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

Sanctity of Life (Abortion Megathread)

Options
1…6364666869…124

Comments

  • Options
    #1952
    ucseae1
    Registered Users Posts: 63 ✭✭ucseae1


    lazygal wrote: »
    This sounds like you prefer making things difficult for pregnant women just because you think the harder way is better, a sort of suffering always being a good thing. I don't think its easier to travel, at great financial and emotional expense, for a medical procedure.

    Do you think we should make labour and not dying in childbirth easier as well, because things like epidurals are an easy exit? Was having my children by c section an easy exit to my situation?

    I'm confused.. What has labour//Epidurals got to do with abortion. My post was about how a pregnancy can cause stress to a women. Someone posted that to avoid this we should allow abortion. But we forget what is at stake, its a child's life.

    Why can't society support women who are in need of help, provide financial support, counselling. We all know its not in the states interest to have un-productive members of society. The young and the old don't contribute to the capitalist system, they are a drain on resources. Abortion is being pushed for a reason.


  • Options
    #1953
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    ucseae1 wrote: »
    I'm confused.. What has labour//Epidurals got to do with abortion. My post was about how a pregnancy can cause stress to a women. Someone posted that to avoid this we should allow abortion. But we forget what is at stake, its a child's life.

    Why can't society support women who are in need of help, provide financial support, counselling. We all know its not in the states interest to have un-productive members of society. The young and the old don't contribute to the capitalist system, they are a drain on resources. Abortion is being pushed for a reason.

    Your empathy levels need checking. Either that or you're wilfully ignoring the women forced to gestate foetuses that won't live. Why is it so important that all pregnancies continue regardless of any other considerations?


  • Options
    #1954
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,799 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    ucseae1 wrote: »
    My post was about how a pregnancy can cause stress to a women. Someone posted that to avoid this we should allow abortion. But we forget what is at stake, its a child's life.

    Stress from knowing your infant will either be dead on arrival or soon after; you say a child's life is at stake, but how many other children's lives would you willingly sacrifice just for the rare chance? And if what's at stake is a dismal quality of a life, why subject that poor soul to that? You may as well argue for keeping someone's body alive long after they are brain dead.


  • Options
    #1955
    Kiwi in IE
    Registered Users Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    ucseae1 wrote: »

    Why can't society support women who are in need of help, provide financial support, counselling.

    If was pregnant and the foetus had a fatal abnormality or an abnormality which meant that the resulting child would have no quality of life, no ability to communicate or move, and would face an existence of pain and medical procedures that it had no way of understanding, I would not want societies support, help or financial assistance, I would want an abortion, and an abortion I would have.


  • Options
    #1956
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,779 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    ucseae1 wrote: »
    I'm confused.. What has labour//Epidurals got to do with abortion. My post was about how a pregnancy can cause stress to a women. Someone posted that to avoid this we should allow abortion. But we forget what is at stake, its a child's life.

    Why can't society support women who are in need of help, provide financial support, counselling. We all know its not in the states interest to have un-productive members of society. The young and the old don't contribute to the capitalist system, they are a drain on resources. Abortion is being pushed for a reason.

    where'd I say that?

    I was challenging the assertion that there are no improvements to the health of the woman who aborts a foetus with a fatal abnormality.
    Delirium wrote: »
    how is aborting a foetus with a fatal abnormality a "social abortion"?
    robp wrote: »
    It offers no improvement in the health of the mother.
    Delirium wrote: »
    So aborting a foetus that is causing a woman mental and emotional distress doesn't improve the health of the woman? Really?

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



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1957
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    Delirium wrote: »
    where'd I say that?

    I was challenging the assertion that there are no improvements to the health of the woman who aborts a foetus with a fatal abnormality.

    What do you expect uscae1 to do, respond to things you've actually said?

    But then they don't get to make stuff up!

    Where's the fun in that?


  • Options
    #1958
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,779 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Kev W wrote: »
    What do you expect uscae1 to do, respond to things you've actually said?

    But then they don't get to make stuff up!

    Where's the fun in that?

    MOD NOTE

    Let's keep to the topic instead of commenting on other posters.

    Thanks for your attention.

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



  • Options
    #1959
    cattolico
    Closed Accounts Posts: 208 ✭✭cattolico


    Has anyone seem the amnesty international video? There was a time I used to respect amnesty. Now its pushing the killing of children I have lost all respect for them.


  • Options
    #1960
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    cattolico wrote: »
    Has anyone seem the amnesty international video? There was a time I used to respect amnesty. Now its pushing the killing of children I have lost all respect for them.

    A fetus is not a child.


  • Options
    #1961
    cattolico
    Closed Accounts Posts: 208 ✭✭cattolico


    Kev W wrote: »
    A fetus is not a child.

    when is it a child?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1962
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    cattolico wrote: »
    when is it a child?

    That's been answered over and over on this and other threads. I'm not going to repeat it again.


  • Options
    #1963
    cattolico
    Closed Accounts Posts: 208 ✭✭cattolico


    Kev W wrote: »
    That's been answered over and over on this and other threads. I'm not going to repeat it again.

    Is it an inconvenient truth that the pro-abortion camp wants to hid?


  • Options
    #1964
    Kev W
    Registered Users Posts: 2,536 ✭✭✭Kev W


    cattolico wrote: »
    Is it an inconvenient truth that the pro-abortion camp wants to hid?

    No. Because there's no such camp, for one thing.


  • Options
    #1965
    cattolico
    Closed Accounts Posts: 208 ✭✭cattolico


    Is our constitution protecting non-persons?


  • Options
    #1966
    cattolico
    Closed Accounts Posts: 208 ✭✭cattolico


    It seems animals have better rights than an unborn child for Amnesty international.


  • Options
    #1967
    Kiwi in IE
    Registered Users Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    cattolico wrote: »
    Has anyone seem the amnesty international video? There was a time I used to respect amnesty. Now its pushing the killing of children I have lost all respect for them.

    It's that awkward moment when you realise your values are in conflict with a leading organisation for the protection of human rights!


  • Options
    #1968
    Kiwi in IE
    Registered Users Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    cattolico wrote: »
    It seems animals have better rights than an unborn child for Amnesty international.

    Well Irish law already allows for animals to be better protected than women when things go wrong during pregnancy. If my cat or dog had a pregnancy that posed a serious threat to the animals health, the vet would have no hesitation in terminating the pregnancy.


  • Options
    #1969
    cattolico
    Closed Accounts Posts: 208 ✭✭cattolico


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    Well Irish law already allows for animals to be better protected than women when things go wrong during pregnancy. If my cat or dog had a pregnancy that posed a serious threat to the animals health, the vet would have no hesitation in terminating the pregnancy.

    Have you read the letter in the Irish Times entitled Amnesty International and abortion dated 19th of June.
    Irish Times wrote:
    Amnesty would do well to look at international reports, which place Ireland high on the leader board in obstetrical care, particularly when it comes to our low rates of maternal death and low perinatal mortality.


    Prof JOHN BONNAR,
    Professor Emeritus
    Obstetrics and Gynaecology,
    Trinity College Dublin;
    Dr PATRICK CONWAY,
    Consultant Obstetrician
    and Gynaecologist,
    Co Meath;
    Dr TREVOR HAYES,
    Consultant Obstetrician
    and Gynaecologist,
    St Luke’s General Hospital,
    Kilkenny;
    Dr CHRIS KING,
    Consultant Obstetrician
    and Gynaecologist,
    Letterkenny General
    Hospital;
    Dr SUBHASH KOHLI,
    Consultant Obstetrician
    and Gynaecologist,
    Co Kildare;
    Dr DERMOT
    MacDONALD,
    Former Master of
    National Maternity Hospital,
    Dublin;
    Dr EAMON McGUINNESS,
    Consultant Obstetrician
    Gynaecologist,
    and St James’s Hospital,
    Dublin;
    Dr JOHN MONAGHAN,
    Dr KHAWAJA
    NAVEED ANJUM,
    Consultant Obstetricians and Gynaecologists,
    Portiuncula Hospital,
    Co Galway.


  • Options
    #1970
    frag420
    Registered Users Posts: 6,158 ✭✭✭frag420


    Can we suggest that any newcomers to the thread sign a declaration stating they have already read all post prior to posting?

    It's a case of pro life person joins convo, states all the usual stuff from bogus sources that have been debunked on the thread previously without actually answering any direct questions, they then vanish as they are getting nowhere and then another pro lifer joins the convo asking questions that have already been asked and answered.....several times!!

    This is not a dig at the mods, you have a tough enough job here as it is, more a suggestion to those joining the convo to have the courtesy to read up on what had been discussed so that they don't repeat the same baseless arguments over and over.....


  • Options
    #1971
    cattolico
    Closed Accounts Posts: 208 ✭✭cattolico


    frag420 wrote: »
    Can we suggest that any newcomers to the thread sign a declaration stating they have already read all post prior to posting?

    I did. So?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1972
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,929 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Fun fact: Amnesty International were formed after the (conservative Catholic) regime of Salazar imprisoned two students for "toasting to liberty".


  • Options
    #1973
    cattolico
    Closed Accounts Posts: 208 ✭✭cattolico


    A new advert starring Liam Neeson suggests what the group really wants is to drive the last remnants of religious influence from Irish public life.. Us very nasty Christians who are letting hundreds of women die in Ireland because there isn't on demand abortion (of course its not true) Nobody is dying in Ireland because we don't have on demand abortion.

    Amnesty has shown its true colours, Its not a secular agenda, is an Anti-Christian Agenda. To drive out the church from our families and our lives.


  • Options
    #1974
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,929 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Oh noes, muh religious privileges!


  • Options
    #1975
    cattolico
    Closed Accounts Posts: 208 ✭✭cattolico


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    Oh noes, muh religious privileges!

    Not up for a serious demand on the Rights of the unborn?


  • Options
    #1976
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,929 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    How serious is your demand? Serious enough to call for a ban on the morning-after pill? Serious enough to demand that the 13th Amendment be repealed?

    It's not like us secularists are calling for religion to be repressed by the state, Hoxha's Albania-style. We just want the unfair advantages given to Catholics in this state neutralised.


  • Options
    #1977
    cattolico
    Closed Accounts Posts: 208 ✭✭cattolico


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    How serious is your demand? Serious enough to call for a ban on the morning-after pill? Serious enough to demand that the 13th Amendment be repealed?

    It's not like us secularists are calling for religion to be repressed by the state, Hoxha's Albania-style. We just want the unfair advantages given to Catholics in this state neutralised.

    So democracy is an unfair advantage. I'm not debating the morning after pill or the 13th amendment. I am debating the status quo. Our present constitution.

    FYI... I think if you open your eyes its not just Catholics who are pro-life. I know many Catholics who voted for gay marriage, however when they saw labour push abortion the very next day because gay marriage has passed they were not happy. Bring it on I saw. Lets have the referendum. Its not going to pass.


  • Options
    #1978
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,929 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    cattolico wrote: »
    So democracy is an unfair advantage. I'm not debating the morning after pill or the 13th amendment. I am debating the status quo. Our present constitution.

    FYI... I think if you open your eyes its not just Catholics who are pro-life. I know many Catholics who voted for gay marriage, however when they saw labour push abortion the very next day because gay marriage has passed they were not happy. Bring it on I saw. Lets have the referendum. Its not going to pass.

    First of all, I wonder if you also believed that the marriage equality referendum wouldn't pass.

    Secondly, back in April Millward Brown polled the public on whether they want the 8th amendment repealed. 63% supported abortion in the case of fatal foetal abnormality, 70% supported abortion in the case of a threat to the pregnant woman's health (as opposed to her life) - both of these are not legal grounds for an abortion under the 8th amendment.


  • Options
    #1979
    cattolico
    Closed Accounts Posts: 208 ✭✭cattolico


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    First of all, I wonder if you also believed that the marriage equality referendum wouldn't pass.

    Secondly,Millward Brown polled the public on whether they want the 8th amendment repealed. 63% supported abortion in the case of fatal foetal abnormality, 70% supported abortion in the case of a threat to the pregnant woman's health (as opposed to her life) - both of these are not legal grounds for an abortion under the 8th amendment.

    As regards Gay marriage (civil marriage) I voted yes because i have a family member. I think gay couples are better protected with civil laws.

    as regards abortion

    Risk to Life and Risk to Health are too extremely different things.


  • Options
    #1980
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    cattolico wrote: »
    As regards Gay marriage (civil marriage) I voted yes because i have a family member. I think gay couples are better protected with civil laws.

    as regards abortion

    Risk to Life and Risk to Health are too extremely different things.

    So you're happy for me to be left with a risk to health from pregnancy. Or for me to wait until a risk turns into a risk to my life before I might maybe be able to have an abortion.

    How many guises have you appeared under at this stage, repeating the same anti choice slogans and never telling anyone why it's ok for women to use the morning after pill or kill the unborn abroad without facing any consequences.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1981
    cattolico
    Closed Accounts Posts: 208 ✭✭cattolico


    lazygal wrote: »
    So you're happy for me to be left with a risk to health from pregnancy. Or for me to wait until a risk turns into a risk to my life before I might maybe be able to have an abortion.

    How many guises have you appeared under at this stage, repeating the same anti choice slogans and never telling anyone why it's ok for women to use the morning after pill or kill the unborn abroad without facing any consequences.

    My mother suffered for 5 years because my brother had a drug addiction. She was hospitalised at one stage because of the stress. Its your child at the end of the day. Society needs to support people instead of telling them to kill their children.

    We are all in agreement that a risk to life can lead to a termination. Nobody is disputing it. It already happens Ireland. However the risk to health opens a long list of exemptions. Where do you start and stop?

    the simple act of having sex can be a risk to your health, even with a condom and contraception. Am I correct?

    Doctors manage health risks in Ireland all the time.


Advertisement