The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

baylah17 · 17-04-2018 10:12AM

horseburger wrote: »

The issue is that he would

Wasn't Mattie McGrath recently accused of calling Catherine Noone fat, when all he did was use a well known phrase talking about discussions not having been completed.

As in "it ain't over till the fat lady sings"

Here's an item

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/mattie-mcgrath-criticised-for-fat-lady-sings-abortion-comments-1.3325859?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Fmattie-mcgrath-criticised-for-fat-lady-sings-abortion-comments-1.3325859

He got 'slammed' for it

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/politicians-slam-td-mattie-mcgraths-bizarre-fat-lady-comments-about-senator-noone-36405136.html

Pitiful lame distraction!
WTF has that got to do with the repeal of the evil 8th?

gozunda · 17-04-2018 10:12AM

January wrote: »

Say the Garda would be very interested in this too.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10160261450765608&id=576200607
What's your thoughts on that Robert

Regarding the posters and the images they contain - what is the situation on the thread? I havn't seen any posts with these included here - did I just not see them? or are the posting of such images permitted etc?

note: I don't wish to post any- just curious.

horseburger · 17-04-2018 10:12AM

B0jangles wrote: »

So you didn't know what I meant, so you just made up your own weird interpretation and ran with it instead of asking for clarification.

I was clearly referencing how you used a phrase, in reference to a birth, that is regularly used to refer to abortion.

Meaning that the euphemism 'ending of a pregnancy' is not an accurate way to reference abortion, even though it is only used with regard to abortion, to avoid dealing with the imagery around what abortion involves.

Sofiztikated · 17-04-2018 10:14AM

"horseburger wrote: »

Irrelevant tosh.

Again, if you are on the fence, what do you see as arguments in favour of Repeal?

gmisk · 17-04-2018 10:16AM

horseburger wrote: »

The issue is that he would

Wasn't Mattie McGrath recently accused of calling Catherine Noone fat, when all he did was use a well known phrase talking about discussions not having been completed.

As in "it ain't over till the fat lady sings"

Here's an item

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/mattie-mcgrath-criticised-for-fat-lady-sings-abortion-comments-1.3325859?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2Fmattie-mcgrath-criticised-for-fat-lady-sings-abortion-comments-1.3325859

He got 'slammed' for it

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/politicians-slam-td-mattie-mcgraths-bizarre-fat-lady-comments-about-senator-noone-36405136.html

And didnt John McGuirk call his own Libertas candidate a "psychotic bitch"....
These weeemen all so sensitive....

Ave Sodalis · 17-04-2018 10:17AM

gozunda wrote: »

Regarding the posters and the images they contain - what is the situation on the thread? I havn't seen any posts with these included here - did I just not see them? or are the posting of such images permitted etc?

note: I don't wish to post any- just curious.

There's been a few posts on them. Mainly the pro-life ones were discussed because of their contents. Nothing against posting them, but some of them are a bit graphic so might be NSFW.

Zubeneschamali · 17-04-2018 10:17AM

B0jangles wrote: »

Why on earth would anyone consider it disrespectful to call her that, unless they think being pregnant is somehow less worthy of respect than being a mother?

Hypothetically, and not referring directly to anyone in this thread, if you were reading carelessly, dashing off replies as fast as you could type, and determined never to admit an error, you could easily end up writing nonsense like this which you don't actually believe but cannot withdraw without losing points for your imaginary school debating team.

horseburger · 17-04-2018 10:17AM

baylah17 wrote: »

Pitiful lame distraction!
WTF has that got to do with the repeal of the evil 8th?

What it has to do with it is that the comment was made in reference to the Oireachtas Committee proceedings on the Eighth.

Mattie McGrath was being criticized for a comment he made, where he didn't reference the person that people insinuated he referenced.

If you read the item, that would not need to be explained to you.

B0jangles · 17-04-2018 10:19AM

Edward M wrote: »

I wouldn't agree with that, though that is open to interpretation.
This is a helpful link for prospective parents, even before considering having a baby.
https://psychcentral.com/lib/are-you-ready-to-be-a-parent/
Personally I feel if someone has conceived at all, regardless of what decision they make on the pregnancy, they make those decisions as a parent, and are entitled to call themselves a parent, man or woman.

Is this not an article recommending that people who are about to have a baby should be preparing themselves for the major changes to their lives that having a baby will bring? It's not really about the literal meaning of the words parent, mother and father - its about understanding how to prepare for parenthood.

Ave Sodalis · 17-04-2018 10:20AM

horseburger wrote: »

What it has to do with it is that the comment was made in reference to the Oireachta Committee proceedings on the Eighth.

Mattie McGrath was being criticized for a comment he made, where he didn't reference the person that people insinuated he referenced.

If you read the item, that would not need to be explained to you.

The irony of you calling me arrogant is growing.

ohnonotgmail · 17-04-2018 10:21AM

horseburger wrote: »

What it has to do with it is that the comment was made in reference to the Oireachta Committee proceedings on the Eighth.

Mattie McGrath was being criticized for a comment he made, where he didn't reference the person that people insinuated he referenced.

If you read the item, that would not need to be explained to you.

but what does it have to do with the 8th amendment itself? You know, that thing we are discussing?

B0jangles · 17-04-2018 10:21AM

horseburger wrote: »

I was clearly referencing how you used a phrase, in reference to a birth, that is regularly used to refer to abortion.

Meaning that the euphemism 'ending of a pregnancy' is not an accurate way to reference abortion, even though it is only used with regard to abortion, to avoid dealing with the imagery around what abortion involves.

So you were trying to use a slightly unclear phrase of mine referring to childbirth to try to drag the conversation back to one of your usual talking points?

Still 'on the fence', yeah?

AmNotADude55 · 17-04-2018 10:22AM

"Child destruction is the crime of killing an unborn but viable foetus; that is, a child "capable of being born alive", before it has "a separate existence"."

"People have been convicted of the offence for injuring a heavily pregnant woman in the abdomen, such that her foetus dies"

So if 8th ammendment gets dropped - do we decriminalise this and if someone attacks pregnant woman and she has miscarriage - they only get charged for assault? Because according to certain posters here - fetus isn't a living human.

(Not voting, idc about this matter, just curious what are peoples opinions on this)

horseburger · 17-04-2018 10:23AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

but what does it have to do with the 8th amendment itself? You know, that thing we are discussing?

It relates to the comment that I referenced that was made on 7th March last year, during a debate on a bill for a wider circumstance for abortion that was proposed by PBB/AAA.

ohnonotgmail · 17-04-2018 10:24AM

AmNotADude55 wrote: »

"Child destruction is the crime of killing an unborn but viable foetus; that is, a child "capable of being born alive", before it has "a separate existence"."

"People have been convicted of the offence for injuring a heavily pregnant woman in the abdomen, such that her foetus dies"

So if 8th ammendment gets dropped - do we decriminalise this and if someone attacks pregnant woman and she has miscarriage - they only get charged for assault? Because according to certain posters here - fetus isn't a living human.

(Not voting, idc about this matter, just curious what are peoples opinions on this)

"People have been convicted of the offence for injuring a heavily pregnant woman in the abdomen, such that her foetus dies"

I dont see any mention here that the foetus is a living human so your post makes no sense.

horseburger · 17-04-2018 10:24AM

B0jangles wrote: »

So you were trying to use a slightly unclear phrase of mine referring to childbirth to try to drag the conversation back to one of your usual talking points?

Still 'on the fence', yeah?

What's your position on the referendum?

ohnonotgmail · 17-04-2018 10:25AM

horseburger wrote: »

It relates to the comment that I referenced that was made on 7th March last year, during a debate on a bill for a wider circumstance for abortion that was proposed by PBB/AAA.

So it has nothing to do with the 8th amendment then?

Edward M · 17-04-2018 10:25AM

B0jangles wrote: »

Is this not an article recommending that people who are about to have a baby should be preparing themselves for the major changes to their lives that having a baby will bring? It's not really about the literal meaning of the words parent, mother and father - its about understanding how to prepare for parenthood.

I know, I just thought it useful.
Just curious as to how you interpret being a parent. Would you say a fetus has a mother and father or what?
If it has a mother and a father, if you don't call them parents what do you call them?
To me the two people involved in conception are the mother and the father, I would consider them parents.
I only know of one alleged immaculate conception.

B0jangles · 17-04-2018 10:29AM

horseburger wrote: »

What's your position on the referendum?

100% pre-repeal, I think I've been pretty clear on that throughout.

Yours?

Sofiztikated · 17-04-2018 10:30AM

Edward M wrote: »

I know, I just thought it useful.
Just curious as to how you interpret being a parent. Would you say a fetus has a mother and father or what?
If it has a mother and a father, if you don't call them parents what do you call them?
To me the two people involved in conception are the mother and the father, I would consider them parents.
I only know of one alleged immaculate conception.

My wife had a miscarriage, am I a father? Is she a mother?

horseburger · 17-04-2018 10:31AM

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

The irony of you calling me arrogant is growing.

I was pointing out that by your posting here, you would be less likely to sway any undecided voters, than for example, by the way Donal Lynch makes his arguments in his interviews and writing on the issue.

And that is pretty important if you are hoping people will vote the way you'd like them to.

expectationlost · 17-04-2018 10:32AM

dudara wrote: »

I was looking at a lot of new Anti-Choice posters that have gone up around work. I can’t see any names and addresses on the posters, either of the publisher or printer. Does this mean they’re technically illegal? Surely they can’t be making a mistake as simple as that?

are you sure there no name on the posters I've seen people claim that and then its pointed out to them that it just really really small

seamus · 17-04-2018 10:32AM

AmNotADude55 wrote: »

"Child destruction is the crime of killing an unborn but viable foetus; that is, a child "capable of being born alive", before it has "a separate existence"."

"People have been convicted of the offence for injuring a heavily pregnant woman in the abdomen, such that her foetus dies"

So if 8th ammendment gets dropped - do we decriminalise this and if someone attacks pregnant woman and she has miscarriage - they only get charged for assault? Because according to certain posters here - fetus isn't a living human.

It would be a special form of assault; causing through intentional or negligent actions, and without the consent of the pregnant person, the miscarriage of a pregnancy to occur.

I wouldn't just apply to assaults designed to cause a miscarriage, but potentially to car accidents, food poisoning, etc.

I think most people would agree that pregnancy itself is a "special" state, worthy of recognition and a certain degree of specific legal protection.

The fact that the foetus is not a legal person doesn't mean that we should pretend pregnancies don't exist.

17-04-2018 10:32AM

LimeGreenBean wrote: »

I can't believe this is my first post, but I guess this is the crux of the pro-life movement and to be honest, it has just really started to bug me how often this statement has been glossed over in the last few months. Not to be disrespectful to anyone on this thread or the repeal movement in general, you have changed many people's views on abortion. Anyways, in response to this argument:

You justify destroying human life every single day. Have you ever donated blood, or bone marrow, or a lung? No, probably not. Are you a murderer because you haven't? Countless people die waiting on kidney transplants lists. And you could give them a kidney, you could keep them alive. Are you a terrible person because you don't? If you are involved in a car crash and you're brain dead will the doctors and nurses ravage your body for organs? No, they won't, they'll ask your family what you want and they will respect your wishes.

We don't force people to donate their bone marrow, even though it would save countless lives. We don't call people up to donate their kidney's like it's jury service. We don't label suicide victims as murders, even though their now useless organs could have saved many people's lives. If you somehow find a surgeon and ask him to remove a kidney so that you can keep it in a jar, you won't be charged with murder, even though that kidney could have saved someone's life. The surgeon also won't be charged with murder. We respect people's right to do what they want to their body regardless of whether someone else will suffer or die.

Except, in pregnancy. A woman's organs keep the baby/foetus/whatever-name-you-want alive, she sustains their life. Should she not get to decide how her organs are used? Should she not get to decide what happens to her body? We allow brain-dead people to decide what will happen to their body when they die. Think about it, we give fewer rights to pregnant women, than we do to brain-dead people, in this country.

When I was 18, (which was only 4 years ago) I felt the exact same way you did, honestly. I just want to give you a different slant on things. I hope you vote, this will probably be your first one.

I'm all for repeal but I don't think that logic follows. A fetus will grow into an entirely different entity. I think its a different kettle of fish to a kidney. I disagree with the "my body, my choice" argument. Its not as black and white as that.

Ave Sodalis · 17-04-2018 10:36AM

horseburger wrote: »

I was pointing out that by your posting here, you would be less likely to sway any undecided voters, than for example, by the way Donal Lynch makes his arguments in his interviews and writing on the issue.

And that is pretty important if you are hoping people will vote the way you'd like them to.

Is that all you were saying?

horseburger wrote: »

I think you might be thinking that it was you that I might be referencing when I said some posters have an attitude.

Well done. At least you now know that because of your arrogance, that you'd be useless canvassing on this issue.

That, to me, sounds very like you're worried about how I may or may not sway posters here alright.

gmisk · 17-04-2018 10:47AM

expectationlost wrote: »

are you sure there no name on the posters I've seen people claim that and then its pointed out to them that it just really really small

I think some of them have printers on them....but you would literally need an electron microscope to see the details.

horseburger · 17-04-2018 10:48AM

B0jangles wrote: »

100% pre-repeal, I think I've been pretty clear on that throughout.

Yours?

I haven't decided yet. I thought this thread would be useful in helping me consider the various for and against arguments.

I am concerned about legislation ending up being more wide ranging in the future, in that there might be abortion in cases where the child would live an otherwise healthy life.

I am also concerned about the issue that sometimes babies will live longer, than diagnosed by doctors before birth, in cases where conditions have been diagnosed. If abortion is carried out, it will never be known how long a life will live.

That's a difficulty.

Could there have been provision made before now, for cases where there is no chance of survival after birth, for example in this item, Sarah McGuinness from Termination for Medical Reasons, speaks about anencephaly, and the very sad prognosis made, and the situation she described of having to carry on with the pregnancy, with very little chance of life, for very long after birth.

I wonder why anencephaly wasn't covered before now.

horseburger · 17-04-2018 10:50AM

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Is that all you were saying?

That, to me, sounds very like you're worried about how I may or may not sway posters here alright.

Not really.

baylah17 · 17-04-2018 10:51AM

horseburger wrote: »

I haven't decided yet. I thought this thread would be useful in helping me consider the various for and against arguments.

I am concerned about legislation ending up being more wide ranging in the future, in that there might be abortion in cases where the child would live an otherwise healthy life.

I am also concerned about the issue that sometimes babies will live longer, than diagnosed by doctors before birth, in cases where conditions have been diagnosed. If abortion is carried out, it will never be known how long a life will live.

That's a difficulty.

Could there have been provision made before now, for cases where there is no chance of survival after birth, for example in this item, Sarah McGuinness from Termination for Medical Reasons, speaks about anencephaly, and the very sad prognosis made, and the situation she described of having to carry on with the pregnancy, with very little chance of life, for very long after birth.

I wonder why anencephaly wasn't covered before now.

I call Bull****, you've well decided, as your constant linking of anti choice anti woman videos clearly shows.
Personally i think you've reached the End of The Road with this charade!

Ave Sodalis · 17-04-2018 10:52AM

horseburger wrote: »

Not really.

Then why feel the need to mention it? Especially in the way that you did.

The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Comments