Alabama USA: Medieval or religious fundamentalist thinking?

A heathen, Bitch please, remember our go around last year on the Trump thread last year just after the Kaveaaugh thing. Pro Life pro Gun, you can't have it both ways.
Why not? it just means that you are giving the fetus a sporting chance of survival before open season begins ;0)
 
You clearly have a problem accepting those figures but there they are, in black and white, published in the scientific literature and in peer reviewed journals, by people that know more than we do. It's no good you slinging platitudes around every time someone presents evidence that disconfirms your outlook, that's a profoundly incorrect way to go through life
Oh, I don't have a problem with facts, particularly information in peer reviewed papers and I do find it entertaining when zealots try to use science to reinforce their medieval world view (the idiots using cod-science to avoid getting their children vaccinated being a case in point or the pseudoscientific cobblers that is the theory of ‘intelligent design’).

However, your assertion that one in five women in the U.K. are committing infanticide (I paraphrase) is ignorant bullshit, which even the anti-abortion website you linked to didn’t state (it says 22% end in abortion - murder isn’t mentioned).

Though like a lot of pressure group websites it is deliberately misleading in its use of information, to wit the glossing over of the quarter of pregnancies that end in miscarriage in order to make the percentage of women having an abortion bigger.

I repeat, one in five babies are not killed and saying they are is at best misguided, or at worst deliberate and wilful misinformation to promote a backward attitude that desires to treat women as little more than passive baby factories.
 
Morality asides, there does send to be an increase in the number of abortions in the UK (according to the link). I would like to see a full break down of the history leading to the abortion. Are they due to birth control failing or birth control not being used?
If it is the former, what is being done to prevent these birth control failure rates?

I am not religious but still see abortion as a very sad thing to go through. As a father of two I saw "life" in the womb as the moment soon my wife told me she was pregnant.

Prevention is always better, if the US right wing want to reduce the number of abortions then they need to promote prevention and family planning.
 
Oh, I don't have a problem with facts, particularly information in peer reviewed papers and I do find it entertaining when zealots try to use science to reinforce their medieval world view (the idiots using cod-science to avoid getting their children vaccinated being a case in point or the pseudoscientific cobblers that is the theory of ‘intelligent design’).

However, your assertion that one in five women in the U.K. are committing infanticide (I paraphrase) is ignorant bullshit, which even the anti-abortion website you linked to didn’t state (it says 22% end in abortion - murder isn’t mentioned).

Though like a lot of pressure group websites it is deliberately misleading in its use of information, to wit the glossing over of the quarter of pregnancies that end in miscarriage in order to make the percentage of women having an abortion bigger.

I repeat, one in five babies are not killed and saying they are is at best misguided, or at worst deliberate and wilful misinformation to promote a backward attitude that desires to treat women as little more than passive baby factories.
I never said women in the UK commit infanticide, I said one in five babies are killed. Please don't misrepresent me. I must admit I first read these stats with incredulity myself, but there they are, cold undeniable figures - one in five babies get killed. Since your arguments seem emotive rather than scientific, let’s just look at the numbers instead. Here are the official statistics: link (pdf)

They put the abortion ‘rate’ in England and Wales this way: ‘The age-standardised abortion rate was 16.0 per 1,000 resident women aged 15-44.’ It is calculated like this:

- number of abortions/number of women aged 15-44 (in thousands).

That’s one definition of ‘rate’, but not the best if I understand it correctly. The best is

- number of abortions/(number of births + number of abortions).

Or better still:

- number of abortions/number of conceptions.

I would call this the REAL abortion rate, in contrast it to the 'official' rate. The REAL rate will be higher, and probably much much higher, than the number they are touting.

I wasn't able to find what the real rate is for England and Wales, but according to one chart in 2013 there were about 54 million people in England and 3.1 million in Wales. If women aged 15-44 are represent 20% of these totals, then the total number of age 15-44 women is 11.4 million in 2016.

That same report said there were 190,406 abortions in 2016. So that would make my estimate of the official rate per 1,000 women at

190,406/11,400 = 16 per 1000. Which is the same as what they got. Meaning that the 20% estimate of the number of women in the 15-44 age bracket is reasonable.

Extrapolating would make about 900,000 conceptions in 2016, maybe a bit higher, maybe lower. They do not account for multiple births per woman, or miscarriages. But 900,000 is an OK ballpark. That would makes the REAL abortion rate about

190,406/900,000 = 21%.

In other words,

ONE OUT OF FIVE BABIES ARE KILLED IN ENGLAND & WALES.
 
Last edited:
A heathen, Bitch please, remember our go around last year on the Trump thread last year just after the Kaveaaugh thing. Pro Life pro Gun, you can't have it both ways.
Sure you can.

Why can’t I be pro life and not condone the murder of the unborn and helpless. Then be by pro 2A at the same time?

It’s a preservation of life mindset, whilst you folks prefer to abort often and engage in sword play. But you are also a fairly non religious society these days.
 
I never said women in the UK commit infanticide, I said one in five babies are killed.
They mean the same thing. Killing a baby is infanticide.

What you seem to be missing / ignoring is that what is developing inside the uterus only becomes a baby when it's born. First it is a blastocyst, then an embryo, then a foetus and so on.

No one is arguing with the statistics of how many abortions happen, the issue is you labelling every potential child as a baby. Imagine someone claiming that abortions kill pensioners because the foetus might become a pensioner later in life. Ridiculous but not a million miles from your phrasing.
 
They mean the same thing. Killing a baby is infanticide.

What you seem to be missing / ignoring is that what is developing inside the uterus only becomes a baby when it's born. First it is a blastocyst, then an embryo, then a foetus and so on.

No one is arguing with the statistics of how many abortions happen, the issue is you labelling every potential child as a baby. Imagine someone claiming that abortions kill pensioners because the foetus might become a pensioner later in life. Ridiculous but not a million miles from your phrasing.
So because the kid is in the womb and unable to draw breath on its own, it’s fair game ??
 
Sure you can.

Why can’t I be pro life and not condone the murder of the unborn and helpless. Then be by pro 2A at the same time?

It’s a preservation of life mindset, whilst you folks prefer to abort often and engage in sword play. But you are also a fairly non religious society these days.
It is the flip side of being pro abortion but mourning miscarriages. It all depends on perspective and if the pregnancy is wanted.
 
Morality asides, there does send to be an increase in the number of abortions in the UK (according to the link). I would like to see a full break down of the history leading to the abortion. Are they due to birth control failing or birth control not being used?
If it is the former, what is being done to prevent these birth control failure rates?

I am not religious but still see abortion as a very sad thing to go through. As a father of two I saw "life" in the womb as the moment soon my wife told me she was pregnant.

Prevention is always better, if the US right wing want to reduce the number of abortions then they need to promote prevention and family planning.
I agree prevention is better than cure and I find it curious that many of those that oppose abortion also oppose sex education and comprehensive access to contraception.

You’re right when you say that having an abortion is a sad thing and the development of a baby in the womb is quite magical, however I wouldn’t want to tell any woman that she must not have an abortion or legislate to prevent her.

I have in the past viewed and assisted in a number of surgical abortions (I was on placement in a day-surgery unit), and certainly the women I saw undertaking the procedure were far from casual about what they were doing, with a number being quite tearful before and/or after.

From what I’ve seen the myth that women casually use an abortion in lieu of contraception is just another bit of anti-abortion propaganda, though I’m sure amongst those seeking an abortion there will be some who are more laid-back about it than others, so to speak.

I don’t know for sure, but I suspect that the increase in the number of abortions taking place in the U.K. can be put down to the increase in population.

Edited for spelling.
 
Last edited:
I never said women in the UK commit infanticide, I said one in five babies are killed. Please don't misrepresent me.
I didn't misrepresent you.

Outside of a very specific set of circumstances (warfare for example) killing is murder and illegal, ergo when you say that a fifth of babies are killed you are saying that a fifth of babies have been murdered.

This is both biologically and legally incorrect.
 
I didn't misrepresent you.

Outside of a very specific set of circumstances (warfare for example) killing is murder and illegal, ergo when you say that a fifth of babies are killed you are saying that a fifth of babies have been murdered.

This is both biologically and legally incorrect.
Not all killing is murder. There is a difference, some killing is justified.
 
Not all killing is murder. There is a difference, some killing is justified.
Indeed, as I said, illegal except under very specific circumstances and infanticide is not one of those exceptions.

An abortion is not killing either a baby, a kid or a pensioner, though I apprecaite there are those who have trouble with the biology and want to redefine the legality.
 
Indeed, as I said, illegal except under very specific circumstances and infanticide is not one of those exceptions.

An abortion is not killing either a baby, a kid or a pensioner, though I apprecaite there are those who have trouble with the biology and want to redefine the legality.
When it reaches fetus stage how is not a baby?

It has a heartbeat.
 
When it reaches fetus stage how is not a baby?

It has a heartbeat.
Unfortunately there's no agreement in medicine, philosophy or theology as to what stage of foetal development should be associated with the right to life.
I admit, it does seem odd that there is a precise moment as to when this should be.
It varies from what point of view you have on it, which religion you follow, which country/state you live in.

;-)
 
When it reaches fetus stage how is not a baby?

It has a heartbeat.
At the foetus stage it is only a potential baby and up until around the 23 week mark the collection of developing cells cannot exist independently of the womb.

Which is why in the U.K. the latest one can have an abortion is 23 weeks, because prior to that it is not a baby in actuality and in law.
 
Unfortunately there's no agreement in medicine, philosophy or theology as to what stage of foetal development should be associated with the right to life.
I admit, it does seem odd that there is a precise moment as to when this should be.
It varies from what point of view you have on it, which religion you follow, which country/state you live in.

;-)
On this I agree. Every country and society is different.

In Alabama wanking in the shower would be genocide.
 
Last edited:
I don't think there is a thread you have posted on where you haven't managed to shoe horn in that you own guns and are prepared to use them. As you identify as a Christian do you not see a conflict with the Thou shalt not kill thing.
I think I'm right in saying that the Hebrew is best translated as "Thou shall not murder" which is a far more subjective concept. As you expect of something made up by priests who need wiggle room in their interpretation.

This holds true today, after all in America killing a man who is on his knees blubbering for his life is not murder if you are a member of a protected class and know the right magic words.
 
At the foetus stage it is only a potential baby and up until around the 23 week mark the collection of developing cells cannot exist independently of the womb.

Which is why in the U.K. the latest one can have an abortion is 23 weeks, because prior to that it is not a baby in actuality and in law.
Here in lies part of the problem. As medical science advances the chances of premature births also increases. We now see premature babies being born at 21-22 weeks and surviving. Yet for the first week outside the womb the law says they are not babies? Should UK law be reviewed too?

I think the is realistic end game for the US pro life lobby group is to reduce the time frame for late stage abortions.
 
IF a woman is the only one who gets a say then why do Men (and Women)who never met her have to pay for her choice with their taxes in the USA?
How did you work that out? Surely it's private health insurance that pays for procedurees or not?
 

Similar threads


New Posts

Latest Threads

Top