anyone else fed up hearing about abortion already

gctest50 · 09-01-2017 12:30PM

infogiver wrote: »

So.. pro lifers=filth
Organ donation proponents = filth?

You know exactly which posters i was referring to

The ones referred to here :

gctest50 wrote: »

Canadian judge sorted the anti-choice filth who just love putting up the graphic posters

We need this here

http://fus.in/2isskZK

A Canadian judge says an anti-abortion group cannot put their ads up on public buses in the city of Grande Prairie, Alberta because they might cause “psychological harm to women who have had an abortion.” The offending ad contains pictures of fetuses and reads, “Abortion kills children. End the killing.”

Shenshen · 09-01-2017 12:31PM

brickmauser wrote: »

If the person killed their own flesh and blood and they are feeling guilty you mean? If they kill a little baby for their own convenience and try to rationalize it as a good deed? Must not offend the child killers. I hope they are upset and I hope anyone who is considering murdering their own child thinks again.

Well, no, mother nature was going to "kill their flesh and blood", they only spared it the suffering. But good to see how much empathy you're capable of.

jameorahiely · 09-01-2017 12:31PM

gctest50 wrote: »

You know exactly which posters i was referring to

The ones of clumps of cells

Biology teachers = filth

Shenshen · 09-01-2017 12:33PM

infogiver wrote: »

See this is the problem all summed up in one sentence.
You are accusing parents who chose to continue with the pregnancy after a diagnosis of anecephaly of deciding to "force the poor thing to suffer and die shortly after birth" (your words not mine).
So that's NOT pro-choice. You are saying really that that choice shouldn't be available to them. That that choice is cruel on the "thing".
So how can you describe yourself as pro choice and reject the term pro abortion?

No, I'm saying that I think it's cruel, but it IS their choice. Their's, and nobody else's.

I would wish for a world where there wouldn't be any reason for anyone to terminate a pregnancy, but given that we don't have a perfect nature and given that we don't have a perfect society, I'm in favour of allowing people to make their own choices rather than force their hands.

brickmauser · 09-01-2017 12:35PM

infogiver wrote: »

See this is the problem all summed up in one sentence.
You are accusing parents who chose to continue with the pregnancy after a diagnosis of anecephaly of deciding to "force the poor thing to suffer and die shortly after birth" (your words not mine).
So that's NOT pro-choice. You are saying really that that choice shouldn't be available to them. That that choice is cruel on the "thing".
So how can you describe yourself as pro choice and reject the term pro abortion?

Pro abortion nuts are pro death.

Let's give up on babies with deformities. Let's just kill them.

They have the same attitude to the old and the sick and the disabled. Kill them.

Let's not treat disease or deformity or disorders or anything. Just kill the patients.

The snowflakes who come up against adversity in life - they are fat or no gifted academically or life is a struggle and things aren't perfect etc kill themselves too.

When something goes wrong just kill yourself.

That's the cult of death.

Whether it is abortion or euthanasia or suicide it's all part of a philosophy that explains away moral responsibility.

infogiver · 09-01-2017 12:36PM

Shenshen wrote: »

Well, no, mother nature was going to "kill their flesh and blood", they only spared it the suffering. But good to see how much empathy you're capable of.

Once again here accusing parents who CHOOSE to continue (you are prochoice aren't you?) with their pregnancy of causing suffering ?
A bit rich for you to talk about empathy!
I hope nobody who DID choose to continue with a pregnancy isn't reading!
You've damned them in 2 posts now!
I see you are obviously pro choice only if the parents choose to end the pregnancy.
That's pretty clear.

gctest50 · 09-01-2017 12:37PM

brickmauser wrote: »

......

When something goes wrong just kill yourself.

That's the cult of death.

Whether it is abortion or euthanasia or suicide it's all part of a philosophy that explains away moral responsibility.

What's wrong with euthanasia if you have an incurable condition and can't put up with it ?

Shenshen · 09-01-2017 12:38PM

infogiver wrote: »

Once again here accusing parents who CHOOSE to continue (you are prochoice aren't you?) with their pregnancy of causing suffering ?
A bit rich for you to talk about empathy!
I hope nobody who DID choose to continue with a pregnancy isn't reading!
You've damned them in 2 posts now!
I see you are obviously pro choice only if the parents choose to end the pregnancy.
That's pretty clear.

Do I agree with people carrying a pregnancy like that to term? No.
Would I fight tooth and nail for their right to do it? Yes.

I hope that's put it simple enough for you now.

I'm pro-choice. I want people to have the right to do something I personally don't agree with and I personally wouldn't do.

infogiver · 09-01-2017 12:39PM

Shenshen wrote: »

No, I'm saying that I think it's cruel, but it IS their choice. Their's, and nobody else's.

I would wish for a world where there wouldn't be any reason for anyone to terminate a pregnancy, but given that we don't have a perfect nature and given that we don't have a perfect society, I'm in favour of allowing people to make their own choices rather than force their hands.

so you don't mind others saying then that they think it is cruel and wrong to murder a baby in the womb and that they would seek to prevent the murder and cruelty from becoming legal in Ireland?
Do you accept that your terminology in now 2 posts might be hurtful and offensive to anyone reading who decided to continue with a pregnancy?

_Kaiser_ · 09-01-2017 12:40PM

If some of the rhetoric and emotional blackmail could be dialed back a bit, an actual debate on the issue could be productive

As it stands it's just name calling and stone-throwing on both sides.

And therein lies the issue - hence why the CHOICE should be there. Those who feel it's the "best" (for want of a better term) option for their SPECIFIC circumstances can avail of it... those who don't agree with it, won't/don't have to.

Besides I doubt very much that any woman who makes such a decision does so lightly and agonises over it before and long after (possibly for the rest of their lives) so the idea that this facilitates a "easy" option is nonsense.

Shenshen · 09-01-2017 12:41PM

infogiver wrote: »

so you don't mind others saying then that they think it is cruel and wrong to murder a baby in the womb and that they would seek to prevent the murder and cruelty from becoming legal in Ireland?
Do you accept that your terminology in now 2 posts might be hurtful and offensive to anyone reading who decided to continue with a pregnancy?

By all means, that's what democracy is about. I wouldn't dream of stopping any interest group from making its point heard.

brickmauser · 09-01-2017 12:42PM

gctest50 wrote: »

What's wrong with euthanasia if you have an incurable condition and can't put up with it ?

Medical science is about trying find cures for what was incurable and about prolonging life.

Euthanasia has a history of corrupting society and leading to barbarism.

Read about the T4 program which had its origins as a "humane" program to kill the incurable which morphed into the death camps.

The same staff who killed the sick and disabled were killing millions by the train load years later.

RobertKK · 09-01-2017 12:42PM

Everyone is just a clump of cells with an opinion, unless you are a baby and you likely don't have an opinion on most things about from something like a dirty nappy, being tired or wanting food.

jameorahiely · 09-01-2017 12:42PM

Shenshen wrote: »

Well, no, mother nature was going to "kill their flesh and blood", they only spared it the suffering. But good to see how much empathy you're capable of.

Suffering, that's a nice sound bite.

The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) describes the presentation of this condition as follows: "A baby born with anencephaly is usually blind, deaf, unaware of its surroundings and unable to feel pain
http://www.checkorphan.org/diseases/anencephaly

bodice ripper · 09-01-2017 12:42PM

Parchment wrote: »

Its obvious what side you are gunning for. I would just like to point out that nobody is pro-abortion. People are pro-choice.

I am pro-abortion. Too many people having kids they neither want nor can afford.

_Kaiser_ · 09-01-2017 12:44PM

infogiver wrote: »

so you don't mind others saying then that they think it is cruel and wrong to murder a baby in the womb and that they would seek to prevent the murder and cruelty from becoming legal in Ireland?
Do you accept that your terminology in now 2 posts might be hurtful and offensive to anyone reading who decided to continue with a pregnancy?

And yet, it's ok to refer to those who believe in the choice or rights of individuals to decide what's best for their circumstances to be referred to as murderers?

Can you not see how your terminology in multiple posts might be hurtful and offensive to anyone reading .... etc

Irony

RobertKK · 09-01-2017 12:44PM

bodice ripper wrote: »

I am pro-abortion. Too many people having kids they neither want nor can afford.

Wouldn't sterilisation be a better approach?

_Kaiser_ · 09-01-2017 12:46PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Wouldn't sterilisation be a better approach?

In the context given there I'd agree... simple enough job too for most men.

gctest50 · 09-01-2017 12:47PM

brickmauser wrote: »

Medical science is about trying find cures for what was incurable and about prolonging life.

Euthanasia has a history of corrupting society and leading to barbarism.

Read about the T4 program which had its origins as a "humane" program to kill the incurable which morphed into the death camps.

The same staff who killed the sick and disabled were killing millions by the train load years later.

The ol slippery slope of daftness and the nazis and the whole lot

bodice ripper · 09-01-2017 12:47PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Wouldn't sterilisation be a better approach?

Oh, yes. If that's what the person wants. Good luck getting a doctor to do it though, particularly if you are female.

suicide_circus · 09-01-2017 12:49PM

It's nothing compared to the coverage of trans issues. The amount of airtime this receives is just ridiculous. It's a sexy media darling which impacts on f*ck all percentage of the population. At least abortion potentially effects loads of people.

gctest50 · 09-01-2017 12:52PM

jameorahiely wrote: »

Suffering, that's a nice sound bite.

The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) describes the presentation of this condition as follows: "A baby born with anencephaly is usually blind, deaf, unaware of its surroundings and unable to feel pain
http://www.checkorphan.org/diseases/anencephaly

jameorahiely wrote: »

....unaware of its surroundings and unable to feel pain

Since you point it out, a woman should have no doubts at all then about terminating that pregnancy since it will be :

jameorahiely wrote: »

....unaware of its surroundings and unable to feel pain

yes ?

infogiver · 09-01-2017 12:57PM

Shenshen wrote: »

Do I agree with people carrying a pregnancy like that to term? No.
Would I fight tooth and nail for their right to do it? Yes.

I hope that's put it simple enough for you now.

I'm pro-choice. I want people to have the right to do something I personally don't agree with and I personally wouldn't do.

This is one of the many fears pro life people have.
That once abortion is legal that there will be a push on to force people to abort apparently disabled unborn babies, because it is "cruel" (why do you think that when the evidence doesn't support it?) or possibly because of the financial strain on the public purse.
You must be disgusted when you hear radio or TV interviews with parents describing their wonderful experience having given birth to a loved disabled baby who later died. Do you feel that it is cruel enough that something should be done about it?
I mean, we have laws against causing unnecessary cruelty to animals.

brickmauser · 09-01-2017 12:59PM

gctest50 wrote: »

The ol slippery slope of daftness and the nazis and the whole lot

Well read about what happened. If killing the innocent is allowed then everything is allowed. Human right will go. If the rights of the unborn mean nothing then it's permissible to kill or experiment or enslave anybody.

infogiver · 09-01-2017 12:59PM

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

And yet, it's ok to refer to those who believe in the choice or rights of individuals to decide what's best for their circumstances to be referred to as murderers?

Can you not see how your terminology in multiple posts might be hurtful and offensive to anyone reading .... etc

Irony

Where did I refer to anyone as a murderer?

bodice ripper · 09-01-2017 01:03PM

brickmauser wrote: »

Well read about what happened. If killing the innocent is allowed then everything is allowed. Human right will go. If the rights of the unborn mean nothing then it's permissible to kill or experiment or enslave anybody.

As shown in all the countries where abortion is legal...

...dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria!

_Kaiser_ · 09-01-2017 01:08PM

infogiver wrote: »

Where did I refer to anyone as a murderer?

You refer to abortion as murder.

Ergo, those carrying it out or making the decision must be murderers.

Right?

gctest50 · 09-01-2017 01:11PM

brickmauser wrote: »

Well read about what happened. If killing the innocent is allowed then everything is allowed. Human right will go. If the rights of the unborn mean nothing then it's permissible to kill or experiment or enslave anybody.

brickmauser wrote: »

.........killing the innocent.......

How do you come up with that from voluntary euthanasia like this :

( WARNING : PEACEFUL VOLUNTARY EUTHANASIA YouTube link )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7BVLSC7YF4

The death of Peter Smedley, the British w billionaire who ended his days at a clinic for assisted suicide from Switzerland.

The businessman was 71 years old, and he suffered of an incurable disease/ motor neurone diseases
has agreed to be filmed in the last moments of life, and that the euthanasia to be allowed in Britain.

TheDoc · 09-01-2017 01:16PM

the_pen_turner wrote: »

im sick of hearing about it and it hasnt even started yet.
its a total waste of time . the subject is so strong that people have their opinions on it and are very unlikely to change them.

why cant we just have one week of facts and then a referendum.

Because that is not how politics work, and make no mistake this is going to be forged in a massively political way.

Like anything, typically everyone isn't in line with the same opinion and feeling about a certain issue. And a representative TD has a responsibility to acknowledge, champion, listen and evaluate and push those views held by those elected to them.

Where Irish TD's frequently trip up, is by pushing an agenda or issue that is theirs, and not representative of their electorate.

It will also allow the Government to get a feel for where the opinion firmly lies. Obviously they won't want to push forward with a decision that could bite them in the polls.

So a Citizen assembly or forum like this is a great way to kick an issue down the road for a while, but also gather a feeling for where the majority or important feeling is, and they can then decide what side of the fence they fall on.

As the OP says, I'm sick of it hearing about it, but only because I think it's absolutely stone age thinking in regards how our legislation works, how the Church has a strong sway in it, and how the varying sides happily just ignore the basics and fundamentals, and go to extremes, to the point of misinformation, to affirm their side.

I'm sick of it because its just an obvious thing to sort out. I hadn't had much interest in the issue until my partner had a miscarriage last year, and then I started to think about the "what ifs". What if my partner was and to a certain extent I, were put through an ordeal based on a law, which formed from a base of thinking that simply should not form part of our legislation in the 21st century.

I'm now a father of two daughters, and that has also changed my outlook. Not on the subject matter, as I've always believed its being a ridiculous situation that women would be held hostage based on legacy beliefs, but on how much of a real "debate" it is.

Like gay marriage. In modern society and civilisation, somethings arn't debatable. There isn't a for and against. It's just common sense, and the aggravation and annoyance is how there needs to be some form of entertainment provided or a platform given to a particular side or faction, in the name of "balance" when all it is, is impeeching the absolutely bloody obvious

ohnonotgmail · 09-01-2017 01:19PM

brickmauser wrote: »

Well read about what happened. If killing the innocent is allowed then everything is allowed. Human right will go. If the rights of the unborn mean nothing then it's permissible to kill or experiment or enslave anybody.

and that is exactly what has happened in every country that allows abortion. right? right?

anyone else fed up hearing about abortion already

Comments