STB. wrote: » You need to get a grip of yourself. Constantly attacking other posters with your own moral compass. Unfortunately for you and your moral compass the constitutional ban on abortion was lifted by popular vote. Move on. People die in hospitals every day in every country because of wrong decisions/wrong scan results/wrong diagnosis. It wasn't a surprise that the pro-life lunatics jumped on this. We have moved far and away from putting all of this in religious orders hands thank fúck. They had their own way of doing things that certainly wasnt morally right.
stefanovich wrote: » You are the one branding people lunatics. There are lots of people who are anti abortion that are also not religious.
[Deleted User] wrote: » medical procedure went wrong, based on erroneous judgement/data common, lessons can be learned no reason to relitigate anything. its a process.
STB. wrote: » Lunatics who refuse to accept a democratic decision.
Faugheen wrote: Our laws don't allow for that. Our laws don't allow for abortions past the point which babies can survive outside of the womb. So your point is irrelevant.
nullzero wrote: » In a democracy dissent is supposed to be encouraged. You can accept a decision whilst disagreeing with it. This is the main problem with people who aligned themselves with the repeal movement, a childish belief that all opinions divergent from their own being cast into some sort of abyss from where they should never be heard again. If the vote had gone the other way would the repeal movement have accepted it and never raised it again?
STB. wrote: » People die in hospitals every day in every country because of wrong decisions/wrong scan results/wrong diagnosis.
STB. wrote: » In democracy, democratic decisions are meant to be respected. Grasp all you want at straws.
Mr.H wrote: » Well that is completely false. There is a small but real chance that a baby born before 20 weeks can live. In fact the youngest born was only 13 weeks which is 2 weeks younger than the one here. Have you any kids? You dont need to answer as it is a personal question. But one that you can think about yourself. Have you been for a 9 week scan, 12 week scan, 15 week scan, 20 week scan and so on. If you have then you do see when they start to form. I have a scan from 15 weeks and while it us blurry you can actually see some detail of my son in it. Its crazy how he was defined so early on and looks the exact same. The reason i ask is because quiet often people talk about stuff they know absolutely nothing about and purely because its popular opinion. Yes forced. The couple. Not just the woman, were told that their child would likely die very early on if it were born. The option was to go through with pregnancy and leave their child suffer for what little life they had, or have an abortion. Yes that is forcing someones decision. They were given the wrong information and if the laws didnt change they would have not been given the option. A healthy baby would have lived.
STB. wrote: » In a democracy, democratic decisions are meant to be respected. This vote overturned the previous in situ arrangements. Grasp all you want at straws. We certainly know how the democratic vote was respected by the minority.
nullzero wrote: » How am I grasping at straws? Could you address what I said please? If Ireland had voted no should people on the yes side have never raised the issue again?
nullzero wrote: » You do realise that the eighth ammendment was something that was introduced to the constitution by means of a referendum in 1983 right? According to your logic that decision should have been respected and never challenged. Do you have any idea what your talking about? You can prove anything with facts...
STB. wrote: » Lunatics who refuse to accept a democratic decision. Go judge somewhere else.
STB. wrote: » You are grasping at straws because you are using words like dissent in democracy whilst not having the cop on to realise that this is the very reason the referendum was raised to change something that the vast majority disagreed with in the first instance. That dissent has resulted in two thirds of the country voting in favour of repealing the 8th. Respect the democratic decision please. Even after the democracy had spoken, there were stupid legal challenges, graspers like yourself.
Plumbthedepths wrote: » The pregnancy whilst it exists is part of her body, your attitude is one of extreme ignorance tbh.
cournioni wrote: How many toes does the mother have while she is pregnant? Twenty?
nullzero wrote: » Do you propose that it should be a criminal offence to express opinions which do not agree with abortion? If not I have no idea what you're getting at.You have shown a complete lack of insight into how things work in a democracy, your argument was poor and now your nose is out of joint because you were pulled up on it, and surprise surprise you revert to snide comments.
cournioni wrote: » How many toes does the mother have while she is pregnant? Twenty? On the contrary, I think your attitude is extremely ignorant towards the baby tbh.
STB. wrote: » It is you that has shown a complete lack of respect or understanding for democratic decisions. Your pissed off because it didn't agree with your moral sensibilities. You'll have to get over that I am afraid. Like I said grasping at straws.
stefanovich wrote: » It's funny how the left defends democracy when it is in their favour but are utterly hostile towards it when it goes against.
Mr.H wrote: » Well that is completely false. There is a small but real chance that a baby born before 20 weeks can live. In fact the youngest born was only 13 weeks which is 2 weeks younger than the one here. Have you any kids? You dont need to answer as it is a personal question. But one that you can think about yourself. Have you been for a 9 week scan, 12 week scan, 15 week scan, 20 week scan and so on. If you have then you do see when they start to form. I have a scan from 15 weeks and while it us blurry you can actually see some detail of my son in it. Its crazy how he was defined so early on and looks the exact same. The reason i ask is because quiet often people talk about stuff they know absolutely nothing about and purely because its popular opinion.
In 2014, Lyla Stensrud, born in San Antonio, Texas, U.S. became the youngest premature baby in the world. She was born at 21 weeks 4 days and weighed 410 grams (less than a pound). Kaashif Ahmad resuscitated the baby after she was born. As of November 2018, Lyla was attending preschool. She had a slight delay in speech, but no other known medical issues or disabilities.[150] Amillia Taylor is also often cited as the most premature baby.[151] She was born on 24 October 2006 in Miami, Florida, U.S. at 21 weeks and 6 days' gestation.[152] This report has created some confusion as her gestation was measured from the date of conception (through in vitro fertilization) rather than the date of her mother's last menstrual period, making her appear 2 weeks younger than if gestation was calculated by the more common method.[135] At birth, she was 9 inches (22.9 cm) long and weighed 10 ounces (280 g).[151] She suffered digestive and respiratory problems, together with a brain hemorrhage. She was discharged from the Baptist Children's Hospital on 20 February 2007.
Mr.H wrote: » Yes forced. The couple. Not just the woman, were told that their child would likely die very early on if it were born. The option was to go through with pregnancy and leave their child suffer for what little life they had, or have an abortion. Yes that is forcing someones decision. They were given the wrong information and if the laws didnt change they would have not been given the option. A healthy baby would have lived.
cournioni wrote: » That’s all fine and well, but my vote didn’t contribute towards the death of a viable baby, the “popular” one did. Then again, sheep don’t have to be all that clever.
cournioni wrote: Then again, sheep don’t have to be all that clever.
SusieBlue wrote: Link to the baby born alive at 13 weeks please? I believe the world record is held by a Canadian baby who was born at 21 weeks. I wouldn’t say there’s a ‘real’ chance babies born at 20 weeks can live when the world record for the most premature baby is 21 weeks.
nullzero wrote: » Cognitive dissonance.
Plumbthedepths wrote: » Same as before she is pregnant 10 and the same after. Now the foetus depends on the stage of development. Any other stupid question you'd like to pose?
Plumbthedepths wrote: » I don't have an issue with a Mod posting, I'm just surprised your behaviour in this thread so far is tolerated. A regular poster would not get the latitude you have gotten so far.
