abortion

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by oscarBravo
Can I ask you a favour? Is there any way I could persuade you to type the words "you" and "what" in full? This isn't SMS: I get headaches trying to read your posts.

okidoki, just for you;)

Lemming

Originally posted by newband
and HOW is my opinion being forced on you, wot do u think forced means, i am EXPRESSING an opinion, just like YOU are expressing yours,

You are expression an opinion that is also the current status-quo in this state. That status-quo prevents anyone having the choice. Ergo, your (and those of as similar stance) opinion is being forced upon society at large.

have you ever seen me on o connell street ''preaching'', eerrr, NO, [/quote

*sigh*
pedant pedant pedant pedant pedant pedant pedant pedant pedant pedant pedant pedant pedant pedant pedant pedant

i wouldn't exactly call england a ''foreign'' country now, thats kinda stupid, it is 30mins away on a plane... ffs, it takes me 45mins to get into town.

Eh .. oddly enough, that's EXACTLY what england is. A "foreign" country. Did you fail geography in school? Have you any grasp of reality? I'm beginnning to *REALLY* suspect not.

And your own words shoot down your rather callous attitude anyway. It's "only" a plane trip away. What about all those millions who will barely be able to afford a trip to a clinic if one were available in this state eh? :rolleyes:

please quote me on this cos i dont remember saying it, err, maybe thats because i DIDN'T

*sigh*
Not directly, no. But you've insinuated it on MORE than one occasion.

wot if it did, ur not making very good points here are u

Look in the mirror. And stop playing the innocent. I made an utterly pedantic and crap point to prove that the point that you had made was crap and utterly pedantic.

Shanka

I'm puzzled, if it's so important why don't the pro-choice lobby in this country campaign for another referendum to actually legalise abortion here?

As its been already been pointed out - sex ed in this country consists of the class looking at biology diagrams followed by anti-abortion videos - It was the same for me. The pro-life agenda is rammed down Irish children's throats from early in life. There is nothing the pro-choice side can possibly do to combat this fact.

If there was another referendum tomorrow the Irish would indeed vote against it. But this does not make the pro life argument correct or morally right. It just means that people are not being allowed to hear both the arguments from the beginning. In any other western country, sex ed consists of discussing the issues from BOTH sides - therefore allowing the individual to make up their own minds having considered both arguments. And without some sex staved member of the clergy condemning them to hell if they dare to differ with the wisdom of the catholic church.

sex is not a 'need' its a pleasure, depriving yourself from sex is not bad for you, priests did not do the things they did because they were deprived from sex and frankly that's just an immature comment, there are plenty of sex offenders around who were never deprived and there are also plenty of priest who have never committed any illegal sexual act even tho they are deprived.... depprivation is not the reason why people commit sexual crimes, it is because those people are sick in the head, plain and simple

This is becoming funny. No - sex IS a basic need. Its programmed into our genes - this is totally off topic but if sex wasn't a basic need, why do we go through puberty? Are you telling me that I went through all of that for NOTHING?

Sex is a basic need - because we have the ability to choose not to have sex does not mean that we do it purely for the pleasure. And besides - no sane person would choose not to have sex - People don't have sex because no-one will sleep with them. Either that or you're cliff richard - and I'm sorry but after that I don't want to know...

It IS debatable that priests depriving themselves of sexual pleasure leads to perverted acts with alter boys. BUT IT HARDLY HELPS!

In any case - why don't you try going without sex for a few years and see what happens..??

bonkey

Originally posted by newband
so if a mother were to leave her new born baby on its own for an indefinate period of time would it survive on its own?... no,, he/she would eventually die.. in my eyes the baby is totaly dependant on the mother, he/she could not survive on his/her own. the fact that the baby can breath on his/her own is irelevant

...

ok point taken but u dont have to be a genius to know wot i meant in the first place, and wot i meant is true

No, it isn't true.

A newborn child is dependant on someone, yes. However, there is no overriding requirement that says the child is dependant on its mother.

jc

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by Lemming
You are expression an opinion that is also the current status-quo in this state. That status-quo prevents anyone having the choice. Ergo, your (and those of as similar stance) opinion is being forced upon society at large.

ergo, i am expressing an opinion, i am not forcing my opinion upon anything, you take it how you want, i dont care

Originally posted by Lemming
Eh .. oddly enough, that's EXACTLY what england is. A "foreign" country. Did you fail geography in school? Have you any grasp of reality? I'm beginnning to *REALLY* suspect not.

so if england wasn't seperated from us by water and it was possible to drive there in the same amount of time would you care that it is a foreign country, no, you wouldn't give a ****, NO ONE would because it would make things easier then gettin on a plane,

Originally posted by Lemming
And your own words shoot down your rather callous attitude anyway. It's "only" a plane trip away. What about all those millions who will barely be able to afford a trip to a clinic if one were available in this state eh? :rolleyes:.

thats exactly MY point, even if there was one in this state there would STILL be people who could not afford an abortion, or do you suggest we make it free as well.

Originally posted by Lemming
*sigh*
Not directly, no. But you've insinuated it on MORE than one occasion.

oh, so first you said that i have said somethin, but now i didn't say it, i just insinuated it, make up your mind ffs.

Originally posted by Lemming
I made an utterly pedantic and crap point

indeed you did

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by Shanka
This is becoming funny. No - sex IS a basic need. Its programmed into our genes - this is totally off topic but if sex wasn't a basic need, why do we go through puberty? Are you telling me that I went through all of that for NOTHING?

puberty: The stage of adolescence in which an individual becomes physiologically capable of sexual reproduction. not when an adult HAS TO HAVE SEX, but when they are capable of having sex, sex is not a need, anyone could go without sex if they truely wanted to, nothin will happen to them, they will NOT become sex offenders because they haven't had sex ffs..

Originally posted by Shanka
People don't have sex because no-one will sleep with them. Either that or you're cliff richard

you have just proved my point good sir, cliff richard has CHOSE not to have sex, its called CELEBACY(sp), believe it or not some people do choose a non sexual path in life, so sex is not a need, its a pleasure

Originally posted by Shanka
It IS debatable that priests depriving themselves of sexual pleasure leads to perverted acts with alter boys.

so if a priest were to have sex with a woman, would he be instantly cured, i dont think so

Originally posted by Shanka
why don't you try going without sex for a few years and see what happens..??

i went thru puberty since i was 12, i lost my virginity at 18, so thats six years without sex, i'm not a sex offender, jee, i wonder why.. maybe u should get yourself a decent argument.

Lemming

Originally posted by newband
ergo, i am expressing an opinion, i am not forcing my opinion upon anything, you take it how you want, i dont care

In that case, why aren't you willing to take on my opinion? You're so eager to have yours heard?

H
Y
P
O
C
R
I
T
E

so if england wasn't seperated from us by water and it was possible to drive there in the same amount of time would you care that it is a foreign country, no, you wouldn't give a ****, NO ONE would because it would make things easier then gettin on a plane,

It's STILL a foreign nation. Not everyone owns a f*cking car. Moot point. It's a foreign nation. Foreign, ie sovereign nation, not ireland, a different country.

thats exactly MY point, even if there was one in this state there would STILL be people who could not afford an abortion, or do you suggest we make it free as well.

Which is why I made my "nuclear bomb" point. Just because there will be someone who cannot afford it does not mean that the possible option should be denied.

There'll be people who can't afford expensive medical treatments. Lets ban those procedures. YEAHH!!! Stone-Age here we come baby!!! :rolleyes:

indeed you did

well that says a lot about you that you quoted the fisrt part of my sentence and ignored the rest of it. You're an ostrich newband. Nothing more. Careful not to blink or life might pass you by

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by bonkey
...



No, it isn't true.

A newborn child is dependant on someone, yes. However, there is no overriding requirement that says the child is dependant on its mother.

jc

ok if you want to be like that fine by me, i was using the mother as an example of ''someone'', never the less if a child was left alone by ANYONE, not just the mother, then it would NOT survive, plain and simple..

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by Lemming
In that case, why aren't you willing to take on my opinion? You're so eager to have yours heard?

i am taking in your opinion, i just dont agree with it, why does that mean i am forcing mine upon you, this is a two way situation, like it or lump it

Originally posted by Lemming
It's STILL a foreign nation. Not everyone owns a f*cking car. Moot point. It's a foreign nation. Foreign, ie sovereign nation, not ireland, a different country.

there is no relevance in this, it makes no difference, i bet ya dont think N. Ireland is a foreign nation, why is that..

Originally posted by Lemming
Just because there will be someone who cannot afford it does not mean that the possible option should be denied.:

but if it was free and in this state then people would see it as an excuse to just not give a ****, i would bet money that unplanned pregnancies would sky rocket of it was free and available to anyone..

Originally posted by Lemming
There'll be people who can't afford expensive medical treatments. Lets ban those procedures. YEAHH!!! Stone-Age here we come baby!!! :rolleyes:

no lets make them free, medical treatments are used to save lives, not kill them..

Lemming

Originally posted by newband
i am taking in your opinion, i just dont agree with it, why does that mean i am forcing mine upon you, this is a two way situation, like it or lump it

But your opinion (or rather the opinion of the pro-life brigade at large) has been forced upon me. Sex education in school was a joke because of people screaming over it. And anyone trying to make an informed choice on abortion has shock-value pictures thrust in their faces (with not much other substance other than shock).

And we do not have the CHOICE. Therefore, as I pointed out your opinion (although "your" is probably the wrong word to use) is being forced upon me and everyone else.

there is no relevance in this, it makes no difference, i bet ya dont think N. Ireland is a foreign nation, why is that..

Yes there is revelance. It makes a difference. If you're too slow to figure it out then you shouldn't be debating such a serious issue.

And N.Ireland is a foreign nation. It is a part of the UK.

/sarcasm
Bet you think france and germany are actually the same country eh? :rolleyes:
/end sarcasm

but if it was free and in this state then people would see it as an excuse to just not give a ****, i would bet money that unplanned pregnancies would sky rocket of it was free and available to anyone..

Have you even been listening to a thing that anyone has said regarding the decision of abortion? It is not something arrived at lightly. Of course there'll always be someone who does otherwise. But that goes the same for everything in life.

And point out exactly where I said abortion should be free?

no lets make them free, medical treatments are used to save lives, not kill them..

Umm ... where do you propose we get the money for all these specialist treatments? Do you know of some way to make our health-service actually work? If so then what the f*ck are y uo doing here. Go talk to Michael Martin about it already

Rock Climber

Originally posted by Seraphina

personally, to me, the baby is not 'alive' until it is born, because it cannot survive by itself. the woman eats, breathes and passes waste for it, it is completely dependent on her, it is a part of her body. she should be able to choose to remove it if she wants.

So you would agree with abortion right up untill birth then?
And when the baby is kicking it's mother in the stomach, you would agree that it's mother has the right to kill it??

please clarify that , you are not saying that, cause I'd hazzard a guess that even the most extreme proponent of elective abortion wouldn't campaign for that and besides it's illegal even in the U.K

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by Lemming
your opinion (although "your" is probably the wrong word to use) is being forced upon me and everyone else.

EXACTLY, ''your'' is the wrong word to use because *I* am not forcing it upon you directly, but merely EXPRESSING my opinion towards you..

Originally posted by Lemming
Yes there is revelance. It makes a difference. If you're too slow to figure it out then you shouldn't be debating such a serious issue.

And N.Ireland is a foreign nation. It is a part of the UK..

the majority of the population of ireland would probably dissagree with you, i dont really care on the matter..

Originally posted by Lemming
/sarcasm
Bet you think france and germany are actually the same country eh? :rolleyes:
/end sarcasm.

you mean they're not:rolleyes:

Originally posted by Lemming
And point out exactly where I said abortion should be free? B]

i never said that u said that now did i

Originally posted by Lemming
Umm ... where do you propose we get the money for all these specialist treatments? Do you know of some way to make our health-service actually work? If so then what the f*ck are y uo doing here. Go talk to Michael Martin about it already

wot the hell is the point in this statement, this has no relevance to what we're discussing,,

Lemming

Originally posted by newband
EXACTLY, ''your'' is the wrong word to use because *I* am not forcing it upon you directly, but merely EXPRESSING my opinion towards you..

*sigh*
the sentiment of your opinion has been forced upon myself and everyone else.

the majority of the population of ireland would probably dissagree with you, i dont really care on the matter..

Really? Well, the reality is that N.Ireland is a part of the UK until such times as it is ceeded to teh Republic of Ireland. That isn't my opinion. That's cold, hard, fact.

you mean they're not:rolleyes:

funnily enough. no.

i never said that u said that now did i

yes, you did. You used the word "free" in context to making abortion available twice in one sentence.

by newband
but if it was free and in this state then people would see it as an excuse to just not give a ****, i would bet money that unplanned pregnancies would sky rocket of it was free an available to anyone..

So why did you keep mentioning free abortion to me?

wot the hell is the point in this statement, this has no relevance to what we're discussing,,

Because you brought it up.

Rock Climber

Originally posted by Shanka
As its been already been pointed out - sex ed in this country consists of the class looking at biology diagrams followed by anti-abortion videos - It was the same for me. The pro-life agenda is rammed down Irish children's throats from early in life. There is nothing the pro-choice side can possibly do to combat this fact.

With respect, that is rubbish.
how many people go to mass in this country?
A small minority of the population, and do they even listen when they are there?
I didnt have any "pro-life" agenda rammed down my throat as far as I can recall.
I came to these conclusions myself, ie killing an unborn child is denying it the life that I believe it is entitled to.
If it was the case that the catholic church or schools were having any effect in the way that you mention, then no body would be having sex and if they were it would be once a month inside marriage.

Originally posted by embee
So, I suppose that makes me a heartless bastard, a disease, a sinner of the highest order and first name down on the list for 'Go Directly to Hell'.

At the end of the day, none of you can call me any of the above based on a lifestyle choice because you dont know me, or my circumstances. You are mostly all men, so you will never fully know or understand what an absolute catastrophic nightmare an unplanned pregnancy can be.

Ok so I introduced the notion of God, if you are a believer, then you know you will be judged when you die and if you are confident that God doesn't mind abortions, then you could rest easy with such a decision.
If you are a non believer, then you can also rest easy, but whether you believe it or not, that has no bearing on whether there will be a judgement day or not.
So thats the individuals call.
From my own point of view as a Christian ( but not a rabid one now... in case ye think I'm a fundamentalist or anything ) I could not condone abortion, I would climb mountains, cross seas, walk on hot coals or more to try and persuade any girlfriend of mine to have her baby and I would do my utmost to provide for it and be proud of it, from the very first moment I became aware of it's existance.
But then thats me, and it's the polar opposite of what some of you think.
I would obviously vote no if asked in a referendum on elective abortion because my conscience wouldnt allow me to make it more easily available, in the same way as it wouldn't allow me make a financial contribution towards a clinic that performed it.

Shanka

Newband - you're a star:)

You're saying that:

puberty: The stage of adolescence in which an individual becomes physiologically capable of sexual reproduction. not when an adult HAS TO HAVE SEX, but when they are capable of having sex, sex is not a need, anyone could go without sex if they truely wanted to, nothin will happen to them, they will NOT become sex offenders because they haven't had sex ffs..

and...

so if a priest were to have sex with a woman, would he be instantly cured, i dont think so

Priests would still mess with kiddies even if they were allowed to have sex with women. Mmmm. In the meantime, I'll keep an eye out for the next protestant minister to be brought up on underage sex charges... (who are allowed have sex with women) THEN I'll take your argument under consideration.

you have just proved my point good sir, cliff richard has CHOSE not to have sex, its called CELEBACY(sp), believe it or not some people do choose a non sexual path in life, so sex is not a need, its a pleasure

So you're saying that Cliff Richard is NORMAL? The man is a freak of the highest order and if you're saying otherwise, I see I've been wasting my time having this discussion with you...

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by Lemming
*sigh*
the sentiment of your opinion has been forced upon myself and everyone else.

in that case the sentiment of your opinion has been forced upon me and everyone else, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Originally posted by Lemming
Really? Well, the reality is that N.Ireland is a part of the UK until such times as it is ceeded to teh Republic of Ireland. That isn't my opinion. That's cold, hard, fact..

i think its plain obvious wot i meant in the first place

Originally posted by Lemming
yes, you did. You used the word "free" in context to making abortion available twice in one sentence...

you i did use the word free, but i didn't say that u said it

Originally posted by Lemming
Because you brought it up.

err, no, u brought it up

There'll be people who can't afford expensive medical treatments. Lets ban those procedures. YEAHH!!! Stone-Age here we come baby!!!

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by Shanka
So you're saying that Cliff Richard is NORMAL? The man is a freak of the highest order and if you're saying otherwise,

u are REALLY showing your immaturity with this gem, so i take it u know cliff richard personnally then?:rolleyes:

D!ve^Bomb!

i'll post this again and challenge anyone who dissagrees with me to answer it,, no body has even mentioned it so far, i wonder why????:rolleyes:

Originally posted by newband
is it ok to kill a new born baby? just because a baby is not technically 'alive' in the womb is irrelevant, the baby WILL become alive,
if i was to hit a pregnant woman in the belly and in turn kill the baby, would i not be tried for murder, of course i would, but why?? if the baby is not alive then how is it murder??

if u really believe it is wrong to try and man for doing this then i believe you are trolling, however if u agree that its wrong then you would be aggreeing with everything i have said thus far and contradicting yourself 100%

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Originally posted by Rock Climber
So you would agree with abortion right up untill birth then?
And when the baby is kicking it's mother in the stomach, you would agree that it's mother has the right to kill it??

please clarify that , you are not saying that, cause I'd hazzard a guess that even the most extreme proponent of elective abortion wouldn't campaign for that and besides it's illegal even in the U.K

erm.. I would agree with what seraphina said in a way.. I think abortions would be ok (i still disapprove of them, and think if you're going to be getting yourself pregnant you should take responsibility for it, but that's a side argument) only until the child has become conscious of itself..

whenever the child becomes self-aware, then it is a seperate human being from the mother and should have the same rights as we do.

i personally wouldn't think self-awareness would come until some time in the first year, maybe even later (not saying I agree with toddler murder either), but if the foetus isn't self-aware, then it is no different from a cow.. albeit a human shaped cow and i don't have any problem with it's termination/death/murder.

Rock Climber

Originally posted by Mordeth

i personally wouldn't think self-awareness would come until some time in the first year, maybe even later (not saying I agree with toddler murder either), but if the foetus isn't self-aware, then it is no different from a cow.. albeit a human shaped cow and i don't have any problem with it's termination/death/murder.

Ok I think thats established, some people think its ok to terminate a baby right up untill it's almost born.
A very , very rare viewpoint I might add... and of course, very, very illegal.
Anyone care to tell me if a baby a few weeks before it's birth can feel pain?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

I'm sure cockroaches feel pain too, but that won't stop me stepping on them.


if they are not self-aware, they are not self-aware.. it's that simple, they are meat.

Rock Climber

Originally posted by Mordeth

if they are not self-aware, they are not self-aware.. it's that simple, they are meat.

you forgot to add in my opinion *

* "my" =mordeth in this case-not rock climber

D!ve^Bomb!

and he asks again and again.....

is it ok to kill a new born baby? just because a baby is not technically 'alive' in the womb is irrelevant, the baby WILL become alive,
if i was to hit a pregnant woman in the belly and in turn kill the baby, would i not be tried for murder, of course i would, but why?? if the baby is not alive then how is it murder??

please, a simple

yes, he deserves to be punsihed or
no, he didn't do anything wrong

is all i'm asking for..

mordeth, if this was to happen to your unborn baby would you still think of it as a piece of meat?? i think not

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

.. how do you mean?

if they are not self aware, then they are simply not self aware.

all the rights and priviledges we have/take as conscious sentient human beings would not apply to a being that is not self aware.



the only difference then from a developing foetus and a donkey would be the emotional sentiment we attach to it, because it bears such a resemblance to ourselves. But it is not yet one of us.

D!ve^Bomb!

who are you replying to.... answer my original question if u please..

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

I don't even plan to spawn.. there are far too many people in the world as it is, don't want to make the problem worse to satisfy my own 'need for parenthood' if such a thing should come to be.

as to your question, I don't know how that should be handled. it is a tricky situation, and I'm just a person expressing my opinion and thoughts.. not a law student.

and are you sure you would be tried for murder?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

Originally posted by Mordeth
I'm sure cockroaches feel pain too, but that won't stop me stepping on them.


if they are not self-aware, they are not self-aware.. it's that simple, they are meat.

*answered*

amp

Newband, you seem to intimate that being alive is the same as being self-aware.

Mordeth has no trouble killing things that aren't sentient beings. Not all life is sentient. A cow is theoritically more self-aware than a pre-sentient baby, yet eating cow isn't as controvertial as abortion is.

My own thoughts on this are that I don't like abortion. Most people don't like it. But if you look at a fetus in it's very very early stages of development then it's just a small collection of cells that are dividing rapidly to potentially become a human being.

Men produce vast quanitities of sperm. Most of it gets expelled with urine. Yet each and every one of those sperm has the potential to create life. The same with periods in women. Every month the female body aborts it's own egg (unless a sperm happens to penetrate it) to prepare for the next egg.

So I'm in favour of limited abortion. Limited in the sense of a couple of weeks after conception. I think that late term abortion after the fetus has become a sentient baby, is in fact, murder. But until then it's not a human being, it's meat with potential.

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by Mordeth
and are you sure you would be tried for murder?

as far as i know if it were to happen then it would be considerd murder, if not then it would definitely be considered manslaughter..

D!ve^Bomb!

Originally posted by amp
Newband, you seem to intimate that being alive is the same as being self-aware.

Mordeth has no trouble killing things that aren't sentient beings. Not all life is sentient. A cow is theoritically more self-aware than a pre-sentient baby, yet eating cow isn't as controvertial as abortion is.

My own thoughts on this are that I don't like abortion. Most people don't like it. But if you look at a fetus in it's very very early stages of development then it's just a small collection of cells that are dividing rapidly to potentially become a human being.

Men produce vast quanitities of sperm. Most of it gets expelled with urine. Yet each and every one of those sperm has the potential to create life. The same with periods in women. Every month the female body aborts it's own egg (unless a sperm happens to penetrate it) to prepare for the next egg.

So I'm in favour of limited abortion. Limited in the sense of a couple of weeks after conception. I think that late term abortion after the fetus has become a sentient baby, is in fact, murder. But until then it's not a human being, it's meat with potential.

answer the question, lets say that we dont know how far along the woman is thru the pregnancy, all we know is the quy hits her, causes a miscarriage.. should he not be punished for that? do u think the mother would care if the baby has developed much??