Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Keep abortion out of Ireland

Options
1…3334363839…65

Comments

  • Options
    #1052
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    Min wrote: »
    [...] who had links to questionable regimes...
    If links to questionable regimes are a problem for you I presume you are not a catholic...?

    MrP


  • Options
    #1053
    1huge1
    Registered Users Posts: 6,171 ✭✭✭1huge1


    MrPudding wrote: »
    If links to questionable regimes are a problem for you I presume you are not a catholic...?

    MrP
    I could not like a comment more


  • Options
    #1054
    Ash.J.Williams
    Registered Users Posts: 20,928 ✭✭✭✭Ash.J.Williams


    Min wrote: »
    Catholics and other Christians cannot vote for the Labour party when they support abortion.
    They are fundamentally an anti-Christian party, headed by a former workers party politician who had links to questionable regimes...and feels at home with the Chinese and their human rights abuses.
    Our entire government and the our last government are wholly depending on the chinese to give us money. It is a little silly to single out the labour party.


  • Options
    #1055
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    yammycat wrote: »
    On a one to one basis i'll show you hundreds of people happily living their lives after waking from gestation for every single long term coma patient who revived

    In that case I'll show you 6.8 billion people who "woke up" from being a sperm. Of course they didn't since that isn't what waking up is. Waking up is reactivating something was already active.
    yammycat wrote: »
    , and again you state your opinion as to brain development equaling personhood, thats an unquantifiable, and could be used as an excuse to teminate far more than just embryos, lets go for 8 month pregnancies or even post natal termination, or perhaps mentally retarded children because if personhood is linked to brain development anything is on the table,

    No, actually it is the other way around. If any random nonsense is on the table (its unique DNA! its potential! its implantation! its birth! its the soul!) then you can have any old qualifier for what is or isn't a person, rather than thinking about what actually matters, ie what is actual the person
    yammycat wrote: »
    Yes, thats a very common analogy, all the time i hear the value of human life being compared to pc parts, like when my gran was dieing and they told my mother it would cost an arm and a leg to keep her alive or she could buy a new one at compustore for a lot less, good point well made.

    The value of a human life was not being compared to a PC, if that is what you think the analogy means you have not understood the analogy.
    yammycat wrote: »
    you have an opinion and all the 'facts' you state just happen to agree with your opinion, yes thats convenience.

    You could say the same thing about the belief that the Earth goes around the Sun. And when we go look at the evidence, ah ha! the evidence says the Earth goes around the Sun. How convenient for such a belief! Of course that would be silly, since people believe the Earth goes around the Sun because of the facts, not the other way around.

    My opinion is shaped by the facts. I believe the Earth goes around the Sun because that is what the evidence says. I believe personhood is the valuable part of humanity and is contained in the human brain because that is what the evidence says.
    yammycat wrote: »
    Sustaining itself ? as in feeding itself, keeping itself warm in a cosy bed ? cleaning up the urine and feces its body produces ? paying for it's hospital bills ? working a few hours a day perhaps ?

    Sustaining itself as in re-growing the neurological cells that make up its neurological pathways. There is significant difference between being in a coma and being brain dead.
    yammycat wrote: »
    If it isn't retrievable it isn't a memory

    Again you do not loose all your memories by being in a coma. When you wake up from the coma the memories are not some how downloaded from some where else. They were always in your brain, sustained by the neurological activity that continues even in a coma.
    yammycat wrote: »
    a coma patient alone could never gain consciosness, stick a coma patient in a field and leave it and see what happens (hint nothing)
    lol yea it works both ways

    Correct. But then I never argued that we should keep coma patients alive because they can survive on their own, that was your argument. I merely pointed out that a zygote can no more survive on its own than a sperm can, or as you helpfully point out, a coma patient.

    We keep coma patients alive because they are already a person, and so long as there is a chance that person might wake up again we consider it worthwhile to sustain them.
    yammycat wrote: »
    Yes I do and thats why i think abortion is wrong, I know you don't agree with bodily privacy, if you do please state the exact and I mean exact time as to when you gain the privilege of bodily privacy and what happens at that point in time that confers the right upon you. That is a question you can never answer because you don't know, there is no answer to that unless you start talking about Gods breathing a soul into a baby when the cord is cut or some other nonsense like that.

    What is a person? A person is the consciousness, memory and personality produced by their brain. Thus it stands to reason that a person begins to exist when a brain that can produce such functionality also first beings to exist. I don't know the exact time that happens in a foetus, I suspect the exact timing is different for each foetus. The facts support this happening around 24-28 weeks. So airing on the side of caution it makes sense to limit abortions to before 24 weeks.

    I've no idea what you think God has to do with this.
    yammycat wrote: »
    Bottom line is if nobodies cares it's worth nothing, if a little girl will cry over it we muct use all of our resources and medical expertise to save it, god forbid a little girl crying, I can feel a lump in my throat now just typing.

    You are nearly crying (while being seemingly unable to actually explain why I should consider an embryo a person) yet I'm the sentimentalist?


  • Options
    #1056
    PDN
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,686 ✭✭✭✭PDN


    JimiTime wrote: »
    BTW, The abortion topic is to go before the Dail soon. There was an Anti-abortion group outside the Dail yesterday. May be an idea to mail your local TD to remind them that there is still a lot of us opposed to it.

    You can send an email postcard to your TD's by following this link: http://www.prolifecampaign.ie/postcard2012/index.htm#.T4xiSamDJkY.email


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1057
    Tea 1000
    Registered Users Posts: 4,520 ✭✭✭Tea 1000


    Zombrex wrote: »
    What is a person? A person is the consciousness, memory and personality produced by their brain. Thus it stands to reason that a person begins to exist when a brain that can produce such functionality also first beings to exist. I don't know the exact time that happens in a foetus, I suspect the exact timing is different for each foetus. The facts support this happening around 24-28 weeks. So airing on the side of caution it makes sense to limit abortions to before 24 weeks.
    Why then, did a baby born after 21 weeks gestation survive and become a "Zombrex approved viable person"? The brain is there already before that, why wait until it actually does something before deeming the owner of it a person?


  • Options
    #1058
    Tea 1000
    Registered Users Posts: 4,520 ✭✭✭Tea 1000


    Wh1stler wrote: »
    Ridiculous and we on the pro-choice pro-abortion side of the debate salute you; it is as if you are on our side considering the damage you are doing to your own cause.

    Thank you. :D
    FYP, seeing as you seem to like fixing others!


  • Options
    #1059
    Wh1stler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 276 ✭✭Wh1stler


    Tea 1000 wrote: »
    FYP, seeing as you seem to like fixing others!

    Not a 'Fair point'. The 'F' stands for 'Fixed' not 'F*#ked'.


  • Options
    #1060
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    Tea 1000 wrote: »
    Why then, did a baby born after 21 weeks gestation survive and become a "Zombrex approved viable person"?

    That question has nothing to do with what I said? There is nothing in what I said that suggests a baby born after 21 weeks wouldn't survive. My argument has nothing to do with viability of the unborn foetus.

    (if you are asking simply practically how did the baby survive I would say done to excellent German medical care)
    Tea 1000 wrote: »
    The brain is there already before that, why wait until it actually does something before deeming the owner of it a person?

    Because the "does something" is the thing that produces a person. Before that happens there is no person yet, he/she does not exist, any more than a person exists in a sperm cell, your liver or a rock.


  • Options
    #1061
    Wh1stler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 276 ✭✭Wh1stler


    Tea 1000 wrote: »
    Why then, did a baby born after 21 weeks gestation survive and become a "Zombrex approved viable person"? The brain is there already before that, why wait until it actually does something before deeming the owner of it a person?

    Because someone cared enough to make the investment?

    Some people who buy Airfix (tm) kits view the pieces in terms of the finished product. Regardless, the kit is just a collection of parts until it is assembled.

    You may argue that you have purchased a model of an aircraft or boat, or whatever, but in reality you have only purchased a collection of parts with the potential to become a model. Hell, there may even be parts missing which means it would lack even the potential.

    Do you see yet?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1062
    qrrgprgua
    Registered Users Posts: 786 ✭✭✭qrrgprgua


    Deputy Clare Daly's Private Members Bill, seeking to have abortions performed in Irish hospitals, will be debated in the Dáil later this month. It is a deceitfully worded Bill.

    Its sponsors wilfully ignore the clear ethical distinction between necessary medical interventions in pregnancy where every effort is made to save the baby and induced abortion where the baby's life is intentionally targeted.

    Contrary to what the Bill's promoters imply, Ireland without abortion, is officially first in the world when it comes to protecting women's lives in pregnancy.

    Report on Maternal Mortality 2010, UN, UNFPA, World Health Organisation, World Bank.


  • Options
    #1063
    Wh1stler
    Closed Accounts Posts: 276 ✭✭Wh1stler


    qrrgprgua wrote: »
    Deputy Clare Daly's Private Members Bill, seeking to have abortions performed in Irish hospitals, will be debated in the Dáil later this month. It is a deceitfully worded Bill.

    Its sponsors wilfully ignore the clear ethical distinction between necessary medical interventions in pregnancy where every effort is made to save the baby and induced abortion where the baby's life is intentionally targeted.

    Contrary to what the Bill's promoters imply, Ireland without abortion, is officially first in the world when it comes to protecting women's lives in pregnancy.

    Report on Maternal Mortality 2010, UN, UNFPA, World Health Organisation, World Bank.

    Well, it's not much of a report, is it?

    And by trying to connect MMR with abortion rates, the anti-choicers have opened up a can of worms, haven't they?

    The same data that shows that Ireland has the lowest MMR also shows that on average, countries with anti-choice legislation suffer higher rates of MMR than countries that are pro-choice; data that shows that Ireland is in fact fairly unique in the larger picture that is painted when the whole data is considered.

    It is disingenuous to associate anti-abortion law with low MMR. In my view, it is bordering on criminal to suggest that anti-abortion laws are directly responsible for keeping women alive.

    TBH, I don't think anyone with a brain (a person) would be fooled by the report you have quoted. If they are, then my job is going to be much harder than I thought.

    But anti-abortion laws are not 'for' mothers-to-be, they are 'for' unborn children and this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate

    paints a very different picture when it comes to children in Ireland. It is possible that the lowered MMR is due the number of females that fail to make it to maturity. Did anyone check that?

    I think that I can state as a fact that Ireland would fly up that table if she adopted the pro-choice stance; legalise abortion, have the lowest infant mortality rate in the world and also have the lowest MMR in the world as well. Win,win win!

    All that is required is a sensible approach.


  • Options
    #1064
    gimmebroadband
    Registered Users Posts: 1,267 ✭✭✭gimmebroadband


    This is a link to a video of parents who were told by their GPs that their child would have no chance of survival once born. They decided not to kill their baby, but wanted to acknowledge that they existed, that they mattered and were loved for a brief time. A photographer freely takes photographs of those precious moments as a keepsake for the parents!

    http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/23481435#23481435


  • Options
    #1065
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    gimmebroadband wrote: »
    This is a link to a video of parents who were told by their GPs that their child would have no chance of survival once born. They decided not to kill their baby, but wanted to acknowledge that they existed, that they mattered and were loved for a brief time. A photographer freely takes photographs of those precious moments as a keepsake for the parents!

    http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/today/23481435#23481435

    Each to their own I guess. If my child was going to suffer and then die I wouldn't bring it into existence just so I can get a photograph.


  • Options
    #1066
    oldrnwisr
    Registered Users Posts: 1,594 ✭✭✭oldrnwisr


    qrrgprgua wrote: »
    Contrary to what the Bill's promoters imply, Ireland without abortion, is officially first in the world when it comes to protecting women's lives in pregnancy.

    Report on Maternal Mortality 2010, UN, UNFPA, World Health Organisation, World Bank.


    No, not really.

    First of all, the report you mention, while published in 2010 actually covers the period 1990-2008 with the 2008 data being the most current available. What the data actually shows is that Greece and not Ireland has the lowest maternal mortality rate (MMR). In fact, these are how the statistics, stack up.

    Greece

    MMR: 2
    MMR Range: 2-3
    Number of maternal deaths: 2
    Lifetime Maternal Death Risk: 1 in 31800

    Ireland

    MMR: 3
    MMR Range: 2-3
    Number of maternal deaths: 2
    Lifetime Maternal Death Risk: 1 in 17800

    Now, Greece has legal abortion for all cases where the mother's life is endangered. It also allows abortion in cases of rape or foetal defect to the end of the 2nd trimester and abortion on request to the end of the first trimester.

    Similarly, Afghanistan for example, another country where abortion is illegal has an MMR of 1400 with a lifetime maternal death risk of 1 in 11!

    Quite simply, there is no argument to be made here regarding abortion and maternal mortality. The WHO has already examined the statistics and determined the causal factors in the MMR. The biggest contributing factors include severe bleeding, eclampsia and infection.

    In fact, when the relevant statistics are examined abortion is one of the safest medical procedures available.

    A study examining abortion statistics from 1972-1997 found that in the ten-year period from 1988-1997, the mortality rate from legal abortion was 0.7 per 100,000 or 0.0007%.

    The mortality rate, by comparison, for general sugrical procedures in the United States is 186,690 deaths in 14,333,993 cases or 1.32%.

    Abortion is a safe medical procedure and saying that Ireland is safer without it is a baseless argument. As far as maternal death is concerned there isn't a whole lot of difference between most European countries and certainly no difference between those where abortion is legal and those where it isn't.

    Sources


    WHO Report:

    Trends in Maternal Mortality: 1990-2008

    (2008 figures on page 23)


    Abortion mortality study:

    Risk Factors for Legal Induced Abortion-Related Mortality in the United States


    General Surgery Mortality:

    Rates and patterns of death after surgery in the United States, 1996 and 2006


  • Options
    #1067
    JimiTime
    Registered Users Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    Zombrex wrote: »
    Each to their own I guess. If my child was going to suffer and then die I wouldn't bring it into existence just so I can get a photograph.

    I think this exemplifies a spectacular lack of empathy and humanity. You may disagree with the decision this couple made, but to make such a heartless quip?? Have you any idea how it feels, especially for a woman, to carry a child only to be told that its going to die? The emotional and psychological strain it causes? The immense grief? So maybe take a minute to ponder that before you quip that this couple just wanted a photo. While I'm not one for sentimentality, I'm not one for emotionally detached coldness neither.


  • Options
    #1068
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    JimiTime wrote: »
    I think this exemplifies a spectacular lack of empathy and humanity. You may disagree with the decision this couple made, but to make such a heartless quip?? Have you any idea how it feels, especially for a woman, to carry a child only to be told that its going to die? The emotional and psychological strain it causes? The immense grief? So maybe take a minute to ponder that before you quip that this couple just wanted a photo. While I'm not one for sentimentality, I'm not one for emotionally detached coldness neither.

    I didn't say that the couple just wanted a photograph. I'm sure they wanted their baby to survive and live a long and happy life. But that wasn't going to happen. All they got was a photograph, and to me I wouldn't dream of doing that to my child just to end up with a photograph. I wouldn't dream of doing it to my child just so I can see it for a few hours, or hold it for a few hours.

    If you are annoyed that I'm dismissive of the celebration of this sort of behavior I'm sorry but I find the whole fixation on the needs of the parents at the expense of the actual child frankly disgusting (you can see my comments about Rick Sanatorium).

    I don't blame the parents who I imagine were going through great emotional distress at the thought of losing their unborn baby and I guess have some sort of excuse for this, but people who are detached from the emotion situation but still celebrate this sort of behavior really have no excuse.


  • Options
    #1069
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Zombrex wrote: »
    I don't blame the parents who I imagine were going through great emotional distress at the thought of losing their unborn baby and I guess have some sort of excuse for this, but people who are detached from the emotion situation but still celebrate this sort of behavior really have no excuse.

    I don't think it is as much celebrating the behaviour as respecting the choice that those parents made. You know, repsecting the choices of others with regards to their unborn children is one of those things we all must do apparently. Respect them for having an abortion that is. If they choose not to (pro-choice and all that), judge them.


  • Options
    #1070
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    prinz wrote: »
    I don't think it is as much celebrating the behaviour as respecting the choice that those parents made. You know, repsecting the choices of others with regards to their unborn children is one of those things we all must do apparently. Respect them for having an abortion that is. If they choose not to (pro-choice and all that), judge them.

    I think respecting a choice doesn't require that much gushing.


  • Options
    #1071
    JimiTime
    Registered Users Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    Zombrex wrote: »
    I didn't say that the couple just wanted a photograph.

    You most certainly implied it! You in fact used it to take the moral high ground by quipping:

    If my child was going to suffer and then die I wouldn't bring it into existence just so I can get a photograph.
    All they got was a photograph,

    No they didn't! If you truly believe that this is all they got, you really have no clue about the human condition. Maybe you need to spend time with some grieving mothers to enlighten you.
    I wouldn't dream of doing that to my child just to end up with a photograph. I wouldn't dream of doing it to my child just so I can see it for a few hours, or hold it for a few hours.

    Firstly, you inserted the suffering part. There is nothing in the video to suggest this suffering you are talking about.

    There is also a complex irony to this stance.
    If you are annoyed that I'm dismissive of the celebration of this sort of behavior

    I couldn't care less about your opinion on people celebrating this sort of behaviour. Its your spectacularly ignorant quip about the couple only getting a photo out of it that disappoints me. I found that tremendously cold.
    I'm sorry but I find the whole fixation on the needs of the parents at the expense of the actual child frankly disgusting

    Will you pull the other one! Thats just self righteous spin.
    I don't blame the parents who I imagine were going through great emotional distress at the thought of losing their unborn baby and I guess have some sort of excuse for this

    They have nothing to be excused for! Also, as a side note, you know doctors get things wrong too? Also, you are inserting this suffering factor. there is nothing in the vid about the suffering of the child. Of course, if the parents decided to scramble it in utero, there would maybe have been some suffering. Seriously, there is no moral highground you can take here!
    , but people who are detached from the emotion situation but still celebrate this sort of behavior really have no excuse.

    You should really have just dealt with your issue with gimmebroadband doing this, rather than being so tactless in relation to the couple in the video then. Surely you see what I'm talking about?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1072
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Zombrex wrote: »
    I think respecting a choice doesn't require that much gushing.

    In a way I agree with you. I just hope you take an equally skeptical approach when it comes to the 'gushing' over people who chose to have abortions however.


  • Options
    #1073
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    prinz wrote: »
    In a way I agree with you. I just hope you take an equally skeptical approach when it comes to the 'gushing' over people who chose to have abortions however.

    Are you serious ? I have never seen any one ''gushing'' at the choice of abortion .


  • Options
    #1074
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    JimiTime wrote: »
    Seriously, there is no moral highground you can take here!

    Of course there is.

    The interests of the parents, even if they are having a hard time emotionally, do not over rule the child. You do not bring a child into existence knowing that it will simply die (and yes suffer since the vast majority of illnesses that cause babies to die soon after birth involve suffering) just so that the parents can be emotionally fulfilled.

    I'm sorry the parents suffered this loss, but my sympathy for them extends no further than the point where they put their child through this just for themselves. There is no argument that can be made that this was for the child. This was purely and solely for the parents.

    If you disagree with that then fundamentally we have nothing to discuss. If you think my post was too quibbish perhaps that is a sign of my increasing lack of patience with the tolerance and celebration of this sort of nonsense.


  • Options
    #1075
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    prinz wrote: »
    In a way I agree with you.

    So you agree they were not simply respecting the choice, but in fact celebrating it?


  • Options
    #1076
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    Zombrex wrote: »
    The interests of the parents, even if they are having a hard time emotionally, do not over rule the child. ....If you disagree with that then fundamentally we have nothing to discuss..


    You heartless god-bothering, biblebashing, Catholic traditionalist, fundamentalist, insensitive, judgemental, anti-women, anti-human right, SPUC-supporting..............


    Oh wait you are pro choice, and you are saying the interests of the parents do not overule the child. I see. Being judgmental is not restricted to pro-lifers after all. Choice is free, as long as you are making the right one by me. The irony.


  • Options
    #1077
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    marienbad wrote: »
    Are you serious ? I have never seen any one ''gushing'' at the choice of abortion .

    In recent days I have seen a few women who came forward with their stories of abortion being described as heroes, having the bravery and courage in making a difficult decision to abort applauded etc. I see no difference between that and applauding the decision of someone who chose a different path.


  • Options
    #1078
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    prinz wrote: »

    You heartless god-bothering, biblebashing, Catholic traditionalist, fundamentalist, insensitive, judgemental, anti-women, anti-human right, SPUC-supporting..............


    Oh wait you are pro choice, and you are saying the interests of the parents do not overule the child. I see.

    Yup. Which is why I find the hypocrisy common in the anti-abortion side rather distasteful and frankly quite baffling. We must think about the unborn child!! Except of course when the parents want something from it!!

    But then I have always suspected that most anti-abortion campaigners are not all that genuinely concerned about the fetus as a person, but rather concerned about the idea of parents not wanting their children. It often seems that the fetus is just an abstract representation of the desires of the mother, not to be actually considered real person (few anti-abortion campaigners bat an eyelid when an embryo naturally miscarries, not treating it as the loss of a person because after all it wasn't the mothers choice to do terminate when in reality if it is a person it shouldn't matter how it died).

    Which is why parents like this are applauded, they wanted their child so much that they brought it into existence simply for it to die a few hours later. They feel as real parents should, right? And isn't that what it is all about. Examining what they actually did and whether or not it was for the benefit of the child seems a distance second to the desire to celebrate that they wanted the child in the first place.


  • Options
    #1079
    qrrgprgua
    Registered Users Posts: 786 ✭✭✭qrrgprgua


    prinz wrote: »
    In recent days I have seen a few women who came forward with their stories of abortion being described as heroes, having the bravery and courage in making a difficult decision to abort applauded etc. I see no difference between that and applauding the decision of someone who chose a different path.

    Few... Yes every group will have its hobby group.. I can never see women talking about abortion. Sure miscarriage is not spoken about much.... Do you honestly think that women who kill their kids intentionally (under the legality of x countries laws) are going to come out and talk about it.. They are certainly not heroes. Women like Stacie Crimm or Jenni Lake are Heroes.


  • Options
    #1080
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    prinz wrote: »
    In recent days I have seen a few women who came forward with their stories of abortion being described as heroes, having the bravery and courage in making a difficult decision to abort applauded etc. I see no difference between that and applauding the decision of someone who chose a different path.

    Absolutely agree with you , but that is a long way from ''gushing'' is it not ? . I wonder how much of the applause was for having the abortion or for coming forward and talking about it ? And why is that honesty worthy of applause ? Because women did something in a legal manner and are demonised for it. That can't be right.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1081
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    prinz wrote: »
    In recent days I have seen a few women who came forward with their stories of abortion being described as heroes, having the bravery and courage in making a difficult decision to abort applauded etc. I see no difference between that and applauding the decision of someone who chose a different path.

    No one wants to be held up as a hero, just respected and treated with a bit of dignity.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement