Abortion Discussion, Part the Fourth

Kidchameleon

Igotadose wrote: »

all sorts of things irrelevant to this thread

Just to point out, your the one who asked. Yes, I agree, lets get back on topic...


Here's one of many video's of Ben talking about abortion, no real mention of faith just science...

Timberrrrrrrr

Charles Ingles wrote: »

It's clear what people's real intentions are here and it's nothing but anti-Semitic nonsense.
He is a good man strong in his faith and very intelligent.
He was on to talk about his book typical BBC sneaky attack.
The BBC are as bad as Rte state sponsored liberal anti Christian and Jewish faith

And couldn't answer questions about this, he even admits he was "unprepared" for the questions!

amcalester

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Just to point out, your the one who asked. Yes, I agree, lets get back on topic...


Here's one of many video's of Ben talking about abortion, no real mention of faith just science...

I got 1 minute in and he had already misrepresented what Wilde had said, didn’t bother going further than that.

end of the road

volchitsa wrote: »

So it's a good thing that they're active in the media concerning abortion but also a good thing that they don't get involved with media campaigns for child protection issues, right?

Hmm. Okay whatever.

Oh but wait, so is it a good thing or not that Breda O'Brien is "calling for" help for babies born with life limiting conditions? Do you disapprove of that character trait??

And more seriously - how is that not part of her anti abortion activism anyway, since one of the points they needed and failed to answer was why Ireland, with 3 decades of "prolife" law had made less progress on that sort of issue than countries which allow women to terminate pregnancies when a serious disability has been identified?

Basically it comes down to this: you can't find any examples of any of the prolife figureheads investing any comparable level of their time and effort into child protection issues that are not directly related to their stance on abortion.

You wish to portray that as admirable modesty on their part. I suspect everyone else will be as unconvinced by that "logic" as I am.

it is the government's fault that such supports either don't exist or exist in a much lesser form. they make the decisions on what our taxes are spent on and they are the only ones who will know the reasons as to why progress hasn't been made. pro-life can't know what the government's reasons are unless the government tell them, which i can only assume hasn't happened hence their failure to answer the point. you will have to take that up with them.
it is a good thing that Breda O'Brien is calling for help for babies born with life limiting conditions, however it is also a good thing that she simply gets on with calling for such help.

Kidchameleon

amcalester wrote: »

I got 1 minute in and he had already misrepresented what Wilde had said, didn’t bother going further than that.

For sure, he misrepresents and sensationalizes but the point of sharing that video is that it shows his opposition to abortion is not just based on his faith. Plenty of atheists are against abortion also.

Igotadose

That video is full of lies. He
1. Misrepresents what the actress said
2. Mentioned Kermit Gosnell (a go-to for the anti-abortion crowd.) Funny, I'd heard of him as did many. How was it he was 'not covered by the media?'Most prolific serial killer in American History?' Really?
3. And he wags his finger at the camera and spouts "No one has the right" etc etc. Nonsense. He'd love to have the right to dictate to others.
4. Various 'science-sounding' things, like 'detectable brainwaves' and 'finger nails forming' and keeps harping back on 'convenience issue.' As if abortion is a convenience issue.
5. Lots of references to 'morality' 'innocence' and 'sin.' Just because he says he doesn't believe the Bible is right, doesn't stop him from multiple god references.

Basically, another god-bothering woman hater. Nothing new here. Smoother than some of them.

amcalester

end of the road wrote: »

it is the government's fault that such supports either don't exist or exist in a much lesser form. they make the decisions on what our taxes are spent on and they are the only ones who will know the reasons as to why progress hasn't been made. pro-life can't know what the government's reasons are unless the government tell them, which i can only assume hasn't happened hence their failure to answer the point. you will have to take that up with them.

It’s the government’s fault that pro-lifers aren’t more involved in supporting children in desperate situations?

You’d think with the lack of government support the pro-lifers would be more vocal about what is needed.

amcalester

Kidchameleon wrote: »

For sure, he misrepresents and sensationalizes but the point of sharing that video is that it shows his opposition to abortion is not just based on his faith. Plenty of atheists are against abortion also.

But if he’s willing to misrepresent what Wilde said then how can we believe anything else he says.

Igotadose

amcalester wrote: »

But if he’s willing to misrepresent what Wilde said then how can we believe anything else he says.

Lying's o.k. if you're anti-abortion. Just ask EOTR.

Kidchameleon

Igotadose wrote: »

And he wags his finger at the camera and spouts "No one has the right"

I agree with everything you say about that video. Just on your point above, he was talking about a 24 week old pregnancy and its worth noting that in many states (and in Ireland), no one has a right to abort a 24 week pregnancy. I'd imagine many here on this forum would not be happy with abortion at 24 weeks. Personally, I think there are instances where abortion should be available at 24 weeks and beyond.

smacl

Igotadose wrote: »

Lying's o.k. if you're anti-abortion. Just ask EOTR.

Mod: As per the charter, attack the post, not the poster.

smacl

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And couldn't answer questions about this, he even admits he was "unprepared" for the questions!

For someone who's supposedly highly intelligent, he seems to hide it well.

aloyisious

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Just to point out, your the one who asked. Yes, I agree, lets get back on topic...


Here's one of many video's of Ben talking about abortion, no real mention of faith just science...

As blunt a bit of editing to the video as propaganda could be. His intent was as clear as the lump-hammer job he did on the video, misrepresent her from his use of "imperative" onwards.

aloyisious

Charles Ingles wrote: »

It's clear what people's real intentions are here and it's nothing but anti-Semitic nonsense.
He is a good man strong in his faith and very intelligent.
He was on to talk about his book typical BBC sneaky attack.
The BBC are as bad as Rte state sponsored liberal anti Christian and Jewish faith

Is there extra footage to the interview that you can give us to A. back up your contention that he was done down by the interviewer and B. that others here are anti people of both books? I'm getting a deja vu feeling of rabbit-holes here.

robindch

smacl wrote: »

For someone who's supposedly highly intelligent, he seems to hide it well.

Somebody made the comment about #45, that he's an angry, poor man's idea of a rich man - same could be said about Shapiro - that he's an angry, stupid man's idea of a clever man.

Hotblack Desiato

Kidchameleon wrote: »

It may be a non functioning blob but it is a brain. I never said it was conscious or functioning, I simply said it was a brain. A 100 year old brain in a jar of formaldehyde is still a brain, that does not mean I think it is conscious or functional.

So you accept a functioning brain is a prerequisite for consciousness, then?

I think it is rather naive to write it off completely, we humans are an amazing species. There have been plenty of discoveries throughout the ages that have inverted our perceptions of reality.

Everything that we know about the brain and consciousness tells us that without brain activity, there can be no consciousness.

Said life is still protected though. We cannot simply unplug life support machines at a whim. You would get charged with murder if you did.

You can't have an abortion on a whim either, there are restrictive laws surrounding it.

Igotadose

Just came across this article about abortion rates in Ireland. 800 - 900/month, according to the START group, a Dr's group. Around 10,000 a year.

My opinion is, this is good news. Women getting to make their own choices are making them, and don't have to hide it anymore


https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/i-expected-more-protests-doctors-on-100-days-of-abortion-in-ireland-1.3857216

.......

Igotadose wrote: »

Just came across this article about abortion rates in Ireland. 800 - 900/month, according to the START group, a Dr's group. Around 10,000 a year.

My opinion is, this is good news. Women getting to make their own choices are making them, and don't have to hide it anymore


https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/i-expected-more-protests-doctors-on-100-days-of-abortion-in-ireland-1.3857216

edit - I misread.

.......

So this article indicates that the abortion rate has trebled in Ireland.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/indications-that-abortion-rate-has-trebled-in-one-year-a-devastating-tragedy-pro-life-campaign-923346.html

But is it not more correct to say that we actually didnt know the pre repeal abortion rate? We assumed around 4000 or so per year going to the UK, but in fact, we always knew that was an under estimation?

If the rate is really more like 10-11k then I actually feel even more furious that this basic healthcare was denied to women for so long.

Kidchameleon

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

So you accept a functioning brain is a prerequisite for consciousness, then?

Yes.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Everything that we know about the brain and consciousness tells us that without brain activity, there can be no consciousness.

The point I was making is that everything we currently know tells us that. New technologies might one day show us we are wrong however.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

You can't have an abortion on a whim either, there are restrictive laws surrounding it.

Like what? Abortions are free of charge in Ireland with no questions asked (up to 12 weeks). There is tonnes of taxpayer funded information available to help anyone who wants an abortion to get one.

Kidchameleon

Igotadose wrote: »

Just came across this article about abortion rates in Ireland...Around 10,000 a year.

My opinion is, this is good news.

SusieBlue

Kidchameleon wrote: »

You conveniently left out this part of the quote:

Women getting to make their own choices are making them, and don't have to hide it anymore

Women having access to safe, legal medical care with adequate support & guidance absolutely is a good thing.
We are finally treating our women & couples with the dignity & compassion in a crisis that they deserve (and should have been getting all along) and we should be very proud of that.

.......

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Abortions are free of charge in Ireland with no questions asked (up to 12 weeks).

Free of charge?

.......

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I dont get it - whats bad about providing necessary health care for women?

I mean, 10k women per year availing of the service - that surely shows how necessary it is!

Kidchameleon

....... wrote: »

Free of charge?

Yep

SusieBlue wrote: »

Women having access to safe, legal medical care with adequate support & guidance absolutely is a good thing.
We are finally treating our women & couples with the dignity & compassion in a crisis that they deserve (and should have been getting all along) and we should be very proud of that.

....... wrote: »

I dont get it - whats bad about providing necessary health care for women?

I mean, 10k women per year availing of the service - that surely shows how necessary it is!

How many of that 10k just made terrible decisions? The majority I would imagine. I'm not judging the ones who need it for medical reasons/rape etc. but I am judging the ones who were just plain irresponsible / stupid. Dont get me wrong, they should have their abortions if they want


Ps. I dont agree that all abortions should be funded by the tax payer. Abortions in emergency situations yes. Family planning, no.

Bannasidhe

Kidchameleon wrote: »

How many of that 10k just made terrible decisions? The majority I would imagine. I'm not judging the ones who need it for medical reasons/rape etc. but I am judging the ones who were just plain irresponsible / stupid. Dont get me wrong, they should have their abortions if they want

And you think someone who is "plainly irresponsible/stupid" should become a parent due to being "plainly irresponsible/stupid"???

wow.

Kidchameleon

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Yep





How many of that 10k just made terrible decisions? The majority I would imagine. I'm not judging the ones who need it for medical reasons/rape etc. but I am judging the ones who were just plain irresponsible / stupid. Dont get me wrong, they should have their abortions if they want


Ps. I dont agree that all abortions should be funded by the tax payer. Abortions in emergency situations yes. Family planning, no.

Your the most pro life pro choice poster we've had in a while I'll give you that.

Kidchameleon

Bannasidhe wrote: »

And you think someone who is "plainly irresponsible/stupid" should become a parent due to being "plainly irresponsible/stupid"???

wow.

Your right, they shouldn't be passing on those genes at all. The future is better off without their offspring.

DubInMeath wrote: »

Your the most pro life pro choice poster we've had in a while I'll give you that.

Yes, the topic does create many strange scenarios. It has always fascinated me. Also:

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Dont get me wrong, they should have their abortions if they want

Igotadose

Kidchameleon wrote: »

. I'm not judging the ones who need it for medical reasons/rape etc. but I am judging the ones who were just plain irresponsible / stupid. Dont get me wrong, they should have their abortions if they want

"Judge not, lest ye be..."

eviltwin

I'm so tired of this abortion for contraception argument. Clearly anyone who thinks that's how it will be used has never had an abortion. It's an induced miscarriage, it's painful, messy, traumatic and physically gruelling, it's time consuming - you can forget about going anywhere for at least a day. It's probably the best advert for contraception there is, I can't see many women who were casual about contraception being blase about it after an abortion.