The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

RobertKK · 08-04-2018 09:00AM

After conception:
Heartbeat at 24 days
Regular vascular system at 30 days
Skeleton is complete at 42 days
Brainwaves at 43 days

Allow to be killed at up to 84 days without restrictions.

That is what we are voting to allow or not allow.

08-04-2018 09:06AM

RobertKK wrote: »

After conception:
Heartbeat at 24 days
Regular vascular system at 30 days
Skeleton is complete at 42 days
Brainwaves at 43 days

Allow to be killed at up to 84 days without restrictions.

That is what we are voting to allow or not allow.

There was a heartbeat when i was approx 7 or 8 weeks pregnant. With an eptopic pregnancy, that would have killed me, instead I had to undergo needless surgery because Of The 8th.
What's your point?

ProfessorPlum · 08-04-2018 09:21AM

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Where are the 24 weeks coming from? That link provided above says 12 weeks?

Scaremongering.

But at least he’s dropped his ‘we’ll have unrestricted abortion up to birth’ line.
Maybe with a few more reads of the policy document he might properly understand it.

bertieinexile wrote: »

The proposed Irish law provides an on request model up to 12 weeks.
As you say, the law in england, as written, doesn't provide an on request model at all.
But the law in england as interpreted and improperly used (the mental health exception) does amount to an on request model up to 24 weeks.
The proposed Irish law will provide the same opportunity for improper use without any time limit at all.
The only difficulty in comparing the proposed Irish regime with the regime in england is that under the Irish it will be even easier and more straightforward to request an abortion than it currently is in england. And, in practice, the law wouldn't provide any time limits.

ProfessorPlum · 08-04-2018 09:25AM

RobertKK wrote: »

After conception:
Heartbeat at 24 days
Regular vascular system at 30 days
Skeleton is complete at 42 days
Brainwaves at 43 days

Allow to be killed at up to 84 days without restrictions.

That is what we are voting to allow or not allow.

Seems Robert has also upped our proposed term limits to 14 weeks!
(Not that it would bother me tbh - it’s still a reasonable limit imo)

PhoenixParker · 08-04-2018 09:25AM

RobertKK wrote: »

After conception:
Heartbeat at 24 days
Regular vascular system at 30 days
Skeleton is complete at 42 days
Brainwaves at 43 days

Allow to be killed at up to 84 days without restrictions.

That is what we are voting to allow or not allow.

12 weeks pregnant isn’t 84 days after conception it’s between 60 and 70.

Hannibal_Smith · 08-04-2018 09:47AM

RobertKK wrote: »

After conception:
Heartbeat at 24 days
Regular vascular system at 30 days
Skeleton is complete at 42 days
Brainwaves at 43 days

Allow to be killed at up to 84 days without restrictions.

That is what we are voting to allow or not allow.

Freedom of choice for a woman to be allowed decide what should happen to her body, thats what I'll be voting for tbh. You vote for what you like.

nice_guy80 · 08-04-2018 09:51AM

Oh look

Save the 8th campaign muddying the waters by constantly shifting the argument
12 weeks
Now 24 weeks

Same as their posters comparing us with the UK (btw they are everywhere)

Any sign of a few repeal posters?

BabysCoffee · 08-04-2018 09:53AM

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

Freedom of choice for a woman to be allowed decide what should happen to her body, thats what I'll be voting for tbh. You vote for what you like.

I'd say there is plenty of people who feel like this too Hannibal

Including footballer Richard Sadlier.......

https://www.thesun.ie/news/2412879/richie-sadlier-referendum-on-the-eighth-amendment-is-about-handing-back-a-basic-human-right-to-women/

PhoenixParker · 08-04-2018 10:02AM

BabysCoffee wrote: »

I'd say there is plenty of people who feel like this too Hannibal

Including footballer Richard Sadlier.......

https://www.thesun.ie/news/2412879/richie-sadlier-referendum-on-the-eighth-amendment-is-about-handing-back-a-basic-human-right-to-women/

That's worth quoting in full. It's beautifully put.

Nobody ever told me I should do it, or even suggested I should do it, but a visit to the doctor wouldn’t be possible if someone stopped it from happening.

I never thought about how important it was until recently, but now I realise it’s fundamental to the success of every appointment.

When I go to the doctor, I close the door behind me before saying a word about why I’m there.

Nobody in the waiting room gets to listen in, nevermind join in. Nobody passing by the surgery gets to wander in and give their tuppence on whatever choices I must make. Nobody from the local school, church or pub get to be a part of the conversation.

When I go to the doctor, I close the door behind me because it’s private, it’s nobody’s business but mine.

I’ve never had to make that case to anyone about my own medical well-being, but people who expect others to respect their own privacy should do likewise themselves.

That’s the main reason why I’ll be voting yes to repeal the Eighth Amendment.

The upcoming referendum is about a lot of things to a lot of people. For me, it’s about handing back a basic human right to pregnant women in the Republic of Ireland.

It’s about giving them access to safe, legal abortion services if they need them. And it’s about staying out of their business after that.

I don’t have a list of scenarios that are acceptable to me for others to end a pregnancy, nor do I have any views on the circumstances of how a woman gets pregnant.

I don’t tie myself in knots trying to decide when life begins, and I don’t bring religion or faith into my thinking on this issue at all.

I certainly don’t think a woman should be forced to remain pregnant against her will, nor do I think she should have to leave the country for the medical treatment.

And quite apart from any of that, the reality which many people are reluctant to face is that Ireland has an abortion rate comparable with other countries in which it is legal.

The Eighth Amendment hasn’t prevented women accessing abortion services, it just puts their health at greater risk because it forces them to travel.

I’m sure some people will wonder why I’m getting involved in a campaign like this.

Maybe they’re thinking a former footballer should stay away from issues as contentious or as sensitive as this — stick to giving views about matches and the performance of referees and leave the more serious business to others.

Maybe some are thinking it’s not a man’s place to even have a view on this issue.

That’s how I feel about it too, which is why I’m voting yes to give women the choice.

It’s not a religious issue either. People will cast their vote for deeply personal reasons and I’m sure everyone honestly believes they have right on their side.

But many people are still undecided on how they’re going to vote, or whether they even should have a voice in this discussion at all.

If you’re one of those and you don’t have a firm opinion yet yourself, just hand the decision-making back to the person that’s pregnant.

dudara · 08-04-2018 10:09AM

That’s really nicely & simply articulated. Very rational. Well done to him

applehunter · 08-04-2018 10:28AM

He doesn't acknowledge the rights of the unborn once in the article.

dudara · 08-04-2018 10:30AM

He’s not trying to. He’s not making this emotional or contentious. He’s leaving it be a private matter, which I also believe it needs to be. This gives everyone the freedom to deal with it according to their own beliefs and emotions.

swampgas · 08-04-2018 10:31AM

applehunter wrote: »

He doesn't acknowledge the rights of the unborn once in the article.

Because the rights of the born are more important, perhaps?

The only way to give rights to the unborn is to take rights away from the born person in whose uterus the unborn is located.

volchitsa · 08-04-2018 10:34AM

applehunter wrote: »

He doesn't acknowledge the rights of the unborn once in the article.

Maybe that's nobody has actually explained why the unborn should ever take priority over the pregnant woman's human rights.

If you can make a convincing case for that, then the question of how to find a satisfactory compromise to allow that to happen.

But prolifers always seem to skip swiftly over that step with a bit of handwaving about fertilization or heartbeats or whatever.

PhoenixParker · 08-04-2018 10:38AM

applehunter wrote: »

He doesn't acknowledge the rights of the unborn once in the article.

The only right of the unborn that could be of relevance is a right to life

But there is good solid case history across the medical spectrum that says my right to my body trumps your right to life.

You may need a blood donation, I don't need a reason not to give blood. I may have caused the injury that means you need blood, doesn't matter.
You may need a kidney. I don't need a reason not to give my kidney.

While the fetus needs a uterus, why is a woman obliged to give hers?

Why should the rights of a fetus exceed those of a living human?

applehunter · 08-04-2018 11:08AM

PhoenixParker wrote: »

The only right of the unborn that could be of relevance is a right to life

But there is good solid case history across the medical spectrum that says my right to my body trumps your right to life.

You may need a blood donation, I don't need a reason not to give blood. I may have caused the injury that means you need blood, doesn't matter.
You may need a kidney. I don't need a reason not to give my kidney.

While the fetus needs a uterus, why is a woman obliged to give hers?

Why should the rights of a fetus exceed those of a living human?

Richie Sadlier doesn't address any of these points.

It's a complex issue with balancing rights.

He just says its a private decision.

I'd be shocked if anyone to do with Second Captains/Off the Ball were anything but for repeal. All the people on those shows think the same.

erica74 · 08-04-2018 11:14AM

Over the past week LOADS of "1 in 5 pregnancies in the UK end in abortion" posters have gone up around Waterford. It makes me so angry, lying on their quest to deny women their right to choose.

applehunter · 08-04-2018 11:20AM

It is 1 in 5 AFAIK.

It's a shocking statistic.

Hannibal_Smith · 08-04-2018 11:21AM

erica74 wrote: »

Over the past week LOADS of "1 in 5 pregnancies in the UK end in abortion" posters have gone up around Waterford. It makes me so angry, lying on their quest to deny women their right to choose.

Same in Dublin...some of them with pictures of babies sleeping as the background pic. My son asked me why people wanted to kill babies. I obviously explained this was not what the referendum was about. Funny enough I managed to explain it to him in such a way that explained both sides. When he told me he agreed with how I see it, I said that was probably because I was his mum and for now he believes I'm right, but whatever way he viewed it was okay by me. It's all about choice at the end of the day.

applehunter · 08-04-2018 11:25AM

From a factcheck on thejournal.ie (another pro repeal media outlet)

http://www.thejournal.ie/yes-to-life-life-institute-8th-amendment-abortion-leaflet-facts-3058066-Nov2016/

reubenreuben · 08-04-2018 11:27AM

applehunter wrote: »

It is 1 in 5 AFAIK.

It's a shocking statistic.

#

This is Ireland not the UK.

Pointless posters

dudara · 08-04-2018 11:27AM

applehunter wrote: »

It is 1 in 5 AFAIK.

It's a shocking statistic.

Let’s say it is true (we can argue that point another time)

It would tell you that a significant amount of women don’t want to be pregnant (for a whole multitude of reasons) and they take action accordingly. It tells you that women see the right to abortion as valid and needed. In other words, it’s a basic fact of life that women don’t always want to be pregnant or want to have a child.

Forcing a woman to stay pregnant against her will is wrong. For me, it doesn’t get any more basic than that.

Martina1991 · 08-04-2018 11:46AM

Britain is not Ireland.

"Approximately 2.7% of the abortions that took place in England and Wales in 2015 were performed on non-residents. Of these 5,190 abortions, 66.5% were performed on residents of the Irish Republic (3,451)."
http://abort73.com/abortion_facts/uk_abortion_statistics/

3,451 Irish women who had abortions that the precious 8th amendment could not stop.

The 8th didn't "save" those babies and it won't stop abortions from happening.

The 8th is only a major obstruction to medical care for women. All it causes is pain and suffering.

Edward M · 08-04-2018 11:54AM

A 12 week limit is reasonable, it gives every woman with an unwanted pregnancy a chance to consider her options, not all of them will opt for abortion, though a percentage will.
A fetus/baby, whatever you think of it as, will have rights in law after that unless in extreme circumstances.
But mainly the right of the pregnant woman will take precedence in all cases be it medically, physically or mentally, and that should be the case.
Who has more of a right, when you look at the situation overall, to decide what should happen within the parameters of the law, than the pregnant woman.
Better to have children born in to loving, wanted and caring situations than forced upon anyone where they grow up through an early life of resentment perhaps.
Society as a whole throughout history have looked down their noses at what they even invented a term for, "bastards" and disregard for the women who had them, while actually forcing a great many of them to endure their situation.
Time for change I think.

January · 08-04-2018 12:01PM

Edward M wrote: »

A 12 week limit is reasonable, it gives every woman with an unwanted pregnancy a chance to consider her options, not all of them will opt for abortion, though a percentage will.
A fetus/baby, whatever you think of it as, will have rights in law after that unless in extreme circumstances.
But mainly the right of the pregnant woman will take precedence in all cases be it medically, physically or mentally, and that should be the case.
Who has more of a right, when you look at the situation overall, to decide what should happen within the parameters of the law, than the pregnant woman.
Better to have children born in to loving, wanted and caring situations than forced upon anyone where they grow up through an early life of resentment perhaps.
Society as a whole throughout history have looked down their noses at what they even invented a term for, "bastards" and disregard for the women who had them, while actually forcing a great many of them to endure their situation.
Time for change I think.

I love how you've changed your mind over the course of this thread Edward. It proves that reasonable people when presented with the actual facts can see that repeal is the only way forward.

NuMarvel · 08-04-2018 12:05PM

RobertKK wrote: »

After conception:
Heartbeat at 24 days
Regular vascular system at 30 days
Skeleton is complete at 42 days
Brainwaves at 43 days

Allow to be killed at up to 84 days without restrictions.

That is what we are voting to allow or not allow.

We already had a vote on allowing women to access abortion, in 1992. It passed by a comfortable margin.

The vote now is deciding if we allow them to do so here, where it will be safer and earlier for them.

Make no mistake a No vote isn't a vote against abortion, it's a vote in favour of later and unsafer abortions.

applehunter · 08-04-2018 12:12PM

NuMarvel wrote: »

We already had a vote on allowing women to access abortion, in 1992. It passed by a comfortable margin.

The vote now is deciding if we allow them to do so here, where it will be safer and earlier for them.

Make no mistake a No vote isn't a vote against abortion, it's a vote in favour of later and unsafer abortions.

The No vote is to retain the 8th Amendment as it stands.

Nettle Soup · 08-04-2018 12:23PM

NuMarvel wrote: »

Make no mistake a No vote isn't a vote against abortion, it's a vote in favour of later and unsafer abortions.

Spot on.

A No vote is burying our heads in the sand. It makes no sense, is the wrong thing to do and prolongs the inevitable.

NuMarvel · 08-04-2018 12:39PM

applehunter wrote: »

The No vote is to retain the 8th Amendment as it stands.

That's pretty much what I said.

The 8th Amendment as it stands doesn't prevent abortions, it just means later and unsafer ones. So voting to retain the 8th Amendment means that will continue. That is the consequence of a No vote.

Madscientist30 · 08-04-2018 01:41PM

applehunter wrote: »

It is 1 in 5 AFAIK.

It's a shocking statistic.

Why is it so shocking to you? Lets assume that the pattern in Ireland is similar, 1 in 5 pregnancies ends in abortion (excluding miscarraiges).

Now think of the converse if abortion was completely outlawed/unavailable as you seem to favour...12,000 forced pregnancies a year in Ireland, 12,000 unwanted children being born into often very difficult circumstances. That is much more shocking for me to contemplate, the effect that would have on us as a society. Do you really feel that forcing all these pregnancies to continue is the better option? What are your proposals for supporting these extra lives, financially, emotionally, practically?

The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Comments