Nick Park wrote: » That's the spirit! Why let people vote for things they actually believe in? Force them to choose between two bad options which both violate human rights.
Nick Park wrote: » Fifthly, I wouldn't swap my 29-year old daughter for the child that was miscarried earlier in our marriage. I wouldn't swap her for my other daughter who died at 4 years of age. I wouldn't swap her for anyone. But, of course, none of that has any bearing on who we should or should not grant human rights to.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » How would you go about implementing and enforcing this ridiculous law?
pilly wrote: » So how about if a woman wants the baby and the man doesn't? Should she be compelled to have an abortion? For your argument to work it has to go both ways.
J C wrote: » Very interesting ... and an amazing testimony from this woman, who had an abortion. It proves that abortion certainly isn't the panacea that the abortion lobby would like us to think that it is, for vulnerable pregnant women. ... and, of course it always results in the needless death of an unborn child. Good to see that this women has had a good life since she recovered from the trauma and deep regrets that her abortion caused ... by accepting the forgiveness of Jesus Christ ... and becoming a Christian.
J C wrote: It is an accurate and anatomically correct representation of a 12 week old unborn child.
J C wrote: » Yes there is practically no care required until a child is born ... everything proceeds quietly and automatically with little or no conscious input required from the pregnant mother. ... then the baby is born ... and there is a free-willed being crying for attention, having to be fed at all hours of the day and night ... and requiring nappy changing, clothing and constant monitoring and love. Its a full-time job !!! ... whereas before the birth, the mother could hold down a full time job with little or no difficulty, in many cases up to and beyond the seventh month.
Gerry T wrote: I haven't moved the goal post, if a woman needs an abortion because of risk to her life (physical or mental), then yes that in my book is a priority. But if a woman only wants an abortion and the father wants the child then she should be compelled to carry it and let the father have sole custody. She of course should contribute to the cost of raising the child, means tested. I then went on to say it also makes sense if the reason for the abortion is only a "want" then the mother should carry the child and then give it up for adoption.
Je_suis_Jean wrote: » If only there was the appetite for it I'd be 100% in favour of having a referendum which gave voters two choices:- 1. Repeal the 8th as is being suggested. 2. Introduce a new amendment which made prosecuting any Irish citizen having an abortion regardless of whether that's within the Rep of Ireland or not. That would truly test the appetite within the country for banning abortion. At the moment a large cohort can smugly pat themselves on the back for being protectors of the unborn yet all they have achieved is the export of abortion so in true NIMBY fashion they can raise their hands and declare "there's no on demand abortion here"!!
Delirium wrote: » The input of care rises in requirement from that of being biologically attached to a person for 9 months? seriously?
NuMarvel wrote: » Both.
Je_suis_Jean wrote: » You make it sound like it could survive at 12 weeks which you know it can't, right?
NaFirinne wrote: » Have a listen to this very Interesting interviewhttp://www.spiritradio.ie/louises-story/
Gerry T wrote: » Have you a point to make or are you just throwing sarcastic comments about
WhiteRoses wrote: » You clearly persist in posting that cartoon in an effort to emotionally blackmail me into feeling guilt for my position.
WhiteRoses wrote: » It won’t work. I am not pro abortion, I am pro women having bodily autonomy and control over their lives. If the result is abortion then so be it. I care about living women more than potential humans.
NuMarvel wrote: » It's like you read the Handmaid's Tale and thought "This is a good idea" :rolleyes:
WhiteRoses wrote: » Actually domestic adoption in this country is pretty much non existent, what we actually have is long term foster care. You can only adopt in Ireland after long term fostering, and unfortunately the care system is such a mess that by the time the child has been fostered long enough, the majority of children have social, emotional and behavioral issues and become very hard to place. Nobody wants to adopt them then. That’s why you’ll find the majority of parents looking to adopt do so internationally.
WhiteRoses wrote: » I believe the opinion/wants/needs of a living, breathing woman are far superior to that of a clump of cells that has potential to be human. I don’t feel forcing motherhood on someone is fair on the woman or the child.
WhiteRoses wrote: » What about women who don’t have a job? Or women who are experiencing domestic violence? Or women who can’t cope or afford any more children? I agree equality rights have improved in recent years but that’s not the issue here. The issue is that there simply isn’t enough support from the government to justify forcing a woman to stay pregnant.
WhiteRoses wrote: » Survival outside the womb has everything to do with it. When it can survive outside the womb, the baby can be passed into state care/social services to be cared for by foster parents. In the early stages of pregnancy, removal of the baby will result in a termination, because the baby simply cannot survive without the woman. You are entitled to believe it is a child from the moment of conception but that doesn’t mean that you are right. Develop is a key word in your reply here - it can develop into a baby.
NuMarvel wrote: » We don't enforce our current abortion laws. We haven't prosecuted anyone for an illegal abortion since the 60s or 70s. And even though the penalty has been reduced, there's no political or public appetite to bring another prosecution. We even went so far as to change our constitution to make sure we couldn't prosecute anyone who travelled. So presumably, you'd want us to enforce your suggestion in the same way.
WhiteRoses wrote: » Are you suggesting we punish women who have sex for pleasure outside of marriage? And punish those who get caught or get pregnant? Because we actually used to do that for many years. They were called the Magdalene laundries and they actually destroyed more families than we’ll ever be able to comprehend. Taking people’s civil liberties from them and going back to this prehistoric notion that people can only have sex while married would be a huge mistake. I’d like to think as a society we’ve moved on a long way since those types of attitude were socially acceptable.
WhiteRoses wrote: » You clearly persist in posting that cartoon in an effort to emotionally blackmail me into feeling guilt for my position. It won’t work. I am not pro abortion, I am pro women having bodily autonomy and control over their lives. If the result is abortion then so be it. I care about living women more than potential humans.
J C wrote: » Can we please talk about reality ... a 12 week old unborn child is unmistakably Human ... complete with functioning Brain, Heart, blood circulation system, arms, legs ... the works!!! Its just a tiny tiny fully formed baby ... and all it needs to do is to grow ... exactly like all a newborn baby need to do is to grow.It is no more a 'clump of cells' than you or I are a 'clump of cells'.https://www.babycenter.com/fetal-development-week-by-week
NaFirinne wrote: » How is any part of the constitution enforced? The amounts of deaths happening in the world is almost doubled by abortion. Wars , famine, disease, old age all kill less then abortion does. The world would benefit with more christian focused people in the world who follow the ways that Christ has thought us. The amount of abortions in the world is a disgrace. This whole do anything you like as long as it doesn't hurt others is destroying society's. Abortion is murder to a Christian - Asking a christian do you support abortion is asking them to support murder. A Christian cannot support murder.
J C wrote: » Can we please talk about reality ... a 12 week old unborn child is unmistakably Human ... complete with functioning Brain, Heart, blood circulation system, arms, legs ... the works!!! Its just a tiny tiny fully formed baby ... and all it needs to do is to grow ... exactly like all a newborn baby need to do is to grow.
wrote: Originally Posted by WhiteRoses I believe the opinion/wants/needs of a living, breathing woman are far superior to that of a clump of cells that has potential to be human. I don’t feel forcing motherhood on someone is fair on the woman or the child.
