Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

Cabaal

fran17 wrote: »

No that's an odd conclusion considering that I used the term equal responsibility.Let me then suggest,seen as we have our suggestion hats on,that a husband and wife mutually consent to having a child and the wife therefor becomes pregnant.Some time later the wife decides she is not ready for motherhood and seeks an abortion.Do you believe that she should have absolute power regarding the death of the human life she and her husband consensually created?What I'm asking is,in your eyes,should a man have any rights regarding the termination of the human life he equally created.

The women has the say, its her body.

Do you believe that a rapist should have a say regarding the fetus if he gets a women pregnant?

aloyisious

fran17 wrote: »

No that's an odd conclusion considering that I used the term equal responsibility.Let me then suggest,seen as we have our suggestion hats on,that a husband and wife mutually consent to having a child and the wife therefor becomes pregnant.Some time later the wife decides she is not ready for motherhood and seeks an abortion.Do you believe that she should have absolute power regarding the death of the human life she and her husband consensually created?What I'm asking is,in your eyes,should a man have any rights regarding the termination of the human life he equally created.

Also hypothetically: If one was to take into account the amount of time and physical effort taken to produce the baby, would you agree that there should be a minimal amount of rights awarded to the man instead of a 50/50 amount of rights which you prefer,,,,,, OR alternatively,,,,, would you agree that if the man wanted (a share of) the resultant baby and the woman had stated that she did NOT want part or parcel of it, the man should take sole responsibility for the baby as it was born, not terminated, on his insistence?

Loafing Oaf

fran17 wrote: »

Do you believe that she should have absolute power regarding the death of the human life she and her husband consensually created?What I'm asking is,in your eyes,should a man have any rights regarding the termination of the human life he equally created.

It's an either/or situation at the end of the day. How in practical terms should the man's 'rights' be taken into account?

Delirium

fran17 wrote: »

No that's an odd conclusion considering that I used the term equal responsibility.Let me then suggest,seen as we have our suggestion hats on,that a husband and wife mutually consent to having a child and the wife therefor becomes pregnant.Some time later the wife decides she is not ready for motherhood and seeks an abortion.Do you believe that she should have absolute power regarding the death of the human life she and her husband consensually created?What I'm asking is,in your eyes,should a man have any rights regarding the termination of the human life he equally created.

And you wonder how I came to my 'odd conclusion'.

To answer your question, the woman should not be stopped from having an abortion if the husband objects.

What rights do you think the man should have over the woman and what actions she can take (or not) regarding the pregnancy?

aloyisious

I listened to the RC Primate (peculiar title for a person of religious-creationist, not evolutionist, belief) of all Ireland, Archbishop Martin of Armagh, talking about politicians not parking their religion at the door (of Leinster House presumably) when it came to discussing and deciding the future of the 8th amendment. I got to wondering if this remark was also intended for the ordinary people chosen to sit in the Citizens Assembly, debate and pass their ideas on to the Govt, like was the Archbishop trying to "guide" the debate there as well. I can't imagine that he'd think only politicians would discuss his remarks.

fran17

Cabaal wrote: »

The women has the say, its her body.

Do you believe that a rapist should have a say regarding the fetus if he gets a women pregnant?

That's quite a simplistic,and may I say a scary,conclusion.A woman engages in an act which is solely geared towards creating a human life and when this life is at its most vulnerable and relies totally on her for survival she should have the sole right to end its life even if the father,who is on an equal par responsibility wise,wishes for this life to live?
No of course I don't believe that a rapist should have a say but I also don't believe the life should be aborted.I believe that statistics regarding pregnancy from rape show that the majority of pregnancies go full term.

fran17

aloyisious wrote: »

Also hypothetically: If one was to take into account the amount of time and physical effort taken to produce the baby, would you agree that there should be a minimal amount of rights awarded to the man instead of a 50/50 amount of rights which you prefer,,,,,, OR alternatively,,,,, would you agree that if the man wanted (a share of) the resultant baby and the woman had stated that she did NOT want part or parcel of it, the man should take sole responsibility for the baby as it was born, not terminated, on his insistence?

I really wouldn't put something as wonderful and precious as the creation of a life on the terms of who contributed more,I think it would be demeaning to all involved.Regarding the alternative hypothetical,well a pass the parcel scenario involving a child is hard to imagine but the child being born is a pretty good start.

aloyisious

fran17 wrote: »

That's quite a simplistic,and may I say a scary,conclusion.A woman engages in an act which is solely geared towards creating a human life and when this life is at its most vulnerable and relies totally on her for survival she should have the sole right to end its life even if the father,who is on an equal par responsibility wise,wishes for this life to live?
No of course I don't believe that a rapist should have a say but I also don't believe the life should be aborted.I believe that statistics regarding pregnancy from rape show that the majority of pregnancies go full term.

Re your last about rape victims (supposing you are using Irish stats) might those statistics exist because the woman has NO legal right to abort the illegally created feotus in her womb?

Re your mention of demeaning to all, I take it you include the woman who doesn't want the hypothetical feotus in her womb to continue it's existence there and that it is likely she also doesn't feel the same as you, ref demeaning.

Absolam

smacl wrote: »

To suggest that just because you have had sex with a woman you have some rights to the foetus if she gets pregnant is ridiculous even by Monty Python standards.

And yet it's considered axiomatic by many here that just because she gets pregnant a woman not only has some rights to the foetus, she should have the ultimate right; to decide whether it lives or dies. Odd that gender bias suddenly becomes PC in that scenario.

Absolam

aloyisious wrote: »

I listened to the RC Primate (peculiar title for a person of religious-creationist, not evolutionist, belief) of all Ireland, Archbishop Martin of Armagh, talking about politicians not parking their religion at the door (of Leinster House presumably) when it came to discussing and deciding the future of the 8th amendment. I got to wondering if this remark was also intended for the ordinary people chosen to sit in the Citizens Assembly, debate and pass their ideas on to the Govt, like was the Archbishop trying to "guide" the debate there as well. I can't imagine that he'd think only politicians would discuss his remarks.

Is there a reason to think Archbishop Martin is a creationist? After all the Church of which he's a Bishop (and Primate) has no issues with the theory of evolution; the Pope said so the bast part of a century ago. Still, I think it's fair to say that the Archbishop, as Primate, must feel at least some obligation to offer moral guidance to Catholics who are currently in a position to help determine (or help guide the determination of) the moral stance of our nation in the future. I can't help but think that those who participated in the march against the 8th felt that they too were offering guidance to anyone who might be in a position to be involved with changes to the 8th either, what do you think? And given that it's not even their job to do so, it must be at least niggling at the Archbishop that he should also be putting a bit of effort in.

smacl

Absolam wrote: »

And yet it's considered axiomatic by many here that just because she gets pregnant a woman not only has some rights to the foetus, she should have the ultimate right; to decide whether it lives or dies. Odd that gender bias suddenly becomes PC in that scenario.

Not so much gender as the fact that the foetus is part of her body and not part of anyone else's. Odd that a bunch of men in frocks who have decided that they personally will never have families are so obsessed with interfering with the lives of pregnant women.

Absolam

smacl wrote: »

Not so much gender as the fact that the foetus is part of her body and not part of anyone else's. Odd that a bunch of men in frocks who have decided that they personally will never have families are so obsessed with interfering with the lives of pregnant women.

It's not actually a part of her body though, is it? It's in her body, and supported by it, but not actually part of it. And I think it's fairly unreasonable to say those men are are so obsessed with interfering with the lives of pregnant women (and rather unnecessarily snarky to describe them as men in frocks, almost as if you were trying to deflect attention from the lack of merit in your point), since it's unlikely you could demonstrate any of them take such an interest as to be an obsession, even allowing for the fact that in this particular arena their interest is in preserving the lives of unborn people rather than interfering with the lives of others. And of course, that interest is shared by 'men in frocks' (and come to that women in similar frocks) who do get married and have families.

Though it has to be said... none of what you've put forward actually addresses why there is an obvious gender line being drawn here; pro choice is apparently for pro choice for women, not pro choice for men.

Cabaal

fran17 wrote: »

No of course I don't believe that a rapist should have a say but I also don't believe the life should be aborted.I believe that statistics regarding pregnancy from rape show that the majority of pregnancies go full term.

So a man should have the say in what happens to the fetus but not if he's a rapist? But in the case of rape the women should have no say either even after her body has already been violated? Nice!

If a raped women decides to go full term thats fine, but it must be her free decision to make. If she does not wish to go to term no blocks or restrictions should stop her from getting an abortion. Its really that simple.

Cabaal

smacl wrote: »

Not so much gender as the fact that the foetus is part of her body and not part of anyone else's. Odd that a bunch of men in frocks who have decided that they personally will never have families are so obsessed with interfering with the lives of pregnant women.

If it isn't an obsession with women's reproductive organs its an obsession with gay men and anal (even the bible backs them on this obsession), you have to wounder sometimes about priests and bishops. Its just weird

Lesbians hardly ever get a mentioned, always found that one odd

Delirium

fran17 wrote: »

That's quite a simplistic,and may I say a scary,conclusion.A woman engages in an act which is solely geared towards creating a human life and when this life is at its most vulnerable and relies totally on her for survival she should have the sole right to end its life even if the father,who is on an equal par responsibility wise,wishes for this life to live?

Somewhat ironic to suggest another poster of being simplistic and then state that sex 'is solely geared towards creating a human life'.

It may shock you but people actually can have sex just for pleasure/intimacy.

Also, any chance of an answer as to what rights a man should have over the foetus in the womb? What choices made by the woman does he get to veto?

magicbastarder

fran17 wrote: »

That's quite a simplistic,and may I say a scary,conclusion.A woman engages in an act which is solely geared towards creating a human life and when this life is at its most vulnerable and relies totally on her for survival she should have the sole right to end its life even if the father,who is on an equal par responsibility wise,wishes for this life to live?

what context or mechanism applies, or how do you think the man's wishes should be respected if they clash with the woman's?
yes, the man has a right to feel aggrieved if the opinions differ, but the woman has to have ultimate say precisely because she's the one left (almost literally) carrying the can.

Absolam

Cabaal wrote: »

If a raped women decides to go full term thats fine, but it must be her free decision to make. If she does not wish to go to term no blocks or restrictions should stop her from getting an abortion. Its really that simple.

Or, no matter what horrors are visited on a person, nothing gives them the right to take the life of another person. Maybe it's really that simple...

PopePalpatine

Poland's government look set to back down from a total ban on abortion.

robindch

Cabaal wrote: »

Briefcase wanker is back in the news

http://www.thejournal.ie/ronan-mullen-abortion-article-3007283-Oct2016/

He got a glowing review on WaterfordWhispers as well:

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2016/10/04/dont-abort-that-baby-and-please-breastfeed-it-where-i-cant-see-it/

Waterford Whispers wrote:

SPEAKING exclusively to WWN, Senator Eamon Russey discusses his simple two-part plan for an easier life for everyone.

"The notion that a pregnant woman could one day to decide to abort the baby in her womb is almost as abhorrent to me as the thoughts that the same woman might carry that child to full-term, give birth to it, and then start breastfeeding it across from me while I’m having a flat white at Starbucks.

As a man, I can remove myself from the emotional and hormonal hysteria that a woman goes through on a day-to-day basis, and calmly and rationally relay the facts and figures about abortion and breastfeeding that I have gathered from wikipedia in a collected, concise manner that even those who disagree with me can relate to. If they’re open to listen when a man is speaking, they might find that they can get through life without complaining every five minutes.

I’ve spoken to dozens of other men, and they all agree with me; if you get pregnant, no matter how that should happen, you have a responsibility to your unborn baby to carry it to term. You also have a responsibility to the rest of society to not force us to look at you whipping your chests out in public to feed that baby. Take it to the toilets or feed it at home, or maybe just never leave the house? Think about someone other than yourself for a while. There’s a good girl."

aloyisious

RTE Drive-Time news programme reporting that Polish Parliament has rejected bill to alter Poland's abortion laws after the recent women's march opposing the bill.

Cabaal

aloyisious wrote: »

RTE Drive-Time news programme reporting that Polish Parliament has rejected bill to alter Poland's abortion laws after the recent women's march opposing the bill.

But I'm confused, if abortion is murder why would you allow murder in certain situations.

Its almost as if abortion isn't considered murder at all....

Cabaal

http://www.thejournal.ie/rte-asked-senator-to-remove-repeal-8th-badge-3013439-Oct2016/

RTÉ says it asked senator to remove Repeal the Eighth badge to stop "unchallenged campaigning"
After the break in the show, Ó Ríordáin could be seen without the badge.

Likely afraid of being sued again
:rolleyes:

and yet we have RTE with a religious agenda (and what it stands for) unchallenged every day,

PopePalpatine

In return, expect Ronan Mullen to get a special guest appearance this Sunday morning while Mass is on RTE, featuring a prayer to the patron saint of needlessly dying in childbirth, Gianna Beretta Molla. :rolleyes:

frostyjacks

Disappointed to see bullyboy tactics succeeded in Poland. It will only embolden the silly women and their beta male lackeys over here. I dread to think what stunts they have in the pipeline.

Delirium

frostyjacks wrote: »

Disappointed to see bullyboy tactics succeeded in Poland. It will only embolden the silly women and their beta male lackeys over here. I dread to think what stunts they have in the pipeline.

Do you view all protests as 'bullyboy tactics' or just those whose goals you disagree with?

PopePalpatine

frostyjacks wrote: »

Disappointed to see bullyboy tactics succeeded in Poland. It will only embolden the silly women and their beta male lackeys over here. I dread to think what stunts they have in the pipeline.

Remember, it's only "bullyboy tactics" when it's being done by your enemies! There's totally absolutely nothing "bullyboy" in Joe McCarthy-esque denunciations of "silly women and their beta male lackeys".

aloyisious

frostyjacks wrote: »

Disappointed to see bullyboy tactics succeeded in Poland. It will only embolden the silly women and their beta male lackeys over here. I dread to think what stunts they have in the pipeline.

Lol, surely you mean bullygirl? You made me imagine alpha male and female anti abortion frontliners quaking in their boots, with an invasion of priestly addresses on Merrion Square or rural RC churches in Co Kildare a la Pussy Riot, with Irish mammies on the rampage......

Pardon the title of the 1st image, that's what went with it on the Net, not mine. It seemed so overpowering and intimidating.........

Absolam

Cabaal wrote: »

But I'm confused, if abortion is murder why would you allow murder in certain situations. Its almost as if abortion isn't considered murder at all....

Did Poland ever categorise abortion as murder? Or are you just confusing yourself?

Zubeneschamali

fran17 wrote: »

what role would the child's father play if legal access to abortion was to become an issue in Ireland.

None, nothing, zero, nada, zilch.

aloyisious

This being an irish Times poll, it'll be discounted as biased by people opposed to abortion...... https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj_hf3htcjPAhUHJMAKHZcuBC0QqQIIMjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fnews%2Fsocial-affairs%2Firish-times-poll-majority-want-repeal-of-eighth-amendment-to-allow-abortion-in-some-circumstances-1.2819814&usg=AFQjCNEGDfPPjoYWLFJByzUyeUMfeJ7TKg

Also this re the obove Irish Times Poll...... http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/new-poll-shows-majority-of-people-in-favour-of-repealing-abortion-laws-758203.html