Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

lazygal

The eighth amendment has a massive impact on maternity care here. Women have to remain pregnant unless their lives are at risk or they can travel to avail of medical services elsewhere. When you've a system where women don't have options there's bound to be an attitude about their care. The eighth amendment is a fairly large consideration for me getting pregnant again. I don't want to be kept alive while decomposing or forced to travel if there's an abnormality or wait until a risk is life threatening before getting medical treatment.

rainbow kirby

Similarly, I'm glad to be having my first here in London. I feel a lot safer with NHS care and no 8th amendment.

Hotblack Desiato

Kev W wrote: »

So very close to coming off as satire.

But no, just genuine stupidity.

'CAN "MENTALLY CRIPPLE" WOMEN, THUS HINDERING ANY MEANINGFUL CAREER'

(a) Since when did they want women to have 'meaningful careers', especially mothers.

(b) The best way for a woman to render herself unemployable (or make it impossible to turn a profit after childcare is paid) is to have kids. Especially to have more kids than she intended

(c) Having small kids 'mentally cripples' women, and men too Hard to reach the pinnacle of your career on 2 hours sleep with baby sick on your work suit.

Shrap wrote: »

"Were they always this big?"

No word of a lie.

Vets probably knew more about pregnancy and had better access to tests/technology than doctors did here in those days.

Cabaal

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2015/11/02/ireland-in-a-world-of-choice/


Here's the map talked about - http://cf.broadsheet.ie/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/abortion.jpg

Ireland’s abortion laws are the most restrictive among western countries and often more conservative than the developing world.

Dr Julien Mercille writes:

The abortion debate and whether or not to repeal the Constitution’s Eighth amendment has grown louder recently. It will no doubt intensify as the next general election approaches. It is a hot subject in Ireland.

One way to contextualise and clarify sensitive issues is to put them in perspective. We need to examine where Ireland stands relative to other countries. Sometimes this suggests easy answers and solutions.

The Center for Reproductive Rights (based in the US and with offices in other countries) publishes an annual world map showing the state of abortion laws globally.

As can be seen from the map (top), it divides countries into four categories, from most liberal (in green) to most conservative (in red).

Ireland is quite an exception. Among Western countries, it’s a red conservative island in a green liberal ocean.

On abortion, Ireland is thus like Africa, Latin America, and other developing countries, and actually more conservative than many. (The map shows abortion legislation but actual implementation may vary; it still provides a largely accurate picture of how countries deal with abortion).

Let’s look at the map more closely.

The most conservative countries (red) either prohibit abortion entirely, or only allow it to save a woman’s life. Ireland is in red.

Indeed, in an excellent recent report, Amnesty International stated that we have one of the world’s most restrictive abortion legislation, which “continues to criminalize abortion in cases of rape, incest and fatal or severe foetal impairment”. The law is “deeply rooted in religious doctrine”.

Human rights bodies worldwide have repeatedly maintained that “restrictive laws on abortion, including those that exist in Ireland, violate women’s and girls’ rights to life, health, privacy, non-discrimination and freedom from torture and other ill-treatment”. The recent reform of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013 has brought no significant change.

The orange countries allow abortion to protect a woman’s life and health. Health can be interpreted as physical or mental health or both.

Next, the yellow countries permit abortion for socioeconomic reasons (when a pregnancy could lead to risks or negative consequences for a woman, broadly interpreted). In practice, many of those countries apply their laws in a liberal manner. For example, in Great Britain, the law allows abortion on socioeconomic grounds but in practice it is freely available (so it should be considered a green country).

Last, the green countries permit abortion without restriction as to the reason. Women simply decide whether to terminate a pregnancy. But most green countries still establish gestational limits on abortion, usually between 12 to 20 weeks of pregnancy. For example, in Denmark, abortion is available without restriction as to the reason up to 12 weeks of gestation. Beyond this limit, it is possible on specific socioeconomic grounds, in cases of foetal impairment, or if the pregnancy results from a criminal act like rape or incest.

In the Western world, green countries form the overwhelming majority.

What they say is something like this.

Women have a right to choose not to continue with a pregnancy, at least as long as the foetus remains unviable outside their bodies. This recognises that there are many valid grounds for women to make that choice.

Maybe a woman is a victim of rape, a criminal act. She should thus be allowed to minimize the consequences of this, including to terminate the pregnancy. To force her to carry on with this pregnancy is not justifiable.

Or maybe a woman is a victim of incest. Why should she be forced to continue with the pregnancy, and fined or jailed for not doing so?

Or maybe a woman had protected sex and the condom split or slipped. Bad luck happens to everybody and has nothing to do with being irresponsible. The green countries agree that this is no reason to force a woman to continue with her pregnancy.

Or maybe a woman finds out that she is pregnant but that for one reason or another, believes that her situation is not conducive to having a baby. In the first few weeks of pregnancy she should thus be able to end it.

Those who oppose abortion may laugh at the above, be outraged, or dismiss it entirely.

But there’s one thing to remember.

Imagine a discussion about abortion held around a table with one representative from each Western country. There would be roughly 40 people around the table. The fact is that all of them would be green, except 2-3 with a slightly more restrictive legislation. And then, there would be Ireland, off the charts in the red.

So it’s basically 1 (or 2 or 3) against 40. It’s harder to laugh now, isn’t it?

In short, Ireland has more in common with many countrys that most Irish people would see as "third world" or backward in their viewpoints and freedoms.

I doubt most people are aware of this,

lazygal

I think the most recent Act has muddied the waters. I've had people tell me.you can have an abortion in cases of FFA or if there's a risk to your health. One person was completely convinced the recent Act changed the law until I explained the TFMR campaign. People often think abortion is illegal for other people and the tragic case they personally know of is a completely different situation.

Dan_Solo

Did yer man on Vincent Brown just say "everybody here today wasn't aborted"?
Wow, compelling stuff.

Cabaal

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34741326

Irish women are live-tweeting Prime Minister (Taoiseach) Enda Kenny their menstrual cycles to highlight the country's restrictive abortion laws.

Comedian Grainne Maguire began tweeting Mr Kenny on Monday to raise awareness about a campaign to repeal the eighth amendment of the Irish constitution.

The amendment equates the life of the foetus to the life of the mother and criminalises abortion in Ireland.

Irish women soon joined Ms Maguire, with #repealthe8th trending in Ireland.

Changes to the constitution can only be made through a referendum.

Pherekydes

They should also tweet them at David Quinn/the iOnanists and church leaders on twitter.

Shrap

Cabaal wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34741326

"I call my womb Ireland's littlest embassy" - Brilliant :cool:

Hotblack Desiato

Hold on a second. Some of these women might have expelled a fertilised egg!

Ve must investigate at once!

Patrick Wheelock

Pherekydes wrote: »

They should also tweet them at David Quinn/the iOnanists and church leaders on twitter.

I know ordinary people who hold pro-life views. They're on Twitter as well. Maybe I should post up their usernames / handles so the women can bully them too.

Pherekydes

Patrick Wheelock wrote: »

I know ordinary people who hold pro-life views. They're on Twitter as well. Maybe I should post up their usernames / handles so the women can bully them too.

Are they anti-choice, though? If they're anti-choice, they're the ones doing the bullying.

Cabaal

Patrick Wheelock wrote: »

I know ordinary people who hold pro-life views. They're on Twitter as well. Maybe I should post up their usernames / handles so the women can bully them too.

I'm sorry but Quinn is not avg joe public, he is a media figure by his own making. He willingly puts himself in the media all of the time, he is part of a lobby group as well.

Nobody is bulling anyone, but we sure do have the right to be critical of lobby groups and media figures like Quinn.

Kev W

Patrick Wheelock wrote: »

I know ordinary people who hold pro-life views. They're on Twitter as well. Maybe I should post up their usernames / handles so the women can bully them too.

So Enda's being bullied is he?

Grow up.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Patrick Wheelock

Pherekydes wrote: »

Are they anti-choice, though? If they're anti-choice, they're the ones doing the bullying.

Surely being pro-life makes them fair game?

I thought the target for the pro-choice outrage was everybody who was uncomfortable with abortion or thought it was wrong.

PS - if somebody votes to retain the eighth amendment but stays silent on the issue at all times, does that make them anti-choice?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

The Randy Riverbeast

Patrick Wheelock wrote: »

I thought the target for the pro-choice outrage was everybody who was uncomfortable with abortion or thought it was wrong.

Theres your mistake.

Patrick Wheelock

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

Theres your mistake.

My body, your choice.

My penis, your vagina.

My arse, your face.

My - ah forget it.

Hotblack Desiato

Patrick Wheelock wrote: »

My body, your choice.

My penis, your vagina.

My arse, your face.

My - ah forget it.

Thanks for your valued contribution there.

It was a lot easier when any discussion could be ended by shouting "IT'S A SIN", eh?

Shrap

Oh boy. Well, paper never refused ink....

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ann-mcelhinney-abortion-campaigners-should-be-careful-about-what-they-wish-for-1.2423209

Because a sensationalist, gratuitous shock-mongering article by two of the US best loved conservative speakers about the tiny percentage of late term abortions adds "balance"? Or just the Irish Times sinking to new lows of click-bait? You decide.

Dan_Solo

Patrick Wheelock wrote: »

My penis, your vagina.

My arse, your face.

Doubt the second one is a beardy sky ghost approved sexual activity myself.

PopePalpatine

Shrap wrote: »

Oh boy. Well, paper never refused ink....

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ann-mcelhinney-abortion-campaigners-should-be-careful-about-what-they-wish-for-1.2423209

Because a sensationalist, gratuitous shock-mongering article by two of the US best loved conservative speakers about the tiny percentage of late term abortions adds "balance"? Or just the Irish Times sinking to new lows of click-bait? You decide.

Next they're probably going to re-print some bollocks from somewhere like Breitbart. :rolleyes:

Dan_Solo

Shrap wrote: »

Oh boy. Well, paper never refused ink....

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/ann-mcelhinney-abortion-campaigners-should-be-careful-about-what-they-wish-for-1.2423209

His case led many people, investigators, lawyers and jury members to hear for the first time the reality of abortion

Yeah, because an illegal abortion is a good example of a legal one.

Links234

This is one of the most disgusting things I've seen recently, anti-choice campaigners mimicking LGBT equality in a nausiatingly hypocritical piece:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r79EPJp9-CM

It's especially appalling because the likes of Youth Defense, Iona and the rest of that shower were so biliously against marriage equality, yet now they want to drape themselves with that terminology? Hideous.

Cabaal

Links234 wrote: »

This is one of the most disgusting things I've seen recently, anti-choice campaigners mimicking LGBT equality in a nausiatingly hypocritical piece:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r79EPJp9-CM

It's especially appalling because the likes of Youth Defense, Iona and the rest of that shower were so biliously against marriage equality, yet now they want to drape themselves with that terminology? Hideous.

Pretty sickening alright,
They are a homophobic organization and now they are trying to whitewash their own history

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/07/02/youth-defence-on-gay-equality/

This is page 14 of of Youth Defence’s magazine Solas from 2009 concerning the civil union bill. The article is plainly and openly homophobic. It requests supporters to oppose any progressive legislation moving towards gay marriage and adoption by gays. When the .pdf began to be shared around Facebook yesterday many people reported that page 14 had disappeared. Luckily, copies of the original .pdf had been saved. I thought that this would be of special interest considering Eamon Gilmore’s recent comments about gay marriage and YD’s recent campaign and attempt to clean up their image, not to mention the Pride march and the ever-growing demand for equality.

Also their anti gay leaflets - http://www.indymedia.ie/article/68442

Cabaal

Just more on the anti gay leaflets they did, see thread http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=221779

Youth Defenses submission to the Oireachtas All-Party Committee on the Constitution was:

1. The Constitutional Family

The family is the fundamental social unit. Article 41.1.1 of Bunreacht na hEireann recognises the special position of the family and gives it inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law. Article 41.3.1 pledges the State to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack. The All Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution (APOCC) should not broaden this constitutional definition of the family.

2. How should one strike a balance between the rights of the family as a unit and the rights of individual members?

The Constitution already does this; firstly by Article 41 which contains the main provisions relating to family and secondly, by Article 40.3.1 which deals with personal rights. The identification of personal rights under Article 40.3.1 are common to all citizens. The rights of the family as a unit and the rights of the individual members of the family are complementary.

3. Is it possible to give constitutional protection to families other than those based on marriage?

Every individual, because of their inherent human dignity, must be protected by the State. The family based on marriage is guaranteed protection under the Constitution and this must remain. It is not possible to give constitutional protection to families other than those based on marriage because the family is a union of a man and woman in the lifelong covenant of marriage. Unions not based on marriage already have protection by the personal rights identified under Article 40.3. Where siblings or other family members reside together, some legal protection with regard to say, distribution of property etc, could be provided. The Constitution currently recognises that the family based on marriage offers the stability and security needed by society. This must not be weakened by affording the same status to other unions.

4. Who has the right to marry?

The legal right to marry should be restricted to one man and one woman, in the best interest of the nation's children and our society. The primary purpose of marriage is to rear children in a loving and secure environment. Children being adopted are entitled to an adoptive mother and an adoptive father, to fulfill the roles of a natural mother and father. Homosexual and lesbian unions should not be given the status of marriage.

5. Who has the right to adopt children?

Homosexual and lesbian couples should never have the right to adopt children. They cannot provide the secure and loving best environment that children require. Parents of Irish children would be horrified to think that their children could, in the event of their deaths, be adopted by homosexuals or lesbians.

6. Is the Constitution's reference to a woman's life within the home a dated one that should be changed?

Absolutely not. It is an important provision and one that reflects the desire of the majority of Irish women, as shown in many surveys, to stay at home and rear their children. Mothers who make many sacrifices to rear their children at home do the State an inestimable and unrewarded service. Article 41.2 should not be changed - instead the APOCC should recommend to the State that it fulfills its obligations to protect mothers at home.

7. What are the rights of Natural mothers and Natural fathers?

The rights of the natural mother are already protected under Article 40 of the Constitution. A natural father's rights should have the same recognition as those of a natural mother.

8. Should the rights of the child be given an expanded constitutional protection, and should the Constitution be changed in view of the UN Convention on the rights of the child?

The child already enjoys Constitutional protection which must be upheld by the State and the Constitution should not be amended to reflect the UN Convention on the rights of the child, or any other extra-territorial conventions.

9. The State and the Family

Despite the Constitutional protection afforded to the family based on marriage, the State continues to fail in its duty to protect and support the family, and has introduced a blatantly anti-family tax measure - tax individualisation - which actively discriminates against single-income families. The APOCC should urge the State to reverse that policy immediately.

10. Bunreacht na hÉireann

The rights of the Family under the Constitution should not be interfered with. Articles 41, 42 and 40.3 reflect the opinions of the majority of Irish people and the best practice for our nation, our children and our society.

Apparently parents in Ireland are horrified at the idea of the ghays adopting children

Parents of Irish children would be horrified to think that their children could, in the event of their deaths, be adopted by homosexuals or lesbians.

The hate is strong with this one,

robdonn

I love how they feel they have to say "homosexual and lesbian", as if they're different things.

Cabaal

robdonn wrote: »

I love how they feel they have to say "homosexual and lesbian", as if they're different things.

Yeah, did find that odd as well.
Shows that they are clueless in relation to what they are talking about,

PopePalpatine

Didn't they also defend the "mother's place is in the home" article in the constitution too?