Um, we’re talking about abortion not murder... wrote:
Sand Dunes wrote:
Killing babies is so ethical.
What are you talking about? The rest of us are talking about a medical procedure that has nothing to do with killing or babies.
Look, just like all civilized peoples, I'm all for preinfanticide, but let's not try and get on a moral high horse over the issue. We truly are the bad guys.
Great idea! Brilliant!!! wrote:
Elemenope wrote:
Too bad you weren't around to correct Shakespeare who has these words from Joan of Arc in Henry VI, Part 1, Act 5, Scene 4:
Will nothing turn your unrelenting hearts?
Then, Joan, discover thine infirmity,
That warranteth by law to be thy privilege.
I am with child, ye bloody homicides:
Murder not then the fruit within my womb,
Although ye hale me to a violent death.
Wow! Impressive logic! Let’s base public policy on a ~500 year old play. Should we also revert back to medical knowledge and technology from the 1500-1600s?
Ummm, I showed that the use of child for a living unborn human being has a most respected pedigree, and child is usually used to describe an even more developed human being than baby.
As for scientific and medical knowledge, when advocates for legal direct abortion refer to a living unborn human being as merely a blob of cells, pregnancy tissue or a parasite, they are the ones looking ridiculous relative to all we know about human development. When merely a blob of cells is deployed, for example, rarely is so little made of so much.
Great idea! Brilliant!!! wrote:
Elemenope wrote:
Too bad you weren't around to correct Shakespeare who has these words from Joan of Arc in Henry VI, Part 1, Act 5, Scene 4:
Will nothing turn your unrelenting hearts?
Then, Joan, discover thine infirmity,
That warranteth by law to be thy privilege.
I am with child, ye bloody homicides:
Murder not then the fruit within my womb,
Although ye hale me to a violent death.
Wow! Impressive logic! Let’s base public policy on a ~500 year old play. Should we also revert back to medical knowledge and technology from the 1500-1600s?
These images are from the last half of the 20th century or more recent:
http://oddstuffmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/zhizn-0015.jpghttps://d1lhri34tovdcj.cloudfront.net/prod/mom365/pregnancy-stage-images/20-weeks-pregnant-p6800471_bdr-5129fe5b-b1aa-4080-b8b8-de8e6acefcc2.jpgThe morally correct, scientific position! wrote:
Congratulations to Ireland for joining the rest of the civilized, scientifically literate world by repealing the ban on abortion...
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/26/world/europe/ireland-abortion-yes.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=HomepageWhile the US continues to slide back into Stone Age ways of thinking similar to ISIS and the Taliban, at least other educated, civilized countries are make appropriate decisions regarding the rights of women.
+1, OP. All reasonable, reality based people agree.
It’s also not surprising that the result was so lopsided. Nearly 70% voted to end the abortion ban AND there was high voter turnout.
https://edition-m.cnn.com/2018/05/26/europe/ireland-count-abortion---intl/index.htmlI am sure the proportions are similar in the US—my guess was that if every eligible person in the US voted it would turn out that 80% of the population supports a women’s right to choose. Only ~20% of the population are Bible-thumping, anti-science types that care sooooo much about a feti & abortion but then fight tooth and to prevent easy access to contraception (to prevent the need for abortion) and argue against programs to help poor families feed, clothe, house, and educate their kids—because they only care about unborn “babies”, they consider real, already-born kids well-being a burden....especially if they are poor and not white.
I’m so angry I’m shaving my head and back!!
AP: Upon hearing the news, priests everywhere began touching kids. The news had nothing to do with their actions. It’s just what they allegedly do. “Allegedly.”
The morally correct, scientific position! wrote:
Congratulations to Ireland for joining the rest of the civilized, scientifically literate world by repealing the ban on abortion...
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/26/world/europe/ireland-abortion-yes.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=HomepageWhile the US continues to slide back into Stone Age ways of thinking similar to ISIS and the Taliban, at least other educated, civilized countries are make appropriate decisions regarding the rights of women.
Agree. This is a great day for the rule of law, ethical behavior, equal rights, women’s rights, and true democracy.
The US could learn some valuable lessons from Ireland. If people in the US would simply turn out to vote we wouldn’t have Trump and all the stupid policies of his parties.
I don't get the need for abortions. Could they not literally drink a barrel of guiness or whisky and that will sort the situation out for them.
What a fantastic day for Ireland, human dignity, and basic human rights.
Well done Ireland. Welcome to the civilized world.
All non-idiots agree with you wrote:
The morally correct, scientific position! wrote:
Congratulations to Ireland for joining the rest of the civilized, scientifically literate world by repealing the ban on abortion...
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/26/world/europe/ireland-abortion-yes.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=HomepageWhile the US continues to slide back into Stone Age ways of thinking similar to ISIS and the Taliban, at least other educated, civilized countries are make appropriate decisions regarding the rights of women.
+1, OP. All reasonable, reality based people agree.
It’s also not surprising that the result was so lopsided. Nearly 70% voted to end the abortion ban AND there was high voter turnout.
https://edition-m.cnn.com/2018/05/26/europe/ireland-count-abortion---intl/index.htmlI am sure the proportions are similar in the US—my guess was that if every eligible person in the US voted it would turn out that 80% of the population supports a women’s right to choose. Only ~20% of the population are Bible-thumping, anti-science types that care sooooo much about a feti & abortion but then fight tooth and to prevent easy access to contraception (to prevent the need for abortion) and argue against programs to help poor families feed, clothe, house, and educate their kids—because they only care about unborn “babies”, they consider real, already-born kids well-being a burden....especially if they are poor and not white.
Ummm, you may not be anti-science, but you are foolishly reductionist and still cannot see what others foresaw in the 1960s. The 1960s champions of artificial birth control fobbed off as "health care" drugs designed to induce a diseased state – prolonged infertility – by poisoning women and devices or interventions which monkey-wrench the human reproductive works, usually in women. They declared that these lifestyle drugs, devices and interventions would prevent out-of-wedlock births, abortion, child abuse, divorce, adultery and more. The 1960s were a time of moonshots, psychedelia and great hope in technology and medicine.
The data are in. After decades of widespread use of these artificial methods, the reported rates of out-of-wedlock births, abortion, child abuse, and divorce have not fallen but have moon rocketed (as have the rates of transmission of sexual diseases). Not groovy. While rates of adultery are difficult to obtain, you may suspect as I do that they have increased. In the USA, unmarried women procure more than 80% of abortions; of the remaining less than 20% of abortions (those procured by married women), a significant percentage may be by women impregnated by men to whom they are not married: abortion in the USA is overwhelmingly a consequence of sex between people unmarried to each other. Further, the majority of women having abortions in the USA were using a "contraceptive" drug or device when they conceived the child they aborted (many so called "contraceptives," besides failing to prevent conception, may also cause a very early abortion); a greater majority were experienced "contraceptive" users but some abandoned these drugs or devices, often because of their side effects which frequently include depression, weight gain and decreased sex drive, for just three examples. How ironic. Should we be surprised by such unintended effects when the intended effect is to produce a diseased state? Might these effects – intended (infertility) and unintended (depression, weight gain and decreased sex drive) - have something to do with adultery and divorce?
The sexual revolution has not so much been tried on an enormous scale and found wanting as it has been tried on an enormous scale and found disastrous. While economic and other factors contributed, that revolution has been fueled largely by the use of artificial “contraceptives.” How much worse must things get before those still clinging to great hopes for these lifestyle drugs, devices and interventions rid the moonbeams from their eyes and shake the psychedelic dust from their bell bottoms?
All non-idiots agree with you wrote:
It’s also not surprising that the result was so lopsided. Nearly 70% voted to end the abortion ban AND there was high voter turnout.
To what extent did the ad blackout have to do with this? Nearly all the major Irish newspapers supported the repeal and they could get their own messages out supporting legal abortion via opinion pieces whereas the opponents had what means of communicating after being denied advertising opportunities? My own messages on Craigslist disappeared within minutes without my even getting "flagged" notifications.
https://slate.com/technology/2018/05/facebook-and-google-introduce-restrictions-to-prevent-foreign-interference-in-irelands-abortion-referendum.htmlElemenope wrote:
The morally correct, scientific position! wrote:
Congratulations to Ireland for joining the rest of the civilized, scientifically literate world by repealing the ban on abortion...
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/05/26/world/europe/ireland-abortion-yes.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=HomepageWhile the US continues to slide back into Stone Age ways of thinking similar to ISIS and the Taliban, at least other educated, civilized countries are make appropriate decisions regarding the rights of women.
Ummm, what are the scientific indications that willfully destroying innocent human beings is good? And how is ripping a human fetus's face or limbs off civilized?
Data from the World Health Organization (WHO, 2010) indicate that only 6 out of 100,000 women die in Ireland as a result of complications related to pregnancy. That is one-half of those who die in the UK (12), less than one-third of those who die in the US (21), and less than one-thirtieth of the those who die in India (200), all countries where abortion is legal. Similar data exist for Chile and Malta where direct abortion as illegal under nearly all or all circumstances (Chile has since become more permissive regarding direct abortion).
IRELAND, where direct abortion was illegal before yesterday, was SAFER for pregnant women AND the unborn than nations where direct abortion was legal.
Expect that to change.
Direct abortion (A) is a risk factor for infertility; (B) is a risk factor for ectopic (tubal) pregnancy; (C) is a risk factor for cerebral palsy in babies conceived later; (D) is a suspected risk factor for breast cancer (the majority of published studies on this have identified abortion as a risk factor for breast cancer and there seems to be a dose effect: the greater the number of abortions a woman has, the greater the risk) and (E) is deliberately fatal to the fetus targeted by the abortion, for a few examples. Rather, ”safe abortion" is a semantic absurdity and a lie. I cannot think of another pairing of the word "safe" with the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. Can you?
Thankfully pro choice . I have seen too many instances where these children do not become presidents or doctors that cure cancer .
Having said , your post is the most eloquent of this thread .
99% of Pro Choice embarrass me .
99% of
ulhygcj wrote:
All non-idiots agree with you wrote:
It’s also not surprising that the result was so lopsided. Nearly 70% voted to end the abortion ban AND there was high voter turnout.
To what extent did the ad blackout have to do with this? Nearly all the major Irish newspapers supported the repeal and they could get their own messages out supporting legal abortion via opinion pieces whereas the opponents had what means of communicating after being denied advertising opportunities? My own messages on Craigslist disappeared within minutes without my even getting "flagged" notifications.
https://slate.com/technology/2018/05/facebook-and-google-introduce-restrictions-to-prevent-foreign-interference-in-irelands-abortion-referendum.html
Did you read the post you’re responding to? Your point is confusing —the post you’re responding to clearly links to an article saying there was high voter turn out but you’re saying there was a lack of advertising?
Or are you upset by the lack of the ability of RWNJ to try and troll to intimidate people into not voting? Because in countries that value reason, logic and education it seems the #1 tactic of white, Christian fascists like Trump and his ilk is to try and suppress the vote. The less people vote, the lower the turn out the more regressive, oppressive laws & regulatons get passed due to the FACT that right wingers vote on pure emotion (hate, fear) vs. liberal folk who consistently use logic and critical thinking to evaluate issues and candidates.
Ireland’s great national nightmare is over! wrote:
What a fantastic day for Ireland, human dignity, and basic human rights.
Well done Ireland. Welcome to the civilized world.
Did you sarcasm sail right over my head?
I'll make mine more obvious: vivisecting a human fetus with scalpels, de-limbing it with forceps or, in the case of partial-birth abortion/infanticide, inverting it to a breech position, jabbing a scissors into the base of its neck, inserting an aspiration (vacuuming) device into its head to suck its brains out, thereby collapsing its skull to enable its passage from the birth canal is civilized and respects the dignity of all living human beings.
Sarcasmo wrote:
Ireland’s great national nightmare is over! wrote:
What a fantastic day for Ireland, human dignity, and basic human rights.
Well done Ireland. Welcome to the civilized world.
Did you sarcasm sail right over my head?
I'll make mine more obvious: vivisecting a human fetus with scalpels, de-limbing it with forceps or, in the case of partial-birth abortion/infanticide, inverting it to a breech position, jabbing a scissors into the base of its neck, inserting an aspiration (vacuuming) device into its head to suck its brains out, thereby collapsing its skull to enable its passage from the birth canal is civilized and respects the dignity of all living human beings.
Yes. Absolutely. You’re simply describing a valid, ethical medical procedure. You know the project veritas videos, the big signs with surgical specimens from D&Cs, and the weird vans covered in picture of surgical specimens have changed no ones mind. You know this, right? Describing the steps of a valid medical procedure in detail isn’t really going to change anyone’s mind either.
Responding to poster with illogical disordered thinking wrote:
ulhygcj wrote:
To what extent did the ad blackout have to do with this? Nearly all the major Irish newspapers supported the repeal and they could get their own messages out supporting legal abortion via opinion pieces whereas the opponents had what means of communicating after being denied advertising opportunities? My own messages on Craigslist disappeared within minutes without my even getting "flagged" notifications.
https://slate.com/technology/2018/05/facebook-and-google-introduce-restrictions-to-prevent-foreign-interference-in-irelands-abortion-referendum.htmlDid you read the post you’re responding to? Your point is confusing —the post you’re responding to clearly links to an article saying there was high voter turn out but you’re saying there was a lack of advertising?
Or are you upset by the lack of the ability of RWNJ to try and troll to intimidate people into not voting? Because in countries that value reason, logic and education it seems the #1 tactic of white, Christian fascists like Trump and his ilk is to try and suppress the vote. The less people vote, the lower the turn out the more regressive, oppressive laws & regulatons get passed due to the FACT that right wingers vote on pure emotion (hate, fear) vs. liberal folk who consistently use logic and critical thinking to evaluate issues and candidates.
Please try (again?) to comprehend what the post about the ad blackout was about. The pro-repeal newspapers had no problem getting their message out via their own opinion pages and articles; the anti-repeal people had an unusual set of problems getting their message out because of the blackout. Capish?
Correct!!!! wrote:
Sarcasmo wrote:
Did you sarcasm sail right over my head?
I'll make mine more obvious: vivisecting a human fetus with scalpels, de-limbing it with forceps or, in the case of partial-birth abortion/infanticide, inverting it to a breech position, jabbing a scissors into the base of its neck, inserting an aspiration (vacuuming) device into its head to suck its brains out, thereby collapsing its skull to enable its passage from the birth canal is civilized and respects the dignity of all living human beings.
Yes. Absolutely. You’re simply describing a valid, ethical medical procedure. You know the project veritas videos, the big signs with surgical specimens from D&Cs, and the weird vans covered in picture of surgical specimens have changed no ones mind. You know this, right? Describing the steps of a valid medical procedure in detail isn’t really going to change anyone’s mind either.
Not even a nice try. Direct abortion destroys an innocent human being, heals nothing and is the opposite of medicine.
09876 wrote:
Correct!!!! wrote:
Yes. Absolutely. You’re simply describing a valid, ethical medical procedure. You know the project veritas videos, the big signs with surgical specimens from D&Cs, and the weird vans covered in picture of surgical specimens have changed no ones mind. You know this, right? Describing the steps of a valid medical procedure in detail isn’t really going to change anyone’s mind either.
Not even a nice try. Direct abortion destroys an innocent human being, heals nothing and is the opposite of medicine.
Incorrect!!! Clearly the vast majority or Irish disagree with you. The overwhelming majority of Americans also disagree with you and your archaic, illogical beliefs.
Incorrect!!!! wrote:
09876 wrote:
Not even a nice try. Direct abortion destroys an innocent human being, heals nothing and is the opposite of medicine.
Incorrect!!! Clearly the vast majority or Irish disagree with you. The overwhelming majority of Americans also disagree with you and your archaic, illogical beliefs.
What was incorrect? What was illogical? You didn't say. And most in the USA want direct abortion limited to rather strict conditions.
Incorrect!!!! wrote:
[quote]09876 wrote:
Clearly the vast majority or Irish disagree with you. The overwhelming majority of Americans also disagree with you
Appeal to popularity is not a argument. Just because majority wants to do x, does not make x moral.
