Abortion?

[silentstriker]

It's an interesting strategy. Normally you don't see nations doing something like that, even though everyone knows a bunch of them do it - it would be weird for the State department to do that after a drone strike. I am not sure if it will have the intended affect though - surely the people being targetted know they're being targetted when people around them start getting blown up - and they don't need to be told on twitter. In terms of world opinion, this might backfire? Hard to say.

[Top_Cat]

M'thinks it's definitely for people outside of Israel. Need to put the word out that these are defensive assassinations.

[uvelocity]

Originally Posted by Jono

**** posting from UV (n)

not at all. the world would be a much nicer place with no people in it

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by Top_Cat

M'thinks it's definitely for people outside of Israel. Need to put the word out that these are defensive assassinations.

I think you're giving their PR department too much credit. That is, you're assuming their PR department exists. They're just being needlessly controversial and provocative because there's a culture in Israel of not giving a **** what the world thinks.

[Dan]

I do not like the idea of abortion as 'contraception'.
I do not like the idea of fetuses being aborted for convenience.
I do not like the idea of killing a potential human being.

However, those are my opinions, and my opinions only. I do not see why people want - no, demand - their opinions be made law. Abortion is obviously necessary in the case of rape, abuse, health of the mother cases .etc. I don't see why we should remove these options for women because of personal opinion.

If a woman decides to have an abortion, she's doing it for a reason. Who are we to make that decision for her? It isn't a decision made lightly, it isn't the 'easy way out'; it's a ****ing traumatic experience and one that must cause so much emotional stress. But a woman has the right to choose.

I reckon 'pro-life' has some nice, idealistic views that nobody need die. The world, however, is far from idealistic. So long as there is unwanted pregnancy, be it from rape, incest or otherwise; and so long as mothers are put in danger by pregnancies, abortion is a necessity. An unfortunate one, in my eyes, but a necessity nonetheless.

We have absolutely zero right to make these decisions for other people, and even less right to force women to carry babies they do not want.

[cpr]

Meh, remove the right to any abortion for none medical reasons (or due to other serious issues - eg rape etc) from the NHS, so if you want shut because you didn't keep your legs closed, then you have to pay. Obviously it'll be easier for rich kids to get daddy to pay for an abortion but hey, get on your feet and off your back and you too can earn enough to pay for a termination!

[silentstriker]

Cause clearly it's going to cost the government less when you force a young poor woman to bear a child that she doesn't want.

[Uppercut]

I would have imagined an abortion operation probably costs less than delivering a baby.

[cpr]

Originally Posted by silentstriker

Cause clearly it's going to cost the government less when you force a young poor woman to bear a child that she doesn't want.

Meh, the umblical cord isn't the only 'lifeline' we should be cutting....

[wellAlbidarned]

Originally Posted by rvd619323

I do not like the idea of abortion as 'contraception'.
I do not like the idea of fetuses being aborted for convenience.
I do not like the idea of killing a potential human being.

I don't think anyone has ever aborted for "convenience", the claim that many people do it willy-nilly is a complete myth, just like beneficiary-bashers claiming that the majority of the people on the dole are lazy, drugged up ****s who aren't willing to work.

Does aborting because having to look after a child you can't afford will mean throwing away prospects of higher education, a better career, and a better chance at being a GOOD parent later in life count as convenience? Aborting for non-medical reasons isn't just a selfish choice - it's making the choice that it would be unfair on the child for them to be brought up in reduced circumstances.

[cpr]

Originally Posted by wellAlbidarned

I don't think anyone has ever aborted for "convenience", the claim that many people do it willy-nilly is a complete myth,

Nope, I know many a person who has for that reason. CBA having a child, forgot the pill, etc, and some because Mr Celebrity X will pay hush money for an abortion and an easy life.

There are some classy young ladies out there, never forget that.

[Uppercut]

Yeah, well, it's none of our business to judge.

[silentstriker]

Originally Posted by cpr

Meh, the umblical cord isn't the only 'lifeline' we should be cutting....

Well unless you want to get rid of ALL of it, the last thing you'd get rid of would be the thing that would lead to starving kids on the street.

[Jono]

Would have thought a "don't use my tax funding on those dweebs" argument would apply to around 90-95% of other government expenditure before abortion. On average, the costs for not aborting a baby to the public coffers is far bigger than actually aborting it.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by cpr

Nope, I know many a person who has for that reason. CBA having a child, forgot the pill, etc, and some because Mr Celebrity X will pay hush money for an abortion and an easy life.

There are some classy young ladies out there, never forget that.

Yeah but so what? If that's what they want to do then let them.

Same people who bitch about that would be those who would whinge at all the unmarried mothers sucking on the teat of the tax payer.