end of the road wrote: » because it's not going to happen. so i would be campaigning for something that won't happen. however campaigning for the status quo where abortion on demand isn't availible in ireland and those who want it can go to england is actually doable.
end of the road wrote: » the pro-life campaign aren't going to give up the fight just because the referendum supposibly passes.
end of the road wrote: » abortion on demand doesn't effect her bodily autonomy. she is not accessing her bodily autonomy by killing the unborn, which is a separate entity and a separate life ultimately, which will rely on the mother for a time.
end of the road wrote: » well i'm not as i don't engage in trolling. having a different viewpoint to you isn't trolling. this is basic stuff.
end of the road wrote: » i don't agree. if people believe it to be murder that is their view and they are entitled to it. if it's insensitive then that can't be helped but it will be nothing near as insensitive as killing the unborn outside extreme circumstances.
end of the road wrote: » the referendum passing isn't going to make the pro-life campaign go away. they are going nowhere, this isn't going to be a repeat of the SSM referendum.
WhiteRoses wrote: » The pro-birthers will go back under the rock they crawled out of until the next referendum comes around.
end of the road wrote: » no it doesn't. you can support something being illegal but understand that the odd time it is such that sanctions can't be enforced.
Loafing Oaf wrote: » What is the next referendum though? I reckon this is the last major issue for the Catholic Right in Ireland. One might almost say a defeat in this referendum would be the "end of the road" for them...
WhiteRoses wrote: » So we've gone right around the carousel and we've just stopped at the NIMBYisms again. I agree with Pilly, this isn't half getting repetitive.
....... wrote: » This post has been deleted.
seamus wrote: » You've explicitly stated that you're fine with there being no legal sanction. Therefore you support abortion being available.
seamus wrote: » It's possible to not like something being available, but if you don't believe that the state should prevent it from taking place, then you implicitly support its availability no matter how distasteful you may find it.
end of the road wrote: » no, you don't. this is untrue and doesn't stand up. your argument completely fails i'm afraid.
NuMarvel wrote: » You might be right, but we barely hear anything anymore from pro life groups about the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act. For all the protests and flyers they had going at the time, they're remarkably quiet now about legislation that they said allowed "abortion up to birth".
Odhinn wrote: » Imposing travel on irish citizens
for a medical procedure
Odhinn wrote: » Imposing travel on irish citizens for a medical procedure is hypocritical and redolent of the worst narrow minded excesses of irish society.
end of the road wrote: » agreed. however this isn't what is happening here. what is happening here is the state is insuring that bar extreme circumstances, the unborn cannot be killed within it.
thee glitz wrote: » He's hardly encouraging anyone to do so, let alone forcing them. This is somewhere between euphemism and deception - quite the specious argument. The 'medical procedure' ie being torn apart is actually for the baby.
January wrote: » A fetus is not torn apart during an abortion.
WhiteRoses wrote: » You are being deliberately obtuse. By not having abortion in Ireland, the state are forcing women who want to procure one to travel to avail of the medical procedure they feel they need. That is exactly what is happening.
Da Boss wrote: Ireland will hopefully vote correctly and as a result thousands of lives would be saved.
Doctor Jimbob wrote: A better way to reduce the amount of abortions happening would be to have better sexual education, better access to methods preventing conception in people who don't want kids (i.e. no guilting people out of sterilisation procedures), and better support for struggling parents. But of course most of that would involve having mature conversations about dirty, immoral, sex. The horror.
Da Boss wrote: » I really hope that the pro life group are successful and the upcoming referendum fails . It would be a victory for humanity, a good news story in this world of bad news. Ireland will hopefully vote correctly and as a result thousands of lives would be saved. I really really sincerely hope my fellow Irishmen and Irishwoman see sense and vote to save life. If that was to be the case I would be a proud man, and such an occasion would restore my confidence in humanity! I’ll live in hope, this is one to win
end of the road wrote: » it often is during a sergical abortion.
Da Boss wrote: » It would be a victory for humanity
NuMarvel wrote: » Where abortion is accessible in one's own country, it's more often a medical abortion. 62% of all abortions in Britain in 2016 were medical abortions and 71% of those were in the first 9 weeks. However, you have stumbled onto another interesting outcome of the ban on abortion; it makes surgical abortions more likely for those who travel. While 38% of English and Welsh women had a surgical abortion, 78% of Irish women and 76% of Northern Irish women had one. Digging into the British statistics brings up more interesting information. For example, a ban makes later term abortions more likely. For English and Welsh women: -81% of abortions were carried out in the first 9 weeks -11% were between 10 to 12 weeks, - 7% were in weeks 13 to 19, and - 2% were week 20 or later. For non-residents, it's a different story: -67% of all abortions were carried out in the first 9 weeks -15% were between 10 to 12 weeks, -12% were in weeks 13 to 19, and - 7% were week 20 or later. The ban makes it twice as likely that a woman will have an abortion at week 13 or later. It makes it 3.5 times more likely she'll have one after week 20. So to recap; the ban doesn't stop abortions at all, just relocates them or makes them unsafe. From the statistics available, the ban means an Irish woman is twice as likely to have a surgical abortion, and more than 3 times more likely to have an abortion after the half way point of the pregnancy.
NuMarvel wrote: » So to recap; the ban doesn't stop abortions at all
From the statistics available, the ban means an Irish woman is twice as likely to have a surgical abortion, and more than 3 times more likely to have an abortion after the half way point of the pregnancy.
Edward M wrote: » That's a skewed figure re non residents. It says non residents, not specifically Irish. Abortion in England or UK if you prefer, is allowed up to a much later date than a lot of countries. For instance in France its 12 weeks, so the higher percentage is not only due to Irish people I feel. Its grand throwing out figures, but relative to the Irish situation these figures are not accurate.
thee glitz wrote: » Where did you get that from?
thee glitz wrote: » Assuming non-resident = Irish... It's not really something to be proud of anyway.
Doctor Jimbob wrote: » I vaugely remember having people come in and talk to us about sexual health and contraceptives, but it was a one day thing. Considering it's such a huge part of a young adult's life, there should really be more of a focus on it. Could have improved since though, that was over ten years ago now.
I don't think it's fair to blame it entirely on schools being Catholic run, although I'd say it plays a part. I also remember being shown an incredibly inaccurate and graphic pro life propaganda video as part of religion class though. That one I'm quite happy to blame fully on the Catholic influence.
agreed. however this isn't what is happening here. what is happening here is the state is insuring that bar extreme circumstances, the unborn cannot be killed within it.
