abortion

greenpilot

Cardinal wants a referendum on abortion. Would he loose? Would there be a backlash against the church?

jaykay74

greenpilot wrote: »

Cardinal wants a referendum on abortion. Would he loose? Would there be a backlash against the church?

Hanging ?

frozenfrozen

im always so glad to see another abortion thread

efb

another ref where the verdict is ignored?

brummytom

Here we go again...

Balmed Out

I can never decide if im pro death or anti choice

mikom

greenpilot wrote: »

Cardinal wants a referendum on abortion. Would he loose?

"Cardinal......... You'll never de fetus."

greenpilot

mikom wrote: »

greenpilot wrote: »

Cardinal wants a referendum on abortion. Would he loose?

"Cardinal......... You'll never de fetus."

He said any legislation would be vigorously opposed.

MagicMarker

I'm not surprised the church are against abortion, it would mean less kids to molest.

Rabies

mikom wrote: »

"Cardinal......... You'll never de fetus."

I'll give ya that one. Pretty good

sheesh

greenpilot wrote: »

Cardinal wants a referendum on abortion. Would he loose? Would there be a backlash against the church?

No he won't, its not that The Irish are particularly conservative to remove the right to life of the unborn is always a tough.

the old and the religious will come out in force and it will be kept.

Annasopra

sheesh wrote: »

No he won't, its not that The Irish are particularly conservative to remove the right to life of the unborn is always a tough.

the old and the religious will come out in force and it will be kept.

They were defeated with divorce.

SmilingLurker

greenpilot wrote: »

Cardinal wants a referendum on abortion. Would he lose?

No, people in this country still do what they are told. Shame on us, but no one to blame except ourselves.

greenpilot wrote: »

Would there be a backlash against the church?

More than there already is? Hopefully there would be, but no, there wont be any larger backlash.

im invisible

we must move forwards, not backwards. sideways, not forwards...

minidazzler

mango salsa wrote: »

They were defeated with divorce.

Yeah, but too many people in this country would say "I'd never have one myself, but I would support it" When push comes to shove though they'd vote against it because they wouldn't have one themselves. I think it would still lose in referendum, but I would vote for it to be allowed.

Matt_Trakker

i do love a good abortion

AnonoBoy

Surely we can get rid of these threads somehow before their gestation period in the mind of the OP finishes?

Cushie Butterfield

minidazzler wrote: »

Yeah, but too many people in this country would say "I'd never have one myself, but I would support it" When push comes to shove though they'd vote against it because they wouldn't have one themselves. I think it would still lose in referendum, but I would vote for it to be allowed.

I agree with freedom of choice & on those grounds would vote for abortion.

I too think that it would lose in a referendum, but feel it's only a matter of time before 'old school thinking' dwindles (or literally dies). I foresee abortion being legalised within 25 years or so.

Savage Tyrant

When you look at Jedward bouncing around the place it almost seems criminal that their mother didn't have the option of aborting them.

In fact, I think she should be allowed (possibly forced) to abort them now.

smcgiff

The church being highly visible in the anti abortion debate would be like having Jeffrey Dahmer as a reference on your CV.

Mr Benevolent

Abortion would almost certainly be legalised these days if a referendum came along.

PieForPi

Savage Tyrant wrote: »

When you look at Jedward bouncing around the place it almost seems criminal that their mother didn't have the option of aborting them.

In fact, I think she should be allowed (possibly forced) to abort them now.

That's a fairly pathetic comment.

They're millionaires in their early 20s, are out living life... and what are you? Some hate filled keyboard warrior sitting alone on his Sunday afternoon begrudging others of their success simply because it doesn't align with your tastes. Crawl back under your rock like a good creature there.

With regards to abortion - it wouldn't pass in a referendum in this country. The main voters here - the elderly - haven't a clue about it and would just tow the church's line on it. 49% of this country voted against the introduction of divorce and that's fairly recent. 49% were trying to force bad or even abuse relationships to continue merely because the church said they should. Throw "babies" into the equation and there's no way it'd pass.

We're a very socially stubborn country and one that certainly doesn't like change. For instance, polish people have been here years now and yet it seems the country, for the most part, does not accept them as a part of Irish society. That's a small thing.

smcgiff

Confab wrote: »

Abortion would almost certainly be legalised these days if a referendum came along.

Depends, I don't think Ireland (or I) would be happy with late term abortions like the UK.

3ndahalfof6

just in case he gets preggers is it.

Mint Sauce

greenpilot wrote: »

Cardinal wants a referendum on abortion. Would he loose? Would there be a backlash against the church?

We already had one about 10 years ago which was passed in relation to abortions and the X Case.

Although what I experienced during a rare visit to Sunday Mass a few weeks ago made me sick. Now I understand the churches stance on abortion, but to actually have someone come up on the Alter during the service to actually promote prolife and their proposals is/was preety sickening. For two reasons mainly, the whole aguement is going to have religious undertones taking place in a church, secondly, the church would never allow a pro choice presentation on the alter meaning its a one sided debate.

Now whilst I dont believe in Abortion for the sake of it, I still think if there is a risk to the mother, or if the child is only going to live for a few minutes after birth, or in the event of rape, then the option should be there. These hospices that the group was recommending for such mothers/familes are a bit of joke my self, whilst they may care for thier physical needs, are they going to be able to provide the up to 9 months psychological care before birth, and how ever long it takes afterwards.

Further more, if the suggestion/arguement that life begins at conception rather than implantation, then be prepared for them trying to ban the morning after pill next.

Now if you do get pregnant, and decide you dont want it for lifestyle or financial reasons, well then maybe you should have taken the precautions, in that case then I dont think there should be an option for abortion.

Judging by the reaction that this group got during this presentation, if there are more people out there who feel the same then be prepared as well for a NO answer.

:mad:

PieForPi

irish-stew wrote: »

Now if you do get pregnant, and decide you dont want it for lifestyle or financial reasons, well then maybe you should have taken the precautions, in that case then I dont think there should be an option for abortion.

Yeah! You should be forced to carry a child you don't want and go through a painful labour to birth it, then be forced to face it every day even though you may not have the physical, emotional or financial means to support it, until a point where it can support itself.

Oh but wait, you've an obligation to it for its first 18 years.

So your one little mistake should be with you for the next 18 years, despite safe alternatives being available.

How f*cking Irish. Although, perhaps I should have left this post alone when it was made by someone who went to a Catholic mass and expected something other than preachy bullsh*te.

smcgiff

Irish-stew,

A group attending mass - literally preaching to the converted - would not be representative of the populace as a whole. Thankfully.

jd007

im invisible wrote: »

we must move forwards, not backwards. sideways, not forwards...

and twirling, twirling twirling towards freedom!

Savage Tyrant

PieForPi wrote: »

That's a fairly pathetic comment.

They're millionaires in their early 20s, are out living life... and what are you? Some hate filled keyboard warrior sitting alone on his Sunday afternoon begrudging others of their success simply because it doesn't align with your tastes. Crawl back under your rock like a good creature there.

Are you new to the "After Hours" forum? It was a typical tongue in cheek comment, the likes of which is made in nearly every thread. Not that I need to justify it to you.
And No, I'm not hate filled. I don't even begrudge them. I just don't like them and find them annoying. I don't SERIOUSLY think they should be aborted. :rolleyes:

PieForPi

Savage Tyrant wrote: »

Are you new to the "After Hours" forum? It was a typical tongue in cheek comment, the likes of which is made in nearly every thread. Not that I need to justify it to you.

Well, you obviously feel like you need to inside because you just did.

Mint Sauce

PieForPi wrote: »

Yeah! You should be forced to carry a child you don't want and go through a painful labour to birth it, then be forced to face it every day even though you may not have the physical, emotional or financial means to support it, until a point where it can support itself.

Oh but wait, you've an obligation to it for its first 18 years.

So your one little mistake should be with you for the next 18 years, despite safe alternatives being available.

How f*cking Irish. Although, perhaps I should have left this post alone when it was made by someone who went to a Catholic mass and expected something other than preachy bullsh*te.

Did you read all of my post? Prehaps you should again. This group was proposing that even if there was a risk to the mother, or if the child had no chance of survival she should be forced to go through with it. In those cases, the choice of abortion should be there.

In relation to preventing pregnancy there are plenty of options, the pill, morning after, condoms, the coil, etc etc etc, if your not using one of these, then prehaps you should consider restrant.

And yes, I did expect preachy bullsh!t, but not for the alter to be used a political platform. It just shows there will never be a seperation of church and state, dispite what our constitution will lead us to belive.

smcgiff wrote:

Irish-stew,

A group attending mass - literally preaching to the converted - would not be representative of the populace as a whole. Thankfully.

You would like the think, although the dominance of the Irish Church is still pretty strong, and does not allow for an informed debate.

Biggins

MagicMarker wrote: »

I'm not surprised the church are against abortion, it would mean less kids to molest.

Ouch! Meow...

Colmustard

If it wasn't for abortion I just wonder how many more mouths would there be to feed on this impoverished planet.

PieForPi

irish-stew wrote: »

Did you read all of my post? Prehaps you should again. This group was proposing that even if there was a risk to the mother, or if the child had no chance of survival she should be forced to go through with it. In those cases, the choice of abortion should be there.

And you expected what exactly?

Why should abortion be limited to those cases? Because it suits you?

In relation to preventing pregnancy there are plenty of options, the pill, morning after, condoms, the coil, etc etc etc, if your not using one of these, then prehaps you should consider restrant.

Sex is the most natural thing we do as post pubescent adults. It is our most basic instinct and drives much of the decisions we make in life, from the small every-minute decisions to large, life changing decisions. If anywhere in life mistakes should be tolerated, it should be with regards to such natural urges.

And yes, I did expect preachy bullsh!t, but not for the alter to be used a political platform. It just shows there will never be a seperation of church and state, dispite what our constitution will lead us to belive.

Of course it'll be used as a political platform. Religion serves as a way of exerting power over people for a desired result. Of course it will be used and abused. It always has been and always will be.

This in particular is regarded as a Catholic country. Much of the canvassing by political entities is done outside churches.

Religion will dominate government here so long as the majority of the voters are religious. While we continue to turn out to vote in low numbers whose majority is comprised of old people, this will continue to be the case. The elderly here are controlled by the church, the government is controlled by the elderly and thus the government is controlled by the church.

Get all the young people out voting and things will change, although each government refuses to accommodate this as they've already spent so much effort pandering to the elderly at a cost to the young.

Mint Sauce

PieForPi wrote: »

And you expected what exactly?

Why should abortion be limited to those cases? Because it suits you?

Well I only usally go to church services for wedding, funerals, and Christmas, I'm not a particulary religious person in the sence of attending church, I have my morals, my beleifs, and my thoughts, but thats for another time. But I thought that the church, and I refer the place or building rather then the organisation was suppose to be for worship, self refelction and peace. Maybe your attending church services more than me or more than you let on, and have encountered such messeges.

Whose to say your arguement is not just to suit you? Cant people have there own opinion, is that not what debate is all about?

Sex is the most natural thing we do as post pubescent adults. It is our most basic instinct and drives much of the decisions we make in life, from the small every-minute decisions to large, life changing decisions. If anywhere in life mistakes should be tolerated, it should be with regards to such natural urges.

It still comes with responsibilty, my views on abortion have nothing todo with religion, if that was the case why would I have been been so disgusted at what I seen/heard?

Of course it'll be used as a political platform. Religion serves as a way of exerting power over people for a desired result. Of course it will be used and abused. It always has been and always will be.

This in particular is regarded as a Catholic country. Much of the canvassing by political entities is done outside churches.

Religion will dominate government here so long as the majority of the voters are religious. While we continue to turn out to vote in low numbers whose majority is comprised of old people, this will continue to be the case.

Get all the young people out voting and things will change, although each government refuses to accommodate this as they've already spent so much effort pandering to the elderly at a cost to the young.

Thankfully I still have my own mind, and use an informed choice. Which I used when this referendum was ran in relation to the X Case and voted in support of it. Unfortunatly our goverment, and every goverment in between have not had the balls to put the passed vote into legislation.

Scarinae

irish-stew wrote: »

In relation to preventing pregnancy there are plenty of options, the pill, morning after, condoms, the coil, etc etc etc, if your not using one of these, then prehaps you should consider restrant.

Unfortunately no form of contraceptive is 100% effective, it is still possible to get pregnant while using any of these. You can't just assume that anyone with an unplanned pregnancy was being irresponsible and having unprotected sex.

Mint Sauce

Scarinae wrote: »

Unfortunately no form of contraceptive is 100% effective, it is still possible to get pregnant while using any of these. You can't just assume that anyone with an unplanned pregnancy was being irresponsible and having unprotected sex.

Granted, but you would have to be pretty damn unlucky if both the condom was to spilt, and then for the morning after pill to fail.

At least you have taken every precaution to avoid it, rather than seeking an abortion just becuase you decided not to use either.

christmas2012

being honest im sick of the abortion issue,they should be done with it already,but i dont think ireland is ready for abortion,and i dont think it is a good idea to legislate in ireland i think it would be a tragedy,if people really feel strongly about having an abortion they should get a plane over to the UK and show their dedication,by leglislating it here there might be a casual blase attitute towards it,teenagers getting them bc it doesnt suit their life or dont want to be tied to a bad boyf etc..

HavingCrack

Colmustard wrote: »

If it wasn't for abortion I just wonder how many more mouths would there be to feed on this impoverished planet.

Probably a negligible amount to be honest. Population growth is generally only an issue in undeveloped countries in Africa, Asia and the poorer parts of Latin America, places where contraception is barely practiced and things like the morning after pill or abortions barely exist. Abortions in developed countries have a tiny impact on Earth's population growth.

irish-stew wrote: »

Granted, but you would have to be pretty damn unlucky if both the condom was to spilt, and then for the morning after pill to fail.

At least you have taken every precaution to avoid it, rather than seeking an abortion just becuase you decided not to use either.

To be fair, do you really think many people use abortion as a method of birth control? Seriously do people think "yeah not bothered using the pill or condoms, we can just have an abortion sure"? How many people think like that in reality? A tiny, tiny amount I would hope.

Biggins

greenpilot wrote: »

Cardinal wants a referendum on abortion. Would he loose? Would there be a backlash against the church?

Brady should go and screw himself!

The arrogant priest has some cheek telling others what is right and wrong.

He has yet to be held to account for his not speaking up for children that have been abused over many, many years.
He should be arrested and charged with withholding evidence of crimes, if possible!
Over ten years he refused to tell not one state but two, of child abuses that was going on.
…But no… he’s kept his head down and hoped the matter has gone away, hoped the public have forgotten – sorry Brady – it hasn’t!

Your a criminal Brady!
Now go away and crawl back under your rock!

Mint Sauce

HavingCrack wrote: »

To be fair, do you really think many people use abortion as a method of birth control? Seriously do people think "yeah not bothered using the pill or condoms, we can just have an abortion sure"? How many people think like that in reality? A tiny, tiny amount I would hope.

No, because the option is not currently there. But if abortion was to be brought in and allowed in all cases then there is a risk it could be and abused.

If it was to be brought in for the condtions that I have argued then careful consideration would obviously have to be given.

Colmustard

HavingCrack wrote: »

Probably a negligible amount to be honest. Population growth is generally only an issue in undeveloped countries in Africa, Asia and the poorer parts of Latin America, places where contraception is barely practiced and things like the morning after pill or abortions barely exist. Abortions in developed countries have a tiny impact on Earth's population growth.



To be fair, do you really think many people use abortion as a method of birth control? Seriously do people think "yeah not bothered using the pill or condoms, we can just have an abortion sure"? How many people think like that in reality? A tiny, tiny amount I would hope.

HUH
I would say at least another Billion in China alone.

HavingCrack

Colmustard wrote: »

HUH
I would say at least another Billion in China alone.

I wouldn't consider China to be an 'undeveloped' country. Due to its communist history it has a very different economic, cultural and social makeup than your typical 3rd world country. I understand your point but birth control was the massive factor there rather than abortions. India is another country that has a similar sort of issue.

To be fair I should qualify what I'm saying as the really undeveloped countries- Sub-saharan Africa and parts of the Indian sub-continent and South-East Asia predominantly. These are places where birth control and abortion aren't practiced or even generally available.

Chuck Stone

I'm anti abortion but pro choice because I'm a realist.

HavingCrack

irish-stew wrote: »

No, because the option is not currently there. But if abortion was to be brought in and allowed in all cases then there is a risk it could be and abused.

If it was to be brought in for the condtions that I have argued then careful consideration would obviously have to be given.

Do you have statistics to prove this occurs in other countries-the United Kingdom or the United States for example? That people actually use abortion as a method of birth control? I just find it hard to believe that is a widespread practice. If evidence exists to prove me wrong I'm prepared to change my views however.

Scarinae

irish-stew wrote: »

Granted, but you would have to be pretty damn unlucky if both the condom was to spilt, and then for the morning after pill to fail.

It still happens, I know someone that this exact scenario happened to. The morning after pill loses effectiveness the longer you leave before taking it, so it is certainly not a foolproof method.

irish-stew wrote: »

If it was to be brought in for the condtions that I have argued then careful consideration would obviously have to be given.

So, for example, if someone used condoms which then split, then took the MAP and it also failed... What then?

christmas2012 wrote: »

being honest im sick of the abortion issue,they should be done with it already,but i dont think ireland is ready for abortion,and i dont think it is a good idea to legislate in ireland i think it would be a tragedy

"Should be done with it already" - by this, do you mean that everyone should just accept that abortion is not currently legal and not seek to change it? Based on what? Why do you not think Ireland is ready for it? Saying it would be a 'tragedy' is not a particularly good argument as this is entirely based on your feelings about it.

christmas2012 wrote: »

if people really feel strongly about having an abortion they should get a plane over to the UK and show their dedication

Do you have any idea what it is like to experience travelling for an abortion? It's not as simple as just jumping on the next plane and making a wee holiday out of it, and there is a considerable expense as well. There was a really good article in the Irish Times a few months back that had people's stories of abortion under a huge variety of circumstances, it's well worth a read.

christmas2012 wrote: »

by leglislating it here there might be a casual blase attitute towards it,teenagers getting them bc it doesnt suit their life or dont want to be tied to a bad boyf etc..

I think most people would see abortion as a last resort, I don't think easing up on the legislation would lead to girls having abortions left, right and centre. As for not wanting to be tied to a bad boyfriend - what exactly do you mean by that? I don't think there's anything wrong with not wanting to be tied to a boyfriend that is abusive, for example.

Colmustard

HavingCrack wrote: »

I wouldn't consider China to be an 'undeveloped' country. Due to its communist history it has a very different economic, cultural and social makeup than your typical 3rd world country. I understand your point but birth control was the massive factor there rather than abortions. India is another country that has a similar sort of issue.

To be fair I should qualify what I'm saying as the really undeveloped countries- Sub-saharan Africa and parts of the Indian sub-continent and South-East Asia predominantly. These are places where birth control and abortion aren't practiced or even generally available.

How about Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union who had no access to Birth control but had liberal access to abortion. Abortion became the birth control method. It still is in Russia.

I would say the world population would be at least 3 billion greater if it wasn't for abortion. The world should have more abortions not less. There should be a 1 child policy for the world.

Mint Sauce

HavingCrack wrote: »

Do you have statistics to prove this occurs in other countries-the United Kingdom or the United States for example? That people actually use abortion as a method of birth control? I just find it hard to believe that is a widespread practice. If evidence exists to prove me wrong I'm prepared to change my views however.

No, but I'm sure that there are some that decide to use abortion as a means to end an unwanted pregnancy.

I would hope though that its only a minority of the abortions performed.

Nodin

christmas2012 wrote: »

being honest im sick of the abortion issue,..

Awwwwwwwww.

christmas2012 wrote: »

they should be done with it already,but i dont think ireland is ready for abortion,and i dont think it is a good idea to legislate in ireland i think it would be a tragedy,if people really feel strongly about having an abortion they should get a plane over to the UK and show their dedication,by leglislating it here there might be a casual blase attitute towards it,teenagers getting them bc it doesnt suit their life or dont want to be tied to a bad boyf etc..

Of course, women can't wait to get aborting. Its the highlight of their lives. They'll have "abort-ins", save one up for hen-nights. Same phenomena happened when they legalised teh ghey. Everyone went mad for the cock, except the wimmin, who went mad for the other thing.

Mint Sauce

Scarinae wrote: »

It still happens, I know someone that this exact scenario happened to. The morning after pill loses effectiveness the longer you leave before taking it, so it is certainly not a foolproof method.


So, for example, if someone used condoms which then split, then took the MAP and it also failed... What then?

Its a decision that I would never wish on anyone to make. Based on my own beleifs re abortion, one of pro-choice belive it or not based on my posts, then if they feel its the route they want to take, the information should be there for them, and the routes available to them, weather that be here or abroad, ie, England or Wales.

I'm not going to cast a view or opinon on someone just because they have decided to get an abortion due to lifestyle or failed contraception, but the choice should be there depending on the circumstances.

crazy cabbage

The church basicly say that it is wrong to destroy a sole, as it never gets a chance at life (i think. I dont exatly keep tabs on this)

Lets presume for a min that the sole does indeed exist (not bringing in god here. Just the concept of the sole).

If the sole does indeed exist there has to be a point during pregancy that the sole enters the fetus. This has to be true if the sole exists.

Then the question has to be, at what point does this happen? There has to be a point for the church to have any stance on this issue or to debate there point with reason.

I think buddists believe it is at 40days or something
Doctor strassman believes that a DMT spike during pregancy could be the point at which what some call the sole in 'put' into the body.

From my own view of the churchs point of view if the 'sole' is not yet in the fetus then there is nothing there to kill. So there shouldn't be a problem

So should the focus (to keep church and older generation happy) not be to try and prove this scientificly?

That would make this debate alot easier
1) if before sole enters then abort away
2) if after and scientific proof of sole is found then have the debate
3) if after and no scientific proof is found then abort away


Dont think i believe anything above but trying to see it from churchs point of view.