my body my choice

[EMS]

What a world we live in, you may see on TV news of countries where children are suffering from hunger and need aid and you pay for it willingly, do the mother's of these children have a choice over their bodies or is it a lack of knowledge? I remember that at one time in the UK it was natural to have large families, some having 15 children as they were needed to work on the land or in factories to earn money. it is a pity that people do not know the value of what they have and how to appreciate it

It is not a lack of knowledge, it is action without responsibility. Let's take Africa as you have brought up the hunger issue....Of course the women know what they are doing, if they have sexual intercourse and its the right time, they will become pregnant. Women aren't stupid lol At this time I would also like to bring up AIDS briefly, African men were being educated on AIDS and the transference, they were also tested and some did have it and were given condoms and advice on not spreading it, openly in TV interviews some of the men said they didn't care and won't be wearing protection. That right there is an unbelievable amount of hate for women. Right back to the other bits....need aid, Sir Bob Geldoff, himself said openly that there is no point continuing with aid to africa because they just become reliant on it and don't do anything for themselves because they know they will keep getting aid.

Everyone and their dog has got their hand out at the minute, I've noticed a huge rise in charity advertising on TV stations and some of them have no right to put their hands out and no one has any money anyway, well not here they don't, fuel hitting £2 a litre, food prices going up, domestic energy supplies going crazy high. My electric bill doubled from the last quarter and everyone puts it down to the evasion of the Ukraine, which again is bollocks. There is a charity advert at the moment and its asking to support girls in other countries where there is child marriage etc and some of them saying oh I didn't know this sort of thing was happening....jesus h christ do they not read the media, watch the media or listen to the media. In the UK, there are grooming gangs all islamics and recently there was one gang made up of 30 men and 1 white woman, something like that. Two muslims walked up to a mother and asked her how much for her daughter, its happening here and no one is doing bugger all. Did you know that labour run councils tell the police to ignore the grooming gangs? So, if Catholics win the votes on anti abortion, what about our children that could very well end up pregnant and can't have abortions? This is why it should be done on an individual case not just no abortions

Yes, SOME families in the UK have a large amount of children but that happens everywhere in the world apart from China and North Korea, to which, China is suffering for their decision of only 1 child per family, huge generation gap and those that were born do not want to stay in the villages they want to go to the cities, leaving the elders to try and fend for themselves.

 

[zaferali]

if a couple feels compelled to have a larger family they should have the legal freedom to do so

yes I agree, but not the legal freedom to make others pay for it ( child allowances )

China and North Korea, to which, China is suffering for their decision of only 1 child per family,

but they did learn from their mistakes and have now adjusted it to 3 children.

 

[EMS]

yes I agree, but not the legal freedom to make others pay for it ( child allowances )


but they did learn from their mistakes and have now adjusted it to 3 children.

I think its 2 but its a little too late for the older generations.

 

[zaferali]

I think its 2 but its a little too late for the older generations.

You know the saying, "Better late than never"
I have just thought of how many females who have had one abortion, have had a second one?
Also in China when having only one child was in force, what controls were used to enforce this?
Also being a mother means being a person who cares for her family and home, ( A very important position) where the father is or should be the provider and that means knowing what you have and how to use it and look after it.

 

[EMS]

You know the saying, "Better late than never"
I have just thought of how many females who have had one abortion, have had a second one?
Also in China when having only one child was in force, what controls were used to enforce this?
Also being a mother means being a person who cares for her family and home, ( A very important position) where the father is or should be the provider and that means knowing what you have and how to use it and look after it.

Don't think you get it or have seen what is happening but the old are on their own in china.....the children do not want to be in the villages in the middle of no where they want to be in the cities, so when the child leaves, they have no one else to look after them. It doesn't matter if the communist peoples republic of china has changed the ruling or not, there will be several generations of old people that have no one left to help them.

what controls were being used to enforce it? lmfao you don't know communism very well do you......they are in fear of spending the rest of their lives in prison or worse still dead. The chinese communist governments have people everywhere across China, reporting people on a daily basis. Hospitals had to report people if they had more than one and the records will show that they have. If the hospitoal staff don't report them, they face life in jail or dead too.

"also being a mother means being a person who cares for her family and home whilst the father is the provider" ? Not a sexist comment at all. I, for one am happy to stay at home and look after any mini me's I have with the droid woman that I am in a relationship with at the moment.

 

[zaferali]

Don't think you get it or have seen what is happening but the old are on their own in china.....the children do not want to be in the villages in the middle of no where they want to be in the cities, so when the child leaves, they have no one else to look after them. It doesn't matter if the communist peoples republic of china has changed the ruling or not, there will be several generations of old people that have no one left to help them.

this maybe true? but you could say that it applies to many other countries as well and they are not communist, that includes the UK. People have a tendency to see what they want to see, but you come back to the main point again, "my body my choice" so you have to look after it, or others are involved then it is not your choice is it?

 

[Dr Pickles]

Another interesting perspective - link at the end.

My dog, my choice?
Posted on August 7, 2022

"My body, my choice" is a favorite slogan of abortion advocates. It's thin gruel.

To the extent this slogan is an analysis and not just a chant, it assumes the conclusion. It assumes that a fetus anywhere from hours old to nearly born is simply owned in a legal property sense by the mother in whom it resides.

But that's the whole question, right? That question is not answered by just determining the location of the fetus. If it were, then a mother wrapping her arms around her baby or toddler or husband could make the same argument; "My body, my choice." Or could leave a toddler outside the house overnight with the argument, "My house, my choice."

In other areas of law, philosophy, religion and morality, we don't subordinate the rights of living creatures to legal property interests. The left's sudden libertarian argument that it can do whatever it wants with whatever it owns seems not apply in such things as building codes that require carbon monoxide detectors in "my" house. Or laws against indecent exposure of "my" body. Or noise ordinances against "my" stereo. Or laws against me ending "my" life. Or laws requiring me to wear a seat belt in "my" car.

So, what about, "My house, my body, my stereo, my life, my car, my choice"?

You may reply that in those examples, there's a societal interest countervailing the individual interest. We don't want people to have to see your naughty bits, or hear your noise, or breathe your car's emissions. But what about the laws requiring carbon monoxide detectors in my house? And what about the laws requiring me to wear a seat belt? And laws prohibiting me from ending my life? It's hard to argue that society has a direct interest in those things.

Here's another example. Suppose a person buys a dog. Unlike a soon-to-be-born baby, the dog is indisputably owned by its owner. The dog is legally the owner's property.

Suppose further that the dog owner decides when the puppy is about eight months old that he doesn't want a dog after all. It's too much effort, too expensive, too constraining, too interfering with the owner's dating life, and too limiting on the travel that's necessary for the owner's career.

Note that there's an alternative for a dog owner who changes his mind. He can bring the dog to the animal shelter where another person can adopt it.

Should the owner be allowed instead to slice and dice the dog with a machete and vacuum up the bits, as we do with a fetus in a dilatation and extraction abortion?

After all, my dog, my choice. And after all, a dog is not a human being, is it?

No, we don't allow that, and we shouldn't. The reason we don't allow that is that we're not barbarians. We don't have public executions either.

So, the abortion-on-demand crowd is left with the position that dogs have more right to life than 8-month-old unborn babies. Really?

There's ownership and there's ownership. What you "own" is not determinative of what you're allowed to do with it. Society has a legitimate interest in regulating activities that lessen us as a culture.

After that little rant, you might assume I'm an abortion abolitionist. I'm not. I see it as the most difficult political/social/moral/legal issue of our time. I firmly believe the Supreme Court was right in deciding in an exercise of judicial modesty that it's not a decision for them but for the people. As one of those people, I would favor state legislation that bars abortion in most instances after 15 weeks, as they do in most of Europe and all of Mississippi, but not before.

In that, I think I'm balancing legitimate and even a few illegitimate interests of a mother against legitimate interests of society and legitimate interests of the living creature within her womb. I recognize that others may reach a different balance. That's why this is a decision for the people, not the judges.

It's complicated. Saying that a fertilized egg is a human being like you and me that is entitled to all the protections of one, and so "abortion is murder," does no more to illuminate the discussion than saying "My body, my choice." Let's get beyond sloganeering.


the Aspen beat
Glenn K. Beaton is a writer and columnist living in Colorado. He has been a contributor to The Wall Street Journal, RealClearPolitics, Powerline, Instapundit, American Thinker and numerous other print, radio and television outlets.

https://theaspenbeat.com/about/

 

[Dr Pickles]

This is a pretty recent update of a survey in the United States from an organization that I feel is reliable.


What the data says about abortion in the U.S.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/06/24/what-the-data-says-about-abortion-in-the-u-s-2/

 

[EMS]

You can't say that about the UK.....no couple has ever been threatened with jail or death if they have more children than the state permits, which is definitely not the case in the UK. You keep referencing the UK like it is a model that everywhere else should be compared to. Why not pick the US? Some states still allow underage marriage, Australia, New Zealand. The UK isn't the bar for all things.

Its not maybe true, it is true lol

 

[zaferali]

You keep referencing the UK like it is a model that everywhere else should be compared to

I was born there (1937) and I knew what the conditions were like when I was a child, (2nd World War) so there I had first hand knowledge and we live and learn as we get old older, or we should do.

 

[EMS]

I was born there (1937) and I knew what the conditions were like when I was a child, (2nd World War) so there I had first hand knowledge and we live and learn as we get old older, or we should do.

You do realise that 1937 was over 75 years ago? lol Things have changed so much in that time. Sexism is out of the window and not one government across the world has learnt from history and that includes the backwards thinking communist British government

 

[zaferali]

You do realise that 1937 was over 75 years ago? lol Things have changed so much in that time. Sexism is out of the window and not one government across the world has learnt from history and that includes the backwards thinking communist British government

Time does pass and things change, but human nature has never changed and never will do, a lioness only kills when she needs food for herself and family, a human kills because he or she enjoys it.