The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Trasna1 wrote: »

You are not going to like campaigning if you have to explain the same thing over and over. I never claimed to be an expert, not have I spread any mistruths. The majority of my posting in this thread has been in relation to questionable campaign activity by both sides and how this makes them both rotten.

I'm not a new poster here btw, I've been around here for years

In fairness, the answers to your questions have been can be found throughout this or the other thread, in some shape or form. I can appreciate it's a large thread at this stage, but similarly, I'm sure you can appreciate the frustration posters experience when they're answering the same questions over and over again.

In any case, your questions have been answered. Do you need clarity on anything said or have any other questions about the referendum?

baylah17 wrote: »

The point is no woman should be required to give a reason or excuse her decision to terminate a pregnancy as it's nobody else's business.

Trust women
Repeal the Oppressive 8th

It is the fathers business as you are killing his child too.

jugger0 wrote: »

It is the fathers business

It is, but less so than the woman as he does not have to carry the pregnancy potentially against his will

jugger0 wrote: »

as you are killing

no one is killing anything

jugger0 wrote: »

his child too.

It's not a child as it hasnt been born yet


So way to miss the point (I'm a man Btw)

jugger0 wrote: »

I dont mind abortion, Im not against it at all, I just dont like that the abortion crew are against the death penalty. Heinous crimes should be punished with death. It makes no sense to me that people are for baby termination but not scumbag multiple offenders? Have you ever watched an abortion? It is killing, I can link you a video if you'd like?

No need for a video.
I've seen the reality thanks. In a cold steel bowl in the UK.

It is not killing. You cannot kill that which is incapable of living. It is the end of a pregnancy which could have, one day, been a child. But it is not a child at that point. Not a baby, a child, a bundle of joy, a human life, any other term of endearment the anti choicers are forcing down our throat today.

My new favourite kind of poster is the one who acts just like a pro-lifer and spouts the same garbage but claims to be completely undecided on the matter or even pro-choice. Seem to be a lot of them in here lately and it's endlessly entertaining as they seem to think they're fooling anyone.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

But what about the father of the multiple offender? Killing his child is ignoring his rights!

Listen if you want to kill babies thats fine, I really dont mind its your choice. I just think its a double standard that there is no death penalty.

jugger0 wrote: »

if you want to kill babies thats fine

If ignorance is bliss you must be permanently ecstatic.

jugger0 wrote:

Listen if you want to kill babies thats fine, I really dont mind its your choice. I just think its a double standard that there is no death penalty.

A Repeal is not about killing anyone, read up on it!
In fact a repeal will stop some woman needlessly dying

jugger0 wrote: »

It is the fathers business as you are killing his child too.

The potential father may have a vested interest, but that does not give a right to have a determination in the action the woman takes.

Her Body, Her Choice.

That is what most folks are missing the point on,

- The referendum is not about mass abortions.
- It is not about how different beliefs are affected.

This referendum is about the RIGHT to a CHOICE !

A choice that has been denied by law and is controlling and can be damaging, resulting in mental or physical health implications up to death of the woman.

You dont have to agree that abortion is right, you dont have to agree that abortion should be in line with your personal beliefs.

What everyone should be in agreement for, is the FREEDOM of CHOICE for a woman to make that determination for themselves of what is the right course of action, or in some cases a determination to be made in their favor if the woman on health grounds, who is incapacitated and not be able to make that decision.

I am a guy and I stand for the right of women to have a CHOICE.

Whats next, a license for have sex or get pregnant? Or limits on how many children you are allowed to concieve?

jugger0 wrote: »

I dont understand the push for abortion but yet people are very against the death penalty? Its ok to scramble babies in the womb but not ok to hang murderers and child molesters? I think if we have one we should have the other.

To be honest I am "agnostic" about the death penalty. I am neither for or against it in principle and it is a debate I have long intended to inform myself on and wade into to decide where I lie on it. I genuinely do not know my position on that one.

But I do not accept the "if you accept one you accept the other" move you are making here. I see massive differences between the two.

The main one is the fetus is an entity that ENTIRELY lacks the faculty of consciousness and sentience. It does not have it. It never has had it. It is a distinct period of time away from getting it.

Not so the recipient of the death penalty.

So the distinction for me is the criminal is still an entity warranting moral and ethical concern, and the debate about the death penalty is whether other concerns related to their crime overrides this.

The Fetus is not an entity for which we can coherently hold moral and ethical concerns. While the pregnant woman is.

The two situations for me therefore are not comparable.

jugger0 wrote: »

Yeah and the majority of the reasons are because they just dont want a baby.. not because they were raped or because of a dangerous medical condition

That is something of an over simplification from you there. There is a lot more going on for a lot more people than simply "Do not want a baby".

The social and economic concerns are VASTLY more diverse than you are representing there.

For example on this thread some women have spoken about how they have already had an abortion and they did so because they already had children and another child would undermine the well being of, and their care and parenting of, the existing children.

That is not a simple "I do not want a baby" that is "I want babies but there is a limit to how many I can care for and I am at that limit and so having more is not a viable option for me".

As someone who claims to have no issue with abortion (I remain dubious) what do you hope to gain by misrepresentation of this level?

jugger0 wrote: »

Have you ever watched an abortion? It is killing, I can link you a video if you'd like?

What you can link to a video of is likely to be an exception. Over 92% of abortions happen in or before week 12. That is what the Citizens assembly have recommended. In fact around 80% by week 10. So yes I HAVE watched abortions before. You know what it looked like???? A woman popping a pill.

I trust linking to videos of women downing a pill will not feed into the agenda you claim NOT to have (that of being against abortion). Ask yourself however what the agenda is behind linking to videos that BY FAR are the exception rather than the common practice when it comes to the reality of abortion? It would be like me saying "I love anesthsia" and then linking to an interview of one of those VERY few people who were consciously aware during their surgery.

jugger0 wrote: »

Listen if you want to kill babies thats fine, I really dont mind its your choice. I just think its a double standard that there is no death penalty.

Yet there is no double standard at all as I explained at the start of this post. The two are massively and entirely different things for the reasons I described. There are few differences between the two at the moral and ethical level. The only similarity there is in fact is at the level of biology, where a "life" is ended. But at that level of rhetoric you might as well say that lawn bowling is the same things as MMA Cage matches. Sure arent all the people doing both BREATHING? Sure that makes them exactly the same thing.

January wrote: »

I've had an abortion, so you're ok thanks, I know what it entails.

That video is fake and has been proven to be so, or is it that cartoon one Tim, Nice But Dim, Jackson had his 'hunger strike' for?

The video I seen is not fake, it is not just one video, it was very disturbing.