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

Abortion Discussion, Part the Fourth

1…2324262829…101

Comments

  • #752
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,637 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    You have misrepresented me to quite an extent there.

    I am very sorry for your loss but the tragic truth is that
    Clearly you have not read the post you are responding to.
    Or if you have read it you have not understood it at all.

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • #753
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    You have misrepresented me to quite an extent there.

    I am very sorry for your loss but the tragic truth is that your child would have stood a much greater chance of survival had he or she been born say, 5 years from now. Your loss no doubt affects your view of what is a "pretty good" chance of survival.

    In my familys case, I have one neice that is now thriving at 13 years old who was born 1 day into the 24th week. I have another neice who sadly passed at 1 week old having been born at 30 weeks. I guess my "pretty good" assesment is subjective. If I had a 20% chance of winning the lottery Id buy a ticket every week - pretty good odds!

    Your not the first poster on here to claim that they have a family member who were born at 24 weeks who are now a healthy x year old, but the stats don't back that up.

    They normally began their posts on the subject with I'm pro choice then after a few posts the but comes and it's normally a problem with women.

    Not saying that you are the same, just pointing out the similarities.


  • #754
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    I agree with you, I am pro choice. One can be pro choice and not like abortion. The two are not mutually exclusive.


    Will you answer this question? You are pro choice, yes? Do you think abortions are great fun? Our opinions are not really that different.

    Sorry but I refuse to believe you are posting in good faith or are trying to seriously discuss what is a very sensitive issue when you are demanding answers to questions such as ‘do you think abortions are great fun’.
    You can’t legitimately be serious.


  • #755
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,819 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    I believe women should be allowed to have abortions up to 40 weeks without reason.

    Just over 24 hours ago...
    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Personally, I think there are instances where abortion should be available at 24 weeks and beyond.


    Hard to take your posts in good faith at this stage.


  • #756
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    osarusan wrote: »
    Just over 24 hours ago...




    Hard to take your posts in good faith at this stage.

    Neither of the posts you quoted contradict each other?


  • Advertisement
  • #757
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Sorry but I refuse to believe you are posting in good faith or are trying to seriously discuss what is a very sensitive issue when you are demanding answers to questions such as ‘do you think abortions are great fun’.
    You can’t legitimately be serious.

    I politely asked a question, where did I "demand" an answer?


  • #758
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,458 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    eviltwin wrote: »
    I'm so tired of this abortion for contraception argument. Clearly anyone who thinks that's how it will be used has never had an abortion. It's an induced miscarriage, it's painful, messy, traumatic and physically gruelling, it's time consuming - you can forget about going anywhere for at least a day. It's probably the best advert for contraception there is, I can't see many women who were casual about contraception being blase about it after an abortion.
    Statistics from Russia indicate that - around ten years ago anyway - abortion remained a regular alternative to contraception - and abortions often outnumbered live births in the country.

    https://www.rferl.org/a/Abortion_Remains_Top_Birth_Control_Option_Russia/1145849.html

    Since then, Putin has spent time and effort cosying up to the nationalistic Russian Orthodox Church, spend some time denigrating abortion and spent some state funds advertising the benefits of having lots of kids - memorably on the Moscow underground, but no doubt in many other places too. I haven't been to Russia for some years at this point, but last time I was there, abortion was considered a normal means of birth-control and nobody really thought all that much about it one way or the other.

    Unrelatedly, discussions concerning the value of human life, and the concept of human rights generally, don't really exist in Russia as they do here in Western Europe - life there is often, and unfortunately, considered cheap and the pro-life side of the abortion discussion will find little moral comfort deriving from the broadly "pro-life" public pronouncements of the Russian government, and what happens on the streets.


  • #759
    Martina1991
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,548 ✭✭✭Martina1991


    Kidchameleon wrote:
    If I was in a situation where my wife delivered premature, I would feel pretty confident of the baby's survival but that is just me.
    I dont know where you're getting your "confidence" from but i doubt its science based.

    Surviving a premature birth is one step in the possible lifelong conditions that can be caused by a premature birth.
    Respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) Intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) Patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC). Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). Jaundice
    Anaemia
    Cerebral Palsy
    Eyesight and hearing problems.
    Chronic infections....to name a few.

    I bowed out of the referendum threads after the vote because i couldn't bear putting up with the same callous attitudes and opinions of women in crisis. Thankfully those opinions dont matter now.

    But i have to say you're posts are incredibly insensitive and you should take a step back.


  • #760
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,458 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Mod:
    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Do you think abortions are great fun?
    Abortion is a serious topic and posters taking part in a discussion concerning abortion should treat the topic, and other posters, with respect.


  • #761
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Kidchameleon wrote: »

    I am very sorry for your loss but the tragic truth is that your child would have stood a much greater chance of survival had he or she been born say, 5 years from now. Your loss no doubt affects your view of what is a "pretty good" chance of survival.

    But my child wasn’t born 5 years from now, he was born at 24 weeks gestation upon which we were told by a team of medical professionals that the odds were far too high for him to overcome, quoting the statistics but maintaining that although the stats are very unfavorable, miracles can sometime happen, to prepare for the worst and try hope for the best.

    So no, there is no “tragic truth” as there is no solid indication he would have survived 5 years from now, it’s pure and utter speculation, not truth, not facts, speculation.

    My loss does not affect my view of what is a pretty good chance of survival, the highly trained team of specialized medical professionals with real world field experience pretty much established that view as factual, because it is. A fully qualified, highly trained individual specializing in premature neonatal care trumps your “pretty good odds”, there is no rebuttal to that whatsoever. They know better than you, it is their job.


  • Advertisement
  • #762
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    smacl wrote: »
    No doubt, but the vast weight of trauma and burden in dealing with an unwanted pregnancy is felt by women, so as a man I'd be extremely cautious of referring to women as being the irresponsible ones here. In my honestly held opinion, those who would seek to stigmatise abortion or moralise over women with an unwanted pregnancy need to take a long hard think about what it means to be a decent human being. I'd guess that very many more women than you'd imagine have found themselves in this position, certainly quite a few of my closer friends. It is already more than hard enough.

    Men and women are equal, they are both equally responsible for their actions. I agree that women physically are more burdened by pregnancy and as such I beleive that they have the right to end that pregnancy. Rape on a man is not as bad as rape on a woman for the same reason, the law reflects that.


  • #763
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,819 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Neither of the posts you quoted contradict each other?


    When you say that you think there are instances when abortion should be allowed up to 24 weeks, the obvious inference is that you think there are other instances when abortion shouldn't be allowed up to 24 weeks.


    That's not consistent at all with you saying that women should be allowed abortions up to 40 weeks without any reason (which would be all instances).


  • #764
    Calina
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,219 ✭✭✭Calina


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    . Rape on a man is not as bad as rape on a woman for the same reason, the law reflects that.

    Well I don't think I agree. It is a serious assault either way and male on male rape is unlikely to be "not as bad as rape on a woman". Far fewer men report when they have been sexually assaulted as a proportion because bad and all as it is for women, men seem to feel even less secure looking for support.

    Ultimately the issue is that it is perhaps not sensible to generalise about rape or people's petsonal decisions regarding pregnancy.


  • #765
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    osarusan wrote: »
    When you say that you think there are instances when abortion should be allowed up to 24 weeks, the obvious inference is that you think there are other instances when abortion shouldn't be allowed up to 24 weeks.


    That's not consistent at all with you saying that women should be allowed abortions up to 40 weeks without any reason (which would be all instances).

    Grand I see where you are coming from. Just to be clear, I beleive abortion should be allowed up to 40 weeks, no questions asked. I have no doubt 24 weeks will be allowed in Ireland before long


  • #766
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    Calina wrote: »
    Well I don't think I agree. It is a serious assault either way and male on male rape is unlikely to be "not as bad as rape on a woman". Far fewer men report when they have been sexually assaulted as a proportion because bad and all as it is for women, men seem to feel even less secure looking for support.

    Ultimately the issue is that it is perhaps not sensible to generalise about rape or people's petsonal decisions regarding pregnancy.

    It is a serious assault no doubt. The potential effects on a woman are worse though. The law and society's attitudes in general reflect that.


  • #767
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    But my child wasn’t born 5 years from now, he was born at 24 weeks gestation upon which we were told by a team of medical professionals that the odds were far too high for him to overcome, quoting the statistics but maintaining that although the stats are very unfavorable, miracles can sometime happen, to prepare for the worst and try hope for the best.

    So no, there is no “tragic truth” as there is no solid indication he would have survived 5 years from now, it’s pure and utter speculation, not truth, not facts, speculation.

    My loss does not affect my view of what is a pretty good chance of survival, the highly trained team of specialized medical professionals with real world field experience pretty much established that view as factual, because it is. A fully qualified, highly trained individual specializing in premature neonatal care trumps your “pretty good odds”, there is no rebuttal to that whatsoever. They know better than you, it is their job.

    Look dude sorry for your loss. It is clearly still very raw for you so I am not going to discuss it further with you. We will just have to agree to disagree and leave it at that. Again, sorry for your loss & I hope you and family are doing well.


  • #768
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,637 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Grand I see where you are coming from. Just to be clear, I beleive abortion should be allowed up to 40 weeks, no questions asked.

    Given that you have said that abortion is a form of state-endorsed murder, like the death penalty, why exactly do you think it should be allowed anyway, and especially "no questions asked"?

    It's not like the baby is a murderer, so the usual justifications for the death penalty don't really apply. And for that matter the death penalty is not applied "no questions asked" - it can take a decade or more in the US for all the questions to be asked and answered.

    So it's hard to understand what exactly your thinking is there.

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • #769
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Given that you have said that abortion is a form of state-endorsed murder, like the death penalty, why exactly do you think it should be allowed anyway, and especially "no questions asked"?

    It's not like the baby is a murderer, so the usual justifications for the death penalty don't really apply. And for that matter the death penalty is not applied "no questions asked" - it can take a decade or more in the US for all the questions to be asked and answered.

    So it's hard to understand what exactly your thinking is there.

    Well lets not get into semantics. I understand it is not murder in the legal sense of the word (although it was for the entire history of the state up until January this year) forgive me if I use a word that has been in use to describe abortion for so many years I need to adjust!

    What abortion is without question is killing. It is killing when we abort a pregnancy in the first week, it is killing at 12 weeks, it is killing at 24 weeks and it is killing at 40 weeks. The only difference is how sentient the human life form is. I was given the example of a tapeworm earlier in the discussion. If I were to stamp on a tapeworm I would be killing it. Theres no getting away from that word.

    I beleive a woman has the right to kill a 40 week old child inside her body because it is just that - her body. She gets to make decisions about her body, not me not you and not the state.


  • #770
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,637 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Well lets not get into semantics. I understand it is not murder in the legal sense of the word (although it was for the entire history of the state up until January this year) forgive me if I use a word that has been in use to describe abortion for so many years I need to adjust!

    What abortion is without question is killing. It is killing when we abort a pregnancy in the first week, it is killing at 12 weeks, it is killing at 24 weeks and it is killing at 40 weeks. The only difference is how sentient the human life form is. I was given the example of a tapeworm earlier in the discussion. If I were to stamp on a tapeworm I would be killing it. Theres no getting away from that word.

    I beleive a woman has the right to kill a 40 week old child inside her body because it is just that - her body. She gets to make decisions about her body, not me not you and not the state.
    Killing a tapeworm would not be state-endorsed murder though. Those were your words.

    Also if it is her body, is she committing state-endorsed "murder" of her own body?

    If it's a "child", as you said above, should she have the right to kill it? Ending the pregnancy doesn't necessarily mean the death of the child: at 40 weeks it's just an induced birth. So why do you think she should be allowed to kill this child, if that is what it is (and at 40 weeks I think it probably is)?

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • #771
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Look dude sorry for your loss. It is clearly still very raw for you so I am not going to discuss it further with you. We will just have to agree to disagree and leave it at that. Again, sorry for your loss & I hope you and family are doing well.

    It's not raw at all, you're just inexplicably wrong, your opinion simply does not trump that of trained specialists, so it is extremely ignorant and mis-informed to say that the survival rates of a 24 week old fetus is "pretty good" when they're in fact, not "pretty good" as reflected by the trained specialists who have been in their profession for years, studying it for years and have endless experience in it.

    You won't discuss it any further because you have no rebuttal, it's genuinely that simple, you know how silly it sounds to say that the odds are "pretty good" despite medical practitioners around the world stating otherwise. You just won't admit that your opinion is farcical, far from fact and not reflective of the actual professionals who deal with it on a daily basis.

    To suggest otherwise to what they outline is pure and utter delusion.


  • Advertisement
  • #772
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    I beleive a woman has the right to kill a 40 week old child inside her body because it is just that -

    This is where you lost absolutely all credibility as a "pro-choice" voter.

    You very clearly aren't "pro-choice" as you've said, you're being incredibly disingenuous now and it would seem you aren't engaging in good faith.

    At this stage I would assume you're either a pro-lifer masquerading as a pro-choice individual (which happened quite a lot on Boards during the build-up to the referendum) or (less likely) you're that naive that you believe everything you post 110%. I'm leaning towards the former.


  • #773
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    It's not raw at all, you're just inexplicably wrong, your opinion simply does not trump that of trained specialists, so it is extremely ignorant and mis-informed to say that the survival rates of a 24 week old fetus is "pretty good" when they're in fact, not "pretty good" as reflected by the trained specialists who have been in their profession for years, studying it for years and have endless experience in it.

    You won't discuss it any further because you have no rebuttal, it's genuinely that simple, you know how silly it sounds to say that the odds are "pretty good" despite medical practitioners around the world stating otherwise. You just won't admit that your opinion is farcical, far from fact and not reflective of the actual professionals who deal with it on a daily basis.

    To suggest otherwise to what they outline is pure and utter delusion.

    Your use of language is very emotive... look I understand the doctors know better than me but you need to understand that not everyone has such a half empty glass outlook as yourself. I have not had a tragedy as personal as you have. If I was in your situation you can be assured that I would be positive for myself, my wife and my baby. No amount of statistics from doctors would convince me to give up hope


  • #774
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    This is where you lost absolutely all credibility as a "pro-choice" voter.

    You very clearly aren't "pro-choice" as you've said, you're being incredibly disingenuous now and it would seem you aren't engaging in good faith.

    At this stage I would assume you're either a pro-lifer masquerading as a pro-choice individual (which happened quite a lot on Boards during the build-up to the referendum) or (less likely) you're that naive that you believe everything you post 110%. I'm leaning towards the former.

    Nice use of selective quoting there.

    I will assume that for the first time you have encountered a person who is more pro choice than youself. You are uncomfertable with this prospect as it shows you are not as distant from the zelots as you thought...

    Serious question:

    Would you deny a rape victim a late term abortion? And force her to give birth to her rapists child? Perhaps with the shock of her experience, perhaps denial of the situation, she only decided to abort at 40 weeks? Would you be happy to force her to give birth? To look at her child and see her rapist? To live her life with the knowledge that she left her child to adoption?


  • #775
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Nice use of selective quoting there.

    I will assume that for the first time you have encountered a person who is more pro choice than youself. You are uncomfertable with this prospect as it shows you are not as distant from the zelots as you thought...

    Serious question:

    Would you deny a rape victim a late term abortion? And force her to give birth to her rapists child? Perhaps with the shock of her experience, perhaps denial of the situation, she only decided to abort at 40 weeks? Would you be happy to force her to give birth? To look at her child and see her rapist? To live her life with the knowledge that she left her child to adoption?

    You have assumed wrong. Nothing you may say, think or do will ever make me uncomfortable so your vague assumptions are just lost.

    Nope I absolutely would not deny a rape victim a late term abortion, it’s that simple. I would not deprive her of a choice. It wasn’t selective quoting by the way, you’re being incredibly disingenuous in your line of “questions” and your odd usage of the phrase “killing”.

    You said you are pro-choice but against abortion, so what are you? Are you pro choice AND pro-life? Which of these are you assuming you’re “more” than me on? This line of debate is really getting quite tedious. Posters have twigged on to what you’re doing and I don’t believe for a second you’re actually here to genuinely discuss this topic.


  • #776
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,458 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Mod:
    robarmstrong wrote: »
    [...] you're being incredibly disingenuous now and it would seem you aren't engaging in good faith. [...] At this stage I would assume you're either a pro-lifer masquerading as a pro-choice individual [...] or [...] you're that naive that you believe everything you post 110%.
    robarmstrong wrote: »
    [...] I don’t believe for a second you’re actually here to genuinely discuss this topic.
    Any more uncivil personal comments and you may be subject to moderation.


  • #777
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Just want to add on - I’ve read your posts from your initial wandering onto this thread all the way up until now and there isn’t a hope you’re here “genuinely” nor do I believe you are what you say you are. I fully believe that you are simply masquerading as someone you’re not, like many others have done over the course of the referendum and eventually they, like you, let the mask slip on their real intentions/reasons for posting.

    Your complete disregard of trained and highly qualified medical professionals views on fetal viability at 24 weeks is just beyond delusional and holds no weight in a debate. It’s not “glass half empty” nor is it glass half full, it is cold hard facts that out of 100 babies born prematurely at 24 weeks, there is a very high chance that only 20-35 of them will survive. This is not an outlook, nor is it an opinion, this is factual statistics based upon research in the field, so please, stop with the assumptions of it being “raw” or “emotive” or any nonsense of the sort for me. Do not speak for me.

    Your casual usage of voting for a woman/believing a woman can “kill” her unborn child in any circumstance? That’s not what pro-choice is about, how are you anti-abortion but supportive of a woman attempting to abort a full term pregnancy in any circumstance, yet then go on to say you have no sympathy for “irresponsible women”?

    To summarize:you are not being genuine whatsoever. You are not being consistent with your statements and you have on multiple occasions contradicted yourself heavily.

    I will be placing you on my ignore list, and gladly so.


  • #778
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,458 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Deleted one disputative post.


  • #779
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,458 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Mod: Deleted a second disputative post. Any more disputative posts will see the poster concerned moderated.


  • #780
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Mod Note:

    Kidchameleon has received a warning card for ignoring on-thread mod instructions here https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=110176331&postcount=760 to treat the subject and other posters with respect.

    "Look dude sorry for your loss" https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=110176576&postcount=767 is not, in this context, treating a fellow poster with respect.


  • Advertisement
  • #781
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,206 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Well here we disagree. I believe that while the fetus/baby is in the woman's body, the fetus/baby is part of the woman's body. I believe in complete bodily autonomy, her body, her choice. It appears I am more pro choice than yourself. Thanks for your honesty in answering the question.

    Her choice is respected, the pregnancy is ended.

    I'm partial to your abracadabra,

    I'm raptured by the joy of it all.



Advertisement