Letters from the country
While idly browsing Twitter this morning, we made a startling discovery triggered by the SNP leadership election, and it was this: nobody in Scotland really knows what the nation’s law on abortion is.
It was prompted by these two tweets, both of which appear to be true:
The thing they agree on is that Humza Yousaf has just declared that he wants to change the law around abortion so that women can abort babies in Scotland solely on the grounds that they don’t like which sex they are. And that seems like something that should probably be bigger news.
Here’s his statement.
It was his response to this letter from abortion-rights group Back Off Scotland, in which we’ve highlighted the relevant paragraph:
But the claim in that first sentence seems to be false, and to understand what’s going on, first we need a little background.
The Abortion Act 1967 became law in England, Scotland and Wales – although not Northern Ireland – on the exact day I was born (which frankly I’ve always taken a little personally). But this 2015 paper highlights some intriguing quirks.
The supposed illegality of abortion in Scotland hinges on the Offences against the Person Act 1861. But the OATPA expressly excludes Scotland from its provisions.
So the Abortion Act of 1967 provided exemptions to a prohibition that never applied to Scotland. The paper (from which we’re going to directly quote large chunks here because it’s already admirably clear and concise and fully sourced) notes that prior to 1967 there had only ever been one successful prosecution for abortion in Scotland, and that it succeeded because the accused pleaded guilty and may well have otherwise failed.
So the idea of “decriminalising” abortion in Scotland is an entirely bogus piece of grandstanding, because it’s already not criminal and never has been except in very particular circumstances where it’s held to be the commission of a different crime.
The second tweet at the start of this article links to the website of Right To Life, an anti-abortion group which ran the story with a very aggressive headline.
But the headline isn’t actually inaccurate. It’s very clear that Humza Yousaf doesn’t KNOW that abortion has never been illegal in Scotland – otherwise he’d have pointed that out when answering Back Off Scotland’s letter – so he believes that he would be making abortion-up-to-birth and sex-selective abortion newly legal.
There is no other valid interpretation of the words “removing abortion from the criminal law”. If it’s not illegal, you can pay someone to do it, no matter what “guidelines” or “recommendations” you might put in place.
And we already know from the horrendous tsunami of mutilations of children in the name of “gender-affirming” surgery that there’s no shortage of unscrupulous doctors who’ll do anything for a quick buck, including performing medically-unnecessary double mastectomies on clearly troubled teenage women covered in self-harm scars.
(We’re inescapably reminded of the shrieks of protest when we pointed out two years ago that a number of Scottish “equality” organisations had signed up to a demand for the age of consent to be reduced to 10. But words mean what they mean. That declaration also demanded the total decriminalisation of abortion.)
Now, we can’t berate Humza Yousaf for not knowing about something we only found out ourselves five minutes ago, although it was hard not to snigger at the sarcastic comments of some feminists to his announcement.
And for the avoidance of doubt, this site absolutely does not want to see any reduction in current abortion entitlements, and is in full agreement with the first two demands in Back Off Scotland’s letter.
We support buffer zones around abortion clinics, which are currently plagued with two opposite types of repulsive scumbag men turning traumatic moments in women’s personal lives into grotesque and tacky warzones for self-promotion.
And we unequivocally agree that no woman in Scotland should have to travel to England or anywhere else to get an abortion up to the (English) legal limit of 24 weeks on the NHS.
But to campaign for the removal of even imaginary restrictions, and therefore to be sending a message effectively approving the Chinese-style abortion of (mostly female) foetuses purely on the grounds of their being the “wrong” sex, and of extending abortion to 36 weeks, is something that we suspect is a step too far for most Scots, and a sign of the dangers of unthinking, kneejerk virtue-signalling.
We wish we could believe those signs would be heeded more often if Yousaf were to become the First Minister. But the evidence of the current one suggests otherwise.
When I was a medical student, about half a century ago, I was told that Dugald Baird, professor of midwifery at Aberdeen, had run an abortion service before the 1967 Abortion Act, on the basis that the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act did not apply to Scotland. (The professor at Glasgow Royal, where I was a student, had trained under Baird). It was never clear whether that was true in law, or whether the police and procurator fiscal in Aberdeen were too scared of Professor Baird to try to stop him.
Thanks for this.
Completely unaware of any of this. You would have thought he would have at least looked at the legislation. Then again… it’s Humza. Scotland’s answer to the monster Johnston.
What a deceitful, lying, useful idiot Humza is.
You simply cannot allow abortion because the baby is not the sex you want. I hope this really de-rails Humza’s coronation.
Say what you like about Forbes but at least she will have a coherent and non-confused personal view on abortion, as I imagine Regan does. Yousaf proving time and again to be the conviction-less twit in this race.
Yousaf is the queerest Muslim i have ever encountered.
Is he a Wuslim ie a new gender of Woke Muslim?
Must be so G-A-Y down the «masjid»
The very last thing Scotland needs more anti reproduction legislation.
Body autonomy?…think nature has the upper hand there.
You may imagine you’re a plank of wood but the physiology isn’t supportive.
Probably par for the course for his religion, as it is for Hindus too
You would think a former justice minister would know the law…
“The thing they agree on is that Humza Yousaf has just declared that he wants to change the law around abortion so that women can abort babies in Scotland solely on the grounds that they don’t like which sex they are. And that seems like something that should probably be bigger news.”
Sorry, but I can’t see the specific link regarding the element “solely on the grounds that they don’t like which sex they are” in BOTH emails at the top of this article.
For sure the second tweet makes this explicit claim. However, no matter how hard I look I cannot see such a claim/demand to be even implicit between the lines in either the first tweet or the subsequent quotes from Yousaf.
The only place I can see such a claim is in the second tweet from the Family Education Trust – which singularly fails to provide evidence that such a demand is part and parcel of what is taking place here.
Even the highlighted quote in the letter from Back off Scotland makes no implicit, never mind explicit, reference to such a demand as selective abortion based on sex (presumably assigned BEFORE birth?).
Is there some other document, tweet or letter which sets out such an explicit demand to substantiate the claim being made in the tweet from the Family Education Trust?
What am I missing here?
Well , did Bumza not build the Queensferry Bridge with his own hands , abolish slavery , lynching , regicide , in between ending the India v Pakistan conflict , the Vietnam War , the War of the Roses , discovering gravity , splitting the the atom & inventing the Internet ( on a rare day off ) ?
All this in addition to making Sturgeon’s breakfast devotedly every day without fail AND carrying her bag to school ( even when rain was forecast , worra guy ) , polishing Murrell’s shoes and teaching Shurely Shome Summermeadow how to count to 21 without using her toes n fingers .
So it’s really no surprise our child prodigy should pledge to decriminalise something that isn’t a crime
Poor old Humza, ignorant and lazy.
Transport Minister, Justice Minister, Health Minister….
in the first too stupid and lazy to insure his own car…
and now, spouting forth on an issue that overlaps criminal and health law – ignorant of Scots law as it stands and too lazy to do any research.
He really is the Scottish Boris isn’t he – the gravy bus version.
One can only hope, if he wins, the press let loose and don’t hold back with any and all sex misconduct scandals… get it over with sooner rather than later.
The legal aspect may be one thing, but there is a moral aspect. I have suggested that the facility to terminate a pregnancy should be extended in time to when the child reaches the age of 16 years.
This was intended to be a “reductio ad absurdum” but the real world is catching up. Termination at term is more accurately described as infanticide. That is unequivocally a crime.
Some States in America are setting the limit for abortion at the point where the baby’s heartbeat becomes detectable.
The moral issue is straightforward. Abortion is murder. One expects to be attacked, at least verbally, for making this point. Deliberately ending the life of another human being is abhorrent.
There is a social aspect, and it is an important one. The numbers are available from Scottish government statistics. Around 10,000 (yes, ten thousand) abortions are carried out in Scotland every year. Going back to the Abortion Act over half a million Scots have been killed in the womb, or retrieved alive and killed for parts. Taking into account that around half would have been female and would have gone on to have children, it is not unreasonable to suggest that Scotland is short of around one million Scots as a result of the large number of abortions.
Remember that one of the First Ministers of Scotland claimed that we needed to take in 600,000 immigrants to make up our numbers. (Is this stupidity, or what?)
Categorising male anti-abortion protestors as “scumbags” is very rude. I’d rather suppose that they were reminding people of the immorality of abortion, likely from a traditional Christian viewpoint, as well as potentially saving the life of a bairn.
Thing to remember is that there are, as we speak, rooms full of earnest and shiny spads with the occasional grizzled old misanthrope, desperately ‘ideating’ on possible squirrels, wedge issues, and leverage points in support of the anointed Prince. This strikes me as potentially that. Looking forward to seeing it erupt like a boil in the “Scottish” media.
This is why Ash and Kate should be everyone’s 1/2 in the vote for whatever your choice is.
Kate has her own views which i disagree with, but appreciate her honesty. And by saying she would support the current standard and improve it because the public want it. She won’t change it based on her opinion.
Ash is on the same side with wanting to improve upon existing legislation and support.
Both without virtue signalling and because it’s the right thing to do.
Anyone fancy writing Humza a letter on a ridiculous topic that will get his virtue signalling erect and make him look like an even bigger idiot?
According to Back Off Scotland Regan also said she supported All 3 points in their letter. Forbes on the other hand replying she supported buffer zones (as long as implemented via balanced legislation) but felt things were fine as they are with regards to their other two questions/demands.
This reply tweet from Regan would seem to confirm she has no issues with Back Off Scotland’s shorthand presenting of her reply. link to twitter.com
Yousaf getting more and more desperate. Almost as much as the Murrell household. Abort the continuity! Abort!
Officially sanctioned child abuse.
link to archive.ph
The dirty «old pervs» female/male/trans etc flaunt their junk in the class room.
[t]he head of two schools in London told The Times: “It’s all a massive storm in a proverbial teacup. We get some queries from parents who don’t want their children to know there are families with two fathers or that there are human beings who don’t see sex as binary or black and white. But a quiet chat over tea*, and open transparency, is all that is needed.”
*tea and unsympathy, that’s the way we do it now daarlings…enjoy!
Yay, Yousaf!
Stu.
Amazing what good journalism can do when researching legislation.
This is also the way forward for the independence of Scotland.
Well done.
This is why we need independence – even our politicians don’t know our own laws. We get swamped with English media talking about English laws, we assume they apply to us as well, then people get confused when they find out that we do things differently.
If we forget our own laws and our own history, we will forget who we are. How can we make or change our laws, or our country, if we don’t understand them?
Abortion up to birth? There is another word for that… murder.
Got the reference to SeX PiSTOls charming love ballad “Bodies”.
Humza certainly is a “bloody disgrace”!
Does your country have a place in the world that others take for granted?
No…then who is going to make that happen?
Not a task for «wee provincials», obviously.
ScotGov needs to get out of our pants.
Scotland. SNP. Deranged, depraved. Perverts.
The removal of womens rights,
Legislation is amazing in its ability to remove rights from one set of people, in this case women, while providing extra protection to those such as trans gender and the perverted sexual offenders in society.
There seems to be a pattern in Britain to go backward to pre- suffragette time period.
To place women in a situation, thus (mothers, grand parents and parents) in the position of having no voice, into dependency on the State, under control and in a financial crises.
The picture is much bigger than just trans gender against women, abortion,
the choice should be a females,
A good example of this is this Scenario,
Suppose a young teenage girl say thirteen years of age, was raped by the perverts we often mention, and becomes pregnant as a result and against her will, does she have the right to choose abortion, rather than suffer the pregnancy and the labour, which would only bring a hatred for the child as a constant reminder of her ordeal she went through nine months earlier,
Perhaps it would be Wiser to Castrate and remove the male sexual organs of the offenders legally by legislation, and by medical surgery.
Once someone is known as a sexual offender it should become automatic legal medical procedure.
Then they can claim they have trans gendered medically.
If you want to reduce crime against women and children, this is the way forward, instead of women having always be the victim and have to talk to men about the abusive behaviour they received, from men.
At one time it used to be a hanging offence…. cut of what hangs and the offence discontinues.
But We see that legislation was also passed on women’s pension rights, in Britain through speeded up legislation.
These women are now in poverty after having paid into a pension system that promised retirement at 60.
Often these women are or were the sole carer looking after their husbands whom are often older than their wife’s , and are often carers for other elderly loved ones, They also used to be the go to place for working parents whom needed that extra support.
The other side of these promised pensions stolen from women and not received at 60 years old, is the man of the house is often got only one pension to run everything on,
whereas two pensions would have prevented pensioner poverty in the household.
Women are being subdued by many pieces of legislation from governments constantly recently. And it has a long term effect on all of us, Why?
James Che says: “… Stu. Amazing what good journalism can do when researching legislation. This is also the way forward for the independence of Scotland. Well done… ”
Well done, indeed, Rev. SALVO and SSRG are already looking into original Scottish legislation and constitutional law, pre and post 1707. The problem with laws made at Westminster is that the Scottish version had to be separate and tacked on to the tail end of ‘British legislation’, so that it covered the whole of the UK – the 2010 Equality Act, etc. Where laws originate in Westminster, they are reserved, usually. Some laws are strict liability and cover the whole of the UK automatically – such as traffic laws.
Scotland relied much more on the Common Law of Scotland than on statute, and, arguably, should still do so. The extremely flexible Breach of the Peace could, conceivably, be used to cover any and all or, at least most, circumstances by tweaking it rather than having a hate crime law or new laws to protect women specifically. The job of the police has extended and expanded to take in hundreds of new statutes when the Common Law of Scotland was fairly easily understood. Of course, Scotland also had statute law and was a sophisticated legal system way before the Union. It was a sister system of the European model rather than English Law, and based on Roman Law.
My own approach to abortion is that of the disinterested by-stander: if you need it; it’s there. Scotland should be no different, although birth control and ‘morning after’ should be available, too, of course, as first options, albeit mistakes do occur. The twattish men in that photo haven’t a clue. Choosing abortion over giving birth to a child of the sex not favoured by society is another question altogether because nature tends to compensate anyway. In some parts of the Indian subcontinent, women are so scarce in the rural villages that the men have no partners and have to scour other parts to find them where women are plentiful, yet they still insisted, when interviewed, that females were ‘useless mouths to feed’, as the ‘lads’ lounged around while their mothers did all their laundry, cooking, cleaning, etc.
Humza is a very liberal, libertarian even, Muslim, and liberalism in the circumstances we find ourselves in today does not equate, of course, to liberty, but to the exact opposite.
If Humza wins then Indy is set back at least a decade.
If either of the other candidates win then the the payroll, MPs and MSPs will undermine them constantly.
Sturgeon has ensured her legacy will continue.
The confusion of English laws with Scottish laws has been bought into being by the Westminster English domestic laws of the “Scotland Act” which created a branch office of their devolved parliament in Scotland,
Through which English laws enter Scotland by the back door, and repeal Scots laws, even although ” the treaty ” states Scots laws were to remain in tact.
One of the first laws of Scotland to be changed and repealed by Westminster after the treaty, was the law on treason, 1708.
Breaching the treaty of union articles.
Hansard records protests in Westminster and the worry by unionist that it breached the treaty of the union,
Still Westminster went ahead and passed it.
“Perhaps it would be Wiser to Castrate and remove the male sexual organs of the offenders legally by legislation, and by medical surgery.
Once someone is known as a sexual offender it should become automatic legal medical procedure.
Then they can claim they have trans gendered medically.”
I would have agreed until I read about one paedophile in Scotland (’70’s / ’80’s) who was impotent, which he compensated for by penetrating which a jagged glass bottle.
Be careful what you wish for with these sickos. Execution or throwing away the key is the only answer. You can’t cure them with therapy, medication, or even castration.
Hope the bastard is still in Carstairs.
Lorna Campbell @ 3:50 pm
“Humza is a very liberal, libertarian even, Muslim, and liberalism in the circumstances we find ourselves in today does not equate, of course, to liberty, but to the exact opposite.”
Yes, as well as eroding womans rights his hand appears to be on catch-all laws on ‘domestic abuse’, hate crime, GRR, and next it may be taking away jury trials for some. He also seems awfu quick to bring in the law against others, e.g. nurseries even. Scotland having the highest prison population rate per head in Western Europe tells its own story about the law and how it is applied here. link to scottishlegal.com
However, we don’t see any effort far less laws protecting the rights of indigenous Scots tae oor ain cultur an langage, nor e’en oor richt tae sel-determination. Naw, yer man isnae interestit in leeberation o us Scots, raither mair in doun-hauden o Scots. link to un.org
Nelson Mandela and other liberation movement leaders warned about the propensity of the state’s social institutions to oppress the people rather than to serve them, especially within a colonial society, which is what we see. In this case we also have different cultural values and beliefs in play and hence even more uncertain outcomes, though hardly positive for a people seeking liberation. People thought Sturgeon was bad, but Yousaf is likely to be a whole lot worse.
People writing, sometimes in the same post, that Scotland is a colonised country and that enforcing a countries borders against, literally, the Albanian mafia speedboating people onto its beaches is exactly the same as Germany in the 1930s and that anyone who is against this population transfer is a Nazi and should be cancelled as such. Then complaining when cancel culture is used against someone who shares their views. What a time to be alive.
UK 2023
link to youtube.com,
No voters should have gone to specsavers!
Scotland has suffered under the SNP, but in no more obvious fashion that in the acceptance by the party of the wildest, most egregious and indefensible moral propositions imaginable. If a Scot believes a man is a woman (his government tells him so), why should not a Scot believe female babies are worthless?
“Now, we can’t berate Humza Yousaf for not knowing about something we only found out ourselves five minutes ago”
I am no sure I agree with you there, Rev. Differently to Yousaf, you have never been the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care under whose remit falls the control of the NHS where terminations of pregancy are currently taking place.
In addition, and as far as I know, differently to Yousaf you have never been the Cabinet Secretary for Justice either, It is expected that the cabinet minister for Justice will have at the very least some basic knowledge on Abortion legislation.
You are being too generous, Rev.
Now, judging by the article above, Yousaf appears to support “abortions” until birth.
I am horrified by this because of its gory implications. I am of the opinion that either Mr Yousaf did not engage his brain on this before opening his mouth, or he is happily endorsing legalised murder.
Let me explain.
When delivered by planned C-section, babies are delivered before the due-date. It is not frequent but it is not uncommon for babies to be born, spontaneously, one month, or even 2-months prematurely.
In all three cases, babies are fully formed when born and go on to survive fine.
Survival of a baby outwith the womb starts from around 24 weeks (month 6 of the pregnancy). So, in light of this, I would like to ask Mr Yousaf:
1. at which point in time the termination of the life of the baby ceases to be simply an “abortion” and becomes murder?
2. Would you see it appropriate for a pregnant lady to simply decide to “abort” their baby a couple of days before or even on their due date?
3. If the answer to “2” above is yes, who is going to kill the baby? Because at that point a fully formed baby with every chance of survival outwith the womb will have to be delivered either vaginally or via C-section. So, does the baby get killed right before it is delivered or are the doctors/midwives expected to kill the baby by suffocation or any other more “humane” way, such as neglecting the baby without food or warmth until it dies “naturally” to “effect” the desired abortion?
4. If the answer to the question above is “before the delivery”, what kind of lethal chemical, in which form and in which dose do you think the mother would have to ingest/be injected with to kill the baby in the womb so the mother can deliver a dead body and not a viable baby?
5. And how is it the process of death of the baby going to be followed to ensure it is not delivered alive? Woud a midwife and the mother be expected to be listening until the baby’s heartbeat stops before inducing the delivery?
REgarding abortion for the purposes of specific sex selection, I would like to ask Mr Yousaf the following questions:
1. How on earth can the mother or the midwife/doctor practising the abortion know what the gender/sex of the baby is going to be before the baby can speak by themselves if, according to the gender nutters behind your GRR legislation, gender or even sex can no longer be associated with karyotype or secondary sexual characteristics?
2. Does your GRR legislation mean pregnant ladies can no longer ask, during their 20 weeks’ scan or after an amniocentesis, what sex their baby is because they and the midwives revealing it are in danger of being accused of “conversion therapy”/hate crime if they assign the “wrong” gender to the baby?
3. What about baby shops? Will they be able to sell things for “boys” and “girls” or not anymore? Will anybody from now on be allowed to ask a pregnant lady or somebody with a baby on a pushchair if their baby is a boy or a girl?
Thank you for the clarification.
Gloag and Henderson 6th edition (1956) states:
“It is criminal to cause or procure an abortion with felonious intent”
In the absence of contradictory reference, the inference is that an abortion was ONlY a crime if it was forced by a second or third party (potential father, grandfather, headmistress, etc) or, in the alternative, if the doctor exploited the situation by charging an extortionate fee.
Given the legislative balance in the country since then, it follows that any changes for the worse must have been made with labour or snp blessing (for whatever reason)
The remaining SNP membership has a huge responsibility to get this right and not be distracted by ‘personalitity politics’. This is about policies.
Ash has presented clear policies and knows how to build on Scotland’s foundations, how to draw on its rich resources.
Can voters please get the country back on track for everyone’s sake?
(Ash 1, Kate 2)
Humza Yousaf has just declared that he wants to change the law around abortion so that women can abort babies in Scotland solely on the grounds that they don’t like which sex they are
Just for a change, could the SNP try doing something that isn’t evil?
Ottomanboi says:
11 March, 2023 at 1:22 pm
“Yousaf is the queerest Muslim i have ever encountered.”
If he calls himself a Muslim, he is a total fraud.
Someone should ask him to clarify.
Looking at those images was pretty shocking.
Did nobody stop to think that allowing people with hundreds of self harm scars and clear mental health issues to make decisions about mutilating their bodies maybe isn’t a good idea?
Perhaps if we focused on mental health instead of “trans healthcare” , we might have less people wanting to chop bits off their own bodies.
ALF BAIRD
Take it from me there is no such beast as «liberal Islam».
It is a creature confected by the anglo-saxon «liberal» media which in itself is actually rather racist as it conflates Islam and ethnicity.
In a Muslim country the Qur’an is THE measure of all things. Its message is quite clear to the faithful. You are reminded five times a day of its importance.
There is no «secular» realm. That has been tried in e.g Syria and Iraq and found rather wanting. Unlike the West, which still clings to to the notion that anything goes in the name of a rather spurious notion of total individual «autonomy» as opposed to a shared sense of identity.
Yousaf is a sturgeonesque aberration.
Halâl he is not.
@Antoine Bisset 1:58
Great post.
Thanks for stating the facts.
It might be more accurate to say Humza Yousaf has just declared that he wants to change the law around abortion so that women can abort girl babies in Scotland.
link to archive.is
Selective abortion in India could lead to 6.8m fewer girls being born by 2030
In some parts of the world it’s an insult to call someone ‘a father of daughters’
link to archive.is
Scotland could offer Northern Irish women access to free abortions
I don’t know much abortions but presumed in view of the fact that Sturgeon was considering offering women from N.Ireland free & legal abortions on the NHS in Scotland that it was legal.
Also the debate about ‘buffer zones’ suggested that abortions were being carried out legally.
Humza is a hoot nearly as funny as Richard Leotard.
How many millions are we short of due to contraception?
What should scare the hell out of wavering voters, is the fact this site, with limited resources in comparison to the SNP machine (although admittedly, the Rev has excellent forensic journalist skills) was able to research the topic and find out what was needed to make an informed opinion. Humza, on the other hand, had not the wherewithal to do same and has effectively made a tit of himself yet again.
This serial failure in government has clearly learned nothing from his years of experience, yet the people of Scotland may end up with as First Minister. Chilling.
“What am I missing here?”
The ability to read carefully- and accurately-written English properly.
Ruby, contraception is prevention, not assassination.
“Deliberately ending the life of another human being is abhorrent.”
A foetus is not a human being. The day after a baby is born you don’t say it’s 9 months old.
James Che, you pick a very bad example of the raped 13 yr old, this disgraceful behaviour must be extremely rare.
Over 80% of abortions are “on grounds of convenience”
In my opinion the killing of babies is despicable and I will never understand what motivates women to go through with it.
I know many women who have had a child “by accident” and to whom that child has become dearer than life itself. In most cases that love has been reciprocated tenfold.
Someone should ask Bumza Useless if he’s a practising Muslim or a progressive Liberal. Either way he’s a liar. They’re allowed to lie though, according to their book. They’re encouraged to lie. As for the people who harass women outside baby murder clinics, yes, they are terrible people; but there’s nothing wrong with people standing praying nearby if they don’t interact with the women going in. If we start arresting people for praying that’s a very slippery slope. If they do insert Bumza into the FM role, one good thing might come out of it. He’ll make a complete arse of it the way he has with every position he’s blagged, (purely on merit of course, not in any way to tick diversity boxes), it might accelerate the end of this despicable government. The SNP have lost their way and the greens are just the worst people in Scotland.
Mr Campbell, I am not religious, but I believe that life begins at conception. Surely this is a biological fact just as much as a human being’s inability to change sex, or for two homosexuals to reproduce?
We live in an Alice in Wonderland world, but I refuse to join in the fun.
It prevents the growth of the population which was your argument against abortion.
You should maybe do some research to try and find out why women decide to terminate their pregnancy.
It takes two to make a baby it’s not just a decision made by the woman.
Often father insists on it and even offers the money to pay for a termination claiming he is not ready to be a dad.
Or the father doesn’t want a girl baby and insists the pregnancy be terminated.
Maybe even the family put pressure on the woman to have an abortion.
The woman may have mental health issues.
PS Are you for or against sex before marriage?
Abortion is such a sensitive and controversial matter and rightly so. The development of a baby in the womb is an amazing process. For me 24 weeks is too long. I would like to see this reduced by 14 weeks at least.
Thanks for that Ruby, food for though in your post. Certainly more persuasive than the usual pro abortion mantra (my body and I shall do as I please).
Perhaps we should re-examine the whole idea of “the permissive society” In my youth we in general made bloody sure we did not get a lassie pregnant, as there were consequences for doing so.
Society marked the men and they carried a useful stigma which meant they were under review and treated with suspicion.
The erosion of society has led to the situation where 100s of thousands of babies are killed annually, a crime against nature and quite unique in the natural world.
Regarding sex before marriage, I can only comment from a personal point of view, but my late wife and I never had full sexual intercourse before our marriage, we believed that marriage really meant something and that we were never truly to gether before making our vows.
In conclusion I think today people act like sheep but believe they are wild stags. We need to take more personal responsibility for our actions strengthen society and bring back stigma for those who continually behave in a manner which weakens it.
If a woman transitions to a man then wants an abortion I guess this will be ok as the termination rights rest with a woman. So there are no rules for men having abortions
Ruby says:
11 March, 2023 at 10:05 pm
“It prevents the growth of the population which was your argument against abortion.”
No, that was a side comment related to the encouragement of immigration by our politicos who were in favour of abortion. A bit of cognitive dissonance, or two-faced hypocrisy.
My “argument” against abortion is that it is murder.
@ Shug
Indeed, as was touched on in this article from Nov last year.
link to wingsoverscotland.com
The point is there are two human beings involved in the birth of a baby, the mother and the baby,
They are at two human beings usual in Circumstances of both being compatable.
But the condition of the mother mentally often is side stepped and goes unnoticed,
For a child to come into this world and not be wanted, and treated cruelly behind closed doors or perhaps even starved as many headlines have read over the years,
This is because the motheris not reconised,
Everyone presumes that the mother should have maternal instincts, the news stories say different.
Perhaps the support from government should be the vastly improved, but that outlook is still primative in Scotland and England,
Poverty and poor housing, abusive partner relation ships,
Bringing children into that world, is cruelty on both mother and the prospects of the baby, if the are not battered or shook to death first before reaching 1 year old.
The condition to happy childhood is imperitive upon the welfare of the mother and the conditions she is living in before and after a baby is born.
The governments have a big roll to play in this.
If the government and monarchs family themselves are pals and mates with pheado and perverts, along with some Councellors, police force members, catholic schools and other religious establishments,
A large purportion of mothers did not wish to be mothers or are to young to be mothers, and have been raped into becoming mothers against their will and circumstances financial and housing ability.
Charles Hodgins.
I think your comment that men should be allowed to keep their Genitailia they use like a weapon against children and women, because ONE man did something worse with a bottle, is mentally disgusting on your part.
That one man, proves the point, that he had those thoughts anyway and was mentally derranged. It does not make other rapes ok, nor does it stop the passing of legislation to remove their weapon they use against victims from them as you would remove any other weapon that hurt children wether they be women, young boys, young girls or male rape victims.
You are one of the problems in your thinking,
It is not a pass to other offenders.
Perhaps
I would like Mia to be first minister.