Register to Comment
Page 1558 of 1646 FirstFirst ... 55810581458150815481556155715581559156015681608 ... LastLast
Results 15,571 to 15,580 of 16451
Like Tree5129Likes
  1. #15571
    Lumpy Talbot Lumpy Talbot is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    14,412
    Twitter
    @

    Old men virtue-signalling over their non-existent uterus. Where were all these puritans when the news was emerging about the way infants and children were being treated in religious institutions?

    Far too many of them were lined up behind Reverend Mother O'Liar.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #15572
    Lumpy Talbot Lumpy Talbot is offline

    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    14,412
    Twitter
    @

    Quite funny watching the paranoia arise. They sense that their old arguments that they downloaded from some socially inadequate priest in the good old day aren't getting much traction these days so they have to construct some conspiracy against them. George Soros' money, foreign influences, communism, the jooz at the New York Times ... all out to 'get' them.

    The truth is much more mundane. The time has come for them to be shoved in the corner and told to gum their pap.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #15573
    damus damus is offline
    damus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    20,691

    Quote Originally Posted by talkingshop View Post
    Any link to where the medical community claimed it was unclear? It's only on here that people seem to have a difficulty understanding it!
    Well then you're not doing your homework. The ICGP have been critical of PLDPA. Doctors for Choice have made a number of observations on the Act. And we've had insight as to the operations of the Act on suicidal grounds from Prof. Veronica O'Keane - but I suppose that the views and opinions of the people working on the cold face, just don't quite matter! And another point, there's no requirement under the Act to report to the minister cases that were refused under the Act. Is it acceptable that pro-choice politicians use the benefit of Dail privilege to name doctors who certify under S.9 - which is what happened in relation to one case involving Prof O'Keane? The Master of the Rotunda has also been critical of the lack of gestational limits in the Act.

    The provisions of the PLDA are either ignored, or if considered, found to be cumbersome, intensely stressfuland difficult by both GPs,and far more importantly,by the women concerned,and their partners
    https://www.citizensassembly.ie/en/M...-Shea-ICGP.pdf

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/soci...rist-1.3116997

    https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-...land-1.2991006

    https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/ca...stacle-course/

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/heal...tion-1.2405663

    https://doctorsforchoiceireland.com/press-releases/
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #15574
    Telstar 62 Telstar 62 is offline

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    18,250

    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #15575
    cozzy121 cozzy121 is offline
    cozzy121's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,950

    Looks like Ronan Mullen's doesn't appreciate a woman arguing with him over abortion..

    (All Credit to broadsheet)
    ‘For Those Six Minutes, They Are My Witnesses’ | Broadsheet.ie

    Mr Mullen argued with Catherine Noone, the Fine Gael senator, after a terse session in the committee.

    A Times journalist and several TDs who were in the ladies lavatory outside the committee room at the time were able to overhear the entire exchange in the corridor. Mr Mullen was upset after he was criticised for the way in which he questioned two representatives of the World Health Organisation (WHO) during his six minutes of Questioning.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #15576
    Bill Bill is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    7,766

    Quote Originally Posted by cozzy121 View Post
    Looks like Ronan Mullen's doesn't appreciate a woman arguing with him over abortion..

    (All Credit to broadsheet)
    ‘For Those Six Minutes, They Are My Witnesses’ | Broadsheet.ie
    She should have told him to fúck off
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #15577
    Uganda Uganda is offline

    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    6,493

    Apologies if this question has already been raised - I havent been following the thread.

    If a couple meet and have sex, and tomorrow morning there is a difference of opinion as to whether the sex was consensual or not, and he says Yes it was, and she says No it was not.

    Does a resulting pregnancy qualify for an abortion under the "in case of rape" argument?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #15578
    cozzy121 cozzy121 is offline
    cozzy121's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,950

    Quote Originally Posted by Uganda View Post
    Apologies if this question has already been raised - I havent been following the thread.

    If a couple meet and have sex, and tomorrow morning there is a difference of opinion as to whether the sex was consensual or not, and he says Yes it was, and she says No it was not.

    Does a resulting pregnancy qualify for an abortion under the "in case of rape" argument?
    Legally I would assume the rape would have to be proven 1st.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #15579
    Nitrogen Nitrogen is offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    672

    Quote Originally Posted by Uganda View Post
    Apologies if this question has already been raised - I havent been following the thread.

    If a couple meet and have sex, and tomorrow morning there is a difference of opinion as to whether the sex was consensual or not, and he says Yes it was, and she says No it was not.

    Does a resulting pregnancy qualify for an abortion under the "in case of rape" argument?
    Indeed.

    I've always thought the rape argument for abortion to be utterly daft.
    People latch onto it as some sort of compromise position, but if you think about it, it makes no sense at all;

    Either;
    The foetus does not have rights, in which case it is entirely the woman's choice
    or
    It does have rights, in which case those rights ought to be protected / weighed against the woman's rights etc.

    The idea that the circumstances of conception should have a bearing on whether it has or has not got rights, makes no sense whatsoever.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #15580
    It Was It Was is offline

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    620

    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrogen View Post
    Indeed.

    I've always thought the rape argument for abortion to be utterly daft.
    People latch onto it as some sort of compromise position, but if you think about it, it makes no sense at all;

    Either;
    The foetus does not have rights, in which case it is entirely the woman's choice
    or
    It does have rights, in which case those rights ought to be protected / weighed against the woman's rights etc.

    The idea that the circumstances of conception should have a bearing on whether it has or has not got rights, makes no sense whatsoever.
    Yes, focusing on difficult situations such as pregnancy as a result of rape seems like a red herring.
    While forcing people to do something against their will such as continuing with an unwanted pregnancy is bad, surely this is less unjust than taking the life of a foetus ... unless of course the foetus doesn't have a right to life?
    And then, if the foetus doesn't have a right to life, it is hard to see what justification there is for any restriction on access to abortion?

    We might try to approach this question from a slightly different angle. Maybe the foetus has a potential right to life that is contingent on the pregnant woman recognising it? And I guess that might be an implicit recognition made by continuing with a pregnancy.

    From a "pro-life" perspective, this seems perverse, in that women with unwanted pregnancies would presumably terminate them earlier rather than thinking for a while. But it does seem like a medically sound approach, and it is hard to see how else a "right to life" can be reconciled with a "right to choose", without the right to life being contingent on the choice.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment