8th amendment referendum part 3 - Mod note and FAQ in post #1

Just her wrote: »

Well it is a developing baby as I've said before. I usually remember to say foetus as well to keep the yes from nitpicking at words instead of sticking to the point. The point is that there is a human in the womb

The point is the womb belongs to someone else.

Dressing gown wrote:

It’s not been pretty I give you that. I think emotions are running high which is why the hysteria. I think it’s because it impacts people’s lives that they feel so passionately. Try to find the good in the hysteria-overall it’s because people care one way or another.

But does it impact on people's lives? The scenario of a possible abortion will not be experienced by the vast majority of posters in this thread.

Pretty much sums up my view of the 'leaders' of the Save The 8th campaign.

I can honestly say I haven't had a bad experience with any campaigners involved on the Yes side and I'm talking about over a number of years now, since they started the whole campaign initially just pushing for the Referendum etc.

Just her wrote: »

Ok well I disagree that it's all to do with religion as I know atheists who are pro life and religious people who are pro choice.

You say the 8th only protects the life of the poorer, to me that's still lives saved and the more saved the better.

You say the mother must be dying or seriously ill to be saved, but if we go the route of England where they allow abortion when the mother's mental health is in danger it resulted in 1 in every 5 or 6 pregnancies aborted which would translate into thousands more deaths here. Ireland is always rated highly as one of the safest places to give birth so I find it hard to buy into that the 8 th is causing deaths in Ireland.

There have been deaths of women from abortion, these are never mentioned or are glossed over as 'well it was her choice she knew the chance she was taking'

As for Irish ordering abortion pills online in one of the debates it was pointed out that the same is being done in the thousands in England where abortion is legal.

You talk of the mother s life trumping the unborns or vice versa. Love both means just that. We don't want either to die. I don't want women prosecuted for abortion, I want them not to do it in the first place. I find it hard to believe there aren't a lot of regrets. I read about a woman who had an abortion and said she had no regrets. She also said she checked on the calendar every so often to see what age the baby would be now. She also said she hoped she would be allowed to be a mother to the baby in heaven and that she could explain to the baby why she did it. That was from a woman with no regrets.

Another said she did regret it but not until many years passed and she had more children and it hit her then, each time she made a child a birthday cake she thought of the one who was aborted. What of the women who abort thinking they are too young but then it never happens for them again. People will say as long as they had the choice is their mistake to make, I think it's a hell of a price to pay.

I could go on and on but I'd be accused of trying to be emotive but this is actually what goes through my head. I have always been prolife but a few years ago someone very close to me who I greatly respect and love told me they were Pro choice. I couldn't get my head around it so I literally went back to the drawing board and put everything I knew or thought I knew aside and looked at the whole abortion debate with fresh eyes, looking only to as objective research as I could find to see what they were seeing. Well it only served to make me more prolife and gave me many sleepless nights thinking about the women and babies that go through this.

Posters can call me what they want I'm just answering dressing gown as they seem genuine. And apologies in advance to whoever replies I probably won't get a chance to answer.

Hi. I’ve taken a while to reply to this as it was late when I first saw it and it’s a tricky one to reply to-I don’t want to come over as aggressive or dismissive but I fear I might.

Re it not being about religion, I’m trying to figure out where your rationale comes from. I can’t extract what I would deem a scientific source for your logic so from that I would infer that your rationale is based in religion.

Re the lives of embryos/foetuses being saved, I find it morally abhorrent that a woman should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. That’s the stuff of enslavery and subservience. And to me it has no place in a free democratic republic. Like I’ve said previously I do not believe a developing life is equivalent to an actual living breathing life. I would conduct all of the abortions myself if my sons life depended on it and I would not lose a wink of sleep.

Re buying into women’s lives or health being at risk, I would defer to the experts on that and if the vote was theirs alone the 8th would be repealed 80/20.

Re deaths from abortion, in England and Wales in 2016 there was one death following an abortion reported in 2016. This is the same number as 2015, and there were zero deaths in 2012, 2013 and 2014. There were 190,000 odd abortions in 2016 so forgive my maths while juggling children here that’s 0.001% for 2016 and less if you count it over 5 years.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/679028/Abortions_stats_England_Wales_2016.pdf

Re abortion pills in the UK: They are debating making ordering pills online freely available in the UK to meet the needs of women that need them. So it can be done in a safe and supportive environment. Scotland already allow it.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/26/women-scotland-allowed-take-abortion-pill-at-home

Re regrets for having an abortion: Opening the door to abortion in Ireland will only help to remove the shame surrounding it and enable those who have already experienced it to receive counselling for what they have been through if they need it. But that goes for counselling services before abortion as well should it become legal. Surely that would help people evaluate their options in a non judgmental environment and possibly enable some to keep their pregnancies as if society deems it acceptable attitudes might start to change and the fear and shame surrounding it will be diminished. I’m getting roared at by the kids here but I know the body for psychologists in Ireland is pronrepeal.

Re your re-evaluation of your position. I think the only way some of the staunch no voters would come around is through having loved ones go through the process of abortion. If your view on abortion remains the same then and you view the person having that abortion as really a murderer then I believe you have the courage of your convictions. But if you don’t, then I don’t think you ever really believed the embryo or foetus to have an equal right to life in the first place.

I’m not trying to set traps and I don’t intend this to be a personal attack on you and I really respect that you are engaging in this debate given the prevalence of vociferous yes voters on this site, but I just can’t put myself in your shoes and where you are coming from. I’m sorry we will have to agree to disagree.

Just her wrote: »

Well now if you thought it was going to miscarry or die tell me why go for an abortion.

You appear to have completely missed the point and context of what I was saying there as this reply makes no sense in the light of the point I was making. I said nothing about people thinking they are going to miscarry. What I said was that when you claim to know that, given some time, the fetus will become sentient.... you simply do not know that because anything can happen in the interim.

I genuinely can not work out what point you think I made that you are replying to here. I just recognize it was one WAY off the one I was actually making.

Just her wrote: »

You want to make sure it dies before it becomes sentient as you say.

Just her wrote: »

Just to clarify sentient is your argument for abortion.

Wow the misrepresentation you are engaging in now is really fetid. I do not want anything to die. What I want is for people to have the choice of abortion. A choice I wish no one ever had to make or take. And what I WANT is for no one to have that choice if it means killing a sentient human being. I want to protect the well being, happiness, freedoms, rights, and choices of sentient people. It really is that simple and not at all the dark "you want to make sure things die" narrative you are painting me with so egregiously.

It is not my argument FOR abortion. It is my rebuttal to people who claim the fetus should have rights. My rebuttal points out that anyone who claims that does not appear to have explored what rights are.... where they come from.... what they are.... how they work..... how they are mediated..... and what their goal is.

If you want to make arguments against abortion, that is great. But if you make a bad one that makes no sense at all, or has built into it an assumption or assertion that is itself nonsense..... I am prone to pointing that out.

And merely declaring a 10 week old fetus should have rights, let alone rights that infringe on the rights of someone who actually should have rights (the pregnant woman) then I am going to point out that nothing about rights, how they work, what they are for and so on seems to support that assertion.

You WANT such a fetus to have rights. But you have not yet moved to argue as to why it should. All you have done in fact is argue why it should have rights in the future, and then brought that forward into the now. Which is itself a crazy move.

Just her wrote: »

You cannot dismiss what is not even there you say. Are you saying there is no baby/foetus there now is it?

Just her wrote: »

Flowery language and denial that there is anything in a pregnant woman's womb at all seems to be how it is on this thread.

Nope. I have said, am saying, and likely will continue to say only one thing. There is no PERSON there. And rights should be based around the PERSON. You want to give the rights of a person to something that is not a person. And you have not managed to adumbrate a coherent algorithm for making that move.

You are seeing what you want to see because I have, perhaps unlike you, read every single one of in order of 28,500 (estimate) posts on this thread. And not one person I have seen so far has "denied there is anything in the womb". What they have said time and time again is NOT that there is noTHING there. They have time and time again said there is noONE there..... at least at the times when abortion occurs.

So perhaps we can make the move going forward of replying to what people are saying, rather than what you want them to be saying? Because that really is "flowery language", or to put it more bluntly.... wanton, contrived, egregious, unwarranted, unjustified and dishonest misrepresentation and demonization of the "other side". Which none of should be doing.

thebull85 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnacb9RzdNw

Link doesn't work so I can't watch it.
Tell me, would you say these young women are being obstreperous?

gmisk wrote: »

What about all the love Both hoodies?
Is it the message or who is wearing them?

I think I will buy a "love boats" tshirt.

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

But does it impact on people's lives? The scenario of a possible abortion will not be experienced by the vast majority of posters in this thread.

Yes. It has impacted my life and caused me many sleepless nights during my last pregnancy. Stress that I and my pregnancy could have done without.

gmisk wrote: »

I would have liked to join the local yes campaign but I wouldnt feel I have the knowledge or confidence to knock on doors.
I have however donated (three time) bought badges, and talked to friends etc.


I think its a shame though, the yes side who knocked on my door could not have been any nicer.

I don't know were you live. I live in a small enough town and I'd know nearly everybody out canvasing. Now they are nice people involved in both campaigns but you'd cross the road to avoid them.
I spoke to both sides briefly and they both were unsure of the information or telling lies.
One thing I don't like about the Yes side on social media is. They post all these sarcastic meme's/rolling eyes/etc mocking no voters.

thebull85 wrote: »

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Link doesn't work so I can't watch it.
Tell me, would you say these young women are being obstreperous?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnacb9RzdNw

What were they doing, you've got me intrigued?

_Dara_ wrote: »

trixi001 wrote: »

So the payout was partly because the HSE breached the 8th amendment to the constitution by denying Savita her right to life, as protected by the constitution?
And yet the yes side claim is that the 8th amendment caused her death?
The 8th amendment did not deny her right to life, the inability of the government and medical professions to have laws and guidelines around the issue of abortion where the mothers life is at risk, caused Savita's tragic and avoidable death.
Does NI, where abortion is restricted by law unless the life of the mother is at risk, have the same issues around healthcare of woman of a child bearing age?
The wording of "exceptions" to abortion being illegal in NI is
(Note taken form Wikipedia)
An offence under section 25(1) of the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 1945 is, by the proviso to that section, not committed if the act which caused the death of a child was done in good faith for the purpose only of preserving the life of the mother
Case law in NI results in the definition of life being extended -
 In Northern Ireland Health and Social Services Board v A and Others [1994] NIJB 1, MacDermott LJ said, at p 5, that he was "satisfied that the statutory phrase, 'for the purpose only of preserving the life of the mother' does not relate only to some life-threatening situation. Life in this context means that physical or mental health or well-being of the mother and the doctor’s act is lawful where the continuance of the pregnancy would adversely affect the mental or physical health of the mother. The adverse effect must however be a real and serious one.
Do we think removing the 8th amendment will actually lead to better healthcare for women?
It is almost universal that women are asked if they are (or could be) pregnant during any medical procedure.
Many countries do not perform certain procedures which involve radiotherapy on women that may be pregnant.
I don't think that removing the 8th amendment will mean that scans etc will be carried out, outside the current menstrual window.
If a woman has even the slightest possibility she is pregnant, and the procedure goes again, she finds out that against all the odds, somehow she is pregnant, and decides to keep the baby, and the child could then born with a severe disability due to being exposed to x, y &z.
The removal of the 8th amendment is not going to remove the above risk, so it is not going to change the procedures around the scans, treatments etc.

You’re missing the point. Yes, scans and radiation therapy can’t be given to pregnant women anywhere. But in other countries, the option would be there to terminate the pregnancy there and then.

And if the life of the mother is at risk, there is the option to terminate the pregnancy here also.
A woman with cancer, can have an abortion and then radiotherapy - that is not against the constitution - as there is a real risk to the life of the mother - the risk does not have to be immediate.