The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

This is my first post on boards and I probably only joined to write it!
This is a subject that I find both sides of the argument extremely frustrating. I have an opinion on the result that I would like but find it difficult to discuss the matter with either side. I might as well state my side for transparency; I feel the 8th amendment should be repealed and terminations allowed in all cases up to twelve weeks and where the mothers welfare is compromised (within reason in terms of the stage of the pregnancy).
I find it extremely insensitive that people on the same side as me reduce the "fetus" to nothing more than cells and argue sentience or any other measure of how human "it" is. Regardless of all of that, it is a baby in the early stages of development, different to a developed baby but not without value and rightly treasured by many potential parents.
I also hate the teen/20's women that feel victimised that it is not already an option and it's their body their choice. They are of course perfectly correct regarding circumstances out of the ordinary like the mothers health is comprised or if they were forcibly impregnated etc (Any pro life person who argues to keep the situation exactly as it is heartless in my opinion) but they do currently have the choice of not having sex and therefore not risking the chance of becoming pregnant. What they are arguing is that if they choose to have sex (which always carries a risk of pregnancy regardless of protection) and they do indeed get pregnant they wouldlike another choice- to end that pregnancy. I think that is a reasonable position but you have to accept that is the position.
The crux of the argument for me is this - abortion is already available for these women but is not easy to access, involves delays, risks the woman's health travelling etc etc. To keep it inaccessible here is needlessly cruel.
If you are religious, don't get one - others can and you will still go to heaven etc.
People should just be honest - we are human not some higher power, we kill and eat other creatures because we like to eat them and we have a similar ability to block out the moral implications of an abortion - and that is fine.

tonymontanavu wrote: »

This is my first post on boards and I probably only joined to write it!
This is a subject that I find both sides of the argument extremely frustrating. I have an opinion on the result that I would like but find it difficult to discuss the matter with either side. I might as well state my side for transparency; I feel the 8th amendment should be repealed and terminations allowed in all cases up to twelve weeks and where the mothers welfare is compromised (within reason in terms of the stage of the pregnancy).
I find it extremely insensitive that people on the same side as me reduce the "fetus" to nothing more than cells and argue sentience or any other measure of how human "it" is. Regardless of all of that, it is a baby in the early stages of development, different to a developed baby but not without value and rightly treasured by many potential parents.
I also hate the teen/20's women that feel victimised that it is not already an option and it's their body their choice. They are of course perfectly correct regarding circumstances out of the ordinary like the mothers health is comprised or if they were forcibly impregnated etc (Any pro life person who argues to keep the situation exactly as it is heartless in my opinion) but they do currently have the choice of not having sex and therefore not risking the chance of becoming pregnant. What they are arguing is that if they choose to have sex (which always carries a risk of pregnancy regardless of protection) and they do indeed get pregnant they wouldlike another choice- to end that pregnancy. I think that is a reasonable position but you have to accept that is the position.
The crux of the argument for me is this - abortion is already available for these women but is not easy to access, involves delays, risks the woman's health travelling etc etc. To keep it inaccessible here is needlessly cruel.
If you are religious, don't get one - others can and you will still go to heaven etc.
People should just be honest - we are human not some higher power, we kill and eat other creatures because we like to eat them and we have a similar ability to block out the moral implications of an abortion - and that is fine.

I was somewhat agreeing with you and understanding your viewpoint until you got to part bolded.
We should be nothing but proud and supportive of all the young women who are so dedicated to their cause and having their voices heard.
I know I sound like a broken record but it’s very easy to be so dismissive about it when it isn’t your bodily autonomy at stake - which brings me to my next point.

Young women in their teens and twenties are the next generation of pregnant women and mothers and arguably, the outcome of this referendum will effect their lives more than any other age group in the country.

And I say that for both the Save and the Repeal side - if anything at all, it’s great to see young people taking an interest in politics and the referendum, regardless of which side they fall on.
It should be celebrated.

Charmeleon wrote: »

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Yet it makes me neither squirm nor uncomfortable nor compelled to ignore anything, and the implications you suggest are either A) Not that relevant or not actually that bad anyway.

You will find me MORE than willing and capable of having the "uncomfortable" conversations on this subject if they are discussions you actually want to have.

How many times has this rationalisation been repeated to excuse atrocities I wonder. It doesn't bother me, therefore it must be morally justified.

Wth did this come from? Did anyone say that?

Fred Swanson wrote: »

A collection of cells.

You are not helping your own position

Fred Swanson wrote: »

You have no idea of my position, new registered member.

No? New members are usually old lurkers all your previous posts are available