abortion

Min

So if some countries are going to war based on a coloured map and they are like the UK, France, USA while others are countries are ones we choose to look down at aren't, we should want to be part of the UK, France, USA colours?

It is like if everyone is jumping off bridges we should all be doing it, but if they aren't in lets say Iran, then they must be the ones doing something wrong.

It is nice to see we aren't the sheep in Europe.

hattoncracker

Min wrote: »

So if some countries are going to war based on a coloured map and they are like the UK, France, USA while others are countries are ones we choose to look down at aren't, we should want to be part of the UK, France, USA colours?

It is like if everyone is jumping off bridges we should all be doing it, but if they aren't in lets say Iran, then they must be the ones doing something wrong.

It is nice to see we aren't the sheep in Europe.

so we're just doing it to be different?

The Idyll Race

histories wrote: »

Indeed, let's have the honest, bitter, unpalatable truth for once. Deciding to have an abortion is THE single most difficult decision that any woman will ever have to make in her life. She will live with it for the rest of her life. This is the truth as much as you may not wish to believe it. Abortion does not promote careless sex. It provides women with an option. An option that is needed in this world due to the fact that the world we live in is so very far from perfect. People need choices and abortion has to be one of them.

As for the "you can have sex and not commit" comment, how many single mothers are out there because the man decided he didn't want to commit? We do live in a society where people have sex before marriage. Even if we lived in a world where there was no sex before marriage and no divorce people can still up and disappear because they have had enough of their lives. So the whole sex=commitment is a moot point really.

"Obviously i will be fair and give exception..." how very kind of you.

I had the misfortune to have to listen to the Life Institute at my local church and they are absolutely hardline. No exceptions, and they made a particular point about non-viable foetuses had to be brought to term. But hey, they support hospice care for those born. How nice.

PieForPi

Min wrote: »

So if some countries are going to war based on a coloured map and they are like the UK, France, USA while others are countries are ones we choose to look down at aren't, we should want to be part of the UK, France, USA colours?

It is like if everyone is jumping off bridges we should all be doing it, but if they aren't in lets say Iran, then they must be the ones doing something wrong.

It is nice to see we aren't the sheep in Europe.

Ok so we could side with those who've made the worlds greatest advancements in things like medicine (causing us to live longer, better lives), technology (you wouldn't be posting here if it weren't for them), biology(we now understand our how bodies work, what is good for us, what is bad for us, etc.),engineering(You know that car/bus/tram and the tracks/roads/bridges/etc you so dearly appreciate) and lots more.

OR, for the sake of not being "sheeple", we could side with countries who are, to this very day, refusing to give their own people basic human rights, denying any form of equality to women or homosexuals or indeed persecuting them for being those things, enslaving their own, enforcing ridiculous religious laws and punishments and a lot more.

I think I'm happy to stick with those, you know, doing good stuff for our species overall. Although it is *very* tempting to be rebels and go play child war with those down in the Congo, I must say, I'll have to respectfully decline the notion.

candy-gal1

These abortion threads seem to go round and round in circles tbh, imho yes I would vote yes to bringing abortion over here as people are going to get abortions if they are needed whether they are available over here or not but having them over here would save a lot less hassle, worry etc for the person involved.
Keeping within the 24 week mark, before the foetus actually becomes a person, and being very strict on them as in making sure in one way or another that any person doesnt just use it as a contraception, once those points are made then i really dont see a problem with bringing it over here.

Everyones life is there own, no-one should be guilted in any way into bringing a life into the world or anything like that, it can only end bad in at least the majority of cases, more than likely for the child that was brought into the world through guilt and that sort of "have to" "take responsability" mentality, instead of through love and being wanted like it should be.

histories

christmas2012 wrote: »

Im not saying that it should be a punishment,its a natural consequence youre reading into things that are not there and i havent explicity said either..scroll back to see what i said..consequence



You have no other option or alternative but to mature and grow up fast when you have a baby,you have someone else to think about other than yourself for once..It very much matures most of the population that decide to keep their children..

And i take insult to the way you say im taking a blinkered approach or doing a disservice to young women who choose to scratch that problem / consequence out of their lives..

It teaches them nothing about each consequence for each action,it takes that away completley and encourages a throw caution to the wind attitude that will soon catch up on them,by way of miscarraige later in life when they are trying for a baby or deep psychological problems due to the aftermath of abortion which can be a traumatic procedure in itself,and very painful procedure to go through..The women at the marie stopes clinic dont tell you that though they just say its all about a womans choice no big deal,but for a lot of women who survived abortion it is a big deal.These clinics should come with a health warning a lot of women going for those abortions dont know what they are letting themselves in for..

The part in bold, you keep saying this but it just isn't that simple. I see it on a daily basis, people who have had children (not teens but adults) and having those children has not matured them. Not a bit! Your attitude seems to be that having a child will magically make people into better human beings and they'll function with a bit of cop on. This may be the case for some but the vast majority continue on as they were before they had a baby. Because life is not just that important to them and having a child and ensuring you follow through on the duty of care you owe that child is just not topping their list.

You say it will encourage a throw caution to the wind attitude but this is already the case. Lots of people, both teens and adults alike, are having unprotected sex and abortion cannot be availed of in this country. Allowing abortion will not suddenly have women running in their hordes to abortion clinics.

If you take away legal abortion you will end up pushing people to back ally abortions. Do you really think that is better? I'd prefer women, the world over, be able to get non-judgemental help in a safe and clean environment with proper aftercare.

Min

PieForPi wrote: »

Ok so we could side with those who've made the worlds greatest advancements in things like medicine (causing us to live longer, better lives), technology (you wouldn't be posting here if it weren't for them), biology(we now understand our how bodies work, what is good for us, what is bad for us, etc.),engineering(You know that car/bus/tram and the tracks/roads/bridges/etc you so dearly appreciate) and lots more.

OR, for the sake of not being "sheeple", we could side with countries who are, to this very day, refusing to give their own people basic human rights, denying any form of equality to women or homosexuals or indeed persecuting them for being those things, enslaving their own, enforcing ridiculous religious laws and punishments and a lot more.

I think I'm happy to stick with those, you know, doing good stuff for our species overall. Although it is *very* tempting to be rebels and go play child war with those down in the Congo, I must say, I'll have to respectfully decline the notion.

You fail to say we are like Russia who are in a colour you admire on that map, where 1 in 2 pregnancies ends in abortion and where the government is looking at trying to restrict abortion given how it is used.
You fail to mention China who are also in a colour you like, where they have forced abortions.
You fail to mention the UK, France, the USA and others where one in five pregnancies are aborted.

We don't want to be like them, but then you want to stick with the colours who have a colour you like while judging others not on abortion but on different criteria.

poeticseraphim

A single woman who has a low economic status makes a mistake and finds herself pregnant and unable to care for it.

In my mind it is immoral not to let her choose.

It is a womans body....end of debate for me.

The church is an evil fossilized institution that did nothing but exploit living children in the most horrendous way and ignore it.


Now they want to exploit the unborn to their own ends.It is a cynical ploy boost publicity for them and drum up support from a base of conservative idiots who are prepared to still go to a building every sunday and give money to an institution who protected their members who abused the living children of the world for decades.

We should protest outside their masses at their crimes and us pro-lifers should tell them where to go.


Who gave them the right to speak for the 'unborn' anway...how would it feel to know your mother was forced to do something against her will to bring you into the world..that she went through that torture.... .it should be choice..

The idea that an institution that does not allow female priests wants a say in this boggles the mind

Late term abortions ..fair enough no....unless the womans life is in danger

Late term abortion is 20 -24 weeks

mid term is 12-19

Early is 0-12 weeks

Early bortion i dont think anyone should have an issue ....mid term i have no issue ..late term only if the woman has complications.

We should do a poll !

poeticseraphim

Min wrote: »

You fail to say we are like Russia who are in a colour you admire on that map, where 1 in 2 pregnancies ends in abortion and where the government is looking at trying to restrict abortion given how it is used.
You fail to mention China who are also in a colour you like, where they have forced abortions.
You fail to mention the UK, France, the USA and others where one in five pregnancies are aborted.

We don't want to be like them, but then you want to stick with the colours who have a colour you like while judging others not on abortion but on different criteria.

I would say the majority do want leglislation more like Frnce or the uk

I think certainly most would back early term abortions....and definitely for rape and incest

Min

poeticseraphim wrote: »

A single woman who has a low economic status makes a mistake and finds herself pregnant and unable to care for it.

In my mind it is immoral not to let her choose.

It is a womans body....end of debate for me.

The church is an evil fossilized institution that did nothing but exploit living children in the most horrendous way and ignore it.


Now they want to exploit the unborn to their own ends.It is a cynical ploy boost publicity for them and drum up support from a base of conservative idiots who are prepared to still go to a building every sunday and give money to an institution who protected their members who abused the living children of the world for decades.

We should protest outside their masses at their crimes and us pro-lifers should tell them where to go.


Who gave them the right to speak for the 'unborn' anway...how would it feel to know your mother was forced to do something against her will to bring you into the world..that she went through that torture.... .it should be choice..

The idea that an institution that does not allow female priests wants a say in this boggles the mind

Late term abortions ..fair enough no....unless the womans life is in danger

Late term abortion is 20 -24 weeks

mid term is 12-19

Early is 0-12 weeks

Early bortion i dont think anyone should have an issue ....mid term i have no issue ..late term only if the woman has complications.

We should do a poll !

The church has been talking for the unborn for a very long time, let me give you some examples:

You shall not kill an unborn child or murder a newborn infant.

The Didache ("The Lord's Instruction to the Gentiles through the Twelve Apostles"). II, 2, translated by J.A. Kleist, S.J., Ancient Christian Writers, Volume 6. Westminster, 1948, page 16.

You shall love your neighbor more than your own life. You shall not slay the child by abortion.

Barnabas (c. 70-138), Epistle, Volume II, page 19.

For us [Christians], murder is once and for all forbidden; so even the child in the womb, while yet the mother's blood is still being drawn on to form the human being, it is not lawful for us to destroy. To forbid birth is only quicker murder. It makes no difference whether one takes away the life once born or destroys it as it comes to birth. He is a man, who is to be a man; the fruit is always present in the seed.

Tertullian, 197, Apologeticus, page 9.

Those women who use drugs to bring about an abortion commit murder and will have to give an account to God for their abortion.

Athenagoras of Athens, letter to Marcus Aurelius in 177, Legatio pro Christianis ("Supplication for the Christians"), page 35.

It is among you that I see newly-begotten sons at times exposed to wild beasts and birds, or dispatched by the violent death of strangulation; and there are women who, by the use of medicinal potions, destroy the unborn life in their wombs, and murder the child before they bring it forth. These practices undoubtedly are derived from a custom established by your gods; Saturn, though he did not expose his sons, certainly devoured them.

Minucius Felix, theologian (c. 200-225), Octavius, p. 30.

... if we would not kill off the human race born and developing according to God's plan, then our whole lives would be lived according to nature. Women who make use of some sort of deadly abortion drug kill not only the embryo but, together with it, all human kindness.

Clement of Alexandria, priest and the "Father of Theologians" (c. 150-220), Christ the Educator, Volume II, page 10. Also see Octavius, c.30, nn. 2-3.

Sometimes this lustful cruelty or cruel lust goes so far as to seek to procure a baneful sterility, and if this fails the fetus conceived in the womb is in one way or another smothered or evacuated, in the desire to destroy the offspring before it has life, or if it already lives in the womb, to kill it before it is born. If both man and woman are party to such practices they are not spouses at all; and if from the first they have carried on thus they have come together not for honest wedlock, but for impure gratification; if both are not party to these deeds, I make bold to say that either the one makes herself a mistress of the husband, or the other simply the paramour of his wife.

St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo (354-430), De Nuptius et Concupiscus ("On Marriage and Concupiscence"), 1.17.

Some virgins [unmarried women], when they learn they are with child through sin, practice abortion by the use of drugs. Frequently they die themselves and are brought before the ruler of the lower world guilty of three crimes; suicide, adultery against Christ, and murder of an unborn child.

St. Jerome, Bible Scholar and translator (c. 340-420), Letter to Eustochium, 22.13.

The hairsplitting difference between formed and unformed makes no difference to us. Whoever deliberately commits abortion is subject to the penalty for homicide.

St. Basil the Great, priest (c. 329-379), First Canonical Letter, from the work Three Canonical Letters. Loeb Classical Library, Volume III, pages 20 to 23.

Accordingly, among surgeon's tools, there is a certain instrument, which is formed with a nicely-adjusted flexible frame for opening the uterus first of all, and keeping it open; it is further furnished with an annular blade, by means of which the limbs within the womb are dissected with anxious but unfaltering care; its last appendage being a blunted or covered hood, wherewith the entire foetus is extracted by a violent delivery. There is also a copper needle or spike, by which the actual death is managed in this furtive robbery of life: they give it, from its infanticide function, the name of enbruosphaktes, the slayer of the infant, which was of course alive ... life begins with conception, because we contend that the soul also begins from conception; life taking its commencement at the same moment and place that the soul does.

Tertullian, theologian (150-225), Treatise on the Soul, pages 25 and 27.

Those who give drugs for procuring abortion, and those who receive poisons to kill the foetus, are subjected to the penalty for murder.

Trullian (Quinisext) Council (692), Canons, 91.

Cookie_Monster

Abortion should be mandatory for everyone from now on, might finally sort this planet out in our lifetimes.

robman60

HavingCrack wrote: »

Do you have statistics to prove this occurs in other countries-the United Kingdom or the United States for example? That people actually use abortion as a method of birth control? I just find it hard to believe that is a widespread practice. If evidence exists to prove me wrong I'm prepared to change my views however.

Not sure if this was addressed in any of the posts in pages 3-11, but I'll address it here anyway.
Source: http://www.ifpa.ie/Hot-Topics/Abortion/Statistics
In 2011 women with Ireland as their primary residence had 4,149 abortions in the UK, which is the main country to which women travelled for abortion from Ireland. From 2005-2009 (5 years) Irish women had 1,470 abortions in the Netherlands, which is an average of about 300 per year. The numbers travelling to other countries aren't documented and I suspect they're quite small. Even if you bump up the figure significantly you'll see we still have a much lower rate than other countries with legal abortion.

So assuming there were similar figures in 2011 (no data yet available) there were approximately 4,449 abortions on Irish women in 2011.


Irish population was 4,581,269 at the 2011 census, so that means Irish people (stats obviously include men and women) had an abortion rate of 1 abortion per 1029.7 people.


Compare this to the UK, or rather Wales and England as the statistics don't include Scotland. England + Wales have a combined population of 56.1 million. Women resident in either England or Wales had 189,931 abortions. I used bold for resident in case you think these stats included Irish women.
This means Wales and England combined had an abortion rate of one abortion per 295.4 people

Source:
http://mediacentre.dh.gov.uk/2012/05/29/abortion-statistics-england-wales-2011/


So, in summary, Irish women had 1 abortion for every 1029.7 people, while English and Welsh women had 1 for every 295.4 people in 2011.


The US rate is even higher again, with about 1 abortion for every 200 people in any given year.

I think this proves beyond a reasonable doubt that people do use abortion as they would contraception.

I'm vehemently opposed to any introduction of abortion here as introducing it for any reason leaves loopholes. Even if it's introduced for cases for cases of the women's health a doctor can argue that a women is always at more risk of dying while carrying a baby than while not pregnant. I also think abortion's legality or lack thereof is far beyond Church vs. State. It's about respecting human life in its most vulnerable form. If the day comes where abortion is introduced we've definitely taken from the intrinsic value of human life.

If it goes to a referendum I think it wouldn't pass and I would certainly be against any form of introduction, even though I can't yet vote.

If you need any clarification on these figures don't hesitate to ask.

efb

But we agreed to abortion where the mother's life's at risk...?

Nodin

efb wrote: »

But we agreed to abortion where the mother's life's at risk...?

Yep. This doesn't seem to have registered with some. Denial, perhaps.

Skylinehead

Min wrote: »

You fail to say we are like Russia who are in a colour you admire on that map, where 1 in 2 pregnancies ends in abortion and where the government is looking at trying to restrict abortion given how it is used.
You fail to mention China who are also in a colour you like, where they have forced abortions.
You fail to mention the UK, France, the USA and others where one in five pregnancies are aborted.

We don't want to be like them, but then you want to stick with the colours who have a colour you like while judging others not on abortion but on different criteria.

I'd be perfectly happy to have legislation like the UK or France. So don't go on with this "we" crap, when it's really "you".

greenpilot

Min wrote: »

poeticseraphim wrote: »

A single woman who has a low economic status makes a mistake and finds herself pregnant and unable to care for it.

In my mind it is immoral not to let her choose.

It is a womans body....end of debate for me.

The church is an evil fossilized institution that did nothing but exploit living children in the most horrendous way and ignore it.


Now they want to exploit the unborn to their own ends.It is a cynical ploy boost publicity for them and drum up support from a base of conservative idiots who are prepared to still go to a building every sunday and give money to an institution who protected their members who abused the living children of the world for decades.

We should protest outside their masses at their crimes and us pro-lifers should tell them where to go.


Who gave them the right to speak for the 'unborn' anway...how would it feel to know your mother was forced to do something against her will to bring you into the world..that she went through that torture.... .it should be choice..

The idea that an institution that does not allow female priests wants a say in this boggles the mind

Late term abortions ..fair enough no....unless the womans life is in danger

Late term abortion is 20 -24 weeks

mid term is 12-19

Early is 0-12 weeks

Early bortion i dont think anyone should have an issue ....mid term i have no issue ..late term only if the woman has complications.

We should do a poll !

The church has been talking for the unborn for a very long time, let me give you some examples:

You shall not kill an unborn child or murder a newborn infant.

The Didache ("The Lord's Instruction to the Gentiles through the Twelve Apostles"). II, 2, translated by J.A. Kleist, S.J., Ancient Christian Writers, Volume 6. Westminster, 1948, page 16.

You shall love your neighbor more than your own life. You shall not slay the child by abortion.

Barnabas (c. 70-138), Epistle, Volume II, page 19.

For us [Christians], murder is once and for all forbidden; so even the child in the womb, while yet the mother's blood is still being drawn on to form the human being, it is not lawful for us to destroy. To forbid birth is only quicker murder. It makes no difference whether one takes away the life once born or destroys it as it comes to birth. He is a man, who is to be a man; the fruit is always present in the seed.

Tertullian, 197, Apologeticus, page 9.

Those women who use drugs to bring about an abortion commit murder and will have to give an account to God for their abortion.

Athenagoras of Athens, letter to Marcus Aurelius in 177, Legatio pro Christianis ("Supplication for the Christians"), page 35.

It is among you that I see newly-begotten sons at times exposed to wild beasts and birds, or dispatched by the violent death of strangulation; and there are women who, by the use of medicinal potions, destroy the unborn life in their wombs, and murder the child before they bring it forth. These practices undoubtedly are derived from a custom established by your gods; Saturn, though he did not expose his sons, certainly devoured them.

Minucius Felix, theologian (c. 200-225), Octavius, p. 30.

... if we would not kill off the human race born and developing according to God's plan, then our whole lives would be lived according to nature. Women who make use of some sort of deadly abortion drug kill not only the embryo but, together with it, all human kindness.

Clement of Alexandria, priest and the "Father of Theologians" (c. 150-220), Christ the Educator, Volume II, page 10. Also see Octavius, c.30, nn. 2-3.

Sometimes this lustful cruelty or cruel lust goes so far as to seek to procure a baneful sterility, and if this fails the fetus conceived in the womb is in one way or another smothered or evacuated, in the desire to destroy the offspring before it has life, or if it already lives in the womb, to kill it before it is born. If both man and woman are party to such practices they are not spouses at all; and if from the first they have carried on thus they have come together not for honest wedlock, but for impure gratification; if both are not party to these deeds, I make bold to say that either the one makes herself a mistress of the husband, or the other simply the paramour of his wife.

St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo (354-430), De Nuptius et Concupiscus ("On Marriage and Concupiscence"), 1.17.

Some virgins [unmarried women], when they learn they are with child through sin, practice abortion by the use of drugs. Frequently they die themselves and are brought before the ruler of the lower world guilty of three crimes; suicide, adultery against Christ, and murder of an unborn child.

St. Jerome, Bible Scholar and translator (c. 340-420), Letter to Eustochium, 22.13.

The hairsplitting difference between formed and unformed makes no difference to us. Whoever deliberately commits abortion is subject to the penalty for homicide.

St. Basil the Great, priest (c. 329-379), First Canonical Letter, from the work Three Canonical Letters. Loeb Classical Library, Volume III, pages 20 to 23.

Accordingly, among surgeon's tools, there is a certain instrument, which is formed with a nicely-adjusted flexible frame for opening the uterus first of all, and keeping it open; it is further furnished with an annular blade, by means of which the limbs within the womb are dissected with anxious but unfaltering care; its last appendage being a blunted or covered hood, wherewith the entire foetus is extracted by a violent delivery. There is also a copper needle or spike, by which the actual death is managed in this furtive robbery of life: they give it, from its infanticide function, the name of enbruosphaktes, the slayer of the infant, which was of course alive ... life begins with conception, because we contend that the soul also begins from conception; life taking its commencement at the same moment and place that the soul does.

Tertullian, theologian (150-225), Treatise on the Soul, pages 25 and 27.

Those who give drugs for procuring abortion, and those who receive poisons to kill the foetus, are subjected to the penalty for murder
.

Trullian (Quinisext) Council (692), Canons, 91.

The church has also been raping and buggering children for a long time too...I don't see that mentioned in your archaic and irrelevant drivel.

Roll on a referendum. The church are in for a serious ass kicking. Ireland is a secular state now. We, the future of Ireland will put the final nail in the churches coffin.

shruikan2553

robman60 wrote: »

Not sure if this was addressed in any of the posts in pages 3-11, but I'll address it here anyway.
Source: http://www.ifpa.ie/Hot-Topics/Abortion/Statistics
In 2011 women with Ireland as their primary residence had 4,149 abortions in the UK, which is the main country to which women travelled for abortion from Ireland. From 2005-2009 (5 years) Irish women had 1,470 abortions in the Netherlands, which is an average of about 300 per year. The numbers travelling to other countries aren't documented and I suspect they're quite small. Even if you bump up the figure significantly you'll see we still have a much lower rate than other countries with legal abortion.

So assuming there were similar figures in 2011 (no data yet available) there were approximately 4,449 abortions on Irish women in 2011.


Irish population was 4,581,269 at the 2011 census, so that means Irish people (stats obviously include men and women) had an abortion rate of 1 abortion per 1029.7 people.


Compare this to the UK, or rather Wales and England as the statistics don't include Scotland. England + Wales have a combined population of 56.1 million. Women resident in either England or Wales had 189,931 abortions. I used bold for resident in case you think these stats included Irish women.
This means Wales and England combined had an abortion rate of one abortion per 295.4 people

Source:
http://mediacentre.dh.gov.uk/2012/05/29/abortion-statistics-england-wales-2011/


So, in summary, Irish women had 1 abortion for every 1029.7 people, while English and Welsh women had 1 for every 295.4 people in 2011.


The US rate is even higher again, with about 1 abortion for every 200 people in any given year.

I think this proves beyond a reasonable doubt that people do use abortion as they would contraception.

I'm vehemently opposed to any introduction of abortion here as introducing it for any reason leaves loopholes. Even if it's introduced for cases for cases of the women's health a doctor can argue that a women is always at more risk of dying while carrying a baby than while not pregnant. I also think abortion's legality or lack thereof is far beyond Church vs. State. It's about respecting human life in its most vulnerable form. If the day comes where abortion is introduced we've definitely taken from the intrinsic value of human life.

If it goes to a referendum I think it wouldn't pass and I would certainly be against any form of introduction, even though I can't yet vote.

If you need any clarification on these figures don't hesitate to ask.

This doesnt show that it would be used as contraception. How many pregnancies would of ended in abortion if an irish woman could? During those year they had to travel which made things more difficult to have one. If a woman cant afford to get to the UK then they will have to give birth to the baby.

JupiterKid

I am firmly pro-choice on the issue of abortion* and would like nothing more than to see the evil shrill views of a religious institution that oppressed this country for centuries and destroyed the lives of countless people being silenced for once and for all.

I would also support pro-choice protests outside churches all over the country where the sheep congregate for a weekly brainwashing.

The Catholic church love to go on about protecting the "unborn" - well, what about the lives of those that are born? The raped children, the women treated as prisoners of their own bodies and third class human beings, gay men and lesbian women treated as outcasts and criminals?



*excepting late term abortions, but at the end of the day I'm a man and it's not my body.

Annasopra

robman60 wrote: »

I'm vehemently opposed to any introduction of abortion here as introducing it for any reason leaves loopholes. Even if it's introduced for cases for cases of the women's health a doctor can argue that a women is always at more risk of dying while carrying a baby than while not pregnant.

What? Are you saying that if a pregnant womans life is at risk then you would rather the woman dies then the baby does?

robman60

JupiterKid wrote: »

I am firmly pro-choice on the issue of abortion* and would like nothig more than to see the evil shrill views of a religious institution that oppressed this country for centuries and destroyed the lives of countlerss people being silenced for once and for all.

I would also support pro-choice protests outside churches all over the country where the sheep congregate for a weekly brainwashing.

The Catholic church love to go on about protecting ther "unborn" - well, what about the lives of those that are born - the raped children, the women treated as prisoners of tbheir own bodies and third class hauman beings, gay men and lesbian women treated as outcasts and criminals?



*excepting late term abortions, but at the end of the day I'm a man and it's not my body.

You can continue to say that being pro-life is reserved to the church, but the fact is you're wrong. I'm firmly pro-life and my debate against abortion doesn't consist of "well babies are the image of God" or anything of the sort. Being against the killing of another individual member of the human race, from my perspective at least, is based on my understanding of right and wrong, not what an institution says.

You're lying if you say only religious people are against abortion. There are countless non-religious groups against abortion.

Min

Skylinehead wrote: »

I'd be perfectly happy to have legislation like the UK or France. So don't go on with this "we" crap, when it's really "you".

It was about colours on a map. It was look who has the same colour as Ireland, then non abortion criteria was used against these countries with the same colour on that map.

Min

JupiterKid wrote: »

I am firmly pro-choice on the issue of abortion* and would like nothig more than to see the evil shrill views of a religious institution that oppressed this country for centuries and destroyed the lives of countless people being silenced for once and for all.

I would also support pro-choice protests outside churches all over the country where the sheep congregate for a weekly brainwashing.

The Catholic church love to go on about protecting the "unborn" - well, what about the lives of those that are born? The raped children, the women treated as prisoners of their own bodies and third class human beings, gay men and lesbian women treated as outcasts and criminals?



*excepting late term abortions, but at the end of the day I'm a man and it's not my body.

In reply to your last comment, a man has every right to a say, we all lived inside a woman's womb for a part of our lives.

blacklilly

Hey all you non religious people stop using the pathetic defence of all people who are pro life are catholics or religious and therefore their opinions aren't valid.
I've said it before and I'll say it a thousand times more, I am not religious, I am pro life, my beliefs do not stem from religion, my generation of pro life supporters are largely non religious (not that that makes my opinions any more valid than that of a religious person) I'm sick of hearing the same religious slanging from pro choice, its like its your only basis of argument! Get a proper argument for once, the religious debate is getting so old and well does absolutely nothing to strengthen your argument.
Do I believe all pro choice are liberal fanatics who despise any form of religion, no, why? Well because my mind is not that narrow and I do not see how your religious or non religious views can alter the validity of someones opinion!
Yes priests have raped children but so have many fathers, uncles and brothers, why is that even relevant to this, why must you always bring the church into this.
Open your mind beyond the confines of the church and awaken yourself to the possibility that not all pro life supporters are religious, it seems to me that the only people who are still confined by the church are those who give out about it at any given opportunity.

efb

Min wrote: »

In reply to your last comment, a man has every right to a say, we all lived inside a woman's womb for a part of our lives.

I lived in a woman's womb once so I can impose my will on what happens their bodies???

robman60

mango salsa wrote: »

What? Are you saying that if a pregnant womans life is at risk then you would rather the woman dies then the baby does?

I didn't say that anywhere if you actually read my post. I'm in favour in principle of abortion where the mother's life is at risk but unless it's regulated extremely tightly you'll end up with abortion for all kinds of reasons.

It's a danger to the mother's health if she's suffering from morning sickness, but I don't think that's adequate grounds for abortion. Any sickness is potentially a threat to the mother's life and that's why I have extreme reservations about legalised abortion even in cases where the mother's life is at risk.

tweniebaby

PieForPi wrote: »

A lot of people, including women, are giving very little credit to other women. There's an underlying implication from a lot of posters here that abortion being available will make a load of women use it as their only contraception. I don't know any women that stupid, maybe you do, who knows, but if they're dumb enough to style their life in such a way then they most certainly should not be responsible for the upbringing of a child, hence furthering the argument for wide access to the service.

I actually know of a girl in the UK who has four abortions and has never used contraception. EVER. To her, I guess, it is form of contraception. The thoughts of her bring up a child is enough to bring on an anxiety attack.

Morag

Min wrote: »

The church has been talking for the unborn for a very long time, let me give you some examples:

How about I give you a few;

http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_hist.htm

The roman catholic church ( I assume this is what you mean by church, despite the fact we have many different denominations of christianity in this country)
has had a varying range of opinion on abortion and it was acceptable in the first trimester for a very long time, so to state that the roman catholic church has had the same stance on abortion all along is incorrect.

efb

tweniebaby wrote: »

I actually know a girl in the UK who has four abortions and has never used contraception. EVER. To her, I guess, it is form of contraception. The thoughts of her bring up a child is enough to bring on an anxiety attack.

how do you know this???

Annasopra

robman60 wrote: »

I didn't say that anywhere if you actually read my post. I'm in favour in principle of abortion where the mother's life is at risk but unless it's regulated extremely tightly you'll end up with abortion for all kinds of reasons.

It's a danger to the mother's health if she's suffering from morning sickness, but I don't think that's adequate grounds for abortion. Any sickness is potentially a threat to the mother's life and that's why I have extreme reservations about legalised abortion even in cases where the mother's life is at risk.

You're actually contradicting yourself saying you are in favour of abortion where the womans life is at risk when a few minutes ago you said the opposite.

robman60 wrote: »

I'm vehemently opposed to any introduction of abortion here as introducing it for any reason leaves loopholes.

The Idyll Race

mango salsa wrote: »

What? Are you saying that if a pregnant womans life is at risk then you would rather the woman dies then the baby does?

That is exactly what is being said, as the hardliners believe such a situation never exists (even if does)