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

woman refused abortion - Mod Note in first post.

Options
1…5455575960…95

Comments

  • Options
    #1682
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    Why bother thinking or posting about anything then ?



    Lots of things that are not legal here are legal in other countries, it does not automatically make them right or needed here.

    Please. Tell me what's so special about Ireland that one of the most restrictive abortion regimes in the world is what's right and needed? what is it about Ireland that makes it more sensible and appropriate for us to align ourselves with parts of Africa and South America rather than the Anglosphere and most of western Europe?

    (Apart from the fact that we're in a position where the UK can deal enough of the problem for us that people can ignore it until something fcuked up like this happens.)


  • Options
    #1683
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    Gustavo CoolS Quote wrote: »
    Please. Tell me what's so special about Ireland that one of the most restrictive abortion regimes in the world is what's right and needed? what is it about Ireland that makes it more sensible and appropriate for us to align ourselves with parts of Africa and South America rather than the Anglosphere and most of western Europe?

    (Apart from the fact that we're in a position where the UK can deal enough of the problem for us that people can ignore it until something fcuked up like this happens.)

    The law in Ireland believes that an unborn child has a right to life.
    I don't believe that because the UK or another country does something it is automatically good. I would think we are capable of making our own laws and minds up.


  • Options
    #1684
    Mountainsandh
    Registered Users Posts: 6,700 ✭✭✭Mountainsandh


    Ralph That's true (the bit about law abroad an law here) however you'll find that the majority of developed countries, and specifically Western Europe since that's where we are, have adopted a similar stance as regards abortion, with sensible guidelines to restrict it from viability point on. The WHO, and European Court of Human Rights are both recommending changes in legislation and a wider availability of abortion in Ireland.

    It is needed here, as an overwhelming majority of posters on this thread have tried to help you understand.

    No one will be forcing women to have an abortion if and when it is legalised here, so you will be able to share you view point and maybe change someone's mind some day.
    But more relevant to this thread, when that hopefully happens in Ireland, no one will be subjecting women to such treatment as Savita or this young lady had to endure.


  • Options
    #1685
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    The law in Ireland believes that an unborn child has a right to life.
    I don't believe that because the UK or other countries do something it is automatically good.
    I would think we are capable of making our own laws and minds up.

    Except we're not given the opportunity. Pro-life campaigners cite a thirty year old referendum to argue that the Irish population does not want to legalise abortion.


  • Options
    #1686
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    Mountainsandh wrote: »
    Ralph That's true, however you'll find that the majority of developed countries, and specifically Western Europe since that's where we are, have adopted a similar stance as regards abortion, with sensible guidelines to restrict it from viability point on. The WHO, and European Court of Human Rights are both recommending changes in legislation and a wider availability of abortion in Ireland.

    It is needed here, as an overwhelming majority of posters on this thread have tried to help you understand.

    No one will be forcing women to have an abortion if and when it is legalised here, so you will be able to share you view point and maybe change someone's mind some day.
    But more relevant to this thread, when that hopefully happens in Ireland, no one will be subjecting women to such treatment as Savita or this young lady had to endure.

    No one should be forcibly killing a child unnecessarily it can be clearly avoided, as it was in this case.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1687
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    Gustavo CoolS Quote wrote: »
    Except we're not given the opportunity. Pro-life campaigners cite a thirty year old referendum to argue that the Irish population does not want to legalise abortion.

    I've no objection to referenda
    Many of our laws are far older than 30 years, why no referendum for them ?
    Where was the referenda for the bank bailout, NAMA etc ?


  • Options
    #1688
    Mountainsandh
    Registered Users Posts: 6,700 ✭✭✭Mountainsandh


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    No one should be forcibly killing a child unnecessarily it can be clearly avoided, as it was in this case.

    It was not unnecessary in this case if it was to save a woman's life.


  • Options
    #1689
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    Mountainsandh wrote: »
    It was not unnecessary in this case if it was to save a woman's life.

    The child and the woman are both alive, why do you think an aborted child would have been a better outcome ?


  • Options
    #1690
    Mountainsandh
    Registered Users Posts: 6,700 ✭✭✭Mountainsandh


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    I've no objection to referenda
    Many of our laws are far older than 30 years, why no referendum for them ?
    Where was the referenda for the bank bailout, NAMA etc ?

    Why indeed ?
    Because we don't want them, or because a generation of politicians don't want them ?


  • Options
    #1691
    jill_valentine
    Registered Users Posts: 7,090 ✭✭✭jill_valentine


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    I've no objection to referenda
    Many of our laws are far older than 30 years, why no referendum for them ?
    Where was the referenda for the bank bailout, NAMA etc ?

    I think when we're at the point that not a single citizen who can possibly be affected by something has been able to have any input on it, it may be time to consider


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1692
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    I've no objection to referenda
    Many of our laws are far older than 30 years, why no referendum for them ?
    Where was the referenda for the bank bailout, NAMA etc ?

    I don't think you understand what a referendum is.


  • Options
    #1693
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    Mountainsandh wrote: »
    Why indeed ?
    Because we don't want them, or because a generation of politicians don't want them ?

    I didn't vote for any of our recent governments, did you ?


  • Options
    #1694
    marienbad
    Registered Users Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    No one should be forcibly killing a child unnecessarily it can be clearly avoided, as it was in this case.


    NO one is saying kill a child


  • Options
    #1695
    takamichinoku
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,110 ✭✭✭takamichinoku


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    Many of our laws are far older than 30 years, why no referendum for them ?
    You know you're just being silly here
    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    Where was the referenda for the bank bailout, NAMA etc ?
    The complexities of effectively arranging a referendum in an extremely short period of time would be colossal?


  • Options
    #1696
    Mountainsandh
    Registered Users Posts: 6,700 ✭✭✭Mountainsandh


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    The child and the woman are both alive, why do you think an aborted child would have been a better outcome ?

    An aborted 8 weeks embryo would have been a lot better than a woman subjected to weeks of suffering.
    An aborted foetus would have been better than the suffering of a traumatised woman.

    The better outcome would have been a woman not subjected to worse suffering than she had already had to bear.

    I am not afraid to say it clearly Ralph.


  • Options
    #1697
    takamichinoku
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,110 ✭✭✭takamichinoku


    marienbad wrote: »
    NO one is saying kill a child
    It's like one of those toys you pull a string on and it says the one phrase, over and over and over and over and...

    Was gonna type "over" 130 times, but you get the point.;)


  • Options
    #1698
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    takamichinoku wrote: »
    It's like one of those toys you pull a string on and it says the one phrase, over and over and over and over and...

    Was gonna type "over" 130 times, but you get the point.;)

    An unborn human baby child! Innocent murder! Dead!


  • Options
    #1699
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    takamichinoku wrote: »
    You know you're just being silly here
    The posters claim was that because we did have a recent referendum on a law, we should have one now.
    takamichinoku wrote: »
    The complexities of effectively arranging a referendum in an extremely short period of time would be colossal?

    This has not stopped referenda being held in the past, particularity when the EU wanted us to keep voting on the same issue until they got their desired result.


  • Options
    #1700
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    Mountainsandh wrote: »
    An aborted 8 weeks embryo would have been a lot better than a woman subjected to weeks of suffering.
    An aborted foetus would have been better than the suffering of a traumatised woman.

    The better outcome would have been a woman not subjected to worse suffering than she had already had to bear.

    I am not afraid to say it clearly Ralph.

    Except it's not very clear.
    Are you saying you would prefer the child had been aborted instead of being alive now, is that correct ?


  • Options
    #1701
    Mountainsandh
    Registered Users Posts: 6,700 ✭✭✭Mountainsandh


    Yes, I am saying that the embryo, not child, should have been aborted when the young woman first presented. That is very clear.

    I think from the time when the foetus becomes viable abortion should not be allowed, so in this case with the delays, there was no other choice at that stage. It simply should not have got to that stage.

    And edit : I would not "prefer" anything in that case other than I would definitely have preferred for the woman not to have been raped.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1702
    takamichinoku
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,110 ✭✭✭takamichinoku


    Gustavo CoolS Quote wrote: »
    An unborn human baby child! Innocent murder! Dead!
    ...and now I'm browsing through chinese websites for cheap pull string sound modules. redface.png
    If I can find some, I want to make that Al Gore doll from the Simpsons too.
    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    The posters claim was that because we did have a recent referendum on a law, we should have one now.

    This has not stopped referenda being held in the past, particularity when the EU wanted us to keep voting on the same issue until they got their desired result.
    Yeah, because public opinion on the matter has changed a fair bit since then. People might feel differently about some of the other laws from 30 years and beyond.

    Eh... don't get what you're on about there with the second part. There were immediate impacts to the whole economy which were going to happen regardless of which decision was made regarding the bailout, it would have been impossible to have referendum about it. Can't remember what kind of gap there was with the Nice and Lisbon referendums, but it was at least a few months for both.


  • Options
    #1703
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    Mountainsandh wrote: »
    Yes, I am saying that the embryo, not child, should have been aborted when the young woman first presented. That is very clear.

    I think from the time when the foetus becomes viable abortion should not be allowed, so in this case with the delays, there was no other choice at that stage. It simply should not have got to that stage.

    The child would not be alive now, if you had your way.
    I can't see how that is right, or a more desirable outcome.


  • Options
    #1704
    gctest50
    Registered Users Posts: 9,605 ✭✭✭gctest50


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    Why bother thinking or posting about anything then ?


    Lots of things that are not legal here are legal in other countries, it does not automatically make them right or needed here.

    Abortion ( without "Irish" conditions attached ) is needed here

    the only ones who will lose out are the ferry companies and the airline companies

    it would be much better for all involved


  • Options
    #1705
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    gctest50 wrote: »
    Abortion ( without "Irish" conditions attached ) is needed here

    Why is killing children in the womb needed ?


  • Options
    #1706
    Frito
    Registered Users Posts: 769 ✭✭✭Frito


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    The child would not be alive now, if you had your way.
    I can't see how that is right, or a more desirable outcome.

    I can't see how it's wrong.


  • Options
    #1707
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    Frito wrote: »
    I can't see how it's wrong.

    So you think it would be better if the child was not alive now, is that correct ?


  • Options
    #1708
    Mountainsandh
    Registered Users Posts: 6,700 ✭✭✭Mountainsandh


    The child simply would not have been, full stop. The embryo would not have evolved into a child, just like thousands of embryos do not every day, and are spontaneously aborted.

    The woman could have started dealing with the trauma she had already been a victim to. There would have been no child, so no question of a child being alive or dead.


  • Options
    #1709
    gctest50
    Registered Users Posts: 9,605 ✭✭✭gctest50


    Ralphdejones wrote: »

    Originally Posted by gctest50
    Abortion ( without "Irish" conditions attached ) is needed here

    Why is killing children in the womb needed ?

    The Rose of Tralee transmissions might be interfering with your internet connection

    you might want to read that again


  • Options
    #1710
    Ralphdejones
    Closed Accounts Posts: 581 ✭✭✭Ralphdejones


    Mountainsandh wrote: »
    The child simply would not have been, full stop. The embryo would not have evolved into a child, just like thousands of embryos do not every day, and are spontaneously aborted.

    The woman could have started dealing with the trauma she had already been a victim to. There would have been no child, so no question of a child being alive or dead.

    There are two innocent people involved here, not one.
    The child would not be alive, the abortion would not have solved anything. Aborting a child is not a cure for suicide or rape.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1711
    Frito
    Registered Users Posts: 769 ✭✭✭Frito


    Ralphdejones wrote: »
    So you think it would be better if the child was not alive now, is that correct ?

    Yes, I would be of a similar opinion to Mountainsandh. I can't see how this is wrong.


Advertisement