20 comments on “Erm

  1. Because the Left has won and now they will convince women that their murdered children are disgusting parasitic cancerous growths that should not be mourned.

    And they call this a victory of empathy.

    The Left’s play book here has been successful again. And now Ireland will murder thousands of children. They are vile people.

  2. Isn’t it the case that when a citizen dies abroad and their remains are repatriated, the Coroner must be informed and an inquest held to establish cause of death?

    It is so in the UK and I suppose in Ireland too.

    This being so, wouldn’t a fœtus aborted abroad give rise to a Coroner’s verdict of unlawful killing or murder?

    The obvious way to avoid this is to smuggle the remains into Ireland to avoid any questions and of course not be able to have any formal interment, memorial or ceremony.

  3. Not all abortions take place because the woman didn’t want the baby. Some happen because the baby is already dead or sufficiently malformed that it’s not going to live past a few weeks (think anencephaly), and the humane thing is to let the woman have an abortion, grieve for the much-wanted baby, and move on with her life. Forcing her to carry it to term and give birth to either a corpse or a lump of twitching meat is a cruelty.

    Abortion bans make those terminations illegal too, and those are the tiny little urns that had to be smuggled back.

  4. John B is right. Under Irish law as it is now, it is illegal either to perform an abortion or to procure one, the latter making illegal for the woman to receive one. Possession of the ashes of an aborted foetus are rather clear proof of her having done so.

  5. I’m minded that any woman voluntarily undergoing an abortion then mourning over the remains is, to say the least, deeply conflicted.

  6. Matthew L–Bullshit.

    If the child is already dead or as good as then grieving is inevitable. Carrying to term would add what torment exactly? A few more weeks? On something someone with a heart will never forget anyway.

    And now the “stick it in and wiggle it about without regard to consequences” (which is the number one cause of abortions) crew will kick the death machine off.

  7. Now that female Paddy’s can kill the products of their boozy nights out without legal restraint, the Irish birth rate will plummet. As a direct consequence of this demographic holocaust, lots of Muslem immigrants (with all the associated MGM, “honour killings”, stonings, acid attacks, forced child marriage, grooming gangs, etc.) will be forced upon the Irish. How does this lead to women getting to control their own bodies, etc.?

  8. “I’m minded that any woman voluntarily undergoing an abortion then mourning over the remains is, to say the least, deeply conflicted.”

    Have a read of this, and then tell me what her conflict is.

    http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/column-my-son-was-cremated-alone-in-a-different-country-because-he-had-a-fatal-foetal-abnormality-1016310-Jul2013/

    “As a direct consequence of this demographic holocaust, lots of Muslem immigrants (with all the associated MGM, “honour killings”, stonings, acid attacks, forced child marriage, grooming gangs, etc.) will be forced upon the Irish. How does this lead to women getting to control their own bodies, etc.?”

    I can see a reasonable/arguable moral argument against abortion that the potential unborn child has a right to life – I don’t see *any* case for saying *you* should have the power to control *other people’s* breeding because *you* want to try to outbreed the Muslims! That’s none of your business.

    They’ve already had the Magdalene Laundries forced on them – a state-backed slavery ring for women whose “offense, in the eyes of society, was to break the strict sexual rules of Catholic Ireland, having children outside wedlock.” Religious nutters have *already* been given power/control and moral carte blanche over the Irish people. What’s the difference, really?

    https://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/world/europe/25iht-abuse25.html

    Authoritarians are still Authoritarians – wherever they’re from, whatever creed or religion they’re pushing.

  9. Mr Ecks – some women have a problem with carrying a necrotic foetus. Can cause significant health problems for the mother too.

  10. I agree Martin–an already deceased childs body should be removed which would not be an abortion anyway.

    The ultimate evil of abortion is the casual murder of a child because two selfish turds couldn’t wait for contraception.

  11. So the Irish will be relaced by breeders from more pigmented places I bet the IRA didn’t see this coming

  12. NiV – “Have a read of this, and then tell me what her conflict is.”

    Her conflict is her need to keep a straight face while lying to the Irish people.

    “I don’t see *any* case for saying *you* should have the power to control *other people’s* breeding because *you* want to try to outbreed the Muslims! That’s none of your business.”

    That is not what he said. The Western governments do everything they can to lower the birth rate and then turn around and demand the importation of Third World rapists because we need more labour. Pointing this absurdity out has nothing to do with claims we want to outbreed anyone.

    “They’ve already had the Magdalene Laundries forced on them – a state-backed slavery ring for women”

    Nonsense. People have been lying about these for a generation in order to destroy the Church in Ireland too. The ML were shelters that women could leave any time by and large. They were not slavery rings of any sort. In fact they were probably the most humane response to single mothers and prostitution the West has tried.

  13. @NiV

    I’ve two things to say here.
    1) That first link you posted is deeply tragic, and I can understand why people would be moved to allow a relaxation of the rules for cases such as these (although I don’t think we should, for reasons I’ll explain in my second point). The issue is that we all know such cases are being presented here as a pretext for something different. 95% of abortions are of perfectly healthy babies whose mothers have decided they are too much of an inconvenience to carry to term, so have them killed instead. If the law was being changed for the genuine hard cases, it would be framed differently (e.g. only permitting abortion when there was significant physical risk to the mother, or in cases of fatal abnormality).

    2)I’ve a childhood friend who was diagnosed as having a fatal fetal abnormality. Despite considerable medical pressure to abort (and being told she was taking irresponsible risks with her health), my friend’s mother carried her to term, and much to everyone’s surprise delivered a healthy baby.
    I’ve another friend, Andy, who was born with a serious heart condition back in the early 80s.
    His parents were told when he was born(back then, these sort of things weren’t often diagnosed before birth) he would probably only live a few days, but after several operations he had a pretty normal life (working on his parents farm! )for the next 30 years. He died fairly suddenly aged 33, and it said something about him that between 300-400 people were at his funeral.
    Nowadays, his condition is picked up at a 20 week scan, and parents are pressured to abort rather than give the baby a chance. I’m sure that for all their grief after his death, Andy’s parents would take the chance to have his life again – but it’s hard to take that view when you are being told that your baby has little chance of life and the kindest thing to do is to kill it.

  14. Weird. It was just a woman’s right to chose before the abortion, but afterwards it’s the remains of a baby?

  15. If the foetus is dead, it’s not really an abortion now, is it? The key characteristic of an abortion being the killing of a foetus?

  16. “Nonsense. People have been lying about these for a generation in order to destroy the Church in Ireland too.”

    And I’ve heard people say much the same things about all the Muslim shenannigans. Some people will defend anything, if it’s *their* side doing it.

    ” In fact they were probably the most humane response to single mothers and prostitution the West has tried.”

    Apart from legalisation and normalisation, you mean?

    “The issue is that we all know such cases are being presented here as a pretext for something different. 95% of abortions are of perfectly healthy babies whose mothers have decided they are too much of an inconvenience to carry to term, so have them killed instead.”

    The issue is that in a passionate debate *both* sides present the examples that best support their case – one side the tragic cases, the other side the unecessary ones.

    It’s always a continuous spectrum, and a question of where to arbitrarily draw a line in a world where objectively there are no sharp boundaries. And wherever you draw it, most people will think it ought to be somewhere else.

  17. NiV – “And I’ve heard people say much the same things about all the Muslim shenannigans. Some people will defend anything, if it’s *their* side doing it.”

    I don’t think you have heard anything except from your own choir. You certainly show no signs of it.

    “Apart from legalisation and normalisation, you mean?”

    No. Welfare bastards are much more likely to be sexually assaulted than children of two heterosexual married parents. What legalisation and normalisation has meant is Baby P. Thousands and thousands of Baby Ps. This is not humane. This is cruel. The people supporting your side of the argument are knowingly supporting a vast expansion of child abuse.

    “The issue is that in a passionate debate *both* sides present the examples that best support their case – one side the tragic cases, the other side the unecessary ones.”

    Except that one side has a hundred to a thousand times more unnecessary ones than the other side has tragic ones.

    “It’s always a continuous spectrum, and a question of where to arbitrarily draw a line in a world where objectively there are no sharp boundaries. And wherever you draw it, most people will think it ought to be somewhere else.”

    Actually there are two sharp boundaries – conception and birth. In practice they are the only two boundaries that matter. Everyone pretends otherwise but either you protect life from conception like Ireland used to or you allow people to kill babies up to and even after the moment of birth. As Britain does.

    I have made my choice. You have made yours. Unfortunately Ireland has made the wrong one.

  18. NiV, you seem not to be capable of reading and understanding what has actually been written. No mention of trying to outbreed Muslims was even hinted at. The statement was to the effect that a falling birthrate amongst the Irish would be used as an excuse to import Muslim savages displaying all the usual hideous behavioural proclivities explicitly encouraged by their “so-called” religion (in reality, a 7th century supremacist and misogynistic death cult). Out breeding no; simply not letting these savages in the country is all that’s required.

  19. Rob W–What nonsense.

    How can what you say be true when NiV is here to persuade such imported folk of the error of their ways.

    Are you not aware of the many thousands of former Jihadis who now embrace the Rainbow Flag as a result of the friendly Persuasion applied by our mutual friend?

    No–me neither.

  20. I heard the Irish prime minister’s speech after the result came in, the man’s a moron. No more stigma as the veil of secrecy is lifted. First of all that’s surely back to front – when there’s no stigma then you don’t have to be secretive – and second of all that’s not what stigma means, abortion has been legal in this country for 50 years now and I wouldn’t say that there’s no stigma or need for secrecy. Halfwit

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.