Can a Christian vote for unlimited abortion?

NuMarvel · 24-04-2018 03:12PM

end of the road wrote: »

i have read that facebook page. but i am still voting no, as i believe that if we hold out a bit longer, we can get a much much better abortion regime then what is proposed.

That's up there with thinking we'll get a referendum to reform the Seanad. Spoilers: we won't. Not anytime soon anyway.

end of the road wrote: »

we don't need abortion on demand to deal with the hard cases. had the government decided to deal with those cases only, and even better, decided that legislation could only be changed by referendum rather then simply at the whim of the politicians, i think there would be a lot bigger support for change and a lot of no votes would be yes votes for repeal..

The notion that the government could have put forward an alternative amendment to deal with only the hard cases has been well and truly debunked. And it's telling that anytime someone resurrects that idea, they say nothing that addresses the reasons it's debunked; they act as if it's the first time someone's said it.

As for legislation to be changed by referendum, the constitution already makes provision for this, under Article 27. Maybe you can explain why this isn't sufficient for you? Particularly when our own experience and international experience is that legislators tend not to change abortion laws "on a whim".

end of the road · 24-04-2018 04:09PM

NuMarvel wrote: »

The notion that the government could have put forward an alternative amendment to deal with only the hard cases has been well and truly debunked. And it's telling that anytime someone resurrects that idea, they say nothing that addresses the reasons it's debunked; they act as if it's the first time someone's said it.

i don't believe it has been debunked. unless you are talking about putting it in the constitution, which it seems there maybe difficulties with that. but implementing legislation to allow abortion in certain circumstances only with a statement that this legislation will only be changed after a referendum. so if the politicians want to change the legislation, they have to consult the people first.

NuMarvel · 24-04-2018 04:14PM

end of the road wrote: »

i don't believe it has been debunked. unless you are talking about putting it in the constitution, which it seems there maybe difficulties with that. but implementing legislation to allow abortion in certain circumstances only with a statement that this legislation will only be changed after a referendum. so if the politicians want to change the legislation, they have to consult the people first.

Yep, the issues with putting that into legislation have been pointed out. Perhaps not in this thread, but certainly in one of the threads you've been part of. Long story short, a provision like this wouldn't be legally binding, so it wouldn't address any of your concerns.

Now, could you address my question as to why the present provisions in the constitution about referring legislation to the people aren't sufficient for you?

....... · 24-04-2018 04:16PM

This post has been deleted.

end of the road · 24-04-2018 04:37PM

NuMarvel wrote: »

Yep, the issues with putting that into legislation have been pointed out. Perhaps not in this thread, but certainly in one of the threads you've been part of. Long story short, a provision like this wouldn't be legally binding, so it wouldn't address any of your concerns.

Now, could you address my question as to why the present provisions in the constitution about referring legislation to the people aren't sufficient for you?

they are but i want it legally binding that abortion legislation can only be changed via referendum.

robarmstrong · 24-04-2018 04:40PM

end of the road wrote: »

i want it legally binding that abortion legislation can only be changed via referendum.

I could see the sense in that, stops future governments coming in and making changes as they see fit, hopefully they add that to the legislation going forward.

NuMarvel · 24-04-2018 04:59PM

end of the road wrote: »

they are but i want it legally binding that abortion legislation can only be changed via referendum.

The Article 27 provisions I referred to are binding on all legislation, including current or future abortion legislation, so that sorts that out.

antiskeptic · 26-04-2018 09:18AM

This pro-"choice" thing.

It seems to me that choice necessitates consequences of choice. I mean, strip the danger out of motorcycling and the exhilaration of motorcycling disappears along with it. Strip out satisfaction obtained from solving a complex puzzle and the puzzle loses it's pleasure. Strip out the healthy consequences of eating healthily / unhealthily and your choice is rendered irrelevant

If you set aside the numerical irrelevancy of pregnancies involving rape, fatal fetal abnormality and the like, you are left with the bulk of abortions being the result of "lifestyle choice"

Is it not the case that abortions in these cases are merely an unwillingness to face the consequences of your choice?

Pro-choice is in fact, anti-choice?

robarmstrong · 26-04-2018 09:24AM

antiskeptic wrote: »

Is it not the case that abortions in these cases are merely an unwillingness to face the consequences of your choice?

Pro-choice is in fact, anti-choice?

Nope, nope, nope and more nope.

You haven't even brought sterility, uterine abnormalities or contraceptive failures into account.

If someone chooses to have an operation rendering them sterile, there's still a sliver of a chance of pregnancy. How is that a consequence of their choice if they're going to the extreme to ensure they don't fall pregnant?

If contraceptive failure occurs, there's a sliver of a chance of pregnancy, how is that a consequence of their choice? Should they have simply not had sex if they did not intend to procreate?

Uterine abnormalities (a number of them at least) mean that the chances of a live birth are very slim due to the whole fate of the pregnancy resting on what part of the uterus the baby implants. For those women who are actively trying for a baby they'd have to endure numerous miscarriages instead of being granted a legal abortion here.

Delirium · 26-04-2018 09:28AM

supporting the idea that a person can have (or not) an abortion is anti-choice?

we in opposite-land??

robarmstrong · 26-04-2018 09:34AM

Delirium wrote: »

we in opposite-land??

Yes.

smacl · 26-04-2018 09:53AM

antiskeptic wrote: »

It seems to me that choice necessitates consequences of choice. I mean, strip the danger out of motorcycling and the exhilaration of motorcycling disappears along with it. Strip out satisfaction obtained from solving a complex puzzle and the puzzle loses it's pleasure. Strip out the healthy consequences of eating healthily / unhealthily and your choice is rendered irrelevant

So what, strip out the risk of the woman getting pregnant and having sex ceases to be fun? Seriously? You might want to rethink that one.

antiskeptic · 26-04-2018 11:25AM

robarmstrong wrote: »

Nope, nope, nope and more nope.

You haven't even brought sterility, uterine abnormalities or contraceptive failures into account.

If someone chooses to have an operation rendering them sterile, there's still a sliver of a chance of pregnancy. How is that a consequence of their choice if they're going to the extreme to ensure they don't fall pregnant?

Again, the focus appears to be on the outliers rather than what will constitute the bulk of abortions. Can we concentrate on the bulk?

Contraceptive failure strikes as on a par with grip failure. I ride a motorcycle, I round a bend, I experience grip failure, I crash.

Grip failure is an inherent possibility of motorcycling. If I engage in motorcycling, I accept the consequences of things which are inherent to it.

By all means try and reduce the risk of grip failure. But to suppose I can enjoy the motorcycling without consequences..

robarmstrong · 26-04-2018 11:28AM

antiskeptic wrote: »

Again, the focus appears to be on the outliers rather than what will constitute the bulk of abortions. Can we concentrate on the bulk?

Contraceptive failure strikes as on a par with grip failure. I ride a motorcycle, I round a bend, I experience grip failure, I crash.

Grip failure is an inherent possibility of motorcycling. If I engage in motorcycling, I accept the consequences of things which are inherent to it.

By all means try and reduce the risk of grip failure. But to suppose I can enjoy the motorcycling without consequences..

So what's your end goal here, what are you trying to say to these women?

Don't have sex if you don't want to be pregnant as it's one of the consequences of choosing to have sex? Do you honestly have any idea how absurd and ridiculous you're sounding right now?

Delirium · 26-04-2018 11:33AM

antiskeptic wrote: »

Again, the focus appears to be on the outliers rather than what will constitute the bulk of abortions. Can we concentrate on the bulk?

Contraceptive failure strikes as on a par with grip failure. I ride a motorcycle, I round a bend, I experience grip failure, I crash.

Grip failure is an inherent possibility of motorcycling. If I engage in motorcycling, I accept the consequences of things which are inherent to it.

By all means try and reduce the risk of grip failure. But to suppose I can enjoy the motorcycling without consequences..

You do realise an abortion is one possible consequence of becoming pregnant?

EDIT: to clarify, you seem to be suggesting that having protected sex means that there is a acceptance of becoming a parent. Which seems contrary to the point of using contraceptives in the first place.

....... · 26-04-2018 11:49AM

This post has been deleted.

smacl · 26-04-2018 11:51AM

antiskeptic wrote: »

By all means try and reduce the risk of grip failure. But to suppose I can enjoy the motorcycling without consequences..

So if you have a motorcycling accident, should be left to die on the roadside, after all it was your fault? Or perhaps you could travel to the UK and get treated by the NHS?

end of the road · 26-04-2018 01:28PM

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

they should be forced to honour the unborn's right to life yes . after that if they don't want to be a parent they don't have to be. there are options open to them.
either way there is no excuse for having an abortion in the circumstances of simple contraceptive failure/lifestyle/convenience.

SusieBlue · 26-04-2018 01:31PM

end of the road wrote: »

they should be forced to honour the unborn's right to life yes . after that if they don't want to be a parent they don't have to be. there are options open to them.
either way there is no excuse for having an abortion in the circumstances of simple contraceptive failure/lifestyle/convenience.

Can you please outline some of these options, I asked you a few pages ago to clarify but you never responded?

We know adoption isn't possible in this country, so I can only presume you are encouraging dumping newborn babies into the care system?

Also what options are there financially, besides "working more hours" and "contacting a charity"? Working more hours isn't very helpful advice to an unemployed new mother with no babysitter. Charities are there for short term crisis's, not to support an entire family's living costs for 18+ years.

Please explain what these options are because so far your advice and opinions just aren't stacking up.

Soldah · 26-04-2018 01:33PM

J C wrote: »

I don't believe that a Christian can morally vote for unlimited abortion.

The Sixth Commandment is very simple and very clear ... 'Thou shalt not kill'.

It means that you cannot kill yourself or another Human Being, except in self defence (or the defence of another Human Being) where no other option is available.
This is the basis for all laws protecting the person and criminalising the killing of other people in Common Law Jurisprudence.

Induced abortion is ethically and morally wrong ... except where the life of the mother is directly threatened and there is no other option available to save her.

This is the current law in Ireland.

Voting to expand Irish Law to allow the unlimited killing of unborn children is not something that any Christian (or other monotheist, indeed) can do in conscience and in clear contravention of the Sixth Commandment of God.

By selfy I am not against abortion but alone I am Protestant but I think me about non abortion is better rights not even allways but in 50 percents I thought with Catholic rights with non abortion conservative political think this way and Catholics too. :ninja:

smacl · 26-04-2018 01:42PM

Soldah wrote: »

By selfy I am not against abortion but alone I am Protestant but I think me about non abortion is better rights not even allways but in 50 percents I thought with Catholic rights with non abortion conservative political think this way and Catholics too. :ninja:

Erm.....?

....... · 26-04-2018 01:59PM

This post has been deleted.

eviltwin · 26-04-2018 02:09PM

Every single pregnant woman knows her options. If she's choosing abortion it's not out of ignorance, it's because she's made the decision that its her best option.

I wouldn't want to see any woman pressured into a decision she doesn't want because of other concerns, we should have a society that fully supports all choice but that includes abortion.

No matter how much we offer a woman with a crisis pregnancy there will always be those who just don't want to be pregnant and no amount of patronising rubbish from certain groups will change that.

antiskeptic · 26-04-2018 02:32PM

robarmstrong wrote: »

So what's your end goal here, what are you trying to say to these women?

Don't have sex if you don't want to be pregnant as it's one of the consequences of choosing to have sex? Do you honestly have any idea how absurd and ridiculous you're sounding right now?

Pregnancy is a potential consequence. Sex is something chosen for (in the cohort we are considering). Abortion evades the consequences.

Rather than simply leap to the answer 'absurd', why not show the work done to arrive at it.

You have some work to show dont you?

robarmstrong · 26-04-2018 02:37PM

antiskeptic wrote: »

Pregnancy is a potential consequence. Sex is something chosen for (in the cohort we are considering). Abortion evades the consequences.

Rather than simply leap to the answer 'absurd', why not show the work done to arrive at it.

You have some work to show dont you?

Not at all, any time you post your thought processes you're doing the work for me.

Please continue to elaborate with your ridiculous theories.

Let's say sex isn't chosen for, let's say it's rape. Is abortion in your mind evading the consequence of falling pregnant from forced intercourse?

antiskeptic · 26-04-2018 02:40PM

....... wrote: »

Certainly, the bulk of abortions are sought because of contraceptive failure (over 50% according to the stats).

So you think that people should accept the consequences of getting pregnant when they took steps not to get pregnant?

You do realise that the stated effective rates from the manufacturers are not 100%. That there is no contraceptive that is 100% guaranteed effective?

Could you bridge the gap between 50% and not 100% with something other than irresponsibility and immaturity?

No tyre promises to save a careless rider. No helmet promised to save from every conceivable impact

You play the game you take what comes with it. Else stay out of the game.

Abortion is just a hangover cure: we want all of the upside without any of the downside. Human nature of course: but a hollowed out kind of existence. Childlike. Immature. Selfish

robarmstrong · 26-04-2018 02:43PM

antiskeptic wrote: »

Abortion is just a hangover cure: we want all of the upside without any of the downside. Human nature of course: but a hollowed out kind of existence. Childlike. Immature. Selfish

Is that so?

So is me fighting for my partner to have access to a safe and legal abortion just me fighting for a hangover cure, right? It's childlike, immature and selfish of me to try to avoid her having a random miscarriage due to her medical issues.

antiskeptic · 26-04-2018 02:49PM

robarmstrong wrote: »

Is that so?

So is me fighting for my partner to have access to a safe and legal abortion just me fighting for a hangover cure, right? It's childlike, immature and selfish of me to try to avoid her having a random miscarriage due to her medical issues.

Remember me specifically saying I was talking about the bulk cohort rather than the cohort of the margins?

robarmstrong · 26-04-2018 02:51PM

antiskeptic wrote: »

Remember me specifically saying I was talking about the bulk cohort rather than the cohort of the margins?

antiskeptic wrote: »

Abortion is just a hangover cure: we want all of the upside without any of the downside. Human nature of course: but a hollowed out kind of existence. Childlike. Immature. Selfish

Sounds like a blanket statement for all abortion there.

Remember you actually making a coherent point on this issue?

Me neither.

antiskeptic · 26-04-2018 02:53PM

robarmstrong wrote: »

Not at all, any time you post your thought processes you're doing the work for me.

Let's say sex isn't chosen for, let's say it's rape. Is abortion in your mind evading the consequence of falling pregnant from forced intercourse?

I checked back. It was indeed to yourself that I specifically mentioned the cohort I was talking of. Not rape, not fatal foetal abnormality etc.

Can a Christian vote for unlimited abortion?

Comments