Video: Discussion On Reproductive Rights

July 7, 2022

Rakaya Simmons, Tierrai Tull, and Lorae Santucci will be joining Bernews at 6.00pm this evening [July 7] to discuss reproductive rights, abortion access and related matters, with the topic having been in the U.S. and international headlines since the U.S. Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v Wade; and the discussion also aimed at ‘starting a conversation about women’s rights in Bermuda.’

Live discussion on reproductive rights

Update: Providing background: “Tierrai Tull is a rising junior at the University of Toronto and University College London, studying international relations, political science and public policy. She founded Bermuda Youth Connect, which aims to increase civic awareness among young Bermudians and has unique goals in advancing the rights of Black Womxn across the globe. Tierrai is currently working as a junior policy analyst with the ministry of health.

“Rakaya Simmons is a law graduate completing her LPC online with the University of Law. She has intentions of becoming a qualified solicitor in Bermuda, but her focus is currently on Corporate Services and Administration. Her passions include Education, Youth and Advocacy. One of her long-term goals is to influence what public education looks like in Bermuda.

“Kevina Lorae is a holistic sex educator and life coach specializing in intimacy, self-love, and relationships. She is currently enrolled in an accredited two-year Holistic Sex Education Program that will allow her to grow as an educator and assist marginalized groups that often struggle to access resources. As a public figure and cohost of a successful podcast, she uses her platform to advocate for comprehensive sex education, women’s rights,& LGBTQIA+ support. Lorae’s primary objective is to provide sex education that encourages our community to make more informed decisions, practice tolerance, and protect our youth.”

The video will be live streamed below, as well as on Bernews YouTube, Twitter and Facebook pages.

Read More About

Category: All, News, Videos

Comments (76)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Joe Bloggs says:

    ‘starting a conversation about women’s rights in Bermuda.’

    As long as the woman in issue is heterosexual, no problem.

    As we all know, the PLP government has passed a law to make gay people (men and women) second class citizens.

    And for those who want to argue “separate but equal” I would refer you to the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Brown v. The Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas

  2. Question says:

    It was only last week the PLP refused to discuss a bill which would ensure fairness and equality. The absolute last thing the PLP want is for everyone to be treated equally.

  3. Life says:

    Less than 1% of abortions are because of rape or incest. Less than 1% are to ‘save the life of the mother’. Why are the exceptions always brought up to defend abortion?

    The tagline about “a woman’s body” is old and illogical. No doubt, women bear tremendous responsibility to carry children and for that reason we should support them in every way possible. But you don’t do that by killing the human being inside of them. How about we care about unborn little women too?

    This is not about a woman’s body- there’s another body involved! The body of a vunerable innocent baby. From the moment of conception there is a distinctly unique human being involved. Science and embryology support these facts. It is not a ‘clump of cells’. The only difference between you and I and this growing life is:

    1- size
    2- location
    3-level of development
    4- level of dependency

    When have any of those been a justifiable reason to have an abortion? The truth is, the VAST majority of abortions are done out of ‘convenience’.

    • sandgrownan says:

      The Pro-life crowd are ignorant of biology and of fetal development, they are ignorant about miscarriages and ignorant about the circumstances around late term abortions. They advocate for bills that outlaw abortion before a woman might even know she is pregnant in the first place. Some have even written bills that would require the reimplantation of an ectopic fetus, which makes no sense and is biologically impossible. And when these facts are pointed out to them, they do not care, because they really care nothing for the fetus or the mother beyond their sick obsession to control the life choices of women. They do not put any money towards providing for day care, education, adoption, or foster care, either. These people even oppose college assistance tuition programs. They are perfectly fine with health insurance companies using pre-existing conditions to deny health care, including pregnancy.

      They want to force women to birth fetuses that are not even viable outside the womb. They care nothing if a child is born only to suffer and die. They base all this solely on their own sick religious beliefs and are obsessed with forcing everyone else to hold these same religious beliefs (while at the same time hypocritically aghast at Sharia Law). And I am old enough to remember when lunatics who killed abortion doctors and bombed abortion clinics were held up as heroes to the “pro-life” movement.

      This is a movement that deserves, almost more than any other, to be wiped from the face of the earth.

      Ask me to show you a person with no redeeming qualities whatsoever, who is repugnant, sadistic, twisted, creepily obsessed with other people’s sex lives and genitalia, and I’ll show you a “pro-lifer”.

      • Question says:

        It’s nothing to do with religion. Abortion should be, and is, available early in a pregnancy. But aborting a baby at 7 or 8 months is abhorrent.

        • Sandgrownan says:

          On every circumstance?

          • Dave says:

            Let it grow that long after a one night stand is grotesque and it is no right for murder.

            • sandgrownan says:

              Ah….so you want to punish women? That’s it isn’t it? It’s about the cruelty, the punishment.

              What happened to you, you get rejected too many times at the school dance?

              • Dave says:

                Nobody is punishing women.

                • sandgrownan says:

                  There is little evidence in any of the anti-abortion states, that the lives of women and children are seen as “sacred” or even minimally valued. If they were, states would not allow pregnant women and babies to die prematurely from preventable causes. They would be investing resources to ensure that every child survives and thrives.

                  o claim that anti-abortion legislation is about children is deceitful. “Pro-life” is a magic trick that wraps disdain and revulsion for women’s bodies and lives inside a shiny silver box with pink and blue ribbon. Forced-birth legislation fails to protect children at all, while punishing women who abort — or even miscarry. But punishment is precisely the point, isn’t it? Because such legislation has never been about the children.

                  It’s misogyny. Plain and simple.

                • saud says:

                  Do you know what an ectopic pregnancy is?

                  Do you know what a uterus is?

                  take a seat, you’re embarrassing yourself.

                  • Life says:

                    Do YOU know that treating ectopic pregnancies is still LEGAL even in states where abortion is banned? It’s not considered an abortion, so stop believing the nonsense on social media or wherever else you get your misinformation.

                    • saud says:


                      Your posts are garbage.
                      you hate women.
                      You want control over people you don’t know.
                      You’re worthless, and it’s why most here are ignoring you.
                      Go back to the dark ages where you belong.

            • Joe Bloggs says:

              Murder is the intentional killing of a human being. On what basis do you claim that a foetus is a human being and at what stage do you claim a foetus becomes a human being?

              • Life says:

                On what basis do I consider a foetus a human being? On the basis of SCIENCE and embryology which fully acknowledge these facts. Even a pro choice atheist acknowledges this, Princeton Professort Peter Singer: “THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT FROM THE FIRST MOMENTS OF ITS EXISTNCE, AN EMBRYO CONCEIVED FROM HUMAN SPERM AND EGGS IS A HUMAN BEING”

                Those are the words of an atheist and someone who is pro choice. There is no legitimate debate we’re talking about human beings. The only debate is whether they have value or not. Amazingly, the position you seem to be supporting is that they don’t have value. You’re deciding which human beings have a right to live and which don’t. Sounds horribly similar to Nazi Germany. They said: “I know it looks human, but it’s really just a Jew, so we can kill it.” Or the slave owners: “yeah they look human, but it’s a black person and it’s my property. I can do with it what I want.”

                Have you numbed your conscience so much that you’re incapable of seeing that!? Have a conscience and find better ways to deal with unexpected pregnancies that don’t involve the killing of unborn babies.

                • Joe Bloggs says:

                  “Have you numbed your conscience so much that you’re incapable of seeing that!?”

                  No, but I do follow mainstream scientific opinion rather than people who give evidence for the anti-abortion establishment in the United States.

                  I provided links to Peter Singer’s evidence in another post. He gives evidence to support the theory you espouse but which is rejected by the majority of the medical community.

                  • Life says:

                    This only shows science can be polluted by politics. If an embryo isn’t human, what is it? It IS human from the moment of conception and this can be verified in a laboratory. To say otherwise is just to avoid the ethical dilemma pro choices face for killing it.

                    • saud says:

                      You’re hilarious.
                      You refuse to debate with anyone, you’re just pushing your sick agenda.
                      Mind your business, stay out of other peoples lives…no one likes you.

      • Life says:

        You seem to put all ‘pro life’ persons in the extremist category. And your claims is demonstrably false. There are more pro life facilities to help women with free healthcare than any other organization! BY FAR- this is a FACT. Planned parenthood likes to say they support women but nearly all they do is just provide abortions. There’s very little ‘healthcare’ going on at all. They’re a business and they’re in the business of killing babies for profit. Funny how an organization founded by a racist who wanted to kill black babies to keep their population down is trying to rebrand as something positive for women.

        There are over 3,000 pro life pregnancy centers across the US which help women who find themselves in hardships. So miss me with this ‘pro lifers don’t care about women’ nonsense. Every time that is said, it demonstrates the ignorance of the reality on the ground. There are no groups who do more for women than pro lifers.

        And while you want to namecall and be emotional in your argument, consider this: a 2015 California law tried to impose an obligation on pregnancy help centers to force them to display where women can get free or cheap abortions. This was eventually struck down as unconstitutional but how outrageous is that? One of the main complaints from abortion advocates is that nobody helps women YET when you have pregnancy centers helping women, they’re trying to encourage women seeking HELP with their pregnancy to abort! THAT is repugnant and horrendous.

        And while we’re on the topic of science, SCIENCE has supported the pro life position. For years abortion advocates have tried to say ‘it’s not human, it’s just a clump of cells’. But only those brainwashed by planned parenthood make such arguments now. Science now tells us that from the moment of conception it is a unique human life with a unique DNA profile and everything it will ever have in life. The only difference between a ‘fetus’ (Latin for baby, i should point out- but abortion advocates love that word because it dehumanizes those they wish to kill) and you and i is their size, location, level of development and level of dependency. When are we ever allowed to kill someone for any of those reasons? We’re not. The pro abortion position is logical inconsistent

        The truth is this is a complex and emotional issue, and i appreciate that. I hate that women are devalued or abandoned by men to care for their children. But the solution shouldn’t be to kill a baby. And no- it’s not a women’s right because it’s not just their body: there’s another human body involved!
        Other than emotional arguments, there are no logical arguments that stand up to allow for abortion.

        We live in a time of social justice and a push for rights…what about the right to life of the unborn? What hypocrisy and what an indictment on our society that we can’t see there are better ways to deal with the hardships of unexpected pregnancies.

        • sandgrownan says:

          And there you have it, the strawman of Planned Parenthood, trotted out as a tired old argument like a donkey heading to the knackers yard.

          ProLife are extremist scum. If there was any doubt before, they have revealed themselves to be 100% pro-death and pro-forced-birth. They only want to punish loose women and control women’s bodies. They do not give two cents for the child after it is born, they refuse to give pregnant women health care, they refuse to give single mothers any help whatsoever, they are anti-mask and care nothing if they infect or kill others through their own selfishness and stupidity. They oppose health care for transgender and other LGBTQ people, again showing their innate hypocrisy. They oppose paid maternity leave. They care nothing about school mass shootings. They are perfectly fine with dead children in concentration camps and they care nothing about women who have been forcibly sterilized in these camps. They are monsters so obsessed with taking away any woman’s right to choose they have campaigned for employers to remove reproductive health care from mandatory employee health plans.

          • Life says:

            Yet another ill-informed and purely emotional response. You’re portraying all pro lifers as the caricature you want them to be. It’s not helpful to discussion to take the extremist and try to say that’s everyone. It’s definitely not. Again, do research- there are countless centers to help pregnant women both now and throughout the life of their children. Could more be done legislatively? No doubt. But that’s not an argument that supports abortion.

            Your pro abortion argument is unsustainable. Actually I’m not even sure you’ve given a cogent argument quite honestly. It’s all based on emotion, accusations, or highlighting other problems.

            I know of many organizations which help women and children throughout their lifetime. But the accusation you make at best only highlights more can be done to inform and help. It’s not an argument to support the right to abortion.

            • sandgrownan says:

              This is what is wrong with the pro-lifers. They can’t fathom that no-one is pro-abortion. They are pro-choice. That means not that they think abortion is a good thing, but that they believe that the decision whether or not to bear a child should be made in private between a woman and her doctor—and not by the government. If a woman needs an abortion, she’s in a pretty tough place anyway.

              And we haven’t even got to how lack of reproductive healthcare affects minorities and the poor the most. You just know that if a congressman’s daughter gets knocked up in the back of car, she’s going to have access to termination.

            • sandgrownan says:

              Conservatives have successfully deployed the term “pro-life” to cloak the underlying misogyny of anti-abortion legislation. We hear a great deal about their care for the fetus, but evidence shows that once a child is born, conservatives lose interest. States passing anti-abortion legislation have among the highest infant mortality rates in the country. In 2017, Alabama’s infant mortality rate was 7.4 infant deaths per 1,000 live births, twice that of Massachusetts, which had the fewest deaths.

              • aceboy says:

                Wow. Just wow. You no doubt consider yourself a tolerant person. Right up until anyone disagrees with you and then you have no problem painting entire segments of any population with labels.

                • Sandgrownan says:

                  Not at all, I loathe conservatives. No one honestly looks at the planet and thinks “you know what earth needs, is more conservatives”.

                • Question says:

                  Yep. Anyone who disagrees with him, he stamps around and calls them names.

      • Life says:

        No sir, you are ignorant of biology and science.

        World famous Anatomist Keith Moore wrote in his Embryology textbook, “The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology” “Human development begins at fertilisation…this highly specialised totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”

        Want to hear from an atheist to further reinforce this isn’t a religious argument? Princeton Professor Peter Singer in his “Practical Ethics” book acknowledges: “Whether a being is a member of a given species is something that can be determined scientifically, by an examination of the nature of the chromosomes in the cells of living organisms. In this sense, THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT FROM THE FIRST MOMENTS OF ITS EXISTENCE, AN EMBRYO CONCEIVED FROM HUMAN SPERM AND EGGS IS A HUMAN BEING.”

    • WOMAN says:

      In the US, the #1 cause of death for pregnant women is MURDER at the hands of the baby daddy. I would argue abortion saves women’s lives a lot more than you would realise just because of that.

      I would always choose to protect and preserve the life of the woman that is alive and currently existing than some foetus.

      Look around Bermuda now. How much better would Bermuda be without these useless hooligans wondering around? Much. Too bad they weren’t aborted.

      Having said all that, I respect your opinion. Have a good evening.

      • Dave says:

        So if men are the number killer of pregnant women I’m sure you will agree that women are the number one killer of infants?

        • WOMAN says:

          Hey Dave, the leading cause of death for infants is actually birth defects. Have a great day!

          • Life says:

            If we use the US as an example: about 4,000 babies die from birth defects each year while over 600,000 babies are aborted each year.

          • Life says:

            Using the US as an example: about 4,000 babies die from birth defects each year while well over 600,000 babies are aborted each year. Abortion ends the life of an unborn human being.

        • tucker says:

          You sound like some dumba$$ed bigoted yankee…ignorant AF.

        • CHRIS says:

          why don’t you stop having sex. that will stop alot of unwanted pregnancies.

    • Joe Bloggs says:

      “But you don’t do that by killing the human being inside of them”

      At what point do you say a foetus becomes a “human being” please?

      Your argument seems to be based on something other than legal or medical opinion.

      • Life says:

        No sir. My argument is based on science. World famous Anatomist Keith Moore wrote in his Embryology textbook, “The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology” “Human development begins at fertilisation…this highly specialised totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual.”

        Want to hear from an atheist to further reinforce this isn’t a religious argument? Princeton Professor Peter Singer in his “Practical Ethics” book acknowledges: “Whether a being is a member of a given species is something that can be determined scientifically, by an examination of the nature of the chromosomes in the cells of living organisms. In this sense, THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT FROM THE FIRST MOMENTS OF ITS EXISTENCE, AN EMBRYO CONCEIVED FROM HUMAN SPERM AND EGGS IS A HUMAN BEING.”

        The pro choice supporters need to catch up with the science on this one. Because the ‘clump of cells’ or ‘it’s not human’ arguments are not only out of touch with science and reality, but they’re embarrassing. It seems the real issue isn’t whether the foetus is human; it’s whether it has value or not.

        Are we seriously, in 2022, debating that some humans are valuable while others aren’t? Are we deciding that some humans have the right to life and others don’t? We saw that argument play out in Nazi Germany. We saw that argument made by slave owners. I know that comparison will trigger many pro choice people but this is the logic you’re following. “it’s not a human being!” (even though science confirms IT IS) or “it’s human but I have the right to kill it.”

        Please tell me at one point are we allowed to kill humans because of their size, location, level of development, or level of dependency.

        • Joe Bloggs says:


          “Are we seriously, in 2022, debating that some humans are valuable while others aren’t?”

          You are not having that debate with me. I am all for equality. See

          “Please tell me at one point are we allowed to kill humans …”

          At no point. But you seem to be asserting that a foetus is a human being and that is contrary to accepted medical opinion and the legal definition of a human being

          • Life says:

            Joe Bloggs: Maybe you have misunderstood. The link you posted only further demonstrates that even leading abortion / pro choice advocates admit that abortion kills a human being! So why do you keep questioning this? There are several quotes on that site which confirm this.

            I’m confused. You’re questioning whether they’re human beings, science confirms this, i posted 2 highly respected individuals in the field of anatomy and embryology, you posted a link which has even more sources confirming the same thing…so what point were you trying to make?

            It seems like you just further made my point for me. Science confirms they’re human from the moment of conception.

        • saud says:

          “Are we seriously, in 2022, debating that some humans are valuable while others aren’t? ”

          You’re in Bermuda…another world…100 years behind the rest of first world society…don’t act so surprised.

    • CHRIS says:

      so what? NO ONE’s BUSINESS why.

    • Joe Bloggs says:

      “This is not about a woman’s body- there’s another body involved! The body of a vunerable innocent baby. ”

      How do yo define “baby”? It does not seem to be based on accepted professional opinion.

      • Life says:

        You seem out of step with the definition of foetus. It is latin and simply means “an unborn human baby”. They’re the same thing- one is unborn and not as fully developed as the other. But as stated several times before, if you’re going to decide who is human and who has a right to life based on their size, level of development, level of dependency, or location, you’re on a slippery slope that leads to madness. Because no argument that uses those criteria as a justification for abortion can be sustained.

        • Joe Bloggs says:

          “You seem out of step with the definition of foetus”

          Or perhaps you are out of step with generally accepted medical opinion. Life does NOT begin at conception according to the majority of accepted medical opinion.

          The belief that life begins at conception is a religious view held by some, but not all people.

          • Life says:

            Patently false. It’s not a religious view, it’s a scientific one. If left to continue to develop unharmed, it will be born in 9 months time. So you’re saying it magically becomes human then? Or somewhere else along the development?

            But for you it’s not human because it’s not developed enough…? OK, let’s apply that concept to born humans and see how it plays out. People with developmental disabilities are less human when we use that logic. People with a disability like me, are less human. How disgusting and dangerous a mindset you have IF you are consistent with how you apply it. No doubt, you’re not consistent; you pick and choose when to grant someone humanity and when not to.

            This is typical for those pro choice doctors and scientists too but there are a huge number who accept the obvious science which can be tested in a lab: at the moment of conception, it is human. What is it if it’s not? The only reason you want to say it’s not human is to avoid the ethical dilemma that comes about when you kill it. That’s all your denial is…

    • Mike Hind says:

      All of that is moot.

      Because of bodily autonomy.

      NO ONE should be forced to use their body to keep someone else alive.

      We, as a society, agree with that – we don’t force organ donations, even after death – except for in this one instance.

      THAT is why it’s wrong. Period.

      • Question says:

        As long as abortion is allowed in the first trimester, no one is ‘being forced to use their body to keep someone else alive’.
        Once the pregnancy is late in its term, the idea of abortion becomes abhorrent.

        • Mike Hind says:

          None of that is true or has anything to do with what I said.

          You don’t get to tell people what they can do with their body.

          • question says:

            So long as abortion is allowed during the first trimester, no one is forcing anyone to do anything. If someone gets pregnant and then decides having a baby is inconvenient or undesirable, as long as they can have an abortion within the first 3 months, that addresses the point you’re making.

            By the way, I’m assuming you take the same position as respects vaccines…no compulsion on anyone regarding what they do with their body.

      • Life says:

        Bodily autonomy: the right to control what things can and can not be done to their own body.

        The issue with your argument is we’re not talking just about a woman’s body. We’re talking about another human being’s body. Science confirms from the moment of conception we’re dealing with another human being. The only difference is it’s location, size, level of development, and level of dependency. None of those are defensible reasons for killing a human being.

        I fully recognize the difficulties women go through in this world and the incredible stresses put on their bodies in pregnancy (and just the every day or monthly struggle of being a woman). But why are we so quick to overlook the tremendous privilege it is to carry and bring another human being into the world? It’s how virtually all of us got here.

        It’s how nature has designed life on this planet to come forth for human beings. In no way would i say women’s purpose is just to have and raise kids- women are SO much more than that whether society properly respects and acknowledges that or not, I DO! Women are intellectually capable of anything men are and so much more and I wish they were paid and respected that way. But the reality is also this: a woman’s uterus literally has but one purpose. So to treat a baby in the womb as if it’s a parasite or as if it’s somehow denying her bodily autonomy is extremely bizarre. Maybe this argument should be taken up with Mother Nature or the universe or God or whatever you believe in, or don’t.

        To complain about the nature of our very existence and to rebel against that also overlooks the tremendous privilege and responsibility it is. (A responsibility we should do everything possible to support a woman in).

        Your organ donor example is not at all analogous to the situation of a pregnancy. First off, in the vast majority of cases, if a woman is pregnant, she has consented to sex. (Less than 1% of abortions are due to rape) So if we can argue from the majority of cases and not handpick exceptions…Pregnancy is a possible outcome of sex. So in most cases we’re dealing with a choice to involve yourself in something that could result in pregnancy. Men cannot and should not be able to say: “well i consented to sex, but I didn’t intend a child to come about from our sex so I’m not going to pay child support.” No judge could accept that because he knew that even if protection was being used, pregnancy was a potential outcome. So I don’t acccept that a woman can have the power to say that either. I think part of the problem in our society is, we’ve become so casual with our sexual encounters that we don’t respect what it can result in and we therefore don’t want to accept the responsibility that comes with it. This is not all cases but it is many, many of them.

        Furthermore, unlike with your organ donor example which has been tried over and over in this debate… parents have a responsibility to their offspring that they don’t have to strangers. So again, your organ donor comparison fails. This is a simply reality and fact of nature. We can try to deny it or run away from it, but it’s just true.

        • Mike Hind says:

          This entire post is nothing more than false talking points from Right Wing Forced Birthers.
          It’s also completely religious. Life wasn’t “designed”.

          This entire post is truly vile.

          • Life says:

            Yet another emotional post with unsupported accusations and no substance to it whatsoever.

  4. WOMAN says:

    How the f**k do you pronounce “womxn”??

    Can’t even name us. Erasing the words WOMAN and WOMEN ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.

  5. Dave says:

    What rights in Bermuda do women not have? Just fly to New York as you have always done, to kill your children. Some of you probably have frequent flyer miles so you can do it for free, or make the father reluctantly pay for his child to be killed because he has no rights.

    • sandgrownan says:

      I bet you’re a second amendment douchebag as well aren’t you?

      • Dave says:

        You don’t get it, you never will. Killing children is illegal and the 2a should be revised.

        • sandgrownan says:

          There’s a good article in today’s Guardian.

          As the nutjobs criminalise doctors and women, there becomes a maternal care desert and a healthcare crisis. And as I said above, the nutjob states likely to do this, are the ones least likely to give a toss about about children, especially poor and black children, once they are born.

        • saud says:

          You don’t get it…you don’t even know what country you live in.
          Seriously, sit down and shut up, you have NOTHING to contribute.

          • Life says:

            Was unable to reply to your latest posts for some reason.

            Anyway you’re saying I’m worthless, I hate women and I’m speaking garbage? Is this the position of the pro choice side? Resort to horrible, hateful, intolerant posts when you have no ability to respond with logic? The immature personal attacks are unnecessary but unsurprising. You’ve contributed nothing of substance to the discussion. You know nothing about me to say such things but emotional attacks like yours are evidence of a lost argument. You’ve been unable to use logic and reason to respond to my posts which are based on science, embryology and reason. Not emotion and not religion.

            You seem like a very bitter and irrationally angry person. I sincerely hope you get help for that.

            • saud says:

              You seem bitter an irrational….which is why you’re pummeling us with your disgusting, bigoted agenda.

              Also, learn about nested quotes.

        • Joe Bloggs says:

          “Killing children is illegal”

          Yes, it is. But there is a fundamental difference between a child and a foetus.

          • jeff says:

            Oh you’re right. Fetus is the Latin word for unborn human baby. I know it’s helpful to your position to pretend it means something so different. I guess when you do that, you think it gives you a right to kill it. but that’s it. Using the word ‘foetus’ or ‘fetus’ doesn’t change the scientific fact that an unborn baby is a human being.

            • Joe Bloggs says:

              “Using the word ‘foetus’ or ‘fetus’ doesn’t change the scientific fact that an unborn baby is a human being.”

              But there is no “scientific fact” that an unborn baby is a human being.

              Indeed, calling a foetus a human being is contrary to generally accepted medical opinion and the legal definition of a life in being.

              • Life says:

                Please read the above quotes from Science textbooks of world renown anatomist. Study embryology. It IS a human being. Please explain what ‘it’ is if you choose to believe it’s not human. You’re out of step with science and ignoring facts to avoid reality.

                There is no magical process by which we move from not being human, to being human, as you seem to think. As noted in the embryology and science textbooks mentioned earlier, from the moment of conception it is a human being. To say otherwise is unscientific and ridiculous.

              • Life says:

                That’s more evidence of how you’re being brainwashed and desensitised to the horror of what’s actually happening. Abortion is the ending of the life of an unborn human being.

                Foetus literally means ‘small unborn baby’. You seem to think because they refer to it by a different name, that it is not human or that it’s something different. It’s not. I know it’s convenient for you to pretend that it is, but it’s not.

                We don’t speak in latin, so let’s use English. It’s an unborn baby; a human being. Embryology and science confirm this.

                • Joe Bloggs says:


                  I have read your references to “Science textbooks” and a Princeton Professor and I have sourced that evidence back to anti-abortion groups (see above).

                  You have a right to believe what you will. My only point is that you your view is NOT supported by the majority of the medical or legal communities.

                  • Life says:

                    You’re missing the point- the site you linked might be a pro life site. But it was quoting pro choice people!!! How are you not understanding this? Those people are the ones admitting that from the moment of conception, we’re dealing with a HUMAN BEING.

                    And that was what you kept questioning “is it even human?” You asked that several times and i was pointing out to you that people on your side of the argument acknowledge and agree we’re dealing with a human being.

                    That is established scientific fact. If you want to then feel you still have a right to kill it, that’s your position. But realize when you do that you are not being logically consistent with how you approach the subject.

                    For a person so concerned with ‘human rights’, you appear to be especially callous and hypocritical towards unborn humans. According to your camp, we can kill them because of their level of dependency or because of their location or because of their size or their level of development. In fact, you think it is our right! Unbelievable. What about the rights of those unborn human beings? You’ve decided they have no rights…so at what point do they possess rights?

                    And I will once again point out to you that those are disastrous criteria for determining who we can kill and who is ‘fully human’. It may have been a different situation, but this was the exact same argumentation you’re using that the Nazis and slave masters used! They decided they had the right to determine who was human and who wasn’t; who they could treat as property at their convenience as they pleased. You can have no argument with what they did because you’re following the same logic.

    • Joe Bloggs says:

      “kill your children … or make the father reluctantly pay for his child to be killed because he has no rights”

      Where do you live? Certainly not in Bermuda. This is a debate about Bermuda. Please keep out of it.

  6. bluenose says:

    There are several commenters on here who should apologise for their disgusting comments with regard to what a woman should be able to do with her own body.
    Just shameful.

    • Life says:

      Here we go again with another emotional argument. It’s not just a woman’s body. There is another human being involved. Killing that uniquely distinct and separate human life is what is being objected to.

      • Joe Bloggs says:

        “It’s not just a woman’s body. There is another human being involved”

        At what point do you say a foetus becomes a human being and on what evidence do you base your opinion please?

        • Question says:

          The availability of abortion during the first trimester deals with all the usual extreme cases where it’s obviously right to allow it – down syndrome, rape, incest, even birth control.
          However I genuinely don’t understand someone who wouldn’t regard aborting a pregnancy at, say, 8 months, as being abhorrent. At that point not reasonable. The concern at some point in the pregnancy has to transfer to the baby.

          • Sandgrownan says:

            I don’t think anyone does.

            The problem is that availability of first trimester abortions has gone with potential murder charges against medical professionals and the women concerned. That’s the problem.

            • Question says:

              In Bermuda and in the UK they are available in the first trimester And in many US states, depending on the electorate.
              The US seems polarised between two equally unreasonable extremes.

      • Sandgrownan says:

        There’s a pregnant woman just been fined for driving in the HOV lane on Texas. She is suing.