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

Abortion in Ireland: 2 years on

Options
1…1819212324…30

Comments

  • Options
    #602
    keybordWarrior
    Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭keybordWarrior


    KiKi III wrote: »
    Have you ever been in an adult, sexually active relationship?

    Yes.


  • Options
    #603
    KiKi III
    Registered Users Posts: 2,653 ✭✭✭KiKi III


    Niner leprauchan wrote: »
    In the scenario you compare to there's undeniable and important differences

    A, you didn't create the problem that result's in the child needing an organ

    B, it's not your child.

    C, you aren't talking direct action to end the childs life.

    In your example, the child will die without your intervention. In abortion, it will live.

    They are important however I would add in that Ireland doesn't currently allow stranger donation from a living source which is something I disagree with as well. In other countries you can donate on a 'first come, first served' basis.

    This is the greatest load of bollocks I ever heard. Organ donation is never done on a “first come, first served basis”. It’s based on a multitude of factors including which recipient is most closely matched to the donor and who is most likely to survive.


  • Options
    #604
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users Posts: 17,589 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    keybordWarrior wrote: »
    I’m saying abstinence IF you’re not prepared or willing to be responsible for a life you could create. Might that be difficult for some? Sure.

    It's completely unrealistic


  • Options
    #605
    WrenBoy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,614 ✭✭✭WrenBoy


    KiKi III wrote: »
    I’m fine with you expressing your opinion on it; I just wonder why anti-abortion activists will engage in these debates online or even stand outside a hospital protesting but they won’t put that energy into something that might actually stop an abortion i.e. sex ed, giving out free condoms in pubs, supporting new parents who are struggling etc.

    I don't know you'll have to ask them.


  • Options
    #606
    Seven Septs
    Closed Accounts Posts: 145 ✭✭Seven Septs


    There are a litany of cliches used today to try and portray something wrong as right.

    'Does a foetus get a birth and death cert'.

    'It's a foetus, an embryo, not a child'.

    'When you masturbate you are killing potential children'.

    'Bodily autonomy'. It has to be the best. It absolves all responsibility for the other life inside you.

    'I'm entitled to basic health care'. Getting rid of a life is 'basic health care'.

    'I'm not obliged to give blood to a stranger who is dying, therefore I have bodily autonomy not to be drained by this foetus'.

    'Vote Yes for a more compassionate society'.

    If people, especially the younger more impressionable generation have these platitudes repeated enough, they actually believe they are doing no wrong.

    However most of us at some level know that getting rid of what, given 7 or 8 months, will be a healthy life is inherently wrong. If it's for medical reasons to save the mother, no, it unfortunately has to happen. But how many abortions are for, and there's no avoiding the word, selfish reasons? Bodily autonomy is a great phrase to cover all this.

    How many reasons are being given such as I was young I was 20, myself and my partner hadn't planned it, I was in college, my career was important to me. Ultimately selfish reasons. Fair play to all those who had children in difficult circumstances and those children enriched their lives, cared for them when they were older, who in turn brought the joy of grandchildren. But too many are choosing the option me, me, me. I need this now. In some cases many mothers who aborted can't have children when they try for them.

    On a side note I read this thread throughout early 2018. It was moderated appallingly with those of a pro life stance banned for little. It was a biased, non democratic site.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #607
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,466 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    conorhal wrote: »
    So the wholesale slaughter of the equivalent of your average mid-sized Irish town annually is a statistical zero..... good to know.

    it is when it is the same figure as the year before as best as we can tell.


  • Options
    #608
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,466 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Niner leprauchan wrote: »
    All of it.

    Sepsis killed her as a result of medical negligence.

    so she wasnt denied an abortion. so she would not have died if she had the abortion? i'm beginning to doubt your grasp on reality.


  • Options
    #609
    keybordWarrior
    Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭keybordWarrior


    Mr. CooL ICE wrote: »
    It's completely unrealistic

    When you say that do you mean it would be unrealistic for you personally, or it would be unrealistic to expect society as a whole to do that? Or both? Just trying to understand if you disagree with the concept, or just think it’s impossible to achieve at scale.


  • Options
    #610
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 5,311 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Seven Septs wrote: »
    There are a litany of cliches used today to try and portray something wrong as right.

    On a side note I read this thread throughout early 2018. It was moderated appallingly with those of a pro life stance banned for little. It was a biased, non democratic site.

    In your opinion.


  • Options
    #611
    KiKi III
    Registered Users Posts: 2,653 ✭✭✭KiKi III


    keybordWarrior wrote: »
    When you say that do you mean it would be unrealistic for you personally, or it would be unrealistic to expect society as a whole to do that? Or both? Just trying to understand if you disagree with the concept, or just think it’s impossible to achieve at scale.

    For most human beings, it would involve denying natural sexual urges for most of their lives.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #612
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,466 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    keybordWarrior wrote: »
    When you say that do you mean it would be unrealistic for you personally, or it would be unrealistic to expect society as a whole to do that? Or both? Just trying to understand if you disagree with the concept, or just think it’s impossible to achieve at scale.

    whatever about the concept it is impossible at scale.


  • Options
    #613
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Seven Septs wrote: »
    'I'm entitled to basic health care'. Getting rid of a life is 'basic health care'.

    Whether or not you agree that an abortion is healthcare, the treatment of any complications that arise afterwards inescapably is. Woman has complication, woman gets medical treatment. That’s why it needed to be legalised. So that women could access aftercare without fear of prosecution. That was the main factor in my voting yes.

    Also, boards.ie is under no obligation to be impartial. Mods are human and will have biases, conscious or subconscious. Undemocratic? What are you on about?


  • Options
    #614
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users Posts: 17,589 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    keybordWarrior wrote: »
    When you say that do you mean it would be unrealistic for you personally, or it would be unrealistic to expect society as a whole to do that? Or both? Just trying to understand if you disagree with the concept, or just think it’s impossible to achieve at scale.

    Both.

    My relationship with my girlfriend is not based on sex, but it is a damn important part of it. And I'd imagine it would be the same for most couples. To just say "no more sex" if we don't want any more children would put a strain on our relationship and we wouldn't be alone. And a strain like this could inevitably end the relationship and leave our children with two parents who aren't together any more. That's hardly ideal now, is it?

    Or, we could practise safe sex like we always do in the knowledge that if we are unlucky to have a contraceptive method fail, that we have options.


  • Options
    #615
    keybordWarrior
    Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭keybordWarrior


    KiKi III wrote: »
    For most human beings, it would involve denying natural sexual urges for most of their lives.
    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    whatever about the concept it is impossible at scale.

    I agree. I don't think in current society everyone would be willing to do it. But wanting to have sex really badly doesn't justify abortion. We're basically talking about abortion as contraception at this point.


  • Options
    #616
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,466 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    keybordWarrior wrote: »
    I agree. I don't think in current society everyone would be willing to do it. But wanting to have sex really badly doesn't justify abortion. We're basically talking about abortion as contraception at this point.

    i dont think anybody should be forced to carry to term. it is really that simple. you put the rights of a 12 fetus over the rights of a woman. i think that is nonsense.


  • Options
    #617
    keybordWarrior
    Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭keybordWarrior


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    i dont think anybody should be forced to carry to term. it is really that simple. you put the rights of a 12 fetus over the rights of a woman. i think that is nonsense.

    Nobody is forcing anyone to have a baby, nobody forced anyone to have sex or to take the risk of creating a life.

    I assume there's a typo and you mean 12 week fetus? To that I would say you are putting having sex above a 12 week old unborn baby. I think that is nonsense.

    Edit: I think we're probably starting to go in circles now.


  • Options
    #618
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,466 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    keybordWarrior wrote: »
    Nobody is forcing anyone to have a baby, nobody forced anyone to have sex or to take the risk of creating a life.

    I assume there's a typo and you mean 12 week fetus? To that I would say you are putting having sex above a 12 week old unborn baby. I think that is nonsense.

    when the woman is pregnant the sex is history and irrelevant. if you deny a pregnant woman an abortion you are forcing them to carry a baby to term assuming there are no medical issues along the way.


  • Options
    #619
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,588 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    keybordWarrior wrote: »
    Nobody is forcing anyone to have a baby, nobody forced anyone to have sex or to take the risk of creating a life.

    I assume there's a typo and you mean 12 week fetus? To that I would say you are putting having sex above a 12 week old unborn baby. I think that is nonsense.

    Edit: I think we're probably starting to go in circles now.

    Really? Go to prison if you abort the child, or have the child? How's that not forcing?

    No woman is forced *today* in Ireland, now that the Eighth has been repealed.

    As for forced sex, http://tinyurl.com/y9bzt9um


  • Options
    #620
    ELM327
    Registered Users Posts: 21,999 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    keybordWarrior wrote: »
    Nobody is forcing anyone to have a baby, nobody forced anyone to have sex or to take the risk of creating a life.

    I assume there's a typo and you mean 12 week fetus? To that I would say you are putting having sex above a 12 week old unborn baby. I think that is nonsense.

    Edit: I think we're probably starting to go in circles now.


    You know a "12 week old" fetus is actually in existence for ~10 weeks in actuality.
    Not a human, but a fetus. Like how if you drop an apple to the ground, the pip could start sprouting roots but it's not an apple tree.


    This has been explained to your ilk several times. But when the alternative you propose is a bible thumping "uNb0rN SlAugHteR", it's difficult to meet such preposterous nonsense head on.


  • Options
    #621
    keybordWarrior
    Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭keybordWarrior


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    when the woman is pregnant the sex is history and irrelevant. if you deny a pregnant woman an abortion you are forcing them to carry a baby to term assuming there are no medical issues along the way.

    It is history, it's not irrelevant. The sex was when the risk was knowingly taken.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #622
    ELM327
    Registered Users Posts: 21,999 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    keybordWarrior wrote: »
    It is history, it's not irrelevant. The sex was when the risk was knowingly taken.
    Why is it your decision?
    What I decide to do with my body is my decision. I can endanger my life by being fat, endanger others around me by smoking, endanger others by drinking and causing a drain on the health service. I can get a vasectomy without the need for your approval. Why is abortion or female healthcare any different


  • Options
    #623
    KiKi III
    Registered Users Posts: 2,653 ✭✭✭KiKi III


    keybordWarrior wrote: »
    It is history, it's not irrelevant. The sex was when the risk was knowingly taken.

    The idea that people should only have sex if they want to get pregnant is Judeo Christian nonsense.


  • Options
    #624
    LorelaiG
    Registered Users Posts: 699 ✭✭✭LorelaiG


    ELM327 wrote: »
    Why is it your decision?
    What I decide to do with my body is my decision. I can endanger my life by being fat, endanger others around me by smoking, endanger others by drinking and causing a drain on the health service. I can get a vasectomy without the need for your approval. Why is abortion or female healthcare any different

    Because of the parasite inside the woman's body.


  • Options
    #625
    ELM327
    Registered Users Posts: 21,999 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    LorelaiG wrote: »
    Because of the parasite inside the woman's body.
    That still doesnt justify him (or anyone else tbh except the woman and her doctor) to have an opinion on it.


    If I had a parasite living on my body or in my body, does he have dominion over that too?


  • Options
    #626
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,466 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    KiKi III wrote: »
    The idea that people should only have sex if they want to get pregnant is Judeo Christian nonsense.

    definitely not jewish nonsense. they are firmly of the belief that sex should be for pleasure as well.


  • Options
    #627
    keybordWarrior
    Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭keybordWarrior


    KiKi III wrote: »
    The idea that people should only have sex if they want to get pregnant is Judeo Christian nonsense.

    The idea that people should not be responsible for their actions, but instead defer to having an unborn baby killed is terrible.


  • Options
    #628
    keybordWarrior
    Closed Accounts Posts: 65 ✭✭keybordWarrior


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    definitely not jewish nonsense. they are firmly of the belief that sex should be for pleasure as well.

    Sex can be had for pleasure too. It doesn’t have to include the killing of unborn babies.


  • Options
    #629
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    Seven Septs wrote: »
    However most of us at some level know that getting rid of what, given 7 or 8 months, will be a healthy life is inherently wrong.

    You complain about "cliches" and then simply assert a position you "know" is "wrong" based on cliches of your own.

    You just "knowing" your position is the correct one, does not magically make it the correct one. Unless you can support your position with actual moral and ethical arguments..... just telling people you "know" you are right is gonna get nowhere.

    Be warned though, my position on abortion is not based on a single one of the cliches you listed. That said though shouting "cliche" at an argument does not make the argument go away and it certainly does not rebut it.


  • Options
    #630
    KiKi III
    Registered Users Posts: 2,653 ✭✭✭KiKi III


    keybordWarrior wrote: »
    Sex can be had for pleasure too. It doesn’t have to include the killing of unborn babies.

    Yes, and in the vast, vast majority of cases sex doesn’t result in abortion.

    But when sex results in an unwanted pregnancy, termination can be the right, responsible thing to do.

    The foetus has not yet developed the capacity to think or feel pain, is not aware of its own existence, and does not have rights that exceed those of the woman carrying it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #631
    Beasty
    Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 76,577 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    keybordWarrior wrote: »
    I asked you a question and made an assumption as to your answer. I stand by it until you prove otherwise.
    If that's the quality of "debate" you bring to this thread do not post in it again


Advertisement