There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

for general chat about stuff

Moderator: moderators

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby The Doc » May 24th, 2018, 7:23 pm

Dave Cahill wrote:
The Doc wrote:
Dave Cahill wrote:[quote="johng"]Whatever sits to the left of those parties is often ridiculed and demonized by media and electorate alike.


I know, and their particular targets are often women because its easy and fun, how we all lolled. Ruth Coppinger, Joan Burton, Clare Daly, Maureen O'Sullivan to take but a few are regularly singled out as figures of ridicule because of their hair, or the way the talk or the way the look or the way they have vagin... the way they believe in stuff, in ways that men aren't.


Can we separate general political commentary from the vote tomorrow. I'd hope people won't vote one way or the other to make a political point in the polls - the issue, for me, is more fundamental than that.


Political commentary is essential though. The vote tomorrow is only a small step in this process. The significant battle will be when the Bill to Regulate Termination of Pregnancy is brought before the Dail. I'm not confident that many people (on either side) realise this and when the 8th is repealed (as I believe it will be) people will head off thinking thats that. I'm more confident of the 8th being repealed than I am of the Bill being passed.[/quote]Agreed. Which is why a small Yes win is probably the worst outcome. It'll end up with a load of stalling on the legislation.



Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
I like your right leg. A lovely leg for the role.
I've got nothing against your right leg.
The trouble is ... neither have you
The Doc
Mullet
 
Posts: 1618
Joined: August 11th, 2006, 2:59 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby Oldschool » May 24th, 2018, 7:38 pm

The Doc wrote:Which is why a small Yes win is probably the worst outcome. It'll end up with a load of stalling on the legislation.

Spot on.
There's been too much talk about the hard cases over the years and not enough action.
Mirror, Mirror on the Wall who's the greatest player of them all? It is Drico your majesty.
User avatar
Oldschool
Shane Horgan
 
Posts: 11159
Joined: March 27th, 2008, 2:10 pm

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby ronk » May 24th, 2018, 7:55 pm

Dave Cahill wrote:
johng wrote:It's time the men of Ireland stood up for the women of Ireland. Long overdue in fact.


Meh, until the men of Ireland stop voting in their droves for catholic centre right parties, the women of Ireland will be right where we've always put them.


Do you think it will change when they get the vote?
User avatar
ronk
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 9236
Joined: April 9th, 2009, 12:42 am

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby tomthefan » May 24th, 2018, 10:52 pm

Nine week old foetus
Show Spoiler:
Image


i saw a video of an aborted foetus of about that age.
It was lying on its back with its hands touching, on a paper towel, between kidney dishes filled with used instruments.
Someone touched its hands with tweezers and the unborn baby's arms shot apart.
As far as I am concerned, it's murder.
You have been banned for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

Date this ban will be lifted: Never
User avatar
tomthefan
Bookworm
 
Posts: 246
Joined: April 16th, 2018, 1:09 pm

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby paddyor » May 25th, 2018, 12:00 am

There's really no need for the gif. If you believe life begins at conception, then it's murder. A lot of people don't and a lot aren't sure.
Ruddock's tackle stats consistently too low for me to be taken seriously as a Six Nations blindside..... Ruddock's defensive stats don't stack up. - All Blacks Nil, Jan 15th, 2014
England A 8 - 14 Ireland A, 25th Jan 2014
Ruddock(c) 19/2 Tackles
User avatar
paddyor
Malcolm O'Kelly
 
Posts: 3708
Joined: November 17th, 2012, 12:48 am

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby tomthefan » May 25th, 2018, 12:26 am

paddyor wrote:There's really no need for the gif.


Why's that now?
You have been banned for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

Date this ban will be lifted: Never
User avatar
tomthefan
Bookworm
 
Posts: 246
Joined: April 16th, 2018, 1:09 pm

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby fourthirtythree » May 25th, 2018, 7:16 am

I'm a loving and devoted father of two young daughters, I also love my wife. If I had or do make her pregnant with number three we will have to go to England. No doctor should be forced to deny the healthcare which would preserve her life and allow her the enjoyment of it.

I don't even think we (or she) qualifies as a "hard case", but it's not that difficult to test the edge of a fundamentalist, hardline, sweeping law and find it wanting. That's what we are voting about today, what law is enacted is another fight. And I hope we do the right thing by women who have been harmed by a law which, in the best interpretation I can give of it, is reckless of women's lives and happiness.

Please vote yes.
Datta: what have we given?
My friend, blood shaking my heart
The awful daring of a moment's surrender
Which an age of prudence can never retract
What the thunder said to Brian Lenihan
User avatar
fourthirtythree
Devin Toner
 
Posts: 9002
Joined: April 12th, 2008, 11:33 pm
Location: Eight miles high

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby tomthefan » May 25th, 2018, 7:59 am

fourthirtythree wrote:I'm a loving and devoted father of two young daughters, I also love my wife. If I had or do make her pregnant with number three we will have to go to England. No doctor should be forced to deny the healthcare which would preserve her life and allow her the enjoyment of it.

I don't even think we (or she) qualifies as a "hard case", but it's not that difficult to test the edge of a fundamentalist, hardline, sweeping law and find it wanting. That's what we are voting about today, what law is enacted is another fight. And I hope we do the right thing by women who have been harmed by a law which, in the best interpretation I can give of it, is reckless of women's lives and happiness.

Please vote yes.


All human lives are of equal value.
All human lives should have equal rights under the law.
You call yourself a loving and deovted father but you would contemplate killing
one of your children so you can have a sex life.
Sex is important in a marriage but not as important as the lives of your children.
If you are so loving and devoted, double down on the contraception, have a vasectomy,don't have sex at high risk times of the month.
Don't expect society to take away the right to life for our unborn citizens so you can be irresponsible without consequence.
BTW if your wife's health would be jeopardised by pregnancy then I can't imagine that an abortion
would be entirely risk free either.
You have been banned for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

Date this ban will be lifted: Never
User avatar
tomthefan
Bookworm
 
Posts: 246
Joined: April 16th, 2018, 1:09 pm

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby The Doc » May 25th, 2018, 8:47 am

tomthefan wrote:All human lives are of equal value.
All human lives should have equal rights under the law.


Except that elsewhere the law recognises that rights are not absolutely equal - that there are times when two rights conflict, that there is a hierarchy. Killing someone in self-defence does not come with the "all human lives have equal rights" implications. Likewise it has already been established that the risk of death to a mother outstrips the rights of a foetus. Even in less serious cases - my rights to free speech are not absolute. I must temper them with the need to not incite hatred or violence.

Absolutism in terms of morality is problematic because that very hard line creates the so called "hard cases" mentioned in the title. It is this absolutism which forces the likes of Ronan Mullen (or whoever) to have to defend a position that would force a 12 year old rape victim to carry to term. The hand waving about "hard cases" is just an avoidance mechanism to dodge having to discuss the logical implications of the "absolute equality" position. Just as the 13th and 14th amendments were a fudge to try to avoid the very same implications
I like your right leg. A lovely leg for the role.
I've got nothing against your right leg.
The trouble is ... neither have you
The Doc
Mullet
 
Posts: 1618
Joined: August 11th, 2006, 2:59 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby Laighin Break » May 25th, 2018, 8:55 am

The Doc wrote:
tomthefan wrote:All human lives are of equal value.
All human lives should have equal rights under the law.


Except that elsewhere the law recognises that rights are not absolutely equal - that there are times when two rights conflict, that there is a hierarchy. Killing someone in self-defence does not come with the "all human lives have equal rights" implications. Likewise it has already been established that the risk of death to a mother outstrips the rights of a foetus. Even in less serious cases - my rights to free speech are not absolute. I must temper them with the need to not incite hatred or violence.

Absolutism in terms of morality is problematic because that very hard line creates the so called "hard cases" mentioned in the title. It is this absolutism which forces the likes of Ronan Mullen (or whoever) to have to defend a position that would force a 12 year old rape victim to carry to term. The hand waving about "hard cases" is just an avoidance mechanism to dodge having to discuss the logical implications of the "absolute equality" position. Just as the 13th and 14th amendments were a fudge to try to avoid the very same implications



Tom, do you think a 12 year old rape victim should be forced to carry to term?
User avatar
Laighin Break
Enlightened
 
Posts: 810
Joined: May 3rd, 2012, 9:35 am
Location: Scandinavia

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby tomthefan » May 25th, 2018, 9:08 am

The Doc wrote:
tomthefan wrote:All human lives are of equal value.
All human lives should have equal rights under the law.


Except that elsewhere the law recognises that rights are not absolutely equal - that there are times when two rights conflict, that there is a hierarchy. Killing someone in self-defence does not come with the "all human lives have equal rights" implications. Likewise it has already been established that the risk of death to a mother outstrips the rights of a foetus. Even in less serious cases - my rights to free speech are not absolute. I must temper them with the need to not incite hatred or violence.

Absolutism in terms of morality is problematic because that very hard line creates the so called "hard cases" mentioned in the title. It is this absolutism which forces the likes of Ronan Mullen (or whoever) to have to defend a position that would force a 12 year old rape victim to carry to term. The hand waving about "hard cases" is just an avoidance mechanism to dodge having to discuss the logical implications of the "absolute equality" position. Just as the 13th and 14th amendments were a fudge to try to avoid the very same implications


Yes but in the case of killing someone we are starting from a position of equal rights and making hard choices from there.

What a yes decision would do, would be to convenience a relatively small number of "already borns" at the expense of the right to life for all unborns.
You have been banned for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

Date this ban will be lifted: Never
User avatar
tomthefan
Bookworm
 
Posts: 246
Joined: April 16th, 2018, 1:09 pm

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby tomthefan » May 25th, 2018, 9:09 am

Laighin Break wrote:
The Doc wrote:
tomthefan wrote:All human lives are of equal value.
All human lives should have equal rights under the law.


Except that elsewhere the law recognises that rights are not absolutely equal - that there are times when two rights conflict, that there is a hierarchy. Killing someone in self-defence does not come with the "all human lives have equal rights" implications. Likewise it has already been established that the risk of death to a mother outstrips the rights of a foetus. Even in less serious cases - my rights to free speech are not absolute. I must temper them with the need to not incite hatred or violence.

Absolutism in terms of morality is problematic because that very hard line creates the so called "hard cases" mentioned in the title. It is this absolutism which forces the likes of Ronan Mullen (or whoever) to have to defend a position that would force a 12 year old rape victim to carry to term. The hand waving about "hard cases" is just an avoidance mechanism to dodge having to discuss the logical implications of the "absolute equality" position. Just as the 13th and 14th amendments were a fudge to try to avoid the very same implications



Tom, do you think a 12 year old rape victim should be forced to carry to term?


Do you think it should be lawful to kill babies?
You have been banned for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

Date this ban will be lifted: Never
User avatar
tomthefan
Bookworm
 
Posts: 246
Joined: April 16th, 2018, 1:09 pm

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby Laighin Break » May 25th, 2018, 9:19 am

tomthefan wrote:
Laighin Break wrote:Tom, do you think a 12 year old rape victim should be forced to carry to term?


Do you think it should be lawful to kill babies?


They are foetuses, not babies. And yes, I do think it should be lawful for them to be aborted.
Now your turn
User avatar
Laighin Break
Enlightened
 
Posts: 810
Joined: May 3rd, 2012, 9:35 am
Location: Scandinavia

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby tomthefan » May 25th, 2018, 10:28 am

Laighin Break wrote:
tomthefan wrote:
Laighin Break wrote:Tom, do you think a 12 year old rape victim should be forced to carry to term?


Do you think it should be lawful to kill babies?


They are foetuses, not babies. And yes, I do think it should be lawful for them to be aborted.
Now your turn


Foetus is just the name we give humans before they are born, just as baby is the name we give humans afterwards.
You're no longer a baby but you're no more or less human than you were when you were one.
The same goes for foetuses.
And yes i don't think abortion should be lawful in cases of rape.
I was unclear on my feelings about that until recently.
But the bottom line is that two wrongs don't make a right.
You have been banned for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

Date this ban will be lifted: Never
User avatar
tomthefan
Bookworm
 
Posts: 246
Joined: April 16th, 2018, 1:09 pm

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby LeRouxIsPHat » May 25th, 2018, 10:57 am

I honestly don't understand why anyone would vote no given that women are already travelling to England anyway. I don't see what a no vote actually achieves.
User avatar
LeRouxIsPHat
Shane Horgan
 
Posts: 11500
Joined: January 22nd, 2009, 8:49 pm

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby Laighin Break » May 25th, 2018, 11:14 am

LeRouxIsPHat wrote:I honestly don't understand why anyone would vote no given that women are already travelling to England anyway. I don't see what a no vote actually achieves.


You're either voting for legal abortions or voting for illegal abortions
User avatar
Laighin Break
Enlightened
 
Posts: 810
Joined: May 3rd, 2012, 9:35 am
Location: Scandinavia

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby LeRouxIsPHat » May 25th, 2018, 11:16 am

Laighin Break wrote:
LeRouxIsPHat wrote:I honestly don't understand why anyone would vote no given that women are already travelling to England anyway. I don't see what a no vote actually achieves.


You're either voting for legal abortions or voting for illegal abortions


That's an excellent way of putting it.
User avatar
LeRouxIsPHat
Shane Horgan
 
Posts: 11500
Joined: January 22nd, 2009, 8:49 pm

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby Hornet » May 25th, 2018, 11:26 am

tomthefan wrote:
Do you think it should be lawful to kill babies?


So what do you propose for women, who will continue to travel abroad for terminations, if a no vote is carried? Pregnancy test at the airport/docks? Ban on all women of child bearing age leaving the state? Or are you, like many in the No campaign, happy for other nations to continue to provide a service that this State fails to offer. Is this not just the No campaign just burying it's head in the sand with it's NIMBY response to something that for many, both men and women, is a profound and difficult decision to make, (and believe me, I've been there). I hope there is a yes vote. My Partner, her Daughters and Granddaughters will be voting yes. I, as a UK citizen will not be voting, but I fully support my Partner and her family in their views.
"The one thing we learn from History, is that we never learn from History".
Hornet
Mullet
 
Posts: 1929
Joined: January 21st, 2007, 8:48 pm
Location: 32,000 feet over Liverpool

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby tomthefan » May 25th, 2018, 11:28 am

LeRouxIsPHat wrote:I honestly don't understand why anyone would vote no given that women are already travelling to England anyway. I don't see what a no vote actually achieves.



By your logic, what's it achieving having a ban on female genital mutilation here since people can just travel to get it done on their daughter?
You have been banned for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

Date this ban will be lifted: Never
User avatar
tomthefan
Bookworm
 
Posts: 246
Joined: April 16th, 2018, 1:09 pm

Re: There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

Postby tomthefan » May 25th, 2018, 11:30 am

Hornet wrote:
tomthefan wrote:
Do you think it should be lawful to kill babies?


So what do you propose for women, who will continue to travel abroad for terminations, if a no vote is carried? Pregnancy test at the airport/docks? Ban on all women of child bearing age leaving the state? Or are you, like many in the No campaign, happy for other nations to continue to provide a service that this State fails to offer. Is this not just the No campaign just burying it's head in the sand with it's NIMBY response to something that for many, both men and women, is a profound and difficult decision to make, (and believe me, I've been there). I hope there is a yes vote. My Partner, her Daughters and Granddaughters will be voting yes. I, as a UK citizen will not be voting, but I fully support my Partner and her family in their views.


If there weren't such barbaric abortion laws in other countries, such as yours, then people wouldn't be travelling for them.
You have been banned for the following reason:
No reason was specified.

Date this ban will be lifted: Never
User avatar
tomthefan
Bookworm
 
Posts: 246
Joined: April 16th, 2018, 1:09 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AhrefsBot [Bot] and 1 guest