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 Discussion

Options
1…158159161163164…334

Comments

  • Options
    #4802
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Pro choice : not necessarily in automatic support of abortion per se, but supportive of the right to have the decision to get one. One can still be anti abortion and pro choice.

    Pro abortion: supportive of the occurrence of an abortive procedure.


  • Options
    #4803
    mezuzaj
    Closed Accounts Posts: 176 ✭✭mezuzaj


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Where did I say there was no value in a child with Down's? I've never been in a position to have a Down's baby so I don't know what I would do but I don't think I would keep it. I already have two children, one with special needs and frankly at this stage of my life I have no more of myself to give especially to another child who may be dependent on me for the rest of their life. I'm sorry if that doesn't tie in with your romantic image of parenthood but I live in the real world. My choices are mine to make and don't reflect on the choices of others. People who have Down's babies are no better than those who chose not to, they just made a different choice.

    Children are not choices.. They are human beings.


  • Options
    #4804
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,784 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    Children are not choices.. They are human beings.

    Um, people choose to have (or not) children. That's even true outside of the whole abortion debate. People get tubes tied/cut or use contraceptives to not have children. So clearly children are a choice.

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



  • Options
    #4805
    mezuzaj
    Closed Accounts Posts: 176 ✭✭mezuzaj


    Obliq wrote: »
    I'm sorry, but you don't have it in my book.




    Bolded words are very pertinent. Choice and decide are definitely important to the issue. Yes, when we decide to go through with a pregnancy, the risks are always there that the child will be (for eg) down's syndrome, but where are the choices? Where is the level of care and support from the state that this family will now need? How do parents take the decision to assign caring roles to their existing or future families FOR LIFE in the face of uncertain supports in terms of medical, educational and social needs?

    You may be willing to judge people for taking a choice that you wouldn't, based on your extremely righteous willingness to hand over your own life choices to a disabled sibling, but nobody should be able to make that choice for you. I can't say I would sign up for a life of uncertainty and potential great hardship for the sake of a foetus who knows nothing yet.....If you would, great, but that's your choice not mine.

    State support... We are the state.. We are society... We decide our future. Every child has meaning, rich poor, born unborn, black white, muslim or jew.

    Children are not choices, they are human beings.... And if society can allow them to become medical waste.. Then its a sick society.


  • Options
    #4806
    mezuzaj
    Closed Accounts Posts: 176 ✭✭mezuzaj


    SW wrote: »
    Um, people choose to have (or not) children. That's even true outside of the whole abortion debate. People get tubes tied/cut or use contraceptives to not have children. So clearly children are a choice.

    I'm am no debating contraception.. Which is totally different to abortion which is turning a living human being into medical waste.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4807
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,784 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    I'm am no debating contraception.. Which is totally different to abortion which is turning a living human being into medical waste.

    So aborting a pregnancy where the foetus has no skull or brain is turning a living human being into medical waste? Seriously?

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



  • Options
    #4808
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    I'm am no debating contraception.. Which is totally different to abortion which is turning a living human being into medical waste.

    Oh cut the emotive dribble, medical waste is medical waste, lots of aspects of what makes us human end up in the hospital incinerator. I don't see anyone shedding tears over the miscarriages that end up being flushed down the loo or that end up being disposed of by a hospital. You also seem to have forgotten that in many cases where the termination is due to an abnormality of some kind the parents are able to bring the body back for burial.


  • Options
    #4809
    mezuzaj
    Closed Accounts Posts: 176 ✭✭mezuzaj


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Oh cut the emotive dribble, medical waste is medical waste, lots of aspects of what makes us human end up in the hospital incinerator. I don't see anyone shedding tears over the miscarriages that end up being flushed down the loo or that end up being disposed of by a hospital. You also seem to have forgotten that in many cases where the termination is due to an abnormality of some kind the parents are able to bring the body back for burial.

    A miscarriage is not an abortion.

    <image removed:Jesus tap dancing Christ! Don't post anything like that again.>


  • Options
    #4810
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig



    Mod : Graphic images with blood and guts, are not allowed!


    This isn't HBO.


  • Options
    #4811
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,935 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    A miscarriage is not an abortion.

    <Jesus tap dancing Christ!>

    Actually, according to the Merriam-Webster medical dictionary...
    ABORTION: the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus:
    a : spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation—compare miscarriage
    b : induced expulsion of a human fetus
    c : expulsion of a fetus of a domestic animal often due to infection at any time before completion of pregnancy—see contagious abortion, trichomoniasis b, vibrionic abortion
    ...abortion and miscarriage are pretty much interchangeable.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4812
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,496 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    Bottom line is I am in no place to judge if a women is advised their child will be born with a lifelong condition that would mean they'd never process past the mental age of a baby/toddler and they decide to have an abortion.

    Why?
    Because I won't be the one dealing with that child all my life, I won't be the one dealing with a 20 year old that will still be in a nappy.

    It is their life and only their decision. As a society we can't claim some sort of twisted moral high ground unless every bit of support possible is available to these people.... If they choose to go ahead with the birth.

    If the Catholic Church and so called pro life groups want to claim some sort of Hugh ground then let them devout all their money to care for such people.

    Until then they can't judge people who are affectively left with no choice,

    Even if they devout money to such people, people still must have the choice.


  • Options
    #4813
    Obliq
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,371 ✭✭✭Obliq


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    Children are not choices, they are human beings....

    Children are a choice. Why else do we use contraception? There is no law saying we HAVE to have children, even if we get pregnant by accident.


  • Options
    #4814
    mezuzaj
    Closed Accounts Posts: 176 ✭✭mezuzaj


    Turtwig wrote: »

    Mod : Graphic images with blood and guts, are not allowed!


    This isn't HBO.

    So pro-choice can't face the reality of abortion.


  • Options
    #4815
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,784 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    So pro-choice can't face the reality of abortion.

    No, people are expected to use their words ;) you could start by explaining how you aborting a foetus with no brain is a living human being.

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



  • Options
    #4816
    swampgas
    Registered Users Posts: 3,552 ✭✭✭swampgas


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    So pro-choice can't face the reality of abortion.

    Actually it appears to be anti-choice people like yourself who can't deal with the reality of abortion. Pro-choice people seem to have a handle on it.


  • Options
    #4817
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    So pro-choice can't face the reality of abortion.

    I'll be honest, I wouldn't really have any desire to see any images of any form of an operation on the site(be it post abortion or post liver transplant). Would you call that an unwillingness to face the reality of medical procedures? Posting images to provoke what you hope is an emotional reaction is not the correct way to conduct a debate. Facts rather than attempting to horrify is a proper discussion.


  • Options
    #4818
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    So pro-choice can't face the reality of abortion.

    Mod:
    People can't face the reality of many things. That doesn't give you the right to post images that are gruesome and nauseous. That isn't acceptable. Especially in an ethics discussion.


  • Options
    #4819
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    So pro-choice can't face the reality of abortion.

    I think everyone here knows the reality of abortion. You don't need to post graphic images in order to illustrate your point, people get it. I don't need to see porn on a discussion on sex or a picture of a bloody tampon when discussing my menstrual cycle. We know what abortion involves, no one claims its pretty or that its not gruesome but that alone is no a reason to restrict it.


  • Options
    #4820
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    So pro-choice can't face the reality of abortion.

    I am well aware that there will be blood and mess. I expect there was also plenty when I had screws and plates inserted into my hips but I would not have appreciated the surgeon showing me photos and I would not have posted them on boards to try and dissuade people from having operations.


  • Options
    #4821
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    So pro-choice can't face the reality of abortion.

    I would also say that in the mercifully brief period of the photo appearing I googled the image and found that the entire foetus shown is significantly less than the length of an adult finger. That is not yet a person any more than a fertilized human egg is.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4822
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    So pro-choice can't face the reality of abortion.

    I can't face the reality of vaginal birth or c sections either. I have zero desire to see any images or video of how I gave birth. Can you face the reality of continuing an unwanted pregnancy?


  • Options
    #4823
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    Children are not choices.. They are human beings.

    You're right. A foetus is not a child however. If there's a petri dish of embryos and a toddler in a burning building, which do you save?


  • Options
    #4824
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    I'm am no debating contraception.. Which is totally different to abortion which is turning a living human being into medical waste.

    Is the morning after pill an abortifacient?


  • Options
    #4825
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    lazygal wrote: »
    You're right. A foetus is not a child however. If there's a petri dish of embryos and a toddler in a burning building, which do you save?

    Both :pac:


  • Options
    #4826
    mezuzaj
    Closed Accounts Posts: 176 ✭✭mezuzaj


    obplayer wrote: »
    I would also say that in the mercifully brief period of the photo appearing I googled the image and found that the entire foetus shown is significantly less than the length of an adult finger. That is not yet a person any more than a fertilized human egg is.

    20 weeks aborted boy was far bigger than a finger.

    And who said an unborn child is not a person.


  • Options
    #4827
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,784 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    20 weeks aborted boy was far bigger than a finger.

    And who said an unborn child is not a person.

    How is a foetus without a brain a person?

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



  • Options
    #4828
    swampgas
    Registered Users Posts: 3,552 ✭✭✭swampgas


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    And who said an unborn child is not a person.

    It's more of a potential person, going from not really a person at all at conception all the way to properly a person at 18 years of age when it gets the vote. You can't really equate a tiny embryo which doesn't even have a developed brain to a fully grown woman. (Unless you have a very dim view of fully grown women.)


  • Options
    #4829
    mezuzaj
    Closed Accounts Posts: 176 ✭✭mezuzaj


    swampgas wrote: »
    It's more of a potential person, going from not really a person at all at conception all the way to properly a person at 18 years of age when it gets the vote. You can't really equate a tiny embryo which doesn't even have a developed brain to a fully grown woman. (Unless you have a very dim view of fully grown women.)

    99% of abortions are not tiny embryos... they are children with beating hearts, head, hands, legs, unique DNA. Size does not define a person.


  • Options
    #4830
    mezuzaj
    Closed Accounts Posts: 176 ✭✭mezuzaj


    Turtwig wrote: »
    Mod:
    People can't face the reality of many things. That doesn't give you the right to post images that are gruesome and nauseous. That isn't acceptable. Especially in an ethics discussion.

    I have to agree with you.. (as much as I don't want to) but I know logically you have a point.

    But abortion is just that.. At the moment we have a conflict in Gaza and we are SEE the horror of death the masked photos of dead children and it calls us to say this is wrong, the worlds media is focused on this.. But sadly over the last 3 weeks more Children died up the road in Syria than gaza and we do nothing, we don't see it , we don't care, they don't mean much to the world.
    Mod Link removed: NSFW.

    If you are going to defend abortion, then you need to defend the photos. That is abortion, its turning a child that exists, with a heart, head, arms and legs into Medical waste..


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4831
    swampgas
    Registered Users Posts: 3,552 ✭✭✭swampgas


    mezuzaj wrote: »
    99% of abortions are not tiny embryos... they are children with beating hearts, head, hands, legs, unique DNA. Size does not define a person.

    Size describes a person though, and we do treat people differently based on development. We don't let three year olds drive or sign legal documents. Someone who miscarries at 6 weeks doesn't grieve the same way someone does when a 5 year old dies of meningitis.

    You can be as absolute as you want and try to argue that all people are the same whether they are a minute post conception or 80 years old, but in reality we do differentiate.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement