Can a Christian vote for unlimited abortion?

uptherebels · 10-02-2018 08:11PM

Bob_Marley wrote: »

Why should human life not have constitutional protection ?

im talking about the right to travel for an abortion.

end of the road · 10-02-2018 08:14PM

uptherebels wrote: »

It is ok with both you and the state for irish women to have abortions.They must just pass a geographical boundary.
You can deny it all you want. You posting history shows the truth

it doesn't show the truth as it's not the truth. we are not okay with people traveling to kill the unborn but the state can do very little if anything to stop them.

J C · 10-02-2018 08:19PM

uptherebels wrote: »

im talking about the right to travel for an abortion.

People have the right to travel ... and they can legally avail of abortion, or any other legal service, in the juristiction(s) to which they travel.

The right to travel is not condoning abortion ... it is just a basic right that everyone correctly enjoys in law, in free societies.

uptherebels · 10-02-2018 08:20PM

end of the road wrote: »

it doesn't show the truth as it's not the truth. we are not okay with people traveling to kill the unborn but the state can do very little if anything to stop them.

despite giving constitutional protection to such acts?:rolleyes:

please tell us your plans on removing the right to travel or even the availability of information? wouldn't want people to think your a hypocrite now.

end of the road · 10-02-2018 08:22PM

uptherebels wrote: »

despite giving constitutional protection to such acts?

please tell us your plans on removing the right to travel or even the availability of information? wouldn't want people to think your a hypocrite now.

the constitutional protection is for the right to travel. in this day and age one cannot stop information from being availible or saught due to the international and non-jurisdiction of the internet.

uptherebels · 10-02-2018 08:30PM

end of the road wrote: »

the constitutional protection is for the right to travel. in this day and age one cannot stop information from being availible or saught due to the international and non-jurisdiction of the internet.

So you have no plans then:rolleyes: nimbyism at its finest.

Women can freely obtain information on obtaining abortions and travel freely for such because the people of ireland decided that abortion was only bad inside state borders

Bob_Marley · 10-02-2018 08:35PM

uptherebels wrote: »

So you have no plans then:rolleyes: nimbyism at its finest.

How do you propose to prevent Irish people who also travel abroad to sexually abuse Children that would be underage here, but it's legal to do so there ?

end of the road · 10-02-2018 09:02PM

uptherebels wrote: »

So you have no plans then nimbyism at its finest.

Women can freely obtain information on obtaining abortions and travel freely for such because the people of ireland decided that abortion was only bad inside state borders

no they decided that it was not practical to stop people from traveling as innocent people who were not traveling for abortions would suffer under the law, and that it was impossible long term to stop information from being made availible.

J C · 10-02-2018 09:04PM

uptherebels wrote: »

So you have no plans then:rolleyes: nimbyism at its finest.

Women can freely obtain information on obtaining abortions and travel freely for such because the people of ireland decided that abortion was only bad inside state borders

The Irish people can only legally control what happens inside the Irish state's borders.

Other countries are starting to roll back some of the abortion excesses in their countries ... but this is entirely up to them.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ohio-gov-john-kasich-signs-down-syndrome-abortion-ban-n832336

Delirium · 10-02-2018 09:13PM

J C wrote: »

The Irish people can only legally control what happens inside the Irish state's borders.

Other countries are starting to roll back some of the abortion excesses in their countries ... but this is entirely up to them.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ohio-gov-john-kasich-signs-down-syndrome-abortion-ban-n832336

And yet you only recently said that societies only loosen abortion and never the opposite.

You even went so far as to suggest people are gullible to consider abortion laws being made more restrictive was a possibility.

J C · 10-02-2018 09:20PM

Delirium wrote: »

And yet you only recently said that societies only loosen abortion and never the opposite.

You even went so far as to suggest people are gullible to consider abortion laws being made more restrictive was a possibility.

It can go both ways ... but Ireland is showing every sign of liberalising abortion laws ... and that is the stated purpose of repealing the 8th, after all.

Of course, if the Irish people sensibly decide to retain the 8th, then we won't significantly loosen abortion law in this country.
... and your theory will be proven correct.

Delirium · 10-02-2018 09:29PM

J C wrote: »

It can go both ways ... but Ireland is showing every sign of liberalising abortion laws ... and that is the stated purpose of repealing the 8th, after all.

Of course, if the Irish people sensibly decide to retain the 8th, then we won't significantly loosen abortion law in this country.
... and your theory will be proven correct.

My theory, as you put it, was that Ireland could loosen or strengthen abortions post repeal of the 8th at some stage.

You rejected that possibility and threw the word gullible around.

But rather than complain you're late to the party, we'll be happy you showed up.

end of the road · 10-02-2018 09:33PM

Delirium wrote: »

And yet you only recently said that societies only loosen abortion and never the opposite.

You even went so far as to suggest people are gullible to consider abortion laws being made more restrictive was a possibility.

perhapse he wasn't aware that Ohio was going to make such a sensible decisian when he posted his point about society only loosening abortion law. so his original point is just as valid as his new one given the intervening time frame and the changing face of ohio's stance in relation to abortions of ds babys.

Bob_Marley · 10-02-2018 09:35PM

Delirium wrote: »

My theory, as you put it, was that Ireland could loosen or strengthen abortions post repeal of the 8th at some stage.

You rejected that possibility and threw the word gullible around.

But rather than complain you're late to the party, we'll be happy you showed up.

How will removing the human life rights of unborn children from the constitution strengthen their protection ?

- This will be an interesting newspeak spin . . .

Delirium · 10-02-2018 09:42PM

Bob_Marley wrote: »

How will removing the human life rights of unborn children from the constitution strengthen their protection ?

- This will be an interesting newspeak spin . . .

Yes, it would if that's what i said.

For those trying to keep up, JC claimed that should the repeal happen Ireland would only ever loosen abortion laws. E.g 12 weeks becomes 22 week limit.

I suggested that at some point in the future the law could be tightened by a government. JC rejected this possibility. He now seems to considering it could happen.

At no point did I suggest that repeal would strengthen protection for the unborn.

Hope that clears up your confusion.

Delirium · 10-02-2018 09:44PM

end of the road wrote: »

perhapse he wasn't aware that Ohio was going to make such a sensible decisian when he posted his point about society only loosening abortion law. so his original point is just as valid as his new one given the intervening time frame and the changing face of ohio's stance in relation to abortions of ds babys.

Fair point about not knowing about Ohio case. Though you don't need to know about it to consider the possibility as mentioned in my last post.

PopePalpatine · 10-02-2018 09:55PM

I wonder what extra funding the Ohio Republicans will provide for services needed by the disabled. I'd say Sweet Fanny Adams is the heavy favourite.

J C · 10-02-2018 09:56PM

Delirium wrote: »

Yes, it would if that's what i said.

For those trying to keep up, JC claimed that should the repeal happen Ireland would only ever loosen abortion laws. E.g 12 weeks becomes 22 week limit.

I suggested that at some point in the future the law could be tightened by a government. JC rejected this possibility. He now seems to considering it could happen.

At no point did I suggest that repeal would strengthen protection for the unborn.

Hope that clears up your confusion.

I don't reject the idea that abortion law can be tightened as well as loosened.
The passing of the 8th in 1983 was a tightening of abortion law, at the time.

However, the current argument for repealing the 8th is to ensure that no woman has to travel to England for an abortion ... and if this is to be fully achieved, then Ireland's abortion laws will have to be loosened out dramatically to fully match English abortion law.
... i.e. well beyond the current proposal of 12 weeks ... and more like the CA proposal of 22 weeks ... and with no gestational limit for unborn children with disabilities to match English Law on this issue.

end of the road · 10-02-2018 10:03PM

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I wonder what extra funding the Ohio Republicans will provide for services needed by the disabled. I'd say Sweet Fanny Adams is the heavy favourite.

quite possibly, but abortion on demand is and was not the solution to that possibility. abortion on demand is not a solution to a lack of services.

J C · 10-02-2018 10:09PM

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I wonder what extra funding the Ohio Republicans will provide for services needed by the disabled. I'd say Sweet Fanny Adams is the heavy favourite.

What has that got to do with banning the killing unborn children with disabilities?
Extra funding has been provided for disabled services in every country over the past number of years.
The paralympics and the special olympics also celebrate and recognise extraordinary achievements by disabled and special needs people.

Bob_Marley · 10-02-2018 10:13PM

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I wonder what extra funding the Ohio Republicans will provide for services needed by the disabled. I'd say Sweet Fanny Adams is the heavy favourite.

Your concern for them is touching, but I'm not convinced of the logic that killing them as unborn children is being kind to them.

Delirium · 10-02-2018 10:14PM

J C wrote: »

I don't reject the idea that abortion law can be tightened as well as loosened.
The passing of the 8th in 1983 was a tightening of abortion law, at the time.

However, the current argument for repealing the 8th is to ensure that no woman has to travel to England for an abortion ... and if this is to be fully achieved, then Ireland's abortion laws will have to be loosened out dramatically to fully match English abortion law.
... i.e. well beyond the current proposal of 12 weeks ... and more like the CA proposal of 22 weeks.

Really?

Delirium wrote: »

Equally there will be nothing stopping the government from introducing stricter abortion laws should the laws be revisited.

J C wrote: »

... but that is not how it will play out if the 8th is repealed.

It is as certain as night follows day that the government will revisit the CA recommendartions, if the 8th is repealed ... and they will implement all of the CA recommendations.
The reason for this is that the CA recommendations are practically identical to the current English abortion law ... and the cry that no woman should have to go to England for an abortion, will logically lead to the complete harmonisation of Irish abortion law with English abortion law, if the 8th is repealed. Otherwise women will still have to go to England for abortions outside 12 weeks ... and that will become politically impossible to resist if the 8th is repealed.
The question will be asked as to why women still have to go to England for abortions after the 8th has been repealed ... and the answer will very quickly be the complete harmonisation of Irish abortion law with English law.
The CA recommendations provide a 'roadmap' and 'political cover' for doing precisely this.
... and you would need to be extremely gullible to believe otherwise, if the 8th is repealed.
... whichever side of the abortion issue, you stand on.

At this stage, I don't know if this is a communication breakdown or you're being dishonest as I've posted the above which contradicts your statement.

I said that laws could be tightened if revisited and you said " It is as certain as night follows day that the government will revisit the CA recommendartions, if the 8th is repealed ... and they will implement all of the CA recommendations. "

That clearly rejects the notion that things could go either way.

Hopefully it's a communication breakdown rather than the alternative.

Bob_Marley · 10-02-2018 10:18PM

Delirium wrote: »

At no point did I suggest that repeal would strengthen protection for the unborn.

Hope that clears up your confusion.

I'm not confused at all - I'm not the one advocating the removal of their rights from the constitution and thinking it's ok to take their life.

Delirium · 10-02-2018 10:25PM

Bob_Marley wrote: »

I'm not confused at all - I'm not the one advocating the removal of their rights from the constitution and thinking it's ok to take their life.

your unintended misrepresentation of my post says otherwise.

I'm familiar with my position on allowing women make informed consensual decisions about their pregnancy.

J C · 10-02-2018 10:33PM

Delirium wrote: »

Really?

At this stage, I don't know if this is a communication breakdown or you're being dishonest as I've posted the above which contradicts your statement.

I said that laws could be tightened if revisited and you said " It is as certain as night follows day that the government will revisit the CA recommendartions, if the 8th is repealed ... and they will implement all of the CA recommendations. "

That clearly rejects the notion that things could go either way.

Hopefully it's a communication breakdown rather than the alternative.

The current proposals are one way ... the repeal of the 8th and the installation of 12 week abortion on demand.

The only way that abortion will not be 'loosened' is if people vote 'no' to repealing the 8th. Hopefully they will do so ... and prove you correct that abortion can be tightened.

Delirium · 10-02-2018 10:37PM

J C wrote: »

The current proposals are one way ... the repeal of the 8th and the installation of 12 week abortion on demand.

The only way that abortion will not be 'loosened' is if people vote 'no' to repealing the 8th. Hopefully they will do so and prove you correct.

And this is why things are confused.

I'm well aware of the current situation. I'm also aware that not repealing the 8th gives more protection to the unborn than repeal does.

I asked if repeal happens, do you accept that the laws could be tightened at some stage down the line?

Yes or no?

J C · 10-02-2018 10:45PM

Delirium wrote: »

And this is why things are confused.

I'm well aware of the current situation. I'm also aware that not repealing the 8th gives more protection to the unborn than repeal does.

I asked if repeal happens, do you accept that the laws could be tightened at some stage down the line?

Yes or no?

Its a 'no' ... in theory anything could happen ... but in practice, I would see further loosening (and no tightening for the foreseeable future) if the 8th is repealed.

TBH, I don't see the 8th being restored if it is repealed. I remember back in the day there was a proposal to 'tighten' the 8th ... because there was an idea that abortion could be introduced if judges were to give emphasis to the mothers rights in the 8th.
There was a mass media campaign that such a proposal would be deeply divisive and damaging to society ... and it never went anywhere as a result.
Of course the current proposal to repeal the 8th is also deeply divisive ... but there is not a word about this ... because the pseudo-liberal media want the 8th repealed, irrespective of whether its divisive or not.
If the 8th is repealed ... this will be the last time the people will be directly consulted on abortion.

... and all the political pressure is moving in the direction of matching English abortion law.

Even if you are proven correct and some time in the far future people decide to tighten abortion laws, thousands of unborn children will be killed before this might happen, if the 8th is repealed.

... so people who vote 'yes' for repeal will have the blood of all unborn children on their hands, that are killed as a result of the repeal of the 8th and the introduction of abortion demand ... and there is no getting around that with facetious arguments about voting for abortion ... but hoping no child will be killed as a result ... or holding the vain hope that it might be partially reversed some day.

Anybody voting to repeal the 8th is voting for abortion on demand ... and that is a unarguable fact.

end of the road · 10-02-2018 10:45PM

J C wrote: »

What has that got to do with banning the killing unborn children with disabilities?
Extra funding has been provided for disabled services in every country over the past number of years.
The paralympics and the special olympics also celebrate and recognise extraordinary achievements by disabled and special needs people.

good post. as we know, the funding of services has nothing to do with the banning of the killing of unborn disabled children. however, it is being used as an argument to have abortion on demand as the solution to the issue of services not meeting the standards they need to, instead of calling for better services.

Delirium wrote: »

And this is why things are confused.

I'm well aware of the current situation. I'm also aware that not repealing the 8th gives more protection to the unborn than repeal does.

I asked if repeal happens, do you accept that the laws could be tightened at some stage down the line?

Yes or no?

of course they could, but it's unlikely they would be as it wouldn't be politically possible. the expectation would be to harmonise with british abortion law as otherwise the interest groups would scream until it happens.

Bob_Marley · 10-02-2018 10:48PM

Delirium wrote: »

your unintended misrepresentation of my post says otherwise.

I'm familiar with my position on allowing women make informed consensual decisions about their pregnancy.

Are you're ok with the removal of human life rights of unborn children, and ok with the termination of their life ?

No trying to hide it - yes or no.

ouxbbkqtswdfaw · 10-02-2018 10:53PM

JC is correct regarding the laws around abortion being loosened further. Not only that, but we will no longer be able to have any further say on the matter.

Can a Christian vote for unlimited abortion?

Comments