Chief Twit

[Saga Lout]

My problem with abortion is as follows:

I think, I hope, most people would agree that it's wrong to kill a one day old baby.
Most of those people would agree that it's wrong to kill a baby as the mother is in labour.
And a day before that, and another day before that,,, etc.

So when does it stop being wrong and start to become right? If it's wrong to kill a nine month old foetus, why isn't it wrong to kill a one month old foetus?

[DefTrap]

Personally I think it's the mother's decision and nobody elses. That there are laws in place to control what the cut-off date is, is probably a good idea for all sorts of reasons - I'm not qualified to say whether 'the standard' # of weeks is set too high or too low. But the law can f### right off with meddling in having absolute power over the issue and preventing it outright. It's unfortunately typically pompous men and religious zealots who are making the rules. (for reference - it's your right as a pompous man or a religious zealot to object to it - I just think your objection should be noted rather than acted upon - cry it from the rooftops but don't FFS be so presumptuous as to enforce it by law).

So that's what I think.

What has this got to do with Musk and my accidental Marxism then? Is Twitter fixed yet? 8 days and counting now.

[Cousin Jack]

My problem with abortion is as follows:

I think, I hope, most people would agree that it's wrong to kill a one day old baby.
Most of those people would agree that it's wrong to kill a baby as the mother is in labour.
And a day before that, and another day before that,,, etc.

So when does it stop being wrong and start to become right? If it's wrong to kill a nine month old foetus, why isn't it wrong to kill a one month old foetus?

For my money the cut off should be roughly when a foetus can be expected to live unaided if it was born at that point. Before that it is foetus, with no legal rights at all. After that point it is an unborn child, and should have protection under the law. The current UK law, which I think is about 20 weeks gestation, is probably about right. A foetus at 20 weeks can sometimes live, but only with a huge amount of medical assistance, less than 20 weeks and it has a snowball's chance in hell.

Having said that there are circumstances that may justify later abortions, but these will be rare, and should be determined on a case-by-case basis, not by a big legal steamroller. Especially one wielded by old men and god botherers.

[wheelnut]

My problem with abortion is as follows:

I think, I hope, most people would agree that it's wrong to kill a one day old baby.
Most of those people would agree that it's wrong to kill a baby as the mother is in labour.
And a day before that, and another day before that,,, etc.

So when does it stop being wrong and start to become right? If it's wrong to kill a nine month old foetus, why isn't it wrong to kill a one month old foetus?

Should abortion be available in a safe and legal manner? Yes.

Should it be rarer than it is? Also yes.

[Asian Boss]

[Bwana]

My problem with abortion is as follows:

I think, I hope, most people would agree that it's wrong to kill a one day old baby.
Most of those people would agree that it's wrong to kill a baby as the mother is in labour.
And a day before that, and another day before that,,, etc.

So when does it stop being wrong and start to become right? If it's wrong to kill a nine month old foetus, why isn't it wrong to kill a one month old foetus?

One need only to look at what is known about fetal development to find the answers. Late term abortions are extremely rare events and typically involve a high rise pregnancy or one that is going south as far as the fetus' survival is concerned.

As an atheist, I'm not burdened by the notion of a soul (yes, I occasionally use the term). I've heard a load of bollocks about a fetal heartbeat being detected early in pregnancy. That is misrepresentation and is often used as an argument against abortion. The tissue that will form the heart is present and has electrical activity taking place but there is no heart as a functional organ and it isn't pumping blood. The centers of the brain required for conscious perception of pain aren't present/functional until about the end of the 2nd trimester/beginning of the 3rd. That brings us to about 20 to 21 weeks. An unwanted pregnancy should have long since been terminated. It will be the exceptions, the anencephaly babies, severe congenital defects, etc. that occur late in pregnancy.

[Bwana]

There's a good argument for the abortion issue to be in the jurisdiction of women and doctors, not male politicians.

And the other half of the population should have no opinion about the moral and ethical issues surrounding the subject?

An INFORMED opinion would be nice. Unfortunately the world is filled with uninformed ones. There's a good number of Republican legislators that have some really bizarre ones regrarding many issues. Not many of them are based in science.

[Saga Lout]

An INFORMED opinion would be nice. Unfortunately the world is filled with uninformed ones. There's a good number of Republican legislators that have some really bizarre ones regrarding many issues. Not many of them are based in science.

That sounds perilously close to you telling me that my opinion is uninformed because it differs from your informed opinion. That's the sort of thing I sometimes say for comic effect, but you seem to be serious,

[irie]

An INFORMED opinion would be nice. Unfortunately the world is filled with uninformed ones. There's a good number of Republican legislators that have some really bizarre ones regrarding many issues. Not many of them are based in science.

That sounds perilously close to you telling me that my opinion is uninformed because it differs from your informed opinion. That's the sort of thing I sometimes say for comic effect, but you seem to be serious,

It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that by ignoring the science you are ensuring that you remain uninformed.

[Ant]

An INFORMED opinion would be nice. Unfortunately the world is filled with uninformed ones. There's a good number of Republican legislators that have some really bizarre ones regrarding many issues. Not many of them are based in science.

That sounds perilously close to you telling me that my opinion is uninformed because it differs from your informed opinion. That's the sort of thing I sometimes say for comic effect, but you seem to be serious,

People don't like other people's opinion.

[Le_Fromage_Grande]

My problem with abortion is as follows:

I think, I hope, most people would agree that it's wrong to kill a one day old baby.
Most of those people would agree that it's wrong to kill a baby as the mother is in labour.
And a day before that, and another day before that,,, etc.

So when does it stop being wrong and start to become right? If it's wrong to kill a nine month old foetus, why isn't it wrong to kill a one month old foetus?

What if the woman has got pregnant through being raped?

[Saga Lout]

An INFORMED opinion would be nice. Unfortunately the world is filled with uninformed ones. There's a good number of Republican legislators that have some really bizarre ones regrarding many issues. Not many of them are based in science.

That sounds perilously close to you telling me that my opinion is uninformed because it differs from your informed opinion. That's the sort of thing I sometimes say for comic effect, but you seem to be serious,

It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that by ignoring the science you are ensuring that you remain uninformed.

"THE science"? The one true science that all must believe or be cast out as heretics? That science?

[cheb]

The science that right thinking people use.

[Horse]

It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that by ignoring the science you are ensuring that you remain uninformed.

"THE science"? The one true science that all must believe or be cast out as heretics? That science?

How many types of science are there?

NB:

heretic
/ˈhɛrɪtɪk/
a person believing in or practising religious heresy.

[Saga Lout]

It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that by ignoring the science you are ensuring that you remain uninformed.

"THE science"? The one true science that all must believe or be cast out as heretics? That science?

How many types of science are there?

Science is a process, a debate, a search for truth. Somebody proposes a theory, other people try to disprove it. the more it can withstand that debate the more likely it is to be true.

I asked the question: if it's wrong to kill a one day old baby and it'd wrong to kill a minus one day old baby (i.e. the day before it's born) and a -2 day old and a -3 day old, at what point does it become right to kill it. Working backwards from birth, when does it stop being wrong and start being right and who or what flips the switch?

NB:

heretic
/ˈhɛrɪtɪk/
a person believing in or practising religious heresy.

Erm... yes, that was my point. Hence the use of the words "one true".

[Count Steer]

I asked the question: if it's wrong to kill a one day old baby and it'd wrong to kill a minus one day old baby (i.e. the day before it's born) and a -2 day old and a -3 day old, at what point does it become right to kill it. Working backwards from birth, when does it stop being wrong and start being right and who or what flips the switch?

How about it's never 'right' but sometimes may be the least worst option?

[Noggin]

I asked the question: if it's wrong to kill a one day old baby and it'd wrong to kill a minus one day old baby (i.e. the day before it's born) and a -2 day old and a -3 day old, at what point does it become right to kill it. Working backwards from birth, when does it stop being wrong and start being right and who or what flips the switch?

I think it is rare that any woman 'wants' to 'kill' a foetus

But to ban it with no exceptions is somewhat short sighted

The people/politicians that force women (girls, children) to have babies they shouldn't have to or can't look after - are they going to support that child financially or emotionally?

No, thought not. Great idea then - force women, girls, children to have an unwanted/unplanned/forced upon them baby and then stand back saying "well, we did that right and saved that child. Gold stars all round" And fuck the consequences!! Fantastic!


I lived in Guernsey when abortion was illegal there. All that happened was the those in need flew/went by ferry to the uk and had one.

All the USA is doing is forcing those that need an abortion back into the hands of dirty backstreet abortionists with few qualifications and no legislation to keep those that need them safe

[irie]

"THE science"? The one true science that all must believe or be cast out as heretics? That science?

How many types of science are there?

Science is a process, a debate, a search for truth. Somebody proposes a theory, other people try to disprove it. the more it can withstand that debate the more likely it is to be true.

I asked the question: if it's wrong to kill a one day old baby and it'd wrong to kill a minus one day old baby (i.e. the day before it's born) and a -2 day old and a -3 day old, at what point does it become right to kill it. Working backwards from birth, when does it stop being wrong and start being right and who or what flips the switch?

NB:

heretic
/ˈhɛrɪtɪk/
a person believing in or practising religious heresy.

Erm... yes, that was my point. Hence the use of the words "one true".

In spite of @Bwana"s clear definition of the difference between a "foetus" and a "baby", for reasons known only to you you insist on conflating them. The question is why?

[Horse]

How many types of science are there?

Science is a process, a debate, a search for truth. ... the more likely it is to be true.

OK, so - typically, for any 'thing', at a point in time, at the then current state off that process - how many trues are there?

Erm... yes, that was my point. Hence the use of the words "one true".

Not my fault if you decided to introduce religion into it.

[Saga Lout]

OK, so - typically, for any 'thing', at a point in time, at the then current state off that process - how many trues are there?

None (probably). Many can usefully be assumed to be true. I.e. they convincingly explain natural events and/or can be used to predict future events. Until some better theory comes along and shows them to be false and they take their places on the (figurative) shelf alongside phlogiston and the philosopher's stone.

Are we getting into philosophy now?