8th amendment referendum part 3 - Mod note and FAQ in post #1

.......

This post has been deleted.

Hotblack Desiato

wingsof daun wrote: »

Religion doesn't exist to give you rights, it's to guide you back to God and to suppress evil in society. Women should be respected and treated well but women's rights is a modern day invention.

Whereas religion is a much older invention

SusieBlue

trixi001 wrote: »

I am not a yes voter - on balance I believe a no vote is the lesser of 2 evils, the referendum is not about changing the wording of the 8th to recognize the right not to cause significant harm of the mother, it is too fully repeal the 8th amendment.
The plan is to then introduce abortion on demand, which I will never be comfortable with.
Yes, no one would ever force me to have an abortion, but it will be expected in cases of FFA, I wonder how many pregnancies where an FFA is found in the UK proceed to full term?
Even back in the 1980's the doctors placed significant pressure on my mother to have an amniocentitous test to see if her children had the same condition as my sister that died - she was strong enough to resist that pressure as there was a risk of miscarriage, and she would not have travelled to England for an abortion regardless, so the test was subjecting her and her baby to pointless risk,

No it absolutely will not. Abortion in any circumstances will not be mandatory. Your are using hyperbole to scaremonger.

I was only watching an episode of One Born Every Minute last week where the mum had a baby with an FFA.
She was treated with compassion, understanding, and was given excellent care. She gave birth naturally and spent time with her baby before he passed away.
She and her son were treated with dignity and love.
I only wish we treated our own women the same here.

DrumSteve

Genuinely cannot wait to vote Yes at this stage so I don't have to listen to the ****ing Iona Institute and Maria Steen for at least another few years.

trixi001

trixi001 wrote: »

I am saying that I don't know if I have the right to deny my child a few weeks or  a few hours of life?
It strikes me that it would be selfish for me to deny them that short life, because I think it would be the lesser of 2 evils to terminate my pregnancy now, than to continue it and give birth to a seriously ill baby.
What would be the criteria be for deciding what is a FFA - how short of a life must a baby be expected to have for it to be a FFA?
We would love a child, but the possibility of this is too real for us

but you don't have to have an abortion.
you admit yourself that the very real risk you have of having a baby with FFA is putting you off getting pregnant. so, you are choosing not to get pregnant because you know the risks.
You won't be forced to have an abortion.

how about women who find out they are pregnant and the feotus has FFA? they didn't know, like you. that there was a risk. Why would you stop them from deciding what is right for them & their family? for their pregnancy?

What if I forced you to undergo a termination if you fall pregnant & the feotus has a FFA? Is that fair to you? your family ? your child?

kylith

trixi001 wrote: »

For FFA, who decides what is a FFA,
If I have children, there is a significant chance they could have the same condition as my sister, in current Ireland the default position is that I continue with the pregnancy as normal and have my child, if the 8th is repealed will the default be abortion? It is not a decision I would want to make, as someone for whom having a child with a FFA is a real possibility

You would decide. There will never be a situation in this country where you will be diagnosed with FFA and then forced to abort.

HOWEVER by voting no you would be forcing people who have received such a diagnosis and who are not able to continue with pregnancy and birth knowing that the baby will die to do so, or to travel to the U.K. and smuggle the remains of the child they wanted back in the boot of their car, or to be couriered back like an Amazon delivery.

You don’t want to be forced to have an abortion. Do you think it is fair to force people to watch their baby die?

wexie

wingsof daun wrote: »

Religion doesn't exist to give you rights, it's to guide you back to God and to suppress evil in society.

You're right in that indeed.

Religion is much better at taking rights away, I wouldn't be too sure on the suppressing of evil either. Seems to me religion is responsible for plenty of it's own evil

pleas advice

SusieBlue wrote: »

The hospital not wanting to be first is neither here nor there.
The fact of the matter is that the woman in question received COMPROMISED healthcare even after the law changed.
No lessons were clearly learned from Savita. There is no reason to assume this won't happen again.
Public opinion and the law didn't stop it from happening before..

Earlier in this thread, or possibly the last one, a poster compared her treatment during pregnancy here to what it was like in Britain under the NHS. She placed all the blame for any inferior treatment here squarely with the 8th.
Do you think our healthcare system will magically transform over time to something like the NHS once the 8th is removed?

joe40

trixi001 wrote: »

joe40 wrote: »

trixi001 wrote: »

I am very much a no supporter, as I do not believe in abortion on demand.

I do have significant concerns regarding the health care given to pregnant women, but I firmly believe this is down to medical guidelines.

The law (and the constitution) allows for abortion where the life of the mother is a risk, the risk does not have to be imminent, it just has to be real and substantial (ie in cases of cancer, abortion is allowed by the constitution, so that cancer treatment can be provided)

I have no objection to the life of the mother also including the quality of life - ie: if continuing the pregnancy is going to cause significant harm to the health of the mother, that it drastically affects her quality of life (long term), then I do support her being allowed an abortion.

I recognize that there are a number of hard cases - such as rape and FFA, however repealing the 8th will lead to hard cases such as a young pregnant woman being forced into an abortion by an abusive partner.

For FFA, who decides what is a FFA, my sister lived for only 6 weeks after she was born, should I have the right to deny a child of mine 6 weeks of life? My mum declined scans with her 2 future children, as she didn't want to know if they had the same condition.
If I have children, there is a significant chance they could have the same condition as my sister, in current Ireland the default position is that I continue with the pregnancy as normal and have my child, if the 8th is repealed will the default be abortion? It is not a decision I would want to make, as someone for whom having a child with a FFA is a real possibility, I do not support repealing the 8th and then having to decide which is the best outcome, giving birth to my son or daughter and watching them die or not even giving them the chance to be born?

Abortion is a very emotive subject, and is not the same as the same sex marriage.

Same sex marriage effected only the couple getting married, abortion affects more, if you view the unborn as a child, abortion obviously affects them, it affects fathers or potential fathers, it is not the same as the Same Sex Marriage, and a number of people who supported SSM (including me) will not be supporting repealing the 8th

So you are saying that because you would not like to have to make the decision, that is grounds for not allowing anyone to make that decision for themselves in that situation.
Does that not strike you as a  bit selfish.

I am saying that I don't know if I have the right to deny my child a few weeks or  a few hours of life?
It strikes me that it would be selfish for me to deny them that short life, because I think it would be the lesser of 2 evils to terminate my pregnancy now, than to continue it and give birth to a seriously ill baby.
What would be the criteria be for deciding what is a FFA - how short of a life must a baby be expected to have for it to be a FFA?
We would love a child, but the possibility of this is too real for us

I do sympathise, with your position, and whatever decision you make during a pregnancy involving a FFA would be your decision and yours alone.

Repealing the 8th will have no impact on that. That is the point I'm making. You will still be free to make your choice for whatever is right for you and your partner.

A NO vote just simply removes that choice from someone else.

I do hope things work out for you, but for me the pain for both parents but especially the mother of going through wit a FFA, watching the child possibly suffer for its short life would be unbearable for me.

Life is precious but not at any cost.

freshpopcorn

dudara wrote: »

One of them tried to push me off the road recently, when I was signaling to merge. Let’s say I was surprised

Must have being a big sticker!:D

Sofiztikated

trixi001 wrote: »

I am saying that I don't know if I have the right to deny my child a few weeks or  a few hours of life?
It strikes me that it would be selfish for me to deny them that short life, because I think it would be the lesser of 2 evils to terminate my pregnancy now, than to continue it and give birth to a seriously ill baby.
What would be the criteria be for deciding what is a FFA - how short of a life must a baby be expected to have for it to be a FFA?
We would love a child, but the possibility of this is too real for us

I think you might be under the assumption that if a doctor says you have a baby with FFA, that's the end of it, and pregnancy IS terminated.

If you get pregnant, and the outlook isn't good for the fetus, you can continue to bring it to term, should you so wish. I'd stand by you in that choice, and hope that you were safe, secure, and in a place to deal with it properly.

The same way, if a woman didn't think she could do that, and terminating the pregnancy was her choice, she gets the same, that she is safe, secure, and in a place to deal with it properly.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

wexie wrote: »

You were attributing an opinion or post to me, I'm just letting you know you were doing that wrongly



See? Not my point.

Oh right. Sorry. You jumped in on a point being argued by me and another poster and I thought you were one and the same person.

wexie

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

Oh right. Sorry. You jumped in on a point being argued by me and another poster and I thought you were one and the same person.

Yeah me and Kylith get that a lot, can barely tell us apart really

retro:electro

trixi001 wrote: »

Yes, no one would ever force me to have an abortion, but it will be expected in cases of FFA,

No it won’t. Get a grip of yourself, ffs.

But as barbaric as that sounds, that is how some women feel the law caters to them at this point in time, when they have no option BUT to carry FFA pregnancies to term, knowing their babies won’t make it.
Horrible isn’t it?

Aniya Moldy Trowel

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

No they're arguing the stance of the Catholic Church on abortion as a human rights issue. They're not simply saying, it's a sin so no one should do it. They have a human rights argument to back it up.

So it's not like, for instance, trying to make it the law that everyone has to go to Mass on Sunday, or abstain from eating meat on Good Friday. They're purely theological rules, abortion has a human rights dimension.

https://www.amnesty.ie/un-human-rights-committee-finds-irelands-abortion-ban-violates-womens-human-rights/

which human rights are they trying to argue exactly?

SusieBlue

pleas advice wrote: »

Earlier in this thread, or possibly the last one, a poster compared her treatment during pregnancy here to what it was like in Britain under the NHS. She placed all the blame for any inferior treatment here squarely with the 8th.
Do you think our healthcare system will magically transform over time to something like the NHS once the 8th is removed?

I think a lot of the problems in our healthcare system are nothing to do with the 8th - underfunded, underpaid, overworked staff, etc.

I'm currently being treated as an outpatient and cannot speak highly enough of the care I'm receiving. The nurse who I normally see is an angel. She is amazing at her job.

There are people in every industry who are good and bad at their jobs.

I do think that the 8th restricts and compromises maternity care for sure, but the fact that medical staff are overworked and under resourced has a lot to do with it too.

freshpopcorn

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

They're probably giving them out at mass at this stage.

My parents go to mass and my father is like a Jackdaw(He pick up everything) and he didn't get one.
He has loads of Yes/No stuff, leaflets of periods/etc from he visits the doctor but no stickers from either side.

.......

This post has been deleted.

wexie

Sofiztikated wrote: »

I think you might be under the assumption that if a doctor says you have a baby with FFA, that's the end of it, and pregnancy IS terminated.

If you get pregnant, and the outlook isn't good for the fetus, you can continue to bring it to term, should you so wish. I'd stand by you in that choice, and hope that you were safe, secure, and in a place to deal with it properly.

The same way, if a woman didn't think she could do that, and terminating the pregnancy was her choice, she gets the same, that she is safe, secure, and in a place to deal with it properly.

I understand there are many many other considerations in this debate.

But to me this is what it all comes down to...just choice.

And I'd like to give people (in general) more choices rather than less and I don't feel I have any business at all in interfering with those choices.

trixi001

I do not believe I have the right to choose not to let my child live, just because its life will be short.
It is not simply a matter of it being easier not to have to make the decision.
FFA's are a very emotive and complex subject - but I don't believe repealing the 8th and allowing abortion on demand for whatever reason is a price worth paying to allow people to have a abortion in cases of FFA.

SireOfSeth

trixi001 wrote: »

I am not a yes voter - on balance I believe a no vote is the lesser of 2 evils, the referendum is not about changing the wording of the 8th to recognize the right not to cause significant harm of the mother, it is too fully repeal the 8th amendment.
The plan is to then introduce abortion on demand, which I will never be comfortable with.
Yes, no one would ever force me to have an abortion, but it will be expected in cases of FFA, I wonder how many pregnancies where an FFA is found in the UK proceed to full term?
Even back in the 1980's the doctors placed significant pressure on my mother to have an amniocentitous test to see if her children had the same condition as my sister that died - she was strong enough to resist that pressure as there was a risk of miscarriage, and she would not have travelled to England for an abortion regardless, so the test was subjecting her and her baby to pointless risk,

I understand that you don’t want to ever have an abortion, but are you okay with forced a women to stay pregnant against her wishes? And if so, how is that regulated? If a woman is discovered to be thinking about having an abortion, should she be detained in Ireland until she has had the birth? If a woman is discovered to have had an abortion, should she go to prison? Only way I can see this working is... for the decision to terminate a pregnancy being between the pregnant woman (and her doctor).

wexie

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

abortion has a human rights dimension.

Well you're right in that :

Bodily integrity is the inviolability of the physical body and emphasizes the importance of personal autonomy and the self-determination of human beings over their own bodies. In the field of human rights, violation of the bodily integrity of another is regarded as an unethical infringement, intrusive, and possibly criminal

SusieBlue

trixi001 wrote: »

I do not believe I have the right to choose not to let my child live, just because its life will be short.
It is not simply a matter of it being easier not to have to make the decision.
FFA's are a very emotive and complex subject - but I don't believe repealing the 8th and allowing abortion on demand for whatever reason is a price worth paying to allow people to have a abortion in cases of FFA.

So you're offering those families in tragic, distressing circumstances up as collateral damage because you aren't sure if its what you'd do yourself, and because you want to keep the "bad" abortions out.

kylith

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

kylith wrote: »

Hang in, sonthey’re arguing from a HUMAN RIGHTS basis? NOT a religious one? Then they’re outside their remit and should not be using their status as a religious charity to campaign.

No they're arguing the stance of the Catholic Church on abortion as a human rights issue. They're not simply saying, it's a sin so no one should do it. They have a human rights argument to back it up.

So it's not like, for instance, trying to make it the law that everyone has to go to Mass on Sunday, or abstain from eating meat on Good Friday. They're purely theological rules, abortion has a human rights dimension.

The UN has stated that the 8th amendment is a contravention of human rights.

Either way, the rules for charities state No Politics. So either the Iona should stop campaigning or give up the benefit she of charitable status.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Sofiztikated

trixi001 wrote: »

I do not believe I have the right to choose not to let my child live, just because its life will be short.
It is not simply a matter of it being easier not to have to make the decision.
FFA's are a very emotive and complex subject - but I don't believe repealing the 8th and allowing abortion on demand for whatever reason is a price worth paying to allow people to have a abortion in cases of FFA.

You might not want to, or have to make a decision like that.

Other people don't have the luxury of not wanting to, or having to make that decision. They need to make that decision.

neonsofa

Just her wrote: »

neonsofa wrote: »

A dead/dying person generally has all the same parts as a living person. Doesn't mean they're alive and well.

How is a dead or dying person equivalent to an unborn baby. No one is going out of their way to end their existence. Presumably you are talking of someone dying of natural causes.

You're the one who deemed a foetus having "all the same parts as a baby" relevant. A foetus may have all the "same parts" but that doesnt equate to it being a viable fully formed living human being.

wingsof daun

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Whereas religion is a much older invention

Maybe, but the laws for humanity must come from the Creator, man creates his own religious systems which r never perfect. Whereas, christianity is a way of life given to us by Christ. We can never accept Islam. Christ taught Thou shalt not kill, so we can;t call us a christian ppl if we perform abortions.

trixi001

trixi001 wrote: »

I do not believe I have the right to choose not to let my child live, just because its life will be short.
It is not simply a matter of it being easier not to have to make the decision.
FFA's are a very emotive and complex subject - but I don't believe repealing the 8th and allowing abortion on demand for whatever reason is a price worth paying to allow people to have a abortion in cases of FFA.

that is pretty heartless tbh, you know the heartache someone goes through when they have a child who dies. You can even see that women pregnant with FFA should be allowed to have the choice, but you won't allow it because you feel 'others' may also have abortions.

SusieBlue

wingsof daun wrote: »

Maybe, but the laws for humanity must come from the Creator, man creates his own religious systems which r never perfect. Whereas, christianity is a way of life given to us by Christ. We can never accept Islam. Christ taught Thou shalt not kill, so we can;t call us a christian ppl if we perform abortions.

What has the benefits of Christianity and Islam got to do with the 8th amendment?

I'm not a practicing Christian. Why should my healthcare be restricted because of someone else's beliefs?