The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Euthanasia? Oh does this mean the abortion debate is finally concluded? I expected it would go on a bit longer. I have all these logical points prepared. And retorts, so many retorts. What will I do now?

professore wrote: »

So basically your mum was swayed by not wanting to be grouped with pro life religious types - I feel the same, they are disgraceful and irrational, but that doesn't make them totally wrong.

Your other family member was swayed by self interest - I have to say that's a very poor reason for changing your mind on something.

She was swayed because after just accepting the pro life stance for years she went did some proper research ,not just reading a youth defence leaflet, on what it really involves and why women would choose to do it. It might have pro-lifers acting stupidly that motivated her to do it but having more knowledge on the topic and then changing her opinion based on that knowledge seems reasonable to me

And I don't know what debate she watched, but they may not have been religious at all. Many pro-lifers aren't and it gets tiresome to hear them all labelled as Ned Flanders types. They can still behave just as badly. You can have pro-choice religious people as well.

So what if she was? As good a reason as any. Her circumstance could have changed and it was a wake up call to actually learn about it and that this isn't a topic that just affects other women. Could well have been her booking that flight.

infogiver wrote: »

Well, we'll all be dead before the possibility of a referendum is even discussed in the Dail

Nope. They're not quick, but don't kid yourself.

infogiver wrote: »

and another poster was wondering what will be next and I thought gender quotas and another poster disagreed and said that gender quotas are not relevant to progressive liberals but euthanasia is.
Its all about individuals deciding when life begins and ends, it seems, the way forward for the brave new Ireland...

The term you're looking for is "bodily autonomy".

Game Face MCGee wrote: »

but I genuinely get a real pang or guilt or sadness when I think about the child/fetus (whatever side of the fence you sit) being terminated. I just cant shake it

Ultimately that's down to personal feelings. Although I'm pro-choice, I'm not going to say, "yeah whatever", when it comes to the loss of a foetus, be that naturally or through choice. There was a potential there, no doubt about it.

But for me, if one looks at the developing foetus dispassionately, that's all it was, potential. There wasn't yet a living, breathing individual with thoughts and feelings, with the ability to grow and learn independently.

I don't think it's possible for anyone to tell you how or what you should feel about it. All you can really do is think about how you feel about it, examine why you feel that way and decide if that's a reasonable way to feel about it, or if you're allowing your judgement to be clouded.

And FWIW - if it helps to "judge" where I'm coming from while you read my post - I'm a father of 2, and one miscarriage.

when people "celebrate" and are "overjoyed" about getting closer to legal abortion I just feel upset and think "how can you be so happy about this"
not sure if I'm in the minority on this??

They're happy about being given the choice. About freedom. The problem is that the two sides in the debate are not

"We want to save foetuses" -v- "We want to abort foetuses"

or

"We want to tell women what they can with their bodies" -v- "We want freedom of choice for women about reproduction".

It's

"We want to save foetuses" -v- "We want freedom of choice for women about reproduction".

Because these are not directly opposing viewpoints (a person can both oppose abortion and support choice, for example), then confusion reigns when they're placed side-by-side.

If you're pro-life, seeing people happy about a step towards abortion can appear like they're celebrating the opportunity to kill foetuses.

If you're pro-choice, then someone fighting against the right to choose abortion appears to be an inhumane fascist.

Academic wrote: »

So what happens next? (I'm not asking what people would like to happen next, a question on which we already know there are deep differences so there's to need to re-hash that. I'm asking what people think will happen next.)

Next a Dáil committee will appoint a subcommittee to look at the recommendations, then the chairman will resign and they'll start again, then an election will happen and they'll start again, then they'll report to the full committee, then an election and a new committee, then they'll report to the Minister, then the minister will ask them to look again, then they'll report again, then an election and a new committee. Then they'll report to the new minister, who will bring the report to cabinet, and the Government of the day will commit to adding something to their manifesto for the next election. Then they will lose the next election. Next the responsible Department will be merged with the Dept. of Fisheries and Space Travel, and the incoming minister will commit to studying the report of the committee, but he is new and there are many things higher on his priority list.

This will continue for about 30 years or so.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Next a Dáil committee will appoint a subcommittee to look at the recommendations, then the chairman will resign and they'll start again, then an election will happen and they'll start again, then they'll report to the full committee, then an election and a new committee, then they'll report to the Minister, then the minister will ask them to look again, then they'll report again, then an election and a new committee. Then they'll report to the new minister, who will bring the report to cabinet, and the Government of the day will commit to adding something to their manifesto for the next election. Then they will lose the next election. Next the responsible Department will be merged with the Dept. of Fisheries and Space Travel, and the incoming minister will commit to studying the report of the committee, but he is new and there are many things higher on his priority list.

This will continue for about 30 years or so.

I like the space bit of this.

A Little Pony wrote: »

Morals don't exist in society now. Everyone thinks they can do what they want, when they want. The family life is dying off, less togetherness in society now which is probably why I enjoy my own community as we tend to have a bondness, instead of the empty vessel of multiculturalism which is utterly meaningless.

This is all in your head.

Game Face MCGee wrote: »

I genuinely get a real pang or?guilt or sadness?when I think about the child/fetus (whatever side of the fence you sit) being terminated. I just cant shake it, and when people "celebrate" and are "overjoyed" about getting closer to legal abortion I just feel upset and think "how can you be so happy about this"
not sure if I'm in the minority on this??

Not at all. I have tried to communicate with many people against abortion and their position on it quite often comes down to nothing more than what you describe here. Their position on the matter is entirely emotional, and not at all intellectual.

And why would it not be? We are a species that is hyper-tuned to be protective of our young. An attribute in us that is so hyper active that it triggers when we look at the young of many OTHER species, especially in the bird and mammal domains.

And we also trigger at the vulnerable and the under dog, feeling a hyper sense of justice and wanting to protect them and fight their corner.

And this is an issue of having the abortion debate rationally and civilly. The Pro-Choice position tends to be quiet rational and intellectual before emotional, but we are bringing that to a table where the people on the other side are often very much emotional before intellectual........ which is why they are showing emotive pictures rather than making arguments or clinging to emotive words like "baby" rather than "fetus" and so forth.

So no, I do not think you are in a minority here at all. And in fact I think even the pro-choice people you describe as "celebrating" certain changes are not immune to the emotions you describe either. I know I certainly am not. I just have the ability to check my emotions and parse them through rational discourse and check which ones are worthy and relevant, and which ones I need to simply build a bridge and get over.

But I think "celebrating" is probably the wrong word. I know I, and pretty much every pro-choice campaigner I have had any deep conversations with, would "celebrate" a world where no abortions happen at all. That would be worth celebrating. Wishing people to have the CHOICE of abortion does not mean we prefer them to be taking that choice. We would ideally want a word where 100% of people had the choice of abortion but 0% of them ever took it or required it.

So we would prefer to "Celebrate" any successful initiative that reduces people needing that choice. Better and EARLIER sex education in schools. Cheaper and more effective and more widely accessible contraception. Better financial support for parents, especially single parents, who are making a choice for abortion solely due to financial or resource pressures. And so on and so on and so on.

kunst nugget wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Morals don't exist in society now. Everyone thinks they can do what they want, when they want. The family life is dying off, less togetherness in society now which is probably why I enjoy my own community as we tend to have a bondness, instead of the empty vessel of multiculturalism which is utterly meaningless.

What's this bilge got to do with what he was saying?

Baiting, of course.

A Little Pony wrote: »

Mankind as a term is now up for debate, gender neutral bathrooms and other such guff. Welcome to 21st century cultural marxism.

Oh I dunno. I have not yet waded into the whole gender identity discourse myself. I am wholly ignorant of it, and all the trans-gender issues and terminology and what they want to call themselves and so forth. I hold my hands up and simply admit almost total ignorance on the issue and hope to sit down with someone who can explain it all to me. There have been a few coherent posters on this site who seem to know the ins and outs of the whole thing and I would love a few hours of their time.

But the whole issue of bathrooms to me is totally separate from modern gender identity and transgender-ism and other issues. From the age of 6, which is about 3 decades ago now, I have found the idea of public bathrooms being segregated by sex AT ALL to be ridiculous in the first place. And it is a feeling that has never left me since.

And I do not see that as me seeking "to ruin everything and anything". I see it as something that is just not that great an idea in the first place.

What it has to do with a thread on abortion however, I have to admit, is also entirely unknown to me

frag420 wrote: »

Tell us about this one dimensional community of ponies where everyone agrees...

I have an image now of a herd of ponies wearing bowlers and sashes trotting behind a pipe and drum band.

A Little Pony wrote: »

Morals don't exist in society now. Everyone thinks they can do what they want, when they want. The family life is dying off, less togetherness in society now which is probably why I enjoy my own community as we tend to have a bondness, instead of the empty vessel of multiculturalism which is utterly meaningless.

I'm not sure i would like to live in a bubble like that.

A Little Pony wrote: »

Of course it is as is every view anyone has ever held in human history. That is my view. If you think fundamental rules shouldn't exist, then just let everyone do what they want in society. We shouldn't have laws on anything.

Presumably those fundamental rules should come from a really old book?