The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Madscientist30

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Martina1991 wrote: »

What qualifies "pro life" supporters to force women to continue with their pregnancies.
Are they aware of every woman's circumstances?

You would need to ask a profile supporter that question. I was specifically told in this forum that I choose not to travel that the 8th had no impact whatsoever on my situation is that because to state that perhaps the 8th has at some point had a positive impact would to set seeds of doubt

It just seems a bit bizarre to "thank" the 8th for what was an extremely lucky set of circumstances for you and your baby. 99 times out of 100 (or more?) it would not have been a misdiagnosis and thanks to the 8th you would have been forced to carry your baby to term against your own stated wishes..... It's like being forced into a game of Russian Roulette and then so grateful to the gun for having an empty chamber when pointed at you that you think it should keep shooting at everyone else! Plus even if termination was available to you surely would have received a second opinion beforehand.

PhoenixParker

horseburger wrote: »

If the issue is the question about whether it is right of wrong to end human life, why is it ok to end the life of a human foetus, but not a human man, woman or child?

The foetus is human, and is growing and developing at an earlier stage of human life cycle, just the same as anyone who is just born, is growing and developing at an earlier stage of human life cycle, compared to a 2 year old child or 20 year old person.

Because unlike the child, woman or man, it cannot survive without being attached to another human being. That human being has the right to decide what they do with their body.

petalgumdrops

amdublin wrote: »

Is this not a fact? "Not all women have the financial means to travel

It seems clear to me. Unless I'm misunderstanding the question?

Because a poster implied unless I.was an illegal immigrant or a refugee that I had the choice to travel

gctest50

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Because a poster implied unless I.was an illegal immigrant or a refugee that I had the choice to travel

#it'sallaboutmeeee


If you had the money ( and time off etc etc ) you did have the choice to travel

pjohnson

petalgumdrops wrote: »

You would need to ask a profile supporter that question. I was specifically told in this forum that I choose not to travel that the 8th had no impact whatsoever on my situation is that because to state that perhaps the 8th has at some point had a positive impact would to set seeds of doubt

You keep saying this but I have no idea why its relevant or what you are trying to prove?

amdublin

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Because a poster implied unless I.was an illegal immigrant or a refugee that I had the choice to travel

I'm completely confused!

I'm assuming you did have the choice to travel.

Are you saying you didn't??

Ave Sodalis

horseburger wrote:

I already answered you about the issue of miscarriages. My understanding is that miscarriages are an unfortunate unintended occurrence.

And I counter argued it, which has not been addressed.

horseburger wrote:

So because Anthony Levatino is American, his perspective on the issue doesn't matter?

On an Irish matter, he has the freedom to talk about it but I don't believe any foreign representative has any place to be talking at an official capacity.

horseburger wrote:

There is no assurance that the recommendations of the Oireachtas Committee would be the legislation enacted. So as it stands there is nothing definite that abortion not being legislated for, for just 12 weeks without restriction.

We have gone over this in the last few pages.

horseburger wrote:

What is a foetus if it is not human. If a foetus is not human, what else can grow in the womb of a human woman, as a result of the union of a human male sperm and human female egg?

This has been answerd for you repeatedly.

horseburger wrote:

I said you seem to have a problem with me considering the arguments for and against.

No, and I'm not sure where you got that idea. I just don't like when people ignore or don't actually answer questions directed at them. Something you are still doing.

Sephiroth_dude

Zerbini Blewitt wrote: »

Just came across this PrimeTime “debate” in 2013 between a women who had anencephaly detected in her pregnancy and Dr Berry Kiely (long time in PLC).
I saw this at the time it was broadcast and was not well & speechless for the rest of the evening.

I think this demonstrates the almost limitless depths of depravity & inhuman cruelty that can result from ideological beliefs not based on reason.
Or in other words, the beliefs of the average vocal pro-life (forced-birther).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXTEt3KSrYw

Heartbreaking to watch that, your wan with the glasses has little or no empathy or clue of what shes talking about, I wonder would she have the same opinion if it happened to her.

petalgumdrops

amdublin wrote: »

I'm completely confused!

I'm assuming you did have the choice to travel.

Are you saying you didn't??

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

amdublin

Anyway the choice to travel is one thing.

More importantly the option for abortion should be here in Ireland and each individual makes their own personal decision.

Not "abortions for all"
And equally not "no abortions for all"

Choice for all.

petalgumdrops

gctest50 wrote: »

#it'sallaboutmeeee


If you had the money ( and time off etc etc ) you did have the choice to travel

I salute your compassion

amdublin

petalgumdrops wrote: »

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

Sorry ive been in and out all day. I do know your baby arrived safe right? which is fantastic news.

Please can you refresh me/us why could you not travel?
(Which btw you shouldn't have to do imo)

volchitsa

petalgumdrops wrote: »

amdublin wrote: »

I'm completely confused!

I'm assuming you did have the choice to travel.

Are you saying you didn't??

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

So are you saying that if you had been able to travel you would have terminated without even asking for a second opinion? Why would you have done that? Anyone I know with a significant problem that's been diagnosed has always wanted to be absolutely 100% sure before doing anything irreparable - and I don't just mean pregnancy, I mean any major illness. Do you need a law to stop yourself agreeing to get a limb removed on the basis of a single examination?

NuMarvel

petalgumdrops wrote: »

On a point of voting what would you suggest No/undecided voters do if they are at odds with one particular aspect of repeal?

I would suggest they properly research the aspect they are concerned about, especially with regard to the basis of that concern. I would also suggest they consider what practical difference their vote would make in relation to that concern, and also if there were other ways to address their concern.

What would you suggest?

amdublin

And sorry petalgumdrops have i missed another post.

Did you want to access a termination at all??

I am unsure if you did or not. I'm actually totally confused to be honest.

Sofiztikated

petalgumdrops wrote: »

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

I honestly don't understand your position.

kylith

horseburger wrote: »

What is a foetus if it is not human. If a foetus is not human, what else can grow in the womb of a human woman, as a result of the union of a human male sperm and human female egg?

How on earth can you suggest that a foetus is not human.

I said you seem to have a problem with me considering the arguments for and against.

No one is arguing that a foetus is not ‘human’. My kidneys are also ‘human’.

What we’re saying is that it is not a human being. It is not an individual. It is not a separate person from the woman. At 12 weeks it does not have a functioning brain, or liver, or lungs, or kidneys. Its ears are down by its jaw. It’s guts are outside its abdomen and its skin is transparent. It has zero chance of surviving outside the womb.

Based on the toll that pregnancy takes on the woman how is it ethical to force her to carry a pregnancy that she does not want?

kylith

petalgumdrops wrote: »

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

Why not?

pjohnson

petalgumdrops wrote: »

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

Your posts have never explained how not?

petalgumdrops

NuMarvel wrote: »

I would suggest they properly research the aspect they are concerned about, especially with regard to the basis of that concern. I would also suggest they consider what practical difference their vote would make in relation to that concern, and also if there were other ways to address their concern.

What would you suggest?

I completely agree with you.

But some people will want or feel that the unborn should have some rights. Should they dismiss this because of the greater good.

My position is I support so much of repeal but the crux of the issue for me is that at some point the unborn need to be protected(my opinion)

Perhaps I feel the amendent has the potential to become too liberal as the politicians will have future decision making - that is a fact. Whether there is appetite for that is not really significant.

baylah17

My toenails are human, I still clip them off .
My toenails are NOT human beings.

amdublin

petalgumdrops wrote: »

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

Did you want to travel? I.e. did you want to pursue a termination?

Ken.

Mod-horseburger, you have been answered several times. So either drop it or do not post in this thread again.

ProfessorPlum

volchitsa wrote: »

So are you saying that if you had been able to travel you would have terminated without even asking for a second opinion? Why would you have done that? Anyone I know with a significant problem that's been diagnosed has always wanted to be absolutely 100% sure before doing anything irreparable - and I don't just mean pregnancy, I mean any major illness. Do you need a law to stop yourself agreeing to get a limb removed on the basis of a single examination?

I don’t think that’s quite fair - plenty of people decide to terminate on the grounds of CVS testing. There’s a less than 2% chance of a false positive, less when combined with other testing such as a Nuchal scan and given that it’s done much earlier than amniocentesis, if someone were to decide st that stage to terminate, it would possibly be a medical termination rather than a more difficult/ costly/ risky surgical abortion.

Like everything, it’s a mater of weighing up both sides and choosing whether to continue with the pregnancy regardless, terminate early, or continue and have further amino testing later with a view to terminate later if the diagnosis is further supported.

The important word there i think is choice.

robarmstrong

Some very very silly arguments being put forward.

You aren't pro-life, you're pro-birth because let's be brutally honest, you don't give two monkeys about what happens after the baby is born.

It isn't difficult to grasp the concept of being against abortion (like I am, in ALL circumstances) but be able to put aside personal beliefs to vote to repeal (like I am) in order to give women the right to a choice over what happens to their pregnancy.

Voting to repeal doesn't make anyone a "baby-killer" or a "murderer", they're just ridiculous soundbites thrown in as an emotional overload to try divert people from making an informed and proper vote on what women can or can't do with their own bodies.

There's no need for the pro-life side to make up stories as they go along in terms of blatantly ignoring or twisting statistics to suit their own agenda nor is there a need to purposefully misinterpret the proposals, it's 12 weeks. Not 16, not 20, not 24 and certainly not up to birth, statements like these are hysterical and should be just outright ignored.

You can be against abortion, but support the choice for it, you (pro-birth crowd) just refuse to budge from the pedestal of lies, deceit and sheer ignorance you're perched upon.

Shadowstrife

Sometimes I can't tell if a anti-abortion poster on forums like these really is spreading a moral message , or just some expert troll living in his mother's basement and poking people for the lulz.

petalgumdrops

pjohnson wrote: »

Your posts have never explained how not?

Should every woman who acceses or doesn't access a termination need to give a litany of reasons. If I had accesed a termination would you be pressing me to justify.

The irony of advocing choice but needing an explanation on the grounds I couldn't travel.

I

amdublin

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Should every woman who acceses or doesn't access a termination need to give a litany of reasons. If I had accesed a termination would you be pressing me to justify.

The irony of advocing choice but needing an explanation on the grounds I couldn't travel.

I

Forgive me, did you want to travel?

Edward M

baylah17 wrote: »

My toenails are human, I still clip them off .
My toenails are NOT human beings.

A foetus is a human being I would accept.
Toenails, organs, or any other part of a human that can't grow to life on their own are a completely different proposition to a fetus.
I can accept that up to sentience the baby/fetus doesent know of its existence though or be aware that its being aborted or dying or feel any terror because of its situation.
The 12 weeks is perfectly within the bounds of justification of abortion for whatever the need of the woman involved is, and there are many, many justifiable reasons for it.
But don't try to bring it to the level of toenails, terrible reasoning IMO.

Annasopra

petalgumdrops wrote: »

The surprising thing is is that the government could have legistated for FFA years ago without repealing the 8th.

Have you some more information on this?