The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Da Boss wrote:

I agree this is farcical, the reason being though however is that you and your like don’t even consider the arguments that don’t agree with yeer agenda, yee just dismiss them as rubbish despite the fact there were many valid points made. The arrogance of the pro choice contingent won’t help their cause

Any "arguments" from the pro life side have not been dismissed.

Anytime anyone has questioned EOTR or OEJack for evidence, their views boil down to opinions rather than actual fact.

Da Boss wrote: »

Well many here are totally forgetting the unborn, and the fact abortion denies there sole chance of having a life.

Who is forgetting that? No one I have seen. Rather what people are claiming is that this factoid of yours is not in any way relevant, and places absolutely no moral onus on us of any kind.

Just because something can have "a life" that does not mean we have any moral obligation to allow it to, or to help it, achieve that.

Rather what many people, including myself, think is that attributes like sentience are what grounds moral and ethical concern, and so we have rarely got cause to have moral and ethical concern towards something that is not actually sentient. Such as a fetus at 0-16 weeks..... which is therefore the moral equivalent of a rock or a table leg for the most part.

Cue the people who then jump in doing what I referred to in post #4681 above, which is to simply INVENT a "right to become sentient" that they feel the fetus should have. The problem there however is:

A) They have not offered any argument as to why this right should exist. They just invent it and declare THAT it should exist.

They are not just slightly but ENTIRELY unwilling/unable to explain any reasons why SOME entities that could become sentient should have this right, but others should not.

Your personal anecdote of your mother, while clearly emotive for you, could not really be less relevant to the discussion. It explains why YOU do not want abortions to happen. It does not one iota explain why anyone else should think that too.

And had she had the abortion, you would simply not have cared. Because no "you" would have been created TO care. Because the fetus at 0-16 weeks was not "you" in any sense of personhood or sentience.

Da Boss wrote: »

Never once did she realize that abortion is in fact the murdering of the unborn.

Except that is not a "fact" at all. You really need to look up what exactly we mean by the word "murder". You were doing well using the word "killing" I guess.

You should tell your mother she has nothing to feel ashamed about. She did not care about a blob without sentience. She DOES care for that blob after it attained sentience. In both regards she morally did EXACTLY the right thing, and rather than let her beat herself up over this......... or worse beat her up over it or use her to beat other people up over it......... you should tell her the truth that she was morally warranted in both situations.

The 8th did not "save your life" in anything but the biological sense therefore. It coerced/compelled her to create your life. A subtly different state of affairs, but an important distinction none the less.

Da Boss wrote: »

Well many here are totally forgetting the unborn, and the fact abortion denies there sole chance of having a life. By having an abortion you are ending the life of another. I’ve told my story before, and as hard as it is for me to share this story I’ll share it again as I’m so passionate about my stance against abortion. My mother, for various reasons, was strongly considering traveling for an abortion no different to many today. However she chose against it and quite obviously proceeded to having me. It was when she had me that it dawned to her she almost Ended the life of another, she was considering an abortion as it was inconvenience ( the pregnancy that is) at the particular time. Never once did she realize that abortion is in fact the murdering of the unborn. The thought that she almost ended my life embarrasses and shocks my mother to this day and she is ashamed having even contemplated an abortion even if it was in her best interests. The 8th made an abortion difficult for my mother so she didn’t proceed with an abortion so the 8th has literally saved my life. Only for the eight I would not enjoy a life like I currently do

Every argument put forward to keep the 8th is in reality an argument to repeal the 13th. But absolutely nobody who supports the 8th is interested in that, because that would actually mean having to face up to the consequences of their beliefs. Far better for them that women continue to head overseas, or order pills in secret, all to maintain the illusion that Ireland is abortion free.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well don't you paint a shítty picture!

There's so many assumptions in there I'm not even sure where to start. What makes you assume that their mother would always be a single mother for a start, let alone that this alone would render her incapable of raising a child who grows up to contribute to society? Far more wasters in my experience come from homes where the family has two parents, but as I say that's just my experience.

Secondly neither kylith nor I mentioned anything about anyone being forced to give birth, and thirdly, you're assuming a conclusion that someone will do poorly in life as a result of being born to a single mother (and that is of course assuming the father is also single at the time!), when you should be looking at the actual cause, and not just the symptoms.

A child born to an already affluent single woman will of course have more opportunities in life (the Danish model, you should look it up!), than a child born to a woman who is already socially disadvantaged. It's not their status as a single mother will be the sole determinant factor in any comparison of outcomes, it's the base from where their parents are starting off.

Jaysus this really is absolute and utter bunkum

There is a wealth of evidence out there showing that single parent households live in poverty more than the general population.

This report on inequality and this one show us various things about the poverty of Single Parent headed households including
1 The net wealth of a Single parent headed household is % of the average household
2 Irelands at risk of poverty rate for single parent households is considerably higher than the EU average at 62.5%
3 Single parent are less likely than their counterparts to own their own home
4 Have a miniscule amount of savings of approximately €300 - about 10% of evryone else

This CSO data released in 2017 and giving us 2015 data shows us quite a range of facts that single parent headed households live in poverty

1 Single parent households have the highest rate of deprivation in Ireland
2 Single parent houselholds have the lowest income of all families with children in Ireland
3 People living in single parent households have the highest consistent poverty rate in Ireland.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

You should tell your mother she has nothing to feel ashamed about. She did not care about a blob without sentience. She DOES care for that blob after it attained sentience. In both regards she morally did EXACTLY the right thing, and rather than let her beat herself up over this......... or worse beat her up over it or use her to beat other people up over it......... you should tell her the truth that she was morally warranted in both situations.

The 8th did not "save your life" in anything but the biological sense therefore. It coerced/compelled her to create your life. A subtly different state of affairs, but an important distinction none the less.

it saved his life. he is here because the 8th stopped his mother from having an abortion within the state. it allowed him to grow from a would be sentient being who is entitled to it's right to life to be upheld as per the constitution, to a fully sentient being. sentients alone is not a valid way to judge whether the unborn should be given some protection, given that they are likely to become sentient, unless circumstances stop it from doing so.

NuMarvel wrote: »

You're the guy who thinks making women travel to have an abortion is a good idea because it means women will "think about if they really want it". That is not the rationale of someone who trusts women, no matter how much you protest to the contrary.

i trust women, i disagree with the killing of the unborn outside extreme circumstances. both very different and cannot be linked.

NuMarvel wrote: »

Every argument put forward to keep the 8th is in reality an argument to repeal the 13th. But absolutely nobody who supports the 8th is interested in that, because that would actually mean having to face up to the consequences of their beliefs. Far better for them that women continue to head overseas, or order pills in secret, all to maintain the illusion that Ireland is abortion free.

for me it's not about creating an allusion of an abortion free ireland, it's about trying to keep the state from sanctioning and funding the killing of the unborn outside extreme circumstances, an act i disagree with.

end of the road wrote: »

i trust women,

A person who trusts women and thinks they should be able to have abortions abroad would think they should be able to do the same here. That's not you though, so no, you don't trust women.

end of the road wrote: »

a person who trusts women but who disagrees with abortion on demand but who recognises that he cannot stop people from procuring it abroad, still trusts women, he just disagrees with a particular act. so yes, i trust women.

It's not that you can't stop women, it's that you don't want to. A few posters have suggested ways to do this, you've even thanked one or two of those posts, so you've obviously read and agreed with them. Yet, you've also said you wouldn't support changes to the law to allow women to be stopped.

At the end of the day, you're in favour of forcing women to travel if they decide to have an abortion, because in your mind it means they've really thought about. And the only reason for thinking that they need to show they really want it, is because you don't trust them to make the right decision to begin with.

I know this won't make a blind bit of difference to you and you'll keep doing your usual ad infinitum thing, but it's plain to see that you don't.

end of the road wrote: »

... i am simply against the allowing of unlimited abortion within the state of ireland, and i believe that nobody is "forced" to travel for an abortion, they choose to do it because they want an abortion outside necessary and extreme circumstances. there is no good reason to provide unlimited abortion and the state has no obligation to provide it. the fact that i believe it is not reasonable to impose travel banns due to the fact others would be effected simply means i recognise the realities in relation to the procurement of abortion. other then that it means nothing.

After telling us that we "cannot stop people from procuring it [abortion] abroad", you're now telling us we can, but it would be unreasonable to do so due to the effect on others. You go so far as to declare this as a "fact", making a lie of your first statement.

The actual fact is that you don't want to be able to stop them. It's not abortion on demand you're opposed to, it's some kind of "abortion on impulse", because you think if a woman can access abortion locally, she'll decide to have one on the spot without thinking about it. And that's because you don't trust women.

NuMarvel wrote: »

After telling us that we "cannot stop people from procuring it [abortion] abroad", you're now telling us we can, but it would be unreasonable to do so due to the effect on others. You go so far as to declare this as a "fact", making a lie of your first statement.

The actual fact is that you don't want to be able to stop them. It's not abortion on demand you're opposed to, it's some kind of "abortion on impulse", because you think if a woman can access abortion locally, she'll decide to have one on the spot without thinking about it. And that's because you don't trust women.

again this is false, my reasons for being against the killing of the unborn outside extreme circumstances is that it is wrong. i have been clear in my position through the thread in relation to my views including the travel bann, and have not changed it. no matter how much people twist my posts in an aim to make out i don't trust women, they are inaccurate and always will be. i trust women, i simply disagree with abortion on demand being availible in ireland.

NuMarvel wrote: »

Most if not all of those other procedures are exceptionally specialised. Ireland is a small country and wouldn't have the capacity to build up the required experience to become specialised in those procedures. It's not because we want the patients to think about if they really want the procedure.

Abortion is nothing like these procedures, because in the majority of cases it will involve taking a pill and maybe scheduling a followup doctor's visit.

i would still be happy to see money spent on those treatments over abortion on demand, as they will likely benefit society compared to abortion on demand, which doesn't benefit society.

NuMarvel wrote: »

Every argument put forward to keep the 8th is in reality an argument to repeal the 13th.

One I have never really understood is this nonsense that life begins at implantation. In reality, that is just a legal line in the sand, it is not based on any actual science.

Pro-lifers commonly say that a new human life exists from the start, and that there is continuous development from a single cell to birth and what we all agree is a human baby, so it is impossible to draw a line anywhere in that process and say abortion is OK up to here, but it's a baby a day later.

But factually, that "new life" moment is fertilization. That's when the mother's and father's genes are combined to create the DNA of a new individual, and guess what, we already DO draw a legal line and say absolutely no legal protections before that line.

That line is implantation of the embryo in a woman's womb, and it is open season on new human beings before that point. Created in a test tube? They can be frozen, thawed out, thrown away. Created during sex? Morning after pill to prevent implantation is A-OK.

And this legal line was not created after panels of experts studied all the evidence - judges did it simply by considering the meaning of the English word "unborn" in context. One decided that when an embryo is not implanted, meaning the woman is not pregnant, article 40.3.3 cannot apply since it is balancing the rights of a mother her unborn baby.

One of the other judges simply said that an implanted embryo is definitely unborn, but who the hell knows about a test tube embryo.

Yet here we are - no protection for those poor, poor fertilized cells, each one a unique human like you or me if you believe the pro-life spoofology.