The 8th amendment referendum - part 4

jjmcclure

PhoenixParker wrote: »

Pregnancy is not merely an inconvenience nor is childbirth. Anyone can look after a child once it's born but adoption has it's own problems and in many cases isn't even possible (e.g. married couples with other children).
Childcare costs nearly €1000 pm.

Ahhh so its about money. Thats OK then, Im a firm YES voter now.

bloodless_coup

Looking forward to the debate tonight, with another resounding win for the No side most likely.

jjmcclure

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i misread. So 2 lives and 1 person.

Totally agree! And in many of the instances both lives will have a name, or at least some that have been thought about

ohnonotgmail

bridster007 wrote: »

Well I've met plenty Yes people who object to using the word baby or child in conjunction with abortion. They say its not a child or baby until born. That's how they are rationalising it.

pregnant women call what is inside them a baby. Up to 8 weeks it is an embryo. After that it is a fetus. People dont use always use scientific terms and if they do they dont always do it correctly. That doesnt change what it is

ohnonotgmail

jjmcclure wrote: »

Totally agree! And in many of the instances both lives will have a name, or at least some that have been thought about

alive but not a person and all that entails. you seem to have missed that bit

munsterlegend

FingerDeKat wrote: »

You give 2 reasons to vote yes and then decide to vote no???

Well I am not going into the graphic reasons why I would vote no. If you asked most people in Ireland they would be against the actual act it's whether people should have the choice. Anyone who has had a child knows how precious life is even before a child is actually delivered.

DarkScar

bridster007 wrote: »

Well I've met plenty Yes people who object to using the word baby or child in conjunction with abortion. They say its not a child or baby until born. That's how they are rationalising it.

IMO it's a foetus up to 20-24 weeks and after that it's clearly a human being. The specific date is all that needs a consensus, but it sure isn't either conception or birth as most of the Yes and No campaigners appear to be hollering.

Guy:Incognito

None of the back and forth matters at the end of it all. The people involved, the woman and man, in conjunction with the doctor are the only ones that should have a say in what happens. There is no need and shouldn't be any want, for someone uninvolved to have a say.

Have people not enough crap in their own lives to be dealing with without wanting to control the choices of others?

Bannasidhe

bridster007 wrote: »

I have never seen a pregnant woman going around holding belly talking about her "Foetus" or how her "Foetus" kicked last night. Always "my baby", but now some want to deny this.

I certainly never said "foetus" but I never said "baby" either. I used the term "little bugger" and vowed to give him a few good thumps as soon as he turned 18 as payback for the internal kicking.

I did too.

I've never heard any Irish person refer to their "vacuum cleaner" - yet strangely few of them have an actual Hoover. It's all Dyson and Miele now isn't it.

jjmcclure

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

alive but not a person and all that entails. you seem to have missed that bit

Not at all. the Pro-Choice view is that the life is not a person until outside the womb. So 1 hour before birth = not a person, 1 second after birth = person. Nonsense

antiskeptic

doylefe wrote: »

Looking forward to the debate tonight, with another resounding win for the No side most likely.

If they manage to swing Maria Steen then I'm onto Paddy Power.

Must be a stunt. Steen plays a cracker of a game, they reckon if they put her forward RTE will deny and their forced to field another.

This way, the prospect of an old episode of Only Fools and Horses beckons to fill the blank screen

Hope it's the one with the chandelier!

Macha

munsterlegend wrote: »

Well I am not going into the graphic reasons why I would vote no. If you asked most people in Ireland they would be against the actual act it's whether people should have the choice. Anyone who has had a child knows how precious life is even before a child is actually delivered.

The actual act? What do you know of it?

I had a missed miscarriage last year at 12 weeks and had to take the abortion pills. I was in full labour in 5 minutes flat, almost in too much pain to take the prescription painkillers that had also been prescribed. Then I had to wear what were effectively nappies for a week while everything came out. I missed a week of work.

The idea that a woman would chose to go through this lightly is incredibly insulting.

And yes, I have a child.

jjmcclure

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

None of the back and forth matters at the end of it all. The people involved, the woman and man, in conjunction with the doctor are the only ones that should have a say in what happens. There is no need and shouldn't be any want, for someone uninvolved to have a say.

Have people not enough crap in their own lives to be dealing with without wanting to control the choices of others?

Take it a step further ... why the hell did the world get involved in 1930s/40s Germany. None of our business, we had enough problems. Let the Germans do what they want

ohnonotgmail

jjmcclure wrote: »

Not at all. the Pro-Choice view is that the life is not a person until outside the womb. So 1 hour before birth = not a person, 1 second after birth = person. Nonsense

we will have to agree to disagree

DarkScar

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

alive but not a person and all that entails. you seem to have missed that bit

Thinking there's something miraculous about birth that transforms a "clump of cells" into a human being is every bit as creepy as thinking and egg fusing with a sperm is magically a human being.

bridster007

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

pregnant women call what is inside them a baby. Up to 8 weeks it is an embryo. After that it is a fetus. People dont use always use scientific terms and if they do they dont always do it correctly. That doesnt change what it is

So, why don't they admit that they are going to abort a baby so, I have not found anyone Yes voter who will talk about it in these terms. Why suddenly they choose to use scientific terms when they want rid ?

Bannasidhe

jjmcclure wrote: »

Not at all. the Pro-Choice view is that the life is not a person until outside the womb. So 1 hour before birth = not a person, 1 second after birth = person. Nonsense

Yeah, governments say that too. Even the one that brought in the 8th in the first place. Can't call them pro-choice by any stretch of the imagination.

FingerDeKat

munsterlegend wrote: »

Well I am not going into the graphic reasons why I would vote no.

Stop watching sh1t videos with an obvious agenda...at 12 weeks it's a heavy period for the woman

PhoenixParker

jjmcclure wrote: »

Very poor analogy!

BTW thats not the analogy I was speaking about. Its in my first post.



You suggest that for 9 months of "inconvenience" termination is justified. Anyone can look after the child when it is born.

I answered that in post 1429.
The husband would mourn one person, his wife.

I had a miscarriage myself at 12 weeks.
It was upsetting but in no way comparable remotely to the loss I would experience if my living breathing son were to die.

A fetus has value but not value remotely comparable to a living breathing child or indeed the living breathing woman who carries it.

Maybe some women feel differently and that's their prerogative but to enforce that view on all women is quite frankly ridiculous.

Nobody treats or treated my miscarriage as though I lost a child. I didn't get child benefit. There wasn't a funeral or a death certificate. Your example would be reported as the death of a pregnant woman not a woman and a baby. Maternity leave is available for women who lose a baby after 24 weeks gestation but not earlier. . .

In every possible way society and the law make it clear that a fetus is not in fact a baby, except when it suits them in the 8th amendment.

erica74

jjmcclure wrote: »

Not at all. the Pro-Choice view is that the life is not a person until outside the womb. So 1 hour before birth = not a person, 1 second after birth = person. Nonsense

What are you talking about? The referendum is to remove the 8th from the constitution, the proposed legislation is abortion up to 12 weeks and abortion up to 6 months in specific circumstances. I'm not sure what an hour before and a second after have to do with the discussion.

ohnonotgmail

bridster007 wrote: »

So, why don't they admit that they are going to abort a baby so, I have not found anyone Yes voter who will talk about it in these terms. Why suddenly they choose to use scientific terms when they want rid ?

you seem to think that women having abortions are ignorant about what they are doing. that is just insulting.

DarkScar

jjmcclure wrote: »

Take it a step further ... why the hell did the world get involved in 1930s/40s Germany. None of our business, we had enough problems. Let the Germans do what they want

This has never been answered by the Yes side. If somebody thinks abortion is killing a human being (I'd say it is after 20 weeks) but thinks it is a "personal choice", then the same logic says that all killing of human beings is a "personal choice" and "nobody else's business".

Bannasidhe

jjmcclure wrote: »

Take it a step further ... why the hell did the world get involved in 1930s/40s Germany. None of our business, we had enough problems. Let the Germans do what they want

But "we" didn't did we?
"we" had an "emergency" so couldn't play.
Sweden was busy too.
Switzerland was minding everyone's money.

Whole swathes of Asia and South America minded their own business.

What was your point again?

ohnonotgmail

DarkScar wrote: »

This has never been answered by the Yes side. If somebody thinks abortion is killing a human being (I'd say it is after 20 weeks) but thinks it is a "personal choice", then the same logic says that all killing of human beings is a "personal choice" and "nobody else's business".

what percentage of abortions do you think take place after 20 weeks and do you think women do it because it is inconvenient? Or do you think they do it for medical reasons?

jjmcclure

PhoenixParker wrote: »

I answered that in post 1429.
One.

I had a miscarriage myself at 12 weeks.
It was upsetting but in no way comparable remotely to the loss I would experience if my living breathing son were to die.

A fetus has value but not value remotely comparable to a living breathing child or indeed the living breathing woman who carries it.

Maybe some women feel differently and that's tgeir prerogative but to enforce that view on all women is quite frankly ridiculous.

Nobody treats or treated my miscarriage as though I lost a child. I didn't get child benefit. There wasn't a funeral or a death certificate. Your example would be reported as the death of a pregnant woman not a woman and a baby. Maternity leave is available for women who lose a baby after 24 weeks gestation but not earlier. . .

In every possible way society and the law make it clear that a fetus is not in fact a baby, except when it suits them in the 8th amendment.

Sorry but you are wrong about this part
"Your example would be reported as the death of a pregnant woman not a woman and a baby."
It is often reported as a mother and unborn child. e.g. the unborn twins killed in the Omagh bombing

Macha

The Church itself doesn't consider a miscarriage a lost baby. Where are all of the sacraments and traditions and ceremonies to mark that occasion? I don't know of any.

Guy:Incognito

jjmcclure wrote: »

Take it a step further ... why the hell did the world get involved in 1930s/40s Germany. None of our business, we had enough problems. Let the Germans do what they want

Ah, we're back to the nazis again.
Each nazi wasn't assigned a tiny jew to live inside them, feed off them and be dependent on then to survive, being the sole person that could provide the task while the mini jew could die at any stage of their own accord or affect their health care should they need any.

There's also very little chance that abortion is looking to take over the world and rule us with an iron fist.


I'll debate nazi Germany with you at any stage if you like, just not on this thread. I've a load of family members that were in various branches of the German army at the time. A few of whom did stints in pow camps.

fxotoole

bridster007 wrote: »

Well I've met plenty Yes people who object to using the word baby or child in conjunction with abortion. They say its not a child or baby until born. That's how they are rationalising it.

You're deliberately misrepresenting the Yes side's position. Or mine at least.

The Yes side believe that a foetus is not a baby until it develops sentience and/or the ability to feel pain. Many Yes people are OK with abortion up to the point that a foetus develops sentience, but are uncomfortable with it after that point.

It's a lot more nuanced than you're making it out to be.

jjmcclure

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what percentage of abortions do you think take place after 20 weeks and do you think women do it because it is inconvenient? Or do you think they do it for medical reasons?

A mixture of both.

antiskeptic

What do folk think of the line up tomorrow at 10pm on Pat Kenny

Maria Steen and Ronan Mullen (he seemed to do okay on the Claire Byrne show)

vs.

Regina Doherty and Colm O'Gorman