Neither England, Italy, nor Spain have anywhere near a similar religious demographic to Ulster.
Well, “Ulster” is not Northern Ireland, but it was only a suggestion. Are you saying you can’t find a place with a roughly similar religious demographic? I’d say Germany is close enough. But I was intending to do all your homework for you…
Ulster can and often is used to refer to the six counties that are part of the United Kingdom, as well as the more geographically accurate way of using it (8 counties? I can never remember).
I think a comparison with Germany would be fundamentally flawed for many cultural reasons. But that’s not the bottom line confusion I have. I thnk you would need to do a comparison before and after an abortion ban in the same place, controlling for other changes. And I don’t have the time, data, or ability to do that.
But if that were true, we’d expect to see at least some level of misogynistic judges jailing women now for filing false reports, yes? That is, you’re asking me to believe that women would fear a greater chance of that happening under the proposed system, so you should be able to point to at least some instances of it happening now.
Yes?
There are actually first world countries where abortion is illegal except for standard exceptions.
Not necessarily, no.
Would the existance of such cases strengthen the argument? Yes. Does (if it is the case) an absence of prosecution of women for falsely reporting rape currently negate it? No.
Let’s break this down one section at a time. Does the crime of filing a false police report typically require that harm to another (ie., the alleged perpetrator) be shown?
This isn’t a rhetorical question.
The English language has existed since the dawn of mankind?
Well Real Mankind, yes.
I dunno, maybe living in the real world where cops are human, and abuses and injustices occur? If you want a safeguard, make it illegal for the police to inquire if the alleged victim is pregnant. That way the cops won’t know if she’s pregnant and wont have any basis for suggestig she’s filing for the sole purpose of getting an abortion.
As you will. I always think data is the best way to bolster an argument, even if it’s not perfect data. And you might find that it actually takes less time to get it than to defend your hypothetical for several pages of a thread.
What about statutory rapes? Free pass for abortions for girls below the age of consent?
Data would be useful. But unless we can find a country where abortion went from being on demand, to illegal other than in cases of rape, and at a time near enough to the present so credible rape statistics are kept, then it will be a thankless task, and any results produced will be meaningless at best, or actively disceptive at worst.
Given that, I don’t think it is a good use of my time.
How about a real-world case of a westernized democracy that eliminated virtually all restrictions on abortion - and nothing bad happened as a result?
Re’ the OP: This is a very good example of why abortion must remain on demand and between a woman, her Dr. and/or the man.
Every attempt to limit the affected woman’s options entails complicated and ultimately unworkable strategies.
Be it bans on “partial birth” abortions (which represent a miniscule number of terminations performed and are rarely if ever elective in nature…every one I have personal knowledge of was done due to severe, invariably fatal defects in the fetus which were not diagnosed until late in the pregnancy, was heart-wrenching for the parent/s, and was the safest procedure for the woman according to the Dr.)
OR limitations based on “cases of rape or incest” (many victims of which fail to/are unable to come forward immediately or be in the position to prove their allegations, certainly not before the pregnancy progresses to a point that termination would be late-term).
OR even the imposition of rules requiring a waiting period (and multiple trips to an often distant location).
All of these limitations boil down to attempts to prevent women from exercising their legal right to terminate an unwanted or doomed pregnancy.
There is a strong aversion to the idea of trusting women to make their own decisions regarding birth control and family planning, but the reality is that women ARE the ones who are, by nature, in the ideal position to control this aspect of life.
As the bumper sticker puts it, “If you can’t trust me with a choice, how can you trust me with a child?”
Seems to me the underlying mentality seems to be a rejection of science (the Drs.) and the intelligence and morality of women. A very Middle-Ages view of the world.
There are just too many variables involved to insert all these middle-men into the process and get the government involved on anything but the most basic level. (oversight of Drs. and consumer safety). Ironically, those lamenting later-term abortions the most are those trying to impose barriers which result in abortions being performed later when they are.:smack:
The U.S.? It can be argued that this is the case, since abortions have DECREASED significantly under conditions of virtually on-demand, no limitation abortion and the deaths of women from the procedure have plummeted.
But I suppose it depends on one’s definition of “bad”.
You quote a column from 1988? Good thing we’ve made no progress in making language more nonsexist since then!
Have we?
I mean, yeah, you can use “they” as a singlar pronoun, but I think that was okay before 1988 too.
We have. There’s now a growing trend of using masculine and feminine terms interchangeably in the general sense.
Even if there is, it doesn’t make the original rule wrong.
And what is the substitute for, “A doctor may find himself accused of sexism for using words like ‘him’ in a gender-indeterminant context?”
“A doctor may find themself accused of sexism for using words like ‘him’ in a gender-indeterminant context?”
Please.
How about “Doctors may find themselves accused of sexism for using words like ‘him’ in a gender-indeterminant context”