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

The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Options
1…199200202204205…325

Comments

  • Options
    #6032
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    What's your point exactly? You're agitating for repealing the 8th amendment on the basis of healthcare issues while simultaneously acknowledging that none of those concerns will be addressed by repealing the 8th amendment.

    Why don't Pro Choicers come straight out and say that they are in favour of abortion on demand. I get it, but running a campaign based on a healthcare issue because you think that this is more palpable to a wider audience is disingenuous. I think that Pro Lifers would be better served arguing the merits of abortion on demand instead of this tactic of taking the marginal case and use that as the broad argument when regardless of whether the woman was raped they are still in favour of abortion in which case you're giving an exceptional example to prove a rule that you don't actually want to defend. Taking the marginal case of the imaginary victim who has been raped or has a cancer and saying "this is all abortions" when know that this is simply not the case.

    Is there a script ye get for posting on here? Because your arguments especially the one above is very similar to thee glitz earlier posts, which have now been mainly reduced to pretty bad one liners


  • Options
    #6033
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    pleas advice wrote: »
    Indeed, next you'll be saying every sperm is sacred

    You can honestly see the point I'm trying to make though, right?

    More than happy to use contraceptives with the intent of not being pregnant, but have a problem seeking an abortion with the intent of no longer being pregnant... What?


  • Options
    #6034
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    Contraceptive pill, husband could have tubes tied.
    thee glitz wrote: »
    Zappone's gonna make up the numbers by giving out baby boxes.
    pleas advice wrote: »
    * as a form of birth control, so

    Are ye on some kind of pro-life piss up? These are nonsensical posts, literally nothing to do with the posts they're allegedly replying to. Is that what ye're reduced to?


  • Options
    #6035
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    You can honestly see the point I'm trying to make though, right?

    More than happy to use contraceptives with the intent of not being pregnant, but have a problem seeking an abortion with the intent of no longer being pregnant... What?

    as we have been told quite recently, abortion isn't contraception.


  • Options
    #6036
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,971 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Do pro life really care about "born" babies once they have arrived? Just wondered about that.

    They seem to be very focused on embryos and foetuses with moving fingers and all the rest of it. But once born, all is forgotten.

    And then the parents have a battle for that kid's care for the rest of their lives. Where is pro life support there I often wonder?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6037
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    pleas advice wrote: »
    as we have been told quite recently, abortion isn't contraception.

    Not quite recently, since it was first mentioned.

    And repeatedly since then.


  • Options
    #6038
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    Contraceptive pill, husband could have tubes tied.

    a friend of mine was married to a man that had a vasectomy, both of them had grown up children from previous relationships.
    she got pregnant.
    With twins.
    que much rows etc etc turned out he still fathered the children.

    no contraceptive is 100% affective.


  • Options
    #6039
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    Contraceptive pill, husband could have tubes tied.

    Contraception, including sterilisation, is not 100% effective. That’s if you can find a doctor who will do it as it is notoriously difficult to get sterilised in this country.

    So, should that woman not have sex with her husband? Yes or no?

    And to answer your question: as you have been told abortion cannot be used as contraception as conception has already occurred. However I have no problems with women using abortion to not have babies that, for their own reasons, they do not want to have.


  • Options
    #6040
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    Not quite recently, since it was first mentioned.

    And repeatedly since then.

    so you can see the difference between preventing a pregnancy, and ending one?


  • Options
    #6041
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    pleas advice wrote: »
    so you can see the difference between preventing a pregnancy, and ending one?

    can you?
    people can do everything in their power to prevent a pregnancy but it still occurs.
    what would you suggest they do if contraception fails?
    remember they dont want to be pregnant & they dont want a baby?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6042
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,553 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote:
    Contraceptive pill, husband could have tubes tied.


    Husband could have tubes tied....


  • Options
    #6043
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    pleas advice wrote: »
    so you can see the difference between preventing a pregnancy, and ending one?

    Absolutely I can, you just cannot try to take the perceived moral high ground against abortion ending a pregnancy if you take contraception to prevent a pregnancy in the first place, it is mindnumbingly flawed logic.


  • Options
    #6044
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,553 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Neddyusa wrote:
    Interestingly Repeal campaigners repeatedly play the man rather the ball when it comes to "debate".


    What exactly does that mean?


  • Options
    #6045
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Ave Sodalis wrote: »
    What exactly does that mean?

    It means the 'no' side have a victim complex, and it's no more effective today than it was in 2015.


  • Options
    #6046
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,080 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    horseburger wrote: »
    Would you place any limits as to when an abortion can be carried out?

    Yes. In legislation only.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #6047
    spoonerhead
    Registered Users Posts: 313 ✭✭spoonerhead


    Pro-life campaigners knocked at a few doors on my road. I admire that they’re out there trying to canvass, but being in Dublin South-Central it’s a waste of time. Probably the most left leaning constituency in Ireland? Got a bit nasty when people where opening their door before they even reached the gate to shout their disapproval. So knock at my door all you want, us working class people know a liar when we see one. This poster is a classic example of the misinformation they’re trying to feed


  • Options
    #6048
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,553 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Spanish Eyes wrote:
    They seem to be very focused on embryos and foetuses with moving fingers and all the rest of it. But once born, all is forgotten.


    It's like what George Carlin said in that video posted earlier (yes it's American based but apt given the involvement of Americans in this referendum). Conservatives don't care after their born until they reach recruitment age. Then they're interested again. They want live babies so they can have dead soliders.

    In a similar way here, they don't care until you are if child baring age and suddenly your reproductive system (and habits) are of great interest, regardless of the person attached to those systems.


  • Options
    #6049
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    Absolutely I can, you just cannot try to take the perceived moral high ground against abortion ending a pregnancy if you take contraception to prevent a pregnancy in the first place, it is mindnumbingly flawed logic.

    how so?
    it would be massively more flawed to say there is no qualitative difference between a separate sperm and an egg, and a fertilised egg / zygote / fetus


  • Options
    #6050
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,553 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    pleas advice wrote:
    how so? it would be massively more flawed to say there is no qualitative difference between a separate sperm and an egg, and a fertilised egg / zygote / fetus

    Has anybody said that?


  • Options
    #6051
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    I have no words.

    30729956_830923910429021_7405785518350270464_n.png?_nc_cat=0&oh=ceb94bbf0efb1a182b2210b1d6b632d3&oe=5B64FE8B

    ,


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6052
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    pleas advice wrote: »
    how so?
    it would be massively more flawed to say there is no qualitative difference between a separate sperm and an egg, and a fertilised egg / zygote / fetus

    "I'm using contraception because I don't want to be pregnant/can't support a baby right now/I'm not financially stable enough to have a baby/etc"

    "I'm seeking an abortion because I don't want to be pregnant/can't support a baby right now/I'm not financially stable enough to have a baby/etc"

    Neither one of these individuals want to be pregnant, so why does one get a free pass whilst the other doesn't?

    Not saying I disagree with contraception, I just think it's funny that pro-lifers can be so pro-life when technically contraception is the prevention of fertilization/creation of life in the first place.


  • Options
    #6053
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    Ave Sodalis wrote: »
    Has anybody said that?
    Misael Echoing Horse wrote: »
    Are ye on some kind of pro-life piss up? These are nonsensical posts, literally nothing to do with the posts they're allegedly replying to. Is that what ye're reduced to?

    are some of the pro-choice on the beer as well?


  • Options
    #6054
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Ave Sodalis wrote: »
    Has anybody said that?

    I used it to demonstrate to a pro-lifer the flawed logic behind willingly using contraception because she didn't want to be pregnant, yet has a problem with other women having abortions because they don't want to be a problem.

    For some reason this poster has latched onto it.


  • Options
    #6055
    pleas advice
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,492 ✭✭✭pleas advice


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    Not saying I disagree with contraception, I just think it's funny that pro-lifers can be so pro-life when technically contraception is the prevention of fertilization/creation of life in the first place.

    can you see no qualitative difference between a separate sperm and an egg, and a fertilised egg / zygote / fetus?


  • Options
    #6056
    AnneFrank
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,827 ✭✭✭AnneFrank


    A pro lifer, I can't believe people use that as a negative.Amazing really.


  • Options
    #6057
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    pleas advice wrote: »
    can you see no qualitative difference between a separate sperm and an egg, and a fertilised egg / zygote / fetus?

    I never said I couldn't.

    Like I said, I used it to demonstrate to a pro-life individual who doesn't see the hypocrisy in using contraceptives because they don't want to be pregnant (MAP included) yet has a serious issue with abortion.

    Surely if they're so pro-life they would (by their own ideologies) only have intercourse to procreate, no? If all life is precious to them, then by their mindsets, contraception would be the denial of life and an attempt at fertilization, no?


  • Options
    #6058
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    AnneFrank wrote: »
    A pro lifer, I can't believe people use that as a negative.Amazing really.

    The term should be pro-birth seeing as they don't give a tiddlywinks what happens after the baby is born, providing that no abortion takes place, it funnily enough doesn't become their problem anymore.


  • Options
    #6059
    Trasna1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 565 ✭✭✭Trasna1


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    "I'm using contraception because I don't want to get pregnant/can't support a baby right now/I'm not financially stable enough to have a baby/etc"

    "I'm seeking an abortion because I don't want to get pregnant/can't support a baby right now/I'm not financially stable enough to have a baby/etc"

    Neither one of these individuals want to get pregnant, so why does one get a free pass whilst the other doesn't?

    Not saying I disagree with contraception, I just think it's funny that pro-lifers can be so pro-life when technically contraception is the prevention of fertilization/creation of life in the first place.

    I would have thought it fairly obvious that the two situations are different. Pro lifers would see the embryo/fetus as a new human life and abortion is the ending of a human life from their perspective. Contraception is the prevention of a human life from occurring so the act of ending it (which is their problem) never happens. This would be an example of the end not justifying the means.


  • Options
    #6060
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    kylith wrote: »
    Contraception, including sterilisation, is not 100% effective. That’s if you can find a doctor who will do it as it is notoriously difficult to get sterilised in this country.

    So, should that woman not have sex with her husband? Yes or no?

    And to answer your question: as you have been told abortion cannot be used as contraception as conception has already occurred. However I have no problems with women using abortion to not have babies that, for their own reasons, they do not want to have.

    It's not for me to say if they should have sex or not, but if they are and they don't plan on having any more children then I suggest they use a form of "birth control" which on the balance of probability will prevent them from ever having any unwanted children.

    Again trying to take a marginal case in an attempt to prove something which you have no intention of defending.

    This is the problem, when you remove the marginal case of the rape victim with the glass eye who has stage 4 cancer, and you concede that repealing the 8th will address none of the healthcare issues which have been raised, the whole argument falls to shreds. Why don't they just run a campaign based on the merits rather than the imaginary victim?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6061
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 18,749 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    It's not for me to say if they should have sex or not, but if they are and they don't plan on having any more children then I suggest they use a form of "birth control" which on the balance of probability will prevent them from ever having any unwanted children.

    what about the people were contraceptive fails?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement