Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 1620 of 1791 FirstFirst ... 620112015201570161016181619162016211622163016701720 ... LastLast
Results 24,286 to 24,300 of 26864
Like Tree10278Likes

Thread: The American Politics thread

  1. #24286
    International Coach StephenZA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    South Africa / UK
    Posts
    11,742
    Because people are using the word fetus.... technically a fetus is at aprox 9 weeks; up till that point it is an embryo still developing.
    "The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they’ve found it."

    "I have neither the time nor crayons to explain it to you...."

  2. #24287
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Burgey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    The Castle
    Posts
    69,003
    Quote Originally Posted by sledger View Post
    Just building on the above, it's interesting how in English law, if you stab a pregnant woman in the stomach (let's say), and the fetus is killed as a result, this would not be murder.

    But, if you did this stabbing, and this caused the woman to give birth prematurely, and then the fetus/baby died, this would be murder.
    The born alive law here came under a fair bit of scrutiny after this bloody awful case:

    https://theconversation.com/when-unb...ability-104222

  3. #24288
    The Wheel is Forever silentstriker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    40,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Ausage View Post
    I think, theoretically at least, the woman's negligence is responsible for the death of the child in such a scenario. That's a much cleaner line than "has the mother exercised enough" or "is she eating right" though?

    Another example would be in cases where a pregnant woman has been assaulted with the express aim of harming/killing the child (but not killing the mother). To me that's straight up murder.
    So, let’s say you examine a pregnant woman and determine the fetus will die without immediate c section (this happens). The mother refuses. Do you use force to put her under anesthesia and perform surgery against her will to remove the baby?

  4. #24289
    Spanish_Vicente sledger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Elm, he do brood. And Oak, he do hate. But the Willow-man goes walking, If you stays out late.
    Posts
    48,132
    Quote Originally Posted by Burgey View Post
    The born alive law here came under a fair bit of scrutiny after this bloody awful case:

    https://theconversation.com/when-unb...ability-104222
    Yeah they've come in for flak here as well. Courts reluctant to diverge from them though, as there are so many aspects of the UK legal framework, not just criminal law, that rest on the premise that unborn people are not strictly "human".

    If the common law were to adopt a different approach in the criminal law context it would cause an unholy mess in other areas like human rights, trusts, succession, data protection etc.


  5. #24290
    123/5 Flem274*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    lockie ferguson should get a side gig with brazzers
    Posts
    41,350
    i find the overlap between people who are determined to outlaw abortion under most or even all circumstances, and people who want to remove social welfare systems, contraception access and other economic/practical safeguards from vulnerable families/single parents/children, an extremely interesting phenomena.
    StephenZA and NZTailender like this.
    Proudly supporting Central Districts
    RIP Craig Walsh

  6. #24291
    Cricketer Of The Year Ausage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    I'll show ye!!
    Posts
    8,675
    Quote Originally Posted by sledger View Post
    Out of interest (and apologies if you have already clarified this), but at which point for you would the fetus be considered human? At the point an egg becomes fertilised? At the point a fertilised embryo attaches to the uterus? Something else?
    That's a tough one. Even I have trouble squaring the bundle of congealed cells that is the first few weeks of the process with being a human. As such I find it hard to get worked up over something like the morning after pill. That said it's still the exact same entity as it is at 9 months, 2 years, 10 years, 36 years etc. I don't see a reason to draw the line anywhere but conception.

    But to me that's almost an academic (albeit interesting) point of argument. The point at which the vast majority of abortions happen is well past the point I'd have any question marks.
    Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.

    Too many bones, not enough CASH!!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEHMbJ_FVfA
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5oGJTUpbpA

    RIP Craig

  7. #24292
    International Coach StephenZA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    South Africa / UK
    Posts
    11,742
    Quote Originally Posted by Flem274* View Post
    i find the overlap between people who are determined to outlaw abortion under most or even all circumstances, and people who want to remove social welfare systems, contraception access and other economic/practical safeguards from vulnerable families/single parents/children, an extremely interesting phenomena.
    Beyond that even, as already pointed out majority of women who do have abortions do it for economic but also career reasons. It is often a forget affect that women have to put their lives 'on hold' for 9 months to have a child and even after that. Why does society penalise a women's career (and sometimes life) for having a child? And it is more than just keeping jobs open for expectant mothers to come back to, but an understanding that parents with kids have different time needs to that of a single person. Restructuring both the mindset and manner in which business operate should play a very important role in this sort of discussion.

  8. #24293
    Spanish_Vicente sledger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Elm, he do brood. And Oak, he do hate. But the Willow-man goes walking, If you stays out late.
    Posts
    48,132
    Quote Originally Posted by Ausage View Post
    That's a tough one. Even I have trouble squaring the bundle of congealed cells that is the first few weeks of the process with being a human. As such I find it hard to get worked up over something like the morning after pill. That said it's still the exact same entity as it is at 9 months, 2 years, 10 years, 36 years etc. I don't see a reason to draw the line anywhere but conception.

    But to me that's almost an academic (albeit interesting) point of argument. The point at which the vast majority of abortions happen is well past the point I'd have any question marks.
    This distinction has very significant practical dimensions though. In the UK anyone who isn't a doctor who performs an "abortion" will be committing a major criminal offence, whereas anything considered "contraception" is generally legal.

    The morning after pill is considered to be "contraception", which is controversial, given that it is a tool that can be used to stop pregnancy after an egg is fertilised, whereas most contraceptives function by stopping said fertilisation from happening in the first place.

  9. #24294
    International Coach StephenZA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    South Africa / UK
    Posts
    11,742
    Quote Originally Posted by sledger View Post
    The morning after pill is considered to be "contraception", which is controversial, given that it is a tool that can be used to stop pregnancy after an egg is fertilised, whereas most contraceptives function by stopping said fertilisation from happening in the first place.
    Technically 'morning after' pills prevent fertilisation (and/or implantation), does not cause an 'abortion' after an egg is fertilised (there is another pill that does that).
    Last edited by StephenZA; 08-04-2019 at 05:44 AM.

  10. #24295
    Spanish_Vicente sledger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Elm, he do brood. And Oak, he do hate. But the Willow-man goes walking, If you stays out late.
    Posts
    48,132
    Quote Originally Posted by StephenZA View Post
    Technically 'morning after' pills prevent fertilisation (and/or implantation), does not cause an 'abortion' after an egg is fertilised (there is another pill that does that).
    As I understand it the morning after pill is capable of either:

    - Stopping the release of eggs;

    - Preventing released eggs from being fertilised; and/or

    - Stopping a fertilised egg from becoming attached to the uterus.

    The actual affect had will vary depending on how far along the biological process the person involved is.

    To many, this third possibility, is akin to an abortion. This argument has been made by many in the UK, but particularly the Society for Protection of the Unborn Child (SPUC), who have gone to court to contest the legality of the pill on precisely this basis.
    Last edited by sledger; 08-04-2019 at 05:53 AM.

  11. #24296
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    55,664
    The Catholic Church has always been deeply sceptical of the pill on similar grounds as well IIRC.
    citoyens, vouliez-vous une révolution sans révolution?

    those nights were on fire
    we couldn't get higher
    we didn't know that we had it all
    but no one warns you before the fall

  12. #24297
    International Coach StephenZA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    South Africa / UK
    Posts
    11,742
    Quote Originally Posted by sledger View Post
    As I understand it the morning after pill is capable of either:

    - Stopping the release of eggs;

    - Preventing released eggs from being fertilised; and/or

    - Stopping a fertilised egg from becoming attached to the uterus.

    The actual affect had will vary depending on how far along the biological process the person involved is.
    Yep. Technically an abortion is when you terminate an implanted viable fertilised egg- embryo.

  13. #24298
    Spanish_Vicente sledger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Elm, he do brood. And Oak, he do hate. But the Willow-man goes walking, If you stays out late.
    Posts
    48,132
    Quote Originally Posted by StephenZA View Post
    Yep. Technically an abortion is when you terminate an implanted viable fertilised egg- embryo.
    Well yeah, to you and I perhaps, but my point was that not everyone would agree with that.

  14. #24299
    International Coach StephenZA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    South Africa / UK
    Posts
    11,742
    Quote Originally Posted by Spark View Post
    The Catholic Church has always been deeply sceptical of the pill on similar grounds as well IIRC.
    Technically the Catholic church is truly idiotic on this ground.... argument being that anything that prevents the fertilisation of an egg is preventing the creation of a child. Thank goodness many priests are brighter than this. i.e. when the priest went to my grandmother after the 9th child and said 'here is a condom'...

  15. #24300
    Cricketer Of The Year Ausage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    I'll show ye!!
    Posts
    8,675
    Quote Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
    So, let’s say you examine a pregnant woman and determine the fetus will die without immediate c section (this happens). The mother refuses. Do you use force to put her under anesthesia and perform surgery against her will to remove the baby?
    I don't know if I'm honest. I think the mother (who had presumably decided she wanted the baby) would be acting negligent in the extreme. Does it warrant forcibly putting her under to save the baby? It might I suppose. I'd certainly have no problem with deception if that was an option. Either way, I certainly don't like the idea, but I don't see there being much question if the same actions were necessary to save the child's life once it was born.

    Again though, I'll point out I don't even like the idea of people being jailed for aborting their babies. I just think the scale of the death we're inflicting is horrific on a level far above anything Alabama is proposing and that for too many people it's just a straightforward civil rights issue to the point that we ban people protesting it, heap scorn on those providing services that steer folks away from it and celebrate when we expand our laws to allow us to murder with ever more freedom.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The British Politics Thread
    By cover drive man in forum News and Politics
    Replies: 18012
    Last Post: Yesterday, 07:21 PM
  2. Media
    By SirBloody Idiot in forum Cricket Web Tennis
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 06-08-2011, 07:10 AM
  3. FAQ & Introduction Thread
    By Magrat Garlick in forum Cricket Web Tennis
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 20-06-2011, 12:06 PM
  4. Finally ! A Last Word Thread
    By SJS in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-01-2010, 08:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •