Why does Kjell Britain Ropstad all mouth?
It was really something wonderfully honest of padda Sector-leader in spe, Kjell Britain Ropstad, relax out on the fly after a long and exhausting day on Thursday. He should defend his big little victory; nemndbehandling of fosterreduksjon, which violates women's right to abortion on demand: "the main point is that if a woman can bear a child, she may carry forward two."
Day thereupon it was time for anger. It was "krøkkete" said, admitted he. But it was well strictly speaking no apology. He glapp out with what he thought, and probably says to their own. It sounded just as horrible patriarchal and conservative out in the open landscape.
It is this abortkampen was all about; the right of women to decide over their own health and body. In the 40 years of the law have been challenged through different strategies that all have had as a goal to limit the right and let the authorities and the politicians who Ropstad decide. The rationale is the same; the women are not able to take the ethically justifiable options.
When the law and the technology provides the opportunity for fosterreduksjon, it will lead to women aborterer healthy twins on an ongoing ties without some misgivings, we shall believe. Admittedly, there are vanishing few who have availed themselves of the offer by the St. Olavs Hospital. Eight in the last year. But think about.
Think about. You can build a whole policy on the think about.
There is here the battle stood for the Progress and Ropstad. An opportunity to make it more difficult for a handful of Norwegian women who take a choice of many thousands do each year. This can not take from women the right to abortion on demand, but they could send more to the committee.
And it was Erna Solberg who made them . She went on a historical innstramning to please a reluctant and vulnerable partner, and she argued for the Thursday night at the peculiar view by thinking aloud about how it would be to live with to remove a fetus and carry one forward.
It is a well-known argument. The application of guilt and shame are veiled as ethical considerations. But I didn't think it was politically legitimate other than in marginal environments. The problem with giving This such a victory, contrary to the will of the people, with modern medical care and with the intention, is that they have to resort to arguments that have nothing to do with politics. For KrF it is common and unproblematic. The entire party business idea is to interfere in people's lives. For the Right, it is at least on the paper the opposite.
Therefore, this innstramningen no opinion, other than to give KrF a victory at the expense of a handful of women's lives. The number of abortions in the Uk will not go down. The number of children who are born to mothers who have taken the abortion, will not go down. But it can lead to that women are deprived of self-determination, aborterer both, or several children in the place to keep one. There is an obvious alternative to having to explain themselves to a committee.
Both Ropstad and Solberg have shown that fosterreduksjon not permitted in our neighbouring countries. It can have several reasons, not least knowledge and resources. Funny enough, this is an argument that does not apply when Erna Solberg lets His get right of veto in the biotek policy and stop the egg donation is allowed in neighbouring countries.
It is little wonder that Solberg the last time, through his shameless courting of the christian democratic party has, seems to have been obsessed with women's reproduction. She urged the also in his nyttårstale that Norwegian women had to give birth to more children.
Then I have an advice to her. birth rates are associated with women's control over their own fertility. It comes to access to ultrasound and NIPT, to birth control and abortion. Modern women take it for granted that the decision is theirs. Although innstramningen when it comes to fosterreduksjon frames get, frames the very idea of and the intention behind self-determination, so also lovavdelingen assumed in its assessment.
It is emphasized by Kjell Britain Ropstads honest opinion: He thinks he knows better than women what they should be able to withstand. What they can do. And what is best for them.
The hands that the women like that half on the fleip, says that; we would like to see what the men had said about the state intervened in their reproduction on the just as invasive and authoritarian view. But this speilvendingen has something for themselves as long as women are deprived of self-determination with the rationale that it will prevent the unethical personal choice. It will as soon as someone rushing to and say that these restrictions put the state on all citizens ' lives. Unstoppable. People don't get a time, buy six bottles of wine on the taxfreen without that Parliament should mix.
But abortion is unique , because societies throughout history have had and still have as goal to control women's fertility. Abortloven was a milestone in the liberation struggle. Now is the battle on the adjacent areas, not least when it comes to biotechnology. The leader of the biotekrådet, Kristin Halvorsen, said the other to the newspaper Dagbladet that abortkampen as we know it will soon be over, because modern technology is pushing the limits of what medicine is able to detect, repair and change.
The know, of course, Kjell Britain Ropstad. He won an important first stage victory in a new struggle that among other things is about women's access to use of modern technology when it comes to fertility and pregnancy. He has laid down a veto against egg donation, as the Parliamentary majority finally said yes to in the last year.
With Erna's help the Progress on the amazing show come on the offensive in one of the next decades most important battles.
This is the Better make. Ever since the miracle of the virgin birth, they have been obsessed with women's reproduction. Normally should not this marginal vision had felt. But thanks to Erna's desire to be historical, is a backward and kvinnefiendtlig view of biotechnology has been Norwegian policy.
Yes, Siv Jensen can be happy to get to share the blame. We are talking about 30 tolls?