Born Hunter 17,645 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 (edited) Some government stats here https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/652083/Abortion_stats_England_Wales_2016.pdf Jesus f***ing christ! Repeat abortions Thirty-eight per cent of abortions in 2016 were to women who had had one or more previous abortions, the same proportion as in 2015. So that's 70'000 of 185'000 that are not their first time....... Edited October 17, 2017 by Born Hunter 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
WILF 44,431 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 Some government stats here https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/652083/Abortion_stats_England_Wales_2016.pdf Jesus f***ing christ! Repeat abortions Thirty-eight per cent of abortions in 2016 were to women who had had one or more previous abortions, the same proportion as in 2015. So that's 70'000 of 185'000 that are not their first time....... More worrying is that medical people are sanctioning that because it require 2 signatures. That's a 140,000 medical people that didn't stop to think "hang on a minute ?" Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,645 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 Some government stats here https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/652083/Abortion_stats_England_Wales_2016.pdf Jesus f***ing christ! Repeat abortions Thirty-eight per cent of abortions in 2016 were to women who had had one or more previous abortions, the same proportion as in 2015. So that's 70'000 of 185'000 that are not their first time....... More worrying is that medical people are sanctioning that because it require 2 signatures. That's a 140,000 medical people that didn't stop to think "hang on a minute ?" I don't really want to get into this debate but that stat smacks of a really fundamental social irresponsibility. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie 6,362 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 Some government stats here https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/652083/Abortion_stats_England_Wales_2016.pdf Jesus f***ing christ! Repeat abortions Thirty-eight per cent of abortions in 2016 were to women who had had one or more previous abortions, the same proportion as in 2015. So that's 70'000 of 185'000 that are not their first time....... This is disgusting imo, women whod already had an abortion or two, had another f***ing abortion. God forgive me but couldnt these women learn to keep there legs closed, i mean come on ffs, 2 or three abortions in couple of years, thats disgusting an vile imo. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Kay 3,709 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 The '' selective abortion '' stats shocked me IVF patents abort some of the fetus , a bit of a contradiction if you ask me 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Accip74 7,112 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 (edited) Yep, people can use abortion irresponsibly, just like cars & guns....... Sounds like a case for Tommy Robinson? Haha.... Edited October 17, 2017 by Accip74 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,645 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 Yep, people can use abortion irresponsibly, just like cars & guns....... Yes but unlike cars and guns the act of abortion itself violates the 'harm principle'. Owning cars and guns doesn't in itself. The two aren't directly comparable imo. Essentially we have laws which prohibit an action that in itself is considered immoral because they are directly harmful to an innocent party (assault, murder, rape, theft etc) and we have laws which prohibit actions that can easily be abused and lead to such a immoral crime/harm, they're what I call preventative laws/crimes rather than moral ones. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Accip74 7,112 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 Yep, people can use abortion irresponsibly, just like cars & guns....... Yes but unlike cars and guns the act of abortion itself violates the 'harm principle'. Owning cars and guns doesn't in itself. The two aren't directly comparable imo. Essentially we have laws which prohibit an action that in itself is considered immoral because they are directly harmful to an innocent party (assault, murder, rape, theft etc) and we have laws which prohibit actions that can easily be abused and lead to such a immoral crime/harm, they're what I call preventative laws/crimes rather than moral ones. We have laws to ensure abortion is done responsibly. Abortion is legal under those circumstances. Sometimes it will be abused......... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie 6,362 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 I see 2% for fetal abnormalitys, which is very low, the doc has advised that the child is abnormal an to abort. So 98% of abortions are for the sake of it no immediate danger to mother or baby. Theres a couple who lives down the street, lady was pregnant an docs advised her that the child was badly deformed, but she didnt get an abortion an the child came out perfectly healthy, an iv read that yhis is common that doctors give a false prognosis. Even if the child was handicapped i still would not abort, its still a child, i know a few handicapped children, an there the most loving caring people i know. Theres a little lad call patrick in my sons class in school, seven years old, his we legs are crooked, he has a hard time walking, but hes loving life an cracking on an my son said he a sound wee lad, my son helps him all time. An my daughter just started p1, an theres a girl in her class, shes in a whellchair., my daughter got star of the week for helpibg this little girl, she pushes her round an plays with her, i didnt know any of this until she came home with a star an a picture of her an the wee gal. Every child deserves a chance in life,no matter what the situation. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Accip74 7,112 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 (edited) To all those that feel so strongly about it...............switch off your computers, get out the fcuking house & start campaigning! Maybe you'll get something done........however, feeling morally superior on a sub section of an Internet forum will achieve fcuk all! Edited October 17, 2017 by Accip74 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Born Hunter 17,645 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 Yep, people can use abortion irresponsibly, just like cars & guns....... Yes but unlike cars and guns the act of abortion itself violates the 'harm principle'. Owning cars and guns doesn't in itself. The two aren't directly comparable imo. Essentially we have laws which prohibit an action that in itself is considered immoral because they are directly harmful to an innocent party (assault, murder, rape, theft etc) and we have laws which prohibit actions that can easily be abused and lead to such a immoral crime/harm, they're what I call preventative laws/crimes rather than moral ones. We have laws to ensure abortion is done responsibly. Abortion is legal under those circumstances. Sometimes it will be abused......... But it's nothing at all like owning cars or guns. Owning a car isn't harming anybody. The act of aborting a unborn child fits the literal definition of the harm principle which we base our law on. Just because in certain circumstances we consider such a violation of our principles to be the lesser evil is neither here nor there. The two are totally different. Not to mention those 70'000 non first timers have fulfilled the legal requirement. They haven't abused anything legally. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dave88 1,565 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 (edited) I see 2% for fetal abnormalitys, which is very low, the doc has advised that the child is abnormal an to abort. So 98% of abortions are for the sake of it no immediate danger to mother or baby. Theres a couple who lives down the street, lady was pregnant an docs advised her that the child was badly deformed, but she didnt get an abortion an the child came out perfectly healthy, an iv read that yhis is common that doctors give a false prognosis. Even if the child was handicapped i still would not abort, its still a child, i know a few handicapped children, an there the most loving caring people i know. Theres a little lad call patrick in my sons class in school, seven years old, his we legs are crooked, he has a hard time walking, but hes loving life an cracking on an my son said he a sound wee lad, my son helps him all time. An my daughter just started p1, an theres a girl in her class, shes in a whellchair., my daughter got star of the week for helpibg this little girl, she pushes her round an plays with her, i didnt know any of this until she came home with a star an a picture of her an the wee gal. Every child deserves a chance in life,no matter what the situation. A fetal abnormality isn't going to be the only thing that may endanger the mother...i do agree that the stats are pretty shocking but i very much doubt that the other 98% are just having an abortion cos 'they feel like it'. Pregnancy due to rape is another reason...the mental health of the mother should play a part in decisions as well imo Edited October 17, 2017 by daveee88 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie 6,362 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 Maybe not, but the stats agree dave. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Accip74 7,112 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 Yep, people can use abortion irresponsibly, just like cars & guns....... Yes but unlike cars and guns the act of abortion itself violates the 'harm principle'. Owning cars and guns doesn't in itself. The two aren't directly comparable imo. Essentially we have laws which prohibit an action that in itself is considered immoral because they are directly harmful to an innocent party (assault, murder, rape, theft etc) and we have laws which prohibit actions that can easily be abused and lead to such a immoral crime/harm, they're what I call preventative laws/crimes rather than moral ones. We have laws to ensure abortion is done responsibly. Abortion is legal under those circumstances. Sometimes it will be abused......... But it's nothing at all like owning cars or guns. Owning a car isn't harming anybody. The act of aborting a unborn child fits the literal definition of the harm principle which we base our law on. Just because in certain circumstances we consider such a violation of our principles to be the lesser evil is neither here nor there. The two are totally different. Not to mention those 70'000 non first timers have fulfilled the legal requirement. They haven't abused anything legally. Fcuking yaaawwwwwn! You know I what was trying to say! Ffs Hahaha... Abortion can be used responsibly & irresponsibly. Some fcukwits should just never own a car or gun, just like some people are irresponsible & reckless with their bodies & abortion.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Francie 6,362 Posted October 17, 2017 Report Share Posted October 17, 2017 Another wee story, a girl lives few doors down had a baby girl, she was advised to abort because the child, had abnormalities, an yes the child had a bad heart, an the wee critter fought until she was three, the wee critter passed away last year. Her wee life was not in vain tho, the mother is called bronagh, an she has now gone on to adopt, a young 7 year old girl, who had an awful upbringing. My opinion is that everyone wont be dealt the same cards in life, but everyone deserves a chance to fight. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.