Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

Igotadose · 18-02-2019 07:03PM

Odhinn wrote: »

..wearing high vis vests to "fit in", giving out what sound like "goodie bags" while they're at it.

Great. Back to escorting women to the Doctors office like we did in the US. Thuggishness is all it is. Lying, scheming, lackeys of the US anti-abortion industry who could give a rat's arse about anyone but themselves.

Would love to know what the relevant Irish laws are - like, if you shout at someone approaching you, "Go away! Keep your distance!" and they continue to approach, is that a crime?

And even so, would there be an arrest, a prosecution, a conviction, a sentence?

Beechwoodspark · 18-02-2019 07:05PM

Odhinn wrote: »

RTE - "Today" with Sean O Rourke had a journalist on who had gone undercover with an anti-abortion group. Their plan is to target women attending facilities where abortions are carried out. They've been told to home in on women who look "upset" etc and try to refer them to anti-abortion run facilities. Fairly vile stuff - podcast should be up later.

Devils advocate and all- If it saves even one life then maybe it’s worth it

eviltwin · 18-02-2019 07:09PM

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Devils advocate and all- If it saves even one life then maybe it’s worth it

maybe we should start harassing smokers or overweight people then, might save a life. Give me strength. Vulnerable women are not fair game for these nuts. The sooner we get exclusion zones the better.

Beechwoodspark · 18-02-2019 07:12PM

eviltwin wrote: »

maybe we should start harassing smokers or overweight people then, might save a life. Give me strength. Vulnerable women are not fair game for these nuts. The sooner we get exclusion zones the better.

Smokers or overweight not a valid comparison.

Literally a matter of life and death when it comes to abortion though. That’s what the choice in “pro choice” refers to

eviltwin · 18-02-2019 07:18PM

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Smokers or overweight not a valid comparison.

Literally a matter of life and death when it comes to abortion though. That’s what the choice in “pro choice” refers to

That doesn't make a difference, it's still someone who is vulnerable, doing something deeply personal and private. They don't deserve to be targeted like this.

Igotadose · 18-02-2019 07:23PM

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Devils advocate and all- If it saves even one life then maybe it’s worth it

It's not a life though. Life begins at birth, after all

Odhinn · 18-02-2019 07:40PM

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Devils advocate and all- If it saves even one life then maybe it’s worth it

did you listen to the podcast?

aloyisious · 18-02-2019 07:50PM

RTE's "DriveTime" news programme had an interview with a director of the U.S. organisation mentioned in the paper report. She gave their interest as being the wellbeing of the women that their Reps approached on the public sidewalk [sic:in the U.S] as distinct from a carpark approach. Not a mention of baby or unborn at all. She said they had no people in Ireland, the U.K. or the E.U. and had no contact with people here but in respect to the email contact they had with people in Ireland (which she had mentioned earlier to the DriveTime interviewer) it was in respect to what her organisation stated was its position/practice on women's wellbeing. The interview will be available - soon - on RTE's podcast system.

Beechwoodspark · 18-02-2019 07:59PM

Odhinn wrote: »

did you listen to the podcast?

I did yes

Odhinn · 18-02-2019 08:01PM

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

I did yes

...and an organised group systematically targeting visibly distressed women doesn't strike you as in any way dodgy?

Beechwoodspark · 18-02-2019 08:04PM

Odhinn wrote: »

...and an organised group systematically targeting visibly distressed women doesn't strike you as in any way dodgy?

See my original post on this. Maybe it’ll save a few lives

eviltwin · 18-02-2019 08:08PM

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

See my original post on this. Maybe it’ll save a few lives?

and it upsets or traumatises a majority that's OK?

volchitsa · 18-02-2019 08:18PM

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

See my original post on this. Maybe it’ll save a few lives

Are you still playing devils advocate here, or is this your actual opinion?

Only it's a bit odd that you don't seem to want to consider the level of proof of this view that you're advocating.

aloyisious · 18-02-2019 08:20PM

Shannonside.ie reported a defacing of a Longford GP practice today with ugly anti-abortion graffiti which seems way over the top. The GP clinic is one currently in use. This follows on from a earlier attack on the local F/G TD's office after the passing of the abortion legislation bill.

https://www.shannonside.ie/news/local/longford/longford-gp-practice-defaced-anti-abortion-graffiti/?fbclid=IwAR2jhJ8X9sfTZSLp40TTwBA5TQDG0hsCX_4fz_bcelcXxvblm

Edit: for what must be a legal reason, the image of the graffiti on the right-side of the GP's practice building has been altered and a title and name removed from the top of the original published photo, though it's probably still available on computer memory banks (should the author of the graffiti be found).

end of the road · 18-02-2019 08:23PM

eviltwin wrote: »

maybe we should start harassing smokers or overweight people then, might save a life. Give me strength. Vulnerable women are not fair game for these nuts. The sooner we get exclusion zones the better.

not at all given they won't make any difference and will just be a money sink.

Igotadose wrote: »

It's not a life though. Life begins at birth, after all

given the life is alive before birth then it not being a life until birth is not possible.

Credit Checker Moose · 18-02-2019 08:23PM

Spelling is not their forte.

volchitsa · 18-02-2019 08:32PM

end of the road wrote: »

not at all given they won't make any difference and will just be a money sink.

given the life is alive before birth then it not being a life until birth is not possible.

Sperm is alive too, but it's not exactly a life. Never mind a person.

ohnonotgmail · 18-02-2019 08:45PM

end of the road wrote: »

not at all given they won't make any difference and will just be a money sink.

given the life is alive before birth then it not being a life until birth is not possible.

I thought you were asked not to post on this thread again? Or am i thinking of the thread in AH?

aloyisious · 18-02-2019 08:48PM

end of the road wrote: »

not at all given they won't make any difference and will just be a money sink.

given the life is alive before birth then it not being a life until birth is not possible.

Yes well, our current law and the opinion of the Irish SC disagree with you, along with the term "it's a live birth", when it comes to the birth of a HUMAN life.

Igotadose · 18-02-2019 09:12PM

Credit Checker Moose wrote: »

Spelling is not their forte.

Time for CCTV outside GP's? Tax the church to pay for it.
Or, confiscate a few churches and sell off the land. That'd do, too.

Hotblack Desiato · 18-02-2019 09:17PM

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

See my original post on this. Maybe it’ll save a few lives

"Devil's advocate" is often used when the truth would be more along the lines of "I don't have any kind of coherent argument, but here goes anway."

Didn't you claim to be a Yes voter? How do you reconcile that with "saving lives" by preventing women accessing the legal abortion services you voted to allow?

end of the road · 18-02-2019 10:33PM

volchitsa wrote: »

Sperm is alive too, but it's not exactly a life. Never mind a person.

that's not relevant though to be fair. the poster claimed the unborn is only a life at birth. given it is developing and moving and all else before birth then clearly it is a life and alive.

Igotadose wrote: »

Time for CCTV outside GP's? Tax the church to pay for it.
Or, confiscate a few churches and sell off the land. That'd do, too.

it is probably unlikely that this could be done. property rights and other laws would likely prevent the state simply taking property belonging to the church, at least without compensation.

aloyisious wrote: »

Yes well, our current law and the opinion of the Irish SC disagree with you, along with the term "it's a live birth", when it comes to the birth of a HUMAN life.

they may disagree with it but if it was the case that it isn't a life before birth or even a life then there wouldn't be a time limit on abortions at all surely? an unborn baby moving around in the womb before birth can't be not alive or a life in that case. i'm not seeing how it's possible for something living to not be living at the same time.

volchitsa · 18-02-2019 11:31PM

end of the road wrote: »

that's not relevant though to be fair. the poster claimed the unborn is only a life at birth. given it is developing and moving and all else before birth then clearly it is a life and alive.

You're carefully tailoring your definition of a life to fit your argument by adding criteria. Could you just give a definition once and for all of what you think deserves to be protected from killing and what doesn't? And why of course. Sperm? Fertilised egg? Fertilised implanted egg? Etc.

it is probably unlikely that this could be done. property rights and other laws would likely prevent the state simply taking property belonging to the church, at least without compensation.

We could always change the law. I'm sure you're against that though.

they may disagree with it but if it was the case that it isn't a life before birth or even a life then there wouldn't be a time limit on abortions at all surely? an unborn baby moving around in the womb before birth can't be not alive or a life in that case. i'm not seeing how it's possible for something living to not be living at the same time.

You've already seen that something can be alive but not a person so this is a pointless claim based on mere pedantry.

18-02-2019 11:45PM

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Devils advocate and all- If it saves even one life then maybe it’s worth it

That's what the three day period after the initial consultation is designed for, having a bunch of pricks hanging around a car park or the street leading up to a surgery, stopping and questioning people isn't.

19-02-2019 12:02AM

Odhinn wrote: »

RTE - "Today" with Sean O Rourke had a journalist on who had gone undercover with an anti-abortion group. Their plan is to target women attending facilities where abortions are carried out. They've been told to home in on women who look "upset" etc and try to refer them to anti-abortion run facilities. Fairly vile stuff - podcast should be up later.

Sure we all know that the only reason you'd be upset coming or going to a hospital or gp surgery, would be if you wanted an abortion especially if your a woman.

I've got cancer fecken happy days why would I be looking worried or upset.

end of the road · 19-02-2019 12:42AM

volchitsa wrote: »

You're carefully tailoring your definition of a life to fit your argument by adding criteria. Could you just give a definition once and for all of what you think deserves to be protected from killing and what doesn't? And why of course. Sperm? Fertilised egg? Fertilised implanted egg? Etc.

fertilised implanted egg because that is when real devopment is about to begin. my statement that an unborn baby is very much alive before birth is not me tailoring anything but simply coming to a logical conclusion based on what is actually going on.

volchitsa wrote: »

We could always change the law. I'm sure you're against that though.

i'm not sure it would be that easy to do but perhapse that is worth a discussion in itself, perhapse in the legal discussion forum sometime? personally i would be against such a change as i fear there may be unforseen repercussions which could effect all of us.

volchitsa wrote: »

You've already seen that something can be alive but not a person so this is a pointless claim based on mere pedantry.

i would have to disagree with you on that.

volchitsa · 19-02-2019 01:37AM

end of the road wrote: »

fertilised implanted egg because that is when real devopment is about to begin. my statement that an unborn baby is very much alive before birth is not me tailoring anything but simply coming to a logical conclusion based on what is actually going on.

It's your conclusion though - that what comes before that point is less human, or less alive, or something, and therefore can be killed - that's where I have a problem with your views here.

And I say you're tailoring them because, for instance, you've now added implantation. A whole new criterion there. Just because.

Hannibal_Smith · 19-02-2019 09:05AM

Imagine harrassing women and sticking your beak in to their medical treatment. Where do people get their sense of self importance from?

Just saw that Longford pic, it really is disgusting. 'If it saves One life '.... yeah..because women cant make their own decision about their own bodies so need medical centres spray painted with all kinds of sh*te to make them see 'sense'.

aloyisious · 19-02-2019 09:21AM

end of the road wrote: »

they may disagree with it but if it was the case that it isn't a life before birth or even a life then there wouldn't be a time limit on abortions at all surely? an unborn baby moving around in the womb before birth can't be not alive or a life in that case. i'm not seeing how it's possible for something living to not be living at the same time.

I suppose the notion that anti-abortion (or Pro-Life if you like) people are OK with the waiting period up to the 12th week doesn't surprise you. How do you read that acceptance, what it envisages and how it affects what you see in the womb?

19-02-2019 09:52AM

Just a couple of quotes I think deserve pointing out with this new information coming out.

end of the road wrote: »

simply protesting outside a hospital with banners, a perfectly legitimate act within a democracy even though i and most personally wouldn't do it, does not, directly or indirectly in itself, target women accessing actual forms of health care or abortion on demand. the protest is about the act itself.
if they are physically manhandling or getting in the face of such women, that would be targeting and in that case the gardai can and will become involved, either upon witnessing such actions themselves or being provided with evidence and being called to the scene.

end of the road wrote: »

kingmob wrote:

You also avoided the points made to you about how just being there and protesting is intimidating. You ran away from that point and never addressed it.

i didn't avoid or run away from it. i simply don't believe it is the case so there is nothing to adress as i see it.

kingmob wrote:

Again, you know why they really protest.
Shame and intimidation.

only in your opinion is that the real reason. in reality, it's not the real reason, for most anyway. a tiny few might be protesting in the aim of doing that but a tiny minority is all they are.

Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

Comments