nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

How do Pro Life campaigners want women who have abortions punished?

rjpf1980

Since pro life campaigners believe abortion is murder wouldn't this mean women who abortions should be jailed for life or executed in many jurisdictions?

In Ireland this doesn't happen because women just travel to Britain and other EU countries where it is legal so no need to be arrested in Ireland.

Apart from a few crazies nobody in the referendum in the early 1990s wanted to prohibit women from travelling for an abortion abroad or accessing information on abortion.

In the ideal world Pro Life campaigners wish no where on earth would abortion be legal and for abortion to be murder. In an ideal world they would have women thrown into jail for life wouldn't they?

If you are pro life what is your view,?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

PucaMama

AbusesToilets wrote: »

People have rights, cells do not. Should a tumor have rights? It is alive, self replicating and reacts to stimuli.

A tumour has no potential at all to develop into anything resembling a human life, whereas every day the unborn is alive it develops. The unborn deserve at least a chance at life.

AbusesToilets

feargale wrote: »

It is, but no more than your original post which implied that the unborn have no rights - wrong in law, and wrong in morality.

I'm p1ssed off posters shouting about human rights every time they want to shout down those they disagree with. Too many here don't seem to comprehend the concept of conflicting rights, something any pair of neighbouring sheep or goat farmers on the Kerry Mountains could educate them about.

I have said that the rights of the woman should outweigh any afforded to the fetus. Which you seem to have missed somewhat ironically, given your last paragraph.

Decent Skin

Or - as happened here - the abortion was delayed against her wishes until such time as it was objectionable and she was induced.

Absolutely disgusting to then land her with the consequences of such an imposition.

feargale

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The rights of citizens are defined by the state. Non-citizens have less rights.

Your point is intentionally specious, as slavery is crime.

It is, but no more than your original post which implied that the unborn have no rights - wrong in law, and wrong in morality.

I'm p1ssed off posters shouting about human rights every time they want to shout down those they disagree with. Too many here don't seem to comprehend the concept of conflicting rights, something any pair of neighbouring sheep or goat farmers on the Kerry Mountains could educate them about.

Decent Skin

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

It's quite clearly an opinion.

And if they introduce something more restrictive then you would have wanted?

Anything is an improvement on what we have at present, so I'd take it.

Decent Skin

Hence the need for proper support services beforehand where such things are clearly outlined.

Throwing them in as if someone was so immature as to change their mind on a life-changing decision overnight on a whim is disingenuous.

Be it keeping it or carrying it or giving it for adoption aborting it NEITHER decision should be taken lightly or without proper support.

Little CuChulainn

The Specialist wrote: »

No it's pretty much fact.

It's quite clearly an opinion.

Decent Skin wrote: »

Wouldn't trust a government in a million years, but that won't stop me voting the way I believe is right.

And if they introduce something more restrictive then you would have wanted?

Decent Skin

Because only people can have human rights ?

eviltwin

Oh really? After 26 weeks she just decided out of the blue she didn't want to be pregnant?

Grayson

why? What's your deciding factor. For me it's brain activity. A functioning brain is what makes us human. You can replace every other organ without destroying the person. Replace my brain with say yours and I'm effectively you.

AbusesToilets

thee glitz wrote: »

Do you have any concept of responsibility?

You find it to be more responsible to force mothers to bring unwanted children into society. Children who would possibly then go on to become burdens upon society in one fashion or another?

eviltwin

What are the specifics of this case? Why did the woman wait until 26 weeks

Grayson

People have rights, human cells don't. I have a right to vote, my arm if it gets chopped off doesn't even though it's a collection of cells. Likewise if I become brain dead the machines can be switched off because technically I am dead and not a person. If I was in a coma and not brain dead I would still have rights and the machines keeping me alive would not be switched off.

AbusesToilets

Repeating yourself doesn't make your post any less silly.

The actions of the Nazis has no bearing on a discussion about abortion in Ireland and the rights afforded to a woman therein.

thee glitz

AbusesToilets wrote: »

No, I don't feel that it is morally just to force a woman to carry to term a baby she does not want.

Do you have any concept of responsibility?

The Specialist

What is this 26 weeks emotive bull**** you keep going on about? The debate is around FFA and early term unwanted pregnancies. Nobody i know in favour of this would agree with near full term abortion and thats not what this topic is even about. Typical over emotive bull**** from the pro life side.

eviltwin

What's your fixation on 26 weeks?

The Specialist

Because to apply human rights you kind of need to be a human person.

AbusesToilets

People have rights, cells do not. Should a tumor have rights? It is alive, self replicating and reacts to stimuli.

feargale

Decent Skin wrote: »

If you like labels then yes. I don't know anyone who's "anti-life" though.

I'll rephrase it. You're against abortion in some circumstances?

P.S. Thanks for answering my original question btw. I'm sorry others didn't

Grayson

So what about 10 weeks or 5 weeks? You'll find few pro choice people here that want it up to 26 weeks. How about 5 weeks? And what should the punishment be for the woman if she takes an abortion pill at that stage?

AbusesToilets

No, I don't feel that it is morally just to force a woman to carry to term a baby she does not want.

A fetus is not a person nor a citizen. It should not have rights ascribed to it that place it's importance ahead of it's mother.

AbusesToilets

feargale wrote: »

I must remember that the next time I see my two Nigerian non-citizen neighbours. I could do with a pair of slaves.

The rights of citizens are defined by the state. Non-citizens have less rights.

Your point is intentionally specious, as slavery is crime.

The Specialist

I think your overblown emotionalism is getting the better of your logical thinking.

Decent Skin

That 25 week old one is going to be really pissed off with you for excluding him.

The 10 or 12 week old one should be grand though - no consciousness or feelings there yet.

AbusesToilets

PucaMama wrote: »

I know a couple with a child born earlier than 26 weeks and she's fine now.

As was stated before, I don't know what the medical standard for fetal viability would be.

The ability to survive independent of a mother that would not want it, seems a fairly obvious place to put the cut off point.

thee glitz

Widdershins wrote: »

How did you deduce that? I said nothing of the sort

You said:

wrote:

all you are achieving is making a lot of people either break themselves to pay for it abroad or attempt it in some unsafe way at home.

implying that women must get abortions, which is clearly not true.

Decent Skin

WHAT would the FETU..... (turns down volume - sorry folks) .... What would the foetus choose ?

And show the little lad some respect by spelling him or her properly, will ya ? Not being all grammar nazi but apparently he can't speak for himself and it's up to us living adults to do so :P

The Specialist

Because the mother is a LIVING FUNCTIONING ADULT. A fetus is a collection of cells that may or may not reach full term or be born alive. What part of this are you failing to grasp?

feargale

AbusesToilets wrote: »

Citizens have rights. A fetus is not a citizen.

I must remember that the next time I see my two Nigerian non-citizen neighbours. I could do with a pair of slaves.