Your right to an Abortion

Suaimhneach

These people are running a demonstration tomorrow stating they're "Saving babies lives and mothers mental health", it's called a "Rally for Life" and they are supporting the current norm which is if a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, under our current laws she is not entitled to an abortion, even if that rape consititutes incest.

This video sums up their attitude I think:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWscldMzwcM

I'm attending a counter-rally if anyone wants to come. I think it is SO important that we stand against these people (peacefully) and make it known that there IS an opposition to these self righteous zealots who do not represent the women of this country.

The rage these guys causes in me is unreal. Their moral righteousness and indignation that people would want a choice is beyond what I can handle. When will it be that Ireland is not run by people like this? It's actually embarssing.

My personal opinion is that we have the right to a choice. Let the medical professionals decide the whens and hows, let the philsophers debate the moment of conception, but for me, what ultimately is so important is that we are women in charge of our own bodies and our own choice to have, or not have, children. The state and the church should have no say in that.

baby and crumble

What an awful video. Not only is the message against my own beliefs, but man it's really crappy quality.

Unfortunately I can't make the counter-rally tomorrow, but best of luck to all those who do!

ravima

hard cases make bad law.

G86

Count me in, just signed up on the page there.

krudler

"yo elephant, thanks for the reminder" is now my new favourite catchphrase.

my god that video is awwwwful, who approved that? how to make your cause seem amatuerish, have a badly animated zebra say "yo" , cos thats all down with the youths and stuff.

Asphyxia

That's just awful, they do not own our bodies so it shouldn't be their decision :mad: Good luck to everyone who will be attending.

Suaimhneach

What I forgot to mention in the original post, that is another crux to my logic is that, regardless of whether or not it's legal, the harsh reality is that women just go to the UK or Europe.

I have friends who've had abortions and friends who've had some horrific circumstances in their lives, the last thing they need, to add to this horrible time in their lives is to have to have a guilt and go abroad.

I hope more people can attend. I'm mostly sorry I couldnt raise this sooner.

ted1

I'm anti abortion buy that's my belief and ever body is entitled to their own belief I just really hate the way everbody tries to force their belief upon others. That goes for both sides of the argument.

Adhamh

As opposed to self-righteous zealots who do represent every single woman in the country?

saa

If a woman decided to do this time is of the essence its just ridiculous that they would have to find the money to travel, plan, and then wait on a list that is backed up because two feckin countries are trying to use the clinics.

chocgirl

Suaimhneach wrote: »

What I forgot to mention in the original post, that is another crux to my logic is that, regardless of whether or not it's legal, the harsh reality is that women just go to the UK or Europe.

I have friends who've had abortions and friends who've had some horrific circumstances in their lives, the last thing they need, to add to this horrible time in their lives is to have to have a guilt and go abroad.

I hope more people can attend. I'm mostly sorry I couldnt raise this sooner.

This is my basic problem with the current legislation. A lot of women do have a choice to go to the UK but not all, for some it's just not feasible they can't get their hands on that money in time, can't do the research to find out what they need to know and are encouraged to play the happy expectant mother against their will. Unfortunately this group are the least well able to support their babies and vulnerable babies are born into effective poverty.

Duddy

Youth Defence = scumbags with a "moral" cause. Although it'd be sinking to their paltry level, it'd be kinda great to see a strong militant liberal group in Ireland.

gargleblaster

ted1 wrote: »

I'm anti abortion buy that's my belief and ever body is entitled to their own belief I just really hate the way everbody tries to force their belief upon others. That goes for both sides of the argument.

I completely agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the issue. However nobody is trying to force anyone who doesn't want an abortion to get one.

At least in Ireland women aren't being brought up on murder charges after having miscarriages (a disturbing new trend in the US).

micayla

Won't be able to make the counter rally due to work but best of luck! What really gets me is when they display those horrible images at their rallies and protests on O'Connell St. It's bad enough that women have to go through this experience with very little support in this country but to have to walk down the street on a Saturday afternoon and be reminded of what they've gone through and made to feel guilty really p***** me off:mad:

It's about damn time we had another referendum in this country!

Fad

Oh Youth Defence, you awful awful human beings....

krudler

Fad wrote: »

Oh Youth Defence, you awful awful human beings....

do I want to know who they are?

rainbow kirby

krudler wrote: »

do I want to know who they are?

Hardcore Catholic pro-life nutters.

krudler

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Hardcore Catholic pro-life nutters.

oh, had a google at their page

Abortion is not just some overwhelming statistic that happens 50 million times a year, it's the death of an individual person; each abortion is the bloody and painful execution of some child. Sadly, it has now become acceptable to sacrifice children on the altar of choice.

allandanyways

Not starting a prolife vs prochoice argument, this is a rhetorical rant.

Why do other people get to decide what I do to my body? If I were to get pregnant, why do other people get to make my choice for me? What if I didn't want to be pregnant full stop, I don't want to lose 9 months of my life to a child that my only option would be to give up because I couldn't support it. Why is this someone else's decision? Why should I have to pay money to travel to England if I were to seek an abortion? Because someone else has made the decision for me that I have to, because God forbid I had the option to do what I want with my body in my own country.

It's an absolute travesty and makes me so, so angry that other people who have one opinion get to decide what happens to someone else's body.

If you don't want an abortion then don't effing have one

It really is a demonstration of how backwards Ireland is in terms of modernisation when a woman cannot make her own choices because someone else has already made the choice for her.

Am in work today, but good luck to all who attend.

While I'm utterly completely prochoice I can understand where prolifers are coming from with protests
gosh I have mellowed out in the last few years!!

that said, if I could make the counter rally today I might have gone

good luck to ye

wild_cat

I can't make the counter rally today .

Probably for the best as I don't know how civil I could remain.


Youth defence make me feel ill... with anger.

Suaimhneach

I'll tweet some pics to The Journal.ie (I made some rage meme posters..!) so hopefully "our" side will get some representation in the media. Hopefully it'll all be peaceful too!

wild_cat

Suaimhneach wrote: »

I'll tweet some pics to The Journal.ie (I made some rage meme posters..!) so hopefully "our" side will get some representation in the media. Hopefully it'll all be peaceful too!

A nation can't keep its head in the sand forever over an issue. Good work.

lace

Suaimhneach wrote: »

I'll tweet some pics to The Journal.ie (I made some rage meme posters..!) so hopefully "our" side will get some representation in the media. Hopefully it'll all be peaceful too!

Lovin' the idea of the meme posters! Please post pics/links to any rally-related articles afterwards. I'd love to know how it goes!

HellFireClub

Suaimhneach wrote: »

What I forgot to mention in the original post, that is another crux to my logic is that, regardless of whether or not it's legal, the harsh reality is that women just go to the UK or Europe.

I have friends who've had abortions and friends who've had some horrific circumstances in their lives, the last thing they need, to add to this horrible time in their lives is to have to have a guilt and go abroad.

I hope more people can attend. I'm mostly sorry I couldnt raise this sooner.

Just out of interest, the vast vast majority of women who travel abroad for an abortion, who are not pregnant due to a horrific rape, but who do not wish to continue with a pregnancy for whatever reason of their own, what do you think the legal position should be on access to abortion services for those women?

drkpower

allandanyways wrote: »

Because someone else has made the decision for me that I have to, because God forbid I had the option to do what I want with my body in my own country.

I certainly support the thrust of the march. But I always wonder whether people who make the type of statement above actuallly mean it.

If women were to be fully free to do what they choose with their own body, they would be entitled to have an abortion at 39 weeks, or during delivery (obviously, very few would actually exercies that choice). Most people (perhaps even yourself?) agree that that should not be permitted.

So it is not about allowing women to do anything they choose with their body; it is about determining where the balance lies between the rights of two different entities.

Ickle Magoo

HellFireClub wrote: »

Just out of interest, the vast vast majority of women who travel abroad for an abortion, who are not pregnant due to a horrific rape, but who do not wish to continue with a pregnancy for whatever reason of their own, what do you think the legal position should be on access to abortion services for those women?

That they should be free to have one - up to a certain stage...just as it's legal to get the MAP. I'm not sure why contraceptions that prevent implantation are legal, the MAP is legal and yet some arbitrary line has been drawn that abortion is not - it certainly seems more political than "right to life".

Now, I'm not a fan of abortion but in the early days/weeks - I have no issue with abortion...once a pregnancy gets to more than, say, six to eight weeks - then I have more and more of an issue with it.

That said - being close enough to another country that you can afford to deport your issue en masse and still claim the moral high ground is more than a little transparent.

rainbow kirby

HellFireClub wrote: »

what do you think the legal position should be on access to abortion services for those women?

Safe and legal in this country. If someone is absolutely determined to end a pregnancy, they will find a way and it is best if this takes place within a medical facility.

allandanyways

drkpower wrote: »

I certainly support the thrust of the march. But I always wonder whether people who make the type of statement above actuallly mean it.

If women were to be fully free to do what they choose with their own body, they would be entitled to have an abortion at 39 weeks, or during delivery (obviously, very few would actually exercies that choice). Most people (perhaps even yourself?) agree that that should not be permitted.

So it is not about allowing women to do anything they choose with their body; it is about determining where the balance lies between the rights of two different entities.

But this is my point, it's my body.

It's selfish, and I don't care. I should not have to put myself through the stress and pain of being pregnant and giving a child that I do not want up for adoption because I have no means to support it just because this backwards secular-but-still-sort-of-Catholic-just-cos-we-have-to-be society has made the decision for me that I can't have an abortion in my own country.

drkpower

allandanyways wrote: »

But this is my point, it's my body.

I understand that. But is the implication that you should be legally permitted to procure an abortion at 39 weeks or during delivery?

Wolfe Tone

More people wanting to legalize the murder of babies out of "choice", wheres their choice eh?

Its disgusting that some try and portray abortion as somehow being forward, progressive etc, while in actual fact it is barbaric in the extreme and is quite simply, the taking of a persons life.

(of course there is an exception imo where the mother has a very high chance of dying if the pregnancy is carried to term)

drkpower

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

...... is quite simply, the taking of a persons life.

Is it really that simple, though?

For instance, do you believe that the oral contraceptive pill, the IUD, or the morning after pill should be illegal? They all have the potential act of 'taking of a persons life'.

Ickle Magoo

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

More people wanting to legalize the murder of babies out of "choice", wheres their choice eh?

Its disgusting that some try and portray abortion as somehow being forward, progressive etc, while in actual fact it is barbaric in the extreme and is quite simply, the taking of a persons life.

(of course there is an exception imo where the mother has a very high chance of dying if the pregnancy is carried to term)

I presume you feel strongly against a whole raft of contraceptives and the MAP then?

Wolfe Tone

drkpower wrote: »

Is it really that simple, though?

For instance, do you believe that the oral contraceptive pill, the IUD, or the morning after pill should be illegal? They all have the potential act of 'taking of a persons life'.

To answer that question fully I would have to know the exact moment when life begins, I don't.

Is it fertilization? Implantation?

I think it may be best to say implantation as once that happens everything is in place, ideally, for the pregnancy to be carried to term. Its a fair position/compromise I think.

Ickle Magoo

So you can make up some arbitrary line but others aren't allowed to draw the same arbitrary line a bit further down the road? Bit hypocritical...

Wolfe Tone

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

So you can make up some arbitrary line but others aren't allowed to draw the same arbitrary line a bit further down the road? Bit hypocritical...

Its not "arbitrary" at all, as I said implantation is a very important part of the process, and once that happens, imo, it is unjustifiable for an abortion to be carried out, except if it poses a huge risk to the mothers life.

This position is a fair compromise as it still allows things such as IVF and the contraceptives.

How far "down the road" would you put it at then?

drkpower

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Its not "arbitrary" at all, as I said implantation is a very important part of the process, and once that happens, imo, it is unjustifiable for an abortion to be carried out, except if it poses a huge risk to the mothers life.

Why is implnatation any more important than fetilization?

But more importantly, why do you get to choose that it is the critical event yet those who, for instance, believe that the development of conciousness is the critical event, do not get to choose?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

well it definitely shouldn't be legal once the foetus is out of nappies, but anything before that is kind of a grey area

Truley

bluewolf wrote: »

While I'm utterly completely prochoice I can understand where prolifers are coming from with protests
gosh I have mellowed out in the last few years!!

So have I! I'm pretty much 100% 'pro choice' but at the same time I can completely empathize with people who aren't. When I was a teenager I would have considered myself very against abortion but this was never down to any religious or anti feminist/ anti freedom reasons. I guess since you're told all your life that killing = bad the natural conclusion I had come to was that killing unborn babies = bad. I don't think there was ever anything wrong with feeling this way

As I got older my views changed but only out of gaining more life experience and a slightly more skeptical outlook of the world. It's not like I suddenly realized that abortion was a positive thing or a 'right' thing to do. I don't feel this way. I think it's something that just ... is, it's a method of dealing with unwanted pregnancy that people want to use and I don't feel I have the right to prevent them doing it.

There are a lot of very good, rational people that don't agree with abortion and I can accept that and understand where they're coming from. I don't understand all the aggression that's leveled at people who don't agree with abortion. Although I agree that Youth Defense are a crowd of loonies.

Wolfe Tone

drkpower wrote: »

Why is implnatation any more important than fetilization?

But more importantly, why do you get to choose that it is the critical event yet those who, for instance, believe that the development of conciousness is the critical event, do not get to choose?

Why does anyone get to choose?

The people chose that position via many referendums.

What position do you want? A free for all where people can have late term abortions etc etc?

Its not simply about what the mother wants, there are two people involved(three if you involve the dad)

Ickle Magoo

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Its not "arbitrary" at all, as I said implantation is a very important part of the process, and once that happens, imo, it is unjustifiable for an abortion to be carried out, except if it poses a huge risk to the mothers life.

This position is a fair compromise as it still allows things such as IVF and the contraceptives.

How far "down the road" would you put it at then?

Of course it's arbitrary - what about those who consider life to begin at sentience? What about those who consider life to begin and independence? You have decided that's where YOU draw the line - but that's based entirely on your own arbitrary point of view, which is just a couple of arbitrary stops before my own.

There are those against contraceptives, IVF, abortion - all arguing with the same cries of unjust and heinous barbery...I don't see what makes any one of them right beyond their own personal views - which is all anyone in the abortion debate has.

Wolfe Tone

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Of course it's arbitrary - what about those who consider life to begin at sentience? What about those who consider life to begin and independence? You have decided that's where YOU draw the line - but that's based entirely on your own arbitrary point of view, which is just a couple of arbitrary stops before my own.

There are those against contraceptives, IVF, abortion - all arguing with the same cries of unjust and heinous barbery...I don't see what makes any one of them right beyond their own personal views - which is all anyone in the abortion debate has.

You didnt answer the question, how far down the road would you put it?

wild_cat

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Its not simply about what the mother wants, there are two people involved(three if you involve the dad)

What about pregnancies that have resulted from rape or incest?

Would you FORCE a woman to carry a child she didn't have a choice in creating?

drkpower

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Its not simply about what the mother wants, there are two people involved(three if you involve the dad)

I agree that there are two entities involved. I am simply illustrating that your initial assertion that the matter is 'simple' is way off the mark. But I think even your own follow up posts have demonstrated that that is the case.:cool:

Wolfe Tone

wild_cat wrote: »

What about pregnancies that have resulted from rape or incest?

Would you FORCE a woman to carry a child she didn't have a choice in creating?

What stage the pregnancies are at is something which is relevant. Up to when do you think that person should be allowed to abort?

gargleblaster

Truley wrote: »

So have I! I'm pretty much 100% 'pro choice' but at the same time I can completely empathize with people who aren't. When I was a teenager I would have considered myself very against abortion but this was never down to any religious or anti feminist/ anti freedom reasons. I guess since you're told all your life that killing = bad the natural conclusion I had come to was that killing unborn babies = bad. I don't think there was ever anything wrong with feeling this way

As I got older my views changed but only out of gaining more life experience and a slightly more skeptical outlook of the world. It's not like I suddenly realized that abortion was a positive thing or a 'right' thing to do. I don't feel this way. I think it's something that just ... is, it's a method of dealing with unwanted pregnancy that people want to use and I don't feel I have the right to prevent them doing it.

There are a lot of very good, rational people that don't agree with abortion and I can accept that and understand where they're coming from. I don't understand all the aggression that's leveled at people who don't agree with abortion. Although I agree that Youth Defense are a crowd of loonies.

The aggression is directed at people who disagree? This is not my impression at all. The aggression is directed at those who wish to push their belief onto others.

No one is forcing anyone who disagrees with abortion to have one. But some of those who disagree with abortion are doing everything in their power to stand in the way of anyone who disagrees with them.

Wolfe Tone

gargleblaster wrote: »

The aggression is directed at people who disagree? This is not my impression at all. The aggression is directed at those who wish to push their belief onto others.

No one is forcing anyone who disagrees with abortion to have one. But some of those who disagree with abortion are doing everything in their power to stand in the way of anyone who disagrees with them.

That would be a good argument against those against gay marriage etc, but this is different in that it involves a child.

wild_cat

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

What stage the pregnancies are at is something which is relevant. Up to when do you think that person should be allowed to abort?

Not until you answer my question first or does it mean that you'd be willing to consider abortion up to a certain point in the case or rape or incest?

I'm quite happy with the 26/24 week rule the English have in place. But if needs be it should be increased.

gargleblaster

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

That would be a good argument against those against gay marriage etc, but this is different in that it involves a child.

Not really. You've already conceded that you're not unconditionally opposed to abortion (sorry, "murder"). You just don't seem to appreciate that not everyone has the same view as you do where the limits are set.

Ickle Magoo

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

You didnt answer the question, how far down the road would you put it?

I take it you didn't bother reading the thread then?

dark crystal

wild_cat wrote: »

Not until you answer my question first or does it mean that you'd be willing to consider abortion up to a certain point in the case or rape or incest?

I'm quite happy with the 26/24 week rule the English have in place. But if needs be it should be increased.

You think an abortion should be available for someone who has had 6 months to get one and still hasn't? In fact, you think abortions should be performed after 6 months?

You do realise there is a chance that the foetus can survive outside the womb at that stage? Yet, you think the mother's right to terminate supercedes that fact?