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…246247249251252…325

Comments

  • Options
    #7442
    kittensmittens
    Registered Users Posts: 2,074 ✭✭✭kittensmittens


    amdublin wrote: »
    And dictatorial. You forgot she's like a little dictator.

    We just want choice.

    No wants an abortion.
    Trust women.

    Pro Choice

    Does anyone else find the implication by the Pro life side that women will he having abortions "willy nilly" as really belittling and condescending? Do they think that having an abortion is like....removing an unsightly blemish on the side of you arm????
    Do people really genuine think its this easy a choice??
    If so, they really need to give their head a shake.

    I cant imagine the heartbreaking and gut wrenching experience it must be and how awful and difficult and soul destroying the choice is to do the right thing for yourself and all the while knowing what you have to do to make that right.
    If the Pro Choice side dont get that, then it shows them for what they are.
    People who will soapbox for a seed....but couldnt give a damn about the woman. Persona non grata.


  • Options
    #7443
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    AnneFrank wrote: »
    I disagree, she speaks for many people and many women.She's Pro life and all about traditional families.

    She speaks for people who support and have committed the sexual abuse of children in my opinion


  • Options
    #7444
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,080 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    What about FGM, that happens in otter countries should we legislate for that in Ireland also?
    I fail to understand the argument that just because everybody else is doing it we should be doing it also.

    Whatabout whataboutery?

    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
    #7445
    AnneFrank
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,827 ✭✭✭AnneFrank


    DubInMeath wrote: »
    She speaks for people who support and have committed the sexual abuse of children in my opinion

    How bizarre, the woman is a qualified barrister, architect and teacher. A highly intelligent lady and frankly someone all girls should look up to and aspire too.


  • Options
    #7446
    horseburger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,137 ✭✭✭horseburger


    Pedro K wrote: »
    She's a God botherer whose religious views should have absolutely no bearing in creating our laws.

    She is Catholic, but in debates on TV and radio, she doesn't bring religion into the argument.

    Here is a debate between her and Colm O'Gorman on the Pat Kenny show on Newstalk in May 2016:

    At the end she asks Colm O'Gorman what is so wrong with an amendment that strives to save both lives in a pregnancy. He doesn't answer.

    The video below includes the last section of the interview, where Colm O'Gorman doesn't respond.



    https://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/The_Pat_Kenny_Show/The_Pat_Kenny_Show_Highlights/138973/Amnesty__Iona_Institute_debate_abortion_in_Ireland


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7447
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,080 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »
    Again with the marginal cases to prove the broader argument. Would you be in favour of abortion if the baby was healthy?

    I'm in favour of the proposed legislation. I trust women to make the right decisions in consulation with doctors.

    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
    #7448
    smokingman
    Registered Users Posts: 3,749 ✭✭✭smokingman


    DubInMeath wrote: »
    She speaks for people who support and have committed the sexual abuse of children in my opinion

    ...and also that it's fine to kill actual children and stuff them in a septic tank


  • Options
    #7449
    AnneFrank
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,827 ✭✭✭AnneFrank


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    I'm in favour of the proposed legislation. I trust women to make the right decisions in consulation with doctors.

    Joey are you just quoting posts from ten hours ago and more ? The person you are now attacking was banned and can't reply


  • Options
    #7450
    AnneFrank
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,827 ✭✭✭AnneFrank


    smokingman wrote: »
    ...and also that it's fine to kill actual children and stuff them in a septic tank

    Haha I'd love you to back that up with proof, oh wait, you can't.


  • Options
    #7451
    horseburger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,137 ✭✭✭horseburger


    DubInMeath wrote: »
    She speaks for people who support and have committed the sexual abuse of children in my opinion
    smokingman wrote: »
    ...and also that it's fine to kill actual children and stuff them in a septic tank

    I don't think that these comments are fair.

    People who follow a religious faith, are not responsible for what others - who are involved in that particular faith - have done.

    I think that what you both have stated, alleging that she endorses child and sexual abuse, are legally contentious statements.

    I would suggest that what you both said, are cases of defamation.

    What you allege against her, is a bit like saying that all soccer players endorse having nine year long affairs with their brothers wives.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7452
    AnneFrank
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,827 ✭✭✭AnneFrank


    horseburger wrote: »
    I don't think that is fair.

    People who follow a religious faith, are not responsible for what others - who are involved in that particular faith - have done.

    I think that what you stated, alleging that she endorses child abuse, is a legally contentious statement.

    I would suggest that what you said is defamation?

    What you allege against her, is a bit like saying that all soccer players endorse having nine year long affairs with their brothers wives.

    It's 100% defamation


  • Options
    #7453
    Pedro K
    Registered Users Posts: 1,197 ✭✭✭Pedro K


    horseburger wrote: »
    She is Catholic, but in debates on TV and radio, she doesn't bring religion into the argument.
    She's a card carrying Iona instituter. A member of a Catholic advocacy group. Her very precense in the debate is bringing religion into it.


  • Options
    #7454
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    AnneFrank wrote: »
    How bizarre, the woman is a qualified barrister, architect and teacher. A highly intelligent lady and frankly someone all girls should look up to and aspire too.

    AnneFrank wrote: »
    How bizarre, the woman is a qualified barrister, architect and teacher. A highly intelligent lady and frankly someone all girls should look up to and aspire too.

    Don't know what's bizarre about my post the iona institute and Steen are on record stating that gay people should be discriminated against, women and doctors who assist them in obtaining an abortion should be prosecuted, stating that no real harm was done in mother and baby homes, while downplaying the nature and rate of clerical sexual abuse.

    The professions she is qualified in are all open to women and indeed girls and boys should aspire to being a member of them, but they shouldn't aspire to being a religious bigot like her.


  • Options
    #7455
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    horseburger wrote: »
    I don't think that these comments are fair.

    People who follow a religious faith, are not responsible for what others - who are involved in that particular faith - have done.

    I think that what you both have stated, alleging that she endorses child and sexual abuse, are legally contentious statements.

    I would suggest that what you both said,is defamation.

    What you allege against her, is a bit like saying that all soccer players endorse having nine year long affairs with their brothers wives.

    Given your endless rinse and repeat posts I don't really care what you think.


  • Options
    #7456
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    AnneFrank wrote: »
    It's 100% defamation

    If true and it's not by the way, it would be something I'd have in common with her, and yourself.


  • Options
    #7457
    horseburger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,137 ✭✭✭horseburger


    Pedro K wrote: »
    She's a card carrying Iona instituter. A member of a Catholic advocacy group. Her very precense in the debate is bringing religion into it.

    You can debate an issue without bringing your religious, or agnostic, or humanist, or atheist beliefs, into the discussion.

    I haven't heard her mention her religious beliefs into any of the live TV or radio debates in which she has participated on the issue of abortion.

    She addresses religious events, for example she spoke in Knock last August, making an address on the issue of abortion. This was not a debate in that it wasn't one side against the other discussing the issue. She was speaking to people who are of the Catholic religion.

    The suggestion that she is trying to ram her religious beliefs onto others, is unfair, I think, considering that when she speaks about issues like abortion, with a religious angle, it is in situations where the audience reading or listening, would be of the same religious belief and outlook.

    For example her articles in The Irish Catholic, may include references to religious scripture, but in TV and radio discussions, where she is debating with a person whose perspective differs to hers in relation to religion, I haven't heard her emphasise her religious beliefs.

    I haven't heard her bring her religious beliefs into any live TV or radio debate, in which I have heard her participating, with regard to the issue of abortion.

    Her religious beliefs may get asked of her during a debate, but I think it is the case, that she doesn't bring it up, unless asked.


  • Options
    #7458
    horseburger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,137 ✭✭✭horseburger


    DubInMeath wrote: »
    If true and it's not by the way, it would be something I'd have in common with her, and yourself.

    Why do you think, that stating that someone endorses child abuse and sexual abuse, isn't defamation?

    You stated:
    DubInMeath wrote: »
    She speaks for people who support and have committed the sexual abuse of children in my opinion


  • Options
    #7459
    smokingman
    Registered Users Posts: 3,749 ✭✭✭smokingman


    She defends the authorities that put children in a septic tank in Tuam.
    Your cognitive dissonance is astounding.


  • Options
    #7460
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    smokingman wrote: »
    She defends the authorities that put children in a septic tank in Tuam.
    Your cognitive dissonance is astounding.

    Poster has been asked numerous times for their opinion (not a video of a debate, not a quote, not transcripts of an interview) on the pro-life campaign, it's shortcomings and behaviour and has blissfully ignored any and all attempts by other people to gain insight on the matter.

    Oh and they initially joined the thread as someone "on the fence" that was just "asking some questions" yet has gone on to nitpick at the pro-choice campaign and completely deflect any questions regarding the pro-life campaign, even when asked directly, they conveniently ignore the posts or deflect with a classic "Why do you want to know what I think?"

    Ya just can't win.


  • Options
    #7461
    horseburger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,137 ✭✭✭horseburger


    smokingman wrote: »
    She defends the authorities that put children in a septic tank in Tuam.
    Your cognitive dissonance is astounding.

    She is Catholic. She has not defended nor justified cases of child abuse, that were carried out by other Catholic people.

    You are being unfair.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7462
    horseburger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,137 ✭✭✭horseburger


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    Poster has been asked numerous times for their opinion (not a video of a debate, not a quote, not transcripts of an interview) on the pro-life campaign, it's shortcomings and behaviour and has blissfully ignored any and all attempts by other people to gain insight on the matter.

    Oh and they initially joined the thread as someone "on the fence" that was just "asking some questions" yet has gone on to nitpick at the pro-choice campaign and completely deflect any questions regarding the pro-life campaign, even when asked directly, they conveniently ignore the posts or deflect with a classic "Why do you want to know what I think?"

    Ya just can't win.

    I have already stated to you that I have a difficulty with the idea of abortion wihout restriction for three months.

    I have already stated that I think that in the case of the risk to the life of the mother, that abortion should be available, if it is sought, on the basis that there is a risk to the mother's life.

    I never used the phrase "on the fence".

    You could try responding to the arguments made against abortion, in the items I have cited.

    What did you ask me about the pro life groups?


  • Options
    #7463
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    horseburger wrote: »
    I have already stated to you that I have a difficulty with the idea of abortion wihout restriction for three months.

    I have already stated that I think that in the case of the risk to the life of the mother, that abortion should be available, if it is sought, on the basis that there is a risk to the mother's life.

    I never used the phrase "on the fence".

    You could try responding to the arguments made against abortion, in the items I have cited.

    What did you ask me about the pro life groups?
    robarmstrong wrote: »
    Would you care to engage with and enlighten those courteous posters who are very keen to hear what comments you have to make about the pro-life campaign, including the statements and inaccuracies the campaign has made.

    As someone who is "on the fence" surely you would have some observations or questions to bring up, no? You're asking all these questions about the pro-choice campaign and the opinions of the pro choice individuals on posts you put up but you never address those who question you, in fact you just keep on regurgitating pretty much the same over and over again.

    Are you unable to engage with posters who query you about your standpoint on the pro-life campaign? Has someone forbidden you from engaging with people who want your views and observations on that aspect?

    If I was on the fence I'd be readily available to give my thoughts and observations on both sides of the matter, so why can't you?

    There ya go, I've asked you at least five times now for your opinion about the behaviour and willingness to spread false and misleading information by the pro-life campaign and you have not bothered your hole once with addressing it. Sure one of your pro-life buddies today suggested that I have a vasectomy, due to my partner having a heart-shaped uterus and weak womb that it was "my responsibility" to take care of birth control. What do you think of comments like that, hmm?

    Also, Maria Steen? The woman who compared legalizing abortion with legalizing speeding? Yes, travelling somewhere faster in a car has absolutely everything to do with a debate on abortion, ridiculous comparison and in my opinion has completely discredited her previous reasonable debates and remarks regarding abortion.


  • Options
    #7464
    horseburger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,137 ✭✭✭horseburger


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    There ya go.

    Also, Maria Steen? The woman who compared legalizing abortion with legalizing speeding? Yes, travelling somewhere faster in a car has absolutely everything to do with a debate on abortion, ridiculous comparison and in my opinion has completely discredited her previous reasonable debates and remarks regarding abortion.

    What inaccuracies have been made?

    You are the one claiming that inaccuracies have been made.

    I didn't state that there weren't inaccuracies made.

    Her analogy about speeding and abortion is no worse than using euphemisms to describe abortion, where advocates for abortion, try to avoid using words that accurately describe abortion.


  • Options
    #7465
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    horseburger wrote: »
    What inaccuracies have been made?

    You are the one claiming that inaccuracies have been made.

    I didn't state there weren't inaccuracies made.

    Because you have dodged every single attempt by people here to get you to comment on them and instead you've just deflected them and continued on your mantra. You're turning a blind eye.

    Are you honestly telling me you are completely unaware of any and all inaccuracies spouted out by the pro-life campaign?

    "1 in 5 of all pregnancies in England and Wales end in abortion" - this was proven to be an outright lie.

    "90% of babies with Down Syndrome are aborted" - a blatant misrepresentation of the truth, 64% of Down Syndrome diagnoses are made prenatally (before birth), the remaining 36% being diagnosed postnatally. 90% of the 64% prenatally diagnosed Down Syndrome pregnancies are aborted, are you telling me that you cannot see the blatant intentional misrepresentation of figures here? Can't see the pattern?

    All the pictures of "12 week old fetuses" - there have been an unholy amount of these posted, it's an artists rendition to humanise it, the doctored picture being the one I tried so hard to get your opinion on earlier in the thread but you avoided giving your opinion on it, it has absolutely minimal resemblance to what an actual fetus looks like.

    That "abortion nurse" that ended up being a shill and getting outed.

    And also, I edited my post before your reply, so I'll include it again in case you missed it. One of your pro-life buddies today suggested that I have a vasectomy, due to my partner having a heart-shaped uterus and weak womb that it was "my responsibility" to take care of birth control. What do you think of comments like that, hmm?


  • Options
    #7466
    horseburger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,137 ✭✭✭horseburger


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    Are you honestly telling me you are completely unaware of any and all inaccuracies spouted out by the pro-life campaign?

    "1 in 5 of all pregnancies in England and Wales end in abortion" - this was proven to be an outright lie.

    "90% of babies with Down Syndrome are aborted" - a blatant misrepresentation of the truth, 64% of Down Syndrome diagnoses are made prenatally (before birth), the remaining 36% being diagnosed postnatally. 90% of the 64% prenatally diagnosed Down Syndrome pregnancies are aborted, are you telling me that you cannot see the blatant intentional misrepresentation of figures here? Can't see the pattern?

    All the pictures of "12 week old fetuses" - there have been an unholy amount of these posted, it's an artists rendition to humanise it, the doctored picture being the one I tried so hard to get your opinion on earlier in the thread but you avoided giving your opinion on it, it has absolutely minimal resemblance to what an actual fetus looks like.

    That "abortion nurse" that ended up being a shill and getting outed.

    And also, I edited my post before your reply, so I'll include it again in case you missed it. One of your pro-life buddies today suggested that I have a vasectomy, due to my partner having a heart-shaped uterus and weak womb that it was "my responsibility" to take care of birth control. What do you think of comments like that, hmm?

    I didn't make the inaccurate statements that you mention.

    Why do you think that I would defend inaccurate statements?


  • Options
    #7467
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Ah here you're taking the piss at this stage.

    I said the pro-life campaign have made these inaccurate statements, I've asked for you to comment on them which you flat out refuse to do.


  • Options
    #7468
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,917 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    horseburger wrote: »
    Why do you think, that stating that someone endorses child abuse and sexual abuse, isn't defamation?

    You stated:

    She and the Iona institute have consistently defended the likes of cardinal Sean Brady who swore a 14 year old abuse victim to silence, while hiding abuse from the police and moving pedophile priests to other areas to allow them to continue abusing children.
    So yes she and the Iona institute do speak for those who support and commit sexual abuse of children, if you speak for a religion that does these things you endorse it.

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/mishandling-of-abuse-cast-a-shadow-over-cardinals-career-28960389.html
    "He is an extremely nice man - it's impossible to find anybody who knows him personally to say anything bad about him," Mr Quinn said.



    I've been gracious enough to answer you, so do the same, plenty of posters are waiting on your answers to their questions.


  • Options
    #7469
    horseburger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,137 ✭✭✭horseburger


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    Ah here you're taking the piss at this stage.

    I said the pro-life campaign have made these inaccurate statements, I've asked for you to comment on them which you flat out refuse to do.

    What inaccurate statements have I made?


  • Options
    #7470
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    horseburger wrote: »
    What inaccurate statements have I made?

    Deflecting again are we? Like I said, I never said you made these statements, I said the pro-life campaign did, are you the entirety of the pro-life campaign?

    Again -

    "1 in 5 of all pregnancies in England and Wales end in abortion" - this was proven to be an outright lie.

    "90% of babies with Down Syndrome are aborted" - a blatant misrepresentation of the truth, 64% of Down Syndrome diagnoses are made prenatally (before birth), the remaining 36% being diagnosed postnatally. 90% of the 64% prenatally diagnosed Down Syndrome pregnancies are aborted, are you telling me that you cannot see the blatant intentional misrepresentation of figures here? Can't see the pattern?

    All the pictures of "12 week old fetuses" - there have been an unholy amount of these posted, it's an artists rendition to humanise it, the doctored picture being the one I tried so hard to get your opinion on earlier in the thread but you avoided giving your opinion on it, it has absolutely minimal resemblance to what an actual fetus looks like.

    That "abortion nurse" that ended up being a shill and getting outed.

    And also, I edited my post before your reply, so I'll include it again in case you missed it. One of your pro-life buddies today suggested that I have a vasectomy, due to my partner having a heart-shaped uterus and weak womb that it was "my responsibility" to take care of birth control. What do you think of comments like that, hmm?

    What are your comments?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7471
    horseburger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,137 ✭✭✭horseburger


    DubInMeath wrote: »
    She and the Iona institute have consistently defended the likes of cardinal Sean Brady who swore a 14 year old abuse victim to silence, while hiding abuse from the police and moving pedophile priests to other areas to allow them to continue abusing children.
    So yes she and the Iona institute do speak for those who support and commit sexual abuse of children, if you speak for a religion that does these things you endorse it.

    I've been gracious enough to answer you, so do the same, plenty of posters are waiting on your answers to their questions.

    I asked you, why you think that you stating that Maria Steen endorses child and sexual abuse, isn't defamation?

    You stated:
    DubInMeath wrote: »
    She speaks for people who support and have committed the sexual abuse of children in my opinion

    Considering she is a member of the Iona Institute, you are now stating as fact that members of the Iona Institute "support and have committed the sexual abuse of children".[/B]


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement