The 8th amendment referendum - part 4

Shenshen · 24-05-2018 07:37PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Rape victims represent a tiny proportion of overall pregnancies in this country. There are something like 50,000 pregnancies in Ireland every year. The number of pregnant rape victims would be tiny in comparison.

So because they are a small number, it's ok to add to their trauma and add loss of another aspect of bodily autonomy to the crime they have already suffered?

Paranoid Bob · 24-05-2018 07:39PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Another misrepresentation.
A large number of No voters, perhaps the majority would like a referendum with removes the unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks clause, but instead deals with unfortunate cases of FFA, rape etc which themselves represent a small minority of pregnancies.
I don't think I can be any clearer.
The misrepresentations by the Yes side need to stop.

There has been 35 years of opportunity to propose the referendum you are suggesting. It hasn't happened. If this one is voted down then there will not be another for many years.

We have the opportunity now to fix the problems. If there really are ways to get the situation you are looking for then they will be put forward as amendments to the proposed legislation. We have a hung Dáil now, so it is the perfect time for the TDs who agree with you to pressure the government into accepting those amendments.

The system is broken. You say you see some of the problems with the current system. This is the best opportunity we will have for decades to improve it, and it can only happen with a yes vote.

Please don't squander the opportunity we have now. Vote yes.

Shurimgreat · 24-05-2018 07:41PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so they are acceptable collateral damage then?

Nice editing of my post to remove the part where I said I supported abortions for rape victims.
More misrepresentations from the Yes side.

Tipperary animal lover · 24-05-2018 07:41PM

https://twitter.com/IzzyKamikaze/status/999662369465921536

Digital_Guy · 24-05-2018 07:41PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Rape victims represent a tiny proportion of overall pregnancies in this country. There are over 60,000 pregnancies in Ireland every year. The number of pregnant rape victims would be tiny in comparison.

Introducing potentially unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks for every single unborn baby to deal with a tiny number of pregnant rape victims is not the solution. Abortion for rape victims by all means but for healthy babies is an extreme step.

Exactly, and yet going by the discussions you'd think it was more like 90% of cases. Why is that I wonder?

And if someone has been raped and wants a termination all they should need to do is sign a statement to that effect - nobody should have to prove it.

Macha · 24-05-2018 07:41PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Rape victims represent a tiny proportion of overall pregnancies in this country. There are something like 50,000 pregnancies in Ireland every year. The number of pregnant rape victims would be tiny in comparison.

Introducing potentially unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks for every single unborn baby to deal with a tiny number of pregnant rape victims is not the solution. Abortion for rape victims by all means but for healthy babies is an extreme step.

You are scaremongering, and forgetting that abortion already exists in Ireland - for those capable of travelling.

What about FFAs? What about when a woman's life isn't in immediate danger? What about when her physical health is in danger? What about when her mental health is in danger. What about when she is under 18, a child herself?

There is ALWAYS a reason for an abortion. Maybe it isn't one you agree with but even putting aside forcing a woman to be pregnant for 9 months against her will (and I have been pregnant for 9 1/2 months and it is not a walk in the park), will you be there to sign the adoption papers as soon as the baby comes out?

Shurimgreat · 24-05-2018 07:42PM

Shenshen wrote: »

So because they are a small number, it's ok to add to their trauma and add loss of another aspect of bodily autonomy to the crime they have already suffered?

Did you bother reading where I said rape victims should be allowed abortions? When you edit posts like that you misrepresent people, deliberately or otherwise.

Introducing unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks is one of the worst examples of a blunt instrument being used by a government I have seen. This government is proving to be one of the worst in the history of the state.

Conservatory · 24-05-2018 07:42PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

There is nowhere near enough demand to support a private abortion clinic.

Seriously? There is private sti clinics.

Paranoid Bob · 24-05-2018 07:42PM

djPSB wrote: »

Still undecided.

Thought process. 100% agree with termination in situations where there is any threat to a woman's life. I feel the 2013 Protection of Life during Pregnancy allows for termination in such cases.

Also 100% agree with termination in fatal fetal abnormalities where there is no chance of a baby surviving.

100% agree with terminations in instances of rape.

So for the so called hard cases, abortion must be an option.

However, there is something in the proposed bill that does not quite sit right with me. I don't think it is correct to be aborting perfectly healthy babies up to 12 weeks. It's just something that I don't feel is morally right, killing a healthy 12 week old baby.

Yes people say sure 'can't women just go to England anyways'. That's not a valid reason to support the Bill and doesn't make it morally correct just because it's in place in the UK.

It's an all or nothing Bill that is not morally correct or something I can say I fully support. It should have been drafted to protect women's right in the so called hard cases but unfortunately it's gone beyond that and taken from the rights of perfectly healthy babies.

Difficult vote.

The vote tomorrow is not on the legislation.
The vote tomorrow is on the opportunity to have a debate on what the legislation should be.

I absolutely respect the view that the proposed legislation is too broad, but there will never be a better time to improve it than right now; and if we pass on this opportunity there will not be another for many, many years.

murpho999 · 24-05-2018 07:42PM

djPSB wrote: »

Still undecided.

Thought process. 100% agree with termination in situations where there is any threat to a woman's life. I feel the 2013 Protection of Life during Pregnancy allows for termination in such cases.

Also 100% agree with termination in fatal fetal abnormalities where there is no chance of a baby surviving.

100% agree with terminations in instances of rape.

So for the so called hard cases, abortion must be an option.

However, there is something in the proposed bill that does not quite sit right with me. I don't think it is correct to be aborting perfectly healthy babies up to 12 weeks. It's just something that I don't feel is morally right, killing a healthy 12 week old baby.

Yes people say sure 'can't women just go to England anyways'. That's not a valid reason to support the Bill and doesn't make it morally correct just because it's in place in the UK.

It's an all or nothing Bill that is not morally correct or something I can say I fully support. It should have been drafted to protect women's right in the so called hard cases but unfortunately it's gone beyond that and taken from the rights of perfectly healthy babies.

Difficult vote.

You have to think about who will be seeking these abortions.

Women who want to have a child will be totally unaffected by this they will continue to have babies as they do now.

It's for women in crisis pregnancy that will need it for various reasons. Whether that be social economic reasons, contraception failure, poor sex education, being too young or simply making a mistake.
They must make a personal decision that will not be taken lightly and I feel they should have that right.

They will also not be killing a baby but removing a foetus. Big difference.

The body often does this too with natural miscarriages in the first 12 weeks ad a medical abortion would be very similar.

I really don't see how people can be denied by others the right to choose this and "can't women just go to England anyways" is just a negligent and cruel outlook to take as it just adds more to the stress that the woman and/or her family/circle is going through.

Penn · 24-05-2018 07:42PM

djPSB wrote: »

Still undecided.

Thought process. 100% agree with termination in situations where there is any threat to a woman's life. I feel the 2013 Protection of Life during Pregnancy allows for termination in such cases.

Also 100% agree with termination in fatal fetal abnormalities where there is no chance of a baby surviving.

100% agree with terminations in instances of rape.

So for the so called hard cases, abortion must be an option.

However, there is something in the proposed bill that does not quite sit right with me. I don't think it is correct to be aborting perfectly healthy babies up to 12 weeks. It's just something that I don't feel is morally right, killing a healthy 12 week old baby.

Yes people say sure 'can't women just go to England anyways'. That's not a valid reason to support the Bill and doesn't make it morally correct just because it's in place in the UK.

It's an all or nothing Bill that is not morally correct or something I can say I fully support. It should have been drafted to protect women's right in the so called hard cases but unfortunately it's gone beyond that and taken from the rights of perfectly healthy babies.

Difficult vote.

The simple fact is that these abortions will still happen whether the vote is Yes or No. Women will still travel to the UK for abortions, or order abortion pills online, or even simply try to harm themselves in other ways to terminate the pregnancy. These abortions will still happen.

Thousands of women each year travel from Ireland to the UK for abortions, and that doesn't include the unreported ones, or those taking abortion pills (as there's almost no way to quantify those).

A No vote simply means that will continue to happen. Even if there's a No vote and a new referendum in a year allowing abortions only in the event of rape or FFA, those other abortions will still continue to happen.

A Yes vote means those abortions can happen here, safely, where women can actually consult with their doctors properly and completely. Where they can receive full and proper medical care as opposed to having to travel to the UK and being an outpatient etc. Where they can receive safe and sufficient aftercare (as whether its a surgical abortion or via the abortion pill, there are still health risks after).

A No vote won't prevent abortions. It will only prevent safe abortions.

NIMAN · 24-05-2018 07:43PM

I take it that should Yes win tomorrow, then abortions will be a fast-tracked procedure on the health service? There won't be the usual waiting time that people in the health service usually experience.

Say a woman goes to her GP and is 9 weeks pregnant and says she won't be able to cope with the child. This obviously means that the HSE/GP etc only have 3 weeks to get everything sorted out.

Is it a procedure that will be able to be done in a GP surgery, or will it require a hospital visit?

namloc1980 · 24-05-2018 07:43PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Nice editing of my post to remove the part where I said I supported abortions for rape victims.
More misrepresentations from the Yes side.

In that case then a yes vote is the only logical option. To legislate for rape victims the 8th must go. No ifs, buts or maybes.

Digital_Guy · 24-05-2018 07:43PM

spookwoman wrote: »

1 I don't have an irish times subscription so can't read it
2 Breda O'Brien of Gays should abstain from sex - like all unmarried couples
3 Breda O'Brien of "Do you think we should change the Constitution to allow grandmothers and their daughters to marry?"

A tip is to open an article in an incognito / private browsing window, and then you should be able to read it.

igCorcaigh · 24-05-2018 07:44PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Did you bother reading where I said rape victims should be allowed abortions? When you edit posts like that you misrepresent people.

No one can demonstrate how we can legislate for abortion in these cases but not for others.

neonsofa · 24-05-2018 07:45PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Rape victims represent a tiny proportion of overall pregnancies in this country. There are over 60,000 pregnancies in Ireland every year. The number of pregnant rape victims would be tiny in comparison.

Introducing potentially unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks for every single unborn baby to deal with a tiny number of pregnant rape victims is not the solution. Abortion for rape victims by all means but for healthy babies is an extreme step.

Ok so tell us how this will work.
What alternative would you propose to ensure it is only that "tiny proportion" availing of terminations?

_Dara_ · 24-05-2018 07:45PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Rape victims represent a tiny proportion of overall pregnancies in this country. There are over 60,000 pregnancies in Ireland every year. The number of pregnant rape victims would be tiny in comparison.

Introducing potentially unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks for every single unborn baby to deal with a tiny number of pregnant rape victims is not the solution. Abortion for rape victims by all means but for healthy babies is an extreme step.

So? Because they are few, they are not important?

murpho999 · 24-05-2018 07:46PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

There is nowhere near enough demand to support a private abortion clinic.

Conservatory wrote: »

Seriously? There is private sti clinics.

There won't be any medical procedures. Just medical ones.

Two tablets prescribed by a GP.

First taken at the GP and second a couple of days later at home. That's it.

Shurimgreat · 24-05-2018 07:46PM

Macha wrote: »

You are scaremongering, and forgetting that abortion already exists in Ireland - for those capable of travelling.

What about FFAs? What about when a woman's life isn't in immediate danger? What about when her physical health is in danger? What about when her mental health is in danger. What about when she is under 18, a child herself?

There is ALWAYS a reason for an abortion. Maybe it isn't one you agree with but even putting aside forcing a woman to be pregnant for 9 months against her will (and I have been pregnant for 9 1/2 months and it is not a walk in the park), will you be there to sign the adoption papers as soon as the baby comes out?

A lot of the reasons are spurious such as not wanting to bring shame to a family. A lot of the decisions are rushed with no alternatives offered. A lot of reasons are economic.

namloc1980 · 24-05-2018 07:48PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Rape victims represent a tiny proportion of overall pregnancies in this country. There are over 60,000 pregnancies in Ireland every year. The number of pregnant rape victims would be tiny in comparison.

Introducing potentially unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks for every single unborn baby to deal with a tiny number of pregnant rape victims is not the solution. Abortion for rape victims by all means but for healthy babies is an extreme step.

How would you possibly enforce that? Have you actually thought about your suggestion??

dense · 24-05-2018 07:48PM

Shenshen wrote: »

So because they are a small number, it's ok to add to their trauma and add loss of another aspect of bodily autonomy to the crime they have already suffered?

Yes, and having an abortion will add to the trauma they've already experienced.

On rape, what are the known stats of victims becoming pregnant?

Is there any data on the use of the morning after pill?

Conservatory · 24-05-2018 07:49PM

murpho999 wrote: »

There won't be any medical procedures. Just medical ones.

Two tablets prescribed by a GP.

First taken at the GP and second a couple of days later at home. That's it.

So you are telling me a tablet making company could have skin in the game and may want to make sure the committee goes through with full on demand abortions?

murpho999 · 24-05-2018 07:49PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Rape victims represent a tiny proportion of overall pregnancies in this country. There are over 60,000 pregnancies in Ireland every year. The number of pregnant rape victims would be tiny in comparison.

Introducing potentially unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks for every single unborn baby to deal with a tiny number of pregnant rape victims is not the solution. Abortion for rape victims by all means but for healthy babies is an extreme step.

Do you realise that people who don't want an abortion simply won't get one?

Also, you cannot introduce legislation just for rape victims as it's impossible to prove and adds more stress to the victim.

Thankfully I feel your viewpoint in the minority and you'll be very disappointed with the result on Saturday.

Calina · 24-05-2018 07:49PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Macha wrote: »

You are scaremongering, and forgetting that abortion already exists in Ireland - for those capable of travelling.

What about FFAs? What about when a woman's life isn't in immediate danger? What about when her physical health is in danger? What about when her mental health is in danger. What about when she is under 18, a child herself?

There is ALWAYS a reason for an abortion. Maybe it isn't one you agree with but even putting aside forcing a woman to be pregnant for 9 months against her will (and I have been pregnant for 9 1/2 months and it is not a walk in the park), will you be there to sign the adoption papers as soon as the baby comes out?

A lot of the reasons are spurious such as not wanting to bring shame to a family. A lot of the decisions are rushed with no alternatives offered. A lot of reasons are economic.

Those are not spurious reasons. You have no idea of the power of shame and economic absolutely is not trivial in a country with a basket case accomodation market.

ohnonotgmail · 24-05-2018 07:50PM

Conservatory wrote: »

Seriously? There is private sti clinics.

There were more that 12000 case of STIs last year. And that doesnt include those who got tested and were clear. So that is more than twice the number of abortions. STIs can take multiple visits to resolve. The vast majority of abortions will take only 2 consultations. So even if ALL the women who required an abortion went to a private clinic the turnover would only be

4000 * 60 * 2 = 480,000

a year. barely enough to support a private clinic.

Digital_Guy · 24-05-2018 07:50PM

erica74 wrote: »

What does that culture look like? How is it described?

That's an easy one. Just replace 'abortion' with any other word. For example; 'drinking'.

Ireland has a culture of drinking - it's socially very acceptable, not at all frowned upon, really prevalent, etc.

Spain doesn't (or pick another nation). Being drunk is frowned upon, people don't tend to drink to excess as a matter of course, alcohol is more seen as a complement to a meal than something to go out and binge on.

erica74 wrote: »

20 women who needed an abortion had one. Why is that messed up?

Missing the crucial part there - 20 women she *knows*. So she has 20 friends who have had abortions, and they've clearly talked about it, discussed it, said 'oh I had one too', etc. Reflective of a culture of abortion.

Do you know 20 women who have had abortions? I am 99.99% certain you don't, and I'd say there is almost nobody in Ireland who does. Why? Because there is a very low abortion rate (relatively at least), and no culture of abortion - one where it is really acceptable and commonplace to have one.

erica74 wrote: »

I mean you sure seem "undecided", there is nothing in your long post which suggests you're contemplating voting yes.

Well I did say I was leaning towards no. And the long posts are a way of teasing things out for myself as well.

ohnonotgmail · 24-05-2018 07:50PM

Conservatory wrote: »

So you are telling me a tablet making company could have skin in the game and may want to make sure the committee goes through with full on demand abortions?

no they are not saying that. You're making it up.

Shenshen · 24-05-2018 07:51PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Did you bother reading where I said rape victims should be allowed abortions? When you edit posts like that you misrepresent people, deliberately or otherwise.

Introducing unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks is one of the worst examples of a blunt instrument being used by a government I have seen. This government is proving to be one of the worst in the history of the state.

You kindly added that in after I had quoted your post.
You may want to re-think accusing posters of making edits you did yourself.

murpho999 · 24-05-2018 07:52PM

Conservatory wrote: »

So you are telling me a tablet making company could have skin in the game and may want to make sure the committee goes through with full on demand abortions?

What committee?

The tablets already exist but are not legal here.

They are very cheap generic drugs.

Also why do the "No" side keep saying "On Demand" abortions like it's Netflix?

No woman will "Demand" an abortion, she will go to a doctor and seek the medical advice and care needed to suit her needs at a very difficult time.

"No" side keep trying to make out that it's a trivial decision when it's not at all.

gmisk · 24-05-2018 07:52PM

I see the orange order have called for a no vote zzzz

The 8th amendment referendum - part 4

Comments