The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

zedhead · 20-04-2018 02:03PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

Again with the marginal cases to prove the broader argument. Would you be in favour of abortion if the baby was healthy?

'In favour' is a bad choice of words here. Regardless of the health of the fetus, abortion is a decision to be made by the woman and her doctor. It is not up to anyone else to decide if her reasons for requiring an abortion are 'good enough'.

I would not encourage someone with a health pregnancy to choose abortion, however I would absolutely defend their right to make the decision that is best for their situation and would not be arrogant enough to believe that I know whats best for a strangers life, body and pregnancy than they do themselves.

January · 20-04-2018 02:04PM

Another reason the 8th needs to be repealed. This woman could not travel, she could not afford to and even if she could have afforded it she would not have been able to. What were her options? Answer me that Tickers, this isn't a minority case, this is the reality for a lot of women trying to access abortion, they either cannot afford or cannot travel because they haven't got the right documentation, nobody to mind their already born children while they do travel. Answer me that instead of deflection.

I came to Ireland 3 years ago with my 2 kids because where we were living was not safe for us. Now we live in a small room together in a Direct Provision centre. I have been taking birth control pills because I don’t want to have more children while we have to live in this place. Direct provision is no place for children. They have no place to play, especially when it is cold and raining outside. I didn’t think I would become pregnant because I was taking my pills everyday, but then I missed my period. I took a pregnancy test and it was positive.

I asked a friend who I trusted what I should do, because I had heard that abortion was illegal here. Many women I know talk about how dangerous it is to have a baby in Ireland and they try to go home to have their babies if they can. In my home country abortion is legal. I could walk into a doctor and get one.

I was very scared and I could not have another child to take care of in this centre. I was very nervous about the whole thing because I knew I could not tell anyone, not even a doctor if something bad happened. I felt embarrassed for getting pregnant, but I had taken my birth control everyday. A friend helped me to get abortion pills and I took them quickly because I just wanted to stop worrying about everything. I had to have the abortion in secret. I was living in the same room as my children. I couldn’t tell anyone why I was sick for fear of someone finding out and it effecting my status. We are already treated as criminals living in this prison of Direct Provision. Then they make us criminals because we don’t want to have more children in here."

In Her Shoes - Women of the 8th Amendment

B0jangles · 20-04-2018 02:14PM

Just saw this on facebook - a leaflet from 1982 warning about the possible effects the 8th would have on women's healthcare

The dangers were known long before it came into effect but 35 years later we're still trying get to rid of it.

Shameful.

SusieBlue · 20-04-2018 02:14PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

Again with the marginal cases to prove the broader argument. Would you be in favour of abortion if the baby was healthy?

What about the wants, needs, and rights of the born living woman who is carrying this child?
Whose life and health will be altered the most from the unwanted burden of motherhood? What of her?

We should be looking after the living, breathing people we have before affording potential people rights at their expense.
Its nonsensical to suggest otherwise.

Dead people currently have more rights than pregnant woman regarding bodily autonomy in this country. That's an absolute disgrace.

Bannasidhe · 20-04-2018 02:17PM

gmisk wrote: »

But surely you must concede if this is repealed it is the end of days?!?!

Did you miss the sky falling down after same sex marriage was brought in here??

Well it has rained a lot.
We had to buy a bigger, pinker, gazebo and waterproof fairylights for our big Gay BBQs.

ELM327 · 20-04-2018 02:21PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

People are travelling to Amsterdam to take legalised drugs in that country therefore we should we should legalise drugs in Ireland???

Ignoring the fact that we as a country voted to allow a woman to travel specifically for an abortion? The 13th amendment?
Before that, the state could and did detain women and prevent their travel.
You cannot travel specifically for illegal purposes (Traficking, paedophila, probably euthanasia).

Bannasidhe · 20-04-2018 02:22PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

These arguments are all sounding very familiar, I’m sure I’ve heard them before....

Deja Poo.

swampgas · 20-04-2018 02:24PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

Again with the marginal cases to prove the broader argument.

Every "marginal case" is an actual, living breathing woman. What's the phrase hurled by pro-life fanatics, "dehumanise then kill" ? Is that your approach to women killed because of the 8th?

Are you one of those people who thinks that anyone who dies because they wanted an abortion deserved it anyway?

January · 20-04-2018 02:24PM

ELM327 wrote: »

Ignoring the fact that we as a country voted to allow a woman to travel specifically for an abortion? The 13th amendment?
Before that, the state could and did detain women and prevent their travel.
You cannot travel specifically for illegal purposes (Traficking, paedophila, probably euthanasia).

Wasn't there a court case recently about travelling or helping someone travel for euthanasia?

v638sg7k1a92bx · 20-04-2018 02:27PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

What about the wants, needs, and rights of the born living woman who is carrying this child?
Whose life and health will be altered the most from the unwanted burden of motherhood? What of her?

We should be looking after the living, breathing people we have before affording potential people rights at their expense.
Its nonsensical to suggest otherwise.

Dead people currently have more rights than pregnant woman regarding bodily autonomy in this country. That's an absolute disgrace.

There is no "right to an abortion" that I am aware of. Additionally "rights" are not absolute when they impact the life of another person.

Ave Sodalis · 20-04-2018 02:29PM

http://www.donegaldaily.com/2018/04/20/donegal-doctors-grouping-back-no-campaign-in-8th-amendment-referendum/

It's good to see that my own doctor wasn't listed on this so I don't have to change.

Dr Cook, according to the comments, who is the first sig, also denies giving out the morning after pill so it's really no surprise.

swampgas · 20-04-2018 02:29PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

There is no "right to an abortion" that I am aware of. Additionally "rights" are not absolute when they impact the life of another person.

Just as well there isn't another person involved. Just the potential for one.

SusieBlue · 20-04-2018 02:30PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

There is no "right to an abortion" that I am aware of. Additionally "rights" are not absolute when they impact the life of another person.

Unborn fetuses are not "persons". They are potential persons.
A fetus should not be of equal worth to a living breathing woman, unless she chooses so. A zygote should not have equal rights to the woman carrying it.

The rights I am speaking of is the right to bodily autonomy. Which all citizens have, except for pregnant women.

ELM327 · 20-04-2018 02:31PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

There is no "right to an abortion" that I am aware of. Additionally "rights" are not absolute when they impact the life of another person.

Good thing that legally the status of "Person" is not conferred until a birth certificate is issued at birth.

January wrote: »

Wasn't there a court case recently about travelling or helping someone travel for euthanasia?

That rings a vague bell yes.

baylah17 · 20-04-2018 02:32PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

SusieBlue wrote: »

What about the wants, needs, and rights of the born living woman who is carrying this child?
Whose life and health will be altered the most from the unwanted burden of motherhood? What of her?

We should be looking after the living, breathing people we have before affording potential people rights at their expense.
Its nonsensical to suggest otherwise.

Dead people currently have more rights than pregnant woman regarding bodily autonomy in this country. That's an absolute disgrace.

There is no "right to an abortion" that I am aware of. Additionally "rights" are not absolute when they impact the life of another person.

A clump of cells with the potential under certain circumstance to develop into a healthy human is not another person
It is a clump of cells paracitically existing in a host
Most times a willing host
Sometimes an unwilling host
Sometimes trying to kill the host

v638sg7k1a92bx · 20-04-2018 02:54PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

Unborn fetuses are not "persons". They are potential persons.
A fetus should not be of equal worth to a living breathing woman, unless she chooses so. A zygote should not have equal rights to the woman carrying it.

The rights I am speaking of is the right to bodily autonomy. Which all citizens have, except for pregnant women.

So at what stages does a fetus become a being with a right to life?

ELM327 · 20-04-2018 02:55PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

So at what stages does a fetus become a being with a right to life?

Birth.
Medically it is a foetus (that's how we spell it in Ireland, cowboy), until birth.
Legally it is not a person until birth.

SusieBlue · 20-04-2018 03:02PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

So at what stages does a fetus become a being with a right to life?

When its born, and/or has reached the point of being viable outside the womb.

Babies lost to stillbirth and miscarriages are not assigned death/birth certs if they are lost before 22 weeks.
Unborn babies are not assigned PPS numbers at conception.
We don't back date children's allowance payments to the date of the positive pregnancy test.
Why? Because as far as the government is concerned, they aren't people. They aren't living citizens.

Which is why its extremely hypocritical that they have an EQUAL right to life as that of the woman gestating them.

Zubeneschamali · 20-04-2018 03:02PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

So at what stages does a fetus become a being with a right to life?

Today, it gets its little right to life at implantation (which is a weird consequence of the stupid wording of the 8th amendment that no-one predicted because even the people who wrote it didn't understand what it meant) but it is not recognised in law as a human being, just a poorly defined "unborn".

The Supreme Court recently clarified that it has no other rights.

After we delete the 8th, it will have no Constitutional rights at all before birth, just the same as in 1982 before all this nonsense started.

v638sg7k1a92bx · 20-04-2018 03:09PM

ELM327 wrote: »

Birth.
Medically it is a foetus (that's how we spell it in Ireland, cowboy), until birth.
Legally it is not a person until birth.

But at what stage do you think it has a right to life?

AnneFrank · 20-04-2018 03:10PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

So at what stages does a fetus become a being with a right to life?

Apparently it's just a clump of cells up to 12 weeks, so any child lost before that due to miscarriage or abortion was only an idea of a child, and not actually a child going by what has been written on this very forum.

January · 20-04-2018 03:11PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

But at what stage do you think it has a right to life?

Birth. I thought the poster made that pretty clear.

Zubeneschamali · 20-04-2018 03:12PM

AnneFrank wrote: »

Apparently it's just a clump of cells up to 12 weeks, so any child lost before that due to miscarriage or abortion was only an idea of a child, and not actually a child going by what has been written on this very forum.

It isn't a child until it is born. Seriously, you can look up the law and everything.

January · 20-04-2018 03:12PM

AnneFrank wrote: »

Apparently it's just a clump of cells up to 12 weeks, so any child lost before that due to miscarriage or abortion was only an idea of a child, and not actually a child going by what has been written on this very forum.

That's the truth. It doesn't mean someone doesn't have the right to grieve for what could have been though.

SusieBlue · 20-04-2018 03:15PM

AnneFrank wrote: »

Apparently it's just a clump of cells up to 12 weeks, so any child lost before that due to miscarriage or abortion was only an idea of a child, and not actually a child going by what has been written on this very forum.

You seem to be a fan of the melodramatics. If that is how that person chose to deal with their loss and grieve for it, you have no right to make a cheap shot by using it to passive aggressively make a point.

And anyway, he's correct. The government do not consider any baby lost before 22 weeks to be citizens because they do not authorise birth or death certs for these babies. Its like the never existed.
And I know the reality of this all to well so please, spare me the passive aggressive reply that I know is coming my way.

Zubeneschamali · 20-04-2018 03:15PM

If you prolifers want the law to say a fetus is a human being, an actual child, you are going to need a new amendment.

And if you think the 8th had unexpected effects, your new amendment would have 10 times more.

nozzferrahhtoo · 20-04-2018 03:15PM

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

But at what stage do you think it has a right to life?

Answering for me personally..... I think as soon as we have any inclination the faculty of human sentience and consciousness has in any way come into the equation, we should stop just seeing it as a human entity biologically and start seeing it as a human person too.

AnneFrank wrote: »

any child lost before that due to miscarriage or abortion was only an idea of a child, and not actually a child going by what has been written on this very forum.

Not just by what is written on this forum, but by the lights of many other documents and sources too.

In the grief and trauma counselling of women who have had miscarriages for example we very much do work with models of the differences between the concept of having "lost a baby" and having "lost a pregnancy".

Even mere recourse to a dictionary will give you definitions of the word "child" that do not fit with what a fetus is. Nor does the process of how we work with birth and death certificates suggest anything of the sort either.

So no, your attempt to paint this as some narrative people on this forum are somehow coming up with is a disingenuous and distortion move.

ohnonotgmail · 20-04-2018 03:16PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If you prolifers want the law to say a fetus is a human being, an actual child, you are going to need a new amendment.

And if you think the 8th had unexpected effects, your new amendment would have 10 times more.

childrens allowance for all pregnant women?

Martina1991 · 20-04-2018 03:18PM

AnneFrank wrote: »

Apparently it's just a clump of cells up to 12 weeks, so any child lost before that due to miscarriage or abortion was only an idea of a child, and not actually a child going by what has been written on this very forum.

Exactly, a childless woman who has a miscarriage is not a mother of one. Not by the letter of the law anyway.

You lose a potential life.

v638sg7k1a92bx · 20-04-2018 03:23PM

January wrote: »

Birth. I thought the poster made that pretty clear.

What they said was it it's not a child until it is born but at what stage do they believe a foetus should have a right to life?

The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Comments