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

Sanctity of Life (Abortion Megathread)

Options
1…5455575960…124

Comments

  • Options
    #1682
    robdonn
    Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭robdonn


    credoie wrote: »
    Let the american people vote on it then. without a shadow of a doubt abortion would be made illegal.

    Is there ever a situation that you think abortions should be available?


  • Options
    #1683
    credoie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭credoie


    robdonn wrote: »
    Is there ever a situation that you think abortions should be available?

    what is your definition of Abortion? If there is no medical risk to the mothers life then the child should not be killed.

    I would follow the Dublin declaration

    “As experienced practitioners and researchers in obstetrics and gynaecology, we affirm that direct abortion – the purposeful destruction of the unborn child – is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.

    We uphold that there is a fundamental difference between abortion, and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child.

    We confirm that the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women.


  • Options
    #1684
    The Randy Riverbeast
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,770 ✭✭✭The Randy Riverbeast


    credoie wrote: »
    what is your definition of Abortion? If there is no medical risk to the mothers life then the child should not be killed.

    I would follow the Dublin declaration

    “As experienced practitioners and researchers in obstetrics and gynaecology, we affirm that direct abortion – the purposeful destruction of the unborn child – is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.

    We uphold that there is a fundamental difference between abortion, and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child.

    We confirm that the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women.

    Um abortion is always bad because we dont consider it abortion when it's needed?

    Nobody has ever been killed by guns, it's called a woopsie when a person dies due to a gun related incident so is completely different.


  • Options
    #1685
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,851 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    I'm on my phone right now, but here's oldrnwisr demolishing the dumbassed "Dublin declaration": http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2056990082/232/#post90430864


  • Options
    #1686
    robdonn
    Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭robdonn


    credoie wrote: »
    what is your definition of Abortion? If there is no medical risk to the mothers life then the child should not be killed.

    And if there is a medical risk to the mother's life then the child should be killed?
    credoie wrote: »
    I would follow the Dublin declaration

    “As experienced practitioners and researchers in obstetrics and gynaecology, we affirm that direct abortion – the purposeful destruction of the unborn child – is not medically necessary to save the life of a woman.

    We uphold that there is a fundamental difference between abortion, and necessary medical treatments that are carried out to save the life of the mother, even if such treatment results in the loss of life of her unborn child.

    We confirm that the prohibition of abortion does not affect, in any way, the availability of optimal care to pregnant women.

    And I would respond with The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists:
    abortions are necessary in a number of circumstances to save the life of a woman or to preserve her health. Unfortunately, pregnancy is not a risk-free life event, particularly for many women with chronic medical conditions. Despite all of our medical advances, more than 600 women die each year from pregnancy and childbirth-related reasons right here in the US. In fact, many more women would die each year if they did not have access to abortion to protect their health or to save their lives.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1687
    credoie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭credoie


    robdonn wrote: »
    And if there is a medical risk to the mother's life then the child should be killed?



    And I would respond with The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists:

    Did I say we should let women die of pregnancy related situations. Doctors are trained and paid to manage these risks.

    Our Constitution specially says a Mother has a right to life.

    The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.


  • Options
    #1688
    robdonn
    Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭robdonn


    credoie wrote: »
    Did I say we should let women die of pregnancy related situations. Doctors are trained and paid to manage these risks.

    So we should let doctors kill the child, since they are trained and paid to do so?
    credoie wrote: »
    Our Constitution specially says a Mother has a right to life.

    The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.

    Yup, that's what the law says, but as you said yourself:
    credoie wrote: »
    Slavery was legal, Racial segregation was legal, Gay Marriage was illegal.

    Laws change.


  • Options
    #1689
    credoie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭credoie


    robdonn wrote: »
    So we should let doctors kill the child, since they are trained and paid to do so?



    Yup, that's what the law says, but as you said yourself:



    Laws change.

    Our laws have to have human rights as their base. You can't create laws that favour some and discriminate against others.

    Laws that allow someone to kill another human being are wrong.

    The baby killing industry has been peddling lies for years, de-humanising the child and removing its rights. Yet when it comes to selling their baby parts, well all of sudden they are very human. Not just a couple of cells anymore, real hearts, real lungs, kidneys.. Fully human children being intentionally killed for their parts.

    These are children that are being intentionally killed. If it looks like a child and its heart is sold as human tissue, then its a human being and should be respected.. Not killed.


  • Options
    #1690
    robdonn
    Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭robdonn


    credoie wrote: »
    These are children that are being intentionally killed. If it looks like a child and its heart is sold as human tissue, then its a human being and should be respected.. Not killed.

    So a foetus in any of the Carnegie stages are fair game then, good to know.


  • Options
    #1691
    credoie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭credoie


    robdonn wrote: »
    So a foetus in any of the Carnegie stages are fair game then, good to know.

    Children "fair game"... .???


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1692
    robdonn
    Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭robdonn


    credoie wrote: »
    Children "fair game"... .???

    "Children"... ???


  • Options
    #1693
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,726 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    credoie wrote: »
    Children "fair game"... .???
    how about answering the question posed?

    Would you allow for abortion prior to the organs developing?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #1694
    credoie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭credoie


    Delirium wrote: »
    how about answering the question posed?

    Would you allow for abortion prior to the organs developing?

    How about some respect for unborn instead of saying the some children are "fair game" to be killed..

    Also this is not some secular thread, it's about the sanctity of life in the Christian forum if that hasn't escaped you.


  • Options
    #1695
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,726 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    credoie wrote: »
    How about some respect for unborn instead of saying the some children are "fair game" to be killed..

    Also this is not some secular thread, it's about the sanctity of life in the Christian forum if that hasn't escaped you.

    Should abortion be allowed before organs have formed/developed?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #1696
    robdonn
    Registered Users Posts: 1,107 ✭✭✭robdonn


    credoie wrote: »
    How about some respect for unborn instead of saying the some children are "fair game" to be killed..

    I was simply following your reasoning that we shouldn't kill a foetus if it looks like a child, which a foetus in early development does not.

    Although I did find your statement strange since you think a foetus is a child. So it's like saying that we shouldn't ride horses that look like horses or eat bananas that look like bananas.
    credoie wrote: »
    Also this is not some secular thread, it's about the sanctity of life in the Christian forum if that hasn't escaped you.

    Cool, nobody has claimed or acted otherwise, but that's fine. Now answer the question?


  • Options
    #1697
    credoie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭credoie


    robdonn wrote: »
    I was simply following your reasoning that we shouldn't kill a foetus if it looks like a child, which a foetus in early development does not.

    Although I did find your statement strange since you think a foetus is a child. So it's like saying that we shouldn't ride horses that look like horses or eat bananas that look like bananas.



    Cool, nobody has claimed or acted otherwise, but that's fine. Now answer the question?

    Why would I debate with you? When you are starting from a base of "fair game" when it comes to abortion. I don't see where a debate with you could lead. It seems to be the same pro-abortion rhetoric that is always used to for their argument.


  • Options
    #1698
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,441 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    credoie wrote: »
    Why would I debate with you? When you are starting from a base of "fair game" when it comes to abortion. I don't see where a debate with you could lead. It seems to be the same pro-abortion rhetoric that is always used to for their argument.

    So St what stage should abortion be "illegal" in your eyes, 1 week? 1 month? 5 months? Never?


  • Options
    #1699
    credoie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭credoie


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    So St what stage should abortion be "illegal" in your eyes, 1 week? 1 month? 5 months? Never?

    Let me think that over.. At what stage should we kill a human being... Hmmmm....


  • Options
    #1700
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,726 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    credoie wrote: »
    Let me think that over.. At what stage should we kill a human being... Hmmmm....

    Are twins half a human being?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #1701
    credoie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭credoie


    Delirium wrote: »
    Are twins half a human being?

    Let me ask my Brothers.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1702
    credoie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭credoie


    Are there any Christian Pro-life Moderators on this forum?


  • Options
    #1703
    _CreeD_
    Registered Users Posts: 4,130 ✭✭✭_CreeD_


    credoie wrote: »
    Are there any Christian Pro-life Moderators on this forum?

    Why would that be relevant? A public forum exists for open debate. A Moderator's job is to maintain the rules and courtesies as laid out by the forum owner. A Moderator may also post their opinion as a user, one does not conflict with the other.
    If you believe the Mod above has overstepped their authority in editing/censoring posts with Bias then report them. Or are just looking for someone in power to agree with you....?


  • Options
    #1704
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,441 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    credoie wrote: »
    Let me think that over.. At what stage should we kill a human being... Hmmmm....

    So the moment of conceptions (in your opinion) makes it human?


  • Options
    #1705
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,726 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    credoie wrote: »
    Let me ask my Brothers.

    why? can you not form opinions of your own? :confused::confused:

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #1706
    credoie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭credoie


    _CreeD_ wrote: »
    Why would that be relevant? A public forum exists for open debate. A Moderator's job is to maintain the rules and courtesies as laid out by the forum owner. A Moderator may also post their opinion as a user, one does not conflict with the other.
    If you believe the Mod above has overstepped their authority in editing/censoring posts with Bias then report them. Or are just looking for someone in power to agree with you....?

    There has been a number of threads on this. When one is open in a Christian forum and is titled Sanctity of Life then we should be allowed make our arguments according to our faith. However it seems that is not the case.


  • Options
    #1707
    credoie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭credoie


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    So the moment of conceptions (in your opinion) makes it human?

    Unless you know of another path to gain access to the human race.


  • Options
    #1708
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,441 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    credoie wrote: »
    There has been a number of threads on this. When one is open in a Christian forum and is titled Sanctity of Life then we should be allowed make our arguments according to our faith. However it seems that is not the case.

    No one is stopping you from making your argument according to your faith, just don't get upset when people who are not of your faith have different opinions to yours.


  • Options
    #1709
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,441 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    credoie wrote: »
    Unless you know of another path to gain access to the human race.

    So the moment the sperm enters the egg you have a human being?


  • Options
    #1710
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    credoie wrote: »
    Unless you know of another path to gain access to the human race.

    So the morning after pill shouldn't be allowed?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1711
    credoie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 118 ✭✭credoie


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    No one is stopping you from making your argument according to your faith, just don't get upset when people who are not of your faith have different opinions to yours.


    I'm not upset :-) however the facetious questions by those of no faith are ignorant.

    Calling the abortion of an unborn child "fair game" is ignorant.


Advertisement