Blog powered by Typepad

« Obama: Guru or Gump? Part II | Main | Obama: Guru or Gump? Part III »

Thursday, 31 March 2016


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

David, if you had been "dumped in the waste bin"...this blog would have to make do with the name " and Nonsense". That would not have the proper literary flow.

When you return, I suspect you might need to bring a mop.

And a first aid kit if the ladies read it!

No mud slinging from me. I gave birth to my lovely daughter, who is a bastard by birth as well. Being a mere 30 years ago, I knew the pressure that would be put on me to have an abortion, so I did not tell anyone until it was past the "legal" date. One of my sisters was furious, the rest of my family and friends were very supportive.
The thought of having an abortion was not something I was going to entertain. I am of one mind with you; life begins at conception and all life is precious and a gift from God.

I just don't think it's anybody's business except the lady carrying said child/person/thing.

David, I can agree with everything you said, and still think abortion should be left to the pregnant woman's decision. The difference between legal and illegal abortions may not be the number of abortions, but the unintended consequences, such as the back alley abortions.

Well done, Miss Red, my Mum would have nodded her approval!

I think, Andra, that "said child/person/thing" is entitled to an opinion!

Dom, I should have added another thought on this topic which is, alas, the exact opposite of yours. I do not think this topic is, so to speak, only women's business. On something that important - the life or death of a human being - we are all entitled to a view.

The term bastard was always inappropriate as the child had no say and no fault. There were times when I thought my father was a bastard and it was his fault.

missred, entirely your decision as it should be for all women.

No brown stuff from me, either. I agree entirely. No person's life should be dependent upon whether they are "wanted" (whatever that means) or not.

Just personally mind but, Andra's and Dom's thinking sorta much mirrors mine.

But. A slight correction is in order where, what The Donald was actually responding to: MSNBC's Chris Matthews (of Obama giving him "a tingle down the leg" fame) posed the question thusly;

"IF abortion was [Court] declared illegal would you [Donald Trump] punish the woman having the procedure?"

Much as I dislike Trump - the manner in which the question was posed - guaranteed a typical Trump response. But the Media's 'Bait 'n Switch' of course ...

The Democrats and fellow travellers in the USA media are clearly shitting themselves by dragging up this attempted diversion.
Trump is up for it.

How exactly do you stop a woman from getting an abortion if she wants one? The only question is, will it be safe or not. I'm not sure that legalized abortion has increased the number of abortions. I don't trust the statistics on this score, because the number of abortions before legalization is not well estimated. In any case, it's not like woman get abortions at the drop of a hat. It is a very difficult decision for them.

If life begins at conception how do you reconcile the coil as contraception within your mindset, when it is an abortion device?

It is quite true and not a point to be disregarded that if all abortion is banned then the number of back street abortions will rise and the number of blighted lives will rise as a consequence.

I am with our host in his point about the sanctity of human life.

Therefore my view is that it probably should be legal, but difficult. I think the legal limit is too high. These horrifying stories from the USA about Planned Parenthood turn the stomach.

Dom - the point is for some women, and I don't know how many, abortion has become an alternative to contraception. I suspect that for most it is quite stressful, as indeed it should be because they are terminating the life of a potential human being.

As with so many issues of this kind the problem starts with children not having a sound moral foundation.

In a civilised country abortion would be legal and a matter of choice for the individual woman. But, in a civilised country, public policy would be aimed at reducing abortion as much as possible.

I class myself as a right wing libertarian atheist so I believe people should be allowed to do whatever they wish as long as it does not harm others. The problem for me is that in my mind abortion does do harm to others. Unborn people however young and how little their conciousness has developed are still people. On the other hand humans have managed to cheat evolution and many are born and live longer than nature ever intended that they should. If abortion balanced that out then that would be fine but it does not. It is in fact humans yet again manipulating nature for their own selfish ends.

However I believe criminalising abortion would be wrong like many other things that we prohibit such as drugs and prostitution because making things illegal because they are morally repugnant to us gives rise to even greater evils. We should neither encourage or discourage abortion and we certainly should not fund it unless it is for proper medical reasons.

I seem to recall Mr Trump praising "planned parenthood", an organisation that largely though not entirely carries out abortions.
As ever it's difficult to know what the man plans to do, if in fact he has decided on any.

Trump is likely to do what most president's have done, act on advise from those close to him. It is likely he will give the military a boost to keep them quite and on side.

Duffers, as an ex NCO (substantive too, dammit!) you must have been used to having your legitimacy questioned. Mine was, along with pointed comparisons to the late unlamented Fuhreur's army rank.
Apropos of nothing at all; why is it always 'a junta of Colonels?' Why shouldn't there be a junta of Corporals? I'd have enjoyed that.

jimmy, while I agree the term bastard is now inappropriate (and I have never called my daughter that-I used the term as our esteemed host did), it wasn't always so. William the Conqueror was also known as William the Bastard. Only modern times have made the word bad form.
Saying that - because I had to! Dear Duffers and my daughter are in esteemed company - Confucious, Leonardo da Vinci, Thomas Paine, Alexander Hamilton and TE Lawrence to name a few as well as Billy above, are all love children.

Hmm, I've been called "bastard" and some other things in my life but it never slowed me down a bit. Sort of a term of endearment it seemed. If I ever conquer anything, I'll mention it.

An excellent post, Mr. Duff. I'll forgive and forget your dodgy opinion of the community organizer and align myself 100% with your remarks. We are supposed to defend the weakest and those not able to defend themselves. When did wholesale abortion become respectable?

missred, there was a time in Glasgow when the River Clyde was a hub for ships arriving from all over the world. And of course the crews would meet Glesga wummin and that is why a child was called half coffee half cream.

May I posit a little mind experiment?

Imagine it was possible to transfer a foetus to a synthetic womb housed in a hospital. And the procedure was no more trouble than having an injection. The unborn child could then gestate and be born unaided by and at zero inconvenience to the (ex-)mother - including at no future obligation to the child. The procedure and future upbringing commitment would then be the responsibility of the tax payer.

Would pro-abortionists be ok with making that procedure mandatory instead of abortion for those seeking abortion?

And likewise, what about the anti-abortionists?


The comments to this entry are closed.