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

Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Options
1…318319321323324…330

Comments

  • Options
    #9602
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    robindch wrote: »
    While the term "parasite" is accurate, it has social overtones that shouldn't be ignored in normal debate.

    My own kid, for example, fits that definition of "parasite" fairly well, but I don't refer to her as one, nor do I think of her as one, and I wouldn't expect too many other people to do so either.
    Which is why I said that I wouldn't use the term myself, but there's no denying that a foetus fits the definition of 'parasite'.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    What indication is there that old hippy's mates were junkies, abusive etc? That is what I was discussing.
    Apologies. When there are so many posts it's easy to get confused :o


  • Options
    #9603
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Not ignoring the facts. In fact I am requesting them. Can you provide a medical definition of a "foetus" being described as a "parasite"? Yes or No?

    If you cannot it is you who is "ignoring the facts".

    If you don't know that a foetus takes all its nutrients directly from the another being (the mother) without any return then maybe you shouldn't be in a discussion about abortion?


  • Options
    #9604
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    bumper234 wrote: »
    OK

    So what about a woman during the Famine? She cannot feed it she cannot give it a loving home and if she goes through with the birth both will die. Is it ok for her to have an abortion?

    Why can't she give it a loving environment???

    If all children born into food insecure homes during the famine(s) were somehow aborted then there wouldn't be very many of us here now.


  • Options
    #9605
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Because you described the foetus as a "parasite".

    Only skimmed the posts so apologies if it's been mentioned. Fetuses can indeed be parasites. Parasitic twins is very often used as a means of discussing ethical positions in abortion. As they produce very intriguing discussions on the concepts of life and human rights.


  • Options
    #9606
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    If you don't know that a foetus takes all its nutrients directly from the another being (the mother) without any return then maybe you shouldn't be in a discussion about abortion?

    Can you provide a medical definition of a "foetus" being described as a "parasite"? Yes or No?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9607
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    And what has that to do with a mother making the choice of having killed-off her own unborn child or giving birth to it, putting it up for adoption and the child growing up healthily and happily in a loving environment?

    There are currently thousands and thousands of children in orphanages globally, and there are simply not enough people to adopt them. What is the point in adding to the numbers of children that will grow up in institutions or foster care?


  • Options
    #9608
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Because you described the foetus as a "parasite".

    Because it is biologically accurate. I used the term to reinforce the rest of the argument in that post, see here for an explanation why.


  • Options
    #9609
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Can you provide a medical definition of a "foetus" being described as a "parasite"? Yes or No?

    I don't have to, it fits the biological criteria. If you want to get back on topic, see my previous post.


  • Options
    #9610
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Why can't she give it a loving environment???

    If all children born into food insecure homes during the famine(s) were somehow aborted then there wouldn't be very many of us here now.

    And if most were aborted then maybe those that remained would have had better lives.


  • Options
    #9611
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Jernal wrote: »
    Only skimmed the posts so apologies if it's been mentioned. Fetuses can indeed be parasites. Parasitic twins is very often used as a means of discussing ethical positions in abortion. As they produce very intriguing discussions on the concepts of life and human rights.

    Right but how then is describing a foetus as a parasite "extremist language" when it is completely unneccessary with all it's negative connotations not "extremist language" when describing actual abortion methods is?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9612
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    I don't have to, it fits the biological criteria. If you want to get back on topic, see my previous post.

    So that's a NO then, thought so.


  • Options
    #9613
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Right but how then is describing a foetus as a parasite "extremist language" when it is completely unneccessary with all it's negative connotations not "extremist language" when describing actual abortion methods is?

    Hopefully this is just you catching up with posts, or you missed it, but I explained why I used the term here.


  • Options
    #9614
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Right but how then is describing a foetus as a parasite "extremist language" when it is completely unneccessary with all it's negative connotations not "extremist language" when describing actual abortion methods is?

    Sorry I don't follow.


  • Options
    #9615
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    So that's a NO then, thought so.

    Can you explain in what way (relevant to my use of the term "parasite") that a foetus isn't?


  • Options
    #9616
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Why can't she give it a loving environment???

    If all children born into food insecure homes during the famine(s) were somehow aborted then there wouldn't be very many of us here now.

    Erm because she lost her home to the British landlord and has been living in a ditch for the last 6 weeks;)


  • Options
    #9617
    oldrnwisr
    Registered Users Posts: 1,594 ✭✭✭oldrnwisr


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Can you provide a medical definition of a "foetus" being described as a "parasite"? Yes or No?

    Well, here's a foetus being referred to as a parasite in a medical context if that will do.

    Foetus as a parasite

    Not only does it refer to a foetus as a parasite but it specifically refers to it in the context of maternal nutrition which is what Mark was referring to in post #9598.


  • Options
    #9618
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    And if most were aborted then maybe those that remained would have had better lives.
    eliminate the useless eaters class for the sake of the rich having "better lives"- a little extreme


  • Options
    #9619
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    eliminate the useless eaters class for the sake of the rich having "better lives"- a little extreme

    More like 'eliminate large families, allow parents to better care for their children', the same way contraception does.


  • Options
    #9620
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    eliminate the useless eaters class for the sake of the rich having "better lives"- a little extreme

    How would you go about it then? Make all of the women have the babies and then go with natural selection? Survival of the fittest and all that jazz?


  • Options
    #9621
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    kylith wrote: »
    More like 'eliminate large families, allow parents to better care for their children', the same way contraception does.
    And what about the parents "choice"?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9622
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Hopefully this is just you catching up with posts, or you missed it, but I explained why I used the term here.

    OK. And if I were to explain that "cutting open a babies head" is an accurate description of what happens is it then no longer "extremist language"?

    Parasite is to foetus as cut is to incision.


  • Options
    #9623
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    And what about the parents "choice"?

    How would it restrict their choice?


  • Options
    #9624
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    eliminate the useless eaters class for the sake of the rich having "better lives"- a little extreme

    I was thinking more along the lines of very poor families can support one or two kids much easier than they can support 5 or more.


  • Options
    #9625
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    OK. And if I were to explain that "cutting open a babies head" is an accurate description of what happens is it then no longer "extremist language"?

    Parasite is to foetus as cut is to incision.

    That's extremist because you are referencing an act which you have been told, time after time, is not in any way representative of how abortions are carried out. All foetuses are biologically parasitic on their mother.

    So, to get back on topic, do you understand my disbelief at being unable to anaesthetise a foetus via a mother (despite the facts that there is nothing biologically stopping them and that is what they do)?


  • Options
    #9626
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    I was thinking more along the lines of very poor families can support one or two kids much easier than they can support 5 or more.
    Right, so would you like to see a ban on very poor families having more than 2 children?


  • Options
    #9627
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    That's extremist because you are referencing an act which you have been told, time after time, is not in any way representative of how abortions are carried out. All foetuses are biologically parasitic on their mother.

    So, to get back on topic, do you understand my disbelief at being unable to anaesthetise a foetus via a mother (despite the facts that there is nothing biologically stopping them and that is what they do)?

    Rubbish,

    Take Canada for example.
    Dilation and Extraction (D&X) (intact D&E, partial birth abortion)

    There are no laws in Canada restricting abortion. Since abortion reporting and recording is inconsistent and incomplete across Canada, it is not known if, or how many, abortions occur by this method in Canada each year.


    D&X abortion is a variation of the D&E method, and is used after the first 20 weeks of pregnancy. Laminaria treatment over several days causes wide cervical dilation. The abortionist, guided by ultrasound, uses forceps to grasp the fetus and position it face down and feet first. The fetus, intact and often still alive at this point, is delivered up to the head. The head is too big to pass through the cervix. After puncturing the base of the skull, the brain is suctioned out, the skull collapses, and the dead fetus is delivered. Digoxin, potassium chloride, saline or urea are sometimes used to kill the fetus before delivery.18
    http://abortionincanada.ca/methods/


  • Options
    #9628
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Right, so would you like to see a ban on very poor families having more than 2 children?

    Would you care to show where anyone has suggested that?

    You well know that education and the availability of contraception, along with a general turning away from the RCC, has meant that the average Irish family has gone from having maybe a half dozen or more kids to having one or two, because they are able to plan their family. Abortion can be used the same way; if a couple has feels that they would not be able to care for another child properly, and contraception has failed, they may choose to have the pregnancy terminated.


  • Options
    #9629
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users Posts: 7,776 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Right, so would you like to see a ban on very poor families having more than 2 children?

    Where the hell are you getting that from? You do know we are talking about the famine, right?


  • Options
    #9630
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    kylith wrote: »
    How would it restrict their choice?
    Their choice to have big families.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9631
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    Where the hell are you getting that from? You do know we are talking about the famine, right?
    It was a yes or no question really.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement