to think they would feel differently if they had children?

[Violetbeauregardesgum]

Just reflecting that the three most vehemently pro-abortion, abortion on demand up till 40 weeks women I know are all child free. Was talking to one the other day and was taken aback by how uncompromising she was. The 32 week old baby that the woman was imprisoned for aborting was not a baby, all women have the right to end a pregnancy at any point.

I am pro choice but think the 24 week cut off is about right. AIBU to think they would feel differently if they had gone through a pregnancy to term themselves?

Does anyone else see both sides? My feelings are that both the mother and baby have rights. A forced birth is horrific and a forced death is horrific.

I swing to the side of pro-choice because children need mothers who love them and want them, and when they don’t get that their whole childhood is painful and most likely their adult life too. It’s kinder not to bring them into the world.

I sympathise with people who are pro-life and don’t see them as wrong and bad. It’s a heartbreaking thing to think about, especially if you have looked into how it works and seen images.

The bigger picture, if abortions were stopped, would be lots and lots more children and adults in pain. Look at us now. Mental health services are swamped and don’t know what to do.

So it cases of rape and contraceptive failure it's fine but otherwise not. But it's the same procedure, what difference does it make? And how would you even enfoce it? You cant prove contraceptive failure, and rape has a notoriously low conviction rape. It sounds like you just want to punish the mother.

Well there is not point because in practice no one is demanding any-stage abortions of healthy babies. You can have a theoretical belief and you can have an in-practice belief, and only the latter truly matters.

As a comparison - in theory I think it would be a better world if we all lived in lovely big houses with a garden and spare room. In practice this is completely unmanageable and I wouldn’t fight for legal changes.

I think that anyone who isn't advocating for either a total ban on abortion or for abortion to be available on demand for any reason at any point in pregnancy sees both sides. Thank goodness!

To add - I have children and have miscarried.

“based on random choice or personal whim”

What exactly is random about choosing 16 as age of consent or 24 weeks as abortion limit? Do you think k they picked a bingo ball out a machine? Nothing arbitrary about it.

This is all hypothetical speak though.

I could say “Isn’t it awful some people want police officers to perform sex acts on prisoners against their will” - it it would just be absolute irrelevant drivel that will literally never happen and getting wound up about it would just be plain odd

If it's entirely hypothetical and nobody would actually request a very late term abortion of a health baby, then I'll ask again: why does the current law need to change?

I still feel pretty happy that it's illegal for "police officers to perform sex acts on prisoners against their will" regardless of whether we are convinced it wouldn't happen even if it was made legal. And actually I have my doubts whether that's the case as well. Laws exist for a reason.

Well with phrases like killing babies I don’t think you are very pro choice.

What is extreme about my views exactly? Do you think I’m trying to force people to have abortions?

This is one of those issues where I think pro-lifers make up bogeymen to try to support their positions.

Abortion after 24 weeks is rare in the UK. It’s such an incredibly unpleasant procedure for the mother that I don’t believe any woman would opt to go through it unless she really needed to. I don’t believe any woman does it for fun. So, as late as necessary.

What’s more important is ensuring that women have access to the care and support they need as early and quickly as possible. Instead of focussing on statistically insignificant events.

And I know it’s been said a thousand times on this thread but don’t do the ‘they’d understand if they had children’ thing. It’s reductive, patronising, plays into negative stereotypes about childfree women… and it’s simply untrue.

I am not in favour of abortion simply
for the sake of it. It makes a difference, because in rape, the mother is defenceless, and it isn’t her fault. It’s a completely different situation to a couple having sex without contraception, and then just changing their mind about their unborn child. It’s not about punishing the mother, but actually taking responsibility for their actions. An unborn life didn’t ask to be punished by abortion.

What exactly is random about choosing 16 as age of consent or 24 weeks as abortion limit? Do you think k they picked a bingo ball out a machine? Nothing arbitrary about it.

Huh? Where have I said that?! I was responding to a post claiming that a baby only become a being whose sentience and rights should be part of the balance of rights considered in setting laws once it has "passed down the birth canal". Which is obviously nonsense given that many babies born at 26 weeks are totally sentient, feel pain and are certainly conscious humans. So arguing that one that happens not to be born until 40 or even 42 weeks is not because it is still inside the mother makes no scientific sense.

Please explain where I've objected to the age of consent?!?!? Or indeed the current abortion laws, which my posts have been supportive about...

It's hardly a bogeyman when you have people on this thread actually saying they think it should be legal for a woman in labour to get an injection to stop her baby's heart before she delivers.

So how do you propose to determine whether a woman was raped or not before you decide whether she can have an abortion?

Most of us saying it aren’t pro lifers, we just believe that the current limit for abortion is reasonable. Luckily the vast majority of women will have abortions with in that limit, but once that limit is passed other options like adoption have to be considered for an unwanted pregnancy. Except in the most extreme of circumstances.

i haven’t seen anyone creating a “boogie man” and saying that lots of people wait until late in pregnancy to abort just for fun. No one thinks that.

It is an extreme view to say it should be legal to terminate a healthy pregnancy at full term.

If that's not what your view is then I'm not sure what we are arguing about.

I’m not a doctor to determine this. Hypothetically speaking, it’s one of the scenarios, I consider it acceptable.

I’m not a doctor to determine this. Hypothetically speaking, it’s one of the scenarios, I consider it acceptable. And if so, should be done as early as possible, especially
before the baby becomes viable to live outside the uterus.

It makes a difference, because in rape, the mother is defenceless, and it isn’t her fault

Ah - fault. So it’s not about “right to life” and “killing babies”, it’s about punishing someone (well, the woman at least!) who has erred. Who is at fault. That’s clear at least. It’s about policing women’s behaviour.

I did say in my original comment, it’s both the mother and fathers fault, yes, for bringing an unwanted child in the first place,
then deciding to get rid of it.

So, just to clarify, you think that there is a medical test to determine whether a woman has been raped or not (there isn't, by the way), and that any woman seeking an abortion on grounds of rape should be forced to submit to it?

I did say in my original comment, it’s both the mother and fathers responsibility, for getting pregnant without contraception in the first place. It’s the the unborn child’s fault the parents went to get rid of them.

No woman is having a “forced birth” by being denied a late-term abortion.

The woman is giving birth anyway.

How else is the baby coming out if she isn’t giving birth to it?!

Even if she has a late-term abortion she’s still got to give birth to the baby.

Its such a ridiculous term.

Can I ask, what is the difference between aborting a baby at say 35 weeks, and killing one that has been born at the same age? Why is it ok to kill them inside the womb but not outside?

What.
I didn’t say that. 🙄 just saying, if rape happens to be the case, it makes sense for the woman to be given access to abortion.

Exactly. It’s not for forced if she chose to have sex. At late gestation, the birth is inevitable anyway.