Can a Christian vote for unlimited abortion?

It wasn’t a false statement Nick. Its a fact.

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

My statement about my daughter's disability and death was in response to a false statement by another poster (who has not been averse to sharing his own personal tragedy in this thread btw). He had claimed that "92% of all abortions happen before the 12th week. The other 8% are wanted pregnancies that tragically won’t survive after birth."

My daughter's condition can be detected by amniocentesis from 14 weeks onwards. She survived after birth for nearly five years, and other children with her condition have lived into their teenage years. So my comments were directly relevant to his post.

But thank you for being so compassionate.

Policy paper to include time period between abortion request and pill
Government sources insist measure is to assist medical professionals and women

Minister for Health Simon Harris will publish a policy paper this week outlining how the Government intends to legislate should article 40.3.3 be removed from the Constitution.

It is understood the 10-page document will commit to legislating for terminations “without specific indication” up to 12 weeks of pregnancy.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/policy-paper-to-include-time-period-between-abortion-request-and-pill-1.3417404

Nick Park wrote: »

Yes, France and Italy are actually very good examples. France initially brought in a 10-week limit for abortion on demand, but later liberalised its laws further. It now allows unborn children with Down Syndrome to be aborted at any stage of the pregnancy. 96% of unborn children diagnosed with Down Syndrome are aborted in France.

For clarity, when did France change its laws to allow abortion in cases of fetal disability/non-fatal abnormalities? And when was the 10 week timeframe increased to 12?

Nick Park wrote: »

Italy permits abortions for conditions such as cleft palates.

When did Italy introduce its current abortion laws and when did Italy change those laws to include such conditions?

volchitsa

Nick Park wrote: »

Yes, France and Italy are actually very good examples. France initially brought in a 10-week limit for abortion on demand, but later liberalised its laws further. It now allows unborn children with Down Syndrome to be aborted at any stage of the pregnancy. 96% of unborn children diagnosed with Down Syndrome are aborted in France.

Italy permits abortions for conditions such as cleft palates. In one case, in 2010, a child was aborted for having a cleft lip and palate, was then left untended but was discovered to still be alive 20 hours after the abortion. The child (am I allowed to call it a 'child' - or will I be lectured for being unscientific?) lived another day .

Thank you for pointing them out as examples as to what we might expect in Ireland if we vote to remove the Eighth Amendment.

No links, I wonder why.

What stage did France later liberalize to then? Birth? Or less?
My understanding of French law is that Downs would always have come under their "health" conditions, so I dont see how it answers my question which was about healthy babies. Including Downs is a choice the French made, not an obligation.

As for Italy, without a link it's impossible to say, but even if true, it is still not evidence that Ireland will have to allow healthy babies to be killed just before birth. UK guidelines state that a child born alive must be given all appropriate care, so negligence or malpractice can easily be prevented without constitutional protection - which is the only subject here.

But TBH going by the recent death of a young woman in Italy because of a miscarriage that needed to be terminated surgically, like Savita Hallapanavar, I'd be very dubious about your claim.

My impression of Italian hospitals is that many are run by religious orders and that finding a doctor who is not a conscientious objector - if only for his own career - is more likely to be the problem.

(Didnt prolife start a big campaign a few weeks back, with videos supposedly testifying about abortions, only for them to hastily delete them when the so called witnesses turned out to be lying? Your man Noel Pattern was one of them, he's an armed robber <snip>! https://twitter.com/ArtimusFoul/status/968527472810692608

So no prolife site links either please, theyve shown themselves to be liars.)

Nick Park wrote: »

I think you need to check your "facts". The treatment of conditions such as Down Syndrome and cleft palates in newborn children has obviously improved since you did your research.

My own daughter had a condition that is routinely used as a reason for abortion. She lived to be 4 years and 10 months.

I have checked my facts. I posted them above.

Can you give me some info on your claim about abortion up to birth? I’m doubting its basis in fact

This post has been deleted.

This post has been deleted.

david75 wrote: »

92% of all abortions happen before the 12th week. The other 8% are wanted pregnancies that tragically won’t survive after birth.

Those are facts. Why are thes people so allergic to facts and addicted to hysteria?

I think you need to check your "facts". The treatment of conditions such as Down Syndrome and cleft palates in newborn children has obviously improved since you did your research.

My own daughter had a condition that is routinely used as a reason for abortion. She lived to be 4 years and 10 months.

volchitsa wrote: »

You mean like all the other countries where there is no constitutional protection for the unborn and where they have 12 week limits too, like France or Italy?

Yes, France and Italy are actually very good examples. France initially brought in a 10-week limit for abortion on demand, but later liberalised its laws further. It now allows unborn children with Down Syndrome to be aborted at any stage of the pregnancy. 96% of unborn children diagnosed with Down Syndrome are aborted in France.

Italy permits abortions for conditions such as cleft palates. In one case, in 2010, a child was aborted for having a cleft lip and palate, was then left untended but was discovered to still be alive 20 hours after the abortion. The child (am I allowed to call it a 'child' - or will I be lectured for being unscientific?) lived another day .

Thank you for pointing them out as examples as to what we might expect in Ireland if we vote to remove the Eighth Amendment.

92% of all abortions happen before the 12th week. The other 8% are wanted pregnancies that tragically won’t survive after birth.

Those are facts. Why are thes people so allergic to facts and addicted to hysteria?

This post has been deleted.

Where is this ‘up to birth’ thing coming from? Once again the only people saying that are pro life campaigners. Nobody else is even suggesting it. It’s not on the table.

This post has been deleted.

volchitsa

Nick Park wrote: »

My bad. What I meant to say was that we will be voting whether to remove the only Constitutional right to life of all children - right up to the point of birth.

Are you suggesting that without such protection Ireland will have to allow healthy babies at term to be killed?

Can you tell us where this actually happens today, seeing as there must be only a handful of countries which have such protection?

Delirium wrote: »

If that's true then we'll be implementing a more restrictive abortion policy if repeal fails? Women won't be allowed an abortion even when their life is in danger?

Right to travel will be revoked to stop any women who are attempting to travel for an abortion?

My bad. What I meant to say was that we will be voting whether to remove the only Constitutional right to life of all children - right up to the point of birth.

volchitsa

Nick Park wrote: »

That certainly clarifies what we will be voting on in the Referendum, doesn't it?

The case before the Supreme Court referred to an unborn child that was due to be born in three weeks time. The Supreme court has determined that such a child, 35 weeks into the pregnancy, has no Constitutional rights outside of the Eighth Amendment.

So we can forget all this talk about 12 weeks. We will be voting as to whether all unborn child, right up to the point of birth, should have the right to be born.

You mean like all the other countries where there is no constitutional protection for the unborn and where they have 12 week limits too, like France or Italy?

It's a bad idea to set up a legal conflict of interest between the woman and her unborn.
Especially in the constitution.

This post has been deleted.

Delirium

Nick Park wrote: »

That certainly clarifies what we will be voting on in the Referendum, doesn't it?

The case before the Supreme Court referred to an unborn child that was due to be born in three weeks time. The Supreme court has determined that such a child, 35 weeks into the pregnancy, has no Constitutional rights outside of the Eighth Amendment.

So we can forget all this talk about 12 weeks. We will be voting as to whether all unborn child, right up to the point of birth, should have the right to be born.

If that's true then we'll be implementing a more restrictive abortion policy if repeal fails? Women won't be allowed an abortion even when their life is in danger?

Right to travel will be revoked to stop any women who are attempting to travel for an abortion?

This post has been deleted.

Nick Park wrote: »

That certainly clarifies what we will be voting on in the Referendum, doesn't it?

The case before the Supreme Court referred to an unborn child that was due to be born in three weeks time. The Supreme court has determined that such a child, 35 weeks into the pregnancy, has no Constitutional rights outside of the Eighth Amendment.

So we can forget all this talk about 12 weeks. We will be voting as to whether all unborn child, right up to the point of birth, should have the right to be born.

I notice that you don't mention the woman's rights at all even though those will also be affected by the outcome of the referendum.

In any case though, it's more accurate to say that the referendum is about where we think the rights of the woman and the unborn should be set out, as opposed to what the rights will be. Many countries leave these matters to legislation as opposed to their constitutions, and we did the same ourselves up to 1983.

Whatever discussion may be had about what our abortion laws should be, I have yet to hear a valid argument as to why the rights of women and the unborn during pregnancy should be in our constitution.

Delirium wrote: »

Latest on case that was before supreme court today:

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/971338864127348736

That certainly clarifies what we will be voting on in the Referendum, doesn't it?

The case before the Supreme Court referred to an unborn child that was due to be born in three weeks time. The Supreme court has determined that such a child, 35 weeks into the pregnancy, has no Constitutional rights outside of the Eighth Amendment.

So we can forget all this talk about 12 weeks. We will be voting as to whether all unborn child, right up to the point of birth, should have the right to be born.

Timberrrrrrrr

NuMarvel wrote: »

Yeahbuhwhatnow?? :eek::eek:

Back when the brooks concert was in doubt and croke park residents threatened to bkock the roads that was EOTR's solution to the protestors

Delirium

Latest on case that was before supreme court today:

https://twitter.com/gavreilly/status/971338864127348736

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Yep, that's the same poster who once said the guards should baton charge women and children if they tried to prevent a Garth Brooks concert from going ahead! The moral compass is spinning like a windmill for that poster.

Yeahbuhwhatnow?? :eek::eek:

Timberrrrrrrr

NuMarvel wrote: »

That proverb about stones and glasshouses comes to mind.

EOTR: Abortion is the worst act known to man!!
Also EOTR: I'm not going to stop anyone travelling for an abortion because it might inconvenience other people.

Yep, that's the same poster who once said the guards should baton charge women and children if they tried to prevent a Garth Brooks concert from going ahead! The moral compass is spinning like a windmill for that poster.