The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

.......

This post has been deleted.

JDD

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

Being pro-life is not about judging "good girls" from "bad girls". That's an idea that exists in many pro-choicers head because they feel they are "judged" if they have an abortion. Being pro-life is motivated by wanting to protect the unborn child who has no voice. And protecting women who are tricked into thinking abortion is a good thing ...only to find out the true horrors of it once the abortion has actually taken place.

No one is judging women who've had abortions. That's an idea pro-choicers need to get out of their head, really for their own good as its not nice (or good) to feel judged by anyone.

Except, those who say that they are pro-life but would permit an abortion in the circumstance of rape, is judging. Are they not? Because they are saying that this is the only circumstance where a woman should be allowed to have an abortion in one where she did not actively participate in the sex that resulted in the pregnancy. All other reasons for having an abortion are off the table.

You know, I respect your position. If you believe there are women who will regret having abortions because they haven't been fully educated on the process, and the regret will traumatize them, then I believe you should go right ahead and have your voice be heard. I believe you come from a compassionate place.

It wouldn't make any difference to me mind. I miscarried at nine weeks between my first and second child. It wasn't horrific by any extent. I miscarried naturally (no surgical intervention) and it was like a heavy period. No particular pain. I went to work every day. I didn't see a foetus or anything - I suspect like most early miscarriages it went down the toilet. Bit gross but true. I was sad I wasn't pregnant anymore but to be honest I got pregnant pretty soon after that so didn't really think about it too much. I don't mean to degenerate everyone else's experience, everyone reacts differently, I'm just voicing my own.

I'd imagine if I took the abortion pill I probably wouldn't feel sad I wasn't pregnant, given I had chosen of my free will to take the pill, so it would have even less of an impact. I don't think a story about someone else who had taken the abortion pill but regretted it afterwards would particularly influence me one way or the other. I'd just be sad for them that they made a choice that didn't work out for them. But that's life I suppose.

Neyite

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

I don't understand this. What kind of early pregnancy treatments are you taking about? The 8th is designed to protect the unborn. Do the treatments you talk about result in damaging or killing the unborn?

No. Do keep up. The medications and treatments help prevent miscarriage. Blood tests and tissue testing can give a couple answers and help diagnose issues that can cause miscarriage. Often a woman could be given medication based on those test results to sustain a pregnancy.

The whole point of this thread is that the 8th is unfit for it's purpose. It prevents abortion. That's it. It falls far short of protecting all unborn.

wrote:

In response to your earlier questions, i posted a situation of a woman who buried her 4 week miscarriage, gave the baby a name and lit a candle for them.

That never happened.

A 4 week embryo cant be found in amongst the clotting. It is the size of a SESAME SEED at four weeks. It can't even be seen on a scan. A woman won't feel it passing from her vagina. At 4 weeks it's a period with a zygote that failed to implant. Your "woman" would have had no idea if that zygote was male or female, so dunno how she chose a name. As for burying it? At four weeks? That never happened and its actually really nasty of you to assert its even possible and give false hope to a bereaved mother.

But keep going with your incorrect stories. They are doing wonders to piss people off who might otherwise be on the fence over to the side where facts are more important than hyperbole.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Neyite

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You are quite right. What I should have said is that it prevents Irish doctors from offering abortions.

2wsxcde3

Neyite wrote: »

A 4 week embryo cant be found in amongst the clotting. It is the size of a SESAME SEED at four weeks. It can't even be seen on a scan. A woman won't feel it passing from her vagina. At 4 weeks it's a period with a zygote that failed to implant. Your "woman" would have had no idea if that zygote was male or female, so dunno how she chose a name. As for burying it? At four weeks? That never happened and its actually really nasty of you to assert its even possible and give false hope to a bereaved mother.

I was just repeating what some women do. It wasn't meant to be nasty towards women who've had a miscarriage and never thought of it that way. Though I can see what i've done now.

.......

This post has been deleted.

kylith

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

Being pro-life is not about judging "good girls" from "bad girls". That's an idea that exists in many pro-choicers head because they feel they are "judged" if they have an abortion. Being pro-life is motivated by wanting to protect the unborn child who has no voice. And protecting women who are tricked into thinking abortion is a good thing ...only to find out the true horrors of it once the abortion has actually taken place.

No one is judging women who've had abortions. That's an idea pro-choicers need to get out of their head, really for their own good as its not nice (or good) to feel judged by anyone.

Saying that women who have been raped can have abortions, but that women whose contraception has failed can't is judging them, and dividing them into women who 'deserve' abortions and women who don't.

blanch152

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

No ones suggesting they have to go to trial. Simply file a report at a garda station that they have been raped and would like an abortion. The women need take no further action beyond that.

But obviously pro-choicers don't trust women enough to tell the truth.

Do you realise the damage that this could cause to the men accused of rape?

Do you know anything about the system of Garda vetting and soft information?

Anyone accused of rape in this way would never be able to get a job in a school or work with an underage sports team.

2wsxcde3

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It's not my story, I posted a link earlier to the womans story:

When I miscarried I passed the baby onto my pad. I was very early (4 weeks) but could tell that tissue was different and was my baby. I got a soft cloth and put him on it, I wrapped him, and buried him in our yard. Then I lit a candle and put it there alone with a piece of paper that I wrote his name on and a flower. It was my way of marking his grave. Even a year later all 3 items were still there! However, I do regret burying him there because we moved about 6 months ago. It was very hard to leave him there after being able to visit him whenever for 2 years! The last day before we left I did light his candle one more time.
(Source: https://community.babycenter.com/post/a21467597/what_did_you_do_with_your_miscarried_baby )

blanch152

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

It's not my story, I posted a link earlier to the womans story:

When I miscarried I passed the baby onto my pad. I was very early (4 weeks) but could tell that tissue was different and was my baby. I got a soft cloth and put him on it, I wrapped him, and buried him in our yard. Then I lit a candle and put it there alone with a piece of paper that I wrote his name on and a flower. It was my way of marking his grave. Even a year later all 3 items were still there! However, I do regret burying him there because we moved about 6 months ago. It was very hard to leave him there after being able to visit him whenever for 2 years! The last day before we left I did light his candle one more time.
(Source: https://community.babycenter.com/post/a21467597/what_did_you_do_with_your_miscarried_baby )

I don't want to be unnecessarily upsetting people, particularly the woman who posted that story, but there is absolutely no way that she could be sure that anything she passed at 4 weeks was a baby unless it was tested.

January

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't want to be unnecessarily upsetting people, particularly the woman who posted that story, but there is absolutely no way that she could be sure that anything she passed at 4 weeks was a baby unless it was tested.

For all she knows she buried a blood clot, but sure if it makes her feel better about what happened to her then leave her off.

volchitsa

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

It's not my story, I posted a link earlier to the womans story:

When I miscarried I passed the baby onto my pad. I was very early (4 weeks) but could tell that tissue was different and was my baby. I got a soft cloth and put him on it, I wrapped him, and buried him in our yard. Then I lit a candle and put it there alone with a piece of paper that I wrote his name on and a flower. It was my way of marking his grave. Even a year later all 3 items were still there! However, I do regret burying him there because we moved about 6 months ago. It was very hard to leave him there after being able to visit him whenever for 2 years! The last day before we left I did light his candle one more time.
(Source: https://community.babycenter.com/post/a21467597/what_did_you_do_with_your_miscarried_baby )

I think grief makes people write themselves a narrative. A piece of paper left out im the garden was there a year later? Sounds a bit like a miracle, no?

As for "knowing" which clot was the "baby" - well, maybe, but again, frim my own experience I find it hard to credit. TBH I wouldnt know for sure what happens at 4 weeks but I do know that at 7/8 weeks I felt the amniotic sac pass (and sorry if this is TMI) when I was on the toilet but I really couldnt identify it in the mess of blood and bits of placenta. TBF I didnt search too much I was too horrified at the time.

So basically I'm dubious, though Im not saying she is deliberately lying.

pilly

2wsxcde3 wrote:

I trust women not to abuse the system. Though i'm still against abortion in cases of rape as the baby is innocent.

If your against it any way why are you debating the how and why's? I'm confused.

2wsxcde3

JDD wrote: »

Except, those who say that they are pro-life but would permit an abortion in the circumstance of rape, is judging. Are they not? Because they are saying that this is the only circumstance where a woman should be allowed to have an abortion in one where she did not actively participate in the sex that resulted in the pregnancy. All other reasons for having an abortion are off the table.

I don't think its a case of judging the woman. Its really a case of people trying to make abortions as rare as possible (and so there is a grudging allowance for cases or rape, incest and FFA). Just like setting the limit at 12 weeks is not an attempt to judge women who have an abortion at 13 weeks. The objective is to try to make abortions as rare as possible, not to judge one woman who has an abortion from another woman who has an abortion.

When you introduce abortion on demand into a society, it comes along with so many unavoidable negative side effects. So the goal in alot of peoples minds is to restrict it.

uptherebels

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

When you introduce abortion on demand into a society, it comes along with so many unavoidable negative side effects. So the goal in alot of peoples minds is to restrict it.

What are these many negative side effects? I

.......

This post has been deleted.

Bannasidhe

Andrew Beef wrote: »

The interaction between abortion and rape is a key issue; at least I have proposed a potential solution rather than simply rant and gas-bag as most people do.

Complex issues such as this are so polarising and will never result in agreement.

What you have proposed is to add yet more indignity upon rape victims.

You are seriously suggesting that a rape victim should firstly be raped. Then discover she is pregnant by her rapist. Then have to convince a panel of so-called experts that she was actually raped. Whereupon if she succeeds have an abortion so she can be ready for the later trial. Because they would have to be a trail.
And if she doesn't convince them? What then? Should she enter the subsequent born child as evidence or will a DNA sample do??

Listen to yourself man. What you are suggesting is beyond barbaric. Have you absolutely no empathy?

drkpower

January wrote: »

For all she knows she buried a blood clot, but sure if it makes her feel better about what happened to her then leave her off.

This type of comment is really disappointing.

Early pregnancy scans can be carried out at 6 weeks from LMP. That's a gestational age of c. 4 weeks (ie. from the date of conception). There are many people who lose a pregnancy at 4 weeks and are devastated by that.

To demean that experience is just unnecessary.

2wsxcde3

uptherebels wrote: »

What are these many negative side effects?

• Boyfriends putting pressure on their girlfriends to get an abortion against the wishes of the woman.
• Women regretting having an abortion like the "C Case" woman here in Ireland in 1997 who says she thinks about the baby she aborted every day.
• Unborn children die (who were wanted by adopted parents even though the mother and/or father might not have wanted them or thought they didn't want them).
• Lowered birth rate in the country and so we will need to import people (from cultures with values very different to our own) like Germany and Sweden did.
• A loss of humanity in the country like in the UK and USA where they were burning unborn babies to heat hospitals and thought nothing of it.

And alot of others including some women die from abortions while others are left infertile. Abortion on demand is like a new drug a pharmaceutical company tries to sell you. But the side-effects from the drug are worse than the problem it was trying to cure.

SusieBlue

If I see the ‘they could have been put up for adoption’ argument one more time, I may throw my laptop out the window.
Why is this argument still made when it has been debunked about 30 times now?

amdublin

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

• Boyfriends putting pressure on their girlfriends to get an abortion against the wishes of the woman.
• Women regretting having an abortion like the "C Case" woman here in Ireland in 1997 who says she thinks about the baby she aborted every day.
• Unborn children die (who were wanted by adopted parents even though the mother and/or father might not have wanted them or thought they didn't want them).
• Lowered birth rate in the country and so we will need to import people (from cultures with values very different to our own) like Germany and Sweden did.
• A loss of humanity in the country like in the UK and USA where they were burning unborn babies to heat hospitals and thought nothing of it.

And alot of others including some women die from abortions while others are left infertile. Abortion on demand is like a new drug a pharmaceutical company tries to sell you. But the side-effects from the drug are worse than the problem it was trying to cure.

Abortion on request in Ireland might actually reduce the amount of Irish abortions.

Give the lady some time to consider it more, rather than the focus being on getting flights booked and time off work go go travel.
Also once you are over there in the UK if you are having second doubts I think the pressure of travel will mean you go ahead with it anyway.

I know it's tv. But remember Miranda in sex and the city going for an abortion and then changing her mind. I'd hope that if the abortion experience/clinic was like that in Ireland that more women may decide not to go through with the abortion.

2wsxcde3

amdublin wrote: »

Abortion on request in Ireland might actually reduce the amount of Irish abortions.

I'm sure some people said that in the UK in 1967.

amdublin

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

I'm sure some people said that in the UK in 1967.

I have faith and trust Irish women.

Remember all the hooha and propaganda before the divorce referendum. Hey guess what the sky did not fall down.
Ok correct me if I'm wrong but divorces per year (per capita)are less in Ireland than the UK?
Hello divorce, goodbye daddy...you'd swear we were bringing jn mandatory divorce.

Again the marriage equality referendum. Two years later and all is ok and good.

January

drkpower wrote: »

This type of comment is really disappointing.

Early pregnancy scans can be carried out at 6 weeks from LMP. That's a gestational age of c. 4 weeks (ie. from the date of conception). There are many people who lose a pregnancy at 4 weeks and are devastated by that.

To demean that experience is just unnecessary.

I'm not demeaning anyones experience. She could not have identified an embryo on a pad at that stage of gestation. As Neyite said its the size of a sesame seed.

This person was obviously devastated by what happened to her but there's no way she knew what she was burying was an embryo but if it brought her some peace to think that she was burying her miscarried baby then she should be left to do what she felt she needed to do.

2wsxcde3

amdublin wrote: »

I have faith and trust Irish women.

So you trust Irish women but not UK women. That makes no sense. Aren't both pretty much the same?

amdublin wrote: »

Remember all the hooha and propaganda before the divorce referendum. Hey guess what the sky did not fall down.
Ok correct me if I'm wrong but divorces per year (per capita)are less in Ireland than the UK?

Lower so far. The numbers are increasing. There is a time lag between actually bringing in divorce into a country and people actually getting divorced as commonplace like in the USA for example.

amdublin wrote: »

Again the marriage equality referendum. Two years later and all is ok and good.

We now have two straight men getting married in order to defraud the tax man. That's only after two years. Same sex marriage is still in experimental mode and its already throwing up problems.

kylith

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

We now have two straight men getting married in order to defraud the tax man. That's only after two years. Same sex marriage is still in experimental mode and its already throwing up problems.

Because that has NEVER happened with two people of opposite genders?

amdublin

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

So you trust Irish women but not UK women. That makes no sense. Aren't both pretty much the same?



Lower so far. The numbers are increasing. There is a time lag between actually bringing in divorce into a country and people actually getting divorced as commonplace like in the USA for example.



We now have two straight men getting married in order to defraud the tax man. That's only after two years. Same sex marriage is still in experimental mode and its already throwing up problems.

Divorce in Ireland peaked in 2007 and fell after that:
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.independent.ie/life/family/family-features/why-does-ireland-have-the-lowest-divorce-rate-in-the-eu-34217513.html

We "had" one incident of two straight men getting married. Out of all the good happy news stories about people in love getting married that's what you jump On? The sanctity of marriage not being affected and you jump on that??

uptherebels

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

• Boyfriends putting pressure on their girlfriends to get an abortion against the wishes of the woman.

If this is going to happen it will occur whether abortion is available in ireland or not due to the prevalence of abortion pills and the fact that the irish state and people have made it perfectly acceptable for women to travel outsider the state for abortion.
Any statistics to back up the ocurence of this scenario?

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

[*]Women regretting having an abortion like the "C Case" woman here in Ireland in 1997 who says she thinks about the baby she aborted every day.

Perfectly avoidable by ensuring that women suffering an unwanted pregnancy are informed of all their options

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

[*]Unborn children die (who were wanted by adopted parents even though the mother and/or father might not have wanted them or thought they didn't want them).

You mean fetuses?
There was only 5 domestic adoptions in 2016! Dont think it was from lack of kids.

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

[*]Lowered birth rate in the country and so we will need to import people (from cultures with values very different to our own) like Germany and Sweden did.

Ya cause abortion is the sole effect of a lowered birth rate.Remind me how the thousands of Irish women who already have abortions every year has resulted in us needing to import labour? Are you campaigning against contraception aswell?

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

[*]A loss of humanity in the country like in the UK and USA where they were burning unborn babies to heat hospitals and thought nothing of it.

Like the humanity of burying actual babies in mass graves? They thought nothing of it because medical waste is incinerated

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

And alot of others including some women die from abortions while others are left infertile. Abortion on demand is like a new drug a pharmaceutical company tries to sell you. But the side-effects from the drug are worse than the problem it was trying to cure.

like women die from having to endure unnecessary surgeries because they are pregnant! Why is dying in one scenario a problem for you but not the other?

frag420

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

We now have two straight men getting married in order to defraud the tax man. That's only after two years. Same sex marriage is still in experimental mode and its already throwing up problems.

Sure isn’t experimenting half the fun, trying different positions, techniques etc! And sure look, nobody outside of the relationship between those two are being hurt, imagine that!?

What problems have we got? You mention tax avoidance, should we ban naming fruit n veg because some guy decided to rename his apples as garlic to pay less tax?

uptherebels

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

We now have two straight men getting married in order to defraud the tax man. That's only after two years. Same sex marriage is still in experimental mode and its already throwing up problems.

It not fraud when it is perfectly legal:rolleyes:

The country has enough problems without you fabricating more

.......

This post has been deleted.

pitifulgod

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

So you trust Irish women but not UK women. That makes no sense. Aren't both pretty much the same?



Lower so far. The numbers are increasing. There is a time lag between actually bringing in divorce into a country and people actually getting divorced as commonplace like in the USA for example.



We now have two straight men getting married in order to defraud the tax man. That's only after two years. Same sex marriage is still in experimental mode and its already throwing up problems.

I trust women in the UK to make their own decisions too. Divorce wise, in much the same way I oppose forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy against her will, I also oppose forcing somebody to remain in a marriage that is deeply unhappy. It's not beneficial to any party including their children....

A man and a woman can also engage in tax avoidance by getting married, it's not illegal to do so. So really marriage is still experimental so?

TomSweeney

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Indeed, and what a dishonest silly argument :

like in the UK and USA where they were burning unborn babies to heat hospitals and thought nothing of it.

When you resort to that kind of shyte you don't have a lot to go on.

.......

This post has been deleted.

.......

This post has been deleted.

TomSweeney

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Indeed, If only these people were as concerned for life after birth as they are supposedly before hand..

pilly

2wsxcde3 wrote:

I was just repeating what some women do. It wasn't meant to be nasty towards women who've had a miscarriage and never thought of it that way. Though I can see what i've done now.

I don't believe you. What could a woman bury at 4 weeks? Blood? It's either an out and out lie or the person who told you that is mentally unwell.

Andrew Beef

The rape piece is a bit of a red herring though, isn’t it?

How many women are vaginally raped every year in Ireland? Not many I would venture; the CSO indicates that circa 2,500 sexual offences occur each year. When you remove the attacks on men, the number’s probably closer to 2,000. What’s a woman’s fertility window, perhaps four days per month? So statistically, only circa 14% of rape victims are fertile at the time of the rape. That’s 280 women. I’d be shocked if female rape victims don’t take the morning after pill which is 95% effective. So circa 14 rape victims will give birth each year; why does this number of cases dominate the debate to such a degree?

Andrew Beef

Andrew Beef wrote: »

The rape piece is a bit of a red herring though, isn’t it?

How many women are vaginally raped every year in Ireland? Not many I would venture; the CSO indicates that circa 2,500 sexual offences occur each year. When you remove the attacks on men, the number’s probably closer to 2,000. What’s a woman’s fertility window, perhaps four days per month? So statistically, only circa 14% of rape victims are fertile at the time of the rape. That’s 280 women. I’d be shocked if female rape victims don’t take the morning after pill which is 95% effective. So circa 14 rape victims will give birth each year; why does this number of cases dominate the debate to such a degree?

I believe you said rape victims should have the right to an abortion?
So you brought it up this time. You were asked why, if you believe in the unborn right to life, does the unborn not have a right to life in this case?

pilly

Andrew Beef wrote:

How many women are vaginally raped every year in Ireland? Not many I would venture; the CSO indicates that circa 2,500 sexual offences occur each year. When you remove the attacks on men, the number’s probably closer to 2,000. What’s a woman’s fertility window, perhaps four days per month? So statistically, only circa 14% of rape victims are fertile at the time of the rape. That’s 280 women. I’d be shocked if female rape victims don’t take the morning after pill which is 95% effective. So circa 14 rape victims will give birth each year; why does this number of cases dominate the debate to such a degree?

Jesus wept is all I can say to that.

SusieBlue

Andrew Beef wrote: »

The rape piece is a bit of a red herring though, isn’t it?

How many women are vaginally raped every year in Ireland? Not many I would venture; the CSO indicates that circa 2,500 sexual offences occur each year. When you remove the attacks on men, the number’s probably closer to 2,000. What’s a woman’s fertility window, perhaps four days per month? So statistically, only circa 14% of rape victims are fertile at the time of the rape. That’s 280 women. I’d be shocked if female rape victims don’t take the morning after pill which is 95% effective. So circa 14 rape victims will give birth each year; why does this number of cases dominate the debate to such a degree?

It doesn’t matter if it’s 1 woman or 1000 women.
She should have access to a safe abortion should she want it, without any additional stress put on her by making her plead her case to rape committees.
She doesn’t and shouldn’t have to justify herself to anyone. It’s no ones business but hers.

Andrew Beef

The Rape Committee solutions stands; my only ancillary observation is that looking at the maths of it, only circa 14 babies are born as a result of rape each year so that’s the scale of the issue. On that basis, there’s no way that 14 cases should be the trojan horse for abortion on demand.

One of the most shocking stats is that 1 in 5 pregnancies in the UK ends in abortion; do we really want a society like that where abortion is a method of contraception?

SusieBlue

Andrew Beef wrote: »

The Rape Committee solutions stands; my only ancillary observation is that looking at the maths of it, only circa 14 babies are born as a result of rape each year so that’s the scale of the issue. On that basis, there’s no way that 14 cases should be the trojan horse for abortion on demand.

One of the most shocking stats is that 1 in 5 pregnancies in the UK ends in abortion; do we really want a society like that where abortion is a method of contraception?

Your rape committee is up there as one of the worst ideas to manage abortion I’ve heard to date.
Absolutely appalling idea, it doesn’t have the best interests of women at heart at all and would do nothing but add further distress and suffering at an already extremely vulnerable time.

Andrew Beef

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Andrew Beef wrote: »

The Rape Committee solutions stands; my only ancillary observation is that looking at the maths of it, only circa 14 babies are born as a result of rape each year so that’s the scale of the issue. On that basis, there’s no way that 14 cases should be the trojan horse for abortion on demand.

One of the most shocking stats is that 1 in 5 pregnancies in the UK ends in abortion; do we really want a society like that where abortion is a method of contraception?

Your rape committee is up there as one of the worst ideas to manage abortion I’ve heard to date.
Absolutely appalling idea, it doesn’t have the best interests of women at heart at all and would do nothing but add further distress and suffering at an already extremely vulnerable time.

It’s designed to protect the unborn child and deal with the time-lag between conception in a rape scenario and the actual rape trial.

SusieBlue

Andrew Beef wrote: »

It’s designed to protect the unborn child and deal with the time-lag between conception in a rape scenario and the actual rape trial.

And add further stress and suffering to the already traumatized woman carrying that unborn child.

Or.... here’s a mad idea... We could take all women at their word, not make them prove themselves to a panel of strangers and trust them to make the best decision for themselves by offering unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks??????

Andrew Beef

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Andrew Beef wrote: »

It’s designed to protect the unborn child and deal with the time-lag between conception in a rape scenario and the actual rape trial.

And add further stress and suffering to the already traumatized woman carrying that unborn child.

Or.... here’s a mad idea... We could take all women at their word, not make them prove themselves to a panel of strangers and trust them to make the best decision for themselves by offering unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks??????

No we shouldn’t, because the life of the unborn takes precedence over the whim of a woman, unless there is a medical issue or she has been raped. Rape cannot be proven within the relevant timescale, hence my Rape Committee solution.

Buford T. Justice XIX

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Mod note: ........, please don't post in this thread again,

Buford T. Justice.

drkpower

January wrote: »

I'm not demeaning anyones experience. She could not have identified an embryo on a pad at that stage of gestation. As Neyite said its the size of a sesame seed.

This person was obviously devastated by what happened to her but there's no way she knew what she was burying was an embryo but if it brought her some peace to think that she was burying her miscarried baby then she should be left to do what she felt she needed to do.

She may have had an early pregnancy scan, so wouldn't have needed to have identified anything visually. The story posted came from a thread about pregnancy loss in IVF when people know - very very early - when they are pregnant, and - surprise surprise - can be devastated with such losses. You don't need to see humanoid features to suffer such loss.

You have rightly decried people for judging you and your choices. You shouldn't be so quick to judge the experiences of others.

JDD

Andrew Beef wrote: »

No we shouldn’t, because the life of the unborn takes precedence over the whim of a woman, unless there is a medical issue or she has been raped. Rape cannot be proven within the relevant timescale, hence my Rape Committee solution.

I call troll. Or, a pro-choice poster taking just enough of an offensive pro-life view so as to swing undecideds lurking on the thread. I don’t agree with your tactics mate.