Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
RECENT TRENDS IN afforestation suggest a renewed interest amongst farmers in native woodland creation, helped along by the generous new payment rates announced last December.
For a country which has less than two per cent of its land mass in native woodland, this is a good thing. However, simply planting trees in green fields does not a woodland make, and should not be the extent of our ambitions.
A woodland is more than just trees. A true woodland is a symphony of nature which includes trees, but also shrubs, flowers, lichens, fungi, mammals and birds. This diversity can take a very long time to develop, especially when trees are planted on land that has been under grass or crops for millennia.
Yet this is exactly how the current system operates. Native woodlands are created at random according to the wishes of the landowner or based on the likelihood of acquiring a planting licence. There is no overarching strategy or coordination at a national or local level.
When measured by land cover our native woodland is despairingly low, however in terms of spatial distribution and frequency things look quite different, with small pockets of old woodland scattered all across the country.
I have been exploring these woodlands near my home in the west Clare in recent years. I have found perhaps 40 of them, none of which appear on official inventories or national databases.
In my experience, they are in every townland, or certainly in every parish. Often, they are small, maybe 15 or 20 metres wide, tracing a townland boundary, or clinging on in steep river valleys.
When you step into one of these places ancient woodland indicators like bluebell, wood anemone or wood sorrel give away the longstanding presence of trees. More clues can be found in the canopy where curiosities like the hazel glue fungus, or lungwort lichen similarly indicate the woodland’s antiquity.
Pine marten, red squirrels or birds like the treecreeper may reside here too.
All this unique flora and fauna will readily expand, but the woods must expand first. Thankfully this is a straightforward process and can be achieved by simply giving the woods space, perhaps a 25 or 50-metre boundary around the existing perimeter from which grazing animals and machinery are excluded.
There’s no need to plant trees – once the fence has been moved out into the field the trees will return themselves, their seeds spread by wind, or distributed by the hoarding efforts of squirrels and jays.
Farmers can be paid the same rates as if trees had been planted. Based on the most favourable schemes currently available one hectare of land allowed to revert to woodland would be worth roughly twenty-five thousand euro over a ten-year period.
Although unknown to the state or the public, these wooded hovels are well known to the farmers who own them. They know them as places of childhood fun or places where their animals seek out shelter in bad weather.
Generally, they are difficult to access pieces of ground left to their own devices.
Historically, land-use policies and market forces would have seen the expansion of these woods heavily suppressed. In some instances, the old woods were removed altogether. Thankfully these pressures particularly in relation to policy have receded. As of January 1st, the new CAP farm payments can be made on woodlands or scrub. This is a major change.
To go about expanding these old woodland pockets, we must first locate them. Certainly, farmers’ knowledge has a role here, but the heavy lifting can be done by using satellite imagery and machine learning. Old woodlands give off a particular visual signature from above. Once identified we can use machine learning to correlate different datasets (including old maps from the 1840s) to suggest probable locations.
The accuracy of this system can then be improved through “ground truthing”. That is visiting a random sample of suggested sites and corroborating that it is in fact an old woodland.
Once we know what’s out there, we can go about putting together a communications and incentives package to get willing landowners on board. In my opinion, this approach should be central to Ireland’s native woodland strategy.
Ray Ó Foghlú is a Nuffield scholar investigating attitudes to trees in rural Ireland. He is the project lead on Hometrees Wild Atlantic Rainforest Project.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Why are they all coming out against a referendum ? Surely in a democracy nobody can be against a referendum
For most of the last Century they got to dictate how we lived our lives. It’s going to take a while before they get used to their insignificance.
Should we ignore the fact that the 8th is there as a result of democracy.
Rob it’s that small group of angry, mouthy atheists you belong to that are insignificant in this country, and the rest of the world for that matter. Sure there’s a few of you on the journal that like to mock and ridicule but in the real world you are just another minority group full of frustration and hate.
Yes because it was voted on when the Church still had a stranglehold on the country. Plus nobody that voted for it can even have children now.
Yes Tony, I’m the one actively voting to stop other people having the right to do something that’s none of my business. The fact I’m not superstitious is irrelevant.
It seems that the “majority” are afraid of the “minority..”
Are you not afraid of all the “indoctrinated” people leaving the school system every year.
Tony I’d say its more bemusement at the level of gullibility of people believing this laughable nonsense.
Carry on being a subservient little worshipper, wasting your time talking to one of 2800 different Gods worshipped by the human race, or learn to think rationally. Its never too late.
There’s no atheists in foxholes ….never a truer word said. Go into an oncology ward in a hospital see how many atheists you find.
Rob doesn’t sound like the angry one, Tony. What does oncology have to do with atheists?
You didn’t get that did you ? Lol….You know what an oncology ward is right ?
Now Tony would a person in an indian foxhole or cancer ward be begging his elephant or cow god?
What would a Chinese, Japanese suffer be praying to?
Stop talking shite!
There’s no atheists in foxholes ….never a truer word said. Go into an oncology ward in a hospital see how many atheists you find.
=======================
Why does a believer go to a hospital when you can just pray?
So many stories in the USA of seriously ill people being saved by excellent surgeons only for the patient to wake up and thank ‘God’!
If God was all powerful and could answer prayers we wouldn’t even need hospitals. If you pray for 10 things and 3 or 4 of them come to fruition then it was going to happen anyway.
I blame the schools.
Nice….why are you lot so angry ?
@ Pocahontas
Tony…be serious now..you really really don’t believe in all that fairytale nonsense. .
@tony, the fact that people in foxholes or cancer wards will turn to almost anything to save them as they may be on the brink of death. If they had been indoctrinated into believing that singing loudly gets good things then many would indeed be singing as loud as possible.
It doesn’t make what they turn to any more real than Santa Claus but picking them as your example is more an indictment of you than them.
Yes Tony, I work in cancer research. Now would you care to explain your point about atheists in an oncology, ward or are you going to keep spamming and BSing?
I’m not overly religous to be honest, I’ve said that on here before, but I do have faith and respect for believers. I do try to defend the good Catholics of this country because the vast majority are good people. The atheists on this site are just obnoxious kids from what I can see. Calling something “fairytale nonsense” just because you don’t believe it proves my point.
Don’t believe that for a minute Critical, if you did you’d know how many turn to God when faced with life threatening illness.
Tony, I don’t belive in Thor, and I think it’s fairytale nonsense. Does that make me obnoxious?
You just proved mine….
Tony…sorry I can’t stop laughing. ..explain what u mean “I’m not overly religious “
Tony, you do realise that the people who tell you that “they turned to god” are the people who wanted them to turn to god, and not the person who actually died. It’s even harder to die honestly in Irish hospitals as they are all sabotaged by religious groups as much as schools. And that’s not really important, if be more worried if an oncologist wasn’t in someway rational, and focused more on medicine instead of prayer.
I’m not overly religous to be honest
======
Cherry picker.
No one who thinks about the big questions can rationally come to the conclusion that God did it.
No one is saying most Catholics aren’t good people. Totally naive, but decent human beings, clinging to a belief system that fills in a few gaps for them, no matter how questionable. Because the big questions don’t get asked. They were told what to think from the age of about 4 onwards.
Yes, I’m laughing too 3 A’s. I can’t decide which word you don’t understand, overly or religious.
Are you sure it is not you that is naive though Old School ? You know your views are vastly outnumbered many times over.
Haha..I understand both..but it’s when you put them in a sentence together it’s pure comical genius. …
Tony, religious tradition is common in many different parts of the world, based on ancients books written by people with a lot of time on their hands and who thought the earth was flat. But yep, they had all the answers to all the big questions!
Even if there is a God, you are even more naive if you think yours is the right one out of about 2800 worshipped by humans.
Essentially you believe that God came to Earth via Jesus to right a few wrongs and sacrifice himself to himself, so he could pay the price of sin demanded by himself, so that God could forgive humans and save them from…himself!
And I’m the naive one?!
But what makes you so arrogant to think you are right when so many more people think differently than you ? All you do is mock and belittle, that isn’t answering the ” big questions” , that’s just being immature.
I’m curious to understand which god you follow Tony, there are so many to choose from like….
Difference is, Tony, I’m not claiming to have all the answers, religions do.
Who is the arrogant one?!
We don’t need science to debunk religion, we only need common sense. The number of different religions alone tells us most of them are wasting their time – they can’t all be right, they COULD all be wrong.
Padraig – that’s a nonsense argument against a referendum and I’ll just give you two reasons why.
1. The 8th Amendment is 33 years old. That means that nobody under the age of 51 could vote in it – that’s about half the current population. Leave it another 33 years and then there will be very few people alive who could have voted in it. To put this another way, there are very few women of childbearing age who had an opportunity to vote on their own reproductive rights.
2. The entire constitution was voted on as a result of democracy. Are you suggesting we should never amend it to fix issues in it, to reflect changing society or to account for new practices/ideas. Or should the voting age go back to 21 (4th Amendment), adoptions not ordered by a judge be ruled invalid (6th), remove the right to travel for all citizens (13th), bring back censorship of information (14th), bring back the death penalty (21st), ban gay marriage again (34th). The Constitution is, and should be, a fluid framework within the legislature must work and is changed as required based on the will of the people.
How many athesits are in an oncology ward ? Well most western doctors for a start according to polls in the UK and France, but lets not stop there.
Firstly if your God created the vast expanse of the Universe all its planets, galaxies and animals etc then he created you and by proxy he also created Cancer to afflict humanity with. So God creates Cancer and by virtue of being all knowing and all powerful allows you to develop the condition or intentionally gives you cancer, depending on interpretation.
Nowyou believe that praying to this God can cure you of the cancer? That sheer power of supernatural communication directed at this one Devine being who created cancer will allow him to see how persecuted a soul you are and thus heal you of the disease he created and knew you would develop anyway.
So your God essentially inflict’s you with a condition that ravages your body, your mind and all you are and due to this you belive he demands worship. Worship your abuser !
There is little to no evidence of devine healing, in fact you are more likely to die at Lourds etc than be cured ( even factoring the amount that claim to be healed and are examined by the church).
So why would one turn to a higher power to save you from what has already been pre-deterimined ? Obviously you would be afarid, i know i would be in such a condition knowing what the cancer cells are doing, multiplying rapidly, causing clots and the only treatment i can perhaps turn to is what is essentially poisen. Very scary thought.
But is this a test of faith ? Will prayer and belief somehow help you in this situation ? If so then the true monster is a God that would give children and such cancer to see how much they think he is great !
If you belive in God, fair enough, thats grand, more power to you, i dont dare judge someones deeply held surface beliefs , many intelligent people find comfort in the thought that they will be spared from such an awful condition. But please do not think that faith healing will somehow help, that a God spares the faithful and allows the non believers to suffer.
In the bleek context of an Oncology Ward believing you will get better (as proven by numerous studies) is far more helpful than bargaining with your abuser.
You will find me
Tony, you say that a majority belief determines reality? Does that mean the world used to be flat?
@Tomy. You’re agnostic I believe. Well you admitted that before. Now you’re wrong when you say so many more people think different than lor choicers. In a poll last year, Asked whether the Irish Government should decriminalise abortion, 67% agreed and 25% disagreed. 81% are in favour of significantly widening the grounds for legal abortion access in Ireland. https://www.amnesty.ie/news/new-poll-finds-two-thirds-majority-ireland-want-abortion-decriminalised it’s anti choicers that are in the minority I’m afraid.
@Tony_kilduff. Apologies tones, that was for your info there. Dont know who tomy is !!
@Natan. Your point on Doctors is correct. http://www.joe.ie/news/poll-irish-doctors-call-for-the-decriminalisation-of-abortion-do-you-agree/520387 . But sure what would those pesky useless doctors know ??
Nathan that is an excellent post, it should be required reading for any God believer. Unfortunately it is most likely that their brainwashing is so deep that they will disregard it.
Ok Tony. Whatever you say. God gives the middle finger to most people with life threatening illnesses anyway.
It is not about faith or belief or even superstition, what this is about is respect we must all as citizens of this nations respect one another at people regardless of religious beliefs.
Doctors and nurses and so on do a tremendous job in coming to the aid of teh most vulnerable in society. They do the best they can under chaotic conditions and they do not get the respect they deserve for such tremendous conditions in which they operate. But to attribute healing to a God seems moronic to me on a logical level as i have outlined above.
However while saying that, i can understand why people embrace the concept so easily. I was in a serious car crash before, an SUV hit us while we were coming out of a car park at about 60 miles an hour. The car flipped and my door was completly crushedfrom the impact.
Now amazingly myself and my Step father were compeltly unharmed, hanging upside down shaken and a bit paniced he thanked God and i later thanked Volkswagen crash testing process.
In that moment one can understand where teh mind goes, in times of great struggle the mind will reach for anything to save you, its fair to say that it is illogical to belive that no one, no God, no person, no equipment etc will save you in a fox hole when artillery shells are replacating the monsson season. But i can understand if you would accept any consolation of comfort in that scenario, however it doesnt make it true and when shells are exploding around you and your brain is pumping, adrenaline, endorphins and other chemicals around your body, one can hardly be expected to make logical judgments of life after death and the existence of a devine creator.
I for one am not a religious man adn find the whoel concept fascinating and intellectually stimulating but nonetheless unappealing as a lifestyle choice.
While we may diasagree with the core tenants of many beliefs such as Islam, Christianity or even jainism and how fundementalist groups act them out in earnest. This does not mean we need to split society in half, the belivers and the non beliebers.
Secular Society its all about the cold gard facts and our attention to them. You have your faith and i dont but keep it to youself and i’ll keep mine to we will all get on fine.
Walk into any pediatric oncology ward in the country and then tell me you believe in a loving god. …. Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then He is not omnipotent. Is He able, but not willing? Then He is malevolent. Is He both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is He neither able nor willing? Then why call Him God?…Epicurus
@Paddy. Exactly. It is noteworthy that All Gods are set up by men to be 3 things 1) invisible 2) inaudible 3) omnipotent. That way when you pray and you never see him, hear him and he does nothing, it won’t be questioned. Mysterious ways and all that.
How many referendums do you want, just keep on having a referendum until you get your way???
Because the Catholic Church is not democratic
There is an auschwitz, therefore, there is no God.
You missed the point I’m making critical… I’m not saying praying will save anyone I’m saying many of the Atheists on here would probably change their tune if faced with the likes of cancer, I’ve seen it happen. No atheists in foxholes, you know ?
No priests in foxholes either.
They prefer underage boys holes Larry.
@Tony_kilduff. If there were more Atheists , there would be less fox holes. Have a think about that.
Lol… good point, but I’m sure mankind would still find other reasons to kill each other, it’s not always down to religion.
While it’s normal for people to become disillusioned and confused close to death I doubt I would consciously decide to become superstitious. Would love to see where you get your figures that most atheists start believing in some god when threatened with death. You know nearly everyone on the planet starts believing in Unicorns just before they die too Tony?? I have as much proof for that as you do for your assumption.
I think Tony’s benchmark for “overly religious” is ISIS.
It’s actually borderline contemptuous that they think they have any moral standing in this country
Sarcasmo, unfortunately they still have their croziers around the necks of the same god fearing catholic demographic which are most likely to vote next Friday.
The bishops should know their bible. Apparently it is not widely known that the bible does not ever state that life begins at conception. In fact, it states that life enters and leaves the body through the breath. In with your very first breath, out with your very last. I thought everyone knew that fundamentalists were not just wrong about science, but also about the bible and theology, as well. But apparently, this isn’t common knowledge. So here it is, a full breakdown on how the bible very clearly states that life begins at breath, not at conception. Okay, first off, this is so important a theological question to an ancient society (When does life enter the body?) that it’s laid out right there in Genesis: And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Gen 2:7
An organisation that harboured and enabled paedophiles wants to dictate morality to us. Nope. Zero credibility boys.
Interesting fact. Until something like 1880 the catholic church did not consider a foetus to be a person until 6 months into the pregnancy. It was referred to as the time of ‘ensoulment’. Also interesting that one pope could consider this to be factual, then all of a sudden a different pope considers the foetus to be a person from conception, and thanks to papal infallibiltiy both are correct.
Why are they allowed to take any influence on the election in any case? Separation of state and church, anyone?
Interestingly enough they don’t consider a fetus a person if it will cost them gods much need money. http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/26/us/colorado-fetus-lawsuit/
Larissa, they don’t really have any influence, just a well funded media team to get this wafflers opinions in the papers.
The church should empty the septic tanks of babies and renumerate their child abuse victims fully as agreed first.
@Alien, fair enough, but still they should keep out of politics, if you mix religion and politics, then you soon go down the route to having a theocracy, and I’m pretty sure no-one on here would want to live in one.
Church has no power in Ireland anymore. I guess someone forgot to tell them that fact. We voted yes to LBGTQ equality. And we all know of the churches involvement in kiddy fiddling and the Madeleine laundries. They have lost their grip. The generations coming up now don’t give a f**k about the Roman Catholic establishment which is hypocritical to the core.
I’m with you Larissa! It’s just 4.5 million of us against the thousands or so priest and bishops trying to say they have the answers. They only have influence due to misguided lawmakers from a hundred years ago not being challenged until recently. Can we tag along another amendment to remove any religious references from the constitution? Then we can have a constitution for the people, and a church for the religious and never an overlap.
@Alien8. Theres always one that butt’s in with all that commonsense rethoric. Less of that. /s
Dear Bishops,
The days of Irish women being little more than brood mares for your cult are long gone.
PFO
If they want to talk about abortion then let’s have a referendum. Meanwhile this is an election about electing a government.
Yes Larry but when we decide who to vote for in the world we look at policy and what the parties will do for us and what they stand for and this is something that some people want to know, so the topic of abortion is relevant to some (maybe not you).
Well said, Larry Doyle.
And still the heartbreak of thousands of priests having to travel alone to the UK each week continues… Is this what this bishop guy wants our politicians to stop?
Greg,surely then you you too want a referendum to let this generation decide on what type of constitution they want to live under.
Politics is a rather simple concept and I distrust anyone who seeks to complicate it for their own narrow purposes.
Stay out politics kreeps
I’m for separation of church and planet.
Let’s go one further and out of the universe.
Yes am all for separation of church and state but they like everybody have the right to an opinion.
They don’t just want an opinion, they want to tell others how to think too.
Of course they have a right to am opinion, but what they should have is it written into the consitution of a country.
Yes but no different to atheists telling People how to live their lives and mocking them if they have beliefs.
I wouldn’t say atheists tell people how to live their lives or mock beliefs. Atheists especially in Ireland are in no position to rock the boat with the grip the church still has on many aspects of society. Atheists more so criticise having blind faith.
Greg…we don’t mock you guys just trying to guide ye..
Greg, the Bishops want their beliefs enshrined in law. Atheists want to let people make up their own minds. Spot the difference?
Greg, if you believe a man in the sky created everything tangible as we know it, is still watching us, and if we don’t follow him and have a chat with him periodically(he doesn’t seem too bothered if its just once a year a la the big occasion Christains!) we are doomed to eternity with his arch rival in the big bad fire, then mockery is the least of your worries. Or should be!
TheBull good point well made and then comes along oldschool to prove my point!
Greg, atheists deal with reality. Things that can be observed, measured, recorded and repeated. We tell people about these things and they are free to see for themselves. Theists try to use what’s in their imagination to control us. BIG difference
3as.. Oh thats funny.. No one takes ye atheists seriously.. After all its only a phase ye are going through.. Banging on keyboards like madmen, reading the Bible ye dont believe in.. Its all so negative.. So thanks for the guidance and pointing the way. But any one with any cop on will go the opposite direction
It’s like getting a telegram from the 1700′s
@sinead . Which of the Gods do you worship and what made you pick that particular brand ?
Sinead..you obviously do.fyi..I’ve never read the bible, to me it has as much relevance as little red riding hood…in my life..by the way maybe you can explain what I hear a lot of people say..”I’m not overly religious”
Sinead, many of us I’m sure used to share your beliefs. But we are not all intellectual lightweights – you don’t have to be either. You are choosing to be.
What part of ” not overly religious” is confusing you 3A’s ?
You see Sinead people like oldschool here can’t accept himself or his beliefs, so that he must attack those who have a belief or a faith whatever that may be. I know many people very anti Catholic Church people who have a strong faith but yet militant atheists can’t allow any of these people be left alone and just attack them all throwing insults and negativity their way. For the love of God (excuse the pun) let people live and let live.
Tony..if I have to explain that to you I think it’s time you found another bedtime story book to read..
Greg.. Too right.. And they criticize Diarmuid Martin for shoving opinions down peoples throats.. Sure they are only trying to fit in somewhere.
I think gregs too far gone. Another one bites the dust!
Greg please point out when exactly these people have been attacked,if offering an opinion is a form of attack..maybe it’s time the religious nut jobs should leave atheists alone.
Sinead, is this accurate and the basis of your beliefs:
‘Essentially you believe that God came to Earth via Jesus to right a few wrongs and sacrifice himself to himself, so he could pay the price of sin demanded by himself, so that God could forgive humans and save them from…himself!’
If not, please explain the basis of your beliefs. I await your comments.
Is calling people “religious nut jobs” not a form of attack ? It is certainly mocking and a very clear sign of your insecurities.
Methinks you can’t explain it….
@ 3 A’s
Tony…or not overly religious Tony. ..hahaha
Explain what exactly
Sinead, did you read the Bible before you had an abortion?
“For the love of God (excuse the pun) let people live and let live.”
But if they want to do something you don’t agree with (Abortion, Same sex Marriage etc) then actively try and stop them right?? Live and let live works both ways. I couldn’t care less if you believed in Monsters under your bed. Keep it to your self and we’ll all be much better off.
So is calling people freaks Tony, and calling whole communities of people who you don’t know disgusting, so maybe polish your own mirror.
@Sinead. Which brand of God do you subscribe to and what made you pick that particular brand ?
Socrates.. No i didnt.. I listened to angry people like you.. More fool me. Typical pro choicer. Once she has the abortion, they dont care…..
Sinead, please answer above query – reposted below for convenience:
‘Essentially you believe that God came to Earth via Jesus to right a few wrongs and sacrifice himself to himself, so he could pay the price of sin demanded by himself, so that God could forgive humans and save them from…himself!’
Critical thinking is not just a phase we go through Sinead, FYI.
Sinead should always be ignored. She trolls the journal and her opinion changes like the wind. If religion would keep their noses out non believers lives I would stop attacking and mocking them, it really is that simple. But they don’t, in fact they tell us that we will burn in unbelievable agony for all eternity because we don’t believe what they do. But they cry if they get challenged in their ridiculous beliefs.
@Sinead. Its a long thread. Maybe you missed the question I’ve already asked you twice. I’ll give it another shot. 3rd time lucky. Which God do you subscribe to and what made you pick that particular brand of God ?
Sinead, I’m not angry at all. Just curious. You seem angered by my question though….or my existence.
He says directly under a posting from an atheist who’s trying to ‘guide’ people.
The irony…
Where’s the irony. .
What did the pro-choicers do to you that was so bad,Sinead?
I seem to recall that it was something to do with the counselling that you got ..?
@Rob I voted for same sex marriage. I am a libertarian. I believe everybody has a right to live as they wish providing it doesn’t harm others so what’s your point?
The issue I have is with people attacking and mocking people if they have a faith or are religious. It’s just nasty and shows their own lack of self worth to need to bully people. I would say the same for people who shove their religious views down the neck of others.
@Tom. That a dig at me there buddy ? I’d be more panthiest anyway.
Greg, you are an idealist and wouldnt it be great if we could all live in harmony and everyone could live their lives with as much or as little religious interference as they liked.
Reality check – how much time is wasted in classrooms up and down the country teaching this wholy unverifiable, often laughable claptrap? What long term damage is done teaching our kids about the consequences of non adherence to faith ie. hell? What if the next big medical advancement is trapped in the mind of a youngster being indoctrinated in the ways of a blind faith and prayer? What kind of message is sent out by forcing pubs to close on certain dates every year for religious reasons and where is the freedom of choice for those in the trade? Does the fact one county returned a majority No vote on the same sex marriage referendum not illustrate the backward, out of touch and frankly bigoted mindset that religious people are not afraid to inflict on others when they get the chance?
Militant atheists? Would you classify that as predominantly young to middle age well educated westerners behind computers and in debate halls discussing points rationally?
Militant Christians? Oh that’s right they are the ones who frequently have blown up abortion clinics, murdered gay people on mass and when they weren’t wage actual wars they waged a war on women’s rights in the form of Chattel reproductive slavery.
Militant Muslims? Well ISIS and the 5,000 other Jihadi cells worldwide seem to have that one pegged.
Militant Buddhists ? The Saffron Revolution for your troubles?
Militant Hindu’s ? Hindutva mass killings?
We can now get into the crux of this debate on about the atheists Mao, Stalin and Pol Pott. I will not recognise Hitler as among their number and you are entitled to disagree if you have not read Mein Kampf or seen an SS belt buckles etc.
The above men, some of the most evil people ever to have lived in the twentieth century were primarily communists who did what they did in the name communism, nationalism and general dictatorial powers and not a lack of religious belief.
Stalin for one had very close ties with the Orthodox church and if you look at the Cults of personalities that were so common with all these men and the worship they received, the fear the population had that they knew everything and could do anything, the elaborate structures they built to glorify themselves one wonders where they got the idea to create such a cult around themselves. Many academics have argued they did so out of control, create the cult of personality and you can easily elicit control.
Or we can accept that most of us civilised people would prefer a militant atheist at a computer pointing out logical thinking by quoting Epicures, Plato, Newton, Jefferson and Aristotle over a militant religious fanatic, any day of the week.
Any one agree?
“@Rob I voted for same sex marriage. I am a libertarian. I believe everybody has a right to live as they wish providing it doesn’t harm others so what’s your point?”
My Point Greg is if all people of faith thought like you there wouldn’t be an issue. Sadly the minority who are against others having choice in life because it doesn’t suit them are louder than the majority average punters.
@Nathan. Agreed.
McF Kevin.. I wont get too deep into it. The whole experience was hell. I went back to the centre where i initially received the information and they scoffed at my feelings of regret saying they were abnormal. My 2 staunch pro choice friends (and i wasnt pro life at the time) didnt want to know. Looking back now i realise they all had their own agenda and denial is what they do best. I shouldnt have said a word to any of them. There are people who did help in a huge way but these are people who are neutral or who are pro life. Wait til you see the red thumbs. And there will be no pro choicers telling me i am “brave” for telling my abortion story.
Hi again Sinead. Which God do you worship and what made you decide to subscribe to that particular brand ?
Sinead, I call bs.. Actually I call bs on most things you post but this one I definitely call bs on. Also even if it were true, grow up and be accountable for your own actions. I assume you were an adult when you had this supposed abortion? well whether you regret it or not is down to you, you made the decision and you went through with it. It is hardly your friends fault for supporting your decision or the fault of the people who gave you the information you requested. just because you have regrets about a decision you made doesn’t mean you should deny other people a right to choice or that you should scorn those advocating people having a choice which I’ve seen you do time and time again.
Funny how you never mention any of the disgusting things your gay friends called people Demise…
Gay as in happy Tony ? Stop being so offended. Doesn’t go on in your house, so what do you care ?
I don’t… Demise is referring to some of the banter that went on before the marriage referendum but she forgets some of the disgusting slurs her pals came out with. I don’t purposely insult anyone who hasn’t insulted me first, but I fight fire with fire if need be. Like this thread here there’s a lot of atheists trying to ridicule others, they only serve to make themselves look like fools.
@Greg..u called me out as a troll on a political debate tonight..u stated i couldn’t back up what I said..FYI. .you never answered any of my questions but you know that.!but I guess been ignorant to facts,easy easy. Run Greg run.
Dell.. I take full responsibility for what I have done. And I blame no one only myself. 100%. As for my assertion that once they have the abortion they don’t wanna know, well you have just proven it.
We have no problem knowing about it, if it did indeed actually happen. What was the name of this organisation you got information from? . I would suggest, however, you actually get professional unbiased help if you have issues regarding choices you made and went through with. what exactly did you exoect your pro choice friends and people you went to for information on abortion to do about your regrets? If your friends were unsympathetic, then they just weren’t real friends and their pro choice stance has zero to do with that and you need to be more careful choosing your friends. what exactly were the people who you went to for information on abortion supposed to do about your regrets? I’ve seen you on more than one occasion ridicule women who put themselves out there to protest about repealing the 8th, your experiences, which I highly suspect are fabricated, does not give you the right to do so. If anything it just makes you look like a complete hypocrite.
Nobody is more qualified to speak out about about abortion and women’s reproductive rights than a celibate (hopefully) bishop. Laughable.
They don’t want to tell people who to vote for, but tell people to put right to life number 1 or whatever. They say you can’t be Catholic and forget about a particular issue addressed by the church. Contradictory hypocrites, many Catholics ‘accept’ gay people so are they all pretenders? I missed the passage in the bible where it says it’s ok to molest childre. The church needs to be cut off from having anything to do with the state.
It’s a woman’s choice I don’t think anybody else should have an opinion on what you do with your life …
The father doesn’t get an opinion on what happens to his unborn child?
I don’t think the church should have an opinion on this matter however I think the father of the unborn child should have an equal say in whether an abortion takes place or not. It is wrong to say it should be the mother’s choice. A lot of Pro Choice women seem to think it should be the mothers choice only however if she decides to keep the child, the father will be expected to be a part of that child’s life and contribute emotionally and financially. Therefore both parents should decide. Not just the mother.
He gets an opinion .That’s all.
Except he won’t be forced to be involved if he doesn’t want to Declan. Only yesterday someone was lamenting the lone parents payment as breaking up families as the state becomes the father in terms of financial responsibility. Women have babies, therefore the decision lies ultimately with them as it is their body which has to go through nine months of pregnancy and give birth. Of course the father should be involved in the decision where possible but the final say needs to be the woman’s as it is her body. If babies could be nurtured and born outside the womb I’d be of the opinion they deserve an equal say.
So, Declan, if the mother decides to keep the child, but the father can’t be bothered to contribute to the upbringing then the child should be aborted?
It can ultimately only be the choice of women , it’s their body, so their choice!
The child inside is not “their body”.
That is true Tony but it is still her body ..
So…why should she allow something that is growing inside of her that she doesn’t want there ?
Because that “something” that you so fondly refer to happens to be a human life.
It’s a ‘potential’ human life ,Tony,only if the woman allows it to be one..
The woman who has an unwanted pregnancy have been known to call it ‘it’ ..
You do know this,Tony?Don’t you?
That doesn’t surprise me oggie, the easiest way to kill the unborn is to dehumanise them first. Helps with the feelings of guilt afterwards.
Guilt is a wasted emotion,Tony.
He didn’t dehumanise it. He never said it wasn’t human. Try again
Tony nobody wants to have an abortion it is never an easy thing to do. It often is however the right and best thing to do. It is not good parenting to bring a child into the world if you can’t meet their needs. They would most likely be subjected to a life of misery, and contribute to the problems in society. And societies tend to blame parents for things like antisocial behaviour, for not raising the child properly/not meeting their needs. Sometimes it’s better not to continue with the pregnancy if you can’t provide a good home for a child.
Learn to read Socrates, he referred to it as something growing inside. A baby is not a fecking tumour you know….
None of what you say Demise will ever be justification for killing a baby.
Tony
What if the mother would die giving birth ?
Is there justification in killing the “baby” then?
I believe abortion is justified in certain circumstances yes, to save the life of the mother being one of them. Abortion on demand is different.
And just for you I put ” ” around the baby ..
Just to please you :)
Fair enough,Tony .
I believe in a woman having agency over their bodies ..
No need for them Oggie. A baby is a baby…
Thank you Oggie and I respect your right to have whatever beliefs you want.
He didn’t say it was a tumour. Every human grows knife another initially. So how is stating a fact dehumanising it?
@Tomy. I’ll give you credit tones, you at least are fair about your stance. Some people in here have no thought for the mother’s no matter what the circumstances. Sad reflection on them I suppose.
@Tony_kilduff. There are difficulties with choosing a precise point when the unborn gets the right to live. Although it’s uncomfortable to be so imprecise, the right answer may lie in accepting that there are degrees of right to life, and the foetus gets a stronger right to life as it develops. This answer has the value of reflecting the way many people feel about things when they consider abortion: the more developed the foetus, the more unhappy they are about aborting it, and the more weight they give the rights of the foetus in comparison with the rights of the mother. This view is sometimes called”"gradualism”". Now Tony, 93% of abortions are in the first trimester and the correct name for the humanoid non sentinel being is either an Embryo or is about to develope into a foetus. In these first three months the embryogoes through organogenesis and develops body organs, its heart beats after the fourth week, brain waves can be monitored after six weeks, and by the eighth week all major body parts are present. At the end of the trimester the embryo has matured into a fetus. Calling a foetus or embryo a child or baby is what fundamentally loose’s your arguement.
The child’s father, yes; Father Ted, no.
More in their line to sort out the money they were supposed to pay abuse victims
Is this the same organisation that doesn’t allow stillborn children to be buried in church plots as they’re not christians until their baptised? Tell me again how they respect women and children?
Well that’s not true.
Yes it is. Same for illegitimate children and their mothers. Had to be buried in unconsecrated ground. Learn the history of your religion Padraig.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/farming/life/saving-irelands-forgotten-burial-sites-270192.html
Yes it is
Unfortunately you can go along to most graveyards and see the crosses or headstones of babies that died pre birth or at birth. Sadly that is the reality. Check out baptism by intention.
So you are denying that the church used graves outside the walls of consecrated ground for dead babies, illegitimate child and their mothers? I don’t need to check anything out – you can’t whitewash the facts with bull dogma along the lines of “mental reservation” that priests and bishops used when lying about their knowledge of abuse.
What I am saying and let’s be clear. I said that the church does not refuse unbaptised babies from being buried on consecrated land. That’s includes a brother of mine buried more than 50 years ago in the family plot.
Perhaps in your parish Padraig but I know having spoken to my father and aunt that this was not the practise in ours. Unbaptised babies were not buried in the family plot.
‘This harsh doctrine was only rectified when St Thomas Aquinas and the medieval church created the concept of Limbo, which assured the faithful that while unbaptised infants could not enter heaven, they would not suffer in hell for eternity either.’
Above taken from the link posted by Steve Mac. Quite literally making it up as they go along.
@Padraig. What about the investigation into the Tuam septic tanks. It follows the discovery by a local historian that 796 babies and infants died at the home, with death certificates citing measles, tuberculosis and malnutrition among the causes. There is no record of the children’s burial in cemeteries and locals believe they were dumped beside a septic tank over the years. Was that sacred ground ?
Would Doran care to explain why the church pays no tax? Give to Caesar and all that stuff in the bible about the poor? no thought not. These bishops suddenly lose the power of speech when money is mentioned
The Church is a registered Charity under Irish Law and as such can avail of one of the four Pillars of Charity i.e “the advancement of religion” when it registered and as such avails of a tax emption status on most Taxes.
This has been a key component of the law of Trusts for hundreds of years.
I would be interested to see how much the Church would pay in tax if it were taxed the same as any other business selling a product.
The church needs to keep their nose out of political business
“You cannot pretend to be a Catholic and say ‘I leave aside a very vital part of Catholic teaching’”
While Bishop Doran has a beard it does look well maintained. Also his hair is well groomed. Both vital parts of Catholic teaching too that they not be cut. Also that collar doesn’t seem to be the same material as his shirt. I wonder does he eat Shellfish? You can’t just pick the parts that suit you Bishop.
It would seem the “word of the lord” is negotiable, until it’s not but that all depends on situation and context.
He would do well not to upset the pick and mix Catholics, without them the churches would be empty.
It’s called cherry picking. Cherry pickers conscience over rides their faith. Its not the bible they believe, as they disarm the verces and teachings they don’t like morrally ect. Its their conscience they believe. Thats perfectly normal when asked to suspend your cognitive faculties and believe in the supernatural.
I’m so glad that embittered old men are taking on the burden of making decisions about my body for me. Glad they know I have no business worrying my pretty little head about those things.
Incredible that they still have any traction in this country Aoife. Had far too much influence for far too long, now noses are out of joint as they are slowly reined in. Progress is slow.
If little boys could have got pregnant with all the abuse the priests use to do to them abortion would have been legalized years ago!! They have no right whatsoever to talk about the right to life when they destroyed so many young lives through pedophilia, which to this day they still cover up!! Now feck off ya creep!
Even if that means keeping vulnerable children and families homeless!?!? What great ‘christian’ teachings!
It is my redline issue but not in the way they want it to be.
No candidate that can’t commit to a referendum on repealing the 8th will not get my vote.
That automatically excludes FF & FG and a few Independents about my area.
Nobody listens to you anymore.
You and your church are increasingly irrelevant and good riddance.
Maybe you should have spoke out when thousands of children were being sexually abused over decades by your colleagues.
Pointless posturing from an increasingly irrelevant organisation. The result of the Marriage Equality referendum showed that they can’t preach hellfire and brimstone from the pulpit and have a deferential congregation do their bidding anymore.
That went well for them the last time.
The majority of the population (Catholics) welcome the bishop’s guidance on this matter of national importance.
A timely intervention.
The way their disastrous campaign is going this public pronouncement could well be the death knell for the outgoing government. (and I think I’m safe in saying – we can all be delighted in that regard)
A good strong sermon from the pulpit in every parish in the land to drive the message home is in order also.
This is a Catholic country.
We are a Catholic people.
We respect life.
This is as it should be.
Yes Tommy. It’s true because you say it is.
“This is a Catholic country.”
A Catholic country that has same sex marriage :-)
No Socrates.
It’s true because……well because it’s true.
“This is a Catholic country”
Its not actually. This is a secular country where the majority of the population were baptised catholic, without their consent, before they reached the age of reason.
Pi$$ poor troll .
Don’t feed the troll.
Ireland is not a Catholic country ??? Lol, I love the way all the atheists try to deny this…
Tony it’s secular. That’s why it’s so annoying that the church continue to try to direct our lives on a national level whether we are believers of their faith or not. They are deluded. They lie to themselves about the number of followers they have by not allowing people to leave their faith which boosts their numbers on paper. We are not a Catholic country. Would same sex marriage be here if we were?
If that was directed at me ‘tony’ just to give you a heads up, I’m not an athiest.
If you want to live in a republic of religious designation, I heard that the islamic republic of Iran is lovely at this time of year.
Tony
What percentage of the population do you believe are practicing Catholics ?
Hopefully,you don’t go by the seriously flawed Census ..
Incidentally tony, if you are moving to the islamic republic of Iran, I should warn you that their abortion laws are more liberal than here.
Why would I move For Connolly? It’s not me that has a problem living in a Catholic country. Why don’t you go somewhere that is predominantly atheist ? Good luck in you search …
“I love the way all the atheists try to deny this”
It’s a secular country and I’m not an atheist!
It’s not a secular country, I suggest you read the opening lines of our constitution.
If it’s a Catholic country, why do we have laws that contradict the teachings of Catholicism?
It’s a Catholic country because over 85 % of the people are Catholic !
The majority voted in favour of same sex marriage, which goes completely against the teachings of Catholicism therefore it’s not a Catholic country. As stated in the article, Ireland is a country populated by false Catholics SSM referendum proved that.
The same thing was said in advance of the marriage equality referendum and look what happened there. I don’t think anyone gives any notice to what the RCC have to say on things anymore. They lost the moral high ground years ago.
You realise Maggie 40 % of the country didn’t even bother voting on gay marriage ? And of those who did almost 40 % voted no ? There’s a lot of people out there who don’t really care who or what the gays marry.
And yet you did Tony. You were on here daily arguing against it. Are you assuming the 38% of people that didn’t vote are Catholic?
“There’s a lot of people out there who don’t really care who or what the gays marry.”
There’s lots of people out there who don’t really care that the Catholic church right up to the top covered up the abuse and rape of little children Tony, they are called Catholics. I think you may be one of them!
“over 85 % of the people are Catholic !”
Wrong wrong wrong.. A baptism does not make a Catholic unless the person chooses it for themselves.
I would state I’m atheist because people immediately understand what you believe, but I’d also state that I’m Pantheist. Most educated reasonable logical people leave their indoctrination behind. Other educated people don’t. Let’s all get along and everyone have a nice cosy personal relationship with whichever brand of religion you like. Why do people need to proclaim how divine they are on public forums and then not expect critism and questioning is beyond me. Is it point scoring with your God ? As long as theists proclaim ideas to be better than actual knowledge, I’ll be happy to question these archaic primitive ideologies. If theists are confident that their God is the one true God, while dismissing Billions of others with different beliefs, then why would it bother them that we question them ? You look at Sinead above and it raises an eye brow. How confident is she in her beliefs ? You can’t cherry pick. You must believe it all. Old and new testaments. Thats God’s rules. Mathew 2:17-20.
Remember the leaders debate the other night??
the ONLY politician to drop the dreaded “8th Bomb” was Richard Boyd Barret,
he will be getting my first preference, with Sinn Féin the second .
Phuck the Catholic Church, their days of ruling us , ditating, scaring and bullying are well an truly over,
I`ll never take direction from a man in a skirt.
Why does the church feel that they should have a say in anything to do with child welfare, thier track record in this department ain’t too good,
Pro tip for the media: atheists, agnostics and religious people are both pro life and pro abortion to various degrees on a spectrum. Simplifying and piting people against each other is lazy. It’s a difficult enough subject to deal with as it is.
The Catholic Church had their shot at influencing the consciousness of the Irish People and blew it. They betrayed all the years of blind conformance of their flock with covert assault on the young and innocent.It’s over.
Church has a right to an opinion. I also. Abortion should be legal. If you can’t afford to have a child you be suck in poverty. Also when it is legalised remove childerns allowance
My favorite quote is from the bishop stating that individuals cannot pretend to be catholics and yet leave out vital teachings. How do we know which teachings are vital? I’m always unsure as to whether or not stoning, forcing a raped daughter to marry the rapist, keeping slaves, being near a woman who is menstruating, and wearing clothes of mixed fabrics are considered “vital teachings”. Either way, as a male myself, I would never take the opinion of a predominantly male led organization, who facilitated cover up of child abuse, into consideration when considering whether or not women can make choices about their own bodies. Now yes, I understand that the Catholic Church would prefer to harness the life long potential of slavery in the Magdelene laundries for those women caught out by pregnancy, but I for one will support a woman’s choice.
Jesus are the Bishops trying to get labour back in? Because there’s one thing the Irish public don’t do anymore and that’s listen to the church
The clergy should not be allowed vote,they are an insignificant part of our society,and their beliefs have more in common with ISIS the 5th century terror group.
Well, I’ve already ran the shinners, greens and that horrible yoke from AAA from my door because they fail to recognise the humanity of the unborn. For all the anti-church rhetoric here, it’s the Church that has taken the most scientifically accurate and appropriate stance in this debate by insisting that life begins at conception. There is no other point in ones existence that is as fundamentally transformative as conception. That is literally when you become “you”. You were unique in your genes, your very DNA, weeks before your mother realised that you existed. All that you needed was to be allowed to grow.
Where is the humanity in poisoning or flushing out or cutting up the unborn to “spare” them the assumed pain of a short life in the case of so-called fatal foetal abnormalities? How can that be more humane than to let them die in peace?
The hypocrisy of this paradox baffles me.
“Well, I’ve already ran the shinners, greens and that horrible yoke from AAA from my door ”
How very christian of you. I hope you’re planning on forgiving them.
“For all the anti-church rhetoric here, it’s the Church that has taken the most scientifically accurate and appropriate stance in this debate by insisting that life begins at conception. ”
The scientifically accurate stance is that life began around a billion years ago and has been in a constant state of cell division, evolution and reproduction ever since.
Ah shut up, I suppose you think pedophilia wasn’t rampant in the church, men of god abusing CHILDREN! I worked with a dude that was abused by a priest and when he got home and told his man she bet the crap out of him for saying such a thing, a man of god could .ot do such a thing!! You are like his mother, deluded! If little boys could have got pregnant abortion would have been legalized years ago by the priests! Now go back saying your penance!
The ignorance is strong with this one.
“And that yoke from aaa. “Such humanity there for the actual living!! The 8th amendment was passed in 1983. I was too young to vote then. And yet my generation were the ones most affected by it. We have abortion in this country lads we just export it to England for those who can afford to pay and for those that can’t well tough. Let’s have a grown up conversation on this for once and start the ball rolling by allowing another referendum and let the people decide. That’s what a democracy is all about
Well said Malcolm
They don’t die in peace, they die in pain because at that point their nervous system is fully developed. Often the suffocate to death while their horrified parents watch. Let them have a choice rather than forcing them to do what YOU think is right Brian
We put pets down if they are in pain or will have no quality of life because it is the humane thing to do Brian, so yes it is humane to prevent pain and suffering/poor quality of life.
@Brian Lenehan. Then the church is wrong and you should pull them up on it. Is it not the bible that is the word of God. Which supercedes which….: content://com.sec.android.app.sbrowser/readinglist/0203053922.mhtml according to the bible, and I challenge you to disprove this, life begins at first breath.
Here’s the link, apologies. content://com.sec.android.app.sbrowser/readinglist/0203053608.mhtml
Ah I give up (“,)
A Catholic lecturing another Catholic on selective reading and cherry picking the bible.
Pot? Meet kettle.
They can keep their urges to themselves because it’s none of their business who I, or anyone, vote for.
The Scandinavian countries are predominantly Lutheran yet you don’t see them allowing Luther’s philosophies to dominate their lives and lawmaking. Ireland thankfully is leaning towards this way of thinking.
I never really got the politicisation and religisization of abortion.
They still control our schools brainwashing children with this stuff.
The General Election has nothing to do with Roman Catholic bishops. They have one vote each like everyone else. Keep church and state separate.
If done at the earliest possible time, then OK, but the father should have a say, if the mother doesn’t want the child and the father does then, ?, the mother is the one that will carry it for 9 months, so it’s a diffucult call. In the case where the child is unlikely to survive, then it’s the parents choice, where the mother is put at risk, it’s her choice only. In reference to the Bishops views, we seen their actions with respect to children, so they shouldn’t be giving an opinion.
I am anti abortion and it’s got nothing to do with religion. Let’s not use the Catholic card every time.
I would have more respect if the pro choice stop using that endearing term and call themselves what they are which is pro-abortion.
This isn’t about choice, it’s about abortion. If it was about choice we would be considering the choice of the baby.
Before anybody says the foetus can’t make a choice, I would remind them that a 2 day old baby can’t make a choice and we wouldn’t consider taking that baby’s life.
How about saving these babies and see what great people they can become.
Good comment.
The pro abortion lobby have no sound argument to support their position, a position which can be summed up thus:
‘I’m a liberal – I can do what I want (whatever the consequences)’
Therefore they try to turn the issue into a religious/ secular divide, which affords them an opportunity to spout the usual anti religious nonsense as if it held any weight, which it doesn’t.
It’s a deliberate tactic to cloud the debate thereby allowing them to side step the deeper questions on the inhumanity of their position.
Ultimately there is no humane argument in favour of abortion.
They know this and so they obfuscate.
Predictable and tedious at this stage.
Guess it’s all they’ve got really.
What about where the woman has been raped? Would you force her to have her rapists child?
A foetus can’t understand anything, therefore cannot have a choice. It is about choice, a woman’s choice for her body. She can carry to term or abort. A choice
@Tom. You are pro choice for rape/incest/FFA scenarios. You have clearly states that before. So what do you call yourself ? Semi pro abortionist? You’re obviously not anti abortion. This article is about the bishops views and is a religious article. This is absolutely about choice and nothing else. It is about our women’s basic human rights, rights which have been denied by the church since its beginnings. The churchs ideology is fundamentally Mysogonistic and it is another example of the church attempting to control our sexual nature’s. Their anti contraceptive and anti abortion. WTF ? It is clearly an archaic culture and tactic, imposed on believers to keep increasing their churchs population. It is the fear of further loss of control of real people’s lives that is driving the churchs views. The bible doesn’t support their views, and neither does progresssive 2016 humanistic Ireland.
@Oran. You really are a pathetic troll who yesterday joked and used Richard Dawkins, an elderly man, stroke…as a point scoring football. I wouldn’t even wish that on you or one of yours. Sick sick kid.
P-anti
Hang on a sec. Read over my post. What I said was I can completely understand the difficulty of these situations and I will not make a judgement of people in these situations. What I clearly said was I myself am anti abortion but I understand people in these situations need to make an abortion decision.
The rape of a 10 year old is always thrown up as a test. Of course it is tremendously difficult situation and it’s a situation where I would be damned no matter what I say. It’s a loaded question designed to force a win-win answer for the pro choice (abortion) lobby.
However, let’s put these extremely difficult situations aside for a moment. The rape of a child who ends up pregnant is grotesque but thankfully rare. I feel these extreme hypothetical situations are thrown up as a smoke screen. Let’s deal with the problem of the vast majority of abortions which are abortions undertaken by adults for reasons of convenience.
@Tom. I’m not calling you out here but these are some of the reasons I believed what I said about you. In the article linked below, while argueing Rosie and myself you made a few comments . You could arge that these could be taken out of context but hit the link and scroll about halfway down and keep going and you will see these sentences in your posts. 1) would I loose a family member to try and save another or lose both, of course I would try to save one. 2) I would support a termination to save the woman’s life, I answered that question 3 hours ago. 3) the issue off FFA or rape ect is something to be addressed, but in the main I think it’s a red herring. How Lucinda and Averil clashed over abortion as students more than a decade ago http://jrnl.ie/2584512 I’m confused, you support a termination to save a woman’s life – is that not pro abortion ?
P-anti
Supporting abortion to save a woman’s life is not pro abortion. It’s a loaded question but I’m ok with that. I’ll deal with it head on. It’s an impossible scenario designed to force a pro abortion answer.
Put it this way. If somebody broke into somebody’s house and said I will kill both your parents unless you choose one to live. If you choose one are you pro murder? It’s a loaded question which I can’t win. I kill the mother or I kill the baby? How can I answer that?
I could support abortion there with a clear conscience.
Personally, I would prefer to save both.
@Tom. Your not listening. That can be sen in your last few lines. The vast number may be convenience as you call it, or to avoid an inconvenience you could say, whatever, but the facts are that over 90% of abortions are within the first trimester, 40% occur naturally, and it is not a child, baby, kid whatever. Factually, it is an embryo developing into a foetus. The fact that anti choicers use rare late term abortions is also a smoke screen. It is also rare and is mostly for health reasons and nothing else. Something that you support.
@Tom. Loaded question or not, my point is, your are pro abortion in that case. Not pro allow the mother to live, pro abortion. I also agree that I would like to save them both, who wouldn’t ??
Apologies Tom, should read “not pro allow the mother to die”.
@Tom. If a woman was suicidal and had already attempted suicide as a result of an unwanted pregnancy, would you be pro abortion there also, to save her life ? In other words, do you agree that mental health is as important as physical health ?
Demise – the father is involved from the moment of conception. That’s how the woman became pregnant. In certain cases, the father should be excluded, eg X case etc., but there should be provisions in the legislation for the father’s rights.
Larissa – you ask if the father can’t be bothered to contribute to the child’s upbringing should the child be aborted. I don’t think so. If the mother can’t be bothered to look after the child when it’s born, should the responsiblity fall on the father? Even though he had no legal avenue to object or support the pregnancy.
Well we all know how much respect for human life church leaders
have shown in the past. ‘Do unto others’ and all that..
For those who think that the Irish Constitution has nothing to do with Catholicism, I suggest you read the first 2 paragraphs of it
What about the bit where gay people can marry? Is that Catholic?
Nope, that’s exactly the reason why I voted No. The whole constitution was founded on the Catholic faith as per the opening paragraphs. I would’ve preferred to give gay people equal rights without amending the constitution but that wasnt an option. Now the whole thing is contradictory
The constitution was founded in law, the preamble mentions the beliefs of those people at the time. Thankfully nowadays most know it’s utter nonsense! I’d be happy to vote to amend the preamble
The constitution is continuously added to, reduced and changed. As our continuous improvement of our knowledge of science and the universe and our place in it continues, it is religion that suffers. The laws of the universe will never change to authenticate any archaic holy books. As humanity matures, and organised religions deminish, our constitution will reflect our progressive advances. Imo.
Siiiiggghhh
Yis are all mad !
have your say