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

Prolife Campaign on Protection of Life in Pregnancy Bill Superthread

Options
1…1011131516…24

Comments

  • Options
    #362
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,219 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Zulu wrote: »
    And if we were talking about only having abortions at that point, I'd suggest far more people would support it (hell I would) - but we aren't.

    Those in favour of abortions wish to make them available a good deal later. Don't they?

    Some do. Some don't.

    Personally I am not pro-abortion and the only situation where I can imagine I would have gotten one is is the fetus was not campatable with life.

    I am pro-choice because I do not believe I, or anyone else, should have the right to dictate what others do with their bodies. If I did I would outlaw bad tattoos and those rings through the middle of people's noses.

    But the likes of YD are intent on women carrying to term fetus' that are simply not viable and have no chance of survival outside the womb with no choice in the matter.
    Do you support that view?


  • Options
    #363
    jaja321
    Registered Users Posts: 793 ✭✭✭jaja321


    Zulu wrote: »
    Why bother? :confused: If he said "no" you'd just ignore his wishes.

    Because he's my partner? It would be a decision we would hopefully agree upon and make together. But if we couldn't, then yes, its my body and if I don't want to go through with a pregnancy then I won't.

    In your hypothetical situation earlier whereby you found yourself in a situation where you wife was raped (i'm sorry to use this example, I don't mean to be crass, but its what we were talking about earlier) and she became pregnant - if she didn't want to keep it, you would be ignoring her wishes by wanting her to stay pregnant.


  • Options
    #364
    wp_rathead
    Registered Users Posts: 10,071 ✭✭✭✭wp_rathead


    Zulu wrote: »
    And considering that no choice is offered to the father, but only to the mother, "pro-choice" is a fallacy.

    Womans body dude, her choice


  • Options
    #365
    Reekwind
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,126 ✭✭✭Reekwind


    Zulu wrote: »
    And considering that no choice is offered to the father, but only to the mother, "pro-choice" is a fallacy.
    No. Firstly, 'some choice' is better than 'no choice'. Your position removes the possibility of choice from any actor in this scenario. For all your talk of "to hell with anyone else", anti-abortionists reject the possibility of men having any choice on abortion. No abortion means no choice for anyone and that is the context of 'pro-choice'

    Secondly, abortions are obviously sensitive decisions that should be taken in consultation with the father and other family. But no man, or woman for that matter, should have the right to insist that a(nother) woman carry an unwanted child. The day that men are able to become pregnant is the day that they will get more say in this matter. Until then the final decision should always remain with the mother who is expected to carry, birth and raise the baby growing inside of her


  • Options
    #366
    Phill Ewinn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭Phill Ewinn


    Reekwind wrote: »
    ...the mother who is expected to carry, birth and raise the baby growing inside of her

    No other option springs to mind? Abortion or nothing. That it?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #367
    jake_the_muss
    Site Banned Posts: 18 ✭jake_the_muss


    what do the scientists say on the subject

    id be broadly speaking pro life but I seriously doubt a cell - foetus can feel any pain at a week old , therefore id be ok with women having abortions up until such time the baby can feel pain , can that point be indentified ?


  • Options
    #368
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,219 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Phill Ewinn wrote: »
    No other option springs to mind? Abortion or nothing. That it?

    Choice Phill.

    A pregnant woman gets to decide if she wants to be pregnant or not.


  • Options
    #369
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Zulu wrote: »
    ...and the childs body. Lets try not forget that.


    ...if you regard it as a child - which for a long period it obviously isn't. Whether we forget about it or not, the womans right to control her own health should be the overriding concern.


  • Options
    #370
    conorhal
    Registered Users Posts: 6,994 ✭✭✭conorhal


    Pherekydes wrote: »
    How ironic:

    Who are you Alanis Morisette?


  • Options
    #371
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,219 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    jake_the_muss wrote: »
    what do the scientists say on the subject

    id be broadly speaking pro life but I seriously doubt a cell - foetus can feel any pain at a week old , therefore id be ok with women having abortions up until such time the baby can feel pain , can that point be indentified ?

    As with everything on this topic there is debate but the general consensus is that a fetus cannot feel pain until around the 24th week of development.
    The anterior cingulate is the area of the cerebral cortex responsible for pain processing. The anterior cingulate is part of the cerebral cortex, which begins to develop in the fetus at week 26.

    They certainly cannot feel pain in the first trimester as the required neural pathways simply do not exist. They have nothing to feel pain with..


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #372
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Phill Ewinn wrote: »
    No other option springs to mind? Abortion or nothing. That it?

    Besides having an abortion or continuing with a pregnancy, what other options do you have in mind?


  • Options
    #373
    Zulu
    Registered Users Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭Zulu


    jaja321 wrote: »
    ...But if we couldn't, then yes, its my body and if I don't want to go through with a pregnancy then I won't.
    Thats the crux of it. He doesn't really have a choice at all - unless it suits you.
    In your hypothetical situation
    It wasn't mine.
    wprathead wrote: »
    Womans body dude, her choice
    Indeed, thankfully a citizen in a democratic society doesn't have a gender, that is to say, thankfully, men and women have equal voting power.


  • Options
    #374
    jaja321
    Registered Users Posts: 793 ✭✭✭jaja321


    Zulu wrote: »
    Thats the crux of it. He doesn't really have a choice at all - unless it suits you.

    It wasn't mine.

    Indeed, thankfully a citizen in a democratic society doesn't have a gender, that is to say, thankfully, men and women have equal voting power.

    THE hypothetical situation then - jeez.

    Seriously though - what do you want? Do you want the man to have the ultimate choice? Because that seems to be what you're advocating for? Unless I'm missing something..


  • Options
    #375
    Zulu
    Registered Users Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭Zulu


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    They certainly cannot feel pain in the first trimester as the required neural pathways simply do not exist. They have nothing to feel pain with..
    ...and?
    If I was in an accident and through brain damage, I was no longer able to feel pain. Is it somehow ok to kill me? Simply because I don't feel pain?
    If a murderer was to anesthetize their victims, would their crimes be somehow less bad?


  • Options
    #376
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Zulu wrote: »
    ...and?
    If I was in an accident and through brain damage, I was no longer able to feel pain. Is it somehow ok to kill me? Simply because I don't feel pain?
    If a murderer was to anesthetize their victims, would their crimes be somehow less bad?


    More silly analogies?


  • Options
    #377
    Zulu
    Registered Users Posts: 10,965 ✭✭✭✭Zulu


    jaja321 wrote: »
    Seriously though - what do you want? Do you want the man to have the ultimate choice?
    No, jaja321. I haven't stated that anywhere. I was only pointing out how the lable "pro-choice" was as bad as "pro-life".

    With regards to what I "want": I've clearly stated, twice, where my opinion lies on abortion.


  • Options
    #378
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,765 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Zulu wrote: »
    Thats the crux of it. He doesn't really have a choice at all - unless it suits you.

    The man has the choice he has with any pregnancy, to support (or not) the woman in her choice.

    It's not really possible to offer anything beyond that as it would be saying the man makes the decisions for the woman when she becomes pregnant.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #379
    Reekwind
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,126 ✭✭✭Reekwind


    Zulu wrote: »
    No, jaja321. I haven't stated that anywhere. I was only pointing out how the lable "pro-choice" was as bad as "pro-life"
    And twice you have ignored my riposte that the pro-choice movement is indeed 'pro-choice' when compared to the 'no-choice' anti-abortion camp


  • Options
    #380
    jaja321
    Registered Users Posts: 793 ✭✭✭jaja321


    Zulu wrote: »
    No, jaja321. I haven't stated that anywhere. I was only pointing out how the lable "pro-choice" was as bad as "pro-life".

    With regards to what I "want": I've clearly stated, twice, where my opinion lies on abortion.

    Call it what you want - its about having options available.


  • Options
    #381
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,219 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Zulu wrote: »
    ...and?
    If I was in an accident and through brain damage, I was no longer able to feel pain. Is it somehow ok to kill me? Simply because I don't feel pain?
    If a murderer was to anesthetize their victims, would their crimes be somehow less bad?

    I was directly answer a question posed by another poster.

    But yes, If you no longer had a functioning brain then they would stop life support. In some cases this would result in death by starvation. By not feeding you they would in effect 'kill' you.

    Care to answer the question I asked earlier as to whether you agree that a woman should be forced to carry a fetus that is incompatible with life to full term?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #382
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    Zulu wrote: »
    ...and the childs body. Lets try not forget that.

    Embryo does not equal child.

    Whats the difference you ask? One you can freeze the other you can't. Its not really a difficult concept.


  • Options
    #383
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    Zulu wrote: »
    ...and?
    If I was in an accident and through brain damage, I was no longer able to feel pain. Is it somehow ok to kill me? Simply because I don't feel pain?
    If a murderer was to anesthetize their victims, would their crimes be somehow less bad?

    Its this kind of logic that leaves me of the opinion that the vast majority of pro lifers are so blinded by the "BABIES" they will never be fit to engage in anything close to a constructive debate.


  • Options
    #384
    Carlos Orange
    Registered Users Posts: 2,499 ✭✭✭Carlos Orange


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    Embryo does not equal child.

    Whats the difference you ask? One you can freeze the other you can't. Its not really a difficult concept.

    You can freeze a child.


  • Options
    #385
    **Vai**
    Registered Users Posts: 1,302 ✭✭✭**Vai**


    psinno wrote: »
    You can freeze a child.

    Only for a month after the sell by date though.


  • Options
    #386
    Phill Ewinn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭Phill Ewinn


    Nodin wrote: »
    More silly analogies?

    "They're" like a bad tatoo, "they're " like a paracite, "they" can't feel pain, "they" have no choice. God forbid they should be described as seperate entities with rights and entitlements under the constitution.

    The pro-choice types love analogies.


  • Options
    #387
    Mardy Bum
    Registered Users Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    Phill Ewinn wrote: »
    "They're" like a bad tatoo, "they're " like a paracite, "they" can't feel pain, "they" have no choice. God forbid they should be described as seperate entities with rights and entitlements under the constitution.

    The pro-choice types love analogies.

    Is an embryo a baby?


  • Options
    #388
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,219 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Phill Ewinn wrote: »
    "They're" like a bad tatoo, "they're " like a paracite, "they" can't feel pain, "they" have no choice. God forbid they should be described as seperate entities with rights and entitlements under the constitution.

    The pro-choice types love analogies.

    But they are not separate entities. They are very much dependent on being attached to another person's body to survive entities.


  • Options
    #389
    Phill Ewinn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭Phill Ewinn


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    But they are not separate entities. They are very much dependent on being attached to another person's body to survive entities.

    Dependants? That the word we want?


  • Options
    #390
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,219 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Phill Ewinn wrote: »
    Dependants? That the word we want?

    What words would you suggest?

    Separate entity certainly doesn't apply to something that is incapable of survival outside of another person's body.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #391
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Phill Ewinn wrote: »
    Dependants? That the word we want?



    ...they don't get a PPSN at conception. The protection afforded by the constitution is the result of a political campaign, not some statement of universal truth.


Advertisement