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, we have some important news to share. Please follow the link here to find out more!

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058419143/important-news/p1?new=1

At Least 25,000 Attend Anti-Abortion Vigil

1…34689…28

Comments

  • #152
    otto_26
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 518 ✭✭✭otto_26


    COYVB wrote: »
    Who said you were religious?

    Nobody did. Just making the point due to generalisation of Pro-Lifers.


  • #153
    COYVB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,660 ✭✭✭COYVB


    otto_26 wrote: »
    Nobody did. Just making the point due to generalisation of Pro-Lifers.

    Why make an irrelevant unrelated point though?


  • #154
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    I think you could address this point to both sides of the debate in fairness.

    No; I disagree, people involved in pro choice movements are generally much more in favour of safe sex education

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #155
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    King of Kings wrote: »
    yes , you did and i'm calling you out on that cos it's horse**** steroetyping.

    you do not know their views on anything beyond abortion.
    We know who you voted for. :)


  • #156
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    robman60 wrote: »
    I think the fatal fetal abnormality scenario is not the most contentious issue in the abortion debate. The fact that the child is not compatible with life makes it somewhat more acceptable to abort. Personally, I'm still against dictating when the child should die, but counter arguments regarding this very specific case are rational too, and I acknowledge that.

    Your second case is an intrinsic one, but I don't think the possibility of illness or presence of illness are legitimate grounds for abortion. It would also be absolutely impossible to legislate for such a scenario, without implementing a more liberal abortion regime.


    Can you not acknowledge that most of the time, the person who is carrying the pregnancy is the best informed person about whether they should proceed with it?
    robman60 wrote: »
    Personally, I'm still against dictating when the child should die

    Yet you seem to be perfectly comfortable about dictating that the mother should be forced to continue with the pregnancy. Do you not see the contradiction there?
    robman60 wrote: »
    It would also be absolutely impossible to legislate for such a scenario, without implementing a more liberal abortion regime.

    And you now see why I hold the pro-choice views I have.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    King of Kings
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,695 ✭✭✭King of Kings


    dvpower wrote: »
    We know who you voted for. :)

    dana :eek:









    actually no I didn't - in case it's used to beat me


  • #158
    otto_26
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 518 ✭✭✭otto_26


    COYVB wrote: »
    A gun is made for shooting things, a hurley is made for hitting a sliotar. Technically, you could use a gun to hit a sliotar too, and you could use a hurley to beat someone, but that's not what they're made for

    Just because someone has a Hurley doesn't mean they are going to beat you to death with it. But they could if they had no morals.

    Just because someone has a Gun doesn't mean they are going to shoot you with it. But they could if they had no morals.

    Both weapons for someone with no morals.

    So what's the problem with the gun laws?


  • #159
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,874 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    ShooterSF wrote: »
    And if that is truly their beliefs why aren't they marching to have the government hold a referendum to make it illegal again for a woman to travel abroad for an abortion like we still have with regard assisted suicide? But they won't because they know their support would drop off pretty fast. For most of them all they care about is imposing their religion on others, that's why the life institute and youth defense etc. don't spend any effort lobbying for better conditions for youth that are actually alive.

    I agree, before I was pro choice I went to a very catholic school. But part of the reason I disliked prolifers was because they were so anti contraception and it was because the church told them. They were pretty much willing to do nothing to prevent unwanted pregnancies which would have stopped abortions. They were also providing feck all support to girls after they gave up their child.

    But that doesn't avoid the fact that there are a lot of people who believe that a child is being killed. And if they honestly believe that, then they should make their voice heard.
    The post I was replying to said why should they care if someone else want to have one. Generally I'd be ok with that.
    Why should you care if I use a condom? You think it's immoral? feck off.

    Why should you care if I decide I want to marry someone of the same gender? Because your dictionary defines it as blah blah. Feck off.

    Why should you care if I smoke a joint? Because drugs are bad mkay? Feck off.

    Why should you care if I have an abortion. Because it's murder. Oh. Well, I disagree with the whole murder thing, but if you believe that then you have a moral obligation to make your voice heard and try and stop it.

    It is pretty much the only time I can think where I'll feel that someone who's opposed to me has a moral obligation to stop me. I believe they are wholeheartedly wrong in there reasoning and I believe that for a lot of them, most of their opinions are coloured by a religion I think is silly, but if they actually believe 100% that a murder is occurring, they have to try and stop it.


  • #160
    brokenarms
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,387 ✭✭✭brokenarms


    COYVB wrote: »
    Why make an irrelevant unrelated point though?

    Its not irrelevant as it seems to be the "pro-chop-up-the-little babies" main argument on here.

    Im not religious either. Its just wrong in the worst way possible.

    And it seems to me that this could well be the view of the vast majority.


  • #161
    otto_26
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 518 ✭✭✭otto_26


    COYVB wrote: »
    Why make an irrelevant unrelated point though?

    This is an Abortion thread. :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Bertser
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭Bertser


    So were they protesting against the legislation being proposed or against the whole 'abortion-on-demand' thing they claim is going to happen?


  • #163
    amdublin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,653 ✭✭✭✭amdublin


    squod wrote: »
    Some of the 400 signees of the Dublin declaration were there.

    What's your point?

    I don't care if they are doctors, lawyers, bin men, housewives, signees, non signees. They were scary.


  • #164
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,702 ✭✭✭squod


    Bertser wrote: »
    So were they protesting against the legislation being proposed or against the whole 'abortion-on-demand' thing they claim is going to happen?

    There was people crying out for ''abortion on demand' on the other thread an hour ago. Yes, there are psychopathic nut cases within government who want just that. Limitless, pro-choice, abortion on demand.


  • #165
    COYVB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,660 ✭✭✭COYVB


    brokenarms wrote: »
    Its not irrelevant as it seems to be the "pro-chop-up-the-little babies" main argument on here.

    Im not religious either. Its just wrong in the worst way possible.

    And it seems to me that this could well be the view of the vast majority.

    It's the chopping up of them that's the issue? What about inducing labour instead of chopping them up instead? Is it the procedure that's the main bug bear here? I agree, chopping them into little pieces is gruesome


  • #166
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,874 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    COYVB wrote: »
    The difference is that as long as the fetus/embryo/baby/whatever you want to call it is dependent on the mother for its survival, that is to say cannot survive outside her body independently, then it is, if you pardon the callous connotations of the word, a parasite

    Well, I believe that most people would be wholly against a woman who is 8 months and 3 weeks getting an abortion. At that point it's pretty much a baby. It's dependant on the mother, yes. But I wouldn't label it any more of a parasite than a 6 month old child that sucks a parents emergy and wages down the drain.

    At 1 week after conception it is 100% just a group of cells.

    There's a hazy line somewhere, in fact calling it a line is dubious. There's a period where it's definitely cells. There's a period where it's definitely a baby. And there's a period in-between where I really don't want to guess. I think most pro-choice people see it this way. There might be some variance on when the periods begin and end (except for the mothers periods, they end when the pregnancy begins. Sorry, I couldn't help myself, the pun was just hanging there), but most have at least a hazy idea about it.


  • #167
    robman60
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,229 ✭✭✭robman60


    B0jangles wrote: »
    Can you not acknowledge that most of the time, the person who is carrying the pregnancy is the best informed person about whether they should proceed with it?
    That's the main point of contention as far as I can see. You consider it a subjectively valuable pregnancy, while I consider it a child who's entitled to live. There's no contradiction once this has been established.




    B0jangles wrote: »
    And you now see why I hold the pro-choice views I have.
    You presented that one rare case which people may support, deliberately concealing the fact that it would never be possible to have a legal framework to allow abortions in just those limited circumstances.


  • #168
    COYVB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,660 ✭✭✭COYVB


    Grayson wrote: »
    Well, I believe that most people would be wholly against a woman who is 8 months and 3 weeks getting an abortion. At that point it's pretty much a baby. It's dependant on the mother, yes. But I wouldn't label it any more of a parasite than a 6 month old child that sucks a parents emergy and wages down the drain.

    At 8 months and 3 weeks it can survive outside the mother's body independently though. That's the key differentiation IMO


  • #169
    robman60
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,229 ✭✭✭robman60


    Grayson wrote: »
    At 1 week after conception it is 100% just a group of cells.
    Even if we take that as fact, it's important to remember that abortions don't happen one week after conception anyway. They're happening much further on in the gestational period.


  • #170
    Pride Fighter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,729 ✭✭✭Pride Fighter


    The truth of the turnout at the rally for misogyny http://www.wsm.ie/c/turnout-vigil-life-dublin-jan2013

    However, the above article fails to mention that people were given free ipads, iphones and MP3 players to attend.


  • #171
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,874 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    robman60 wrote: »
    Even if we take that as fact, it's important to remember that abortions don't happen one week after conception anyway. They're happening much further on in the gestational period.

    1) Did you read the rest of it?

    2) I'm pretty certain all prolifers believe that's a baby. If they didn't they'd be pro abortion, just at a different time frame.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    Bertser
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 634 ✭✭✭Bertser


    squod wrote: »
    There was people crying out for ''abortion on demand' on the other thread an hour ago. Yes, there are psychopathic nut cases within government who want just that. Limitless, pro-choice, abortion on demand.

    There is nowhere near a majority in the Dáil who want anything like that, thankfully some of them acknowledge that there should be abortion in the situation where the mother's life is at risk.


  • #173
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,182 ✭✭✭dvpower


    squod wrote: »
    There was people crying out for ''abortion on demand' on the other thread an hour ago. Yes, there are psychopathic nut cases within government who want just that. Limitless, pro-choice, abortion on demand.
    Name one person in Government who holds this position?


  • #174
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,874 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    Pride Fighter wrote: »
    The truth of the turnout at the rally for misogyny http://www.wsm.ie/c/turnout-vigil-life-dublin-jan2013

    However, the above article fails to mention that people were given free ipads, iphones and MP3 players to attend.

    Honestly, I don't know how much I'd rely on an app :D


  • #175
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    robman60 wrote: »
    That's the main point of contention as far as I can see. You consider it a subjectively valuable pregnancy, while I consider it a child who's entitled to live. There's no contradiction once this has been established.

    You presented that one rare case which people may support, deliberately concealing the fact that it would never be possible to have a legal framework to allow abortions in just those limited circumstances.

    I concealed nothing. I just presented you with just two of the infinitely complex circumstances which fall into what I would consider the grey areas that surround the black and white certainties to which the pro-life movement cling to.

    Real life is made up entirely of the grey areas. Most people realise that the black and white certainties disappear when they gain experience.


  • #176
    TomoBhoy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 179 ✭✭TomoBhoy


    robman60 wrote: »
    Even if we take that as fact, it's important to remember that abortions don't happen one week after conception anyway. They're happening much further on in the gestational period.
    the majority happen in the first trimester, fatal fetal abnormalities usually in the 2 or 3 trimester


  • #177
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,702 ✭✭✭squod


    Bertser wrote: »
    There is nowhere near a majority in the Dáil who want anything like that, thankfully some of them acknowledge that there should be abortion in the situation where the mother's life is at risk.

    That wasn't what Sundays demo was about. There are people who want abortion on demand. Posters on this forum & people in government. That's story.


  • #178
    Scortho
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,871 ✭✭✭Scortho


    I am all for freedom of speech! Who knows what will happen if we stop people expressing their views just because you don't agree with them.

    On the issue of abortion I'm pro-choice. It's not fair to bring an unwanted child into the world. However just because abortion might become legal doesn't mean that mothers will be forced to have abortions. If a mother is against abortion, then she doesn't have to have one, just don't force your beliefs on other people!

    I am against the governments decision to legislate for abortion where suicide is a possibility. What proof is there that abortion is a cure for suicide?
    I can see many women seeking abortions who will now have to pretend that they are suicidal even though they're not. This could be very traumatic for the mother.

    Is there any test to say that someone is suicidal?
    If so, and a girl is denied her abortion as she isn't "suicidal" and then commits suicide, will the state/hse be liable for her death, opening up the possibility of legal action?

    Oh and how many of the pro life protestors have used contraception?


  • #179
    TomoBhoy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 179 ✭✭TomoBhoy


    squod wrote: »

    That wasn't what Sundays demo was about. There are people who want abortion on demand. Posters on this forum & people in government. That's story.
    deluded much ?


  • #180
    padd b1975
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,859 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    mango salsa wrote: »
    Oh ffs - the opposite of pro life equals pro choice
    The choice to kill.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,702 ✭✭✭squod


    Pride Fighter wrote: »
    The truth of the turnout at the rally for misogyny http://www.wsm.ie/c/turnout-vigil-life-dublin-jan2013

    However, the above article fails to mention that people were given free ipads, iphones and MP3 players to attend.

    :D That's the wackiest thing I've read so far. Thanks for cheering me up.


Advertisement