Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Morag

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Do you think that life begins at conception? Yes

If so were do you stand on hormonal contraception which may prevent implantion? I haven't a clue.

If you believe a new life begins at conception, then where do you stand on anything interfering with that developing new life being born?

OK what is your stance on Emergency contraception/ Morning after pill?

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Would you support a woman's right to an abortion for other reasons apart from threats to the her health, fatal fetal abnormalities, rape/incest and pregnancies beyond which the abortion pill would be effective..?

If we achieve the right to have an abortion in this country free, safe and legal for reasons of threats to life, threats to health, fatal fetal abnormalities, rape/incest and access to the abortion pill in my life time I will be happy with that.

Morag

oldrnwisr wrote: »

So once again, what does the position of the contributors of this thread have to do with the overall debate?

Standard tactic from the pro life side in debates to discredit pro choice or pro abortion rights people as being immoral and unreasonable

Silvio.Dante

oldrnwisr wrote: »

Next time you might answer the entire question Silvio.

In the context of this debate, how does that information, assuming that all those you asked decide to respond, get us any further in deciding whether or not we should legislate for X which after all is the pertinent question.

So once again, what does the position of the contributors of this thread have to do with the overall debate?

The thread title is 'Abortion' and I see no issue in asking folk where they stand on the general topic.

God (sorry ) knows I've had many quesitons flung my way that have little or no relevance to X...:)

Silvio.Dante

Morag wrote: »

If you believe a new life begins at conception, then where do you stand on anything interfering with that developing new life being born?

OK what is your stance on Emergency contraception/ Morning after pill?





If we achieve the right to have an abortion in this country free, safe and legal for reasons of threats to life, threats to health, fatal fetal abnormalities, rape/incest and access to the abortion pill in my life time I will be happy with that.

1. Aboraficient contraceptives are a no/no I'd afraid.

2. No to the MAP.

3. Would you be happy to deny a woman the right to choose what to do with her own body in seeking an abortion for reasons other than threats to life, threats to health, fatal fetal abnormalities, rape/incest..?

4. Any time limits? Or abortion up to full term..?

oldrnwisr

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

The thread title is 'Abortion' and I see no issue in asking folk where they stand on the general topic.

God (sorry ) knows I've had many quesitons flung my way that have little or no relevance to X...:)

OK, so in the context of the general topic what use does your question serve? How does knowing the position of other posters advance the debate?

Morag

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

1. Aboraficient contraceptives are a no/no I'd afraid.

So you consider any contraception which prevents the implantation of an embryo to be an Aboraficient contraceptive?

Should such forms of contraception be available on prescription here?

This would be

all types of combined pill
all types of mini pill
the contraceptive patch
the depo contraceptive injection
the implanon contraceptive implant
the Mirena contraceptive implant (ius)
the Copper coil (iucd)

In other words the most common used contraceptives in this country by the majority of women using contraceptives.

efb

http://m.gawker.com/5978597/catholic-hospital-chain-kills-wrongful-death-lawsuit-by-arguing-that-a-fetus-is-not-a-person

Church argues foetus is not a person- for the sake of money of corse!

Flier

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

No one is throwing the M word around here...

There has been plenty of reference in the 'pro life' literature to those who have abortions as murderers, to those who preform abortions as murderers and to the foetus being aborted as having been murdered. I have not the time, interest or inclination to go back over the threads to check has the word been used here, but I would be surprised if it hadn't been. In any case, I never said it had been used here.

Bannasidhe

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

The thread title is 'Abortion' and I see no issue in asking folk where they stand on the general topic.

God (sorry ) knows I've had many quesitons flung my way that have little or no relevance to X...:)

and you are flinging just as much questions that have nothing to do with X so I don't really see what your point is here.

Silvio.Dante

oldrnwisr wrote: »

OK, so in the context of the general topic what use does your question serve? How does knowing the position of other posters advance the debate?

I'm curious, thats all...

Silvio.Dante

Morag wrote: »

So you consider any contraception which prevents the implantation of an embryo to be an Aboraficient contraceptive?

Should such forms of contraception be available on prescription here?

This would be

all types of combined pill
all types of mini pill
the contraceptive patch
the depo contraceptive injection
the implanon contraceptive implant
the Mirena contraceptive implant (ius)
the Copper coil (iucd)

In other words the most common used contraceptives in this country by the majority of women using contraceptives.

Did you miss these..:

3. Would you be happy to deny a woman the right to choose what to do with her own body in seeking an abortion for reasons other than threats to life, threats to health, fatal fetal abnormalities, rape/incest..?

4. Any time limits? Or abortion up to full term..?

When you've answered them I'll get back to you...:)

Silvio.Dante

Flier wrote: »

There has been plenty of reference in the 'pro life' literature to those who have abortions as murderers, to those who preform abortions as murderers and to the foetus being aborted as having been murdered. I have not the time, interest or inclination to go back over the threads to check has the word been used here, but I would be surprised if it hadn't been. In any case, I never said it had been used here.

Well its never been used by myself...

Silvio.Dante

Bannasidhe wrote: »

and you are flinging just as much questions that have nothing to do with X so I don't really see what your point is here.

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander...:)

So, where do you stand of time limits on the avalability of an abortion. Good thing..?

Sarky

You still have questions to answer. Nobody needs to bother with yours until you respond.

Bannasidhe

Sarky wrote: »

You still have questions to answer. Nobody needs to bother with yours until you respond.

I shall indulge him one more time.

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Whats good for the goose is good for the gander...:)

So, where do you stand of time limits on the avalability of an abortion. Good thing..?

I would have no issue with the legislation currently applicable in the UK (which is already availed of by thousands of Irish women) being enacted here.

Now, perhaps you will answer this - do you think women who are resident in Ireland should be prevented from availing of the UK's laws on abortion?

Silvio.Dante

Sarky wrote: »

You still have questions to answer. Nobody needs to bother with yours until you respond.

So what do you reckon. Chinese or Indian tonight..?

Silvio.Dante

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I shall indulge him one more time.



I would have no issue with the legislation currently applicable in the UK (which is already availed of by thousands of Irish women) being enacted here.

Now, perhaps you will answer this - do you think women who are resident in Ireland should be prevented from availing of the UK's laws on abortion?

1. So efectively abortion on demand in all but name...:(

2. No...

swampgas

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

So what do you reckon. Chinese or Indian tonight..?

To be honest Silvio, it's the questions you dodge and refuse to answer that say most about your position. It can't be a very nice position, when you are afraid to come straight out and give answers that you know will probably damn you.

Silvio.Dante

swampgas wrote: »

To be honest Silvio, it's the questions you dodge and refuse to answer that say most about your position. It can't be a very nice position, when you are afraid to come straight out and give answers that you know will probably damn you.

Dude, I damn myself everyday. T'Is the nature of being human.

Now if there's a particular question you wnat answering, and If I can, i'll give it to you...:)

Bannasidhe

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

1. So efectively abortion on demand in all but name...:(

2. No...

1. If that is how you want to perceive it even though there are limits set so the catch phrase 'abortion on demand' is not actually accurate.

2. What do you propose should be done to prevent women (and girls) travelling to the UK for abortions?

Obliq

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

1. Aboraficient contraceptives are a no/no I'd afraid.

2. No to the MAP.

You have GOT to be kidding. Are you actually a priest? Or perhaps you just get off on controlling women by denying them control over reproduction. Oh wait.....that's a priest's USP isn't it?

I cannot be bothered with your exceedingly low standard of trolling. At least have the wit to pretend to have compassion for this century's women. Good grief. I'm outta here till you're banned :mad:

lazygal

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Dude, I damn myself everyday. T'Is the nature of being human.

Now if there's a particular question you wnat answering, and If I can, i'll give it to you...:)

Here's a question I want answered. Do you want the right to travel and information to be repealed, and injunctions taken out against Irish women who travel abroad with the express intention of aborting their unborn children?

Here's another one. If the answer is yes, how would the State implement such a law?

Here's another one. If the answer is no, do you really care more about abortion not taking place in Ireland than the fact 12 women leave Ireland every day with the express purpose of procuring abortions?

JimiTime

Bannasidhe wrote: »

1. If that is how you want to perceive it even though there are limits set so the catch phrase 'abortion on demand' is not actually accurate.

2. What do you propose should be done to prevent women (and girls) travelling to the UK for abortions?

Just curious, what limits are on abortion in the UK? I was under the impression that you merely had to want one, and be under a certain amount of weeks with child. Have I got it completely wrong?


Just an observation too, but the poster you answered said women should NOT be prevented from going to the UK if they wish. It seems by your question there, you think he said the opposite.

Silvio.Dante

Bannasidhe wrote: »

1. If that is how you want to perceive it even though there are limits set so the catch phrase 'abortion on demand' is not actually accurate.

2. What do you propose should be done to prevent women (and girls) travelling to the UK for abortions?

1. That is how I perceive the abortion Laws in the UK.

2. Take another look at my answer in my previous post...:rolleyes:

Bannasidhe

JimiTime wrote: »

Just curious, what limits are on abortion in the UK? I was under the impression that you merely had to want one, and be under a certain amount of weeks with child. Have I got it completely wrong?


Just an observation too, but the poster you answered said women should NOT be prevented from going to the UK if they wish. It seems by your question there, you think he said the opposite.

My mistake - you are right he did. My apologies to Silvio.

But this begs the question - why not? Prevention of travel to the UK to procure an abortion would seem to be a logical goal.

Re: UK legislation - you answered the question yourself 'be under a certain amount of weeks' is a limit.

Silvio.Dante

lazygal wrote: »

Here's a question I want answered. Do you want the right to travel and information to be repealed, and injunctions taken out against Irish women who travel abroad with the express intention of aborting their unborn children?

Here's another one. If the answer is yes, how would the State implement such a law?

Here's another one. If the answer is no, do you really care more about abortion not taking place in Ireland than the fact 12 women leave Ireland every day with the express purpose of procuring abortions?

No...

All we can do is try to keep the horrors of the intentional kiling of unborn babies out of Ireland. We have no influence on other country's laws...

Silvio.Dante

JimiTime wrote: »

Just curious, what limits are on abortion in the UK? I was under the impression that you merely had to want one, and be under a certain amount of weeks with child. Have I got it completely wrong?


Just an observation too, but the poster you answered said women should NOT be prevented from going to the UK if they wish. It seems by your question there, you think he said the opposite.

Thank you...:)

Bannasidhe

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

No...

All we can do is try to keep the horrors of the intentional kiling of unborn babies out of Ireland. We have no influence on other country's laws...

Yet you are inviting Americans to influence our laws?

Sarky

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

No...

All we can do is try to keep the horrors of the intentional kiling of unborn babies out of Ireland. We have no influence on other country's laws...

And again we're back to you accepting bribes from other countries to subvert the Irish constitution. The hypocrisy is staggering.

Silvio.Dante

Bannasidhe wrote: »

My mistake - you are right he did. My apologies to Silvio.

But this begs the question - why not? Prevention of travel to the UK to procure an abortion would seem to be a logical goal.

Re: UK legislation - you answered the question yourself 'be under a certain amount of weeks' is a limit.

The Right to Travel within the EU is something I whole heartedly support. I'm not going to start advicating people cannot avail of services in other jurisdictions, legally. No matter how horrific I view them...