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

Late Late Show April 27th

Options
1…2224262728

Comments

  • Options
    #692
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    NAGDEFI wrote: »
    I disagree. 2 human beings. Woman's health and well being paramount and to be saved at the cost of the baby if it comes to it.

    That’s fine. A Yes vote will allow you to continue to live your life by that principle.
    A No vote ensures the whole of society has to live by your morals.
    Even though they also disagree with you.


  • Options
    #693
    NAGDEFI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 755 ✭✭✭NAGDEFI


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    No I actually didn’t, I only included the ones off the top of my head that I remembered from when I was in that situation.
    I’m sure there are many more.

    Why are you oversimplifying and dismissing the sacrifice and impact pregnancy had on women’s lives?

    I'm not dismissing it but you're overstating a natural event. The way you describe it the human race would be extinct now.

    And in response to your statement that if people want abortions they will find them, yes. But it's also true that abortion rates soar when introduced in most countries.


  • Options
    #694
    NAGDEFI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 755 ✭✭✭NAGDEFI


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    That’s fine. A Yes vote will allow you to continue to live your life by that principle.
    A No vote ensures the whole of society has to live by your morals.
    Even though they also disagree with you.

    There is an onus on society as a whole to protect the weaker elements. You tritely dismiss this as imposing my morals on other individuals. Well if one believes saving lives is a greater good than individual choice vote No.

    'He who saves one life saves the world entire'- The Talmud.

    Why do individuals think they have the right to play God with a life?


  • Options
    #695
    Thepoet85
    Registered Users Posts: 2,751 ✭✭✭Thepoet85


    Here's an idea. Let people choose for themselves what they want to do with their bodies.

    If you don't want to have an abortion, or don't agree with people having them, that's fine, but everyone should be free to do what they want.

    For me, it's no more complicated than that. Both sides can serve up numerous stories that will tug at all our heartstrings. I don't necessarily agree with abortions, but I'll vote yes, because I think everyone in this day and age should be able to decide for themselves.


  • Options
    #696
    PhoenixParker
    Registered Users Posts: 2,671 ✭✭✭PhoenixParker


    NAGDEFI wrote: »
    I disagree. 2 human beings. Woman's health and well being paramount and to be saved at the cost of the baby if it comes to it.

    In other situations when there are two human beings and one of them needs a bit of the others body to survive (e.g. A blood donation, a kidney, bone marrow) they have no right to demand that piece of the others body.

    People, wonderful people, choose to donate; but if you're a perfect match for kidney donation and your match will die without your kidney, no country in the world will force you into the operating theatre.

    That's a real living human being but your bodily autonomy trumps their right to life.

    Why does a foetus have more right to life then a real living human being?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #697
    NAGDEFI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 755 ✭✭✭NAGDEFI


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    I’m sure the families of those women who needlessly lost their lives will appreciate that.

    Here we go the martyr card again. You have a few names of women? More are killed in car crashes on an average weekend.

    Perhaps some men took their lives because their babies were aborted? Your focus is so narrow.


  • Options
    #698
    NAGDEFI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 755 ✭✭✭NAGDEFI


    PhoenixParker wrote: »
    In other situations when there are two human beings and one of them needs a bit of the others body to survive (e.g. A blood donation, a kidney, bone marrow) they have no right to demand that piece of the others body.

    People, wonderful people, choose to donate; but if you're a perfect match for kidney donation and your match will die without your kidney, no country in the world will force you into the operating theatre.

    That's a real living human being but your bodily autonomy trumps their right to life.

    Why does a foetus have more right to life then a real living human being?

    In your opinion. Where has this been written in stone? If anything when a life is dependant on you one has more responsibility.


  • Options
    #699
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    NAGDEFI wrote: »
    There is an onus on society as a whole to protect the weaker elements. You tritely dismiss this as imposing my morals on other individuals. Well if one believes saving lives is a greater good than individual choice vote No.

    'He who saves one life saves the world entire'- The Talmud.

    Why do individuals think they have the right to play God with a life?

    And I already told you, I don’t agree with your definition of ‘saved’ when you don’t take into account the circumstances that baby will be born into.
    ‘Saved’ yet born into poverty, neglect, severe disability, a home with domestic violence or addiction issues, you take none of that into account. Born, but at what cost?

    Children should be wanted and born to loving, stable parents who cherish and adore them.
    If a woman says she cannot offer that to a baby I believe her and will not force her to give birth just to satiate my own desire to ‘save lives’.


  • Options
    #700
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    NAGDEFI wrote: »
    Here we go the martyr card again. You have a few names of women? More are killed in car crashes on an average weekend.

    Perhaps some men took their lives because their babies were aborted? Your focus is so narrow.

    Car crashes have nothing to do with the 8th amendment.
    Savita, Malek Thawley, and Michelle Harte lost their lives because of this law. Not to mention the countless others.
    You might think it’s ok to dismiss this number as nothing, but maternity care should not be compromised because of a crap piece of law.
    It shouldn’t happen. Period.
    One woman is too many.


  • Options
    #701
    NAGDEFI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 755 ✭✭✭NAGDEFI


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    And I already told you, I don’t agree with your definition of ‘saved’ when you don’t take into account the circumstances that baby will be born into.
    ‘Saved’ yet born into poverty, neglect, severe disability, a home with domestic violence or addiction issues, you take none of that into account. Born, but at what cost?

    Children should be wanted and born to loving, stable parents who cherish and adore them.
    If a woman says she cannot offer that to a baby I believe her and will not force her to give birth just to satiate my own desire to ‘save lives’.

    Who are you to judge how an individual will emerge from poverty or any of these situations? Many great people emerged from them. They will only form a minority of cases. The majority will be failed contraception and so on. Of course adoption is never mentioned now, though i have many adopted friends who are successful. Let's just kill the baby, yeah?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #702
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    NAGDEFI wrote: »
    I'm not dismissing it but you're overstating a natural event. The way you describe it the human race would be extinct now.

    And in response to your statement that if people want abortions they will find them, yes. But it's also true that abortion rates soar when introduced in most countries.

    It wouldn’t. Because it’s an easier sacrifice to make when you want and love your baby.
    However when you don’t, it’s as good as a death sentence. That’s the difference.

    Abortion rates don’t soar. Actually statistics show that countries with rigid and conservative abortion laws have higher numbers of abortions than those with more liberal regimes.


  • Options
    #703
    NAGDEFI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 755 ✭✭✭NAGDEFI


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Car crashes have nothing to do with the 8th amendment.
    Savita, Malek Thawley, and Michelle Harte lost their lives because of this law. Not to mention the countless others.
    You might think it’s ok to dismiss this number as nothing, but maternity care should not be compromised because of a crap piece of law.
    It shouldn’t happen. Period.
    One woman is too many.

    3 people lost their lives because of this law and countless thousands are living today in Ireland because of it. Do the Maths as the yanks would say. You can only name 3 people?


  • Options
    #704
    NAGDEFI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 755 ✭✭✭NAGDEFI


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    It wouldn’t. Because it’s an easier sacrifice to make when you want and love your baby.
    However when you don’t, it’s as good as a death sentence. That’s the difference.

    Abortion rates don’t soar. Actually statistics show that countries with rigid and conservative abortion laws have higher numbers of abortions than those with more liberal regimes.

    Not true. 1 in 5 in the UK and that's a legit figure. 8.75 million since 1969.


  • Options
    #705
    PhoenixParker
    Registered Users Posts: 2,671 ✭✭✭PhoenixParker


    NAGDEFI wrote: »
    In your opinion. Where has this been written in stone? If anything when a life is dependant on you one has more responsibility.

    In every consent procedure for every person except pregnant women.

    Funny how when it only affects women, bodily autonomy suddenly becomes less important.


  • Options
    #706
    NAGDEFI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 755 ✭✭✭NAGDEFI


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Car crashes have nothing to do with the 8th amendment.
    Savita, Malek Thawley, and Michelle Harte lost their lives because of this law. Not to mention the countless others.
    You might think it’s ok to dismiss this number as nothing, but maternity care should not be compromised because of a crap piece of law.
    It shouldn’t happen. Period.
    One woman is too many.

    http://www.advertiser.ie/athlone/article/98827/the-8th-amendment-saves-lives

    Maybe read some of the personal stories of those alive because of the 8th?


  • Options
    #707
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    NAGDEFI wrote: »
    Who are you to judge how an individual will emerge from poverty or any of these situations? Many great people emerged from them. They will only form a minority of cases. The majority will be failed contraception and so on. Of course adoption is never mentioned now, though i have many adopted friends who are successful. Let's just kill the baby, yeah?

    I’m not judging, way to go and jump the gun.
    I’m saying if a woman doesn’t want to bring a baby into that type of situation, I believe her and won’t forcr her just to ‘save’ the baby.

    Adoption laws are actually something I’m extremely well versed in and have a lot of experience with.
    Its pretty much non existent in Ireland, and has been for quite awhile.
    Our most recent government statistics (2016) show that just 5 infants were adopted that year.
    Yet we have over 6k kids in foster care.
    It isn’t a viable option.


  • Options
    #708
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    That’s fine. A Yes vote will allow you to continue to live your life by that principle.
    A No vote ensures the whole of society has to live by your morals.
    Even though they also disagree with you.

    I propose killing my son tomorrow. Are you going to push your morals on me and denying me that choice?


  • Options
    #709
    NAGDEFI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 755 ✭✭✭NAGDEFI


    PhoenixParker wrote: »
    In every consent procedure for every person except pregnant women.

    Funny how when it only affects women, bodily autonomy suddenly becomes less important.

    Well i think that's down to the fact that males generally don't bear children. If it happens i'll be responsible for the life i carry.


  • Options
    #710
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    NAGDEFI wrote: »
    http://www.advertiser.ie/athlone/article/98827/the-8th-amendment-saves-lives

    Maybe read some of the personal stories of those alive because of the 8th?

    They aren’t alive because of the 8th. The 8th doesn’t stop abortions. They are alive because their mothers opted not to abort them.

    Have a look at ‘In Her Shoes - Women of the 8th’ on facebook. Devastating real stories of the horrific experiences real living women have had at the hands of the 8th.


  • Options
    #711
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    PhoenixParker wrote: »
    In every consent procedure for every person except pregnant women.

    Funny how when it only affects women, bodily autonomy suddenly becomes less important.

    Ehm, men can't get pregnant.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #712
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    I propose killing my son tomorrow. Are you going to push your morals on me and denying me that choice?

    Yes, because your son is a born living citizen. And we have laws against that. Next.


  • Options
    #713
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Yes, because your son is a born living citizen. And we have laws against that. Next.

    But I thought you were against pushing your morals on other people


  • Options
    #714
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    NAGDEFI wrote: »
    3 people lost their lives because of this law and countless thousands are living today in Ireland because of it. Do the Maths as the yanks would say. You can only name 3 people?

    So you’re saying they’re collateral damage is it? Worth it, to keep Ireland abortion free?


  • Options
    #715
    NAGDEFI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 755 ✭✭✭NAGDEFI


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    They aren’t alive because of the 8th. The 8th doesn’t stop abortions. They are alive because their mothers opted not to abort them.

    Have a look at ‘In Her Shoes - Women of the 8th’ on facebook. Devastating real stories of the horrific experiences real living women have had at the hands of the 8th.

    The 8th was instrumental in the decision to have the babies. The 8th stops abortions because it denies easy access. To say otherwise is just silly.


  • Options
    #716
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    But I thought you were against pushing your morals on other people

    Stop being pedantic.


  • Options
    #717
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Stop being pedantic.

    That's exactly what you said.


  • Options
    #718
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    NAGDEFI wrote: »
    The 8th was instrumental in the decision to have the babies. The 8th stops abortions because it denies easy access. To say otherwise is just silly.

    If their mothers really wanted access, they would have travelled and had the abortion. The 4K women who still travel every year are proof of that.
    They were not saved by the 8th.


  • Options
    #719
    NAGDEFI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 755 ✭✭✭NAGDEFI


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    So you’re saying they’re collateral damage is it? Worth it, to keep Ireland abortion free?

    Most countries and governments which are democratic should provide the best care possible for all it's people.

    You would obviously prefer having 3 people alive rather than thousands of babies, most of whom are fully grown humans now?


  • Options
    #720
    NAGDEFI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 755 ✭✭✭NAGDEFI


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    If their mothers really wanted access, they would have travelled and had the abortion. The 4K women who still travel every year are proof of that.
    They were not saved by the 8th.

    You just made my point. A huge group in doubt would have aborted if the facilities were here. You just ended up with the determined travelling.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #721
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    NAGDEFI wrote: »
    Most countries and governments which are democratic should provide the best care possible for all it's people.

    You would obviously prefer having 3 people alive rather than thousands of babies, most of whom are fully grown humans now?

    Not if it was against their mothers wishes.
    She has to go through the pregnancy, she has to bring the child up. It affects her more than anyone else.
    If she says she can’t do it I trust her and support that.
    I don’t believe in babies being born at all costs is in the best interests of ANYONE, least of all the babies born into sh*t circumstances.

    No women should die because of a law. None. That could have been your wife or daughter or sister. If the 8th isn’t repealed it could happen again.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement