Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Kiwi in IE

Bannasidhe wrote: »

A demonstration that the refusal of treatment has already happened.

Did you miss this?


Now, would you care to answer the question?

Is it preferable to deny a woman vital medication causing long term damage to her physical and/or mental health to protect a fetus?

Silvio you have been asked the above question repeatedly, by different people providing different scenarios over a number of days now. You have continuously dodged it by spouting endless pro birth rhetoric that does not properly address the question. Could you please answer? Read the above post provided by Bannisidhe where real life women HAVE been denied abortions and tell us do you think that it is acceptable?

Silvio.Dante

Bannasidhe wrote: »

A demonstration that the refusal of treatment has already happened.

Did you miss this?


Now, would you care to answer the question?

Is it preferable to deny a woman vital medication causing long term damage to her physical and/or mental health to protect a fetus?

Not in Ireland...:rolleyes:

robindch

Silvio is taking a 24-hour break from A+A during which he/she can ponder the difference between soap-boxing and discussion.

Kiwi in IE

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Not in Ireland...:rolleyes:

Silvio how is that an answer? Please explain. It HAS happened in Ireland. The evidence is in front of your eyes.

Suicide by Mod?

coffee_cake

Sir, – There is an urgent and immediate need for an inter-party alliance of pro-life TDs to defy and resist Enda Kenny and Eamon Gilmore’s attempt to railroad their pro-abortion legislation through Dáil Éireann. “There will be no free vote on this”, Mr Kenny has said. There should be a referendum – never mind a free vote – on on this crucial moral issue. Mr Kenny, displaying breath-taking arrogance, has crassly betrayed the Catholic and pro-life constituency who voted him and his party into office. He and Mr Gilmore must be stopped. – Yours, etc,

Fr PATRICK

McCAFFERTY,

Glen Road,

Belfast.

There already was a fcuking referendum. Jaysus

Sarky

Well that was a mediocre distraction, at best. Do you think he'll last the 24 hours or will he come back under a cunning alias to preach misinformed bollocks at us again?

Bannasidhe

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Not in Ireland...:rolleyes:

YES IN IRELAND - Unless Cork declared independence in 2010...

This happen in CUH. Missed it again did you?

Strange, since you previously commented on it...

Mr Boylan said her obstetrician was willing to perform a termination but was “hamstrung” by legal issues. The issue was referred to the hospital’s “ad hoc” ethics committee.

Appalling delay

He said there was an absence of clear guidelines about what to do and an “appalling delay” ensued. After the committee refused the termination, there were further delays because Ms Harte did not have a passport.

“I couldn’t believe the decision [to refuse an abortion in Ireland] when it came,” Ms Harte, who was then 39, told The Irish Times in December 2010. “Apparently my life wasn’t at immediate risk. It just seemed absolutely ridiculous.”

Her condition worsened significantly during this time and she was not able to receive cancer treatment because she was pregnant. She eventually travelled to Britain for an abortion; she had to be helped on to the aircraft due to a deterioration in her condition.

Michelle Harte died in November 2011. She was survived by her partner and one child.

Silvio. Lets make this simple for you.

Michelle Harte was refused treatment for cancer as she was pregnant. Fact.

Do you think it is acceptable to refuse cancer treatment to a pregnant woman on the grounds that such treatment would harm the fetus?


Edit - ah, he succeeded in being fleshwounded by MOD I see.

I suspect Silvio will never answer that question as he knows just how bad it will make him look.

Sarky

In fairness It's not like he can make himself look much worse after his waffle from the last few days.

Bannasidhe

Sarky wrote: »

In fairness It's not like he can make himself look much worse after his waffle from the last few days.

I think its interesting that he cannot bring himself to actually say that a pregnant woman should be denied cancer treatment but has to try and deflect.

Seems to me even he knows just how appalling such a statement would be.

Lingua Franca

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

I don't do straw as you may have noticed

Yes you do. Your late term partial birth abortions ramblings, for example. That entire thing was just one big strawman. It doesn't happen here. It doesn't even happen in the states, where it was made illegal anyway. We all noticed that and pointed it out to you.

It's funny that your words and opinions are here in black and white for all to see and you think you can deny them. Honestly, no one is that stupid. Not even people who would agree with your pro life views.

If you think you're doing your cause any credit with your strawmen, misdirection, rhetoric, smarmy little emoticons and inability to answer direct questions, you are sorely mistaken. But I don't think you even believe you're doing that. You're here picking fallacious arguments and feeling smug about putting dem damn pro aborts down, and you're too blinkered for any self awareness. You're being extremely disrespectful with your inability to engage in meaningful debate. You will look back on this conversation some day with humiliation at your lack of debating skills and how you have presented yourself.

Now, post a few one liners that don't address anything in this post and just express dismay at what you'll claim you've read as my belief that all new born babies should be stabbed, make sure you use the word "barbaric" and top it all off with a smiley face, there's a good youth defender.

Edit: sorry mods, I hadn't read this last page before posting.

Morag

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

For those who seem confused about the term Partial Birth Abortion allow me to clarify..:

Partial-Birth Abortion is a procedure in which the abortionist pulls a living baby feet-first out of the womb and into the birth canal, except for the head, which the abortionist purposely keeps lodged just inside the cervix (the opening to the womb). The abortionist punctures the base of the baby’s skull with a surgical instrument, such as a long surgical scissors or a pointed hollow metal tube called a trochar. He then inserts a catheter (tube) into the wound, and removes the baby's brain with a powerful suction machine. This causes the skull to collapse, after which the abortionist completes the delivery of the now-dead baby.


Anyone open to this procedure being an option in this country..?

Yes for dealing with fatal fetal abnormalities like Anencephaly.

kylith

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I think its interesting that he cannot bring himself to actually say that a pregnant woman should be denied cancer treatment but has to try and deflect.

Seems to me even he knows just how appalling such a statement would be.

I think you're right. Anyone saying "A woman should be denied cancer treatment so that, while she may die, a baby can live (assuming that the mother makes it to full-term)" would, quite rightly, be hung from the highest yardarm, figuratively speaking. That's why they never answer directly, but say things like 'every effort should be made to protect the lives of both the mother and child', but will shilly shally away from an actual answer to what they are being asked.

MrPudding

And another...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/22/roe-v-wade-republican-radicalisation

MrP

Gbear

kylith wrote: »

I think you're right. Anyone saying "A woman should be denied cancer treatment so that, while she may die, a baby can live (assuming that the mother makes it to full-term)" would, quite rightly, be hung from the highest yardarm, figuratively speaking. That's why they never answer directly, but say things like 'every effort should be made to protect the lives of both the mother and child', but will shilly shally away from an actual answer to what they are being asked.

So it's not really out of character for them to bury their heads in the sand about a constitutionally required law and just try to fob it off. It's their answer to any tough problem.

Sure what do you think Heaven is about?

"Oh ****, we're going to die! What's that going to be like?"
"Emmm... nope, it's fine, we'll go to heaven instead."

kylith

Gbear wrote: »

So it's not really out of character for them to bury their heads in the sand about a constitutionally required law and just try to fob it off. It's their answer to any tough problem.

Sure what do you think Heaven is about?

"Oh ****, we're going to die! What's that going to be like?"
"Emmm... nope, it's fine, we'll go to heaven instead."

Ah, when the question is any way difficult it's all generally vague stuff they come out with, I find: 'Morality comes from God, and is unchanging, except for the bits that change cos God changed his mind about it, even though God doesn't change his mind', 'You can't prove that there isn't a god', 'It doesn't matter that there's no evidence for it, I just feel that it's true'; that sort of stuff.

_rebelkid

kylith wrote: »

Ah, when the question is any way difficult it's all generally vague stuff they come out with, I find: 'Morality comes from God, and is unchanging, except for the bits that change cos God changed his mind about it, even though God doesn't change his mind', 'You can't prove that there isn't a god', 'It doesn't matter that there's no evidence for it, I just feel that it's true'; that sort of stuff.

Did you know that if you rearrange the letters in the word faith, it spells microwave?
Don't test the theory, just believe in it.


Anyway, the scenarios lined out above are extremely interesting and disheartening.

Glad to know that once X is legislated for, that will never happen again.

kylith

_rebelkid wrote: »

Did you know that if you rearrange the letters in the word faith, it spells microwave?
Don't test the theory, just believe in it.

I wouldn't even attempt to test it; I feel in my heart that it's true.

_rebelkid

Morag wrote: »

Yes for dealing with fatal fetal abnormalities like Anencephaly.

Which is why when I was questioned about it, I stated that there would in all probability be a specific situation where it would be necessary.

I didn't know of Anencephaly, so I could not comment on a definite circumstance. Thank you for the info.

Nodin

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Do you think killing the baby and then delivering him/her is preferrable..?

...to maiming the mother? Yep. Harsh, but there we go.

TwoShedsJackson

This guy has disgraced the good name of Silvio Dante, owner of the best TV hair ever:

_rebelkid

I seem to have royally riled up YD on twitter.

The insults are flowing from them.

The Black Oil

I'm glad we have a site like boards where we can discuss issues like this. Particularly now when social sites are in the headlines for all the wrong reasons and coming under more and more scrutiny. Plus, when you consider that the public faces of both sides of this debate are not exactly appealing (in some cases) in terms of their media persona, etc, nor does either side have its nose squeaky clean when it comes to language choices or the narratives they pursues. So, it's great that we can just get on with the discussion...even if it gets heated, the facility is still there to talk about it.

Lingua Franca

_rebelkid wrote: »

I seem to have royally riled up YD on twitter.

The insults are flowing from them.

The "patting themselves on the back without realising they're being mocked" tweets sound very familiar.

_rebelkid

Lingua Franca wrote: »

The "patting themselves on the back without realising they're being mocked" tweets sound very familiar.

Yep.

This one was funny: From YD:

@peterhayesf1 ha ha ha you are hilarious, go away and come back when you know something useful, good lad now run along

BURN ON ME!

lazygal

_rebelkid wrote: »

I seem to have royally riled up YD on twitter.

The insults are flowing from them.

Can you link? I need a larf.

_rebelkid

lazygal wrote: »

Can you link? I need a larf.

Go to me, @peterhayesf1, on twitter. Everything should be there.

MrPudding

Methody wrote: »

The church know a hell of a lot better than the likes of Ivana Bacik who is an extremist liberal and was rejected by the most liberal constituency in the country! lol.

_rebelkid wrote: »

Go to me, @peterhayesf1, on twitter. Everything should be there.

But what if one does not twitter?

MrP

Bannasidhe

MrPudding wrote: »

But what if one does not twitter?

MrP

One doesn't.

_rebelkid

Bannasidhe wrote: »

One doesn't.

You should still be able to see it.

Go to twitter.com/peterhayesf1, and click view conversation on a few of the tweets. Should all come up as you go down the timeline. No need to be signed up.

Lingua Franca

You can still read it. Just google "youth defence twitter" or _rebelkid's twitter handle and you can read the twa... tweets.