The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Hannibal_Smith

Edward M wrote: »

They should do what they feel is the right thing.
I'm not moralising for anyone, but I'm not voting for abortion on demand either, as I said I probably will abstain.
AVFCStephens post is a good one.
An example of an abortion that would have been carried out as a mistake, a perfectly healthy child and from his post I presume to very happy parents.
If abortion on demand had been available their baby may well have been aborted. Who'd have ever known a perfectly healthy foetus was destroyed?
The grey area between necessity and convenience is what gets me though.

Ah you edited as I was replying. That post isn't an example of an abortion that WOULD have been carried out as a mistake? That poster never said they even considered it? They said the doctor refused to go into detail IN CASE it led to an abortion.

I would take that post as a reason to introduce abortion tbh...if it's putting medics in a situation where they cannot divulge full health information to you in case you travel for an abortion, that is seriously flawed. It's exactly the kind of thing that makes me angry about maternity care.

AVFC.Stephen

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

But that's the whole point. They CAN'T do what they feel is right. That choice is not there for them. People will vote with their conscience on it when the time comes, but to those who don't what to just get on with it, like the women you've referred to, you can understand what they would vote the way they do.

I strongly agree with this. I really feel what choice ppl make it's nobody else's business. There is ppl out there now in this country that decided it was best to go the England and abort for whatever reason and when they come back and are frowned upon or not educated into the choice they made they end up with mental health issues.

If abortion was done correctly and it was part of sexual education in schools like the country I lived in, ppl would be a lot more understanding like towards a miscarriage meaning they would get support. Not a gun to the head

Edward M

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Ah you edited as I was replying. That post isn't an example of an abortion that WOULD have been carried out as a mistake? That poster never said they even considered it? They said the doctor refused to go into detail IN CASE it led to an abortion.

I would take that post as a reason to introduce abortion tbh...if it's putting medics in a situation where they cannot divulge full health information to you in case you travel for an abortion, that is seriously flawed. It's exactly the kind of thing that makes me angry about maternity care.

That's what I meant really, why repeal of the eighth is important too, its just the abortion on demand I can't reconcile with.

AVFC.Stephen

Edward M wrote: »

They should do what they feel is the right thing.
I'm not moralising for anyone, but I'm not voting for abortion on demand either, as I said I probably will abstain.
AVFCStephens post is a good one.
An example of an abortion that would have been carried out as a mistake, a perfectly healthy child and from his post I presume to very happy parents.
If abortion on demand had been available their baby may well have been aborted. Who'd have ever known a perfectly healthy foetus was destroyed?
The grey area between necessity and convenience is what gets me though.

We were not informed what the problem with the baby was because the doctors hands were tied. I'm sure the doctor would of loved to tell us the story but the law prevented her.

This is exactly the reason I'm for abortion. That doctor was with us for 15mins and couldn't open her mouth but the choice I had was nothing except it's for the rest of your life. It's totally wrong to not inform ppl about what to expect

joey1111

Edward M wrote: »

They should do what they feel is the right thing.
I'm not moralising for anyone, but I'm not voting for abortion on demand either, as I said I probably will abstain.
AVFCStephens post is a good one.
An example of an abortion that would have been carried out as a mistake, a perfectly healthy child and from his post I presume to very happy parents.
If abortion on demand had been available their baby may well have been aborted. Who'd have ever known a perfectly healthy foetus was destroyed?
The grey area between necessity and convenience is what gets me though.

AVFC.Stephen wrote: »

We were not informed what the problem with the baby was because the doctors hands were tied. I'm sure the doctor would of loved to tell us the story but the law prevented her.

This is exactly the reason I'm for abortion. That doctor was with us for 15mins and couldn't open her mouth but the choice I had was nothing except it's for the rest of your life. It's totally wrong to not inform ppl about what to expect

You'd like to think that if abortion does come into effect that it would be more than a 15 minute consultation with a Doctor whos hands are tied.

If I came across such an idiot i'd change hospital or look for someone more senior to enlighten me.

That was your right to know what was wrong with the foetus. I personally wouldn't have accepted the answer about their fear of you going off to have an abortion.

AVFC.Stephen

joey1111 wrote: »

You'd like to think that if abortion does come into effect that it would be more than a 15 minute consultation with a Doctor whos hands are tied.

If I came across such an idiot i'd change hospital or look for someone more senior to enlighten me.

That was your right to know what was wrong with the foetus. I personally wouldn't have accepted the answer about their fear of you going off to have an abortion.

This^^^^^^

Amen. We were under the impression we weren't allowed the full answer due to the law....

joey1111

AVFC.Stephen wrote: »

This^^^^^^

Amen. We were under the impression we weren't allowed the full answer due to the law....

More likely they were too busy or something to look into it properly for you.

AVFC.Stephen

joey1111 wrote: »

More likely they were too busy or something to look into it properly for you.

Hence the reason the choice should be to change. Not to change the topic but we live in a country where last year nearly 20 ppl died of the flu. I don't blame the doctors but the overflow that we can't look after in a small country is embarrassing. 15mins and a pain killer and off you go.....

joey1111

AVFC.Stephen wrote: »

Hence the reason the choice should be to change. Not to change the topic but we live in a country where last year nearly 20 ppl died of the flu. I don't blame the doctors but the overflow that we can't look after in a small country is embarrassing. 15mins and a pain killer and off you go.....

I'm on the fence about the whole thing to be honest but I do believe that if pro life remains they need to change the laws and enforce a mandatory sentence or large fine on men who dont take financial responsibility for their offspring.

You cant keep putting on all the burden on women and the state to support them. In many cases the women are working and raising the kid on their own without state help.

If men get an opinion on what women do with their foetus then they need to take responsibiliy for what happens after its born.

But I believe because of pressure from the UN we will become pro choice, maybe with some stipulations but some form of it will be enforced.

AVFC.Stephen

joey1111 wrote: »

I'm on the fence about the whole thing to be honest but I do believe that if pro life remains they need to change the laws and enforce a mndatory sentence or large fine on men who dont take financial responsibility for their offspring.

You cant keep putting on all the burden on women and the state to support them. In many cases the women are working and raising the kid on their own without state help.

If men get an opinion on what women do with their foetus then they need to take responsibiliy for what happens after its born.

But I beleive because of pressure from the UN we will become pro choice, maybe with some stipulations but some form of it will be enforced.

As far as I know. A mate of mine has his deductions taken directly out of his pay.

When I think of abortion I think not only about what I stated but the drug addicts homeless or even the well off that should have a choice of what they do.

For ex. If my daughter was 14 and ended up doing the "dirty deed" and getting pregnant, I would recommend she abort

Edward M

Edward M wrote: »

I never said if she was raped she should get an abortion, that's twice today I've been misquoted.
Twisting what I say doesent change what I said.
I said she should have the choice if she was raped.
I don't know why I feel the way I do, but a rape victim is a different case than an ordinarily induced pregnancy.

I meant you think she should have the choice if raped, but you don't if she happened to get pregnant. So if contraception fails & the woman doesn't want to be pregnant, that's just tough?
I'm sorry but that IS a moral judgement.
It has nothing to do with the unborn & everything to do with judging the mothers actions. It's almost like a punishment.
I have heard this same argument from a lot of men, unsurprisingly. There never seems to be the same judgement on the fathers of these children.

Bannasidhe

Edward M wrote: »

I agree on that BTW.
Its funny how it goes though, the other day I posted on political opinions here locally, they were announced on local radio, most were anti repeal or if they were pro, they were against the 12_week on demand proposal.
A poster replied that it didn't really matter what any individual politician thought, this was a matter for personal choice, which was greeted with rapturous thanks also from repeal posters.
Funny how when it suits its great, when it doesn't matter what they think.

And LaaavLine was lit up yesterday with furious pro-lifers condemning Martin's 'betrayal' as a 'pragmatic' and 'cynical' ploy to attract de liberal young voters of de People's Repeublic of Kark Sout Central.

Apparently he sensed a change in the wind and is going with the tide (it was a show brimming over with mixed metaphors) of course another way of putting that would be he is following the wishes of the electorate he was elected to represent.

He paid dearly for his lukewarm 'support' for Marriage Equality in the leafy suburbs of Koork - perhaps he's decided the bourgeoisie of Ballinlough and Blackrock are more liberal than he realised in 2015.

Funny old world isn't it.

applehunter

From my perspective the more Kate O'Connell speaks on the issue the better.

She is hitting close to 10 on my thundering-bitchometer.

Bannasidhe

applehunter wrote: »

From my perspective the more Kate O'Connell speaks on the issue the better.

She is hitting close to 10 on my thundering-bitchometer.

Meh - I'd gladly give Ronan Mullen a slap of a fish every time he he looks like he's going to speak but tbh I don't give a fiddler's what any politician has to say - I made my mind up in 1982 and if anything the actions of the likes of SPUC then and Iona now, plus how it has been seen to damage the lives of innocent women and girls like X have only strengthened my opposition to the 8th.

I am not pro-abortion. I am pro-choice.
I do care about the unborn but I care about the born more.
No child should come in to this world unwanted.

p.s - I had to google Kate O'Connell

Loafing Oaf

Bannasidhe wrote: »

And LaaavLine was lit up yesterday with furious pro-lifers condemning Martin's 'betrayal' as a 'pragmatic' and 'cynical' ploy to attract de liberal young voters of de People's Repeublic of Kark Sout Central.

I wonder how closely Liveline vet their callers' bona fides. I'd be skeptical a lot of these are actual FF members...

Bannasidhe

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I wonder how closely Liveline vet their callers' bona fides. I'd be skeptical a lot of these are actual FF members...

About as many of the callers who live in Martin's constituency I'd say...
#fingersofonehand

PopePalpatine

applehunter wrote: »

From my perspective the more Kate O'Connell speaks on the issue the better.

She is hitting close to 10 on my thundering-bitchometer.

#LoveBoth in a nutshell.

Call me Al

Edward M wrote: »

I never said if she was raped she should get an abortion, that's twice today I've been misquoted.
Twisting what I say doesent change what I said.
I said she should have the choice if she was raped.
I don't know why I feel the way I do, but a rape victim is a different case than an ordinarily induced pregnancy.

But the developing embryo foetus baby is the same whichever way the conception happens so how can you distinguish?

Loafing Oaf

Bannasidhe wrote: »

About as many of the callers who live in Martin's constituency I'd say...
#fingersofonehand

I mean I don't doubt a lot of FF grassroots are genuinely unhappy with this move, but lambasting your leader on national radio is not the FF way...

Edward M

bubblypop wrote: »

I meant you think she should have the choice if raped, but you don't if she happened to get pregnant. So if contraception fails & the woman doesn't want to be pregnant, that's just tough?
I'm sorry but that IS a moral judgement.
It has nothing to do with the unborn & everything to do with judging the mothers actions. It's almost like a punishment.
I have heard this same argument from a lot of men, unsurprisingly. There never seems to be the same judgement on the fathers of these children.

What can I say, if a normal healthy woman, with a normal healthy pregnancy presents to a doctor and no good medical grounds can be found for abortion then she should have the baby IMO.
Its tough I know to accept that I can feel like I do, but that's the way I feel.
All I can say of men is i know some who have abdicated their responsibility as a parent both of babies and of older children also, scumbags if you want to refer to them as such.
I also know women who have exploited men with their children and rights after relationship breakdowns too.
Speaking for myself, I have never shirked a responsibility towards any of my children or their mothers, I love them all dearly and if they found themselves in a situation on either side of this debate I would do my utmost to support them in their decision also.
If my son shirked his responsibility I would gladly support the girl in any decision she would make, and my daughters in any they would make also.
Hopefully that will never arise, I have a grandchild on the way, looking forward to that in April.

Bannasidhe

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I mean I don't doubt a lot of FF grassroots are genuinely unhappy with this move, but lambasting your leader on national radio is not the FF way...

Absolutely. They have always been a quiet inner putsch kind of party - public lambasting is more of a FG groove thang.

Hannibal_Smith

Edward M wrote: »

What can I say, if a normal healthy woman, with a normal healthy pregnancy presents to a doctor and no good medical grounds can be found for abortion then she should have the baby IMO.

And just get on with it? :P

Edward M

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

And just get on with it? :P

It'd be great if you could talk for me wouldn't it?

Hannibal_Smith

Edward M wrote: »

It'd be great if you could talk for me wouldn't it?

Don't make it about me. You tied yourself up.

swampgas

Edward M wrote: »

What can I say, if a normal healthy woman, with a normal healthy pregnancy presents to a doctor and no good medical grounds can be found for abortion then she should have the baby IMO.
Its tough I know to accept that I can feel like I do, but that's the way I feel.

You do realise that you are saying that a woman who wants an abortion should have the baby because that's what feels right to you? Your feelings are your own and you should not disown them, but please don't extrapolate to everyone else that they should feel the same way. What about what feels right to her? Why should your feelings have such a say over what happens to her life?

Babies and children are wonderful when they are wanted. But an unwanted pregnancy is often a terrible thing, and thinking that women who really don't want to continue a pregnancy can be forced to "get on with it" is misguided and more cruel than you seem to imagine.

Edward M

Edward M wrote: »

I love them all dearly and if they found themselves in a situation on either side of this debate I would do my utmost to support them in their decision also.
If my son shirked his responsibility I would gladly support the girl in any decision she would make, and my daughters in any they would make also.
Hopefully that will never arise, I have a grandchild on the way, looking forward to that in April.

So basically you would support a member of Your Own family, no matter what decision she makes? But you don't agree that women who are not related to you should make a decision that is right for them?
You do realise the hypocrisy in that right? & I don't mean to sound harsh.

Congrats on your grandchild, a wanted child is a great gift!

joey1111

Edward M wrote: »

What can I say, if a normal healthy woman, with a normal healthy pregnancy presents to a doctor and no good medical grounds can be found for abortion then she should have the baby IMO.
Its tough I know to accept that I can feel like I do, but that's the way I feel.

Speaking for myself, I have never shirked a responsibility towards any of my children or their mothers

..I'd LOVE to listen to your opinion if you spent a number of years minding all of your children on your own 24/7, even one of them.

But reading your blasé opinion is laughable to say the least.

Edward M

swampgas wrote: »

You do realise that you are saying that a woman who wants an abortion should have the baby because that's what feels right to you[/

Edward M wrote: »

Many women have unwanted pregnancies, most just get on with it though.
Inconvenience is a poor reason for aborting IMO.

]? Your feelings are your own and you should not disown them, but please don't extrapolate to everyone else that they should feel the same way. What about what feels right to her? Why should your feelings have such a say over what happens to her life?

Babies and children are wonderful when they are wanted. But an unwanted pregnancy is often a terrible thing, and thinking that women who really don't want to continue a pregnancy can be forced to "get on with it" is misguided and more cruel than you seem to imagine.

You see again with the misquoting or misinterpretation.
I said several times, this will be the last, twist it any way you want after this, I never said they "should" or even "get on with it" on its own.
My original statement said that most women just get on with it.
An example of no posting a sentence in full context is this from your post, tell me what someone would think of your post if I quoted only this bit?
"a woman who wants an abortion should have the baby".

Edward M

joey1111 wrote: »

..I'd LOVE to listen to your opinion if you spent a number of years minding all of your children on your own 24/7, even one of them.

But reading your blasé opinion is laughable to say the least.

You know nothing of me joey, your ignorance of my situation is laughable in its presumption of how my children were reared.

swampgas

Edward M wrote: »

You see again with the misquoting or misinterpretation.I said several times, this will be the last, twist it any way you want after this, I never said they "should" or even "get on with it" on its own.
My original statement said that most women just get on with it.
An example of no posting a sentence in full context is this from your post, tell me what someone would think of your post if I quoted only this bit?
"a woman who wants an abortion should have the baby".

Sorry, I wasn't responding to your earlier post, I was responding to post #5001:

What can I say, if a normal healthy woman, with a normal healthy pregnancy presents to a doctor and no good medical grounds can be found for abortion then she should have the baby IMO.
Its tough I know to accept that I can feel like I do, but that's the way I feel.

What am I missing?

Edit: maybe I'm misreading you, I'm assuming you mean that the 8th shold be kept because you feel this way?