Keep abortion out of Ireland

Festus · 28-03-2012 3:26pm

Wh1stler wrote: »

It is the same with pregnancy; conception brings the materials and tools together and birth is the end of the production line.

What happens between conception and birth?

Wh1stler wrote: »

It could even be argued that the 'person' doesn't exist until some time after birth as babies are not born with spacial awareness nor are they able to relate your anger to their bad behaviour, etc.

Person is an aribitrary term. You could argue that a person does not exist until they reach an age where they are allowed to vote. You could argue that people of a certain race are not persons if you wanted to.

Wh1stler wrote: »

Abortion is no more murder than switching off a life-support machine is.

Perhaps abortion should involve turning off the child's life support machine.

IT-Guy · 28-03-2012 5:45pm

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

I dont believe that human personhood begins at conception, and neither did most of the Scholastics, however to say that a baby in its mother's womb at a point where it could survive outside of it is just insane. Clearly once it kicks a soul is obviously there.

I dont consider abortion at an early stage murder though I do consider it to be gravely sinful. It should be legalized however in my opinion in Ireland in order to prevent late term abortions in the UK or Holland given how evil this country has become.

The argument as to whether a baby could survive or not outside of the womb is also irrelevant in the abortion debate. What's being discussed is the termination of a fetus, not at what point said fetus can survive without the protection of it's mother's womb. I fail to see the relevance of a fetus's ability to survive when that is not what's wanted by a woman seeking an abortion?

As for the existence of the soul that's also moot in the debate, I don't believe there is such a thing and it's proposed existence should have no bearing on the availability of abortion. I never quite understood this whole 'sin' concept, even though I was raised in a catholic household it never quite made sense to me. If something is wrong it's because it's hurtful either physically, mentally or emotionally to someone i.e. don't be a dick. No need for religion to explain that one! So 'gravely sinful' or any other gradations of sin I would think are also moot. And this country hasn't become evil, the existence or the wanting of abortion =/= evil. There are many evil things but to say a woman wanting an abortion is evil is guilt tripping, tantamount to psychological abuse at a difficult time for any woman seeking an abortion.

Peregrinus · 29-03-2012 2:16am

IT-Guy wrote: »

Yes it is deliberate but not an over simplification, simply a simplification, if you will. If I come across as absolutist then it's because I have a very definite position on abortion that comes from years of consideration and argument as well as experiences with women who had to go to the UK to get an abortion. I had a similar point of view to you Peregrinus in terms of believing the argument should be looked at from the fetus point of view. It doesn't have a point of view, it has no rights as it's not an individual.

I do believe that the fetus is part of the womans body . . .

It's beyond argument at this point . . .

I don't believe the fetus to be a person . . .

The fetus is quite clearly alive but is not a living individual. An individual is someone born and has all the rights of humanity conferred on them.

It’s “beyond argument” only in the sense that you refuse to make any arguments, or to address any arguments made against you. You’ll restate your beliefs again and again, but you never offer any argument to suggest that anyone else needs to share them, or that your beliefs have any greater validity than any else’s. Instead, you simply dismiss any questioning of or challenge to your beliefs as “irrelevant”.

But you can see, can’t you, that to someone who doesn’t already agree with everything you say this is not a very compelling case?

IT-Guy wrote: »

That to me is much more unsatisfactory than any form of argument/discourse which ultimately serves only to delay the introduction of abortion in Ireland.

I have to say that refusing to address or even acknowledge arguments against abortion is unlikely to be a quick route to the introduction of abortion to Ireland!

The case you are making essentially boils down to this: I believe X; therefore the law should be based on X. It is not necessary for me to demonstrate that X is true, or to persuade others to believe X along with me; it is enough that I believe it. The fact that others do not believe X is “irrelevant”.

This may be “satisfactory” in the sense that it is a clear moral position, proclaimed proudly and with integrity. But it’s deeply unsatisfactory in the sense that it’s plainly going to do nothing to change things in Ireland, since it’s only appeal is to people who already agree with you about X - and perhaps not even to all of them.

And, worse, it seems to me, it validates the legitimacy of an analogous position by someone who believes Y. If it’s OK for those who hold your view to demand that the law reflect it, then it is OK for those who hold the opposing view to make the same demand. And, since as far as I can see they are the majority, this legitimasation of this stance will favour them more than you. You have, in effect, conceded that they need not take account of your views in framing laws.

IT-Guy wrote: »

It's unfortunate you don't find rights based discourse very satisfactory, I've found it to be the only way to clear up and simplify a situation that should not be complicated. If a woman wants an abortion in Ireland, she should not be forced to travel abroad or have to endure any form of government induced/sponsored pressure to reconsider. It's patronizing to assume she already hasn't considered her options and decided what's best for her.

And the fact that believing and stating this is either useless or positively counterproductive in securing a woman’s effective right to choose isn’t something that you find at all unsatisfactory?

Wh1stler · 29-03-2012 2:43am

Festus wrote: »

What happens between conception and birth?

You need to ask?

<snip>

Festus wrote: »

Person is an aribitrary term. You could argue that a person does not exist until they reach an age where they are allowed to vote. You could argue that people of a certain race are not persons if you wanted to.

Shh! The grown-ups are talking.

Festus wrote: »

Perhaps abortion should involve turning off the child's life support machine.

:eek: You suggest that women who choose abortion should be killed?

Fester Festus.

HamletOrHecuba · 29-03-2012 12:07pm

IT-Guy wrote: »

The argument as to whether a baby could survive or not outside of the womb is also irrelevant in the abortion debate. What's being discussed is the termination of a fetus, not at what point said fetus can survive without the protection of it's mother's womb. I fail to see the relevance of a fetus's ability to survive when that is not what's wanted by a woman seeking an abortion?

It isnt though- leaving aside God and His claims on both mother and child- once it is clear that there are two living human entities involved not matter how much one is dependent on the other different criteria come into play. Would you support the right of parents to have the choice of switching off the life support on babies born pre-mature? If we are going to say that the child (and Im talking about the last trimester and not a fertilized egg) in the womb should be completely within its mother's power than why stop there? Why not make children completely within their parents power until they can speak or reason?

qrrgprgua · 29-03-2012 5:44pm

IT-Guy wrote: »

The argument as to whether a baby could survive or not outside of the womb is also irrelevant in the abortion debate. What's being discussed is the termination of a fetus, not at what point said fetus can survive without the protection of it's mother's womb. I fail to see the relevance of a fetus's ability to survive when that is not what's wanted by a woman seeking an abortion?.

The pro-choice camp don't have a clear view on what human life is. Their Moral borders shift from country to country.

We are not discussing a Fetus.. we are discussing a person... at 15 weeks I know I would have a daughter and she was named.. She was not a nameless fetus. She was a Person, our Child.

The problem with abortion or allowing abortion is that we remove value from humanity and replace the value of human life with subjective assessments.. Its well known that the UK government via NHS has a policy to help parents abort handicapped children as they are an economic drain. About 80% of pregnancies with downs syndrome in the UK are aborted. Society has removed the value of the human person and replaced it with economic policy.

Christians hold that Life begins at conception and that is should be respected from Conception. Its not our call to kill.

HamletOrHecuba · 29-03-2012 6:05pm

IT-Guy wrote: »

So 'gravely sinful' or any other gradations of sin I would think are also moot. And this country hasn't become evil, the existence or the wanting of abortion =/= evil. There are many evil things but to say a woman wanting an abortion is evil is guilt tripping, tantamount to psychological abuse at a difficult time for any woman seeking an abortion.

You do realize this is the Christian forum and you requesting that Christians in it refrain from using words like sin and evil because it might hurt non-Christian feelings? By any standards abortion in the third trimester is a genuinely cruel act, though one you seem to have no problems with at all.

Run_to_da_hills · 30-03-2012 11:41am

The shocking face of China’s brutal one child policy which many academics and pressure groups are now calling to be imposed in the west, Could it ever creep into Europe I wonder?

http://www.infowars.com/the-shocking-face-of-chinas-brutal-one-child-policy/

PDN · 30-03-2012 2:44pm

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The shocking face of China’s brutal one child policy which many academics and pressure groups are now calling to be imposed in the west, Could it ever creep into Europe I wonder?

http://www.infowars.com/the-shocking-face-of-chinas-brutal-one-child-policy/

So who are these 'many academics and pressure groups' who are calling for a one-child policy to be imposed in the West?

I looked up one of the links in the article, the one that refers to CNN, and it suggests that couples might choose to adopt a voluntary one-child policy for their own lives. So the article is telling a bare-faced lie in claiming that CNN supports the imposition of such a policy in the West.

prinz · 30-03-2012 3:12pm

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The shocking face of China’s brutal one child policy which many academics and pressure groups are now calling to be imposed in the west, Could it ever creep into Europe I wonder?

As an official policy doubtful as much of Europe is going into population decline. Some countries are offering bonuses to have more kids over towards the east, Russia, Slovakia IIRC, maybe some others.

As an unofficial policy in society it's more or less already in. The role of the child-rearing parent etc is being relegated. The place of children is slowly being pushed farther and farther away from mainstream society (see restaurants banning children under a certain age). Children are more and more being seen as an inconvenience that should be tolerated or dealt with and not much more.

On a side note it was with some incredulity I listened to a few friends of mine rant and rave about animals in a circus and the methods used to try and contain that elephant in Cork... (something I agree with, I don't think there's any need for animals in a circus environment anymore) when these friends also claim abortion (including late term) is a human right.

johnfás · 30-03-2012 3:21pm

J

prinz wrote: »

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The shocking face of China’s brutal one child policy which many academics and pressure groups are now calling to be imposed in the west, Could it ever creep into Europe I wonder?

As an official policy doubtful as much of Europe is going into population decline. Some countries are offering bonuses to have more kids over towards the east, Russia, Slovakia IIRC, maybe some others.

As an unofficial policy in society it's more or less already in. The role of the child-rearing parent etc is being relegated. The place of children is slowly being pushed farther and farther away from mainstream society (see restaurants banning children under a certain age). Children are more and more being seen as an inconvenience that should be tolerated or dealt with and not much more.

That's not really true though. Most businesses know that mums are an incredibly lucrative market and if you look around the place there is in fact an increase in restaurants, cafes, hotels etc trying to tap that market.

prinz · 30-03-2012 3:38pm

johnfás wrote: »

J
That's not really true though. Most businesses know that mums are an incredibly lucrative market and if you look around the place there is in fact an increase in restaurants, cafes, hotels etc trying to tap that market.

We're somewhat lucky in that we still have a high birth rate so it's not as noticeable, but it's already happening from what I can see. I know my family members with kids would have a very small list of what they'd consider to be child friendly cafes and that. In parts of the continent you could go a long time without seeing a small child in public.. I get a lot of German visitors here and it is one of the first things almost all of them have commented on, the number of kids around. I'd see this aiming to go the same way given time.

Wh1stler · 30-03-2012 4:19pm

HamletOrHecuba wrote: »

You do realize this is the Christian forum and you requesting that Christians in it refrain from using words like sin and evil because it might hurt non-Christian feelings? By any standards abortion in the third trimester is a genuinely cruel act, though one you seem to have no problems with at all.

Not true because cruelty requires intent.

Is fire cruel by virtue of the fact that it burns?

qrrgprgua · 30-03-2012 6:44pm

PDN wrote: »

So who are these 'many academics and pressure groups' who are calling for a one-child policy to be imposed in the West?

I looked up one of the links in the article, the one that refers to CNN, and it suggests that couples might choose to adopt a voluntary one-child policy for their own lives. So the article is telling a bare-faced lie in claiming that CNN supports the imposition of such a policy in the West.

The Population of Europe is falling. Its a fact. Ireland is one of the few nations with a growing population. Italy has a heavily ageing population

The only families that are growing a lot in Europe are Muslims (no disrespect intended just stating the facts).

qrrgprgua · 30-03-2012 6:48pm

prinz wrote: »

On a side note it was with some incredulity I listened to a few friends of mine rant and rave about animals in a circus and the methods used to try and contain that elephant in Cork... (something I agree with, I don't think there's any need for animals in a circus environment anymore) when these friends also claim abortion (including late term) is a human right.

Yes..... beached whales and half of Ireland rushes to help them and safe them. yet 26 terminations since 2002 due to cleft palate fears in the UK.... Humanity has lost its priorities.

CiaranMT · 30-03-2012 7:04pm

PDN wrote: »

So who are these 'many academics and pressure groups' who are calling for a one-child policy to be imposed in the West?

I looked up one of the links in the article, the one that refers to CNN, and it suggests that couples might choose to adopt a voluntary one-child policy for their own lives. So the article is telling a bare-faced lie in claiming that CNN supports the imposition of such a policy in the West.

Run to da hills is fond of the oul conspiracy sites, nothing new here.

GarIT · 30-03-2012 7:15pm

I believe it should be completely the decision of the mother, the mother decides weather she wants to carry the baby or not, if the baby survives or dies that's just the way it is and it just be let happen.

qrrgprgua · 30-03-2012 7:21pm

GarIT wrote: »

I believe it should be completely the decision of the mother, the mother decides weather she wants to carry the baby or not, if the baby survives or dies that's just the way it is and it just be let happen.

Sure join the pro-choice band on some other forum.. Christians don't believe the life of a person depends on what other people do or don't decide.. Why should it. Once a person is conceived they should be respected.

GarIT · 30-03-2012 7:29pm

qrrgprgua wrote: »

Sure join the pro-choice band on some other forum.. Christians don't believe the life of a person depends on what other people do or don't decide.. Why should it. Once a person is conceived they should be respected.

You could apply that to anything, why does the pope sit on a pure gold chair that is apparently worth €100 million when a child dies of starvation every three seconds. That was his choice. In some cases they are doing the child a favour as they may have suffered given the circumstances of the pregnancy.

Hyperduck · 30-03-2012 9:42pm

GarIT wrote: »

You could apply that to anything, why does the pope sit on a pure gold chair that is apparently worth €100 million when a child dies of starvation every three seconds. That was his choice. In some cases they are doing the child a favour as they may have suffered given the circumstances of the pregnancy.

Why don't you give up your wealth?

Why don't you campaign to sell the country in the name of "child hunger"?

The Vatican has a bureaucracy by virtue of the fact that it must manage over a billion people worldwide. Then again, those artworks bring in millions every year (tourism) to be spent on charitable works.

I'd love to know what you do for charity?

30-03-2012 9:48pm

Hyperduck wrote: »

Why don't you give up your wealth?

Why don't you campaign to sell the country in the name of "child hunger"?

The Vatican has a bureaucracy by virtue of the fact that it must manage over a billion people worldwide. Then again, those artworks bring in millions every year (tourism) to be spent on charitable works.

I'd love to know what you do for charity?

I don't imagine GarIT is promoting himself as a moral leader dedicated to worshiping a god who said to give up all your wealth

Hyperduck · 30-03-2012 9:53pm

bluewolf wrote: »

I don't imagine GarIT is promoting himself as a moral leader dedicated to worshiping a god who said to give up all your wealth

Name one organisation in the world who can lead a billion people with no assets.

Wealth is not inherently evil as certain anti-Catholic folk like to believe.

The interest from the church's wealth funds a sustainable programme of charitable works. The Church must think 500 years ahead - the organisation outlives man and must not go bankrupt for that would cause the loss of charitable capability.

Witcher · 30-03-2012 10:00pm

Hyperduck wrote: »

Name one organisation in the world who can lead a billion people with no assets.

Yeah, the fancy throne and other accessories are really necessary to lead the flock:rolleyes:

Hyperduck · 30-03-2012 10:07pm

Blay wrote: »

Yeah, the fancy throne and other accessories are really necessary to lead the flock:rolleyes:

Knew you couldn't.

Perhaps Eire could be run from a shed in Blanchardstown. Ceann Comhairle could wear sack cloth.

Sonics2k · 30-03-2012 10:11pm

Hyperduck wrote: »

Name one organisation in the world who can lead a billion people with no assets.

Wealth is not inherently evil as certain anti-Catholic folk like to believe.

The interest from the church's wealth funds a sustainable programme of charitable works. The Church must think 500 years ahead - the organisation outlives man and must not go bankrupt for that would cause the loss of charitable capability.

Absolutely wealth is needed in order to donate to charity, Bill Gates would be a fine example of a man who's literally given billions of his own money to assist charity. But unlike the Pope, he doesn't do it from a Golden throne, in his own private gold covered Cathedral and tell those with little money to give to the poor.

GarIT · 30-03-2012 10:16pm

Hyperduck wrote: »

Name one organisation in the world who can lead a billion people with no assets.

Wealth is not inherently evil as certain anti-Catholic folk like to believe.

The interest from the church's wealth funds a sustainable programme of charitable works. The Church must think 500 years ahead - the organisation outlives man and must not go bankrupt for that would cause the loss of charitable capability.

Was it not the Catholic church that teaches us that wealth is evil? Is not not priests that take a vow of poverty. (excluding chairs of course).

Around Christmas or New Years the pope said how this year everyone should give up something that is not necessary and use it to help the less well off, then he sat down on a hundred million euro chair.

I understand that it is necessary for the Pope to have a chair. If the Pope keeps his own word and sells his chair I will personally buy him a chair from Ikea, they have quite a nice selection and I'm sure they would be better for his back than the one he currently has. We can then donate any money left over to charity.

The money that the RCC gives to charity is money that was donated and fund raised by its members.

€15 million as well on a gold stick, my granddad has a spare walking stick that he would be happy to lend the Pope.

I don't believe in the theories behind the religion, but if the Pope kept his own word I might go along with it for the good of it. Unfortunately I don't want to take advice from someone that tells me to get rid of material possessions while he sits on €100 million and hold €15 million in his hands.

I'm not saying the church should give up its assets but according to an audit by price waterhouse coopers the church has €120 billion in gold worldwide, the majority of this is buried in vaults under the Vatican that nobody ever sees anyway. I also understand the church needs to look good, but I believe the nicest wooden chair in the world would be a suitable substitute, you could probably buy the nicest wooden chair in the world for a few thousand euro, no need for the hundred million. He could even have an exact replica of his current chair but made of wood made up for less than €10,000.

GarIT · 30-03-2012 11:03pm

It also annoys me how the church can be so high and mighty about its moral values and sin but then sell porn magazines for extra profit.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/9638-german-catholic-bishops-selling-porn

gimmebroadband · 30-03-2012 11:04pm

GarIT wrote: »

Was it not the Catholic church that teaches us that wealth is evil? Is not not priests that take a vow of poverty. (excluding chairs of course).

Around Christmas or New Years the pope said how this year everyone should give up something that is not necessary and use it to help the less well off, then he sat down on a hundred million euro chair.

I understand that it is necessary for the Pope to have a chair. If the Pope keeps his own word and sells his chair I will personally buy him a chair from Ikea, they have quite a nice selection and I'm sure they would be better for his back than the one he currently has. We can then donate any money left over to charity.

The money that the RCC gives to charity is money that was donated and fund raised by its members.

€15 million as well on a gold stick, my granddad has a spare walking stick that he would be happy to lend the Pope.

I don't believe in the theories behind the religion, but if the Pope kept his own word I might go along with it for the good of it. Unfortunately I don't want to take advice from someone that tells me to get rid of material possessions while he sits on €100 million and hold €15 million in his hands.

I'm not saying the church should give up its assets but according to an audit by price waterhouse coopers the church has €120 billion in gold worldwide, the majority of this is buried in vaults under the Vatican that nobody ever sees anyway. I also understand the church needs to look good, but I believe the nicest wooden chair in the world would be a suitable substitute, you could probably buy the nicest wooden chair in the world for a few thousand euro, no need for the hundred million. He could even have an exact replica of his current chair but made of wood made up for less than €10,000.

Here I was expecting Dan Brown in the credits...... :rolleyes:

BTW only priests attached to religious orders take a vow of poverty!

gimmebroadband · 30-03-2012 11:11pm

GarIT wrote: »

It also annoys me how the church can be so high and mighty about its moral values and sin but then sell porn magazines for extra profit.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/9638-german-catholic-bishops-selling-porn

The Non-Dan Brown Version!

The publishing house was owned by a few German Bishops, and not the Catholic Church, typical that we all get lumped together. When the bishops found out about the publishers selling soft porn titles, the Bishops decided to sell it!

http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/international/international-deals/article/49656-germany-s-weltbild-for-sale.html

GarIT · 30-03-2012 11:39pm

gimmebroadband wrote: »

The Non-Dan Brown Version!

The publishing house was owned by a few German Bishops, and not the Catholic Church, typical that we all get lumped together. When the bishops found out about the publishers selling soft porn titles, the Bishops decided to sell it!

http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/international/international-deals/article/49656-germany-s-weltbild-for-sale.html

Sorry, I suppose you get a biased view while reading a biased article, your own link does say that the diocese owned it though not the bishops, anyway, it doesn't really matter.

What I do have to say though if a company employs a representative that becomes corrupt, the reaction is usually a bad one saying the company shouldn't have hired that person, I feel the same about the church, it is the churches fault for choosing representatives that don't do it justice.

Hyperduck · 31-03-2012 12:37am

@GarIT: stick to the IT...

GarIT · 31-03-2012 1:28am

Hyperduck wrote: »

@GarIT: stick to the IT...

Why, because I'm right?
Do you not realise how hypocritical it is for you leader to talk about charity while living a lifestyle that most people could never even imagine?

Wh1stler · 31-03-2012 3:59am

I don't suppose that everyone could agree that unwanted pregnancies are a problem in Ireland?

Equally, it must be evident that to keep abortion out of Ireland is tantamount to sweeping the problem under the carpet. In some cases, abortion is the best solution to the problem.

Alcoholism is another problem that is brushed under the carpet by facilitating it. Drink is sold, alcoholism proliferates and thousands of souls are lost each year. It is nothing less than human-sacrifice but to whom? Would these souls be destined for heaven? Which force enjoys the most benefit from the deaths of alcoholics; God or Satan?

But this is acceptable. And smoking is an even greater sacrifice.

'The gate is narrow; only a few may pass; many choose the wider gate to destruction.'

Do smokers and alcoholics constitute the 'few'? Or are they likely to be among the many? The many who are eternally suffering in the fiery lake?

Whereas abortion prevents the loss of a soul's innocence, doesn't it?

It seems to me that the church's opposition to abortion is that undeveloped foetuses do not qualify as valid sacrifices to God.

Smokers and alcoholics do; unborn babies don't.

I think that the anti-abortion brigade should pick a better fight and try to save souls that actually need saving.

Let science take care of the other thing and try to adopt a more (or less) Christian attitude to those people who choose abortion as a solution to a particular problem.

And let the state support them.

whitemocha · 31-03-2012 10:41am

Hi Guys if you get a chance can you listen to the interview i had with Ray Darcy and tell me what your opinion is on it.
I would love to hear what you think either negative or positive
Thanks

http://media.todayfm.com/podcast/61162/?uniqueID=37719

PDN · 31-03-2012 1:28pm

Wh1stler wrote: »

I don't suppose that everyone could agree that unwanted pregnancies are a problem in Ireland?

Equally, it must be evident that to keep abortion out of Ireland is tantamount to sweeping the problem under the carpet. In some cases, abortion is the best solution to the problem.

Alcoholism is another problem that is brushed under the carpet by facilitating it. Drink is sold, alcoholism proliferates and thousands of souls are lost each year. It is nothing less than human-sacrifice but to whom? Would these souls be destined for heaven? Which force enjoys the most benefit from the deaths of alcoholics; God or Satan?

So, since alcoholism is also a problem, then the equivalent to abortion as an answer would be to kill off a few alcoholics?

I was once an alcoholic who slept on the streets. I am so grateful that Christians didn't treat me as a 'problem' but as a human being who could experience redemption.

gimmebroadband · 31-03-2012 1:43pm

My brother is a lifelong alcholic and would be dead only for the help of those institutions who get no help from the goverment.

Good for you PDN, I know that it will be lifelong battle for you, 3 generations of my family were alcoholics, so I know how hard it is!

qrrgprgua · 31-03-2012 6:39pm

Wh1stler wrote: »

I don't suppose that everyone could agree that unwanted pregnancies are a problem in Ireland?

Equally, it must be evident that to keep abortion out of Ireland is tantamount to sweeping the problem under the carpet. In some cases, abortion is the best solution to the problem.

Abortion IS sweeping a problem under the carpet. I know many women who will talk about miscarriages and how they suffered. I know not one single women who has ever talked about having an abortion. Why? Probably something they are ashamed of.. probably because they know it was a wrong thing to do. But its not a topic they bring up.

Aids & Poverty in Africa is a problem it causes enormous suffering.. Should we done the humane thing and kill them off?

whitemocha · 31-03-2012 7:09pm

qrrgprgua wrote: »

Abortion IS sweeping a problem under the carpet. I know many women who will talk about miscarriages and how they suffered. I know not one single women who has ever talked about having an abortion. Why? Probably something they are ashamed of.. probably because they know it was a wrong thing to do. But its not a topic they bring up.

Aids & Poverty in Africa is a problem it causes enormous suffering.. Should we done the humane thing and kill them off?

its because of people like you its not brought up.

Can you please listen to my podcast and then tell me i did the wrong thing ??
i would love to hear your opinion

qrrgprgua · 01-04-2012 11:47am

whitemocha wrote: »

its because of people like you its not brought up.

Can you please listen to my podcast and then tell me i did the wrong thing ??
i would love to hear your opinion

Hi I listened to your Podcast, I am sorry for your Child.

But letting nature takes its course would be the best thing. There is a big difference to going to die to actually dying.

You case is the exact same the Santorum family, same syndrome. Against al the odds and medical advise the Child did survive. They didn't abort

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq5no8mHtm0

I am not going to Judge you as a Person. As a Catholic I have always been Taught to Hate the SIN not the SINNER. And its not my place to judge you.

But the fact remains and will always remain that is it wrong to Kill a child, knowingly, willingly.

Its not medically possible to say trisomy 13 is not possible with life. The advise you were given was wrong. Probably not going to make it. Reality is Children with trisomy 13 do survive.

Zero hope/Zero Chance..... The advise was wrong.

My Mother know her first born would be born dead, She dead in her womb and they delivered. She suffered enormously .. but she always said to me that Abortion would never be the option for she. While she grieved she also had consolation.

01-04-2012 11:57am

qrrgprgua wrote: »

Abortion IS sweeping a problem under the carpet. I know many women who will talk about miscarriages and how they suffered. I know not one single women who has ever talked about having an abortion. Why? Probably something they are ashamed of.. probably because they know it was a wrong thing to do. But its not a topic they bring up.

Because everyone condemns them

qrrgprgua · 01-04-2012 12:22pm

bluewolf wrote: »

Because everyone condemns them

Or because they condemn themselves with their actions. UK and US are pretty liberal... but still not a society that talks about it.

Wh1stler · 01-04-2012 12:41pm

whitemocha wrote: »

Hi Guys if you get a chance can you listen to the interview i had with Ray Darcy and tell me what your opinion is on it.
I would love to hear what you think either negative or positive
Thanks

Heartbreaking. Thank you for sharing this; it absolutely validates what I said in my previous post.

Wh1stler · 01-04-2012 12:44pm

PDN wrote: »

So, since alcoholism is also a problem, then the equivalent to abortion as an answer would be to kill off a few alcoholics?

I was once an alcoholic who slept on the streets. I am so grateful that Christians didn't treat me as a 'problem' but as a human being who could experience redemption.

It is no wonder that you have so much trouble correctly interpreting the Bible. :pac:

Wh1stler · 01-04-2012 12:49pm

qrrgprgua wrote: »

Abortion IS sweeping a problem under the carpet. I know many women who will talk about miscarriages and how they suffered. I know not one single women who has ever talked about having an abortion. Why? Probably something they are ashamed of.. probably because they know it was a wrong thing to do. But its not a topic they bring up.

Aids & Poverty in Africa is a problem it causes enormous suffering.. Should we done the humane thing and kill them off?

Probably? Probably?

You are arguing from ignorance.

And where did I say alcoholics should be killed? I said they should be saved.

Sheesh.

Wh1stler · 01-04-2012 12:58pm

qrrgprgua wrote: »

But the fact remains and will always remain that is it wrong to Kill a child, knowingly, willingly.

Yes but a child was not killed; the pregnancy failed.

qrrgprgua wrote: »

Its not medically possible to say trisomy 13 is not possible with life. The advise you were given was wrong. Probably not going to make it. Reality is Children with trisomy 13 do survive.

Zero hope/Zero Chance..... The advise was wrong.

Way to heap on the misery.

You exemplify perfectly why religion should have nothing to do with any decision process.

qrrgprgua wrote: »

My Mother know her first born would be born dead, She dead in her womb and they delivered. She suffered enormously .. but she always said to me that Abortion would never be the option for she. While she grieved she also had consolation.

Good for you; your mother's suffering meets with your approval. Keep the suuffering going, huh?

whitemocha · 01-04-2012 1:27pm

qrrgprgua wrote: »

Hi I listened to your Podcast, I am sorry for your Child.

But letting nature takes its course would be the best thing. There is a big difference to going to die to actually dying.

You case is the exact same the Santorum family, same syndrome. Against al the odds and medical advise the Child did survive. They didn't abort

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq5no8mHtm0

I am not going to Judge you as a Person. As a Catholic I have always been Taught to Hate the SIN not the SINNER. And its not my place to judge you.

But the fact remains and will always remain that is it wrong to Kill a child, knowingly, willingly.

Its not medically possible to say trisomy 13 is not possible with life. The advise you were given was wrong. Probably not going to make it. Reality is Children with trisomy 13 do survive.

Zero hope/Zero Chance..... The advise was wrong.

My Mother know her first born would be born dead, She dead in her womb and they delivered. She suffered enormously .. but she always said to me that Abortion would never be the option for she. While she grieved she also had consolation.

certain Trisomy 13 survive(but not often) full trisomy with hygromas dont i think i would be better to listen to a proffessional then you

hattoncracker · 01-04-2012 1:28pm

qrrgprgua wrote: »

Wh1stler wrote: »

I don't suppose that everyone could agree that unwanted pregnancies are a problem in Ireland?

Equally, it must be evident that to keep abortion out of Ireland is tantamount to sweeping the problem under the carpet. In some cases, abortion is the best solution to the problem.

Abortion IS sweeping a problem under the carpet. I know many women who will talk about miscarriages and how they suffered. I know not one single women who has ever talked about having an abortion. Why? Probably something they are ashamed of.. probably because they know it was a wrong thing to do. But its not a topic they bring up.

Aids & Poverty in Africa is a problem it causes enormous suffering.. Should we done the humane thing and kill them off?

abortion is something that is not spoken about because it's too painful, and because of the way, automatically, women are judged for having one, just like you, saying that it is "probably" because theyre ashamed.

I'm not ashamed of the choices I made. I Do not regret them. I never will, and I don't hate myself for it, and I will not let someone else hate me for it. But one person who I thought was my friend gave me dogs abuse for even considering it. So I learned to keep it to myself, and it was not being able to talk about it that has me in counselling now, not the abortion itself.

I would not wish being in that situation on anyone. No one ever understands unless they've been there (and by being there, I'm talking about being a woman who has had to make that choice, or her partner).

You have never personally been in the situations that me or the other lady on this thread have, so your
opinion, whether based on religion or personal choice, should not affect the ability for other women to make that choice. That is why abortion should be legalised. You only ever hear about the women with abortions for eye colour, or those ridiculous other reasons you read about. You never hear about the quiet, grief stricken, terrified women who every singe day have to leave on a jet plane to another country, who only just want their own bed, and their own local Chinese or whatever else that would give them one nice memory on what they will look back on as being one of the most horrible days in their lives, but can't have it because this country does not recognise their rights to a safe abortion in their own country.

Its not because of shame, that you dont hear the stories I can tell you. Its because it's easier to keep it to yourself than to have your decisions disected and judged without the least bit of consideration as to how hard that decision was.

whitemocha · 01-04-2012 1:31pm

just looked at the youtube video There baby had Trisomy 18 mnine had 13 COMPLETELY DIFFERENT you find me a child that is living with full Trisomy with cystic hygromas who is not suffering

01-04-2012 1:33pm

whitemocha wrote: »

just looked at the youtube video There baby had Trisomy 18 mnine had 13 COMPLETELY DIFFERENT you find me a child that is living with full Trisomy with cystic hygromas who is not suffering

Some people prefer to stick their fingers in their ears especially if they haven't been through it
i'm sure it was difficult enough for you, don't bother trying to rub salt in the wounds from people who don't care

Wh1stler · 01-04-2012 1:54pm

bluewolf wrote: »

Some people prefer to stick their fingers in their ears especially if they haven't been through it
i'm sure it was difficult enough for you, don't bother trying to rub salt in the wounds from people who don't care

Out of interest, bluewolf, are you a Christian.

Keep abortion out of Ireland

Comments