• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Abortion Referendum

Vixen said:
Hello? It was me who gave you the figure of 182K in the first place.

I then described the abortion rate in the UK as nearly a quarter of a million.

Some clever dick said it was 'nearer one-fifth of a million'. I explained that that is not a ready figure of speech for most people. He said there was a big difference between one fifth and one quarter and I merely pointed out there was not.

If I take £20 and divide it amongst five, you each get £4. Amongst four £5.

Does that put it into perspective for you?

Did you fail to see the figure I quoted, of 182K?

So, what is the problem?
Click to expand...

I had a job making about $182k.

I moved to a different city that I didn't really like to take a job making about $250k.

It was a substantial difference. Even if you convert it to pounds.
 
Vixen said:
Hello? It was me who gave you the figure of 182K in the first place.

I then described the abortion rate in the UK as nearly a quarter of a million.

Some clever dick said it was 'nearer one-fifth of a million'. I explained that that is not a ready figure of speech for most people. He said there was a big difference between one fifth and one quarter and I merely pointed out there was not.

If I take £20 and divide it amongst five, you each get £4. Amongst four £5.

Does that put it into perspective for you?

Did you fail to see the figure I quoted, of 182K?

So, what is the problem?
Click to expand...
The problem is that either (1) your maths suck and you're not an accountant, or (2) you're being liberal with the truth, as always. I don't think there's a single word true of your sentence. I'll colour code it:

Vixen said:
The statistics for the UK says there were 182K abortions last year (nearly a quarter of a million!) of which two were of women who had had eight previous abortions.
Click to expand...
Last year's statistics are not yet published, the most recent on the UK government's site are from 2016.

The UK government keeps separate statistics for England and Wales, not the whole UK.

The 2016 statistics for England and Wales are 190,406 abortions, not 182K.

<citation required>
 
Last edited:
ddt said:
The problem is that either (1) your maths suck and you're not an account, or (2) you're being liberal with the truth, as always. I don't think there's a single word true of your sentence. I'll colour code it:


Last year's statistics are not yet published, the most recent on the UK government's site are from 2016.

The UK government keeps separate statistics for England and Wales, not the whole UK.

The 2016 statistics for England and Wales are 190,406 abortions, not 182K.

<citation required>
Click to expand...

I hate color coding and yet I like that post. So confused.
 
ddt said:
The problem is that either (1) your maths suck and you're not an accountant, or (2) you're being liberal with the truth, as always. I don't think there's a single word true of your sentence. I'll colour code it:


Last year's statistics are not yet published, the most recent on the UK government's site are from 2016.

The UK government keeps separate statistics for England and Wales, not the whole UK.

The 2016 statistics for England and Wales are 190,406 abortions, not 182K.

<citation required>
Click to expand...



Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, the 182K were not my words, but a direct citation. Doh!
 
Vixen said:
As I understand it, the Netherlands (or was it Belgium?) also has euthanasia centres where people can go to 'die with dignity'.

The statistics for the UK says there were 182K abortions last year (nearly a quarter of a million!) of which two were of women who had had eight previous abortions. These can't all be 'rape victims' or 'women forced to carry babies with severe congenital conditions'.


There is a silent holocaust going on here.
Click to expand...

I don't see a citation here.
 
Vixen said:
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, the 182K were not my words, but a direct citation. Doh!
Click to expand...
Do you know what 'citation' means?
A "citation" is the way you tell your readers that certain material in your work came from another source. It also gives your readers the information necessary to find that source again, including:
  • information about the author
  • the title of the work
  • the name and location of the company that published your copy of the source
  • the date your copy was published
  • the page numbers of the material you are borrowing
Click to expand...
(Quoted from here)
 
Vixen said:
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, the 182K were not my words, but a direct citation. Doh!
Click to expand...

erwinl said:
I don't see a citation here.
Click to expand...
Neither do I.

Darat said:
Perhaps you meant direct quotation as you didn't provide any citation?
Click to expand...
What part would be quoted? I don't see quotation marks or anything else that makes clear what is quoted. The sentence structure does not really allow for a direct quote either.

Here's some more numbers. NHS Scotland reports that the number of abortions in Scotland in 2017 was 12,212, and in 2016 it was 12,063. (They can't do math either because the report on 2017 says "This was 106 more terminations than reported in 2016"). We can ignore NI as the law is so restricted there that the number of abortions is negligible; wiki mentions 394 abortions in a 5-year period.

Your number can only be true if there was, in England and Wales, a drop of ca. 20,000 in the number of abortions between 2016 and 2017. If you turn to pages 25/26 of the afore linked-to Dept. of Health report, you see that the number of abortions in E&W has been quite stable over the years, and such a big drop is simply not realistic. And those numbers simply haven't been reported yet, AFAICS. Note the report on 2016 is dated June 2017. :rolleyes:

So provide that actual citation, or we must conclude that you pulled the number from your ass. Which would really be par for the course.
 
catsmate said:
I see you've avoiding answering the question. Again.
Click to expand...
I'll help as it is in risk of being snowed under under the discussion of primary school math skills.

Thor 2 said:
Now we have the maths problem sorted :), I would like to ask Vixen if he/she has an opinion regarding the moment the separate life in the woman body, becomes a person and should be given equal right to life as the mother?

Just as a prompt here 3 days after conception the life is called a blastocyst and is composed of about 150 cells typically. To get this into perspective the brain of a fly has about 1000 cells. To help you with the maths the blastocyst is 15% the size of a fly's brain.
Click to expand...

Vixen said:
It doesn't really matter what it's called does it?
Click to expand...

The highlighted part was the crux of the question. Why don't you answer that?
 
Last edited:
ddt said:
I'll help as it is in risk of being snowed under under the discussion of primary school math skills.

The highlighted part was the crux of the question. Why don't you answer that?
Click to expand...
There does seem to be a reluctance to answer the hard ones. I wonder why?
 
Vixen said:
Hello? It was me who gave you the figure of 182K in the first place.

I then described the abortion rate in the UK as nearly a quarter of a million.

Some clever dick said it was 'nearer one-fifth of a million'. I explained that that is not a ready figure of speech for most people. He said there was a big difference between one fifth and one quarter and I merely pointed out there was not.

If I take £20 and divide it amongst five, you each get £4. Amongst four £5.

Does that put it into perspective for you?

Did you fail to see the figure I quoted, of 182K?

So, what is the problem?
Click to expand...
Oh- no problem! In fact I withdraw my suggestion that you stop attempting to defend your math. Instead I urge you to continue! The original post, and your defense of it, are so silly, irrelevant, misleading, and so obvious an intentional distortion of the actual arithmetic that they only further and further erode the veracity of your overall argument here and the trustworthiness of your logic. Please continue.
 
Vixen said:
It doesn't really matter what it's called does it?
Click to expand...

True- what matters is: what it is. And when it is human enough to be considered a person. In fact that was the question asked of you. One you have failed to answer.
 
Last edited:
ddt said:
Neither do I.


What part would be quoted? I don't see quotation marks or anything else that makes clear what is quoted. The sentence structure does not really allow for a direct quote either.

Here's some more numbers. NHS Scotland reports that the number of abortions in Scotland in 2017 was 12,212, and in 2016 it was 12,063. (They can't do math either because the report on 2017 says "This was 106 more terminations than reported in 2016"). We can ignore NI as the law is so restricted there that the number of abortions is negligible; wiki mentions 394 abortions in a 5-year period.

Your number can only be true if there was, in England and Wales, a drop of ca. 20,000 in the number of abortions between 2016 and 2017. If you turn to pages 25/26 of the afore linked-to Dept. of Health report, you see that the number of abortions in E&W has been quite stable over the years, and such a big drop is simply not realistic. And those numbers simply haven't been reported yet, AFAICS. Note the report on 2016 is dated June 2017. :rolleyes:

So provide that actual citation, or we must conclude that you pulled the number from your ass. Which would really be par for the course.
Click to expand...


I can't remember where I got it (but it would have been a reputable site). However, here are some similar figures:

In 2016 according to Department of Health statistics the total number of abortions on residents of England and Wales was 185,596. This number excludes the 4,810 abortions performed on non-residents in the UK. Therefore the total number of abortions performed in England and Wales was 190,406.
Click to expand...
http://abort67.co.uk/facts/uk_abortion_statistics


So now we'll have a long thread about how I was 4K out.
 
Giordano said:
True- what matters is: what it is. And when it is human enough to be considered a person. In fact that was the question asked of you. One you have failed to answer.
Click to expand...

Let's use Lothian's definition - which he claims is the accurate objectively scientific one - an unborn foetus is...'a parasite'.

This proves conclusively it is a discrete independent being in its own right, albeit having a symbiotic relationship with its host, in this case, its mother.
 
ddt said:
The problem is that either (1) your maths suck and you're not an accountant, or (2) you're being liberal with the truth, as always. I don't think there's a single word true of your sentence. I'll colour code it:


Last year's statistics are not yet published, the most recent on the UK government's site are from 2016.

The UK government keeps separate statistics for England and Wales, not the whole UK.

The 2016 statistics for England and Wales are 190,406 abortions, not 182K.

<citation required>
Click to expand...

Do the maths, ddt. Lets assume the figures for 2017 not yet released are at least the same (although probably more, as austerity kicks in).

Then,

190K + 190K = 380K


This is a massacre.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom