tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post1537376947617530499..comments2024-03-04T17:54:32.559+00:00Comments on Iain Dale's Diary: The Fall-Out From the Abortion DebateIain Dalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03270146219458384372noreply@blogger.comBlogger80125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-53343737485977129512008-05-23T14:44:00.000+01:002008-05-23T14:44:00.000+01:00Newmania - Thank you. You write: "I am also fasc...Newmania - Thank you. <BR/><BR/>You write: "I am also fascinated by her ‘apparently’ faithless defence of faith." Whether or not I have a faith isn't germane. I acknowledge the spiritual dimension in every human being, as most human beings do. (For the anoraks, look it up yourselves.) Most of the world professes a faith, which means that most human beings believe they have a spiritual dimension that transcends their body and their mind. It is this insubstantial yet indominitable element that the socialists, recognising its value and permanence, seek to destroy. Because they cannot control it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-65411154716851314022008-05-23T06:09:00.000+01:002008-05-23T06:09:00.000+01:00Newmania, without any sense of irony, you are beyo...Newmania, without any sense of irony, you are beyond belief and I will pray for you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-13628866512970609132008-05-23T00:43:00.000+01:002008-05-23T00:43:00.000+01:00Anyway, if I can summarise, you don't know of a "r...<I>Anyway, if I can summarise, you don't know of a "right date", can't provide any criteria that would rigourously define a "right date" and therefore rely on what you feel is right.Nothing wrong with that at all. In fact an admirably open and honest position. There is no "right date" or "wrong date" that could be defined in such a way as to be acceptable to all sides in the debate.</I><BR/><BR/>You have reiterated your error. Moral sense is not the same as “feeling” . Feelings might be trivial or selfish For example the vanity or pride of someone who feel their special expertises being questioned hmmm. <BR/>Do you sneer loyalty or a sense of right and wrong or indeed love ?.If you deny any moral instinct springing from the human then humanist through has no basis whatsoever . I might commend my soul to the almighty but you must value feelings .( See Feuerbach for example on humanism). Do you think civilisation is only better gadgets ?<BR/>Science is incidental , debate is a tactic , Parliament is in touch only with the heartless selfishness of the progressive 60s and 70s , and we are entering a far more nuanced time than the old stand off between Feminazis and the Church .<BR/>Well I do not have the time to unconfuse confused but on the rapprochement between feeling and intelligence you might do well to read more metaphysical Poets and less books about female empowerment .<BR/><BR/>My gift<BR/><BR/>Speaking of Intelligence and Instinct coming together ,Verity is always such a shaft of light .There is sense in which fundamentalist atheists are all socialists …I would spend long boring paragraphs teasing that out but I know immediately and exactly what she means . I am also fascinated by her ‘apparently’ faithless defence of faith.<BR/><BR/>Anyway I would not want Verity to think that her contributions are not appreciated. They are .Newmaniahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11922161971821380803noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-53350699261375412872008-05-22T18:39:00.000+01:002008-05-22T18:39:00.000+01:00Alberich - I haven't read enough Ayn Rand to chall...Alberich - I haven't read enough Ayn Rand to challenge you, but can I ask, was she not just an atheist, but not a militant, crusading (sic) atheist who wanted to tear down the beliefs of others?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-71592788285187724452008-05-22T17:15:00.000+01:002008-05-22T17:15:00.000+01:00"fundamentalist atheists are always socialists"Cou..."fundamentalist atheists are always socialists"<BR/><BR/>Counterexample: Ayn Rand.<BR/><BR/>Whose kid sister you resemble in most material respects.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-74572679707027841152008-05-22T16:34:00.000+01:002008-05-22T16:34:00.000+01:003:56 - I said "all faiths". Moslems who try to li...3:56 - I said "all faiths". Moslems who try to live according to the code their diety set out for them are equally worthy of respect.<BR/><BR/>There is a terrible problem with militant Islam and that is why this religion needs a Reformation. There are people working on this. But those who live by their faith in peace - yes, of course. To try to persuade them that Allah doesn't exist is, in any case, as future as telling Christians and Jews that they are being fanciful by praying to entities they have never seen.<BR/><BR/>Trying to destroy the faith of others is malevolent and is practised only by fundamentalist atheists, and fundamentalist atheists are always socialists. And socialists are always destructive and controlling. Any target of established human practice will do for tearing down and trying to destabilise society.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-26733989991780258192008-05-22T15:56:00.000+01:002008-05-22T15:56:00.000+01:00verity said... "All they know is that I defend peo...verity said... <BR/>"All they know is that I defend people of faith - all faiths ..."<BR/><BR/>Even Moslems?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-4831326210699274752008-05-22T14:12:00.000+01:002008-05-22T14:12:00.000+01:001. Fundamentalist atheists must stop making assum...1. Fundamentalist atheists must stop making assumptions about me and ascribing to me a belief in a god, which they could not possibly know. All they know is that I defend people of faith - all faiths - people who know they have a soul - against vicious, militant atheists who seek to destroy faith. I wonder why. It seems an odd psychopathy, but then I suppose all psychopathies are strange. <BR/><BR/>They cannot destroy faith, of course, which infuriates them even more. Something outside their control! I have nothing against normal atheists - that is, atheists on the right - who do not seek to destroy the faith of others. (Not they can; they cannot compete with a diety.) It is the fundamentalists on the left who seek to destroy. Always, when you see destruction of human values, it is the left, busy at work. They naively use dismissive phrases like "sky fairy", I suppose in the belief that a person of faith is going to think, "Gosh! I'd never thought of it quite like that before! I'm not going to believe in God any more! Thank you, militant atheist!" You people need to shut up and stop making absolute fools of yourselves.<BR/><BR/>Make no assumptions about my faith or non-faith from the above. <BR/><BR/>2. Hold your noses and go over to The Daily Mail and read the story of the lady who couldn't have children, finally conceived through IVF and then the pregnancy went wrong just under the [whatever the time limit is]. How she and her husband lied to the doctors about when the baby was conceived, how the baby started coming way early and the mother caught an infection, and they didn't tell the doctor because they knew the doctors would abort it.<BR/><BR/>So she lay in her hospital bed for days with a raging, painful infection but she was determined that this little thing wasn't going to be killed.<BR/><BR/>Well it was born in a very difficult birth, and was so premature it was transparent, but the doctors thought it was over the time barrier, so worked flat out to save it rather than letting it die.<BR/><BR/>Just go and look at its tiny little feet between the surgeon's fingers. It's little feet aren't even as big as a surgeon's fingernail, but today, it is home and thriving.<BR/><BR/>Read the whole saga. Your eyes will tear up, I guarantee. Brave lady, and her husband lied valiantly to the medical staff.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-59828273287355101202008-05-22T14:02:00.000+01:002008-05-22T14:02:00.000+01:00Thank you Newmania for making your point perfectly...Thank you Newmania for making your point perfectly clear. Oh, and sorry for taking the piss, but I really couldn't resist.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, if I can summarise, you don't know of a "right date", can't provide any criteria that would rigourously define a "right date" and therefore rely on what you feel is right.<BR/><BR/>Nothing wrong with that at all. In fact an admirably open and honest position. There is no "right date" or "wrong date" that could be defined in such a way as to be acceptable to all sides in the debate.<BR/><BR/>The problem is that in the abortion debate there is an attempt to quantize a continuum, to place boundaries upon a continuous spectrum of foetal development, one that theoretically extends from the moment of fertilisation (if not earlier cf Catholic proscription on contraception) through to death (whenever it occurs).<BR/><BR/>So, before we can even start arguing about arbitrary time limits how about a debate on how we as a society are going to define such a time limit? And clarity about the foundations of our position? Then we could maybe come up with some compromise that respects the rights of everyone involved whilst acknowledging that the solution is a compromise that should be reviewed on a regular (but not too frequent) basis. I'm not optomistic, but all that's been achieved so far is maintenance of the status quo and a polarisation of the debate. Hardly conducive to finding common ground.<BR/><BR/>"If you are suggesting women can conceive without sperm then you are crackers."<BR/><BR/>Wasn't saying that all all.<BR/><BR/>"If not then you are saying nothing at all incomprehensibly "<BR/><BR/>Was simply pointing out that some lesbian friends of mine had conceived a child through the act of sexual intercourse. No need for IVF or other artifical methods.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-80914537967390316752008-05-22T12:33:00.000+01:002008-05-22T12:33:00.000+01:00Confused writes:"I was disappointed about this Iai...Confused writes:<BR/><BR/><I>"I was disappointed about this Iain and it seems to me we have to lose this entirely spurious viability factor."And replace it with what, some spurious "it feels right" factor or "my God says" factor?</I><BR/><BR/>You may feel moral and metaphysical systems of belief are trivial feelings such as might prompt you to buy another big book of why wimmin are best at everything , but they grow through time and form the basis of all important decisions . When you are fertilising your garden with your dead parents in a logical way you might ponder on this . Its so rational .<BR/><BR/><I>you've presented yourself with an almost insurmountable object. What is a non-spurious factor?</I><BR/><BR/>Even if I accepted this , which I do not , it would still be an advance on a false framework which places the ability of the child to live unaided at the centre of the debate . Why not slaughter the crippled ? Without some notion of the special value of people aside from their attributes at this or that time horrific conclusions follow that you avoid thinking about because you like your nice comfy constituency of “scientists” who , amazingly , think science can and will supply an answer unaided.<BR/><BR/><I>"I have two new-borns at home at the moment and it is entirely clear their viability is about 5 minutes without 24 hour attention."<BR/><BR/>So they're being fed intravenously, in an oxygen rich atmsophere, etc, etc? Nope, thought not. And if their viability was 5 minutes, then how on Earth do you managed to go to the toilet?</I> <BR/><BR/>How fatuous .Well going to the toilet is not easy since you mention it but their ability to live without me is zero. Clear enough .You are not thinking you are just desperately defending what you know is a weak position about to give way<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><I>"I say that 12 weeks is long enough , murder trumps inconvenience"<BR/><BR/>Woa! There goes the emotive use of murder. Why 12 weeks? Why not 11, or 9 or, what the heck why not ban it altogether. What is the rational basis for your decision that up to 12 weeks isn't murder, but from day 84 on it is?</I><BR/><BR/>I can`t say I much like using the word murder but if you are killing a person I `m not sure what other word there is . If you prefer something like de –living , or un existing , or anti – lifing I would be happy to comply with the New Labour book of ok words<BR/><BR/><I>Can we assume that you're a strict vegan, because if aborting a 12 week foetus is murder, then killing animals (which are far more sentient than a 12 week foetus) must also be murder.</I><BR/><BR/>See murder-of-cripples and who decided that sentience was the issue , I am not sentient when I am asleep , I have the potential of sentience as does an unborn child . You obviously see humans and animals as on the same spectrum in which case if you are not a vegan then I must assume an especially stupid one might not actually be eaten burnt , experimented on and so on but would certainly qualify for far less respect and might be asked to pull a plough or chase foxes .Its not as if this has never happened <BR/><BR/><BR/> <I>Or is the difference just that - with a fair wind and a lot of good luck - that foetus just might be born and go on to live a happy and fulfilling life, or be miscarried, die in childbirth, die from illness in the first weeks after being born, etc.<BR/>In which case, if it is the potential that makes aborting a 12 week foetus murder, then you'd better be honest and outlaw abortion altogether.</I><BR/><BR/>You would like that wouldn’t you. Anyone who finds the prospect of unborn children being chopped up for the convenience of some woman must want to bann abortion altogether. Nothing of the sort, there are two irreconcilable principles here. A womans right to her body and a child’s right to life . Unlike you , I do not expect to live forever and I accept that death is part of life ,including for the unborn. It is always to be regretted but it will,never be neat and tidy.<BR/>My view is this. The foetus gather value as it grows from valueless cells into a person. When this happens is not amenable to scientific enquiry and the competing rights of the woman must also be respected . You are looking for an easy solution but there is none. You pick viability arbitrarily only because it suits a political agenda that comes from feminism’s history and understandable abhorrence of being in thrall to child birth( a historic argument ). The only possible approach is pragmatic .<BR/><BR/>1 Any abortion is a tragedy <BR/>2 The earlier the better if it must happen <BR/>3 A suitable date would be one by which the woman has time to know she is pregnant and decide whether she wishes to have the child . Let us say , and there is no right date , 3 months .<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/> True it would be better if it were earlier , and true it is not “right” but I neither seek nor expect the sort of trite satisfaction you have gathered based on nothing whatsoever . <BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><I>Ha ha ha. Strangely enough, I have a couple of lesbian friends who have 2 children, both conceived in the natural way, courtesy of friction between mucus mebranes and the combination, in utero of sperm and ovum.</I><BR/><BR/>If you are suggesting women can conceive without sperm then you are crackers. If not then you are saying nothing at all incomprehensibly . BravoNewmaniahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11922161971821380803noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-49651897687474637282008-05-22T12:06:00.000+01:002008-05-22T12:06:00.000+01:00S Yorks @10.11 - I returned only to check whether ...S Yorks @10.11 - I returned only to check whether you had done the necessary, which you have, and very professionally too if I may say so. We, not to say she, could do with a bit more of this sort of Yorkshire grit.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-4297392252294646072008-05-22T11:08:00.000+01:002008-05-22T11:08:00.000+01:00Anon May 22, 2008 9:41 AMApology accepted. "I stil...Anon May 22, 2008 9:41 AM<BR/><BR/>Apology accepted. <BR/><BR/>"I still however, think that killing healthy babies is wrong and the mothers suffer in later life."<BR/><BR/>That's the sticking point, isn't it? You say baby, I say foetus, and then there's the viability issue and at what point does abortion become murder. The latter could result in a reducto ad absurdo situation whereby we end up with abstinence as the only acceptable form of birth control. But it does highlight one of the many problems with deciding what is and isn't legal.<BR/><BR/>In an ideal world, there would be no need for abortion. Unfortunately we don't live in such a world and thus the messy compromises on matters such as this. Personally, I'm all for regular reviews of the law, better education and more widespread and informed debate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-33531569242873163792008-05-22T10:11:00.000+01:002008-05-22T10:11:00.000+01:00Verity"What "God factor" [capitalisation yours]? W...Verity<BR/><BR/>"What "God factor" [capitalisation yours]? Where on earth did you get that from, other than that you don't bother to read other people's posts before steaming in with your own important contribution?"<BR/><BR/>Okay, let's spell it out. I made a comment (May 21, 2008 1:41 PM) which contained the phrase "'my God says' factor". You responded to that comment, accusing me of being a militant atheist, said accusation being based (unless you'd care to enlighten me) on my inclusion of that phrase. Or perhaps my support for reasoned debate.<BR/><BR/>I then made reference to your comment attacking me from your position of ignorance in a comment (May 21, 2008 11:43 PM) responding to Anon's comment of (May 21, 2008 7:45 PM) in which he decided to bring class and education in to the discussion from a position of ignorance, again like yourself. I pointed out that at least you had my use of "God factor" upon which to hang an unfounded accusation.<BR/><BR/>So, "S Yorks, you sound a little daft on your own account.", whereas your demonstrable failure to follow the comment thread is either a consequence of your own rash stupidity or being caught out by comments being moderated in blocks. Your choice.<BR/><BR/>"You know nothing about me. You know that I strongly disapprove of fundamentalist atheism. I don't like bullies. That is all you know.<BR/><BR/>Do not ascribe imagined thoughts to me, there's a good chap."<BR/><BR/>Pot, meet Kettle.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-47635361356937893272008-05-22T09:41:00.000+01:002008-05-22T09:41:00.000+01:00confused of W.YorksOh dear, Oh dear,actually I pos...confused of W.Yorks<BR/><BR/>Oh dear, Oh dear,<BR/><BR/>actually I possibly got a bit off beam with the last remark but had just watched some news programme re election...and was feeling furious<BR/><BR/>having been born on the other side of the green beize door I have experienced the very good in everyone of all backgrounds and some considerable bad - <BR/><BR/>I do,. however, get very cross about modern education -children leaving school unable to read and write get me very angry and logic should be taught in schools it is markedly absent in this debate.<BR/><BR/>However, as you rightly point out this has nothing to do with the present question so I apologise.<BR/><BR/>I still however, think that killing healthy babies is wrong and the mothers suffer in later life.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-11573599170768809572008-05-22T08:04:00.000+01:002008-05-22T08:04:00.000+01:00All four votes demonstrate, again, that MPs are mo...All four votes demonstrate, again, that MPs are mostly a bunch of out-of-touch deviant weirdos.<BR/><BR/><BR/><B>Angela said... </B> <BR/><BR/>"Dawn Primarolo is enough to make anyone puke."<BR/><BR/>You got that right.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-56252149985156016552008-05-22T02:44:00.000+01:002008-05-22T02:44:00.000+01:00Confused of S Yorks writes, to my amazement: In th...Confused of S Yorks writes, to my amazement: <I>In this respect you're as bad as Verity, flinging an accusation based on ignorance. In fact, your comment is possibly worse, given that she at least had "God factor" to use as a tenuous fact.</I><BR/><BR/>What "God factor" [capitalisation yours]? Where on earth did you get that from, other than that you don't bother to read other people's posts before steaming in with your own important contribution?<BR/><BR/>S Yorks, you sound a little daft on your own account.<BR/><BR/>I wrote that I loathe militant atheism because it seeks viciously to destroy the faith of others. It's nasty, aggressive and destructive. <BR/><BR/>How do you relate "the God factor" to me? You know nothing about me. You know that I strongly disapprove of fundamentalist atheism. I don't like bullies. That is all you know.<BR/><BR/>Do not ascribe imagined thoughts to me, there's a good chap.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-9047946326401984962008-05-21T23:43:00.000+01:002008-05-21T23:43:00.000+01:00Anon 7:45pm"By the way I attended a Secondary Mode...Anon 7:45pm<BR/><BR/>"By the way I attended a Secondary Modern and am very working class if you wish to judge on such stupid standards"<BR/><BR/>Oh great, where did I even mention working class or educational background? I didn't did I? So don't even bother to try and justify a pointless misdirection. In this respect you're as bad as Verity, flinging an accusation based on ignorance. In fact, your comment is possibly worse, given that she at least had "God factor" to use as a tenuous fact.<BR/><BR/>For what it's worth, I went to the local comprehensive, followed by tech college and then polytechnic. And as for class, without knowing my background, don't even think about following that one up. Go right ahead though, I doubt you have a chip on your shoulder (that would be so stereotypical), but comments like that could give such an impression.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-56126339361755602922008-05-21T23:37:00.000+01:002008-05-21T23:37:00.000+01:00StBobMy point, perhaps not clearly expressed was t...StBob<BR/>My point, perhaps not clearly expressed was that I am mystified that time limits for abortions should be a matter for party politics. Why should the <I>government</I> want a later date? Why not leave it to a genuinely free and unsupervised vote? There is absolutely no need to introduce notions of winning and losing here. The important thing surely is to make the best decision and one that will fairly reflect public opinion.Little Black Sambohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16699227938165106710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-15931156693920450412008-05-21T23:08:00.000+01:002008-05-21T23:08:00.000+01:009:29 - I have absolutely no idea what you were try...9:29 - I have absolutely no idea what you were trying to convey or what bone you are trying to pick, and no, I wouldn't care to join you in a lifeboat. <BR/><BR/>But have great respect for the people who died at Ypres and elsewhere on the Continent defending our island and feel they have been betrayed by the destructors within: the socialists and One Worlders. <BR/><BR/>They live on, insulated by death and honour, as Britain today sinks knee-deep in slags, serial "partners", floods of alien "immigrants" living off the taxpayer according to their own laws, with their own parallel courts, and foreign rapists and murderers the government declines to deport, hiding behind Cherie Blair's monstrous "Human Rights Act". The rights they gave their lives to protect are being picked off one by one by our own government, which adheres to the cult of One Worlder socialism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-49592258018753494822008-05-21T21:29:00.000+01:002008-05-21T21:29:00.000+01:00Verity - I am off to Ypres next week to pay my res...Verity - I am off to Ypres next week to pay my respects to my uncles who died there. <BR/><BR/>Care to join me baby? No I think not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1829773671156362942008-05-21T20:48:00.000+01:002008-05-21T20:48:00.000+01:00Verity,really you hate me? You know I once had a v...Verity,<BR/>really you hate me? You know I once had a very young female friend who thought she might be pregnant and her hideous ex-boyriend asked her to have an abortion if she was. She didnt want to and I offered to support her financially whatever she wanted to do. <BR/><BR/>I dont believe in God but I do believe in people. The two things arent incompatible are they?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-66813149291624717742008-05-21T20:27:00.000+01:002008-05-21T20:27:00.000+01:00Anon 7:45pm"Maybe there are many things Nadine say...Anon 7:45pm<BR/><BR/>"Maybe there are many things Nadine says that are not factual -but then she is a politician, very few of whom are truthful. However this dies not discredit everything she says - one does not take the word of one person in making up ones mind about important issues"<BR/><BR/>Two points to make regarding your comment. First, check out Aesop's "The Shepherd and the Wolf". Secondly, Dorries approach was symptomatic of many campaigning from the same position. It did their arguments no good, when a bit less reliance on emotion might well have swung the day.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-2405137050087341892008-05-21T20:12:00.000+01:002008-05-21T20:12:00.000+01:004:47 - Me as an individual? But hundreds of thous...4:47 - Me as an individual? But hundreds of thousands, if not millions, who feel like me should carry a little weight, I believe. even in your parallel, hate-driven universe.<BR/><BR/>St Bob, baby, the people for whom I express intense dislike, and you have just joined the portfolio, are all socialists. You write: "Need I go on?" Yes. You left out Tony Blair. Hatred of destructive left wingers/socialists/Trots/One Worlders and their grim ilk is more common than you appear to imagine, especially on conservtive and right wing sites, and many of us see the destruction of the left as a duty.<BR/><BR/>You must admit I am very mild compared with Devil's Kitchen or the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler.<BR/><BR/>"When you can't win an argument you regularly belittle people ...". I can always win an argument. This has nothing to do with getting fed up with people who race into a site having nothing to say, and say it badly. <BR/><BR/>The left always attempts to deride those who see through them. It's OK. You're transparent, baby.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-49128350304122205082008-05-21T19:45:00.000+01:002008-05-21T19:45:00.000+01:00confused:Maybe there are many things Nadine says t...confused:<BR/><BR/>Maybe there are many things Nadine says that are not factual -but then she is a politician, very few of whom are truthful. However this dies not discredit everything she says - one does not take the word of one person in making up ones mind about important issues . Many of us know people whom we trust who have reports to make.<BR/><BR/>Why, when one disagrees about such things do we have to be branded 'religious'. It may come as a surprise but not all religious people are meekly obedient to the doctrine of their faith and not all people who have a reverence for life and ethical opinions are of a religious faith. <BR/><BR/>Typical of this government which is always saying that the public needs 'educating'.<BR/><BR/>Some of us are a damn sight more educated that some parliamenatrians, some of us were taught how to look at all points of view before making a decision.<BR/><BR/>Some of us were taught to think for ourselves especially on such issues as ethics and morals.<BR/><BR/>I recommend the Philosophers Magazine -that demonstrates how to work through logically to a point of view.<BR/><BR/>By the way I attended a Secondary Modern and am very working class if you wish to judge on such stupid standards)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-9291461217975928772008-05-21T19:39:00.000+01:002008-05-21T19:39:00.000+01:00To my mind, the only thing last night's abortion v...To my mind, the only thing last night's abortion vote did was emphasise the contempt of Parliament for the electorate. Poll after poll has shown that majority opinion, especially among women, favours a lowering of the abortion limit. Members of Parliament are supposed to reflect the views of the constituents who voted them their seat. What a joke!<BR/><BR/>I don't have fixed views about it, I think it is far too complicated an issue to HAVE fixed views. However...<BR/><BR/>Nadine Dorries muddied her own waters with plenty of false claims in pursuit of her goal. That does not necessarily make the goal unworthy, but it makes her lack credibility.<BR/><BR/>The 'other side' was equally culpable, loading evidence & statistics in its favour and ignoring valid arguments in opposition. Dawn Primarolo is enough to make anyone puke.<BR/><BR/>I am against capital punishment because however much I may support it in theory, I know I could not in cold blood take the life of a fellow human being, and I don't have the right to delegate that responsibility.<BR/><BR/>Every MP who voted to retain 24 weeks should have been compelled to witness, in person, an abortion at that stage before voting for it. It is no coincidence that most NHS doctors won't do it and late abortions have to be contracted out to those for whom payment is the priority.<BR/><BR/>I am disgusted by our 'representatives' in Parliament on a daily basis, but yesterday will take quite some beating.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com