“talking about “the child”.”

Shock! Horror!

People who think a foetus is a child refer to a foetus as a child.

My God, the iniquity!

Can anyone really be surprised by this? These places exist to deprive women of their reproductive choices, of course they’re going to lie.

…and so it begins

and so it begins

*puts on flame-proof jacket*

And therein lies the problem, they actually are pushing women towards an option. They’re not fit for purpose.

*Christian*, not religious, thanks.

@1. Really? Can you really not see that the point isn’t what people think/believe, but that every person seeking advice on abortions should be given a view by people who do not have a vested interest in any particular path that person should take?

I can’t disagree with the fact that religious groups of any demomination may give advice that is skewed – if a person chooses to go to that organisation that’s their choice. I might not like it, but that’s people’s beliefs.

But I can verfy much disagree with the government promoting abortion advice coming from a vested interest, and moving to sideline unbiased advice.

@Tim Worstall

I’m assuming the concept of impartial advice has escaped you.

When you provide what’s supposed to be a non-biased service, no-one cares one jot what you “believe”. It’s a foetus, so you refer to it as a foetus. Same way I don’t refer to God as “that made up guy weirdos pray to” when talking to christians.

Unless of course it’s *not* supposed to be a non-biased service… in which case I highly doubt they should be calling themselves counsellors, seeing as their aim is to talk you out of it, rather than, y’know, counsel you.

Thanks for correcting the article title

@8 – Exactly, I have a problem when the Government is consulting with a religious group, and using it as a provider for those *seeking* advice, when it has one answer pretty much regardless of the situation. Especially when that bias is not always disclosed up-front.

Certainly I have my own opinion, and IF ASKED I’ll give it. And yes, it’s religiously influenced. But I’ll always, in a public debate, take the side of public health – that abortion should be available – because to do otherwise leads to unsafe practices.

this goes to prove that counselling needs to be independent.

These are the types that the govt wants on their advisory panel.

Dismal isn’t it. Pro abortion advice groups give people the choice, this lot just bully and scare vulnerable women.

When it comes to ethical issues there is never such a thing as impartial advice. It is illusionary nonsense to suggest that presenting ‘all the options’ (or indeed not presenting them) does not contain bias, when logically admitting an option (or denying it) betrays the acceptance of a particular value.

When this is acknowledged, then the debate can be about which bias is the more acceptable for society – which is where this needs to start.

@13 – Which is why the advice given by reputable organisations in this area is designed to help women sort out their OWN feelings and views, and to let them decide what they really want for themselves.

Rather than imposing a one-size-fits-all view onto them.

No one should be suprised that the groups chosen by Tory vermin turn out to scumbags themselves.

Taxpayers money earmarked for advice is being spent spewing anti abortion propaganda. Tell me that is not corruption.

@15. Way to go with emotive language there. And to think people accuse anti-abortion people of such things.

I don’t particularly have a dog in this fight, but it seems to me that the way forward is to bar any group who publicly take a position on abortion from offering advice on behalf of the government. Only organisation who are officially neutral should be allowed to refer individuals.

@16 – That sounds like an excellent way to ensure that existing groups who have provided advice for years are excluded, because they offer abortion services, as in America.

The previous board and system worked, well, and was not in need of revision.

Ian @ 15

What ‘emotive’ language? Some of the nastiest people in society are up to their collective necks to these religious nutters and not only have they sacrificed vulnerable women to them, but have weighed in with public money for the purpose as well.