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

Why we can't have a rational conversation about abortion

12467…21

Comments

  • #92
    Clandestine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Clandestine


    Pumpkinseeds wrote: »
    I totally agree with that Nobel winning scientist who said 'ignorance is the curse of the Irish'
    Well, the curse of those who won't think for themselves and let the Catholic church think for them....


  • #93
    PinkLemonade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 768 ✭✭✭PinkLemonade


    Pumpkinseeds wrote: »
    Ever noticed how many of the anti-abortion protesters are retired, church going ladies, long past child bearing age? Abortion should be available on demand to any woman who asks for one. If a woman wants an abortion she should be entitled to one. If a woman doesn't want an abortion nobody is going to force her to have one. Sadly so long as the goverment are straddling the fence trying to keep the catholics happy women will never have any other choice than to go abroad for an abortion.

    I saw some of these elderly women with their 'love them both' placards and petitions today. I do actually feel quite irate at them and their hypocritical slogans. Forcing a woman to have a child she doesn't want doesn't help the woman or the child. What kind of life is an unwanted child going to have. You won't find these protestors popping round to visit the woman and her child to see if they are coping or if they need any help. Oh no,these people don't give a flying fig about the woman or her child. They want to keep catholic Ireland abortion free. They're the same twats who were against the pill and availabilty of condoms.

    I totally agree with that Nobel winning scientist who said 'ignorance is the curse of the Irish'

    This is exactly how I feel. So frustrating these hypocrites...

    The abortion topic makes me so uncomfortable because it's an awful choice to have to make, but not one I would ever judge someone for making.


  • #94
    Phill Ewinn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭Phill Ewinn


    I don't think the headings of these bills will give me any consolation. If clinics can amke money from abortions then they'll go ahead and make money. Flying in 3 doctors one day a week isn't uneconomical. Technology, process improvement and transport links will leave this country in the same state as the UK.


  • #95
    eyescreamcone
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,562 ✭✭✭eyescreamcone


    bhamsteve wrote: »
    How do people feel about aborting due to the gender of the child? It has become a real problem in some parts of the UK. Is it the inevitable outcome of a pro-choice society?

    BTW, I am undecided on the issue of abortion myself and wouldn't vote if it went to a referendum. I think that the only viable outcomes would be abortion on demand or abortions only for serious physical health complications , and I don't think either is ideal.

    That's a cop out.
    This is a serious issue - you should get youself informed enough to make a decision and not let it to other people


  • #96
    bhamsteve
    Closed Accounts Posts: 451 ✭✭bhamsteve


    eyescreamcone wrote: »
    That's a cop out.
    This is a serious issue - you should get youself informed enough to make a decision and not let it to other people

    I am a man so I will never know what the decision to abort involves. My stance is not through a lack of information, I'll make my own decisions in life based on my own beliefs and leave it at that thanks.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    FoxT
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,204 ✭✭✭FoxT


    I think the reason we cannot have a rational debate about abortion is along the following lines:


    The anti-Abortion camp regard ANY relaxation of the current law as a step toward ‘opening the floodgates’. Because of this fear, they will not negotiate on the issue, no matter how heartbreaking individual tragedies may be.
    Some of them, (indeed, many of them) may recognize the human tragedy & heartbreak behind cases such as rape, incest, and fatal foetal abnormalities. Nevertheless, in their eyes, this suffering is a small price for society to pay, in order to prevent what they regard as the ‘mass murder’ of the unborn.


    IMO, their position is flawed, for two reasons:
    1 – Their stance with regard to, say, rape victims, and fatal foetal abnormalities is too inhumane.
    And
    2 – ‘The Floodgates’ are already open, with thousands of women going to the UK for abortions every year.

    The pro-choice movement takes the view that the foetus is part of the woman’s body, for her to dispose of as she sees fit. They will use cases such as X, and Savita, to appeal to the compassion of the ‘majority in the middle’, but, ultimately, the desired end-state for pro-choice activists is abortion on demand for all comers. For example, see here:

    I do not agree with either extreme. In my view, the pro-choice movement would achieve a great deal more if they took a more moderate stance. In doing so, they would, over time, defuse the ‘floodgate’ argument that fuels & energises that anti-choice movement, and we would have some chance of achieving a less draconian situation than we have in Ireland today.

    I personally lean toward pro-choice, but I would not at all support what I see as their more extreme demands.

    -FoxT


  • #98
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    OCorcrainn wrote: »
    One thing that I have noticed is that it is mostly single, 'educated', middle and upper class young women and students with no children that vehemently support abortion. Why is that?

    Because the younger and more "educated" you are the less likely it is that you'll think like a rosary worrying creeping jesus :)


  • #99
    PinkLemonade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 768 ✭✭✭PinkLemonade


    FoxT wrote: »
    I think the reason we cannot have a rational debate about abortion is along the following lines:


    The anti-Abortion camp regard ANY relaxation of the current law as a step toward ‘opening the floodgates’. Because of this fear, they will not negotiate on the issue, no matter how heartbreaking individual tragedies may be.
    Some of them, (indeed, many of them) may recognize the human tragedy & heartbreak behind cases such as rape, incest, and fatal foetal abnormalities. Nevertheless, in their eyes, this suffering is a small price for society to pay, in order to prevent what they regard as the ‘mass murder’ of the unborn.


    IMO, their position is flawed, for two reasons:
    1 – Their stance with regard to, say, rape victims, and fatal foetal abnormalities is too inhumane.
    And
    2 – ‘The Floodgates’ are already open, with thousands of women going to the UK for abortions every year.

    The pro-choice movement takes the view that the foetus is part of the woman’s body, for her to dispose of as she sees fit. They will use cases such as X, and Savita, to appeal to the compassion of the ‘majority in the middle’, but, ultimately, the desired end-state for pro-choice activists is abortion on demand for all comers. For example, see here:

    I do not agree with either extreme. In my view, the pro-choice movement would achieve a great deal more if they took a more moderate stance. In doing so, they would, over time, defuse the ‘floodgate’ argument that fuels & energises that anti-choice movement, and we would have some chance of achieving a less draconian situation than we have in Ireland today.

    I personally lean toward pro-choice, but I would not at all support what I see as their more extreme demands.

    -FoxT
    This is so incorrect, pro choice does not mean you think its grand to kill fetuses, that's pro abortion, pro choice is not deciding for other peoole what they should do with their bodies.
    Every active pro choice women I know is incredibly cautious about not letting it get that far and are very responsible, that's just my experience


  • #100
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    An Coilean wrote: »
    Out of curiosity, at what point does the unborn child become a human being with the same right to life that you have acording to you?


    ....after 24 weeks. These things tend to be a matter of opinion though.


  • #101
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    PinkLemonade wrote: »
    This is so incorrect, pro choice does not mean you think its grand to kill fetuses, that's pro abortion, pro choice is not deciding for other peoole what they should do with their bodies.
    Every active pro choice women I know is incredibly cautious about not letting it get that far and are very responsible, that's just my experience
    How in the name of God does being pro life mean you think it's grand to kill foetuses.


  • Advertisement
  • #102
    PinkLemonade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 768 ✭✭✭PinkLemonade


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    How in the name of God does being pro life mean you think it's grand to kill foetuses.

    Please re read what I wrote


  • #103
    Clandestine
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Clandestine


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    How in the name of God does being pro life mean you think it's grand to kill foetuses.
    I think you misread


  • #104
    OCorcrainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 428 ✭✭OCorcrainn


    Bambi wrote: »
    Because the younger and more "educated" you are the less likely it is that you'll think like a rosary worrying creeping jesus :)

    That only applies to people who quote scripture or give religious reasons for not supporting easier access to abortion. There are plenty of atheists and agnostics who do not support it for ethical reasons they would hold that are in no way religious. There are religious people who oppose it also and their reasons for doing so are not religious.

    There are many people who support abortion who think of themselves as open-minded and liberal yet are quick to label anyone who disagrees with them as narrow-minded religious zealots, and those type of negative assertions and willingness to employ false negative stereotypes undermines their own position and credibility. It destroys the integrity of their views.

    It is extremely hypocritical.


  • #105
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Phill Ewinn wrote: »
    I don't think the headings of these bills will give me any consolation. If clinics can amke money from abortions then they'll go ahead and make money. Flying in 3 doctors one day a week isn't uneconomical. Technology, process improvement and transport links will leave this country in the same state as the UK.


    I asked you a question earlier Phill, care to get back to me?


  • #106
    ilovesleep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,619 ✭✭✭ilovesleep


    bhamsteve wrote: »
    How do people feel about aborting due to the gender of the child? It has become a real problem in some parts of the UK. Is it the inevitable outcome of a pro-choice society?

    In relation to abortion on gender of the baby - I really wish abortion was available in my mothers day because my mother made it very clear that she had nothing more but contempt for me and my sister. My brothers - she loves dearly and idolises them. My mother tolerated me and my sister but never wanted us. I never asked for that sh1te.


  • #107
    An Coilean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,285 ✭✭✭An Coilean


    Nodin wrote: »
    ....after 24 weeks. These things tend to be a matter of opinion though.


    Why not before in your opinion?


  • #108
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    FoxT wrote: »
    I do not agree with either extreme. In my view, the pro-choice movement would achieve a great deal more if they took a more moderate stance.

    Pro-choice is a moderate stance. There's nothing extreme about allowing people to make their own decisions.
    OCorcrainn wrote:
    There people are many people who support abortion who think of themselves as open-minded and liberal yet are quick to label anyone who disagrees with them as narrow-minded religious zealots, and those type of negative assertions and willingness to employ false negative stereotypes undermines their own position and credibility. It destroys the integrity of their views.

    Having watched and listened to far too many abortion discussions on TV and radio, I can't think of a single anti-choice commentator who isn't a very obvious religious zealot. Even those who purport to be legal or medical experts on the subject (like William Binchy and Patricia Casey) are merely using their professional qualifications to lend some credibility to their religious zealotry.

    If there really are plenty of atheists and agnostics out there who believe that women shouldn't have the right to control their own bodies, then why aren't they represented in the media?


  • #109
    bhamsteve
    Closed Accounts Posts: 451 ✭✭bhamsteve


    ilovesleep wrote: »
    In relation to abortion on gender of the baby - I really wish abortion was available in my mothers day because my mother made it very clear that she had nothing more but contempt for me and my sister. My brothers - she loves dearly and idolises them. My mother tolerated me and my sister but never wanted us. I never asked for that sh1te.

    Sorry to hear that, must be tough to deal with. I find it hard to empathise with anybody who treats children as anything other than a wonderful gift.


  • #110
    RebelSoul
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 356 ✭✭RebelSoul


    "They’re all in favor of the unborn. They will do anything for the unborn. But once you’re born, you’re on your own. Pro-life conservatives are obsessed with the fetus from conception to nine months. After that, they don’t want to know about you. They don’t want to hear from you. No nothing. No neonatal care, no day care, no head start, no school lunch, no food stamps, no welfare, no nothing. If you’re pre-born, you’re fine; if you’re preschool, you’re ****ed." - George Carlin

    If pro-lifers really care about these unborn, why not pop round with a bag of nappys or a new buggy. "Here you go Brid, I compiled a list of the local schools which I think are best suited for your rugrats education". Set up a savings account to safeguard the little tots future while you're at it.
    No they won't do that. Why? Because it's not their problem. Not their problem, so keep your nose out of the personal choice of a woman.


  • #111
    Phill Ewinn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭Phill Ewinn


    RebelSoul wrote: »
    "They’re all in favor of the unborn. ........Not their problem, so keep your nose out of the personal choice of a woman.

    Hope this is some kind of joke. Glad we have constitutional protection of the unborn.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    RebelSoul
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 356 ✭✭RebelSoul


    Phill Ewinn wrote: »
    Hope this is some kind of joke. Glad we have constitutional protection of the unborn.

    Why?


  • #113
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    An Coilean wrote: »
    Why not before in your opinion?

    Insufficiently developed.


  • #114
    Czarcasm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,076 ✭✭✭✭Czarcasm


    RayM wrote: »
    Pro-choice is a moderate stance. There's nothing extreme about allowing people to make their own decisions.


    While the ideology is a moderate stance, it's the way those who hold that view express it so vigorously that makes it look like an extreme point of view.

    Having watched and listened to far too many abortion discussions on TV and radio, I can't think of a single anti-choice commentator who isn't a very obvious religious zealot. Even those who purport to be legal or medical experts on the subject (like William Binchy and Patricia Casey) are merely using their professional qualifications to lend some credibility to their religious zealotry.


    I don't know who these people are, but I'm sure these people didn't get their qualifications doing a FAS course, just because you are well educated doesn't mean it has to stand in the way of you being a hellfire and brimstone god botherer.

    If there really are plenty of atheists and agnostics out there who believe that women shouldn't have the right to control their own bodies, then why aren't they represented in the media?


    S/He who shouts loudest, etc. For example on this issue the media wouldn't have any interest in a Roman Catholic who holds the view that until the foetus is actually delivered, whether by natural birth or cesarean section, then the woman has every right to decide what happens, or doesn't happen, within her own body.

    It goes against my religious teaching, but there's a point where religion as a belief, and the actual reality of life, the ethical considerations of both are incompatible, and it's at that point that humanity for me trumps religious belief every time. I wouldn't force any woman to have a child she didn't want, and I wouldn't crucify her as a "scarlet harlot" for having sex either. We've only just learned in recent years the detrimental effects of the "close your legs or you'll be off to the laundries" ignorance has had massive repercussions on our society even today. I'd rather we as a society learned to have a bit more compassion than feeling it was more important that we had to be right all the time.

    The media would also have no interest in the opinion of said Roman Catholic's atheist wife, who is vehemently opposed to abortion, based on her own ethical ideals. You can only have a rational discussion if people are open to listening to your opinions, and unfortunately too many times in too many discussions, the group think sets in and those who are otherwise interested in having said rational discussion, just get tired of the same inane, repedive back and forth between both sides of the argument who are only interested in spreading FUD and shouting the other side down and claiming the high moral ground to say how right and righteous they are.


  • #115
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Phill Ewinn wrote: »
    Hope this is some kind of joke. Glad we have constitutional protection of the unborn.

    Phill - if you'd be good enough to get back to me....
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=84450085&postcount=61


  • #116
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    OCorcrainn wrote: »
    That only applies to people who quote scripture or give religious reasons for not supporting easier access to abortion. There are plenty of atheists and agnostics who do not support it for ethical reasons they would hold that are in no way religious. There are religious people who oppose it also and their reasons for doing so are not religious.

    There people are many people who support abortion who think of themselves as open-minded and liberal yet are quick to label anyone who disagrees with them as narrow-minded religious zealots, and those type of negative assertions and willingness to employ false negative stereotypes undermines their own position and credibility. It destroys the integrity of their views.

    It is extremely hypocritical.
    im liberal? lets be honest here, the reason other countries have abortion legislation isnt because they lacked athiests and agnostics who opposed it, its because they lack the malign level of influence that the sky pilots have in this country and the generations of holy joes that it creates


  • #117
    666irishguy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 469 ✭✭666irishguy


    We will never see a rational debate on the subject for the simple reason that those who hide behind the banner of "pro-life" are for the majority of time, basing their entire argument in one way or another on the need to appease a supernatural deity. Plain and simple. IMO the woman should be the one who decides for herself. Free will and all that lark.


  • #118
    squod
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,704 ✭✭✭squod


    666irishguy wrote: »
    ........ the woman should be the one who decides for herself. Free will and all that lark.

    That's working out well for New Yorkers. 41% of whom don't even have the right to life.

    http://www.nyc41percent.com/


  • #119
    Rezident
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,823 ✭✭✭Rezident


    Because it's life or death. It might only be the death of a foetus which doesn't have any legal rights or anything but it is still a part of life and life is the most amazing, fragile and precious thing in the universe.

    All the arguments over religion etc. boil down to a single question, perhaps most succinctly put by Dawkins when he asked: where did life come from? with only two possible answers. There is no fence to sit on.

    I do wish people would debate it less negatively though which is why I normally don't get involved anymore. In 35 years I've never seen one person from either side of the debate suddenly switch sides based on the opposition's arguments so you're mainly wasting your time. It's not worth killing each other over, the irony of which is appalling.


  • #120
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    Rezident wrote: »
    Because it's life or death. It might only be the death of a foetus which doesn't have any legal rights or anything but it is still a part of life and life is the most amazing, fragile and precious thing in the universe.

    it sure as **** isnt the most amazing fragile precious thing on this planet never mind the maudlin theorizing about whats out in the universe


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    Pumpkinseeds
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,635 ✭✭✭Pumpkinseeds


    squod wrote: »
    That's working out well for New Yorkers. 41% of whom don't even have the right to life.

    http://www.nyc41percent.com/
    That information is provided by the God's light foundation. Whose God, not mine. As far as I'm concerned if a person disagrees with abortion, that is fine, that is their right. Those people should not be able to inflict those religious or moral beliefs on anyone else. Who decides what God did or did not say? There are so many versions of the Bible which in my opinion has watered down any original teachings to suit the whims of the church.

    Take the ordination of a Pope for example. The choosing of a Pope is not God coming down and patting someone on the shoulder and saying 'its you', it is based on a group of men backing a candidate who is most likely to be of benefit to their own interests.

    The more distance between church and state the better in my opinion. So please do not delude yourself that by denying the right to terminate a pregnancy, that you are doing God's will. That is just arrogance.


Advertisement