ABC101 wrote: » I'm sure you would agree with the above.
smacl wrote: » Yes the foetus is a human foetus, just as it was formed when a human sperm came into contact with a human ovum and go implanted in a human uterus. The debated question is whether and when the human foetus becomes a person though and why? For a Christian you might go with the notion that ensoulment happens at conception, or at implantation, or at some later stage. Early Christians actually consider ensoulment to take place with the babies first breath. From a perspective that is not based on religious belief, we might consider the point at which there are significant measurable brain waves or other significant points in gestational development. While you might state that the human foetus is a person, that is simply your opinion, it is not a matter of fact.
ABC101 wrote: » The point being... that a foetus is human, not animal. If a foetus is not human, what else can it be?
david75 wrote: » I’m a man of the people I say keep hope alive. Got bibles to burn got bigots to die Keep on Rockin in a secular free of groping brainwashed zombies claiming to know better than you free world!
antiskeptic wrote: » I'd prefer if you argue the points made. Insert cannabis smoking and show me the fundamental difference. I have a problem with abortion anywhere but I can't do much about abortion anywhere but here.
end of the road wrote: » pro-lifers are very likely part of that campaign.
antiskeptic wrote: » uptherebels wrote: » again your not getting it. Its not about doing something here. Its about only objecting to something because it happens here. I'd prefer if you argue the points made. Insert cannabis smoking and show me the fundamental difference. You don't have a problem with the act, only when it occurs in a certain place I have a problem with abortion anywhere but I can't do much about abortion anywhere but here.
uptherebels wrote: » again your not getting it. Its not about doing something here. Its about only objecting to something because it happens here.
You don't have a problem with the act, only when it occurs in a certain place
david75 wrote: » If all the so called pro life crowd spent their energies campaigning with the same vigour and energy to help the 3000 homeless children currently in the state you’d have to think it would go a long way to improving those kids situations. If only.
Hoboo wrote: » This guy.
pilly wrote: » Your point being?
antiskeptic wrote: » There's a problem with smoking cannabis in the street and marrying at the age of 16 in this geographical location. Is it nimbyism that there is no problem doing these things in countries where its legal? There is a problem with abortion here, just as there is with smoking cannabis in public and getting married at 16. Irish people can do all these things in countries were it's legal. Clearer?
ABC101 wrote: » Never heard of a man and woman coming together and procreating a puppy. Or any animal for that matter.
pilly wrote: » 1. We have no proof that is an actual scan. 2. It looks no more human to me than a puppy.
Gerry T wrote: » It's not about what I think about women. My question is, if you think women having an abortion because it affects the social life/finances etc...is not a valid reason for an abortion then you should vote against repeal. Unless of course you can satisfy yourself that 100% of women wouldn't do that. A vote to repeal allows women to abort for any and all reasons. What should be done is look to change legislation so that as a society we agree under what circumstances an abortion can be allowed. Your comment suggests that women wouldn't have an abortion for a frivolous reason, so this approach should sit well with you
antiskeptic wrote: » looks "practically human" to me. Indeed, you'd be very hard put to avoid that conclusion.https://youtu.be/ieqWuQma1Q4
uptherebels wrote: » you seem not to be able to comprehend the meaning of nimbyism Its not legalising drugs or lowering the age of consent to match other countries its only having a problem with something inside a geographical location.
So its not having a problem with abortion just as long as its not in ireland. Irish women can have abortions just not here.
end of the road wrote: » those points are inaccurate and are just made up in an attempt to de-rail the thread. i haven't used any unsupported claims and i don't masquerade anything as fact. i do give some well known and widely availible facts yes, however where something isn't fact i make it clear that it's my viewpoint.
pilly wrote: » Have you ever actually seen a scan rather than keep posting this cartoon. :rolleyes:
antiskeptic wrote: » Are you suggesting that we should legalize drugs to the extent found in the most liberal country in the world. Or lower the age of consent similarly. Or, or, or.. Perhaps you could explain the difference between a society establishing how it wants to operate for itself and NIMBYism? If you could avoid assuming your personal views on any of these topics is correct and keep the explanation neutral, logical and rigorous??
J C wrote: » We're not dogs ... and we (should) hold ourselves to higher standards when it comes to Human Life. I agree there is no point and less reason for keeping somebody alive using extraordinary means ... that removes people's dignity ... but if we sanction the deliberate killing of adult Humans then we are on a very dangerous legal road ... because, unlike unborn children, outside of Ireland, these people are persons in law and in practice. Anyway, that is a debate for another day. All I'll say is that it is not without irony that the generation who introduced abortion in the western world will probably be the first generation to experience euthanasia in the Western World.
J C wrote: » ... it is, unless you deny that this isn't somebody else.https://www.babycenter.com/fetal-development-images-12-weeks Quote:- "1. Reflexes are developing. Your baby's already busy kicking and stretching. Soon his fingers will open and close. 2. Intestines in place. Your baby's intestines, which have grown so rapidly they protrude into the umbilical cord, are moving back into the abdominal cavity. 3. Your baby looks practically human. His eyes have moved from the sides to the front of the head and his ears are where they should be."
....... wrote: » This post has been deleted.
So to make comparable analogies. We don't allow travel to use Dignitas. We do allow travel for abortion.
We would not hesitate to charge someone with murder if they travelled to London and killed their 5 year old child there. Yet we allow them to travel for abortion.
Not only do we allow the travel for abortion - we explicitly voted on it and copper fastened it into the Constitution. The NIMBY aspect of this seems lost on you?
