end of the road wrote: actually there is no evidence they favour unlimited abortion as that wasn't the question asked. it could be abortion in limited circumstances they are in favour of but the question was ambiguous. as a republican i will never except the unquestioned and on demand killing of the unborn in my country.
end of the road wrote: there is little support for drug enforcement anyway abortion pills asside. most ordinary people caught with a bit of whatever are usually cautioned or given a very light sentence if bought to court, it's only the big dealers who get actual sentences. the gardai need to do little in relation to the abortion pills as customs are getting the vast majority that are being imported anyway. the people on the train were let have their little stunt because customs are having huge success. it was a way of the gardai trying to get some of the people back on side.
end of the road wrote: i expect the laws of the land to be enforced without fear or favour, regardless of whether i agree with the law or not. it's not up to me to campaign for the forces of the state to do their job, they should do it. but as i said, customs are having great success in stopping abortion pills from getting into the country. they won't get them all but i believe they are getting a massive percentage of them.
smacl wrote: » Expectant mothers anticipating a baby and their doctors / midwives will talk about a baby as that is what they're planning and hoping for. A pregnant woman who does not want to have a baby, not so much. I would assert that for a woman who chooses to have an abortion, there isn't nor has there been any baby. That you or anyone else might believe differently is no more or less than your belief, it is not a matter of fact. Do you in all honesty consider the woman who has an abortion to be a murderer? Is have an abortion, by your way of thinking, the exact same crime as murdering a child?
pilly wrote: » Proof that customs are getting the vast majority of pills please.
ABC101 wrote: » Abortion is the physical implementation of a opinion that a beautiful baby should never be born. It is the enactment of a appalling injustice.
Ash.J.Williams wrote: » Life begins at conception and anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot.. And I'm pro choice.
Dionysis wrote: » Agreed. However the question here is, when do you begin to have rights, and when are they considered to be infringed. To explain. If after conception a foetus has rights, then at what stage are you considering them to infringe on the mothers rights. If a child is born with a deficiency due to something that happened when the mother was still carrying it, (for arguments sake, drinking/smoking during pregnancy caused a defect), has the mother infringed the unborn babies rights and caused the deficiency, and so is liable? If not, then a babies rights and infringing on them only occurs after it’s born.
pilly wrote: » Please provide proof that most people who claim to be christan aren't? Really sick of you making stuff up. Lies.
J C wrote: » We're at over 1200 posts ... and both sides have presented 'logical' arguments for their positions. Here is an interesting Chrisitian song from the possible perspective of the unborn child herself ...
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Stop spamming the thread with videos of songs because it doesn't validate your pro life stance one bit. I wonder would you be ok if I started posting death metal videos or videos of satanic rituals?
smacl wrote: » That's your opinion. Mine would be that forcing a woman to carry a pregnancy through to full term and go through with a birth against her will just because you believe the world needs another 'beautiful baby' is barbaric. In case you weren't aware, our world is not exactly short of unwanted and unloved babies. Perhaps you'd do better to devote your energies to the many actual children in the world today living in horrendous conditions. Did you know for example that 3.1 million children under the age of 5 die from hunger every year? It seems to me that the pro-life brigade are more concerned about telling other people how they should run their lives than actually caring about babies.
Nick Park wrote: » Whether those who tick 'Christian' on a census are genuine Christians or not is a matter of opinion. It is hardly a verifiable fact - no more than your or my differing subjective opinions about when personhood begins can be verified or falsified objectively. Have you ever thought that you could accept the reality that some people have different opinions, rather than labelling them as liars because their opinions are different to yours?
Cabaal wrote: » I can see your point Nick, however I find it most unusual that many Catholic and Christian's in this thread and forum overall feel they can dictate who is or who is not a christian or catholic even when the person says they are a christian or catholic. It's pretty disrespectful for a christian to claim another person is not a christian when they say they are and know they are do you not think?
ABC101 wrote: » Smacl, with respect, abortion is a physical action not an opinion. In relation to the existing children you mention living in poverty it is encumbent on all people not just pro lifers to give charity. Or do you believe the pro choice brigade have no responsibility to charity? ( I don’t believe you do, but you seem to be implying in your posts that that is the case). The RCC Church has a long history in charity, and even when some injustices did occur in mother and baby homes / orphanages / institutions etc not all were badly run. Why were these women there in the first place? Because society put them there!!! What about the men who made these women pregnant? Why did they shirk their responsibility? Even today pregnant girls are been shunned / thrown out of their family home. Even today the taxpayer picks up the tab for single mothers, yet the fathers have not much financial responsibility.
Nick Park wrote: » The thread is in the Christianity Forum, asking if Christians can vote for unlimited abortion. Christian songs, Scriptures etc. are of no use whatsoever in debating abortion in general in wider society. But, as part of a wider Christian tradition, they are very relevant to the subject of this thread. Of course if a thread was posted in another forum asking how Satanists should vote, then your videos would be perfectly apt. :rolleyes: Nobody's saying you can't post in the Christianity forum, but do you see how intolerant you come across when you start trying to dictate what Christians can post in a thread directed at Christians in the Christianity Forum?
WhiteRoses wrote: » Posting emotional blackmail videos is something we could all do, I’m sure I could find hundreds that support my pro choice position. A song about the possible perspective of the unborn fetus? This is almost as bad as your cartoon of the embryo. Spare me. Really heartbreaking story on The Simon Community’s Facebook at the moment. It’s the story of a man, now in his 30’s. Born with fetal alcohol syndrome to a mother who neither wanted him nor could cope. He was surrendered to the care system aged 4 and had been in 13 different care homes around the country by the age of 12. At age 12 he started drinking, and at age 15 he was addicted to heroin. He didn’t attend school and no one cared. At 18, he was released from state care and left to fend for himself. It’s a surprise to no one that he ended up homeless. He was in trouble with the law for stealing and being drunk and disorderly. It was only in the last year that he managed to get himself clean. Thanks to the hard work of the Simon Community, he’s now got his own place. He’s studying for his junior cert at the moment and is doing very well for himself. He was the one who suffered for the lack of support given to his mother. It all fell back on him.So forgive me for giving more weight to the story of a real man who actually grew up in the care system, and how it impacted him. The same system we rely on today to bring up the babies of women who had no choice. His perspective is far more valuable than the song about the possible feelings of an embryo in the womb.
pitifulgod wrote: » Just to clarify, do you think overall mother and baby homes and laundries were a force for good overall? Seems distinctly like you're intentionally diminishing how large scale the neglect was. The church bore considerable responsibility for how single mothers were viewed in the first place. In much the same way women who have abortions are referred to as murderers by some
J C wrote: » There is a well established principle in law that third parties who cause damage to a baby in utero may bear full criminal and civil responsibility for such damage. Society hasn't extended such liability to the mother.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6551914
J C wrote: » There is an amazing (and convenient) double think going on with all of this raking up of 1950's Ireland ... the RCC is the only institution being villified for all of the sins of the 1950's ... no mention of society in general, the immediate families (who were all to happy, in most cases, to lock these women up) or the state and its institutions, who were all too happy to look the other way or actively support these homes. I'm no great lover of the RCC ... but, in justice, I have to say that current Roman Catholic clergy are being scapegoated, for the sins of some of their antecedents ... while the rest of society is giving itself a 'free-pass' for all that happened in its name.
J C wrote: » There is an amazing (and convenient) double think going on with all of this raking up of 1950's Ireland ... the RCC is the only institution being villified for all of the sins of the 1950's ... no mention of society in general, the immediate families (who were all to happy, in most cases, to lock these women up) or the state and its institutions, who were all too happy to look the other way or actively support these homes. I'm no great lover of the RCC ... but, in justice, I have to say that current Roman Catholic clergy are being scapegoated, for the sins of some of their antecedents ... while the rest of society is giving itself a 'free-pass' for all that happened in its name. ... and deciding to vote for unlimited abortion, 'because there were Magdelene Laundries in 1950s Ireland' ... is neither logical nor reasonable.
ABC101 wrote: » Smacl, with respect, abortion is a physical action not an opinion.
In relation to the existing children you mention living in poverty it is encumbent on all people not just pro lifers to give charity. Or do you believe the pro choice brigade have no responsibility to charity? ( I don’t believe you do, but you seem to be implying in your posts that that is the case).
The RCC Church has a long history in charity, and even when some injustices did occur in mother and baby homes / orphanages / institutions etc not all were badly run. Why were these women there in the first place? Because society put them there!!! What about the men who made these women pregnant? Why did they shirk their responsibility? Even today pregnant girls are been shunned / thrown out of their family home.
Even today the taxpayer picks up the tab for single mothers, yet the fathers have not much financial responsibility.
Dionysis wrote: » Why has it not? Is there any particular reason? Also based on the above, please correct me, in Irish Law the unborn fetus is considered a person and has rights? Is there any particular age, in months obviously, that this law for criminal damage can be in Acted? Any finally, you say above criminal damage is that, damage to a property/ possession or damage to a person, would it be worded differently if the law wS against damage to a person? Not a solicitor so have to ask?
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » But living your life according to the teachings of a 2000 year old book that was written by shepherds is logical and reasonable :rolleyes:
J C wrote: » Both are important. ... and the Simon Community was founded by a Christian, Anton Wallich-Clifford and its work was modelled on Simon of Cyrene, who helped Jesus to carry His cross to Calvary. ... so Christians aren't solely focussed on abortion ... they put their money and time where their mouths are, across the whole spectrum of care for their fellow man.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Community Quote:- "The Simon Community is a charity which helps homeless people, taking its name from Simon of Cyrene. It was founded in 1963 by Anton Wallich-Clifford who had encountered many homeless people while working for the Probation Service at Bow Street Magistrates Court. Wallich-Clifford was influenced by the work of Dorothy Day and her Catholic Worker Movement in the USA and his original vision was to establish a farm and community in Sussex but local protests prevented this and the organisation developed as a chain of houses and night shelters run by local volunteers."
