If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(News.com.au)   Australian couples expecting baby girls demand doctors do a procedure down under because they want a boy instead   (news.com.au) divider line 235
    More: Sick, Australians, Australian Medical Association, gender selection, blue moons  
•       •       •

13851 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Apr 2013 at 2:57 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



235 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-28 03:57:42 AM

bbfreak: What part of it is sick Subby?


the male dynastic lineage part.

fta: "It was the husband who did all the talking - he was so insistent."

Abortion should never be the man's decision. Ever. At least, not 100%. It is the height of misogynistic arrogance for the man to assert that he has full control over all rights and usages of his woman's uterus. This shiat always comes from hell-hole countries with social stratification that can best be described as "chauvinistic patriarchies".
 
2013-04-28 03:58:50 AM

R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: (which is not mentioned as we are with a high Indo/Asian community).

So they take your race into account when deciding to let you know what information they will give someone about their own bodies?
Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?


LOL
my guess is that withholding information would be illegal or required by law.
there is zero medical risk if you are not informed of the gender of the fetus.
but, my guess is that it is illegal for them to tell the gender.
because otherwise, HELLO lawsuits
 
2013-04-28 03:59:05 AM

BarkingUnicorn: Anyone who has a problem with this cannot also claim that a fetus isn't a human being.


Boring and bland false-flag argument, BarkingUnicorn.  Try harder next time.

/3/10
 
2013-04-28 03:59:12 AM

R.A.Danny: Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?


Here in the US we absolutely do.  Check the liquor laws in Alaska, they're designed with exactly this goal in mind.
 
2013-04-28 03:59:58 AM

R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: (which is not mentioned as we are with a high Indo/Asian community).

So they take your race into account when deciding to let you know what information they will give someone about their own bodies?
Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?


I did not say that muckrucker. Try not to goad.
 
2013-04-28 04:01:45 AM
I see news.com.au got its clickbait from fark as well. I should't be surprised, I clicked on the article ready to feel the outrage, but then I read the article.
 
2013-04-28 04:02:08 AM

namatad: R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: (which is not mentioned as we are with a high Indo/Asian community).

So they take your race into account when deciding to let you know what information they will give someone about their own bodies?
Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?

LOL
my guess is that withholding information would be illegal or required by law.
there is zero medical risk if you are not informed of the gender of the fetus.
but, my guess is that it is illegal for them to tell the gender.
because otherwise, HELLO lawsuits


The people that so ultra sounds are not medical practitioners.
 
2013-04-28 04:04:15 AM

sleeps in trees: R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: (which is not mentioned as we are with a high Indo/Asian community).

So they take your race into account when deciding to let you know what information they will give someone about their own bodies?
Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?

I did not say that muckrucker. Try not to goad.


I did not say you, doofus, don't take it personally.

How the hell are you supposed to have the kid's room painted in time? Someone having a procedure like an ultrasound is far more likely trying to check on the health of a wanted and already loved child, not trying to figure out if they're gonna eject.
 
2013-04-28 04:05:11 AM

sleeps in trees: The people that so ultra sounds are not medical practitioners.


Burger flippers in their spare time?
 
2013-04-28 04:05:39 AM

R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: (which is not mentioned as we are with a high Indo/Asian community).

So they take your race into account when deciding to let you know what information they will give someone about their own bodies?
Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?

I did not say that muckrucker. Try not to goad.

I did not say you, doofus, don't take it personally.

How the hell are you supposed to have the kid's room painted in time? Someone having a procedure like an ultrasound is far more likely trying to check on the health of a wanted and already loved child, not trying to figure out if they're gonna eject.


I like the doofus!
 
2013-04-28 04:10:47 AM
Must be a coincidence that Australia is getting a large influx of Asians.
 
2013-04-28 04:10:52 AM
Hmmn.   Any country with "too many men," (China, India) will soon enough have guerilla wars break out, due to too many guys (the gender that commits war acts) going to war, in form or another.

Yes, men like pussy.  And (secret be told), women like dick.  But, if a country aborts a large percentage of its female babies, it is just ASKING for civil disruptions or wars to break out.  Women don't go bombing or shooting up places--men do.  Too many men, devoid of satisfaction. . .  You will have trouble.

And if you try to import your gender-bias into developed countries, you will run into additional difficulties.
 
xcv
2013-04-28 04:12:29 AM

Myria: Strolpol: Logically speaking, motive is irrelevant when it comes to abortion. It doesn't matter if you were raped or you just don't want a girl.

The problem is the externalities.  While allowing this seems like it ought to be a right, the problem comes from its societal effects.

With the vast majority of such families requesting sex-based abortion for female children, you end up with a significant population bias toward men.  This is exactly what has happened in China, even though the practice is officially illegal.  You end up with many straight men who can't find partners.


That's a huge fallacy.
 The gender imbalance in China is already increasing socioeconomic prospects for women and it would do the same in any secular, free society.  If women are outnumbered they can afford to be pickier for mates. Even homely and poor women will have far more opportunities to 'marry up' and happily satisfy the natural females' affinity for hypergamy.


Gender-based abortion is far more a reflection of (relatively uncommon) immigration issues than an abortion-rights matter.
 
2013-04-28 04:13:33 AM

Ishkur: bbfreak: What part of it is sick Subby?

the male dynastic lineage part.

fta: "It was the husband who did all the talking - he was so insistent."

Abortion should never be the man's decision. Ever. At least, not 100%. It is the height of misogynistic arrogance for the man to assert that he has full control over all rights and usages of his woman's uterus. This shiat always comes from hell-hole countries with social stratification that can best be described as "chauvinistic patriarchies".


I don't disagree, but the main thrust of the article is about limiting abortion because you don't agree with someone's reasons for doing so. You either believe in abortion or you don't. Government should never impose moral values on its population. Fark that shiat.
 
2013-04-28 04:13:47 AM
fta: "It was the husband who did all the talking - he was so insistent."

That just makes me incredibly sad. Anyone I've met who's been in the basic situation (ie. all kids of one gender, would like one of the other) always passes it of as a 'meh' because they then follow it up with saying that they wouldn't change their currents kids one bit and love them unconditionally.

Then you have this PoS who sounds like he shouldn't have the responsiblity of looking after a pet rock.
 
2013-04-28 04:16:10 AM

namatad: R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: (which is not mentioned as we are with a high Indo/Asian community).

So they take your race into account when deciding to let you know what information they will give someone about their own bodies?
Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?

LOL
my guess is that withholding information would be illegal or required by law.
there is zero medical risk if you are not informed of the gender of the fetus.
but, my guess is that it is illegal for them to tell the gender.
because otherwise, HELLO lawsuits



Lawsuits for what? Ultrasounds all over the world disclose this information routinely. This farker pointed out that private ultrasounds do so in Canada as well (i.e. wealthier patients are granted access to more of the information gathered from the same procedure). We're also talking about the raw data, not just interpretation. If this is true it is some really ugly patronism.
 
2013-04-28 04:16:45 AM

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: namatad: R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: (which is not mentioned as we are with a high Indo/Asian community).

So they take your race into account when deciding to let you know what information they will give someone about their own bodies?
Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?

LOL
my guess is that withholding information would be illegal or required by law.
there is zero medical risk if you are not informed of the gender of the fetus.
but, my guess is that it is illegal for them to tell the gender.
because otherwise, HELLO lawsuits


Lawsuits for what? Ultrasounds all over the world disclose this information routinely. This farker pointed out that private ultrasounds do so in Canada as well (i.e. wealthier patients are granted access to more of the information gathered from the same procedure). We're also talking about the raw data, not just interpretation. If this is true it is some really ugly patronism.


if the information were being illegally withheld ...
FFS, people sure for the dumbest reasons
 
2013-04-28 04:18:44 AM

jshine: R.A.Danny: Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?

Here in the US we absolutely do.  Check the liquor laws in Alaska, they're designed with exactly this goal in mind.


After checking, it seems that there are dry reservations, counties and municipalities just like in many other states, and those places have voted to be dry on their own accord. It has nothing to do with race, even though many of those dry places have higher Native populations. A native could easily go to another town and legally possess booze.
 
2013-04-28 04:22:29 AM

doglover: The Mormons actually have to kick young men out of the church to make sure they have enough brides to go around for the senior members.


I think that's only the radical underground pedophile group (your link won't work).  I'm not a fan of Mormonism, or any religion particularly, but lets at least slander them for real offenses.
 
2013-04-28 04:23:11 AM

Lorelle: One of Australia's biggest abortion clinics has revealed that parents have requested abortions on gender grounds - although it is "extremely rare" and always refused.

The Fertility Control Clinic - Victoria's biggest abortion provider - told the Senate inquiry that 96 per cent of abortions are performed before 12 weeks' gestation, when it is too early to know the sex.

So anti-abortionists in Australia managed to find  one rare case of abortion based on gender, and are using that to try to impose restrictions on abortion. Sounds like the fetus-obsessed, pro-forced-childbirth nuts in the U.S.


This argument also work with gun control nuts
 
2013-04-28 04:24:48 AM

R.A.Danny: jshine: R.A.Danny: Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?

Here in the US we absolutely do.  Check the liquor laws in Alaska, they're designed with exactly this goal in mind.

After checking, it seems that there are dry reservations, counties and municipalities just like in many other states, and those places have voted to be dry on their own accord. It has nothing to do with race, even though many of those dry places have higher Native populations. A native could easily go to another town and legally possess booze.



That's true; nowhere do the laws explicitly mention race (as they did in the past).   ...but the correlation between demographics and alcohol laws (wet/damp/dry) is extremely strong; more so than simple coincidence can reasonably explain.
 
2013-04-28 04:28:08 AM

jshine: but the correlation between demographics and alcohol laws (wet/damp/dry) is extremely strong; more so than simple coincidence can reasonably explain.


There is a VERY simple explanation. These communities choose to impose these laws upon themselves by vote. They are choosing to be dry, not having it thrust upon them by some outside force.
 
2013-04-28 04:30:23 AM

namatad: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: namatad: R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: (which is not mentioned as we are with a high Indo/Asian community).

So they take your race into account when deciding to let you know what information they will give someone about their own bodies?
Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?

LOL
my guess is that withholding information would be illegal or required by law.
there is zero medical risk if you are not informed of the gender of the fetus.
but, my guess is that it is illegal for them to tell the gender.
because otherwise, HELLO lawsuits


Lawsuits for what? Ultrasounds all over the world disclose this information routinely. This farker pointed out that private ultrasounds do so in Canada as well (i.e. wealthier patients are granted access to more of the information gathered from the same procedure). We're also talking about the raw data, not just interpretation. If this is true it is some really ugly patronism.

if the information were being illegally withheld ...
FFS, people sure for the dumbest reasons


Ah, I see. I misunderstood what you were saying, sorry.
 
2013-04-28 04:30:24 AM

bbfreak: You either believe in abortion or you don't.


First of all, there is nothing to "believe". Abortion is not a moral issue, it is a legal one.

Secondly, it is not a black-white issue. I think abortion should be permitted, but with conditions and regulations. 24 weeks is way too late. It should fully be the woman's choice without coercion.

bbfreak: Government should never impose moral values on its population.


It's not. It's giving its population the freedom to make that choice themselves.
 
2013-04-28 04:30:42 AM

namatad: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: namatad: R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: (which is not mentioned as we are with a high Indo/Asian community).

So they take your race into account when deciding to let you know what information they will give someone about their own bodies?
Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?

LOL
my guess is that withholding information would be illegal or required by law.
there is zero medical risk if you are not informed of the gender of the fetus.
but, my guess is that it is illegal for them to tell the gender.
because otherwise, HELLO lawsuits


Lawsuits for what? Ultrasounds all over the world disclose this information routinely. This farker pointed out that private ultrasounds do so in Canada as well (i.e. wealthier patients are granted access to more of the information gathered from the same procedure). We're also talking about the raw data, not just interpretation. If this is true it is some really ugly patronism.

if the information were being illegally withheld ...
FFS, people sure for the dumbest reasons


When I was pregnant I wasn't able to find out the sex before 24 weeks, which is/was the legal limit for abortion. I live in BC, Canada. At that time, the BC college of physicians' official stance was that the potential for gender based abortions was a moral issue that ethically, they shouldn't be a party to. It appears that they have changed their stance. https://www.cpsbc.ca/files/u6/Disclosure-of-Fetal-Sex.pdf

It was never illegal, just strongly frowned upon by doctors. Private sex determining ultrasounds are readily available for about $100. About 10 years back I was told by and ultrasound tech "I can clearly see the sex, I just can't tell you". My doctor told me that that meant it was a boy. She was right.
 
2013-04-28 04:31:55 AM

Arumat: cedarpark: DON.MAC: With the trends of male vs female success rates of the 20 somethings, why would a parent today prefer a male?

An issue that I believe is not spoken about in the article is that, although this is an Australian article, I believe the emphasis on preferring males is predominantly by Chinese and Indian immigrants.

I'm probably going to be accused of trolling, but is this the same part of Australia that was having issues with Muslim immigrants beating women up on the beach for wearing revealing clothing, whether those women were Muslims themselves or not?  There's a pretty serious "tell" given in the article that at the very least these are probably first or second generation immigrants from a more patriarchal society.

FTFA:   "It was the husband who did all the talking - he was so insistent."

/I don't dislike Muslims as a group any more/less than I dislike any other group
//stand against the radical elements of whatever group you belong to, or don't complain about being lumped in with them
///third slashie is an equal opportunity hater too


I live here and haven't heard of any instances of Muslim men beating up women on the beach for inappropriate dress. There was a huge riot a couple of years ago in Sydney after a group of Lebanese men beat up a lifesaver, but he was a male. Afterwards a bunch of retarded bogans went bananas because their testicles got in a twist over Lebanese men daring to speak to 'white' women. The Lebanese then retaliated and it was all fun and games.

If you actually read the article, it mentions several times that sex-based abortion requests are extremely rare, and it says nothing about the ethnicity of those requesting those abortions. We really don't keep records on this sort of thing so it's pure speculation to single out immigrants. We have very large populations of Chinese and Indians - and have done so for over a century - but I can't find any statistics showing they practice sex-specific family planning. They are usually middle class and well educated and can afford birth control.

Besides which, those few people who request abortions based on sex may actually be requesting that a male fetus be aborted rather than a female. As far as I know, requests to adopt and foster children are skewed towards female children in this country, so it is entirely possible.

Besides which which, the fundamentalist retard mentioned in the article who has pushed for this Senate inquiry is a fundamentalist retard, so potato.
 
2013-04-28 04:31:55 AM

doglover: BarkingUnicorn: Anyone who has a problem with this cannot also claim that a fetus isn't a human being.

The Mormons actually have to kick young men out of the church to make sure they have enough brides to go around for the senior members. http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.jp/2012/09/where-do-extra-men-go.htm l

That's what I think one of the big things in the Muslim countries with all the extreme terrorists is. They also allow polygamy. So the richest, most powerful old goats snap up all the women and the poor young men are left with no money, no power, and no pussy. When was the last time a George Clooney type playboy went all suicide bomber? If you guessed never, step up and collect your prize.

So a dearth of unwed young men will always lead to trouble. That's my hypothesis and thus objection.


That's exactly why I think China is not particularly worried about its own country's gender imbalance. It's going to have a huge amount of men to make it's army strong. When they have no money, no power and no pussy there is not much to motivate people to stay at home and be peaceful.
 
2013-04-28 04:36:17 AM

steerforth: Besides which which, the fundamentalist retard mentioned in the article who has pushed for this Senate inquiry is a fundamentalist retard, so potato.


Fair enough.  I'm only slightly less ignorant than the average American when it comes to current affairs in foreign countries.
 
2013-04-28 04:36:30 AM

Nidiot: That's exactly why I think China is not particularly worried about its own country's gender imbalance. It's going to have a huge amount of men to make it's army strong.


That's good -- if there's one thing China has historically lacked, its manpower.
 
2013-04-28 04:40:27 AM

Marlys: namatad: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: namatad: R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: (which is not mentioned as we are with a high Indo/Asian community).

So they take your race into account when deciding to let you know what information they will give someone about their own bodies?
Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?

LOL
my guess is that withholding information would be illegal or required by law.
there is zero medical risk if you are not informed of the gender of the fetus.
but, my guess is that it is illegal for them to tell the gender.
because otherwise, HELLO lawsuits


Lawsuits for what? Ultrasounds all over the world disclose this information routinely. This farker pointed out that private ultrasounds do so in Canada as well (i.e. wealthier patients are granted access to more of the information gathered from the same procedure). We're also talking about the raw data, not just interpretation. If this is true it is some really ugly patronism.

if the information were being illegally withheld ...
FFS, people sure for the dumbest reasons

When I was pregnant I wasn't able to find out the sex before 24 weeks, which is/was the legal limit for abortion. I live in BC, Canada. At that time, the BC college of physicians' official stance was that the potential for gender based abortions was a moral issue that ethically, they shouldn't be a party to. It appears that they have changed their stance. https://www.cpsbc.ca/files/u6/Disclosure-of-Fetal-Sex.pdf

It was never illegal, just strongly frowned upon by doctors. Private sex determining ultrasounds are readily available for about $100. About 10 years back I was told by and ultrasound tech "I can clearly see the sex, I just can't tell you". My doctor told me that that meant it was a boy. She was right.


Thank you for clarifying.
 
2013-04-28 04:45:30 AM

Arumat: steerforth: Besides which which, the fundamentalist retard mentioned in the article who has pushed for this Senate inquiry is a fundamentalist retard, so potato.

Fair enough.  I'm only slightly less ignorant than the average American when it comes to current affairs in foreign countries.


No worries. We certainly have fewer fundamentalists rearing their ugly heads than the US seems to, but they do pop up now and again.
 
2013-04-28 04:48:48 AM
Before going on about how bad it is for women in the US, take a look worldwide.
 
2013-04-28 04:51:59 AM

cedarpark: DON.MAC: With the trends of male vs female success rates of the 20 somethings, why would a parent today prefer a male?

An issue that I believe is not spoken about in the article is that, although this is an Australian article, I believe the emphasis on preferring males is predominantly by Chinese and Indian immigrants.


If they're living here, and they're citizens, they're Australians. Yes, they're bringing in an older cultural sensibility, of course - but it's not one that lasts. Australia is where dogmas come to die, oddly.
 
2013-04-28 04:54:44 AM

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: namatad: R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: (which is not mentioned as we are with a high Indo/Asian community).

So they take your race into account when deciding to let you know what information they will give someone about their own bodies?
Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?

LOL
my guess is that withholding information would be illegal or required by law.
there is zero medical risk if you are not informed of the gender of the fetus.
but, my guess is that it is illegal for them to tell the gender.
because otherwise, HELLO lawsuits


Lawsuits for what? Ultrasounds all over the world disclose this information routinely. This farker pointed out that private ultrasounds do so in Canada as well (i.e. wealthier patients are granted access to more of the information gathered from the same procedure). We're also talking about the raw data, not just interpretation. If this is true it is some really ugly patronism.


It is up to your doctor to disclose. If you don't like his or her answer find another doctor (at no cost). Or yes, you can pay.

Further you can also get an abortion at no cost if you are unsure or have a daughter.

The history of the ethnic community in BC pushed this and is not prevalent in the majority of Canada. It has now lessened as 2nd generations are becoming part of an open community. We had wife burning, bride acid etc. We are now very protective of our women. And rightly so.
 
2013-04-28 05:00:55 AM

God-is-a-Taco: Must be a coincidence that Australia is getting a large influx of Asians.


Chinese people have been here since the 1850s. You have heard of the term Gold Rushes, I presume? We had them too.
 
2013-04-28 05:06:08 AM

BarkingUnicorn: Anyone who has a problem with this cannot also claim that a fetus isn't a human being.


Not at all. One might find it objectionable because it devalues female children, just as it's possible to object to the selective abortion of children with Downs'. Or, to put it another way, one could accept a woman's right not to any child at all, but object to the idea of her saying that some particular children are not worth having.
 
2013-04-28 05:09:17 AM

orbister: BarkingUnicorn: Anyone who has a problem with this cannot also claim that a fetus isn't a human being.

Not at all. One might find it objectionable because it devalues female children, just as it's possible to object to the selective abortion of children with Downs'. Or, to put it another way, one could accept a woman's right not to any child at all, but object to the idea of her saying that some particular children are not worth having.


As I said before, you either get choice or you do not. Some half baked, cockamie scheme that judges whether you get a right by your reason to use that right is just plain silly.

Whether or not you find that choice reprehensible is up to you. There's a difference.
 
2013-04-28 05:09:42 AM

Marlys: namatad: Monkeyfark Ridiculous: namatad: R.A.Danny: sleeps in trees: (which is not mentioned as we are with a high Indo/Asian community).

So they take your race into account when deciding to let you know what information they will give someone about their own bodies?
Do they still protect "Injuns" from firewater too?

LOL
my guess is that withholding information would be illegal or required by law.
there is zero medical risk if you are not informed of the gender of the fetus.
but, my guess is that it is illegal for them to tell the gender.
because otherwise, HELLO lawsuits


Lawsuits for what? Ultrasounds all over the world disclose this information routinely. This farker pointed out that private ultrasounds do so in Canada as well (i.e. wealthier patients are granted access to more of the information gathered from the same procedure). We're also talking about the raw data, not just interpretation. If this is true it is some really ugly patronism.

if the information were being illegally withheld ...
FFS, people sure for the dumbest reasons

When I was pregnant I wasn't able to find out the sex before 24 weeks, which is/was the legal limit for abortion. I live in BC, Canada. At that time, the BC college of physicians' official stance was that the potential for gender based abortions was a moral issue that ethically, they shouldn't be a party to. It appears that they have changed their stance. https://www.cpsbc.ca/files/u6/Disclosure-of-Fetal-Sex.pdf

It was never illegal, just strongly frowned upon by doctors. Private sex determining ultrasounds are readily available for about $100. About 10 years back I was told by and ultrasound tech "I can clearly see the sex, I just can't tell you". My doctor told me that that meant it was a boy. She was right.


There's no legal limit on abortion in Canada. It's just that practically speaking, the clinics won't do them past about 20-22 weeks, and the hospitals won't do them then unless medically indicated (and even then, there often aren't any doctors qualified to perform such late abortions, and women who need them because of a fetal condition incompatible with life and the like often need to go to the few US clinics that do. It's often paid for by provincial health care.)

There's no law forbidding the public clinics/hospitals from giving the information. But some have policies that they won't give it out, and some commenters have argued that the provincial regulatory bodies should pass regulations prohibiting disclosure of the sex before 30 weeks (on the grounds that it's not medically relevant information). But there's a lot of disagreement, and at this point it's left to individual facilities as far as I can tell (at least in Ontario and Quebec - I know lots of women who've found out the sex at 20 weeks.)
 
2013-04-28 05:16:07 AM
The cognitive dissonance amongst the abortionists in this thread is amusing.
 
2013-04-28 05:16:08 AM

Myria: randomjsa: The headline made me think they were going to demand sex change operations be done on babies... Then I clicked the link and was outraged for an entirely different reason.

I was about to get all riled up about how horrible that would be, then I read the article.  The anger is still there, it's just now directed at subby.

/transgender, so has an interesting perspective on what the headline first sounded like


You're not got confused by the headline. Either way it's crazy though.
 
2013-04-28 05:19:06 AM
resources0.news.com.au

Meh. China White people problems.
 
2013-04-28 05:22:12 AM
thevillage-locksmith.com

The only good fetus is an aborted fetus.
 
2013-04-28 05:23:41 AM

tinfoil-hat maggie: Myria: randomjsa: The headline made me think they were going to demand sex change operations be done on babies... Then I clicked the link and was outraged for an entirely different reason.

I was about to get all riled up about how horrible that would be, then I read the article.  The anger is still there, it's just now directed at subby.

/transgender, so has an interesting perspective on what the headline first sounded like

You're not got confused by the headline. Either way it's crazy though.


Er not the only one that got confused.
/I'll blame not previewing before posting
//But it's I've been drinking all night really :/
 
2013-04-28 05:46:51 AM

Lorelle: One of Australia's biggest abortion clinics has revealed that parents have requested abortions on gender grounds - although it is "extremely rare" and always refused.

The Fertility Control Clinic - Victoria's biggest abortion provider - told the Senate inquiry that 96 per cent of abortions are performed before 12 weeks' gestation, when it is too early to know the sex.

So anti-abortionists in Australia managed to find  one rare case of abortion based on gender, and are using that to try to impose restrictions on abortion. Sounds like the fetus-obsessed, pro-forced-childbirth nuts in the U.S.


I think it's clear from the article that they're not wanting an outright restriction on abortion, they just want a restriction on the parents knowing the gender before it's too late to get an abortion so parents can't get an abortion just because they don't like the gender of the baby.
 
2013-04-28 05:58:50 AM
If someone doesn't want a child of a specific gender badly enough to abort it, maybe the child is better off being aborted. Society on the other hand, yes that will eventually get totally farked up where this stuff is happening. But maybe that's what they need to drag them out of the dark ages. After a generation of men has to take a wide stance in the men's room or get shipped overseas as mail order husbands to get any action, maybe they'll have another think about the cunningness of their plan.
 
2013-04-28 06:02:39 AM

Munchkin City Coroner: [thevillage-locksmith.com image 426x249]

The only good fetus is an aborted fetus.


I see you have the old model kit. You can upgrade it by adding one of these...

www.kotulas.com
 
2013-04-28 06:03:17 AM

Cloudchaser Sakonige the Red Wolf: Lorelle: One of Australia's biggest abortion clinics has revealed that parents have requested abortions on gender grounds - although it is "extremely rare" and always refused.

The Fertility Control Clinic - Victoria's biggest abortion provider - told the Senate inquiry that 96 per cent of abortions are performed before 12 weeks' gestation, when it is too early to know the sex.

So anti-abortionists in Australia managed to find  one rare case of abortion based on gender, and are using that to try to impose restrictions on abortion. Sounds like the fetus-obsessed, pro-forced-childbirth nuts in the U.S.

I think it's clear from the article that they're not wanting an outright restriction on abortion, they just want a restriction on the parents knowing the gender before it's too late to get an abortion so parents can't get an abortion just because they don't like the gender of the baby.


It's clear from the article that there isn't a problem.
 
2013-04-28 06:06:50 AM

ambercat: If someone doesn't want a child of a specific gender badly enough to abort it, maybe the child is better off being aborted. Society on the other hand, yes that will eventually get totally farked up where this stuff is happening. But maybe that's what they need to drag them out of the dark ages. After a generation of men has to take a wide stance in the men's room or get shipped overseas as mail order husbands to get any action, maybe they'll have another think about the cunningness of their plan.


I don't know it seems to me itf you care about the child's gender that much maybe they shouldn't be having kids. And unfortunately there seems one popular way of getting rid of surplus male children.
 
2013-04-28 06:10:04 AM
I should also add a recommendation to all you guys who don't want kids to get a vasectomy.

It's fast, easy, and (in my case at least) nearly painless.

It's even better when you get it done and don't tell anyone.

/Our bodies, our choice right ladies? Ladies?
//I'm always forgetting rule 16.
 
2013-04-28 06:20:58 AM

BarkingUnicorn: Anyone who has a problem with this cannot also claim that a fetus isn't a human being.


R.A.Danny: Amos Quito: What part of CHOICE did you not understand?

Yep. You either believe that choice is a right or you do not. Or at least that you should keep your nose out of it.


In China, you can only have one child; you will be forced to abort any more after that, or pay very stiff fines.

But, you cannot abort that first child due to gender preferences.

So, it is possible to claim that they aren't human beings AND deny the mother their choice!
 
Displayed 50 of 235 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report