Abortion Discussion

Sarky

Morag wrote: »

Tbh it seems like it was drafted to spite both sides, which is par for the course.

Typical stupid tactic of trying to please everyone instead of doing the right thing, but that's nothing new in Irish politics.

But with the building momentum the pressure won't be let up until we have a referendum to repeal the 8th
so we can have real health care for women.

Aye, the outrage at all the things this bill failed to address is going to come in handy. Most people know the score now, and how incredibly backward women's rights in relation to health care are in Ireland.

iguana

Well I don't know what your response was EB but as far as I can tell that is an image of what a third trimester foetus would look like if human reproduction was cleaner, nicer and more comfortable all around. The proportion of the head to the body make the foetus look to me like a foetus past the cut off point for abortion nearly everywhere on this planet. Yet the foetus is all floaty in an amazingly roomy uterus rather than all squished up and the emerging body fat would be scrunched up where the body is bent in foetal position. And there is no vernix coating to be seen, nor is there any lanugo but I guess that could be because the pregnancy is so advanced that has already been shed. I have video and a large number of images from a 3D scan I had done of my son when I was 32 weeks pregnant and it's really quite different to your cartoon drawing.

So as you are refusing to answer I guess that either you disingenuously posted up a deceptive image designed to make people feel bad for supporting a woman's right to have an abortion to protect her own life which means that you have no genuine argument and must resort to lies to try and win people round. Or you posted up that image honestly having yourself fallen victim to dishonest liars who have twisted the truth in order to get you to spout their nonsense. Either way I don't think anyone here will be falling for it.

eireannBEAR

<SNIP>

robindch

eireannBEAR, I'm going to be generous and assume that you simply forgot this warning from five days ago, especially the parts concerning infanticide and hysterical language which Jernal kindly deleted for you.

Your next hysterical post will earn you a red card. The one after that will earn you a ban.

eireannBEAR

robindch wrote: »

eireannBEAR, I'm going to be generous and assume that you simply forgot this warning from five days ago, especially the parts concerning infanticide and hysterical language which Jernal kindly deleted for you.

Your next hysterical post will earn you a red card. The one after that will earn you a ban.

<SNIP>

robindch

eireannBEAR, I'm not sure if you're familiar with how either A+A, or boards in general, works.

For the avoidance of doubt, if you want to complain about some action a moderator has taken, you can do so in the feedback forum where other moderators will be present to judge what's been going on. In-thread discussion of moderator decisions is banned, and repeated offences against this rule will result in cards, bans etc.

eireannBEAR

robindch wrote: »

eireannBEAR, I'm not sure if you're familiar with how either A+A, or boards in general, works.

For the avoidance of doubt, if you want to complain about some action a moderator has taken, you can do so in the feedback forum where other moderators will be present to judge what's been going on. In-thread discussion of moderator decisions is banned, and repeated offences against this rule will result in cards, bans etc.

<SNIP>

robindch

eireannBEAR wrote: »

if this is a bannable offence can i just say it was worth it

Not bannable for this instance -- just red-cardable.

You'll be banned if you disagree with, ignore, query or even mention a mod instruction. As you will be if you post insults, indulge in hysterical language, post unhelpful imagery or anything else that you've been warned not to do on multiple occasions, or that might happen to violate the forum charter.

Do try to debate, rather than wave, rant, wave your fists, froth at the mouth and so on -- it really does work much better here.

eireannBEAR

robindch wrote: »

Not bannable for this instance -- just red-cardable.

You'll be banned if you disagree with, ignore, query or even mention a mod instruction. As you will be if you post insults, indulge in hysterical language, post unhelpful imagery or anything else that you've been warned not to do on multiple occasions, or that might happen to violate the forum charter.

Do try to debate, rather than wave, rant, wave your fists, froth at the mouth and so on -- it really does work much better here.

imaginary??? please explain

Morag

Hey eireannBEAR any chance you can answer my question?

Morag wrote: »

eireannBEAR are you still trying to say there is no difference between a embryo and a newborn?

robindch

eireannBEAR wrote: »

robindch wrote: »

You'll be banned if you disagree with, ignore, query or even mention a mod instruction. As you will be if you post insults, indulge in hysterical language, post unhelpful imagery or anything else that you've been warned not to do on multiple occasions, or that might happen to violate the forum charter.

imaginary??? please explain

For the crime of ignoring a direct, elegantly-spelled mod instruction, eireannBEAR will be letting his keyboard cool down for the next 24 hours.

Morag

Looks like the HSE is using the 8th amendment to justify the leap in restriction for home births and midwifes who do home births outside of their guidelines can face massive fines and a possible jail time.

That amendment to our Constitution is so toxic.

Turtwig

robindch wrote: »

For the crime of ignoring a direct, elegantly-spelled mod instruction, eireannBEAR will be letting his keyboard cool down for the next 24 hours.

His ban just got upgraded (downgraded?) to site wide week long ban.

lazygal

Jernal wrote: »

His ban just got upgraded (downgraded?) to site wide week long ban.

I consider it an upgrade in terms of the quality of debate.

Turtwig

Gerry Edwards. wrote:

Dear Member of the Oireachtas,
In October 2000 my wife and I celebrated our first wedding anniversary. Within a week we found out we were expecting our first baby. Imagine our delight – we would no longer be a couple, we would be a family. We immediately told our families and there was great excitement.
At the beginning of February 2001 we went to Holles Street for our 20 week scan and were taking note of crèches on the way that would be close to where we worked. We were projecting so much, where s/he would go to school, what would s/he do for a living etc. I assume this is normal.
When we were having our scan we didn’t notice the student ultra sonographer leave the room or that the midwife had stopped talking and was concentrating on taking a variety of measurements from different angles. I do remember thinking ‘it looks a bit like E.T.’ because there was a straight line above the eyebrows – I assumed the rest of the head was being hidden by some tummy or other tissue. I didn’t understand then how ultrasound scans work. The obstetrician on duty, not our own, arrived in the room and took more measurements and eventually asked us to come with him. We were brought to a small room with soft lighting and a box of tissues on the table. It began to dawn on us that something was wrong, but nothing could have prepared us for what we were told.

It was explained to us in a matter of fact manner with a coating of empathy that our baby had anencephaly (we never heard of it) and that it was a condition which was incompatible with life (we didn’t understand) and eventually that our baby had no prospect of life outside the womb – none! They were very sorry and there was nothing they could do for us in this jurisdiction. At some point we left. We knew nothing more. We contacted our employers and said something was wrong with the scans and we couldn’t make it to work that day. We then went home to our internet dial-up to see what we could find out about anencephaly ourselves, including how to spell it.
We eventually understood that our loved and very much wanted baby would never live so we contacted our parents to try to explain. I will never forget trying to tell my mother this news over the phone. Our parents called to our house immediately, but what could they do? They were just as devastated as we were, they could see our pain but couldn’t make it go away.

...
Full letter here.
-journal.ie

The full letter is recommended reading. Such a horrid experience for anyone to have to go through.:(

The Black Oil

That's one of the most moving stories I've ever read. Articulate, poignant, and heart breaking.

Sierra 117

That's heart breaking. The pain those poor people had to go through. It must have been unbearable.

shruikan2553

Looked at the comments, thankfully they were mostly supportive but you still had the odd people trying to judge someone for doing what they felt best. I really dont understand how someone could read that and think that they were wrong and bring up "infanticide"

Galvasean

Jernal wrote: »

His ban just got upgraded (downgraded?) to site wide week long ban.

Isn't it funny how the ones who moan about how strict A&A is tend to get sitebanned when they venture to other forums. They really don't realise how accommodating the forum is to them.

Morag

Wow so Human life Ireland (who are anti vaccinations) have set up a pro life charity shop in knock.
http://www.thecloak.org/you-can-help.html

iguana

Morag wrote: »

Wow so Human life Ireland (who are anti vaccinations) have set up a pro life charity shop in knock.
http://www.thecloak.org/you-can-help.html

Oh how I wish I lived in Knock. I have a load of old crap in the shed I could donate to them and they'd have to pay to dispose of it.:)

Sarky

Morag wrote: »

Wow so Human life Ireland (who are anti vaccinations) have set up a pro life charity shop in knock.
http://www.thecloak.org/you-can-help.html

Oh for sh*t's sake, Knock. This is why we can't have nice things.

Sarky

I had a quick look at Human Life Ireland's web page. Yup, vaccines cause autism is right on the front page. Just scroll down from the picture of the baby that must be on drugs to look so happy. Or, actually, you'd have more fun if you didn't go to their website and instead drove staples through your eyelids.

coolhull

Sarky wrote: »

I had a quick look at Human Life Ireland's web page. Yup, vaccines cause autism is right on the front page. Just scroll down from the picture of the baby that must be on drugs to look so happy. Or, actually, you'd have more fun if you didn't go to their website and instead drove staples through your eyelids.

Staples through my eyelids? Yep, I did that. Pretty painful, but still more fun than reading the HLI website

maguic24

Sarky wrote: »

I had a quick look at Human Life Ireland's web page. Yup, vaccines cause autism is right on the front page. Just scroll down from the picture of the baby that must be on drugs to look so happy. Or, actually, you'd have more fun if you didn't go to their website and instead drove staples through your eyelids.

Did you see the list of side effects for contraception on their page? :eek: We're all going to die. :eek:

lazygal

Is anyone still waiting on an answer on what St. Joseph wants of them?

Bannasidhe

maguic24 wrote: »

Did you see the list of side effects for contraception on their page? :eek: We're all going to die. :eek:

Not me.

Dades

lazygal wrote: »

Is anyone still waiting on an answer on what St. Joseph wants of them?

Apparently he wants them to go back to the 50's. And stay there.

Bannasidhe

Dades wrote: »

Apparently he wants them to go back to the 50's. And stay there.

The 0050's one assumes.

Frito

lazygal wrote: »

Is anyone still waiting on an answer on what St. Joseph wants of them?

It's nippy up there and he wants his cloak back.