|
|
Post by cleefarqhuar on Nov 9, 2014 13:32:48 GMT
I was pleased to read in today's paper that a practicing UK doctor is to be charged (with a private prosecution of course) with giving permission for an abortion on the (sole?) grounds of the gender of the foetus
Naturally the doctor is of Asian (Indian) origin, one Prabha Sivaraman; indeed the entire concept of gender-based abortion seems to be an Indian sub-contintental import, because, as we know from that corrupt racist sub-continent, women are held as substantially lower in value than men
The only delight I take in this , a mean schadenfreude is the predicament that people like Jean and Aqua find themselves in: they do believe (don't they?) that a woman has the right to choose whether to abort or not?
If a 'woman's right to choose' is an actual right, then they can have no objection to abortions based on whatever the woman decides the reason should be
Like true socialists these two are are true pro-abortionists and true multiculturalists and these two true dogmas happily met in this case!
|
|
aqua
WH Member
Posts: 58 
|
Post by aqua on Nov 9, 2014 14:07:15 GMT
The only delight I take in this , a mean schadenfreude is the predicament that people like Jean and Aqua find themselves in: they do believe (don't they?) that a woman has the right to choose whether to abort or not? If a 'woman's right to choose' is an actual right, then they can have no objection to abortions based on whatever the woman decides the reason should be Like true socialists these two are are true pro-abortionists and true multiculturalists and these two true dogmas happily met in this case! Sorry to threaten the longevity of your smirk, but I’m happy to say I’m glad that such abortions are illegal. |
|
|
|
Post by cleefarqhuar on Nov 9, 2014 14:24:57 GMT
The only delight I take in this , a mean schadenfreude is the predicament that people like Jean and Aqua find themselves in: they do believe (don't they?) that a woman has the right to choose whether to abort or not? If a 'woman's right to choose' is an actual right, then they can have no objection to abortions based on whatever the woman decides the reason should be Like true socialists these two are are true pro-abortionists and true multiculturalists and these two true dogmas happily met in this case! Sorry to threaten the longevity of your smirk, but I’m happy to say I’m glad that such abortions are illegal. Good But I thought you were an advoacte of 'the woman's right to choose'? Deja vu? |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Nov 9, 2014 14:33:57 GMT
Déjà vu indeed.
Cleefy, we've done all the arguments on this one already. If you want to know what I think, look it up.
|
|
aqua
WH Member
Posts: 58
|
Post by aqua on Nov 9, 2014 14:53:35 GMT
Sorry to threaten the longevity of your smirk, but I’m happy to say I’m glad that such abortions are illegal. Good But I thought you were an advoacte of 'the woman's right to choose'? Deja vu? Yes – we’ve been here before (same case, I think). The thread, started by you, is under Discussions around October 2013: Don't Like The Gender of your baby? I think you'll find the argument boiled down to dogmatism vs pragmatism. |
|
|
|
Post by cleefarqhuar on Nov 9, 2014 16:20:32 GMT
Good But I thought you were an advoacte of 'the woman's right to choose'? Deja vu? Yes – we’ve been here before (same case, I think). The thread, started by you, is under Discussions around October 2013: Don't Like The Gender of your baby? No You specifically would allow a 'woman's right' to over-ride your doubts Here it is (thanks for the dating) |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Nov 9, 2014 18:01:15 GMT
|
|
aqua
WH Member
Posts: 58
|
Post by aqua on Nov 10, 2014 0:09:24 GMT
Thanks jean.
That there* was a relatively rational discussion, for a change, wasn't it? The good old times?
For me, the main lesson is that all generalisations are odious, and I should've noticed it before.
But I don't resile from anything I said on that thread you linked to.
Who but the woman - in reality - can and does choose, whether cowed by the law or regardless?
*Horror of horrors! Ambiguity! And barbarity!
I meant, <that what I just referred you to>
Phew!
|
|
