At Least 25,000 Attend Anti-Abortion Vigil

lazygal · 21-01-2013 02:13PM

jank wrote: »

Ah, so it is a disease? Thanks for clearing that up for me.

You're welcome. Be sure to come see me when you're pregnant, I'll tell you exactly what you can and can't do with your body.

VinLieger · 21-01-2013 02:13PM

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Is there more American money supporting the Pro Life campaign than is going to support the Pro Choice side? Abortion is very profitable business in the USA, there is money to be made in helping to spread the practice over here too. Just for one example the Pro-Choice Irish Council for Civil Liberties recieved €8,822 in donations from Irish people in 2009 (€45 of this was from public donation, the rest was from membership) but received €2 million from America.

Nobody knows because YD wont let anyone see their books, however we can see the stats on their Facebook page and last time it was checked out of the 60000 likes/followers the page had 39000 were from the states and only 9000 were from Ireland with the rest being from other parts of the world.
Now its obviously not proof of anything but its deffinitely very interesting

123 LC · 21-01-2013 02:14PM

Lingua Franca wrote: »

I'll just refer you to this photoset too: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.584801708212313.155515.132000150159140

Priests, nuns, monks, rosaries, crucifixes, people carrying statues and portraits of the virgin Mary all in abundance.

well these photos aren't biased at all :pac:

Pompey Magnus · 21-01-2013 02:14PM

jank wrote: »

Ah, so it is a disease? Thanks for clearing that up for me.

To some in the Pro Choice camp pregnancy is more of a parasitic infestation rather than a disease.

jank · 21-01-2013 02:18PM

lazygal wrote: »

You're welcome. Be sure to come see me when you're pregnant, I'll tell you exactly what you can and can't do with your body.

How about taking responsibility, most abortions occur due to the fact the are inconvenient. People normally don't become pregnant by eating a bar of wispa. Don't want to get pregnant? Don't have sex. Simple.

VinLieger · 21-01-2013 02:20PM

jank wrote: »

How about taking responsibility, most abortions occur due to the fact the are inconvenient. People normally don't become pregnant by eating a bar of wispa. Don't want to get pregnant? Don't have sex. Simple.

Dont want to have an abortion? Dont have one.... see it works both ways

jam_mac_jam · 21-01-2013 02:20PM

jank wrote: »

Don't have sex. Simple.

How about being a tiny bit realistic?

Lingua Franca · 21-01-2013 02:23PM

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Just for one example the Pro-Choice Irish Council for Civil Liberties recieved €8,822 in donations from Irish people in 2009 (€45 of this was from public donation, the rest was from membership) but received €2 million from America.

Have you got a link for that? Fair play to them for publishing their accounts, others could learn from their example.

Anyway, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (I notice you put "Pro Choice" in front of that with capital letters, to make it look like it was a part of their name, which certainly is not) not a single issue group like YD and their umbrella organisations. They deal with, as they say in their name, civil liberties.

Pro choice groups in Ireland get little to no funding, they're certainly not making enough to lay on Dublin shopping trips coaches, big screens, glossy placards and the chance to win fabulous prizes to boost their numbers.

lazygal · 21-01-2013 02:25PM

jank wrote: »

How about taking responsibility, most abortions occur due to the fact the are inconvenient. People normally don't become pregnant by eating a bar of wispa. Don't want to get pregnant? Don't have sex. Simple.

Do you follow your no sex advice?

lazygal · 21-01-2013 02:26PM

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

How about being a tiny bit realistic?

Jank and being realistic are mutually exclusive.

jank · 21-01-2013 02:28PM

lazygal wrote: »

Do you follow your no sex advice?

Well I didn't get wan knocked up. Since ur turning this personal why didn't you follow this advice?

jank · 21-01-2013 02:30PM

VinLieger wrote: »

Dont want to have an abortion? Dont have one.... see it works both ways

In some ways I agree but then your saving that the unborn has no rights at all, even up to the finals days before birth.

jank · 21-01-2013 02:32PM

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

How about being a tiny bit realistic?

Of course, so how about taking responsibility?

cycnus · 21-01-2013 02:34PM

well not surprising really, if you consider most people who are anti-choice are clearly uneducated, or old, or dont have jobs, and have time to protest. Where as most pro-choice folks would tend to be the more secular, educated, and working sort who just dont have time to rally.

Its funny that most of the folks ive seen who are in the anti-termination camp are people who are physically unable to have children, ie older women, or men. But that is a bit of a generalisation on my part, based on my experience.

To the anti-termination folks I ask the same question. "If a pregnant woman has cancer, and needs immediate chemotherapy to save her life, would you find a termination acceptable then?" I have not yet received an answer that didnt contain the words "God", or "divine plan".

Its typical narrow minded holy rollers who want to force their way of life on others. You know what Cathlolic people can do if they dont agree with abortion? Dont get one. Problem solved.

Pompey Magnus · 21-01-2013 02:35PM

Lingua Franca wrote: »

Have you got a link for that? Fair play to them for publishing their accounts, others could learn from their example.

This is for 2010:

http://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/grant/core-support-iccl

http://www.iccl.ie/articles/securing-impact---our-annual-report-for-2010.html

I don't see the €2.1m from America mentioned on the account section of the annual report, probably a good reason for that as I am no expert on what should and should not be recorded.

Min · 21-01-2013 02:37PM

cycnus wrote: »

well not surprising really, if you consider most people who are anti-choice are clearly uneducated, or old, or dont have jobs, and have time to protest. Where as most pro-choice folks would tend to be the more secular, educated, and working sort who just dont have time to rally.

Its funny that most of the folks ive seen who are in the anti-termination camp are people who are physically unable to have children, ie older women, or men. But that is a bit of a generalisation on my part, based on my experience.

To the anti-termination folks I ask the same question. "If a pregnant woman has cancer, and needs immediate chemotherapy to save her life, would you find a termination acceptable then?" I have not yet received an answer that didnt contain the words "God", or "divine plan".

Its typical narrow minded holy rollers who want to force their way of life on others. You know what Cathlolic people can do if they dont agree with abortion? Dont get one. Problem solved.

So people are uneducated if they don't hold your views?

We could all call eachother uneducated so we can make oneself feel intelligent. The fact is calling others uneducated for not holding your views is in fact not very intelligent.

TomoBhoy · 21-01-2013 02:40PM

jank wrote: »

In some ways I agree but then your saving that the unborn has no rights at all, even up to the finals days before birth.

if a child is induced 22/23/24 weeks upwards the child will be giving every effort to survive, seriously your scaremongering is something else I've seen prem babies in unit 8 do the impossible, I know women who at 24 weeks had to be induced due to pre eclapisa so your argument is that of a die hard prolifer

Pompey Magnus · 21-01-2013 02:44PM

Min wrote: »

We could all call eachother uneducated so we can make oneself feel intelligent. The fact is calling others uneducated for not holding your views is in fact not very intelliegent.

I disagree, it is a very common feature found in all sorts groupthink which is very successful in solidifying attitudes, if you can dehumanize and degrade the out group then it makes it very hard for your supporters to change their attitudes.

In the instance of the pro choice campaign that means identifying the foetus as a bunch of cells or a parasite and the pro life campaign as being of just a bunch of idiots, nuns and women haters.

In the instance of the pro life campaign it means identifying the women who go through with abortion as uncaring harlots and the doctors who perform the operation as murders.

Lingua Franca · 21-01-2013 02:46PM

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

This is for 2010:

http://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/grant/core-support-iccl

Odd, it says there that the grant was for reconciliation and human rights, not supporting the pro choice campaign.

http://www.iccl.ie/iccl-annual-report-2009-.html

I don't see the €2.1m from America mentioned on the account section of the annual report, probably a good reason for that as I am no expert on what should and should not be recorded.

You don't see a grant from 2010 recorded in the 2009 accounts? Weird.

lazygal · 21-01-2013 02:46PM

jank wrote: »

Well I didn't get wan knocked up. Since ur turning this personal why didn't you follow this advice?

Because I wanted to be pregnant. What's your point?

jank · 21-01-2013 02:48PM

TomoBhoy wrote: »

if a child is induced 22/23/24 weeks upwards the child will be giving every effort to survive, seriously your scaremongering is something else I've seen prem babies in unit 8 do the impossible, I know women who at 24 weeks had to be induced due to pre eclapisa so your argument is that of a die hard prolifer

Stating the obvious that the unborn should be afford some small rights make me a hard line prolifer? All I am hearing is " my body my choice" which effectively means carte Blanche to do what they want to an unborn baby no matter how late the pregnancy. Most fair minded people wouldn't agree with that.

jank · 21-01-2013 02:51PM

lazygal wrote: »

Because I wanted to be pregnant. What's your point?

In another post you mentioned u got pregnant and were on your own which made it a hard and traumatic mental and physical experience. Now either ur telling fibs or u need to flesh out the explanation a bit.

cycnus · 21-01-2013 02:52PM

Min wrote: »

So people are uneducated if they don't hold your views?

We could all call eachother uneducated so we can make oneself feel intelligent. The fact is calling others uneducated for not holding your views is in fact not very intelligent.

Well you certainly cant call me uneducated.

You are implying that education and intelligence are one an the same, that not what I said. and the fact that you deduced from what I said that people who don't share my opinion are uneducated only serves to show how deeply unintelligent you are. I would not say that, because it is not true.

I am implying that if people were more well educated and perhaps had a little more respect for women, they would probably not see a termination to save a woman's life as a bad thing.

Pompey Magnus · 21-01-2013 02:53PM

Lingua Franca wrote: »

Odd, it says there that the grant was for reconciliation and human rights, not supporting the pro choice campaign.

I'm sure many in the pro choice movement would regard abortion as a human right, would you disagree?

You don't see a grant from 2010 recorded in the 2009 accounts? Weird.

I edited my post to show the 2010 accounts which also don't show any American donation.

Lingua Franca · 21-01-2013 03:01PM

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

I'm sure many in the pro choice movement would regard abortion as a human right, would you disagree?

You claimed that ICCL got 2.1 million euro from America to support the pro choice campaign. You have been proved wrong with your own links.

I edited my post to show the 2010 accounts which also don't show any American donation.

Indeed, and neither do their 2011 accounts. Since you're confused and appalled by this I suggest you contect them to ask them why it's not in their accounts and refer it to who ever is responsible for auditing them. You might be on to something there and might even be able to get that pro choice group shut down!

smash · 21-01-2013 03:02PM

jank wrote: »

Of course, so how about taking responsibility?

Such an arrogant and ignorant thing to say to people when you don't know their circumstances. I'd class it as a form of bullying to spout such condescending shíte to someone to be honest.

lazygal · 21-01-2013 03:06PM

jank wrote: »

In another post you mentioned u got pregnant and were on your own which made it a hard and traumatic mental and physical experience. Now either ur telling fibs or u need to flesh out the explanation a bit.

I never said I was alone. My husband was supportive, but pregnancy and birth was still difficult. And I never alluded to having an unwanted pregnancy.

Penn · 21-01-2013 03:09PM

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Is there more American money supporting the Pro Life campaign than is going to support the Pro Choice side? Abortion is very profitable business in the USA, there is money to be made in helping to spread the practice over here too. Just for one example the Pro-Choice Irish Council for Civil Liberties recieved €8,822 in donations from Irish people in 2009 (€45 of this was from public donation, the rest was from membership) but received €2 million from America.

A good blog post on the issue:

http://geoffsshorts.blogspot.ie/2012/09/youth-defence-money-shot.html

And the American organisation in question had this to say on their own website:

Life House Ireland’s main mission is to inform Americans about the pro-life situation in Ireland, and by doing so help keep Ireland pro-life and abortion-free. We do this by providing information about the challenges facing Ireland’s pro-life success story.

We attend and host educational conferences, meet with Irish-American groups, and confer with other pro-life organizations. We also publish a free, online newsletter about current events affecting life and family issues in Ireland.

And, importantly, Life House Ireland is an American tax-exempt organization.

With tax-deductible donations received from Americans, we can help ensure that vital projects and research can continue to keep Ireland abortion-free, and can also continue to spread its pro-life model further afield.

http://www.lifehouseireland.org/who-we-are/

ScumLord · 21-01-2013 03:12PM

I got a letter in the door about this march. I'm in a small town in the west of Ireland so this vigil was widespread. They had a bus leaving for the local church bringing people up to Dublin. I took advantage of the free bus and went to the science gallery then had a few pints while I was waiting for the women to finish fighting over who gets to tell who what to do.

Pompey Magnus · 21-01-2013 03:13PM

Lingua Franca wrote: »

You claimed that ICCL got 2.1 million euro from America to support the pro choice campaign.

No I didn't. I said that the ICCL were in receipt of significant funding from America and that the ICCL are very active in the pro choice campaign. I didn't say all that money went towards the pro choice campaign, maybe it did and maybe it didn't but they don't even acknowledge receipt of it on the accounts of their annual report and when asked about where that American money goes the director of the ICCL refused to deny it went towards their pro-choice campaign. He missed a great opportunity to deny American funding of his pro-choice campaign there.

At Least 25,000 Attend Anti-Abortion Vigil

Comments