Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Hotel Cancels Pro life event due to Intimidation.

1…1415171920…42

Comments

  • #482
    frag420
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,161 ✭✭✭frag420


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    And I get teased for being unscientific.

    More your refusal to accept science...


  • #483
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    ELM327 wrote: »
    To be fair, he called it a delusion so I doubt he's going to listen to reason.

    What age are you ELM?


  • #484
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    frag420 wrote: »
    More your refusal to accept science...

    I don't accept junk science.


  • #485
    frag420
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,161 ✭✭✭frag420


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    I don't accept junk science.

    So you accept that abortions don't cause great cancer then...and that the event at the hotel was peddling junk science?


  • #486
    pjohnson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,002 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    I don't accept junk science.

    Hell theres a thread here in AH about some canadian 50+ year old male who thinks he is a 6 year old girl "transage" or some such nonsense.


    Do you understand that this male doesnt suddenly transform his penis into a pre-pubescent vagina. Despite claiming to be a 6 year old girl he is a genetic male capable of reproducing with a genetic female?


    Do you think basic knowledge of reproduction is "junk science"? Where do YOU think reproduction occurs if you dont believe it only takes one male and one female reproductive system? A stork? Immaculate conception? An Post?


  • Advertisement
  • #487
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    frag420 wrote: »
    So you accept that abortions don't cause great cancer then...and that the event at the hotel was peddling junk science?

    Yes.


  • #488
    frag420
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,161 ✭✭✭frag420


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    Yes.

    Just checking...


  • #489
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    pjohnson wrote: »
    Hell theres a thread here in AH about some canadian 50+ year old male who thinks he is a 6 year old girl "transage" or some such nonsense.


    Do you understand that this male doesnt suddenly transform his penis into a pre-pubescent vagina. Despite claiming to be a 6 year old girl he is a genetic male capable of reproducing with a genetic female?


    Do you think basic knowledge of reproduction is "junk science"? Where do YOU think reproduction occurs if you dont believe it only takes one male and one female reproductive system? A stork? Immaculate conception? An Post?

    Can you a link to that thread?


  • #490
    pjohnson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,002 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    Yes.

    Sorry but can you clarify "junk science"?

    Do you not understand that a genetic male "woman" cannot use his penis to impregnate a genetic female "man" with a vagina?


  • #491
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    pjohnson wrote: »
    Sorry but can you clarify "junk science"?

    Do you not understand that a genetic male "woman" cannot use his penis to impregnate a genetic female "man" with a vagina?

    I think you've got the wrong man.


  • Advertisement
  • #492
    pjohnson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,002 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    I think you've got the wrong man.

    No. Its you you proudly on TWO occassions called posters out for being "unscientific" for saying a man could get pregnant. A man CAN get pregnant. A MALE cannot. Surely if you believe in science you understand this?


  • #493
    JupiterKid
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 13,532 Mod ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    This thread shows how social issues are impacting on the Irish psyche. It seems we are importing this bullsh*ttry directly from the USA which is a country tearing itself apart on racial, social and political issues.

    I'm personally strongly pro-choice and have been since my early 20s but I have never seen such pure vitriol launched at both sides of the debate. It just seems that calm, reasoned discussion and debate between both sides is impossible now.

    Maybe a bit off topic, but Britain has legal abortion for 50 years now. It hasn't resulted the the destruction of British society.

    I well remember a time when the so-called "pro-lifers" silences anyone with opposing views. It wasn't all that long ago either. Ireland lagged well behind the rest of the developed world on social issues and remains an anomaly on abortion in the developed world.

    That said, some on the "left" have behaved disgracefully and need to polish up their game if they are to gain support from the wider public.


  • #494
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    pjohnson wrote: »
    No. Its you you proudly on TWO occassions called posters out for being "unscientific" for saying a man could get pregnant. A man CAN get pregnant. A MALE cannot. Surely if you believe in science you understand this?

    Sorry, explain again how a man can become pregnant. In English please. I don't understand babble.


  • #495
    pjohnson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,002 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    Sorry, explain again how a man can become pregnant. In English please. I don't understand babble.

    I have about 20 posts ago? By babble do you mean actual science?


  • #496
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    pjohnson wrote: »
    I have about 20 posts ago? By babble do you mean actual science?

    You referred to the man/girl having sex with a woman. That's not the man becoming pregnant. What are you on about?


  • #497
    pitifulgod
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,282 ✭✭✭pitifulgod


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    I don't accept junk science.
    The parts of science that you don't understand is what you're defining as 'junk'. Pretty different.
    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    Sorry, explain again how a man can become pregnant. In English please. I don't understand babble.

    You aren't understanding the difference between gender and sex.


  • #498
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,524 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    ELM327 wrote: »
    Point of note:
    You can't dehumanize that which is not (yet) human .


    In spite of some peoples best efforts, you're absolutely correct - they can't dehumanise human life which begins from the moment of conception. However, the law in Ireland regards human life as from the moment of implantation with respect to the right to life of the unborn, and human rights are determined by cultural, social and political factors, certainly not science.

    pjohnson wrote: »
    Wait Dick calm down. You're getting erratic. You asked when is it a human?

    You were answered it is a human when it is born. Until then including one day before birth it is still a fetus.

    That was your first question.


    And that answer would be scientifically and medically inaccurate. You're also either forgetting, or purposely ignoring the fact that in a social context, most people will, from the moment it is discovered that a female is pregnant, refer to the developing human life as a baby.

    Secondly abortions are not carried out a day before. If a fetus is removed from the mothers womb (thus being born and becoming a baby) it is called a C-Section.


    Not necessarily, as there are many ways to terminate a pregnancy resulting in the human life being removed from the females body -

    Late termination of pregnancy


    I wouldn't suggest your misguided ideas were dangerous though, nor would I attempt to see you silenced for them. I believe everyone should be given the opportunity to assess your ideas for themselves.


  • #499
    pjohnson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,002 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    You referred to the man/girl having sex with a woman. That's not the man becoming pregnant. What are you on about?

    No not that post. I'll copy paste. It has big words.




    "Man" nowadays is a useless terminology. It is also NOT a scientific terminology.

    Genetic males cannot have children. However nowadays genetic males are calling themselves both man or woman or both. A male whether calling itself man or woman or both cannot have a child.

    However genetic females are behaving the same way calling themselves man or woman or both. A genetic female whether man or woman or both can have a child.

    This is because a genetic female has a vagina, uterus etc. A genetic male would be required, but it could easily be two "men" that reproduce with one of them pregnant provided that one has the female reproductive system and the other the male reproductive system.


    Simples!


  • #500
    ELM327
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,103 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    What age are you ELM?
    What age are you?
    Are you before 12 weeks?


  • #501
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    pjohnson wrote: »
    No not that post. I'll copy paste. It has big words.




    "Man" nowadays is a useless terminology. It is also NOT a scientific terminology.

    Genetic males cannot have children. However nowadays genetic males are calling themselves both man or woman or both. A male whether calling itself man or woman or both cannot have a child.

    However genetic females are behaving the same way calling themselves man or woman or both. A genetic female whether man or woman or both can have a child.

    This is because a genetic female has a vagina, uterus etc. A genetic male would be required, but it could easily be two "men" that reproduce with one of them pregnant provided that one has the female reproductive system and the other the male reproductive system.


    Simples!

    Oh don't be so ridiculous. Right, I'm 27 years old but tomorrow I'm going to be 15. Age is just a social construct.


  • Advertisement
  • #502
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    In spite of some peoples best efforts, you're absolutely correct - they can't dehumanise human life which begins from the moment of conception. However, the law in Ireland regards human life as from the moment of implantation with respect to the right to life of the unborn, and human rights are determined by cultural, social and political factors, certainly not science.





    And that answer would be scientifically and medically inaccurate. You're also either forgetting, or purposely ignoring the fact that in a social context, most people will, from the moment it is discovered that a female is pregnant, refer to the developing human life as a baby.





    Not necessarily, as there are many ways to terminate a pregnancy resulting in the human life being removed from the females body -

    Late termination of pregnancy


    I wouldn't suggest your misguided ideas were dangerous though, nor would I attempt to see you silenced for them. I believe everyone should be given the opportunity to assess your ideas for themselves.

    Finally some sense.


  • #503
    pjohnson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,002 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    Oh don't be so ridiculous. Right, I'm 27 years old but tomorrow I'm going to be 15. Age is just a social construct.

    Scientifically one cant undo the degeneration of cells, you would also need to reverse puberty. Also that was a post about reproduction. You are supposedly 27. You should know about sexual health?

    What is ridiculous about the male and female reproductive system being required to reproduce?


  • #504
    Will I Am Not
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,496 ✭✭✭Will I Am Not


    I think you need a stronger argument than "call themselves" to prove anything.


  • #505
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    pjohnson wrote: »
    Scientifically one cant undo the degeneration of cells, you would also need to reverse puberty. Also that was a post about reproduction. You are supposedly 27. You should know about sexual health?

    What is ridiculous about the male and female reproductive system being required to reproduce?

    What are you talking about? Is that not what I'm saying? That the female reproductive system is required to reproduce.


  • #506
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,524 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    JupiterKid wrote: »
    That said, some on the "left" have behaved disgracefully and need to polish up their game if they are to gain support from the wider public.


    From what I've seen of those groups actively campaigning to repeal the 8th amendment, they don't appear to be particularly interested in gaining support from the wider public at all, they seem more interested in virtue signalling among their peers for acceptance of themselves. I don't think they're likely to have any effect on people who are eligible to vote one way or the other tbh.


  • #507
    pjohnson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,002 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    The Fake Sheikh wrote: »
    I think you need a stronger argument than "call themselves" to prove anything.

    What "scientist" Dick cannot comprehend. Is that only the male and female reproductive organs are required. Maybe the person with the male reproductive system is called Sarah but it can still impregnate a person with the female reproductive system even if that person is called Daniel. It is called the MALE and FEMALE reproductive system. Not the man and woman reproductive system.


  • #508
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    January wrote: »
    I support fully abortion to term. Knowing that the killing of 'babies' the day before they are due to be delivered just does not happen, anywhere in this world.

    The question was not (and never is) put to suggest that there are women frothing at the mouth to kill babies that are due.

    The question was, as ever, posed in order to highlight hypocrisy.

    Saying you would be okay with such abortions, on the basis that they 'do not happen', is just a cop out.


  • #509
    pjohnson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,002 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    What are you talking about? Is that not what I'm saying? That the female reproductive system is required to reproduce.

    Yes so do you admit at LAST a man can get pregnant?


  • #510
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    pjohnson wrote: »
    Yes so do you admit at LAST a man can get pregnant?

    No.


  • Advertisement
  • #511
    Stonedpilot
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭Stonedpilot


    Gianna Jessen abortion survivor. Interesting talk.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOWMmx6eBjU


Advertisement