pilly wrote: » Coming from a very strong pro-choice view even I would have to agree that abortion figures probably will go up. It's not logical to me to presume otherwise.
Wombatman wrote: » Given the very restrictive conditions the exist at present I think that is a safe assumption. A total of 25 legally-permitted abortions were carried out in Ireland in 2016. Of that total number, the procedures were carried out for a range of reasons: - 8 procedures were due to a risk of physical illness - 1 was due to a risk from suicide - 16 were carried out because of emergencies arising from physical illnesses. If the recommendations of the Citizen’s Assembly are adopted you could expect 10-20 abortions per 1,000 women between ages of 15-44 per annum. Obviously this will represent a big increase. The rate of unwanted pregnancies however will probably will remain about the same. If it is repealed, the choices available to these women, will increase.
bubblypop wrote: » is there any word of dates for the referendum yet? i am overseas and will be coming home to vote hopefully
david75 wrote: » And the pope visiting before the referendum? Happy accident? Hardly.
If the referendum was tomorrow which option would you vote for: No repeal Repeal + unlimited abortion up to 12 weeks
Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: » Mods: It's been a good debate up to now so I wonder if we could add a poll to the OP to gauge the opinion of Boards contributors.
seamus wrote: » If you're looking for a gauge of opinion, then you should ask accurate questions. Nobody is ever going to be asked to vote on a 12 week limit. The options will be - Repeal + Oireachtas has power to legislate - Keep things the way they are While, yes, the proposed legislation will mention 12 weeks, that's legislation, that can be changed. So voting on the basis of a 12 week limit is folly because that's not what you're voting for, long term.
Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: » Do you not think they will put the 12 week wording into the referendum rather than give themselves the power/problem of legislating ?
Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: » With regard to figures I know there'll be a kneejerk if the number jumps to say 6,000 per annum. But remember it will be the first time we'll have had proper reliable data. With the unknown amount taking the online pills perhaps we are there already. Plus you'll still have people ordering online for anonymity & +12 weeks cases going to the UK.
seamus wrote: » I'd be very disappointed if they did. Because remember, this mostly isn't about the 12 weeks. It's about cases of rape, risk to the mother and fatal feotal abnormality. And they won't be limited to 12 weeks, because they can't be. So in order to properly capture everything, you either insert 500 lines into the constitution - making it incredibly difficult for voters to know what they're voting for, and leaving us wide open to decades of challenges on interpretation - or you insert a single empowering line into the constitution and those 500 lines of complication go into legislation.
Which option would you vote for were the referendum tomorrow ? No repeal Repeal & Dail to legislate
....... wrote: » This post has been deleted.
dr.fuzzenstein wrote: » That's the point of some people all along. To them there is zero difference to aborting a weeks old foetus to grabbing a random child off the street and bashing it's skull in with a brick whilst laughing maniacally. The "abortion of children already born" argument is saying exactly that.
Belfast wrote: » or they could try some thing different approach. They could set the penalty for abortion to nil or a nominal fine. This could be done in the Dail without changing the constitution.
Belfast wrote: » They could set the penalty for abortion to nil or a nominal fine. This could be done in the Dail without changing the constitution.
chalkitdown1 wrote: » I noticed this morning on my way out of Cork city that the big 'Save The 8th' billboards with the down syndrome lies on them have been replaced by Tesco ads. :pac: That didn't last long. I don't know how paying for ad space on billboards works but I was expecting to be looking at these eyesores right up to election day. Glad they've been replaced already. They'll probably be up again at some point.
seamus wrote: » I've seen that suggested before but it's just not possible. From the ideological viewpoint, it would be ridiculous - "Abortion is technically illegal in Ireland, but there are abortion clinics in every town that operate on the good grace of the Gardai not to prosecute them". But there's also a constitutional bar preventing such a non-criminal scenario to be set up. The constitution requires the state to defend the right to life of the unborn "as far as is practicable". This has the implication that a minor or otherwise inconsequential penalty for abortion would be a failure on the state's part to uphold the constitution - because the constitution requires that the state does everything reasonable to defend the right to life of the unborn. This is why the current penalty of 14 years is so severe and way out of proproportion even if you're pro-life; because a poorly written part of the constitution demands it.
The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.
] The Act also repeals sections 58 and 59 of the 1861 act;[29] these criminalise attempted or actual procurement of miscarriage, and assisting such procurement. It replaces them with a new offence of "destruction of unborn human life", with a maximum penalty of 14 years' imprisonment.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Life_During_Pregnancy_Act_2013
Unborn child adds to Dublin bomb toll Juno McEnroe November 23 2003, 12:00am, The Sunday Times The bombs that exploded on Parnell Street, Talbot Street and South Leinster Street on May 17 almost 30 years ago killed 26 people including a pregnant woman. Colette Doherty was days from giving birth to her baby when she was killed in the blast. Her unborn child is to be recorded as a victim of the bombing by Brian Farrell, the Dublin city coroner.https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/unborn-child-adds-to-dublin-bomb-toll-dmh2lpjb8lw Unborn twins `raise Omagh deaths to 31'https://www.irishtimes.com/news/unborn-twins-raise-omagh-deaths-to-31-1.1100036
Belfast wrote: » You could say with abortion pills and easy travel to countries where abortion is allowed that there are no practical steps that the state can take to protect the unborn children from abortion.
"destruction of unborn human life" could also cover a violent attack on the mother that results in the death of the unborn. I imagine violent attacks on the unborn would be getting the maximum sentence.
Edward M wrote: » Wait till this one comes atcha.https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/anti-abortion-campaign-to-show-image-of-11-week-old-foetus-467059.html
nice_guy80 wrote: » I'm willing to help crowd fund a billboard campaign calling for people to vote to stop women having to travel to the uk "stop shoving the problem under the carpet" 5000 women have to travel abroad for proper health care
volchitsa wrote: » Not easy, no, but surely if people are taking their children abroad to murder them we shoudo make an effort? Instead we actually changed the constitution to make it legal for them to do so,because the AG found that he could, and therefore had to, injunct C to stop her having an abortion abroad. So when it comes to cold facts, it doesnt seem like people really think it's anything like killing babies. I can't say for the Dublin bombings, though it may be something of a circular argument anyway, given the constitution, but it isnt true for the Omagh bombings, and it's very dishonest of you to present a report about an application for the unborn twins to be counted among the victims when that application was refused and their older sister, Maura, is officially the youngest victim at 18 months. I have a family member who died in the Omagh bombing, so I very much dislike people lying about it to further their own agenda.
