Militant Pro-Choicers in Ireland

Laisurg

Nope, pro life nutjobs are like that mainly because they're religious headcases anyway not because of being pro life, sure they'd probably go gaybashing too if they could get any support for it :rolleyes:

Newsite

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Define life?

Btw my god is a better one than yours and he's pro-choice so maybe they could argue that among themselves while we stay in the real world.

Why do people have abortions?

4leto

OP you are not pro choice.

I am pro choice and what that means is I believe a woman can have an abortion why ever she chooses, no matter the circumstance.

Temptamperu

Newsite wrote: »

Why do people have abortions?

Many different reasons... none of them your business.

Duke Leonal Felmet

Newsite wrote: »

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Violence against dividing cells?

Against life. The reason it's on a par with murder is the total rejection of God, of life, rejection of one of the fundamental reasons we are on this planet and of how we all came to be.

Which 'God' would that be? There are over 3,000 in recorded history.

Chuck Stone

Newsite wrote: »

Why do people have abortions?

I don't know. I've never been in that situation.

Newsite

Temptamperu wrote: »

Many different reasons... none of them your business.

Nice. You're dodging the uncomfortable question though.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

I don't know. I've never been in that situation.

You're dodging it too.

pragmatic1

Newsite wrote: »

Against life. The reason it's on a par with murder is the total rejection of God, of life, rejection of one of the fundamental reasons we are on this planet and of how we all came to be.

Someone call the press. Newsite has discovered the meaning of life.

Chuck Stone

Newsite wrote: »

You're dodging it too.

Wait..

I answer 'I don't know' to the question 'why do people have abortions' and that is dodging the question?

So you expect me to do some interviews with women who've had abortions and give you the general gist of my findings?

?????

mackg

Newsite wrote: »

Nice. You're dodging the uncomfortable question though.



You're dodging it too.

go on so, why do they have them?

Neyite

FinnLizzy wrote: »

I consider myself Pro-Choice, but only if it's a last resort (ie. rape, incest, risk of death) .

See, I dont really understand why it should be allowed in some cases and not in others. An unwanted pregnancy is an unwanted pregnancy and these types of limits dont really make sense.

Should abortion be allowed in cases of alleged rape or incest, or should it only be the ones that resulted in a conviction thus proving that she does in fact qualify for the termination? Should we rush these cases through the courts, so she gets to have her termination within 6 weeks of finding out she was pregnant? how does this affect the alleged rapists right to due process - is six weeks long enough to investigate and put a case together?

Rape cannot be proven by a doctor. They can only prove that sexual activity took place at the time, and record any injuries. What if it was rohypnol and she didnt fight back and does not have vaginal tears or bruising? What happens when rape did in fact occur but the evidence is long gone? Who decides then whether she is telling the truth or not?

Why is she more deserving of a termination than a woman whose contraception failed through no fault of her own? I know many who were put on medication by their doctors and not informed that it would render their contraceptive pill useless. That happened to 3 women I know. But because they had consentual sex they dont get to terminate their equally unwanted pregnancy by the above limits.

This was posted by Nom de Plume in the Ladies Lounge some months ago, and articulates it far better than I ever could:

wrote:

This isn't about the right to life, then. It's not about the foetus at all; it's about the woman, her level of fault, and her comeuppance.

If it's your fault that you got pregnant, you must endure the pregnancy or be termed a murderer. You are not allowed off the hook.

If it's not your fault, because you were raped, you are entitled to an abortion. We won't term you a murderer because, well, you weren't a slut.
In other words, we never really considered it murder; we just use that word to shame the girls we don't like.

old hippy

Newsite wrote: »

Why do people have abortions?

Because they live in the real world and sometimes you have to make tough decisions.

As for mine own situation; as the previous poster said - none of your business.

old hippy

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

Which 'God' would that be? There are over 3,000 in recorded history.

Even more; the Hindu religions gods, deities and demi gods run into millions and even more if you take Shinto etc etc etc

old hippy

Newsite wrote: »

Against life. The reason it's on a par with murder is the total rejection of God, of life, rejection of one of the fundamental reasons we are on this planet and of how we all came to be.

I totally reject god and all his/her/its adherents who speaketh such bobbins unto me.

CarMe

jinxremoving wrote: »

CarMe wrote: »

I would consider myself very much pro choice. In saying this, when I went to buy a pregnancy test just over a year ago I hoped all the way back from the chemist that I wasn't. My mam had just been diagnosed with terminal cancer two days before, I felt at 23 and living in a house share on a pretty low wage and my boyfriend out of work I just felt we weren't ready. It had been my dream to go traveling. However when the test said pregnant 3+ I sat down and was filled with a joyous happiness. I read that my baby was already the size of an Apple pip, so for the rest of my pregnancy became lovingly known as Pip.
I sit here just over a year later with my beautiful daughter and I know abortion was never ever an option for me. She's my everything and I can't possibly imagine my life without her.
In saying that I still believe every woman and man should be entitled to the choice. Women who sneak off without even telling the father-unless it was rape of.corse- sicken me.

Good for you, but I don't see why you're imposing your morals on other womens bodies? I can see why in an ideal situation the couple should talk about a termination together before it happens but the real world doesn't work like that, there will often be other issues at play so prehaps you should keep from juding situations that you don't fully understand. Also 'sicken me' is very condemning to a woman who is making a big, often emotional decision!

Ok I don't think I quite explained myself very well there, there are lots of times where of corse it is the woman's right. I was actually referring to an incident where a man I know desperately wanted a child but when his wife got pregnant she told him she couldn't have it because she no longer loved him and wanted to leave him. He begged her to keep the baby and he would raise the child on his own but she didn't and it destroyed him.
I didn't mean to come off so aggressive it just really bothers me that she had the right to take his own baby away from him.

Newsite

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Wait..

I answer 'I don't know' to the question 'why do people have abortions' and that is dodging the question?

So you expect me to do some interviews with women who've had abortions and give you the general gist of my findings?

?????

mackg wrote: »

go on so, why do they have them?

old hippy wrote: »

Because they live in the real world and sometimes you have to make tough decisions.

As for mine own situation; as the previous poster said - none of your business.

Just asking a simple question and waiting for some replies, is all.

old hippy

Newsite wrote: »

Just asking a simple question and waiting for some replies, is all.

Why don't you ask your god, since he/she/it is apparently all knowing?

Newsite

old hippy wrote: »

Because they live in the real world and sometimes you have to make tough decisions.

As for mine own situation; as the previous poster said - none of your business.

It's fairly clear I'm asking a general question in abstract terms. Not sure how anyone would think I'm asking for the specifics of individual cases involving named people!

old hippy

Newsite wrote: »

It's fairly clear I'm asking a general question in abstract terms. Not sure how anyone would think I'm asking for the specifics of individual cases involving named people!

I see. So are we going to hell again, caller?

thebostoncrab

Newsite wrote: »

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Wait..

I answer 'I don't know' to the question 'why do people have abortions' and that is dodging the question?

So you expect me to do some interviews with women who've had abortions and give you the general gist of my findings?

?????

mackg wrote: »

go on so, why do they have them?

old hippy wrote: »

Because they live in the real world and sometimes you have to make tough decisions.

As for mine own situation; as the previous poster said - none of your business.

Just asking a simple question and waiting for some replies, is all.

And you got plenty of them, so how about you stop dodging the question and give us your view?

And my answer, btw, is that it's not my business to why someone gets an abortion. It's a private, extremely difficult decision to make and one that shouldn't have to be justified to anyone. If "God" had an issues with it that's between him/her/splee and the woman.

Chuck Stone

Newsite wrote: »

Just asking a simple question and waiting for some replies, is all.

A simple question =/= simple answer.


Indeed there are probably a myriad of reasons why someone would have an abortion.

I'm male btw so I guess I'll never truly know why anyone would have an abortion.

My name is URL

Neyite wrote: »

See, I dont really understand why it should be allowed in some cases and not in others. An unwanted pregnancy is an unwanted pregnancy and these types of limits dont really make sense.

I sort of disagree.. limits are vital in any system which aims to run effectively and for the overall benefit of the person. I don't see why just anyone should be allowed opt to have an abortion, at any time, and regardless of circumstance or history. People say they're pro-choice but neglect to take into account the choices of other parties who may be involved in any given situation.

Aishae

Desire not to pass on genetic defects or a disease the mother has
Not ready for a child and contraceptives failed
Not in any kind of financial situation to support a child and it'd be too much to give it up for adoption
Genuinely terrified of pregnancy (like a phobia)
Is in a terrible situation they wouldn't bring a child into
Do not feel remotely mature enough to rear a child
Etc
^some of the reasons given. I've never heard of someone using abortion as an excuse to practice unsafe sex 'ah sure I can have an abortion' - even if an abortion is the right choice for a woman it's an experience they'll never forget and it's not a decision taken lightly.

sensibleken

Newsite wrote: »

Against life. The reason it's on a par with murder is the total rejection of God, of life, rejection of one of the fundamental reasons we are on this planet and of how we all came to be.

thats not true. St Brigit was an abortionist. Pretty sure St Columba was too. And they're saints!

Aurum

I'm just curious as to what a militant pro-choicer actually does? A militant anti-choice person chooses extreme (often violent) methods to prevent people having abortions. A militant pro-choicer…tries to force abortions on pregnant people? Spends time protesting in town holding signs with "seven billion people" written on them, trying to talk women out of going ahead with their pregnancy? Genuinely…what is a militant pro-choice person actually like?

(And I'm amazed no one has brought up the only viable solution to the debate- "Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others".)

Newsite

mackg wrote: »

go on so, why do they have them?

Because people want the freedom to 'fool around' and have rampant sex with whoever they please, and then when a baby is on the horizon it's just an inconvenience to them, and they just get rid of it?

Chuck Stone

Newsite wrote: »

Because people want the freedom to 'fool around' and have rampant sex with whoever they please, and then when a baby is on the horizon it's just an inconvenience to them, and they just get rid of it?

Nun.

AnonoBoy

Newsite wrote: »

Because people want the freedom to 'fool around' and have rampant sex with whoever they please, and then when a baby is on the horizon it's just an inconvenience to them, and they just get rid of it?

Ah yes - everyone that has sex outside of marriage is a godless heathen who will burn for all eternity and has no morals whatsoever. We have abortions for breakfast just for the fun because that's what people who don't believe in God do! :rolleyes:

Ellis Dee

Newsite wrote: »

Because people want the freedom to 'fool around' and have rampant sex with whoever they please, and then when a baby is on the horizon it's just an inconvenience to them, and they just get rid of it?

What is "rampant sex"? And do you know anywhere in Laois that I can get it?:)

Seriously, though, do you really think people who make no effort at all to practice contraception and, if they are women, may not even have the faintest clue who has gotten them pregnant, are likely to make good parents?:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Newsite

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Ah yes - everyone that has sex outside of marriage is a godless heathen who will burn for all eternity and has no morals whatsoever. We have abortions for breakfast just for the fun because that's what people who don't believe in God do! :rolleyes:

What is it with Boards posters and the rolling of eyes?

All the above are your words, not mine.

ash23

Newsite wrote: »

Because people want the freedom to 'fool around' and have rampant sex with whoever they please, and then when a baby is on the horizon it's just an inconvenience to them, and they just get rid of it?

People have abortions because they don't want to be pregnant.

As for the above statement, it really does warrant a :rolleyes:

Sure, we all long for the days where women had to please their husbands and just pop out babies willy nilly, even if they couldn't afford to feed them, house them or if they were physically unable for the toll a pregnancy and birth takes. Back to the good oul days where we were nowt but incubators and sex toys for our husbands.
Back in the days where we couldn't eat meat on Fridays, babies went to limbo when they died and unmarried mothers were flung into workhouses. Oh how we long for that time of innocence and decency before people had rampant sex and sex was not to be enjoyed under any circumstances! no pleasure allowed, for procreation only!

Newsite

Ellis Dee wrote: »

What is "rampant sex"? And do you know anywhere in Laois that I can get it?:)

Seriously, though, do you really think people who make no effort at all to practice contraception and, if they are women, may not even have the faintest clue who has gotten them pregnant, are likely to make good parents?:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Right yes, so the answer you're giving to my question above is - yes. You've just proved the point I was making.

AnonoBoy

Newsite wrote: »

What is it with Boards posters and the rolling of eyes?

All the above are your words, not mine.

Of course they're my words. If they were yours I would have quoted you.

I included the rolleyes to indicate sarcasm. I felt that it was necessary as I've often found that people with views similar to yours are completely unable to detect sarcasm even in its most obvious form.

Newsite

Newsite wrote: »

Against life. The reason it's on a par with murder is the total rejection of God, of life, rejection of one of the fundamental reasons we are on this planet and of how we all came to be.

Any argument you make becomes null and void after mention of your God, which might I point out you didn't answer a previous poster which one it is. God is not proven, zygotes, blastocyts and morulas are, for example.

Newsite wrote: »

Why do people have abortions?

Because they can (well they can if they leave Ireland to do so). Can't really see what it's got to do with you though. You're not going to have an abortion so why does it concern you what someone does with a ball of cell's in HER womb? I don't discriminate against you for losing brain cells everytime you spout God crap.

Newsite wrote: »

Because people want the freedom to 'fool around' and have rampant sex with whoever they please, and then when a baby is on the horizon it's just an inconvenience to them, and they just get rid of it?

Are you suggesting women use abortion as a form of contraception? Also having sex with whoever you want, whenever you want is neither dirty nor whatever else you think it is. It's just sex get over it. If a woman thinks a baby is an inconvienience then who are you to say she can't get rid of it? It wouldn't be my choice but I hate to live in a world when people can dictate what happens to other people's bodies.

Ellis Dee

Newsite wrote: »

Right yes, so the answer you're giving to my question above is - yes. You've just proved the point I was making.

Glad I made you happy.;) I'm sure you have a terribly important point to make; if only I knew what it was.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Incidentally, you still haven't answered either of the two questions I asked in my last post. :)

I Heart Internet

4leto wrote: »

OP you are not pro choice.

I am pro choice and what that means is I believe a woman can have an abortion why ever she chooses, no matter the circumstance.

Even up to a day before birth? Last minute change of plan? No matter what the circumstances? Really?

Why do people have abortions? Because it's a way to correct a perceived mistake by them. I can't see how that's right because I regard it as human life. It's a fact thought that some/many don't share that view.

Newsite

Starla_o0 wrote: »

Any argument you make becomes null and void after mention of your God, which might I point out you didn't answer a previous poster which one it is. God is not proven, zygotes, blastocyts and morulas are, for example.

I didn't answer as there is only one God. The proof of Whom is all around us.

Starla_o0 wrote: »

Because they can (well they can if they leave Ireland to do so). Can't really see what it's got to do with you though. You're not going to have an abortion so why does it concern you what someone does with a ball of cell's in HER womb? I don't discriminate against you for losing brain cells everytime you spout God crap.

Eloquent. Hate the message don't you?

Starla_o0 wrote: »

Are you suggesting women use abortion as a form of contraception? Also having sex with whoever you want, whenever you want is neither dirty nor whatever else you think it is. It's just sex get over it. If a woman thinks a baby is an inconvienience then who are you to say she can't get rid of it? It wouldn't be my choice but I hate to live in a world when people can dictate what happens to other people's bodies.

All I'm saying is that the Bible says 'thou shalt not kill'. And for anyone who claims to be a Christian, those words are for you.

Fundamentally what I am saying is that if people did follow the Word of God, there wouldn't be any abortion. No guilt, no suffering, no murder.

But people love themselves and their own lives more than obeying God (and thus having eternal life). Hence, to allow people indulge themselves, we've come up with monstrous practices like abortion.

I'm not here to have an argument with anyone. But these are the standards of God, the standards all Christians are called to adhere to. If you don't, then you can't call yourself Christian.

People hate the truth though.

Good night all.

ash23

Newsite wrote: »

I didn't answer as there is only one God. The proof of Whom is all around us.



Eloquent. Hate the message don't you?



All I'm saying is that the Bible says 'thou shalt not kill'. And for anyone who claims to be a Christian, those words are for you.

Fundamentally what I am saying is that if people did follow the Word of God, there wouldn't be any abortion. No guilt, no suffering, no murder.

But people love themselves and their own lives more than obeying God (and thus having eternal life). Hence, to allow people indulge themselves, we've come up with monstrous practices like abortion.

I'm not here to have an argument with anyone. But these are the standards of God, the standards all Christians are called to adhere to. If you don't, then you can't call yourself Christian.

People hate the truth though.

Good night all.

Well you can go to sleep smug in the knowledge that we're all going straight to hell. And we can all go to sleep knowing that we're having a great time in this life because there is nothing after this.
Win-win for everyone.
See, I am pro-choice

Ellis Dee

Newsite wrote: »

I didn't answer as there is only one God. The proof of Whom is all around us.

How do you define "proof"? If, however, your faith is sufficient proof, then you might as well accept that, rather than there being only the one sky fairy you say, there could be vast numbers of them. Some Hindus, for example, say there are 33 crores of gods. That's 330 million. If I say I agree with them, I can produce exactly the same amount of proof as you can for your sky fairy: diddley-squat. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Newsite wrote: »

All I'm saying is that the Bible says 'thou shalt not kill'. And for anyone who claims to be a Christian, those words are for you.

Lots of people who are/were not members of that particular sect were totally opposed to killing. Have you heard of Gandhiji?;);)

I Heart Internet

Starla_o0 wrote: »

I don't discriminate against you for losing brain cells everytime you spout God

Stupidly put and patently untrue but God is certainly used by both sides to dismiss the others point of view. This debate could certainly be had without reference to the big man. There is nothing in humanist values, for example, that would support abortion.

Starla_o0 wrote: »

If a woman thinks a baby is an inconvienience then who are you to say she can't get rid of it?

Ah come off the stage! Another human being can't care for the welfare of a baby (your word)?? That's absolute nonsense.

The King of Moo

Newsite wrote: »

I didn't answer as there is only one God. The proof of Whom is all around us.



Eloquent. Hate the message don't you?



All I'm saying is that the Bible says 'thou shalt not kill'. And for anyone who claims to be a Christian, those words are for you.

Fundamentally what I am saying is that if people did follow the Word of God, there wouldn't be any abortion. No guilt, no suffering, no murder.

But people love themselves and their own lives more than obeying God (and thus having eternal life). Hence, to allow people indulge themselves, we've come up with monstrous practices like abortion.

I'm not here to have an argument with anyone. But these are the standards of God, the standards all Christians are called to adhere to. If you don't, then you can't call yourself Christian.

People hate the truth though.

Good night all.

That's a fair point, but the problem is that I'm pretty sure you're the only person in this thread who's identified themselves as Christian.

Many people here have explicitly stated themselves to be non-religious, so why expect them to be followers of God's words if they're not Christians?

I Heart Internet

Ellis Dee wrote: »

sky fairy

The above and mention of the fifth commandment means this debate has hit rock bottom.

Siuin

Newsite wrote: »

All I'm saying is that the Bible says 'thou shalt not kill'. And for anyone who claims to be a Christian, those words are for you.

The bible also says that women are subservient to their husbands and that women shouldn't be allowed voice their opinions; "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent."(1 Timothy 2:12) So if you're to take a truly biblical view on the matter, women should just STFU and do as they're told.

Most pro-choice advocates would consider it a horrendous punishment for a woman to be forced to bear the child of her rapist and be given no say in the matter. The Christian solution to a rape? Hand over the rape victim to her rapist and force them to be married for ever, regardless of the circumstances. Oh, and compensate her father for his daughter being 'damaged goods' --
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
(Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

If you're going to trot out this religious bullshít, at least be consistent

4leto

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Even up to a day before birth? Last minute change of plan? No matter what the circumstances? Really?

Why do people have abortions? Because it's a way to correct a perceived mistake by them. I can't see how that's right because I regard it as human life. It's a fact thought that some/many don't share that view.

Any circumstances, right up to a week before birth, it is a woman's right to choose, I will go as far to say it has nothing to do with us men. It a woman's choice whether she wants to go through the birth or not.

hiram

Siuin wrote: »

The bible also says that women are subservient to their husbands and that women shouldn't be allowed voice their opinions; "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent."(1 Timothy 2:12) So if you're to take a truly biblical view on the matter, women should just STFU and do as they're told.

Most pro-choice advocates would consider it a horrendous punishment for a woman to be forced to bear the child of her rapist and be given no say in the matter. The Christian solution to a rape? Hand over the rape victim to her rapist and force them to be married for ever, regardless of the circumstances. Oh, and compensate her father for his daughter being 'damaged goods' --
If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay her father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the young woman, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
(Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

If you're going to trot out this religious bullshít, at least be consistent

Its much more fun over in the Freemasons Thread!! since this thread has hit a brick wall!! come on over...ive the kettle on:)

Siuin

hiram wrote: »

Its much more fun over in the Freemasons Thread!! since this thread has hit a brick wall!! come on over...ive the kettle on:)

On the way

Ellis Dee

I Heart Internet wrote: »

The above and mention of the fifth commandment means this debate has hit rock bottom.

I never mentioned the fifth commandment. Don't even recall what it is, and couldn't give a sh1t, either. ;)

And what is wrong with me using the phrase "sky fairy" to describe the supernatural being/deity than many deluded people believe exists? isn't it as good as anything else? It looks like some believers would like to dictate a lot of things; not only what women do with their bodies and manage their reproductive systems, but also what terminology they must use. The days when writers needed the "imprimatur" of the crossdressers in black before they could publish something are long gone. Live with it! :):)

I Heart Internet

4leto wrote: »

Any circumstances, right up to a week before birth, it is a woman's right to choose, I will go as far to say it has nothing to do with us men. It a woman's choice whether she wants to go through the birth or not.

Day 272: abortion legal
Day 273: 7lb baby born
Day 274: killing baby = murder = life sentence

So cutting the cord means it's a human? What about hitting a baby over the head with a kidney dish before you cut the cord? That ok?

Morag

Yes there are militant pro choicer people out there, they were the ones who broke the law to give information and contact numbers to women who needed them before the law was changed.

They are the people who make sure women get to real and reputable places to go for counselling and information, they are the ones who accompany women on trips to the uk, who help pay for trips to the uk, either directly or via Abortion Support Network and don't judge those who have had an abortion harshly.

They are the people who staged the counter protest at the march for life a few months ago.
They also post in online debates debunking the many pro life myths and trying to roll thier eyes too much at the hyperbolic rhetoric used, like in the post above.

4leto

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Day 272: abortion legal
Day 273: 7lb baby born
Day 274: killing baby = murder = life sentence

So cutting the cord means it's a human? What about hitting a baby over the head with a kidney dish before you cut the cord? That ok?

But its not a life, its a potential life, its not aware, you may think it is but it is not and it wont be till it has the ability to verbalise its thoughts. So its not murder.

How about when a couple practice birth control is that stopping a potential life, isn't this why the C Church are opposed to birth control. So by that reason everytime you have a **** (they don't like that either) you are committing mass murder.

"Every sperm is sacred".