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

The Students' Union & Abortion

Options
2456789

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Kopf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 681 ✭✭✭Kopf


    ****, RUN, BOSTON'S GOT YOU NOW

    Seriously, Joe, what's your perverse fixation with personal details?


  • Options
    #33
    ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 760 ✭✭✭ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI


    Boston wrote: »
    Has Holy ever had an abortion?

    Creepy and weird.


  • Options
    #34
    Bartron Prime
    Closed Accounts Posts: 309 ✭✭Bartron Prime


    ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI wrote: »
    Pro-choice on abortion is a neutral stance...

    Not in a debate as loaded as this one. The act of acknowledging it as an option by providing information is regarded as anathema and morally reprehensible by some groups. The infamous SPUC case was based on the fact that information was provided. The three groups (TCDSU, UCDSU and USI) didn't 'encourage' or 'always recommend' abortions but they made the information accessible.

    The abortion debate is, in Ireland, often an all-or-nothing argument. You either provide no information on it and are dead against or you provide information and support its legalisation. Nobody's mind is ever changed by a debate as tensions tend to run high and opinions are very fixed.

    What the stance is, while not in my opinion neutral, is not zealous. It recognises it as a legitimate option but recognises other options too.


  • Options
    #35
    AlanSparrowhawk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 485 ✭✭AlanSparrowhawk


    I've changed my mind to largely agree with the consensus that pro-choice is the correct stance to have. Although I can understand why when a pro-life status quo was broken by an individual with an obvious pro-choice agenda and chip on his/her shoulder came into office it was looking like an individual was trying to misrepresent the student's stance.

    I actually think abortion is the worst event to experience as a college undergrad, worse than rape and losing a close family member. Although I say that having not experienced any of those tragedies. Therefore, if only one person out of the entire student body finds support in the SU's offices when experiencing this ultimatum I think the pro-choice stance has been worth its while.


  • Options
    #36
    Señor Juárez
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,388 ✭✭✭Señor Juárez


    I agree with ZVZ's post on pro choiceness. A welfare officer who expresses a loud opinion on the matter in any direction will, as AlanSparrowhawk says, be seen as betraying the conglomorate stance.

    disclaimer: I am pro choice, but would personally not opt for abortion to resolve an unwanted pregnancy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    EGaffney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 288 ✭✭EGaffney


    ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI wrote: »
    Surely pro-choice logically is a neutral position. If you want information on abortion, you can get it. If you want information on other alternatives, such as keeping the baby, or having it put up for adoption, you can get that too. You won't be pushed in either direction.

    Compare to either of the possible non-neutral positions, always pushing towards getting an abortion, or always saying you should not get an abortion.

    Pro-choice on abortion is a neutral stance, how can people not understand this, they must be thick, thick, thick as planks.

    No. One may as well say that advertising murder trips to a country that allows murder would be the "neutral stance" on that issue. In this country, we have laws against abortion, so promoting it is a political statement about one's desired stance in law. It only makes sense if you are taking the word "neutral" and bringing it to Mad Philosophical Thought Experiment Land, where forced abortions is the opposite to no abortions (not the advocacy that you describe, which is nothing to do with the usual meaning of "pro-choice", so it distorts the issue). If I am as thick as a plank, you are too clever by half.


  • Options
    #38
    ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 760 ✭✭✭ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI


    Bartron Prime wrote: »
    Not in a The act of acknowledging it as an option by providing information is regarded as anathema and morally reprehensible by some groups.

    So what? Just because they're on the ridiculous extremes does not change the fact that logically speaking, pro-choice is a neutral stance.

    "you're interested in abortion? cool, here's a brochure"
    "you're interested in keeping it? cool, here's a brochure"
    Bartron Prime wrote: »
    What the stance is, while not in my opinion neutral, is not zealous. It recognises it as a legitimate option but recognises other options too.

    I think that makes it neutral.

    Really, if I were arguing in say Iran, that "people should be free to have their own religion, or if they so chose, be free to have no religion, I don't care either way what people do", would you argue that that is not neutral?

    Would the fact that there would be some angry ayatollahs out to have my head chopped off change the fact that my point of view is essentially neutral? Does their extremism change what my point of view is?


  • Options
    #39
    Señor Juárez
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,388 ✭✭✭Señor Juárez


    The difference here is, nobody is pro murder.

    Are you a PD, by any chance? Your debate methodology reeks of PD.


  • Options
    #40
    EGaffney
    Closed Accounts Posts: 288 ✭✭EGaffney


    Señor Juárez wrote: »
    The difference here is, nobody is pro murder.

    Are you a PD, by any chance? Your debate methodology reeks of PD.

    The state of Ireland classifies abortion as murder. I am sure plenty of people are pro-abortion.

    Are you being ad hominem, by any chance? Your debate methodology reeks of being ad hominem.


  • Options
    #41
    Boston
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,163 ✭✭✭✭Boston


    No it doesn't. Abortions aren't even illegal here, the criteria for getting one is simply highly selective.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Kopf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 681 ✭✭✭Kopf


    EGaffney wrote: »
    Mad Philosophical Thought Experiment Land

    Having read that in your voice, I'm desperately looking for an electric drill to off myself with


  • Options
    #43
    Pet
    Registered Users Posts: 4,579 ✭✭✭Pet


    EGaffney wrote: »
    No. One may as well say that advertising murder trips to a country that allows murder would be the "neutral stance" on that issue. In this country, we have laws against abortion, so promoting it is a political statement about one's desired stance in law. It only makes sense if you are taking the word "neutral" and bringing it to Mad Philosophical Thought Experiment Land, where forced abortions is the opposite to no abortions (not the advocacy that you describe, which is nothing to do with the usual meaning of "pro-choice", so it distorts the issue). If I am as thick as a plank, you are too clever by half.
    Ding ding ding ding ding! I was wondering how long it would take before someone mentioned the word "murder". Thanks, Mr Gaffney, whoever you are.

    Do you realise, though, that people can and will travel to the UK for abortions? Or just have them at home, after a trip to their local pharmacy [c.f. http://www.womenonweb.org/]. Fair enough, you have your views on the subject, but objecting to the availability of information is rather Orwellian, don't you think?


  • Options
    #44
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 16,720 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Thread split from TCDSU website thread.

    EVERYONE - enough with the childish bitching at each other.

    This is an emotive topic for all sides in the argument so keep that in mind before posting. Any personal abuse will result in a ban.


  • Options
    #45
    Señor Juárez
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,388 ✭✭✭Señor Juárez


    Pet, I must say, a website where you can order abortion pills does unnerve me a little.

    Then again, it is unfortunate that it comes down to needing this. Their vague reassurances of an online consultation with a real doctor probably mean it's better than a nameless blind ordering system.


    I have to wonder though, is it legal to import what probably counts as prescription medication into Ireland?


  • Options
    #46
    ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI
    Closed Accounts Posts: 760 ✭✭✭ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI


    Señor Juárez wrote: »
    Pet, I must say, a website where you can order abortion pills does unnerve me a little.

    Why?


  • Options
    #47
    Halla Basin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 316 ✭✭Halla Basin


    Alls I'm sayin' is, the pro-life crowd are IDIOTS who don't even know what life is.


  • Options
    #48
    p1akuw47h5r3it
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,001 ✭✭✭p1akuw47h5r3it


    Halla Basin wrote: »
    Alls I'm sayin' is, the pro-life crowd are IDIOTS who don't even know what life is.

    Wow nice argumentitive skills you got there well done.


  • Options
    #49
    Halla Basin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 316 ✭✭Halla Basin


    DanDan6592 wrote: »
    Wow nice argumentitive skills you got there well done.

    mahahaha ad hominem

    Nice arguing skills there, ma boy.


  • Options
    #50
    AlanSparrowhawk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 485 ✭✭AlanSparrowhawk


    Defining what is 'alive' what isn't and what is a life aren't easy things. Halla Basin is your opinion as simple that all foetuses are not life?


  • Options
    #51
    Halla Basin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 316 ✭✭Halla Basin


    AlanSparrowhawk wrote: »
    Defining what is 'alive' what isn't and what is a life aren't easy things. Halla Basin is your opinion as simple that all foetuses are not life?

    A newborn baby has less brain activity than any fully grown primate or dolphin. But we don't need to let it get that far. I'd hazard there isn't a woman alive in the developed world who hasn't noticed they're pregnant after three months (and then decided if they want to keep it or not). If I had to pander to the pro-life side, I still can't see why they would object to abortion pre-11 weeks, before the embyro's heart has started beating. That's mostly an arbitrary line for the sake of a line, though.

    EDIT: And of course, a foetus that presents a potential risk to the mother's life should be aborted immediately, no matter how far along it is.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    AlanSparrowhawk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 485 ✭✭AlanSparrowhawk


    Halla Basin wrote: »
    A newborn baby has less brain activity than any fully grown primate or dolphin

    What's this got to do with anything? Anyway, judging by your two posts on this subject it's obvious you haven't thought about this at the level of depth it requires to actually have an opinion worth mentioning in public. You should go and think about it and come back in a week or two so we can actually discuss it.


  • Options
    #53
    Liquorice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 849 ✭✭✭Liquorice


    I hope all the lads who are RARRGH NO ABORTION either aren't doing the horizontal tango with anyone or else have agreements with the lassie over what will happen if your seed takes seed. I'm all for fathers' rights and I'm sure that a majority of college boys would share the sacrifice in money, academic performance and social life, but at the end of the day it's her body that's going to go through nine months of hardship (unless of course you become a punching bag for the hormonal she-hulk inside every pregnant woman). She can't do a runner from her own womb six months in if you decide to. Just make sure you're on the same page before the bangin' begins, s'all.


  • Options
    #54
    Halla Basin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 316 ✭✭Halla Basin


    AlanSparrowhawk wrote: »
    What's this got to do with anything?

    It's got everything to do with it. Without any real thought processes going on, that is, feelings, sentience, whatever, what's the real difference between deleting a living thing and an inanimate thing, loik?


  • Options
    #55
    AlanSparrowhawk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 485 ✭✭AlanSparrowhawk


    Halla Basin wrote: »
    It's got everything to do with it. Without any real thought processes going on, that is, feelings, sentience, whatever, what's the real difference between deleting a living thing and an inanimate thing, loik?

    I'm going to ignore this, I've given you a week to read; use it.


  • Options
    #56
    Halla Basin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 316 ✭✭Halla Basin


    Right, instead of wasting a week, why don't you tell me why that was stupid now.


  • Options
    #57
    AlanSparrowhawk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 485 ✭✭AlanSparrowhawk


    Liquorice wrote: »
    I hope all the lads who are RARRGH NO ABORTION either aren't doing the horizontal tango with anyone or else have agreements with the lassie over what will happen if your seed takes seed. I'm all for fathers' rights and I'm sure that a majority of college boys would share the sacrifice in money, academic performance and social life, but at the end of the day it's her body that's going to go through nine months of hardship (unless of course you become a punching bag for the hormonal she-hulk inside every pregnant woman). She can't do a runner from her own womb six months in if you decide to. Just make sure you're on the same page before the bangin' begins, s'all.

    I'm not sure entirely what your point is. You just seem to be trying to take a swipe at the entire male gender. I do agree with the sentiment, the 'burden' of unplanned pregnancy ultimately lies with the female. However, whether you're 17 or 34 I think everyone involved in sex is aware that there are plenty of adequate contraception out there. In my experience, it isn't unusual for college couples to be using the pill in conjunction with condoms to allow for missing pills/ burst condoms.

    As a last resort, any sort of unexpected unprotected sex or times of uncertainty can be remedied, quite easily imo, with the 'morning after pill'.

    Pregnancy is always a risk and consequence of sex between 2 virile fertile young things but we all know this.


  • Options
    #58
    Liquorice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 849 ✭✭✭Liquorice


    AlanSparrowhawk wrote: »
    I'm not sure entirely what your point is. You just seem to be trying to take a swipe at the entire male gender.

    It was completely not my intention to sound like I was taking a swipe at anybody, I even pointed out that most guys would probably behave like perfect gentlemen and responsible partners and parents-to-be in the case of unplanned pregnancy. Sorry for any offence caused! I just noticed that plenty of lads here seemed to have strong opinions on abortion & I'm just curious as to whether they would refuse to have a sexual relationship with someone who isn't also against abortion, or whether they'd trust contraception enough in such a situation, or if they're totally celibate, or what.


  • Options
    #59
    AlanSparrowhawk
    Closed Accounts Posts: 485 ✭✭AlanSparrowhawk


    Well being young men under the age of 25 aren't they all completely reckless? Probably just go with the flow and stick it in where ever they get a chance. Think about the consequences later.


  • Options
    #60
    Liquorice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 849 ✭✭✭Liquorice


    AlanSparrowhawk wrote: »
    Well being young men under the age of 25 aren't they all completely reckless? Probably just go with the flow and stick it in where ever they get a chance. Think about the consequences later.

    Offence is not my intention and I really don't understand where you're picking up this feminazism on my part. Again, I'm sorry for any offence caused, but if you're not accepting my apology that's fine. My sentiment was that if you're seriously against abortion, you're best off not banging someone who isn't. It wasn't 'boys are dumb, let's abort their seed cos they clearly don't know how to guard against impregnating us'.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Mark200
    Registered Users Posts: 3,536 ✭✭✭Mark200


    Halla Basin wrote: »
    I'd hazard there isn't a woman alive in the developed world who hasn't noticed they're pregnant after three months (and then decided if they want to keep it or not).

    That's not true. I know of someone who didn't know she was pregnant until very shortly before the birth. She didn't get the usual 'symptoms', and she was somewhat chubby at the time (not overly fat though). You'd think these things just don't happen, but they do.

    Anyway, I think there's nothing wrong with the SU giving help with a pregnancy regardless of the girl's decision.


Advertisement