Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Pro-abortion group fears Salmond will tighten laws

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
20 October 2007
HOME AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT
A NEW Scottish "pro-choice" movement will be launched next week amid accusations that First Minister Alex Salmond is "playing politics with women's bodies" over abortion.
The Scotsman can reveal that MSPs will be targeted in a protest outside the Scottish Parliament next week by members of the new Women's Abortion Rights (WAR) Scotland campaign.

The move is a direct response to Mr Salmond's recent comments on the
issue, and his personal support for a reduction in the abortion time limit to 20 weeks.

The First Minister also said that a "national conversation" about Scotland's constitutional future should include a review of the law on terminations, an issue currently reserved to Westminster. Women's rights groups fear that the First Minister has signalled a move that will result in far more restrictive rules surrounding abortion in Scotland.

Naomi McAuliffe, a campaigner, said: "What we are asking Alex Salmond is to consider women's rights when he talks about abortion. In everything he has said on this issue, women have been ignored.

"The alternative to termination is to force a woman through an unwanted pregnancy and we consider that an act of violence. The women who have late terminations do so for very serious reasons and are likely to be among the most vulnerable women in our society. Let's not abuse them further."

WAR co-founder Jacq Kelly claimed that Mr Salmond was "playing politics with women's bodies".

She said: "We believe that the reason for making abortion a devolved issue is to further restrict women's access to terminations as demanded by interested groups such as the Catholic Church. This isn't about medical advances, it's about women's access to healthcare."

WAR Scotland, which includes Scottish Women's Aid, Engender, Zero Tolerance, and NUS Scotland, will begin their campaign with a protest outside Holyrood on Thursday.

A spokeswoman for the First Minister yesterday rejected the "playing politics" claim, saying: "The First Minister believes the issue of abortion should be kept well away from party politics and indeed party instruction.

"And he has no interest in such a sensitive issue becoming an arm wrestle between Holyrood and Westminster."



The full article contains 360 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 19 October 2007 9:20 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

,

20/10/2007 02:18:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 1070730, Article id was mapped to record!
2

Scullion,

Canada 20/10/2007 02:27:28

Loosen those laws, sir. Women alone have the rights to make decisions concerning their own bodies.
Are they going to be forced to breed simply to make more soldiers to fight the Saracens?

3

Anonym,

somewhere 20/10/2007 02:50:24

#1

Your comment does not make sense. What are you trying to say?

The proposal is to reduce the time limit for abortion. To 20 weeks. Time enough to decide if a baby is wanted or not, in my opinion.

#2

What are the 'very serious reasons' for some vulnerable women having late terminations? I accept these reasons may be valid and persuasive, but cannot think what they might be.

Why would somebody go through more than 20 weeks of pregnancy only to decide to go through an abortion which would have been a safer procedure in the earlier stages?

4

Scullion,

Canada 20/10/2007 05:10:20

#3 The reasons are none of our business. Our duty is to make it safe for those who choose to do so.
Personally, I'm against abortion but I have no right to dictate morality to other people who may feel differently than me.

5

Yane,

20/10/2007 05:35:04

#3 Grave fetal abnormality or life threatening maternal illness. (In Aust.).

Who is stronger pressure group in Scotland - right wing religious lobby or women's groups?

6

,

20/10/2007 05:43:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 1070877, Article id was mapped to record!
7

Petro,

20/10/2007 06:11:59

My single biggest fear about the SNP (and in turn about independence) is the loss of many of our liberal values and laws built up over the last 30 years.

Whether on DNA testing, abortion or gay rights Alex Salmond has said some things over the last few months which allies him to the conservative right. Couple that with the fact that the SNP is bank rolled by that well-known Christian fundamentalist Brian Souter and that equally well known Catholic fundamentalist Tom Farmer and I don't think that the SNP look like much of a friend to women or persecuted minorities.

8

murren87,

Georgia. 20/10/2007 06:12:23

#7

under Dalriadiic law, we have the right to tell you to goffffffffffkkkkkkyersell...

Have a nice day.

9

Chuck Vindaloo,

20/10/2007 07:17:34

#8 Petro care to enlighten us with some examples of this move to rightwing Christian viewpoints?

10

Harris tweed and levi's 501,

Edinburgh 20/10/2007 07:27:35

#8 writes:-
“Whether on DNA testing, abortion or gay rights Alex Salmond has said some things over the last few months which allies him to the conservative right.”

Really?
Perhaps you would care to supply some examples of this?

Sits back and awaits a fully researched and damning riposte.

11

Harris tweed and levi's 501,

Edinburgh 20/10/2007 07:32:23

#10

Snap!

12

Boy Wonder,

20/10/2007 07:43:06

The last word on abortion belongs to a woman. Men can pontificate all they want (and we will), but ultimately we do not rule women, we are partners. We talk and listen to each other and in the final analysis, she will tell you what is going on inside her body. No-one knows better than her ... and if she says an abortion is necessary, then so be it. Just like it is a man's personal path accept when to have the snip. Discussion first, then she says "Do it" and you do.

Either that or its no babies and men will end up playing with themselves for life!

13

eric,

20/10/2007 07:47:33

My sis was strongly advised not to have her 3rd as there was achance she could die as well.But it was her decision,And shes still here,

14

49th State,

Just this side of a good night's sleep 20/10/2007 07:58:09

A nation this kills its young is doomed. With out a por-life moral axiom, a nation cannot long live.

15

49th State,

Just this side of a good night's sleep 20/10/2007 07:58:20

er, pro-life

16

Mode,

Glaschu 20/10/2007 08:07:39

What about the foetus and the pain it may feel in development.

Isn't that what this is all about...? The law as it stands now is based on our knowledge of the pain and survival rate for un-borns then.

It's been reviewed and the foetus is now understood to be able to survive after 20 weeks with modern technology.

We have to think about this and this is why a change in the law is perhaps needed in order to prevent us abusing un-born children who have no choice.

Women still have choices and it's wrong to make this a womens only issue or a moral issue but it's societies issue.

Jj

17

,

20/10/2007 08:11:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 1071054, Article id was mapped to record!
18

Mikey,

20/10/2007 08:36:19

Well said Scullion and Boy Wonder! I notice that most of the pro life comments come from Septics? Thank God we have an education system in Scotland where one is encouraged to think for oneself instead of following the herd.

19

Yane,

20/10/2007 08:47:30

#18 Popes? Papers? Papas? Or all of the above?

20

McNasty,

Edinburgh 20/10/2007 08:58:35

Do women's rights include aborting a viable fetus?

I consider that abortion is being used as a form of contraception and that should be stopped.

There are many methods of contraception available and there is no excuse for not using them.

21

grandson of the winged messenger,

20/10/2007 09:05:28

I'd say that a politician with this kind of agenda is showing signs of becoming reactionary if I heard this kind of posturing coming from anyone else. However, Alex has built up a great deal of trust with the people of scotland - unlike bendy wendy, he is actually in tune with "where it's at in scotland"! Anyway, why should we just follow what the English do on important issues like this which quite literally have life and death implications?

22

eric,

20/10/2007 09:11:26

15 We are still here!Anti abortionists who murder doctors and blow up clinics will be treated as criminals and murderers,Until there is 100% proof God exists Choice should be down to the woman.END

23

JG,

Fife 20/10/2007 09:33:07

#7 gffd............
Scotland (and Britain) is NOT a Catholic country. Women should not be dictated to by men (many of whom have p!ssed off and left the women in a predicament in the first place). Abortion is a difficult enough decision for a woman to make and it's not helped by people pontificating on an issue they'll never be directly involved in. Hopefully this law is one that emanates from Westminster and Salmond will be prevented from poking his nose in.

24

grandson of the winged messenger,

20/10/2007 09:48:07

#24 JG: you are obviously a unionist fanatic of the worst kind! How dare you suggest that Salmond has no business interfering in the abortion debate! That man has more popular appeal than any other politician in Scotland right now and I think you know it!

25

JG,

Fife 20/10/2007 10:06:25

#25 grandson..............
I'm not a fanatic of any kind - and Salmond (like me) is entirely entitled to his opinion on absolutely everything. I can't really argue about his political ability - he frequently leaves his opponents standing - but I don't find him at all appealing on a personal level. My one and only concern is that politicians will take away a woman's right to choose whether or not to have an abortion simply because they can. Westminster are already planning to debate this issue and I don't see the point on doing it twice!

26

Ms Fiona,

20/10/2007 10:07:51

This issue should not be used as a political football. I dont think Salmond is the only person to have cocerns about the termination of viable fetuses. If the Govt do intend to bring in new legislation, and what is this protest about exactly seeing that nothing has been published, is it a protest about thinking ?, then any legislation could be used to affirm the womans right to choose and to guarantee support for the women affected. However, we now have a situation where fetuses can be terminated when a premature baby of the same age is being preserved and that has got to throw up questions for everybody. That is not right wing or reactionary or anti femenist but abortion is a dreadful enough procedure in itself, if we continue to allow late abortions the women concerned are going to have to live with the fact that at the age their fetus was terminated, it could have lived. I think thats a situation that we all want to avoid.

27

Harris tweed and levi's 501,

Edinburgh 20/10/2007 10:12:44

#24
It seems to me that this issue has little or nothing to do with Alex Salmond, (or any other male for that matter), “poking his nose in.”

Whatever weird connotations that concept may evoke, the fact remains that Scottish laws should be the embodiment of the will of the Scottish electorate.

28

grandson of the winged messenger,

20/10/2007 10:31:57

#26 JG: what do you mean you don't find Alex appealing at a personal level? I'm sorry, but this can only be because you are a narrow minded unionist who is stuck up his own fundament! Whatever you may think of the independence agenda, I just can't understand why anyone would fail to find him appealing at a personal level. The man is the consumate politician!

29

Kobi,

20/10/2007 10:52:11

#29

"I just can't understand why anyone would fail to find him appealing at a personal level."

Get yer head out of Salmond's arse. There are thousands of Scots who find Salmond a smarmy, smug, glib individual, who puts them off voting for the SNP.

Nothing to do with unionism.

30

dunnoony,

20/10/2007 11:34:47

i am opposed to a reduction to 20 weeks. you don't always know you're pregnant at that stage, strange it may sound. a nurse i know was 6 months pregnant and still had regular periods. you would think coming from a medical background her and her surroundings would have realised she was pregnant, but instead she was admitted to hospital due to suspected bowel cancer.
it's women who have to go through pregnancy and birth and therefore it should be up to them if they want to do this. if they come to the conclusion they cannot care for a child for whatever reason then so be it. or is anybody up for more cases in need for a super nanny?

besides, contraception may fail you even if used properly (split condoms, adverse reaction to pill, etc.) and the morning-after pill may not work.

31

Scotsman in Dublin,

20/10/2007 11:51:42

Dont think its fair to say that this is a womens rights only issue, if you follow this argument then you could say that a Woman has the right to terminate right up to minutes before birth and then where do you go. Is it only once it exits the womb that it has rights?

There was a case a few years ago where a couple were trying to get a Doctor on manslaugter for his negligence which resulted in the death or their child minutes before birth. The court ruled that because the child had not been born it did not have any human rights. The same media that campagn for 'womens rights' over abortion were all of a sudden pro-life when it came to a child that was minutes away from birth.

Who has the knowledge or the right to decide at what stage an unborn child becomes a human being?

32

Harris tweed and levi's 501,

Edinburgh 20/10/2007 11:58:57

#30

You epitomise the Scottish Cringe.

An individual steps up to the plate, armed with the knowledge of experience, reality and erudition, and you retreat to your ghettos of denial, subversion and misrepresentation.

We have long known of your tactics.
You describe us as being too small, too stupid, too poor, totally incapable of determining our own future.

In reality, we understand that the above descriptions refer to your happy to underachieve labourtories.

Your crowd have been chased, and continue to be chased.

Scotland has awaken, your gang has been consigned to a footnote.

33

Adam T,

West Labourshire 20/10/2007 12:09:55

#10 and #11 (I know, I´ve taken my time)

I´m a gay Scottish nationalist, and proud to be both, and I have to admit I share Petro´s concerns. There have always been homophobic elements in the SNP (Fergus Ewing,Andrew Welsh, Bryan Adam, even Roseanna is anti gay adoption, if not anti-gay per se), which is fair enough,as you can´t expect to see eye to eye with all the members of a party. However, the more Salmond, the Cardinals and the reactionary tycoons cosy up to each other, the more I ask myself what kind of independent
Scotland we´re heading for. Does nobody remember Souter and Keep the Clause? The FM is reportedly, ´thinking about´exempting the Catholic church from anti-discrimination laws which forbid them from refusing to allow gay couples to adopt children on the grounds of their sexuality, and now it seems the pro-choice lobby has a bone to pick with him too. The SNP is the only major party inScotland that doesn´t have a gay group, or show its face at Scotpride. They are also very relaxed in their attituce to turning up to debate gay issues at Holyrood. And now this. Well, if Salmond is worried about the medical aspects of abortion at 24 weeks then fair enough, but I don´t think he should take too much guidance from his friends on this one- I´d prefer it if he listened to the doctors, and the women, of course.

the irony is that, when I became aware of my political and sexual persuasions, the 2 experiences were uncannily similar. Both groups were equally reviled in the west of Scotland in the early 1990s

34

Kobi,

20/10/2007 12:29:28

#30

Your inane ramblings typify why some people, who might be inclined to support independence for Scotland, like me, find it difficult. Nationalism is not the problem, but nationalists.

Are you sure you are not related to George W Bush? Those who are not for us are against us, and all that?

You are in effect arguing that unless I accept that Salmond is wonderful and everything he says is absolute gospel, then I am guilty of the Scottish Cringe.

Well, I will stick to my view that Salmond is a balloon, while appreciating the qualities of minsters like Swinney, Russell, and Hyslop.

Thankfully, if Scotland becomes independent, pathetic wee nonetities like you will have nothing to do with running it, and you will be reduced to whingeing about how great it was in the good old days.

You are certainly too small, too stupid, too poor, totally incapable of determining what to have for yer breakfast.

35

Kobi,

20/10/2007 12:29:53

#35

Sorry, meant #33, not #30

36

Harris tweed and levi's 501,

Edinburgh 20/10/2007 12:32:45

#34

And your examples of this are where?
Please supply the links to the statements you refer to …..

37

Aqwes,

Edinburgh 20/10/2007 12:36:00

As a moral issue, wouldn't this go to a free vote in any case?

A hypothetical:
A woman, five months pregnant, is driving her car along a country road. Another driver, distracted by the radio, crashes into the woman's car. As a result of the crash, the woman loses her baby. Is the other driver responsible for the loss of the baby? Can he be charged under criminal law? What if the woman was driving to the hospital to abort the foetus? Is the other driver still criminally responsible?

(of course, this hypothetical has a poblem in that it doesn't match up exactly to the issue; if you identify the fault, you get one free internets).

38

JG,

Fife 20/10/2007 12:38:52

#29 Grandson...............
I am not impressed by politicians AT ALL. Salmond comes across as being smarmy and smug and he can make my skin crawl sometimes. I already conceded that he is a very able debater. Who says I'm a unionist? And who says I'm a "him"? If a woman feels that having an abortion is the right thing to do then the facility should be there for her to carry that through. Salmond - or the Cardinal - or Gordon Brown - have no right to tell a woman what to do with her body. We should be listening to the medical people and (of course) the women and not self-seeking politicians or misogynistic clergy.

39

Harris tweed and levi's 501,

Edinburgh 20/10/2007 13:04:41

#35

I understand that you have difficulty in understanding the difference between #30 and #33.

The lack of knowledge of the meaning of numbers appears to be endemic within the community of unionist drones.

You appear to claim that you support the concept of Independence, whilst at the same time opposing the leadership of Alex Salmond.

I would counter your claim by suggesting that you are a labourtory troll. Attempting to sew discord within the ranks of the pro-Scottish movement by claiming that this movement is in some way divided.

I challenge you to declare your true identity, and to meet me in public debate.

40

Kobi,

20/10/2007 13:24:01

#37

"And your examples of this are where?
Please supply the links to the statements you refer to …"


http://muppets.go.com/

You're the one in green.

41

Ayrshire Scot™,

20/10/2007 13:53:13

4 Scullion

spot on. If only others adopted your common sense approach - this issue is best left, as far as possible, to a woman and her doctors.

34 Adam T - I share you concerns about a few in the SNP. But I think Salmond and the SNP in general (policy) have been pro equality. The appointment of Ewing was unfortunate. I am 'agnostic' on taking the money from Soutar - as the SNP haven't compromised policy on this it bothers me less.

I too feel uneasy about a potential reduction in abortion on demand limit.

I don't share your worry about an independent Scotland and gay rights - the parliament voted overwhelmingly, cross party on Section 28?

42

Ayrshire Scot™,

20/10/2007 13:55:58

37 Harris

unfortunately the people referred to by Adam at 34 did not vote for equal rights legislation, or have made other unfortunate statements that could be construed as homphobic - Ewing and the fire service/ gay pride argument being an unfortunate example. I am, I think it could failry be said, pro SNP and pro independence, and I too think the concerns at 34 are valid of consideration.

43

contented little mum,

20/10/2007 14:07:01

I have very strong views on abortion so anybody who is proposing to reduce the time up until a woman can have an abortion gets my vote......I know people bang on about 'woman's rights' but what about the rights of the unborn child?

I accept that there are sometimes medical reasons for abortions.....but abortion should not be used as a means of contraception. I know of at least two women who have had abortions becasue they were 'caught out'.....did their contraception fail??? no....they did not use any in the first place!!

It is time that some woman (and men) started acting more responsibly......if you don't want a baby then use contraception.....it's not that difficult.

44

JG,

Fife 20/10/2007 14:14:45

#45 clm
I completely agree that people shouldn't use abortion as a means of contraception - and people should be more careful when they are sexually active, but I still believe women should have the choice. You are entitled to your strong views and if you don't want to have an abortion then don't have one. Unfortunately it's not just those stupid "caught out" women who are involved here - many people have complicated, unpleasant lives and often abortion is their only salvation.

45

Ms Fiona,

20/10/2007 14:30:52

A lot of people are worried about this, it is not an SNP issue. To consider the termination of viable fetuses unacceptable is not to be against a womans right to choose or to be a right wing reactionary. But if we continue to allow viable life to be terminated we are playing into the anti choice brigades hands because the vast majority of people, including woman most of whom are mothers, find that unacceptable. If this issue is not addressed by the people who are in favour of choice then the anti brigade can use it to their own unsavory ends,

46

contented little mum,

20/10/2007 14:38:00

JG - as mentioned I did say that I accepted that there were sometimes medical reasons for abortion and I accept that some women still want the choice....fair enough but as I said earlier anyone who wants a reduction in the time period gets my vote.

Surely 20 weeks is ample time enough?

47

dunnoony,

20/10/2007 14:46:42

#45 granted everyone has their own opinion on this.

but i feel it sounds like a bit of a drastic punishment for both the resulting child and the mother who has led an "irresponsible sex life" if she was denied a late abortion just because she had not used contraception in the first place. what a loving mother-child relationship that must be! not all women develop motherly feelings when they fall pregnant unwantingly.
i certainly would not want to be a child who had to learn they were only born because their mother was denied a late abortion, even if she decided to have the child adopted.

48

contented little mum,

20/10/2007 14:53:54

#49 - as said before I accept that women want to have the choice but don't you think that 20 weeks is ample enough?

49

Ms Fiona,

20/10/2007 14:55:08

This is not an argument about whether to have an abortion or not. Its a womans right to choose. But, does that extend to aborting a fetus which otherwise might live ? I dont see how you can justify that.

50

megz,

glasgow 20/10/2007 15:53:56

I don't see why it would take someone 5 months to decide to terminate pregnancy, surely 12 weeks would be adequate time. Perhaps exemptions for medical reasons for a later termination.

51

dunnoony,

20/10/2007 16:12:44

it's not just about deciding. that nurse sadly is not the only one i know who never noticed until very late, way past those 20 weeks. and there were no contraception accidents. how about if the circumstances of a woman change dramatically?
nobody should be forced to be pregnant if they don't want to be.

52

dunnoony,

20/10/2007 16:14:38

each had used contraception and none of them had reported sickness or broken condoms.

53

Ms Fiona,

20/10/2007 16:38:26

What at 6 months ? 7 months ? 9 months ? You have to draw a line somewhere and the line now is wrong.

54

Hugo, Ayrshire,

20/10/2007 16:54:31

At present, the law on terminations is an issue currently reserved to Westminster.

Most of the posters have jumped the gun and are arguing pro-, or anti-, abortion.

First let us get the power to make the relevant law and then argue the decision.

I believe people should be responsible for their own actions, not for the actions of their neighbours.

55

Eric D,

Glasgow 20/10/2007 16:58:54

I think WAR have enough rights. 1 in 5 pregnancies
aborted is shameful and shouldn't be happening in country.

56

JG,

Fife 20/10/2007 17:01:29

#48 clm
In the normal way of things, I would take medical advice on when a baby would be viable and decide on that as a general limit (with exceptions made for emergencies, of course). As I said before, if a woman doesn't agree with abortion there is nothing o say she has to have one. How about youngsters who are unaware they are pregnant (many of them aren't as sexually aware as people think) - would you force them to carry on? Or the 14 year old who was "seduced" by her mother's boyfriend and was too afraid to say anything?

57

contented little mum,

20/10/2007 17:30:03

I would never force someone to carry on with a pregnancy if they did not want to, however there has to be a sensible limit as to the period of time.

I am afraid to say that I am against teminating any pregnany and whilst there are situations that a woman many find herself in (as the ones you mentioned) I find it so upsetting that babies are being terminated just to make some one else's life easier - and yes I know that may seem very harsh - it's just merely my opinion on the subject.......however I appreciate that I am probably in the minority.

58

JG,

Fife 20/10/2007 17:39:01

#59 clm
Don't apologise for your opinion! My concern is though, that once they take the possibility of allowing a woman her choice that's it! And I fear that desperate women will resort to finding amateur, back street abortionists with all of the risks THAT carries. In a perfect world men and women would take suitable precautions and it would only be in dire emergencies that a foetus would be aborted. Unfortunately, life's not like that.

59

contented little mum,

20/10/2007 18:00:29

Yes, back street abortionists would certainly take advantage and ultimately women would suffer...but there has to be a better answer.....and I think a good start is lowering the time limit. Let's face it, abortion in this country will never be made illegal....we are too far down the road for that, but I still hang on to the hope that one day there will be fewer terminations....and perhaps more support for women who are embarking on that decision.

60

Dr Malcolm H Sutcliffe PhD Physics,

20/10/2007 18:36:48

Who is to say abortion will never be made illegal again
in reference to contented mum 61 above? There are three kinds of pro_abotionists, hypocrtites otherwise known as OPers. These are people who have children themselves but want other peoples children dead, a typical example would be the war criminal Bliar who had ten years to change the abortion laws but preferred to bomb and kill in other peoples countries.
The second category are women who have already had abortions and not yet recognized it as an error,but many more bitterly regret their so called choice, many suffer depression after having taken life, like many of the soldiers will when they come back from Iraq. The third category apart from the foolish is of course, homosexuals ,(but not all of them) and others who for other reasons are jealous of those who have children. So if and when Alex Salmond changes the
law he will have my full support. The advantage of course will be Scotland will no longer be depopulating and will move closer to Ireland in its approach, a very successful country that makes a good contribution to Europe. I wonder if Ireland will vote down the EU treaty? Shouldn't Scotland have a vote too? We live in interesting times and isn't it brilliant that the SNP are winning, keep it upp!

61

Dr Malcolm H Sutcliffe PhD Physics,

20/10/2007 18:39:35

Who is to say abortion will never be made illegal again in reference to contented mum 61 above? There are three kinds of pro_abortionists, hypocrites otherwise known as OPers. These are people who have children themselves but want other peoples children dead, a typical example would be the war criminal Bliar who had ten years to change the abortion laws but preferred to bomb and kill in other peoples countries.
The second category are women who have already had abortions and not yet recognized it as an error,but many more bitterly regret their so called choice, many suffer depression after having taken life, like many of the soldiers will when they come back from Iraq. The third category apart from the foolish is of course, homosexuals ,(but not all of them) and others who for other reasons are jealous of those who have children. So if and when Alex Salmond changes the
law he will have my full support. The advantage of course will be Scotland will no longer be depopulating and will move closer to Ireland in its approach, a very successful country that makes a good contribution to Europe. I wonder if Ireland will vote down the EU treaty? Shouldn't Scotland have a vote too? We live in interesting times and isn't it brilliant that the SNP are winning, keep it up! Stay on top

62

Miss H,

20/10/2007 18:46:36

I also agree that the time limit should be looked at. Medcal science has advanced a great deal since the previous time limit was set. It's not a question of being pro or anti choice. I am 100% pro choice but there obviously have to be limits and those limits should reflect current medical possibilities.

63

Miss H,

20/10/2007 18:52:14

Dr Malcolm what a lot of nonsense you talk.

If people genuinely want to reduce the number of terminations that are carried out there is one very simple way to do it - make it easier to have children.

As long as women can still be sacked or discriminated against because they become pregnant there will always be pressure on them to opt for a termination, if only to keep up the mortgage payments.

Let's sort that issue out and start celebrating the fact that both women and men can work and have a family life too, instead of regarding it as a problem.

64

Harris tweed and levi's 501,

Edinburgh 20/10/2007 18:59:01

#42
A curious response.

What exactly do you have to fear about debate ?

I will leave the question of our relative intelligence open to the readers of this thread.

65

,

20/10/2007 19:41:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
66

,

20/10/2007 19:50:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
67

,

20/10/2007 19:52:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
68

,

20/10/2007 19:53:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
69

,

20/10/2007 19:53:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
70

,

20/10/2007 19:53:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
71

,

20/10/2007 19:54:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
72

,

20/10/2007 19:54:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
73

,

20/10/2007 19:55:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
74

,

20/10/2007 19:56:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
75

,

20/10/2007 19:56:55
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
76

,

20/10/2007 20:01:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
77

,

20/10/2007 20:02:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
78

,

20/10/2007 20:03:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
79

,

20/10/2007 20:04:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
80

Kirkton Johnny,

20/10/2007 20:09:56

#81

Dominate what?

81

contented little mum,

20/10/2007 20:14:20

#64 and 65 - well said. I think we have disagreed on some other issues before (if memory serves me correctly) but I am in total agreement with you here.

More support should be given to women who are faced with the awful decision of a termination...I know some women who are still traumatised by their experiences and deeply regret their decision. I am sure there are women out there who have terminated a pregnancy and have felt relieved etc....as I said before I do not think that abortion will ever be made illegal in this country but a lot more has to be done in the way of looking at the time limits, support for women etc. I know from my 20 week scan of my second daughter just how much of a little person she was....at 28 weeks she may have survived had she been born prematurely.

82

Kirkton Johnny,

20/10/2007 20:21:32

Mr "Digory", as a silver surfer, I have to say I find your disjointed arguments difficult to follow. Are you a raving lunatic perchance?

83

contented little mum,

20/10/2007 20:25:05

#84 - I think Digory may be watching the rugby and is getting upset.....

84

,

20/10/2007 20:30:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
85

,

20/10/2007 20:33:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
86

contented little mum,

20/10/2007 20:47:31

#87 - don't get upset Digory, I was only teasing...x

87

Meths™,

20/10/2007 21:23:15

Digory Digory Dock
You're off your effin' clock

88

,

20/10/2007 22:01:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
89

Ayrshire Scot™,

20/10/2007 22:07:30

90 What?

90

contented little mum,

20/10/2007 22:10:28

Digory - if you have a point to make then do so...handy hint, do it all in one post....I am finding it hard to keep up and despite your numerous posts I really am not getting what you are trying to say.....however it is late so maybe I am the only one!!

91

Ayrshire Scot™,

20/10/2007 22:47:50

92 I agree - very hard to follow.

92

Sherridan,

21/10/2007 04:54:21

Digory,

You said that you are a an English woman living in Scotland...perhaps you do not realize that Digory was a man. Your many posts do not make any sense either.

93

,

21/10/2007 07:17:29
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
94

,

21/10/2007 07:31:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.