Ultrasound Group Banned?

LovelyHurling

Not have I not never thought of not never ever doing that. Never.

You murder the language.

Syth

John_C wrote:

I think it's the combination of a tripple negative with a statement that he might not be able to say anything.

D'oh. Now that I think about it, that statement should be negated to form "No-one has the right not to ever be offended".

LovelyHurling

Dont worry syth got youre point was just stimulating the micturition reflex (i was taking the piss dude!!) Seriously, point taken. if we had a judge, at this point somebody smart would say lets hear from the judges. Since this is boards, forget it.... And the debate goes marching on-n.

Syth

I just like being accurate and I'm quite pedantic.

The abortion debate will almost never be over. It's fascinating though.

panda100

Sorry guys just want to say my last 0.00001cent on the matter!
Just in relation to blush's particularly passionate post.

Your right blush I have no idea what the person sitting beide me has gone through or is going through at the moment . I appreciate that some women have to have abortions be they for medical or social reasons. However.I think for blush to insinuate that those posters would have caused so much distress for someone that they would consider taking their life with your refrence to the flyover is ludicrous and ridiculous.

People are offended everyday by posters in UCD.Everytime I walk through campus I feel a bit more down about myself when I see c+e posters with beautiful,stunning women on them. Does this make me feel depressed?yes Do these posters offend me by viewing women as sex objects? yes,greatly so. Do i wish these posters weren't allowed up? Yes. However I appreciate and accept that some people in UCD want these posters up and want to go to what I think are the degrading and sex fuelled events that they advertise.

However,this is off the point of want I was saying in my original post.My point was not to discuss whether this group should have been allowed on campus or not but rather the left involvment in ucd to protest against this group.As some of you know I am left wing myself and have been a member of labour youth for the last four years in Limerick.However,i am continuously embarrased to say I am left in UCD due to the behaviour of so many of my comrades.
Can they not see how they stifle the freedom of speech constantly on campus by only hearing their own views and only allowing their voices to be heared. Then to come up with these sort of pitiful excuses in order for the pro lifers not to have their right to speak:

Angel of fire:
These people are Scum and they must be Smashed.
one of them pushed me over on the ground. i was traumatised for a long time afterwards

darobot:
These right wing cvnts have no place being on campus.

Lovelyhurling:
Theyre nutcases. I cant say all of them are but in general... theyre nutcases

Vainglory:

I have heard from countless, varied sources that they have a history of violently disrupting meetings

Will you listen to yourselves lads!Come on i've never heared a bigger bunch of generalisations in my life. People would have a lot more repect for our left wing views if you didnt come up with these sort of pathetic,weak and quite frankly disturbing views of pro lifers.

And Vainglory just out of intrest.If I was to attend one of these pro-life marches and stopped a van full of women heading over to England to get abortions and got arrested for it.Do you really,really think our union as it stands at the moment would pay for my £500 get out of jail free card?

Vainglory

panda100 wrote:

Sorry guys just want to say my last 0.00001cent on the matter!
Just in relation to blush's particularly passionate post.

Your right blush I have no idea what the person sitting beide me has gone through or is going through at the moment . I appreciate that some women have to have abortions be they for medical or social reasons. However.I think for blush to insinuate that those posters would have caused so much distress for someone that they would consider taking their life with your refrence to the flyover is ludicrous and ridiculous.

People are offended everyday by posters in UCD.Everytime I walk through campus I feel a bit more down about myself when I see c+e posters with beautiful,stunning women on them. Does this make me feel depressed?yes Do these posters offend me by viewing women as sex objects? yes,greatly so. Do i wish these posters weren't allowed up? Yes. However I appreciate and accept that some people in UCD want these posters up and want to go to what I think are the degrading and sex fuelled events that they advertise.

However,this is off the point of want I was saying in my original post.My point was not to discuss whether this group should have been allowed on campus or not but rather the left involvment in ucd to protest against this group.As some of you know I am left wing myself and have been a member of labour youth for the last four years in Limerick.However,i am continuously embarrased to say I am left in UCD due to the behaviour of so many of my comrades.
Can they not see how they stifle the freedom of speech constantly on campus by only hearing their own views and only allowing their voices to be heared. Then to come up with these sort of pitiful excuses in order for the pro lifers not to have their right to speak:

Angel of fire:
These people are Scum and they must be Smashed.
one of them pushed me over on the ground. i was traumatised for a long time afterwards

darobot:
These right wing cvnts have no place being on campus.

Lovelyhurling:
Theyre nutcases. I cant say all of them are but in general... theyre nutcases

Vainglory:

I have heard from countless, varied sources that they have a history of violently disrupting meetings

Will you listen to yourselves lads!Come on i've never heared a bigger bunch of generalisations in my life. People would have a lot more repect for our left wing views if you didnt come up with these sort of pathetic,weak and quite frankly disturbing views of pro lifers.

And Vainglory just out of intrest.If I was to attend one of these pro-life marches and stopped a van full of women heading over to England to get abortions and got arrested for it.Do you really,really think our union as it stands at the moment would pay for my £500 get out of jail free card?

Well, as the argument behind paying Dara's (60 euro) fine was that he was acting in tandem with union policy (we have an anti-deportations policy), it wouldn't really work for that situation as the union doesn't have a pro-life policy.

LovelyHurling

panda100 wrote:

People are offende People would have a lot more repect for our left wing views if you didnt come up with these sort of pathetic,weak and quite frankly disturbing views of pro lifers.

They werent views on pro lifers they were views on YD. YD are pro life, but a poor portrayal of pro lifers.

How can this even be debatable? It makes as much sense as that time that mrs doyle put jam on dougal's sandwich which didnt make sense at all because he doesnt even eat jam sandwiches.

Syth

LovelyHurling wrote:

How can this even be debatable?]

Because to me it looks like people want to censor or support censoring of a group that has different political views from their own while claiming that this is justified because it upsets them, and we all must be protected from the other group's harmful thoughts.

pretty*monster

Syth wrote:

Because to me it looks like people want to censor or support censoring of a group that has different political views from their own while claiming that this is justified because it upsets them, and we all must be protected from the other group's harmful thoughts.

Is it not obviouse to you that if I or anyone else who objected to the YD talk were interested in only silencing the opinions of those who disagreed with us there would be a protest at every meeting of ucd's LifeSoc.

Our objection the the event was based on Youth Defences methods and history of violence. Simple as.

panda100

pretty*monster wrote:

Is it not obviouse to you that if I or anyone else who objected to the YD talk were interested in only silencing the opinions of those who disagreed with us there would be a protest at every meeting of ucd's LifeSoc.

Our objection the the event was based on Youth Defences methods and history of violence. Simple as.

Well then why stop at the YD's.They are most certainly not the only group that have used violence in the past to get their message across. I expect to see you all perched outside every sinn fein meeting from now till the end of term pretty monster if a history of violenve offends you so much.

john^doyle

I'm pro-life because abortion is nasty.

Blush_01

Syth wrote:

Because to me it looks like people want to censor or support censoring of a group that has different political views from their own while claiming that this is justified because it upsets them, and we all must be protected from the other group's harmful thoughts.

That's bullsh!t. I couldn't give a damn what anyone's political views are, as long as they don't shove them down my throat or really upset someone (as opposed to just make someone face an uncomfortable realisation).

pretty*monster

panda100 wrote:

Well then why stop at the YD's.They are most certainly not the only group that have used violence in the past to get their message across. I expect to see you all perched outside every sinn fein meeting from now till the end of term pretty monster if a history of violenve offends you so much.

Ok, if you have to reach for that argument, which is ridiculous (and completely twists what I said) I've as good as won.

Syth

People keep saying these Youth Defence people are violent, yet no-one provides (credible) evidence.

Gah, I'm just very pro-free speech. I think just about any political speech should be allowed. There are much too many examples from history of censoring political groups and it not working out well. I don't trust 'the man' to choose wisely. Power corrupts in my opinion.

www.youthdefence.ie/

It links to something called "Truth TV", which is from YD.

alantc

So?

Homerbeer

I went to same talk in dcu. There was no violence. 2 speakers just spoke, no heckling or anything. At the end they took questions, from prolife and prochoice people even though most of the people there were prolife. I think ucd prolife and prochoice people lost out on this been pulled, always best to hear from first hand experience people instead of some boring politician or proffessor debating the rights and wrongs of irish constitution.

LovelyHurling

Syth wrote:

People keep saying these Youth Defence people are violent, yet no-one provides (credible) evidence.

Gah, I'm just very pro-free speech.

Seriously are you taking the piss? we've entered repetition city

does that mean that dcu is a bit slow seeming as they booked every lecture room on their irish tour under false pretenses!nuig locked the door to them on thursday night!

john^doyle

5.4?? i give you a 10... a straight 10

*uncomfortable silence*

Red Alert

i for one wish it to be written into the union's constitution that any of the officers cannot object to an event simply because it goes against current union policy, save where such event is illegal/racist. abortion is a problem as far as society is concerned - it's a problem for those who do not want it to be there, as well as for those who do want it to be there. such matters need to be debated, as only when people hear both sides can they even say that their view on the matter is considered as opposed to a rant. if such debates offend people then they shouldn't go. as an under-25-male who drives carefully i get offended constantly that my insurance premia are paying for ads who portray male and only male young drivers as death incarnate. does that mean i can/should stop a debate on the causes of road accidents? certainly not.

panda100

pretty*monster wrote:

Ok, if you have to reach for that argument, which is ridiculous (and completely twists what I said) I've as good as won.

Oh yes congrats you've won-huzzah and hurrah for you!:rolleyes:

I feel like i am repeating myself but as it is quite clear from that youth defence link that ultrasound and the yd's while having the same views on abortion are entirely different groups.So you cannot hold this ultrasound group accountable for the yd's action.So if your only reason for protesting against this group is because of their 'supposed' violence in the past you are just tarring all pro-lifer's with the same brush and calling them ALL violent.

I as yet have no idea why they used a false name to hold their talks-however i do not feel we can hold this against them as for weeks they have been advertising their talk via posters and so have not been 'sneaky' or 'underhand' as so many people on here have said they are.If they really wanted to be sneaky about this would they really have so blatantly put up posters everywhere?no,they would have discreetly given out flyers or something.This they have not done so I think they have been quite up front about the motives of their talks via their many posters.

Anyway,all this has reinforced for me is that the way some people have stopped this talk from going ahead is contradictory and shallow.This ultrasound debacle has confirmed to me that i am not going to sit back and watch it happen next year,so as i have been contemplating for a while now, I am 100% definatly going to run for the su this year. P.s I loved the tribune letter red alert!go you

*marie*

Well I went to the talk in Maynooth on Wednesday. I have to say I'm shocked at some of the comments here, there was nothing violent about it. The girl who was talking, her mother had an abortion at 7 and a half months (it's legal for the whole 9 months in the US). They injected some sort of salt into the womb that burns the baby, then the mother gives birth to the dead baby a couple of hours later. This girl (obviously) survived the abortion and now has cerebal palsy as a result of it.

I for one think abortion is wrong, how can it be descibed as anything else but murder? But that is my opinion and I wouldn't go shouting it around or telling other people what they should believe, simple as that.

pretty*monster

Red Alert wrote:

i for one wish it to be written into the union's constitution that any of the officers cannot object to an event simply because it goes against current union policy, save where such event is illegal/racist.QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure that this has been stated somewhere on the thread before, but any of the union officers who were active on this issue were active in a personal capacity in their own time.

panda100

pretty*monster wrote:

Red Alert wrote:

i for one wish it to be written into the union's constitution that any of the officers cannot object to an event simply because it goes against current union policy, save where such event is illegal/racist.QUOTE]

I'm pretty sure that this has been stated somewhere on the thread before, but any of the union officers who were active on this issue were active in a personal capacity in their own time.

yes,we know we have acknowledged this-but there is a difference between protesting and actively trying to stop these talks from going ahead which is what the group of 'protestors' did. And I know it was in her own time etc etc but its pretty bad showing when the education officer prevents the going ahead of these talks.She was not 'protesting' as you call it but tearing down posters and stopped the talk twice form going ahead in UCD.If even our own education officer wont allow the education of others on abortion just because she doesnt believe in it,then i think this does reflect badly on the union,i think that is red alerts point.

Blush_01

Maybe they're just not the right group to educate people? Maybe their approach to the education of people is done in an offensive and disgusting manner? (sorry, cold fingers)

Education is not something there's a problem with, it's the method they take - as far as I can see.