david75 wrote: » Ehh a mod just posted not to be posting these kinds of images. Just a friendly reminder
david75 wrote: » This same Leo has also said he’s supporting repealing the eighth, I don’t know but you guys seem to be unaware of that.
Clearly our politicians also have personal opinions and beliefs surrounding abortion and not just electoral concerns. Parsing his contributions, it does seems that while Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has pledged to hold a referendum, he falls on the conservative side of the argument. He appears likely to back terminations in the event of fatal foetal abnormality, rape and a serious threat to a woman’s health. He has gone global on that, telling the New York Times recently: “While I don’t accept the view that the unborn child, the foetus, if you prefer that term, should have equal rights to an adult woman, to the mother, I don’t share this view that the baby in the womb, the foetus, whatever term you want to use, should have no rights at all.”
splinter65 wrote: » Do you not like the pictures? How are they offending you?
railer201 wrote: » Here are more of Leo's views on the present discussion around the 8th, note in particular he puts the mother's well being ahead of the foetus or unborn child.https://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/analysis/how-the-death-of-savita-halappanavar-changed-the-abortion-debate-461787.html
david75 wrote: » I wasn’t threatening you at all. Man you people really do like your hysteria and making stuff up
david75 wrote: » Ps a foetus is not a child. Unborn or otherwise.
david75 wrote: » They aren’t offending me at all. They’re computer generated images though and being employed in a misleading manner. A 12 week old foetus does not have fingernails in fact it’s handed are still fused. Anyone believing those images are real need to ask how such a picture is possible to take (hint. It is not possible at all) and why isn’t every pregnant woman out there isn’t asking for such pictures rather than scratchy black and white ultrasound images. Just to be straight. They’re believing camera was inserted into a woman’s womb breaking the sack and taking a perfectly lit photo of a foetus and with background lighting (how????) through the mother’s body to light it? The ridiculousness is astounding. If you’ll believe images such as those are real you’ll believe anything.
J C wrote: » He would say that, wouldn't he ... when he is proposing that the 8th be removed ... and abortion on demand be introduced. However, his hesitency to dehumanise the baby with the term fetus, shows that he has very serious reservations about where all of this might head. Leo doesn't need to worry, the pro-life movement 'has his back' on this ... and he will emerge in the happy position of having 'tried' to repeal the 8th (thereby keeping his pseudo-liberal supporters happy) ... and it will have failed ... thereby easing his conscience ... and keeping his pro-life supporters happy!!! It will be a win, win, win result all round.:) ... a true poitical 'sweet spot'!!!
david75 wrote: » They aren’t offending me at all. They’re computer generated images though and being employed in a misleading manner.A 12 week old foetus does not have fingernails in fact it’s handed are still fused.
J C wrote: » Which part of these independent quotes about a 12 week old unborn baby do you not understand? Quote:- Your baby is starting to look more human every day. Her eyes have moved closer together and her tiny earlobes are taking shape. She's also gaining some of the skills she'll need after she's born. She can close her fingers to make a fist and use the muscles in her mouth to suck.https://www.babycentre.co.uk/12-weeks-pregnant Quote:- Baby is able to flex his or her tiny fingers now that your third month of pregnancy is coming to an end. Those little nail beds that recently developed are already starting to sprout fingernails and toenails,"
david75 wrote: » Can’t disagree with any of that basically because he’s a total opportunist and on this most important of topics he’ll sit on the fence and go where the winds are blowing. He’s totally hedging his bets. I don’t trust him and I think he’s snake like and manipulative to such a degree he would put Bertie to shame. No matter what the result of the referendum you can be sure he’ll come out and say it was what he supported and take credit for it. Bank on this. He’s pretty much lying to both sides on this debate he only cares about his own political career.
david75 wrote: » Yeah cos fingernails are important in development.
david75 wrote: » They aren’t offending me at all. They’re computer generated images though and being employed in a misleading manner. A 12 week old foetus does not have fingernails in fact it’s handed are still fused. Anyone believing those images are real need to ask how such a picture is possible to take (hint. It is not possible at all) and why isn’t every pregnant woman out there isn’t asking for such pictures rather than scratchy black and white ultrasound images.
photographer Nilsson shot to world fame in 1965 when the American magazine Life ran 16 pages of pictures from his book "A Child is Born" showing the development of a human fetus in the womb.
railer201 wrote: » Here's the currents odds from Paddy Power Vote to change/remove the 8th Amendment 3/10 Vote to leave the 8th Amendment unchanged 11/5 Speaks for itself
david75 wrote: » What does that mean? I don’t know anything about odds. Plus I don’t think Christians are allowed bet or gamble
railer201 wrote: » It means that if you bet 10€ on removal of the 8th you will get €3 back plus the ten if the people win the vote to remove the 8th. If you bet 5€ for the 8th to remain, you will get €11 back plus the five if the people win the vote for it to remain unchanged. Therefore the first scenario is the more likely.
J C wrote: » Whichever way anybody bets, and whatever the result ... those odds for either result won't make any punter up. That looks like Paddy Power don't know which way it's going to go. ... they are literally 'hedging their bets' ... and I would agree with them on that.
J C wrote: » David, your innocence on this matches your innocence on 12 week old unborn babies (as Leo would say). One or two Christian denominations don't gamble ... but most Christians have no problem with it ... provided it's for fun and entertainment. ... and Paddy Powers odds are indicating that the repeal result will be 'yes' by a whisker ... or in other words, it could go either ways, as far as they think.
railer201 wrote: » You seem to be very certain of the outcome, 11/5 - double your money - not to be sneezed at.
david75 wrote: » Again, bolding when you’ve been asked by a mod not to. Again insisting a zygote or foetus is a baby when it isn’t. Either medically or legally. Round and round we go.
J C wrote: » David you really are a nit picker ... who needs a good 'schooling' from Leo, on the fact that a fetus is the scientific term for a baby.
david75 wrote: » JC you should read this thread. Real stories and experiences. Eye opening.https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057844175/1/#post106226252
david75 wrote: » No. It’s really not. And I wouldn’t let Leo school me on anything. Did you see the absolute state of his attempt at pancakes on shrove Tuesday?? Scarlet for him doesn’t come close. He’s clueless about everything.
splinter65 wrote: » So David have you decided yet wether you think as a committed Christian you can vote for unlimited abortion?
