Can a Christian vote for unlimited abortion?

NuMarvel · 12-04-2018 07:45PM

Katie Full Leak wrote: »

Absolutely. And for that very reason we should be voting against the act of violence that is abortion which is perpetrated against women and destroys the life within them.

You speak as if women aren't already having abortions, when in reality thousands of Irish women every year are having abortions either here or abroad. A No vote isn't going to stop women having abortions, especially when No-side campaigners and politicians have shown no inclination of doing anything to change that.

The referendum isn't about if women access abortion. It's about how . A No vote just means abortions keep happening, and they'll tend to be later and at a higher risk to the woman. On the other hand, a Yes vote at least means abortions will be earlier and safer.

uck51js9zml2yt · 12-04-2018 10:46PM

NuMarvel wrote: »

You speak as if women aren't already having abortions, when in reality thousands of Irish women every year are having abortions either here or abroad. A No vote isn't going to stop women having abortions, especially when No-side campaigners and politicians have shown no inclination of doing anything to change that.

The referendum isn't about if women access abortion. It's about how . A No vote just means abortions keep happening, and they'll tend to be later and at a higher risk to the woman. On the other hand, a Yes vote at least means abortions will be earlier and safer.

So you don't agree that it's an act of violence?

Delirium · 13-04-2018 06:08AM

Katie Full Leak wrote: »

So you don't agree that it's an act of violence?

How is someone taking a pill an act of violence?

NuMarvel · 13-04-2018 06:21AM

Katie Full Leak wrote: »

So you don't agree that it's an act of violence?

I don't agree that abortion is, as you put it, an act of violence which is perpetrated against women. The obvious exception to that is when a woman doesn't freely consent.

Now for my questions to you. Do you think a No vote is going to stop women travelling or ordering abortion pills? If so, how?

Hannibal_Smith · 13-04-2018 06:46AM

end of the road wrote: »

no . i'm afraid many of us will not be giving women the choice to take the lives of their unborn children outside genuine medical necessity in our country, and we will be prowd to do so. the same as we wouldn't give them the choice to terminate the life of that unborn child once born.

Why do you get to say what a woman can do with her body? There is no comparison between abortion and killing a baby and it is hysterical nonsense to compare the two.

they can, just like anyone can, but they should not. anyone and everyone who can vote should vote. this is about the type of society you want to live in, so it's important that all who can vote do vote.

No. It's a vote on whether to repeal the 8th amendment. Forcing a woman to have a child she doesn't want is not a society I like

they can, but they also have a right via their constitutional vote to say no to abortion on demand, and the killing of the unborn.

up to 12 weeks when the fetus is about 2 inches in size

it changes everything, as lots of unborn lives will be lost in this country, which is not good for society. there is no comparison what soever to gay marriage. yes unborn lives are currently been taken outside the country, but our stance in relation to allowing it in our country, i believe is saving some lives.

These babies are still being lost in this country. To say go do it elsewhere but not here is hypocrisy. You're grand with aborting a fetus, as long as it's not on this island. That's just grasping at straws

we already do. we also treat the unborn the same.

No, we dont. I had a missed miscarriage a few years ago. Fetus died in the womb. I was given tablets to take at home so the fetus would pass. When it did it was flushed down the toilet, went down in to the sewers with excrement and urine. A rat could have got hold of it for all I know! If a baby dies, we don't treat it like that. When a woman dies, we don't treat her like that. So why a fetus?

It's because at that stage everyone knows the fetus is not a baby, it's not a life.

Noo · 13-04-2018 07:08AM

In terms of unplanned pregancies, there's thousands of women over the years who had/have the choice. They are in a position where their families and partners support them and able to fund the trip to UK whatever decision they make. Faced with choice, they still choose to go ahead their unplanned pregnancy.

The 8th is just another way of telling women that they cannot not be trusted to make that choice.

NaFirinne · 13-04-2018 09:54AM

I guess if a Christian is to ask themselves if it's okay for them too vote for abortion. You as a believer really need to think about what would Jesus do.

However I would call on Christians to re read the Gospels very carefully.

My view on in is that abortion is the willful killing of the most innocent.

The question I would ask is what will Jesus do when all the souls of these innocent babies cry out to the lord for justice.

Is it this the Adulteress and wicked generation he speaks about?

Hannibal_Smith · 13-04-2018 10:16AM

NaFirinne wrote: »

Is it this the Adulteress and wicked generation he speaks about?

Explain how abortion and an adulteress are are connected?

Furthermore if you believe in god, isn't it up to him to judge people and souls? Why get involved in an issue between god and someone else?

If you believe in god, isn't it a bit cruel of him to give a baby to someone who doesn't want it, and deny those who would cherish it? Maybe think of it as a returns policy. God gave, woman returned, it could be given to someone else?

NaFirinne · 13-04-2018 10:44AM

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Explain how abortion and an adulteress are are connected?

Furthermore if you believe in god, isn't it up to him to judge people and souls? Why get involved in an issue between god and someone else?

If you believe in god, isn't it a bit cruel of him to give a baby to someone who doesn't want it, and deny those who would cherish it? Maybe think of it as a returns policy. God gave, woman returned, it could be given to someone else?

It's not simply an issue between God and someone else.

I believe that killing of an unborn baby is just as wicked if not far more wicked then the killing of anyone else.

When people say trust women to make the choice.

Well why not just get rid of murder laws altogether so we can trust women to be able to decide if anyone can be aborted no matter what stage of life they are at.

I believe that there is no stage of life anyone should be terminated due to the decision of another person.

God isn't cruel in giving life we are cruel in hardening our hearts so much that we destroy life.

Adultery can mean sex outside of marriage in a human context or the turning away from God in a spiritual context.

Delirium · 13-04-2018 10:51AM

NaFirinne wrote: »

It's not simply an issue between God and someone else.

I believe that killing of an unborn baby is just as wicked if not far more wicked then the killing of anyone else.

and others would disagree that taking an abortion pill is more wicked than killing a woman. Some would even go so far as to say it shows a shockingly low level of value put on women to suggest that a foetus is of more value.

When people say trust women to make the choice.

Well why not just get rid of murder laws altogether so we can trust women to be able to decide if anyone can be aborted no matter what stage of life they are at.

Do you understand what the word abort means? How do you about a 10 year old child???

I believe that there is no stage of life anyone should be terminated due to the decision of another person.

So you oppose turning off life-support machines for brain dead people?

God isn't cruel in giving life we are cruel in hardening our hearts so much that we destroy life.

Adultery can mean sex outside of marriage in a human context or the turning away from God in a spiritual context.

now you're just making things up.

Hannibal_Smith · 13-04-2018 11:30AM

NaFirinne wrote: »

It's not simply an issue between God and someone else.

I believe that killing of an unborn baby is just as wicked if not far more wicked then the killing of anyone else.

When people say trust women to make the choice.

Well why not just get rid of murder laws altogether so we can trust women to be able to decide if anyone can be aborted no matter what stage of life they are at.

I believe that there is no stage of life anyone should be terminated due to the decision of another person.

God isn't cruel in giving life we are cruel in hardening our hearts so much that we destroy life.

Adultery can mean sex outside of marriage in a human context or the turning away from God in a spiritual context.

But you said adulteress? You asked whether this was the adulteress god warned about. What did god warn about a woman who commits adultery that makes it relevant to abortion?

Regarding murder laws, the referendum isn't about murder laws. It's not about killing another living breathing human being. It's aborting a fetus that is the size of a plum that the carrier does not want. Are you outside the special criminal court heckling murderers?

Why not trust women? Again, we're back to the adulteress comment. Why shouldn't women be trusted. If abortion is legalised, there are plenty of women who won't be having one. Women are perfectly capable if deciding whether or not to have an abortion. Do you think women need extra guidance on decision making?

If you believe in god, you have to accept it is cruel to create a human who does not want a child and then make that human pregnant. How twisted is that?

If you are religious it is not your place to judge others. That is gods business, no one else's. You cannot use your religion as an excuse to tell others what to do. It is not fair on those who do not subscribe to the religion .

Captain Flaps · 13-04-2018 11:54AM

I find that religious No voters prefer to lean on theory and scripture and emotions to rationalise why they should have an opinion on the healthcare offered to someone they will never meet. It's much easier to do that than to look into the eyes of someone who's had to travel for a much needed but unwanted abortion and call them a murderer.

SusieBlue · 13-04-2018 11:56AM

I actually know a man who has two kids with 2 women out of wedlock, who has cheated on his partner multiple times, doesn't work, abuses gambling and alcohol and voted no to same sex marriage and will be voting no to repeal because "its against his religion".

Captain Flaps · 13-04-2018 12:02PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

I actually know a man who has two kids with 2 women out of wedlock, who has cheated on his partner multiple times, doesn't work, abuses gambling and alcohol and voted no to same sex marriage and will be voting no to repeal because "its against his religion".

I'm happy with 12 weeks but I'd make an exception up to whatever age that guy is under 'special circumstances'

end of the road · 13-04-2018 01:10PM

NuMarvel wrote: »

I don't agree that abortion is, as you put it, an act of violence which is perpetrated against women. The obvious exception to that is when a woman doesn't freely consent.

Now for my questions to you. Do you think a No vote is going to stop women travelling or ordering abortion pills? If so, how?

it may stop some yes . how many would be unknown, but i believe some would be deterred from importing and taking the pills because of the jail sentence, and would be deterred from going to england because of the expence and time involved.

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Why do you get to say what a woman can do with her body? There is no comparison between abortion and killing a baby and it is hysterical nonsense to compare the two.

No. It's a vote on whether to repeal the 8th amendment. Forcing a woman to have a child she doesn't want is not a society I like

up to 12 weeks when the fetus is about 2 inches in size

These babies are still being lost in this country. To say go do it elsewhere but not here is hypocrisy. You're grand with aborting a fetus, as long as it's not on this island. That's just grasping at straws

No, we dont. I had a missed miscarriage a few years ago. Fetus died in the womb. I was given tablets to take at home so the fetus would pass. When it did it was flushed down the toilet, went down in to the sewers with excrement and urine. A rat could have got hold of it for all I know! If a baby dies, we don't treat it like that. When a woman dies, we don't treat her like that. So why a fetus?

It's because at that stage everyone knows the fetus is not a baby, it's not a life.

i don't get to say what a woman can do with her body. she can do whatever she likes with her body.
i do believe however that there are 2 bodies involved, the woman and the unborn, and that the woman does not, and should not have the right to do what she wants with the body of the unborn child. i believe that killing the unborn and the born are in most cases similar, as both are at different stages of development. there are a couple of cases where there is a bit of a difference and that is the extreme circumstances of the unborn causing a threat to the mother's life or a threat of permanent disability.
the vote is both about repealing the 8th, the introduction of abortion on demand, and whether one wants abortion on demand in their country. preventing a woman from killing her unborn child just because she doesn't want it is a society i want to continue to live in if possible. the fetus is a life, that fact cannot be denied.

Noo wrote: »

In terms of unplanned pregancies, there's thousands of women over the years who had/have the choice. They are in a position where their families and partners support them and able to fund the trip to UK whatever decision they make. Faced with choice, they still choose to go ahead their unplanned pregnancy.

The 8th is just another way of telling women that they cannot not be trusted to make that choice.

it's not. it's a way of saying you cannot legally kill your unborn child within ireland. this is nothing to do with trusting women, given women are also prevented by law from killing a child once born.

Hannibal_Smith · 13-04-2018 01:16PM

end of the road wrote: »

i don't get to say what a woman can do with her body. she can do whatever she likes with her body.
i do believe however that there are 2 bodies involved, the woman and the unborn, and that the woman does not, and should not have the right to do what she wants with the body of the unborn child. i believe that killing the unborn and the born are in most cases similar, as both are at different stages of development. there are a couple of cases where there is a bit of a difference and that is the extreme circumstances of the unborn causing a threat to the mother's life or a threat of permanent disability.
the vote is both about repealing the 8th, the introduction of abortion on demand, and whether one wants abortion on demand in their country. preventing a woman from killing her unborn child just because she doesn't want it is a society i want to continue to live in if possible. the fetus is a life, that fact cannot be denied.

it's not. it's a way of saying you cannot legally kill your unborn child within ireland. this is nothing to do with trusting women, given women are also prevented by law from killing a child once born.

They are not two bodies. You are factually incorrect on that point. It is one body with another depending on it to survive. But I know you don't accept facts, so there's no point addressing that any further.

If you believe the killing of the born and unborn are similar, you must place equal value on the born and the unborn, yes? So if both are equal, when a person who is born dies, we have a funeral. Why are there no funerals for a fetus or embryo miscarried in the first trimester?

Delirium · 13-04-2018 01:21PM

end of the road wrote: »

i don't get to say what a woman can do with her body. she can do whatever she likes with her body.
i do believe however that there are 2 bodies involved, the woman and the unborn, and that the woman does not, and should not have the right to do what she wants with the body of the unborn child. i believe that killing the unborn and the born are in most cases similar, as both are at different stages of development. there are a couple of cases where there is a bit of a difference and that is the extreme circumstances of the unborn causing a threat to the mother's life or a threat of permanent disability.
the vote is both about repealing the 8th, the introduction of abortion on demand, and whether one wants abortion on demand in their country. preventing a woman from killing her unborn child just because she doesn't want it is a society i want to continue to live in if possible.the fetus is a life, that fact cannot be denied.

That's only part of it.

You're leaving out rape, incest, fatal foetal abnormalities or where the pregnant person needs an abortion to continue medical treatment to name a few.

As well as the numerous ways that womens health care is affected by the 8th, for both pregnant and non-pregnant women.

end of the road · 13-04-2018 01:42PM

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

They are not two bodies. You are factually incorrect on that point. It is one body with another depending on it to survive. But I know you don't accept facts, so there's no point addressing that any further.

If you believe the killing of the born and unborn are similar, you must place equal value on the born and the unborn, yes? So if both are equal, when a person who is born dies, we have a funeral. Why are there no funerals for a fetus or embryo miscarried in the first trimester?

i believe they are 2 bodies and that i'm factually correct. 1 body with another body depending on it to survive equals 2 bodies to me.

Delirium wrote: »

That's only part of it.

You're leaving out rape, incest, fatal foetal abnormalities or where the pregnant person needs an abortion to continue medical treatment to name a few.

As well as the numerous ways that womens health care is affected by the 8th, for both pregnant and non-pregnant women.

i would include a pregnant person needing treatment as part of the mother's life being put at threat. yes i did leave out FFA, it was simply forgetfulness on my part which is not like me. i do believ abortion should be availible for FFA cases where it is proven the baby will not survive. i struggle with rape and incest if i'm honest. both brutal crimes where pregnancy happened by force, however i am not sure i can agree that it's okay to end the life of the unborn in those circumstances. both the mother and unborn are victims of the sub-human that forced the pregnancy. however i cannot agree that the unborn should pay with their lives.
as i said, i do understand there are problems caused by the 8th, but feeling strongly as i do in relation to abortion on demand and believeing it shouldn't be availible in my country if possible, and believeing that the unborn's right to life should remain within the constitution given it is the only thing protecting and upholding that right in some form, i believe voting no is the least worst option. if the legislation being proposed was to deal with hard cases only, and there was some sort of guarantee against abortion on demand being introduced, then i would be voting yes to repealing the 8th.

Hannibal_Smith · 13-04-2018 01:48PM

end of the road wrote: »

i believe they are 2 bodies and that i'm factually correct. 1 body with another body depending on it to survive equals 2 bodies to me.

They are not two bodies. You are wrong.

What about the second part of my post, could you respond to that? Why no funerals for fetuses miscarried in the first trimester?

end of the road · 13-04-2018 01:52PM

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

They are not two bodies. You are wrong.

What about the second part of my post, could you respond to that? Why no funerals for fetuses miscarried in the first trimester?

i don't know, there could be many many reasons.

Delirium · 13-04-2018 01:54PM

end of the road wrote: »

i would include a pregnant person needing treatment as part of the mother's life being put at threat.
yes i did leave out FFA, it was simply forgetfulness on my part which is not like me. i do believ abortion should be availible for FFA cases where it is proven the baby will not survive. i struggle with rape and incest if i'm honest. both brutal crimes where pregnancy happened by force, however i am not sure i can agree that it's okay to end the life of the unborn in those circumstances. both the mother and unborn are victims of the sub-human that forced the pregnancy. however i cannot agree that the unborn should pay with their lives.
as i said, i do understand there are problems caused by the 8th, but feeling strongly as i do in relation to abortion on demand and believeing it shouldn't be availible in my country if possible, and believeing that the unborn's right to life should remain within the constitution given it is the only thing protecting and upholding that right in some form, i believe voting no is the least worst option. if the legislation being proposed was to deal with hard cases only, and there was some sort of guarantee against abortion on demand being introduced, then i would be voting yes to repealing the 8th.

So you opposition to abortion on request is greater than you desire to reduce suffering in cases where you would support access to abortion?

By voting no you're merely paying lip-service to those women in situations you say you'd allow abortion.

All you're doing is supporting a system where increases suffering/ problems for pregnant people. You're doing nothing to stop abortions, with the exception of those too poor/ or legally barred from travelling.

Captain Flaps · 13-04-2018 01:55PM

Well that's a cop out.

Hannibal_Smith · 13-04-2018 01:58PM

end of the road wrote: »

i don't know, there could be many many reasons.

Any sample reasons? You've said it's a life similar to a born child, yes? If that's true, why does it not get the same treatment as a child who dies?

Doesn't the difference in treatment suggest to you that a born child and an unborn child are not equal at all?

end of the road · 13-04-2018 02:04PM

Delirium wrote: »

So you opposition to abortion on request is greater than you desire to reduce suffering in cases where you would support access to abortion?

both are something i equally desire to solve. however the position we are in isn't going to allow me to do this via my vote. the unborn do not have a voice, and i believe that given how pressing their situation could be if the 8th is repealed for which they will no longer have a right to life, i have to prioritise this with my vote.

Delirium wrote: »

By voting no you're merely paying lip-service to those women in situations you say you'd allow abortion.

i don't agree. at the end of the day we can only vote 1 way and i believe the voiceless need a voice to look out for their interests, which is what i have to do via the vote.

Delirium wrote: »

All you're doing is supporting a system where increases suffering/ problems for pregnant people. You're doing nothing to stop abortions, with the exception of those too poor/ or legally barred from travelling.

i would disagree that i'm supporting the system, by voting for it to remain due to the severe situation the unborn would find themselves in doesn't mean that i agree with the system as a whole.
if some abortions are being stopped then to me that is a good thing. of course it is

end of the road · 13-04-2018 02:06PM

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Any sample reasons? You've said it's a life similar to a born child, yes? If that's true, why does it not get the same treatment as a child who dies?

again, i don't know.

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Doesn't the difference in treatment suggest to you that a born child and an unborn child are not equal at all?

it wouldn't no . some groups of people throught history have been treated differently to others unfortunately.

Captain Flaps · 13-04-2018 02:12PM

I wouldn't lean on history here pal, you're on the wrong side of it.

Delirium · 13-04-2018 02:14PM

end of the road wrote: »

both are something i equally desire to solve. however the position we are in isn't going to allow me to do this via my vote. the unborn do not have a voice, and i believe that given how pressing their situation could be if the 8th is repealed for which they will no longer have a right to life, i have to prioritise this with my vote.

Understood. Protecting a potential person is more important than reducing suffering for a child/woman.

i don't agree. at the end of the day we can only vote 1 way and i believe the voiceless need a voice to look out for their interests, which is what i have to do via the vote.

clearly you don't agree, however your decision to vote no clearly shows it to be true.

i would disagree that i'm supporting the system, by voting for it to remain due to the severe situation the unborn would find themselves in doesn't mean that i agree with the system as a whole.

It's a Yes/No vote. Vote No is supporting the current system regardless if you agree with all aspects of it.

if some abortions are being stopped then to me that is a good thing. of course it is

High cost to it though with suffering that is created and problems with healthcare for anyone that can potentially be pregnant.

end of the road · 13-04-2018 02:14PM

Captain Flaps wrote: »

I wouldn't lean on history here pal, you're on the wrong side of it.

there is no guarantee of that. if trump and brexit have thought me anything, the side most sure they would win, could be in for a real shock. even if i do end up being on the wrong side of history, so be it, at least i tried.

end of the road · 13-04-2018 02:21PM

Delirium wrote: »

Understood. Protecting a potential person is more important than reducing suffering for a child/woman.

again, it's not more important as such, it's just that the unborn's situation is extremely more pressing given the constitution is the only piece of protection their right to life has.

Delirium wrote: »

clearly you don't agree, however your decision to vote no clearly shows it to be true.

It's a Yes/No vote. Vote No is supporting the current system regardless if you agree with all aspects of it.

Delirium wrote: »

i'm only supporting 1 aspect of it though and that is the protection it gives to the life of the unborn.

Delirium wrote: »

High cost to it though with suffering that is created and problems with healthcare for anyone that can potentially be pregnant.

there is a higher cost to the unborn if i vote yes though.

Delirium · 13-04-2018 02:33PM

end of the road wrote: »

again, it's not more important as such, it's just that the unborn's situation is extremely more pressing given the constitution is the only piece of protection their right to life has.

but it is with what you've posted. You've said as much on this thread minutes ago, i.e. "if some abortions are being stopped then to me that is a good thing. of course it is."

i'm only supporting 1 aspect of it though and that is the protection it gives to the life of the unborn.

I know, you are literally rephrasing what I posted and echoing it back to me

there is a higher cost to the unborn if i vote yes though.

How so? you have no assurances other than the pregnant person must suffer more than is necessary to have an abortion. You certainly have no assurance that any foetus will not be aborted.

Can a Christian vote for unlimited abortion?

Comments