Abortion

HemlockOption wrote: »

And even though you acknowledge that fact, you still think women should be forced to go ahead with unwanted pregnancies, often ending up in poverty ?

There is always adoption and I also believe that the father should be forced to pay for half of the medical bills etc but thats going off topic a bit

[Deleted User]

Des Carter wrote: »

There is always adoption and I also believe that the father should be forced to pay for half of the medical bills etc but thats going off topic a bit

there isn't always adoption because married couples cannot adopt out their child

Des Carter wrote: »

I agree 110%. Your absolutely correct and I think it is completely wrong for fathers to abandon their children even if they dont want to be with the mother. I also agree that they should not under any circumstance preassure the mother into getting an abortion.

There are many couples who cant have babies and would love to adopt. Surely that would be better than an abortion.

Although, you make it sound simple and clear-cut, unfortunately it is anything but. Just one example is that of a married woman in her forties with a grown up family who thinks she can no longer become pregnant but is horrified to find herself in that situation. How could she possibly consider adoption?

hattoncracker wrote: »

Thats not always the right decision. Women with unwanted pregnancies are not incubators..

Bullseye1 wrote: »

What if the woman gets pregnant and he doesn't want a child?

Ill just repost two of my older posts that explains my view

Des Carter wrote: »

oh dont be ridiculous unless its as a result of rape it wasnt forced. The woman made the choice to have sex with full knowledge of the possible outcomes and so should take responsibilities for her actions (Same goes for men if they get a woman pregnant)

Its called taking responsibilities for your actions if you dont want a child dont have unprotected sex. And even if you do you know there is still a chance and so it is your responsibility to go through the pregnancy (not including rape, mothers life in danger etc)

[Deleted User]

HemlockOption wrote: »

Although, you make it sound simple and clear-cut, unfortunately it is anything but. Just one example is that of a married woman in her forties with a grown up family who thinks she can no longer become pregnant but is horrified to find herself in that situation. How could she possibly consider adoption?

she can't

Des the problem is that your argument is not pro life, it's "nyah nyah you had sex, live with it".
If it were pro life you'd insist on cases of rape being included because it's still a baby/foetus/whatever
and that kind of pro-punishment "deal with the consequences except by having an abortion because i don't like counting that as dealing with them" attitude is seriously backward

Des Carter wrote: »

hattoncracker wrote: »

Thats not always the right decision. Women with unwanted pregnancies are not incubators..

Bullseye1 wrote: »

What if the woman gets pregnant and he doesn't want a child?

Ill just repost two of my older posts that explains my view

Des Carter wrote: »

oh dont be ridiculous unless its as a result of rape it wasnt forced. The woman made the choice to have sex with full knowledge of the possible outcomes and so should take responsibilities for her actions (Same goes for men if they get a woman pregnant)

Its called taking responsibilities for your actions if you dont want a child dont have unprotected sex. And even if you do you know there is still a chance and so it is your responsibility to go through the pregnancy (not including rape, mothers life in danger etc)

So does that mean I can ask for the father of my unborn child to surrender his rights to immigrate?

bluewolf wrote: »

there isn't always adoption because married couples cannot adopt out their child

Really? I was unaware of that. why not? sorry if its a little off topic.

[Deleted User]

Des Carter wrote: »

Really? I was unaware of that. why not? sorry if its a little off topic.

Don't know but that's how it is

probably some ancient "don't break up a family" rule

Bullseye1

Des Carter wrote: »

Ill just repost two of my older posts that explains my view

But pregnancy can occur even with contraception. Or the woman might tell her partner she is on the pill when in fact she isn't. He may have told her he doesn't want children and she goes against his wishes. It's not as straight forward as you make out.

HemlockOption wrote: »

Although, you make it sound simple and clear-cut, unfortunately it is anything but. Just one example is that of a married woman in her forties with a grown up family who thinks she can no longer become pregnant but is horrified to find herself in that situation. How could she possibly consider adoption?

the woman might tell her partner she is on the pill when in fact she isn't. He may have told her he doesn't want children and she goes against his wishes.

I am well aware that this whole topic is not black and white and there are all sorts of individual examples where there are problems but im just talking in an general overall sense.

Des Carter wrote: »

HemlockOption wrote: »

Although, you make it sound simple and clear-cut, unfortunately it is anything but. Just one example is that of a married woman in her forties with a grown up family who thinks she can no longer become pregnant but is horrified to find herself in that situation. How could she possibly consider adoption?

I am well aware that this whole topic is not black and white and there are all sorts of individual examples where there are problems but im just talking in an general overall sense.

So you're generalising. Lovely.

How many women do you know who have had abortions?

Des Carter wrote: »

I am well aware that this whole topic is not black and white and there are all sorts of individual examples where there are problems but im just talking in an general overall sense.

The reason why abortion is such a divisive subject is precisely because it involves real women in very difficult situations.

Bullseye1 wrote: »

But pregnancy can occur even with contraception. Or the woman might tell her partner she is on the pill when in fact she isn't. He may have told her he doesn't want children and she goes against his wishes. It's not as straight forward as you make out.

Sorry I phrased that all wrong it meant to read

Its called taking responsibilities for your actions if you dont want a child dont have unprotected sex. And even if you do use protection you know there is still a chance and so it is your responsibility to go through the pregnancy (not including rape, mothers life in danger etc)

Des Carter, I really hope you never have a daughter with a crisis pregnancy because I would pity her.

Wild Bill

Folk here are probably more conditioned by the Church and way less "liberal" than they imagine!

A challenge: If you tick a "yes" against any of these you are merely a conservative fundamentalist that would happily fit into the Church - your objections are those of prejudice or taste - not rationality:

Pro-abortion but anti-euthanasia?

Pro-abortion but against legalizing multiple wives (but probably support gay marriage!)?

Pro-abortion but would shudder at the idea of terminating the severely mentally handicapped?

Pro-abortion on grounds of "women's choice" but horrified if the choice was based on sex or race rather than convenience?

And so on......

If you want a few more examples - gimme a call :cool:

prinz

hattoncracker wrote: »

Des Carter, I really hope you never have a daughter with a crisis pregnancy because I would pity her.

What an unnecessary, insulting thing to say to someone.

hattoncracker wrote: »

So you're generalising. Lovely.

How many women do you know who have had abortions?

HemlockOption wrote: »

The reason why abortion is such a divisive subject is precisely because it involves real women in very difficult situations.

1st off there is two women that I know of who has had an abortion and one is a very close friend actually. I have said already in this thread that I know how complex the subject is and I would never hold it against anyone or look down on them for it as it must be a really emotional and stressfull ordeal.

If we discuss each individual case we would be here forever my point is that the unborn baby is a human life and so must be protected so I think abortion should remain illegal as if it were allowed even in specific cases it would open the floodgates (thats how it satrted in england)

paddyandy

An Abortion can haunt you in your later years when you might think differently .

prinz wrote: »

What an unnecessary, insulting thing to say to someone.

But maybe the views expressed by the poster you are defending were insulting to a lot of other posters ?

prinz

HemlockOption wrote: »

But maybe the views expressed by the poster you are defending were insulting to a lot of other posters ?

Wrong + wrong = Right?

There is a massive difference between taking a stance on abortion, and by extension other people finding that insulting and making a personal attack on another poster.

Bullseye1

HemlockOption wrote: »

But maybe the views expressed by the poster you are defending were insulting to a lot of other posters ?

But yours was personal. I don't understand why people have to resort to personal insults. Can you not make your point yet still respect others opinion?

hattoncracker wrote: »

Des Carter, I really hope you never have a daughter with a crisis pregnancy because I would pity her.

you are intitled to your opinion but would you like to explain why? because I would discourage her to get an abortion?

Dyr

philologos wrote: »

Perhaps you can clear up what you mean by "the church" do you mean just the RCC or all Christianity or what else?

For the loveajaysus, you're like the religious equivalent of a culchie in AH bellyaching because someone referred to dublin as "town". When I say the church I mean the only bleedin' church that counts in this country: the one true church, (and I'm an atheist

) Not yer little breakaway vauxhall conference sects.

Des Carter wrote: »

hattoncracker wrote: »

Des Carter, I really hope you never have a daughter with a crisis pregnancy because I would pity her.

you are intitled to your opinion but would you like to explain why? because I would discourage her to get an abortion?

Would you disown her if she chose to have one?

HemlockOption wrote: »

But maybe the views expressed by the poster you are defending were insulting to a lot of other posters ?

I am really sorry if my views offended you or anyone else that was not the intention. Was it anything in particular, maybe I could clear it up?

prinz wrote: »

Wrong + wrong = Right?

There is a massive difference between taking a stance on abortion, and by extension other people finding that isnulting and making a personal attack on another poster.

I think we're all adults? and I think we're all anonymous and that should give us great freedom to express our views no matter how insulting.

That's the beauty of boards!

Dyr

paddyandy wrote: »

An Abortion can haunt you in your later years when you might think differently .

What like a little foetus ghost waving its umbilical cord like marley with his chains? that would be pretty scary in fairness.

philologos

Bambi: Not at all, I'm merely pointing this stuff out because the term can be used in a confusing manner by many on boards.ie.

I'm not sure if the RCC is the only church that counts in Ireland. Sure, other Christians form a minority, but they still have a significant presence. I think it's important to distinguish when were talking about Christianity in general from when we're talking about a specific denomination (such as the RCC).

We need to make sure that we're using the same terms in discussion to understand eachother best.

prinz

HemlockOption wrote: »

I think we're all adults? and I think we're all anonymous and that should give us great freedom to express our views no matter how insulting. That's the beauty of boards!

You should probably read the forum charter.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=63135178&postcount=4