Advertisement
This site uses cookies to improve your experience and to provide services and advertising. By continuing to browse, you agree to the use of cookies described in our Cookies Policy. You may change your settings at any time but this may impact on the functionality of the site. To learn more see our Cookies Policy.
OK
Dublin: 18 °C Tuesday 18 September, 2018

Comment #745219 by Michael Skellig

Michael Skellig Nov 21st 2012, 10:20 PM #

Strong man. Can’t believe that Steen woman gets air time. Iona is an extreme organisation with no place in a modern secular western democracy.

| Share | Report this comment

Read the article where this comment appeared:

Praveen Halappanavar: "I still can't believe that she's not with us"

Praveen Halappanavar: "I still can't believe that she's not with us"

The husband of Savita Halappanavar told Prime Time tonight that he has no confidence in the HSE and wants a public, government-funded investigation into her death.

REPLIES

    Favourite Oliver O'Neill
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Nov 21st 2012, 10:56 PM

    If only we were a secular republic but I’m afraid the hangover of religious superstition will be with us for another generation at least.

    142
    Favourite michael o'toole
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Nov 21st 2012, 11:01 PM

    @ Michael Skellig
    “Can’t believe that Steen woman gets air time”
    why ?
    because she’s Pro Life & anti Abortion – is that why?

    bet you consider yourself to be a Liberal.

    78
    Favourite zedabelzer
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Nov 21st 2012, 11:09 PM

    Probably because she spouts on about legislation existing where it does not, says that medical responses to situations where the mothers health or life is at risk are clear cut which they are not and she also disagrees with the Masters of the Maternity hospitals when she is not qualified to do so. She should stick to what she knows – whatever that is.

    171
    Favourite Kerry Blake
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Nov 22nd 2012, 12:58 AM

    Bit like yourself so Michael. Noticed in the prime time program she was quite happy to hang out the doctors in Galway. If you were a little less intolerant yourself you might understand that what most are talking about here is
    providing legislation to cover the Supreme Courts judgement on the X case. Not abortion on demand but sure why would you be bothered in letting the facts cloud your better values.

    107
    Favourite M Bowe
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Nov 22nd 2012, 1:08 AM

    If he is a religious man he is not IMPOSING his beliefs on the rest of the nation who do not share those beliefs. Worship what you please but don’t impose it on me.

    95
    Favourite michael o'toole
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Nov 22nd 2012, 1:34 AM

    @ Kerry Blake:
    you must have watched a different Prime Time progam to me.
    she said that there were a number of possibilities, but that all of the evidence had to be considered.
    i think you’re being deliberately unfair to ms Steen, who i hadn’t heard of before.
    no one – not even you should reach a conclusion in this case, without hearing the evidence, from all sides.

    BTW – the people here who are advocating that those whose views they disagree with, should be banned from the airways, seem to be of your ilk.
    i not suggested censorship pf anyone’s vieweven those of Clare Daly & Ivana Bacik, whose views, i fundamentally disagree with.
    that would be intolerant – i’d be a bigot.

    i’m Pro Choice
    my choice is to try & defend the lives of unborn babies, against those who want abortion on demand in this state.

    27
    Favourite Kerry Blake
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Nov 22nd 2012, 1:53 AM

    Indeed I probably did watch a different prime time to you Michael. I understand the debate is not about “abortion on demand” but giving effect to the Supreme Court judgement arising from the X case. Something by the way we were told could never occur during the referendum prior to that case. We were also told no one would die. That it seems was also wrong.

    My Ilk? What’s my ilk? I’m pretty sure I’ve not suggested anyone should be banned from the “airwaves” nor do I call people who I disagree with bigots.

    71
    Favourite michael o'toole
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Nov 22nd 2012, 2:46 AM

    @ Kerry Blake:
    the program was not about “giving effect to the Supreme Court judgement”
    it was about Parveen’s interview.
    you accused ms Steen of being “quite happy to hang out the doctors in Galway”
    untrue.
    you did not criticize those here who advocated that ms Steen should not be allowed to express her views,
    but you insinuated that i was intolerant & a bigot, although i didn;t advocate that those who i disagree with, be prevented from freely expressing their views.

    you say – “We were also told no one would die” ?????

    10
    Favourite Michael
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Nov 22nd 2012, 3:38 AM

    Michael O’toole here, is right on principle even though he has no tact whatsoever. He’s simply pointing out that anyone who condemns the pro-life people are bigots, to which they are if they are using slurs and ad hominem attacks, to which they do 95% of the time.

    This legislation will go too far, when it is eventually introduced. It should be that the life of the mother is saved, in my opinion, the child on the other hand is another matter, not for this discussion.

    Remember how small a sliver of people we have in the journal.ie community, we are not the silent majority, which is almost always overlooked.

    11
    Favourite Ian Stephenson
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Nov 22nd 2012, 7:48 AM

    That’s not pro choice btw ! Pro choice means that you are in favour of people making there own choice …. what you are espousing is that you want people to have a choice but only a choice to chose what you find acceptable. That’s anti choice. I, like you, am a man and feel I have no right to impose my beliefs one way or the other on a woman’s choice in whatever situation she is in regarding her own body. Much like in the reverse situation I have no right to dictate to a 19 y o mother of 3 what she does with her body. It’s not a matter of right or wrong black or white. It’s a deeply personal matter which should be de politicised. And religion of ANY denomination should have NO bearing.

    63