The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Doltanian wrote: »

And it will be No vote believe me, upto €1 billion will be pumped into Ireland to ensure it is a No vote, this is one battle Soros will not win. Today is the 100th Anniversary of the Bolshevik takeover and they have cost the lives of over 150million people in Europe in the last century with their destructive policies.

Dafuq are you on about?

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

FWIW, if it were up to me, I'd remove all legal regulation of abortion. Leave it totally for doctors to decide, in consultation with their patients. There would still be plenty refused, because doctors decide it's not in their best interests.

have to disagree with you there. If there is no regulation then there is no legal reason to deny someone an abortion. While individual doctors might say no people would get it done somewhere else.

captbarnacles wrote:

This country is embarrassing sometimes.

Only sometimes?

eviltwin wrote: »

Hold your horses there a second. We don't even know what we are being asked to vote on. It might just be a vote on repealing the amendment which will change little for women like the one in the article. Abortion will still be illegal and will need to be legislated for and that could take years.

If we are being asked to allow abortion for FFA, like the case in the article, the voters would allow it by a huge majority. Unlike some most Irish people are compassionate and realistic where FFA is concerned.

??

We're clearly being asked to vote no on a Bolshevik takeover.

Doltanian wrote: »

Better than taxpayer funded murder of the unborn. One of the most rights is the right to life however liberals obviously don't want to extend that human right to defenceless babies who haven't had the chance to be born or grow.

Doltanian wrote: »

Better than taxpayer funded murder of the unborn.

function EmoteEmoteEmote() {

Doltanian wrote: »

......... defenceless babies who haven't had the chance to be born or grow.

}

The link below leads to some very graphic photos. You have been warned

Holoprosencephaly :



http://bit.ly/2zqMTRK



The overall prevalence of holoprosencephaly is 1/16000 live birth. It has been associated with autosomal-dominant, recessive and monogenic inheritance, infectious (cytomegalovirus, toxoplasmosis), toxic (hydantoin), maternal diabetes, first trimester bleeding and dizygotic twinning

.

gctest50 wrote: »

function EmoteEmoteEmote() {


}

That link should have a warnin, in fairness.

Doltanian wrote: »

Better than taxpayer funded murder of the unborn. One of the most rights is the right to life however liberals obviously don't want to extend that human right to defenceless babies who haven't had the chance to be born or grow.

Even if the unborn will never live?

bear1 wrote: »

Yep.
This Saturday 1 year ago my son died or at least that's when the doctors time the death as cause it could have been about 2 weeks prior.
We knew in September something was wrong when the scans were coming back incomplete.
By October we knew the child will either die inside the womb or during birth.
I wouldn't wish the agony and torture of that on my worst enemy.
It opened my eyes to the whole abortion debate and i honestly think it should be allowed but there will need to be a cut off point and not simply allowed cause you didn't use protection.
I'll also say, having gone through all that, that the procedure itself is heartwrenching.
No one really focuses on the father, who is usually sitting outside the room waiting for the doctor to come with a black body bag to bring your son away who didn't even have a chance in life but not cause we didn't want him to have but ****ing nature ran its course.

I'm probably going off on a tangent at this point so I'll just bow out.

I remember you posting about that, Bear, when it happened, and I've often thought about you since. Yes I think it's just as awful for the father in a different way, being under pressure to be "strong" and to keep it all together.
I hope you're both doing as well as possible now.

I do just want to say one thing though, which is that the idea that women carry a pregnancy for months and months and then decide they want an abortion is just not true. In the UK where the limit is 24 weeks, the vast majority of all terminations take place before 14 or 15 weeks. Because no woman in her right mind would choose to have a late termination "just because she can".

Late terminations are all for serious reasons. Even the very few that are not medical are for reasons like young girls who were unable to tell anyone before, sometimes because they were the victims of abuse.

That said I have nothing against there being a time limit, if that's what the majority vote for. I just don't think it's actually needed, and may end up causing its own problems. Like women affected by Zika who don't know how badly affected the baby is: if they have to decide before a certain date, they may be pushed into terminating out of fear of the baby being terribly disabled, but they won't actually know. That would be terrible.

Doltanian wrote: »

And it will be No vote believe me, upto €1 billion will be pumped into Ireland to ensure it is a No vote, this is one battle Soros will not win. Today is the 100th Anniversary of the Bolshevik takeover and they have cost the lives of over 150million people in Europe in the last century with their destructive policies.

Doltanian wrote: »

And it will be No vote believe me, up to €1 billion will be pumped into Ireland to ensure it is a No vote ,

And where is all this money for those that might need a little help after going through heartbreak ?

gctest50 wrote: »

And where is all this money for those that might need a little help after going through heartbreak ?

Yeah, like most of this crowd care. Didn't Youth Defence try and get benefits cut off for single mothers sure? The antichoice extremists don't care one iota for the women involved, or indeed the men. They just want to press their agenda. Not all of em, but the vocal ones are certainly like this.

circadian wrote: »

Not sure how mods feel about Reddit posts being linked here but this one is something that has stuck with me. https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/5m4lx9/_/

Warning: swearing and graphic description of FFA.

It's from a father's point of view, and imagining what these poor people went through. What thousands of poor people went through, and continue to do so just because others don't want abortion, in any shape or form, drives me up the walls.

Another point, if you're anti abortion and especially if you disagree even in medical conditions you should read it. Read it and tell me you still don't think an abortion was the right thing to do.

That is just awful. Those poor people. I just wanted to give that poor man a hug

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Who cares about logic when there's slut-shaming to be done?

you get a bit of that sometimes

Doltanian wrote: »

Judging by some of the Instagram whores and snapchat sluts I follow we badly need another recession and quick.

Doltanian wrote: »

Better than taxpayer funded murder of the unborn. One of the most rights is the right to life however liberals obviously don't want to extend that human right to defenceless babies who haven't had the chance to be born or grow.

It's absolutely meaningless to talk about the unborn's human rights if you're not out there looking to repeal the 13th Amendment. 25 years ago, nearly two thirds of voters put a woman’s freedom to travel above the unborn’s right to life, and since then, I’ve not met once single “pro lifer” who wants to reverse that.

maxsmum wrote: »

Maybe someone legal would know whether, if the country voted No in a referendum, we'd still be liable for these payouts under Human Rights law?

We’d still be liable. A No vote wouldn’t absolve us of our obligations under human rights treaties, all of which are treaties we’ve voluntarily entered into. It just makes it harder to reconcile any conflicts that may arise between our laws and those treaties.

Nice to see the lying about the cause of Savita's demise has died down.

Valerie Fat Turbojet wrote: »

As far as I'm concerned, someone else's rights don't trump mine.

Well, as far as the law is concerned, they can.

I'm not going to put my body or mind through something I'm not able for, or don't want to, to give someone rights.

Cool, well, that's all well and good once what you choose to do is legal wherever it is that you reside but if you were say 30 weeks pregnant and resided in the UK (for example) and took some abortion pills resulting in the death of your baby, you would most likely be imprisoned.

If something's impacting my health or mental wellbeing it's in my best interests to deal with that whatever way I see fit.

Not necessarily. I mean, is prison in your best interests?

Predicted response # 1:

"Who said anything about being 30 weeks pregnant!!?"

Well, you never specified gestational stage, you just said that you would do whatever you want when pregnant.

Predicted response # 2:

"If the baby has a ffa then why....."

I'll stop you there. Total agree with abortions carried out for ffa but again, you never specified such a condition being present.

Predicted response # 3:

"The vast majority of abortions happen long b...."

I'll stop you there again. Yes, the majority of abortions happen long before the gestational stage I used as an example but I did so not to suggest that women are chomping at the bit to have such abortions, but to merely illustrate how yes, you can think anyway you like about what you feel it is that you should be able to do when you are pregnant, but the reality is that in most civilized societies there are laws about what pregnant women can and cannot do with the babies they are carrying and for good reason.

So unless your life is in danger, or the fetus has a ffa, then it might be best if you don't just do "whatever you see fit" just because you "don't want" to be pregnant as you might not like the consequences.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-tyne-35121524