Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Hotel Cancels Pro life event due to Intimidation.

1…2526283031…42

Comments

  • #812
    January
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,862 ✭✭✭✭January


    No, it's every woman should have the right to have an abortion IN HER OWN COUNTRY if that's what she chooses to do. Nobody is forcing anybody to have abortions.


  • #813
    optogirl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,075 ✭✭✭optogirl


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    In the spirit of the thread could you provide links to show members of the pro life campaign erecting the posters. Proof dear boy, proof as in the claims of hotel intimidation.

    You don't think that the pro-choice side put these up surely?


  • #814
    keano_afc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,713 ✭✭✭keano_afc


    January wrote: »
    Let's see what people think of the anti-choice side erecting these (illegal) posters in Dublin city centre to try and make them look like the pro-choice side has put them up.

    Dirty tactics galore here...

    Who put the posters up? I assume you have evidence or are you just going by your assumptions?


  • #815
    January
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,862 ✭✭✭✭January


    keano_afc wrote: »
    Who put the posters up? I assume you have evidence or are you just going by your assumptions?

    The evidence is the posters themselves, the pro-choice side do not use terms like that in their campaigns, so it could only come from the anti-choice side.


  • #816
    keano_afc
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,713 ✭✭✭keano_afc


    January wrote: »
    The evidence is the posters themselves, the pro-choice side do not use terms like that in their campaigns, so it could only come from the anti-choice side.

    So just assumptions then. Thanks.


  • Advertisement
  • #817
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    January wrote: »
    No, it's every woman should have the right to have an abortion IN HER OWN COUNTRY if that's what she chooses to do. Nobody is forcing anybody to have abortions.

    If someone said:
    Every government should have the right to execute criminals IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY if that's what they choose to do.

    Nobody is forcing any other country to have the death penalty.

    Don't you think that would be missing the point of why people are against state executions?


  • #818
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,725 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    January wrote: »
    No, it's every woman should have the right to have an abortion IN HER OWN COUNTRY if that's what she chooses to do. Nobody is forcing anybody to have abortions.

    But you want to force people opposed to abortion to pay for the abortions of those who choose to have them.

    Free safe legal.

    That is the mantra is it not?

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • #819
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,725 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    optogirl wrote: »
    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    In the spirit of the thread could you provide links to show members of the pro life campaign erecting the posters. Proof dear boy, proof as in the claims of hotel intimidation.

    You don't think that the pro-choice side put these up surely?

    If the pro life campaign put up these posters I would condemn it because it detracts from mature, open debate, just like stealing posters, harassing venues does.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • #820
    ELM327
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,464 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    But you want to force people opposed to abortion to pay for the abortions of those who choose to have them.

    Free safe legal.

    That is the mantra is it not?
    Where are you getting that idea you mad yoke
    No one is mentioning state funded abortions.

    It should be a private elective surgery, not state funded.

    It's not about free in terms of cost, it's free in terms of possibility within the law, and without needing to travel to the uk


  • #821
    January
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,862 ✭✭✭✭January


    No, it should be free, just like all maternity care is free to public patients in Ireland. Obviously some people will choose to go private, just like they do in England, but if it can be funded publicly then all the better (and before 10 weeks its pills, so not wait lists needed.)


  • Advertisement
  • #822
    _Dara_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭_Dara_


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    But you want to force people opposed to abortion to pay for the abortions of those who choose to have them.

    Free safe legal.

    That is the mantra is it not?

    I don't necessarily think abortion should be free myself. I just hate the thought of anyone having to travel a good distance (if there are complications, you should be near home) to have the procedure and then having little or no support when she returns home.


  • #823
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    WinnyThePoo wrote: »
    But I did answer it. It's not. If you have a problem with people expressing themselves. Which is there right. You don't believe in free speech or democracy.
    To be fair you can believe in democracy without believing in unbridled free speech for everyone. But you're right that you can't be in favour of complete free speech while not wanting certain people to express themselves.


  • #824
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,745 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    January wrote: »
    No, it should be free, just like all maternity care is free to public patients in Ireland. Obviously some people will choose to go private, just like they do in England, but if it can be funded publicly then all the better (and before 10 weeks its pills, so not wait lists needed.)

    I disagree, I don't think it should be free. Affordable, yes, and subsidised if necessary, but not free.


  • #825
    Akrasia
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,692 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    January wrote: »
    No, it should be free, just like all maternity care is free to public patients in Ireland. Obviously some people will choose to go private, just like they do in England, but if it can be funded publicly then all the better (and before 10 weeks its pills, so not wait lists needed.)

    The argument against free abortions makes no sense.

    "If you can't afford to have an abortion, you should be forced to have a baby"

    Chomsky(2017) on the Republican party

    "Has there ever been an organisation in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organised human life on Earth?"



  • #826
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    I think it should be legal for mothers to kill newborns up until they are five weeks old.
    I know many will disagree with that but I don't see why.
    If you don't agree with it, then just don't do it yourself!

    #prochoicelogic


  • #827
    gctest50
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,534 ✭✭✭gctest50


    kylith wrote: »
    I disagree, I don't think it should be free. Affordable, yes, and subsidised if necessary, but not free.

    Why not ?

    = about 6 months of Child Benefit

    Child Benefit is €140 per month for each child

    http://bit.ly/23aDDII


  • #828
    Akrasia
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,692 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    kylith wrote: »
    I disagree, I don't think it should be free. Affordable, yes, and subsidised if necessary, but not free.

    Because there needs to be a cost to punish the woman for getting an abortion?

    There is a cost by the way, by all accounts, even medical abortions are extremely unpleasant and cause bleeding, cramping, nausea, weakness, dizziness, fever, high heart rate and pelvic pain.

    If you gave a man a choice between paying a 50 quid fine, or getting a really hard kick in the testicles, a lot of people would choose to pay the fine, and even if they chose the kick in the balls, it would be just as much of a dis-incentive get that fine again in future.

    Chomsky(2017) on the Republican party

    "Has there ever been an organisation in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organised human life on Earth?"



  • #829
    ELM327
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,464 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    January wrote: »
    No, it should be free, just like all maternity care is free to public patients in Ireland. Obviously some people will choose to go private, just like they do in England, but if it can be funded publicly then all the better (and before 10 weeks its pills, so not wait lists needed.)
    Hmm. I would disagree that it should be free.
    But, on a cost benefit analysis perhaps it is better for the state to pay for an abortion than to pay years of child benefit and other DSP costs.


  • #830
    ELM327
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,464 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    Akrasia wrote: »
    Because there needs to be a cost to punish the woman for getting an abortion?

    There is a cost by the way, by all accounts, even medical abortions are extremely usually unpleasant and cause bleeding, cramping, nausea, weakness, dizziness, fever, high heart rate and pelvic pain.

    If you gave a man a choice between paying a 50 quid fine, or getting a really hard kick in the testicles, a lot of people would choose to pay the fine, and even if they chose the kick in the balls, it would be just as much of a dis-incentive get that fine again in future.

    There is indeed a cost, even for non surgical abortions. Essentially the pills induce a miscarriage of the foetus, which often results in it being visibly expelled from the woman. There is also a risk of clots and excessive blood loss. By no means is it an easy decision. My heart goes out to anyone caught in that place, one can only imagine how bad a situation must be if an abortion is the least worst option


  • #831
    Akrasia
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,692 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    I think it should be legal for mothers to kill newborns up until they are five weeks old.
    I know many will disagree with that but I don't see why.
    If you don't agree with it, then just don't do it yourself!

    #prochoicelogic

    #strawman #icantwinthedebatebyhonestlyrepresentingtheotherpersonspositionsoijustmakeupaterribleanalogyandpretendthatswhattheythink

    (not sure if that 2nd hashtag will catch on)

    Chomsky(2017) on the Republican party

    "Has there ever been an organisation in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organised human life on Earth?"



  • Advertisement
  • #832
    rainbow kirby
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,928 ✭✭✭✭rainbow kirby


    By forcing people to pay you are still punishing the weakest members of society - imagine a woman in Direct Provision getting under €20 a week, how the hell is she supposed to pay? How is a 15 year old schoolgirl supposed to get the full cost within a limited timeframe? How is someone who finds out late after a sexual assault supposed to get the increased cost together before reaching a term limit?


  • #833
    ELM327
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,464 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    rainbow kirby wrote: »
    By forcing people to pay you are still punishing the weakest members of society - imagine a woman in Direct Provision getting under €20 a week, how the hell is she supposed to pay? How is a 15 year old schoolgirl supposed to get the full cost within a limited timeframe? How is someone who finds out late after a sexual assault supposed to get the increased cost together before reaching a term limit?
    Why don't we make everything free, by that logic?


  • #834
    _Dara_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭_Dara_


    rainbow kirby wrote: »
    By forcing people to pay you are still punishing the weakest members of society - imagine a woman in Direct Provision getting under €20 a week, how the hell is she supposed to pay? How is a 15 year old schoolgirl supposed to get the full cost within a limited timeframe? How is someone who finds out late after a sexual assault supposed to get the increased cost together before reaching a term limit?

    Personally, I'd happily donate to a charity that paid for abortions for anyone who couldn't afford it.


  • #835
    January
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,862 ✭✭✭✭January


    _Dara_ wrote: »
    Personally, I'd happily donate to a charity that paid for abortions for anyone who couldn't afford it.

    asn.org.uk donate away!


  • #836
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,745 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Akrasia wrote: »
    Because there needs to be a cost to punish the woman for getting an abortion?

    There is a cost by the way, by all accounts, even medical abortions are extremely usually unpleasant and cause bleeding, cramping, nausea, weakness, dizziness, fever, high heart rate and pelvic pain.

    If you gave a man a choice between paying a 50 quid fine, or getting a really hard kick in the testicles, a lot of people would choose to pay the fine, and even if they chose the kick in the balls, it would be just as much of a dis-incentive get that fine again in future.

    Is paying €50 for a filling a punishment for not cleaning your teeth?

    It's a medical procedure and all medical procedures cost money, pills aren't free. As I said, I believe that it should be affordable, and all-but free on medical card, as all medications are.

    I'm fully aware that medical abortions are not pleasant affairs, thanks, nor is the morning after pill by all accounts, but I don't see what that has to do with the price of turnips, or medications.


  • #837
    January
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,862 ✭✭✭✭January


    Maternity care is free to everyone though, abortion is maternity care, so should fall under that bracket.


  • #838
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,155 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    ELM327 wrote: »
    There is indeed a cost, even for non surgical abortions. Essentially the pills induce a miscarriage of the foetus, which often results in it being visibly expelled from the woman. There is also a risk of clots and excessive blood loss. By no means is it an easy decision. My heart goes out to anyone caught in that place, one can only imagine how bad a situation must be if an abortion is the least worst option

    Medical abortions are still safer than colonoscopies. And that's why it should be safe and legal.


  • #839
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,155 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    ELM327 wrote: »
    Why don't we make everything free, by that logic?

    How about we just use existing structures like medical cards?


  • #840
    Loafing Oaf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,645 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    ELM327 wrote: »
    Where are you getting that idea you mad yoke
    No one is mentioning state funded abortions.

    It should be a private elective surgery, not state funded.

    It's not about free in terms of cost, it's free in terms of possibility within the law, and without needing to travel to the uk

    A left-wing pro-lifer will be along in a minute to tell you you are facilitating the profiteering of the abortion industry. (Feel free to insert quotation marks where appropriate across that sentence)


  • Advertisement
  • #841
    Akrasia
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 23,692 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    ELM327 wrote: »
    Why don't we make everything free, by that logic?

    Because even just thinking in pure financial terms, there are false economies, where it is counter productive to charge someone for something, if giving it to them for free saves money in the long term.

    If your broadband provider forced everyone to buy a router when they signed up to the service, they'd save the cost of the router, but it would cost them a fortune trying to troubleshoot all the problems when a customer tries to plug her phone cable into a 56k modem and wonders why her fiber broadband isn't working

    If you force a woman to have a baby because she can't afford to pay for an abortion, you're stuck paying the costs of delivering the baby, all the pre-natal care, all the post natal care, and then you're stuck with a woman having to raise a child that she didn't want for one of the variety of reasons each of which has long term financial costs...

    Chomsky(2017) on the Republican party

    "Has there ever been an organisation in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organised human life on Earth?"



Advertisement