Delirium wrote: » Two contrasting examples have been cited regarding what happens if the child survives the abortion (>= 22 weeks). UK leaves the child, while US endeavours to keep the child alive. It's been stated more than once that Ireland will align itself with the UK model regarding the scenario I've mentioned. Can anyone show why that would be the case rather than the US model?
recedite wrote: » You're entirely in the realm of speculation there. Once the protection of the 8th amendment was removed, it could go either way. It might even vary, being left to the "ethos" of the individual hospital. As the debate has generally centred around comparisons with UK clinics (Minister Harris saying we already effectively have UK style abortion because of all those who travel to the UK) then the implication of what he is saying is that we are competing against that particular regime, and must aspire to match it.
J C wrote: » You made the following statement ... and I responded to it:-You were the one who raised the issue of child euthenasia ... and I linked to a New Scientist article on the subject .. hardly scaremongering, by any stretch of the imagination. If Belgium already has it ... can 'Post-Holy Catholic Ireland' be far behind? ... especially, if a signal that 'anything goes' is given, by the repeal of the 8th. Childhood euthenasia is all part of a continuum in the culture of death starting with the abortion of the unborn ... and ending with the euthanasia of the born.
Katie Full Leak wrote: » i highlighted the wrong part of his post...should have been the first line:D Buts he's equally happy with 16 weeks. Whats stopping our politicans at some future date making it 20 weeks or 24 ...or 28.....you get the picture!
J C wrote: » I'd have thought that the answer was obvious ... and they would want to live. ... but if you doubt me, I'll let another abortion survivor tell you whether unborn lives are taken against their will/choice in abortions. Here Melissa Ohden is addressing a September 9, 2015 US House of Representatives Judiciary Committee hearing into 'rolling back' abortion in America. Another powerful, strong Christian woman ... who was aborted but survived to 'blow the whistle' on this latter day horror.
If I were her, I probably would have aborted. It has nothing to do with her maternal instincts – she already had two kids. It’s just that it wasn’t the right time.
Am I glad that she didn’t succeed? I don’t really care. I am glad I am alive, but not necessarily because I am glad my mother didn’t do it. I shouldn’t have a say in it. It’s her body. It’s her choice. It would have been much better for my mum’s mental and physical health if she had had the abortion. It was never an idea for me that women shouldn’t be given the right to abort because their kids could grow up, get an education, get a good life, all that.
WhiteRoses wrote: » That's interesting, I also did some research and found the story of another woman who survived an abortion and she holds no grudges, respects her mothers decision and acknowledges that her mothers life would have been better had the abortion been successful. Link here Some excerpts: So I think after reading that, we can categorically say, that not all of the unborn would choose to live, some respect that their mothers should have a choice.
pilly wrote: » The level of hysteria that's being resorted to in here is madness. Now we're talking about euthanizing new-borns? When all else fails resort to hysteria. Hyperbole of the highest order and disgusting carry on.
end of the road wrote: » no we can safely say the unborn want the right to life and we have a duty to insure that continues to happen in this country.
pilly wrote: » Whilst we're on the subject of euthanizing newborns however, the Catholic Church is the only organisation in Ireland that has a history of doing so. All the more reason for these decisions to be taken out of their hands.
WhiteRoses wrote: » Its the height of hypocrisy this is being used as a scaremongering tactic to frighten people into voting no, I wonder are their memories too short to remember the atrocities of the Tuam mother and baby homes, et al.
WhiteRoses wrote: » I literally just provided a link three posts up to debunk that theory. You are incorrect.
end of the road wrote: » the thing is it didn't debunk it as the woman is now an adult and has formed her viewpoint. when she was unborn she would have been unable to state her wishes. it is assumed that a fetus wishes to live bar exceptional circumstances and thanks to the relevant law this woman survived her attempted abortion.
end of the road wrote: » well they aren't allowed to do it anymore thankfully, and they should never have been able to get away with it in the first place. it was barbaric. however, the catholic church have nothing to do with this debate, this is about humanity. the thing is it didn't debunk it as the woman is now an adult and has formed her viewpoint. when she was unborn she would have been unable to state her wishes. it is assumed that a fetus wishes to live bar exceptional circumstances and thanks to the relevant law this woman survived her attempted abortion.
pilly wrote: » You do know which thread you're in don't you?
end of the road wrote: » i do yes. however, there are many varients of christianity. it is the religion and it's teachings that are relevant to this strand of the debate, not the specific church and the behaviours of people within those churches. this is not a referendum about whethr you like the catholic church or not, dispite some elements of the pro-choice movement trying to make it out to be.
pilly wrote: » <snip> of the highest order, you have no interest in Christianity.
....... wrote: This post has been deleted.
fkx2nspcw9omhg wrote: » What's human thinking got to do with God? Whatever you think, humanly speaking, is a million miles from God's thinking.
pilly wrote: I'm so surprised we agree on so much baloney.
