nice_guy80 wrote: » and yet the unborn baby had plenty of protection before the 8th amendment was inserted into the constitution anyway I don't remember hearing about the thousands of back alley abortions being carried out in the 60s, 70s, 80s was there a concerted campaign against unborn babies before the 8th was voted in?
beertons wrote: » I was told a story last night about a woman who previously had an abortion, went for a smear in Holles street. The master of the hospital did the smear, and remarked of some abnormal cells. Woman said to master that she recently had an abortion. The master was making notes, looked up and said you can't tell me that. Both you and I can be prosecuted. He wrote down miscarriage on the sheet as an explanation. Happened around 2003.
Peregrinus wrote: » You may have been told this story, but it is not credible. Neither the woman nor the Master could have been prosecuted - it is not an offence to have had an abortion, and it is not an offence to know that someone has had an abortion - and the Master would have been well aware of the fact.
Ineedaname wrote: » http://www.broadsheet.ie/2018/03/08/a-pro-life-pattern/ So it turns out one of the people featured on the "My Abortion Story" billboards was a fake. Not only did he not work in an abortion theatre as he claimed he's actually a convicted armed robber.
Ineedaname wrote: » Not only did he not work in an abortion theatre as he claimed he's actually a convicted armed robber.
Peregrinus wrote: » There was an illegal abortion trade in until legal abortion became available in the UK. For obvious reasons, hard figures are not available, but the trade certainly existed and there are, for example, records of prosecutions of people for administering abortions. And, yes, it was a back-alley trade. It was unlawful, unregulated and unsafe. Google "Nurse Cadden" for an instance of someone being prosecuted for murder when a woman died during the administration of an abortion. At least one other women had previously died during an abortion administered by Nurse Cadden, and she had several convictions for administering abortions and for child abandonment (of an infant born alive) before her murder conviction. And there were many practitioners other than Nurse Cadden. Business pretty much dried up once legal abortion became available in the UK, but this obviously had nothing to do with the unborn baby having "plenty of protection".
david75 wrote: » Amazing turn out and brilliant to see the majority are all young. Gotta be up around 10k
January wrote: » It's amazing. Unfortunately the anti choice side will horribly inflate their numbers on Saturday and say ours was a measly turn out today.
average_runner wrote: » Whoever allowed the march to go through rush hour should lose their job. I don't care which side it was, but please have marches at a time that won't affect people trying to get to creches and kids sports.
January wrote: » Isn't it terrible people were inconvenienced like that... It's exactly why it was done at that time. To highlight how hard it is for women to travel to England.
JDD wrote: » I have to agree with Average Runner January. It was a bad tactics to do it at rush hour. I see the reason for it in a strike - you inconvenience people to a point where pressure is put on an employer to resolve an issue, but that's not the right tactic to win over votes. It would have been better to organize a march on a Saturday when more people (of my age, who do have to get home to creches and sports) could have attended. To get someone to empathise with a cancer sufferer you don't have to give them a dose of chemotherapy.
JDD wrote: » I don't think a point of a march is to actually dent support for the reason you're marching. And so it follows that the fact that support for repeal hasn't dropped because you held the march during rush hour isn't exactly something to be shouted from the rooftops. And of course there are more people coming out in support for pro-choice marches with the referendum so close. Somebody in the organizing bodies should have anticipated that, thought about the increased level of inconvenience, considered whether a bigger impact would have been made with a weekend march, and made their decision accordingly. Perhaps they did. I believe they made the wrong one. It's not a fatal mistake, but a mistake nonetheless.
Laneyh wrote: » Not really that much disruption some buses along O'Connell St and Eden Quay might have needed to be rerouted but other than that other modes of transport were running. I can't imagine there would be too many parents driving via O'Connell St - Custom House Quay to collect kids from creche or sports activities.Considering the volume of people traffic and transport was back on track quite quickly
