AtomicHorror wrote: » Not addressing the substance of my argument at all.
infogiver wrote: » You can't murder someone by accident Lexie.
notjustsweet wrote: » Not every woman can use hormonal contraception, also some medications interfere with them. Even when used perfectly there's no contraception 100% safe. Condoms can break, tear or slip off.
conorhal wrote: » You can however be prosecuted for deliberately ending one, sidestep that.
infogiver wrote: » Well I called it the "thing in the womb" at 40+ weeks ( so as not to use emotive language) and you are referring to it as a fetus. Why do we have to play this very silly childish game in which we're not allowed to refer to the thing in the womb as a baby until it's made a journey head first down an inches long canal? Sometimes (in the case of my niece) the journey only took 10 minutes. Your telling me that ten minutes and 6 inches ago it was a fetus and it's host had an entitlement to end its life but now it's a person and a human being and a baby and a child and heaven and earth must be moved to protect it? The vaginal canal conferred these rights on this thing? (I'm trying so hard not to use emotive language. If you've ever given birth it's kinda emotive).
cinnamony wrote: » I am pro choice but I must admit I'm not sure as to what extent the accidental pregnancy/contraception failed excuse holds in a country like Ireland. You are usually recommended to use 2 forms of contraception and from what I know (please correct me if I am wrong) contraceptive pills/shots implants etc... are not only easily available but free on the medical card. Condoms are easily available too in stores etc.. So in these cases I'm not sure if there's a pro choice argument to be made barr that people should be able to do what they want with their bodies..
conorhal wrote: » I'm glad we legislate to protect lives here too. Legislation to protect lives is a good thing.
AtomicHorror wrote: » You can be criminally prosecuted for killing someone by accident however, which was Lexie's point. You've sidestepped it by focusing on the narrowest possible interpretation of her argument. A habit of yours, which you need to stop.
AtomicHorror wrote: » The rate of road fatalities in Ireland is 3.9 deaths per every 1 billion kilometres of road travel. Per year, the numbers who die on Irish roads represents about 0.003% of the population. Those sound tiny, yet we legislate, extensively, to try and protect those lives because once you cut through those stats, it actually equals 100-200 real people who die each year and leave behind a lot of pain and sadness. I'm not suggesting an unwanted pregnancy is comparable to a death, but the odds you're being quite dismissive of also represent substantial numbers of real people. Of the 3000-4000 Irish women who get abortions each year, you're probably looking at 1000-2000 being a result of contraceptive failure, unless our stats are radically out of line with the international norm. Those numbers are not trivial.
infogiver wrote: » Get with which "times"?
conorhal wrote: » The typical contraception failure rate is less then 1% I don't think we should be legislating on the basis of those odds for society as a whole, otherwise we'd ban all risk and wrap ourselves in cotton wool.
KKkitty wrote: » First off I'm pro choice. Being pro choice doesn't mean I want abortions left, right and centre. I want abortions for those who really need them. If a mother wants to terminate her pregnancy let her do it in Ireland. Why have her going on a boat or plane to a different country to have it done. There's many reasons why a pregnancy is terminated but this country needs to get with the times.
gctest50 wrote: » Once ye pass through the registry office, ( and make a mark on paper a few inches long ), you emerge as married couple Amazing innit
LexieOnRale wrote: » So let's say for example, a woman is 15 weeks pregnant. Something happens her, she's going through an incredibly stressful time and isn't looking after herself, or she's out running and falls, or she's speeding and crashes the car and ends up losing the pregnancy. Why isn't she charged with murder, or manslaughter? Why isn't there a death certificate provided for the unborn?
infogiver wrote: » .............but once it passes through an inches long canal and emerges .....
notjustsweet wrote: » You've asked this same question to at least 3 different people now and it's been explained to you very clearly that despite your attempts at emotive language, fetus is a medical term as is embryo.
AtomicHorror wrote: » No form of contraception has a 100% success rate, and neither does the combination of any 2 or 3 or any number of them together.
Beyondgone wrote: » I'd say (but then I'm a halfwit) that common sense should apply. 2 weeks pregnant? Yes. 1 month? Yes. 6 months. No. Baby has congenital defects? Yes. You were raped? Yes. Apart from them few, I'm very pro life. But then I'm male, and as such, I consider that it is none of my business what a woman does with her body, because "not a woman". Pretty much.
infogiver wrote: » So the journey through the vaginal canal confers personhood? While the thing in the womb is fully grown, sucking its thumb, sometimes having a bowel movement, reacting to stimulus, reacting to sounds like the sound of its mothers voice, it's not a baby, not a person, not a human being and if it's mother chooses she can decide to kill it, but once it passes through an inches long canal and emerges then it becomes a baby a person a human being and she can no longer kill it. Why? I mean why can she now not kill it? Because she can see it?
conorhal wrote: » Well here come the hard questions, and abortion asks them. 6 months no, why? What constitutes a congenital defect? Are you talking about fatal fetal abnormalities or survivable conditions? Rape is a difficult one granted, but after 6 months does that context nullify the right to life? The baby is no less viable. I get that it's a tough one, but should that baby have less rights then one conceived in a one night stand?
