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…238239241243244…324

Comments

  • #7202
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    kylith wrote: »
    It is in law.

    The law recognises the unborn child's right to life...


  • #7203
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    So the basis on which you think it is justified to end another persons life is whether they have a PPS number?

    For what reason do you think a woman would seek an abortion at such a late stage?


  • #7204
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    So the basis on which you think it is justified to end another persons life is whether they have a PPS number?

    It isn't a person. Not in the same capacity as the woman carrying it. And it certainly shouldn't be afforded any rights at the expense of hers.

    It isn't murder.
    Are you campaigning to repeal the 13th and 14th amendment? I assume you are, considering you perceive these fetuses to be people, you're surely campaigning to stop these monsters from travelling overseas to cruelly murder Irish citizens?
    Or is it only a problem if it happens in Ireland?


  • #7205
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,919 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    The law recognises the unborn child's right to life...

    but it doesnt recognise an unborn child as a person.


  • #7206
    swampgas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,615 ✭✭✭swampgas


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    So the basis on which you think it is justified to end another persons life is whether they have a PPS number?

    You really are annoying. Which bit of "a foetus is not a person (yet)" do you not accept?

    Maybe you can explain why a (for example) 8 week foetus should be considered to be a person?


  • Advertisement
  • #7207
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    Can you put that in a sentence please? I don't even think it's grammatically correct.

    "Hello Mary how are you?"
    "Not very well I have a pregnancy"

    "I brought a pregnancy to term"

    "No, this isn't the first time I've lost a pregnancy."


  • #7208
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,812 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    So the basis on which you think it is justified to end another persons life is whether they have a PPS number?

    Mod: Your questions are becoming increasingly ridiculous. If you want to troll somewhere, here is not the place for it.


  • #7209
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    It isn't a person. Not in the same capacity as the woman carrying it. And it certainly shouldn't be afforded any rights at the expense of hers.

    It isn't murder.
    Are you campaigning to repeal the 13th and 14th amendment? I assume you are, considering you perceive these fetuses to be people, you're surely campaigning to stop these monsters from travelling overseas to cruelly murder Irish citizens?
    Or is it only a problem if it happens in Ireland?

    In what circumstances do you thin it is acceptable to end another persons life?


  • #7210
    swampgas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,615 ✭✭✭swampgas


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    In what circumstances do you thin it is acceptable to end another persons life?

    Personally I think internet trolls should be shot in the head. Does that help?


  • #7211
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    In what circumstances do you thin it is acceptable to end another persons life?

    We've already established that it isn't a person about 12 times now, and already covered when we feel it does become a person, I think your question has already been answered.

    You're staring so hard at the uterus you can't see the living breathing woman attached to it.


  • Advertisement
  • #7212
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    24 weeks is when a fetus is awarded citizenship, this applies to stillborns, you can have your stillborn son or daughter put on a register and they'll be given a PPS number, I know this from experience.

    Before then, they are not assigned a PPS number and therefore are technically not citizens.


  • #7213
    ELM327
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,109 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    AnneFrank wrote: »
    wow trolling me through different threads on different topics,
    i wasn't aware that was allowed.
    The one thread, and not trolling, just quoting some of your one liners.
    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    As opposed to your argument where a foetus magically turns into a person during birth. Very scientific.

    There's no magic. It is indeed science. We even thought of a name for it and everything. Biology.
    As per the very smart poster below:
    ELM327 wrote: »
    But it is though.
    Seriously.
    They like, hand out certificates and everything now.


  • #7214
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    We've already established that it isn't a person about 12 times now, and already covered when we feel it does become a person, I think your question has already been answered.

    Who exactly established that? Please show me the scientific evidence which proves your theory?


  • #7215
    BarleySweets
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 198 ✭✭BarleySweets


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    Who exactly established that?

    The people that wrote the medical dictionary.


  • #7216
    ELM327
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,109 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    Who exactly established that? Please show me the scientific evidence which proves your theory?

    1 - www.google.ie (I don't know the US domain for Google, you'll probably be redirected to the .com)
    2- Search for "Biology and the reproductive system"
    3- skip the fun part at the start and go straight to birth.


  • #7217
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    ELM327 wrote: »
    The one thread, and not trolling, just quoting some of your one liners.



    There's no magic. It is indeed science. We even thought of a name for it and everything. Biology.
    As per the very smart poster below:

    So what is the scientific process that takes place during birth whereby a foetus turns in a person as it passes through the canal?


  • #7218
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    So what is the scientific process that takes place during birth whereby a foetus turns in a person as it passes through the canal?

    "Birth"


  • #7219
    ELM327
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,109 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    So what is the scientific process that takes place during birth whereby a foetus turns in a person as it passes through the canal?

    1 - Define Foetus (Hint: it's the developing entity during gestation)
    2 - Define baby (Hint: It's the entity post gestation).
    3 - Hint: Gestation ends when it is complete, ie when birth occurs


  • #7220
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    Who exactly established that? Please show me the scientific evidence which proves your theory?

    Can you please provide evidence that a 6 week old zygote should have the same rights as a living citizen, thanks.


  • #7221
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,771 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    B0jangles wrote: »
    Just saw this on facebook - a leaflet from 1982 warning about the possible effects the 8th would have on women's healthcare

    aJ33K08.jpg
    FzPgvzQ.jpg
    HaqsmPV.jpg
    yNIQVNW.jpg

    The dangers were known long before it came into effect but 35 years later we're still trying get to rid of it.

    Shameful.

    So the abortion advocates were telling lies then as well.

    So is the morning after pill banned?
    Women do get treated if ill in pregnancy even if poses a risk to the life of the unborn.
    Women not treated for high blood pressure in pregnancy?
    But they did use 'may' a lot since they were not dealing with truths.

    So many falsehoods that didn't happen from the anti-amendment side in 1983.


  • Advertisement
  • #7222
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,812 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    Mod: Reports flooding in faster than they can be dealt with. Please bear with us.



    Some people need to take some time to chill out. It's a nice and sunny Friday lads.


  • #7223
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,812 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    Mod: Thread reopened.

    However, some things need to be reiterated as people seem to be forgetful.

    1) Don't question moderator actions on thread. Seriously, this is boards 101. It clutters up the thread. Report posts and move on. PM the mod in question if you have a question to ask. Any more of this and it'll be straight to cards/bans.

    2) Don't discuss other posters' posts in other forums, as it is dickish behaviour. If you want to discuss other posters' posts from within After Hours, only do it if it is in some relevant context.

    3) Stop accusing posters of being in US (or whatever) time zones. It is taking cheap shots and adding nothing to the discussion. This has been warned about before so any more will result in cards/bans.



    Have deleted some posts because the last few pages is a bickering mess. And ffs, the weather is nice, so why can't everybody play nice?


  • #7224
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    RobertKK wrote: »
    So the abortion advocates were telling lies then as well.

    So is the morning after pill banned?
    Women do get treated if ill in pregnancy even if poses a risk to the life of the unborn.
    Women not treated for high blood pressure in pregnancy?
    But they did use 'may' a lot since they were not dealing with truths.

    So many falsehoods that didn't happen from the anti-amendment side in 1983.

    OR treatments for some conditions have moved on since the 80s.

    Incidentally; termination of pregnancy is still the only option for Toxaemia, or pre-eclampsia as it is now usually called.


  • #7225
    pitifulgod
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,282 ✭✭✭pitifulgod


    RobertKK wrote: »
    So the abortion advocates were telling lies then as well.

    So is the morning after pill banned?
    Women do get treated if ill in pregnancy even if poses a risk to the life of the unborn.
    Women not treated for high blood pressure in pregnancy?
    But they did use 'may' a lot since they were not dealing with truths.

    So many falsehoods that didn't happen from the anti-amendment side in 1983.

    To use an example, a woman has cancer and wishes to avail of a drug trial. This medical drug has a potentially higher survival rate. She cannot have a medical trial as an abortion is required. That's being refused a treatment no? This has happened.
    https://amp.independent.ie/regionals/goreyguardian/news/abortion-nightmare-for-cancer-sufferer-michelle-27340507.html?__twitter_impression=true


  • #7226
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    RobertKK wrote: »
    So is the morning after pill banned?
    Women do get treated if ill in pregnancy even if poses a risk to the life of the unborn.
    Women not treated for high blood pressure in pregnancy?
    But they did use 'may' a lot since they were not dealing with truths.

    The MAP is not banned, because the courts decided the 8th does not apply from fertilization, and the poor little zygote has no legal protection at all until implantation. This court case could have gone the other way as outlined in the pamphlet - the prolifers certainly thought it would.

    Women do not get treated for some conditions. There are medications like chemo which doctors will not give you if pregnant, and you can't get an abortion (here) to start them. Only option is a trip to England.

    They predicted the X case injunction, and we had to have a referendum to fix that issue (13th).

    They predicted the issue with abortion information, and we had to have another referendum (14th) to fix that.

    And, not mentioned, but both Alan Shatter in the Dail and the AG on record said the amendment would have the opposite effect of its intention and would make legal abortion a constitutional necessity.


  • #7227
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Can you please provide evidence that a 6 week old zygote should have the same rights as a living citizen, thanks.

    You are the one advocating repealing the 8th amendment, the onus is on you to to outline the basis for changing the status quo and to prove that a 6 week old zygote should not have a right to life.


  • #7228
    Triceratops Ballet
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,894 ✭✭✭Triceratops Ballet


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    You are the one advocating repealing the 8th amendment, the onus is on you to to outline the basis for changing the status quo and to prove that a 6 week old zygote should not have a right to life.

    Because it's right to life directly impacts on the rights of another living breathing human being


  • #7229
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    This post has been deleted.


  • #7230
    baylah17
    Closed Accounts Posts: 790 ✭✭✭baylah17


    AnneFrank wrote: »
    ELM327 wrote: »
    The one thread, and not trolling, just quoting some of your one liners.Not just this thread actually, multiple threads.
    AhGo suck on your rosary beads lol Seriously though You need to try living You know Get a life ChillRelaxHave sexEnjoy sexGreet the world with a smile


  • Advertisement
  • #7231
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    Triceratops Ballet wrote: »
    Because it's right to life directly impacts on the rights of another living breathing human being

    How does a baby in a woman's, who did not choose to be there, impact on anyone else's rights?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement