Abortion Discussion

bumper234

Mardy Bum wrote: »

Didn't know the High Court still blocked women from travelling?

it's her partner apparently

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/man-seeks-to-stop-partner-travelling-to-uk-for-abortion-1.1466364

Mardy Bum

bumper234 wrote: »

it's her partner apparently

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/man-seeks-to-stop-partner-travelling-to-uk-for-abortion-1.1466364

She may be under 16 therefore her guardians get to make the decision.

Zombrex

Mardy Bum wrote: »

She may be under 16 therefore her guardians get to make the decision.

If she was I don't think there would be much point in this challenge. By the sounds of it this woman either has a very controlling family or a very controlling boyfriend. Which ever the case I feel sorry for her.

kylith

bumper234 wrote: »

Either one is a better story, Can just imagine some kid in 2000 years finding an old dog eared copy of lord of the rings and it becoming a religion.:D

Oh, feck off. The songs in LOTR are bad enough without having to think of people chanting them en mass for hours on bloody end.

And as for St. Tom Bombadil, don't get me started. Useless fecker.

kylith

Mardy Bum wrote: »

She may be under 16 therefore her guardians get to make the decision.

I'm not happy with the idea that a woman or girl of any age would have the decision to have an abortion or not made for her. I think that going through an unwanted abortion would be as traumatic as going through an unwanted pregnancy.

Zombrex wrote: »

If she was I don't think there would be much point in this challenge. By the sounds of it this woman either has a very controlling family or a very controlling boyfriend. Which ever the case I feel sorry for her.

Hopefully the court will have someone, maybe a therapist of some kind, talk to her and find out what she wants.

Nodin

...would have thought that a matter for the gardai rather than the high court...allegation of kidnapping like.

keane2097

Nodin wrote: »

...would have thought that a matter for the gardai rather than the high court...allegation of kidnapping like.

Yeah, that's what I thought as well. Making the reason for the woman being forcibly removed from the country the issue here, rather than the fact that she's allegedly been kidnapped, makes me very queasy.

TheChizler

keane2097 wrote: »

Yeah, that's what I thought as well. Making the reason for the woman being forcibly removed from the country the issue here, rather than the fact that she's allegedly been kidnapped, makes me very queasy.

Well maybe like in other cases, the woman can reject the pregnancy in cases of 'legitimate kidnapping'?

aloyisious

The RTE report on this case say's both young parties are in their early twenties, so unless the B/F can prove a successful case that the woman's family have pressured her to opt for (and travel to) a foreign abortion, he may have lost his case.

In line with a thought I've had on what been revealed so far, maybe this could be made into a new thread. Does the ruling made by the SC on the right to travel include any woman or girl here who is NOT an Irish Citizen or does the ruling follow the precepts of UN and other human rights conventions or agreements Ireland entered into?

There's a distinct chance that mud will be slung about in this case, Mention was made in one paper of a member of the woman's family allegedly objecting to her marrying a non-white man. I have pity for the judge who's desk this landed-on.

Brian Shanahan

ninja900 wrote: »

It's ludicrous that several remedies which are regarded as safe and effective in other EU countries are banned here.

Often what is deemed "safe and effective" is nothing of the sort. Some regimes are nothing of the sort. For example, to use the UK again, pretty much the only test herbal "remedies" have to pass across the water is "are the ingredients poisonous?"

I wouldn't touch anything with a 40 foot pole unless it has good solid scientific evidence of efficacy above placebo, printed in a proper scientific journal using the double blind method. And very little in the "CAM" field, of which herbals are a part, even acknowledge evidence as a means of testing for efficacy, never mind going to the bother of testing their products to see if they work.

aloyisious wrote: »

In line with a thought I've had on what been revealed so far, maybe this could be made into a new thread. Does the ruling made by the SC on the right to travel include any woman or girl here who is NOT an Irish Citizen or does the ruling follow the precepts of UN and other human rights conventions or agreements Ireland entered into?

If she's an EU or EEA citizen, plus a few other former Empire territories, she cannot be stopped from leaving here nor can she be stopped from entering the UK. If she's not a citizen of any country covered above, she cannot be stopped from leaving here, but she can be turned away from the UK if she doesn't have correct documentation for entry, of if said documentation was deemed to have been obtained fraudulently.

The Black Oil

Hearing some of Jim Walsh's comments is depressing. I wish certain conservatives who throw around terms like 'totalitarian state' would travel a bit more and cop on.

Delirium

In the ongoing saga of Senators Saying Stupid Things:


Senator: Abortions would deprive future Special Olympians of life

A Fianna Fáil senator has been accused of reaching a new low after he said allowing abortions in cases of fatal foetal abnormalities would be “depriving future Special Olympics athletes of being born”.

[...]
Mr Ó Domhnaill said he could not support the amendment as it would lead to the destruction of a human life “simply because the unborn child is disabled”.

Labour’s Aideen Hayden said it was “incredibly low” to suggest there is any link between disability and fatal abnormalities — especially as the House was preparing for a discussion last night on the Special Olympics.

“I am absolutely convinced there is no connection and I think the senator is misleading,” she said.

If the foetus has a fatal foetal abnormality, it's not likely to live long outside the womb, never mind long enough to compete in the special olympics.

lazygal

Not to mention the unborn athletes that nature decides to abort all the time.

lazygal

Hang on now.

I said nature but is that God? WHY IS GOD ABORTING THE PRECIOUS TINY PREBORN ATHLETES?

iguana

How fuking stupid are these people? The man obviously doesn't actually understand what fatal foetal abnormality actually means, in fact the word he doesn't understand is simply 'fatal' yet feels justified in speaking on it from his position as someone who holds public office. How the hell can that actually happen?

lazygal

I don't think its stupidity, its wilfully confusing the argument. They just leave out 'fatal' on purpose, thereby painting a picture of all women rushing to abort when the baby has even a slight problem in utero.

I think there's some weird cult of worship of the idea of a woman selflessly caring for a special needs child, but the actual hard graft and money required to deal with such children is simply brushed aside. The child must be born at all costs, regardless of anything else.

Don't get me started on Fidelma Healy Eames and her contention that women she met who gave birth to babies with fatal abnormalities were 'happier' than those who chose termination. She's possibility one of the most obnoxious voices in the debate on this in the Seanad.

_rebelkid

lazygal wrote: »

Hang on now.

I said nature but is that God? WHY IS GOD ABORTING THE PRECIOUS TINY PREBORN ATHLETES?

Because he doesn't want any more gays... Tyson Gay, that is...

aloyisious

Lazygal is right, the gent is being false in his claims, he's misrepresenting the facts. He has a tendency for playing the rules to suit his game.

HurtLocker

lazygal wrote: »

Hang on now.

I said nature but is that God? WHY IS GOD ABORTING THE PRECIOUS TINY PREBORN ATHLETES?

I told him to. -Allah

PopePalpatine

HurtLocker wrote: »

I told him to. -Allah

And I told Allah to tell God to. - His Noodly Appendage

ShooterSF

I would have loved it for a senator to turn and ask Brian Ó Domhnaill how he could dare suggest that the special olympics add a new event, the dead baby shot put. It's the only way I can see fatal foetal abnormality abortions affecting the games and its disgusting that he even suggest it.

Show him strawmen work both ways.

aloyisious

Fidelma Healy Eames amendment requiring presence of Anaethetist at each abortion to ensure that aborted babies feel no pain is defeated. Dr Reilly replied that he could not be "prescriptive" to doctors in how to perform their work.

That left me wondering two things: how FHE imagined the anaesthetic would be applied before the abortion procedure began (as that seem's logical - if one wanted to prevent the feotus feeling pain) and how it could be monitored to ensure the feotus wasn't O/D-ing, prior to delivery. Is it possible to anaesthetize a feotus through either the womb-wall or via the vagina/cervix, and allow for monitoring the foetus to prevent an O/D?

Did FHE even think (even though she, as a woman, should be sensitive-to ) of what the medical procedure in her amendment could do to a feotus and a pregnant woman?

Turtwig

One thing the cynic in me realised during the committee hearing was that it's possible some of these TDs and Senators are only saying this stuff for sound bytes for the next general election. TD A asked X,Y,Z at the committee hearing and there's a written transcript of it. Otherwise you'd have to conclude that within the six months since this whole debate really blew up. TDs didn't bother their arse in doing the slightest bit of research. In fact, it was doubtful some of them had even read the bill.

It's not their fault, it's the people's who voted for them fault. In my experience, so it's just an anecdote that must be taken with a pinch of salt, most people give the most vaguest of reason for why they vote for a particular person.
"He was a teacher."
"I knew his father."
"I liked the manners on him and cut of his face."
"She looked nice."
And other worse stuff.

aloyisious

Jernal wrote: »

One thing the cynic in me realised during the committee hearing was that it's possible some of these TDs and Senators are only saying this stuff for sound bytes for the next general election. TD A asked X,Y,Z at the committee hearing and there's a written transcript of it. Otherwise you'd have to conclude that within the six months since this whole debate really blew up. TDs didn't bother their arse in doing the slightest bit of research. In fact, it was doubtful some of them had even read the bill.

It's not their fault, it's the people's who voted for them fault. In my experience, so it's just an anecdote that must be taken with a pinch of salt, most people give the most vaguest of reason for why they vote for a particular person.
"He was a teacher."
"I knew his father."
"I liked the manners on him and cut of his face."
"She looked nice."
And other worse stuff.

I suppose I was really asking if FHE was a cynic or thick

TheChizler

Apparently FHE is describing doctors who perform abortions as Terminators now.

https://twitter.com/davidcullinane/status/357836552799404032

Maybe they're on to something with aborting the pre-born, they could be aborting future John Connors...

Mr. CooL ICE

Or future Myles Dysons...

lazygal

Imagine <SNIP>

Turtwig

lazygal wrote: »

Imagine <SNIP>

Sarky

aloyisious wrote: »

I suppose I was really asking if FHE was a cynic or thick

<less personal comments about a person's intellectual ability please>

Hotblack Desiato

Jernal wrote: »

*unsure of what to be careful about*

wasn't anything to do with Will from the Inbetweeners was it?