Women’s seminar hears call for legalised abortion

[webfact]

Women’s seminar hears call for legalised abortion

By PRATCH RUJIVANAROM 
THE NATION

 

 

WOMEN’S RIGHTS groups have called for the revocation of the law against abortion, allowing women to terminate unwanted pregnancies.

 

The issue was highlighted at a public seminar, titled “Women who abort their pregnancies are not criminals and abortion must be legalised”, at Thammasat University on Monday.

 

The seminar heard that women in Thailand face risks to their reputation, welfare, health and even their lives through illegal and unsafe abortions because the procedure is outlawed under the Thai Criminal Code.

 

 

Manushya Foundation executive director Emilie Pradichit said all women should have the freedom to decide what to do with their own bodies and legal, safe abortion was a human right that should be respected.

 

However, she said law enforcement in Thailand did not pay attention to human-rights principles even though Thailand had an obligation to follow the international Human Rights Declaration.

 

She added that abortion was still illegal, even though deaths from unsafe abortions was among the most common causes of fatalities in women around the world.

 

“Some 300,000 to 400,000 women in Thailand risk their lives on illegal and unsafe abortions every year. This problem still exists and there is a tendency that it will continue into the future, because Thailand still has an outdated law that criminalises safe abortion,” she said.

 

“As long as we keep this law, many women will be kept away from the choice to fix what they have done wrong in an unplanned pregnancy, and restart their path in life with good health.”

 

She said the Criminal Code should be amended to legalise abortion out of respect for women’s rights over the own bodies, and to offer women who are unprepared to have a child a chance to choose their path in life.

 

The relevant law is Section 3 of the Criminal Code about foeticide. Article 301 states that women who aborts pregnancies, or anyone who allows another to undergo an abortion, should be punished with no longer than three years in prison, a Bt6,000 fine or both.

 

Article 302 states that anyone who conducts an abortion for a woman should be punished by five years in prison, Bt10,000 fine or both.

 

The law only allows for abortion if a doctor concludes the pregnancy is harmful to a woman’s health or the pregnancy is a product of a criminal offence such as rape.

 

The coordinator of Tamtang, or the “path building” women’s rights group, Kaitlyn Mccoy, told the seminar about a study in the United Kingdom showing that before abortion was legalised in 1967, the country had one of the highest teenage pregnancies rates in Europe, and the death rate among women who had undergone unsafe abortions was 30 out of every 50 undergoing the procedure.

 

After abortion became legal, there were intense campaigns to educate people about contraception choices and the risks of unsafe abortions, and sex education was taught in school. The campaign resulted in a dramatic drop in the number of unwanted and teenage pregnancies, and the abortion rate was also lowered.

 

Mccoy added that legal abortion, along with sex education and knowledge about contraception, helped prevent unexpected pregnancies.

 

Dr Nithiwat Saengruang, from the Referral System for Safe Abortion medical network, said not only had developed Western countries already adopted legal abortion, so had many countries in this region, including Nepal, Singapore, Vietnam and Cambodia.

 

However, legal abortions still seem unlikely in Thailand in the near future. Sunthorn Pliansri, a legal officer with the Council of State, said a committee had been set up to improve the Criminal Code, and the law concerning abortion was one of the areas under discussion.

 

Sunthorn said possible amendment to the law on foeticide would not be to legalise abortion, but would provide more open conditions for people who needed to undergo abortions under the supervision of doctors.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30341962

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-03-29

[stanleycoin]

Good luck to them, hope it gets legalized soon

The back street abortions are truly awful for all involved.

Good luck girls  

[grumbleweed]

Here's a novel idea: Why not give women control of their bodies, instead of letting men, with minds polluted by religious BS, decide for them?

 

Treating women as second class baby machines is a concept of the dark ages, along with the religions used to control them. Instead of being counselled before and after, they're stigmatized and condemned as criminals.

 

Such behavior in a country whose religious infrastructure ensures a very unhealthy mix of sex depraved men and small boys could be viewed as them not wanting to cut of their supply chain

 

Considering most religions demand that their holy MEN abstain from sex, a reasonable counter demand would be for the women to campaign for the religious nut jobs to undergo castration to ensure they adhere to their  abstinence rule

 

 

 

 

[Krataiboy]

Proper sex education and access to affordable contraception 

7 hours ago, grumbleweed said:

Here's a novel idea: Why not give women control of their bodies, instead of letting men, with minds polluted by religious BS, decide for them?

 

Treating women as second class baby machines is a concept of the dark ages, along with the religions used to control them. Instead of being counselled before and after, they're stigmatized and condemned as criminals.

 

Such behavior in a country whose religious infrastructure ensures a very unhealthy mix of sex depraved men and small boys could be viewed as them not wanting to cut of their supply chain

 

Considering most religions demand that their holy MEN abstain from sex, a reasonable counter demand would be for the women to campaign for the religious nut jobs to undergo castration to ensure they adhere to their  abstinence rule

 

 

 

 

I'm all for giving women control of their bodies, but religious nut jobs are not stopping them from either using contraceptives or insisting their partners do so.

 

Getting rid of an unwanted baby is a traumatic tribute to failure and a lack of responsibility.

 

Rather than use abortion as a form of contraception, which is in effect what is done in many "developed" countries, Thailand might be better advised to ramp up its sex education, conception and family planning facilities.

 

Abortion is a dreadfully traumatic business (as I know from personal experience) and prevention is far preferable to the murderous "cure". 
 

Edited March 29, 2018 by Krataiboy

[kannot]

7 hours ago, grumbleweed said:

Here's a novel idea: Why not give women control of their bodies, instead of letting men, with minds polluted by religious BS, decide for them?

 

Treating women as second class baby machines is a concept of the dark ages, along with the religions used to control them. Instead of being counselled before and after, they're stigmatized and condemned as criminals.

 

Such behavior in a country whose religious infrastructure ensures a very unhealthy mix of sex depraved men and small boys could be viewed as them not wanting to cut of their supply chain

 

Considering most religions demand that their holy MEN abstain from sex, a reasonable counter demand would be for the women to campaign for the religious nut jobs to undergo castration to ensure they adhere to their  abstinence rule

 

 

 

 

Hear hear, religion poking its nose into everything with NO evidence its true in ANY way, laughable but the sad  world we live in where "belief" is sacred..........HUH! go figure.

Belief without evidence , must be the definition of stupidity.

[kannot]

13 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Proper sex education and access to affordable contraception 

I'm all for giving women control of their bodies, but religious nut jobs are not stopping them from either using contraceptives or insisting their partners do so.

 

Getting rid of an unwanted baby is a traumatic tribute to failure and a lack of responsibility.

 

Rather than use abortion as a form of contraction, which is in effect what is done in many "developed" countries, Thailand might be better advised to ramp up its sex education, conception and family planning facilities.

 

Abortion is a dreadfully traumatic business (as I know from personal experience) and prevention is far preferable to the murderous "cure". 
 

 Tell the Catholics and Im pretty sure the "Buddhist" (joke) culture here will frown heavily on  terminations.

However YES I fail to understand these days how anyone gets pregnant when its so easy NOT TO.

[Expatthailover]

Funny how men are the ones who want to call the shots on abortion.

[kannot]

15 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Proper sex education and access to affordable contraception 

I'm all for giving women control of their bodies, but religious nut jobs are not stopping them from either using contraceptives or insisting their partners do so.

 

Getting rid of an unwanted baby is a traumatic tribute to failure and a lack of responsibility.

 

Rather than use abortion as a form of contraction, which is in effect what is done in many "developed" countries, Thailand might be better advised to ramp up its sex education, conception and family planning facilities.

 

Abortion is a dreadfully traumatic business (as I know from personal experience) and prevention is far preferable to the murderous "cure". 
 

Everyday you will kill a  million things you wont even know about, do you lie awake at night thinking about all those  other things youve killed, insects ants whatever, I dont think "murderous" is the word.

I guess you mean contraception not contraction although contraction is  quite  funny as its about babies

[kannot]

Just now, Expatthailover said:

Funny how men are the ones who want to call the shots on abortion.

AND RELIGION

[Expatthailover]

3 minutes ago, kannot said:

 Tell the Catholics and Im pretty sure the "Buddhist" (joke) culture here will frown heavily on  terminations.

However YES I fail to understand these days how anyone gets pregnant when its so easy NOT TO.

Men control most of tje govts in tje world and women end up javing no rights. 

 

[Krataiboy]

Just now, kannot said:

Everyday you will kill a  million things you wont even know about, do you lie awake at night thinking about all those  other things youve killed, insects ants whatever, I dont think "murderous" is the word.

I guess you mean contraception not contraction although contraction is  quite  funny as its about babies

 

Just now, kannot said:

Everyday you will kill a  million things you wont even know about, do you lie awake at night thinking about all those  other things youve killed, insects ants whatever, I dont think "murderous" is the word.

I guess you mean contraception not contraction although contraction is  quite  funny as its about babies

Thanks for pointing out the typo, which I'd missed.

 

I fail to grasp the significance of your conflation of killing ants and babies. I sprayed some termites today and that won't stop me sleeping tonight. I doubt I would get a wink, however, if I had destroyed a child growing in my body.  

 

What adjective, other than murderous, would you use for the act of chopping up nascent human of up to six months in pieces small enough to extract from a uterus?

 

[Krataiboy]

38 minutes ago, Expatthailover said:

Men control most of tje govts in tje world and women end up javing no rights. 

 

True in the case of many third world countries and even highly-developed Islamic states. But hardly at all in the West, where women are often treated better than their male counterparts - and certainly not in the UK.  

 

A couple of key areas where women tend to be treated preferentially are gaining custody of children after a divorce and lighter sentences for committing the same crimes as men. There are others.

 

According to the latest Ipsos Mori poll 67 percent of British men and and 51 per cent of women agree that women have equality. 

Edited March 29, 2018 by Krataiboy

[jak2002003]

5 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

True in the case of many third world countries and even highly-developed Islamic states. But hardly at all in the West, where women are often treated better than their male counterparts - and certainly not in the UK.  

 

A couple of key areas where women tend to be treated preferentially are gaining custody of children after a divorce and lighter sentences for committing the same crimes as men. There are others.

 

According to the latest Ipsos Mori poll 67 percent of British men and and 51 per cent of women agree that women have equality. 

And in the UK a women will be give emergency housing, council housing etc while a man will be told to go away and sleep on the streets like a tramp.

 

That is not equality.  

[stephen tracy]

10 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

 

Thanks for pointing out the typo, which I'd missed.

 

I fail to grasp the significance of your conflation of killing ants and babies. I sprayed some termites today and that won't stop me sleeping tonight. I doubt I would get a wink, however, if I had destroyed a child growing in my body.  

 

What adjective, other than murderous, would you use for the act of chopping up nascent human of up to six months in pieces small enough to extract from a uterus?

 

The decision is entirely up to the woman who has managed to get pregnant, no one else. No one has the right to dictate that. If it was men that had wombs, you can bet that abortion would be legal everywhere. And certainly in the case of a pregnancy as a result of rape, there should be absolutely no question about legalizing abortion.  

[Krataiboy]

19 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

The decision is entirely up to the woman who has managed to get pregnant, no one else. No one has the right to dictate that. If it was men that had wombs, you can bet that abortion would be legal everywhere. And certainly in the case of a pregnancy as a result of rape, there should be absolutely no question about legalizing abortion.  

Don't unborn babies have rights, as well as the women who, deliberately or accidentally, are carrying them? Clearly, since there is a cut-off date after which unborn babies cannot be lawfully be chopped up and pulled out of the womb, they do. The question is: at what point in a human's child's gestation do they start.

 

Rather than my attempting to deal with what is the key issue here - the rights of a child not to be "terminated", whether inside or outside of it's mother's body - I will let a young father whom I must confess I rather admire do it for me here:

 

Babies conceived by rape are as entitled to life as any others. There are many childless people out there who would be willing to adopt such a child in those cases where the mother cannot or will not take care of the child.

 

 

 

[rkidlad]

If the state wanna keep abortion illegal, the state can also help and pay to bring up these children. Also, the state can completely abolish the death penalty. After all - life is sacred, right?

 

Well, sacred til the baby comes out. Then the state seemingly don’t care anymore. 

[stephen tracy]

8 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

Don't unborn babies have rights, as well as the women who, deliberately or accidentally, are carrying them? Clearly, since there is a cut-off date after which unborn babies cannot be lawfully be chopped up and pulled out of the womb, they do. The question is: at what point in a human's child's gestation do they start.

 

Rather than my attempting to deal with what is the key issue here - the rights of a child not to be "terminated", whether inside or outside of it's mother's body - I will let a young father whom I must confess I rather admire do it for me here:

 

Babies conceived by rape are as entitled to life as any others. There are many childless people out there who would be willing to adopt such a child in those cases where the mother cannot or will not take care of the child.

 

 

 

You think a woman should be forced to give birth to a child as a result of a rape? An abortion would be far less traumatic. You can debate the rights of an unborn fetus all you like, but if I were a woman and someone else tried to dictate to me what I can and cannot do with my own body, I would happily tell them to go and fist themselves. It's easy to harp on about the rights of a fetus when it's not you carrying the result of a rape in your womb. At the end of the day, it's no ones business but the woman in question.

[kannot]

3 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

 

Thanks for pointing out the typo, which I'd missed.

 

I fail to grasp the significance of your conflation of killing ants and babies. I sprayed some termites today and that won't stop me sleeping tonight. I doubt I would get a wink, however, if I had destroyed a child growing in my body.  

 

What adjective, other than murderous, would you use for the act of chopping up nascent human of up to six months in pieces small enough to extract from a uterus?

 

The same as  killing some termites because you dont like them

[kannot]

5 minutes ago, rkidlad said:

If the state wanna keep abortion illegal, the state can also help and pay to bring up these children. Also, the state can completely abolish the death penalty. After all - life is sacred, right?

 

Well, sacred til the baby comes out. Then the state seemingly don’t care anymore. 

Like many of the Fathers and judging by the amount of toddlers gawking at a mobile phone the Mothers also, I d say many simply dont deserve children.

[kannot]

17 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Don't unborn babies have rights, as well as the women who, deliberately or accidentally, are carrying them? Clearly, since there is a cut-off date after which unborn babies cannot be lawfully be chopped up and pulled out of the womb, they do. The question is: at what point in a human's child's gestation do they start.

 

Rather than my attempting to deal with what is the key issue here - the rights of a child not to be "terminated", whether inside or outside of it's mother's body - I will let a young father whom I must confess I rather admire do it for me here:

 

Babies conceived by rape are as entitled to life as any others. There are many childless people out there who would be willing to adopt such a child in those cases where the mother cannot or will not take care of the child.

 

 

 

Shouldnt termites also have rights, you can laugh but really you are judge  jury and executioner for the termites, the termites  will survive long after humans with their view of the world and what should and shouldnt be granted life have departed.and a better place it would be although thats a subjective human construct anyway.

[kannot]

11 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

You think a woman should be forced to give birth to a child as a result of a rape? An abortion would be far less traumatic. You can debate the rights of an unborn fetus all you like, but if I were a woman and someone else tried to dictate to me what I can and cannot do with my own body, I would happily tell them to go and fist themselves. It's easy to harp on about the rights of a fetus when it's not you carrying the result of a rape in your womb. At the end of the day, it's no ones business but the woman in question.

It  will be sperms rights  soon!!

[stephen tracy]

8 hours ago, kannot said:

It  will be sperms rights  soon!!

I guess that means having a wank would be illegal. As Monty Python pointed out: "Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great, if a sperm get's wasted, God get's quite irate".

[kannot]

3 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

 

Thanks for pointing out the typo, which I'd missed.

 

I fail to grasp the significance of your conflation of killing ants and babies. I sprayed some termites today and that won't stop me sleeping tonight. I doubt I would get a wink, however, if I had destroyed a child growing in my body.  

 

What adjective, other than murderous, would you use for the act of chopping up nascent human of up to six months in pieces small enough to extract from a uterus?

 

youve made it "personal" 

"you" wouldnt get a wink of sleep, others may have a totally different view and thats their choice.

At what point does a baby become a  baby after the first cell division? should the "baby" get rights at the first division?

Id  agree at a certain point it would be unfair to terminate ( not murder ) a pregnancy.

Do you remember being born? do you remember being inside the womb,  some claim they do,  will they remember being "murdered" at such an early age, I doubt it.

Does that fetus feel pain..........http://discovermagazine.com/2005/dec/fetus-feel-pain

Edited March 29, 2018 by kannot

[kannot]

2 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

I guess that means having a wank would be illegal. As Monty Python pointed out: "Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great, if a sperm get's wasted, God get's quite irate".

Religious hangups, but GREAT  movie showing it for the crap it is.

[Jingthing]

36 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Don't unborn babies have rights, as well as the women who, deliberately or accidentally, are carrying them? Clearly, since there is a cut-off date after which unborn babies cannot be lawfully be chopped up and pulled out of the womb, they do. The question is: at what point in a human's child's gestation do they start.

 

Rather than my attempting to deal with what is the key issue here - the rights of a child not to be "terminated", whether inside or outside of it's mother's body - I will let a young father whom I must confess I rather admire do it for me here:

 

Babies conceived by rape are as entitled to life as any others. There are many childless people out there who would be willing to adopt such a child in those cases where the mother cannot or will not take care of the child.

 

 

 

So you're willing to carry these rape babies to term in your belly? If not, who are you to dictate that to others? 

This is a woman's issue. Women should decide. 

[kannot]

9 minutes ago, stephen tracy said:

I guess that means having a wank would be illegal. As Monty Python pointed out: "Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great, if a sperm get's wasted, God get's quite irate".

Nah it would only  be  illegal if it didnt go into a woman, strike me down Lord for I have sinned even more illegal if it went into a  man!!

[rkidlad]

17 minutes ago, kannot said:

Like many of the Fathers and judging by the amount of toddlers gawking at a mobile phone the Mothers also, I d say many simply dont deserve children.

When I get asked the the same old question of “Why don’t you have kids!?” I tell people I’m too selfish and enjoy my ‘me’ time too much. I’m not ready to sacrifice that yet. They look at me like I’m weird or I genuinely am a selfish so-and-so. Very rarely do people connect the dots and realize that it’s better to be a selfish person without kids than it it is to be one with kids. 

[kannot]

1 minute ago, rkidlad said:

When I get asked the the same old question of “Why don’t you have kids!?” I tell people I’m too selfish and enjoy my ‘me’ time too much. I’m not ready to sacrifice that yet. They look at me like I’m weird or I genuinely am a selfish so-and-so. Very rarely do people connect the dots and realize that it’s better to be a selfish person without kids than it it is to be one with kids. 

You know I see a  lot of young Thai kids, toddlers and see them stuck in front of a mobile phone 3  years old and feel sad, someone should be playing with that kid, showing  it flowers and insects and stuff  like that, just see a total waste of its  life with parents who couldnt give a ferk, I couldnt have kids and neither could Mrs  Kannot...some here would say its a blessing, an irony for the atheist barstard that i am Im sure its "Gods punishment" but yeah they are a lot of  hard work and you do have to sacrifice  certainly the first 10+ years totally to them.

[rkidlad]

44 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Don't unborn babies have rights, as well as the women who, deliberately or accidentally, are carrying them? Clearly, since there is a cut-off date after which unborn babies cannot be lawfully be chopped up and pulled out of the womb, they do. The question is: at what point in a human's child's gestation do they start.

 

Rather than my attempting to deal with what is the key issue here - the rights of a child not to be "terminated", whether inside or outside of it's mother's body - I will let a young father whom I must confess I rather admire do it for me here:

 

Babies conceived by rape are as entitled to life as any others. There are many childless people out there who would be willing to adopt such a child in those cases where the mother cannot or will not take care of the child.

 

 

 

There’s a cut off point as to when you can’t abort anymore. I’ll let doctors and professionals decide that point. Ben Shapiro is misrepresenting this actress’ ideas. She doesn’t want the right to kill her baby one minute before birth. She wants the right to abort her child within a legal and compassionate timeframe. 

[Krataiboy]

2 hours ago, rkidlad said:

There’s a cut off point as to when you can’t abort anymore. I’ll let doctors and professionals decide that point. Ben Shapiro is misrepresenting this actress’ ideas. She doesn’t want the right to kill her baby one minute before birth. She wants the right to abort her child within a legal and compassionate timeframe. 

Shapiro is not misrepresenting anyone. He is pointing out the bitter irony of a woman who has clearly gone beyond the legal time frame for an abortion advocating for the killing of unwanted babies.

 

You defend for her right to abort her child within "a legal and compassionate time frame". Legal or not, chopping up a living human in the womb seems anything but compassionate. Unfortunately, we can't ask the opinion of countless children who have had no choice suffer this fate.