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…7172747677…174

Comments

  • #2192
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Bob_Marley wrote: »
    When the mother chooses to kill her child, what choice was given to the child in the ending of their life ?

    I don’t see it as a child before the development of sentience. I don’t feel the child should have a choice while it depends on the mother for survival and viability.


  • #2193
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,533 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    J C wrote: »
    Why this fixation with sentience and brain development?

    agreed, it makes no sense given we don't base human rights on sentients and brain development. they keep using the argument dispite it being invalid and unviable and being constantly debunked.

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



  • #2194
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    J C wrote: »
    I'm not telling you what your opinion is ... just drawing the logical conclusion that everybody who is pro-choice for abortion is pro-abortion.


    My faith is one of love ... no ramming of beliefs anywhere.

    I'm also in favour of people having control over their lives ... but such control cannot be achieved by killing other Human Beings.

    Your ‘logical conclusion’ conveniently supports your own opinion on the matter.

    You are in favour of people being in control, right up to the point where a woman gets pregnant. Then you somehow feel you yourself have more of a say in what happens to her body than she does herself. The arrogance is astounding.


  • #2195
    Bob_Marley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Bob_Marley


    smacl wrote: »
    Glad to see you have a grasp of basic biology.

    I'm not the one that thinks a sperm or a kidney is human life.
    smacl wrote: »
    So by your definition above, the humans life begins at fertilization which is in accordance with the Vatican stance. As such the morning after pill constitutes abortion, and assuming all human life shares the same worth, taking the morning after pill is thus no better or worse than say having a third trimester abortion or murdering an infant for that matter. Is this what you believe? If so, yikes! If not, at what stage in gestation do you say that 'a human life' suddenly gets the same right to life as a pregnant woman?

    It's not my definition or anyone else's it's the definition biological science uses for the beginning of the human life cycle :

    http://www.biologyreference.com/La-Ma/Life-Cycle-Human.html

    As for the morning after pill strawman, no one is being asked to vote on that, it's already freely available, and is designed to be an emergency contraceptive.


  • #2196
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    end of the road wrote: »
    nope wrong, it has absolutely everything to do with their will, end of the road doesn't deflect under any circumstances.



    abortion on demand has nothing to do with bodily autonomy. a woman is not entitled to kill the unborn outside extreme circumstances. preventing the woman from killing the unborn is not controling her life. we don't have a right to kill outside extreme circumstances. as a human being, you have a duty to have both compassion and respect for both woman and baby.

    Why are you referring to yourself in third person?

    Can I just say how EXTREMELY frustrating it is that you are still saying abortion has nothing to do with bodily autonomy when it has been explained to you multiple times across many threads in more than one forum why it DOES affect bodily autonomy?
    Can you not read?


  • Advertisement
  • #2197
    Bob_Marley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Bob_Marley


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    I don’t see it as a child before the development of sentience. I don’t feel the child should have a choice while it depends on the mother for survival and viability.

    It is the taking of another human life without their choice.


  • #2198
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,533 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    I don’t see it as a child before the development of sentience. I don’t feel the child should have a choice while it depends on the mother for survival and viability.

    sentients isn't a viable basis on which to decide when a child becomes a child. the child has a right to live regardless of it depending on the mother for survival and viability, something that takes place for a while after the child leaves the womb. unfortunately your logic doesn't stand up to scruteny or corelate with reality, given we don't allow the killing of newborns dispite them depending on the mother for survival and viability.

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



  • #2199
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,038 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    Pro-life people are pro-the-life of both the mother and her unborn child ... whereas so-called pro-choice people seem to be pro-abortion on demand.

    Do you really think that people will agree with you and vote to repeal the 8th if you keep maintaining that you are pro-choice ... but not really pro-repeal of the 8th or pro-abortion on demand up to 12 weeks?

    People will begin to wonder why you are asking them to take the blood of unborn children on their hands by voting for the repeal of the 8th and follow-on abortion on demand ... while you continue to coyly describe yourself as pro-choice but not pro-abortion.

    It sounds like you have serious reservations about abortion, just like pro-life people have.

    Why do I refer to myself as pro-choice rather than pro-abortion?

    For a start, I don't want to force anyone to have an abortion.

    I want women to have the option of choosing to have an abortion. If they don't want an abortion, not going to legally veto that choice. Likewise if they choose to have an abortion.

    It really is that simple.

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



  • #2200
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    end of the road wrote: »
    sentients isn't a viable basis on which to decide when a child becomes a child. the child has a right to live regardless of it depending on the mother for survival and viability, something that takes place for a while after the child leaves the womb. unfortunately your logic doesn't stand up to scruteny or corelate with reality, given we don't allow the killing of newborns dispite them depending on the mother for survival and viability.

    Hopefully the referendum will change all of that.

    I realize what the current position is, you don’t need to keep repeating it to me.


  • #2201
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Bob_Marley wrote: »
    It is the taking of another human life without their choice.

    We can’t ask the unborn what they want. How do you know what their choice would be?


  • Advertisement
  • #2202
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,038 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Bob_Marley wrote: »
    As for the morning after pill strawman, no one is being asked to vote on that, it's already freely available, and is designed to be an emergency contraceptive.
    Not entirely accurate. A pharmacist can refuse to dispense the pill.
    A Cork woman was denied the morning-after pill after being accused of lying about being raped by a high street pharmacy.


    The 24-year-old was asked a series of invasive questions following the incident before being denied the emergency contraception.

    In harrowing turn of events, the young woman discovered that she was pregnant with his child and she was forced to travel to the UK to abort the baby.

    Source

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



  • #2203
    Bob_Marley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Bob_Marley


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    We can’t ask the unborn what they want. How do you know what their choice would be?

    Since when was that to be considered consent to take their life?

    Even if someone says they are suicidal, or not in a position to be able to answer, that does not mean you have the right to kill them.


  • #2204
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,533 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    Why are you referring to yourself in third person?

    Can I just say how EXTREMELY frustrating it is that you are still saying abortion has nothing to do with bodily autonomy when it has been explained to you multiple times across many threads in more than one forum why it DOES affect bodily autonomy?
    Can you not read?

    i can read, hence i read people's opinions, not facts, on why they believe abortion on demand not being availible effects bodily autonomy. however their opinion is just that, and it doesn't stand up to scruteny given the fact there are 2 human beings in the equation.
    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    Hopefully the referendum will change all of that.

    I realize what the current position is, you don’t need to keep repeating it to me.

    it's not the current position i'm telling you about, it's the facts and reality in relation to how your logic doesn't stand up to scruteny or corelate with reality given both the unborn and the mother are human beings with equal rights.

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



  • #2205
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    I don’t see it as a child before the development of sentience. I don’t feel the child should have a choice while it depends on the mother for survival and viability.
    We all depend on others at various times in our lives, sometimes totally ... and somebody exploiting this dependence to kill us would be grossly immoral.

    Somebody could equally say they don't believe a newborn baby is a child, because it cannot speak or walk ... or any other self-defined aribtrary reason ... but this still wouldn't allow them to morally or legally kill her.


  • #2206
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Bob_Marley wrote: »
    Since when was that to be considered consent to take their life?

    Even if someone says they are suicidal, or not in a position to be able to answer, that does not mean you have the right to kill them.

    It isn’t considered, but you can’t say that the unborns lives are taken against their will/choice when we don’t know what their choice is or what it would be.

    If I thought I was causing distress/emotional trauma/health issues while she was carrying me I would 100% her having an abortion.


  • #2207
    Bob_Marley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Bob_Marley


    Delirium wrote: »
    Not entirely accurate. A pharmacist can refuse to dispense the pill.

    Then you go to another pharmacy. If an individual shopkeeper refuses to sell you something, it does not mean it is not available. What strawman is next, a shop is closed ?


  • #2208
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    end of the road wrote: »
    i can read, hence i read people's opinions, not facts, on why they believe abortion on demand not being availible effects bodily autonomy. however their opinion is just that, and it doesn't stand up to scruteny given the fact there are 2 human beings in the equation.



    it's not the current position i'm telling you about, it's the facts and reality in relation to how your logic doesn't stand up to scruteny or corelate with reality given both the unborn and the mother are human beings with equal rights.

    Just making you aware, I won’t be responding to any more of your posts.
    I’m not going on another merry go round with you while you dole out your ‘facts’ and ignore any and all reasonable conversation.

    I have no doubt that you are going to reply stating something along the lines of me not being able to face the truth etc, that isn’t the case either, I just find you exhausting to converse with and am frankly sick of repeating myself.


  • #2209
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,038 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    end of the road wrote: »
    i can read, hence i read people's opinions, not facts, on why they believe abortion on demand not being availible effects bodily autonomy. however their opinion is just that, and it doesn't stand up to scruteny given the fact there are 2 human beings in the equation.
    You've been informed numerous times what bodily autonomy is.

    If you believe denying a woman an abortion doesn't affect her bodily autonomy then I would ask for your understanding of what bodily autonomy is. We should at least establish that we understand it to mean the same thing before addressing your claim its relation to abortion on request.

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



  • #2210
    Bob_Marley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Bob_Marley


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    It isn’t considered, but you can’t say that the unborns lives are taken against their will/choice when we don’t know what their choice is or what it would be.

    If I thought I was causing distress/emotional trauma/health issues while she was carrying me I would 100% her having an abortion.

    So you're saying that if someone is suicidal that gives you the right to kill them. Hmmm. The baby was suicidal, so I had to kill them your honour, twas the kind thing to do.


  • #2211
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    J C wrote: »
    We all depend on others at various times in our lives, sometimes totally ... and somebody exploiting this dependence to kill us would be grossly immoral.

    Somebody could equally say they don't believe a newborn baby is a child, because it cannot speak or walk ... or any other self-defined aribtrary reason ... but this still wouldn't allow them to morally or legally kill her.

    A newborn and a mere weeks old fetus are incomparable.


  • Advertisement
  • #2212
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Bob_Marley wrote: »
    So you're saying that if someone is suicidal that gives you the right to kill them. Hmmm. The baby was suicidal, so I had to kill them your honour, twas the kind thing to do.

    You literally just made all that up. I never said nor implied that.

    I said you can’t say that it’s wrong to deny the unborn the choice to live when we don’t know what their choice is or what be. In my situation, if I was causing that much distress to my mother, I would rather she aborted me.

    But do carry on.


  • #2213
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,038 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Bob_Marley wrote: »
    So you're saying that if someone is suicidal that gives you the right to kill them. Hmmm. The baby was suicidal, so I had to kill them your honour, twas the kind thing to do.
    What is the punishment for being convicted of attempted suicide?

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



  • #2214
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    We can’t ask the unborn what they want. How do you know what their choice would be?
    We can't ask a newborn baby either.
    ... so we should make the working assumption that they don't want to be killed.
    ... we cannot do otherwise, because it is recognised that a desire to be killed is regarded as a mental illness.

    ... and it doesn't actually matter what their choice would be ... because if somebody is suicidal and asks to be killed ... everybody who can, should do all in our power to ensure that they don't go through with it ... and we certainly shouldn't kill them.


  • #2215
    Bob_Marley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 626 ✭✭✭Bob_Marley


    Delirium wrote: »
    What is the punishment for being convicted of attempted suicide?

    Reading endless strawman questions and posts ?


  • #2216
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Delirium wrote: »
    What is the punishment for being convicted of attempted suicide?
    Suicide has been de-criminalised on the basis that somebody who is suicidal is not in control of their faculties.

    However, Bob was talking about assisting somebody to commit suicide ... by killing them.
    ... and the sentence is 14 years, I think ... but if somebody killed a child ... and argued that they thought the child was suicidal at the time ... they would likely be convicted of murder.

    ... so the argument that we don't know what an unborn childs views on being killed ... has been proven to be a strawman.


  • #2217
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Bob_Marley wrote: »
    Reading endless strawman questions and posts ?
    I agree Bob.
    ... and this is the best arguments that they can make for the repeal of the 8th ... and the introduction of abortion on demand ... quite pathetic really.


  • #2218
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,861 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    end of the road wrote: »
    because i do. their will is not to be killed.

    I hate when a perfectly good thread gets ruined


  • #2219
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    It isn’t considered, but you can’t say that the unborns lives are taken against their will/choice when we don’t know what their choice is or what it would be.

    If I thought I was causing distress/emotional trauma/health issues while she was carrying me I would 100% her having an abortion.
    ... so if you have broke your mothers heart since you were born by your behaviour ... should she also be allowed to kill you ... eh???


  • #2220
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    A newborn and a mere weeks old fetus are incomparable.
    Why? ... because you say so ?
    ... and want to kill the foetus.


  • Advertisement
  • #2221
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    J C wrote: »
    ... so if you have broke your mothers heart since you were born by your behaviour ... should she also be allowed to kill you ... eh???

    You seem to be having difficulties distinguishing the difference between a weeks old embryo and a living breathing person.

    If I have to explain to you why an adult has more rights and legal protections than an embryo there is no point in continuing this conversation.


Advertisement