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

The Dilemma of the Undecideds in the abortion referendum

Options
1…1213151718…25

Comments

  • Options
    #422
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,083 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DarkScar wrote: »
    A child on ECMO doesn't breath either, even on a ventilator they wouldn't be breathing on their own. Sounds like you would allow it to be "aborted" then at any age.
    Your logic. Sorry you didn't think it through.

    A child is not a fetus. Quite the roving goalpost there


  • Options
    #423
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,083 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DarkScar wrote: »
    So what? I agree totally that a foetus becomes a human being at some stage during pregnancy, probably around the UK abortion limit.
    Try to get Overheal for example to give a straight answer on that.

    I would agree.

    #YouAreMostWelcome


  • Options
    #424
    DarkScar
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭DarkScar


    Overheal wrote: »
    By no natural nor man-made means does a fetus breathe.
    So if a teenager needs CPR can the we abort it? It's not breathing and your "logic" says that means it isn't a human being.
    Oh dear.


  • Options
    #425
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    DarkScar wrote: »
    So what? I agree totally that a foetus becomes a human being at some stage during pregnancy, probably around the UK abortion limit.
    Try to get Overheal for example to give a straight answer on that.

    So if you're of the opinion it's not a human then what's your issue?


  • Options
    #426
    DarkScar
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭DarkScar


    Overheal wrote: »
    A child is not a fetus. Quite the roving goalpost there
    Your differentiator was that one was breathing and the other wasn't. Now apparently the difference between the two is that one is a foetus and the other is a child.
    So the only thing you really have to offer to differentiate between a foetus and a child is that, er, one is a foetus and the other is a child.
    Wouldn't take up obstetrics there if I were you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #427
    DarkScar
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭DarkScar


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    So if you're of the opinion it's not a human then what's your issue?
    My issue? Somebody's telling me if you stop breathing you can be aborted. You think we should give that kind of blather a round of applause because we both think a 12 week old foetus isn't a human being? Any old crap is OK so long as we agree on one single thing?


  • Options
    #428
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,083 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DarkScar wrote: »
    So if a teenager needs CPR can the we abort it? It's not breathing and your "logic" says that means it isn't a human being.
    Oh dear.

    Are you actually this obtuse?


  • Options
    #429
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    DarkScar wrote: »
    My issue? Somebody's telling me if you stop breathing you can be aborted. You think we should give that kind of blather a round of applause because we both think a 12 week old foetus isn't a human being? Any old crap is OK so long as we agree on one single thing?

    No stop answering the questions you want to answer and answer the question asked. If you are of the opinion that the foetus isn't human before 12 weeks what's your issue with abortion?


  • Options
    #430
    backspin.
    Registered Users Posts: 1,091 ✭✭✭backspin.


    I think i am just not going to vote. I can't make up my mind.


  • Options
    #431
    gctest50
    Registered Users Posts: 9,605 ✭✭✭gctest50


    Seems to have become a thread for the Megathread refugees


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #432
    PhoenixParker
    Registered Users Posts: 2,671 ✭✭✭PhoenixParker


    DarkScar wrote: »
    So if a teenager needs CPR can the we abort it? It's not breathing and your "logic" says that means it isn't a human being.
    Oh dear.

    If a teenager isn’t breathing there is no obligation on you to perform CPR. You might get shame and judgement for it but you wouldn’t be prosecuted.

    If someone isn’t breathing, they’re often classed as dead so in many cases your example teenager would not be a living human being.


  • Options
    #433
    DarkScar
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭DarkScar


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    No stop answering the questions you want to answer and answer the question asked. If you are of the opinion that the foetus isn't human before 12 weeks what's your issue with abortion?
    If I said 2+2 is a fish so therefore the foetus doesn't become human until 20 weeks you wouldn't bat an eyelid? You're completely freely admitting you don't care one bit about logic so long as the you agree with the conclusion.


  • Options
    #434
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,083 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DarkScar wrote: »
    If I said 2+2 is a fish so therefore the foetus doesn't become human until 20 weeks you wouldn't bat an eyelid? You're completely freely admitting you don't care one bit about logic so long as the you agree with the conclusion.

    I have no idea what you just said but would you like fries with that?


  • Options
    #435
    DarkScar
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭DarkScar


    PhoenixParker wrote: »
    If a teenager isn’t breathing there is no obligation on you to perform CPR. You might get shame and judgement for it but you wouldn’t be prosecuted.
    Where did those goalposts go again...
    So it a person who isn't breathing a human or not? That was one of the criteria proposed for what is a human being.
    Plenty of other animals breathe too so I guess they are all humans?


  • Options
    #436
    DarkScar
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭DarkScar


    Overheal wrote: »
    I have no idea what you just said but would you like fries with that?
    Seeing as you think somebody who isn't breathing isn't a human I'm not that shocked you didn't understand a fairly beginner level English sentence to be perfectly honest.


  • Options
    #437
    DarkScar
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭DarkScar


    Overheal wrote: »
    I have no idea what you just said but would you like fries with that?
    If you have no idea what I said how would you know it was a food order?
    What a ****e joke.


  • Options
    #438
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    DarkScar wrote: »
    If I said 2+2 is a fish so therefore the foetus doesn't become human until 20 weeks you wouldn't bat an eyelid? You're completely freely admitting you don't care one bit about logic so long as the you agree with the conclusion.

    I'm asking you to outline your position, not conflate about me or others and then defend it. I've outlined mine already.

    If you can't or are unwilling to do so we can't have a reasoned discussion can we?


  • Options
    #439
    DarkScar
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭DarkScar


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    I'm asking you to outline your position, not conflate about me or others and then defend it. I've outlined mine already.

    If you can't or are unwilling to do so we can't have a reasoned discussion can we?
    Outline my position? Why? We're already in the middle of a discussion and you're looking for a position paper?
    You know soapboxing is actually banned here?


  • Options
    #440
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,083 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DarkScar wrote: »
    Seeing as you think somebody who isn't breathing isn't a human I'm not that shocked you didn't understand a fairly beginner level English sentence to be perfectly honest.

    I’m shocked you’re failing the Turing Test myself.

    I was reasonably clear: by no means, man-made or otherwise, does a fetus breathe. It’s also in the womb, as a second point, to your likely next obtuse retort about the ICU. Before it exits the womb it is by no stretch a sovereign person either, which is the larger point.

    A human, who stops breathing on their own and requires the use of a man made device, may still be alive and their personhood is not in question: they were born long before the fact.


  • Options
    #441
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    DarkScar wrote: »
    Outline my position? Why? We're already in the middle of a discussion and you're looking for a position paper?
    You know soapboxing is actually banned here?

    I'm asking you to commit to a position . Clearly this is beyond you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #442
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,083 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DarkScar wrote: »
    If you have no idea what I said how would you know it was a food order?.

    Was just hoping it was, with the call out of fish and the generously portioned word salad.


  • Options
    #443
    ArthurDayne
    Registered Users Posts: 1,708 ✭✭✭ArthurDayne


    DarkScar wrote: »
    Outline my position? Why? We're already in the middle of a discussion and you're looking for a position paper?
    You know soapboxing is actually banned here?

    I'm immensely confused by your position here. You have said that you 'agree totally that a foetus becomes a human at some stage during pregnancy, probably around the UK abortion limit'. This seems somewhat at odds with the views have you been espousing . . . unless I have really seriously misunderstood you.


  • Options
    #444
    DarkScar
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭DarkScar


    ArthurDayne wrote: »
    I'm immensely confused by your position here. You have said that you 'agree totally that a foetus becomes a human at some stage during pregnancy, probably around the UK abortion limit'. This seems somewhat at odds with the views have you been espousing . . . unless I have really seriously misunderstood you.
    Amazing that you can quote one thing I say and then claim it contradicts... well, who knows what as you seem to be incapable of supporting your argument.
    Want to try again?


  • Options
    #445
    DarkScar
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭DarkScar


    LeinsterDub wrote: »
    I'm asking you to commit to a position . Clearly this is beyond you.
    I'm asking you to at least attempt to follow the discussion, without invoking some lame "define your position" debating tactic when you find yourself without the first clue what's going on.


  • Options
    #446
    DarkScar
    Registered Users Posts: 226 ✭✭DarkScar


    Overheal wrote: »
    I’m shocked you’re failing the Turing Test myself.

    I was reasonably clear: by no means, man-made or otherwise, does a fetus breathe. It’s also in the womb, as a second point, to your likely next obtuse retort about the ICU. Before it exits the womb it is by no stretch a sovereign person either, which is the larger point.

    A human, who stops breathing on their own and requires the use of a man made device, may still be alive and their personhood is not in question: they were born long before the fact.
    So it is a foetus because it doesn't breathe. But other things that do breathe aren't humans or foetuses and other things that don't breathe can be pretty much anything includes humans and foetuses. This is one of your criteria? It is completely useless.
    A foetus is inside a womb... yay. Can a human being be inside a womb? That's sort of the question? Or is the location of something now it's only definition? If you put a foetus in a jar is it still a foetus... only now it's not in a womb? Hmm, another useless definition, there's a shock.
    Sovereign... hmm, no definition of this provided. Is a man on life support sovereign? Is a 40 year old starving Ethiopian who needs food aid? Another utterly worthless definition from you.
    Got anything that makes sense?


  • Options
    #447
    LeinsterDub
    Registered Users Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    DarkScar wrote: »
    I'm asking you to at least attempt to follow the discussion, without invoking some lame "define your position" debating tactic when you find yourself without the first clue what's going on.

    No your not your deflecting. Your posts don't make any sense they are half sarcastic, half confusion and half nonsense. And yes 3 halves makes more sense than some of the nonsense you've posted tonight.

    Several others have asked you to clarify so don't make it out that it's my issue.


  • Options
    #448
    ArthurDayne
    Registered Users Posts: 1,708 ✭✭✭ArthurDayne


    DarkScar wrote: »
    Amazing that you can quote one thing I say and then claim it contradicts... well, who knows what as you seem to be incapable of supporting your argument.
    Want to try again?

    Pal, I'm just trying to figure out what you're actually standing for here. I had it in my mind that you were a No voter, then I read that comment you made about a foetus becoming a human around the time of the UK abortion limit. It just confuses me a little but feel free to clarify your stance or link me to a previous comment you've written which clarifies it.

    Like I said, perhaps I have misunderstood.


  • Options
    #449
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,083 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DarkScar wrote: »
    Amazing that you can quote one thing I say and then claim it contradicts...

    Is the reason you to trailed off here because you realized you mocked your own style of argument?


  • Options
    #450
    bleary
    Registered Users Posts: 495 ✭✭bleary


    backspin. wrote: »
    I think i am just not going to vote. I can't make up my mind.

    Keep it simple ,
    Do you think the unborn has a completely equal right to life at any stage as the woman carrying them disregarding everything else. And this has to be maintained in the constitution rather than through legislation.
    Yes = vote no
    No= vote yes


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #451
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,083 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    DarkScar wrote: »
    So it is a foetus because it doesn't breathe.
    I never once said this anywhere? You’re building a straw man.
    But other things that do breathe aren't humans or foetuses and other things that don't breathe can be pretty much anything includes humans and foetuses. This is one of your criteria?
    again, reflects nothing I said. More straw men.
    A foetus is inside a womb... yay. Can a human being be inside a womb?
    sure, especially In the third trimester, when it has achieved viability.
    If you put a foetus in a jar is it still a foetus... only now it's not in a womb? Hmm, another useless definition, there's a shock.
    I never defined a fetus in a jar, you did. If you want to declare that definition useless it begs why you brought it up?
    Sovereign... hmm, no definition of this provided. Is a man on life support sovereign? Is a 40 year old starving Ethiopian who needs food?
    yes and yes. They are individuals with self-ownership. If you’re unfamiliar with the concept there is plenty of material out on the web to educate you on it. Somewhat similarly, a sovereign nation doesn’t forfeit its sovereignty when it accepts foreign aid. So, I see no reason to sound so exasperated or exclaim the concept is illogical.


Advertisement