miscarriage occurs. What are they crying for? The death of an unborn child. We should all cry. We cry for our soldiers whom we feel is unjustly being sent to fight a war some believe isn't our war. We cry when they fall on the battlefield. The only difference between those young men and women is the fact that they were allowed to be born and become who they are. People that other people love.

Obviously I feel quite strongly about this issue, I don't believe abortion is right just because a woman fell pregnant because she wasn't being smart. But if you're going to stop the gestation, stop it as soon as possible, don't make an acceptable waiting period. When she finds out... do the deed.

34

LAM,

21/10/2007 11:04:10

Abortion is not a decision that hopefully is taken lightly. This is why it is very important that the person having the abortion is the one that makes and lives with that decision. No one else should impose their opinion onto this person. The inner turmoil you go through is hell and hopefully your end decision is the right one for you. You will likely always remember and you will wonder what if... if you had been in a position to have made a different decision. Thirty years on and I will never forget that decision having been made for me...I didn't have a choice , I was niave young teen who got herself in trouble and waited too long before telling anyone.Results, being told because of my stupidity everyone else has to run around and fix my problem for me. But THEY, didn't have to live with it. The longer a person has to wait to have an abortion is cruel... it would be more humane and easier to live with early stage abortion where you have not actually felt life yet... to a later stage abortion where you have felt life and are very aware of a baby growing inside you....

35

Centurion2,

Glasgow 21/10/2007 11:14:31

As pregnancy is not an illness, why should people be freeloading on the NHS for abortions and contraceptive devices at any time.

36

Gill,

West Lothian 21/10/2007 11:20:56

Archie, Gourock (and friends)
You have just confirmed what I have always thought - Christian compassion is an oxymoron.

Abortion is a highly emotive and very personal issue and jailing 'everyone involved' is, quite simply, a moronic statement. The limit needs to come down, I agree. But to insist that women should be forced into having children they don't want is no solution at all.

The religious right simply drive those with more moderate views in the opposite direction.

37

Capital C,

Next to Pope John Pauls Ghost!!!! 21/10/2007 11:26:25

So how many of you would want your wife/daughter to be forced to give birth to a baby if she had been raped?

Abortion = Muder - codswollop!

The same pious rubbish means that millions of Africans are dying with Aids because the vatican says condoms are unholy!!!!!

38

Munchkin,

Dunblane 21/10/2007 12:30:38

Guga II...I like your way of thinking. Too many people are emotional about abortions...or are Christians who think that THEY have the moral high ground! (You're not from the Deep South, are you, 49th State?) My father who was an atheist used to say, "I don't need to be bribed or threatened to do the right thing." It also annoys me that too many men think they ought to make decisions about abortions for women. It is the woman's body not theirs! Just because they can't deal with ending a life (I include those opposed to euthanasia as well) doesn't mean they ought to impose their way of thinking on woman who want abortions. Not all babies are wanted and could be brought up in unhappy circumstances if allowed to live. Let's be pragmatic about it. There are generally too many people in this world anyway. Yeh, sex is enjoyed by both sexes but, unfortunately, woman have to pay the price of any mistake if they get pregnant. Not fair!

39

Donal K,

Lost on the piedmont 21/10/2007 13:13:15

Wow. you guys picked up the abortion ball and ran with it, tossing aside the whole Healthcare issue - what about the "adequate care with minimal delay" part of this story?
This is the end result of socialize medicine. Are people really just sheep, to be left standing in the pens, waiting to be sheared at someone else's convenience?
Less government, more self-reliance - keep the government out of my life and out of my wallet!

40

Becket Montague Saunders,

Texas 21/10/2007 13:19:27

"hundreds of women not treated"

The only treatment needed is to STOP killing Scottish, English, Welch & Irish babies.

The Continent is another killing field, which the islamo-facists adore, and aspire to rule.

41

Boy Wonder,

21/10/2007 13:26:02

My final thought for the day on this issue is, that if we don't allow abortion to continue, all you're doing is forcing it underground and back into the old days of illegal abortions performed without modern surgery and probable deaths of both mother and foetus!

Think on that all you 'moralising' Christians and others!

42

SoCerebral,

Over the Pond 21/10/2007 13:27:24

Interesting array of comments. If the unborn baby's rights supersede those of the mother, then rape is no excuse to have an abortion, nor are congenital abnormalities, nor is a threat to the mother's health. On the other hand, if a woman's right to choose is supreme, then she doesn't need a reason or a time limit for abortion.

Abortion is somewhat like closing the gate after the horse has bolted. More work has to be done at the front end with sex education for youth (and some older folk!) and easy access to preventative measures. Kids need to think of sex and condoms as one and the same thing. No, it won't prevent every unplanned pregnancy, but I think it might take care of most of them.

For me, there is a big difference between chemical and surgical abortion. By those, I mean where the foetus is at a stage where a pill will terminate the pregnancy, as opposed to a later term situation that requires surgical removal of the baby.

I know many women who have suffered for years, most mentally, some physically, because of having had abortions. Their suffering (to my personal knowledge) is surpassed only by women who have given up children for adoption. I have yet to meet any women who have experienced that kind of suffering because they had, and kept, their babies. Perhaps in considering what's best for mother and child, it is this that we should be focusing on.

I believe that anyone contemplating an abortion has both the right and the responsibility to know exactly what will be done, which should include videos of procedures. I hope anyone who has not seen pictures of aborted babies should do so before continuing to voice an opinion on the subject.

In this anonymous environment, I would like to say that I was raped at 12, and subsequently had a rather late term abortion. I can attest to both physical and mental damage. I miscarried an unplanned child in what turned out to be a failed relationship, while using 2 kinds of prote

43

Mary Virgin,

England 21/10/2007 13:40:05

The male created the child and is therefore legally reponsible for the child. The only thing he can do is the test to prove he is not the biological father. The baby is his. Every man I know to have forced a partner to have an abortion I have asked 'If the woman exersised har legal right and gave the baby to you, would you have been man enough to murder the baby with your own two hands?' None of the men have ever answered that question. The only woman i know to have had an abortion who did not scream 'I murdered my baby' when I told her that she had the legal right to give the baby to the male who created it, had the abortion because she was too scared to tell her father that she was carrying a white mans child. The majority of women are forced to have abortions because the male who created the child tells them that he is out of there, they didn't plan the baby etc etc. women have the abortions only because men force them too. It is an infringement on the womans basic human rights that she is not told that she has the right to give the baby to the male who created it. His baby time to grow up. Let him live in poverty off State benifits bringing up his child and the Suffragetts will not have died in vane.

44

Martha,

21/10/2007 13:53:34

Guga II, you are dead wrong. It is only in law that an unborn human is called a "foetus" and deemed to have no legal rights. At least, it has no rights unless the mother wants it to have them. There are a number of legal precedents wherein an unborn child has been deemed to have been illegally deprived of life or property. Unborn children can inherit, for instance, and if a murderer kills a pregnant woman, he is usually charged with two murders, not just one.

In biology, an unborn child is a human being in the earliest stages of life. Its DNA is exclusively human. Everything about it is human. From the moment of conception, it will not become anything but a human baby. And, this unborn infant is capable of feeling pain, possibly even within the first eight weeks of life. It responds to stimuli, as any pregnant woman can tell you when she feels her baby jump when it hears a sudden sharp sound. The unborn child is not an unfeeling lump of clay. Those are scientific, not legal, facts.

Abortion is NOT a simplistic, easy problem. It is the collision of biology with the human construct of a person's rights over her own body. That construct does not exist in nature.

45

Longing for "home",

21/10/2007 13:56:43

...and the time for CHOICE is prior to having sex.

46

disgusted with courts,

21/10/2007 13:58:06

There are right reasons for having a termination and wrong reasons......medical reasons, ok, using abortion as birth control, which some young girls and women do, is wrong.....
Are records kept as to how many abortions one person has?
If not for medical reasons( and rape), then they should pay for the procedure, no freebie on the NHS, then this might make them think twice about 15 minutes of pleasure with gawd knows who, and having the nerve to actually be upset when they have to wait to terminate the life they conceived.
Perhaps the waiting period they are causing from promiscuousness mainly, will put a halt to so many not stopping to think, Oh, wait, if I do this I may get pregnant, no protection, which also raises the subject of STD's.

47

JG,

Fife 21/10/2007 14:24:34

#46 Martha
"if a murderer kills a pregnant woman, he is usually charged with two murders, not just one."

Oh no he's not. It might be an aggravation to the murder, but he has killed one person - and I'm guessing that you live in the US as I can't see how an unborn child could inherit anything. It hasn't actually arrived yet! I'm sure the mother hasn't taken the notion of abortion lightly but sometimes it's her only way out of a dreadful situation. No-one is forcing anyone to do this by the way, only giving women a right to make that choice and I can't think of anyone who would argue with the fact that the earlier the better. I's what makes these delays they are speaking about so unacceptable.

#49 disgusted..................

Here's an novel idea for you - why not force the man concerned (because unlike the popular saying, the woman didn't "get herself pregnant" there was actually a male there too - unless you didn't know that and would like a quick sex education lesson!) to play his part? Make the MAN pay for the termination or (horror!!!) the upbringing of HIS child. Stop blaming everything on the woman and then critisise her when she looks for a solution.

48

phocus,

Prescott, AZ, USA 21/10/2007 14:38:59

From the article..."amid growing calls for the time limit to be reduced from 24 weeks given that some babies born at that time can survive."

Babies...it says babies! BABIES! It's not abortion you fools...it's killing!...and it's killing BABIES!

Choice! You can be Pro Life or Pro Choice! If you are 'Pro Choice', you are for the right to choose to kill BABIES!

Here in America, we are fighting the stupid left and their attempt to give us socialised healthcare like you folks have. Then, American women will have to wait 10 weeks to before they can kill their babies. That's just too long...isn't it?

49

Hunky Dorey,

Glasgow 21/10/2007 14:47:52

#10 Guga ......Maybe some day they will pass a law deciding that anyone over the age of 70 is"NOT VIABLE". I can just see people like you slipping on your own sh*t trying to get the law changed. Are these people telling us that there is no additional life in the pregnant womans body before 10 weeks ? The destruction of the unborn in the womb is not a crime against any particular faith,IT IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY! These murdering clinics are just HITLERS DEATH CAMPS in another form. Who is prepared to defend the rights of the unborn? UNBORN LIFE IS NOT A CHOICE. The right to life is a basic human right, otherwise capital punishment would still be with us. Some women use destruction of unborn life (abortion) as a contraceptive. I have heard all the hard luck stories before,and they dont wash with me . Unless on serious medical grounds,there is absolutely no reason for any woman to have her own creation destroyed. We live in a welfare state, not in the third world. Lifestyle abortions are a sign of a sick and selfish society I.E. pick on the weakest of the weak. If there is a God and I very much hope there is, I would not like to be in the shoes of those who are involved in the destruction of his creation. Just in case anyone out there thinks I am some sort of religious freak,I am not. I am just an ordinary Scottish Protestant who believes in the right to life for the unborn.I am sickened by this silent holocaust.

50

Hunky Dorey,

Glasgow 21/10/2007 14:53:05

#49 JG Fife.............Excellent post .You are absolutely correct when you say that the murderer of a pregnant woman is by law charged with the murder of TWO people.(See Omagh bombing case)

51

Catharine,

Winnipeg, Canada 21/10/2007 14:57:31

#17 Thinking
It's a moot point, of course, but I give no kudos to my biological mother for not having an abortion. I have marvelous adoptive parents and love life, but would certainly not encourage any woman to go through an unwanted pregnancy. Women in the western world fought long and hard for the right to control our own bodies. The decision should be the woman's and the woman's alone. Assigning some sort of humanity to the multicelled organism feeding off the woman's body certainly gives the religious and "moral" nutbars a kind of power and contol they so deperately crave, but biologically, the foetus is not viable. Life? Perhaps, but so is the fungus around your bathtub or the virus that causes the flu.

52

Guga II,

Rockall 21/10/2007 15:01:33

#51 Typical emotive bulldust. Incidentally, there is no god. religion is the opium of the massses, and a crutch for the weak-minded.

No doubt you'll be a supporter of the right to life mob in America that are happy to murder anyone involved in abortion clinics.

By the sound of things, you are over 70, so maybe you should put yourself down.

53

phocus,

Prescott, AZ, USA 21/10/2007 15:12:31

#54 Guga

Strange you would use the word 'typical'. Your writing makes you the posterboy of typical. When was the last abortion clinic bombing or murder? Come on...when was the last time either happened? And while you are looking that up...and I know you will, look up the meaning of sad, empty, and pitiful. Maybe you will find the meaning of your life there. While you are fighting to protect a woman's right to kill her baby, I...and many more...will pray for you. One day, you too might become emotive when defending a person's right to breathe. If not...well you already know the dark and bleak existence that is your life.

54

Fernie,

21/10/2007 15:15:31

Wow Guga. Trying to play that religious angle again, and with the tired old quote from Karl Marx. Then speculating on whether old Hunky Dorey supports any other forms of murder, and then suggesting Hunky should be killed for being old.

Is that the best you've got?

55

Catharine,

Winnipeg, Canada 21/10/2007 15:28:25

You go, Guga! I will NOT pray for you, and hope you are protected from those who do! Perhaps Phocus would like to biologically explain how the foetus has a right to "breathe"? As for Sad, Empty and Pitiful - that's how I would describe any person who must have some misogynistic and archaic corporation do their thinking for them. Where would they be if they had to have an original thought? As for Karl Marx being tired and old, has Fernie checked out the age of the supposed "word og God" - even those whacky creationists put that one back to between 6 and 2 thousand years ago!!

56

Fernie,

21/10/2007 15:38:29

Catharine,
Are you having trouble reading my post? Or just following it? I never said Karl was tired or old, he's just dead. His QUOTE is tired and old. And why is religion creeping into this topic again anyway?

Slow down, read carefully, dear.

57

Catharine,

Winnipeg, Canada 21/10/2007 15:48:06

IIIIIIIII'mmmmmmmmmmmmm ssssssooooooooorrrrrrrrryyyyyyyy, iiiiiiiiiffffffffff yyyyyyoooooouuuuuurrrrrrr pppppooooossssttttt mmmmmmaaaaaddddddeeeeeee ssssseeeennnnnnnsssssssseeeeeee, iiiiiiwwwwwwwoooooouuuuuuuullllllldddddddnnnnnn''ttt hhhhhhaaaaaavvvvvveeeee ttttoooo ssssllllllloooooowwwwww dddooowwwwwnnnnn tttttoooo aa pppppprrrrrrrrreeeeeessssssccccchhhhhoooooollll llllleeeevvvvveeeeeellllllll
Of course Karl Marx is dead, And, Yes, I did make the grammatical error of assigning the person not the quotation. My point, remains... the words of Karl Marx are much less tired or old than the much misused, misquoted and mistranslated so-called Word of God, which has been thrown in here by the majority of those opposed to a woman's right to control her own body and her own life.

58

phocus,

Prescott, AZ, USA 21/10/2007 15:55:06

Catharine,

Yep, we're prayin for you too! Look out! If things go as planned, the spittle at the side of your mouth will be replaced by a smile. The vein in your neck and forhead will smooth. You will be able to see the humor in the lunacy that is the left. That funny smell will go away. And, you will no longer fear God. As for an 'original thought', still checking your post for an example...have to get back to you if I find one.

59

phocus,

Prescott, AZ, USA 21/10/2007 16:14:02

Catharine,

One more thing. No one is opposed to a woman's right to control her own body and her own life. It's when she mucks it up by spreading her legs and ALLOWS conception to occur that we are talking about. She is in complete control. She can do what ever she wants with HER body. But the minute the cells split, she is no longer alone. If left to nature, there are two bodies there now. One that screwed up perhaps...and one that has yet to have that right. The woman has all the power. She decides if a baby is to be conceived. No one else makes this choice. Legs spread = baby. Legs together = no baby. Talk about an original thought!

60

thinking,

Scotland 21/10/2007 16:23:34

#18
1. I didn't say sex was not enjoyable, I said it's main purpose is to reproduce.
2. using the term 'foetus' does not change the fact that it is life and how you started
3. I did not mention the Bible. Many people who are not Christians are against abortion , although I am and not ashamed to say that i am a Christian
4. Why do you think that everyone has a different opinion to you is Labour? I am most certainly not.

61

Catharine,

Winnipeg, Canada 21/10/2007 16:27:33

Considering the only birth that had no male involved was your fairy tale virgin mary, perhaps you should take a few biology lessons? Legs spread = baby?? Grow up! sperm + egg equals a non-viable life form that MAY continue to split and form and live off the host life form for the usual period of 40 weeks. The host life form has the right to expunge the cells - in fact probably has many time over the years, during the menstrual cycle. THAT is the biology. If you have only ever had sex for procreation, I pity you. I also don't believe you, but hey! that's my perogative. Fortunately, I live in a country that, so far, stays the hell out of the bedrooms of the nation, and allows me to make my own decisions.

62

phocus,

Prescott, AZ, USA 21/10/2007 16:53:46

Catharine,

Right...and you get to live with the decisions...guess that's why you fear God. You're on the side of death for innocents Catherine, and it's all about you...the rest is rhetoric. Just keep on killing those babies...after all, it's your right and nobody's lookin.

63

disgusted with courts,

21/10/2007 19:07:04

JG Fife......
#48 disgusted..................

Here's an novel idea for you - why not force the man concerned (because unlike the popular saying, the woman didn't "get herself pregnant" there was actually a male there too - unless you didn't know that and would like a quick sex education lesson!) to play his part? Make the MAN pay for the termination or (horror!!!) the upbringing of HIS child. Stop blaming everything on the woman and then critisise her when she looks for a solution.

First of all sarcasm is the lowest form of wit!! and when I stated "with gawd knows who" It was obvious
that I was referring to the amount of one night stands that lead to the women having a problem to solve.....does the man care? hell, no way...it goes without saying that women and young girls have to be the one to decide if they have unprotected sex with someone, anyone, as we ALL know, including me, that's how babies are made and STD's transmitted when they have no idea who they are lying down with. SHE has to stop and think is it worth it, SHE is the one that suffers, he walks away. Then when asked for support his first words are....No way it's mine, she's a slut. So please, the message to young girls should be..."think before you act" Babies are a lifetime commitment...Abortions are not the solution.

64

Hunky Dorey,

Glasgow 21/10/2007 19:16:48

#54 Guga.......... You started away with promoting the murder of the unborn and as I predicted you have advanced to talking about the destruction of the over 70s. Oh dear! Oh dear! what ever will you think of next. Of course a shi*head as selfish as you could not possibly believe in anything other than yourself, thus the no God theory. You seem to be so sure that God does not exist. Hooh Hooh Hooh,I would not like to be in your shoes if he does! Haaa Haaa Haaa, ars*h*le.

65

MichScot,

USA 21/10/2007 19:23:50

#6

You are so right!

Those are babies, not ducks or dogs or something else. It is amazing that such civilized people as we are far behind the most backward people in the world when recognizing human life when we receive it. THEY know it's a baby! When did we become so ignorant?

When "Me, Myself, and I" became our gods.

66

Hunky Dorey,

Glasgow 21/10/2007 19:33:26

Guga and catharine are sad atheists, and atheists are sad people with no invisible means of support. however ,they both should be glad about one thing and that is,that their parents did not consider them "just a bunch of cells",just think we would not at this time be enjoying the laughs they are giving us.

67

MichScot,

USA 21/10/2007 19:33:48

I am also a woman against abortion.

On another thread, we were discussing birthrates by race and religion. If you want to keep your land Scots, why kill young Scots? You can be sure the muslims won't stoop to such a thing.

68

MichScot,

USA 21/10/2007 19:36:52

#19

Sins in the name of religion do not reflect the true spirit of Christianity. Christians sin and make mistakes, just like everyone else. That's why God redeemed us: we cannot save ourselves.

69

MichScot,

USA 21/10/2007 19:41:28

#22
Boy Wonder

Adam and Eve were around long before Hammurabi and all those others. It's just possible that their descendants had an inkling about what God told the ancestors. Oral tradition...

Try it in your own family and see if the same story sounds the same when other people tell it. Facts get mixed up over time. You might have the right ideas and the wrong players or motives or whatever.

70

MichScot,

USA 21/10/2007 19:45:37

#30

"Welcome to the real world."

Don't you mean "new world"? (No capitals there.)

71

MichScot,

USA 21/10/2007 19:51:36

#44

Hear, hear!

72

MichScot,

USA 21/10/2007 19:57:17

Ditto hurrah! for #50 and #51!

73

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 21/10/2007 20:45:05

Don't hear too many complaints from women having to wait too long for conceptions. Would it not be better to put conception on the NHS?

74

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 21/10/2007 20:48:26

Kids are a social inconvenience in a country with a falling population.

Too sophisticated to breed.

75

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 21/10/2007 20:50:13

It really is the epitomy of fur coat and nae knickers.

76

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 21/10/2007 20:50:59

Let them all be born.

77

Astarte,

Giffnock 21/10/2007 21:40:42

The story that gives rise to the comments which follow is not well written or documented and possibly those factors and its ambiguity can be held culprit for the slant in discussion. The article however, can be interpreted enough to make it literate and this literation (sic) has nought to say about morals, Christianity, god or the devil; it is about the length of waiting time for woman who have already made the decision to terminate pregnancy, albeit in certain specified areas in Scotland. If it is necessary to diversify on the topic, it can be well served by being critical of health boards, the NHS and the bureaucracy which faciltates its governance.

78

Boy Wonder,

21/10/2007 21:50:05

#71 Michscot. Hammurabi and the others actually existed. There is real evidence for them.

Adam and Eve are mythical. Completely. Even Orthodox Jews recognise that fact!

79

Charles Linskaill,

Chairman for the 'Babies-Union' 21/10/2007 21:54:00

~44. SoCerebral, Thankyou for giving us a such valuable contribution and taking the time to do so, one which is 'close to your heart', for me it was a very interesting read, one which I will remember and possibly refer to in the future, as no resolve meets this debate.
Both sides have, what we think as credibility!
Its a 'crying-shame' our third and MOST important party,
'The BaBa' has NO voice in this matter!

80

Charles Linskaill,

Chairman for the 'Babies-Union' 21/10/2007 21:55:46

BW, what are you doing, being on site at this time, its not like you!

81

Annlass,

Toronto,ON 21/10/2007 22:43:26

#80 Astarte..Thank you for reminding us that this is really a story about lengthy periods for women awaiting abortion. Most of the comments on this story are from the societal divide and never the twain shall meet; and then there are others who must take every opportunity to bare their bleeding hearts, usually expressing a "moral" contempt for those who hold opposite views on an issue. Others understand enough to make a point, such as #44..SoCerebral..who made an excellent point in the last sentence of the first paragraph and should have stopped there but chose to go on to pontificate.
It must take women of strong will who choose to abort a pregnancy in a society of "caring-uncarers" where the heart can be located on a sleeve. There is only one side to this issue, the woman's right to choose and then to believe, to really believe, that her decision was the right one.

82

Florenz,

San Francisco,CA 21/10/2007 22:57:55

I was about to commend Astarte for reminding us about the rules of response but while thinking about it Florenz sneaked in ahead of me and stole my moment of passion and said it all. Good for her!

83

JG,

Fife 21/10/2007 23:07:26

#65 digusted................
You miss the point - a baby is created by two people. If you are villifying the woman for being a "slut", what does that make the man who sleeps with her? A lowlife? And he SHOULDN'T be allowed to walk away, shirking his responsibilities. Certainly the woman is the one left with the problem, which brings us back to the fact that it she who must decide what to do with her body.

84

Charles Linskaill,

Chairman for the 'Babies-Union' 21/10/2007 23:50:14

Question ?, We all were a 'fertilized-egg' at the beginning of our lives, why do we think we have anymore right to be here now, than once was?
Whats the difference, if Mama comes round now to abort your life now!, after-all, she has the 'right' as some proclaim,
When are you, YOU? , tell me! when do you all think, you have the 'Right' to be alive!
You are all alive from Day1, Conception!
What time are you NOT you? I would say never, because you are you from Day1!

85

49th State,

In the laundry room 21/10/2007 23:57:41

My wife and I lost a baby because it died in her womb. Her body wouldn't reject it and we have to have it removed to keep her from getting ill. This was no easir thing fo rus to do. She was five months along and we were very happy and preparing for her arrival. For those of you who think that this matter doesn't effect, I have news for you, it does. It took three years for me to be able to let go - atleast to a healthy point. My wife still has some problems from time to time. I do not want to hear that this is just a woman's choice because it is not fair to the woman or the man. And especially not for the child.

86

49th State,

In the laundry room 22/10/2007 00:02:14

If you're here today, thank your parents for thinking that you where worth while and not scraping you out of your mom's womb. Your mother whom had the courage to carry you and to raise you in the most unforseen curcumstances and place in life. Too bad so many of you in here lack the same fortitude your own mother had. Furthermore, I'm sure your mums would be ashamed to know you think so lowly of humanity.

87

MichScot,

USA 22/10/2007 01:21:30

#81

I heard an article today on NPR about DNA genetic tracking. It is about the human genome project. It was called, "Who's your Daddy?' We are 91% the same genetically and they feel we trace back to one man and one woman. Who is to say they were not Adam and Eve? Were you there?

Another theory I read about before stated that Adam and Eve never met, and there were three matriarchs. Compare to Noah's flood: three sons of the same man married to women of possibly three different families.

Why does science not take those coincidences into account? Perhaps they don't want to acknowledge that the Bible just might be true and they might have to admit to a divine being as a possibility?

And, by the way, the flood is said to have been about one year after Adam died.

88

MichScot,

USA 22/10/2007 01:26:13

Muslims revere their mothers for the dangers through which they put themselves. They realize the courage it takes to face such pain and possible death, not to mention the years of rearing the child.

89

BonnyBird,

22/10/2007 01:26:31

I honestly cant believe the utter crap that is being written on this forum.

If you are not in total unenviable position of having to consider an abortion SHUT UP.

The 24 weeks is the right time frame and should stay. This is a terrible decisision for any woman to face and it has nothing to do with your likes and dislikes get over your sad pathetic selves.

Because, some babies born at 22 weeks are surviving (with massive medical intervention) is something to be grateful for. But, it is a completely diffferent senario from a woman who is facing the choice of weather to have an abortion, don't try to put these two scenarios together. Its lying pure and simple, they are not the same.

Take all this pathetic innane chatter about Adam and Eve and shove it. Its bollox, we are all the product of incest by your reconning, very nice. ...not. Does keeping it in the family really sit so highly with the faithful.

Did your God not tell you not to judge others least you be judged yourself... Obviously you think that
God didn't mean this issue. So, when your time comes you'll be a shoo in. Better remember that what you want and what you get are two entirely different things.

I think if I was you God I would be asking were was your compassion, love and understanding to another person who by the standard of the post on here, you show no love, respect or understanding of. And I would ask why you alway took the easy way out by blaming the person in dire need. And also ask if your arms were not sore from casting all those stones.

Then I would burn the bloody lot of you hypocates all.

90

Ross Fyffe,

Scotland 22/10/2007 01:40:32

Abortion is MURDER nothing less.......... partial term abortion should incure the death penalty, sooking out the brains of a viable child ............. MURDER nothing less

91

BonnyBird,

22/10/2007 01:45:16

It seems that getting your brain sooked out doesn't seemed to have done you any harm. because talk like that has to be from a brainless clown

What's murder is having arses like you spout this kind of drivel and think that they are making serious comment.

Bugger off and go to bed your boring.

92

Ross Fyffe,

Scotland 22/10/2007 01:45:26

92

By your pathetic bleating nonsensical arguement we should not condemn peaodos either, maybe that would suite you nor should we condemn rapists nor should we condemn theft. coz by your spiel that would be the case.

93

Ross Fyffe,

Scotland 22/10/2007 01:48:32

by any chance BonnyBird does your vain nickname suggest you think you are "Bonnny" and the Bonny Bird get herself up the duff and decide that the inconvenient pregnancy mean you had to have a life terminated?

94

whatsyourname,

22/10/2007 01:51:12

# 93 95 number 4 is right your such a looser

95

whatsyourname,

22/10/2007 01:52:10

#I mean number 94

96

BonnyBird,

22/10/2007 01:53:54

By any chance Sanity is relative does your vain nickname suggest you think you are "Sane"

My sex life is my business and so are my choices.

You should try getting one yourself it might help stop all this ranting and raving.

97

Ross Fyffe,

Scotland 22/10/2007 01:57:53

99 is that the best response you can come up with, make no wonder you gotta spreed em to keep any interest in you

98

Ross Fyffe,

Scotland 22/10/2007 02:09:21

contemplating what could have been ............. the smiles, the laughter, the first picture for the fridge, the first day at school, birthday parties, friends, ...........................

99

NemarketNDPer,

Taipei, Taiwan, Formosa 22/10/2007 04:32:33

Shocking to have discovered that women need to obtain the agreement of a second doctor I always thought the UK had taken the abortion question out of the hands of men (judges, politicans, police, and doctors) and placed it in the hands of the individual woman.
What about greater supplies of RU-486 and morning after medicine.

100

Pomodora,

Gravesend,Kent 22/10/2007 07:16:09

To all who post, please read #80 and then read #84.
They say it all!

101

Pomodora,

Gravesend,Kent 22/10/2007 07:18:09

For all who wander in diversity, follow the posts of #80 and #84 for sane and inteeligent comments.

102

Pomodora,

Gravesend,Kent 22/10/2007 07:24:47

#80 Astarte relates to the issue and Annlass #84 speaks for all intelligent women who have escaped from the world of vodoo and man's biblical interpretations.

103

Pomodora,

Gravesend,Kent 22/10/2007 07:26:11

Read #80 and #84 again and say amen.

104

Boy Wonder,

22/10/2007 07:43:45

#83. Sod all on TV. :)

105

Boy Wonder,

22/10/2007 07:55:46

#90. We may well all be traced back to one or two individuals ultimately, but they were NOT Adam and Eve (or Havvah). Those two belong to the Judaic books of myths, stolen by Christians to give themselves a bit of history.

As for "the flood" ... where did get that lovely wee nugget of cr*p?

According to your bible, the length of Life before the Flood (from Adam to Noah) went something like this ...

Adam - 930 yrs, Seth - 912 yrs, Enosh - 905 yrs, Kenan - 910 yrs, Mahalalel - 895 yrs, Jared - 962 yrs, Enoch - 365 yrs, Methuselah - 969 yrs, Lamech - 777 yrs, Noah - 950 yrs ... with flood happening after Noah had three sons and was quite old already when "god" called him.

No human ever lived that long, you twonk! And rather puts paid to your "the flood is said to have been about one year after Adam died", doesn't it?

IT IS ALL MYTHS!

106

Hunky Dorey,

Glasgow 22/10/2007 08:29:11

What bravery does it take to drag a defenceless being from the womb of its mother,and then cast God's creation in to an incinerator. If God really exists then we can only hope that he will seek retribution on those responsible for such a ghastly crime against humanity. ABORTION IS MURDER MOST FOUL, AND NO EXCUSES!

107

Pomodora,

Gravesend,Kent 22/10/2007 09:02:26

Read #80 and #84 and join progressive women in the twenty-first century.

108

Lithgyman,

Edinburgh 22/10/2007 12:15:05

#109

If god really exists and wanted us to know it, do you not think that he/she/it would give us some kind of a sign?

I'm sure instantly ending world poverty or bringing an end to all human conflict would do the trick.

Even a small thing like answering just one of my childhood prayers would have been enough to convince me.

109

DRJ,

22/10/2007 12:22:02

Here we go - religious vs Atheists.

My story may make you think - after getting married, we tried for a family only for my 1st 2 pregnancies to end in miscarriage. When I got to my 20 wk scan with my 3rd (and very much wanted pregnancy) we were told our baby had no kidneys and would not live at birth as the lungs wouldn't have developed and he would have suffocated. We decided to end the pregnancy at 21 wks.

No-one could say that this is 'murder' as he would have died even with no intervention, so I have no guilt what-so-ever about my decision - I'm just grieving for my son.

As far as abortions go for those women who do not want their pregnancies - surely it is kinder for that child not to be brought up unwanted. My in-laws foster children and I can see the damage it does.

If a woman who wishes an abortion is made to wait unneccesary lengths of time I believe it's not right.

I can see why, if you're religious you wouldn't condone abortion, but not everyone is religious, so vive la difference!

110

MichScot,

USA 22/10/2007 13:54:31

Boy Wonder,
I didn't call you names.
And for your dates, those are death dates, not the dates the children were born.

Anyway, you can believe as you wish. We will all find out in the end what the truth is.

As the Bible states, the, "The fool says in his heart, there is no God." So I guess I will stay where I am, and you will stay where you are, and that's that. We don't have to be enemies just because we disagree.

111

molu kikes,

basel 22/10/2007 16:15:02

due to exodus of impending kerb_crawling business in the scotland there was massive patient on the bay awaiting for POC being mastigated out repel and worn out to overcame the burden of child welfare standard and indecency baby boom .,,,,,,,,,,but most abortionist are religiuos boundd they are very relax in doing so -.-,,,,,

112

Em,

22/10/2007 16:47:59

#108 Boy Wonder

You say
"We may well all be traced back to one or two individuals ultimately, but they were NOT Adam and Eve"

What makes you so sure? and why such an indignant denial of the existence of Adam and Eve as a possible answer to the question of who humanity started with? or is it simply these names you have an aversion to because of their religious connotations.
Your statement reminds me of those folk when asked "what caused the beginning of the universe" they reply with "I don't know but it wasn't God" it is not in such that they believe there is no God but more a desire for there to be no God, they do not want to be open to the possibility that there is a God because this threatens the self centered existence of every one of us.
New York University philosopher Thoman Nagel once said "Being strongly subject to this fear (of Religion) myself: I want atheism to be true and am made uneaasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well informed people I know are religious believers. It isn't just that I don't believe in God and hope that I'm right in my belief. It's that I hope there is no God! I don't want there to be a God, I dont want the universe to be like that."

#111

There is an abundance of signs that point to the existence of God, there are many however who choose not to see them.
As we look at the universe and identify the many accidents of physics and astronomy that have worked together for our benefit, this cosmic condition in which we find ourselves has been called the "Goldilocks effect"- everything is just right for human existence. The slightest alteration in any of the dozens of required conditions would render biological life impossible, for example, a 0.01percent increase in the early stages of the universe's expansion would have yielded a present day expansion thousands of times faster than what we find. An equivalent decrease would ha

113

DRJ,

22/10/2007 17:05:43

I can't believe people are using this debate to go on and on about religion!!!!! Pathetic.

Debate until you're blue in the face and there will NEVER be hard evidence to the existance/or not of God.

If you believe, fantastic - don't preach.

If you don't believe, great - don't try and convert those who are un-covertable to sense!

114

Kornelius,

Planet Fatherless 22/10/2007 17:08:07

How's about the pharmaceutical companies be forced to promote the "Man Pill" that has been developed.

Their attitude is one of "there's not a lot of money to be made on this one", Men want this pill now! The attitude of these companies is immoral!
Money should not be at the forefront.

Unwanted babies should be a thing of the past and also the decision of both the man and the woman should be the norm when it comes to wanting to become a parent, not the decision of the woman only!

The best interests of the potential child should be paramount , not the pandering of a selfish person that has a yearning to be a parent!

As for all the anti abortion factions out there, well if a baby is unwanted for whatever reason then the utmost should be done to terminate without delay. There should be an option to get this done as swiftly as possible so as not to prolong the unnecessary time wasting and all the soul searching that goes with it!.

Life is hard enough out there for a child without the thought of being a child that is to be dragged up by one parent and be totally disadvantaged and stigmatised for the rest of their life.

Remember the child has not got a choice in any of all this?

115

Em,

22/10/2007 17:45:48

#116

I was simply posting in reply to others who had on several occasions veered the topic towards religion, but it is related to the topic as moral value is concerned, I was laying out that people don't want to be made answerable to such crimes against humanity as abortion so they would opt to deny the existence of a higher deity in the hope that they may remain unaccountable for their actions.

116

The Fly Fifer,

Fife 22/10/2007 18:30:43

and none of you have considered the longer waiting times are a gift from God when maybe just one child will be permitted to grow up when a woman hesitates at the long wait?

117

Em,

22/10/2007 21:20:56

I have posted the below article for commenters discernment.

http://www.spiritdaily.org/Our%20Lady%20Apparitions/guada...

118

3rdjerseyman,

Princeton, New Jersey 22/10/2007 22:11:11

Without reference to religion, there are logical grounds on which to oppose abortion on demand.
The fetus or unborn child or baby is indisputably an individual ( advances in our DNA science proved that ). Absent the termination procedure he or she will present themselves to the world with all their "inherent rights" ( stop discussion if you don't accept the notion of universal inherent rights) intact. So it must be understood that abortion does, indeed, kill a "someone".
The question then boils down to when an individual or the state has the right or duty to kill.
Most of us accept that self-defense is an inherent right. Form this follows not just the individual right but also the collective right as expressed in police and military use of deadly force. Explicit in this right is both the distinction between innocent and guilty life and the demand for proportionality.
IS the fetus innocent or guilty? Is its "termination" proportionate to the damage inflicted on its putative mother by its birth? How can one assert any answer but no to either of those questions. Except for that little trouble with Adam, the unborn are the defintion of innocence, and other than as a direct threat to her own life, what harm can the child's exsistance pose to the mother that justifies his being extinguished in utero? Death is a harsh penalty for being inconvenient.

119

Wullie Pullar,

27/10/2007 15:02:39

Guga II
I wanted to draw your attention to two massive red-herrings which are interfering with sensible debate on important issues.
First, have a look at any threads on abortion and see how often the religion card is played. In the case of people with an Atheist view (which, by the way, is a perfectly reasonable and honourable view to have imho)I can completely understand this. Religious extremism can be a very damaging thing and it is right that this should be pointed out. In any case anti-religious rhetoric and sloganising often sounds superficially good and it no doubt gets the troops cheering. The trouble is that the vast majority of religious people are not extremists and are somewhere in the middle of the argument somewhere between the extremes (I think that both extremes of the abortion argument are fairly inhuman).Almost no-one would say that abortions should not ever be permitted in any circumstances. What the debate is truly about is when and why they should be permitted. The problem is that when you characterise all religious people as nutters (you make no distiction in your post) who want abortion completely banned you are stifling the debate, possibly even forcing people to the pro-choice side for fear of appeasing a non-existent horde of religious extremists. I have many arguments about the when and why of abortion, not one of them religious, all based on facts, science, statistics and sweet reason. Because of this they demand a thoughtful response. If you dismiss me and my arguments because of my religious views, how are we to have a reasonable discussion?
------------------------------------
That's it Guga, no response required. The rest of the post isn't particularly aimed at you, feel free to ignore. What I'm asking for is that you please consider moderating and qualifying your view a little. The way it appears in your original post is almost unbelievably extreme. Thanks. -------------------------------------
That's th

120

Wullie Pullar,

27/10/2007 15:03:16

A word of advice - treat their conclusions with great care. There is a good case for viewing each of these individuals as cranks, intelligent and well-educated perhaps, but cranks nonetheless. Dawkins is particularly creepy. Among other things, he thinks eugenics is a good idea. He's disappointed that the Nazis gave it a bad name! All the information, exactly the wrong conclusion.
Dawkins lubricates his arguments with a ghastly false bonhomie and forced jokes. He does humour as though someone had to explain it to him with flip-charts. But I'm wandering off -subject.
Among all the exaggeration, misdirection and very, very selective use of history and facts however Dawkins and co. (and their adherents) do have two genuine, serious causes for alarm. These are fundamental, violent Islamists and certain aspects of the extreme Christian right wing in America. I, and most reasonable people agree with this. They appear to believe that the best way to deal with these threats is to attack all religion. This is a problem because they will no doubt be successful with the "softer" moderates but this is no guarantee that this tactic will ever work on the extremists i.e. the ones who are causing the problems. Further, although many people have no need of religion (which is fine by me) many do. Since religion fills some poorly understood, but strong need that many have, it is likely that some people will continue to be religious. Destroying the moderate religions will create a vacuum which militant Islam and other extreme philosophies will glady fill. The ironic thing is that, because of this, moderate Christianity (me included) is an important part of the defence against extremism. You don't want your children or grandchildren to live in a country even remotely influenced by Sharia Law.
So, the message is, keep the extreme rhetoric and contempt for those that have earned it - the extremists. Let's keep the debates real and locked to the issues. We'll


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.