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

RBG, abortion and Ireland

Options
1246789

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,179 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Bonniedog wrote: »
    Americans could, and some would argue, should have stayed. There would have been no mass murders when North Vietnamese took over, no labour camps, no millions trying to flee (you might remember the Boat People?), and no Pol Pot.

    War was ended by Paris Peace Accord, not by Vietnamese winning. If there had been a pro Nazi "anti war" movement in 1941, US would not have helped to defeat the Germans, and you would be marching around in leather strides :)

    there was a pro-nazi anti-war movement in the US. If it was not for pearl harbor they might have succeeded in keeping the US out of the war. you keep calling others ignorant but the only ignorance on display here is yours.


  • Options
    #93
    Deebles McBeebles
    Registered Users Posts: 5,753 ✭✭✭Deebles McBeebles


    Quantum Erasure wrote: »
    With 6,666 abortions in Ireland in 2019 we kinda do though, you're welcome.

    on demand up to 12 weeks, it is what it is...

    If only we had proper numbers from before 2019 to compare, Q. Its great we have numbers on it now, shows we've evolved as a country. Well, 66% of us have. Whats with all the sixes anyway? Weird.

    Abortion on demand is another phrase for people who often miss the point, a bit like "all lives matter" or "build that wall".


  • Options
    #94
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,179 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Deebles McBeebles wrote: »
    If only we had proper numbers from before 2019 to compare, Q. Its great we have numbers on it now, shows we've evolved as a country. Well, 66% of us have. Whats with all the sixes anyway? Weird.

    Abortion on demand is another phrase for people who often miss the point, a bit like "all lives matter" or "build that wall".

    it is possible to estimate how many irish women were having abortions before it was legalised and the numbers dont seem to have increased at all.


  • Options
    #95
    bfa1509
    Registered Users Posts: 1,022 ✭✭✭bfa1509


    SusieBlue wrote: »

    I still don’t believe that an embryo should be held to the same level of importance as a grown woman, in fact I think it’s quite dehumanising to women to equate them to the same worth as embryo.
    This line sounds so pretentious. An embryo has all their gender specific organs, their vital organs and their limbs at 8 weeks. They even move on their own accord at this point. Do you think that there is some kind of ranking system for life? Do you have a list like this:
    1.Women
    2. Children
    3. Cats
    4. Fetus
    5. Embryo
    6. Single celled organisms
    7. Men

    SusieBlue wrote: »
    We were asked to trust women and we as a country agreed to do that. If you don’t agree, you don’t have to trust them but you don’t get to impose your opinion on them either.
    We agreed that it’s a private matter between a woman and her doctor so unfortunately your unwanted opinion on her choice is irrelevant.

    There's a difference between trusting women and letting them self-prescribe treatments. Do you think we should let cancer patients choose the type of chemo they get because it's their body, their choice?
    SusieBlue wrote: »
    the referendum is long over and the people have spoken.
    The referendum is over but the fight for the unborn will never end, whether you like it or not. One day we will realise the mistake we made and will rightfully treat all lives as equal.


  • Options
    #96
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,179 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    bfa1509 wrote: »

    There's a difference between trusting women and letting them self-prescribe treatments. Do you think we should let cancer patients choose the type of chemo they get because it's their body, their choice?
    Do you know how GPs work? it is the GP that does the prescribing not the patient.
    bfa1509 wrote: »
    The referendum is over but the fight for the unborn will never end, whether you like it or not. One day we will realise the mistake we made and will rightfully treat all lives as equal.
    not likely in my lifetime.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Deebles McBeebles
    Registered Users Posts: 5,753 ✭✭✭Deebles McBeebles


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    it is possible to estimate how many irish women were having abortions before it was legalised and the numbers dont seem to have increased at all.

    Yeah, I remember seeing the estimations when the 2019 numbers were released alright. You'll never know the full number for any given year obviously but there certainly doesn't seem to be any sort of a jump.


  • Options
    #98
    nolivesmatter
    Registered Users Posts: 886 ✭✭✭nolivesmatter


    uptherebels wrote: »
    There is only one person involved, you can keep your head in the sand about that, the days of you being able to force you views on others is thankfully long gone.

    If you truly don't believe that the life of the unborn is a person then it's you that has your head in the sand. Regardless of whether abortion is right or wrong at least be honest about what it is.


  • Options
    #99
    Quantum Erasure
    Registered Users Posts: 8,207 ✭✭✭Quantum Erasure


    Igotadose wrote: »
    If you want to have an intellectual argument about the 'mess' the #IMPOTUS has done very little about, you might want to read a few books. Ones that mention George W. Bush's administration and its role in the middle east conflicts. ..

    What's the impotus?


  • Options
    #100
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    bfa1509 wrote: »
    This line sounds so pretentious. An embryo has all their gender specific organs, their vital organs and their limbs at 8 weeks. They even move on their own accord at this point. Do you think that there is some kind of ranking system for life? Do you have a list like this:
    1.Women
    2. Children
    3. Cats
    4. Fetus
    5. Embryo
    6. Single celled organisms
    7. Men




    There's a difference between trusting women and letting them self-prescribe treatments. Do you think we should let cancer patients choose the type of chemo they get because it's their body, their choice?


    The referendum is over but the fight for the unborn will never end, whether you like it or not. One day we will realise the mistake we made and will rightfully treat all lives as equal.

    I can only hope you take the same interest in fighting for the rights and wellbeing of born children who are living in horrific conditions and circumstances throughout the world today.

    The referendum is over and your position wasn’t shared with the majority of Irish citizens. If you are against abortion they aren’t compulsory so you can continue to live your life as you did before.
    The women who need a choice now finally have one, and I live in hope that people who share your beliefs will never be able to impose them on the lives of another woman or couple again.
    Not your womb, not your life, you don’t have to live with the consequences therefore it’s absolutely none of your business and I’ll never be convinced otherwise.

    PS. Abortion is as much as an issue for men as it is women. Most men want their wife, daughter, sister or mother to have a choice if they find themselves having a crisis pregnancy.
    Actual people are more important than potential people, so the list would actually look like:

    1. Men/women/children.
    2. Zygotes/embryos/fetuses/the unborn.

    The end.


  • Options
    #101
    Bonniedog
    Registered Users Posts: 6,665 ✭✭✭Bonniedog


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    I can only hope you take the same interest in fighting for the rights and wellbeing of born children who are living in horrific conditions and circumstances throughout the world today.

    .


    :)

    And you do I suppose?

    In what way?

    I also assume that you apply your rigorous scientific categories to the fact that people who are biological born as one of the two sexes cannot on a whim decide to be the other one?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Colton Odd Strife wrote: »
    The way I see it, Roe v Wade was foisted upon the American people. Abortion was a "value" of the liberal elites, who constituted a large part the court, but it was not a value for the majority of American citizens. The American population began to further recoil from it with the discovery of ultrasound scans, which clearly showed that the fetus very early on developed a head, limbs and a heartbeat; that it was a little human being. The stance on abortion is now one of the key factors in US elections and appointments. t.

    Abortion wasnt an issue for either side before the evangelicals got involved, with Phyllis Schlafly and the like who was anti feminism and the like.

    have a listen to the behind the bastards episodes on her.

    https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-phyllis-schlafly-the-mother-70553705/


  • Options
    #103
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Bonniedog wrote: »
    :)

    And you do I suppose?

    In what way?

    I also assume that you apply your rigorous scientific categories to the fact that people who are biological born as one of the two sexes cannot on a whim decide to be the other one?

    Yes I do actually, but I’m not the one here arguing that zygotes deserve a right to life equal to that of the woman or girl in whose womb it resides (as per the 8th).

    I raised the point cause I can only assume that someone so passionate about the right to life of a zygote would be even more passionate and dedicated to upholding the rights and bettering the circumstances of born children.

    Zero interest in adding the trans debate to this thread, it’s off topic and has no relevance.
    I don’t think that believing actual people are more important than potential people is an obtuse or contrary position to hold.


  • Options
    #104
    nolivesmatter
    Registered Users Posts: 886 ✭✭✭nolivesmatter


    Bonniedog wrote: »
    :)
    SusieBlue wrote:
    I can only hope you take the same interest in fighting for the rights and wellbeing of born children who are living in horrific conditions and circumstances throughout the world today.

    And you do I suppose?

    In what way?

    I also assume that you apply your rigorous scientific categories to the fact that people who are biological born as one of the two sexes cannot on a whim decide to be the other one?

    It's such a cheap deflection tactic. No need to try to make people look bad by inferring things you have no proof of. This is a thread about abortion, just stick to the topic.


  • Options
    #105
    Bonniedog
    Registered Users Posts: 6,665 ✭✭✭Bonniedog


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Yes I do actually, .

    What do you do?


  • Options
    #106
    uptherebels
    Registered Users Posts: 1,586 ✭✭✭uptherebels


    nolivesmatter wrote: »
    If you truly don't believe that the life of the unborn is a person then it's you that has your head in the sand. Regardless of whether abortion is right or wrong at least be honest about what it is.

    People have rights, if a foetus was a person, it would have the same rights as every other person. The 8th wouldn't have been needed. This isn't difficult to grasp.


  • Options
    #107
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    Bonniedog wrote: »
    This is what passes for leftie "intellectual" argument is it?

    Would you not be better off reading a few books?

    As for the war thing, Trump the "war monger" has not started any new war. He did clean up the mess left by the Clinton/Obama gang. Vietnam US involvement was begun by JFK and continued by Johnson. They were Democrats by the way.

    It was ended by Nixon. He was a conservative.

    Anything at all happen in the 8 years between Clinton and Obama? No? 8 years of total peace in America and around the world?


  • Options
    #108
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,179 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nolivesmatter wrote: »
    It's such a cheap deflection tactic. No need to try to make people look bad by inferring things you have no proof of. This is a thread about abortion, just stick to the topic.

    there is no further discussion to be had on abortion. that seam was well mined during the abortion debate. your side lost.


  • Options
    #109
    nolivesmatter
    Registered Users Posts: 886 ✭✭✭nolivesmatter


    uptherebels wrote: »
    People have rights, if a foetus was a person, it would have the same rights as every other person. The 8th wouldn't have been needed. This isn't difficult to grasp.

    Oh, well that settles that so. Everything that was ever legal was right and illegal was wrong so. Sure if you should have rights, you would have rights.


  • Options
    #110
    nolivesmatter
    Registered Users Posts: 886 ✭✭✭nolivesmatter


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    there is no further discussion to be had on abortion. that seam was well mined during the abortion debate. your side lost.

    It wasn't my side. And there's always room for discussion.


  • Options
    #111
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,179 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    nolivesmatter wrote: »
    It wasn't my side. And there's always room for discussion.

    of course it is your side. you are anti-abortion, no? and there really isn't anything new to say on the subject. we have had 10s of thousands of posts on the subject already.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    nolivesmatter
    Registered Users Posts: 886 ✭✭✭nolivesmatter


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    of course it is your side. you are anti-abortion, no? and there really isn't anything new to say on the subject. we have had 10s of thousands of posts on the subject already.

    You're both claiming to know what I support while simultaneously asking me. Let not make assumptions about one another.

    If you feel it's all been covered and there's nothing new to say that's fine but not everyone agrees with that.


  • Options
    #113
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users Posts: 16,115 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    bfa1509 wrote: »
    1.Women
    2. Children
    3. Cats
    4. Fetus
    5. Embryo
    6. Single celled organisms
    7. Men

    Your list might be:
    1. Men
    2. Dogs
    3. The unborn
    4. ...
    5. Cattle
    6. Pigs
    7. Women


  • Options
    #114
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Bonniedog wrote: »
    What do you do?

    Again, I’m not the one fighting for zygotes and women to be given an equal right to life.
    So I don’t really feel compelled to answer you when regardless of my answer you’ll probably just scoff at it, and you’re clearly only interested in muddying the waters of the conversation by bringing up trans issues and partially quoting me when I’m going to the effort of replying to you.


  • Options
    #115
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users Posts: 17,508 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    bfa1509 wrote: »
    This line sounds so pretentious. An embryo has all their gender specific organs, their vital organs and their limbs at 8 weeks. They even move on their own accord at this point. Do you think that there is some kind of ranking system for life? Do you have a list like this:
    1.Women
    2. Children
    3. Cats
    4. Fetus
    5. Embryo
    6. Single celled organisms
    7. Men

    When I read uninformed nonsense like this, it makes me think that perhaps pro lifers don't disagree with the pro choice position; they probably just don't understand it.

    My girlfriend recently gave birth to our second child. If we had a problem with the pregnancy and had to choose between my girlfriend's life and the baby's, you bet your ass we'd choose my girlfriend's life. My girlfriend's life is more important to all than any unborn child (there's already a living child that benefits from having its mother around). But this flippant 'ranking system' comes across as little more than a lame attempt to belittle choices some parents have to make in unfortunate circumstances.

    I'd love to think that posters like this aren't that disrespectful and simply don't understand what why one would be pro choice, but I just don't know.


  • Options
    #116
    osarusan
    Registered Users Posts: 16,560 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Mr. CooL ICE wrote: »
    But this flippant 'ranking system' comes across as little more than a lame attempt to belittle choices some parents have to make in unfortunate circumstances.
    Inclusion of 'men' at the bottom of the list tells you all you need to know about this particular victimhood complex.


  • Options
    #117
    nolivesmatter
    Registered Users Posts: 886 ✭✭✭nolivesmatter


    Mr. CooL ICE wrote: »
    When I read uninformed nonsense like this, it makes me think that perhaps pro lifers don't disagree with the pro choice position; they probably just don't understand it.

    My girlfriend recently gave birth to our second child. If we had a problem with the pregnancy and had to choose between my girlfriend's life and the baby's, you bet your ass we'd choose my girlfriend's life. My girlfriend's life is more important to all than any unborn child (there's already a living child that benefits from having its mother around). But this flippant 'ranking system' comes across as little more than a lame attempt to belittle choices some parents have to make in unfortunate circumstances.

    I'd love to think that posters like this aren't that disrespectful and simply don't understand what why one would be pro choice, but I just don't know.

    What's uninformed? The first part of their post is accurate, but the list is clearly facetious in response to a perceived lack of regard for unborn life. And I doubt you'll find many or any on here that oppose your hypothetical scenario with you're girlfriend. Almost everyone supports abortion where it is medically necessary.


  • Options
    #118
    Gervais08
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Gervais08


    nolivesmatter wrote: »
    What's uninformed? The first part of their post is accurate, but the list is clearly facetious in response to a perceived lack of regard for unborn life. And I doubt you'll find many or any on here that oppose your hypothetical scenario with you're girlfriend. Almost everyone supports abortion where it is medically necessary.

    FYI the list is:

    1 People
    2. Stem cells
    3. Fertilised ova
    4. All other cells


  • Options
    #119
    nolivesmatter
    Registered Users Posts: 886 ✭✭✭nolivesmatter


    Gervais08 wrote: »
    FYI the list is:

    1 People
    2. Stem cells
    3. Fertilised ova
    4. All other cells

    That gets tricky though when you have to draw the line for when a fertilized ovary becomes a baby/person.
    I'm not pushing you for that answer by the way.


  • Options
    #120
    Gervais08
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,612 ✭✭✭Gervais08


    nolivesmatter wrote: »
    That gets tricky though when you have to draw the line for when a fertilized ovary becomes a baby/person.
    I'm not pushing you for that answer by the way.

    To my mind (and this isn’t exact as I’m no doctor) at 22 weeks when the brain stem is fully formed and the foetus can make deliberate movements.

    In a perfect world though I’d prefer abortions only to be performed pharmaceutically, up to 9/10 weeks.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,338 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    It's pointless Pete - people don't believe it's "another human being's life involved" until it has passed through the birth canal

    I can only think of about three people I have ever come across who hold that view. Perhaps you can enlighten me with examples from this forum of people who hold it? I am sure such people are out there but not in any significant numbers.

    One of the three was on this forum but it turned out he was seemingly only contriving to be a dishonest "Poe" of the pro choice position and conveniently when the referendum looked like it was going to start being a thing he flipped from this extreme to the opposite extreme of being pretty much against nearly all abortions ever. Though his arguments for that position were no less absurd after the flip.

    No, the reality is nearly all pro choice people I have encountered ascribe humanity to the process significantly before any birth canal passage. The near totality of them doing so somewhere in the region of 16 to 24 weeks of development (in my experience).

    So, citations needed I think because your claim here seems to be at odds with my own experience. Not just my experience either but it seems the majority of choice based abortion happens consistently in that time frame REGARDLESS of whether the jurisdiction in question has laws entirely against abortion, has laws allowing it within set time frames, or has laws more open ended like in Canada with theoretically no time frames.

    So not only do peoples beliefs not seem to line up with what you claim above.... their actions do not either.
    bfa1509 wrote: »
    This line sounds so pretentious. An embryo has all their gender specific organs, their vital organs and their limbs at 8 weeks.

    I am glad your first sentence so honestly represents your second. That level of self awareness shows potential for progress. Well done.

    The useful question then to ask is what moral relevance have organs in isolation? A corpse and a mannequinn have limbs too for example. So what? We do not mediate moral and ethical concern on limbs. A human PERSON born without limbs has, and damn well should have, all the same rights as as person born with all of them. Siamese Twins born SHARING limbs and organs do not have half the moral and ethical concern as "normal" twins either.

    Limbs and organs are simply not relevant to moral and ethical philosophy in my view. Nor have I seen a reason as to why they should be.
    bfa1509 wrote: »
    Do you think that there is some kind of ranking system for life? Do you have a list like this

    Actually I think most people do yes. I suspect if you are honest about it you do too. For example I think if most people were running from a burning building and they could save one of two boxes, that nearly all people would make the same choices when told what is in the boxes.

    If one had a cat and one had a monkey, I think most people would save the monkey. If one had a dog and one had a gerbil, I think most people would save the dog. In fact I think you can push the arithmetic on this too. If one had a monkey and one had 20 cats..... or 1 billion single cell organisms......... my suspicion is the monkey will STILL be the one saved.

    And I suspect I know WHY this is so too. And the reason for it is EXACTLY the same reason why I have no moral and ethical concern for a 12 week old fetus.
    bfa1509 wrote: »
    Do you think we should let cancer patients choose the type of chemo they get because it's their body, their choice?

    Errrrrrrr..... we already do!?! We offer cancer patients a range of treatment options and they are entirely free to choose which one they want or...... in fact...... to refuse any and all treatment....... PERCISELY because it is their body. It is their choice.

    Foot in mouth often?
    bfa1509 wrote: »
    The referendum is over but the fight for the unborn will never end, whether you like it or not. One day we will realise the mistake we made and will rightfully treat all lives as equal.

    And I look forward to the next "fight". I hope THIS time your side comes up with some actual arguments for affording moral and ethical concern to 12 week old fetuses. You guys failed to last time. But I remain, as always, agog and open. All ears.


Advertisement