eviltwin wrote: » This thread is becoming farcical. If this is the standard of the argument to keep the 8th that we'll be subjected to god help us. It swings from complete distrust of women to patronising us that we need to be protected from our bad choices. Typical it's two men coming out with this sexist drivel. As a woman who has had an abortion I can say, in my experience, they are both talking through their holes.
The process of setting up an abortion referendum is being undermined by the Taoiseach, according to Fianna Fáil’s health spokesperson. Billy Kelleher says Leo Varadkar needs to show leadership by declaring his position on repealing the Eighth Amendment.
Da Boss wrote: » I agree this is farcical, the reason being though however is that you and your like don’t even consider the arguments that don’t agree with yeer agenda, yee just dismiss them as rubbish despite the fact there were many valid points made. The arrogance of the pro choice contingent won’t help their cause:)
Da Boss wrote: I agree this is farcical, the reason being though however is that you and your like don’t even consider the arguments that don’t agree with yeer agenda, yee just dismiss them as rubbish despite the fact there were many valid points made. The arrogance of the pro choice contingent won’t help their cause
Da Boss wrote: » Well many here are totally forgetting the unborn, and the fact abortion denies there sole chance of having a life.
Da Boss wrote: » Never once did she realize that abortion is in fact the murdering of the unborn.
end of the road wrote: » again this is false. the argument is simply about protecting the unborn from being killed. there is no distrust of women, no wanting to protect them from their bad choices as we have all made a bad choice in our lives, and no sexist drivel either.
Da Boss wrote: » Well many here are totally forgetting the unborn, and the fact abortion denies there sole chance of having a life. By having an abortion you are ending the life of another. I’ve told my story before, and as hard as it is for me to share this story I’ll share it again as I’m so passionate about my stance against abortion. My mother, for various reasons, was strongly considering traveling for an abortion no different to many today. However she chose against it and quite obviously proceeded to having me. It was when she had me that it dawned to her she almost Ended the life of another, she was considering an abortion as it was inconvenience ( the pregnancy that is) at the particular time. Never once did she realize that abortion is in fact the murdering of the unborn. The thought that she almost ended my life embarrasses and shocks my mother to this day and she is ashamed having even contemplated an abortion even if it was in her best interests. The 8th made an abortion difficult for my mother so she didn’t proceed with an abortion so the 8th has literally saved my life. Only for the eight I would not enjoy a life like I currently do
NuMarvel wrote: » Every argument put forward to keep the 8th is in reality an argument to repeal the 13th. But absolutely nobody who supports the 8th is interested in that, because that would actually mean having to face up to the consequences of their beliefs. Far better for them that women continue to head overseas, or order pills in secret, all to maintain the illusion that Ireland is abortion free.
One eyed Jack wrote: » Well don't you paint a shítty picture! There's so many assumptions in there I'm not even sure where to start. What makes you assume that their mother would always be a single mother for a start, let alone that this alone would render her incapable of raising a child who grows up to contribute to society? Far more wasters in my experience come from homes where the family has two parents, but as I say that's just my experience. Secondly neither kylith nor I mentioned anything about anyone being forced to give birth, and thirdly, you're assuming a conclusion that someone will do poorly in life as a result of being born to a single mother (and that is of course assuming the father is also single at the time!), when you should be looking at the actual cause, and not just the symptoms. A child born to an already affluent single woman will of course have more opportunities in life (the Danish model, you should look it up!), than a child born to a woman who is already socially disadvantaged. It's not their status as a single mother will be the sole determinant factor in any comparison of outcomes, it's the base from where their parents are starting off.
nozzferrahhtoo wrote: » You should tell your mother she has nothing to feel ashamed about. She did not care about a blob without sentience. She DOES care for that blob after it attained sentience. In both regards she morally did EXACTLY the right thing, and rather than let her beat herself up over this......... or worse beat her up over it or use her to beat other people up over it......... you should tell her the truth that she was morally warranted in both situations. The 8th did not "save your life" in anything but the biological sense therefore. It coerced/compelled her to create your life. A subtly different state of affairs, but an important distinction none the less.
NuMarvel wrote: » You're the guy who thinks making women travel to have an abortion is a good idea because it means women will "think about if they really want it". That is not the rationale of someone who trusts women, no matter how much you protest to the contrary.
end of the road wrote: » it saved his life.
end of the road wrote: » sentients alone is not a valid way to judge whether the unborn should be given some protection
end of the road wrote: » for me it's not about creating an allusion of an abortion free ireland, it's about trying to keep the state from sanctioning and funding the killing of the unborn, an act i disagree with.
Bannasidhe wrote: » The State already sanctions and funds abortion. 26 of them in 2016 plus the ones where the HSE takes girls to the UK.
end of the road wrote: » i trust women,
NuMarvel wrote: » A person who trusts women and thinks they should be able to have abortions abroad would think they should be able to do the same here. That's not you though, so no, you don't trust women.
end of the road wrote: » again those are extreme circumstances, where it is not possible for the baby to be caried to term due to either threats to the life of the mother or a threat of permanent injury or disability. i have edited my previous post to clarify this.
end of the road wrote: » a person who trusts women but who disagrees with abortion on demand but who recognises that he cannot stop people from procuring it abroad, still trusts women, he just disagrees with a particular act. so yes, i trust women.
NuMarvel wrote: » It's not that you can't stop women, it's that you don't want to. A few posters have suggested ways to do this, you've even thanked one or two of those posts, so you've obviously read and agreed with them. Yet, you've also said you wouldn't support changes to the law to allow women to be stopped. At the end of the day, you're in favour of forcing women to travel if they decide to have an abortion, because in your mind it means they've really thought about. And the only reason for thinking that they need to show they really want it, is because you don't trust them to make the right decision to begin with. I know this won't make a blind bit of difference to you and you'll keep doing your usual ad infinitum thing, but it's plain to see that you don't.
end of the road wrote: » it's not plain to see that i don't, as i do. i am simply against the allowing of unlimited abortion within the state of ireland, and i believe that nobody is "forced" to travel for an abortion, they choose to do it because they want an abortion outside necessary and extreme circumstances. There is no good reason to provide unlimited abortion and the state has no obligation to provide it. the fact that i believe it is not reasonable to impose travel banns due to the fact others would be effected simply means i recognise the realities in relation to the procurement of abortion. other then that it means nothing.
Hannibal_Smith wrote: » Therein lies the crux. They don't chose to travel. You ask any woman who has travelled and I bet they'll tell you plane travel before and after is the last thing they wanted or would chose. They decide to have an abortion, for whatever reason that is their business, and they are forced to travel because they cannot have an abortion here. I'm not sure what you mean by unlimited abortion, but there is no reason why we cannot look after our citizens within our own borders. Instead of pushing the problem and the women/couples facing it abroad. It is cruel.
end of the road wrote: » ... i am simply against the allowing of unlimited abortion within the state of ireland, and i believe that nobody is "forced" to travel for an abortion, they choose to do it because they want an abortion outside necessary and extreme circumstances. there is no good reason to provide unlimited abortion and the state has no obligation to provide it. the fact that i believe it is not reasonable to impose travel banns due to the fact others would be effected simply means i recognise the realities in relation to the procurement of abortion. other then that it means nothing.
end of the road wrote: » i don't believe it is cruel for someone to have to go abroad for a non-necessary abortion. if we were talking about people having to go abroad in extreme circumstances because of the lack of availability of abortion for that particular circumstance then you would have a point, but we aren't. people have to go abroad for many treatments that aren't availible within the state, and i'd bet there are treatments which aren't available but which should be long long before abortion on demand. i think really we have bigger fish to fry at the moment.
NuMarvel wrote: » After telling us that we "cannot stop people from procuring it [abortion] abroad", you're now telling us we can, but it would be unreasonable to do so due to the effect on others. You go so far as to declare this as a "fact", making a lie of your first statement. The actual fact is that you don't want to be able to stop them. It's not abortion on demand you're opposed to, it's some kind of "abortion on impulse", because you think if a woman can access abortion locally, she'll decide to have one on the spot without thinking about it. And that's because you don't trust women.
NuMarvel wrote: » Most if not all of those other procedures are exceptionally specialised. Ireland is a small country and wouldn't have the capacity to build up the required experience to become specialised in those procedures. It's not because we want the patients to think about if they really want the procedure. Abortion is nothing like these procedures, because in the majority of cases it will involve taking a pill and maybe scheduling a followup doctor's visit.
NuMarvel wrote: » Every argument put forward to keep the 8th is in reality an argument to repeal the 13th.
Bannasidhe wrote: » And illusion it is. 25 legal abortions in Ireland in 2016.http://www.thejournal.ie/legal-abortions-in-ireland-3469898-Jun2017/ Abortion is not illegal in Ireland. It is 'just' very restricted. Still legal in some circumstances.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » Yet here we are - no protection for those poor, poor fertilized cells, each one a unique human like you or me if you believe the pro-life spoofology.
