Savita dies due to refusal to terminate an unviable foetus.*Mod warning Post #1*

goodie2shoes

username123 wrote: »

The outcome of any enquiry still doesnt alter the agreed upon fact that the legislation surrounding abortion in this country is unclear and needs to be clarified.

i agree and it's a disgrace that because of political cowardice we've had to wait so long to tackle the issue.

however no matter what legislation they/we introduce, it will not go far enough for some folk and will go too far for the other side.

username123

goodie2shoes wrote: »

i agree and it's a disgrace that because of political cowardice we've had to wait so long to tackle the issue.

however no matter what legislation they/we introduce, it will not go far enough for some folk and will go too far for the other side.

Finally we agree - see how debate is a good thing!!

Personally, I feel that whatever my own view, what Id like to see is a full referendum of scaled options to get a picture of what the overall opinion is. And legislation based on that. I think that legislation based on a 20 year old case will fall short.

goodie2shoes

username123 wrote: »

Finally we agree - see how debate is a good thing!!

Personally, I feel that whatever my own view, what Id like to see is a full referendum of scaled options to get a picture of what the overall opinion is. And legislation based on that. I think that legislation based on a 20 year old case will fall short.

Noooooooooooooooo!
Not another refererdum please!
It'll just bring out the loonies.

We elect these frickin' politicians, who are paid excessively imo, to legislate so let them do what they are (over)-paid to do.
or maybe they're too busy fixin' potholes?

username123

goodie2shoes wrote: »

Noooooooooooooooo!
Not another refererdum please!
It'll just bring out the loonies.

We elect these frickin' politicians, who are paid excessively imo, to legislate so let them do what they are (over)-paid to do.
or maybe they're too busy fixin' potholes?

Potholing I think.

Jack B. Badd

goodie2shoes wrote: »

We elect these frickin' politicians, who are paid excessively imo, to legislate so let them do what they are (over)-paid to do.

Even if they get off their arses & legislate for X (which they should do), it still doesn't address the issue that Ireland's constitution allows for abortion only in a very restricted set of circumstances in a lot of Irish people's opinions. For instance it does nothing to protect the health of the woman in a situation where abortion may avert significant adverse impacts on her health. For that to happen, at least one more referendum is needed but the right options need to be presented.

goodie2shoes

it's beyond me why they cant take a civilized country, and adopt their laws to suit us. eg Denmark or Sweden (although i know little of their laws in this regard).

i think the vast majority of people in this country do not have a problem with abortion where the mum's health/life are at risk, but likewise most do not want abortion on demand.

surely we are capable of finding a compassionate, sensible middle-ground?

please tell me we are.

username123

goodie2shoes wrote: »

i think the vast majority of people in this country do not have a problem with abortion where the mum's health/life are at risk, but likewise most do not want abortion on demand.

Thats why Id like to see a full referendum. Ive no idea what most people want.

What I do know is that since the 1983 constitutional ban there have been 4 referenda, and all 4 were wins for the pro-choice view.

I also know that since 1983 the church has loosened its stranglehold on the country, many many more people have had access to third level education and that our population has been exposed to media from modern countries across the world through tv, the internet etc... Travel has become more accessible and we have had advances in science and technology. In short, we have progressed.

So who knows what the electorate thinks?

goodie2shoes

username123 wrote: »

Thats why Id like to see a full referendum. Ive no idea what most people want.

What I do know is that since the 1983 constitutional ban there have been 4 referenda, and all 4 were wins for the pro-choice view.

I also know that since 1983 the church has loosened its stranglehold on the country, many many more people have had access to third level education and that our population has been exposed to media from modern countries across the world through tv, the internet etc... Travel has become more accessible and we have had advances in science and technology. In short, we have progressed.

So who knows what the electorate thinks?

i have no idea what "the electorate" think, but from speaking to friends, family, colleagues etc. i too believe we have progressed. (of course some will debate we have regressed!).
the problem with another referendum as i see it, is there is a very real chance it will be highjacked by the loonies, and the sensible, compassionate folk i alluded to will be drowned-out.
and what then happens then is the middle-ground simply switches off. the mere mention of the word referendum sends me to sleep.

besides let those lazy, fat, cowardly politicians do what they are (over)-paid to do!

username123

goodie2shoes wrote: »

i have no idea what "the electorate" think, but from speaking to friends, family, colleagues etc. i too believe we have progressed. (of course some will debate we have regressed!).
the problem with another referendum as i see it, is there is a very real chance it will be highjacked by the loonies, and the sensible, compassionate folk i alluded to will be drowned-out.
and what then happens then is the middle-ground simply switches off. the mere mention of the word referendum sends me to sleep.

besides let those lazy, fat, cowardly politicians do what they are (over)-paid to do!

Well thats the problem with democracy isnt it, the loonies have just as much say as anyone.

At least maybe people might turn up to vote instead of the disgracefully low turn out in the Childrens Referendum. Where, I wonder, were all the pro-life advocates when that was happening? No interest once the child is outside the womb presumably.

I think the outcome has to be some kind of middle ground. I think it is clear that as things currently stand it is intolerable, so anything would be an improvement.

goodie2shoes

username123 wrote: »

Well thats the problem with democracy isnt it, the loonies have just as much say as anyone.

At least maybe people might turn up to vote instead of the disgracefully low turn out in the Childrens Referendum. Where, I wonder, were all the pro-life advocates when that was happening? No interest once the child is outside the womb presumably.

I think the outcome has to be some kind of middle ground. I think it is clear that as things currently stand it is intolerable, so anything would be an improvement.

you're making an awful lot of assumptions there.

sorry like i said i've switched off already!

besides there's footie on the box.:D

frfintanstack

username123 wrote: »

At least maybe people might turn up to vote instead of the disgracefully low turn out in the Childrens Referendum. Where, I wonder, were all the pro-life advocates when that was happening? No interest once the child is outside the womb presumably.

Bit of a leap there! Is there anything they aren't to blame for?

username123

frfintanstack wrote: »

Bit of a leap there! Is there anything they aren't to blame for?

What leap - is it not the rights of the unborn child they are so keen to protect? What about the born child then? Do they just lose interest immediately?

Berlin at night

Its insane that there are no ABORTION clinics in this country. Its a woman's body and if she wants to have an abortion she shold be allowed to go to a private abortion clinic of her choice.

If these pro-lifers don't like, then they don't have to have abortions do they, and stay the f**k out a pro-choice woman's face.

Sadly we don't have a real government (only a nest of self-serving, nest feathering cowards) in the true sense of the word. This shower, like previous clowns who have held office under the guise of government, will do their utmost to worm and wheedle their way from this issue.

Its so sad to see politicians (in name only) without a shred of self-respect, honesty or common decency, crawl and slither like insects, shirking away from A VERY SERIOUS ISSUE, frightened how it might impact on their votes.

The X case is a classic case of how these maggots work. Happy to a young girl's life RUINED, as they were alright Jack. And now SAVITA . . . where is their shame????????????????????

These worms forget that the rest of the world is watching how they are reacting. They are not fooling anybody.

I'm a bloke and I support women's right to ABORTION.

We'll get there in the end.

frfintanstack

Berlin at night wrote: »

Looks like the HSE are doing a cover up job. They are claiming that there is no record of her asking for a termination in the files. Utter BS IMO, and the world and her dog know that this is a major cover up, the exact reason her husband wants a public inquest.

Now, the whole world is up in arms over this case as it is; do they honestly think they are going to get away with this???????

The merde is going to hit the fan on this one. The problem is, its all this deceit and cowardice by the powers that be is really putting us in a bad light as a nation - now adding blatent lies into the mix. Man, this is a time bomb, it so reminds me of the Paul newman film 'THE VERDICT.'

We know in this country ministers, bankers, consultants etc are above the law and protected, and I'm sure they cover this sort of thing up everyday, but the worlds eyes are on them, and it just takes one person on the sidelines like a midwife to have an attack of guilt, being unable to look themselves in the mirror knowing they are complicit in this most heinous of fraud, and come forward. The HSE and the rats that protect them in the DAIL are total idiots (we know that anyway) to think they can get away with this disgusting lie.

Two words come to mind 'SCUM' and 'BAGS'.

This post is very reasonable and considered. Perhaps you should volunteer to run an independent and impartial inquiry


The HSE aren't claiming anything. These details were released by Savita's husband and his legal team.......as have all the "facts" in the public domain so far.

The HSE havent released any details about Savitas management.

frfintanstack

username123 wrote: »

What leap - is it not the rights of the unborn child they are so keen to protect? What about the born child then? Do they just lose interest immediately?

Blaming people who are against abortion for the low turnout in a referendum about something else......

sounds like an amazing leap of imagination to me or have I picked you up wrong

Berlin at night

goodie2shoes wrote: »

it's beyond me why they cant take a civilized country, and adopt their laws to suit us. eg Denmark or Sweden (although i know little of their laws in this regard).

i think the vast majority of people in this country do not have a problem with abortion where the mum's health/life are at risk, but likewise most do not want abortion on demand.

surely we are capable of finding a compassionate, sensible middle-ground?

please tell me we are.

Why shouldn't we have abortion on demand? Its not an infant, just an embryo, its not a person. The way anti-abortionists rant on, you'd swear abortion was all about going into the womb with a corkscrew and slaughtering a fully grown infant. FFS, its an EMBRYO, and then you get the holy Joe's screaming about Gods will and yadda yadda. Honest to goodness, we aren't back in the 16th century. Time to get with the programme.

We need a referendum as the yes vote would win and that's what the anti women's rights, or pro-life brigade, or whatever they call themselves are terrified of.

Berlin at night

frfintanstack wrote: »

This post is very reasonable and considered. Perhaps you should volunteer to run an independent and impartial inquiry


The HSE aren't claiming anything. These details were released by Savita's husband and his legal team.......as have all the "facts" in the public domain so far.

The HSE havent released any details about Savitas management.

Its what is not in the records is what the HSE said, friend, it speaks volumes. This is going to cause a s,hit storm. And its exactly why her husband didn't want a HSE inquiry, because, well, u read my post, I need say no more.

Ellsbells

Berlin at night wrote: »

Its not an infant, just an embryo, its not a personf.

An embryo becomes a person if its let....

Neyite

Berlin at night wrote: »

Its what is not in the records is what the HSE said, friend, it speaks volumes. This is going to cause a s,hit storm. And its exactly why her husband didn't want a HSE inquiry, because, well, u read my post, I need say no more.

Berlin, can you quote a source for this information? I'd be very interested to read it.

frfintanstack

Berlin at night wrote: »

Its what is not in the records is what the HSE said, friend, it speaks volumes. This is going to cause a s,hit storm. And its exactly why her husband didn't want a HSE inquiry, because, well, u read my post, I need say no more.

It'd be pretty near impossible to remove from the notes if it was there and I'd find it amazing if 3 discussions with the family asking for a termination weren't recorded.......especially if the doctor thought he was doing the correct thing legally...

doctors learn to record everything in the notes if they dont want to get sued. As the saying goes "if its not written down it didnt happen".

If I were a doctor and thought I was doing the right thing in a situation like this I'd make damn sure I recorded every discussion I had with the family.


Maybe the reason its not in the notes is because it didn't happen....just a possibility. But lets make judgements with one side of the story.

username123

frfintanstack wrote: »

Blaming people who are against abortion for the low turnout in a referendum about something else......

sounds like an amazing leap of imagination to me or have I picked you up wrong

I am not blaming anyone for anything, I am asking the question, where were all the pro life advocates during the Childrens Referendum?

The turn out was extremely low. It indicates one of two things to me:
(1) There are not that many pro-life advocates about
or
(2) If there are lots of them, then clearly they were uninterested in the rights of born children - which would seem to be at odds with their general stance

Would you disagree?

username123

Ellsbells wrote: »

An embryo becomes a person if its let....

You could apply that logic to a sperm cell.

frfintanstack

username123 wrote: »

I am not blaming anyone for anything, I am asking the question, where were all the pro life advocates during the Childrens Referendum?

The turn out was extremely low. It indicates one of two things to me:
(1) There are not that many pro-life advocates about
or
(2) If there are lots of them, then clearly they were uninterested in the rights of born children - which would seem to be at odds with their general stance

Would you disagree?

2 + 2 = 22 logic there.

maybe they all voted and nobody else did. maybe 80% of them did and feck all of anybody else did. maybe they voted in the same proportion as everybody else did.

maybe they only make up 18.75% of the population and 96% of them voted. maybe they only make up 96% of the population and 18.75% of them voted.

who knows!

I dont..... and neither do you. Yet you blame them for the low turnout

username123

frfintanstack wrote: »

Yet you blame them for the low turnout

I havent blamed anyone for anything - if you can show where I did that would be nice. I have asked where they were, something I notice you cannot answer either.

Ellsbells

username123 wrote: »

You could apply that logic to a sperm cell.

Not in it's 'current' form no it couldn't. .. it takes something else to turn it into an embryo / fetus/ baby/ person... with a fetus the job is already done and assuming the fetus stays healthy, barring a termination it will become a human...

username123

Ellsbells wrote: »

Not in it's 'current' form no it couldn't. .. it takes something else to turn it into an embryo / fetus/ baby/ person... with a fetus the job is already done and assuming the fetus stays healthy, barring a termination it will become a human...

It takes a healthy womans body to turn an embryo into a person. Embryos are lost all the time due to natural causes. Not every embryo is guaranteed to become a person. It simply represents potential, same as a sperm cell.

frfintanstack

username123 wrote: »

I havent blamed anyone for anything - if you can show where I did that would be nice. I have asked where they were, something I notice you cannot answer either.

To paraphrase yourself

"blah blah disgraceful low turnout......where were all the pro life people? dont care about child once its out of the womb"

If blame isnt implicit in that sentence then I dont know what is.

Then you ask a question that nobody can answer and "notice" that I havent answered it.....even after I said its impossible to answer.

Have you been sticking a pencil up your nose? you may have gone to far

username123

frfintanstack wrote: »

Have you been sticking a pencil up your nose? you may have gone to far

No need for personal abuse, goodbye.

Ellsbells

username123 wrote: »

It takes a healthy womans body to turn an embryo into a person. Embryos are lost all the time due to natural causes. Not every embryo is guaranteed to become a person. It simply represents potential, same as a sperm cell.

You are just arguing for the sake of it.... I did say a healthy fetus... They are lost all the time due to natural causes. Abortion is not a natural cause. Its a choice one person makes to terminate the (potential) life of another. Its that simple. The reasons for having a termination may not be that simple but the fact is that simple.

eviltwin

frfintanstack wrote: »

To paraphrase yourself

"blah blah disgraceful low turnout......where were all the pro life people? dont care about child once its out of the womb"

If blame isnt implicit in that sentence then I dont know what is.

Then you ask a question that nobody can answer and "notice" that I havent answered it.....even after I said its impossible to answer.

Have you been sticking a pencil up your nose? you may have gone to far

I think that's the feeling a lot of people have. Where are they when these women have babies, where is the support? There is none that I can see. Look at those ads taken out a few months ago "abortion tears her life apart". The money that cost would have gone a long way towards supporting a woman who was facing a crisis pregnancy or helping counsel one of those women they claimed to be representing. But they are all talk.

For all their talk about keeping Ireland abortion free - which it is - they seem happy to stand by and see embryos in our fertility clinics destroyed without any comment.

Can you blame people for being cynical?