The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

.......

This post has been deleted.

dudara

garbo speaks wrote: »

I think if alot of these younger Yes voters actually understood the actual process of an abortion, they would be horrified. It's easy to sugar-coat everything for them though.

Most early term abortions are by pill and essentially resemble a miscarriage, or even a particularly heavy period. Remember that women have periods every month and early term miscarriages are sadly quite common. It’s unpleasant but part of normal life for women.

A surgical abortion is rarer and obviously not a pleasant experience. Our proposed legislation means that most abortions will be early term and not require surgical intervention.

One could also say that any form of surgery is unpleasant but necessary. How about open heart surgery or popping out an eyeball to correct a detached retina? (both of which I have had done, not pleasant but necessary)

RobertKK

SusieBlue wrote: »

The referendum isn't just about abortion.

Then why does the government have proposed legislation ready to allow unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks and longer in other cases if people vote yes?
Abortion is the Centre of all this.

garbo speaks

garbo speaks wrote: »

I think if alot of these younger Yes voters actually understood the actual process of an abortion, they would be horrified. It's easy to sugar-coat everything for them though.

What process exactly?
The one where the woman takes a few pills, then experiences something like a very heavy period?

optogirl

garbo speaks wrote: »

I think if alot of these younger Yes voters actually understood the actual process of an abortion, they would be horrified. It's easy to sugar-coat everything for them though.

Would you deny brain surgery because the process is gorey?

Most abortions can be chemical and before 12 weeks so scare-mongering about horror is redundant.

Grayson

Jim Jeffries did a bit on the 8th last night. I went back a few pages but didn't see it posted. Apologies if it's a repost.

SusieBlue

RobertKK wrote: »

Then why does the government have proposed legislation ready to allow unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks and longer in other cases if people vote yes?
Abortion is the Centre of all this.

I didn't say it wasn't about abortion, I said it wasn't just about abortion.
Its easier to focus on how awful abortion is for the anti-choicers though, so that they don't have to think or worry about how the 8th negatively effect maternity care for everyone.

RobertKK

RobertKK wrote: »

Then why does the government have proposed legislation ready to allow unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks and longer in other cases if people vote yes?
Abortion is the Centre of all this.

No, repealing the 8th is centre. Abortion is after.
I was asking you earlier Robert if you feel abortion should be permitted in any circumstances?

RobertKK

bubblypop wrote: »

No, repealing the 8th is centre. Abortion is after.
I was asking you earlier Robert if you feel abortion should be permitted in any circumstances?

I am not a supporter of needless killing dressed up as compassion and healthcare.

.......

This post has been deleted.

nice_guy80

How do I stop the Love Both adverts appearing in my browser

They seem to be bombarding me with images of foetuses

ELM327

nice_guy80 wrote: »

How do I stop the Love Both adverts appearing in my browser

They seem to be bombarding me with images of foetuses

If it's on youtube report them as "spam" and/or "irrelevant".
If it's on facebook do not engage them on any level (do not react "angry") as any engagement at all will drive more ads.

If it's on page "banner" ads ran by google you can report them aswell.

_Dara_

RobertKK wrote: »

I am not a supporter of needless killing dressed up as compassion and healthcare.

Hi RobertKK. Can you fill us in on some of the lies the Yes campaign has been telling?

ohnonotgmail

ELM327 wrote: »

If it's on youtube report them as "spam" and/or "irrelevant".
If it's on facebook do not engage them on any level (do not react "angry") as any engagement at all will drive more ads.

If it's on page "banner" ads ran by google you can report them aswell.

when they popped up on FB i reported them as misleading. haven't seen one since.

robarmstrong

RobertKK wrote: »

I am not a supporter of needless killing dressed up as compassion and healthcare.

You seemed to have missed my point to you somehow.

robarmstrong wrote: »

And what of cases like mine Robert, was I looking to "kill" my unborn children when my partner and I knew she was doomed to miscarry them?

SusieBlue

RobertKK wrote: »

I am not a supporter of needless killing dressed up as compassion and healthcare.

Under what circumstances are you ok with abortion? What conditions are necessary to meet your own personal standards of an acceptable abortion?

optogirl

RobertKK wrote: »

I am not a supporter of needless killing dressed up as compassion and healthcare.

Yes I'm not surprised - what has become so apparent is that the anti-brigade are shockingly deficient in compassion despite their zygote-glorification. They don't give a single solid sh*t about the hurt they are causing to grieving families, girls & women in dangerous situations which a pregnancy exacerbates, rape victims -some of whom are children themselves or families facing into the long journey of dealing with a FFA with f*ck all support from their own state. Nobody is dressing up abortion - abortion is not a wonderful thing, but in many many varied & individual circumstances it is required. If many of these fertilisation zealots would get off their own moral high horse for a second they might just realise that their dogmatic approach hurts more lives than it protects.

AtomicHorror

optogirl wrote: »

Yes I'm not surprised - what has become so apparent is that the anti-brigade are shockingly deficient in compassion despite their zygote-glorification. They don't give a single solid sh*t about the hurt they are causing to grieving families, girls & women in dangerous situations which a pregnancy exacerbates, rape victims -some of whom are children themselves or families facing into the long journey of dealing with a FFA with f*ck all support from their own state. Nobody is dressing up abortion - abortion is not a wonderful thing, but in many many varied & individual circumstances it is required. If many of these fertilisation zealots would get off their own moral high horse for a second they might just realise that their dogmatic approach hurts more lives than it protects.

Also explains Robert's frequent characterization of Repeal Shield as a way for "snowflakes" to engage in echo chamber discussion. Not, you know, a way for women who endured trauma and loss to avoid getting spammed with photos of dismembered fetuses just for retweeting a pro-choice tweet.

gandalf

Grayson wrote: »

Jim Jeffries did a bit on the 8th last night. I went back a few pages but didn't see it posted. Apologies if it's a repost.

Absolutely poetic stitch up of Justin Barrett. The symbolism of making him travel to London for the interview, brilliant!

RobertKK

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Do the gullible see the lies?
Why would I want to help yes by pointing them out? They just help the side I support.

Virgil°

RobertKK wrote: »

Why would I want to help yes by pointing them out?

Ah convenient.
It would "help" the yes campaign by pointing out that they've been lying?
What a strange world you live in.

kylith

RobertKK wrote: »

Do the gullible see the lies?
Why would I want to help yes by pointing them out? They just help the side I support.

Because if you told us what the lies were maybe we’d change our minds?


Actual translation though: I can’t find any. I’m going to obfusticate in the hope you’ll stop asking me questions I know there’s no answer to.

RobertKK

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Also explains Robert's frequent characterization of Repeal Shield as a way for "snowflakes" to engage in echo chamber discussion. Not, you know, a way for women who endured trauma and loss to avoid getting spammed with photos of dismembered fetuses just for retweeting a pro-choice tweet.

I never posted any image on twitter to do with the aftermath of an abortion. I never insulted anyone. Repeal shield is for people who want to be ignorant of an overall debate so they created an echo chamber, using a questionable means that takes people personal information from twitter and putting it into an outside api or whatever it called, where no one who ended up on a public list gave permission for their data to be used in such a public way.

robarmstrong

You've complained you're being targeted by individuals seeking to have you threadbanned previously.

Let's look at your history in this thread.

You've posted blatant inaccuracies and when challenged on it you slunk away, you were warned (to my knowledge) for posting inaccuracies, you've been warned for your comments about certain cases involving abortion, you've dodged and avoided people trying to engage directly with you by crying out victim, when you eventually come back into the thread you usually post some snippet of something aimed snidely at either the pro-choice crowd or it's followers and then put the blinkers on.

Robert there have been so many genuine attempts to get you to engage honestly, but you dip and dodge and pick and choose what you want to answer, with my own questions included on it, so I'll ask you this.

Do you feel you've been a fair and well-meaning contributor to the thread?

RobertKK

kylith wrote: »

Because if you told us what the lies were maybe we’d change our minds?


Actual translation though: I can’t find any. I’m going to obfusticate in the hope you’ll stop asking me questions I know there’s no answer to.

Ok let me see and remember last night I said there are lies and unintentional lies.

Do people when they look at abortion stats and see most abortions are by healthy women of healthy unborn, then people see yes posters talking generally about compassion and healthcare think the Yes side is telling the truth or just using one big umbrella to cover up inconvenient truths?

RobertKK

robarmstrong wrote: »

You've complained you're being targeted by individuals seeking to have you threadbanned previously.

Let's look at your history in this thread.

You've posted blatant inaccuracies and when challenged on it you slunk away, you were warned (to my knowledge) for posting inaccuracies, you've been warned for your comments about certain cases involving abortion, you've dodged and avoided people trying to engage directly with you by crying out victim, when you eventually come back into the thread you usually post some snippet of something aimed snidely at either the pro-choice crowd or it's followers and then put the blinkers on.

Robert there have been so many genuine attempts to get you to engage honestly, but you dip and dodge and pick and choose what you want to answer, with my own questions included on it, so I'll ask you this.

Do you feel you've been a fair and well-meaning contributor to the thread?

I would need a secretary if I was to reply to everything.

robarmstrong

RobertKK wrote: »

I would need a secretary if I was to reply to everything.

Here you go, no secretary needed.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106824184&postcount=8607

It's all well and good to miss a few posts due to the nature of this thread, but you seem to have made a habit of missing those that address your inaccurate statements and challenges made on claims you've made, that's not on.

kylith

RobertKK wrote: »

Ok let me see and remember last night I said there are lies and unintentional lies.

Do people when they look at abortion stats and see most abortions are by healthy women of healthy unborn, then people see yes posters talking generally about compassion and healthcare think the Yes side is telling the truth or just using one big umbrella to cover up inconvenient truths?

Are you claiming that women who find themselves unexpectedly pregnant don’t need compassion? Do you think the Yes campaign are lying about the fact that pregnant women in this country do not have the right to be fully informed on their healthcare choices or to consent to or reject procedures?

Got any evidence of blatant lies similar to those told by the No campaign?

RobertKK

RobertKK wrote: »

I am not a supporter of needless killing dressed up as compassion and healthcare.

That's really not an answer to the question. I'm not suggesting there is a right or wrong answer, I am merely interested to know if you think abortion is ever justified?

AtomicHorror

RobertKK wrote: »

I never posted any image on twitter to do with the aftermath of an abortion.

I never insulted anyone.

Who said you did either thing? I used the images thing as an example. In case my meaning is not clear, the intention is to protect vulnerable people who want to engage in an important debate, from people who are insensitive to their trauma.

You have consistently shown yourself to be either insensitive or dismissive here, so it is plausible you behaved the same way on Twitter.

RobertKK wrote: »

Repeal shield is for people who want to be ignorant of an overall debate so they created an echo chamber, using a questionable means that takes people personal information from twitter and putting it into an outside api or whatever it called, where no one who ended up on a public list gave permission for their data to be used in such a public way.

Your argument on use of personal information might hold some water, but it has nothing to do with the intention behind the thing.