nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

RobertKK

The citizens assembly voted to replace or amend the 8th amendment.

50% voted to replace or amend
44% voted to repeal
Rest preferred to not state an opinion

Now deciding how it will be replaced or amended
: Let the Dail legislate on the rights of the unborn
: Amend the provision in the constitution.

Meltdown on twitter by Repealthe8th people.

Mod- This thread has descended in to petty name calling. We've tried to let this thread run without too much mod interference but now it's on our radar we will be watching. From here on the name calling stops. If you can't debate civilly we will remove your right to post.

__________________

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

2wsxcde3

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Your McCarthyite reds under the bed stuff is very odd.

Very odd is it?

Teenagers feel under pressure to have sex
ALMOST ONE-THIRD of teenage girls and 8 per cent of boys have come under pressure to start having sex, according to research presented yesterday by the Crisis Pregnancy Agency (CPA). Research carried out by the agency has found that young people who engage in sex before the age of consent – 17 years – are more likely to experience crisis pregnancy, to have an abortion and to contract a sexually-transmitted disease. “Young people who had sex at an early age were also more likely to express regret – to say that they wished they waited longer,” said Prof Hannah McGee of the Royal College of Surgeons at the launch.Teenage sexual activity was highly culturally influenced, she said, and “myths” of early sexual experience abounded. Caroline Spillane, director of the CPA, said young people experienced immense pressure from their peers, boyfriends and girlfriends, and the media, but differed in their ability to cope with these pressures.
(Source: https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/teenagers-feel-under-pressure-to-have-sex-1.790521 )

Teenage sexual activity was highly culturally influenced ...by the media. In other words, its not their own choice. They feel under pressure to have sex. So the media is causing alot of the problem and then they need to force an abortion referendum on people to fix the problem they helped create.

Annasopra

Orion wrote: »

Has happened with straight couples. Not could have.

Indeed. Utter nonsense dressed up with weird obsessions about commie mommies

kylith

Actually, young people are having less sex.

Orion

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

No
We have a gay man marrying his straight best friend in order to avoid inheritance tax. It could happen with a straight couple and could have happened with a gay civil partnered couple. There is no experimental mode. There is no fraud. There is no problem. Wrong, wrong and wrong again.

Has happened with straight couples. Not could have.

Orion

david75 wrote: »

The PLC bots are becoming blatantly obvious at this stage.

Same circular nonsensical points, endless nimbyism, little grasp of what the referendum is actually about and knock out blow, Nobody in the real world has even used the word fornication for about 20 years.

Except for Michelle Mulherin.

http://www.thejournal.ie/td-fornication-most-likely-cause-of-unwanted-pregnancies-422895-Apr2012/

Orion

Andrew Beef wrote: »

“Fornication” is a term for extra-martial sex.

To answer your question, a woman being forced into motherhood is the lesser of two evils compared with the killing of an unborn child.

If women (and men) want to fornicate, they must accept the possibility of a baby being conceived.

Abortion is a “get out of jail free” card that neither the male nor the female protaganists should be allowed.

So what about a married couple who don't want children? No contraception is 100% effective.

What about a woman who's raped? Has she fornicated despite it being forced on her?

Annasopra

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

The "freedom" is just an illusion. Are young people free to say they intend to wait until marriage to have sex? No they are not. They are immediately looked upon by their piers as being weird (the same piers that have been brainwashed by the media and don't realize it).

There is no freedom when it comes to sex for young people. You have to do things the way other people do it, the way dictated by the media and the left. And that means you are weird unless you are having sex.

Your McCarthyite reds under the bed stuff is very odd.

2wsxcde3

WhiteRoses wrote: »

No proof then, just as I thought.
It’s ok to have an opinion but you can’t go around claiming everyone is riding all around them as fact. It isn’t true.

I didn't say everyone is riding all around them. I said young people feel under pressure to give the impression they are having sex, or at the very least to give the impression that they have had sex at some point in their lives already. That's the default position young people have to take nowadays.

JDD

Andrew I don’t know how to quote your post on my phone, but given that fornication can’t occur inside a marriage, does that mean a married woman could obtain an abortion?

Annasopra

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

We now have two straight men getting married in order to defraud the tax man. That's only after two years. Same sex marriage is still in experimental mode and its already throwing up problems.

No
We have a gay man marrying his straight best friend in order to avoid inheritance tax. It could happen with a straight couple and could have happened with a gay civil partnered couple. There is no experimental mode. There is no fraud. There is no problem. Wrong, wrong and wrong again.

david75

The PLC bots are becoming blatantly obvious at this stage.

Same circular nonsensical points, endless nimbyism, little grasp of what the referendum is actually about and knock out blow, Nobody in the real world has even used the word fornication for about 20 years.

SusieBlue

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

You don't need a link for the obvious.

No proof then, just as I thought.
It’s ok to have an opinion but you can’t go around claiming everyone is riding all around them as fact. It isn’t true.

JDD

No one sniggers. Really. A liberal way of thinking means you accept all comers. My colleague is Mormon. Not married yet and I’d say in her early 20s. In the pub before Christmas another colleague mixed up Mormons and jehovahs witnesses, so she set him straight. She got way more increduelty on the fact that she can’t drink coffee rather than she was was waiting until marriage to have sex. Honestly not an eyelid was blinked.

SusieBlue

Andrew Beef wrote: »

“Fornication” is a term for extra-martial sex.

To answer your question, a woman being forced into motherhood is the lesser of two evils compared with the killing of an unborn child.

If women (and men) want to fornicate, they must accept the possibility of a baby being conceived.

Abortion is a “get out of jail free” card that neither the male nor the female protaganists should be allowed.

Grand for you to say that, as a man who can walk away and never have motherhood forced upon him.
You can’t also be pontificating about the importance of the unborn when in your last post you referred to a baby as an ‘occasional consequence’.
It isn’t a bout of flu or a flat tyre, this is a human being we’re talking about.

I care about the woman more than the unborn. Her health, wellbeing, wants and needs are far superior to that of a fetus.

Can you please explain to me why my wants and needs are less significant to that of a 10 week old zygote?
Would you yourself be willing to die for a 10 week old zygote? Would it be worth risking your life?

2wsxcde3

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Can you back up that with a link to prove what your saying, or is this just more anecdotal stories?

You don't need a link for the obvious.

SusieBlue

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

If a 25 year old today says they intend on waiting till marriage to have sex ...the sniggering would start. No one is free to say that today.

Can you back up that with a link to prove what your saying, or is this just more anecdotal stories?

captbarnacles

The latest two prolifers to the thread are clearly on a wind-up. Rape committees and no sex before marriage to thwart the liberals?

Andrew Beef

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Andrew Beef wrote: »

I think, to be fair, that the issue isn’t the fornication per se; it the refusal to deal with the occasional consequences, i.e. a baby. It is not right to fornicate left, right, and centre, only to end the life of an unborn child just because it doesn’t suit. Fornication should not take place unless both participants are willing to accept that life may be created.

‘Fornicate????’
You sound the Westboro Baptist Church now, that’s the word they use!

Anyway, I would consider bringing a baby into the world to be a bit more serious than an ‘occasional consequence’.
A child should be much more significant and important than an occasional inconvenience, as you so nicely dismissed it as.

Do you think it’s in the very best interests of any child to be born to a mother who does not want him, and is forced into motherhood?
Is that a good precedent for a happy, healthy, loving childhood?

Or do you just want to punish the woman for ‘fornicating’ and enjoying sex?

“Fornication” is a term for extra-martial sex.

To answer your question, a woman being forced into motherhood is the lesser of two evils compared with the killing of an unborn child.

If women (and men) want to fornicate, they must accept the possibility of a baby being conceived.

Abortion is a “get out of jail free” card that neither the male nor the female protaganists should be allowed.

2wsxcde3

WhiteRoses wrote: »

More lies. Of course they are free to wait until they marry if they so wish.

I am in my mid 20’s and I have never felt this pressure you speak of, either from men, my friends, or society as a whole.

I don’t know where you are getting these notions from, I certinaly don’t go around discussing my sex life with my colleagues and acquaintances, how do you know for sure all these people are having all this sex?

Who is going around forcing all these young people into having sex they don’t want?

And what has this got to do with the referendum?

If a 25 year old today says they intend on waiting till marriage to have sex ...the sniggering would start. No one is free to say that today.

Andrew Beef

January wrote: »

I was married when I had an abortion. (ó still am married just as an FYI to the same person). I was not married when I had my very unplanned pregnancy that I decided to keep (same father still). Unplanned pregnancies happen to married people too.

If it’s not too personal a line of questioning, and please feel free not to answer, why did you have an abortion and do you regret it at all?

SusieBlue

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

The "freedom" is just an illusion. Are young people free to say they intend to wait until marriage to have sex? No they are not. They are immediately looked upon by their piers as being weird (the same piers that have been brainwashed by the media and don't realize it).

There is no freedom when it comes to sex for young people. You have to do things the way other people do it, the way dictated by the media and the left. And that means you are weird unless you are having sex.

More lies. Of course they are free to wait until they marry if they so wish.

I am in my mid 20’s and I have never felt this pressure you speak of, either from men, my friends, or society as a whole.

I don’t know where you are getting these notions from, I certinaly don’t go around discussing my sex life with my colleagues and acquaintances, how do you know for sure all these people are having all this sex?

Who is going around forcing all these young people into having sex they don’t want?

And what has this got to do with the referendum?

January

I was married when I had an abortion. (ó still am married just as an FYI to the same person). I was not married when I had my very unplanned pregnancy that I decided to keep (same father still). Unplanned pregnancies happen to married people too.

rainbow kirby

The older you get, the better and better an idea only having sex inside marriage seems. No STIs, no cancer causing HPV, no unwanted pregnancies, no timewasters (of men who are only after one thing) ...and you know the person you're dating is genuine as they are willing to wait till marriage.

No unwanted pregnancies just because you are married? What are you smoking?

2wsxcde3

WhiteRoses wrote: »

I don’t think so, I think people have more freedom to explore their sexuality and experiment in a way they couldn’t before.

The "freedom" is just an illusion. Are young people free to say they intend to wait until marriage to have sex? No they are not. They are immediately looked upon by their piers as being weird (the same piers that have been brainwashed by the media and don't realize it).

There is no freedom when it comes to sex for young people. You have to do things the way other people do it, the way dictated by the media and the left. And that means you are weird unless you are having sex.

SusieBlue

Andrew Beef wrote: »

I think, to be fair, that the issue isn’t the fornication per se; it the refusal to deal with the occasional consequences, i.e. a baby. It is not right to fornicate left, right, and centre, only to end the life of an unborn child just because it doesn’t suit. Fornication should not take place unless both participants are willing to accept that life may be created.

‘Fornicate????’
You sound the Westboro Baptist Church now, that’s the word they use!

Anyway, I would consider bringing a baby into the world to be a bit more serious than an ‘occasional consequence’.
A child should be much more significant and important than an occasional inconvenience, as you so nicely dismissed it as.

Do you think it’s in the very best interests of any child to be born to a mother who does not want him, and is forced into motherhood?
Is that a good precedent for a happy, healthy, loving childhood?

Or do you just want to punish the woman for ‘fornicating’ and enjoying sex?

Martina1991

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

But the media and the left need to sexualise young people in order to make them think along more liberal lines and consequently they will be more likely to vote for a liberal abortion regime. The media tries to control the sex lives of young people by making them believe there is something wrong with them unless they are having sex.

Give one example of any of this.

By the way Liberal means:
1. Willing to respect or accept behavior or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas.

2.(of education) concerned with broadening a person's general knowledge and experience, rather than with technical or professional training.

How does being liberal make young people sex mad.

david75

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

Isn't the media dictating the kind of sex lives people live? Sex and the city etc etc. Its a fact that young people nowadays feel under pressure to give the impression they are sexually active even when they aren't. That's not healthy.

Nobody is forcing or dictating to anyone in society to anything.
Except this current campaign which is dicatating to women what they can’t do with their bodies and forcing them to be incubators

Andrew Beef

I think, to be fair, that the issue isn’t the fornication per se; it the refusal to deal with the occasional consequences, i.e. a baby. It is not right to fornicate left, right, and centre, only to end the life of an unborn child just because it doesn’t suit. Fornication should not take place unless both participants are willing to accept that life may be created.

SusieBlue

2wsxcde3 wrote: »

Isn't the media dictating the kind of sex lives people live? Sex and the city etc etc. Its a fact that young people nowadays feel under pressure to give the impression they are sexually active even when they aren't. That's not healthy.

Sex and the City last aired in 2004 so you’re about 14 years late with that analogy.

I don’t think so, I think people have more freedom to explore their sexuality and experiment in a way they couldn’t before.
People aren’t under pressure to marry and have the 2.0 kids by the age of 25 any more.
None of this is a bad thing.

But this also has nothing to do with the referendum.
Still throwing sh*t at the wall to see what sticks, it seems.

2wsxcde3

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Why are you trying to control what kind of sex other people have? Why do you care?

Isn't the media dictating the kind of sex lives people live? Sex and the city etc etc. Its a fact that young people nowadays feel under pressure to give the impression they are sexually active even when they aren't. That's not healthy.

The media and the left want to sexualise young people in order to make them think along more liberal lines and consequently make them more likely to vote for a liberal abortion regime. The media tries to control the sex lives of young people by making them believe there is something wrong with them unless they are having sex.