Government TD blames 'fornication' for unwanted pregnancies

hatrickpatrick

Sorry but what does mass attendance have to do with this? We have a separation of church and state for a reason.

iguana

Nodin wrote: »

http://www.irishcatholic.ie/site/content/where-now-weekly-mass-attendance-michael-kelly

Of course thats country-wide. Dublin and the cities are going to be generally well under that.

That's from last year. I'm quoting figures from last week.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0412/breaking31.html

iguana

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Sorry but what does mass attendance have to do with this? We have a separation of church and state for a reason.

I'm not sure which country you are referring to but separation of Church and State is a long, long way off in Ireland.

marty1985

The census has never been, or ever intended to be, an indication of how well people practice their faith or their atheism or skepticism. People are free to identify with any religious denomination or none, and will always do so for a number of reasons (get over it). People (religious and non religious) who say it does or doesn't reflect reality should focus solely on other surveys designed to find that information, because it's simply not the job of the census to do that.

Nodin wrote: »

I never suggested that she be silenced for all time, thrown in a laundry, branded a "slut", forced to leave the country or any similar measure. I just carry on with the fairly reasonable idea that if you come out with shite, you can expect to be called on it. .

You said she deserves abuse. I just said I disagree with you on this, although I may agree with some other points. When "reasonable" people advocate abusing others who hold different views they should be called on it too IMHO.

My name is URL

I was at a relatives anniversary mass on Sunday and the church was absolutely packed. There were people standing at the entrance because there weren't enough seats. I couldn't believe it myself. I'm an atheist and would have thought that numbers would be far lower considering the massive drops in attendance figures that you usually read about.

And it wasn't even a rural or small church. It's feckin huge - http://archiseek.com/2010/1892-st-josephs-redemptorist-church-and-monastery-dundalk-co-louth/

franklyshocked

According to her Facebook profile she's single. So before the Mods hop on me regarding remarks about her needing fornication, it would appear to be a statement of fact that she appears to be lacking a good fornication

shopaholic01

franklyshocked wrote: »

According to her Facebook profile she's single. So before the Mods hop on me regarding remarks about her needing fornication, it would appear to be a statement of fact that she appears to be lacking a good fornication

Are you offering?

franklyshocked

shopaholic01 wrote: »

Are you offering?

Na, I'm already married to a Mayo woman. One is more than enough

notsobusy

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Sorry but what does mass attendance have to do with this? We have a separation of church and state for a reason.

But therein lies the problem!! There isn't when it comes to this abortion debate. Religion shouldn't come into it at all yet she was using it saying that fornication is a sin and that fornication leads to unwanted pregnancies. Yes it does as so many others have pointed out there, there are married couples that have unwanted pregnancies, maybe due to finacial situations but most likely to do with medical reasons.

Yet at the end of her interview with Mat Cooper she said that she would accept abortion if the mother's health was at risk?! So as far as I can see she's going back on what she believes

shopaholic01

Another point worth mentioning here is that the church is all for sex if it is in the confines of marriage and solely for procreation, no contraception allowed.
By that argument surely most unwanted pregnancies would occur inside marriage.

Me personally I'm all for fornication;).

phasers

She probably believes the urban legend about the woman who got pregnant from sitting on a public toilet seat

Sea Filly

Well, this story gave my workplace our collective LOL for the day.

Though I did learn something, I learned that fornication isn't just a fancy name for sex, which is what I thought. Didn't realise it was more specific. Still though, what was she smoking? :eek:

Nodin

phasers wrote: »

She probably believes the urban legend about the woman who got pregnant from sitting on a public toilet seat

Apparently that can only happen to Protestants.

franklyshocked

notsobusy wrote: »

But therein lies the problem!! There isn't when it comes to this abortion debate. Religion shouldn't come into it at all yet she was using it saying that fornication is a sin and that fornication leads to unwanted pregnancies. Yes it does as so many others have pointed out there, there are married couples that have unwanted pregnancies, maybe due to finacial situations but most likely to do with medical reasons.

Yet at the end of her interview with Mat Cooper she said that she would accept abortion if the mother's health was at risk?! So as far as I can see she's going back on what she believes

Careful wording from a politician, He asked her if she would support abortion if the mothers health was at risk, and she stopped for a second and replied "I would accept it", Not she would support it. BIG difference

FTGFOP

This thread makes me forny.

Dudess

"Fornication, I would say, is probably the single most likely cause of unwanted pregnancies in this country."

Doesn't that mean "Non marital sex, I would say, is probably the single most likely cause of unwanted pregnancies in this country"?

Jeez, er... groundbreaking.

MetalDog

When is she moving to America and joining the Tea Party?
F**king idiot of a woman. :rolleyes:

Royal Legend

To be honest there was a lot more to her speech than the fornication bit. she appears to have scuppered herself with the obvious comment that sex creates pregnancy!!

Anyway, everyone is entitled to their opinion, obviously the good people of Mayooo knew what they were voting for.

My issue with this woman is the following. When put to the pin of her collar today by Matt Copper, the woman did not have the guts to stand by her opinions, or even state what her real opinions or beliefs were. For example, she stated in her written speech that she was totally against any form of abortion, yet when quizzed she said that in the case of the mothers life being in danger she would accept it.
To my mind, it sounded like she agreed because it was the right thing to say on national radio.
Yet another politician that cannot stand by her convictions, that to me is the bigger issue then some brain-dead remark

Doc Ruby

franklyshocked wrote: »

According to her Facebook profile she's single. So before the Mods hop on me regarding remarks about her needing fornication, it would appear to be a statement of fact that she appears to be lacking a good fornication

Going by the general trend of politicians denouncing gay people before being outed as gay themselves and so on, well I'm not saying Roman orgies involving copious amounts of melted cheese and little pieces of bread on sticks are likely, but all that free EU cheese I didn't get had to go somewhere.

flanders1979

She is shagging Roy Cropper and cant have babies cos she used to have a winky.

D1stant

FGs answer to Billy Graham, with less intellect. How fucking dare she

To my horror, the more this year goes on, the more I realise why FF were in power so long. They are gob****es but slightly better than FG.

philologos

kevin65 wrote: »

Quite a tolerant and progressive country we live in...

Disagreement with how other people live is not intolerance. Tolerance is agreeing to disagree, that is exactly what tolerance is. Claiming that everyone must praise how everyone else chooses to live is a perversion of the word:

The ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with

I recognise the right of people to do things I disagree with, that's the simplicity of toleration.

It's sensible to suggest that most unplanned pregnancies arise in situations of pre-marital or extra-marital relationships. I think that's fair. It's also quite reasonable to suggest that a marriage is a more stable environment to raise a child. Mothers and fathers provide support to their children, and their active commitment to one another provides stability for children.

kincsem

So she used a word that was correct but people have a different idea of what it means.

Discover used to mean "make known" but now it seems to mean "find".

Royal Legend

philologos wrote: »

Disagreement with how other people live is not intolerance. Tolerance is agreeing to disagree, that is exactly what tolerance is. Claiming that everyone must praise how everyone else chooses to live is a perversion of the word:


I recognise the right of people to do things I disagree with, that's the simplicity of toleration.

It's sensible to suggest that most unplanned pregnancies arise in situations of pre-marital or extra-marital relationships. I think that's fair. It's also quite reasonable to suggest that a marriage is a more stable environment to raise a child. Mothers and fathers provide support to their children, and their active commitment to one another provides stability for children.

I for one am not disagreeing that she is entitled to a point of view, what i find abhorant is that when questioned she does not have the bottle to stand by her beliefs and principles, she is a coward.

dpqt

Just another case of political opportunist pandering to the church-going, conservative old granny portion of the electorate which sees abortion as the work of the divil. If the younger and more progressive generation with their views became predominant in voting tomorow, they'd be pandering to the legalise abortion crowd.

philologos

dpqt wrote: »

Just another case of a political opportunist pandering to the church-going, conservative old granny portion of the electorate which sees abortion as the work of the divil. If the younger and more progressive generation became predominant in voting tomorow, they'd be pandering to the legalise abortion argument.

I don't get this, what is "progressive" about abortion? It's been around since time immemorial, and I think most people would say it would be better if we lived in a world where it wasn't necessary bar medical emergencies. Abortion is not an ideal by any means as far as I can tell.

efb

Riding like rabbits! You don't get an unwanted pregnancy saying a few decades of the rosary!


(or Anal or Oral)

Pottler

She is also an expert at waffling in a circuitous manner to avoid coming right out and saying what we all know she thinks " the durty, sinful slappers are out der fornicating and probably drinking and shure if they wer'nt theyred be no need for any of that abortion malarky here in Holy Catholic Ireland."
I fecking shuddered listening to her on Matt Cooper today - it was like the last 20 years of grindingly slow, feck off and bother someone else Father Sur, drag it into the present century, progress was getting rolled back by the re-emergence of the holier than thou biddy. Please, can we at least pretend we are trying to become a modern secular society and keep Mary Whitehouses like this where they belong, out of sight and sound. Mayo might be far enough away.....

philologos

Pottler: People can be both a non-believer, and a pro-lifer, indeed I've met a few who fall into this category.

We should be looking at this issue on the basis of merit. Not fobbing it off by means of an ad-hominem, or because of peoples religious beliefs. I couldn't care less if it was a Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Sikh, or atheist / agnostic. It must be looked at on merit.

Getoffmytrain

http://www.google.ie/imgres?imgurl=http://files.broadsheet.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/article-1298845999951-0D6287B5000005DC-873720_636x396.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/01/10/no-wonder-she-was-so-happy/&h=396&w=636&sz=46&tbnid=FCeFpjVoyQxs5M:&tbnh=77&tbnw=123&zoom=1&docid=NXLPzXer1MNY1M&sa=X&ei=AGiQT5_tJILKhAfA2d2aBA&ved=0CD8Q9QEwBQ&dur=1232

mikom

BaZmO* wrote: »

A Fine Gael TD said today that fornication is the "most likely cause" of unwanted pregnancies in Ireland.

Mayo TD Michelle Mulherin made the remarks during a debate on proposed abortion legislation in the Dáil.

"Abortion, as murder, therefore sin, which is the religious argument, is no more sinful, from a scriptural point of view, than all other sins we don't legislate against, like greed, hate and fornication, the latter, being fornication, I would say, is probably the single most likely cause of unwanted pregnancies in this country," she said.

Read more: http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakin...#ixzz1sUYDWzsx

Onward Christian democrats.
Backward this country is going.

More choice quotes from Queen Victoria.........

FG TD says Libyan rebellion should not be supported

A GOVERNMENT backbencher has described the Libyan crisis as an internal matter and that “coups and attempted coups are commonplace in Africa”.

Michelle Mulherin, who shares the Mayo constituency with Taoiseach Enda Kenny, told a Dáil debate on the conflict that opponents of Muammar Gadafy “did not follow democratic means. They took up arms against their leader.”

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0325/1224293045350.html

New Fine Gael TD Michelle Mulherin, who stressed she was speaking in a personal capacity, wants to introduce national military service for all young men.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/john-drennan/john-drennan-deadbeat-dads-under-fire-in-new-proposals-2672697.html

She may just beat Fidelma Healy Eames to this years Hyacinth bouquet award.

notsobusy

Oh god help us all!!

Nodin

philologos wrote: »

Disagreement with how other people live is not intolerance. Tolerance is agreeing to disagree, that is exactly what tolerance is. Claiming that everyone must praise how everyone else chooses to live is a perversion of the word:


I recognise the right of people to do things I disagree with, that's the simplicity of toleration.

It's sensible to suggest that most unplanned pregnancies arise in situations of pre-marital or extra-marital relationships. I think that's fair. It's also quite reasonable to suggest that a marriage is a more stable environment to raise a child. Mothers and fathers provide support to their children, and their active commitment to one another provides stability for children.

Is it reasonable to put abortion, murder and 'fornication' on the same level?

Doc Ruby

mikom wrote: »

Onward Christian democrats.
Backward this country is going.

More choice quotes from Queen Victoria.........

She may just beat Fidelma Healy Eames to this years Hyacinth bouquet award.

For pity's sake.

philologos

Nodin wrote: »

Is it reasonable to put abortion, murder and 'fornication' on the same level?

Abortion is killing. That's precisely what it is, destroying human life.

As for "fornication" (a term I wouldn't use too extensively). I think she's correct in saying that more than likely unplanned pregnancy arises out of sexual expression outside of a marriage. More than likely if one is in a stable marriage and falls pregnant they will bring the child to birth. A stable marriage can provide a child the environment it needs to grow and develop with the love of both a mother and a father.

It's not surprising that if one is more careful about the idea of sexual expression and its risks, that one will be less prone or less likely to fall into this situation. One can hold this position without absolutely saying that sexual expression is bad, but rather it is something to be praised in the appropriate situation.

Napper Hawkins

I wonder what her stance on the holocaust is.

"Weeelllll they did kill Jesus, sssoooooooooooo......"

And so on.

The_Thing

Government TD blames cali'fornication' for unwanted pregnancies

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlUKcNNmywk

Nodin

philologos wrote: »

Abortion is killing. .........in the appropriate situation.

Thats not what I asked.

She made the statement

Abortion, as murder, therefore sin, which is the religious argument, is no more sinful, from a scriptural point of view, than all other sins we don't legislate against, like greed, hate and fornication.

Does putting 'fornication' at the same level as murder strike you as reasonable?

JupiterKid

Remember that some of the most right-wing, the most bigoted and backward politicians and ministers have harked from Fine Gael. Alice Glenn, anyone? Or, going a few decades further back, the Blueshirts? Former Taoiseach Liam Cosgrave who voted aganist his own party on legistating for contraception in 1973?

Michelle Mulherin is entitled to her views but today she showed us all that she is the political heir of Alice Glenn. There a quite a few others like her. TDs also tend the reflect the values, views and attitudes of those who voted for them.

philologos

Nodin wrote: »

Does putting 'fornication' at the same level as murder strike you as reasonable?

The unjustified taking of life could be considered murder.

I do think that the law shouldn't be a means for coercing people to follow Christianity however. Man's relationship with God, and disobedience against His standards is something different than human legislation in the here and now.

Having said that I think the law should protect human rights, including the most fundamental, the right to human life.

By the by, she didn't fornication at the same level as murder in that quote. Listing things together does not say anything about what one considers more or less serious. I think her phrasing leaves much to be desired actually, but I agree with the sentiment concerning abortion.

Nodin

philologos wrote: »

...............

By the by, she didn't fornication at the same level as murder.

Abortion, as murder, therefore sin, which is the religious argument, is no more sinful, from a scriptural point of view, than all other sins we don't legislate against, like greed, hate and fornication.

Do please then parse out the above, because thats what it reads as to me.

vicwatson

notsobusy wrote: »

Are 84% of those RC practising catholics? Do they go to mass every Sunday?

Of course they do. I've a pain in me hole trying to get to the shops every Sunday due to the 3.6 million Catholics queueing to get into mass. its crazy.

laoch na mona

proof FG are a bit not right

philologos

Nodin: In Christianity sin as a concept has nothing to do with severity. It is simply put the state of being in rejection of God. If you want me to analyse her opinions exactly, I can't. I'd need to speak to her to ask what her opinion was exactly. All I can say is I agree with the sentiment.

Personally, I don't think laws should deal with the Judeo-Christian concept of sin. Indeed, legislators can't do this effectively insofar as man has rejected God and has fallen into sin. Rather the simple aspiration that human legislation should aspire to is ensuring liberties.

As for judgement concerning what is good or evil, that's ultimately down to God, not to man.

Pherekydes

philologos wrote: »

The unjustified taking of life could be considered murder.

I do think that the law shouldn't be a means for coercing people to follow Christianity however. Man's relationship with God, and disobedience against His standards is something different than human legislation in the here and now.

Having said that I think the law should protect human rights, including the most fundamental, the right to human life.

By the by, she didn't fornication at the same level as murder in that quote. Listing things together does not say anything about what one considers more or less serious. I think her phrasing leaves much to be desired actually, but I agree with the sentiment concerning abortion.

It's a simple question: is fornication on the same level as greed, hate and murder?

Pottler

philologos wrote: »

Pottler: People can be both a non-believer, and a pro-lifer, indeed I've met a few who fall into this category.

We should be looking at this issue on the basis of merit. Not fobbing it off by means of an ad-hominem, or because of peoples religious beliefs. I couldn't care less if it was a Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Sikh, or atheist / agnostic. It must be looked at on merit.

I'm not pro-life. Sorry, but I'm not. I'd rather that every child born was wanted, not just born because someone other than the parent insists on forcing their view down somebody elses throat. I'm pro-choice. People should make up their own minds wether they want a child or not.
If, for whatever reason, that answer is not, then they should be able to make the choice of have an abortion, go the adoption route, whatever they themselves choose.
I do not have any desire to make rules for other people and I do not want other's opinions foisted onto me. If you believe abortion is wrong, fine, don't have one. Nobody is going to hold you down and force you to have one. If you decide you want an abortion, fine, have one. Lets not have the usual Irish hypocrisy of simply burying our heads in the sand and letting the British do for us what we are too sanctimonious to do for ourselves.

Nodin

philologos wrote: »

Nodin: In Christianity sin as a concept has nothing to do with severity. It is simply put the state of being in rejection of God. If you want me to analyse her opinions exactly, I can't. I'd need to speak to her to ask what her opinion was exactly. All I can say is I agree with the sentiment.

.............

I was referring to what she said, not asking for your ideas as to what the 'christian' position was. Seeing as you've failed to parse out a different interpretation of her statement I take it you now agree with my reading of it.

So you regard murder as being as "no more sinful, from a scriptural point of view" than 'Fornication'?

philologos

Pottler: I never said or suggested that you were. That has no bearing on whether or not it reasonable to hold a pro-life position.

You talk about shoving things down peoples throats, but ultimately there are some things which society regards as harmful and destructive, and ultimately in the case of abortion. It is either a case that you deny the right of the child to life, or that you allow the child the right to life. That's what it comes down to. Most pro-lifers would hold that the mothers rights are significant and important, but so are the childs rights. Both are worthy of consideration.

When we start steamrolling over one or the other, we need to start asking questions. I don't think it is justified to say that one should kill and unborn child as a matter of choice.

If abortion-by-choice is the fundamental denial of human rights for unborn children, then it is worth defending. When opinions come down to life or death, we need to start saying that it is better to deny liberty of choice where it is to the detriment of others safety, integrity and their very lives. I support the right and liberty of people to hold whatever opinion they wish insofar as it doesn't result in the death of another human being.

Nodin: Scripturally sin is sin. As for what manifest effects that sin can have, it depends on the situation. Ultimately all sin leads us to be separated from God (Isaiah 59:2, Ephesians 2), and as a result has the same consequence. You say that has nothing to do with the Christian position, but actually it does. All Christians should be standing clearly against sin in equal measure, irrespective of what it is.

notsobusy

There you go, shoving it down our throats.

I respect your opinion Phillogos but abortion is not murder. It's all about choice. I am pregnant, I'm not married either but the child was wanted and it will be brought up in a loving enviroment. I don't feel that being married makes a difference or not to whether the child feels loved or not.

I feel that I should have the right to have an abortion if I want one. It's my body and my foetus. Not yours.

Nodin

philologos wrote: »

.............

Nodin: Scripturally sin is sin. As for what manifest effects that sin can have, it depends on the situation. Ultimately all sin leads us to be separated from God (Isaiah 59:2, Ephesians 2), and as a result has the same consequence. You say that has nothing to do with the Christian position, but actually it does. All Christians should be standing clearly against sin in equal measure, irrespective of what it is.

So both you and she put murder and 'fornication' at the same level. Grand. As long as we know your priorities.