Abortion Discussion

dharma200

I really don't think replying to jack serves any purpose atall... Some of his comments are just disgusting. It always amazines me how quick, after a few posts, it becomes apparent that the person is either a troll or a total mysogynist. There is nothing to be gained by engaging with this particular poster other than contempt so I am out. ��

Morag

Morag wrote: »

So Jack Kyle if you consider abortion to be the murdering of a child, are women who have had an abortion there fore unfit to be mother's to other children?

Should if it is know a woman has had an abortion and has children or goes on to have children should she be reported to social services?

Should those children be removed from her care as she has already murdered a child?

Any change you would answer these questions?

Jack Kyle

Pherekydes wrote: »

Showing your true colours now...

Don't try and tar me with that brush.

I've repeatedly included the men in various posts.

Abortion as a lifestyle choice is not a women's issue.

Afroshack

Jack Kyle wrote: »

The men are just as culpable in a "we had a drunken knee trembler, let's hop on the boat and have the baby murdered" scenario, which I'd venture is the typical abortion scenario.

Rape victims are much cited but virtually non existent.

Jack I think it's safe to say you don't give a toss about women.

Jack Kyle

Morag wrote: »

Any change you would answer these questions?

<SNIP>

No is the simple answer to your question. Interesting question though.

Jack Kyle

Afroshack wrote: »

Jack I think it's safe to say you don't give a toss about women.

That is not true.

Fairer to say that women don't think that men are entitled to a view on these topics.

dharma200

Men who advocate tying women up, restraining them and calling women sluts are entitled to a few things, and their opinion taken seriously is not one.......

The Black Oil

Compassion and empathy called - they want their definitions back.

Morag

<SNIP>

Jack Kyle wrote: »

No is the simple answer to your question. Interesting question though.

So you don't think that a woman who has murdered a child is a danger to other children she has or may have.

Surely that is a daft double standard?

Afroshack

Jack Kyle wrote: »

That is not true.

Fairer to say that women don't think that men are entitled to a view on these topics.

An opinion is fine. The following are not:

1. Thinking it's acceptable to physically restrain women during pregnancy
2. Thinking it's acceptable to monitor their travel and stop them leaving the country.
3. Undermining how many rape survivors have terminated an unwanted pregnancy. (have you forgotten how the X-case began)
4. Calling women regretful sluts, baby-killers, murderers, and accusing them of infantcide.
5. Denouncing women who would rather fulfill their career ambitions before starting a family.

Bannasidhe

Jack Kyle wrote: »

Rape victims are much cited but virtually non existent.

Funny - as that is exactly what sparked off the X Case.

Are you going to tell us that the body has a way of not becoming pregnant following a legitimate rape next?

Or are you now saying that pregnancy due to rape is a justifiable reason to have an abortion?

by the by

A young girl in Chile is facing health complications after getting pregnant from a rape--and her ordeal has ignited a debate over the country’s total abortion ban.
...The 11-year-old is now 14-weeks pregnant. Her mother’s boyfriend confessed to abusing the fifth-grader. The girl was raped numerous times over the past two years.

But abortion is not an option.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/rape-11-year-old-chile-sparks-national-debate-over-abortion-ban

The very life of an 11 year old child jack is threatened because she got pregnant after being raped numerous times - you are all talk about protecting innocent unborn 'children' - what about her jack? She is a child. Doesn't her life need to be protected too?

Jack Kyle

Anyways, I've noted the first sly little references to trolling (which this isn't).

The usual tactics are about to be deployed...

More and more ludicrous questions will be asked. The sheer volume of questions and their similarity will force me to ignore some and to repeat my position. I'll then be accused of peddling opinions rather than facts (which is the only option for topics like this) and repeating my points ad nauseam.

I'll then be baited and insulted to provoke an angry response.

Then the pro-abortion lobby will delight in looking to have me banned.

Well I'm out before all of the above.

Good luck to you all. I am entitled to my opinion, as are you.

dharma200

Good.

The Black Oil

Ah, the persecution card, how are ye?

Turtwig

Jack Kyle wrote: »

Anyways, I've noted the first sly little references to trolling (which this isn't).

The usual tactics are about to be deployed...

More and more ludicrous questions will be asked. The sheer volume of questions and their similarity will force me to ignore some and to repeat my position. I'll then be accused of peddling opinions rather than facts (which is the only option for topics like this) and repeating my points ad nauseam.

I'll then be baited and insulted to provoke an angry response.

Then the pro-abortion lobby will delight in looking to have me banned.

Well I'm out before all of the above.

Good luck to you all. I am entitled to my opinion, as are you.

Deja vu.

Anyways, please refrain in future from insulting posters grammar or syntax. Especially when it's perfectly obvious that it's a typo and the grammar and prose of post is otherwise near excellent.

Thanking yous,

Morag

Jernal wrote: »

Deja vu.

Indeed last time I saw a poster taking the tact he did, they said that abortion was child sacrifice and so likened feminists to witches.

Turtwig

Morag wrote: »

Indeed last time I saw a poster taking the tact he did, they said that abortion was child sacrifice and so likened feminists to witches.

I was actually referring to this. :P

MrPudding

MrPudding wrote: »

To the extent that they should be sedated, restrained and have the bone marrow extracted against their will?

MrP

On the off chance that you haven't gone, any chance of an answer to this, relating to your opinion that a person should donate bone marrow?

Also, I see the mask starting to slip... I know you said you were not religious, but I would hazard that very, very few non-religious people would use the term fornicate. It has a decidedly religious ring to it. You sure you are telling fibs...?

MrP

gaynorvader

Jack Kyle wrote: »

Anyways, I've noted the first sly little references to trolling (which this isn't).

The usual tactics are about to be deployed...

More and more ludicrous questions will be asked. The sheer volume of questions and their similarity will force me to ignore some and to repeat my position. I'll then be accused of peddling opinions rather than facts (which is the only option for topics like this) and repeating my points ad nauseam.

I'll then be baited and insulted to provoke an angry response.

Then the pro-abortion lobby will delight in looking to have me banned.

Well I'm out before all of the above.

Good luck to you all. I am entitled to my opinion, as are you.

Just in case you return once again. Why do you believe that a foetus becomes a child when it becomes human shaped? I think this is a central point as the debate is not really whether abortion should be allowed, as you yourself said earlier in the debate that it was ok if it was early enough. The debate is really around when a foetus becomes a child, that seems to be where the disagreement arises.

MrPudding

gaynorvader wrote: »

Just in case you return once again. Why do you believe that a foetus becomes a child when it becomes human shaped? I think this is a central point as the debate is not really whether abortion should be allowed, as you yourself said earlier in the debate that it was ok if it was early enough. The debate is really around when a foetus becomes a child, that seems to be where the disagreement arises.

But, but, but it has tiiiinnnnny fingers!!!!

MrP

Bannasidhe

MrPudding wrote: »

On the off chance that you haven't gone, any chance of an answer to this, relating to your opinion that a person should donate bone marrow?

Also, I see the mask starting to slip... I know you said you were not religious, but I would hazard that very, very few non-religious people would use the term fornicate. It has a decidedly religious ring to it. You sure you are telling fibs...?

MrP

I've seen it used in Early Modern documents relating to how awful it was when people of good English blood had if off with the mere Irish.

Actually, the authors of those documents tended to be of a religiously persuasion now that I think on it....

Doctor Strange

Jack Kyle wrote: »

Now you are sounding like someone from a bygone era.

*You're* going to throw that accusation at someone?

Sarky

I keep missing Jack's tantrums

Sonics2k

Jack Kyle wrote: »

If there was no alternative, I'd willingly take the beating. Not just for my own child...I'd take it for yours.

The killing of a child is heartbreaking. The experiences that you and I have had and that the child will not have. It's upsetting.

I'd take my chances with the bat.

You're right, the killing of a child is heartbreaking.

However we're discussing abortions of a fetus that has yet to form a full life form. It's a clump of cells.

Corkfeen

Jack Kyle wrote: »

That is not true.

Fairer to say that women don't think that men are entitled to a view on these topics.

Eh, you're claiming that the women who travel for abortions are 'sluts' or the dreaded 'career women', you're posts can't be taken particularly seriously given the nasty tone of them.

Brian Shanahan

Jack Kyle wrote: »

Instances like the Savita case are straightforward. She should have received an "abortion". I use the term loosely as what she needed was a necessary medical procedure.

That's akin to the example of a woman who requires life saving treatment which would kill the unborn child.

However, all of the examples provided by the pro-choice side are extreme and designed to muddy the argument.

A "normal" woman with a "normal" pregnancy who hasn't been raped and isn't dying should not be allowed to have an abortion. Such an abortion is morally wrong and is murder.

This is the scenario in almost all cases. Women that have been raped or women that are dying or women with two heads represent a tiny portion of cases yet they're the cases spouted by the pro-choice lobby.

You want to force women to have unwanted children, you take care of them. Until I see proof positive that you've personally adopted multiple newborn infants who would have otherwise been aborted, I'll treat your opinions, rightly, as being no better than the donkey dung I fell on earlier today (donkey derby for GAA festival, if anyone is curious).

Afroshack

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

You want to force women to have unwanted children, you take care of them. Until I see proof positive that you've personally adopted multiple newborn infants who would have otherwise been aborted, I'll treat your opinions, rightly, as being no better than the donkey dung I fell on earlier today (donkey derby for GAA festival, if anyone is curious).

YES! Exactly.

Brian Shanahan

Bannasidhe wrote: »

For all your talk of defending life - you appear to have placed some serious limits on what form that defense takes. Limits that mean force should be used when dealing with a fetus in utero but once it's born - then hell, let it die.

Well I've never met an anti-abortion advocate who gave two ****s about the life they're trying to "protect" once it actually becomes alive by being born.

Brian Shanahan

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I doubt that such a system would be affordable, and I'll hazard a guess that multinationals won't want to invest in such a country, nor would the EU want to trade with us.

Given what he wants Saudi Arabia would be up in arms over our misogynistic treatment of women!

That's how warped his mentality is.

aloyisious

This might force another "look" at women's rights in regard to pregnancy.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/fatal-abnormality-case-puts-abortion-back-in-spotlight-240972.html?