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

We are the only nation in Europe which bans abortion.

Options
1…457910…23

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    StudentDad
    Registered Users Posts: 1,457 ✭✭✭StudentDad


    AnGaelach wrote: »
    And a more sizeable number of people disagree with your proposed "right". You would give women the right to extinguish life. Frankly that's barbaric.

    I would give women the right to decide whether they choose to be pregnant. Yes. If you're going to go down the route of extinguishing life as you put it, then I presume you are also against the myriad forms of contraception currently available as well?

    SD


  • Options
    #183
    AnGaelach
    Registered Users Posts: 1,533 ✭✭✭AnGaelach


    bubblypop wrote: »
    Sick, evil and inhumane were bandied about because maintenance is paid for the child. To withhold maintenance is punishing a child for something beyond their control.
    It's never right.

    But you can somehow justify terminating a child?


  • Options
    #184
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    AnGaelach wrote: »
    You're simply wrong, and now you're being passive aggressive about it. You've not studied the law, because you've made erroneous claims time and again.

    The law is open to interpretation and reinterpretation, you know that if you study law.


  • Options
    #185
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    AnGaelach wrote: »
    But you can somehow justify terminating a child?

    A pregnancy that has been terminated does not produce a child, a child never exists, therefore there is no terminating of children.
    Terminating a child would be murder.
    Terminating a pregnancy is not murder


  • Options
    #186
    AnGaelach
    Registered Users Posts: 1,533 ✭✭✭AnGaelach


    StudentDad wrote: »
    I would give women the right to decide whether they choose to be pregnant. Yes. If you're going to go down the route of extinguishing life as you put it, then I presume you are also against the myriad forms of contraception currently available as well?

    SD

    No, because a sperm or unfertilised egg does not have the capacity for life by itself. A zygote, barring any catastrophe, will become life. This is a clear distinction that must be made. I'm aware people have sex, I'm not a puritan (I've been told [more like accused, really] on here that I must want to punish people for the sin of sex before).

    If you don't want a kid, wear a condom or go on the pill. If you get pregnant while on the pill or if you've used a condom, then that's just bad luck and you're going to have to accept it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #187
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    _Jamie_ wrote: »
    This is a terrible idea and is a good example of why F4J never seems to get much public support behind them. By withholding maintenance, the child the father supposedly cares about is the one that suffers. Maintenance and access should never be linked. This is why it is, deservedly, met with derision as a concept. How can a father who cares about his child do something that will detrimentally affect their life?

    Who are you kidding? You think children don't suffer from losing a loving parent a bit more than their mother having to pull her belt in a bit?

    It's all they have when the only penalty for withholding access is a parenting course that came in last year and has yet to have a single mother sent on.

    Absolute cock. Children suffer terribly at the hands of vengeful mothers who stop them seeing a loving father. This is the only weapon fathers have. I fully support it.


  • Options
    #188
    AnGaelach
    Registered Users Posts: 1,533 ✭✭✭AnGaelach


    bubblypop wrote: »
    The law is open to interpretation and reinterpretation, you know that if you study law.

    Yeah, and that's why they referred it to the people, to clarify if travel would conflict with the Constitution. Jeez, you'd know that if you had any wits about you, instead of calling it hypocritical.


  • Options
    #189
    nice_guy80
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,723 ✭✭✭nice_guy80


    Its the thinking that is stuck in the middle ages


  • Options
    #190
    Arcade_Tryer
    Registered Users Posts: 2,021 ✭✭✭Arcade_Tryer


    Enters thread.
    AnGaelach wrote: »

    If you don't want a kid, wear a condom or go on the pill. If you get pregnant while on the pill or if you've used a condom, then that's just bad luck and you're going to have to accept it.
    Leaves thread.


  • Options
    #191
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    AnGaelach wrote: »
    Yeah, and that's why they referred it to the people, to clarify if travel would conflict with the Constitution. Jeez, you'd know that if you had any wits about you, instead of calling it hypocritical.

    It is hypocritical!
    That's why they need to do something about it


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #192
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    AnGaelach wrote: »
    If you've been discriminated against, you can sue them in the courts, which people are only too happy to do. Away with that victim nonsense.

    You seem to be the person with the chip not me


  • Options
    #193
    _Jamie_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 603 ✭✭✭_Jamie_


    FortySeven wrote: »
    Who are you kidding? You think children don't suffer from losing a loving patent a bit more than their mother having to pull her belt in a bit?

    They do suffer if they don't see their dad enough. And by withholding maintenance, you are adding to their troubles. You are making life worse for them than it already is. There is no defence and the notion is rightfully derided. It won't engender much public support so back to the drawing board, F4J! And by deriding it, that doesn't mean one is supporting mothers spitefully not letting childrens see their fathers. Both are abhorrent. Both are showing spite to the other parent with little regard for the child in the middle of it. Awful stuff.


  • Options
    #194
    AnGaelach
    Registered Users Posts: 1,533 ✭✭✭AnGaelach


    bubblypop wrote: »
    It is hypocritical!
    That's why they need to do something about it

    Like criminalising it? Or is this just a shtick of yours to try and browbeat someone into agreeing with you?


  • Options
    #195
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    FortySeven wrote: »
    Children suffer terribly at the hands of vengeful mothers who stop them seeing a loving father. This is the only weapon fathers have. I fully support it.

    I think this is a bit too personal for you.
    Children may suffer from not seeing a parent, absolutely.
    They also suffer from lack of money.
    It's not the only 'weapon' father's have. And it shouldn't be seen as a weapon!
    Maintenance should be paid no matter what other problems there are. Sort the problems some other way.
    Money shouldn't come into it, and to use it as a weapon is so wrong.


  • Options
    #196
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Using children as a weapon is just wrong no matter what gender you are. It's just as disgusting and harmful to hold back maintenance as it is to hold back access. You have to feel sorry for the children stuck with those kinds of deadbeats for parents.


  • Options
    #197
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    bubblypop wrote: »
    I think this is a bit too personal for you.
    Children may suffer from not seeing a parent, absolutely.
    They also suffer from lack of money.
    It's not the only 'weapon' father's have. And it shouldn't be seen as a weapon!
    Maintenance should be paid no matter what other problems there are. Sort the problems some other way.
    Money shouldn't come into it, and to use it as a weapon is so wrong.

    I wholeheartedly disagree. There are NO other ways to sort the problem.

    Witholding maintenance should not hurt the children. There is not a single mother in Ireland who is not either working and receiving fis or on benefits enough to feed a family.

    Maintenance is cream. Not butter. It is the Friday night out and a paid babysitter. It us that little extra to get a spa treatment.

    A decent mother would tighten HER belt and the children's lives would not change one bit. Until she fancied her night out or her spa day and there it is. Kids get to see that loving parent again.

    I'm surprised this hasn't happened sooner.

    100% has my support.

    By the way, having experience of something does not necessitate taking it personally.


  • Options
    #198
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    FortySeven wrote: »
    I wholeheartedly disagree. There are NO other ways to sort the problem.

    Witholdong maintenance should not hurt the children. There is not a mother in Ireland who is not either working and receiving fis or on benefits enough to feed a family.

    Maintenance is cream. Not butter. It is the Friday night out and a paid babysitter. It us that lite extra to get a spa treatment.

    A decent mother would tighten HER belt and the children's lives would not change one but. Until she fancied her night out or her spa day and there it is. Kids get to see that loving patent again.

    I'm surprised this hasn't happened sooner.

    100% has my support.

    Maybe that's your life.
    Speaking as someone that grew up in a one parent family with 3 kids, we didn't have a penny.
    My father didn't give us a penny, ever.
    We had st Vincent de Paul make Xmas for us.
    So no, maintenance is not a babysitter on a Friday night for a mother.
    My friend has 4 kids and her ex husband holds that maintenance money over her, back to school, xmas? Forget about it, why would he give any money to those things?
    Some weeks he gives money, some weeks he doesn't bother his bum.
    He sees his kids but doesn't bother providing for them when he doesn't want to.

    So, no maintenance should never be a weapon, ever.


  • Options
    #199
    _Jamie_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 603 ✭✭✭_Jamie_


    FortySeven wrote: »
    I wholeheartedly disagree. There are NO other ways to sort the problem.

    Witholding maintenance should not hurt the children. There is not a single mother in Ireland who is not either working and receiving fis or on benefits enough to feed a family.

    Maintenance is cream. Not butter. It is the Friday night out and a paid babysitter. It us that little extra to get a spa treatment.

    A decent mother would tighten HER belt and the children's lives would not change one bit. Until she fancied her night out or her spa day and there it is. Kids get to see that loving parent again.

    I'm surprised this hasn't happened sooner.

    100% has my support.

    By the way, having experience of something does not necessitate taking it personally.

    Whatever you need to tell yourself, buddy.


  • Options
    #200
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    _Jamie_ wrote: »
    They do suffer if they don't see their dad enough. And by withholding maintenance, you are adding to their troubles. You are making life worse for them than it already is. There is no defence and the notion is rightfully derided. It won't engender much public support so back to the drawing board, F4J! And by deriding it, that doesn't mean one is supporting mothers spitefully not letting childrens see their fathers. Both are abhorrent. Both are showing spite to the other parent with little regard for the child in the middle of it. Awful stuff.

    One is only because of the other. These men want to pay maintenance. These men were paying maintenance. It is a protest. There is only one side being abhorrent here. This is a response to that due to the complete failing of the state to do ANYTHING to help these children. Many of who were raised by their fathers right up until the day they can't see them again.


  • Options
    #201
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    FortySeven wrote: »
    I wholeheartedly disagree. There are NO other ways to sort the problem.

    Witholding maintenance should not hurt the children. There is not a single mother in Ireland who is not either working and receiving fis or on benefits enough to feed a family.

    Maintenance is cream. Not butter. It is the Friday night out and a paid babysitter. It us that little extra to get a spa treatment.

    A decent mother would tighten HER belt and the children's lives would not change one bit. Until she fancied her night out or her spa day and there it is. Kids get to see that loving parent again.

    I'm surprised this hasn't happened sooner.

    100% has my support.

    By the way, having experience of something does not necessitate taking it personally.

    I know plenty of single parents who would be on the breadline without maintenance. Your comments about it going towards treats for the mother shows your true feelings about women. A parent should love their kids more than they hate the ex and do the decent thing by them. Your obligations don't end just because you mo longer live with them. I feel so sorry for children caught up in this juvenile tug of war. The psychological damage alone won't stop the childish antics of their parents.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #202
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,057 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    FortySeven wrote: »
    I wholeheartedly disagree. There are NO other ways to sort the problem.

    Witholding maintenance should not hurt the children. There is not a single mother in Ireland who is not either working and receiving fis or on benefits enough to feed a family.

    Maintenance is cream. Not butter. It is the Friday night out and a paid babysitter. It us that little extra to get a spa treatment.

    A decent mother would tighten HER belt and the children's lives would not change one bit. Until she fancied her night out or her spa day and there it is. Kids get to see that loving parent again.

    I'm surprised this hasn't happened sooner.

    100% has my support.

    By the way, having experience of something does not necessitate taking it personally.

    Well I don't live down south any more, but maybe I should - I've never lived any place where social welfare was so good that maintenance was the "cream" on top of it!

    Court ordered Maintenance is only needed to pay for a spa day for the ex? TBH it sounds like a complete fantasy.


  • Options
    #203
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    _Jamie_ wrote: »
    Whatever you need to tell yourself, buddy.

    You know I'm right hence the lack of an argument.

    You're white knighting. Not sure why, you won't get a ride on an abortion thread buddy.


  • Options
    #204
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,057 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    FortySeven wrote: »
    You know I'm right hence hence the lack of an argument.

    You're white knighting. Not sure why, you won't get a ride on an abortion thread buddy.

    FFS. Didn't take long for your agenda to show did it.


  • Options
    #205
    _Jamie_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 603 ✭✭✭_Jamie_


    FortySeven wrote: »
    One is only because of the other. These men want to pay maintenance. These men were paying maintenance. It is a protest. There is only one side being abhorrent here.

    Nope, if maintenance is withheld, one side is as bad as the other. And will increase tensions between parents, which will also affect the children. Also, how would this work as bargaining chip? Once a judge sees that maintenance has not been paid for a while, how will that convince him that the father cares about the child? A hare-brained, half-baked F4J stunt, as per fucking usual.


  • Options
    #206
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    volchitsa wrote: »
    FFS. Didn't take long for your agenda to show did it.

    What agenda is that?


  • Options
    #207
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    _Jamie_ wrote: »
    Nope, if maintenance is withheld, one side is as bad as the other. And will increase tensions between parents, which will also affect the children. Also, how would this work as bargaining chip? Once a judge sees that maintenance has not been paid for a while, how will that convince him that the father cares about the child? A hare-brained, half-baked F4J stunt, as per fucking usual.

    It is a desperate last resort of men who have for years fought with the legal system and got nowhere.

    You're full of talking. What do you suggest they do?


  • Options
    #208
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    Anyway. Had no intention of getting into an abortion row and it seems I've been instrumental to dragging this off topic. I disagree with you all. That much is clear.

    Fathers don't appear to be any value at all in Ireland. Except as cash cows. I am now out of this discussion.


  • Options
    #209
    _Jamie_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 603 ✭✭✭_Jamie_


    FortySeven wrote: »
    You know I'm right hence the lack of an argument.

    You're white knighting. Not sure why, you won't get a ride on an abortion thread buddy.

    I'm female. And straight.

    Your post is very revealing though. Thanks for that. :D


  • Options
    #210
    FortySeven
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,296 ✭✭✭FortySeven


    _Jamie_ wrote: »
    I'm female. And straight.

    Your post is very revealing though. Thanks for that. :D

    That explains a lot, my apologies for the misunderstanding. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #211
    _Jamie_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 603 ✭✭✭_Jamie_


    FortySeven wrote: »
    That explains a lot, my apologies for the misunderstanding. :)

    Apologising for misunderstanding, not for the absolutely pathetic post you wrote? Lollers.


Advertisement