Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Is it still 1971 in Ireland? The contraceptive train still runs - Under another name.

Options
1…34689…15

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    lazygal wrote: »
    How can a father have a say in whether a woman continues a pregnancy? A woman either stays pregnant or has an abortion.

    I was really anti choice until I grew up a bit and realised women will always need and want abortion services and making them continue pregnancies they don't want to continue is barbaric.
    JuliusCaesar wrote: »
    What permanent changes happen his body?

    Just because the father doesn't go through any direct physical issues with the abortion, doesn't mean they can't or won't be invested in it emotionally/mentally and should be expected to stand aside unscathed in any manner at all. I thought the whole pro choice thing for abortion was in reference to supporting others who are in need of or go through it? You are discarding 50% of the people involved, round of applause there folks, round of a fúcking appluase.


  • Options
    #153
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    Just because the father doesn't go through any direct physical issues with the abortion, doesn't mean they can't or won't be invested in it emotionally/mentally and should be expected to stand aside unscathed in any manner at all. I thought the whole pro choice thing for abortion was in reference to supporting others who are in need of or go through it? You are discarding 50% of the people involved, round of applause there folks, round of a fúcking appluase.

    So what should happen when a woman doesn't want to remain pregnant, against the wishes of the man involved?


  • Options
    #154
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    lazygal wrote: »
    So what should happen when a woman doesn't want to remain pregnant, against the wishes of the man involved?

    There is no one answer for that. It's too simple a question, loaded with bias. Anything I say in response to it or others have said here you've taken as being anti woman, as some other posters have pre-emptively anticipated as well. While none who've challenged that stance about the man actually having a stake in the pregnancy/abortion did so from an anti woman point of view.


  • Options
    #155
    mirrorwall14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,751 ✭✭✭mirrorwall14


    At 28 weeks pregnant right now for the first time, I have to say that going through this has made me staunchly pro choice. While I am happy to be pregnant and looking forward to having a baby, this is not easy. As soon as one symptom calms down, another kicks in. Today I can't decide what's worst,; the itching, the heartburn, the pregnancy rhinitis, the nausea, the swollen feet/hands or the back pain... And I'm not actually having that bad a time of it! It's like your entire body just goes ****ing nuts for 9 months and that's a bloody long long time. I can't believe there is still 12 weeks of this to go, assuming I don't go over.

    Forcing someone to go through this for any reason is just barbaric.


  • Options
    #156
    Earl Turner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭Earl Turner


    mirrorwall14 wrote: »
    At 28 weeks pregnant right now for the first time, I have to say that going through this has made me staunchly pro choice. While I am happy to be pregnant and looking forward to having a baby, this is not easy. As soon as one symptom calms down, another kicks in. Today I can't decide what's worst,; the itching, the heartburn, the pregnancy rhinitis, the nausea, the swollen feet/hands or the back pain... And I'm not actually having that bad a time of it! It's like your entire body just goes ****ing nuts for 9 months and that's a bloody long long time. I can't believe there is still 12 weeks of this to go, assuming I don't go over.

    Forcing someone to go through this for any reason is just barbaric.

    Will be well worth it in the end.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    mirrorwall14 wrote: »
    At 28 weeks pregnant right now for the first time, I have to say that going through this has made me staunchly pro choice. While I am happy to be pregnant and looking forward to having a baby, this is not easy. As soon as one symptom calms down, another kicks in. Today I can't decide what's worst,; the itching, the heartburn, the pregnancy rhinitis, the nausea, the swollen feet/hands or the back pain... And I'm not actually having that bad a time of it! It's like your entire body just goes ****ing nuts for 9 months and that's a bloody long long time. I can't believe there is still 12 weeks of this to go, assuming I don't go over.

    Forcing someone to go through this for any reason is just barbaric.

    Quite possibly the worst pro-choice argument I have ever heard.


  • Options
    #158
    Wompa1
    Registered Users Posts: 8,170 ✭✭✭Wompa1


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Well you go right ahead and make that spurious argument that doesn't have anything to do with whether a woman has a right to an abortion or not. It's a completely separate issue, and not one you'll gain much support for either - a father's right to be a deadbeat dad?

    Yeah, good one, can see the father's rights groups getting behind that one alright...

    I actually didn't raise the point. There was a back and forth and I replied. I also did say earlier in this thread that it is a different issue and us men need to fight for our own rights, like the ladies are.

    It's not a fathers right to be a deadbeat dad...since he wouldn't be a deadbeat. He'd legally have no obligations. His sperm created this fetus which optionally will become a child. If both don't want it to be a child, then there's no point in forcing them, surely.


  • Options
    #159
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,849 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    Quite possibly the worst pro-choice argument I have ever heard.

    What's the matter? Did her post make you feel empathy?


  • Options
    #160
    mirrorwall14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,751 ✭✭✭mirrorwall14


    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    Quite possibly the worst pro-choice argument I have ever heard.

    Why? This is the reality that you are forcing a woman to go through. And lets be honest, with 12 weeks to go-it ain't getting any easier!


  • Options
    #161
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    What's the matter? Did her post make you feel empathy?

    For who?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    Earl Turner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭Earl Turner


    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    For who?

    As if pro-choice people are capable of empathy.


  • Options
    #163
    Earl Turner
    Closed Accounts Posts: 151 ✭✭Earl Turner


    mirrorwall14 wrote: »
    Why? This is the reality that you are forcing a woman to go through. And lets be honest, with 12 weeks to go-it ain't getting any easier!

    Will surely be a very distant thought when you are holding your child for the first time.


  • Options
    #164
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    Just because the father doesn't go through any direct physical issues with the abortion, doesn't mean they can't or won't be invested in it emotionally/mentally and should be expected to stand aside unscathed in any manner at all. I thought the whole pro choice thing for abortion was in reference to supporting others who are in need of or go through it? You are discarding 50% of the people involved, round of applause there folks, round of a fúcking appluase.


    I don't think it's fair to say anyone is suggesting discarding 50% of the people involved, or even 33.3% of the people involved if you really wanted to accommodate all points of view!

    It is of course the intention of most people to support everyone involved, but to place the importance of a man's emotional and mental health on hearing of an unexpected pregnancy, on a par with the emotional and mental health of a woman who finds herself dealing with an unexpected pregnancy and then having to make the determination for her own emotional and mental health as well as her physical health, to terminate her pregnancy...

    You honestly think there's any comparison can really be drawn? Support both individuals, but jesus christ to even think the two individual scenarios are even comparable is to do an injustice to both individuals.


  • Options
    #165
    ezra_pound
    Registered Users Posts: 2,497 ✭✭✭ezra_pound


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    What a farce. Emergency contraception is readily available in Ireland. http://www.ifpa.ie/node/72 What is not readily available is abortion. That is the Law, as voted by several times by the people.

    Exactly. The reason that these pills are not available here is the democratic will of the Irish people as expressed in several referenda.


  • Options
    #166
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    I don't think it's fair to say anyone is suggesting discarding 50% of the people involved, or even 33.3% of the people involved if you really wanted to accommodate all points of view!

    It is of course the intention of most people to support everyone involved, but to place the importance of a man's emotional and mental health on hearing of an unexpected pregnancy, on a par with the emotional and mental health of a woman who finds herself dealing with an unexpected pregnancy and then having to make the determination for her own emotional and mental health as well as her physical health, to terminate her pregnancy...

    You honestly think there's any comparison can really be drawn? Support both individuals, but jesus christ to even think the two individual scenarios are even comparable is to do an injustice to both individuals.

    I do not believe such comparisons can be drawn between 2 people and never stated that. I merely responded to other posters who've dismissed any sense of the father being impacted by a pregnancy/abortion on the basis that they themselves are not pregnant. Otherwise I'm of the opinion that they have just as much a stake in it. I never mentioned who'd be affected more than the other as something along the lines of that has no place in hypothetical and undefinable scenarios. You, like Lazygal and JuliusCaesar have just taken such responses as a Man V Woman response, where they were not presented as such. I myself am not looking to bring oneupmanship to this, as to do so is to diminish the position of both people involved in the pregnancy/abortion. And I believe others that challenged the same point of view did so to recognise that there is a man too.


  • Options
    #167
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Wompa1 wrote: »
    I actually didn't raise the point. There was a back and forth and I replied. I also did say earlier in this thread that it is a different issue and us men need to fight for our own rights, like the ladies are.


    I know you did, and I completely agree with you, but the issue of abortion is a woman's issue, it can never be a men's issue until men are able to bear children (I don't even want to imagine the physics of that one!).

    It's not a fathers right to be a deadbeat dad...since he wouldn't be a deadbeat. He'd legally have no obligations. His sperm created this fetus which optionally will become a child. If both don't want it to be a child, then there's no point in forcing them, surely.


    That's a different argument to the one that was being made though - the argument being made was that a man should be have the right to relinquish all responsibilities and rights towards his child should he choose to do so.

    The fact of the matter is that this is a false equivalence with abortion. If you wanted to argue like for like - a mother does not have a right to relinquish all responsibilities and rights towards her child either!


  • Options
    #168
    mirrorwall14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,751 ✭✭✭mirrorwall14


    Earl Turner wrote: »
    Will surely be a very distant thought when you are holding your child for the first time.

    However I want the baby. I can't imagine having to go through this without that to cling to


  • Options
    #169
    The One Doctor
    Registered Users Posts: 2,339 ✭✭✭The One Doctor


    Celly Smunt wrote: »
    And how about the permanent change to the fathers life who wanted the child,that doesn't count for anything no?

    No, and it shouldn't. It's not the man's body. Besides, if the man insisted on preventing the abortion, I can guarantee the woman would abort the relationship instead.


  • Options
    #170
    LoganRice
    Registered Users Posts: 424 ✭✭LoganRice


    It's 2014 but that was shocking to read :/


  • Options
    #171
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 23,695 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    I do not believe such comparisons can be drawn between 2 people and never stated that. I merely responded to other posters who've dismissed any sense of the father being impacted by a pregnancy/abortion on the basis that they themselves are not pregnant. Otherwise I'm of the opinion that they have just as much a stake in it. I never mentioned who'd be affected more than the other as something along the lines of that has no place in hypothetical and undefinable scenarios. You, like Lazygal and JuliusCaesar have just taken such responses as a Man V Woman response, where they were not presented as such. I myself am not looking to bring oneupmanship to this, as to do so is to diminish the position of both people involved in the pregnancy/abortion. And I believe others that challenged the same point of view did so to recognise that there is a man too.


    I'm certainly not being dismissive of the effects of the news of an unexpected pregnancy upon on a man, but to claim that a man has just as much a stake in a pregnancy as a woman is... well, it completely ignores the fact that a man will suffer no ill effects physically speaking should a woman be forced to continue, or indeed terminate her pregnancy.

    I mean, I know you're not suggesting that the woman's mental and physical health be ignored were she to decide to have an abortion, but the effects for her having an abortion in the vast majority of cases are far more consequential than the mental, emotional and physical effects that her decision will have on a man.

    That's not one-upmanship, that's just a fact.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    The One Doctor
    Registered Users Posts: 2,339 ✭✭✭The One Doctor


    mirrorwall14 wrote: »
    At 28 weeks pregnant right now for the first time, I have to say that going through this has made me staunchly pro choice. While I am happy to be pregnant and looking forward to having a baby, this is not easy. As soon as one symptom calms down, another kicks in. Today I can't decide what's worst,; the itching, the heartburn, the pregnancy rhinitis, the nausea, the swollen feet/hands or the back pain... And I'm not actually having that bad a time of it! It's like your entire body just goes ****ing nuts for 9 months and that's a bloody long long time. I can't believe there is still 12 weeks of this to go, assuming I don't go over.

    Forcing someone to go through this for any reason is just barbaric.

    You're saying that experiencing the symptoms of pregnancy make you favour abortions? I know pregnant women can be a bit emotional (my girlfriend is 32 weeks pregnant), but your argument makes no sense whatsoever. Women don't have abortions because pregnancy is unpleasant, they have abortions because they don't want the little fetus inside them to live.


  • Options
    #173
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    One eyed Jack wrote: »

    The fact of the matter is that this is a false equivalence with abortion. If you wanted to argue like for like - a mother does not have a right to relinquish all responsibilities and rights towards her child either!

    Yes she does, it's called adoption. A (single, or married if the child isn't her husband's) woman can place a child up for adoption if she so wishes, relinquishing all responsibilities and rights, this essentially is a 'paper abortion'. The father doesn't have that option either. Any suggestion that a father be allowed a right to a 'paper abortion' is fundamentally just a suggestion that men should have the same rights as women currently do in terms of giving a child up for adoption.


  • Options
    #174
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,849 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    The One Doctor wrote: »
    You're saying that experiencing the symptoms of pregnancy make you favour abortions? I know pregnant women can be a bit emotional (my girlfriend is 32 weeks pregnant), but your argument makes no sense whatsoever. Women don't have abortions because pregnancy is unpleasant, they have abortions because they don't want the little fetus inside them to live.

    Yeah, totally no hatred and/or misogyny in this post. :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #175
    Colossal Phallus
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9 ✭Colossal Phallus


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    Yeah, totally no hatred and/or misogyny in this post. :rolleyes:

    Can you clarify how that is misogynistic? Do you know what misogyny is?

    Aborting a fetus at 28 weeks is pure scum.


  • Options
    #176
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    The One Doctor wrote: »
    You're saying that experiencing the symptoms of pregnancy make you favour abortions? I know pregnant women can be a bit emotional (my girlfriend is 32 weeks pregnant), but your argument makes no sense whatsoever. Women don't have abortions because pregnancy is unpleasant, they have abortions because they don't want the little fetus inside them to live.
    Tell me you aren't really a doctor, please?

    (I think not, tbh)

    You've got that the wrong way around - women accept to get pregnant, and/or remain pregnant, despite the unpleasantness and sometimes danger involved because they want a baby.

    If they don't want a baby, or can't look after one, why should they put themselves through all that? Particularly when society is quite ready to judge them negatively for "getting themselves pregnant" as well.

    But nobody has an abortion so they can kill the fetus. They just don't want to be pregnant, that's all.


  • Options
    #177
    sheesh
    Registered Users Posts: 4,080 ✭✭✭sheesh


    lazygal wrote: »
    The unborn right to life is not vindicated at all by our constitution. We allow the unborn to be taken elsewhere to be killed and we protect the right to information on how and where to go to kill the unborn in the constitution. Apparently the right to life only exists when a woman doesn't or can't go abroad.


    Yes it is in as far as the law can protect it. you cannot stop people traveling we just don't have that kind of society where it is acceptable for the government to stop people from leaving to travel to other parts of the EU. you cannot prevent the transfer of information either.


  • Options
    #178
    sheesh
    Registered Users Posts: 4,080 ✭✭✭sheesh


    Celly Smunt wrote: »
    I clearly forgot that women don't choose to have sex and it was only a mans choice to have a child.

    Isn't a woman having the total entitlement of having an abortion forcing the father to have an abortion (obviously not physically)? How is that not inherently evil?

    no, that is just the way things are the baby is in the woman's body you cannot force her to have an abortion you cannot force her not to have an abortion.


  • Options
    #179
    Colossal Phallus
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9 ✭Colossal Phallus


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Tell me you aren't really a doctor, please?

    (I think not, tbh)

    You've got that the wrong way around - women accept to get pregnant, and/or remain pregnant, despite the unpleasantness and sometimes danger involved because they want a baby.

    If they don't want a baby, or can't look after one, why should they put themselves through all that? Particularly when society is quite ready to judge them negatively for "getting themselves pregnant" as well.

    But nobody has an abortion so they can kill the fetus. They just don't want to be pregnant, that's all.

    Killing the fetus is immoral once it can feel pain and suffer. The life of the fetus is more important than the mother's convenience.


  • Options
    #180
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,208 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    ezra_pound wrote: »
    Exactly. The reason that these pills are not available here is the democratic will of the Irish people as expressed in several referenda.

    Totally incorrect.

    In 1983 the Irish people were not given an option to vote to allow abortion. The law dating from 1861 remained in effect afterwards (right up until the very limited legislation was brought in last year) and would have done, irrespective of the result in that referendum.

    Almost nobody under 50 today could have had a vote in that referendum. So almost every woman of reproductive age in Ireland today never even had a vote on the 8th amendment yet they are affected by it.

    There were two further referendums in 1992 and 2002. Both were intended to make abortion even less accessible in Ireland than the extremely limited circumstances in which the 8th amendment may permit it. Both were rejected. In other words, the Irish people twice refused to vote against abortion.

    The Irish people have never been given a vote in a referendum where allowing abortion to be more available was even an option.

    sheesh wrote: »
    Yes it is in as far as the law can protect it. you cannot stop people traveling we just don't have that kind of society where it is acceptable for the government to stop people from leaving to travel to other parts of the EU. you cannot prevent the transfer of information either.

    Really?

    http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/pro-choice-group-shocked-as-irish-women-forced-to-cancel-assisted-suicide-trip-503792.html
    The women, one of whom is in the final stage of multiple sclerosis, had booked flights to Switzerland and were due to attend the Dignitas clinic.

    However, gardaí became aware of their plans and the women were forced to cancel their trip when they learned they could be prosecuted if they availed of the assisted-suicide services available at the clinic.

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    The One Doctor
    Registered Users Posts: 2,339 ✭✭✭The One Doctor


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Tell me you aren't really a doctor, please?

    (I think not, tbh)

    You've got that the wrong way around - women accept to get pregnant, and/or remain pregnant, despite the unpleasantness and sometimes danger involved because they want a baby.

    If they don't want a baby, or can't look after one, why should they put themselves through all that? Particularly when society is quite ready to judge them negatively for "getting themselves pregnant" as well.

    But nobody has an abortion so they can kill the fetus. They just don't want to be pregnant, that's all.

    No, I'm not a doctor. We're actually agreeing on this topic, I simply didn't express myself very well. I simply substituted the phrase 'the woman wants to kill the fetus' for the word 'abortion'. It's a more emotive phrase, I accept, but it is essentially true. The woman makes a decision that will end a the fetuses life.

    As I mentioned earlier, I'm pro abortion if the abortion can be done medically (i.e, chemically by prostaglandin analogues etc) rather than surgically. Frankly, surgical abortion is utterly barbaric and hasn't changed in 3000 years. Well it has, but the only difference now is that the woman is virtually guaranteed to survive a surgical abortion.


Advertisement