Abortion Discussion

silverharp

The Black Oil wrote: »

Fidelma Healy-Eames on Prime Time, erm..

where do they learn that fake grin , she is like an Irish version of the american religious nut Wendy Wright

K4t

I especially loved how the seemingly kind and understanding senator told us of how "life is full of suffering." The spirit of Mother Theresa lives on!

lazygal

K4t wrote: »

I especially loved how the seemingly kind and understanding senator told us of how "life is full of suffering." The spirit of Mother Theresa lives on!

The fetishism around suffering is grotesque. It's obvious Fidelma prefers in utero suffering to be prolonged as much as possible, no matter what. What a twisted view of life she has. I presume she never takes a painkiller because the suffering is part of life.

Loafing Oaf

Alan Shatter calling for constitutional change on divorce as well as abortion.

http://www.thejournal.ie/abortion-divorce-ireland-1931454-Feb2015/

I wonder if Labour want to get back on the front foot on 'social issues' might it be an idea for them to call for an entirely new Constitution, might be more inspiring message than talking nonstop about 'abortion'...

Nodin

Dissapointed in the lack of labour rebellion and the SF abstention yesterday. Poor form.

alaimacerc

Nodin wrote: »

Dissapointed in the lack of labour rebellion and the SF abstention yesterday. Poor form.

Probably Peadar Tóibín cried too much about his brief enough trip to the naughty step last time. Going AWOL gives them more scope to snipe at the government from both sides, as suits.

It's almost a surprise there wasn't more of a Labour "rebellion". The "penalty" is... losing the Labour whip? Thereby increasing one's chances of retaining one's seat at the next GE, surely, if the opinion polls are anything to go by? I note that Roisin Shorthall, having rebelled in the conservative direction on the PoLDPA, voted against the government in the opposite way this time. I'm sure on some deep, and yet unspecified principle.

K4t

K4t wrote: »

I especially loved how the seemingly kind and understanding senator told us of how "life is full of suffering." The spirit of Mother Theresa lives on!

lazygal wrote: »

The fetishism around suffering is grotesque. It's obvious Fidelma prefers in utero suffering to be prolonged as much as possible, no matter what. What a twisted view of life she has. I presume she never takes a painkiller because the suffering is part of life.

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

To answer Fidelma, the logical conclusion of where we're going is legalised Euthanasia. Understanding that dying on one's own terms might be preferable for some.

aloyisious

The "Family & Life" non-profit organization - Dublin have posted this on their facebook page... "Clare Daly's Private Member's Bill seeking to allow for abortion when a woman is carrying a baby that will die at or shortly after birth ... received huge coverage but much more importantly the debate was allowed by most of the media, led by RTE, to take place from within an almost entirely pro-choice frame. Article 2 on the linked page below.

Link to page.... https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDEQFjAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FFamilyVitae&ei=-_DdVI-cC7Cv7AbYiYDICA&usg=AFQjCNEc4sOce_SNSddmq72LiS498s_Neg

K4t

If every woman in the world decided they were not going to have kids or become pregnant, it would not be right for men to force themselves on a woman to continue humanity. It would be for men to change their minds. Not to tell them what to do. And if men would not change their minds, then extinction would be right.

A man or a woman deciding another woman cannot have an abortion, no matter at what stage, is to force themselves on that woman. It is not right.

aloyisious

The topic of abortion might rear it's head on the Saturday with Claire Byrne show at 1 PM. She has Alan Shatter, Roisin Shorthall, the Bishop of Elphin and Ben from Iona coming on to discuss the family relationship bill coming before the Dail on Tuesday. It might get interesting.

aloyisious

My understanding of the A.G's advice to the Gov't is that if the feotus in the womb has a heartbeat and/or signs of life and has a chance of being born alive from the woman, then the Constitutional section banning abortion applies to that feotus. Simply coldly, the A.G. READ'S THE LAW (incl constitutional law) AS IT'S WORDED IN ANY MATTER SHE'S ASKED FOR ADVICE ON. The length of time the newly born baby will survive independently is outside the remit of the A.G's consideration. There is going to be a debate on RTE 1 radio at 1 PM today (it's on now) with Ivana Bachik and William Binchy on the A.G's advice and it's exact wording vis a vie the wording in the constitution on abortion.

recedite

aloyisious wrote: »

Simply coldly, the A.G. is a law officer and is obliged to apply the law (incl constitutional law) coldly without fear or favour.

AG's job is just to supply legal advice/opinion to the govt.

Absolam

According to the SBP:
The legal advice given to the cabinet last week by the Attorney General states categorically that abortion cannot be permitted in Ireland in cases of fatal foetal abnormality.
The advice, which has been seen by The Sunday Business Post, states that where babies are capable of being born alive, “it is quite clear that Article 40.3.3 is engaged”. <...> The Attorney General’s view is unequivocal, and leaves no room for doubt that the legislation proposed by independent TD Clare Daly last week to allow abortion in cases of fatal foetal abnormality is in conflict with the Constitution. The advice notes that there is no consensus as to what is meant by the term “fatal foetal abnormality”. However, it says, in many cases there is a possibility that such foetuses would be born alive. This is the case with conditions such as Edwards Syndrome and anencephaly.
Even though babies with these conditions will eventually die after a period which in some cases may be very short, the Attorney General advised that the constitutional protections of Article 40.3.3 apply. <...> Given the unequivocal nature of the advice given to ministers, it would have been a constitutionally highly questionable course to have proceeded with the legislation on the basis that the Supreme Court could have eventually established its legality. The advice to the cabinet suggests that only a constitutional referendum which changes the current protections of the unborn could enable the issue of fatal foetal abnormalities to be addressed.

aloyisious

recedite wrote: »

AG's job is just to supply legal advice/opinion to the govt.

Sorry, worded my post badly. I meant that she had to be dispassionate on anything the Gov't had asked her for advice on.

lazygal

http://fusion.net/story/44072/fertile-ground/

I came across this - A what do you do guide for a woman in a state in the USA. It's interesting to speculate what a woman in Ireland would or could do, especially one who lives here but who's right to travel is restricted, say if one was a 17 year old raped asylum seeker.

Absolam

lazygal wrote: »

I came across this - A what do you do guide for a woman in a state in the USA. It's interesting to speculate what a woman in Ireland would or could do, especially one who lives here but who's right to travel is restricted, say if one was a 17 year old raped asylum seeker.

Surely what a woman in Ireland would do is determined by her own proclivities, so not really worth speculating on? She would do what she wants within the limits of her means and the law. And what a woman could do is determined by the law as it stands, and whether she has the means (and desire) to avoid the law. I can't see there's a lot of room for speculation on what a woman would or could do, only to point out what she could or would do is different depending on the country she is in and the amount of money she has access to. Which is pretty much what can be said for any situation any person finds themselves in.
We already have an idea of what one possibly seventeen year old allegedly raped asylum seeker would do, and couldn't do.

The Black Oil

Uh oh. The balance machine again.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0311/686420-media-bias-protest/

volchitsa

The Black Oil wrote: »

Uh oh. The balance machine again.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0311/686420-media-bias-protest/

But I thought Iona told us that tragic story had nothing to do with abortion at all?

So it's just a coincidence they've chosen the 18th December to start their evaluation of bias from?

TheChizler

Interesting considering a few days ago RTÉ devoted a particularly cringeworthy segment to a group campaigning to get the term 'incompatible with life' banned. They were stating that doctors use the phrase as an excuse to get out of treating patients. Queue examples of how little babeees were misdiagnosed because they ended up being born alive, glossing over the fact that they unfortunately died a short while later.

Lots of images of ultrasounds and tiny premature babies in little knitted hats, really attempting to appeal to emotion.

No opinions from medical professionals were given.

rainbow kirby

The Black Oil wrote: »

Uh oh. The balance machine again.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0311/686420-media-bias-protest/

"The dates reviewed were 18-30 December... 33 'pro-choice' articles to one 'pro-life' one".

Funny that, when something is in the news that shows up how absolutely messed up Ireland's current abortion laws are don't expect to see too many anti-choice articles in the news! :rolleyes:

PopePalpatine

I wonder how many of those 1,500 were brought there by buses paid for by the Forced Birth Fetish Campaign.

The Black Oil

Funny that people who constantly complain about bias often have the largest megaphones with which to do so. It should be 17 articles from either side, is that it?

TheChizler wrote: »

Interesting considering a few days ago RTÉ devoted a particularly cringeworthy segment to a group campaigning to get the term 'incompatible with life' banned.

That's not censorship, though...

Brian Shanahan

The Black Oil wrote: »

Uh oh. The balance machine again.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0311/686420-media-bias-protest/

They really pulled out the stops, flying 1,470 people from America and all.

TheLurker

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

They really pulled out the stops, flying 1,470 people from America and all.

A large group of people holding identical posters all saying "Real debate not groupthink"

Irony isn't their strong suit I see.

aloyisious

Lucinda and Ray D'arcy debating the legalization of abortion here. RTE 1.

The Black Oil

That's it, just use anecdotal data.

“I'm aware of plenty of women who have been told by doctors that their child wouldn't survive but they still went through with the pregnancy. These children did survive, I've met some of them, and some of them are now teenagers.”

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/plenty-of-women-told-their-child-wouldnt-survive-still-went-through-with-pregnancy-lucinda-creighton-31079855.html

aloyisious

RTE 2 TV 9 PM (shortly) a programme about the abortion rights fight here

inocybe

aloyisious wrote: »

RTE 2 TV 9 PM (shortly) a programme about the abortion rights fight here

Suzanne is fantastic, well done to her.

Satori Rae

I have to say the crowd I seen in my local town protesting for Pro Life a good while back where miles away from being very peaceful I must say.

Firstly and not to sound like I am attacking a persons right to protest, I believe that even though personally I do not like it, it does not mean they cant do it, however one of my issues with that certain group of Pro Life People was the venue they picked to protest out side of (some office for the local TD I think).

But right across from this happens to be my nieces primary school she is 6, so not only did she exit the school gates seeing angry people shouting and roaring about child murder and how it is wrong she also seen the massive signs of aborted fetuses splashed across them being literally shoved in our faces as I tried to walk by holding her as quickly as I could.

As I said she is 6 and should not be subjected to that in my opinion and obviously her mother agrees on this.

when I lodged a complaint with youth defense I have to say they where so inconsiderate in my views on them re thinking their protest mannerisms.

They basically scoffed in my face saying she should know by now if not earlier basically about babies being aborted...... I am I the only one that is a bit concerned and horrified in this? Isn't the whole thing being pro life to protect children so how can telling a 6 yr old about abortion protect them?

It personally seemed like they twisted a lot of views to suit their justifications to me.

I am most certainly pro choice but I try and ignore their views at least without letting loose at them, because thats their choice/belief.

But doesn't anyone else think this is unacceptable?

K4t

Satori Rae wrote: »

But doesn't anyone else think this is unacceptable?

Not particularly. While it's unfortunate that your 6 year old niece had to witness such scenes, they shouldn't have to accommodate their protest to her sensitivities either. As for their reaction to your grievances, that's not really a surprise to me.