Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Can a Christian vote for unlimited abortion?

1…6667697172…174

Comments

  • #2042
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,038 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Bob_Marley wrote: »
    Are you're ok wit 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.

    Not hiding anything. Yes and yes.

    I place more emphasis on the woman have the right to choose. It's the middle ground. I won't support a system that will force a woman to carry a pregnancy unwillingly, unlike pro-life position. Nor will support the other end of the spectrum, forcing women to have abortions.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #2043
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,038 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: »
    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.

    We're voting on repealing the 8th, not democracy.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #2044
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Delirium wrote:
    We're voting on repealing the 8th, not democracy.

    You see, we will never be allowed to vote on it again. The pro abortionists will have a field day!


  • #2045
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Delirium wrote: »
    We're voting on repealing the 8th, not democracy.
    ... there is no logic to voting to remove all protection for unborn children on the basis that the unlimited abortion that is proposed to directly result from such repeal, might be tightened some time in the distant future ... it is doubly illogical ... when the political and media pressure is to match English law to prevent women having to travel for any abortion.


  • #2046
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,038 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: »
    You see, we will never be allowed to vote on it again. The pro abortionists will have a field day!

    Even if the 8th amendment isn't up for a vote again if a repeal happens. There is no way to stop a government that leans more to pro-life stance from revoking abortion on demand access.

    To suggest otherwise is to say that democracy collapses if repeal happens.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Advertisement
  • #2047
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,038 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    ... there is no logic in voting to remove all protection for unborn children on the basis that the unlimited abortion that is proposed to directly result from such repeal, might be tightened some time in the distant future ... it is doubly illogical ... when the political and media pressure is to match English law to prevent women having to travel for any abortion.
    Who suggested anything of the sort?

    I merely stated that there is no constitutional barrier to revoking abortion on request at some point down the road.

    I know it's late, but do try to address what I type rather than some daft alternative.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #2048
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Delirium wrote:
    Even if the 8th amendment isn't up for a vote again if a repeal happens. There is no way to stop a government that leans more to pro-life stance from revoking abortion on demand access.


    Dream on!


  • #2049
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,038 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: »
    Dream on!
    walk me through the barriers to a pro-life government revoking abortion on request. Are they legal? Constitutional? How was the 8th enacted with these barriers you allude to in existence?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #2050
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Delirium wrote: »
    Even if the 8th amendment isn't up for a vote again if a repeal happens. There is no way to stop a government that leans more to pro-life stance from revoking abortion on demand access.

    To suggest otherwise is to say that democracy collapses if repeal happens.
    We're being asked to remove all constitutional protection for the unborn and to allow the introduction of abortion on demand. That is the horrific decision currently facing us ... period.


  • #2051
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,038 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    We're being asked to remove all constitutional protection for the unborn and to allow the introduction of abortion on demand. That is the horrific decision currently facing us ... period.
    That doesn't contradict (or even address) my post.

    I understand how bad the idea of repealing the 8th is to you, but it's not the fall of democracy as being suggested on this thread.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Advertisement
  • #2052
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,913 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Delirium wrote: »
    That doesn't contradict (or even address) my post.

    I understand how bad the idea of repealing the 8th is to you, but it's not the fall of democracy as being suggested on this thread.

    Hardly a surprise when you consider the autocratic nature of the opening post and much of the subsequent supporting argument. God's will doesn't leave much room for democracy.


  • #2053
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Delirium wrote:
    walk me through the barriers to a pro-life government revoking abortion on request. Are they legal? Constitutional? How was the 8th enacted with these barriers you allude to in existence?


    Where do you think you'd get a pro life government? The barrier was not there when the eighth was enacted. Thus we get a chance to vote. You do know that we will never be given a chance to vote on it again?


  • #2054
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    smacl wrote:
    Hardly a surprise when you consider the autocratic nature of the opening post and much of the subsequent supporting argument. God's will doesn't leave much room for democracy.

    And rightly so. When did a democracy decide what is morally right or wrong? Surely God's law supercedes all human law?


  • #2055
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,038 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: »
    Where do you think you'd get a pro life government? The barrier was not there when the eighth was enacted. Thus we get a chance to vote. You do know that we will never be given a chance to vote on it again?
    If a government can't get a pro-life mandate from the electorate, then that's democracy for you. Why should the 8th remain if the electorate doesn't support it?

    It's a democratic country. That comes with good and bad times for any number of opinions in society.

    Personally, I wouldn't write off any position from regaining votes over time. Pro-life included.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #2056
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,038 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: »
    And rightly so. When did a democracy decide what is morally right or wrong? Surely God's law supercedes all human law?
    What you're talking about is a theocracy. For someone who was decrying the loss of opportunity to vote on something, it's somewhat ironic to support the notion of a theocracy.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #2057
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Delirium wrote:
    If a government can't get a pro-life mandate from the electorate, then that's democracy for you. Why should the 8th remain if the electorate doesn't support it?


    If you're a non believer it doesn't matter. If you are a believer, you are in a different situation.


  • #2058
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Delirium wrote:
    What you're talking about is a theocracy. For someone who was decrying the loss of opportunity to vote on something, it's somewhat ironic to support the notion of a theocracy.


    I will do my utmost to stop abortion. If I fail, it doesn't matter. In the end, I will be able to face my God with a clear conscience.


  • #2059
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,533 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Delirium wrote: »
    If a government can't get a pro-life mandate from the electorate, then that's democracy for you. Why should the 8th remain if the electorate doesn't support it?

    it should remain because right now it is the only option to protect the unborn's rights. sometimes what the electorate want isn't good for the country or society, and in exceptional circumstances their wishes must be ignored. exceptional circumstances being where the human and other non-negotiable rights of people are proposed to be removed and there is support from the electorate to remove those rights.
    fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: »
    I will do my utmost to stop abortion. If I fail, it doesn't matter. In the end, I will be able to face my God with a clear conscience.

    even if repeal are successful, that is not the end of the fight to stop abortion on demand. even if it is implamented, the fight can and will go on.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #2060
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    end of the road wrote:
    even if repeal are successful, that is not the end of the fight to stop abortion on demand. even if it is implamented, the fight can and will go on.


    They will never win, because God is on our side.


  • #2061
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Delirium wrote: »
    What you're talking about is a theocracy. For someone who was decrying the loss of opportunity to vote on something, it's somewhat ironic to support the notion of a theocracy.
    No its not a theocracy ... but what is increasingly being proposed is an atheistic secular state ... that doesn't tolerate any cultural expressions of faith in the public domain.
    Its a form of religious persecution masquerading as respecting diversity ... when it does nothing of the sort ... and instead imposes one ethos ... the atheistic secular one ... before which, every knee is expected to bend ... on every issue, from the control of schools and hospitals ... to abortion on demand ... and on a more trivial level, the repeal of the ban on drinking on Good Friday or the banning of Christmas Cribs and symbols on public premises
    Indeed, they seem determined to even eliminate Christmas from the lexicon with the euphimism of 'the Holidays' or the 'winter festival', replacing it.

    It seems that they are not content to retain even the smallest remnant of Christian culture.
    It has to go ... or be re-purposed to an atheisitic secular objective.


  • Advertisement
  • #2062
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    God said "Thou shalt not kill".


  • #2063
    Bob_Marley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Bob_Marley


    Delirium wrote: »
    Not hiding anything. Yes and yes.

    I place more emphasis on the woman have the right to choose. It's the middle ground. I won't support a system that will force a woman to carry a pregnancy unwillingly, unlike pro-life position. Nor will support the other end of the spectrum, forcing women to have abortions.

    but you're happy enough if defenseless unborn children can be killed, some middle ground indeed.


  • #2064
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    A woman's body is not hers. It is the temple of the Holy Spirit. Similarly with a man.


  • #2065
    Bob_Marley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Bob_Marley


    fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: »
    You see, we will never be allowed to vote on it again. The pro abortionists will have a field day!

    If the 8th is not repealed, they will keep holding the referendum until it is.

    It's not the first time an Irish government kept holding the same referendum,until they got the political result they wanted and then no more re-votes ever allowed. Pretend democracy at its finest.


  • #2066
    Bob_Marley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Bob_Marley


    fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: »
    A woman's body is not hers. It is the temple of the Holy Spirit. Similarly with a man.

    don't be a prat. Religion has nothing to do with respecting the human right to life.


  • #2067
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    Bob_Marley wrote:
    don't be an arsehole. Religion has nothing to do with respecting the human right to life.


    You are fully entitled to believe that. Unfortunately, you will never get to heaven. Think about that.


  • #2068
    Bob_Marley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Bob_Marley


    fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: »
    You are fully entitled to believe that. Unfortunately, you will never get to heaven. Think about that.

    well if that's the case at least you'll not be there either for preaching hateful fire and brimestone to others.


  • #2069
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Bob_Marley wrote: »
    don't be a prat. Religion has nothing to do with respecting the human right to life.
    I think, in fairness, many religious leaders are in the vanguard on right to life issues. I also accept that there are Atheists who are pro-life ... but the culture of Atheistic secularism is dominated by anti-life ideas, like abortion and euthanesia on demand.


  • #2070
    ouxbbkqtswdfaw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭ouxbbkqtswdfaw


    I will be there, because I am on God's side, and so are all pro lifers. The pro abortionists are doomed, and they know it. It is too late for them.


  • Advertisement
  • #2071
    Bob_Marley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Bob_Marley


    J C wrote: »
    I think, in fairness, many religious leaders are in the vanguard on right to life issues. I also accept that there are Atheists who are pro-life ... but the culture of Atheistic secularism is dominated by anti-life ideas, like abortion and euthanesia on demand.

    true atheism is just simply a lack of belief, other than than that atheists have absolutely noting in common.

    nothing wrong with a simple honest lack of belief - if that someone honestly can't believe something to be true, they can't. - also Christians have failed to convince them remember, often because of their poor conduct and harsh words like owenybaloney

    The rest of the stuff you refer to is not simple atheism, but in fact political anti-Christian, and anti-theism - state atheism - masked up as mere atheism.


Advertisement