[Football] Jacob Rees-Mogg.

[dingodan]

Profiting from abortion less morally unacceptable though -

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/pro-life-tory-multi-millionaire-11267331

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/pol...aking-money-from-abortion-pills-a3647806.html

He has a share of an investment company, and he makes no investment decisions and doesn't interfere in the decision they make for their clients, not should he. He doesn't have any investments in the pharmaceutical company himself. The pills in question are not for abortions, they are a gastric ulcer medication, but are often used illegally on the black market in Indonesia to induce illegal abortions.

So he has no investments in a company which doesn't make pills for abortion. Amazing how things can be twisted.

 

[dingodan]

Could I ask, would you consider the taking of a pill which does not prevent conception, but does prevent a fertile egg from embedding in the womb, as an abortion? The woman would not know if an egg had become fertilised and been unable to embed or if no fertilisation took place.

There is a grey area in the short time just after intercourse where it is not known whether or not there has been a pregnancy. Would I consider your example abortion? Nobody would know if it was or it wasn't because nobody would know if there was or was not a pregnancy. It's a grey area, but I will say that if that were what was permitted it would be significantly better than what we have now, which is basically abortion as a form of retrospective contraception, that I think is wrong.

 

[Baldseagull]

There is a grey area in the short time just after intercourse where it is not known whether or not there has been a pregnancy. Would I consider your example abortion? Nobody would know if it was or it wasn't because nobody would know if there was or was not a pregnancy. It's a grey area, but I will say that if that were what was permitted it would be significantly better than what we have now, which is basically abortion as a form of retrospective contraception, that I think is wrong.

Thanks for responding, there is a drug used widely in India for family planning that is taken once a week by ladies wishing to avoid a pregnancy, it does as I described and does not allow the fertilised egg to settle in the womb. It is a drug that some parts of the anatomy treats as female hormone, whilst other parts do not in a particularly useful way. Because of this property, it has side effects that are beneficial in preventing osteoporosis, breast cancer and cervical cancer, whereas other hormone contraceptives can increase the risk, it would be hugely beneficial to female health in this country.

In the case of a rape, retrospective contraception would be the only remedy available to the victim, and I think any rape victim ought not be obliged to go through a pregnancy and give birth to her attackers child.
Though other reasons for making that choice may be morally questionable, it would not be practicable to have a rape proven before a termination was possible, so all women must have the choice. The question of stage of pregnancy is the most difficult for me.

 

[ManOfSussex]

He has a share of an investment company, and he makes no investment decisions and doesn't interfere in the decision they make for their clients, not should he. He doesn't have any investments in the pharmaceutical company himself. The pills in question are not for abortions, they are a gastric ulcer medication, but are often used illegally on the black market in Indonesia to induce illegal abortions.

So he has no investments in a company which doesn't make pills for abortion. Amazing how things can be twisted.

Youre a nobber.

 

[Hastings gull]

Youre a nobber.

After an eloquent post, this is your response. If you disagree, then let's hear your counter-arguments, which is what a forum is all about. But yet again you show your pathetic immaturity.

 

[dingodan]

Thanks for responding, there is a drug used widely in India for family planning that is taken once a week by ladies wishing to avoid a pregnancy, it does as I described and does not allow the fertilised egg to settle in the womb. It is a drug that some parts of the anatomy treats as female hormone, whilst other parts do not in a particularly useful way. Because of this property, it has side effects that are beneficial in preventing osteoporosis, breast cancer and cervical cancer, whereas other hormone contraceptives can increase the risk, it would be hugely beneficial to female health in this country.

In the case of a rape, retrospective contraception would be the only remedy available to the victim, and I think any rape victim ought not be obliged to go through a pregnancy and give birth to her attackers child.
Though other reasons for making that choice may be morally questionable, it would not be practicable to have a rape proven before a termination was possible, so all women must have the choice. The question of stage of pregnancy is the most difficult for me.

Obviously I feel awful for anyone who is raped, but I also don't feel that the child should be punished because of how they were conceived. With that said, I can imagine that the prospect of giving birth as a result of rape must be very difficult, it's an awful situation, I still don't feel that it makes it ok to kill the unborn child though. This is one of those situations where early intervention, for example giving a shot of estrogen, would be a solution, as in what you said earlier, there is not at that point any biological or chemical evidence of a pregnancy. The problem there is that often women who have suffered a rape are not necessarily able to report it immediately, sometimes it takes a long time for a victim to talk about what happened at which point that kind of a solution is no longer viable.

It should be said though that cases of pregnancy through rape are not very common, and they certainly don't make up a significant proportion of abortion cases. I don't like how people immediately bring up rape and incest as a defense for abortion, since those issues are not relevant in most cases, and not really what the opposition to abortion is about.

I think people bring up those examples to demonstrate that being against abortion on principle is an absolutist position, and rape and incest cases are extremes to highlight the difficulty with such an absolutist position, but then the same can be done in the other direction. A woman's body and her right to chose is an absolutist position too. A day before birth it's still her body, is it then her right to chose at that point too?

It's a difficult issue there is no denying it, both sides have a point, and often (but not always) neither side is willing to concede that. One side calls the other murderers, the other side calls them women haters, it's quite sad. I tend to think that eventually people will come around and that abortion will become a last resort in very extreme cases, but that we will also start to develop a little more respect for the life that we are dealing with, even when it's in the womb. I certainly think it will take a change in attitudes rather than the law for things to change.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

Obviously I feel awful for anyone who is raped, but I also don't feel that the child should be punished because of how they were conceived. With that said, I can imagine that the prospect of giving birth as a result of rape must be very difficult, it's an awful situation, I still don't feel that it makes it ok to kill the unborn child though. This is one of those situations where early intervention, for example giving a shot of estrogen, would be a solution, as in what you said earlier, there is not at that point any biological or chemical evidence of a pregnancy. The problem there is that often women who have suffered a rape are not necessarily able to report it immediately, sometimes it takes a long time for a victim to talk about what happened at which point that kind of a solution is no longer viable.

It should be said though that cases of pregnancy through rape are not very common, and they certainly don't make up a significant proportion of abortion cases. I don't like how people immediately bring up rape and incest as a defense for abortion, since those issues are not relevant in most cases, and not really what the opposition to abortion is about.

I think people bring up those examples to demonstrate that being against abortion on principle is an absolutist position, and rape and incest cases are extremes to highlight the difficulty with such an absolutist position, but then the same can be done in the other direction. A woman's body and her right to chose is an absolutist position too. A day before birth it's still her body, is it then her right to chose at that point too?

It's a difficult issue there is no denying it, both sides have a point, and often (but not always) neither side is willing to concede that. One side calls the other murderers, the other side calls them women haters, it's quite sad. I tend to think that eventually people will come around and that abortion will become a last resort in very extreme cases, but that we will also start to develop a little more respect for the life that we are dealing with, even when it's in the womb. I certainly think it will take a change in attitudes rather than the law for things to change.

I don't see this "It's the woman's body" argument. The baby may have a different blood group so how does that stack up?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Youre a nobber.

Sometimes only three words are necessary.

Also sometimes its easy to overlook an apostrophe.

 

[Hastings gull]

Sometimes only three words are necessary.

Also sometimes its easy to overlook an apostrophe.

Brevity can indeed be effective, agreed, but that is hardly the point in this case, as I am sure that you know.

 

[dingodan]

Sometimes only three words are necessary.

Also sometimes its easy to overlook an apostrophe.

Sometimes three words is all you've got.

 

[dingodan]

I don't see this "It's the woman's body" argument. The baby may have a different blood group so how does that stack up?

I agree, I think a pregnant woman is responsible for two people, but "it's a woman's body" is an argument that is often made, and being against abortion is made out to mean being against women's freedom or wanting to control a woman's uterus, and personally I think that's a pretty unfair characterization.

 

[drew]

I don't see this "It's the woman's body" argument. The baby may have a different blood group so how does that stack up?

Because I think historically, it is based on the viability of the foetus outside of the womb. With the advancement of medically science the viability is a lot earlier than it used to be.

 

[drew]

He has a share of an investment company, and he makes no investment decisions and doesn't interfere in the decision they make for their clients, not should he. He doesn't have any investments in the pharmaceutical company himself. The pills in question are not for abortions, they are a gastric ulcer medication, but are often used illegally on the black market in Indonesia to induce illegal abortions.

So he has no investments in a company which doesn't make pills for abortion. Amazing how things can be twisted.

He is well aware that the pill is described as for gastric ulcers but that in countries where abortion is illegal it is used precisely for that purpose. Either he has morals he stands by or he doesn't.

 

[dingodan]

He is well aware that the pill is described as for gastric ulcers but that in countries where abortion is illegal it is used precisely for that purpose. Either he has morals he stands by or he doesn't.

The pills are misused on the black market, and he doesn't invest in the company which makes them anyway.

An investment firm which he is involved with invests in the company, and he doesn't make investment decisions and doesn't interfere in what they should and shouldn't invest in for their clients on the basis of his moral views.

He has moral views, they are personal to him, he doesn't force them on everyone and everything he deals with. & That's relevant only assuming that you would hold an investment firm responsible for what the company they invest in doesn't do, but rather what yet another party does with their products, illegally.

Talk about stretching. You just don't like him, fair enough. Trying to paint him as morally inconsistent on the basis of this is just cheap though.

 

[Eeyore]

Obviously I feel awful for anyone who is raped, but I also don't feel that the child should be punished because of how they were conceived. With that said, I can imagine that the prospect of giving birth as a result of rape must be very difficult, it's an awful situation, I still don't feel that it makes it ok to kill the unborn child though. This is one of those situations where early intervention, for example giving a shot of estrogen, would be a solution, as in what you said earlier, there is not at that point any biological or chemical evidence of a pregnancy. The problem there is that often women who have suffered a rape are not necessarily able to report it immediately, sometimes it takes a long time for a victim to talk about what happened at which point that kind of a solution is no longer viable.

It should be said though that cases of pregnancy through rape are not very common, and they certainly don't make up a significant proportion of abortion cases. I don't like how people immediately bring up rape and incest as a defense for abortion, since those issues are not relevant in most cases, and not really what the opposition to abortion is about.

I think people bring up those examples to demonstrate that being against abortion on principle is an absolutist position, and rape and incest cases are extremes to highlight the difficulty with such an absolutist position, but then the same can be done in the other direction. A woman's body and her right to chose is an absolutist position too. A day before birth it's still her body, is it then her right to chose at that point too?

It's a difficult issue there is no denying it, both sides have a point, and often (but not always) neither side is willing to concede that. One side calls the other murderers, the other side calls them women haters, it's quite sad. I tend to think that eventually people will come around and that abortion will become a last resort in very extreme cases, but that we will also start to develop a little more respect for the life that we are dealing with, even when it's in the womb. I certainly think it will take a change in attitudes rather than the law for things to change.

Lots of good points made. I've never understood abortion and always found the subject quite upsetting. I don't understand how it's almost like a new form of contraception in some cases. I get the rape and incest thing, but as you say it is rare. I think it is important that people don't feel steamrollered into cultural populism. For example, I 100%+ support equal marriage but understand that not everyone who opposed it is homophobic. I supported Remain at BREXIT but rallied to protect those who didn't from accusations of racism. I find abortion difficult to understand (but then I was a baby born under duress and not choice). However, I'm very much a feminist.

What I am saying is that few have an absolute view. Everything is fluid.

 

[dingodan]

Lots of good points made. I've never understood abortion and always found the subject quite upsetting. I don't understand how it's almost like a new form of contraception in some cases. I get the rape and incest thing, but as you say it is rare. I think it is important that people don't feel steamrollered into cultural populism. For example, I 100%+ support equal marriage but understand that not everyone who opposed it is homophobic. I supported Remain at BREXIT but rallied to protect those who didn't from accusations of racism. I find abortion difficult to understand (but then I was a baby born under duress and not choice). However, I'm very much a feminist.

What I am saying is that few have an absolute view. Everything is fluid.

My kind of person. If only more people were open to listening to those who disagree with them, taking their views seriously (even while disagreeing) and trying to meet them where they are at in terms of understanding where they are coming from. We'd solve a lot of problems a lot easier than we do.

It's interesting that you ended your post saying that you are a feminist. I was about to make a little joke about that, but actually instead I'm going to post this video, which I think speaks more widely to what I am saying about listening to those you disagree with, hopefully some people will give this a listen, we need to start listening to one another.

 

[Eeyore]

My kind of person. If only more people were open to listening to those who disagree with them, taking their views seriously (even while disagreeing) and trying to meet them where they are at in terms of understanding where they are coming from. We'd solve a lot of problems a lot easier than we do.

It's interesting that you ended your post saying that you are a feminist. I was about to make a little joke about that, but actually instead I'm going to post this video, which I think speaks more widely to what I am saying about listening to those you disagree with, hopefully some people will give this a listen, we need to start listening to one another.

Yes. What she says about humanising the enemies of new liberal thinking is very important. I honestly think that the greater enemies of progress are those who hold the current moral high ground by populist force.

 

[sjamesb3466]

Obviously I feel awful for anyone who is raped, but I also don't feel that the child should be punished because of how they were conceived. With that said, I can imagine that the prospect of giving birth as a result of rape must be very difficult, it's an awful situation, I still don't feel that it makes it ok to kill the unborn child though. This is one of those situations where early intervention, for example giving a shot of estrogen, would be a solution, as in what you said earlier, there is not at that point any biological or chemical evidence of a pregnancy. The problem there is that often women who have suffered a rape are not necessarily able to report it immediately, sometimes it takes a long time for a victim to talk about what happened at which point that kind of a solution is no longer viable.

It should be said though that cases of pregnancy through rape are not very common, and they certainly don't make up a significant proportion of abortion cases. I don't like how people immediately bring up rape and incest as a defense for abortion, since those issues are not relevant in most cases, and not really what the opposition to abortion is about.

I think people bring up those examples to demonstrate that being against abortion on principle is an absolutist position, and rape and incest cases are extremes to highlight the difficulty with such an absolutist position, but then the same can be done in the other direction. A woman's body and her right to chose is an absolutist position too. A day before birth it's still her body, is it then her right to chose at that point too?

It's a difficult issue there is no denying it, both sides have a point, and often (but not always) neither side is willing to concede that. One side calls the other murderers, the other side calls them women haters, it's quite sad. I tend to think that eventually people will come around and that abortion will become a last resort in very extreme cases, but that we will also start to develop a little more respect for the life that we are dealing with, even when it's in the womb. I certainly think it will take a change in attitudes rather than the law for things to change.

Is a child born from rape not being punished more by being allowed to be born than being terminated when it is still a ball of cells that doesn't even know it exists? Personally if I knew I was the product of a horrendous crime against my mother I would suspect that I would be rather ****ed up emotionally so which is for the greater good?

I appreciate that these instances are not common however they have to be discussed in the wider context of the debate.

My personal opinion is that in the early stages of pregnancy if the potential parent('s) are not capable or in a position to give a child a good upbringing then a termination can be the best possible outcome. The borders become very cloudy the longer the pregnancy goes on and I become more uncomfortable at the later stages of legal abortion and would support a lower legal limit at for example 20 weeks. To ban all bar the most extreme cases would be a massive backwards step in my opinion.

 

[dingodan]

Is a child born from rape not being punished more by being allowed to be born than being terminated when it is still a ball of cells that doesn't even know it exists? Personally if I knew I was the product of a horrendous crime against my mother I would suspect that I would be rather ****ed up emotionally so which is for the greater good?

I appreciate that these instances are not common however they have to be discussed in the wider context of the debate.

My personal opinion is that in the early stages of pregnancy if the potential parent('s) are not capable or in a position to give a child a good upbringing then a termination can be the best possible outcome. The borders become very cloudy the longer the pregnancy goes on and I become more uncomfortable at the later stages of legal abortion and would support a lower legal limit at for example 20 weeks. To ban all bar the most extreme cases would be a massive backwards step in my opinion.

I never said ban, I don't think that is an option, like I said it will be people changing their minds that would bring about a change.

I also think that the argument that it's "kinder" to kill someone is a pretty bad one to be honest.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Sometimes only three words are necessary.

Also sometimes its easy to overlook an apostrophe.

I'm afraid I was very, very drunk.

(I'm not surprised he stuck up for his hero Jacob though)