Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

1…199200202204205…324

Comments

  • #6032
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    pleas advice wrote: »
    so you can see the difference between preventing a pregnancy, and ending one?

    can you?
    people can do everything in their power to prevent a pregnancy but it still occurs.
    what would you suggest they do if contraception fails?
    remember they dont want to be pregnant & they dont want a baby?


  • #6033
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote:
    Contraceptive pill, husband could have tubes tied.


    Husband could have tubes tied....


  • #6034
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    pleas advice wrote: »
    so you can see the difference between preventing a pregnancy, and ending one?

    Absolutely I can, you just cannot try to take the perceived moral high ground against abortion ending a pregnancy if you take contraception to prevent a pregnancy in the first place, it is mindnumbingly flawed logic.


  • #6035
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Neddyusa wrote:
    Interestingly Repeal campaigners repeatedly play the man rather the ball when it comes to "debate".


    What exactly does that mean?


  • #6036
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Ave Sodalis wrote: »
    What exactly does that mean?

    It means the 'no' side have a victim complex, and it's no more effective today than it was in 2015.


  • Advertisement
  • #6037
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,228 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    horseburger wrote: »
    Would you place any limits as to when an abortion can be carried out?

    Yes. In legislation only.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #6038
    spoonerhead
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 318 ✭✭spoonerhead


    Pro-life campaigners knocked at a few doors on my road. I admire that they’re out there trying to canvass, but being in Dublin South-Central it’s a waste of time. Probably the most left leaning constituency in Ireland? Got a bit nasty when people where opening their door before they even reached the gate to shout their disapproval. So knock at my door all you want, us working class people know a liar when we see one. This poster is a classic example of the misinformation they’re trying to feed


  • #6039
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Spanish Eyes wrote:
    They seem to be very focused on embryos and foetuses with moving fingers and all the rest of it. But once born, all is forgotten.


    It's like what George Carlin said in that video posted earlier (yes it's American based but apt given the involvement of Americans in this referendum). Conservatives don't care after their born until they reach recruitment age. Then they're interested again. They want live babies so they can have dead soliders.

    In a similar way here, they don't care until you are if child baring age and suddenly your reproductive system (and habits) are of great interest, regardless of the person attached to those systems.


  • #6040
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    Absolutely I can, you just cannot try to take the perceived moral high ground against abortion ending a pregnancy if you take contraception to prevent a pregnancy in the first place, it is mindnumbingly flawed logic.

    how so?
    it would be massively more flawed to say there is no qualitative difference between a separate sperm and an egg, and a fertilised egg / zygote / fetus


  • #6041
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    pleas advice wrote:
    how so? it would be massively more flawed to say there is no qualitative difference between a separate sperm and an egg, and a fertilised egg / zygote / fetus

    Has anybody said that?


  • Advertisement
  • #6042
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    I have no words.

    30729956_830923910429021_7405785518350270464_n.png?_nc_cat=0&oh=ceb94bbf0efb1a182b2210b1d6b632d3&oe=5B64FE8B

    ,


  • #6043
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    pleas advice wrote: »
    how so?
    it would be massively more flawed to say there is no qualitative difference between a separate sperm and an egg, and a fertilised egg / zygote / fetus

    "I'm using contraception because I don't want to be pregnant/can't support a baby right now/I'm not financially stable enough to have a baby/etc"

    "I'm seeking an abortion because I don't want to be pregnant/can't support a baby right now/I'm not financially stable enough to have a baby/etc"

    Neither one of these individuals want to be pregnant, so why does one get a free pass whilst the other doesn't?

    Not saying I disagree with contraception, I just think it's funny that pro-lifers can be so pro-life when technically contraception is the prevention of fertilization/creation of life in the first place.


  • #6044
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    Ave Sodalis wrote: »
    Has anybody said that?
    Misael Echoing Horse wrote: »
    Are ye on some kind of pro-life piss up? These are nonsensical posts, literally nothing to do with the posts they're allegedly replying to. Is that what ye're reduced to?

    are some of the pro-choice on the beer as well?


  • #6045
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Ave Sodalis wrote: »
    Has anybody said that?

    I used it to demonstrate to a pro-lifer the flawed logic behind willingly using contraception because she didn't want to be pregnant, yet has a problem with other women having abortions because they don't want to be a problem.

    For some reason this poster has latched onto it.


  • #6046
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    Not saying I disagree with contraception, I just think it's funny that pro-lifers can be so pro-life when technically contraception is the prevention of fertilization/creation of life in the first place.

    can you see no qualitative difference between a separate sperm and an egg, and a fertilised egg / zygote / fetus?


  • #6047
    AnneFrank
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,827 ✭✭✭AnneFrank


    A pro lifer, I can't believe people use that as a negative.Amazing really.


  • #6048
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    pleas advice wrote: »
    can you see no qualitative difference between a separate sperm and an egg, and a fertilised egg / zygote / fetus?

    I never said I couldn't.

    Like I said, I used it to demonstrate to a pro-life individual who doesn't see the hypocrisy in using contraceptives because they don't want to be pregnant (MAP included) yet has a serious issue with abortion.

    Surely if they're so pro-life they would (by their own ideologies) only have intercourse to procreate, no? If all life is precious to them, then by their mindsets, contraception would be the denial of life and an attempt at fertilization, no?


  • #6049
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    AnneFrank wrote: »
    A pro lifer, I can't believe people use that as a negative.Amazing really.

    The term should be pro-birth seeing as they don't give a tiddlywinks what happens after the baby is born, providing that no abortion takes place, it funnily enough doesn't become their problem anymore.


  • #6050
    Trasna1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 565 ✭✭✭Trasna1


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    "I'm using contraception because I don't want to get pregnant/can't support a baby right now/I'm not financially stable enough to have a baby/etc"

    "I'm seeking an abortion because I don't want to get pregnant/can't support a baby right now/I'm not financially stable enough to have a baby/etc"

    Neither one of these individuals want to get pregnant, so why does one get a free pass whilst the other doesn't?

    Not saying I disagree with contraception, I just think it's funny that pro-lifers can be so pro-life when technically contraception is the prevention of fertilization/creation of life in the first place.

    I would have thought it fairly obvious that the two situations are different. Pro lifers would see the embryo/fetus as a new human life and abortion is the ending of a human life from their perspective. Contraception is the prevention of a human life from occurring so the act of ending it (which is their problem) never happens. This would be an example of the end not justifying the means.


  • #6051
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    kylith wrote: »
    Contraception, including sterilisation, is not 100% effective. That’s if you can find a doctor who will do it as it is notoriously difficult to get sterilised in this country.

    So, should that woman not have sex with her husband? Yes or no?

    And to answer your question: as you have been told abortion cannot be used as contraception as conception has already occurred. However I have no problems with women using abortion to not have babies that, for their own reasons, they do not want to have.

    It's not for me to say if they should have sex or not, but if they are and they don't plan on having any more children then I suggest they use a form of "birth control" which on the balance of probability will prevent them from ever having any unwanted children.

    Again trying to take a marginal case in an attempt to prove something which you have no intention of defending.

    This is the problem, when you remove the marginal case of the rape victim with the glass eye who has stage 4 cancer, and you concede that repealing the 8th will address none of the healthcare issues which have been raised, the whole argument falls to shreds. Why don't they just run a campaign based on the merits rather than the imaginary victim?


  • Advertisement
  • #6052
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    It's not for me to say if they should have sex or not, but if they are and they don't plan on having any more children then I suggest they use a form of "birth control" which on the balance of probability will prevent them from ever having any unwanted children.

    what about the people were contraceptive fails?


  • #6053
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Trasna1 wrote: »
    I would have thought it fairly obvious that the two situations are different. Pro lifers would see the embryo/fetus as a new human life and abortion is the ending of a human life from their perspective. Contraception is the prevention of a human life from occurring so the act of ending it (which is their problem) never happens. This would be an example of the end not justifying the means.

    It's my fault, I should have been more clear.

    There are a number of pro-life posters who are against preventing pregnancies altogether, my post was a demonstration of that flawed logic by showing that you cannot say you are against the prevention of pregnancy from taking place but utilize contraception.


  • #6054
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    It's not for me to say if they should have sex or not, but if they are and they don't plan on having any more children then I suggest they use a form of "birth control" which on the balance of probability will prevent them from ever having any unwanted children.

    I take every precaution i can, what would you suggest if my contraception fails?


  • #6055
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    Why don't they just run a campaign based on the merits rather than the imaginary victim?

    Why can't pro-life run a campaign based on facts rather than the blatant misrepresentation of facts and outright lies?


  • #6056
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    Abortion is not a form of contraception.

    Do you think it is? If so, my next post to you is going to be very, very educational.
    robarmstrong wrote: »
    It's my fault, I should have been more clear.

    There is a number of pro-life posters who are against preventing pregnancies altogether, my post was a demonstration of that flawed logic by showing that you cannot say you are against the prevention of pregnancy from taking place but utilize contraception.

    This is from the intellectual powerhouse who schools people on Facebook and posts pictures on here for all to see.

    I feel a very very educational post coming on.


  • #6057
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    hey guys,
    just wondering when does campaining stop before a referendum?
    I am due home on the 19th but I think I may be too late to be involved then?


  • #6058
    baylah17
    Closed Accounts Posts: 790 ✭✭✭baylah17


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

    This is the problem, when you remove the marginal case of the rape victim with the glass eye who has stage 4 cancer, and you concede that repealing the 8th will address none of the healthcare issues which have been raised, the whole argument falls to shreds. Why don't they just run a campaign based on the merits rather than the imaginary victim?

    What a filthy sneering disgusting post:mad::mad:
    Go tell that to the family of Louise Harte, she didnt get raped or have a glass eye but she died of cancer as a result of having her treatment stopped because of the 8th!
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/eighth-amendment-casts-shadow-over-care-for-pregnant-women-1.3454604


  • #6059
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    Contraceptive pill, husband could have tubes tied.

    While the Vas deferens are tubular, and are cut and tied as a form of contraception, it can be very difficult for some men who simply don't want children to have one performed without going to a private clinic. Most doctors seem to have a well wait and see if your really sure attitude when asked for a referral by a man who has no children in my experience. Also a vasectomy can fail

    The contraceptive pill while great, and an item along with other forms of contraception that the pro life side tried to keep illegal and limit for many years, can also fail.

    This leaves women with choices to make, and repeal will hopefully make it easier for some to make the choice that is right for them if abortion is what they decide, because unlike your post regarding imaginary health issues and victims of rape, they are real unless people are living in a blinkered wonder land and they too will hopefully have better choices once repeal is successful.


  • #6060
    Neddyusa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,138 ✭✭✭Neddyusa


    bubblypop wrote: »
    1.we need to repeal the 8th amendment because it restricts the medical treatment a woman is given when she is pregnant.

    do you think women should have to go through unneccesary surgery?

    2.do you think women should have to have a pregnancy test before cancer treatment? if it is positive, what do you think happens to that womans medical treatment?



    3.do you think a woman should be left to suffer for days/weeks with a slow miscarraige that could cause serious problems?


     
    4. do you think a woman should be refused any medical treament because she is pregnant?


    1. Not true :
    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/medical-myths-about-eighth-amendment-must-be-challenged-1.3451748

    2. Pregnant women are always treated for Cancer in Ireland.
    See page 35
    https://www.medicalcouncil.ie/News-and-Publications/Reports/Guide-to-Professional-Conduct-and-Ethics-8th-Edition-2016-.pdf
    Trial cancer treatments can be withheld by the Pharmaceutical companies who do not want to be sued should the baby die. This happens in all countries. Nothing to do with the 8th Amendment.

    3. Miscarriage is treated the same way in Ireland as UK or any other country where Abortions are legal.
    UK regs recommend "7-14 day wait for miscarriage to occur naturally"

     https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg154/ifp/chapter/Treatment-for-miscarriage
    The 8th does not apply as the baby has sadly died in the miscarriage.

    4. This does not happen.
    Irelands maternal health statistics are better than UK'S and 4 times better than the US:
     https://www.rcpi.ie/news/releases/institute-of-obstetricians-and-gynaecologists-welcomes-new-figures-that-show-ireland-is-one-of-the-safest-places-to-have-a-baby/


  • Advertisement
  • #6061
    baylah17
    Closed Accounts Posts: 790 ✭✭✭baylah17


    Neddyusa wrote: »
    1. Not true :
    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/medical-myths-about-eighth-amendment-must-be-challenged-1.3451748

    2. Pregnant women are always treated for Cancer in Ireland.
    See page 35
    https://www.medicalcouncil.ie/News-and-Publications/Reports/Guide-to-Professional-Conduct-and-Ethics-8th-Edition-2016-.pdf
    Trial cancer treatments can be withheld by the Pharmaceutical companies who do not want to be sued should the baby die. This happens in all countries. Nothing to do with the 8th Amendment.

    Lie
    Louise Harte
    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/eighth-amendment-casts-shadow-over-care-for-pregnant-women-1.3454604


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement