Skip to main content

Religious (or not) affiliation

...I wonder whether if the woman's husband had decided to go against his faith at the last minute to save the child from being 'murdered' ... would he legally be able to intervene to over-rule his wife's right to kill herself and the child?... I wonder if this scenario has ever been put to the test?...

I know you're not talking about abortion here, but a woman does not need 'approval' or consent from the father to abort a child.
 
Yeah I was wondering why the outcry over this when there seems to be a general agreement with a woman's right to abort.

This woman's faith means that she can not have a blood transfusion, and therefore, tragically they died. But it's ok for a woman to choose to abort a child for any number of reasons, lifestyle choice being one.
What about the Right to Life movement and religions that disagree with abortion? Can't see their agreement. Unless you refer to laws that allow it. There have been many outcries and protests over abortion. These have included targeting young girls outside abortion clinics.
 
What about the Right to Life movement and religions that disagree with abortion? Can't see their agreement. Unless you refer to laws that allow it. There have been many outcries and protests over abortion. These have included targeting young girls outside abortion clinics.
I guess I'm talking about the outcry in mainstream media which for the most part seem to be pro-choice.
 
i thought the vast majority of people have already decided it is mums right to determine whether the unborn child will have a chance at life or not. since when have people given a shit about the babies right to life?
oh, i see. its an opportunity to malign somebodies faith. thats different hey ;)

...well on my part... I certainly didn't bring this subject up to use it as an opportunity to malign someone's faith... in fact it's far from that... I did say from the outset that I hoped that I did not offend anyone because of their religious beliefs so if I have... I'm sorry about that...

...you said that you thought the vast majority of people had already decided it is mums right to determine whether the unborn child will have a chance at life or not but which majority of people are you talking about?... I haven't ever been aware of that right until you just informed me... I have always thought that the Law outweighed Religion on all matters to be truthful... obviously I was under the wrong impression of that until I read this story the other day...

...it's because of this particular story that the topic has come to my attention... hence my asking for peoples thoughts on it because I do actually give a shit about the baby's right to life in this instance... until this story came along I've never taken any time to really discuss these things with other people as it's not a topic that you talk about at any other time really is it ?...

...also... I was more curious on the legal aspects as to the rights of the unborn child more so than intending to malign the faith of the people involved... but to be honest I think that the parents have certainly done the wrong thing and I also think that what they did is dreadful... there is no excuse for it as far as I am concerned... if one of my children was going to die and was in need of a blood transfusion to live I would put my own life on the line to save that child no matter what it would take... I would move Heaven and Hell to do whatever I could to be able to give that child life... it would not matter what religion I was... even if I was a Jehovah Witness... I would renounce my faith before I would let my child die because of a 'belief'... (I don't know... perhaps that's just me?)...

...again... I just cannot understand why any parent would allow their child to die intentionally for whatever reason regardless... if you think that I'm talking about this subject just to malign someone's religion then you don't really know me too well I'm afraid... everyone is entitled to an opinion... this one happens to be mine... cheers.
 
Yeah I was wondering why the outcry over this when there seems to be a general agreement with a woman's right to abort.

This woman's faith means that she can not have a blood transfusion, and therefore, tragically they died. But it's ok for a woman to choose to abort a child for any number of reasons, lifestyle choice being one.

I know you're not talking about abortion here, but a woman does not need 'approval' or consent from the father to abort a child.

...you are right bleachy... I was not talking about abortion... let me put where I'm coming from into a scenario here so that I might convey what I'm getting at a bit better than I have done so far hopefully...

...a pregnant woman... say 8 months pregnant... is walking to her car in a car park and a man decides to mug her and gets out a knife and threatens to stab her in the stomach if she doesn't hand over all of her money to him... he hears a noise of someone approaching... he panics and stabs her in the stomach to take her money and run... he gets captured by the Police... they know that he did it... she gets rushed to Hospital and she lives but unfortunately the baby dies... he killed that unborn child... doesn't he get charged for murder?...

...what I'm saying is willingly killing an unborn child is tantamount to murder isn't it?... as with the earlier scenario of... if that father decided to renounce his faith as a Jehovah Witness at the last minute to save not only her child but also his too... he must surely have some right to over-rule her faith to save the child?... I really am shocked to see that you wrote 'but a woman does not need 'approval' or consent from the father to abort a child'... I understand that the woman has that option when the foetus is in it's early stages up until so far but surely that doesn't still apply to a baby that is about to be born?... because that is saying that the father has no rights to save his own child at all!... if that is so... I am flabbergasted!...

...I was always under the impression that a woman was allowed by Law to be able to terminate a feotus up until an allocated amount of weeks or months then it was illegal to willingly injure or kill the baby from that time onwards unless the mothers life is in danger if she goes through with the birth... so am I wrong about that?... if I am then I will be horrified to learn that... I think that I will go and 'Google' this right now... thanks for your views and comments bleachy... they're very much appreciated... cheers.
 
...I have just been to several websites and have concentrated on the Law in NSW being that it occurred in a Sydney Hospital... that being said... on this website ... http://australia.angloinfo.com/healthcare/pregnancy-birth/termination-abortion/ ... it informs me...
____________________________________________________________________

Abortion and the Law
In Australia the law surrounding abortion is defined by each state. Abortions can be carried out legally everywhere in the country to protect the health of a woman, though the precise definition of this differs depending on the state or territory. In most of the country the laws relating to abortion can be summarised as follows:

  1. It is against the law to administer any poison or use any instrument or other means to procure a miscarriage.
  2. It is an offence for a woman to attempt to bring about her own miscarriage.
  3. It is an offence to supply the means (a drug or instrument) to procure a miscarriage.
There is no legal requirement for a woman's partner to consent to an abortion, nor is there an enforced waiting period before one may be carried out. The laws surrounding abortion in Australia are inconsistent and often confusing, both for women and for health professionals

A summary of the legal status of abortion services in each state or territory is given below:

New South Wales
Abortions are considered lawful in New South Wales if the pregnancy puts the mental or physical health of the mother at risk. Any of a woman's life circumstances, not just medical aspects, can be used to justify the need for an abortion. Abortion services are available up to weeks 18 to 20 of pregnancy. A woman of 14 or 15 years of age can give informed consent for an abortion if a doctor deems her mature enough to do so. Under the age of 14 women need consent from a parent or guardian, or a Supreme Court before they can have an abortion.
  • For more information on abortion law in New South Wales: Click here
Note: In both New South Wales and Queensland the legality of abortions is based on a common law interpretation of the criminal code. This makes it difficult to determine legality and can lead to significant confusion for both doctors and women.
____________________________________________________________________

...it does say 'Any of a woman's life circumstances, not just medical aspects, can be used to justify the need for an abortion.'... I cannot believe that means that she can legally refuse a blood transfusion to save her baby... that must surely mean that it's something that is threatening her ability to stay alive... I could understand if she was about to die by giving birth to the child but believing in and adhering to the rules of her faith could not possibly be seen as an endangerment to her life... it says... 'any of a woman's life circumstances'... not 'religious' circumstances... technically a religious belief cannot physically kill you in this day and age... so therefore the baby has the right to be saved doesn't it?...

...I found rule #2 to be quite interesting... 'it is an offence for a woman to attempt to bring about her own miscarriage'... doesn't that include refusing treatment no matter what the reasons to save the child if not the mother's life too?...

...it also says that abortion services are available up to 18 to 20 weeks of pregnancy... so doesn't that stand as the time when a feotus is considered to be becoming a human being?... if so then from that time onwards it is the duty of the mother to protect that child until childbirth unless it is a danger to her health from the way that I see it... geez... talk about a fine legal line or what?...

...anyhow... that's how I'm seeing at this moment in time... please feel free to correct me if I am not seeing this the right way because this is all a fuzzy line now... as I say... I welcome your opinions... cheers.
 
Abortion is technically legal in NSW, the legislation is just there to stop backyard abortions and the like. This line is pretty fine here, but I don't think the two situations are as comparable as they seem.
 
Abortion is technically legal in NSW, the legislation is just there to stop backyard abortions and the like. This line is pretty fine here, but I don't think the two situations are as comparable as they seem.

...perhaps you are right jessy_girl... I may be on the wrong track in the way that I am interpreting all of this... it's times like this that I wish that had a strong legal background in order to make some sense of the situation but I don't have it so I guess that I'll never be none the wiser about it... thanks for your input jessy_girl... cheers.
 
...perhaps you are right jessy_girl... I may be on the wrong track in the way that I am interpreting all of this... it's times like this that I wish that had a strong legal background in order to make some sense of the situation but I don't have it so I guess that I'll never be none the wiser about it... thanks for your input jessy_girl... cheers.

Oh that's ok, I didn't really contribute much, I just wanted to qualify the termination law. I do find this discussion interesting though as I never drew the comparison between the two things in my mind until pointed out here.
 
Oh that's ok, I didn't really contribute much, I just wanted to qualify the termination law. I do find this discussion interesting though as I never drew the comparison between the two things in my mind until pointed out here.
The two things aren't necessarily directly related. I guess I was just wondering why it seems politically correct for a woman to abort a child, but for a religious person to deny a certain type of treatment which is against their religion a different matter?

It's definitely a sensitive topic with a variety of thoughts / opinions.

@Mr Stickyfingers I see your reading of the legal stuff brings you to believe that a foetus becomes a human being with rights at around 20weeks. That's quite debatable and is what makes this whole thing a red hot sensitive topic.
 
Abortion is technically legal in NSW, the legislation is just there to stop backyard abortions and the like. This line is pretty fine here, but I don't think the two situations are as comparable as they seem.
Apparently women's rights groups were lobbying around the election for both parties to decriminalize it in NSW (hence the recent media noise around pro-choice).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For my post-midnight tangential ramble you get interesting facts. I (non-professionally) researched the genetic disease incidence rates that were most on the rise, looking for patterns, and I read that the single biggest genetic (bad) influence at present is not obvious. It's actually the demographic shift of men fathering later in life. Not women. Apparently the male DNA quality has it's own ticking biological clock that is more influential than women's (providing they can fall pregnant). Yes women's eggs are much older than the newly produced sperm, but the high incidence of errors from the older men and the general poor quality of the DNA makes it a more significant correlating factor in future diseases.

I think that's interesting, as we humans change lifestyle habits far too fast for nature to catch up. Couple this with lifespans that have roughly tripled over 1000 years and we are one wacky untried experiment.
 
Here's a rambling response.
For my post-midnight tangential ramble you get interesting facts. I (non-professionally) researched the genetic disease incidence rates that were most on the rise, looking for patterns, and I read that the single biggest genetic (bad) influence at present is not obvious. It's actually the demographic shift of men fathering later in life. Not women. Apparently the male DNA quality has it's own ticking biological clock that is more influential than women's (providing they can fall pregnant). Yes women's eggs are much older than the newly produced sperm, but the high incidence of errors from the older men and the general poor quality of the DNA makes it a more significant correlating factor in future diseases.
Interesting post. Wondered if it's been tested or just hypothetical.

I think that's interesting, as we humans change lifestyle habits far too fast for nature to catch up. Couple this with lifespans that have roughly tripled over 1000 years and we are one wacky untried experiment.
Agree. It's as though we're no longer evolving simply in response to our environment. Our ability to change and control our immediate living environment (lifestyle) has never been more potent.

Talk about the Anthropocene, a new epoch defined by a time when humans are making their most significant impact on the planet's natural environment, but what are we also doing to ourselves? Creating new forms of 'natural' selection?
 
The two things aren't necessarily directly related. I guess I was just wondering why it seems politically correct for a woman to abort a child, but for a religious person to deny a certain type of treatment which is against their religion a different matter?

It's definitely a sensitive topic with a variety of thoughts / opinions.

@Mr Stickyfingers I see your reading of the legal stuff brings you to believe that a foetus becomes a human being with rights at around 20weeks. That's quite debatable and is what makes this whole thing a red hot sensitive topic.

...you are so right bleachy... this is a sensitive topic with a variety of thoughts... well that's kind of what my main point is in all of this... up until that headline the other day I had never really given all of this the time of day to discuss it with others... hence the original post on the subject... where better to discuss it than on a forum?... if I spoke about it with just my sweet darling wife then it is pretty much pointless as we tend to agree with each others opinion all of the time... at the beginning of all of this I did say that I was interested in other peoples opinions after all...

...after reading the interpretation of the Law on that website... yes I do now believe that a foetus is a human being at around 20 weeks... I also believe that when a baby is just a few days or weeks from being born and is allowed to die intentionally by the refusal of any form of medical treatment that is available then it is a form of infanticide in my new founded opinion... I'm sorry if that offends anybody from a religious point of view but it is now my opinion... it has nothing to do with maligning anyone's faith... it is purely based on my interpretation of the Law...

...one of my grandchildren had a three month old premature baby... the baby was was so small that it could fit in the palms of a pair of hands... it was in a humidicrib for a long time trying to cling to life... it was basically a fully developed human being... the little fellow managed to stay alive and is now a beautiful young infant full of life and vigour... he brings so much joy into our lives aswell as others around him... to think that anyone could intentionally allow a soon-to-be unborn baby to die by the refusal of a medical procedure is an incomprehensible notion to me... for any reason whatsoever!... that is now how I feel about this whole thing...

...no doubt that what Witty Banter has said about us human beings taking the the process of natural evolution away from the hands of natural selection by being able to keep a 3 month old premature baby alive by artificial means in now a very validated point... he would have died a natural death in years of days gone past... perhaps we are putting the genetic gene pool into a lower category as Witty Banter rightly points out... (I do to certain degrees agree with a lot of your findings Witty Banter believe it or not)... but to hold that little guy in my arms I have no doubt that it is worth all of that in my mind... every unborn child deserves the right to be able to try and live as far as I am concerned...

...anyhow... that is me finished at the moment... again... please feel free to comment more... cheers.[/QUOTE]
 
Last edited:

I have been swimming and jumping without deeper meaning or purpose for too long. I'm going to start dedicating it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top