January wrote: » 18-45? Try from average age of 10 to around age 45.
Valerie Fat Turbojet wrote: » Also I find it absolutely insane that anyone with any connection to the Catholic Church would have the sheer audocity to say “what about the babies? What about life?” Given their record with children and women of reproductive age, and how they were treated
Graces7 wrote: » No good ever came of killing another to serve self. If the family is too poor then they should have practised safe sex. It is called taking responsibility for your own actions. Rather than punishing an innocent for your mistakes.
Sierra Eire wrote: » I am not a "re-reg". This is my first account on this site and I use my username on every website I use. Try googling it. I can't find anything trollish about my question in this thread. I find it ridiculous that a number of pro-abortion people cry "women's rights!!!" even though healthy little unborn girls are the majority of abortion victims. If you think I am a troll for not buying this "women's rights" pro-abortion argument then you are naive.
Havockk wrote: » Ahhh Dave... tis yourself
Sierra Eire wrote: » I'm a nazi (national socialist) because I don't support murdering babies? I'm not sure that makes any sense. Definitely not a socialist. I believe in freedom and limited government.
ForestFire wrote: » Do you really think the ordinary members of the Catholic church today even knew about Tuam? Do you not think that even though they are members, they know that what happened there was wrong? Are you suggestion that members of the Catholic church can never find wrong in anything again because of past wrongs by the church itself? The pro choice side tactics now seem to be to discredit every pro life arguement based on the poster and their beliefs, rather than the argument itself. Are you in favour of removing Catholics from the democratic vote n the 8th all together, because of the church? I know in some cases, with certain posts, it's very hard to resist, but I don't think it's helpful. I am not practicing Catholic or decided on my vote for the record.
robarmstrong wrote: » The Pro-life side tend to forget that with every forced upon unwanted full term pregnancy they're impeding an actual existing citizen's rights, not a "person in the making". Are you going to contribute or just drop troll-like soundbites until you're eventually banned? Genuinely curious as you sprint away from any and all replies.
Ismisejack wrote: » No woman is ever “forced “ into having a pregnancy( unless there the unfortunate victim of a terrible crime that is rape), it is a choice they make, and a woman should think hard before there sure they want a baby, and realise if they are willing to take risks in bed they must be willing to carry any resulting child to birth and thereafter
RobertKK wrote: » Prime Time is interesting, no evidence of the retain the 8th of taking foreign money, unlike Repeal the 8th.
david75 wrote: » I’m selling a huge statue in New York on the Hudson River, while you’re buying everything.
robarmstrong wrote: » Ah there he is, the troll is back! So here let me just discredit your entire little soundbite there mmkay. Have you comprehended that there is no guaranteed 100% fully effective method of contraception? Are you indirectly advocating that sex should be used entirely for procreation? "if they are willing to take risks in bed" - a man could be wearing a condom whilst the lady is on the pill and there is still a chance a little swimmer could make their way through. Do you want us to just dry-hump one another into oblivion based on your outdated mindset and ideologies?
Havockk wrote: »
Ismisejack wrote: » No, however one always has to be willing to risk pregnancy if there having sex, as in the event of conception a baby grows and the baby can’t be just killed as it was unintentional, that although through no fault of anyone, killing the baby would be barbaric as that’s what abortion is, baby killing
RobertKK wrote: » Is that how repeal the 8th are getting the foreign money?
david75 wrote: » All the companies and there are many, registered to the same address as Iona strangely enough, would have and do have ways of funnelling their US dollars. Not interested in a pissing match about that. There are two different threads about referendum funding in the after hours and politics section. Want to talk about that you’ll find all your myopic views and conspiracies in those threads. Be good to keep this one on topic. *ps whose paying for the thousands of billboard pro life posters nationwide? Irish donations? Again, I’m selling a giant statue of you want to buy one.
robarmstrong wrote: » So is molesting kids, shoving payouts under parents noses and throwing ill babies into a mass grave in the back arse of nowhere, but I know what the lesser of two evils is here. .
markodaly wrote: » So, thats the deflection tactic so. Shame, as I thought the pro-choice crowd at least were more honest and had integrity.
ForestFire wrote: » We all know these things are morally wrong. But how can this can be an argument for something less morally wrong is beyond me. It's still wrong (for the people making this argument, as all the other things). Maybe you think it's not wrong at all, which is a different situation.
robarmstrong wrote: » I'd consider the people not wanting to harass women into keeping an unwanted pregnancy and suppressing them the right to autonomy of their own body would hold more integrity than those who are the opposite of which I've described.
robarmstrong wrote: » Someone previously stated that all the pro-lifers would be extremely grateful the 8th was repealed if circumstances in their own personal lives merited an abortion but would never admit it is probably the truest thing I've read in this thread.
