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

Bannasidhe

Edward M wrote: »

I fully appreciate the sentiments in Banasidhes posts. They are exactly the same feelings I might have myselif in her situation.
But they are not the feelings being put across by most pro choice posters and posts, that's my point.
Mostly I have read, its no ones business, its between the woman and her doctor, its the woman's choice.
If I believed that, I would say to someone who asked me, its none of my business, make your decision and then I'll support that decision.
Offering a sweetener counts as subtle coercion IMO.

Because ultimately it is between the woman and her doctor and the final decision is the woman's.

Imagine someone you love has terminal cancer. Treatment might buy them some time but the quality of that time will be drastically reduced due to the side effects of the treatment. They want to stop treatment. Is that their decision or does everyone get to decide?
I've been in this situation also with an aunt with terminal lung cancer. She decided no more chemo because it was making her last few months a hell of sickness. Her family, myself included, wanted more time with her but we also knew that time would be physically hell for her. She discussed her decision with her children, her sisters, and her nieces and nephews. Not everyone was happy about it but it was, ultimately, a decision between my aunt and her doctor.

Bannasidhe

Edward M wrote: »

Just a quick edit, to ask a question.
Why didn't you tell her, in true pro choice wording, its none of my business really?

I don't even know where to start with that...

'true pro-choice wording'.... dear lord....

Pro-choice is a philosophy of life, not a soundbite. Everything I said, everything I did was about showing her she had choicesand her eventual decision would be respected. That, dear Edward, it true pro-choice.

Timberrrrrrrr

Ismisejack wrote: »

Pro choice yee call yeerselfs?? The ultimate choice is the choice one has over whether they life or die and by aborting a baby ur denying it it’s choice as to whether it can live or not, surely if yee were about choice yee wouldn’t deny a baby the choice of whether it lives or is murdered. Abortion Denys a child it’s only life, abortion is murder. If an abortion doesn’t take place a child has a life whereas abortion takes that child’s life, it’s only life. Yee talk about the woman having the child but that isn’t a matter of life or death, unlike in the babies case

What a wall of utter tripe

Try using real words next time and maybe people might listen to what you have to say :rolleyes:

captbarnacles

It's not murder no matter how many times you repeat it.

pleas advice

But it is a life no matter how many times you deny it

[Deleted User]

pleas advice wrote: »

But it is a life no matter how many times you deny it

no.
it is a potential life. A pregnancy may lead to a normal healthy baby or it may end itself naturally.
It is not possible to say that it will definately become a life.

pleas advice

It is alive, it is a life...

amdublin

Edward M wrote: »

The good argument is always to tell the other party to stop.
Fair enough, I've made my point.

Sorry I'm completely confused. Have I you mixed up with someone else or have you mentioned a few times that while you are personally pro-life you will voting for repeal to allow others the choice?

Also you think someone offering to help either way is coercion? But you think they actually should have said stop i.e. 100% coercion not to have an abortion

I'm very confused.

amdublin

Ismisejack wrote: »

Pro choice yee call yeerselfs?? The ultimate choice is the choice one has over whether they life or die and by aborting a baby ur denying it it’s choice as to whether it can live or not, surely if yee were about choice yee wouldn’t deny a baby the choice of whether it lives or is murdered. Abortion Denys a child it’s only life, abortion is murder. If an abortion doesn’t take place a child has a life whereas abortion takes that child’s life, it’s only life. Yee talk about the woman having the child but that isn’t a matter of life or death, unlike in the babies case

I cannot read this post with that weird yee word.

That's not a word right??

amdublin

pleas advice wrote: »

It is alive, it is a life...

If you believe this then that's fine. No one is forcing an abortion on you.

Loafing Oaf

pleas advice wrote: »

It is alive, it is a life...

pitifulgod

Edward M wrote: »

I fully appreciate the sentiments in Banasidhes posts. They are exactly the same feelings I might have myselif in her situation.
But they are not the feelings being put across by most pro choice posters and posts, that's my point.
Mostly I have read, its no ones business, its between the woman and her doctor, its the woman's choice.
If I believed that, I would say to someone who asked me, its none of my business, make your decision and then I'll support that decision.
Offering a sweetener counts as subtle coercion IMO.

Most pro choice people want to support women regardless of the choice they make. It's their choice ultimately and Bann recognised that.

Timberrrrrrrr

pleas advice wrote: »

It is alive, it is a life...

So are weeds yet I bet you dont think twice about killing them.

david75

Major Marref deja vu reading the last few pages.

The other side are having a totally different debate about a totally different issue.

Billy86

pleas advice wrote: »

It is alive, it is a life...

These are alive.

If I remove these out of the ground, they will no longer be alive. Does that mean I have committed murder?

January

pleas advice wrote: »

It is alive, it is a life...

Well no, it's not alive. It cannot survive outside the womb until around 24 weeks gestation.

Ismisejack

amdublin wrote: »

I cannot read this post with that weird yee word.

That's not a word right??

Yet yee never argued my point as there’s no denying twas valod

Ismisejack

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

What a wall of utter tripe

Try using real words next time and maybe people might listen to what you have to say :rolleyes:

Yet yee didn’t argue with my point as there is no denying it’s valid

Timberrrrrrrr

Ismisejack wrote: »

Yet yee didn’t argue with my point as there is no denying it’s valid

There was no point

Just a wall if tripe with made up words thrown in for comedic effect?

amdublin

Ismisejack wrote: »

Yet yee never argued my point as there’s no denying twas valod

There's that weird made up thing again.

What are you about?

pleas advice

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/yee#Pronoun

Bannasidhe

Ismisejack wrote: »

Yet yee never argued my point as there’s no denying twas valod

Perchance thou hast wandering into a time that art not thine ownst and become pateaddled? If tis japes thou hast in mind then begone thou wretch back to whence thou came else thou shalt myss the dunking of the wytch and the burnying of the heretic.

amdublin

pleas advice wrote: »

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/yee#Pronoun

An archaic word it seems. Archaic eh?

pleas advice

it was used as a both informal second-person plural and formal honorific, to address a group of equals or superiors or a single superior. While its use is archaic in most of the English-speaking world, it is used in Newfoundland, Northern England, Cornwall, and Ireland to distinguish from the singular "you"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiberno-English

amdublin

pleas advice wrote: »

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiberno-English

Was.

Weeeeee get it, it's an old fashioned word.

Timberrrrrrrr

amdublin wrote: »

An archaic word it seems. Archaic eh?

A bit like the pro-lifers stance imo

pleas advice

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

A bit like the pro-lifers stance imo

I'm glad you pointed that out, would have flown right over my head otherwise...

amdublin

Here's a reply to IsMiseJack's original post btw:

Women's sole purpose in life is not to be here on earth to be incubators for babies when they don't want to be pregnant (which could be for any variety of reasons detailed over and over again in this thread).

If IsMiseJack wants be pregnant then work away but please stop inflicting their archaic old fashioned view on to others.

Abortion is a private matter for each individual to decide.

nozzferrahhtoo

Ismisejack wrote: »

by aborting a baby ur denying it it’s choice as to whether it can live or not, surely if yee were about choice yee wouldn’t deny a baby the choice of whether it lives or is murdered.

It is a non sentient entity being aborted. Non sentient entities do not have the capacity of choice in the first place. You can not "deny" something that it does not have in the first place any more than you can pour water out of an empty cup.

Do you pour water out of empty cups often?

pleas advice wrote: »

But it is a life no matter how many times you deny it

I have not seen anyone denying that though. We all know that it is, biologically, life. Or more specifically, since it can not survive independently in any way, it is a step in a life cycle. But it is very much "life" in the sense of that life cycle. But that is about all.

What is being "denied" here is that mere "life" alone is not what makes it worth of rights or our moral and ethical concern. It is not "Life" in terms of what we are discussing when we have moral and ethical discourse. There is no more (in fact less) basis for moral and ethical concern for such a fetus as there is for the common house fly.

Really if you can not understand what our arguments even are, how do you propose to address them?

pleas advice

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I have not seen anyone denying that though. We all know that it is, biologically, life. Or more specifically, since it can not survive independently in any way, it is a step in a life cycle. But it is very much "life" in the sense of that life cycle.

life cycle of a human, though. not a flower, or a house-fly,

What is being "denied" here is that mere "life" alone is not what makes it worth of rights or our moral and ethical concern. It is not "Life" in terms of what we are discussing when we have moral and ethical discourse. There is no more (in fact less) basis for moral and ethical concern for such a fetus as there is for the common house fly.

Really if you can not understand what our arguments even are, how do you propose to address them?