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.

8th Amendment

1…78101213…65

Comments

  • #272
    Glenman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 978 ✭✭✭Glenman


    Not a NSA agent wrote: »
    Childbirth is also quite graphic. Have you ever seen surgery being done with an eye? Thats quite uncomfortable to watch. Will we not allow those? Good luck trying to stop childbirth!

    Eye surgery or childbirth usually don't result in the death of a child, abortion does.


  • #273
    No Voter And Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 282 ✭✭No Voter And Proud


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    That definition includes children who won't be born for decades. Whoops, not such a clear-cut definition after all, is it?

    Potential children... how can something not yet growing be classed as an unborn child? Silly.

    In all my time reading this board (i read all through trhe time of the referendum) it really seems that there are people trying to muddy the waters a lot.


  • #274
    No Voter And Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 282 ✭✭No Voter And Proud


    Glenman wrote: »
    Eye surgery or childbirth usually don't result in the death of a child, abortion does.

    That's why I support graphic anti-abortion posters.
    What does more damage? Showing actual abortions on a photo, or allowing abortions to take place - meaning that the person complaining about seeing the photo may have instead been aborted in the first place!


  • #275
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    That's why I support graphic anti-abortion posters.
    What does more damage? Showing actual abortions on a photo, or allowing abortions to take place - meaning that the person complaining about seeing the photo may have instead been aborted in the first place!

    But pictures of any medical procedure are unpleasant. Google 'toenail removal surgery'. Should people have to put up with ingrown toenails because pictures of the corrective procedure are messy?

    Cop on.

    Edit: Also. The scenario you describe would necessitate a temporal paradox.


  • #276
    No Voter And Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 282 ✭✭No Voter And Proud


    endacl wrote: »
    But pictures of any medical procedure are unpleasant. Google 'toenail removal surgery'. Should people have to put up with ingrown toenails because pictures of the corrective procedure are messy?

    Cop on.

    Edit: Also. The scenario you describe would necessitate a temporal paradox.

    You cop on. Removing an ingrown toenail is not killing a child.


  • Advertisement
  • #277
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,644 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    Unborn child is clear as day. Any child yet to be born. Hence my choosing of implantation as my line in the sand.

    This is not clear as day, it is a completely arbitrary line, and another opinion as unsubstantiated as mine.

    Why is a single cell embryo, floating free, just a cell, and an implanted one is a "child"?

    "Because we have to draw a line somewhere" is not a reason, since we can draw a line at 12 weeks or 24, and get an entirely different legal and moral regime.


  • #278
    ectoraige
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,103 ✭✭✭ectoraige


    Glenman wrote: »
    This will be like the SSM, everyone has a different opinion, I believe that God gave life and only he should take it away.

    Have you anything to back-up your belief though? I'm pretty sure that couple fits refers to have proof of their experience, do you have anything to point to other than a tradition of indoctrination?


  • #279
    No Voter And Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 282 ✭✭No Voter And Proud


    ectoraige wrote: »
    Have you anything to back-up your belief though? I'm pretty sure that couple fits refers to have proof of their experience, do you have anything to point to other than a tradition of indoctrination?

    Probably morality.


  • #280
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    You cop on. Removing an ingrown toenail is not killing a child.

    Correct. And neither is removing a clump of cells. ;) You appear to have missed my 'medical procedures look messy' point.

    Have the conversational concepts left you behind? Let me know. I don't mind typing a bit slower for you.

    ;)


  • #281
    No Voter And Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 282 ✭✭No Voter And Proud


    endacl wrote: »
    Correct. And neither is removing a clump of cells. ;) You appear to have missed my 'medical procedures look messy' point.

    Have the conversational concepts left you behind? Let me know. I don't mind typing a bit slower for you.

    ;)

    Removing a baby that's 12 weeks for instance, is a different kind of messy.
    It has a heartbeat at that age.

    Typing slowly for me? Sorry i don't understand how having to wait a long time for a reply will in any way get across your intended slur on my mental state.


  • Advertisement
  • #282
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,396 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    Removing a baby that's 12 weeks for instance, is a different kind of messy.
    It has a heartbeat at that age.

    Typing slowly for me? Sorry i don't understand how having to wait a long time for a reply will in any way get across your intended slur on my mental state.
    Medical consensus is that prior to 10 weeks the "baby" is not a foetus.


  • #283
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    Removing a baby that's 12 weeks for instance, is a different kind of messy.
    It has a heartbeat at that age.

    What's your major concern for the unborn anyway, what about all the people who are already born that are living in poverty and those who are being abused etc, should they not be of far greater concern than a fetus which is totally dependant on it's mother?

    People who claim to be so worried about the unborn children would be far better off focusing their time on caring for those who are already born and need help, unless of course they don't really give a **** about babies once they exit the uterus.


  • #284
    No Voter And Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 282 ✭✭No Voter And Proud


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Medical consensus is that prior to 10 weeks the "baby" is not a foetus.
    I referred to 12 weeks.
    Heartbeat begins before 12 weeks. Not sure what 10 weeks has to do with anything.
    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    What's your major concern for the unborn anyway, what about all the people who are already born that are living in poverty and those who are being abused etc, should they not be of far greater concern than a fetus which is totally dependant on it's mother?

    People who claim to be so worried about the unborn children would be far better off focusing their time on caring for those who are already born and need help, unless of course they don't really give a **** about babies once they exit the uterus.

    If you review my previous posts to the board you will see my concern is for both the unborn and the born.


  • #285
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    I referred to 12 weeks.
    Heartbeat begins before 12 weeks. Not sure what 10 weeks has to do with anything.



    If you review my previous posts to the board you will see my concern is for both the unborn and the born.

    I presume then you work tirelessly for children's charities and adopt as many unwanted children as you can yes? Not being smart those would be genuinely positive things for self proclaimed pro lifers to do.


  • #286
    No Voter And Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 282 ✭✭No Voter And Proud


    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    I presume then you work tirelessly for children's charities and adopt as many unwanted children as you can yes? Not being smart those would be genuinely positive things for self proclaimed pro lifers to do.

    How would me adopting children help anything?
    Sure the farm and my part time job take up most of the day, and in the evening I just like a cup of tea before bed.

    I don't see the relevance of your point to a debate on whether killing viable babies is morally wrong.


  • #287
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    How would me adopting children help anything?
    Sure the farm and my part time job take up most of the day, and in the evening I just like a cup of tea before bed.

    I don't see the relevance of your point to a debate on whether killing viable babies is morally wrong.

    Merely making the point that anti choice people who claim the moral high ground really don't give a toss about children, they just don't want women having control over their own bodies and they're generally against abortion on shaky religious grounds.

    My sister accidently killed her unborn baby, she miscarried so technically by your logic she committed manslaughter, so should it be against the law to miscarry? 'pro-lifers' have to believe that to remain consistent.


  • #288
    No Voter And Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 282 ✭✭No Voter And Proud


    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    Merely making the point that antI choice people who claim the moral high ground really don't give a toss about children, they just don't want wen having control over their own bodies and they're generally against abortion on shaky religious grounds.

    My sister accidently killed her baby, she miscarried so technically by your logic she committed manslaughter, so should it be against the law to miscarry? 'pro-lifers' have to believe that to remain consistent.

    A miscarriage is an act of God, how can that be perpetuated by a human?


  • #289
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    How would me adopting children help anything?
    Sure the farm and my part time job take up most of the day, and in the evening I just like a cup of tea before bed.

    I don't see the relevance of your point to a debate on whether killing viable babies is morally wrong.

    The fact is, it's us you have to convince if it comes to a vote.

    I'm in favour of women being able to avail of the service they currently have to travel to the UK for. Simple as that. I've considered the question. All aspects. I have had experience of women close to me finding themselves in a position whereby the decision they took was the best decision for them. I understand the biology. I've grappled with the ethics.

    Convince me.

    You needn't bother with faith based arguments. I'm immune.


  • #290
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    A miscarriage is an act of God, how can that be perpetuated by a human?

    Then we have a child murdering God so, hardly someone you want to get your morals from!


  • #291
    No Voter And Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 282 ✭✭No Voter And Proud


    endacl wrote: »
    The fact is, it's us you have to convince if it comes to a vote.

    I'm in favour of women being able to avail of the service they currently have to travel to the UK for. Simple as that. I've considered the question. All aspects. I have had experience of women close to me finding themselves in a position whereby the decision they took was the best decision for them. I understand the biology. I've grappled with the ethics.

    Convince me.

    You needn't bother with faith based arguments. I'm immune.

    If I have to convince you why killing a child is wrong then its you that has many questions to answer.
    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    Then we have a child murdering God so, hardly someone you want to get your morals from!

    Who are we to question the will of God?


  • Advertisement
  • #292
    Glenman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 978 ✭✭✭Glenman


    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    Merely making the point that antI choice people who claim the moral high ground really don't give a toss about children, they just don't want wen having control over their own bodies and they're generally against abortion on shaky religious grounds.

    My sister accidently killed her unborn baby, she miscarried so technically by your logic she committed manslaughter, so should it be against the law to miscarry? 'pro-lifers' have to believe that to remain consistent.

    That's silly, miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies can't be helped.
    Abortion is the deliberate killing of a child. Although I don't blame the mothers, they are in a vulnerable state. I blame the doctors and medical people who promote it instead of offering other support services and alternatives to mothers.


  • #293
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    If I have to convince you why killing a child is wrong then its you that has many questions to answer.



    Who are we to question the will of God?

    I know you're only taking the piss, but this is good practice for when I do meet a genuine God nut, keep up the good work bro :-)


  • #294
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Glenman wrote: »
    That's silly, miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies can't be helped.
    Abortion is the deliberate killing of a child. Although I don't blame the mothers, they are in a vulnerable state. I blame the doctors and medical people who promote it instead of offering other support services and alternatives to mothers.

    The women I know chose it. Nobody 'promoted' it. Alternatives were considered.

    How low is your regard for women? They can't make their own decisions?


  • #295
    No Voter And Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 282 ✭✭No Voter And Proud


    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    I know you're only taking the piss, but this is good practice for when I do meet a genuine God nut, keep up the good work bro :-)

    Ok "bro"...
    Off to england then I take it?


  • #296
    No Voter And Proud
    Closed Accounts Posts: 282 ✭✭No Voter And Proud


    Glenman wrote: »
    That's silly, miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies can't be helped.
    Abortion is the deliberate killing of a child. Although I don't blame the mothers, they are in a vulnerable state. I blame the doctors and medical people who promote it instead of offering other support services and alternatives to mothers.

    Finally, someone talking sense! I feel like I'm being attacked on this forum and I'm not here a wet week!


  • #297
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    Glenman wrote: »
    That's silly, miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies can't be helped.
    Abortion is the deliberate killing of a child. Although I don't blame the mothers, they are in a vulnerable state. I blame the doctors and medical people who promote it instead of offering other support services and alternatives to mothers.

    It's not silly, it just clearly highlights the hypocrisy of the anti abortion brigade and abortion is not killing children (which I think most of us are against to be fair, can't speak for everybody though), it's removing a fetus, that's indisputable.

    Anyway I must ask do you give a single sh1t about born children who are in need of help or is it just the unborn that you're so darn worried about and is your concern religion based?


  • #298
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    Ok "bro"...
    Off to england then I take it?

    Apropos of.....?


  • #299
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    Finally, someone talking sense! I feel like I'm being attacked on this forum and I'm not here a wet week!

    You're being responded to. Not our fault you post nonsense.


  • #300
    Huntergonzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,160 ✭✭✭Huntergonzo


    No Voter And Proud wrote: »
    Ok "bro"...
    Off to england then I take it?

    Wouldn't they say bruv more than bro?


  • Advertisement
  • #301
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,443 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Huntergonzo wrote: »
    Wouldn't they say bruv more than bro?

    Depends. Regionality, an' all dat, bruv.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement