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…8586889091…174

Comments

  • #2612
    Bredabe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,411 ✭✭✭Bredabe


    J C wrote: »
    Please don't be so patronising about intelligent adult women !!!

    If somebody is physically assaulted ... of which rape is the most serious manifestation ... everybody knows enough to seek medical help and report it to the Gardai.
    The medical professionals and the Gardai will take it from there.

    NO, you are incorrect there, while some women know about EC, plenty of young women do NOT. I know this to be true. Some youngsters would not go to the guards no matter what happened to them, and others who are say raped at home would be on the receiving end of more violence if they reported it. Given the news coming out of NI, why would youngsters report rape and be violated like all over again?

    Not only are some women ignorant of the existence of EC, some don't know what constitutes rape.

    I would ask you what you expect the guards and medical personnel to do when the survivor will not report or is too brainwashed/lacking in knowledge to access EC. Ask around, bet you will find some women/girls(it's not only grown women who are raped) who have all kinds of misinformation about EC assuming they know it exists at all. But I only dipped into this thread to see if there were any new views emerging.

    "Have you ever wagged your tail so hard you fell over"?-Brod Higgins.



  • #2613
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    It isn’t more important than the wants and needs of the woman carrying it.
    ... nobody is saying that it is more important than it's mother.
    ... just that it shouldn't be killed ... pretty basic stuff, when you think about it.


  • #2614
    uck51js9zml2yt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    J C wrote: »
    ... nobody is saying that it is more important than it's mother.
    ... just that it shouldn't be killed ... pretty basic stuff, when you think about it.

    But it's not a "human being".....I've still no idea what it's supposed to be though! :D


  • #2615
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Bredabe wrote: »
    NO, you are incorrect there, while some women know about EC, plenty of young women do NOT. I know this to be true. Some youngsters would not go to the guards no matter what happened to them, and others who are say raped at home would be on the receiving end of more violence if they reported it. Given the news coming out of NI, why would youngsters report rape and be violated like all over again?

    Not only are some women ignorant of the existence of EC, some don't know what constitutes rape.

    I would ask you what you expect the guards and medical personnel to do when the survivor will not report or is too brainwashed/lacking in knowledge to access EC. Ask around, bet you will find some women/girls(it's not only grown women who are raped) who have all kinds of misinformation about EC assuming they know it exists at all. But I only dipped into this thread to see if there were any new views emerging.
    I'd have thought that younger women would, if anything, have more knowledge on these issues, given all of the sex ed programmes they have gone through at school.


  • #2616
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Katie Full Leak wrote: »
    But it's not a "human being".....I've still no idea what it's supposed to be though! :D
    Of course it's a Human Being.


  • Advertisement
  • #2617
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Delirium wrote: »
    Just because you disagree with a choice, doesn't make it an irresponsible one.
    It's very easy to be pro-abortion, when you're not the one at risk of being killed.


  • #2618
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    J C wrote: »
    It's very easy to be pro-abortion, when you're not the one at risk of being killed.

    It’s very easy to be pro life when you’re not the one left holding the baby.


  • #2619
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    It’s very easy to be pro life when you’re not the one left holding the baby.
    Does holding a baby give you the right to kill it?


  • #2620
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Here is a good scientific question for the pro-abortion people.

    If you are pronounced dead, when your heart stops ... shouldn't you be pronounced alive ... when your heart starts?


  • #2621
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,035 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    It's very easy to be pro-abortion, when you're not the one at risk of being killed.

    Women die due to complications from childbirth/ pregnancy. It's because of that risk of them being killed that I support their right to choose. Hence why I'm pro-choice.

    You just happen to give greater priority to the foetus over the woman.

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



  • Advertisement
  • #2622
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    J C wrote: »
    Does holding a baby give you the right to kill it?

    I don’t see it as killing a baby. It’s terminating a pregnancy.


  • #2623
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    WhiteRoses wrote: »
    I don’t see it as killing a baby. It’s terminating a pregnancy.
    Whatever eupheism you use ... its killing a Human Being.


  • #2624
    uck51js9zml2yt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    J C wrote: »
    Of course it's a Human Being.

    I know that and you know that but those who advocate abortion as a right seem to differ... but they won't tell me what it's supposed to be and how we're wrong in our understanding of biology and how the human genome works!


  • #2625
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    J C wrote: »
    Whatever eupheism you use ... its killing a Human Being.

    Whatever euphemism you use, you are denying women bodily autonomy, potentially putting their lives in danger, interfereing in the private healthcare of another person, and treating females as second class citizens,


  • #2626
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,035 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    Here is a good scientific question for the pro-abortion people

    If you are pronounced dead, when your heart stops ... shouldn't you be pronounced alive ... when your heart starts?

    I hope you'll accept a reply from pro-choice posters to the question.

    What about someone declared brain-dead? The heart can in theory beat for decades after.

    It doesn't make sense to suggest that a person doesn't require a brain to exist from a scientific perspective.

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



  • #2627
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    J C wrote: »
    I'd have thought that younger women would, if anything, have more knowledge on these issues, given all of the sex ed programmes they have gone through at school.

    You are categorically wrong. Just because you feel that is how they should act, doesn’t mean they will. And it doesn’t make it ok to dismiss their experiences or belittle what happened to them.


  • #2628
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Delirium wrote: »
    Women die due to complications from childbirth/ pregnancy. It's because of that risk of them being killed that I support their right to choose. Hence why I'm pro-choice.

    You just happen to give greater priority to the foetus over the woman.
    You don't need abortion on demand to look after women whose lives are seriously threatened by their pregnancy ... the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013 does this ... and the 8th doesn't prevent this.

    ... and of course, I give priority to the woman, if her life is at risk ... whereas you want to give the unborn no rights at all.


  • #2629
    uck51js9zml2yt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    Delirium wrote: »
    Women die due to complications from childbirth/ pregnancy. It's because of that risk of them being killed that I support their right to choose. Hence why I'm pro-choice.

    You just happen to give greater priority to the foetus over the woman.
    So if the womans life is at risk at 39 weeks gestation then you support her right to kill the "whatever it is".?


  • #2630
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,860 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    J C wrote: »
    There is a doctor on call service for anybody who doesn't wish to go to the family doctor ... and if a woman has indeed been raped I think she would go to any doctor, to be treated properly.! Indeed her friends would equally ensure that she received all appropriate medical treatment.

    IF she told anyone about it!


  • #2631
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Katie Full Leak wrote: »
    So if the womans life is at risk at 39 weeks gestation then you support her right to kill the "whatever it is".?

    No of course not, a pregnancy that has progressed that far is obviously a wanted one, a c-section would be performed and the child would be delivered a week early.
    Happens all the time with conditions such as pre-eclampsia and gestational diabetes.


  • Advertisement
  • #2632
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,035 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    You don't need abortion on demand to look after women whose lives are seriously threatened by their pregnancy ... the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013 does this ... and the 8th doesn't prevent this.

    ... and of course, I give priority to the woman, if her life is at risk ... whereas you want to give the unborn no rights at all.

    Yes, I'm aware your position requires the woman to have her life in jeopardy before she can avail of an abortion.

    Whereas I see no reason to put women through that. If they don't accept the risks then they can the abortion.

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



  • #2633
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Delirium wrote: »
    I hope you'll accept a reply from pro-choice posters to the question.

    What about someone declared brain-dead? The heart can in theory beat for decades after.

    It doesn't make sense to suggest that a person doesn't require a brain to exist from a scientific perspective.
    You are correct that somebody can live on when they are brain dead ... but they can't live on when their heart stops ... and that is why the irreversible stopping of the heart is the definitive definition of death.

    The legal definition of death is still the stopping of the heart ... not the death of the brain. That is what a doctor does when he pronounces somebody as dead ... s/he determines that the heart has irreversibly stopped ...
    ... and that is why I'm asking, if you are pronounced legally dead, when your heart stops ... shouldn't you be pronounced legally alive ... when your heart starts?


  • #2634
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,035 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Katie Full Leak wrote: »
    So if the womans life is at risk at 39 weeks gestation then you support her right to kill the "whatever it is".?

    Why would "whatever it is" (your words) have to be killed?

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



  • #2635
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    IF she told anyone about it!
    If she tells nobody about it, then nothing can or will be done about it.
    ... but why would she do that ?


  • #2636
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Delirium wrote: »
    Yes, I'm aware your position requires the woman to have her life in jeopardy before she can avail of an abortion.

    Whereas I see no reason to put women through that. If they don't accept the risks then they can the abortion.
    In most cases there is little or no risks.

    I think that it was Ronald Regan who said "I find that all of the people who are pro-abortion, have already been born".


  • #2637
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,035 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    That is a separate issue to the Heart.

    The legal definition of death is still the stopping of the heart ... not the death of the brain. That is what a doctor does when he pronounces somebody as dead ... s/he determines that the heart isn't beating
    ... and that is why I'm asking, if you are legally pronounced dead, when your heart stops ... shouldn't you be legally pronounced alive ... when your heart starts?

    While I don't accept your suggestion that brain-dead isn't legally recognized as dead, my own answer would be no.

    Legally alive at the minimum would have to disqualify from the category of brain dead.

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



  • #2638
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    J C wrote: »
    The legal definition of death is still the stopping of the heart ...

    Citation for this "legal definition" please.


  • #2639
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    J C wrote: »
    In most cases there is little or no risks.

    I think that it was Ronald Regan who said "I find that all of the people who are pro-abortion, have already been born".

    That is not for you to judge. Even the most straightforward of pregnancies come with risks.

    It’s highly patronizing for you, as a man, to be passing comments about pregnancy bearing little to no risk when you yourself will never be pregnant and have to face them.


  • #2640
    uck51js9zml2yt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,268 ✭✭✭✭uck51js9zml2yt


    Delirium wrote: »
    Why would "whatever it is" (your words) have to be killed?

    My words because it was said in this thread that it's not a human being. No one has told me what it is?
    I still think the fetus is a human being but "obviously" I'm wrong... obviously:D

    It's so much easier to kill something rather than someone!


  • Advertisement
  • #2641
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,035 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    J C wrote: »
    In most cases there is little or no risks.
    There's more risk to the woman than if she takes an abortion pill. It should be up to her if it's a risk she's willing to take rather than forcing her to.

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



Advertisement