Sweden rules 'gender-based' abortion legal

deconstruct that though- if abortion in itself is not barbaric then the "act" is not barbaric in these instances, just the thought processes involved

That does not make sense

reply to post by Common Good

---

ok, if you want to get technical.
the fact remains that the court ruled "not illegal", this example will be used as means for future court rulings.

reply to post by spearhead

---

Actually I wasnt trying to get technical, I was just correcting you =)
Two.
Three.

reply to post by Common Good

---

correct this akrferesurc.

reply to post by blueorder

---

Abortion serves a purpose if the woman's life is in danger, or the child is too young to have a child, or conception took place during a rape. I have my limits about this issue. I don't like abortion, it isn't about liking it, it is about respecting and acknowledging that it has a proper place. This is nothing less than Eugenics, which is a way of essentially killing toward perfection. It is the progressive ideology that empowered Hitler's regime to start exterminating hoards of people.

There is a big difference. I view abortion a a necessary medical procedure to be taken very seriously. It is not a light decision for anyone involved, and it is a very traumatizing experience. Why ANYONE would want to do this to avoid children of a certain gender is beyond me. That is not an emergency, that is immorality.

fair enough



probably, fair enough



again probably fair enough (though I admit I still can't square the approval of abortion at times in my own head, regardless of circumstances)



You realise though that the above cases you listed are not the norm- the explosion in the use of abortion is usually down to a person's OWN reasons other than the above, in other words selfish reasons



This aspect of abortion could be considered in that vein, though I view abortion as barbaric "progressive" ideology in most cases



Most abortions are done out of selfishness, to me, that is neither better or worse than not wanting a girl or boy

lol. better than in ancient history when they would just kill them

or China. or Sparta- defender of the western world and protector of philiosophy.

Never sure why people get all uptight what someone else decides to do.
I would be upset all the time if i worried about that.

reply to post by ScreamtheDance

---

"lol. better than in ancient history when they would just kill them "

That is Abortion.

WHAT???

Are you really serious...?

Now, Im coming from a country where abortion is illegal because we voted to be pro life so if my views on this are a bit.. tell me.

Abortion is abortion, if its legal, its the final choice of the MOTHER.. whats the difference if she chooses to keep a girl and abort a boy?

Its like blowing smoke in your child's face and then complaining when someone else does it.. ie nonsensical.

The articles says the law states a woman cannot be denied an abortion before 18 weeks. That makes sense.

If the law clearly states that, then they have to uphold it. The issue was the woman wanted to know the gender of the baby and then wanted an abortion after she found out. Seems a sensible law would be make it illegal to reveal the gender of the baby before 18 weeks so it can't be used for selective abortion.

A more sensible approach would be for doctors to decide it was not ethical to reveal the gender that young if they thought it would be used for selective abortion, but of course that means some doctor (perhaps a foreign doctor) would start specializing in that anyway. I believe ultra-sounds for gender are illegal in India simply because of this.

It isn't just a moral issue either (well maybe in Sweden where it is not common place). In countries like China and India where it is practiced heavily in some areas it leads to real problems 20 years down the road, including the human trafficking of females from outside the region as wives/slaves.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by Sonya610]

Am I serious about what part? be specific please.
Hey, Im pro life too, yay for us.
Abortion is Legal here in the US...but that doesnt mean that you should be able to go get pregnant as much as you want, and abort as much as you want until you get what you are looking for.
And people want to know why the worldis as screwed up as it is?
Look at the title of the thread and you will know why this world is so screwed up.

edit- Oh, and to let you know, your analogy in this case really doesnt fit with the topic.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by Common Good]

It is screwed up because the Swedish laws have not kept up with the customs of their foreign invaders?

In fact culling based on gender has been practiced for thousands of years in India and China. Difference is, with ultrasound they can do it early in the pregnancy, whereas in the old days they just killed the infant at birth (or abandon it in the streets, they actually have drop off points in India for abandoned babies).

Don't be blaming this on the Swedes.

reply to post by Sonya610

---

Sonya, Im not. its the ideology behind it.
I think that certain 'traditions' and 'customs' is what is holding much of the world back from gaining any kind of credibility or respect from other nations.

Im not one to tell people what they can and can not do, trust me Im not, its their nation, and its their choice as a nation. I just dont agree with it is all. I think Im entitled to believe that they are wrong on this issue, and thats just the way I feel.

edit-

I just wanted to know, who are the foreign invaders you speak of?


[edit on 13-5-2009 by Common Good]

The ideology behind the Swedish law? The Swedish law is a product of Swedish culture. They will have to adjust their laws to fit the other cultures that are entering Sweden.

In Georgia they outlawed the genital mutilation of females a couple of years ago to prevent Africans from cutting up their daughters, or hiring doctors to do it.

Does that mean before Georgia made the law that Georgia condoned cutting up baby girls??? I don't think so, it just never crossed anyones mind that they would need a law to ban it.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by Sonya610]

reply to post by Sonya610

---

no, not the ideology behind the laws...the ideology behind being able to pick and choose if your baby is good enough or not to keep living. people should not have the right to get pregnant as much as they want, abort as much as they want until they get a baby of their liking. Thats the ideology I speak of.

Well the Western world considers "getting pregnant as much as you want" a basic right. Even if you can't feed them, even if you are turning out brain damaged drug babies, even if your kids get taken away to be raised in foster care.

In the western world and also the third world where they depend on foreign aid to feed their offspring. Popping out as "many as you want" is a basic human right apparently, and it is the responsibility of the rest of the world to care for them.

reply to post by Sonya610

---

Im sorry, but Im part of that ""western world" that you speak of, and Idont believe in any of those things.
=)

Edit- If they dont want to have kids...THEN THEY SHOULD STOP BEING WHORES =)
just two more cents.



[edit on 13-5-2009 by Common Good]

To be upfront I am entirely anti-abortion in all circumstances (with the exception provided by the principle of "double effect" where the abortion is consequential rather than directly intended/carried out.)

Whilst the case is particular to Sweden it is an international problem in which the US can, unfortunately, not claim any moral superiority. The practice does take place in the US, most usually among immigrant populations, which has provoked the "Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act" currently being reintroduced in Congress for a second time after time ran out when it was first introduced late last year.

It is interesting to note, if not horrific, that a Planned Parenthood intern, Clint Waltman, had the following to say after it was first introduced:



Source: CBS News

The implications highlighted by Mr Waltman are significant, except perhaps for different reasons. If, as we are lead to believe, it is not a "girl/boy" but just a bundle of cells then objection to it might be as futile as objecting to any abortion. However, if (as has already been said a few times here), there is some revulsion at the barbarism of such gender selective abortions how can we be encouraged to accept any abortion? Is male/female more important than "wanted"?

It's the old line of when a friend/relative tells you they are pregnant you don't worry about what they're going to give birth to - you know its going to be a child (not an elephant, etc.) so the scientific definition of what is being aborted is known, it is a "human life".

Planned Parenthood will always fight any and all restrictions on abortion because they realize that if they give an inch, the other side will keep pushing until they have lost everything.

Same thing with the NRA, or with those that oppose breed specific legislation. They have to fight it on every battle line because if they say "well okay, I guess i don't care if my opponents camp out on my front lawn" that means they are drawing the battle lines at their front door.

It is not about being reasonable, the extremists on the other side are NOT reasonable, if they win on the easy points they will keep going until they have won everything.

It doesn't matter if it's abortion based on gender or what. It's still abortion. Some will say that abortion of a embryo/fetus/whatever is ok since it isn't alive. Who are we kidding? It is alive. It grows to become like you and me.

Pro-choice is a joke. It's murder, hands down. If it's due to rape then don't dress provocatively or you're just asking for it.