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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Abortion debate thread

1…78101213…59

Comments

  • #272
    martinnew
    Closed Accounts Posts: 87 ✭✭martinnew


    Tim Robbins wrote: »
    There are some extremes on both sides.


    It is subjective when life begins. Neither scripture, science or philosophy is clear on the matter.

    You can't state your opinions as objective facts.

    And the pro-life side are not even consistent on the matter. They don't celebrate conception the same they celebrate birth. As I said earlier, they usually wait until the child is born before they baptise, christian and even name him or her.

    Wrong. Christian very much DO celebrate conception. And all my Children were named at 3 months after conception, once we knew the sex.


  • #273
    Tim Robbins
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,032 ✭✭✭Tim Robbins


    martinnew wrote: »
    Wrong. Christian very much DO celebrate conception. And all my Children were named at 3 months after conception, once we knew the sex.
    When did you baptise, Christian them?


  • #274
    martinnew
    Closed Accounts Posts: 87 ✭✭martinnew


    Tim Robbins wrote: »
    When did you baptise, Christian them?


    What has Baptism got to do with this? It dosen't make the child more a child.


  • #275
    pwurple
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,132 ✭✭✭✭pwurple


    martinnew wrote: »
    Wrong. Christian very much DO celebrate conception. And all my Children were named at 3 months after conception, once we knew the sex.

    ?? Huh?

    You can't even tell the gender from a scan until the 20 week scan, 16 at the earliest, but only if you are lucky and they are in the right position when you scan. Also, 20 week gender scan is not available here unless you are high risk, or you go and pay privately in a clinic for it.

    Also, it is only clear if it is a boy, they can only give a 75% probability that it is a girl, as the bits may just be out of sight.

    So please tell me how you knew the gender and named your children at 3 months gestation?


  • #276
    martinnew
    Closed Accounts Posts: 87 ✭✭martinnew


    pwurple wrote: »
    ?? Huh?

    You can't even tell the gender from a scan until the 20 week scan, 16 at the earliest, but only if you are lucky and they are in the right position when you scan. Also, 20 week gender scan is not available here unless you are high risk, or you go and pay privately in a clinic for it.

    Also, it is only clear if it is a boy, they can only give a 75% probability that it is a girl, as the bits may just be out of sight.

    So please tell me how you knew the gender and named your children at 3 months gestation?

    We didn't get Scanned in Ireland, My wife happened to be home at the time.

    As to Gender,, You are correct there are no guarantees, They did say this, but as it happened the their best "guess" was correct 3 times.


  • Advertisement
  • #277
    Tim Robbins
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,032 ✭✭✭Tim Robbins


    martinnew wrote: »
    What has Baptism got to do with this? It dosen't make the child more a child.
    Are you an anabaptist?

    Most christian denomiations either baptise or christian their children.


  • #278
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Tim Robbins wrote: »
    It is subjective when life begins. Neither scripture, science or philosophy is clear on the matter.

    You can't state your opinions as objective facts.
    It is an objective scientific (i.e. repeatedly observable) fact that each individual Human life begins at fertilization ... and barring accidental misadventure or deliberate killing ... they have the potential to go on to be implanted, born and live to ninety!!!

    This is one of the few objectively verifiable facts in all of this ... so let's all do ourselves a favour and accept this obvious and incontrovertible fact.

    No rational debate is possible if people are going to deny such an obvious and undeniable fact.

    This doesn't mean that the life of a pre-born person has to be protected at the cost of the life of the mother carrying it ... but it does logically mean that the person so conceived does have a right to not be killed ... unless the mother's life is in serious and real danger from continuing with the pregnancy.

    Striking the balance between the competing rights of the pre-born Human to be born ... and the rights of the mother, is where all the controversy and strong opinions (on both sides) exist - and in some cases, you would need the 'Wisdom of Solomon' to decide where the balance correctly resides.

    In some cases, a mothers life may not appear to be in any particular danger ... and then some sudden medical crisis develops that kills her.

    In other cases, the mother's life appears to be in iminent danger ... yet the danger passes and everything works out OK for mother and baby.

    I certainly don't envy doctors trying to make these decisions ... or providing opinions to patients on the likely risks involved.


  • #279
    DonnaMarieAva
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 155 ✭✭DonnaMarieAva


    I can see the good points and bad points of abortion. First, I shall say that I am not pro life or pro abortion. I am pro choice.

    I believe that the pregnancy should be terminated if the woman's life is endangered.

    Another points I will make, but I know I will receive lots of negativity for this, if it found out during the early in the pregnancy that the child will me malformed i.e. loss of a limb(s), severe downs syndrome or other problems like that, the child would not live a comfortable life. I understand that the child may have feelings, but unless born blind, they child will see that they are different and therefore will realise just how limited they are with regards to what they could do 'if they were like everybody else'. The child will have to be cared for 24/7. What would happen if the carer were to pass, who would take care of the person then? This is a situation in which I believe abortion should take place.


  • #280
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    DonnaMarieAva wrote: »
    I can see the good points and bad points of abortion. First, I shall say that I am not pro life or pro abortion. I am pro choice.

    I believe that the pregnancy should be terminated if the woman's life is endangered.

    Another points I will make, but I know I will receive lots of negativity for this, if it found out during the early in the pregnancy that the child will me malformed i.e. loss of a limb(s), severe downs syndrome or other problems like that, the child would not live a comfortable life. I understand that the child may have feelings, but unless born blind, they child will see that they are different and therefore will realise just how limited they are with regards to what they could do 'if they were like everybody else'. The child will have to be cared for 24/7. What would happen if the carer were to pass, who would take care of the person then? This is a situation in which I believe abortion should take place.
    Firstly, there are no 'good points' to procured abortion ... is is the deliberate killing of a Human Being ... with considerable risks of medical complications for the mother. It may be a necessary evil, where a mother's life is at serious and real risk ... but that's about it.

    Secondly, there is no fundamental moral difference between killing a pre-born Human who is likely to be mentally or physically challenged ... and killing born Humans with these issues.
    You are sailing very close to the idea of 'life unworthy of life' ... developed in a different era and place, with horrific consequences, when you advocate such ideas.
    For example, Downes Syndrome children are fabulous people that don't deserve to die ... and parents often have a lot more trouble, looking after their so-called 'normal' children, than looking after a child with Downes Syndrome.

    Equally, people with Downes Syndrome live happy and fulfiled lives, just like the rest of us.


  • #281
    Benny_Cake
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,105 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    DonnaMarieAva wrote: »
    Another points I will make, but I know I will receive lots of negativity for this, if it found out during the early in the pregnancy that the child will me malformed i.e. loss of a limb(s), severe downs syndrome or other problems like that, the child would not live a comfortable life. I understand that the child may have feelings, but unless born blind, they child will see that they are different and therefore will realise just how limited they are with regards to what they could do 'if they were like everybody else'. The child will have to be cared for 24/7. What would happen if the carer were to pass, who would take care of the person then? This is a situation in which I believe abortion should take place.

    Plenty of people who are born with conditions such as Down's Syndrome go on to live very full and complete lives, and bring great joy and happiness to those that know them. If you support making abortion available on demand, then you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't see why someone with Down's Syndrome is less entitled to a chance at life than anyone else.


  • Advertisement
  • #282
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Benny_Cake wrote: »
    Plenty of people who are born with conditions such as Down's Syndrome go on to live very full and complete lives, and bring great joy and happiness to those that know them. If you support making abortion available on demand, then you're entitled to your opinion, but I don't see why someone with Down's Syndrome is less entitled to a chance at life than anyone else.
    Therein lies the rub ... everyone deserves to live ... unless they are a real and serious threat to somebody else's life ... and killing them is the only practical alternative to remove the threat.


  • #283
    Tim Robbins
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,032 ✭✭✭Tim Robbins


    J C wrote: »
    It is an objective scientific (i.e. repeatedly observable) fact that each individual Human life begins at fertilization ... and barring accidental misadventure or deliberate killing ... they have the potential to go on to be implanted, born and live to ninety!!!
    Wrong.

    All the DNA and chromozones are there but whether that means human life or not is not something there is any objectivity on.


  • #284
    martinnew
    Closed Accounts Posts: 87 ✭✭martinnew


    DonnaMarieAva wrote: »
    I can see the good points and bad points of abortion. First, I shall say that I am not pro life or pro abortion. I am pro choice.

    I believe that the pregnancy should be terminated if the woman's life is endangered.

    Another points I will make, but I know I will receive lots of negativity for this, if it found out during the early in the pregnancy that the child will me malformed i.e. loss of a limb(s), severe downs syndrome or other problems like that, the child would not live a comfortable life. I understand that the child may have feelings, but unless born blind, they child will see that they are different and therefore will realise just how limited they are with regards to what they could do 'if they were like everybody else'. The child will have to be cared for 24/7. What would happen if the carer were to pass, who would take care of the person then? This is a situation in which I believe abortion should take place.

    Severe downs syndrome? You will only know once the child is born. Are you saying we should abort down syndrome children!!!

    Why not let disabled children live and give them a voice to say if their life was worth it or not.


  • #285
    doctoremma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    martinnew wrote: »
    Severe downs syndrome? You will only know once the child is born. Are you saying we should abort down syndrome children!!!

    Why not let disabled children live and give them a voice to say if their life was worth it or not.

    While I tend to agree with you re: Down syndrome (but wouldn't force that opinion on anyone else), is it not fair to say that there are some disabilities that are tantamount to cruelty? Not all disabled children will have a voice, or even live long enough to develop one.


  • #286
    georgieporgy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,927 ✭✭✭georgieporgy


    You just gotta admire the passion and love exhibited by pro choice people! Though I'm not insisting everyone has to admire them mind you :pac:


  • #287
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Tim Robbins wrote: »
    Wrong.

    All the DNA and chromozones are there but whether that means human life or not is not something there is any objectivity on.
    My statement was framed very carefully ... and it is objectively true that each individual Human life begins at fertilization ... and barring accidental misadventure or deliberate killing ... they have the potential to go on to be implanted, born and live to ninety!!!

    ... just like a one year old baby, barring accidental misadventure or deliberate killing ... also has the potential to go on to live to ninety!!!

    You can deny this all you like ... for you own reasons ... but this reality is objectively true nonethelesss.


  • #288
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    doctoremma wrote: »
    While I tend to agree with you re: Down syndrome (but wouldn't force that opinion on anyone else), is it not fair to say that there are some disabilities that are tantamount to cruelty? Not all disabled children will have a voice, or even live long enough to develop one.
    ... so are you going to kill people who have severe disabilities following accidents ... on the basis that it is 'cruel' to keep them alive?

    ... if you take this to it's logical conclusion ... you'd shoot somebody who broke their leg ... and was in severe pain ... just like you would shoot a horse in the same position!!!:(


  • #289
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    georgieporgy wrote: »
    You just gotta admire the passion and love exhibited by pro choice people! Though I'm not insisting everyone has to admire them mind you :pac:
    ... beneath the velvet glove of the pro-choice position is the cold steel hand of death.:(


  • #290
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    Tim Robbins wrote: »
    Wrong.

    All the DNA and chromozones are there but whether that means human life or not is not something there is any objectivity on.

    Well its not a cat is it? The sophistry that people enter into in this is banana's.

    Its either people like yourself denying the obvious, or its people a little bit more in tune with reality knowing that it is a human life bringing, 'Ahh, but is it a person' into it.


  • #291
    doctoremma
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,870 ✭✭✭doctoremma


    J C wrote: »
    ... so are you going to kill people who have severe disabilities following accidents ... on the basis that it is 'cruel' to keep them alive?

    ... if you take this to it's logical conclusion ... you'd shoot somebody who broke his leg ... just like you would shoot a horse with a broken leg!!!:(

    What? When the fudge did a broken leg become a serious disability? What kind of logic is that? Clue: warped.

    I'm not suggesting anyone 'kill' disabled people. I'm suggesting that there's an argument against bringing a non-viable life into this world (or continuing with a doomed pregnancy) simply to salve one's conscience.

    Perhaps you missed the bit where I agreed that aborting a fetus with Down syndrome was a bit much for me? ETA: pre-emptying the sarcasm but no, I don't want a chufty badge for 'conceding' this.


  • Advertisement
  • #292
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    doctoremma wrote: »
    What? When the fudge did a broken leg become a serious disability? What kind of logic is that? Clue: warped.
    Where does your 'compassionate' killing stop then, Emma?
    doctoremma wrote: »
    I'm not suggesting anyone 'kill' disabled people. I'm suggesting that there's an argument against bringing a non-viable life into this world (or continuing with a doomed pregnancy) simply to salve one's conscience.
    The issue of a 'doomed' pregnancy is certainly a very difficult one.
    ... but there have been situations where doctors have got it completely wrong ... and such babies have survived after birth.
    doctoremma wrote: »
    Perhaps you missed the bit where I agreed that aborting a fetus with Down syndrome was a bit much for me? ETA: pre-emptying the sarcasm but no, I don't want a chufty badge for 'conceding' this.
    ... so does this mean that aborting a perfectly healthy foetus is also 'a bit much' for your? ... if it does ... welcome across to 'pro-life'.


  • #293
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    DonnaMarieAva wrote: »
    I can see the good points and bad points of abortion. First, I shall say that I am not pro life or pro abortion. I am pro choice.

    .

    These terminologies are simply political one-upmanships. Pro and anti abortion are much more appropriate terms.

    Pro Abortion - In favour of abortion being legal
    Anti Abortion - In favour of abortion being illegal

    You'll find little support anywhere in terms of people who will say, 'Let the mother die rather than perform a termination'. I think its safe to say that EVERYONE agrees with medically necessary terminations.

    Pro-Choice is a nonsense, as it COMPLETELY removes choice from the most effected human in an abortion.
    Pro-life wouldn't be as much of a nonsense as pro choice, as in reality, it values all the life being preserved, but its still a political term that sets out to imply that others are anti-life, which is not accurate. Pro-abortionists just don't accept the value of an unborn child, as they've convinced themselves that its not a human being, person, valuable life etc. They usually have a sophisticated matrix of denial to allow them not to feel anything towards unborn human children. Thats why they can't take perfectly fine terminologies such as unborn child, or protest about pictures of unborn children being used by 'pro-life' groups, showing the unborn children, or fetuses if you'd prefer, surgically ripped apart etc.


  • #294
    Tim Robbins
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,032 ✭✭✭Tim Robbins


    J C wrote: »
    My statement was framed very carefully ... and it is objectively true that each individual Human life begins at fertilization ... and barring accidental misadventure or deliberate killing ... they have the potential to go on to be implanted, born and live to ninety!!!

    No the life doesn't begin then. It is subjective when it begins.
    You can deny this all you like ... for you own reasons ... but this reality is objectively true nonethelesss.
    It is not objectively true. You cannot differentiate between your dogmatic opinions and objective facts.


  • #295
    Tim Robbins
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,032 ✭✭✭Tim Robbins


    JimiTime wrote: »
    Well its not a cat is it? The sophistry that people enter into in this is banana's.

    Its either people like yourself denying the obvious, or its people a little bit more in tune with reality knowing that it is a human life bringing, 'Ahh, but is it a person' into it.
    Perhaps give one logical reason why it is sophistry?

    All you have said: "ah it's obvious". There's no substance in that.


  • #296
    JimiTime
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    Tim Robbins wrote: »
    Perhaps give one logical reason why it is sophistry?

    All you have said: "ah it's obvious". There's no substance in that.

    If it needs to be explained to you that the new life created at human conception is human, perhaps you are a little out of your depth in the conversation?


  • #297
    Tim Robbins
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,032 ✭✭✭Tim Robbins


    JimiTime wrote: »
    If it needs to be explained to you that the new life created at human conception is human, perhaps you are a little out of your depth in the conversation?

    What is created at conception has no sentience and looks the same as a fish at the same stage. And many people feel that does not mean it is a human life.

    There's a very long list of intellectuals who only agree that it is impossible to reach agreement, the precise moment when life begins.


  • #298
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    JimiTime wrote: »
    These terminologies are simply political one-upmanships. Pro and anti abortion are much more appropriate terms.

    Pro Abortion - In favour of abortion being legal
    Anti Abortion - In favour of abortion being illegal

    You'll find little support anywhere in terms of people who will say, 'Let the mother die rather than perform a termination'. I think its safe to say that EVERYONE agrees with medically necessary terminations.

    Pro-Choice is a nonsense, as it COMPLETELY removes choice from the most effected human in an abortion.
    Pro-life wouldn't be as much of a nonsense as pro choice, as in reality, it values all the life being preserved, but its still a political term that sets out to imply that others are anti-life, which is not accurate. Pro-abortionists just don't accept the value of an unborn child, as they've convinced themselves that its not a human being, person, valuable life etc. They usually have a sophisticated matrix of denial to allow them not to feel anything towards unborn human children. Thats why they can't take perfectly fine terminologies such as unborn child, or protest about pictures of unborn children being used by 'pro-life' groups, showing the unborn children, or fetuses if you'd prefer, surgically ripped apart etc.

    "Pro-choice" comes from the idea that it is the woman's choice as to what she does to her own body (body autonomy/privacy), irrespective of any standing of the child.


  • #299
    Zombrex
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,848 ✭✭✭✭Zombrex


    JimiTime wrote: »
    If it needs to be explained to you that the new life created at human conception is human, perhaps you are a little out of your depth in the conversation?

    So the sperm and the egg 2 milliseconds before conception are what species exactly?


  • #300
    georgieporgy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,927 ✭✭✭georgieporgy


    Zombrex wrote: »
    "Pro-choice" comes from the idea that it is the woman's choice as to what she does to her own body (body autonomy/privacy), irrespective of any standing of the child.

    so you would argue a woman should have the option of smoking in a pub or other such public place if she chooses?


  • Advertisement
  • #301
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    Zombrex wrote: »
    So the sperm and the egg 2 milliseconds before conception are what species exactly?
    they are a Human sperm and egg ... but they are not a Human Being ... unless and until they fertilise.

    ... you seriously need to consult a Biologist ... or a Leaving Cert student will do, if you are unable to contact a Biologist!!!:eek::)


Advertisement