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

Can a Christian vote for unlimited abortion?

Options
1…145146148150151…174

Comments

  • Options
    #4412
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,031 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    DubInMeath wrote: »
    I certainly wouldn't call John McGuirk any of these things such as respectful, factual or civil why select him as a spokesperson if he doesn't represent the views of the group


    you would have to ask those who selected him. i'm not part of any campaign group so i'm certainly not going to know why he was selected.
    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Would you cop yourself on.
    Are you trying to say now that it’s a case of mistaken identity????
    Her name is Mary Kenny.
    It’s the same girl. She’s a liar. And now you’re telling lies too, to deflect from the fact that it was pointed out that she’s a fibber.

    i don't tell lies.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #4413
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    end of the road wrote: »

    i don't tell lies.

    You are telling lies. You are saying it’s a different girl who looks similar. They are both the same person. They are both Mary Kenny.
    You insisting otherwise is telling lies.


  • Options
    #4414
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    end of the road wrote: »
    you would have to ask those who selected him. i'm not part of any campaign group so i'm certainly not going to know why he was selected.



    i don't tell lies.

    They might want as should some posters supporting them and their stance and tatics to be mindful of the proverb You are the company you keep.


  • Options
    #4415
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,031 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    DubInMeath wrote: »
    They might want as should some posters supporting them and their stance and tatics to be mindful of the proverb You are the company you keep.

    i would disagree, i am no more responsible for people like john mcguirk and what they do then you are for those few people on the pro-choice side who are behaving badly.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #4416
    pitifulgod
    Registered Users Posts: 1,282 ✭✭✭pitifulgod


    end of the road wrote: »
    i would disagree, i am no more responsible for people like john mcguirk and what they do then you are for those few people on the pro-choice side who are behaving badly.

    Thing is, the entire organised campaign is behaving badly. It's top to bottom, dodgy tactics. So while it in no way reflects upon you, it does reflect upon the campaign.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4417
    newmember2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,594 ✭✭✭newmember2


    pitifulgod wrote: »
    Thing is, the entire organised campaign is behaving badly. It's top to bottom, dodgy tactics. So while it in no way reflects upon you, it does reflect upon the campaign.



    We are not voting on who's ran the greatest campaign.

    You agree with the taking of human life or you don't.

    IMHO there is no argument that can be brought forth that can justify the taking of a human life.


  • Options
    #4418
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 29,031 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    pitifulgod wrote: »
    Thing is, the entire organised campaign is behaving badly. It's top to bottom, dodgy tactics. So while it in no way reflects upon you, it does reflect upon the campaign.

    i don't agree, the majority of the campaign is behaving respectfully and civily from what i can see. are their members behaving badly, absolutely, there are on both sides. the best either side can do is ignore them.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #4419
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,468 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    newmember? wrote: »
    We are not voting on who's ran the greatest campaign.

    You agree with the taking of human life or you don't.

    IMHO there is no argument that can be brought forth that can justify the taking of a human life.

    You're in a room, a man stands in front of you with a knife and is about to kill you and your family. You have a gun, would you kill this man to save yourself and your family?


  • Options
    #4420
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,735 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    Yeah. And abortion as a last rather than first resort - with abortion rates to back it up. We can learn something other than Go straight to abortion, do not pass go.

    As it is here. No one ever wants an abortion, it is always a last resort.
    Dutch society is more liberal and permissive - but it lays upon a society which is far more sophisticated and intelligent than ours. You don't see swathes of people stumbling around drunk at the drop of a hat - indeed, it takes a bartender some time rumbling around in the back of a press to find a pint glass (they sell beer in timble-like measures), they have laws which they actually enforce, they have a welfare system which wouldn't be anything like the likes of ours, where folk can sit and suck the life out of it.

    We won't of course - not in this comparatively muck savage society of ours where liberalism is case of trying to appear mod and sophisticated but which anything but.

    The Dutch attribute low abortion rates to reduced teen pregnancy which in turn they attribute to more realistic and sensible sex education. If you look at the 'No' campaign in this country it is driven very much by hard-line conservatism, and from what I gather, American religious conservative funding. This is entirely antithetical to the Dutch model.

    I tend to agree with you with regards to this countries unhealthy relation to alcohol, which could certainly be related to some teen pregnancies. That said, with widespread introduction of contraception here, teen pregnancy has fallen by 64% in the last 15 years. I'd be more concerned that the main religion in this country advocates against use of contraception in relation to teen pregnancy. That and the fact that most sex education in this country promotes abstinence and the dangers of sex, which the Dutch have long since dismissed. From the previously linked article;
    The Dutch are very practical about dealing with issues many other countries (especially the US) struggle with. Rather than sticking their heads in the sand and advocating abstinence only—a policy that has been proven to be a dismal failure—they realize that human sexuality is a perfectly natural part of life, and the more resources with which children are equipped, the better off they will be.

    I'd agree we have a long way to go, and while I also agree that abortion should always be a tool of last resort, neither should it be restricted nor stigmatised.


  • Options
    #4421
    pitifulgod
    Registered Users Posts: 1,282 ✭✭✭pitifulgod


    newmember? wrote: »
    We are not voting on who's ran the greatest campaign.

    You agree with the taking of human life or you don't.

    IMHO there is no argument that can be brought forth that can justify the taking of a human life.

    It's relevant if in the place of debating and informing, the campaign is resorting to 1983 tactics of shock the public. Which isn't actually working as demonstrated by polls.
    end of the road wrote: »
    i don't agree, the majority of the campaign is behaving respectfully and civily from what i can see. are their members behaving badly, absolutely, there are on both sides. the best either side can do is ignore them.

    Don't think you'll find any example of the yes campaign conducting itself as the no campaign does. It's been very much so about hearing women's stories and medical experts have given their views on the impact of the eighth.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4422
    dude_abided
    Registered Users Posts: 57 ✭✭dude_abided


    smacl wrote: »
    As it is here. No one ever wants an abortion, it is always a last resort.



    The Dutch attribute low abortion rates to reduced teen pregnancy which in turn they attribute to ]. If you look at the 'No' campaign in this country it is driven very much by hard-line conservatism, and from what I gather, American religious conservative funding. This is entirely antithetical to the Dutch model.

    I tend to agree with you with regards to this countries unhealthy relation to alcohol, which could certainly be related to some teen pregnancies. That said, with widespread introduction of contraception here, I'd be more concerned that the main religion in this country advocates against use of contraception in relation to teen pregnancy. That and the fact that most sex education in this country promotes abstinence and the dangers of sex, which the Dutch have long since dismissed. From the previously linked article;



    I'd agree we have a long way to go, and while I also agree that abortion should always be a tool of last resort, neither should it be restricted nor stigmatised.

    I agree that we need sex education to inform people, but I do not think it is wrong to promote abstinence especially to young people. Primarily because their immaturity tends them towards poor choices. If we promoted a realistic attitude towards sex, but also removed the pressure to be having it young, I believe people would be far happier.


  • Options
    #4423
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,735 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    dude_abided wrote: »
    I agree that we need sex education to inform people, but I do not think it is wrong to promote abstinence especially to young people. Primarily because their immaturity tends them towards poor choices. If we promoted a realistic attitude towards sex, but also removed the pressure to be having it young, I believe people would be far happier.

    If you read the article I linked, you'll note that in the Netherlands teens on average start having sex later than most other countries, even though they don't promote abstinence. I think the key is more about teaching personal responsibility and respect for others from an early age. In my opinion teaching negative attitudes towards sex is detrimental at many levels, which is unfortunately very much the case in this country.


  • Options
    #4424
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,739 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    MOD NOTE

    EOTR, please do not post in this thread again.

    You were warned a month ago about the standard of your posts.

    A month is ample time to modify how you engage with the thread, but given your recent posts it seems you are unable to post to the standard that was hoped for when you received your previous warning.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #4425
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    smacl wrote: »
    As it is here. No one ever wants an abortion, it is always a last resort.

    Here, the only resort.


    The Dutch attribute low abortion rates to reduced teen pregnancy which in turn they attribute to more realistic and sensible sex education. If you look at the 'No' campaign in this country it is driven very much by hard-line conservatism, and from what I gather, American religious conservative funding. This is entirely antithetical to the Dutch model.

    I think your conflating the No campaign (which seeks to prevent abortion and in doing so, represents those who draw a line at on demand for any reason) and the ways in which society can approach unwanted pregnancies.

    This society is being given a choice between UK-style abortion and a heavily restricted status quo. No mention is made of a far more nuanced alternative. The Dutch show at least one nuanced alternative is possible.



    I tend to agree with you with regards to this countries unhealthy relation to alcohol, which could certainly be related to some teen pregnancies.

    I'm not sure why you draw the line at teens.



    I'd be more concerned that the main religion in this country advocates against use of contraception in relation to teen pregnancy. That and the fact that most sex education in this country promotes abstinence and the dangers of sex, which the Dutch have long since dismissed.

    And the only way in which this can be resolved is by introducing UK style abortion. We aren't capable of altering the current situation shy of that?





    I'd agree we have a long way to go, and while I also agree that abortion should always be a tool of last resort, neither should it be restricted nor stigmatised.

    Isn't this both sides of your mouth?

    If it's introduced as a tool of first resort (because the systems which might push it to tool of last resort aren't present) then the motivation to render a tool of last resort are eliminated.

    Remember: abortion is cheap. All the other options are expensive. You really suppose politicians are going to revisit a Yes vote with a suite of measures intended to render abortion a last resort?


  • Options
    #4426
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    pitifulgod wrote: »
    Don't think you'll find any example of the yes campaign conducting itself as the no campaign does. It's been very much so about hearing women's stories and medical experts have given their views on the impact of the eighth.

    I'd encourage you to drive up Camden St at around 12 midnight on a Friday or Saturday night.

    Then consider the phrase "trust women" (given men have long been eliminated from the discussion).

    Talk about filtering things to suit your book!


  • Options
    #4427
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,735 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    I think your conflating the No campaign (which seeks to prevent abortion and in doing so, represents those who draw a line at on demand for any reason) and the ways in which society can approach unwanted pregnancies.

    This society is being given a choice between UK-style abortion and a heavily restricted status quo. No mention is made of a far more nuanced alternative. The Dutch show at least one nuanced alternative is possible.

    You might want describe the distinction you see with respect to abortion law in the UK versus that in the Netherlands in more detail, because I'm not seeing it. Abortion only ever happens as a result of unwanted pregnancy, and adoption rates in the Netherlands are also comparatively low and primarily from foreign sources.
    Isn't this both sides of your mouth?

    If it's introduced as a tool of first resort (because the systems which might push it to tool of last resort aren't present) then the motivation to render a tool of last resort are eliminated.

    Remember: abortion is cheap. All the other options are expensive. You really suppose politicians are going to revisit a Yes vote with a suite of measures intended to render abortion a last resort?

    When I say abortion is a last resort, it is the last resort for women with an unwanted pregnancy who do not wish to give birth. No woman sets out to have an abortion. As for the price, abortion is comparatively expensive in Ireland as it necessitates travelling abroad. As such the existing legislation is cruellest to those women least well off.


  • Options
    #4428
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #4429
    newmember2
    Registered Users Posts: 2,594 ✭✭✭newmember2


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    You're in a room, a man stands in front of you with a knife and is about to kill you and your family. You have a gun, would you kill this man to save yourself and your family?

    You're talking about self-defence or defence of another. Unless abortion is for one of these reasons then it cannot be justified.


  • Options
    #4430
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    ....... wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    I'm not sure where you dealt with this.

    Let's suppose* the pill, when taken correctly, is up to 99.9% (according to webmed). This means that in one year, 1 woman in 1000 will fall pregnant despite taking the pill correctly.

    *we can argue later about the exact effectiveness later. This discussion is about taking it correctly for a period of 1 year.


    If 100,000 abortions annually are assigned to contraceptive failure (and I supposed we assume all contraception to be the pill for the sake of simplicity), then we are indeed dealing with 100,000 failure-of-the-pill-itself equating to 0.1% of the female child bearing population in the UK.

    Putting the population of the UK in total at something like 400 million.

    Since the population of the UK isn't 400 million, we must suppose the failure of the contraception to be other than the failure of the contraception and failure to use the contraception properly.

    Perhaps you can point out where I'm going wrong here?


  • Options
    #4431
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    newmember? wrote: »
    You're talking about self-defence or defence of another. Unless abortion is for one of these reasons then it cannot be justified.

    To be fair, you did say there is no argument that can be brought forth that can justify the taking of a human life. Maybe edit your post to reflect that it applies to abortion?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4432
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    I'm not sure where you dealt with this.

    Let's suppose* the pill, when taken correctly, is up to 99.9% (according to webmed). This means that in one year, 1 woman in 1000 will fall pregnant despite taking the pill correctly.

    *we can argue later about the exact effectiveness later. This discussion is about taking it correctly for a period of 1 year.


    If 100,000 abortions annually are assigned to contraceptive failure (and I supposed we assume all contraception to be the pill for the sake of simplicity), then we are indeed dealing with 100,000 failure-of-the-pill-itself equating to 0.1% of the female child bearing population in the UK.

    Putting the population of the UK in total at something like 400 million.

    Since the population of the UK isn't 400 million, we must suppose the failure of the contraception to be other than the failure of the contraception and failure to use the contraception properly.

    Perhaps you can point out where I'm going wrong here?

    The real statistic is 91%. 99.9% is not an accurate measure because it doesn't reflect actual usage.
    So the real statistic is 9 in every 100 women will fall pregnant.


  • Options
    #4433
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #4434
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    The real statistic is 91%. 99.9% is not an accurate measure because it doesn't reflect actual usage.
    So the real statistic is 9 in every 100 women will fall pregnant.

    Would you apply 'actual usage' think to your parachuting pre-jump checks?


  • Options
    #4435
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    Would you apply 'actual usage' think to your parachuting pre-jump checks?

    I think using the correct statistics is the fairest way of determining them.
    You can cite 99.9% effectiveness but studies show that with common, typical, usage, the statistic is actually 91%.


  • Options
    #4436
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #4437
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    I think using the correct statistics is the fairest way of determining them.
    You can cite 99.9% effectiveness but studies show that with common, typical, usage, the statistic is actually 91%.

    Common/typical incorporates carelessness.

    The parachute analogy supposes no mid-jump pill to compensate for a less than optimal approach to responsibility. I am arguing that abortion availability diminishes responsibility.


  • Options
    #4438
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #4439
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    Common/typical incorporates carelessness.

    The parachute analogy supposes no mid-jump pill to compensate for a less than optimal approach to responsibility. I am arguing that abortion availability diminishes responsibility.

    No it doesn't.

    A few months ago, I dropped one of my pills down the sink while on a weekend away. I had no prescription with me to get another.
    That meant I was one pill short for the rest of the month. I hadn't had sex that day so the MAP was unnecessary and useless, but even missing one pill can cause a woman to ovulate and she isn't protected for the rest of the month.

    Another time, I vomited a couple of hours after taking my pill. I had a nasty bug. That rendered that day's pill useless. I was too sick to take it the day after, because I couldn't keep water down.
    Which means I wasn't fully protected for the rest of the month.

    Life gets in the way. Things happen. Its not just a case of not bothering to take it as you're assuming.

    By the time a woman realises her pill failed that month, she is already pregnant. And at that point, preaching about how she should have been more careful is pointless.


  • Options
    #4440
    antiskeptic
    Registered Users Posts: 9,555 ✭✭✭antiskeptic


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    No it doesn't.

    A few months ago, I dropped one of my pills down the sink while on a weekend away. I had no prescription with me to get another.
    That meant I was one pill short for the rest of the month. I hadn't had sex that day so the MAP was unnecessary and useless, but even missing one pill can cause a woman to ovulate and she isn't protected for the rest of the month.

    Another time, I vomited a couple of hours after taking my pill. I had a nasty bug. That rendered that day's pill useless. I was too sick to take it the day after, because I couldn't keep water down.
    Which means I wasn't fully protected for the rest of the month.

    Might I ask what your approach to sex for the rest of the month was?
    Life gets in the way. Things happen. Its not just a case of not bothering to take it as you're assuming.

    Life getting in the way isnt good enough. Not unto another life getting in the way. I suggest life doesnt get in the way of a parachutists mindset


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4441
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users Posts: 25,468 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    newmember? wrote: »
    You're talking about self-defence or defence of another. Unless abortion is for one of these reasons then it cannot be justified.

    You said "IMHO there is no argument that can be brought forth that can justify the taking of a human life."

    So now you are backtracking and saying that there is indeed an argument that can justify the taking of a human life!


Advertisement