The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Ave Sodalis

thee glitz wrote: »

Ye - I saw this before, but it doesn't make any sense.

What doesn't make sense about it?

AtomicHorror

MkaylaK wrote: »

I cannot justify destroying innocent human life.

What if the innocent human life will die anyway, but by continuing to exist puts a second innocent human life at risk of death?

MkaylaK wrote: »

I cannot understand why we would want to end the lives of babies after 12 weeks for conditions such as cleft palette and down syndrome etc.

The legislation won't allow for that.

MkaylaK wrote: »

I cannot understand what difference there is in a foetus at 11 weeks and 6 days than at 12 weeks and 1 day. Why does the 12 week mark hold such significance?

We can draw the line at conception, at birth, or somewhere in between. I consider 12 weeks to be largely meaningless, since birth is the only moment that really matters.

MkaylaK wrote: »

At the end of the day, for an abortion to be carried out, a heartbeat has to be deliberately stopped. We know what that is called outside of the womb, so what is the difference inside the womb?

About this time last year, I watched as my aunt's heart was stopped by various actions and inactions of medical personnel and our family. It was called mercy- since her choices were to hold on in an increasing state of suffering, or to let go. Context determines what stopping a heart is called.

Implying unkind things about those who have to make the hard choices in life is for small people. Don't be a small person.

MkaylaK wrote: »

Remember, the same heart beats in you today as it did when your mother was pregnant with you, the whole way throughout her pregnancy.

How can that be true? A foetal heart contains far fewer cells than and adult one. By mass, your own heart must be at least 90% new material.

Assuming this factoid were true, what would it mean? Your heart is just an organ like your kidneys, liver or stomach. It pumps blood. If you put someone else's heart in there, you don't become a different person.

Your brain is what matters, and you most certainly don't have the brain of a foetus.

MkaylaK wrote: »

From reading this thread, I know many people will disagree with me and that's ok, but please stay respectful.

You'll get respect so long as you show willingness to move from dogmatic positions to factual ones!

thee glitz

DubInMeath wrote: »

thee glitz wrote: »

The point was about people with DS.

And under the 8th they could be criminalised if they or a guardian access abortion for them.

I don't think they could be criminalised if forced to have an abortion. I'm not even sure they'd have much of a clue what was happening. How many people with DS do we have in prisons, for 14 years? This is nonsense...

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

What doesn't make sense about it?

How a window for allowing abortion without regard to necessity is related to that in which most miscarraiges occur.

baylah17

thee glitz wrote: »

DubInMeath wrote: »

thee glitz wrote: »

The point was about people with DS.

And under the 8th they could be criminalised if they or a guardian access abortion for them.

I don't think they could be criminalised if forced to have an abortion. I'm not even sure they'd have much of a clue what was happening. How many people with DS do we have in prisons, for 14 years? This is nonsense...

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

What doesn't make sense about it?

How a window for allowing abortion without regard to necessity is related to that in which most miscarraiges occur.

Same ****.e different day

Martina1991

I was just playing angry birds and ads come up every 2 mins. Usually they're ads for other games.

A "Love both " ad now keeps coming up.

How much did that cost.

ColdTurkey

Martina1991 wrote: »

Do you think you have the right to tell these women in crisis what is best for them.

This is the crux of the argument for me, what right do we have over women's bodies? The answer is none. None.

thee glitz

thee glitz wrote: »

I don't think they could be criminalised if forced to have an abortion. I'm not even sure they'd have much of a clue what was happening. How many people with DS do we have in prisons, for 14 years? This is nonsense...



How a window for allowing abortion without regard to necessity is related to that in which most miscarraiges occur.

Nope it sounds like your dismissing what could happen based on the legislation as it stands due to it not suiting your agenda to be honest.

And no one said that they would be forced to abort, I certainly didn't.

Given that you have previously stated that rape victiums are just a happy coincidence for people supporting repeal, your ignoring that someone with down syndrome could fall under this case, while stating how foetuses who are diagnosed with having the condition will be aborted wholesale if the 8th is repealed

baylah17

Martina1991 wrote: »

I was just playing angry birds and ads come up every 2 mins. Usually they're ads for other games.

A "Love both " ad now keeps coming up.

How much did that cost.

Angry Birds

You mean like Cora Sherlock lookalikes lol

Ave Sodalis

thee glitz wrote: »

How a window for allowing abortion without regard to necessity is related to that in which most miscarraiges occur.

Due to the high uncertainty of viability anyway. In fact, the RCPI describe 12 weeks as a milestone exactly for that reason. If you send them an email, they might be able to give you a full and detailed description.

AtomicHorror

thee glitz wrote: »

I don't think they could be criminalised if forced to have an abortion. I'm not even sure they'd have much of a clue what was happening. How many people with DS do we have in prisons, for 14 years? This is nonsense...

So you would be happy to continue with the status quo? No abortions in Ireland by law, but no consequences for those who circumvent that law?

nozzferrahhtoo

MkaylaK wrote: »

I cannot justify destroying innocent human life.

We live in a society of "innocent until proven guilty". If you want to indict an action then by all means do so. But until you do so, no one needs to mount a defence or a "justification". The word justify implies there is something there TO justify. That is not an honest starting point in the discussion.

Nor is the word "innocent". That word brings implications and suggestions with it too. At 12 weeks in a fetus there is no ONE there to even BE "innocent" in the first place. The word is designed to import a humanization of the fetus before it is due. A philosophical humanisation that is, before our resident taxonomist rushes in to remind us it is human biologically.

MkaylaK wrote: »

I cannot understand why we would want to end the lives of babies after 12 weeks for conditions such as cleft palette and down syndrome etc.

That is ONE single reason out of the MULTITUDE of reasons women have for seeking abortion. If you are going to demand people "stay respectful" on this thread then it would pay to act in kind. Starting by not being reductionist in this way by distilling a HOST of motivations and diverse life narratives down to a one liner.

MkaylaK wrote: »

I cannot understand what difference there is in a foetus at 11 weeks and 6 days than at 12 weeks and 1 day. Why does the 12 week mark hold such significance?

What is different in a girl at 15 years and 364 days that prevents her from consenting to sex? What is so special about 16 years old where in many places she gains the ability yo consent?

What is different in a person at 17 years and 264 days that somehow the next day he is allowed buy and consume alcohol?

The difference is law. It might not make sense but we OFTEN write somewhat arbitrary time lines into laws. Because it is workable that way.

As for what is significant about 12 weeks..... it is similarly SOMEWHAT arbitrary, but in biology this denotes pretty close the border between trimesters. Which is why people gravitate towards it. But also very consistently worldwide the VAST majority of abortions happen in or before week 12. So the reason people go to 12 weeks as a cut off is that this cut off facilitates almost the totality of women who actually seek abortions.

MkaylaK wrote: »

At the end of the day, for an abortion to be carried out, a heartbeat has to be deliberately stopped.

We stop heart beats when we produce food like burgers and sausages too. Why in particular is a heart interesting to you? You seem to be bothered by the illusion of arbitraryness with regards "12 weeks" yet randomly picking one organ in the entire development process is about as arbitrary as it gets really. What is so special about the heart compared to, say, the spleen or the liver?

MkaylaK wrote: »

I'm sorry, I don't know what exactly you mean by saying that my 'sentences are wrapped up in tinsel'and not once did I label anybody a 'killer'.

I think the user was referring to your "We know what that is called outside of the womb" rhetoric, the implications of which is pretty clear.

Though feel free to be explicit about what word you were talking about, rather than this cloak and dagger stuff you engage in while demanding respect from others. Give respect to get respect would be my advice there.

Wrongway1985

MkaylaK wrote: »

At the end of the day, for an abortion to be carried out, a heartbeat has to be deliberately stopped. We know what that is called outside of the womb, so what is the difference inside the womb?
Remember, the same heart beats in you today as it did when your mother was pregnant with you, the whole way throughout her pregnancy

Yes which means for example that a child with zero per cent of survival in current circumstances a woman has to carry the child until clinically dead, can't even begin to imagine the added trauma that would cause.

You are saying you can't understand for such matters so decide for everyone else, the reality is abortion will still occur as it has done, personally haven't seen regular instances of people being criminalized for purchasing abortion pills or being forced to purchase flights to the UK. The unfortunate matter should be between a woman and her doctor. Not sure why we must persist with making things more difficult for those struggling it is beyond cruel imo.

horseburger

pitifulgod wrote: »

You want to remain respectful but do you think that you are respectful by shaming them or implying they're 'killers' for ending a pregnancy? You can wrap sentences up in tinsel but your implications are pretty clear.

Recognising that an abortion is not the end of a pregnancy, but in fact the ending of a life, does not mean that the poster to whom you replied, referred to people as 'killers'.

Every birth could be described as the ending of a pregnancy, since every birth coincides with the ending of a pregnancy.

This is the issue highlighted by Donal Lynch on an episode of Claire Bryne Live, on RTE One on Monday 5th September 2016.

He said that "the humanity of the foetus is denied even by people who want abortion on demand, like myself". He said that if advocates for a wider availability of abortion, continue to use phrases and euphemisms like the 'ending of a pregnancy' to describe the ending of the life of the human foetus, that they will have difficulty in helping people to understand their circumstances and their arguments for availability of abortion.

The Legend Of Kira

pitifulgod wrote: »

MkaylaK wrote: »

I'm 18 years old and pro-life. There are certainly some, but definitely not a lot of pro-lifers in my age group.

Firstly, I'd like to say that I truly believe, that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I think that discussion of this highly sensitive issue is important to ensure that everyone is fully informed on both sides of the debate, before they make their decision to vote yes or no.

There is absolutely no need to belittle or disrespect somebody else simply because they have a different view to you. It's important to remain open minded in this debate to make sure that you choose what you believe is the right vote.

These are some of the reasons that I have chosen to be pro life.
I cannot justify destroying innocent human life.
I cannot understand why we would want to end the lives of babies after 12 weeks for conditions such as cleft palette and down syndrome etc.
I cannot understand what difference there is in a foetus at 11 weeks and 6 days than at 12 weeks and 1 day. Why does the 12 week mark hold such significance?
At the end of the day, for an abortion to be carried out, a heartbeat has to be deliberately stopped. We know what that is called outside of the womb, so what is the difference inside the womb?
Remember, the same heart beats in you today as it did when your mother was pregnant with you, the whole way throughout her pregnancy.

From reading this thread, I know many people will disagree with me and that's ok, but please stay respectful.

You want to remain respectful but do you think that you are respectful by shaming them or implying they're 'killers'  for ending a pregnancy? You can wrap sentences up in tinsel but your implications are pretty clear.

The poster he/she is only stating facts when he/she said about a heartbeat being stopped,, why does the truth of the matter bother & offend you ?

AtomicHorror

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

The poster he/she is only stating facts when he/she said about a heartbeat being stopped,, why does the truth of the matter bother & offend you ?

What specific truth was that? What is it called when someone stops a heart outside the womb?

horseburger wrote: »

Recognising that an abortion is not the end of a pregnancy, but in fact the ending of a life, does not mean that the poster to whom you replied, referred to people as 'killers'.

You're ignoring the start of the conversation, despite the fact that you thanked and presumably read it.

To refresh your memory:

MkaylaK wrote: »

At the end of the day, for an abortion to be carried out, a heartbeat has to be deliberately stopped. We know what that is called outside of the womb, so what is the difference inside the womb?

What label would you suggest MkaylaK is implying here?

pitifulgod

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

The poster he/she is only stating facts when he/she said about a heartbeat being stopped,, why does the truth of the matter bother & offend you ?

Because women are routinely shamed over their abortions and I think it's yet another reason on why the eighth needs to be repealed.

erica74

Repeal the 8th.

horseburger

AtomicHorror wrote: »

What specific truth was that? What is it called when someone stops a heart outside the womb?



You're ignoring the start of the conversation, despite the fact that you thanked and presumably read it.

To refresh your memory:



What label would you suggest MkaylaK is implying here?

Mkaylak is recognizing that abortion is the ending of a human life.

Do you think abortion isn't the ending of a human life?

Ave Sodalis

horseburger wrote: »

Mkaylak is recognizing that abortion is the ending of a human life.

Do you think abortion isn't the ending of a human life?

Here we go again...

captbarnacles

horseburger wrote: »

Mkaylak is recognizing that abortion is the ending of a human life.

Do you think abortion isn't the ending of a human life?

At what point is it the ending of human life? fertilisation?

baylah17

horseburger wrote: »

AtomicHorror wrote: »

What specific truth was that? What is it called when someone stops a heart outside the womb?



You're ignoring the start of the conversation, despite the fact that you thanked and presumably read it.

To refresh your memory:



What label would you suggest MkaylaK is implying here?

Mkaylak is recognizing that abortion is the ending of a human life.

Do you think abortion isn't the ending of a human life?

I know it is not the ending of a viable human beings life
Twist that anyway you like

horseburger

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Here we go again...

You're clearly not listening to the reasonable point made by Donal Lynch.

If Ruth Coppinger canvassed on the issue of the referendum, having stated in the Dáil on 7th March 2017, that a pregnant woman is not a mother until the baby is born, despite the obvious care given and precautions taken by a pregnant woman in ensuring the pregnancy develops - and Donal Lynch canvassed on the issue of the referendum, I would very much expect that a person who is not sure what way to vote - having considered different aspects of the debate - would be far more receptive, and likely to be swayed, by the perspective given by Donal Lynch, on the arguments for a wider availability of abortion, than by Ruth Coppinger's arguments.

http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=34782&&CatID=130&StartDate=01 January 2017&OrderAscending=0

https://media.heanet.ie/player/0eab3802edbaf59f7899ee8bd971cdad

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2017030700050?opendocument

MkaylaK

Thank you for your replies and thank you to those who are supporting my original post. I did not intend to cause such a stir.
Due to the amount of replies I will not be able to reply to you all individually, (the leaving cert is fast approaching) but I do not want to be seen as running away from the situation so I will write this final post in response to some of the points raised.

"The legislation won't allow DS and cleft palette babies to be aborted." - Under proposed legislation any baby can be aborted up to 12 weeks without a specific reason and after this time limit, there will be no gestational limits in cases of a foetal condition or on grounds of risk to health. Down syndrome and Cleft palette fall into this category.

"What about the health/rights of pregnant women?"- It's already present in the constitution that a woman's life will always be the priority when pregnant. She will never be refused medical treatment when she needs it.

"Until 17 weeks heart cells beat spontaneously" - My point was always that the heart is beating, spontaneously or otherwise, it's beating.

"Read some 'In her shoes accounts" - I have. Do I think these people are awful people? Of course not but still, it would be hypocritical of me to say that I agree with abortion.

"Do I have a right to tell women in crisis pregnancies what is right for them?" No, but should we give an abortionist the right to end a life? Personally, I don't think so.

"Does a fertilized egg have a right to life?" If it's actively growing and maturing as humans do, then yes.

"What if the baby/foetus will die anyway?"- No doctor can ever diagnose a 0% chance of survival. They have to use the term "life -limiting condition" because they simply do not know if a life will last 5 seconds or 5 years after birth. There are always miracle children. (Please watch a few videos from the YouTube channel "Special books for special kids")

"Why the heart? Why not talk about the spleen or liver" - By all means, substitute whatever organ you wish instead of the heart. The same principle applies.

As I said, this has to be my final post for now as I have to study for the LC, but please remember, it's not too late to change your stance.

horseburger

baylah17 wrote: »

I know it is not the ending of a viable human beings life
Twist that anyway you like

A human life nonetheless. It is not arguable that any newborn baby is viable either, on the basis that it cannot survive on its own.

It needs someone else to care for it and ensure its survival.

Dependency of the baby, on at least one person, does not end when birth takes place.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

amdublin

You don't have to agree with abortion to be pro choice

MkaylaK

Fred Swanson wrote: »

Nope. We make available means to dispose of these. Pro lifers have no problem with the administration of drugs that dispose of fertilised eggs.

I'm sorry if I was unclear. A fertilized egg inside the womb is actively growing and maturing as I stated in my post.
A fertilized egg outside of the womb is another issue, as it cannot grow and mature.

Ave Sodalis

MkaylaK wrote: »

"The legislation won't allow DS and cleft palette babies to be aborted." - Under proposed legislation any baby can be aborted up to 12 weeks without a specific reason and after this time limit, there will be no gestational limits in cases of a foetal condition or on grounds of risk to health. Down syndrome and Cleft palette fall into this category.

Neither of which are diagnosable before 12 weeks

"What about the health/rights of pregnant women?"- It's already present in the constitution that a woman's life will always be the priority when pregnant. She will never be refused medical treatment when she needs it.

Unfortunately, this is not really true and entirely too subjective and is often left until the last possible moment. Reading the aforementioned In Her Shoes, you'll see that many women get diagnosed with an illness and go to England so they can come back for treatment instead of waiting until they are actively dying.

"Until 17 weeks heart cells beat spontaneously" - My point was always that the heart is beating, spontaneously or otherwise, it's beating.

Why is that important? Genuine question.

"Read some 'In her shoes accounts" - I have. Do I think these people are awful people? Of course not but still, it would be hypocritical of me to say that I agree with abortion.

How so?

"Do I have a right to tell women in crisis pregnancies what is right for them?" No, but should we give an abortionist the right to end a life? Personally, I don't think so.

Do you really believe it's the ending of a life? Would you give "abortionists" jail time if you had the choice? Would you prevent them from traveling? What about the fact that abortion is already happening?

"Does a fertilized egg have a right to life?" If it's actively growing and maturing as humans do, then yes.

So you disagree with IVF?

"What if the baby/foetus will die anyway?"- No doctor can ever diagnose a 0% chance of survival. They have to use the term "life -limiting condition" because they simply do not know if a life will last 5 seconds or 5 years after birth. There are always miracle children. (Please watch a few videos from the YouTube channel "Special books for special kids")

No. Just no. I'm sorry but I cannot be respectful of this. There are exceptions to everything. It does not excuse allowing women to suffer just because there is a tiny chance of live birth. What about the pain the birthed baby will be in until it dies? If they're lucky, they'll die within a minute or two. They can survive for hours or days though.

"Why the heart? Why not talk about the spleen or liver" - By all means, substitute whatever organ you wish instead of the heart. The same principle applies.

Again, why?

As I said, this has to be my final post for now as I have to study for the LC, but please remember, it's not too late to change your stance.

I'm afraid you'll have to come up with a more convincing argument than what you have to change my stance.

I realise you said you will not be posting again, but this is for the benefit of anyone reading over the thread.

swampgas

horseburger wrote: »

Do you think abortion isn't the ending of a human life?

Words like "human" and "life" mean many things depending on context.

Does abortion end a human life? Yes and No. Yes, it's a tiny human entity that may (with luck) develop into a baby, a child, a teenager, an adult. No, it's not a "human life" the same way you are. It's just not as developed, it doesn't have much history, it is lacking sentience, memories, thoughts, personality.

Is an embryo or foetus a human life with more value than the independence of the woman carrying it? I would argue not. Certainly not before 12 weeks. Probably not before 24 weeks.

Remember that the pregnant woman is human too, and has a life, and her health, happiness and autonomy all have a lot of value to her and her family.

So please stop banging on, and on, and on, and on, about abortion "ending a human life". Everyone here understands what abortion is and how it does, in a small sense, end a human life, but it is more important to protect grown women than it is to try to force every conception to birth.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.