Water John wrote: » Ah that's what happened. Most of those who were going to vote no, were taken off the Register.
fxotoole wrote: » Something something white genocide something something Islamification of Europe
Sheeps wrote: » How do doctors reconcile the oath they've taken with facilitating abortions on demand?
sdanseo wrote: » I'm a bit confused by the "Home to Vote" thing. The DFA clearly says on its website that people must be ordinarily resident in Ireland to be on the register of electors. Yet many politicians seem to be openly endorsing it and the rule seems to be wholsale ignored and unenforced. I do support citizens being allowed to return and vote for referenda by the way. It just seems strange that unless I'm missing something, there seems to be so much flouting of a pretty basic law to an extent that could well have influence the result (although not significantly enough to affect the outcome).
Fighting Tao wrote: » They understand the terms used unlike you. No one is killed during an abortion.
fxotoole wrote: » Still waiting for a definition of what "social abortion" and "abortion on demand" actually mean
Water John wrote: » Doctors don't take a Hippocratic Oath.
Grayson wrote: » I just saw thishttps://twitter.com/jshocds/status/999974760414052352 When the right lose they always see conspiracies and claim the vote wasn't fair.
Sheeps wrote: » That's not true.
Fighting Tao wrote: » If you don’t wish to educate yourself no one else can help you.
Sheeps wrote: » I'm very well educated. You're choosing to rationalise abortion by dehumanising the foetus. The foetus may not be a conscious sentient being, but it certainly is alive, and it certainly is killed when you take an abortion pill. To claim otherwise is pure ignorance.
The Golden Miller wrote: » Abortion for any reason I would of thought. The yes do seem to fixated on averting any discussion of an actual topic by tediously trying to rephrase labels. The are so cuddly and great, who's coming out with me to faux celebrate the greatest day in out history, while we cry and throw meaningless slogans around? Apparently at some point today, women went from having no rights to loads of rights. Up the Republic...and er...women's rights I think?
Sheeps wrote: » I'm very well educated.
Sheeps wrote: » I'm very well educated. You're choosing to rationalise abortion by dehumanising the foetus. The foetus may not be a conscious sentient being, but it certainly is alive, regardless of a dependency on being hosted in a womb. It is with certainty that when you take an abortion pill it is killed. To claim otherwise is pure ignorance.
The Golden Miller wrote: » Abortion for any reason I would of thought. The yes do seem to fixated on averting any discussion of an actual topic by tediously trying to rephrase labels. They are so cuddly and great, who's coming out with me to faux celebrate the greatest day in our history, while we cry and throw meaningless slogans around? Apparently at some point today, women went from having no rights to loads of rights. Up the Republic...and er...women's rights I think?
Haylee Purple Showboat wrote: » And therein lies the debate.....and so we go round and round again :eek:
Fighting Tao wrote: » So is sperm and eggs. So you’ve never had a **** or a wet dream? No need to answer because I know you have killed billions of living things.
fxotoole wrote: » So both "abortion on demand" and "social abortion" mean the same thing - i.e. Abortion for any reason. And you're the one moaning about meaningless slogans?
Sheeps wrote: » Correct, if you've ever had a **** your sperm that are very much alive will die. When you impregnate someone, most of your sperm will die. This is a fact, to contest otherwise is simply ridiculous. The only question that remains is where you draw the line at what stage of development you're ok with killing the organism.
JP Liz V1 wrote: » Why is Simon Harris and Leo being hailed as loveable heroes