8th Amendment

krankykitty

Atlantis50 wrote: »

I find it bizarre that you would view the opposite extreme of Amanda's speech as murder. You're doing Amanda a terrible disservice by making such a link and I'm obviously no fan of the woman.

I also wasn't aware that the actions of a few people worldwide can be equated to the Irish pro-life movement.

I also didn't know Amanda equates the Irish pro choice movement.. horses for courses

Atlantis50

krankykitty wrote: »

I also didn't know Amanda equates the Irish pro choice movement.. horses for courses

They chose her as a speaker at their rally and even "congratulated" her on her speech:

Stephanie Lord, spokeperson for Choice Ireland told Independent.ie:
"We understand that there may be people who felt unsettled at the comments but the sentiment of them was that men involved in the pro-choice movement should be supporting and not dominating the conversation.
"While the speaker also thanked the men present and stated that she respected them for being there.
"We are a movement aiming to eradicate gender inequality, so that also involves being self-critical and not replicating the oppression of dominant political structures where men consistently make decisions regarding women's reproductive choices.
"However, we do recognise that transgender men and people outside the gender binary may also experience pregnancy. This is their campaign too."
Jene Kelly of AIMSI said: "AIMSI congratulates Amanda on her powerful speech at yesterday's demonstration. Women's voices are so often lost in academic and political debate around maternal health and rights.
"There are often attempts to invalidate and discredit women's stories - instead of listening to and prioritising them as with a woman-centred approach.
"The voice of migrant women needs to be front and centre in this discussion - they are all too frequently overlooked, yet disproportionately represented in tragedy after tragedy in our maternity wards."

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/health/video-men-should-know-their-place-in-abortion-debate-rally-told-30526016.html

What happened in the US is of no relevance whatsoever.

PopePalpatine

Atlantis50 wrote: »

What happened in the US is of no relevance whatsoever.

OK, let's go a bit closer to home.

Atlantis50

cros13 wrote: »

Actually I was at that rally, and I'm a bloke so were the four other people I went with.

I will admit at the time I felt a little hurt by what Amanda was saying...and when I looked around many people male and female in the crowd were visibly offended.

To certain extent given what was happening at the time her anger is understandable and justified.

As a single bloke what was I doing at a pro-choice rally?
Well, I like to think I can empathize with others. I may not always personally agree with the reasons people seek a termination, but I have absolutely no right to avoidably limit their options. And I have a moral obligation to defend their right to choose.

Pregnancy is inherently dangerous. In the middle ages one of the first things on the todo list for an expectant mother was to ensure her will was in place, the maternal mortality rate was between 1 in 40 and 1 in 25. Without medical facilities or skilled assistance, pregnancy and birth is more lethal than untreated Dengue Fever. And that's not even counting increased mortality from some common activities and infections for pregnant women.

Even with full modern medical care (including the medically justified terminations and protective measures that are unavailable in Ireland due to the chilling effect of the 8th amendment) the risks are significant. What right has anyone to impose taking those substantial risks on someone else. And what justification can be given? That we have to protect a questionably viable bundle of cells that at least for the first 10 weeks is a barely cellularly differentiated embryo and for the next 16 weeks lacks even the ability to register sensory input or anything we'd yet recognise as bones.

What kind of quack science is this? A "barely cellularly differentiated embryo"? Is the woman "a little bit pregnant" until 26 weeks according to you?

This is a human rights issue. The unborn have a right to life. Can't you empathize with them at all?

Atlantis50

PopePalpatine wrote: »

OK, let's go a bit closer to home.

Hopelessly biased piece.

You expect me to believe all of that? (not that I bothered reading all of it - I stopped at "Neo-Nazi links").

PopePalpatine

You took a look at the title and didn't bother reading any further, didn't you?

traprunner

Atlantis50 wrote: »

What a misleading picture. I'm sure there must be some pro-lifeOfTheWhatCouldPotentiallyBe women that have had an abortion due to circumstances and the bin should be between them. Also the pro-choice could be pregnant too. Any more nonsensical propaganda?

Atlantis50

traprunner wrote: »

What a misleading picture. I'm sure there must be some pro-lifeOfTheWhatCouldPotentiallyBe women that have had an abortion due to circumstances and the bin should be between them. Also the pro-choice could be pregnant too. Any more nonsensical propaganda?

Why do you refuse to recognise the right to life of the unborn?

PopePalpatine

I'm surprised the pregnant woman in that cartoon was being allowed to wear trousers.

Delirium

Atlantis50 wrote: »

What kind of quack science is this? A "barely cellularly differentiated embryo"? Is the woman "a little bit pregnant" until 26 weeks according to you?

This is a human rights issue. The unborn have a right to life. Can't you empathize with them at all?

The vast majority of abortions are carried out before 13 weeks, so the scale of the foetus in the bin is somewhat exaggerated.

traprunner

Atlantis50 wrote: »

Why do you refuse to recognise the right to life of the unborn?

What does that have to do with what I said?

Atlantis50

SW wrote: »

The vast majority of abortions are carried out before 13 weeks, so the scale of the foetus in the bin is somewhat exaggerated.

What's your cut-off point at which the unborn has a right to life then?

Atlantis50

Atlantis50 wrote: »

What's your cut-off point at which the unborn has a right to life then?

Can you explain precisely what you mean by the unborn?

Are all unborns totally and absolutely equal?

Atlantis50

Getting to what should be the central focus of this thread - the political realities of repealing the 8th Amendment, I'm confident any referendum to repeal the 8th Amendment held within the next few years will be defeated.

Why?

- A repeal of the 8th Amendment will essentially boil down to a debate on abortion on demand which had 29% support in a poll two years ago.

- The pro-life groups have an advantage in terms of an existing organisation and network of support.

- Pro-life groups have the ability to mobilise thousands of people. For example, Up to 50,000 pro-life supporters in Dublin march - Independent.ie

- There is no majority support for abortion on demand among any age group, even the 18-34 age group.

- There is no majority support for abortion on demand among the supporters of any political party.

For the last two points, see the cross-tabs on pages 19 and 20 here: http://www.redcresearch.ie/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Paddy-Power-10th-Jan-Political-Poll-20132.pdf

Delirium

There is marjority support of allowing for abortion that is currently prohibited by the 8th amendment.

A large majority of voters would like to see another referendum on abortion to liberalise the current law, according to the latest Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI poll.

Asked if a referendum should be held on whether or not to permit abortion in cases of rape or where the foetus will not be born alive, 68 per cent said they were in favour, 23 per cent against and 9 per cent had no opinion.

Poll from Oct 2014

Atlantis50

SW wrote: »

There is marjority support of allowing for abortion that is currently prohibited by the 8th amendment.



Poll from Oct 2014

But the referendum won't be asking about "whether or not to permit abortion in cases of rape or where the foetus will not be born alive".

It will be about a full repeal of the 8th Amendment meaning the debate will boil down to abortion on demand.

PopePalpatine

Sorry to refute what your Legatus paymasters have been telling you, but you should know that the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013 would still be in place if the 8th Amendment were removed.

Atlantis50

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Sorry to refute what your Legatus paymasters have been telling you, but you should know that the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013 would still be in place if the 8th Amendment were removed.

Then what's the point of repealing the 8th Amendment?

Delirium

Atlantis50 wrote: »

But the referendum won't be asking about "whether or not to permit abortion in cases of rape or where the foetus will not be born alive".

It will be about a full repeal of the 8th Amendment meaning the debate will boil down to abortion on demand.

The referendum would be to remove (or not) the 8th amendment.

The government can't allow for abortion in cases of rape or where the foetus will not be born alive as long as the 8th amendment exists.

The majority according to the linked poll support limited access to abortion.

galljga1

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Sorry to refute what your Legatus paymasters have been telling you, but you should know that the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013 would still be in place if the 8th Amendment were removed.

Agreed but we all know that the same level of misinformation will be spouted by such good people as Iona as was prevalent in the ssm campaign. Removing the 8th would allow legislation to be enacted to govern abortion. What that legislation could turn out to be is anyone's guess...enter scaremongering and misinformation.

PopePalpatine

Atlantis50 wrote: »

Then what's the point of repealing the 8th Amendment?

To allow for abortions in the case of rape, fatal foetal abnormalities, and threats to the mother's health for starters.

Atlantis50

Atlantis50 wrote: »

Then what's the point of repealing the 8th Amendment?

To allow for legislation to permit medical procedures when necessary or in the best interests of the patient.

Atlantis50

SW wrote: »

The referendum would be to remove (or not) the 8th amendment.

The government can't allow for abortion in cases of rape or where the foetus will not be born alive as long as the 8th amendment exists.

The majority according to the linked poll support limited access to abortion.

If it were only about that, then the pro-choicers would want to have a referendum to amend the 8th to allow for abortion in cases of rape or where the foetus will not be born alive.

But that's not on offer. Instead, a full repeal of the 8th is, which means the debate will rightly come down to abortion on demand.

People's opposition to abortion on demand will override the other issues and the referendum will be defeated.

Atlantis50

PopePalpatine wrote: »

To allow for abortions in the case of rape, fatal foetal abnormalities, and threats to the mother's health for starters.

So your point about the Protection in Life During Pregnancy act is moot.

"Threats to the mother's health" is the threshold for abortion in the UK and we all know they have abortion on demand.

Now we're getting somewhere.

Zubeneschamali

galljga1 wrote: »

we all know that the same level of misinformation will be spouted by such good people as Iona as was prevalent in the ssm campaign.

Hopefully, they will lose again. If not, we are no worse off.

Zubeneschamali

Atlantis50 wrote: »

S"Threats to the mother's health" is the threshold for abortion in the UK and we all know they have abortion on demand.

We all know we do too, for the price of a Ryanair flight.

Atlantis50

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Hopefully, they will lose again. If not, we are no worse off.

So you also reject the findings of the Amnesty report?

I'm glad we can agree on something.

Delirium

Atlantis50 wrote: »

If it were only about that, then the pro-choicers would want to have a referendum to amend the 8th to allow for abortion in cases of rape or where the foetus will not be born alive.

But that's not on offer. Instead, a full repeal of the 8th is, which means the debate will rightly come down to abortion on demand.

People's opposition to abortion on demand will override the other issues and the referendum will be defeated.

It would be unconstitutional to amend the the constituation to allow for abortion in cases of rape due to the 8th amendment. 8th has to go if abortion is to be allowed in cases of rape or incest.

galljga1

Atlantis50 wrote: »

So you also reject the findings of the Amnesty report?

I'm glad we can agree on something.

Apologies, I don't want to trawl through the whole thread. Please provide a link to the report.

Atlantis50

SW wrote: »

It would be unconstitutional to amend the the constituation to allow for abortion in cases of rape due to the 8th amendment. 8th has to go if abortion is to be allowed in cases of rape or incest.

I agree it would be incompatible with the 8th Amendment but if people voted for such an amendment to the 8th Amendment how could it be unconstitutional?