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

Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

1…171172174176177…246

Comments

  • #5192
    Wrongway1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,486 ✭✭✭Wrongway1985


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    I think the prolife movement in general also needs to move away from some of those who are only opposed to abortion on religious grounds. Almost everyone I know who voted No is an atheist and would have voted Yes but for the 12 weeks without restriction.
    In exit polls only 5% who voted identified as Atheist, majority were Yes voters, Atheist Ireland were backing a Yes vote, account you linked is very bizarre mostly retweets from pro religious sources :pac: not very Atheist if I may say so :pac: .


  • #5193
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,552 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    gctest50 wrote: »
    Placental neurokinin B (NKB) contains phosphocoline and that's also uses by the parasitic nematode worm to avoid attack from the immune syatem of the host

    Is the fetus a parasite?

    Glazers Out!



  • #5194
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,552 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    fxotoole wrote: »
    Surely you mean baby, not fetus, right?

    Surely you realize you're trolling...

    An answer would be nice.

    Glazers Out!



  • #5195
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,495 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    sabat wrote: »
    The Caucasus is in Europe; wikipedia also mentions a growing problem in the Balkans. What's your problem with my suggested law? Why not pre-empt the possibility of this becoming an issue and send out a message that it's unacceptable?

    Have you any evidence or should laws be written for everything in case one person does it?. E.g. building a set of wings like Icarus and jumping off a high building

    I presume you have zero evidence of the handful of people from the Caucasus gender selecting in Ireland.


  • #5196
    tretorn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,800 ✭✭✭tretorn


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    No it is not like saying that AT ALL in fact. But this is a common error. The difference is, however, quite large.

    In your example you are talking about two difference instances of human sentience, that of a pre-teen and that of a teen.

    When people are talking about the fetus they are talking about the complete ABSENCE of that faculty however.

    So you are talking about two different statuses of sentience, while they are talking about the absence or presence of it at all.

    To pretend those two things are "like" each other therefore, is simply an error. As if I was talking about the fruit bowl being empty, and rather than acknowledge it to be empty you start telling me about the difference between apples and oranges.

    The human brain is present in the foetus from very early on and its this that decides whether you are human or not. You can argue about the degree of sentients all you like but the fact is the foetus is developing its eventual intelligence everyday thats its allowed to live.
    The foetus also has its entire genetic code in every cell of the twelve week old body and its also has its own unique finger print. Its not going to be anything other than a human baby when its eventually born and the person thats born is the exact same person it was at twelve weeks and its not really sentient in anyway either.

    The main reason abortionists dont like killing babies at later stages of gestation is not because the baby is too big, its because its too human so impossible to pretend its anything other than a human baby.Earlier is gestation people decide that a foetus isnt human so its ok to call it a parasite and parasites are just leeches so no moral arguement to be made against removing it from its life support in the womb.


  • Advertisement
  • #5197
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,552 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    tretorn wrote: »
    The human brain is present in the foetus from very early on and its this that decides whether you are human or not. You can argue about the degree of sentients all you like but the fact is the foetus is developing its eventual intelligence everyday thats its allowed to live.
    The foetus also has its entire genetic code in every cell of the twelve week old body and its also has its own unique finger print. Its not going to be anything other than a human baby when its eventually born and the person thats born is the exact same person it was at twelve weeks and its not really sentient in anyway either.

    The main reason abortionists dont like killing babies at later stages of gestation is not because the baby is too big, its because its too human so impossible to pretend its anything other than a human baby.Earlier is gestation people decide that a foetus isnt human so its ok to call it a parasite and parasites are just leeches so no moral arguement to be made against removing it from its life support in the womb.

    I'd love if the people people who formed a loose consensus on the status of a fetus being equal to that of a parasite earlier in the thread could qualify their thoughts on the subject.
    Apologies but I'm going to bang this drum until a straight answer is given.

    EDIT; I am assuming that asking a simple question in a respectful manner is something that the moderation team do not take issue with.
    I keep posting it because the conversation here turns very quickly and I feel some posters would rather not address this issue.

    Glazers Out!



  • #5198
    sabat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,896 ✭✭✭sabat


    Fighting Tao wrote: »
    Have you any evidence or should laws be written for everything in case one person does it?. E.g. building a set of wings like Icarus and jumping off a high building

    I presume you have zero evidence of the handful of people from the Caucasus gender selecting in Ireland.

    There are innumerable laws on the books that are rarely used but it's still proper for them to be there-bestiality for example.


  • #5199
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,552 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Still curious to take the pulse of the thread in relation to the parasitic fetus issue...

    Glazers Out!



  • #5200
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,495 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    Serious question to those who voted No. I suspect that the uptake will be vert poor but I'll try anyway.

    If you, your wife, your sister, your daughter, your niece etc., needed an abortion in order to survive before repealing, would you have just turned around and said to them something along the lines of "sorry, but you must die because the foetus inside you is more important", or would you fight tooth and nail for an abortion?


  • #5201
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,552 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Fighting Tao wrote: »
    Serious question to those who voted No. I suspect that the uptake will be vert poor but I'll try anyway.

    If you, your wife, your sister, your daughter, your niece etc., needed an abortion in order to survive before repealing, would you have just turned around and said to them something along the lines of "sorry, but you must die because the foetus inside you is more important", or would you fight tooth and nail for an abortion?

    I wouldn't take issue with abortion in those circumstances. The issue of unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks is my only gripe, everything else is fine with me. I expected I would vote yes on this referendum before the details were announced.

    Glazers Out!



  • Advertisement
  • #5202
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,495 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    sabat wrote: »
    There are innumerable laws on the books that are rarely used but it's still proper for them to be there-bestiality for example.

    Beastaility...each to their own. Do you think having a law against it prevents it anyway? Who's going to tell, the animal?

    Having a law about gender selection, if someone really wants to select the gender, will do what the 8th does and export the problem. It won't stop it.


  • #5203
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,495 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    nullzero wrote: »
    I wouldn't take issue with abortion in those circumstances. The issue of unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks is my only gripe, everything else is fine with me. I expected I would vote yes on this referendum before the details were announced.

    So you would support abortion when the woman was at serious risk. However, by voting no, you were going against whatever she needs. You are supporting a death sentence for someone you look in the face, love....


  • #5204
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,552 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Hey bootpaws, I see you thanked a post there, so you're still active on the thread.
    Could you please expand on the notion of a fetus being a parasite?
    Thanks in advance.

    Glazers Out!



  • #5205
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,363 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    tretorn wrote: »
    The human brain is present in the foetus from very early on and its this that decides whether you are human or not.

    What do you mean the human brain is present from early on? Can you explain EXACTLY what you think is present, when and where. Do not hold back on the technical jargon either if you please, you will find me well versed.

    Secondly what definition of "Human" are you using because I know of no definition that is decided by the criteria you suggest.
    tretorn wrote: »
    You can argue about the degree of sentients all you like but the fact is the foetus is developing its eventual intelligence everyday thats its allowed to live.

    Weirdly you are still not getting it. I am not arguing about "degrees of sentience" at all. Even a little bit. I am discussing the whole and complete absence of it. Something else entirely. It is YOU, with your pre-teen and teen example who was arguing over "degrees of sentience" not me. YOU brought that into the discussion. I did not.
    tretorn wrote: »
    The foetus also has its entire genetic code in every cell of the twelve week old body and its also has its own unique finger print.

    Yet having a genetic code, even a unique one, does not seem to be a mediation point for morality and ethics and rights ANYWHERE in the annals of philosophy and discourse. So I am not sure why you are bringing in irrelevancies. Will you have fries with that red herring?
    tretorn wrote: »
    Its not going to be anything other than a human baby when its eventually born and the person thats born is the exact same person it was at twelve weeks and its not really sentient in anyway either.

    You think a new born baby is not sentient in ANY way? Could you elaborate on that further because this is the first I have heard that anywhere ever.
    tretorn wrote: »
    The main reason abortionists dont like killing babies at later stages of gestation is not because the baby is too big, its because its too human so impossible to pretend its anything other than a human baby.

    It is always nice when people get psychic and decide to tell you what they think your position is. However given you are not ACTUALLY psychic, perhaps it would be better to allow people to tell you what their position actually is, rather than you inventing one for them?

    Not that I have ever actually met "an abortionist" nor would I even know what one is if I met one.

    But I certainly know that MY position on when I think it is ok to terminate, and when I think it is not......... is not even remotely similar to the one you have invented here.
    tretorn wrote: »
    Earlier is gestation people decide that a foetus isnt human so its ok to call it a parasite and parasites are just leeches so no moral arguement to be made against removing it from its life support in the womb.

    You will have to take that up with people who want to call it a parasite. This is not a description I would use for a few reasons.


  • #5206
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,552 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Fighting Tao wrote: »
    So you would support abortion when the woman was at serious risk. However, by voting no, you were going against whatever she needs. You are supporting a death sentence for someone you look in the face, love....

    No, I felt a different proposal could and should have been put forward in the event on a no vote.
    I answered honestly and don't appreciate the tone you took in response.

    Glazers Out!



  • #5207
    Cupcake_Crisis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,448 ✭✭✭✭Cupcake_Crisis


    tretorn wrote: »
    The human brain is present in the foetus from very early on and its this that decides whether you are human or not. You can argue about the degree of sentients all you like but the fact is the foetus is developing its eventual intelligence everyday thats its allowed to live.
    The foetus also has its entire genetic code in every cell of the twelve week old body and its also has its own unique finger print. Its not going to be anything other than a human baby when its eventually born and the person thats born is the exact same person it was at twelve weeks and its not really sentient in anyway either.

    The main reason abortionists dont like killing babies at later stages of gestation is not because the baby is too big, its because its too human so impossible to pretend its anything other than a human baby.Earlier is gestation people decide that a foetus isnt human so its ok to call it a parasite and parasites are just leeches so no moral arguement to be made against removing it from its life support in the womb.

    Do you believe that life begins at conception?


  • #5208
    Cupcake_Crisis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,448 ✭✭✭✭Cupcake_Crisis


    nullzero wrote: »
    No, I felt a different proposal could and should have been put forward in the event on a no vote.
    I answered honestly and don't appreciate the tone you took in response.

    A different proposal was put forward, several times, and each tone it was shot down by the same people who tried to stop repeal. When the choice was placed in the public’s hands they made their choice.


  • #5209
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,552 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »
    A different proposal was put forward, several times, and each tone it was shot down by the same people who tried to stop repeal. When the choice was placed in the public’s hands they made their choice.

    I think unrestricted abortion isn't right. That's my opinion. I respect the vote and realize that it has passed. I do take issue with assertions like a fetus being a parasite which is unscientific, on that topic, bootpaws you rascal, I see you thanked the post I'm quoting. Any chance you could address the question I've put to you a number of times already?

    Glazers Out!



  • #5210
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,495 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    nullzero wrote: »
    No, I felt a different proposal could and should have been put forward in the event on a no vote.
    I answered honestly and don't appreciate the tone you took in response.


    35 years and no other proposal ever was put forward.

    Not sure what you mean by my tone as none was implied. Maybe the point I was making made you feel and think a little and thats why you didn't like the tone you choose to read my reply in.


  • #5211
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,552 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Fighting Tao wrote: »
    35 years and no other proposal ever was put forward.

    Not sure what you mean by my tone as none was implied. Maybe the point I was making made you feel and think a little and thats why you didn't like the tone you choose to read my reply in.

    Taking the emotional route to the moral high ground "someone you look in the face, love..."
    Don't be coy about it.

    Glazers Out!



  • Advertisement
  • #5212
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,495 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    nullzero wrote: »
    Taking the emotional route to the moral high ground "someone you look in the face, love..."
    Don't be coy about it.

    That was not tone.

    The country has had emotion shoved down it's throat from the No campaign. I highlight a realistic situation that everyone voted probably should have thought about because it could affect them some day, and I'm the bad guy? Btw, I hope you don't have to face a real situation like that ever. No one deserves to.


  • #5213
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,552 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Fighting Tao wrote: »
    That was not tone.

    The country has had emotion shoved down it's throat from the No campaign. I highlight a realistic situation that everyone voted probably should have thought about because it could affect them some day, and I'm the bad guy? Btw, I hope you don't have to face a real situation like that ever. No one deserves to.


    Well what was the tone?

    Emotive language was used by both sides, to assign it to one side alone isn't accurate.

    Glazers Out!



  • #5214
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,495 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    nullzero wrote: »
    Well what was the tone?

    Emotive language was used by both sides, to assign it to one side alone isn't accurate.

    There was no tone. Be offended all you want. I’m sorry if you suddenly discovered that you have feelings deep down.(there was a genuine tone of sorrow to my last sentence)


  • #5215
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,552 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Fighting Tao wrote: »
    There was no tone. Be offended all you want. I’m sorry if you suddenly discovered that you have feelings deep down.(there was a genuine tone of sorrow to my last sentence)

    I don't agree with you so I have no feelings?

    Glazers Out!



  • #5216
    Crea
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,049 ✭✭✭Crea


    Oxford dictionary definition - An organism that lives in or on an organism of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.

    So by definition an embryo/foetus would be a parasite.


  • #5217
    Fighting Tao
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,495 ✭✭✭Fighting Tao


    nullzero wrote: »
    I don't agree with you so I have no feelings?

    I didn’t say that but rereading I can see how it’s misleading. I meant feelings on this subject that you didn’t realise you had.


  • #5218
    sabat
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,896 ✭✭✭sabat


    Crea wrote: »
    Oxford dictionary definition - An organism that lives in or on an organism of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.

    So by definition an embryo/foetus would be a parasite.

    By that definition all children are parasites.


  • #5219
    nullzero
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,552 ✭✭✭✭nullzero
    °°°°°


    Crea wrote: »
    Oxford dictionary definition - An organism that lives in or on an organism of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.

    So by definition an embryo/foetus would be a parasite.

    Another species...
    You're not reading what you're posting.
    A fetus is a developing human, it's mother is human, that makes them the same species.

    Glazers Out!



  • #5220
    Wrongway1985
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,486 ✭✭✭Wrongway1985


    Former parasites sure we are in a sense.


  • Advertisement
  • #5221
    WillContribute
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34 ✭WillContribute


    Crea wrote: »
    Oxford dictionary definition - An organism that lives in or on an organism of another species (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other's expense.

    So by definition an embryo/foetus would be a parasite.

    Both mother and foetus are of the same species. This definition doesn't support the parasite concept.


Advertisement