captbarnacles wrote: » Worse than the Hawe case for example? But it's not murder and has never been considered murder here.
splinter65 wrote: » But the proposals include the decriminalisation of abortion pills. Are you happy to take pills at home that will cause you to bleed profusely from an orifice, are you happy to give them to your child?
frag420 wrote: » I’ve got piles currently...
splinter65 wrote: » Yes piles. Just the very same thing as inducing an abortion at home with pills you bought on the Internet.
volchitsa wrote: » Did you miss that biology class? It happens every month.
seamus wrote: » So you agree then. Abortion pills should be provided under the supervision of a qualified medical professional, and women should not be forced to resort to buying them online. Great. Thanks for clearing that up.
PeterParker957 wrote: » No brain stem, no person. Brain stem formed 15-18 weeks gestation typically. Thought we needed a bit of science over the fluffy nonsense.
MrPudding wrote: » Give them to my child so they did not have to go through with a pregnancy? Every day, and twice on Sunday. If they sold them on Costco I would buy a big pack of them just in case. That is really stupid question. Let me give you an example to show why... would you rather give your child pills that will make her bleed from every orifice or let her remain pregnant with their rapist's child that will likely physically damage or kill her because she is only 9 and her body is too small? See. I can do silly appeals to emotion too. MrP
end of the road wrote: » because you cannot argue against what has been said. you know abortion on demand is wrong. i know it is wrong. everyone knows it is wrong. refusing to debate me won't change that fact.
splinter65 wrote: » So your only in favor of abortion in the cases of rape and incest? Or are you just throwing it in there for the purposes of silly appeal to emotion, knowing that rape and incest is a reason given for abortion in such a minuscule tiny almost nonexistent percentage of abortions? Interesting that you would by a stack of abortion pills from Costco for your child (? are we in the States or Ireland), in preference over reliable safe contraception coupled with safe sex practices. I suppose there’s no point in campaigning for and fighting for the equipment if your not going to use it when it gets here.
splinter65 wrote: » Yes because they’re not going to buy them cheaply on the internet once they’re decriminalised..
splinter65 wrote: » It happens every month. Naturally, as a consequence of my body’s own biology. The product of a uterus that has been growing a baby for 3 months bears no resemblance to the shedding of a uterine lining that is not needed after 21 days. You can try to convince yourself that it does, but it doesn’t. Anyone who has had a 12 week miscarriage will vouch for that. So, not the same thing at all as a chemically induced abortion. People in favor of abortion work so hard to convince themselves that it’s all very simple and straightforward and clean and tidy, and nobody, but nobody, mother or baby suffers or gets hurt in any way. Inducing a chemical abortion at home is a great step forward for the health of women and children . Sure.
January wrote: » I had an abortion at 10 weeks using pills. It was no worse than a period. A bit more painful (not as bad as contractions but similar pattern) but the amount of blood wasn't much bigger than a normal period for me.
Da Boss wrote: » You can’t face the facts , that’s your problem, unable to admit you condone MURDER , The KILLINGS of defenseless unborn . The 8th amendment is about so much more than woman’s freedom, it’s about SAVING LIVES OF THOUSANDS, legalized abortion cos cause more loss of life than English colonization ever did on this island
Ash.J.Williams wrote: » are you going to adopt these thousands of saved babies?
Edward M wrote: » I'm sure you had very good reason for your decision and are happy that you did what you felt was the right thing, and I applaud you for your honesty on here. Can I just say, I give my opinions for my stance on this issue, I hold no judgement over those who hold a different opinion than mine. If you feel you did no wrong then to hell with other opinions or derogatory comments that might be made about your situation.
seamus wrote: » So you buy all your medication online then? After all, if you can get "decriminalized" medication cheaply online, why go to a doctor?
splinter65 wrote: » PeterParker957 wrote: » Hence the 8th needs to be repealed But the proposals include the decriminalisation of abortion pills. Are you happy to take pills at home that will cause you to bleed profusely from an orifice, are you happy to give them to your child?
PeterParker957 wrote: » Hence the 8th needs to be repealed
splinter65 wrote: » If it’s so easy, risk free, straight forward and commonplace, then why on earth bother with the expense and inconvenience of the doctor at all?
volchitsa wrote: » So, one of the problems the Oireachtas Committee identified was that Irish women were resorting to abortions using pills later than is considered ideal in other countries, precisely because abortion is illegal and therefore carried out without proper medical supervision, as well as often being later than would be the case if the woman had been able to go to her GP or a clinic. I see in the IT today there's an article about abortion law in France, where medical abortion is available until the 8th week, and only surgical abortion after that until the 12th week : https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/abortion-battles-rage-on-in-france-despite-liberal-regime-1.3327713 Since they are having these abortions anyway, the question really is whether the principle is so important that we are prepared to see Irish women put their health at unnecessary risk, or whether we accept that women are having abortions, aided and abetted by our own law, but not in optimally as conditions. It's not as though we're actually trying to stop them, after all. Basically, all those posters who don't want to see women jailed for having abortions, are you prepared nevertheless to see some of them injured and possibly dying as an alternative punishment? I think a spell in jail would be preferable to dying, don't you?
Edward M wrote: » That's been talked through long before now, no one wants to see anyone die here AFAIK. There are extreme views on either side, some accuse abortionists of murder, some accuse pro lifers of causing death to women who die in childbirth or medical conditions during pregnancy. I don't see that either should have to happen or a law be put in place that can cause either to happen. The current law needs changing, no doubt on that, but not so extremely as to have unlimited abortion. There is a middle ground, perhaps it will turn out to be the most popular choice, but not if its not given a chance by not even being considered for a vote.
eviltwin wrote: » Abortion, by choice and done in consultation with medical professionals, is the middle ground.
volchitsa wrote: » A woman who takes abortion pills ordered online?
volchitsa wrote: » It really is the most cowardly dodge isn't it? They'd have us believe they think women are just too stupid to know what they're doing when they seek out an abortion, or that evil abortionists grab them in off the street. I wonder is the idea that women generally are too silly to know the difference between right and wrong, or do they imagine pregnancy frazzles our brains? TBH I suspect they're lying about what they really believe, and they would be perfectly happy with a Nicaraguan-style regime where women are imprisoned even for unexplained miscarriages, never mind actual abortion, but they daren't expose the depth of their extremism because they know very few people in Ireland still think like that these days.
WhiteRoses wrote: » Let's just get one thing straight here, don't dare put words in my mouth. I have made my position more than clear on a number of threads now, but I now see I was flogging a dead horse by even replying to you at all.
WhiteRoses wrote: » I believe in a woman making a choice for herself. I believe it's between her and her doctor. I trust my fellow female citizens to make the right choice for their circumstances. I don't believe a woman should go through the trauma of an unwanted pregnancy. I don't believe a child should be brought into the world unwanted, into a life of neglect and abuse. I believe that when it is YOU who is pregnant, EOTR, or your partner, then you can push all your notions about the unborn into the mix and make your own mind up. But until then it has nothing to do with you.
WhiteRoses wrote: » And to clarify, the reason I refuse to engage with you is not because I think you are right (???), it is because you are full of contractions and NIMBYisms, you just rant your opinion over and over again as if it's fact despite several intelligent posters pointing out flaws in your logic over the course of severel threads.
WhiteRoses wrote: » It is of course your CHOICE to post in that style and I won't take that choice away from you, but I will refuse to reply to your posts because I don't wish to engage with someone with such dedicated disregard for other people's viewpoints.
