100 meter exclusion zone

[TOMO 26,179]

very sad story that scot...

[WILF 46,817]

22 minutes ago, Rusty_terrier said:

Second time ive posted this link it never got much response the first time. So what do the folk who are pro life make of this ?

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/brave-woman-22-forced-abort-12336336

It’s an acute medical condition and the poor girl had no choice.

Its very, very sad and you would have to be totally heartless to not feel sympathy for the girl.

edited to add:

When we talk about these women like they are all a victim, the poor girl in that story really is a genuine victim.

 

Thats completely different to having an abortion (and it being made easy for you) because it don’t fit with your career or because you just don’t want to have the child, it don’t fit with the finances, wanted to get a few more years of holidays in before we get older, already got 4 and can do without another, not sure my partner is going to stick around or any of the other myriad shit excuses.

 

 

Edited April 11, 2018 by WILF

[scothunter 12,609]

Yea but the fact you missing mate you don't know the reason for any of these women going into that clinic. They may Very well Be having the same trouble as this young lassie. But she has to pass a gauntlet of rabid protestors. 

 

[WILF 46,817]

3 minutes ago, scothunter said:

Yea but the fact you missing mate you don't know the reason for any of these women going into that clinic. They may Very well Be having the same trouble as this young lassie. But she has to pass a gauntlet of rabid protestors. 

 

The uncomfortable side of freedom mate.

This week its their freedom, next week it’s yours......that matters mate.

[TOMO 26,179]

whilst i dont agree with wilf or francie on this subject....that story above is a very similar story to a close friend of my wife....she was diagnosed with breast cancer whilst in the early stages of pregnant ...she was also advised to have a termination.....she didnt ....docs wernt happy.....she got ill of course ...apparantly whilst being pregnant your estogen levels increase wich premotes the cancer growth..in other words it spreads quicker whilst pregnant ....anyway they delivered the healthy boy early at 32 weeks so they could start her treatment....and  is alive and well 7 years later...

ok every story is difrent and she was lucky .....

now weather having the termination would have stopped her having to have a mastectomy i cant say...and her son might be on the autistic spectrum ......but after all threse things she is very glad she refused the termination....

 

i will be honest here..if she had been my wife i would have been begging her to terminate....not because we couldnt look after and love another child...but because i wouldnt want to risk loosing her

[Born Hunter 17,763]

7 minutes ago, scothunter said:

Yea but the fact you missing mate you don't know the reason for any of these women going into that clinic. They may Very well Be having the same trouble as this young lassie. But she has to pass a gauntlet of rabid protestors. 

 

Just wanted to add some facts to this. Interpret them as you will.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/679028/Abortions_stats_England_Wales_2016.pdf

 

1.4 A legally induced abortion must be certified by two registered medical practitioners as
justified under one or more of the following grounds:

A the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant
woman greater than if the pregnancy were terminated (Abortion Act, 1967 as
amended, section 1(1)(c))

B the termination is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or
mental health of the pregnant woman (section 1(1)(b))

C the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of
the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of
injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman (section 1(1)(a))

D the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of
the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of
injury to the physical or mental health of any existing children of the family of the
pregnant woman (section 1(1)(a))

E there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such
physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped (section 1(1)(d))

or, in an emergency, certified by the operating practitioner as immediately necessary:

F to save the life of the pregnant woman (section 1(4))

G to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant
woman (section 1(4))

 

In 2016, 97% of abortions (180,794) were undertaken under ground C. A further 2% were
carried out under ground E (3,208 abortions) and a similar proportion (1%: 1342 abortions)
under ground D. Grounds A and B together accounted for very few abortions (246). The
remaining 6 cases were performed under grounds F or G. Ground C abortions have
consistently accounted for over 95% of abortions over the last 10 years.

[TOMO 26,179]

13 minutes ago, scothunter said:

Yea but the fact you missing mate you don't know the reason for any of these women going into that clinic. They may Very well Be having the same trouble as this young lassie. But she has to pass a gauntlet of rabid protestors. 

 

good point 

[TOMO 26,179]

8 minutes ago, WILF said:

The uncomfortable side of freedom mate.

This week its their freedom, next week it’s yours......that matters mate.

as was this reply....

[WILF 46,817]

6 minutes ago, Born Hunter said:

Just wanted to add some facts to this. Interpret them as you will.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/679028/Abortions_stats_England_Wales_2016.pdf

 

1.4 A legally induced abortion must be certified by two registered medical practitioners as
justified under one or more of the following grounds:

A the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk to the life of the pregnant
woman greater than if the pregnancy were terminated (Abortion Act, 1967 as
amended, section 1(1)(c))

B the termination is necessary to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or
mental health of the pregnant woman (section 1(1)(b))

C the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of
the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of
injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman (section 1(1)(a))

D the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of
the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of
injury to the physical or mental health of any existing children of the family of the
pregnant woman (section 1(1)(a))

E there is a substantial risk that if the child were born it would suffer from such
physical or mental abnormalities as to be seriously handicapped (section 1(1)(d))

or, in an emergency, certified by the operating practitioner as immediately necessary:

F to save the life of the pregnant woman (section 1(4))

G to prevent grave permanent injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant
woman (section 1(4))

 

In 2016, 97% of abortions (180,794) were undertaken under ground C. A further 2% were
carried out under ground E (3,208 abortions) and a similar proportion (1%: 1342 abortions)
under ground D. Grounds A and B together accounted for very few abortions (246). The
remaining 6 cases were performed under grounds F or G. Ground C abortions have
consistently accounted for over 95% of abortions over the last 10 years.

I have seen all that information before as well mate, the reality is ground C can be as simple as “I’m really not mentally able to cope at the minute” 

“OK madam, no problem, here is your letter!”

Its like getting signed off work for “stress”

 

[Born Hunter 17,763]

Just now, WILF said:

I have seen all that information before as well mate, the reality is ground C can be as simple as “I’m really not mentally able to cope at the minute” 

“OK madam, no problem, here is your letter!”

Its like getting signed off work for “stress”

 

I don't know how 'flexible' ground C so I can't comment. But I will say that if ground C was there for the situations of the 23 yr old shown above then there would be no need for grounds A and B which cover that very explicitly.

Anyway I just wanted to add some facts.

[NEWKID 27,159]

14 hours ago, Daniel cain said:

Feel your pain kev mate..... Had the same with our first born, we chose to have the tests, my lad Daegan was born 2 pound 3 ozs and spent 3 months in a baby unit, dark dark times. Thank fully he is fine just turned 8, a little slow with his reading just enrolled him with a private tutor, we were told he could have severe downs along with other issues so took that test. I honestly take my hat of to folks who have and care for a child with a disability.... Like you said it brings a lifetime of immense  stress and heart ache the other end of the spectrum you have dirty skip rats that spit them out like shelling peas and don't deserve kids, just see them as a way to claim and free housing etc, I have cousins who don't deserve their children, just so happens that they went to other family members instead of care. When it comes to kids nothing  is just black and white imo. Abusive relationships, rape, under age, groomed there's plenty of factors involved. What I will say though is if a girl is a 'regular' 2/3 times they should be spayed, and alot more men should step up to the mark.... Any man can make a baby, but takes a real man to be a father to that child. 

I bet they were dark days Sean, I know from our yaps how much your kids mean to you mate, brought up the right way...

glad your lad is doing well, looks like he's gonna make a decent angler too...

[NEWKID 27,159]

14 hours ago, ginger beard said:

The 5 year old because if you can't have children naturally then you shouldn't have kids.

Sounds horrible but science shouldn't play any part in concieving.

Nah mate...

the 1000's of couples who cannot conceive for whatever reason, can still raise a child as their own, and probably are more wanted than some because of the heartache and procedures to finally become parents..

cant see a good argument why these parents should be denied that opportunity tbh

[NEWKID 27,159]

2 hours ago, Francie said:

Best comment on the section wilf, thats what it boils down to, no one wants to take responsibilty for there actions, what kind of excuse is, the childs not wanted blah blah excuses excuses, they should have thought about a innocent babies life before they done the deed, thats the problem, not just for abortions.

If the mum an dad are wise enough to do the deed then there should be no excuses.

I teach my children about responsibility all the time, i dont want to hear excuses, they dont wash way me, easy way out excuses, get it done an sort out your shit, an not take the essy way out, theres an excuse for a way out for everything these days.

 

Yeah mate, it's all cut and dry...

all the scroats will knuckle down and take responsibility and all the unwanted kids will be just fine...

the families who can't deal with a disabled child will be fine... cause someone will teach them responsibility, regardless of circumstance...

 

oh oh wait the real world is shouting at me.... the kids will suffer once their born!!

f**k what do we do now??

[WILF 46,817]

8 minutes ago, NEWKID said:

Yeah mate, it's all cut and dry...

all the scroats will knuckle down and take responsibility and all the unwanted kids will be just fine...

the families who can't deal with a disabled child will be fine... cause someone will teach them responsibility, regardless of circumstance...

 

oh oh wait the real world is shouting at me.... the kids will suffer once their born!!

f**k what do we do now??

Now that’s part of a massive and different debate mate.

We have thing that are fundamentally wrong in our society and that need fixing......and, I totally get what you are saying.

However, if we don’t start to deal with small things at a time then we deal with nothing....that’s just my personal opinion.

But as I say, that’s a much wider and massively more complicated debate.

[NEWKID 27,159]

I agree with free speech, it's something we are losing as a country with only a few being allowed free speech......but....

if me and my wife were told she was carrying a severely disabled child etc... and we made the heart breaking decision to terminate, as we felt it was the right thing for the unborn child and us,... if some  prick started shouting murderer and waving some stupid plackatd at my wife as we were walking through the hospital... the plackard would be shoved up their ass and they'd be kicked down Ealing High Street