Marches this Saturday

Boxing.Fan

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Tell me though, do you think men should be forced to pay for children they don't want if a woman decides to have a baby?

Interesting question...

splinter65

klaaaz wrote: »

In case you missed the lovely pic of the religious symbols and the Vatican flag at the anti-abortion march https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=110622646&postcount=71

A couple of flags out of all the rest. So what? Is it illegal to carry a religious symbol? Since when?
Why don’t you just admit that while youre okay with some parades, who organized the parade, who takes part in the parade, what flags and symbols and chants are part of the parade, that you’re not ok with other parades for no other reason except you’re religious bigotry, which you hide behind a facade of “fear of being oppressed” when no such oppression is taking place.

ohnonotgmail

splinter65 wrote: »

A couple of flags out of all the rest. So what? Is it illegal to carry a religious symbol? Since when?
Why don’t you just admit that while youre okay with some parades, who organized the parade, who takes part in the parade, what flags and symbols and chants are part of the parade, that you’re not ok with other parades for no other reason except you’re religious bigotry, which you hide behind a facade of “fear of being oppressed” when no such oppression is taking place.

Women were oppressed for years by the 8th. Thankfully it is gone and the beliefs that led to it can be consigned to the dustbin of history.

Boxing.Fan

Boxing.Fan wrote:

Interesting question...

One that won't get an answer though. It undermines the "her body, her choice" sentiment lightly.

ohnonotgmail

splinter65 wrote: »

The pro life people organized the march.

and who are these pro life people.

splinter65 wrote: »

Who organized the Trans parade?

I honestly couldnt tell you. I'm sure it would be straightforward to find out. you could ask them on their facebook page.

klaaaz

splinter65 wrote: »

A couple of flags out of all the rest. So what? Is it illegal to carry a religious symbol? Since when?
Why don’t you just admit that while youre okay with some parades, who organized the parade, who takes part in the parade, what flags and symbols and chants are part of the parade, that you’re not ok with other parades for no other reason except you’re religious bigotry, which you hide behind a facade of “fear of being oppressed” when no such oppression is taking place.

The photographer only released that picture of the religious marchers, there were probably too many pictures of religious symbolism from the march to publish!

So you religious folk are oppressed because religious rule was removed by popular mandate, haha.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

One that won't get an answer though. It undermines the "her body, her choice" sentiment lightly.

i dont think you have really thought this through.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote:

i dont think you have really thought this through.

I have.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

I have.

so go on then, regale us with your argument? where do you think that question leads us? how does it conflict with "her body, her choice"?

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote:

so go on then, regale us with your argument? where do you think that question leads us? how does it conflict with "her body, her choice"?

Sorry chief. I still am waiting for your opinion on whether or not a man who "found himself" in a situation where he was facing the prospect of being forced to become a father against his will, should be forced to provide payments until the child reaches adulthood.

amcalester

Boxing.Fan wrote: »

Interesting question...

Its not really, if the man didn't want to be a father he should have kept in his pants.

amcalester

amcalester wrote:

Its not really, if the man didn't want to be a father he should have kept in his pants.

Hahahahahahahahahaha.

Brilliant.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry chief. I still am waiting for your opinion on whether or not a man who "found himself" in a situation where he was facing the prospect of being forced to become a father against his will, should be forced to provide payments until the child reaches adulthood.

Who forced him?

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote:

Who forced him?

The woman he impregnated decides to have a baby knowing full well that the man doesn't want to become a father.

Should there be any option for men (outside of total abstinence) that gives them any say on whether or not they are responsible for a woman's choice?

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

The woman he impregnated decides to have a baby knowing full well that the man doesn't want to become a father.

Should there be any option for men (outside of total abstinence) that gives them any say on whether or not they are responsible for a woman's choice?

no. they dont to decide that a woman should have an abortion. the only person who can make that decision is the woman herself. Now tell me how that conflicts with "her body, her choice"?

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote:

no. they dont to decide that a woman should have an abortion. the only person who can make that decision is the woman herself. Now tell me how that conflicts with "her body, her choice"?

Because if a woman chooses to become a single mother, why should the man be forced to support her?

Why are men supposed to be financially liable for a woman's choice?

amcalester

Deleted User wrote: »

Because if a woman chooses to become a single mother, why should the man be forced to support her?

Why are men supposed to be financially liable for a woman's choice?

He's not though, he financially liable for his own choice. It's really simple for a guy not to get a woman pregnant.

amcalester

amcalester wrote:

He's not though, he financially liable for his own choice. It's really simple for a guy not to get a woman pregnant.

No. He is responsible for the woman's choice.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

One that won't get an answer though. It undermines the "her body, her choice" sentiment lightly.

Deleted User wrote: »

Because if a woman chooses to become a single mother, why should the man be forced to support her?

Why are men supposed to be financially liable for a woman's choice?

Explain to me how this "undermines the "her body, her choice" sentiment"?

Its a real pity you didn't bring this up during the discussions on the 8th. those threads could have really done with some light relief.

amcalester

Deleted User wrote: »

No. He is responsible for the woman's choice.

ah, he made the decision to have sex with the woman. Everything that happens after that is a direct consequence.

That the woman can make decisions that will change the outcome doesn't change the fact that he made the decision to sex.

If he doesn't want to be father then he should've kept it in his pants.

Besides, why didn't he use a condom. He really only has himself to blame.

Why should the poor child suffer for his carelessness?

FeirmeoirtTed

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

no. they dont to decide that a woman should have an abortion. the only person who can make that decision is the woman herself. Now tell me how that conflicts with "her body, her choice"?

So men should practice abstinence for fear of getting a woman pregnant and having to pay child support for 18 years.

Flip the coin women should not practice abstinence they should just have the baby and receive the child support or if the baby is unwanted they can abort the baby.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote:

Explain to me how this "undermines the "her body, her choice" sentiment"?

Because it is her body and her choice.

It has literally nothing to do with the person who doesnt want to be a parent so why should they be financially responsible?

ohnonotgmail wrote:

Its a real pity you didn't bring this up during the discussions on the 8th. those threads could have really done with some light relief.

Passive aggressive snide remarks? What a shock.

ohnonotgmail

FeirmeoirtTed wrote: »

So men should practice abstinence for fear of getting a woman pregnant and having to pay child support for 18 years.

There are these things called condoms.

FeirmeoirtTed wrote: »

Flip the coin women should not practice abstinence they should just have the baby and receive the child support or if the baby is unwanted they can abort the baby.

So you think men should have to right to force a women to have an abortion if they dont want to be a father?

FeirmeoirtTed

amcalester wrote: »

ah, he made the decision to have sex with the woman. Everything that happens after that is a direct consequence.

That the woman can make decisions that will change the outcome doesn't change the fact that he made the decision to sex.

If he doesn't want to be father then he should've kept it in his pants.

Besides, why didn't he use a condom. He really only has himself to blame.

Why should the poor child suffer for his carelessness?

Was the woman not involved in the decision to have sex??
The poor child suffer?
Would you think a lot of suffering happens when life is taken away?

amcalester

amcalester wrote:

If he doesn't want to be father then he should've kept it in his pants.

Do you have the same distain for women who get abortions? That they should have kept their legs closed?

Disgusting and archaic attitude (well towards men at least)

amcalester wrote:

Besides, why didn't he use a condom. He really only has himself to blame.

Because it has never been a recorded fact that contraception failed? Get a grip.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

Because it is her body and her choice.

It has literally nothing to do with the person who doesnt want to be a parent so why should they be financially responsible?

because they are jointly responsible for the woman being pregnant.

Deleted User wrote: »

Passive aggressive snide remarks? What a shock.

I call it as i see it. The argument is beyond dumb because before the 8th was repealed the situation for the man was the exact same. in fact it was worse as the woman did not have the option of an abortion. Now men have more of a chance of getting off the hook.

FeirmeoirtTed

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

There are these things called condoms.



So you think men should have to right to force a women to have an abortion if they dont want to be a father?

Great question.
Let's flip it do you think men should be involved in the decision to have an abortion??
I mean after all the woman knew the risk like the man did in having sex?
And what about the poor child??

amcalester

FeirmeoirtTed wrote: »

Was the woman not involved in the decision to have sex??
The poor child suffer?
Would you think a lot of suffering happens when life is taken away?

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you have the same distain for women who get abortions? That they should have kept their legs closed?

Disgusting and archaic attitude (well towards men at least)



Because it has never been a recorded fact that contraception failed? Get a grip.

These are some of the arguments that get used against women (not by you tbf). What's good for the goose and all that...

ohnonotgmail

FeirmeoirtTed wrote: »

Great question.
Let's flip it do you think men should be involved in the decision to have an abortion??
I mean after all the woman knew the risk like the man did in having sex?
And what about the poor child??

what part of "her body, her choice" is causing you difficulty?

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote:

There are these things called condoms.

That don't always work.

ohnonotgmail wrote:

So you think men should have to right to force a women to have an abortion if they dont want to be a father?

That was not said.

ohnonotgmail wrote:

because they are jointly responsible for the woman being pregnant.

And have zero say as to whether or not they become a parent.

Half the responsibility with none of the options. Sounds fair.

ohnonotgmail wrote:

I call it as i see it. The argument is beyond dumb because before the 8th was repealed the situation for the man was the exact same. in fact it was worse as the woman did not have the option of an abortion. Now men have more of a chance of getting off the hook.

Off the hook. Such flippant terminology for such an important life defining circumstances.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote:

what part of "her body, her choice" is causing you difficulty?

The part where the woman's choice becomes the man's responsibility

klaaaz

Deleted User wrote: »

He is responsible for the woman's choice.

Am delighted that you're pro choice believing that a woman has the right to choose!

rireland

A man shouldn't be forced to pay for a kid he doesn't want.

A woman has a choice. If a man doesn't want it, then the decision the woman takes should be in respect on not having a man pay. If she's not able to afford the kid, she can abort it. If she can afford it herself, she can go solo.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

That don't always work.


That was not said.


And have zero say as to whether or not they become a parent.

Half the responsibility with none of the options. Sounds fair.

Half the responsibility with a fraction of the involvement. sounds fair to me.

Deleted User wrote: »

Off the hook. Such flippant terminology for such an important life defining circumstances.

Introduce an intelligent point and i will respond accordingly.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

The part where the woman's choice becomes the man's responsibility

You seem to be forgetting that the woman is responsible for a lot more than the man.

ohnonotgmail

klaaaz wrote: »

Am delighted that you're pro choice believing that a woman has the right to choose!

It really is the stupidest ant-abortion argument i have ever seen. They seem now to want to punish women who dont have abortions. it is all quite bizarre.

FeirmeoirtTed

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

what part of "her body, her choice" is causing you difficulty?

Avoid the questions and splash out a catchphrase excellent argument.
Nothing about abortion is straight forward or fair for the woman for the man or for the baby that's my point its not black and white and never will be. I have great sympathy for women and men who find themselves having to make a decision like that. I have greater sympathy for the unborn child.That doesn't make me a religious nut or anti women I have a wife, a newborn daughter and sisters.

ohnonotgmail

FeirmeoirtTed wrote: »

Avoid the questions and splash out a catchphrase excellent argument.
Nothing about abortion is straight forward or fair for the woman for the man or for the baby that's my point its not black and white and never will be. I have great sympathy for women and men who find themselves having to make a decision like that. I have greater sympathy for the unborn child.That doesn't make me a religious nut or anti women I have a wife, a newborn daughter and sisters.

out of the mother, father and fetus the woman is by far the most important. Hence "her body, her choice". It is not a glib catchphrase. it is the basis for all decisions regarding the pregnancy.

FeirmeoirtTed

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

out of the mother, father and fetus the woman is by far the most important. Hence "her body, her choice". It is not a glib catchphrase. it is the basis for all decisions regarding the pregnancy.

Can you see how not wanting a foetus in the womb to die because a man and a women don't want them seems like an admirable cause as a society to try to defend?

ohnonotgmail

FeirmeoirtTed wrote: »

Can you see how not wanting a foetus in the womb to die because a man and a women don't want them seems like an admirable cause as a society to try to defend?

not when it goes against the wishes of the woman i dont. I see it as just an attempt to control.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote:

It really is the stupidest ant-abortion argument i have ever seen. They seem now to want to punish women who dont have abortions. it is all quite bizarre.

You are all about the white knighting today. Nobody is looking to "punish" women.

Women have the right to choose. If a woman gets pregnant after a consensual one night stand, nobody can force a woman to be a mother (and rightly so), yet the man can be forced to become a father.

If you think that's fair, then that's on you. I won't try to convince you any further.

But keep dismissing valid concerns as stupid if it makes you feel superior.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

You are all about the white knighting today. Nobody is looking to "punish" women.

Women have the right to choose. If a woman gets pregnant after a consensual one night stand, nobody can force a woman to be a mother (and rightly so), yet the man can be forced to become a father.

If you think that's fair, then that's on you. I won't try to convince you any further.

But keep dismissing valid concerns as stupid if it makes you feel superior.

and the same situation existed before the 8th has repealed. How has repealing the 8th made it worse?

FeirmeoirtTed

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

not when it goes against the wishes of the woman i dont. I see it as just an attempt to control.

Control them how?

ohnonotgmail

FeirmeoirtTed wrote: »

Control them how?

spare me the feigned ignorance.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote:

and the same situation existed before the 8th has repealed. How has repealing the 8th made it worse?

This conversation started because you said that abortion was not a nuanced matter. I said it was and brought up this scenario as it i don't believe it is cut and dry or fair in circumstances like this.

You are attempting to paint it as if I said that this was a reason we shouldn't have repealed the eighth.

I never said that. I said the abortion debate is nuanced.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

This conversation started because you said that abortion was not a nuanced matter. I said it was and brought up this scenario as it i don't believe it is cut and dry or fair in circumstances like this.

You are attempting to paint it as if I said that this was a reason we shouldn't have repealed the eighth.

I never said that. I said the abortion debate is nuanced.

Your question is nothing to do with the abortion debate.

FeirmeoirtTed

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

spare me the feigned ignorance.

It's possible that people can believe that abortion is morally wrong and still love and respect women.
In fact it's possible that women themselves can be pro-life.
It's also possible that abortion is right in certain circumstances, I can acknowledge that at least I'm just trying to flesh out what circumstances they are and how as a responsible adult who knows actions have consequences I would be able to support a decision which ended another life, like i said its not black and white and if it ever becomes that way then I think we as a society have lost our way.

ohnonotgmail

FeirmeoirtTed wrote: »

It's possible that people can believe that abortion is morally wrong and still love and respect women.
In fact it's possible that women themselves can be pro-life.
It's also possible that abortion is right in certain circumstances, I can acknowledge that at least I'm just trying to flesh out what circumstances they are and how as a responsible adult who knows actions have consequences I would be able to support a decision which ended another life, like i said its not black and white and if it ever becomes that way then I think we as a society have lost our way.

you really are a day late and a dollar short.

martingriff

FeirmeoirtTed wrote: »

Great question.
Let's flip it do you think men should be involved in the decision to have an abortion??
I mean after all the woman knew the risk like the man did in having sex?
And what about the poor child??

If I was in a relationship and she decided to have an abortion I would expect she would have the love for me to actually come to me a tell me. While I agree if she wants it I can not stop her if I found out afterwards my trust and our r r relationship would be over

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote:

Your question is nothing to do with the abortion debate.

ohnonotgmail wrote:

you really are a day late and a dollar short.

It is. I say that abortion is a very emotional and nuanced decision.

You disagree.

No need to be a prick.