nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

PopePalpatine

I didn't know whether to post this here or in the Sanctimony of Pro-Lifers thread in t'udder forum - a BBC article on Paraguay's "epidemic" of child pregnancies. Paraguay only allows for abortion if the mother's life is at risk. On average, two girls aged 14 and under become pregnant in Paraguay every day.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

end of the road

Igotadose wrote: »

"Trust women."

is a meaningless irrelevant slogan to be fair. the vast majority of people trust women, those who don't have other issues unrelated to beliefs on abortion.

Igotadose wrote: »

It's all about making it acceptable and nothing to be ashamed of, or embarrassed about. Shoutyourabortion.com is a good site to review.

will never be fully achieved as i said.

Igotadose wrote: »

The losers protesting in front of that Galway clinic are all about shaming and guilt.

you can't be surprised there is opposition to people being able to kill their unborn to be fair. that's just natural. in saying that, if they are going to protest then a gp clinic isn't the best place given it's used by plenty of other people. still though, they have a right to protest and if they do do anything bad the gardai can and will move them on.

Igotadose wrote: »

Feck off the lot of 'em. They could care less about women or the babies once they're born. They're likely funded by the anti-abortion industry from the US, probably through their IONA lackeys in Ireland.

pro-choice got funding as well. what's the problem. it's not anyone elses fault yee didn't get as much funding as pro-life. by the looks of it, not as many people are interested in investing with pro-choice groups as they are with pro-life. and shur look, not caring about certain sections of society isn't exclusive to individuals on 1 side of the debate.

eviltwin

Abortion will never be 100% accepted and that's fine once those who object mind their own business and let the rest of us make our decision free from harassment and bullying

[Deleted User]

end of the road wrote: »

will never be fully achieved as i said.
.

There are still people who are opposed to gay marriage and divorce.

However even is there is some sad minority of bitter cranks, it doesn't prevent something being normalised by definition.

You've offered nothing to show that your side will be any more influential or relevant than the opposition to gay marriage or divorce.
You keep ignoring it because you know it's true.

end of the road

King Mob wrote: »

There are still people who are opposed to gay marriage and divorce.

However even is there is some sad minority of bitter cranks, it doesn't prevent something being normalised by definition.

You've offered nothing to show that your side will be any more influential or relevant than the opposition to gay marriage or divorce.
You keep ignoring it because you know it's true.

no, i ignore it because it ultimately doesn't matter whether it is or isn't true because we have all of the time in the world to achieve our aim of eradicating AOD. rhome wasn't built in a day. people who campaigned against many wrongs faced obsticals along the way including large scale support for what they were campaigning against and pro-life or at least some of them, knew this could be the case with this.

[Deleted User]

end of the road wrote: »

.

no, i ignore it because it ultimately doesn't matter whether it is or isn't true because we have all of the time in the world to achieve our aim of eradicating AOD. rhome wasn't built in a day. people who campaigned against many wrongs faced obsticals along the way including large scale support for what they were campaigning against.

Yup. And the anti divorce and anti gay crowd said the same thing I'm sure.
And they had more support than you did.

SusieBlue

end of the road wrote: »

no, i ignore it because it ultimately doesn't matter whether it is or isn't true because we have all of the time in the world to achieve our aim of eradicating AOD. rhome wasn't built in a day. people who campaigned against many wrongs faced obsticals along the way including large scale support for what they were campaigning against and pro-life or at least some of them, knew this could be the case with this.

There has always been abortion, there will always be abortion.
Making it illegal again will change nothing except it’ll be happening in a different jurisdiction and/or without medical supervision.

gctest50

end of the road wrote: »

...........

pro-choice got funding as well. what's the problem. it's not anyone elses fault yee didn't get as much funding as pro-life.

What's this ? got less funding n still won ?

We sunk yer battyship

aloyisious

end of the road wrote: »

which is irrelevant given his point was about maturnity care.

I'm glad you pointed that out. I thought he was totalling up how much more profitable he reckoned abortions would be for GP's over that from maternity care.

tretorn

King Mob wrote: »

Yup pretty much.
I'm sure he'll whine about the hairs he's splitting, but I'm done giving these guys any benefit of doubt.

He rejects the reality that most people in ireland support the legalisation of abortion and claims that many (no number given) yes voters were in fact anti choice, but actually voted yes to get rid of the 8th.
He has said "his side didn't lose."

He claims this when ever someone points to the fact his side is a smaller minority than those that voted against divorce and gay marriage. He does this because he can't deal with the likelyhood that he and his ilk are very soon to be as irrelevant, pitied and mocked as those other groups.

Factually incorrect.
Most people in Ireland do not support abortion, the majority of the 64 percent who actually voted wanted the 8th Repealed but a third of people who voted didnt want any change at all.
Many people who voted to Repeal the 8th did so because of the hard cases, the FFAs, voting for a change so these sad cases could bedealt with meant the introduction of Abortion on demand and this revolts Irish people for the most part. Abortion is horrible, horrible for women and horrible for the unborn baby and its a way out for men who just want the problem to go away. We have always had abortion and always will but it will never and should never be something that potential parents do without shame. It is shameful to sleep around and get so intoxicated you cant even use contraception and then someone else has to take care of sorting out this problem for you. If you dont feel shame at this then someone has done a very bad job in rearing you.
Two hundred doctors signing up is an indication of how anti abortion Irish doctors and nurses are, most of the medical staff involving themselves in abortion will be non national who wont be given a proper choice, it will be a case of heres your contract and abortion is part of it.
The Rotunda and Holles Street hospitals have already said they are only accepting abortion referrals from within their catchment area, they are dedicated maternity hospitals and they dont want to be de facto abortion clinics for the whole country including the North of Ireland.
Holles Street at present is a hell hole and the last thing that over stretched maternity hospital needs is fifty women arriving every day for free abortions!!!!!!!

SusieBlue

tretorn wrote: »

Factually incorrect.
Most people in Ireland do not support abortion, the majority of the 64 percent who actually voted wanted the 8th Repealed but a third of people who voted didnt want any change at all.
Many people who voted to Repeal the 8th did so because of the hard cases, the FFAs, voting for a change so these sad cases could bedealt with meant the introduction of Abortion on demand and this revolts Irish people for the most part. Abortion is horrible, horrible for women and horrible for the unborn baby and its a way out for men who just want the problem to go away. We have always had abortion and always will but it will never and should never be something that potential parents do without shame. It is shameful to sleep around and get so intoxicated you cant even use contraception and then someone else has to take care of sorting out this problem for you. If you dont feel shame at this then someone has done a very bad job in rearing you.
Two hundred doctors signing up is an indication of how anti abortion Irish doctors and nurses are, most of the medical staff involving themselves in abortion will be non national who wont be given a proper choice, it will be a case of heres your contract and abortion is part of it.
The Rotunda and Holles Street hospitals have already said they are only accepting abortion referrals from within their catchment area, they are dedicated maternity hospitals and they dont want to be de facto abortion clinics for the whole country including the North of Ireland.
Holles Street at present is a hell hole and the last thing that over stretched maternity hospital needs is fifty women arriving every day for free abortions!!!!!!!

200 GPs signing up just 3 working days into the year is an amazing achievement, you’re only fooling yourself by saying otherwise.

Your whole post is just a load of projection about you and your experiences and your opinions about abortion, which aren’t relevant to anyone except yourself.

That’s why we chose to give women their own choice, so they could use their own experiences and opinions to make an informed decision.

Your opinion on whether it’s shameful or acceptable doesn’t concern me, because you, a stranger on the internet, have no relevance in my life.
You need to accept that and move on.

Frankly you just summed up every single thing wrong with the No mentality, your post came across as patronising, judgmental and self important.
It still astonishes me that you and many of your ilk feel that your opinion is so superior that you should be entitled to impose it on all the rest of us, even if we don’t agree with you.

The legislation was proposed and available long before the referendum and Repeal still won by a landslide.
This is what the people wanted.

[Deleted User]

tretorn wrote: »

]
Factually incorrect.
Most people in Ireland do not support abortion, the majority of the 64 percent who actually voted wanted the 8th Repealed but a third of people who voted didnt want any change at all.
Many people who voted to Repeal the 8th did so because of the hard cases, the FFAs, voting for a change so these sad cases could bedealt with meant the introduction of Abortion on demand and this revolts Irish people for the most part.

Cool. Evidence?

smacl

tretorn wrote: »

Factually incorrect. Most people in Ireland do not support abortion

You're clearly wrong, as shown by the exit poll conducted after the referendum into attitudes to abortion. Perhaps when you claim something to be 'factual' you could provide some supporting evidence?

nozzferrahhtoo

end of the road wrote: »

a dark and sad day yes. however if there is any comfort for us, it will be that one day this wrong will be undone. who knows when that day will be

Probably not until you finally stop pretending you have supported your claim that things have a right to become sentient and ACTUALLY support your claim that things have a right to become sentient.

Until that point there appears to be no basis to think that something with the sentience equivalence of a table leg should have any rights, let alone rights that curtail the rights, choices, or well being of an actual sentient agent.

Best of luck with that, and let me know if you ever finally produce something so I can change my opinion and votes on the matter accordingly. So far however EVERY time I ask you to back up your position, you falsely claim you already have. and EVERY time I ask you to link me to where you did, you stop replying and ignore me. Like clockwork.

An_Toirpin wrote: »

The church changed it's position on abortion due to the revolution in our understand about human development in the womb. It was purely based on on science and frankly I'm glad it stood on the right side of history.

Regale me. To which science are you specifically referring, and what position do you think it supports exactly? Your post appears to mention neither.

An_Toirpin wrote: »

Why it begins at conception is because that is the only obvious biological threshold of new life. Other groups have other explainations but they all are referring to the same question, the beginning of human life.

Ah so the only argument you can offer for espousing a particular position is that it is "obvious". Hardly fills the position itself with any value or merit really does it.

However I do note how easily you switch between "life" in one breath and "Human life" in the next as if they are 1:1 synonyms. The reason I am pro-choice however is I see the massive distinction between the two terms, and that our morality, ethics and laws should be in the service of protecting the latter not individual instances of the former.

You might want to ignore that distinction by slipping easily between the terms, but it will not magically make it go away.

An_Toirpin wrote: »

Prochoicers often get bogged down in the idea of ensoulment to attack the idea of life beginning at conception, with ever offering a satisfactory alternative of when life begins apart from vague blabbering.

Calling something you can not rebut "vague blabbering" does not rebut it however. I have frequently, clearly, and robustly provided an alternative over the last few years. No one, least of all you and your cohort on this thread, have rebutted it yet.

An_Toirpin wrote: »

Irish GPs get about 220 for maternity care but 450 to abort. What a shameful country we live in.

Is it enough for you that one number appears to be higher than the other? Is that all your point is being based on?

Or have you any actual break down on what the money is for, how the value was decided, what the intent of the investment actually is, what it was expected to cover or relate to, and what basis for the differences there might actually be?

Maybe provide all of that, and you can distil an actual point out of it. Rather than simply country bashing emotively because you don't like the current situation.

nozzferrahhtoo

splinter65 wrote: »

Do you imagine in some way that 2019 undergraduates in Irish 3rd level institutions are enjoying safe casual sex with no consequences of any kind?

I am struggling to find a single person on the thread saying anything that event remotely suggests that position. I suspect you are pulling this out of an orifice not normally associated with communication.

One could also ask if we imagine that in some way that 2019 undergraduates in Irish 3rd level institutions are enjoying sport with no consequences of any kind?

No one is suggesting actions of any kind come with no consequences. What they are discussing is what education and services provide the best way to reduce, prevent and mitigate those consequences.... and then provide the best options to those who suffer from them all the same.

splinter65 wrote: »

putting even more pressure on young adults to compromise their self esteem and self respect by making sure that they’re “intercourse ready” with baskets of condoms positioned carefully all over the place.

You are projecting your own weird values onto others here. Who is "compromising" anything of the sort? You might have some warped feeling it compromised YOURS for some odd reason(ing) but that does not mean a single other person anywhere else does.

splinter65 wrote: »

I’ve a daughter at WIT and I don’t agree.

The great thing is, you are not required to. But by all means have your daughter express your opinion vicariously through her student vote or pressure her for your own agendas to join the Student Union or other forms of elected representatives so she can campaign on your behalf on the matter. Because your political agendas are of course what her time as a student should be about.

splinter65 wrote: »

I can tell you that the combination of huge amounts of cheap booze and drugs and “no strings attached” sex is destroying the self esteem of both sexes.

Yep you can tell us! Free speech and all that. Tell us however does not make it true, thankfully. Because it is a weird reality you live in and I have no wish to join you there.

splinter65 wrote: »

There has to be some way of encouraging them to be the best they can be in a way that allows them to not have so many regrets? Because there appears to be a lot of anguish.

There is, and many of us parents do that all the time. I see it being in no way, not even a small one, mutually exclusive with the provision of free condoms and other sex related educations and services. If you see it that way, then I merely question you methods, if any.

splinter65 wrote: »

Your problem is that science is your friend when science supports the case for abortion but when science supports the case against abortion you have to revert to accusing the entire prolife community of playing the God card.

Since science does NOT support the case against it, I am unsure how you can comment on the actions of people when this occurs. You appear to be imagining a scenario where science went your way, and then further imagining how people here WOULD react in that event.

Fantasy and such is a good thing, but I am not sure how you think it helps here?

splinter65 wrote: »

you have the extraordinary situation in any given hospital of a baby of 21 weeks being aborted in one room while pediatricians fight to save the life of a preemie of 21 weeks down the hall.

And what is wrong with that? In the same area of town you probably also have people getting tattoos while other people are having them removed.

You appear to be suggesting that the hopes and agendas of one set of people, should impinge on that of another? And that because one group are desperately fighting for something they want, this should be of some concern to a different group who are fighting against something they do not want?

You are conflating two things therefore that are entirely separate, doing so in your own head, and then declaring it "extraordinary" for no actual reason or on no actual basis. A weird approach to life I have to say.

splinter65 wrote: »

Apparently they are offensive because a law was passed making abortion legal and that means that the discussion should be over?

Hell no. Democracy and evolving morality demand no discussion on ANY topic should be over, no matter how much of a landslide a vote is.

Rather than being over, you guys need to realize just how badly you and your remarkably poor arguments lost the election. You should go back to the drawing board. And you should attempt to come up with better arguments.

From what I have read, and responded to, above however it seems that rather than do this you would prefer to trot out and same stuff we destroyed multiple times before.

By all means do that if you wish. Just do not do it under the illusions it is going to get you anywhere useful.

splinter65 wrote: »

I don’t know about you but getting threatening PMs from people who don’t think you should be allowed to voice your opinion is pretty much an attempt to silence.

Cry me a river. I got all the same PMs and death threats to boot. Periodically I still do. I just do not harp on about it to play the persecution card as readily as people such as yourself. I just realise it is par for the course of expressing an opinion on the internet.

nozzferrahhtoo

ouxbbkqtswdfaw wrote: »

Like free condoms in schools and colleges. No sense of personal responsibility.

That ad hominem was spewed out A LOT during the referendum debates and I think the vindictive and intellectually bankrupt pettiness of it was one of the factors that cost you and your cohort the election so badly and had you so trounced in the polls.

The problem with your line of "reasoning" (hah, as if there is any) is you seem to think "personal responsibility" equates to people doing what you want them to do, or what you yourself would do in the same situation.

That is however not so. Getting into a situation, considering all the options in that situation, and choosing the best way forward for you in that situation is the very CORE of taking "personal responsibility". And if abortion is the choice made, then so be it.

You not liking a choice does not change the nature of the personal responsibility involved.

ouxbbkqtswdfaw wrote: »

You think it's a good idea to distribute free condoms in schools and colleges?

I would say it is, but I am confused as to what you think that has to do with the topic or the thread, or who specifically you are directing this point at, or in response to what? Actually I somewhat suspect YOU are confused about this, let alone me.

Certainly however, despite the protests of users like "Just her", the one thing I have noticed is that pro choice and anti choice campaigners had one main trait in common. They ALL wanted less abortions to be happening in our society. They just disagreed as to how best attain that.

And the usage and availability of contraception appears at this time to be one of the biggest correlates in both reduced pregnancies, abortions, and STDs. So sure, I would say distribution of free condoms is a great idea. Especially to groups prone to greater quantities of sex.

ouxbbkqtswdfaw wrote: »

It takes away even more personal responsibility from adolescent boys and it will put more pressure on adolescent girls to perform the most intimate act between two people in such a casual way.

Do you have any actual evidence that it applies any such pressure at all? When I was in college they offered a canteen where some food was free and some subsidised. I never felt any pressure to eat. They also provided a free cinema. I never felt any pressure to watch movies. They provided free banking services, I never felt pressured to take out a loan.

I am not seeing your link between providing something to do with X, and pressuring people to do X at all. It would seem to be entirely imaginary on your part.

Not sure at all, and again I suspect you are not either, what you mean that it takes AWAY from personal responsibility. How so?

Finally intimacy is a subjective thing. It might be "The most intimate act" for you, but do not assume it is for anyone else. Or that it always has to be either. For many the opposite is true. And for many others there are many acts and events that are much more intimate than sex. You are merely projecting YOUR values here.

Again however this is a thread about abortion. Not contraception. You appear to be intent on making your point, and the relevance of your point, unclear. If contraception demonstrably reduces incidents of unwanted pregnancy, then in the context of abortion specifically, what is your issue? Or are you simply on the wrong thread playing a record you intend not to defend?

ohnonotgmail

tretorn wrote: »

Factually incorrect.
Most people in Ireland do not support abortion, the majority of the 64 percent who actually voted wanted the 8th Repealed but a third of people who voted didnt want any change at all.
Many people who voted to Repeal the 8th did so because of the hard cases, the FFAs, voting for a change so these sad cases could bedealt with meant the introduction of Abortion on demand and this revolts Irish people for the most part. Abortion is horrible, horrible for women and horrible for the unborn baby and its a way out for men who just want the problem to go away. We have always had abortion and always will but it will never and should never be something that potential parents do without shame. It is shameful to sleep around and get so intoxicated you cant even use contraception and then someone else has to take care of sorting out this problem for you. If you dont feel shame at this then someone has done a very bad job in rearing you.
Two hundred doctors signing up is an indication of how anti abortion Irish doctors and nurses are, most of the medical staff involving themselves in abortion will be non national who wont be given a proper choice, it will be a case of heres your contract and abortion is part of it.
The Rotunda and Holles Street hospitals have already said they are only accepting abortion referrals from within their catchment area, they are dedicated maternity hospitals and they dont want to be de facto abortion clinics for the whole country including the North of Ireland.
Holles Street at present is a hell hole and the last thing that over stretched maternity hospital needs is fifty women arriving every day for free abortions!!!!!!!

As per the forum charter do you have anything to back that up apart from your opinion?

nozzferrahhtoo

tretorn wrote: »

Factually incorrect.

As always, it is nice when people title and precursor their posts with a short accurate description of the content of it. You do it very well here.

tretorn wrote: »

Most people in Ireland do not support abortion, the majority of the 64 percent who actually voted wanted the 8th Repealed but a third of people who voted didnt want any change at all. Many people who voted to Repeal the 8th did so because of the hard cases

I would appreciate, as would the forum charter as it happens, some back up for this claim in the form of something that is not mere assertion or opinion. While we have the direct result of the referendum, it is unclear to me how you are getting inside the heads and opinions of the people who actually voted. Let alone to the point of being capable of such general assertions and statistics on the matter.

My direct experience on the ground, which was extensive, of people in the pro-choice camp does not in any way track with your claims here, even a little bit, which is why the substance behind your claims piques my interest. For example of the many MANY people I met and worked with who voted "yes" to the change, I can recall but ONE person who even brought up the "hard cases" at all. Yet you think "Many" did so for that reason?

tretorn wrote: »

Abortion is horrible, horrible for women and horrible for the unborn baby and its a way out for men who just want the problem to go away.

Your misuse of the word "baby" aside, it is a strange claim you are making that it is "horrible" for the fetus. The majority, by far, of abortions by choice in our world appear to occur in or before week 12 and certainly by week 16. At this point we have zero evidence of any kind on offer to suggest existence, or the ending of it, is "like" anything for the fetus. It is the sentience equivalent of a rock. You appear here to be merely projecting YOUR values and vicarious emotions onto a subjectively dead entity for nothing but emotive effect. Much like the "Oh no, its tongue moves" user we have who drops in occasionally to take pot shots at the thread.

The first words of your sentence are definitely your subjective only assertions however. I would not classify abortion has "Horrible" any more than any other medical intervention that a person feels compelled to have to better their circumstances or well being. Of course we would all likely prefer people never needed medical intervention if it can be avoided, as it always comes with risks, costs, discomfort and more. But I see no reason to single abortion out here specifically.

As for your gendering of the issue, as if it is specifically a "way out" for men and not for women or whatever..... at best I think that unhelpful. At worst a direct attempt to emote the issue by needlessly gendering it.

tretorn wrote: »

We have always had abortion and always will but it will never and should never be something that potential parents do without shame. It is shameful to sleep around and get so intoxicated you cant even use contraception and then someone else has to take care of sorting out this problem for you.

What is shameful is you projecting imaginary scenarios onto entire groups. As if abortion is for drunken sexual flings only. Firstly I see nothing shameful at all about sexual expression, drunken or otherwise. Secondly however many unwanted pregnancies happen DESPITE contraception, not because of the lack of it. Further we can not even assume that all people seeking abortion are doing so because of unplanned or unwanted pregnancies. At the time of conception the pregnancy might have been desired and planned. Circumstances can suddenly change however.

Finally the "shame" issue you are inventing from the ether is not even relevant. The issue of abortion is to offer choice to people who are pregnant. How they got into that situation is not for us to judge. Just like if two people present in A+E with anal rupturing.... one for otherwise legitimate resons and the other because he or she was pleasuring themselves with the end of a vacuum cleaner.... we still treat both cases for the injury they are. Without equivocating over how it came to be.

tretorn wrote: »

it will be a case of heres your contract and abortion is part of it.

And if they are of their own volition accepting a job in the public service then that is, to my mind, exactly how it should be. So do not present this as if it is automatically a bad thing without qualifying your position if you please. If the state offers medical service X Y and Z then a person accepting a job in service of the state and the public should be expected to engage in X Y and Z. I have no more sympathy for such a person than I do for a Jew or Muslim who accepts a job in a butcher and then moans they have to handle pork.

Private practice however is, for me, often a different story and my sympathies there might be different than people who know my position on abortion guess. Similar to, for example, how my opinion on bakers producing cakes for gay weddings does not wholly gel with the general populace of the atheist forum. But there are many issues and caveats and details in my position that do not appear to be relevant yet other than mentioning the distinction is there.

tretorn wrote: »

Holles Street at present is a hell hole and the last thing that over stretched maternity hospital needs is fifty women arriving every day for free abortions!!!!!!!

I am not convinced by the claims that abortion is going to stretch the services all that much. At least not without seeing comprehensive figures on the matter. Because what the figures people tend to spew are, are solely estimated numbers of women showing up for abortions. Nothing else. Nothing about, for example. how many LESS visits happen from such women due to not going ahead with the pregnancies. Or follow up care on abortions had over seas, or complications related to abortions performed on the self. And more.

I think it remarkably dishonest and agenda drive to contrive, in other words as presenting this as a simple X before abortion legislation and X + Y after abortion legislation equation. There are more complex statistics and equations in play there, none of which the anti choice agenda seems to care to explore or offer. For example I could easily re-write your sentence as "Holles Street at present is a hell hole and the last thing that over stretched maternity hospital needs is fifty women arriving every day for births they never wanted in the first place!!!!!!!"

.......

tretorn wrote: »

We have always had abortion and always will but it will never and should never be something that potential parents do without shame. It is shameful to sleep around and get so intoxicated you cant even use contraception and then someone else has to take care of sorting out this problem for you. If you dont feel shame at this then someone has done a very bad job in rearing you.

Ah the old shunning and shame solution.

Yes - shame those women who have had sex, shame them mightily, tell you what, why dont we build special places for them to go and work off their shame and while they are in there we can take their babies and sell them or maybe starve them and then when they die, stuff them into septic tanks.

Shame.

Interesting - but what about the one we shouldnt shame? What about the ones who didnt sleep around? Who did use contraception but it failed? What about the tee totallers who got raped? Should we just shame them too?

Hotblack Desiato

An_Toirpin wrote: »

Irish GPs get about 220 for maternity care but 450 to abort. What a shameful country we live in.

Don't let the door bang you in the ass on the way out.

Calina

tretorn wrote: »

We have always had abortion and always will but it will never and should never be something that potential parents do without shame. It is shameful to sleep around and get so intoxicated you cant even use contraception and then someone else has to take care of sorting out this problem for you.

Why are men never shamed and ostracised for sleepung around? Why weren't they locked away?

tretorn

It is factually incorrect to say most people in Ireland wanted abortion.
Only 64 per cent of the electorate voted and one third of those who came out voted NO. These is a huge section of the population who are very unhappy with Harris and childish remarks like we won are just adding to these peoples sadnessat what is now taking place in Maternity hospitals.
One third of the electorate didnt bother voting at all.
This means less than half of the Irish electorate wanted Abortion on demand, the exact figure would be approx 46 per cent and at least half of those voters would have been swayed by endless sad stories about FFA even though these cases are a tiny minority of pregnancies.
Most abortions are a result if casual sex which is fuelled by alcohol and drugs and now the fathers of these unwanted babies now dont even have to contribute financially to the cost of the abortions. They can have unprotected sex every night of the week and the HSE will fund the abortions, this is so enlighening and good for society, yeah, right, if you say so, I believe you.

[Deleted User]

tretorn wrote: »

It is factually incorrect to say most people in Ireland wanted abortion.
Only 64 per cent of the electorate voted and one third of those who came out voted NO. These is a huge section of the population who are very unhappy with Harris and childish remarks like we won are just adding to these peoples sadnessat what is now taking place in Maternity hospitals.
One third of the electorate didnt bother voting at all.
This means less than half of the Irish electorate wanted Abortion on demand, the exact figure would be approx 46 per cent and at least half of those voters would have been swayed by endless sad stories about FFA even though these cases are a tiny minority of pregnancies.

Again, evidence please or this will be dismissed as a lie.

Most abortions are a result if casual sex which is fuelled by alcohol and drugs and now the fathers of these unwanted babies now dont even have to contribute financially to the cost of the abortions.

And that too while you're at it.

tretorn

Evidence of what.
The figures speak for themselves.
The media gave us non stop coverage of FFA because it would have been seen to be a good tactic and it was.
The reality of abortion though is its mostly required as a result of one nights stands and if women took responsibility and used the morning after pill they wouldnt need an abortion pill at all.
And now we are being told by deluded posters here that women should be proud of their abortions, a notch on their belt so to speak, yeak ok, whatever.

SusieBlue

tretorn wrote: »

Evidence of what.
The figures speak for themselves.
The media gave us non stop coverage of FFA because it would have been seen to be a good tactic and it was.
The reality of abortion though is its mostly required as a result of one nights stands and if women took responsibility and used the morning after pill they wouldnt need an abortion pill at all.
And now we are being told by deluded posters here that women should be proud of their abortions, a notch on their belt so to speak, yeak ok, whatever.

What about the man? Why is all the shame and responsibility on her, isn't there enough supply to go around for both?

Your posts really come across like you hate women.
And you'll need to supply better evidence than "the figures speak for themselves" - because the figures say that Repeal won by a landslide victory.

ohnonotgmail

tretorn wrote: »

Evidence of what.
The figures speak for themselves.
The media gave us non stop coverage of FFA because it would have been seen to be a good tactic and it was.
The reality of abortion though is its mostly required as a result of one nights stands and if women took responsibility and used the morning after pill they wouldnt need an abortion pill at all.
And now we are being told by deluded posters here that women should be proud of their abortions, a notch on their belt so to speak, yeak ok, whatever.

as per the forum charter can you provide the evidence that supports that?

[Deleted User]

tretorn wrote: »

Evidence of what.
The figures speak for themselves.

Evidence of your claim that most people don't support abortion.
You have not provided any figures other than ones you seem to pluck out of your head.

Smacl posted evidence that refutes your claim.
So why is your evidence that shows what you claim is indeed factual.

I have to keep asking you guys this question.

smacl

tretorn wrote: »

It is factually incorrect to say most people in Ireland wanted abortion.
Only 64 per cent of the electorate voted and one third of those who came out voted NO. These is a huge section of the population who are very unhappy with Harris and childish remarks like we won are just adding to these peoples sadnessat what is now taking place in Maternity hospitals.
One third of the electorate didnt bother voting at all.
This means less than half of the Irish electorate wanted Abortion on demand, the exact figure would be approx 46 per cent and at least half of those voters would have been swayed by endless sad stories about FFA even though these cases are a tiny minority of pregnancies.

We can't infer anything from those who for whatever reason decide not to vote, we can only calculate opinion from those who express an opinion by voting. In this case, the majority voted to repeal the eighth, and of those who expressed an opinion in the largest exit poll taken, the majority were in favour of abortion. These are facts. Your comments in relation to Harris are unsupported and are not quantified, as such they're no more or less than your personal opinion.

Most abortions are a result if casual sex which is fuelled by alcohol and drugs and now the fathers of these unwanted babies now dont even have to contribute financially to the cost of the abortions.

Can you please provide some evidence to support this statement, or is it unsupported opinion? As per the rules of this forum, if you can't support the above, can you please retract it or declare it as your personal opinion as opposed to fact.

tretorn

The woman is the mother and its her role to nurture her young. The bond between mother and bsby is the strongest of all human bonds.
Whataboutery about men is irrelevant. Men dont care about women they have one night drunken stands with, free abortion is manna from heaven to them, many men will stop using condoms completely now that they dont have to worry about having to cough up for abortion.
Its great progress though and a great money spinner for GPs who have signed up. Does anyone know how much pharmacists are getting for dispensing the pill. If it all gets too expensive maybe the pill could be dispensed along with the free condoms.

smacl

tretorn wrote: »

The woman is the mother and its her role to nurture her young. The bond between mother and bsby is the strongest of all human bonds.
Whataboutery about men is irrelevant. Men dont care about women they have one night drunken stands with, free abortion is manna from heaven to them, many men will stop using condoms completely now that they dont have to worry about having to cough up for abortion.
Its great progress though and a great money spinner for GPs who have signed up. Does anyone know how much pharmacists are getting for dispensing the pill. If it all gets too expensive maybe the pill could be dispensed along with the free condoms.

A woman who is pregnant and chooses not to have a baby is not a mother. A foetus is not a baby, as most people in this country are clearly aware.

[Deleted User]

tretorn wrote: »

The woman is the mother and its her role to nurture her young. The bond between mother and bsby is the strongest of all human bonds.
Whataboutery about men is irrelevant. Men dont care about women they have one night drunken stands with, free abortion is manna from heaven to them, many men will stop using condoms completely now that they dont have to worry about having to cough up for abortion.
Its great progress though and a great money spinner for GPs who have signed up. Does anyone know how much pharmacists are getting for dispensing the pill. If it all gets too expensive maybe the pill could be dispensed along with the free condoms.

Yea, this kind of sexist detached from reality rambling is why you guys lost the vote.
It's why you are in the pile with the people who want to reoutlaw divorce and gay marriage.

Please keep going.

Do any of the other anti-abortionists who post here have any comment on your compatriot's opinions?