Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

Calina

splinter65 wrote: »

Dr Mark Murphy Givernment Yes campaign spokesman and minister Harris

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rte.ie/amp/962992/

This does not support your claim.

nozzferrahhtoo

splinter65 wrote: »

Dr Mark Murphy Givernment Yes campaign spokesman and minister Harris

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rte.ie/amp/962992/

I just read that link and also searched for the words "all" and "GP". I am not seeing anything in the link supporting the sentence "Why did the government tell people that all the GPs were on board?".

What am I missing there?

ohnonotgmail

splinter65 wrote: »

I live in a large market town population 10000 and there are 7 GPs surgeries and none are signed up to the programme. Why did the government tell people that all the GPs were on board?
My friend is a receptionist in a large modern clinic in Roscommon and they’ve been told that after a meeting of the GPs they’re not signing up and to refer any queries to the free phone number.
There was no explanation.

splinter65 wrote: »

Dr Mark Murphy Givernment Yes campaign spokesman and minister Harris

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rte.ie/amp/962992/

that article does not say that.

splinter65

Calina wrote: »

This does not support your claim.

The minister said 1000 GPs had signed the petition. Where are those GPs now?

ohnonotgmail

splinter65 wrote: »

The minister said 1000 GPs had signed the petition. Where are those GPs now?

it didnt say that. your readiing sklls are poor.

nozzferrahhtoo

tretorn wrote: »

If you do something more than one you are repeating it.

You appear to have an issue with plurals. There is a difference between "have had a repeat abortion" and "repeat abortions".

I know the letter S is a small one, but most English speakers appear to comprehend it's meaning. Since you do not, I am happy to work on it without the issues of fatigue you describe having. First, is English your first language? Always good to know when helping someone through a linguistic failing.

If you have a second abortion, you have had a repeat abortion. If you have 3 or more abortions, you are someone who has had repeat abortions. Getting the difference yet?

However your linguistic issues aside, the fact is you were describing this as "abortion after abortion" which is, even AT BEST, a massively disingenuous mis-reading and spin on what the figures actually say. You know it, and I know it. Only one of us is pretending you don't. The number of people actively having significantly more than a single abortion is around 3%. A figure, as I said, I am happy to see reduced. But it is not what you are painting it as.

If you are tired repeating your error, then stop repeating it. Only you are to blame for your own exhaustion on this one.

splinter65 wrote: »

The minister said 1000 GPs had signed the petition. Where are those GPs now?

First the link does not say that. Secondly however this is NOT the claim you made that people here are asking you to now substantiate. You claimed the government told us ALL the GPs would be on board. ohnonotgmail helpfully bolded YOUR sentence if, as it seems you do, you have any issue remembering having written it.

Where and when did they tell us this?

splinter65

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that article does not say that.

The article last May said that Simon Harris was claiming that as of May 12 2018 1000 Doctors had signed up to support the Yes campaign. Later on he was expecting most of the rest to get on board.
Well either he was lying or he was misled. Which?
Where are they now? 7 surgeries in our town and 11 GPs and our towns most vociferous Repealer rang them all on Monday to be informed, to her fury, that none were providing abortion services.

splinter65

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

You appear to have an issue with plurals. There is a difference between "have had a repeat abortion" and "repeat abortions".

I know the letter S is a small one, but most English speakers appear to comprehend it's meaning. Since you do not, I am happy to work on it without the issues of fatigue you describe having. First, is English your first language? Always good to know when helping someone through a linguistic failing.

If you have a second abortion, you have had a repeat abortion. If you have 3 or more abortions, you are someone who has had repeat abortions. Getting the difference yet?

However your linguistic issues aside, the fact is you were describing this as "abortion after abortion" which is, even AT BEST, a massively disingenuous mis-reading and spin on what the figures actually say. You know it, and I know it. Only one of us is pretending you don't. The number of people actively having significantly more than a single abortion is around 3%. A figure, as I said, I am happy to see reduced. But it is not what you are painting it as.

If you are tired repeating your error, then stop repeating it. Only you are to blame for your own exhaustion on this one.



First the link does not say that. Secondly however this is NOT the claim you made that people here are asking you to now substantiate. You claimed the government told us ALL the GPs would be on board. ohnonotgmail helpfully bolded YOUR sentence if, as it seems you do, you have any issue remembering having written it.

Where and when did they tell us this?

Ok not all but most. Or even 1000 as the minister is quite clearly claiming in this state broadcaster article .
So.
A. Is the article fake news?
B. Was the minister lying?
C. Was he misled?
D. Where are the 1000 GPs?
E. 200 at the last count, where are the rest?

nozzferrahhtoo

Well retracting the error is a good start. But I just re-read your link and also added the word "most" to my search. It is not there either.

All the article says that I can see, is that 1000 GPs declared their support for repeal. Nothing more. Nothing less.

That is a different thing entirely to declaring they would themselves provide the service. So I do not think any of your options A-E fit here, even if I was inclined to playing multiple choice. Which, for the record, I am not.

Rather you appear to be taking one figure of doctors doing one thing, and mapping it in your own head to something else entirely and reading implications that are not actually there into a move only you are making.

tretorn

There is a big difference in signing up to support a YES campaign thsn in actually offering to participate in abortion.

ohnonotgmail

splinter65 wrote: »

The article last May said that Simon Harris was claiming that as of May 12 2018 1000 Doctors had signed up to support the Yes campaign. Later on he was expecting most of the rest to get on board.
Well either he was lying or he was misled. Which?
Where are they now? 7 surgeries in our town and 11 GPs and our towns most vociferous Repealer rang them all on Monday to be informed, to her fury, that none were providing abortion services.

as you seem to have trouble reading an entire article i will quote the 2 important paragraphs. They are the first two paragraphs but perhaps you didnt read that far.

More than 1,000 doctors have declared their support for a repeal of the Eighth Amendment by signing a declaration which was revealed at the National Doctors Together for Yes in Dublin this morning.

Doctors from every county in Ireland have added their names to the document including GPs, psychiatrists, obstetricians and medical students.

So not 1000 GPs. Your original claim of all GPs was clearly nonsense and so clearly nonsense i can onlly presume it was a lie. No person could have honestly thought that all GPs were on board.

ohnonotgmail

splinter65 wrote: »

Ok not all but most. Or even 1000 as the minister is quite clearly claiming in this state broadcaster article .
So.
A. Is the article fake news?
B. Was the minister lying?
C. Was he misled?
D. Where are the 1000 GPs?
E. 200 at the last count, where are the rest?

it doesnt say 1000 GPs. How many times do you need to read the article that YOU linked to before you understand this?

splinter65

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Well retracting the error is a good start. But I just re-read your link and also added the word "most" to my search. It is not there either.

All the article says that I can see, is that 1000 GPs declared their support for repeal. Nothing more. Nothing less.

That is a different thing entirely to declaring they would themselves provide the service. So I do not think any of your options A-E fit here, even if I was inclined to playing multiple choice. Which, for the record, I am not.

Rather you appear to be taking one figure of doctors doing one thing, and mapping it in your own head to something else entirely and reading implications that are not actually there into a move only you are making.

Ok nozz. I take it that as a staunch supporter of abortion services for women you are entirely satisfied with the response of the country’s GPs two weeks into the introduction of these services.
And that you have no questions as to the amount of co operation and input sought or made welcome from these GPs by the Department of Health in the 7 months between the referendum being carried and the introduction of services.

ohnonotgmail

splinter65 wrote: »

Ok nozz. I take it that as a staunch supporter of abortion services for women you are entirely satisfied with the response of the country’s GPs two weeks into the introduction of these services.
And that you have no questions as to the amount of co operation and input sought or made welcome from these GPs by the Department of Health in the 7 months between the referendum being carried and the introduction of services.

so have you decided to withdraw your original nonsense claim?

splinter65

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so have you decided to withdraw your original nonsense claim?

It’s not a nonsense claim. Where are the 1000 GPs that Simon Harris said were on board? 800 of them are no shows 2 weeks in? Have you no questions about that?

ohnonotgmail

splinter65 wrote: »

It’s not a nonsense claim. Where are the 1000 GPs that Simon Harris said were on board? 800 of them are no shows 2 weeks in? Have you no questions about that?

you are clearly trolling now. there were never 1000 GPs. The article does not say that as has been pointed out to you multiple times now.

splinter65

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

as you seem to have trouble reading an entire article i will quote the 2 important paragraphs. They are the first two paragraphs but perhaps you didnt read that far.



So not 1000 GPs. Your original claim of all GPs was clearly nonsense and so clearly nonsense i can onlly presume it was a lie. No person could have honestly thought that all GPs were on board.

I’m glad your satisfied that out of 3000 GPs 200 are on board 8 full months after the referendum was carried. If I were a committed repealer I’d be asking some questions but I voted no, I’m not even Irish and as I think the Irish people are getting exactly what they deserve anyway, I really shouldn’t interfere.

ohnonotgmail

splinter65 wrote: »

I’m glad your satisfied that out of 3000 GPs 200 are on board 8 full months after the referendum was carried. If I were a committed repealer I’d be asking some questions but I voted no, I’m not even and as I think the people are getting exactly what they deserve anyway, I really shouldn’t interfere.

Continuing to ignore reality is very worrying. You should seek medical help.

Loafing Oaf

splinter65 wrote: »

I’m glad your satisfied that out of 3000 GPs 200 are on board 8 full months after the referendum was carried. If I were a committed repealer I’d be asking some questions

Why? What does it matter? 200 is more than enough to meet the need.

Timberrrrrrrr

tretorn wrote: »

My local GP told me she has vulnerable young girls who come to her for contraceptive advice. Her staff keep tabs on these girls so they remember to pick up their contraception and they are reminded about safe sex.

The GP said these girls now wont bother about contraception or safe sex at all. It will be one abortion after the other and this is going to line someones pocket.

And the Government wont be able to set up exclusion zones around premises where abortions are taking place. Irish people have a constitutional right to meet whoever they like and engage in peaceful protest. I think the only place you cant protest is in the Dail grounds but I am open to correction on that.

Anyway in order to draw up exclusion zones around places where abortions are carried out the Government will have to hold another referendum to bring in laws to limit where people can meet up and associate.

Of all the bullsh/t that has been posted on this subject this is the biggest pile i have ever come across!

splinter65

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Continuing to ignore reality is very worrying. You should seek medical help.

What is the reality as you see it? How many GPs are on board?

splinter65

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Why? What does it matter? 200 is more than enough to meet the need.

So in our town (pop. 10,000) there are no GPs on board. What now for a medical card patient in a crisis pregnancy living here with no transport and no money? Is this how you pictured the service panning out?

ohnonotgmail

splinter65 wrote: »

What is the reality as you see it? How many GPs are on board?

The reality that 1000 GPs were never on board. which you continue to ignore.

robindch

Mod:

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you are clearly trolling now.

Honestly, people, how many times do I have to say it? Don't accuse your fellow posters of trolling, lying, soap-boxing and the rest. Keep it civil. Thank you. It's not difficult. And indeed, it's there in black and white - third-last paragraph in the recent charter update. The next person who slags of somebody thusly, or implies any of them, will be getting a card to take home with them.

EOTR - neither am I thank-whoring for the pro-life side, as I imagine you know quite well. If you thank this post or any more of my posts in this thread, you too will be carded.

splinter65

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

The reality that 1000 GPs were never on board. which you continue to ignore.

Ok. You don’t want to talk about the percentage of GPs who are on board, why the rest are not on board, or the impact of this dearth on abortion services in areas with zero affordable public transport. That’s fine. Talk about something else.

aloyisious

end of the road wrote: »

i believe it is, as a fundamental women's right is to be born, to grow and to exist and be part of society on an equal footing. abortion kills unborn women.

Were I to change the wording of yours above to read that abortion kills unborn rapists, what say you?

ohnonotgmail

splinter65 wrote: »

Ok. You don’t want to talk about the percentage of GPs who are on board, why the rest are not on board, or the impact of this dearth on abortion services in areas with zero affordable public transport. That’s fine. Talk about something else.

you are not worth getting banned for. on to the list you go

splinter65

aloyisious wrote: »

Were I to change the wording of yours above to read that abortion kills unborn rapists, what say you?

It kills far less rapists then women though aloyisious. Far far far less. I think we all know that’s true. It’s one thing we can all agree on. Thousands and thousands of unborn girls and some rapists.

aloyisious

splinter65 wrote: »

It kills far less rapists then women though aloyisious. Far far far less. I think we all know that’s true. It’s one thing we can all agree on. Thousands and thousands of unborn girls and some rapists.

Sticking with the thousands and thousands of unborn aborted figure mentioned, it might be worth exploring this piece of information seeing as it refers to girls alone. I know that the gender-specific figure mentioned was apparently supposed to be a response on how women's rights were being trampled on by abortion but the figure must be disputed as it refers to one gender alone being aborted. If the person who introduced the thousands and thousands of girls figure was serious about being anti-abortion, a non-gender specific figure would have sufficed.

I think the gender-specific figure was mentioned solely to throw a gender-selective curve-ball into this discussion, somewhat along the lines of the one about disability-specific abortions being carried out if abortion was legalized here.

eviltwin

splinter65 wrote: »

So in our town (pop. 10,000) there are no GPs on board. What now for a medical card patient in a crisis pregnancy living here with no transport and no money? Is this how you pictured the service panning out?

you're almost foaming at the mouth with glee at that aren't you?

Luckily the family planning clinics will see her and there are groups who will help with travel costs. It's not ideal and hopefully will change but is a million miles away from travelling outside the country. We havent got a perfect service but at least we actually have a service.