zedhead wrote: » I don't think the world would be any better or worse had I been aborted. I am sure it would have been the right choice for my parents if they had chosen that path. To be honest I think my life is wholly irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. What I am grateful for is that I had parents who were in a position to raise me in a home filled with love and where all my requirements were met.
zedhead wrote: » It always comes down to punishing a women for daring to have sex and not be prepared for the consequences, regardless of the fact that there are always 2 people involved.
RobertKK wrote: » Just look at your own reply, you have not even debated the point. It is an uncomfortable truth that I posted.
RobertKK wrote: » But you brought happiness to your parents, so you did make the world a better place for others who love you.
....... wrote: » This post has been deleted.
Lollipops23 wrote: » How come it's murder if I feel unable to feed and raise a child, but not murder if the child's father forces himself on me? What's the line for you?
....... wrote: » RTE reported 70,000 but Gardai estimated between 10,000 and 20,000. The size wouldnt worry me at all tbh, the prolifers tend to be a vocal minority.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » [Dougal] I'm no good at estimating the size of crowds but i reckon there is about 17 million of them. [/Dougal]
hatrickpatrick wrote: » That's pretty bizarre if you compare it to water charge protests, anti war protests etc - the media are usually either in line with or actually more conservative than the Garda statistics. Wonder why the discrepancy?
Ben Gadot wrote: » Sometimes social media can trick one into thinking something is a foregone conclusion but I don't think there is one here now. I'd be concerned now, especially as how one poster pointed out earlier, that there doesn't to be one coherent voice or message in the choice lobby.
....... wrote: » The Garda figure was reported in the Irish Times, it was RTE who published the 70k figure. Perhaps RTE simply didnt fact check?
Syphonax wrote: » Im in favour or women aborting a child in the instance of rape, so your quick witted remark has nothing to do with abortion-on-demand, sorry.
Rebekah Strong Archivist wrote: » How does abortion in the case of rape work on a practical level?
hatrickpatrick wrote: » I must say the reported size of it certainly worries me a little - I never thought it would be a walk in the park for repeal but I did expect there to be an enthusiasm gap, which there doesn't seem to be if the reported attendance of this is anything to go by. Having said that, I really don't think holding simultaneous and co-located counter rallies is ever a good idea. Let them have their moment and then try and have an even bigger repeal rally the following week would have been a better strategy IMO.
freshpopcorn wrote: » I don't understand how abortion is legalised just in cases of rape to be honest. I take it the woman just goes to the doctor and say they were raped and he'll send her to the relevant services. To me this is basically legalised abortion/abortion on demand/abortion by choice/what ever term you want to call it.
Syphonax wrote: » Ehhh Huh? I would imagine if you get raped you have an abortion.
Syphonax wrote: » Yes its THAT straight forward. Dont be soft.
Rebekah Strong Archivist wrote: » You really haven't thought this through mate. Step by step, from a woman going to her doctor and asking for an abortion, walk me through how it works that you allow women who've been raped to access abortion, but not other women.
freshpopcorn wrote: » Can you explain it to me a little. If the referendum was just to legalise abortion just in cases of rape. Could you explain to me how it wouldn't be open to everybody who said they were raped? If I could I could convince people to vote for the repeal.
