nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Can a Christian vote for unlimited abortion?

J C

I don't believe that a Christian can morally vote for unlimited abortion.

The Sixth Commandment is very simple and very clear ... 'Thou shalt not kill'.

It means that you cannot kill yourself or another Human Being, except in self defence (or the defence of another Human Being) where no other option is available.
This is the basis for all laws protecting the person and criminalising the killing of other people in Common Law Jurisprudence.

Induced abortion is ethically and morally wrong ... except where the life of the mother is directly threatened and there is no other option available to save her.

This is the current law in Ireland.

Voting to expand Irish Law to allow the unlimited killing of unborn children is not something that any Christian (or other monotheist, indeed) can do in conscience and in clear contravention of the Sixth Commandment of God.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

uptherebels

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?

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

ABC101

pilly wrote: »

Your point being?

The point being... that a foetus is human, not animal. If a foetus is not human, what else can it be?

antiskeptic

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.

david75

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

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.

This guy.

david75

Hoboo wrote: »

This guy.

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!

end of the road

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.

pro-lifers are very likely part of that campaign.

volchitsa

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.

Because smoking cannabis is comparable to abortion? Forgive me for being dumb, but I thought the ban on abortion was because people thought it was comparable to killing or abusing babies?

Because if it's only illegal in the way smoking cannabis is illegal, why is there a 14 year prison sentence for it?
Shouldn't we be opening treatment centres to get people off their abortion addictions?

david75

end of the road wrote: »

pro-lifers are very likely part of that campaign.

You know how that statement is completely totally wrong??

Cos we don’t see endless threads on boards and all over twitter and self appointed mouthpieces advocating for them in the Irish times and on RTÉ and every other medium possible.

Like we do on the abortion issue.

Never even once not even one single time heard or read Quinn O Brien Mullen Sherlock Mills Manning Ganley or the Church and its resplendent Bishops and cardinals and on and on ad infinitum EVER mention homeless babies and children.

Why? Because they never actually have.

It’s about their all but dead trip on Irish society and womens bodies are the battlefield. They don’t care about the unborn or the born.

uptherebels

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.

how can i argue the points when you cant actually grasp what nimbyism is?:rolleyes:

so tell us about your plans to get the right for irish women to travel for abortions overturned

Delirium

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!

MOD NOTE

Carded for trolling comment.

Please raise the standard of posts.

Thanks for your attention.

smacl

ABC101 wrote: »

The point being... that a foetus is human, not animal. If a foetus is not human, what else can it be?

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

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.

Sorry Smacl, I think you have misunderstood my original post which was in response to Philly and their comment about a 12 week scan looking like a puppy.

I was merely pointing out that it is impossible for humans to create anything other than "another human".

Horses are only able to procreate another horse etc. Horses cannot procreate a lobster for example.

Therefore by putting two humans together (for the purposes of procreation) the result can only be another human, not a puppy or any other animal.

I'm sure you would agree with the above.

WRT human life from conception and abortion, one does not have to hold any religious beliefs to be anti abortion. I know a number of atheists who are anti abortion.

But it is not a matter of opinion to state that humans can only procreate more humans.

smacl

ABC101 wrote: »

I'm sure you would agree with the above.

Of course, my point is simply that at what point in the process of gestation a human foetus becomes a person is probably the more important question in this debate. The RCC would have its flock believe this happens at conception, other Christian traditions would have it at implantation, other Christians who are in favour of liberalising abortion law would clearly have it much later on. It is worth remembering that the vast majority of people in this country consider themselves Christian, and very many of them (I'd guess the majority at this point) are in favour of liberalising abortion. Assuming they're not murderous, it would seem that the pro-life rhetoric holds little sway with many Irish Christians.

Delirium

Down Syndrome issued a statement regarding the use of people with Down Syndrome as an argument for/against abortion (I've embedded the images from source tweet for better readability).

(Source)

Cabaal

They were right to issue a statement, sadly not all people seem to care about it.

I know somebody who had pro-life people come to the door lastnight, they were handed leaflets and the response was did they (the people calling) know about the above statement and why were they using the imagery the claims they were using. The pro-life people's response that were at the door? They called the person a murderer

Not a very constructive response.

Sadly I don't think the above statement will be listened to and we can expect countless signs and leaflets to continue to exploit children and adults with downs.

david75

Exploiting and even weaponising Down syndrome kids is deplorable.
And it’s only one side doing it. They aren’t above using children in such a sensitive debate as we saw in the previous referendum, but this is a new low. A disgusting one.

uptherebels

J C wrote: »

The new low is that 100% of unborn children identified with genetic disabilities are aborted in Iceland ... and it is indeed a disgusting situation.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/iceland-downs-syndrome-no-children-born-first-country-world-screening-a7895996.html

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/22/abort-down-syndrome-child-society-shares-blame

wait- but if its 100% that must include the children of pro lifers:eek::eek::eek:

J C

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.

Pro-life people do all of this and more.
However, somebody must be born, first, to have any other rights conferred on them.

J C

uptherebels wrote: »

wait- but if its 100% that must include the children of pro lifers:eek::eek::eek:

The pro-life movement is tiny in Iceland ... and they wouldn't be testing for genetic issues in their unborn children.

Iceland is an example of a society that has switched over almost completely to an abortion-supportive culture.

Timberrrrrrrr

J C wrote: »

The pro-life movement is tiny in Iceland ... and they wouldn't be testing for genetic issues in their unborn children.

Iceland is an example of a society that has switched over almost completely to an abortion-supportive culture.

Can you back this up with evidence or is it just wishful thinking on your behalf?

david75

J C wrote: »

What are you talking about ?
Why are you advocating the arson of Christian property ?
Who are the people you call 'bigots' and why are you advocating killing them?

What unbelievable arrogance!!!
I sincerely hope that all Christians take good note of what you would like to do to them, if you get a chance.

You don’t know a Neil Young lyric parody when you see one? It’s from a song called keep on Rockin in the free world. On the album Freedom. Released 1989.

Cabaal

J C wrote: »

The other side unfortunately is facilitating the killing of them before they are even born, instead.
In the UK....

The UK, the USA, the UK...repeat, repeat, repeat

Sorry JC but in case you have missed it, we are not the UK.
We are the Republic Of Ireland and we can legislate as we see fit, I've never heard one pro choice person say that people should be able to abort somebody with down syndrome right up until giving birth.

In IRELAND we are looking to repeal the 8th so we can finally properly legislate for upto 12 weeks and after 12 weeks for cases of FFA etc

Can you please stick to EIRE

Cabaal

J C wrote: »

Why are you advocating the arson of Christian property ?

Since you like mentioning other country's so much,
Why do pro life groups not condemn the fire bombing of doctor clinics in the USA and why do pro life groups support a legal fund to defend a man who murdered a doctor?

Murder is ok when it suits them?

david75

J C wrote: »

The other side unfortunately is facilitating the killing of them before they are even born, instead.
In the UK, abortion of unborn children with special needs is allowed right up to 9 months ... so, if you really are as concerned as you say you are ... you could campaign to have this ended, in the UK and not introduced into Ireland, like they have already done in three states in America.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ohio-passes-law-barring-abortion-over-down-syndrome-diagnosis/

Here is an article in the Guardian (not a known pro-life paper).
It gives a balanced account of the issue.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/22/abort-down-syndrome-child-society-shares-blame

Here is an article from the mother of a Downs Syndrome Child speaking to the issue
http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/the-eighth-amendment-protected-my-son-3217231-Feb2017/

The new low is that 100% of unborn children identified with genetic disabilities are aborted in Iceland ... and it is indeed a disgusting situation.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/iceland-downs-syndrome-no-children-born-first-country-world-screening-a7895996.html

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/22/abort-down-syndrome-child-society-shares-blame

Wow. The fake Iceland statistic has been disproven officially and repeatedly even by the Icelandic government. As has the endless fake Scandinavian staitsitics you’re probably about to post.

Deeper question I suppose is if a couple find out the foetus is going to be DS or further, incompatible with life in some regard, FFA, is it not their decision and their choice alone whether or not they want to put themselves and the potential infant through that pain and suffering? They should be allowed the option to determine what is best in their situation.
The birth process itself is horrifically painful for even a normal baby, it is worse for a child that won’t live long after the fact.

I’m not ok forcing a mother to carry a baby to term that would endure immense physical suffering and agony upon birth only to die shortly thereafter.

I can’t imagine any good Christian would want any infant to go through that. Much less the poor mother then watching them die.

J C

wrote:

Originally Posted by J C
... it is, unless you deny that this isn't somebody else.

https://www.babycenter.com/fetal-dev...mages-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.

pilly
Have you ever actually seen a scan rather than keep posting this cartoon. :rolleyes:

I've seen plenty of scans ... but they're the equivalent of something like an x-ray of somebody versus a fine painting, which the linked article is equivalent to.

Are you denying that the article linked to is correct?
Anyway, here is an actual scan of a 12 week old unborn child ... its the same thing ... unmistakably Human

unique-12-week-old-fetus-pictures-4d-ultrasound-pregnancy-of-12-weeks-fetus-moving-dancing-12-week-old-fetus-pictures.jpg

unique-12-week-old-fetus-pictures-4d-ultrasound-pregnancy-of-12-weeks-fetus-moving-dancing-12-week-old-fetus-pictures.jpg

end of the road

david75 wrote: »

Wow. The fake Iceland statistic has been disproven officially and repeatedly even by the Icelandic government. As has the endless fake Scandinavian staitsitics you’re probably about to post.

the icelandic government aren't going to admit to such an evil statistic.

david75 wrote: »

Deeper question I suppose is if a couple find out the foetus is going to be DS or further, incompatible with life in some regard, FFA, is it not their decision and their choice alone whether or not they want to put themselves and the potential infant through that pain and suffering? They should be allowed the option to determine what is best in their situation.
The birth process itself is horrifically painful for even a normal baby, it is worse for a child that won’t live long after the fact.

I’m not ok forcing a mother to carry a baby to term that would endure immense physical suffering and agony upon birth only to die shortly thereafter.

I can’t imagine any good Christian would want any infant to go through that. Much less the poor mother then watching them die.

FFA is a different situation to what is being proposed here. if abortions were just availible for FFA or other extreme issues only then there would be large scale for both repealing the 8th and abortion in those circumstances. but as it will be abortion without reason then that has to be faught against. ds does not fit into extreme circumstances in itself.

uptherebels

J C wrote: »

The pro-life movement is tiny in Iceland ... and they wouldn't be testing for genetic issues in their unborn children.

any source for that claim?:rolleyes:

From your source https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/iceland-downs-syndrome-no-children-born-first-country-world-screening-a7895996.html
it says one or two babies with down syndrome are born in iceland each year.
Now according to the WHO the incidence of DS is between 1 in 1000 and 1 in 1100 for live births worldwide
http://www.who.int/genomics/public/geneticdiseases/en/index1.html
Iceland having a population of of approx 337,000
and a birth rate of 13.7 per 1000 population https://www.indexmundi.com/iceland/birth_rate.html
that gives on average incidence of around 4.
Giving iceland a birth rate of 1 to 2 instead of approx 4
So do you have any source for the number of abortions that were carried out in iceland each year because of DS?

david75

end of the road wrote: »

the icelandic government aren't going to admit to such an evil statistic.

FFA is a different situation to what is being proposed here. if abortions were just availible for FFA or other extreme issues only then there would be large scale for both repealing the 8th and abortion in those circumstances. but as it will be abortion without reason then that has to be faught against. ds does not fit into extreme circumstances in itself.

You have repeatedly almost endlessly been told.

We

Are

Not

Voting

On

Abortion

On

Demand.

It isn’t that difficult. You have been told several times.

This is not what this referendum is about.

This is not the question that will appear on the ballot.

You seem to be confused about the entire thing.

Cabaal

J C wrote: »

I've seen plenty of scans ... but they're the equivalent of something like an x-ray of somebody versus a fine painting, which the linked article is equivalent to.

Are you denying that the article linked to is correct?
Anyway, here is an actual scan of a 12 week old unborn child ... its the same thing ... unmistakably Human

So its only when it "looks" human that you care so much, what about at 3 weeks, is this also unmistakably Human?