208 thoughts on “Taking It To Another Level

      1. Randy Knights

        In fairness both sides are pretty well funded from the States. The Yes side receive substantial funding from Chuck Feeney & Co. To claim either side is clear of subversive funding is to be either A) a liar or B) Pig Ignorant.

        1. michelle

          Yes, that’s the reason why Choice Ireland meets in free social spaces, etc. Because they are really well funded. They use handmade signs that aren’t identical because they are simply more original too and not an economical choice. *rolls eyes*

        2. greypalm

          I doubt it.

          YD always have clean, well designed and professionally printed posters by the boat load (not to mention all those nauseating billboards which I’m sure cost a pretty penny). Just look at their website. It was hardly Terry from the office who made it
          http://www.youthdefence.ie/

          Whereas the pro-choice groups usually have hand-made signs, with nowhere near the public exposure not to mention their websites are quite pedestrian along with this message “Choice Ireland is a non-funded voluntary activist organisation. All we have, we raise through donations.” http://www.choiceireland.org/

          YD are Christian backed and funded. They have a lot of money, I’m sure.

      1. paul

        visit their facebook pages, hilarious stuff, they paid to promote all their posts and now they’ve got loads of foreign spambot followers, who are spamming them in various languages

    1. Mark Dennehy

      Y’know, someone should make that into a T-shirt.

      They’re not just protesting on Kildare St. either, they were hanging banners over the sides of bridges on the M50 today as well. Eejits. One tie-wrap snaps (or tears through the banner) and now you’ve something falling into fast-moving traffic. So, every child matters, unless they’re in the car with you…

  1. cross-eyed cow

    There looks to be a serious funding gap between the Pro-Choice and Anti-Choice sides.

    Look at all those placards… I wonder who is paying for them.

    1. Blobster

      That’s a bullshit “argument” uttered time and time again by people who dislike the pro-life agenda. On what evidence do you base your assertion that people who are pro-life don’t care about children after they are born?? Any evidence at all?

      1. uiscebeatha

        How about all the years of not being allowed abortion in Ireland, when unwanted children where placed in homes and abused by the religious. Who stepped in to defend them? Where was YD? I have had family members who suffered for this. Nobody came to save them, nobody cared.

        I wasn’t in a home but I was abused by people who would not tolerate abortion or divorce in their country. I could always find people to talk to if it was an anti-abortion topic, people weren’t so ready to listen if you were suffering from child abuse.

        So, don’t give me your “bullshit” Blobster.. Your lot get so caught up in defending the “voiceless” but did feck all for those of us who had voices.

        1. Blobster

          So the people in the photos above have flawed opinions on abortion because bad things happened to children who weren’t aborted back before they themselves were even born?

          1. uiscebeatha

            F*ck off you troll. Bad things happened to me and other children after these people were born. And may have even happened to these people.

            You are a typical pro-birther. No compassion. Do you think it was easy to write what I did? Abuse destroys your life, no amount of counselling can fix it. Yet you can be so flippant about my life experiences. And you expect me to believe that you and your ilk will care about these kids after they’re born. F*ck that. You’re delusional (and an uncaring pr*ck)

          2. Blobster

            Thanks Uiscebeatha.

            I have no doubt you suffered terribly and am sorry that it in choosing to write about it regarding the matter of the abortion debate that you are upset by it.

            Despite that, I think it is important to question your original, glib, generalising comment that you put in the mouths of those people pictured and, presumably other people who happen to hold pro-life views – that “Every child matters. Until it’s born.”.

            The vast, vast majortiy (in fact all) pro life and pro choice people I know do care about children’s welfare. To say otherwise – and to infer that pro-life people somehow condone violence against children is just plain wrong.

          3. Sidewinder

            This protest was organised by YD. YD are against contraception, against same sex adoption and have never opposed any cuts to child support or single parent’s allowance. They want people to be born but they quite evidently don’t care what happens to them after they’re born. Their only tactic in reducing the number of abortions is in banning them. Which doesn’t reduce them, it only means they happen in England. If you want every child to be wanted and well looked after then you should be taking a stance on these issues so that women are given the CHOICE to have continue with a pregnancy if they want to.

      2. Dave, Dublin

        Try Youth Defence/The Life Institute/whatever 60A Capel Street are calling themself this week’s websites. Consider their views on vaccination (anti), the childrens referendum (anti), the Roscommon case (supported the defendant).

        1. uiscebeatha

          Well blobster, I wasn’t glib. That is my experience from growing up amongst fanatical pro-birthers. They didn’t give a shit about the child once they were born. I include local clergy and even doctors in that, as the abuse was mentioned to them and they did absolutely nothing. Apart from one priest who advised an abuser to pray for guidance.

          Just because my comment was short doesn’t mean I don’t believe it or hadn’t thought it through.

          You really need to take a long hard look at yourself and see how you come across to other people. Do you think you’ll get other people over to your side with your crass comments? You just come across as trying to score points of the other side. Immature and completely lacking in compassion.

          Like I said, try to have some compassion for those of us with voices, not just the “voiceless”.

          1. Blobster

            Duly noted Uisce.

            I’m sorry you were abused. I really am. But I think you’re using it as a stick to beat people who happen to take a stance, opposit to yours, on a completely different issue.

            Sorry if that comes acros as insensitive.

      3. Arbs

        Blobster: The suggestion that the pro-life agenda, to use your own term, has a rather hypocritical and deeply flawed approach to protecting life is both an apposite and reasonable comment I would have thought.

        The pro-life agenda is overwhelmingly religious based and generally these individuals have quite categorical and unwavering views about a whole range of issues on the sexual mores spectrum. These views are not advanced with any degree of intellectual rigour or even basic thought, but grounded as they are in a febrile ideology, they are ventilated in a rabid and contemptuous manner, expunged of nuance, which seeks to demonise those who don’t conform to these views. The moralising, judgmentalism, scare-mongering and reductionism deemed acceptable by these groups as there is a so-called higher principle at issue smacks ironically of the worst type of fundamentalism which they are only too apt to rail against.

        It is thus a reasonable and credible assertion that pro-lifers are often the very least life-affirming groups in society. One needs to only look to their opposition to gay marriage which is used as a vehicle to peddle the most grotesque, insidious and pernicious of claims against gay men and women. Many of these retrograde dregs of the religious right genuinely believe that Aids was invented by their deity to punish homosexuals. They are also quite adept at linking homosexuality and paedophilia when there is no credible scientific justification for this. These same people will happily, in the vein of a macabre rent-a-mob, line out at will for a Youth Attack or SPUC march. BelongTo youth services, will happily provide you with all the evidence you need about just how life-affirming and tolerant those of the religious right are to their very own gay sons and daughters. Most of these groups are also vehemently against schools providing any form of sexual health education to children, and again, many of their own children are kept, to their own doubtless detriment, in the dark, about these issues. One could go on, suffice it to say, while these groups may not actively take life, they prefer to poison and I would even go so far as to say destroy lives, passively and vicariously, through unwavering and constant brain-washing, abuse and the insidious peddling of untruths and half-baked lies grounded in nothing more than hatred and fear.

        These are the very same tactics employed in the abortion debate, an issue which is as nuanced as it is complex. You rail against the pro-life agenda being stigmatised and pigeonholed but these are these very same individuals who with an even greater vehemence and devoid of nuance and the most basic of humanity, brand everyone who is on the pro-choice side as a murderer, fascist…you can amply fill in the rest. There is though a rather grim and tragic irony with many in the pro-life brigade.

        1. Sidewinder

          Hear, hear. And as long as they continue to claim that scientific fact supports their various claims (it doesn’t) and refuse to acknowledge their real reasons for being against abortion then it remains clear that they don’t have any respect for the people they are trying to control.

        2. Blobster

          There are way too many generalisations in that comment to quite know where to begin. The first generalisation would be that all pro-life people are religious.

          1. uiscebeatha

            Blobster, back off. In my experience, all the pro-lifers I knew were religious and vice versa. Just because that’s not true for your doesn’t make my experience or opinion any less valid.

            And it’s not a completely different issue. You asked why I thought pro-lifers didn’t care about children. I gave you my reasons, now you tell me I’m off topic. I was answering your question, Einstein.

          2. Arbs

            To suggest that the majority of pro-lifers or anti-choicers are not of a religious hue is so incredible an assertion that is an affront to even the most vivid of one’s day-dreaming faculties. FYI: Youth Attack, SPUC, Senator Ronan Mullen, David Quinn, Breda O’Brien (The Iona Institute)…the list of those of an extreme right persuasion is endless. What pro-life groups do not have a religious element? Granted, there are pro-life people who do not argue from a religious stance but they are overwhelmingly in the minority. I mean have you even been to a pro-life march – the amount of religious iconography and references is quite copious, I’m surprised most don’t get entangled in rosary beads that would challenge even Houdini himself.

          3. Arbs

            Blobster: You appear adept at calling for evidence in the negative yet appear very slow to proffer evidence in the positive to counter the assertions you rail against.

          4. Blobster

            My post clearly stated that not “all prolife PEOPLE are religious”. They aren’t.

            As for the original point of whether people/organisations who promote a prolife view care for the welfare of children, I really don’t see why it’s contentious to suggest that most people, whether they are prolife or prochoice care for children and adults. Here – how about these guys for starters: http://www.crosscare.ie

          5. Arbs

            Hmm, I don’t recall suggesting that all pro-life people are religious, but rather that the vast majority are. Rather than get drawn into some skewed semantics, I take it, given that you have not countered the latter suggestion, that you agree with me. The majority of pro-life organisations are underpinned by a very dogmatic religious moral ethic – I mean can you name even a handful of non-religious based pro-life advocates or groups? The religious based ones far and above outweigh them. As for the pro-life commitment to life-affirming principles for people who don’t abide or exist within their moral strictures, well, we’ll have to beg to differ. As I said, there is always the stench of smug and tragic hypocrisy about a lot of these so-called pro-lifers.

  2. woesinger

    So hang on a minute – I thought pro-life groups were all for treatment to save the life of a mother at the expense of the foetus she’s carrying?

    That’s what FG are considering, right? So what are these guys protesting?

    Are they against treatment to save the life of a mother at the expense of the foetus she’s carrying and so in favour of letting women die?

    1. BLC

      They’re presumably against a provision to allow abortion in cases where the mother [pro-choice: is /pro-life: claims to be] suicidal.

          1. woesinger

            Not even:

            “No suicide exception – it’s a lying slut’s ticket to abortion” ?

            I think that sums the point of view pretty well.

  3. robocan

    My innate prejudice and reliance on stereotypes can explain the gap in funding, it’s simple demographics;

    Pro-lifers are all old, and hence have more money.

    Also, fascists are generally better off than non-fascists.

    Pro-lifers have less sex, hence more time to work.

    1. Selina Kill

      Having sopken to some Youth Defence members in a non-confrontational environment, my abiding feeling was pity at the level of religious brainwashing.
      Anger too, at the wilfull ignorance on display.
      These are people who have been brought up at a remove from the rest of society, it seemed.
      Evolution was something that didn’t need to be considered (no shit) ‘cos jesus takes care of all that.
      “Science” almost a dirty word, except when they wanted to talk about the cellular biology involved when a sperm fertilizes an ovum (“it’s then a babeeee”). Purely instinctive reactions it seemed.
      The massive contradictions inherent in their religion were wilfully ignored.
      My impression was that these were people who have managed to avoid considering the concepts most 21st century citizens of democratic countries take for granted.
      I almost felt like I was talking to afghan farmers who had never left the fields, but knew how to use an iphone.
      Just my experience.

      1. Jess

        I feel I should point out at this point that Catholicism is generally down with the theory of evolution. They rarely come right out and say it, but the general consensus seems to be that evolution happens, but may be nudged along the way by a certain magical spacewizard.

    2. Zuppy International

      @robocan

      A point of order, if you please…

      Fascism is a left-wing, non-religious and pro-abortion political philosophy.

      Check out them National Socialists in the middle of the 20th Century.

        1. woesinger

          Hey – that’s ZI’s home you’re talking about. A little respect! It’s a lovely place where the Nazis were commies, the Holocaust never happened, and 9/11 was a false flag operation.

      1. greypalm

        Fascism is right-wing.

        And if memory serves correct, the Nazis, Franco and Mussolini all enjoyed the full endorsement of the Catholic Church.

          1. Sido

            I’m assuming that the big money behind the Anti movement is coming from
            A) Americans
            B) Christians though not necessarily catholic
            C) Imperialists (The sort of people who thought they were doing Ireland big favours by providing the Provos the money and guns).

            Speaking for myself – I like a basic understanding/analysis of people I dislike.

        1. Sido

          Only if you define Right Wing, by their hatred of Commies/Bolsheviks
          I think the Nazi’s were called the National Socialists or some of right on lefty notion.

          1. Kath

            Totalitarianism can be either left or right wing. Fascism is the political system whereby the nation itself is more important than individuals and/or individual rights.
            That’s far too succinct, I know but am legging it to kildare st now.

          2. woesinger

            Did the Nazis try to abolish private property or did they support and encourage business owners and other controllers of the means of production?

            Did the Nazis espouse an international revolution against capital, reaching out to unite workers of all countries and creeds, or did they support a narrow, xenophobic and militaristic nationalism that emphasised the superiority of a particular nation or race?

            Did the Nazis abolish organised churches as tools of the bourgeois capitalist system, or did they enjoy the support of many religious leaders (aside from the Jewish ones, obviously)?

          3. Nigel

            Bu they CALLED themselves NATIONAL SOCIALISTS! Pay attention, sheeple! If you can’t trust the Nazis to name their political party with truthfulness and accuracy, then who CAN you trust? WHO??!!!!!11

          4. Sido

            @ woesinger
            I see so you define “Right Wing” by reference to where they stand in relation to early twentieth century Bolshevik philosophers such as Lenin, Stalin and Trotsky. I always wondered :-/

          5. Zuppy International

            The fascist matrix is complex and disorientating but George Carlin says it best:

            “When fascism comes to America, it will not be in brown and black shirts. It will not be with jack-boots. It will be Nike sneakers and Smiley shirts…Germany lost the Second World War. Fascism won it. Believe me, my friend.”

            on Real Time with Bill Maher, September 9, 2005

          6. Sido

            @ Zuppy – The Big winner of World War II was Stalin & Soviet Russia – Moronically described by Wosinger (As the set of politicians who are not fascists)
            The so called Allies came a poor second.
            And Germany and Japan were clear losers.

          7. Sido

            @ Zuppy – No I haven’t. But in fairness I was being a bit of an ass. Winding up Woesinger by using a more strict definition of Right Wing, (for whom the term fascist is often incorrectly used).
            And we know what he means at the end of the day :-)
            Though strictly speaking I think the Fuhrer probably sought to expand the German Nation by a back door policy of the extermination of lesser races. He wasn’t concerned whether this was achieved privately or by a collectivist movement.

        2. Blobster

          There’s a lot of errors in that small post.

          Fascism – in theory, at least – is defined as a socialist ideology (although these terms have gotten mixed up through the years).
          Franco was not a fascist. Franco was a totalitarian, traditionalist bumpkin.
          Franco had a lot of support in the Spanish church partially because the republican side killed over 7000 priests during the civil war….for being priests.
          The Nazis certainly didn’t ever enjoy wholehearted support of the Catholic Church in Germany or without it. Thousands of priests died in concentration camps.

    1. Max

      Ah Youth Defence, it’s been a long time…clearly some of the grandchildren of the Nic Mhatuna dynasty have reached the age of full indoctrination and can now be let loose on the rest of society.

    1. Leela2011

      “I’m a Roman Catholic
      And have been since before I was born
      And the one thing they say about Catholics is
      They’ll take you as soon as you’re warm”

  4. missred

    The placards should say: “Every theoretical foetus matters in theory to us, even if we don’t know them and will never be arsed meeting them. And, because, y’know, God and my mammy says so. We couldn’t give a toss about individuals because, damnit, EVERY woman HAS to give birth if she is pregnant! ALL of you! Fine Gael, we are pissed off because we cannot bribe/threaten/scare you into keeping our archaic wishes. Tantrum over, we will now sulk in the corner. Or in this case, outside the Dáil”

    But that won’t fit on an A2 size.

        1. Steph

          Also the abortion support network. They give financial aid to women from Ireland travelling to the UK for abortions, from NI and ROI.

    1. Arbs

      Not only do women not matter, every child doesn’t actually matter to these people, the lumpen dregs of the religious right, especially if that child has the temerity to veer off the narrow moral course set for them by this smugly hypocritical motley crew. Pro-life but only if that life mirrors their warped life course.

          1. Sidewinder

            Not to mention their view of people who are born and go on to be pro-choice or have abortions. I’ve been called evil many, many times by members of YD.

          2. Blobster

            The article appears to be a fairly standard defence of the traditional definition of marriage. Are you saying that because that organisation doesn’t support the redefinition of marriage to allow for same sex marriages that the organisation is somehow anti-life?

            If that’s the case, any debate (which would be welcome) about the potential redefinition of marriage is poisoned before we even start.

          3. Arbs

            Blobster: you appear either unwilling or incapable or seeing the bigger picture. It is not the opposition of these pro-life groups to gay marriage that is a distinct cause of concern but it is how they oppose it. To refresh, these views are not advanced with any degree of intellectual rigour or even basic thought, but grounded as they are in a febrile ideology, they are ventilated in a rabid and contemptuous manner, expunged of nuance, which seeks to demonise those who don’t conform to these views. The moralising, judgmentalism, scare-mongering and reductionism deemed acceptable by these groups as there is a so-called higher principle at issue smacks ironically of the worst type of fundamentalism which they are only too apt to rail against.

            It is thus a reasonable and credible assertion that pro-lifers are often the very least life-affirming groups in society. Their opposition to gay marriage is used as a vehicle to peddle the most grotesque, insidious and pernicious of claims against gay men and women. Many of these retrograde dregs of the religious right genuinely believe that Aids was invented by their deity to punish homosexuals. They are also quite adept at linking homosexuality and paedophilia when there is no credible scientific justification for this. These same people will happily, in the vein of a macabre rent-a-mob, line out at will for a Youth Attack or SPUC march. BelongTo youth services, will happily provide you with all the evidence you need about just how life-affirming and tolerant those of the religious right are to their very own gay sons and daughters. Most of these groups are also vehemently against schools providing any form of sexual health education to children, and again, many of their own children are kept, to their own doubtless detriment, in the dark, about these issues. One could go on, suffice it to say, while these groups may not actively take life, they prefer to poison and I would even go so far as to say destroy lives, passively and vicariously, through unwavering and constant brain-washing, abuse and the insidious peddling of untruths and half-baked lies grounded in nothing more than hatred and fear.

            It is utterly fanciful to suggest anything else but that the modus operandi of these people, the dregs of humanity, in any discussion on sexual mores or social issues is to poison it in the most base and contemptible way possible.

          4. Arbs

            I’m sure you’re more than familiar with their literature. In this though, I am comforted, as you once again give your tacit agreement to my precis of the extent of the so-called pro-life agenda. Their magazine as you put it is overflowing with every base suppostion grounded in hate, ignorance and fear in their zeal to oppose gay marriage. The welfare of the child is a consideration which is the very least of their motivations. Contact BelongTo on Capel Street, they’ll only be too happy to expose the tactics of those who infest the “Destroy Life Institute”.

          5. Sidewinder

            Ah the cry of “redefining marriage”! Oh dear oh dear! If only it wasn’t an article about civil partnership, you’d nearly be there. And did I say anything about anti-life? No. The point was that they don’t give a toss about your human rights after you’re born.

            The other point was that if they want people to adopt rather than abort then adoption should be easier. Allowing more people to adopt is right at the top of that list.

            They’re bigots. Pure and simple.

        1. Dave, Dublin

          Roscommon case? Didn’t give two flips about the kids in that case. Plenty of cash for the defence though.

          1. Arbs

            Spurned on by the (thankfully) now deceased Youth Defence founding member and starlet Mena Bean Ui Chribin. Her youngest daughter ended up feeling the brunt of her mother’s religious zealotry and it’s alarming consequences.

  5. OldFatherTime

    That awkward moment when you see your roommate at a Pro-Life gathering. Surely there should be something in my lease agreement to ensure stuff like this does not happen.

  6. Arbs

    The tragedy for some of these individuals is that they may go onto have children themselves but once those innocents don’t conform to their myopic. warped and dysfunctional world outlook, the hatred, bile and anger directed at their own is torrent-like in the the extreme. This is the utter irony for most of these so-called pro-life activists. They are more than ready, willing and able to poison life for those (even their own) who don’t fit into their skewed and grotesquely, if not dangerously hypocritical, moral ethic.

    1. Eve

      A, go on – set the charm lasers to stun and impregnate one of ‘em. A nice neat social experiment… :)

      But it wouldn’t be fair on the resulting child. :(

  7. droid

    Roll on the legislation. Then we can finally fulfill the poisonous liberal social marxist human rights agenda by forcing these people to work in our newly built abortion mills.

        1. droid

          Blast furnaces will of course be integrated into the planned abortion mills – how else could we dispose of the mountains of dead babies we plan on creating?

      1. missred

        Dunno if he came up with the term, but it was repeated several times last night by the loathsome prick William Binchy on Vincent Browne last night. He threw it in there at very random moments, presumably to show off his vocabulary and/or to pander to those pro-lifers who particularly like to be scaremongered

      2. woesinger

        Well, when abortions are made mandatory, you’ll need economies of scale to get through them all efficiently.

  8. bored

    Broadsheet is getting particularly tiresome in their espousing of the supposed ‘liberal’ side of every debate. Broadsheet used to be just funny stuff and it did what it was supposed to do – distract us from our mundane working lives.

    The abortion debate coverage has been particularly irking.

    You are continuously trying to paint this extremely serious debate as black and white when it most certainly is not.

    It’s ok to be a moderate. I hate extreme religious nutters and I hate Richard Dawkins.

    I long for the days of the old Slate magazine. What Broadsheet could have become if it didn’t get so lazy.

    As Chris Rock so aptly put it:

    ‘Everybody’s so busy wanting to be down with the gang. “I’m conservative”, “I’m liberal”, “I’m conservative”. Bullshit! Be a f**king person! Lis-ten! Let it swirl around your head. Then form your opinion. No normal, decent person is one thing, okay? I’ve got some shit I’m conservative about, I’ve got some shit I’m liberal about. Crime, I’m conservative. Prostitution, I’m liberal!’

    1. woesinger

      Does being moderate mean that you can’t have an opinion on anything or that you have to balance out each moderately conservative opinion with a moderately liberal one?

      And a second question if I might – what when you try “being a f**king person”, make your mind up for yourself and you still find your opinions are either conservative or liberal?

    2. Sido

      Here’s the problem with that viewpoint. There is clearly some serious shit that the Anti – movement have at their disposal.

      For all we know you and your opinions might just be some pro active trolling from the Anti movement.

      It won’t be the first time we have seen it on Broadsheet.

    3. A.Tomás

      “It’s ok to be a moderate. I hate extreme religious nutters and I hate Richard Dawkins.”

      Yes, but you’re forgetting some losers have no other way to prove how “intelligent” they are compared to other people, so they refuse to be tolerant.

      See, South Park episode “GO,GOD GO”.

      Slate was brilliant, as was Bloggorah.com! (Am I right in thinking the latter was purely for satire?)

  9. D

    They should be banned from using images like that which is no way reflect what a foetus looks like at the stage it would be aborted.

    1. woesinger

      Ah here, how will they be able to tug on the heart strings if they can’t distort the facts? Fair is fair.

        1. Blobster

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagram

          “A diagram is a two-dimensional geometric symbolic representation of information according to some visualization technique.”

          On the more important point, the subject of the actual scan (thatnks for posting it) would be hard to mistake for anything other than a human baby….maybe another primate baby.

          1. woesinger

            Numbers:

            “In England and Wales in 2006, 89% of terminations occurred at or under 12 weeks, 9% between 13 to 19 weeks, and 1.5% at or over 20 weeks.”
            Source UK Dept of Health.

          2. Blobster

            From those stats there appear to have been approx 5-6,000 abortions carried out at or later than 14 weeks in 2004 in the UK.

            To be honest, I had no particular reason for picking 14 weeks. Could have picked 16 or 12 or 10 weeks. That’s the thing, if you say (as in Britain) that abortion is legal for a range of reasons under 24 weeks then why isn’t the limit 26 or 22 or 18 or 14?

          3. Blobster

            Woesinger – I imagine a 12 week old feotus looks a lot like a 14 week old feotus. Which probably looks a good deal like a18 weeks or 20 week feotus. And they all bear a striking resemblance to a human baby…..I wonder why?

          4. James Murran's Porn Stash

            The reason the limit is 24 weeks is because that’s the officially recognised point at which a foetus could survive outside the womb.

            There have been some (very rare) incidences of foetuses as young as 22 weeks surviving outside the womb, but up until that point, they are completely dependent on the mother and cannot survive as independent human beings.

          5. James Murran's Porn Stash

            Sorry, should have added a little context to make these facts relevant to the thread…

            People who call themselves pro-life believe life begins at fertilisation and that a fertilised egg has the same human rights as every other person.

            Medics and others who support abortion rights believe that a foetus can only gain human rights when it is capable of surviving on its own.

        2. Blobster

          Thanks James. Yeah, I’m familiar with the “viability” argument. As someone else on here I think as said, most babies are viable and born fit and healthy if left to their own devices in their mother’s womb.

          1. James Murran's Porn Stash

            That’s fair enough, but I think the pro-choice argument (which I agree with) is that women shouldn’t be forced to incubate a foetus if they don’t want to.

            Personally, I don’t accept that an unviable foetus has an inherent right to life. I believe that a woman should have the right to terminate a pregnancy if she doesn’t want to carry a foetus to a stage where it becomes a human being.

            I also respect your right to hold a different view.

        3. woesinger

          Blob – you should brush up on your comparative embryology then. The vast majority of the “babies” who are aborted (ie pre-10 wks) look anything but human.

          This, for example, is a human foetus at 4 weeks after fertilization

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:6_weeks_pregnant.png

          But that has more rights than a grown, walking, talking, breathing, thinking woman in this country.

    1. Sidewinder

      I’d venture at least 32 if it wasn’t for the fact that this is either a fabricated image of a foetus or a ridiculously doctored version of one.

  10. notthenineoclocknews

    Why do these people give more of a s**t about unborn babies than real, actual, living people?

    Answers on a placard please.

  11. Cara

    This is why it is important *you* go to the dail @ 7 tonight (and email your TD) to demand change, and bring your friends. Public pressure to legislate must be seen and heard.

    1. Anna

      +1 They’re a vocal and well funded minority. If you disagree with this sort of stuff please come out and show your support tonight!

  12. PapaHotel

    What’s with the question mark like?
    Is it just because so many young people inflect the end of their sentences to sound like questions like?
    Do children not matter to Fine Gael like?
    Not even the ones I saw Enda open-mouth kissing on the campaign trail like?
    Are these questions all rhetorical like?
    What’s the point anyway like?

  13. Randy Knights

    This Indian doc doesn’t seem to think an abortion would have saved Savitas life at all. This discussion is far to emotionally charged fror any sort of reasonable deabte or decession to be taken in. In case nobody noticed, we haven’t been presented with any facts on the Savita case so far, just opinion. As usual we, as a nation, are too busy pulling each other in opposite directions and scoring points rather than fixing anything …… Just saying

    http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/city-doctor-defends-irish-counterparts/article4100988.ece

    1. cluster

      ‘too busy pulling each other in opposite directions and scoring points rather than fixing anything ‘

      Savita case or not, we should fix our abortion law. Before the Savita case there has been a campaign on Broadsheet to legislate finally for the x-case based on the supreme court, the will of the people as expressed in a referendum and the ECHR.

    2. droid

      We have been presented with (apparently corroborated) witness testimony, which, whilst not the full story, seems credible and honest.

      1. enn

        Yeah, because the pro-life massive have really been keeping the emotion out of things. A paragon of sober judgment and balanced argument, them. And women in need of abortion access should not be considered fleshly – statistics and abstract moralizing will do.

    1. woesinger

      Yeah – whatever happened to that? I’ve been playing Arma2 non-stop since the last referendum in the expectation of being conscripted. I’d hate to think I was wasting my time…

      1. Bangalore

        Ive also been waiting for my euthanasia for ages now. Suppose, if theyre only paying them 1.84 an hour then you get what you pay for

  14. Eamonn Clancy

    I don’t agree with them, but they have the bottle to do this. And BS, none of yous would score with any of them, in scorey mac scores, on score night, during score week when all score were free. There’s boys and there’s men. No run along and pick on some more kids like good boys.

    1. woesinger

      Eamonn – I’m beginning to think you might have personal animus against the BS crew. Call it a hunch.

    2. Arbs

      Would this perchance have anything to do with the fact that most of these cuddly, life-affirming folks are vestal virgins just like their hero Senator Ronan Mullen? It can be very hard to find a soul mate of the opposite-sex (no same-sex shenanigans with this lot I’m sure) so one must remain extremely vigilant to keep the flower of one’s chastity intact but all the while keeping an eye out for that other paragon of virtue, capable of storming the Kremlin of one’s loins under the auspices of married heterosexual non-contraceptive baby-making loving.

      1. BLC

        I don’t know what you did here, but kudos for Blastocyst Furnace. If I was setting up a band, that would be first name on the list.

  15. missred

    Bit harsh on the looks front we’re being here now. Personality wise though, I imagine they’re about as much fun as being in one of those American Jesus-Camps. Well, in the gaeltacht.

  16. enn

    Of course every child matters. Get thee to Childline, Barnardos, St Vincent de Paul, and overcrowded, under-funded rural primary school, or talk to an over-burdened social worker powerless to intervene in an abuse case because there is ‘insufficient proof’.

    Foetuses are not children. But a pregnant woman is also a sister, a daughter, a friend, a wife, a partner, a carer, and may be the mother of actual children. She matters more.

  17. Jimbo

    Pro-choice folk often throw out the argument that the anti-choice brigade don’t care about the child after it is born. Now, this is a genuine question. How many of those marching recently actually voted in the recent referendum?

    1. deliverusfromevil

      Good point Jimbo, more saliently, who voted for children’s rights and who voted against such secular heresy?

  18. Pigeon Street

    All the Anti-Choicers are too young to have any real sense. Wait until one of them finds themself knocked up in a period of their lives where having a kid just wouldn’t be fair to the kid, then reality bites. That’s if try get over the whole sex before marriage thing obviously.

  19. Fifi

    Have the baby you don’t want, give it up for adoption and then when some loving gay couple want to actually give it a good home these same backwards arseholes will protest that too.

Comments are closed.