To really want to say something to these abortion protestors?

[Crocodileclip]

Firstly, I know I will probably never say anything as I appreciate that the protestors have the right to protest but it really pisses me off.

A small group of people have been protesting outside the Marie Stoppes clinic in Belfast since it opened in 2012. They stand outside the door on the days it is open holding anti abortion posters and trying to gather signatures for a petition. I pass them on my way to get to the station at home time and every time it annoys me. I can't imagine how offputting they would be if you were young and scared and just wanting some advice. Lots of pics of aborted foetuses etc. I find it intimidating enough myself and I am just walking past. I actually put my head down and walk quicker so that nobody asks me to sign the petition.

I'm currently pregnant with my second and am lucky never to have been in a position where abortion was an option but am of the opinion that there are situations in which it may be the best option available.

The clinic itself operates within NI law so only offers abortions up to 9 weeks and as far as I know is the only such clinic in Northern Ireland. I think I would be ok with the protestors doing their stuff elsewhere in the city centre it is the fact that it is just outside the only entrance to the clinc that makes me irrationally angry. Does this happen at other Marie Stoppes clinics elsewhere in the UK?

confuddled, "A potentially healthy viable foetus has been prevented from growing"

Sorry, I thought you were talking about viable pregnancy rather than the stage at which it is viable outside the uterus (earliest was 21 weeks and 5 days iirc)

confuddled, I didn't mean to suggest that the soul comes from the genes. Just out of curiosity, if you believe the soul 'enters' (not sure what word to use here!) the foetus at conception - what do you think happens with identical twins? Do you think the soul 'splits'? I'm genuinely interested by the way in case this somehow comes across as me trying to be dismissive or something!

Nobody, "I KNOW abortion isn't without it's ramifications" I didn't say you didn't know that but if you're going to draw attention to potential difficulties/complications with alternatives to abortion then I can draw attention to difficulties/complications with abortion.

two fingers, I haven't used the life begins at conception argument.

"deliberate misinterpretation of other people's posts, accusations of 'goading', " Hmmmmm, now who else could be accused of this?

"two fingers, no, because I use the word some not all as those who have been accused of sweeping generalisations have done." - explaining why what I have said is not a generalisation.

"Even though you used 'in your experience' you were suggesting that all those in your experience are like that."

You wrote, "Anti-abortionists are, I have found, very good at insinuating that women have abortions for 'frivolous' reasons." You have said that this is saying "in your experience, you have found, that anti-abortionists are very good at insinuating that women have abortions for frivolous reasons. Even with the addition of, in your experience, you are still suggesting that 'in your experience, all anti-abortionists..."

"Yet you have just gone on to say "I have frequently heard anti abortionists" which suggests that not all of them have said this."

You then said "I have frequently heard which implies that you have not heard all of the anti-abortionists you know saying this. Therefore, your initial statement was a generalisation because even the ones you have do not all insinuate that women have abortions for frivolous reasons.

I hope that clarifies things a bit. There are nicer ways to say that you don't understand something and ask for further clarification than "this doesn't make sense."

second last para - "because even the ones you have had experience with do not all insinuate that women have abortions for frivolous reasons.

I don't know when the soul becomes a part of the foetus, I think it's something beyond science and definitive answers. I don't necessarily think it's conception, it's not really connected to my beliefs of when life starts.

You use viable in a different way to how I did which is why I misunderstood. I meant that it is a healthy conception that would grow into a healthy baby. Following that, you're saying that the conception isn't healthy until it implants.

confuddled, sorry, I thought you thought that life began when the soul entered the foetus and that was at conception. Maybe I have confused you with someone else.

I usually use viable in these discussions when we are talking about whether the foetus can survive outside the uterus but I thought we were talking about 'viable pregnancies' sorry if that caused confusion. I meant that even if the egg is fertilised, it won't necessarily implant. I think quite a high percentage of fertilised eggs don't implant.

I think I'm confusing. I do believe in life from conception but I don't know if that's when the "soul" becomes part of that life, I don't know what I believe about that, I was sort of musing about what that means I guess, when the foetus becomes the "person" (I'm not referring to personhood here).

Yes, usually I would say a viable baby to mean that it would live outside the womb but when I said viable foetus I meant one that would grow healthily.

The situation under which the foetus is conceived does not alter its right to life.

So you don't agree with it in cases of rape? Fucking barbaric.
How about cases of rape where the victim is a child?

The situation under which the foetus is conceived does not alter the mother's right to choice.

The reason I use 'some people think' is because it is not always my opinion that I am expressing

If anyone else wants to post on this thread, they can.

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't give a crap what YOU think other people think, I am talking to you & I, at least, would like to hear YOUR opinion.

The reason I use 'some people think' is because it is not always my opinion that I am expressing

Bit rich, given how you pick other people's posts apart, arguing about semantics, etc., and disregarding their other points.

I think the best thing we can take away from this thread and the wider discussion it's led to is that
(a) a massive majority (sweeping generalisation just for bumbley) think the OP is not being unreasonable in finding the demonstrators outside clinics utterly unreasonable;
(b) hardly anyone (another sweeping generalisation) has come out in support of further restricting abortion rights in the UK, which must be quite hard to stomach if you'd like to see women reduced to little more than incubators.
(c) Most posters (there I go again) - even the ones who have said they'd never choose an abortion themselves - recognise and believe in the principle of choice and the right of the woman to assert that choice.

There are nicer ways to say that you don't understand something and ask for further clarification than "this doesn't make sense."

There are nicer ways of explaining what you've written, other than suggesting posters 'read it again more slowly'.

Different, I don't expect you to agree with me. A life is a life.

I also explained why I was saying 'some people think' when I was talking about protestors. I'm not a protestor. I have given my own opinion on some things as well as indicating that sometimes my opinion is shared by other people. Many of you have used phrases such as 'most people', 'the majority', or spoken about collective beliefs of 'pro-choicers'.

"how you pick other people's posts apart, arguing about semantics, etc., and disregarding their other points."

What has this got to do with 'some people think' I haven't disregarded anyone's points.

'A massive majority' isn't a sweeping generalisation on this thread. It's a fact that the massive majority disagree with the idea that protestors are free to protest where they like.

Hardly anyone on this thread supports the idea of reducing the time limit. The majority of people surveyed in the UK would like to see a reduction.

Reading things more slowly should be the first thing to try if you don't understand something. Perfectly legitimate suggestion.

Will come back with thoughts on the recent issues highlighted when I get to a proper computer. But for the meantime...

A life is a life

Did you read the case in 2009, about the 9 year old Brazilian girl pregnant with twins after years of sexual assault at the hands of her stepfather.

A life is a life, fair enough. Easy to pontificate from a distance.

But what would you do if she was your daughter?

Yes, I had heard about it. IIRC the abortion was carried out because her life was in danger from the pregnancy.

Sorry for the quick post - I'm working now and I have a busy day but I will try to get back later.

Yes, I had heard about it. IIRC the abortion was carried out because her life was in danger from the pregnancy

I think that was the reason given, although it's a fairly vague reason under the circumstances. Younger girls have successfully given birth, although the twin thing is possibly unprecedented and I don't know if there were more acute medical issues.

But that's not what I asked. How would YOU feel if it were your daughter?

I haven't disregarded anyone's points.

Fine example above. Direct question asked and utterly ignored.

The majority of people surveyed in the UK would like to see a reduction.
Who carried out this survey? Where is the report?

Do you have daughters bumbley?

Some people think this is not untypical of the way many anti-abortionists think:
Women are fetal 'hosts'

As someone commented under a similar Washington Post article:
'so fetuses are human beings but women are not...'

Maid that 9yo in Brazil is my benchmark for fighting for abortion rights. Anyone who thinks she should have been forced to carry to term is heartless in my opinion. As I recall the Vatican threatened to excommunicate her, the doctors who carried out the termination but not the stepfather.

So if the foetus is a girl, that will become a woman, that will likely become pregnant, then its really not worth much either?

So really its about saving the male foetuses?

The Vatican is the worst place on earth. Seriously.

Confuddled

Life began several billion years ago and has continued in an unbroken chain ever since. Trying to decide which parts of this chain are worthy of moral consideration based on "biological viability" is futile, IMO.

As you yourself pointed out, what is "viability"? What do we mean by it? And how can that meaning be used universally to define what we think of as a form of life worth protecting?

Maid that 9yo in Brazil is my benchmark for fighting for abortion rights. Anyone who thinks she should have been forced to carry to term is heartless in my opinion. As I recall the Vatican threatened to excommunicate her, the doctors who carried out the termination but not the stepfather

I understand both her mother and the doctors involved were excommunicated, while the sexually abusive stepfather wasn't. The official position was that:

"He committed an extremely serious crime. But that crime, according to canon law, is not punished with automatic excommunication. Abortion is even more serious guff about abortion being a silent Holocaust "

Yes - I regularly drive past a group of religious protestors outside the Marie Stopes Clinic on the way out of Leeds. I also think it must be very intimidating if you are in difficult circumstances and pluck up the courage to go there for help/advice only to be confronted by a group of idiots standing around praying on the way in. I'm all for freedom to express your opinions but feel that this is misdirected at best.