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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Any other women here vote NO for the 8th?

Options
179111213

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 33,867 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Or just go and kick for the other team for a few years, it's got to be better than no sex at all, right? 😁

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Registered Users Posts: 431 ✭✭Jeremy Sproket


    How is it a Freudian slip?


    I meant to type "options for men" instead of "options for me".


    It's funny how pathetic people always resort to abusive language and correcting people's spelling and grammar when they run out of arguments. I pity you actually.


    Life begins at conception.



  • Registered Users Posts: 431 ✭✭Jeremy Sproket


    So why doesn't the abstinence mantra apply to women then?


    Don't want to get pregnant, keep your knees together.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,126 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    and around in circles we go. It is no wonder that your side lost so badly in the referendum.



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,867 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    It appears that in some cases the internet can act as a portal back to the 1950s, it's uncanny.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 431 ✭✭Jeremy Sproket


    Your side also lost several previous referendums.


    That didn't stop the people who wanted to kill babies from throwing shapes until they got a referendum.


    Why should the option exist to kill a baby in the womb for simply being disabled?


    Didn't a bloke with a funny stache in the 1930's and 1940's advocate a similar strategy?? Help me remember who that was... he was born in the Austro-Hungarian Empire in the 1880's, went on to become Chancellor of Germany .....



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,867 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    The pro-choice side only lost one referendum, in 1983, when the power of the Catholic Church was still at its height, its feet of clay had not been exposed. Oh and there was millions of pounds flooding in from the US for leaflets, posters etc. all totally unregulated. Of course the reason we had that referendum in the first place was nothing whatsoever to do with Ireland or Irish politics, we were simply being used as a battleground for US politics. Abortion was already totally illegal here.

    I'm not even going to dignify any of the rest of that excreta with a reply.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,006 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    but it makes it impossible to have a rational discussion...



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,950 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Godwinized. Didn't take long.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Lol. Look it up.

    And spare me your proselytizing. Speaking for myself, I couldn't care less when life begins. Nor will I lose any sleep over another women's abortions or her reasons for wanting to end a pregnancy. None of my business.

    But if I was asked for input, I would prioritise the life of the already born woman over foetus every time. Thats where my sympathy lies, and where yours would be better directed.

    You, on the hand, are one of those type of pro-lifers who likes to loudly declare how wrong you think abortion is, how much you abhor abortion but then goes on to qualify it with an "except when..." e.g. rape.

    How does that work? If you believe so strongly that "all life is precious" and "all life begins at conception" how do you justify in your own mind allowing an exception for abortions in rape cases? If your focus is on the foetus, and not the woman, explain to us the difference between a foetus in the womb that was conceived through rape, and one that was not, and then explain why it should be allowable in the case of the former, but not the latter. Explain why - given your so strongly held beliefs - why that foetus conceived through rape does not deserve the same protection that you so strongly argue for every other foetus?

    Because that just strikes me as hypocritical. You're either all life is precious - including the one conceived through rape - or you're not.

    Something I could never understand about some so called "pro-lifers". Its a bit like being one of those "a la carte" catholics who choose the bits they want to comply with and ignore the bits they don't.

    At least pro-choice are exactly that. Pro-choice.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Oh I understand perfectly.

    But it didn't answer the question - what is the difference between a foetus conceived through rape, and one that was not? (Hint, there isn't one).

    But your reply does go to show that this is never really about the foetus at all, and reveals what it is about. You dress it up as "making moral decisions" but what it really is about, is controlling womens' decisions. You said it yourself. But you call it balancing some "moral equation". And that's what its always been about.

    Well, its not anyone else's moral decision to make or "moral equation" to balance, as far as I'm concerned.

    I just wish these so-called pro-lifers would spare us the "every life is precious" or "life begins at conception" spiel if they're then going to turn around and say its okay to abort in circumstances where the woman "didn't have a choice in avoiding the risk of becoming pregnant".

    Be honest. Call it what it truly is. Controlling women.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I honestly don't care what anyone else's reasons for wanting abortion illegal are, and I care even less what their motivation is.

    What I believe is simple.

    (1) If you believe abortion is wrong, then you never have to have one.

    (2) Stay out of other womens' business.

    (3) Don't impose your "morals" on another woman. You're not walking in her shoes or living her life.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I've no idea where to find mods anymore - but can someone just ban this OP WUM account?

    At the very least, make them make another one with a female name if they're going to pretend to be female.

    A cursory glance at their threads should be enough.

    Reported, anyway.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]



    There's no "moral equation" here at all. If someone is going to die, and the only way to save their life is for me to give up a kidney, or some blood, or some bone marrow, it is nobody's business but mine whether I choose to help that person live or not. It's my body, my personal integrity and my right to privacy, so therefore it is my choice and I should not be forced to act in a particular way. The same logic applies at any point in time, and for any person. Therefore there is no distinction between conceptions of different types. There is no moral equation, and so it never "balances". This is no more and no less than a matter of personal integrity and of conscience, and the law should ensure that it is treated as such. The only logical alternative would be to force me to undergo a medical intervention to give up a kidney, or some blood, or some bone marrow, if that's the only way to keep another person alive. None of those things would kill me, but that is not a good enough test for the law, because they would interfere with my bodily integrity and my privacy.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You could try, I guess.

    But you just sound ridiculous.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,056 ✭✭✭secondrowgal


    And there we have it. Knew it wouldn't take long for the dirty sluts rhetoric to appear. The veil wasn't even thin to begin with.


    Women can have as much sex as they like with other women and not get pregnant. Do they have to keep their knees together?

    Women can have as much sex as they like with men who have had a vasectomy and not get pregnant. Do they have to keep their knees together.

    Both are yes or no questions by the way, for the avoidance of doubt, since you used the blanket phrase "Don't want to get pregnant, keep your knees together".



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It is ridiculous.

    Because I do have autonomy in this matter. Abortion is legal. If I found out today I was pregnant, I can decide to abort that pregnancy.

    I don't have to consult any one in "the society I live in" for their permission or opinion, and my decision has NO impact on them.

    They wouldn't even know.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Not sure transferring "logic" from a situation about a single persons decisions of personal autonomy over onto a discussion of crime from one person on another person - is going to look like anything other than ridiculous though? One is a victimless not-crime. The other is neither. The mapping does not track.

    The temptation at this point to press the summon button is overwhelming :)




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Because it is legal.

    You keep waffling on about morality, (i.e. your morality) and society - well, "the society I live in" voted to Repeal the Eighth Amendment, knowing that would allow for legislation to be passed to allow safe and legal abortions in Ireland.

    So it seems "the society I live in" weighed up the arguments, and decided they were okay with it. And those who voted against, well, they'll just have to deal with it. "Society" has spoken on this issue.

    I wonder what the outcome would be, if society were asked to vote on should theft be made legal? Your analogy is, once again, is ridiculous.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,950 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Nonsense. Theft is illegal. Likewise, abortion is legal. You're talking the law, not 'morals.' Morals are subjective. The law isn't, that's why it's a good thing, and there are (defined by law) ways to modify bad laws, like the 8th amendment. For example, genital mutilation. Some cultures, it's o.k. Not here (or most Western society.) So, it's illegal here. Not a morals issue at all.


    And, as has been repeatedly stated on this thread, if you have an issue with how abortion is controlled by the State, the Dail can legislate changes. So, have a go.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 12,569 Mod ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    This is the reason why I tend to avoid these circular argument threads...




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    What has that got to do with anything?

    The choice isn't between forcing a person to have a kidney removed and letting someone else die. The choice is between forcing a person to have a kidney removed and not forcing a person to have a kidney removed.

    It is wrong to force someone to have a kidney removed and donated, regardless of whether someone else would live or die as a result of its donation. I know that, and before you even comment I am over 99% certain that you agree.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,950 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Fortunately, we have the rule of law. Not morals. And they don't have to align.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    At the risk of stating the obvious, death is a quite effective way to bring an end to someone's concerns about their right to privacy (though in many places it doesn't bring an end to privacy rights). You seem to be taking a view of this which is centred around the process. I'm taking a view which is centred around the patient. People have rights to bodily integrity, and to privacy, and the rights of person A to their bodily integrity and privacy are not subject to the rights of person B to theirs.


    Of course theft shouldn't be legal. You have property rights to your own property, but you don't have rights to expropriate the property of others. On the other hand, you do have rights to bodily integrity and personal privacy that are not subject to the rights of others to theirs.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I wrote in Atari Jaguar.



  • Registered Users Posts: 392 ✭✭Fionne


    I voted to repeal. It doesn't make me "pro-abortion" but pro-choice. The fact is that Irish women were already having abortions, just forced to travel to the UK for them, adding extra stress to an already difficult situation. Abortion being legal doesn't make it compulsory - nobody has to have one who doesn't choose to. It just means that those who do choose, can have the procedure in their own country, with proper support from partners or family or friends if they need it, not making a clandestine trip to another country, often alone.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,898 ✭✭✭circadian


    So, several years later. Has it led to "unconditional and limitless abortions and essentially being used as a contraceptive"?



  • Registered Users Posts: 17,496 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    "Pro-abort" doesn't even make sense.


    I voted to repeal the 8th. I have had two children since access to abortion services became legal. Does that make me "pro-abort"?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,898 ✭✭✭circadian


    "Pro-abort" just makes me think of someone in a failing spacecraft mashing the abort button before being destroyed by a black hole.

    Pointless term.



Advertisement