Alabama has banned abortion!

[Roses]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48275795

Even if a woman has been raped she will still be expected to carry on with the pregnancy!   No doubt the back street abortionists will be very busy indeed. All women should have the absolute right to obtain a termination, for whatever reason, in the first trimester.

[Walter]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48275795

Even if a woman has been raped she will still be expected to carry on with the pregnancy!   No doubt the back street abortionists will be very busy indeed. All women should have the absolute right to obtain a termination, for whatever reason, in the first trimester.

and whom do you expect is going to perform it . You?

[jeremyp]

and whom do you expect is going to perform it . You?

Prior to Roe v Wade there was no shortage of back street abortionists in the USA. This is a tragedy for women in Alabama

[wigginhall]

It's probably unconstitutional, and a judge may well say this.  However, the aim of pro-lifers is to appeal all the way to the Supreme Court, where they hope the Trump appointed conservatives may annul Roe vs Wade.  Or they may declare states'  rights, so that each state can determine their policy on abortion.  In other words, red states will ban it, blue states allow it.  Scary times.

[Alan Burns]

Looks like the tide is finally turning against the ever increasing onslaught of the abortion industry, as people realise that there are two lives involved, and both lives matter.

[Nearly Sane]

Looks like the tide is finally turning against the ever increasing onslaught of the abortion industry, as people realise that there are two lives involved, and both lives matter.

Rape apologist

[jeremyp]

Looks like the tide is finally turning against the ever increasing onslaught of the abortion industry, as people realise that there are two lives involved, and both lives matter.

The “abortion industry” is not having an onslaught against anybody.

The Alabama law, on the other hand potentially criminalizes women who have miscarriages, something that you believe your god ordained should happen to about half of unborn babies.

[ippy]

Looks like the tide is finally turning against the ever increasing onslaught of the abortion industry, as people realise that there are two lives involved, and both lives matter.

I have to admit you do manage to hang on to your rather irrational viewpoint no matter how much reason is laid out before you.

It'd be irrational to do anything that encourages the return of back street abortions and that's only one of quite a few good reasons for legal and as safe as can be abortions, just as the other reasons that have already been mentioned here on this thread.

If you have fundamental reasons to be against abortion, fine, don't let yourself get involved in it, it's not for your organisations to or any of the other organisations like yours to make up our minds for us.

So if you want to worship Leprechauns, fine, just don't expect the rest of us to join you or be forced to do so.

ippy

[Roses]

Looks like the tide is finally turning against the ever increasing onslaught of the abortion industry, as people realise that there are two lives involved, and both lives matter.

A foetus until it is viable has only the potential to become a living, breathing human being. The welfare of the mother must always come first.

[Walter]

A foetus until it is viable has only the potential to become a living, breathing human being. The welfare of the mother must always come first.

I'm with you there Lr

[Robbie]

Me too.

I think that some people who call themselves 'pro life' are totally insulated against rape, incest, risk of life to the mother. Nothing like that has happened to them or to their daughter or wife. They've read about it but it's not real to them so they can be theoretical.

[SteveH]

Me too.

I think that some people who call themselves 'pro life' are totally insulated against rape, incest, risk of life to the mother. Nothing like that has happened to them or to their daughter or wife. They've read about it but it's not real to them so they can be theoretical.

And they're not "pro-life" unless they're also vegans, pacifists, and opponents of hunting and the death penalty. Otherwise, they're just anti-choice.

[Robbie]

Good points. I was using their own description of themselves.

[ProfessorDavey]

And they're not "pro-life" unless they're also vegans, pacifists, and opponents of hunting and the death penalty. Otherwise, they're just anti-choice.

I think many of those who are 'pro-life' on religious grounds restrict the 'pro-life' stance to innocent human life - hence getting themselves a get out of jail free card allowing them to support hunting, capital punishment etc.

[wigginhall]

You've got to give Burns full marks for economy.  Rape apologist, incest apologist and misogyny,  all in one sentence.

[Robbie]

He hasn't thought it out, it's not real to him.

[SteveH]

You've got to give Burns full marks for economy.  Rape apologist, incest apologist and misogyny,  all in one sentence.

Please explain where he defended rape or incest, or attacked women.

[wigginhall]

Please explain where he defended rape or incest, or attacked women.

The Alabama ruling is saying that victims of rape should bear their rapist's child, ditto incest, and Burns seems to agree.  The whole ruling is an attack on women.

I keep reading about women with gynaelogical problems, who are saying that they will have to get sterilized as if they get pregnant, abortion will not be allowed.  The inhumanity of it.

[SteveH]

The Alabama ruling is saying that victims of rape should bear their rapist's child, ditto incest, and Burns seems to agree.  The whole ruling is an attack on women.

He didn't say anything of the sort.

[Nearly Sane]

He didn't say anything of the sort.

You don't think that he seems to agree with the Alabama law making?

[Anchorman]

Looks like the tide is finally turning against the ever increasing onslaught of the abortion industry, as people realise that there are two lives involved, and both lives matter.

Yes, BOTH lives matter. Would you ruin one at the expense of the other? This is not an easy subject, and there is no simple solution. The modern trend for people labelling themselves 'evangelicals' to automatically endorse a no-abortion stance is relatively recent, as is the assumption that Christians automarically ttake the same stance. Whilst the UK acts may need revision in the light of medical advances, never forget that the 1966 act was sponsored by a committed Christian, and that several denominations here endorse his stance. Thangs are not always black and white. (Given Alabama, no pun intended) https://eewc.com/evangelicals-open-differing-views-abortion/

[wigginhall]

I notice that Trump has said he supports exemptions for rape and incest.  There is some commentary that he may have doubts about total abortion bans, as a lot of women would be very angry.  It would also annul the famous precedent of Roe vs Wade, which of course, the Supremes can do, but it looks very radical.  A vote loser?

[SteveH]

You don't think that he seems to agree with the Alabama law making?

Yes, he probably does, and I strongly disagree with it, but that does not mean that Alan condones rape; I'm sure he condemns it as strongly as any of us. I suspect he'd argue against abortion for rape victims on the ground that it isn't the foetus's fault, so it shouldn't suffer, the asnwer to which is that the aborted foetus doesn't suffer, at least in early abortions, and I think the time limit should be no more, maybe less, than 20 weeks, except when the mother's life is at risk or when the foetus has been found to have severe abnormalities which will mean that it can't long survive birth, or is already dead. That would not affect rape survivors, who could have an early abortion.

[Roses]

Maybe AB will clarify his views on this topic.

[jeremyp]

Yes, he probably does, and I strongly disagree with it, but that does not mean that Alan condones rape; I'm sure he condemns it as strongly as any of us. I suspect he'd argue against abortion for rape victims on the ground that it isn't the foetus's fault, so it shouldn't suffer,

I agree. If you truly believe that aborting a foetus at six weeks is morally murder and therefore it should be banned, then you can't allow exceptions based on who the father of the foetus was or the circumstances of the conception.

You might argue that the damage to the psychological or physical health of  the mother could balance the moral wrong of doing the abortion, but I don't think you'd find any pro-lifer arguing that unless the mother's life was in danger of being lost and even if they did, it opens up the possibility of allowing abortions in other circumstances which they do not want.

So, supporting making abortion illegal even for rape victims is not rape apology.