Originally posted by Zebedee
As I said I am in favour of it. You're from the U.K? I don't think we would ever remove choice as far as a womans right to choose goes.
Did I state anything saying I thought an unreasonable restriction shaould occur based on anyones morals? I would say in places where Abortion is restricted it's usually due to the morality of said nation state. The people of said nation/state have a different belief system to you and I. It's the opinion of the majority usually on religious grounds if the nation is any kind of democracy. Your argument in this case would be about the seperation of the political and theological. I also believe that's more complex than us say the restriction is unreasonable if in that culture the religious code is the driving force behind the legislature and the politic. That's an discussion for another day though. Do I believe women have a right to choose "yes", do I think every culture should see it my way. No.
That depends on if personal freedom of choice (As in not affecting, harming or unwillingly involving another human being) is an opinion.
-AC
Originally posted by SchecterOh, I get it. He removes the rest of the body, then they bring out the head normally.
no, you are looking at a cross section. its out of the vagina from the neck down. the doctor then vaccums out its brains through the back/bottom of its skull.
But why not just grab it by the head?
Originally posted by lord xyz
Oh, I get it. He removes the rest of the body, then they bring out the head normally.But why not just grab it by the head?
ugh, you dont get it.
the whole object is to keep the head inside her vagina until its dead. he cant very well have his hands around it while its insider her. once its dead he can pull it out and grab the head all he wishes.
Originally posted by Schecter
no, you are looking at a cross section. its out of the vagina from the neck down. the doctor then vaccums out its brains through the back/bottom of its skull.
Then typically, 15yrs later, the fetus is selected for hollywood test screening audiences, and appearances on X-Factor/Pop idol.
Originally posted by lord xyz
Oh, I get it. He removes the rest of the body, then they bring out the head normally.But why not just grab it by the head?
Did you see, that the babies head, was way in there? If he wanted to grab it by the head, the woman would be in excrutiating pain.
Do you know, that when a child is born, if the feet are sticking out, rather the head, they completely turn the baby around, so that it can be born head first? You can't imagine how badly that would hurt.
Why make a woman go through that much pain, when she doesn't even want the baby?
Originally posted by Darkstorm Zero
Actually... isn't that breach birthing?Sometimes the baby cannot turn, so it has to be born feet first, but that runs risks like strangling itself eith the umbillical.
Hmm, my mother is a nurse, and at least at her hospital, they never birth the baby feet first. That's when they open up the idea of C-section, I believe.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That depends on if personal freedom of choice (As in not affecting, harming or unwillingly involving another human being) is an opinion.-AC
It doesn't in my opinion, although I can see why you might think that. Anyway these are all different off topic discussions.