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

‘People think I’m the devil for having an abortion, but it’s the only option that&

1…1112141617…37

Comments

  • #392
    Dandy Dandridge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭Dandy Dandridge


    kylith wrote: »
    Again - are there 5,000 couples, minimum, in Ireland looking to adopt every year?

    What is to be done with the children who are too disabled, too old, or just too ugly to be chosen by one of the limited number of adoptive parents? Are you going to take them in? Are you happy for your taxes to rise exponentially to cover the cost of raising thousands upon thousands of children in institutions for 18 years apiece?

    Silly argument.


  • #393
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Dandy Dandridge wrote: »
    Silly argument.

    How so?

    5,000 women, at least, go to the UK from Ireland every year to obtain abortions. If they were unable to do so and, as some say, gave the child up for adoption what is then to happen to it? Are there 5,000 people looking to adopt every year? If not, what is to happen to the children who are not adopted? Someone has to pay to feed, clothe, house, and school them and look after their medical needs. Who will do that if not the public purse? That will lead to taxes being raised by vast amounts as thousands of children are left unadopted year after year.

    What else do you suggest?


  • #394
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    My point was maybe, just maybe, after the abortion she was offered a nice few quid to appear in a documentary.
    And she might have taken it to cover the costs of the procedure. Seems logical to me.
    wonderfullife wrote: »
    My point is before hailing this girl as a bastion of light for attempting to break some sort of "omerta", lets remain open to the very real plausibility she only appeared on it after being offered a few grand to do so.

    If she is some sort of torch bearer attempting to highlight the issue she would have done the piece for free. Which I highly doubt is the case.
    She's not afraid to talk where many are. Possible motivation driven by payment to appear on the documentary should not take away from the documentary itself, or the points it raises. She's making valid points and she should be listened to! Not shunned or dismissed because she got paid to give her opinion and tell her story.


  • #395
    Shrap
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    headstrong feminists.

    :pac: Genuinely laughed at that :D. 43 years old, mother of 2, advocates choice, debated your arguments without recourse to rhetoric or appeals to emotion - clearly headstrong and *some word rendered meaningless by abuse of the term*. Damn those wimminz with strong minds. :pac:


  • #396
    somesoldiers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,846 ✭✭✭✭somesoldiers


    I don't use condoms because there is a sort of stigma attached.

    No, Rodney that's just a bit of silver foil, you throw that away


  • Advertisement
  • #397
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    Of course. But I'm not anti abortion or pro-choice (as it stands).

    All I want is for prospective father's to be given a choice. Which will never happen. So I'm just trying to add value to the debate from the middle.

    Middle my arse, you have vilified this young woman in the most cruel and judgemental way.


  • #398
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,144 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    kylith wrote: »
    So why would I go to jail for 14 years for procuring a chemical abortifactant? No ripping apart there.

    Nah, just a bit of penal servitude doing laundry while the RCC profits off your labour.


  • #399
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    marienbad wrote: »
    Middle my arse, you have vilified this young woman in the most cruel and judgemental way.

    How so and where so? I haven't slagged her off once all thread.


  • #400
    wonderfullife
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,924 ✭✭✭wonderfullife


    Shrap wrote: »
    :pac: Genuinely laughed at that :D. 43 years old, mother of 2, advocates choice, debated your arguments without recourse to rhetoric or appeals to emotion - clearly headstrong and *some word rendered meaningless by abuse of the term*. Damn those wimminz with strong minds. :pac:
    43 so you should be almost old enough to appreciate how closely tied the feminism and pro-choice movements were originally.


  • #401
    DuffmanGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 99 ✭✭DuffmanGuy


    kylith wrote: »
    So why would I go to jail for 14 years for procuring a chemical abortifactant? No ripping apart there.

    You'd go to jail if you placed anyone in an environment that will kill them. If you hold someone's head under for 10 mins, thus killing them, you would be tried for murder.


  • Advertisement
  • #402
    Shrap
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    DuffmanGuy wrote: »
    You'd go to jail if you placed anyone in an environment that will kill them. If you hold someone's head under for 10 mins, thus killing them, you would be tried for murder.

    Anyone? Or just born people?


  • #403
    Dandy Dandridge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭Dandy Dandridge


    Build more orphanages maybe? Aborting unborn infants is not the answer.


  • #404
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    All I want is for prospective father's to be given a choice.

    That is a completely different argument and requires a different thread. It's an argument that could be presented once a woman actually has the choice in whether or not she's going to proceed with a pregnancy or not.


  • #405
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Dandy Dandridge wrote: »
    Build more orphanages maybe? Aborting unborn infants is not the answer.

    And how will orphanages help? Either you don't realise orphanages are for orphans, or you don't believe what you said earlier that abortions should be given in life threatening situations. :D


  • #406
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Dandy Dandridge wrote: »
    Build more orphanages maybe? Aborting unborn infants is not the answer.

    You're not seeing what I'm saying WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR THE ORPHANAGES AND THE CHILDREN'S NEEDS?


  • #407
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    What I have learned from this thread.

    1. All trolls should be aborted


  • #408
    Shrap
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    wonderfullife wrote: »
    43 so you should be almost old enough to appreciate how closely tied the feminism and pro-choice movements were originally.

    That doesn't make either movement a bad thing, especially when "originally", the feminist movement was all about genuine equality. It has only recently become a bad word.

    As it happens, as an individual, I like my rights. I would like to have more of them regarding reproductive choice in mine own country. There's no movement I follow, support or wave a flag for unless my headstrong head agrees with it. I don't subscribe to labels, nor do I take kindly to being labelled in a discussion as if it were a way of writing off my opinion as belonging to a discredited movement. Please accept the opinions I have given during this discussion as a product of my intellect rather than as a mouthpiece for somebody else's agenda. Thanks.


  • #409
    muddypaws
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,614 ✭✭✭muddypaws


    Dandy Dandridge wrote: »
    Build more orphanages maybe? Aborting unborn infants is not the answer.

    Yeah, cos we have such a great history of looking after children not in the family home in this country. :rolleyes:

    Calling them unborn infants is a bit silly, you might as well call them unborn OAPs.


  • #410
    bjork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,554 ✭✭✭bjork


    kylith wrote: »
    You're not seeing what I'm saying WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR THE ORPHANAGES AND THE CHILDREN'S NEEDS?

    THERE are 14 times more prospective parents seeking to adopt children domestically than there are children available.

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/fourteen-times-more-couples-who-want-to-adopt-than-children-available-30781078.html

    It is hoped the ratification of the children's rights referendum, which will make 2,000 children in long-term foster care eligible for adoption, will ease demand and give these children "a second chance for a family".

    While there are 6,000 children in long-term foster care, just 19 have been adopted from the system so far this year.


  • #411
    Dandy Dandridge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 45 ✭Dandy Dandridge


    Abortion is acceptable in the two examples I explained in my earlier post. That is the end of my contribution to this thread. Best of luck to you.


  • Advertisement
  • #412
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Dandy Dandridge wrote: »
    In my opinion, abortion is acceptable in the two examples I explained in my earlier post. That is the end of my contribution to this thread. Best of luck to you.

    You left out a part of your post. I put it in for you. It seemed important.


  • #413
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    DuffmanGuy wrote: »
    You'd go to jail if you placed anyone in an environment that will kill them. If you hold someone's head under for 10 mins, thus killing them, you would be tried for murder.

    Which is exactly the attitude that has women in South America imprisoned for life for miscarrying.


  • #414
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    bjork wrote: »
    THERE are 14 times more prospective parents seeking to adopt children domestically than there are children available.

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/fourteen-times-more-couples-who-want-to-adopt-than-children-available-30781078.html

    It is hoped the ratification of the children's rights referendum, which will make 2,000 children in long-term foster care eligible for adoption, will ease demand and give these children "a second chance for a family".

    While there are 6,000 children in long-term foster care, just 19 have been adopted from the system so far this year.



    And if unwilling women were incubators for third parties, you would have a point.


  • #415
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    bjork wrote: »
    THERE are 14 times more prospective parents seeking to adopt children domestically than there are children available.

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/fourteen-times-more-couples-who-want-to-adopt-than-children-available-30781078.html

    It is hoped the ratification of the children's rights referendum, which will make 2,000 children in long-term foster care eligible for adoption, will ease demand and give these children "a second chance for a family".

    While there are 6,000 children in long-term foster care, just 19 have been adopted from the system so far this year.

    Ok, so 600 couples approved to adopt according to that article. What happens the other 4,400 kids? Will there be 600 couples looking to adopt every year or will that number drop after they've adopted one child?


  • #416
    pwurple
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,449 ✭✭✭✭pwurple


    muddypaws wrote: »
    Yeah, cos we have such a great history of looking after children not in the family home in this country. :rolleyes:

    What are people talking about?

    There is no adoption here anymore. There were maybe a handful of children adopted last year? Mostly by family members (grandmothers etc).

    Since the hague convention foreign adoptions are halted for irish couples.

    Loads of adoptive couples on the panels, who went through checks, tests, classes that no biological parent has ever had to do, all ready and able, available. No children there for them though.

    Telling someone to adopt here, is pretty ludicrous. It doesn't happen. Zero need for orphanages.


  • #417
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Dandy Dandridge wrote: »
    Build more orphanages maybe? Aborting unborn infants is not the answer.

    Foetus, not infant!


  • #418
    DuffmanGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 99 ✭✭DuffmanGuy


    super_furry wrote: »
    Her body, her choice.

    It's not brave to kill the defenceless. It is a cowardly act to kill another human being incapable of defending herself.
    Abortion is violence against women.


  • #419
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    DuffmanGuy wrote: »
    It's not brave to kill the defenceless. It is a cowardly act to kill another human being incapable of defending herself.
    Abortion is violence against women.

    Forcing an unwanted pregancy on a woman isn't? If a woman wants one, how is it violence against herself?
    Also, many here don't see a foetus as a human being until it is born.


  • #420
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    DuffmanGuy wrote: »
    It's not brave to kill the defenceless. It is a cowardly act to kill another human being incapable of defending herself.
    Abortion is violence against women.
    Even if the woman has chosen to have an abortion? Can one assault oneself?


  • Advertisement
  • #421
    traprunner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,887 ✭✭✭traprunner


    DuffmanGuy wrote: »
    It's not brave to kill the defenceless. It is a cowardly act to kill another human being incapable of defending herself.
    Abortion is violence against women.


    So switching off a life support system on someone is a bad thing because they can't defend themselves?


Advertisement