A record 3,000 late abortions in U.K. Calls to lower Abortion Deadline

And the Pro Choice crowd says their is no o elective late term abortions?

"Almost 3,000 were carried out on women who were at least 20 weeks pregnant, according to the latest annual figures in England and Wales, representing a 44 per cent increase in less than a decade.
advertisement
<A HREF="http://ads.telegraph.co.uk/event.ng/Type=click&FlightID=26248&AdID=32480&TargetID=6217&ASeg=&AMod=&Redirect=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?menuId=69&menuItemId=510&view=HEADLINESUMMARY&grid=F7&targetRule=10" target="_top"><IMG SRC="http://adc.telegraph.co.uk/s/skandia/cobrand/skandiasailing_300x250.gif" WIDTH=300 HEIGHT=250 BORDER=0></A>

The vast majority were for "lifestyle" reasons; less than a quarter were because of a risk that the child would be born handicapped."

You should edit your post, the Telegraph doesn't deserve free advertising.

The "pro choice crowd", meaning me too?

This is a disgrace, period. There should be more and better sex ed, and stricter rules.

Yes, I am pro choice, but with restrictions when it comes to abortion. You have to draw the line somewhere, and I like to see it lowered to 13 weeks instead of 20.

Westmanguy,

Lay off the damn abortion topics. The religious right in Canada has lost the argument. The irreconcilable difference between the pro-choice and pro-life crowd is the recognition of a fetus as a person. Posting articles about the abuse of abortion is irrelevant and immaterial.

if its a normal pregnancy why cant they have an adoption list for people to adopt these children? I only agree with abortion when its a pregnancy with medical issues or a rape victim. IF there are adoption parents out there willing to take this children I dont see any need for abortion.

Why would a woman carry a child she doesn't want to term and go through all the inconveniences that come with a pregnancy? Why can't she choose herself?

Although we tend to be on opposite sides of this debate when things get polarized, I think your idea is very reasonable.

The left wing church of narcissism and shallow thought is alive and well exemplified by it's ease of considering an argument won simply by labeling people, ie religious, american, bigot, etc.

PS Don't use the "if the shoe fits...." it'll just prove my point.

Is it possible this recent surge of pro-life in Canada and Europe is partly fuelled by the fear of demographic changes due to low birth rates?

Are you seriously suggesting that the reason people are pro life is because they want more "White babies" and decrease immigration?

Get your head out of your @$$. It has absolutely nothing to do with that.

Being Pro Life has nothing to do with religion, or anything of that matter, its the belief that human life begins at the conception of the egg and sprerm into the zygote. i.e. the zygote is the first stage of human life, and that all human life is equal, and deserves rights, freedoms, and protection under the law.

Pro Choice people are defined by the fact they do not believe human life begins at the zygote, and that not all stages of human life are equal.

I'll give you one thing, their is a surge of pro life views in Canada and Europe.

My person belief for the reason behind the surge in pro life views is, their is no more public debate on it, and very little rhetoric on the issue from the two camps (Life and Choice), since the issue has been dormant since the peek in the late 80s/early 90s.

So now our youth and next generation have formed a opinion that has a higher percentage of pro lifers, then the previous generation, because they make their judgment on it without the rhetoric of a national debate on the issue with the mud slinging of both sides.

Thats my take, oh and the fact today's youth were born in a time where it was completely legal, and weren't even ALIVE during the big Supreme Court battles, Roe. v. Wade, etc. thus they have never really had a huge personal effect by it, thus possibly sending them to more pro life views.

AND, Pro Life views and arguments have completely backed away from the religious side of it, most people (including me) have completely secular reasons behind their pro life views, so religion and/or religious intolerance are no longer a factor in the debate, as much as it used too.

The debate has turned into when life begins.

THats my take anyways....

Well, my children have rights and freedoms, but they cannot express themselves legally... They are NOT equal to adults... So, indeed, not all stages in human life are equal. Not by law, and not by common sense.

Yes I have to obey my parents, and am not fully equal until 18.

But ALL human beings and Canadian citizens are guaranteed basic rights under the Charter.

Life
Security of Persons
Pursuit of Happiness
etc.

Are you seriously suggesting that the reason people are pro life is because they want more "White babies" and decrease immigration?

Get your head out of your @$$. It has absolutely nothing to do with that.

Being Pro Life has nothing to do with religion, or anything of that matter, its the belief that human life begins at the conception of the egg and sprerm into the zygote. i.e. the zygote is the first stage of human life, and that all human life is equal, and deserves rights, freedoms, and protection under the law.

Pro Choice people are defined by the fact they do not believe human life begins at the zygote, and that not all stages of human life are equal.

I'm saying thats EXACTLY it. Look at where the base support for the pro life movement is, particularly in the U.S. Generally bible belt, red republican states where racism, while neatly swept under hte rug these past few decades, continues to flourish. The rise of the current right wing government there has only done more to further alot of their beliefs, such as the recent circumventing of laws regarding stem cell reserarch. Aborition is just another battle in their war.