Abortion Discussion, Part the Fourth

eviltwin wrote: »

Your right. No one can stop you protesting outside a hospital or doctors office if you want. But don't be disingenuous about it. Be honest about the true intention, you don't give a damn about women -what woman in crisis would go anywhere near a person waving a prolife placard - your intention is to shame women, scare them and intimidate medical staff in the naive hope they will stop providing abortions.

the protesters are 100% honest about their intention.their intention is not as you claim.

eviltwin

splinter65 wrote: »

But you simply don’t get to say which public spaces I can and cannot enter. There’s no point in even getting into a debate about it.
Once you dictate that I can’t stand in Holles St or over in the street outside the Coombe you’ll have set a precedent that will unravel the free society that people fought and died for us to enjoy.
The Taoiseach has conceded that even in the last few days.
It’s only your opinion that the right to life of the unborn has nothing to do with me. There are 700000 of us here in Ireland alone who don’t agree with you, maybe more. You’ll have your hands full trying to silence that volume of voices.

Your right. No one can stop you protesting outside a hospital or doctors office if you want. But don't be disingenuous about it. Be honest about the true intention, you don't give a damn about women -what woman in crisis would go anywhere near a person waving a prolife placard - your intention is to shame women, scare them and intimidate medical staff in the naive hope they will stop providing abortions.

uptherebels

splinter65 wrote: »

But you simply don’t get to say which public spaces I can and cannot enter. There’s no point in even getting into a debate about it.
Once you dictate that I can’t stand in Holles St or over in the street outside the Coombe you’ll have set a precedent that will unravel the free society that people fought and died for us to enjoy.
The Taoiseach has conceded that even in the last few days.
It’s only your opinion that the right to life of the unborn has nothing to do with me. There are 700000 of us here in Ireland alone who don’t agree with you, maybe more. You’ll have your hands full trying to silence that volume of voices.

Nobody is trying to silence anyone, less of the persecution complex please.
You don't get to try and dictate what healthcare services others access. It's hilarious how you only take issue with restrictions when they affect you.

Odhinn

splinter65 wrote: »

The government allowed itself to be dictated to be the Catholic Church because that’s what the people wanted right at that time.

....so you admit that there was no "opt out" clause for protestants, liberal catholics, non believers etc.

splinter65 wrote: »

Because it’s what people want right now the government is being dictated to by the liberal left... to the point where the Taoiseach is afraid to comment on the murder of all the Catholics in Sri Lanka (more Catholics were murdered then the Muslims in the mosque in NZ, twice as many) for fear of offending them.

You've evidence of this?

SusieBlue

splinter65 wrote: »

But you simply don’t get to say which public spaces I can and cannot enter. There’s no point in even getting into a debate about it.
Once you dictate that I can’t stand in Holles St or over in the street outside the Coombe you’ll have set a precedent that will unravel the free society that people fought and died for us to enjoy.
The Taoiseach has conceded that even in the last few days.
It’s only your opinion that the right to life of the unborn has nothing to do with me. There are 700000 of us here in Ireland alone who don’t agree with you, maybe more. You’ll have your hands full trying to silence that volume of voices.

No one is saying you can’t stand there. Who said anything about entering?
You can go wherever you please.
You just can’t protest wherever the mood takes you. Outside a maternity hospital is not an appropriate location to protest about abortion being wrong.
My right to avail of medical services without interference or harassment supersedes your right to pontificate about how you think you know what’s good for me better than I do.
It’s that simple.

SusieBlue wrote: »

I fully respect and support your right to stand on a street and hand out banners and leaflets. I do not support your "right" to do so outside GP offices or maternity hospitals.
There is a time and place of everything. Know your audience.
Maternity hospitals and GP offices are not appropriate locations for you to "protest" something that has absolutely nothing to do with you.

As I said before, with a bit of mutual respect there is no need for either side to impose on those who don't agree with them, but you just can't see that.

As for the bolded, don't be so patronising. Your opinion is neither more valid nor important than mine just because you are older.
Don't flatter yourself.

But you simply don’t get to say which public spaces I can and cannot enter. There’s no point in even getting into a debate about it.
Once you dictate that I can’t stand in Holles St or over in the street outside the Coombe you’ll have set a precedent that will unravel the free society that people fought and died for us to enjoy.
The Taoiseach has conceded that even in the last few days.
It’s only your opinion that the right to life of the unborn has nothing to do with me. There are 700000 of us here in Ireland alone who don’t agree with you, maybe more. You’ll have your hands full trying to silence that volume of voices.

splinter65 wrote: »

I have every right, as have you,to stand on a public street with a banner or leaflets and protest whatever I like.
It’s been done throughout the free world for as long as there has been a free world and will continue forever.
The fact that you don’t agree with my protest is neither here nor there.
It’s all part of living in a free country.
I’m amazed at how what I suspect is a lot of quite young people, don’t get that.

Well my dad is in his late sixties and voted repeal, my Aunt who is in her Seventies also voted for repeal. The only person in my family who voted no that I know of is a cousin and her husband, who used to be a member of youth defense, both are in their fifties, so age has nothing to do with it as you claim.

I won't repeat my dad's opinion on protesters word for word as I'd be banned for life but basically religious bigotry and personal interface in a free country figures highly.

I have to say that your bigotry is showing again with your earlier post about Sri Lanka.

Cabaal

King Mob wrote: »

All evidence and experience says otherwise however.
You asking us to take your word on it makes it even more suspect.

I know I won't be,
it's utterly meaningless

end of the road wrote: »

it is 100% genuine.

All evidence and experience says otherwise however.
You asking us to take your word on it makes it even more suspect.

King Mob wrote: »

And for something you claim to not care about, you certainly are posting a lot about how you don't care about it and how you're not going to address it.

But this is par for the course. Again, your posting history betrays you.

Your concern about the right to protest is not genuine.
People are going to bring that up when you base your arguments on this concern.

it is 100% genuine.

volchitsa wrote: »

It's not actually about abortion here either. It's about freedom of expression, ie we're no longer discussing what we think of abortion, but more about the right to protest about it.

Are you saying the rules for freedom of expression should be different when abortion is concerned and if so, what other domains would you make exceptions for and why?

no they shouldn't be different at all. however if we are discussing protesting then i think it might possibly be better to talk about it in terms of abortion to keep the thread as close to the topic as is possible?

.......

splinter65 wrote: »

I have every right, as have you,to stand on a public street with a banner or leaflets and protest whatever I like.
It’s been done throughout the free world for as long as there has been a free world and will continue forever.
The fact that you don’t agree with my protest is neither here nor there.
It’s all part of living in a free country.
I’m amazed at how what I suspect is a lot of quite young people, don’t get that.

No no no no no.

As has been repeatedly explained to you - your rights cannot and do not infringe on my rights.

You can protest. On a public street. But not if that public street is outside a doctors office or hospital. I have the right to medical care without being harassed by your ilk. Go protest outside government offices rather than bothering innocent people on the street with your bile - which you only want to do to try and shame women - so you can knock off the "free country" nonsense.

And knock off the ageism too, it just makes you sound even worse than you already do.

amcalester

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I may be misrembering EOTRs previous posts on pickets but i seem to remember that he had no issue with using violence against those who cross picket lines.

That's my recollection of his posts as well, but the violence aspect wasn't really what I was curious about.

It's more how he squares the circle between his opposing viewpoints that people should not be allowed protest a strike by crossing a picket, and opposing the setting up of exclusion zones around hospitals as this would be a limitation on the right to protest.

Now to be fair to end o he did say that he had changed his mind in relation to baton charging people protesting a concert, so again, I'd ask him if this stretches to those protesting a strike?

SusieBlue

splinter65 wrote: »

I have every right, as have you,to stand on a public street with a banner or leaflets and protest whatever I like.
It’s been done throughout the free world for as long as there has been a free world and will continue forever.
The fact that you don’t agree with my protest is neither here nor there.
It’s all part of living in a free country.
I’m amazed at how what I suspect is a lot of quite young people, don’t get that.

I fully respect and support your right to stand on a street and hand out banners and leaflets. I do not support your "right" to do so outside GP offices or maternity hospitals.
There is a time and place of everything. Know your audience.
Maternity hospitals and GP offices are not appropriate locations for you to "protest" something that has absolutely nothing to do with you.

As I said before, with a bit of mutual respect there is no need for either side to impose on those who don't agree with them, but you just can't see that.

As for the bolded, don't be so patronising. Your opinion is neither more valid nor important than mine just because you are older.
Don't flatter yourself.

robarmstrong

splinter65 wrote: »

Approaching someone going into a public building and hassling them and possibly frightening them is totally unacceptable and if you see someone doing that you should take it upon yourself to stand up and be counted by intervening. The person doing the hassling needs to be excluded from any further protests or pickets.
I haven’t heard of anyone currently protesting abortions here in Ireland doing that though, if you see it you should go to the defense of the person being hassled immediately.
Respectfully standing on a public street with banners and leaflets however is totally acceptable and anyone that wants to protest anything that they think is wrong is free to do so.

Thank you for that, I see you haven't heard of anyone protesting that has carried on like that, but the very same protesters have blasted misrepresented images into the faces of women who are miscarrying, that which I hope you can agree with me on, is completely unacceptable.

Leaflets and banners is fine, but graphic imagery and the sensitivity of it's location (along with the constant misrepresentation and intentional deception) is completely off-limits. During the campaign those images were posted outside primary schools, which I again hope you can see as being inappropriate.

SusieBlue wrote: »

You don't have to support it, you just can't interfere with it. Disagree with abortion all you want but leave those who make that choice for themselves alone. You have no right to impose your own beliefs on their private medical matters.

I have every right, as have you,to stand on a public street with a banner or leaflets and protest whatever I like.
It’s been done throughout the free world for as long as there has been a free world and will continue forever.
The fact that you don’t agree with my protest is neither here nor there.
It’s all part of living in a free country.
I’m amazed at how what I suspect is a lot of quite young people, don’t get that.

splinter65 wrote: »

Approaching someone going into a public building and hassling them and possibly frightening them is totally unacceptable and if you see someone doing that you should take it upon yourself to stand up and be counted by intervening. The person doing the hassling needs to be excluded from any further protests or pickets.
I haven’t heard of anyone currently protesting abortions here in Ireland doing that though, if you see it you should go to the defense of the person being hassled immediately.
Respectfully standing on a public street with banners and leaflets however is totally acceptable and anyone that wants to protest anything that they think is wrong is free to do so.

Well it's a good thing that there's nothing in between those options.
:rolleyes:

robarmstrong

end of the road wrote: »

all of my posts have been honest and 99% of them have been accurate. where i have genuinely got something incorrect i have accepted as such.

Just because you believe them to be accurate does not actually make them accurate. You literally have been proven to have contradicted yourself numerous times and have developed a sitewide reputation for saying one thing, only to say another and then flat out deny you ever said the initial statement in the first time. I have done this with you numerous times and when you're confronted with your own contradictions you flee the thread.

I have never seen you "genuinely get something incorrect and accept it as such" to put it in your terms. Flat out sprint from a thread and go into hiding, absolutely. Own up to your mistake? Never, ever seen you do that.

EOTR, you stated abortion was murder, then stated you never said abortion is murder, you were threadbanned numerous times for making "honest and accurate" statements on this subject and you've been warned several times across the site on this subject for your debating/posting style. Please don't try to give off the impression that you post with the intention of debating openly and honestly, as you have been found out a long, long time now.

Splinter65 has taken this discussion down the route of the right to protest, your previous posts about a right to protest are being highlighted because you've stated many different stances on the subject.

You support the right to protest, yet you wanted armed response to forcefully remove protesters from a site in Tipperary (I think, open to correction here) as they were protesting travelers being given houses there or something, my memory doesn't serve me well on this particular one but I know I have indeed proven you wrong on this.

You support the unborn's right to life, up until the women carrying the unborn are about to board a ferry or a plane (or at least you've accepted your opinion is irrelevant on that front).

You support the unborn's right to life, except in the cases of rape, why? As a pro-lifer I am asking you, what is the difference of significance between an unborn that was conceived out of rape, and one that was conceived with consent? Why do you give your full support to one, but not the other?

You support the right to protest, yet were more than happy in suggesting violence to anyone who crossed a picket line (as it is their right to cross said picket-line, etiquette goes out the window when it comes to actual laws and rights).

Can you see now why people genuinely don't believe a word you post when you've shown time and time again that you just don't engage in good faith?

volchitsa

splinter65 wrote: »

Do I have to support things I don’t approve of? Do you support things you don’t approve of? Why would anyone do that?

You do actually, or at least put up with it, unless you can persuade enough people to change the law in your favour. And since abortion is one issue that has been thoroughly thrashed out very recently, and voted upon, it's most unlikely that there is any room for the massive change of public opinion that you would need to bring sufficient numbers of people around to your point of view on that subject in the foreseeable future.

aloyisious wrote: »

On that minority-cant-dictate basis. if you were a protestor on an anti-abortion picket line outside a hospital where abortions were performed and saw a fellow protestor following a person who'd crossed the line toward the hospital declining to stop and listen to the protestor, would you actively call on that protestor to cease and desist in pursuing the person or just stand idly by?

I am presuming from your words and apparent position on hospital anti-abortion protests that you could well be present as a protestor on such an anti-abortion picket line.

Approaching someone going into a public building and hassling them and possibly frightening them is totally unacceptable and if you see someone doing that you should take it upon yourself to stand up and be counted by intervening. The person doing the hassling needs to be excluded from any further protests or pickets.
I haven’t heard of anyone currently protesting abortions here in Ireland doing that though, if you see it you should go to the defense of the person being hassled immediately.
Respectfully standing on a public street with banners and leaflets however is totally acceptable and anyone that wants to protest anything that they think is wrong is free to do so.

SusieBlue

splinter65 wrote: »

Do I have to support things I don’t approve of? Do you support things you don’t approve of? Why would anyone do that?

You don't have to support it, you just can't interfere with it. Disagree with abortion all you want but leave those who make that choice for themselves alone. You have no right to impose your own beliefs on their private medical matters.

Dial Hard wrote: »

Quelle surprise.

Do I have to support things I don’t approve of? Do you support things you don’t approve of? Why would anyone do that?

volchitsa

end of the road wrote: »

the point is it has nothing to do with abortion. that is why i am not explaining it because it has nothing to do with the thread. if it actually had something to do with the thread or was at least on a relevant thread then it could be explained but this thread is about abortion and not me.

It's not actually about abortion here either. It's about freedom of expression, ie we're no longer discussing what we think of abortion, but more about the right to protest about it.

Are you saying the rules for freedom of expression should be different when abortion is concerned and if so, what other domains would you make exceptions for and why?

end of the road wrote: »

i can and i am very much surprised. shocked in fact. people kept going on about this even though i answered it already but when i answer it again, something i have no obligation to do given i already did it, they don't accept the answer. so ultimately it's not my problem, i did my bit.

And for something you claim to not care about, you certainly are posting a lot about how you don't care about it and how you're not going to address it.

But this is par for the course. Again, your posting history betrays you.

Your concern about the right to protest is not genuine.
People are going to bring that up when you base your arguments on this concern.

Cabaal wrote: »

Catholic church basically controlled the government, a perfect example of this is the Mother and Child scheme.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_and_Child_Scheme

Thats not democracy.

The government allowed itself to be dictated to be the Catholic Church because that’s what the people wanted right at that time.
Because it’s what people want right now the government is being dictated to by the liberal left... to the point where the Taoiseach is afraid to comment on the murder of all the Catholics in Sri Lanka (more Catholics were murdered then the Muslims in the mosque in NZ, twice as many) for fear of offending them.
The people will want something else in 15 years or so.
It’s swings and roundabouts really.
No your right it’s not democracy at all, but it’s the best we can manage, so what are you going to do?

ohnonotgmail

amcalester wrote: »

What about crossing a picket line as a form of protest? Would you respect a persons right to do that?

Or do you still think such a person should expect to be met with physical force to stop them crossing the picket?

I may be misrembering EOTRs previous posts on pickets but i seem to remember that he had no issue with using violence against those who cross picket lines.

volchitsa wrote: »

Weeeell, maybe. The point is that the two positions contradict each other, and if you can't - or won't - explain how you got from one to the other it calls into question either your good faith or else your ability to think logically.

Both of which are important qualities on a discussion site. In fact an assumption of both is pretty much all we've got when deciding whether, and how, to engage with other posters.

the point is it has nothing to do with abortion. that is why i am not explaining it because it has nothing to do with the thread. if it actually had something to do with the thread or was at least on a relevant thread then it could be explained but this thread is about abortion and not me.

SusieBlue wrote: »

Not one post you have made on this topic, across the whole of Boards, on any thread, has been honest or accurate.

all of my posts have been honest and 99% of them have been accurate. where i have genuinely got something incorrect i have accepted as such.

King Mob wrote: »

Then you can't really be surprised when people continue to not buy your change of heart and don't take your concerns about the freedom to protest seriously.

i can and i am very much surprised. shocked in fact. people kept going on about this even though i answered it already but when i answer it again, something i have no obligation to do given i already did it, they don't accept the answer. so ultimately it's not my problem, i did my bit.

volchitsa

end of the road wrote: »

i can explain it but i'm not going to because it has no relevance to abortion. whether people believe me or not is not of concern to me as what i have said is accurate.

Weeeell, maybe. The point is that the two positions contradict each other, and if you can't - or won't - explain how you got from one to the other it calls into question either your good faith or else your ability to think logically.

Both of which are important qualities on a discussion site. In fact an assumption of both is pretty much all we've got when deciding whether, and how, to engage with other posters.