You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Abortion
March 29 2024 9.57am

Abortion

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 3 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

 

View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 04 Jan 21 5.22pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Ketteridge

Ok most claims are misleading that is fine then , it does say that the claims abortion will be on demand are false, and claims NO legal requirement: that babies born alive after an abortion are given medical support are false. It also says NO legal requirement: to give pain relief for babies aborted after 20 weeks, omits important context because ‘there is no scientific evidence that the fetus is capable of feeling pain before around 24 weeks’

This legislation looks like it is updating legislation from 1961 in social policy terms fairly old ,’ that legislation made abortions only explicitly allowed for abortions on disability grounds before 20 weeks’ In practice abortions have been available for women in later term pregnancy and ‘many abortions were done for congenital abnormalities (disabilities) post 20 weeks under the circumstances that they would cause serious problems for the mental health of the mother. ‘
That now will only happen if two qualified health care professionals agree, these health care professionals will need to meet the legal, ethical and professional standards set by their professions. I assume the New Zealand medical authorities are writing up or have guidelines for the criteria needed to meet for post 20-week abortions. If it does include allowance for abortions on the grounds of sex, cleft palate or I’ve changed my mind then I’ll happily get my placard and come with you to protest
Yes, to some extent we do need to trust the Doctors and medical authorities to act with integrity, I also hope there would be accountability and transparency in decision making. Of course, I’ll also trust the New Zealand people to hold the parliament and authorities to account and use their power of protest and vote in the next election if late term abortions are being given on demand for spurious reasons.
As I say it looks like they are updating old legislation but the headline ‘New Zealand passes legislation to better aligns the regulation of abortion services with other health services, and modernises the legal framework of abortion provided by the Crimes Act 1961 and the Contraception, Sterilisation, and Abortion Act 1977 (CSA Act 1977).’ Might not get the same visceral reaction which was the point I made originally , the story is being spun to make you feel horrified and react emotively , if a story does that then taking time to check it out is the sensible response.



Firstly I don't accept that the 'misleading' description is automatically accurate but only that your so called 'fact-checking' pro abortion site chooses that word.

Your linked to site chooses to focus only upon that page yet all those claims were linked to a greater explanation of the law changes designed to make abortion easier and more common.

This wasn't recognised by the pro abortion site.

So I consider the 'misleading' claim misleading in of itself as it focuses only upon a summary when more detail was available.

If I focused upon each of the law changes I would still be writing this post next week so I'll encourage those interested to look in closer detail at what these law changes enable in making ending the lives of the unborn easier.

I will pick out just one point where a claim is made that no evidence exists that the unborn can feel pain at six months development so no pain relief should be mandated in law. I have to say I find that incredibly irresponsible and immoral. The nerve system is nearly finished at that stage and births at 24 weeks have around a 40 percent survival rate.

Any law that allows for the act of ending the life of the unborn at six months should only come with overwhelming pain relief even if there was even the remotest possibility.

I'll regard it as the defense of the indefensible.

I couldn't adequately describe the revulsion I had in reading that. But I'll end it here as the longer I stay on the topic the more down I get.

Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Jan 2021 5.24pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View PalazioVecchio's Profile PalazioVecchio Flag south pole 04 Jan 21 6.41pm Send a Private Message to PalazioVecchio Add PalazioVecchio as a friend

Barbara Windsor... had 5 abortions

 


the 'Net-We-had' at the Etihad....again

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View martin2412's Profile martin2412 Flag Living The Dream 04 Jan 21 7.54pm Send a Private Message to martin2412 Add martin2412 as a friend

Originally posted by PalazioVecchio

Barbara Windsor... had 5 abortions

Phil and Grant turned out alright though.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Ketteridge's Profile Ketteridge Flag Brighton 04 Jan 21 9.00pm Send a Private Message to Ketteridge Add Ketteridge as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays


Firstly I don't accept that the 'misleading' description is automatically accurate but only that your so called 'fact-checking' pro abortion site chooses that word.

Your linked to site chooses to focus only upon that page yet all those claims were linked to a greater explanation of the law changes designed to make abortion easier and more common.

This wasn't recognised by the pro abortion site.

So I consider the 'misleading' claim misleading in of itself as it focuses only upon a summary when more detail was available.

If I focused upon each of the law changes I would still be writing this post next week so I'll encourage those interested to look in closer detail at what these law changes enable in making ending the lives of the unborn easier.

I will pick out just one point where a claim is made that no evidence exists that the unborn can feel pain at six months development so no pain relief should be mandated in law. I have to say I find that incredibly irresponsible and immoral. The nerve system is nearly finished at that stage and births at 24 weeks have around a 40 percent survival rate.

Any law that allows for the act of ending the life of the unborn at six months should only come with overwhelming pain relief even if there was even the remotest possibility.

I'll regard it as the defense of the indefensible.

I couldn't adequately describe the revulsion I had in reading that. But I'll end it here as the longer I stay on the topic the more down I get.

Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Jan 2021 5.24pm)

You might find it incredibly irresponsible and immoral to say no evidence exists but apparently the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists don’t ‘ it was apparent that connections from the periphery to the cortex are not intact before 24 weeks of gestation and, as most neuroscientists believe that the cortex is necessary for pain perception, it can be concluded that the foetus cannot experience pain in any sense prior to this gestation’ Para 2 of the summary on page viii [Link]
Despite what people seem to believe science is never going to be unanimous ,you will be unlikely to get 100% agreement and I have no doubt there are dissent voices, but the overwhelming evidence points to the fact that prior to 24 weeks fetuses don’t feel pain. If credible evidence is found to the contrary then the law should be changed without hesitation.
Also being pedantic 6 months isn’t 24 weeks it is 26 weeks so I would agree with you any law that allows for the act of ending the life of the unborn at six months should only come with overwhelming pain relief , fortunately so does the medical profession and the legislation but that is just me being pedantic.
The links in the fact check are to academics or the Universities they are attached to, previous and new legislation or professional medical bodies in New Zealand, don’t know what qualifies as a pro-abortions site, one is to Dr Simon Snook who set up a vasectomy clinic not sure if that counts or not. Another links to a law firm which set up law regarding Doctor and other health practitioners.
Your last paragraph really just makes my point, I am not hard hearted or callous I understand that making the decision to have an abortion especially a late term abortions must be an incredibly hard thing to do. Articles like your original link play on those emotions but if you look into the story it is fairly mundane updating of legislation to make the law fit what is actual happening. As I said previously, I’ll leave it to the medical professional and medical association of New Zealand and the people of New Zealand to ensure those rules are interpreted and applied in the right way.

 


One supporter of hacking argued that without it "you will do away with the courage and pluck of the game, and I will be bound to bring over a lot of Frenchmen who would beat you with a week's practice -Blackheath secretary at first meeting of the F.A

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 04 Jan 21 11.57pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Ketteridge

You might find it incredibly irresponsible and immoral to say no evidence exists but apparently the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists don’t ‘ it was apparent that connections from the periphery to the cortex are not intact before 24 weeks of gestation and, as most neuroscientists believe that the cortex is necessary for pain perception, it can be concluded that the foetus cannot experience pain in any sense prior to this gestation’ Para 2 of the summary on page viii [Link]
Despite what people seem to believe science is never going to be unanimous ,you will be unlikely to get 100% agreement and I have no doubt there are dissent voices, but the overwhelming evidence points to the fact that prior to 24 weeks fetuses don’t feel pain. If credible evidence is found to the contrary then the law should be changed without hesitation.
Also being pedantic 6 months isn’t 24 weeks it is 26 weeks so I would agree with you any law that allows for the act of ending the life of the unborn at six months should only come with overwhelming pain relief , fortunately so does the medical profession and the legislation but that is just me being pedantic.
The links in the fact check are to academics or the Universities they are attached to, previous and new legislation or professional medical bodies in New Zealand, don’t know what qualifies as a pro-abortions site, one is to Dr Simon Snook who set up a vasectomy clinic not sure if that counts or not. Another links to a law firm which set up law regarding Doctor and other health practitioners.
Your last paragraph really just makes my point, I am not hard hearted or callous I understand that making the decision to have an abortion especially a late term abortions must be an incredibly hard thing to do. Articles like your original link play on those emotions but if you look into the story it is fairly mundane updating of legislation to make the law fit what is actual happening. As I said previously, I’ll leave it to the medical professional and medical association of New Zealand and the people of New Zealand to ensure those rules are interpreted and applied in the right way.

It's about as irresponsible as it gets to pretend that the unborn all develop at the same rate because they don't. Secondly it's also irresponsible to believe that 'science' has de facto knowledge on pain in the unborn when they don't have full knowledge in adults.

Irresponsible and immoral is precisely how I regard both your post and the institutions involved in this disgusting practice.

Edited by Stirlingsays (05 Jan 2021 12.00am)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View georgenorman's Profile georgenorman Flag 05 Jan 21 2.53pm Send a Private Message to georgenorman Add georgenorman as a friend

I'm very uneasy about abortion laws in general, but in particular, I find the way the pro-lobbies 'celebrate' it as if it is a positive thing particularly nauseating.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 05 Jan 21 3.22pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by georgenorman

I'm very uneasy about abortion laws in general, but in particular, I find the way the pro-lobbies 'celebrate' it as if it is a positive thing particularly nauseating.

Agreed, and nauseating is a particularly appropriate word.

I remember watching that collection of mainly females celebrating the Irish abortion law change and being revolted at what they were celebrating.

Edited by Stirlingsays (05 Jan 2021 3.23pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View beak's Profile beak Flag croydon 05 Jan 21 3.36pm Send a Private Message to beak Add beak as a friend

Abortion, I cannot help but hope that in a dystopian world Boris bloody Johnson was aborted and the pandemic was solved by a competent P.M.who doesn't fall down every bloody rabbit hole.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View eaglesdare's Profile eaglesdare Flag 05 Jan 21 3.50pm Send a Private Message to eaglesdare Add eaglesdare as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Agreed, and nauseating is a particularly appropriate word.

I remember watching that collection of mainly females celebrating the Irish abortion law change and being revolted at what they were celebrating.

Edited by Stirlingsays (05 Jan 2021 3.23pm)

I was absolutely disgusted when I seen the "Celebrations" crowds at dublin castle all celebrating!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Flag 05 Jan 21 4.36pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by eaglesdare

I was absolutely disgusted when I seen the "Celebrations" crowds at dublin castle all celebrating!

A sad day sir, a sad day indeed.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View nead1's Profile nead1 Flag 05 Jan 21 5.36pm Send a Private Message to nead1 Add nead1 as a friend

It wasn't in my view. Just consider the context of an Ireland dominated for generations by the Catholic Church with their illiberal views on a whole range of matters. Then, consider the history of Ireland with so many orphaned children, raised in desperate circumstances and extremely large families unable to cope financially.

Then also consider the black market that developed around this. Young, innocent women having to go to London or elsewhere for back street abortions with decidedly dodgy medical people.

So, my general reaction to what has happened in Ireland and most European countries is that huge progress has been made. Ultimately, the whole matter boils down to choice but far better that exists than the historic practices of yesterday.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Online Flag Truro Cornwall 05 Jan 21 11.25pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays


Earlier last year New Zealand....that country with the PM who looks like a chimp have introduced the most extreme abortion law in the world after the Abortion Legislation Bill passed its third reading in Parliament.

The bill passed by 68 votes to 51 – a much narrower margin than at the first and second reading.

The new law will mean that New Zealand has the most extreme abortion law in the world, this will include:

Abortion will now be available on-demand, for any reason, up to birth.

Sex-selective abortion will be legalised

The current 20 week limit for disability-selective abortion will be scrapped and abortion will be available up to birth for disabilities including cleft lip, club foot and Down syndrome

There will be no requirement that a doctor must be involved with providing an abortion

There will be no legal requirement that babies born alive after a ‘failed’ abortion are given medical support

There will be no legal requirement that pain relief be given to babies being aborted between 20 weeks and birth

There will be no legal restrictions on controversial methods of abortion such as intact dilation and extraction abortions (also knows as partial-birth abortions)

[Link]

This is disgusting.

The slippery slope argument is real and abortion is one of its clearest examples.

Liberalism is a murderer of the unborn and in this case newly born on a scale unlike any other in history.

The left, for example, the Guardian celebrated the passing of these laws even though polls in New
Zealand were against them.

You just cannot stop yourself can you?

Misrepresentation after misrepresentation again! This is chock full of them.

Abortion is a subject I have debated at length very often and experience has taught me that it's a pointless exercise. Those who believe that a child exists the moment after conception will never find common ground with those who don't and believe a foetus only becomes a separate person after viability. Those who believe abortion is murder will never agree with those who don't.

So I won't be entering another debate here. Others are already pointing out the frailties of your position, based as it is on emotion and not on either reason or science.

I will though just take you up on this:-

"Abortion will now be available on-demand, for any reason, up to birth."

This is a lie. After 20 weeks 2 doctors must determine whether there is, in their professional opinions, a clinical justification to provide an abortion. The later it gets the more unlikely it becomes that such a justification could be made.

To suggest that abortion in NZ is now available on demand up to birth is a scandalous distortion of the truth.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 3 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Abortion