"Political correctness" causes CPS to abandon forced abortion case says government aide

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
33,397
CPS 'blinded by political correctness' dropped sex-selective abortion case, government aide reveals

The story is eye catching for two reasons. The lady in the article, Mandy Sanghera, was pointed by the government to advise on so-called honour based violence. She claims there has been no conviction for sex selective based abortions which are illegal in the UK. In the case in the article a woman claimed to have been under severe pressure to have an abortion when the baby was discovered to be a girl. Sanghera claims.............

But when they pursued the case and the woman said she wanted to prosecute, the CPS refused to press charges for the offence, claiming it was not in the public interest and that it was a "family matter". The husband later pleaded guilty to controlling behaviour and was sent on a course.
"Because they didn't think she would make a competent witness...because she didn't have physical injuries, they said it wasn't in the public interest," said Ms Sanghera, who is one of the founders of and advisors to the Foreign Office and Home Office’s joint Forced Marriage Unit.
"She felt [the case had been] abandoned for cultural reasons. Her having that termination was the nail in the coffin after all the psychological abuse. When she went and asked for help she didn’t get it."
It seems PC Britannia is alive and well. The so called "Asian" community, in reality Pakistan, India and Bangladeshi communities, has spokesmen who have skilfully used Islamophobia to attack any efforts to police their community to western standards.

The second issue concerns sex selective abortions. If it is a woman's right to chose then surely she can chose to abort a girl if that is her choice? Would the pro-abortion people not agree?
 


willow68

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 8, 2012
Messages
1,856
Deafening silence from the millennial feminazis...
 

former wesleyan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
25,605
CPS 'blinded by political correctness' dropped sex-selective abortion case, government aide reveals

The story is eye catching for two reasons. The lady in the article, Mandy Sanghera, was pointed by the government to advise on so-called honour based violence. She claims there has been no conviction for sex selective based abortions which are illegal in the UK. In the case in the article a woman claimed to have been under severe pressure to have an abortion when the baby was discovered to be a girl. Sanghera claims.............



It seems PC Britannia is alive and well. The so called "Asian" community,
in reality Pakistan, India and Bangladeshi communities,
has spokesmen who have skilfully used Islamophobia to attack any efforts to police their community to western standards.

The second issue concerns sex selective abortions. If it is a woman's right to chose then surely she can chose to abort a girl if that is her choice? Would the pro-abortion people not agree?
In reality it's only the Hindus who practice this so best to leave Pakistan and Bangladesh out of it.
 

Hitchcock

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
8,779
CPS 'blinded by political correctness' dropped sex-selective abortion case, government aide reveals

The story is eye catching for two reasons. The lady in the article, Mandy Sanghera, was pointed by the government to advise on so-called honour based violence. She claims there has been no conviction for sex selective based abortions which are illegal in the UK. In the case in the article a woman claimed to have been under severe pressure to have an abortion when the baby was discovered to be a girl. Sanghera claims.............



It seems PC Britannia is alive and well. The so called "Asian" community, in reality Pakistan, India and Bangladeshi communities, has spokesmen who have skilfully used Islamophobia to attack any efforts to police their community to western standards.

The second issue concerns sex selective abortions. If it is a woman's right to chose then surely she can chose to abort a girl if that is her choice? Would the pro-abortion people not agree?
You start a thread with a statement, one reads the article and see it's the opinion of ONE person, of course she may be right but she may also be wrong. The CPS have denied the allegation - yet you didn't quote that.

Would the pro-abortion people not agree?
Are people pro abortion? I'm pro choice, women should have access to free and safe abortion facilities. If a woman doesn't wish to avail of abortion that's fine but those who do should have that option, it's only the anti choice side who wish to dictate on the lives of women.

You're use of alleged 'sex selective' abortion is utterly dishonest, you are not in favour of any woman having an abortion IIRC but you'll focus in on one 'controversial' aspect to muddy the waters on the issue. Many of these 'moral' matters be they abortion, euthanasia etc are complicated and throw up difficult issue but that does not mean that particular or small number so matters should necessitate a general ban.
 

Notachipanoaktree

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2013
Messages
8,137
to use abortion as a gender selective option is wrong
So is down syndrome and gay Ok? Ask the 'intello' Petajack. Why is that objectionable individual still a mod?




The world will be a dull barren 'lifeless' wilderness, full of hags, witches, and the other Accountants, Lawyers, Entrepreneurs 'n' Politicians without you honey.
 

Skypeme

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2010
Messages
1,914
In reality it's only the Hindus who practice this so best to leave Pakistan and Bangladesh out of it.
"Hindu" is not a country but there are Hindus in..."India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, United States, Myanmar, United Kingdom, Canada, South Africa, Mauritius, the Caribbean (West Indies), and Fiji....". In fact they "...have 1.08 billion adherents worldwide (15% of world's population) with about 95% living in India....".

What exactly is your point?
 

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
33,397
You start a thread with a statement, one reads the article and see it's the opinion of ONE person, of course she may be right but she may also be wrong. The CPS have denied the allegation - yet you didn't quote that.
I hate to say the obvious but...................they would wouldn't they.

You're use of alleged 'sex selective' abortion is utterly dishonest, you are not in favour of any woman having an abortion IIRC but you'll focus in on one 'controversial' aspect to muddy the waters on the issue. Many of these 'moral' matters be they abortion, euthanasia etc are complicated and throw up difficult issue but that does not mean that particular or small number so matters should necessitate a general ban.
Are you in favour of sex selective abortions? Yes or No?
 

former wesleyan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
25,605
"Hindu" is not a country but there are Hindus in..."India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, United States, Myanmar, United Kingdom, Canada, South Africa, Mauritius, the Caribbean (West Indies), and Fiji....". In fact they "...have 1.08 billion adherents worldwide (15% of world's population) with about 95% living in India....".

What exactly is your point?
My point is that it's an almost exclusive Hindu practice. The Muslims majorities of Pakistan and Bangladesh don't practice female infanticide. For Hindus abortion is not murder ; see the Gita for their description of the atma or soul.
 

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
33,397
My point is that it's an almost exclusive Hindu practice. The Muslims majorities of Pakistan and Bangladesh don't practice female infanticide. For Hindus abortion is not murder ; see the Gita for their description of the atma or soul.
Yes they do.
 

former wesleyan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
25,605

Hitchcock

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
8,779
I hate to say the obvious but...................they would wouldn't they.



Are you in favour of sex selective abortions? Yes or No?
I'm not in favour of any abortion but it exists and we have to deal with it, which means making it available for women who wish to avail of it. I'm opposed to restrictions on women's right to choose abortion. I am in favour of funding for support and counselling services for women to help them make an informed choice on the issue and to negate some of the issues that can arise in that decision making process such as pressure and coercion.

Those services need proper funding, funding which many on the anti choice side campaign against and the services are also constantly under pressure from right wing pro market politicians - two clubs you fit snugly into, so your compassion for the aborted foetus pales beside your championing of societal and economic inequality.
 
Last edited:

Skypeme

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2010
Messages
1,914
My point is that it's an almost exclusive Hindu practice. The Muslims majorities of Pakistan and Bangladesh don't practice female infanticide. For Hindus abortion is not murder ; see the Gita for their description of the atma or soul.
If we stay with India for a moment and have a quick look at this commentary on current legislation:

" The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (MTP)[1] Act, which prohibits abortion, was enacted with a view towards containing the size of the family. However, in some cases the desire for a small family may have outweighed the desire for a child of a specific gender, leading to abortions where the sex of the fetus was different from that desired by the family. The MTP Act stipulated that an abortion may lawfully be done in qualified circumstances. But the unscrupulous connived to misuse the law to have abortions conducted for the purpose of sex selection. ......

"Later, innovative technologies made sex selection easier, and without the regulations to control the use of such technologies, these technologies began to be misused for sex-selective abortions. These actions necessitated enactment of the Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1994 (PNDT)[2] in 1994. This act was amended in 2002 in an effort to close loopholes contained in the original act....

"Indian laws do not, under any circumstance, allow sex determination tests to be undertaken with the intent to terminate the life of a fetus developing in the mother’s womb, unless there are other absolute indications for termination of the pregnancy as specified in the MTP Act of 1971. Any act causing the termination of the pregnancy of a normal fetus would amount to feticide, and in addition to rendering the physician criminal liable, is considered professional misconduct on his part, leading to his penal erasure.
...."

No mention, nor is it implied, of sex-selective abortion as a specific practice of the Hindu faith, unless they are included among the "unscrupulous".
 

former wesleyan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
25,605
If we stay with India for a moment and have a quick look at this commentary on current legislation:

" The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (MTP)[1] Act, which prohibits abortion, was enacted with a view towards containing the size of the family. However, in some cases the desire for a small family may have outweighed the desire for a child of a specific gender, leading to abortions where the sex of the fetus was different from that desired by the family. The MTP Act stipulated that an abortion may lawfully be done in qualified circumstances. But the unscrupulous connived to misuse the law to have abortions conducted for the purpose of sex selection. ......

"Later, innovative technologies made sex selection easier, and without the regulations to control the use of such technologies, these technologies began to be misused for sex-selective abortions. These actions necessitated enactment of the Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1994 (PNDT)[2] in 1994. This act was amended in 2002 in an effort to close loopholes contained in the original act....

"Indian laws do not, under any circumstance, allow sex determination tests to be undertaken with the intent to terminate the life of a fetus developing in the mother’s womb, unless there are other absolute indications for termination of the pregnancy as specified in the MTP Act of 1971. Any act causing the termination of the pregnancy of a normal fetus would amount to feticide, and in addition to rendering the physician criminal liable, is considered professional misconduct on his part, leading to his penal erasure.
...."

No mention, nor is it implied, of sex-selective abortion as a specific practice of the Hindu faith, unless they are included among the "unscrupulous".
It's pointless putting up modern secular legislation against a practice which has been going on since scanners could determine the sex of the foetus and before that when females were simply either killed or abandoned and left to die. And yes, it is probably unscrupulous to justify a monetary decision with religious sanction, but it remains a fact that abortion doesn't carry the same opprobrium in Hinduism as it does in Islam or Christianity.
 

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
33,397
I'm not in favour of any abortion but it exists and we have to deal with it, which means making it available for women who wish to avail of it. I'm opposed to restrictions on women's right to choose abortion. I am in favour of funding for support and counselling services for women to help them make an informed choice on the issue and to negate some of the issues that can arise in that decision making process such as pressure and coercion.

Those services need proper funding, funding which many on the anti choice side campaign against and the services are also constantly under pressure from right wing pro market politicians - two clubs you fit snugly into, so your compassion for the aborted foetus pales beside your championing of societal and economic inequality.
So you are in favour of sex selective abortion. Glad that's cleared up. The rest of your post is the usual leftie boilerplate nonsense. Neither I nor anyone I know is "championing" inequality.
 

Skypeme

Well-known member
Joined
May 19, 2010
Messages
1,914
It's pointless putting up modern secular legislation against a practice which has been going on since scanners could determine the sex of the foetus and before that when females were simply either killed or abandoned and left to die. And yes, it is probably unscrupulous to justify a monetary decision with religious sanction, but it remains a fact that abortion doesn't carry the same opprobrium in Hinduism as it does in Islam or Christianity.
An interesting point raised in your final comment, analogous perhaps in the current clamor among certain political classes to repeal the Eight Amendment.

Perhaps the Eight should stay. "Nulla poena sine lege" (No penalty without a law).
 

Equinox

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 4, 2011
Messages
2,980
I'm not in favour of any abortion but it exists and we have to deal with it, which means making it available for women who wish to avail of it. I'm opposed to restrictions on women's right to choose abortion. I am in favour of funding for support and counselling services for women to help them make an informed choice on the issue and to negate some of the issues that can arise in that decision making process such as pressure and coercion.

Those services need proper funding, funding which many on the anti choice side campaign against and the services are also constantly under pressure from right wing pro market politicians - two clubs you fit snugly into, so your compassion for the aborted foetus pales beside your championing of societal and economic inequality.

So that's a ......yes..? (By way of an obtuse, say's nothing, pre-prepared standard response PR statement from Probort Inc.)
 

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
33,397
So that's a ......yes..? (By way of an obtuse, say's nothing, pre-prepared standard response PR statement from Probort Inc.)
You were expecting something else? If you think women should be allowed to have abortion on demand then you have to believe that they have the right to kill a baby for being a girl, or for having down syndrome or maybe in the future for being gay if a marker for gayness is discovered. BY acknowledging the right of a woman to so do you are engaging in eugenics and infanticide selling out on the very groups the proborts would claim to fight for.
 

Watcher2

Well-known member
Joined
May 2, 2010
Messages
34,559
So is down syndrome and gay Ok? Ask the 'intello' Petajack. Why is that objectionable individual still a mod?




The world will be a dull barren 'lifeless' wilderness, full of hags, witches, and the other Accountants, Lawyers, Entrepreneurs 'n' Politicians without you honey.
Your question would lead one to deduce that you believe homosexuality to be a disease or malformity. Is that the case? Otherwise, how would one detect "gay" in the womb?
 

Hitchcock

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
8,779
So you are in favour of sex selective abortion. Glad that's cleared up. The rest of your post is the usual leftie boilerplate nonsense. Neither I nor anyone I know is "championing" inequality.
What an insightful and detailed response.

Neither I nor anyone I know is "championing" inequality.
The economics you laud and advocate by necessity produces inequality.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top