Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Abortion Discussion, Part the Fourth

1…2425272930…101

Comments

  • #782
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,201 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Rape on a man is not as bad as rape on a woman for the same reason, the law reflects that.

    Who are you to tell any victim of sexual violence that their suffering is "not as bad"..?

    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Well lets not get into semantics. I understand it is not murder in the legal sense of the word (although it was for the entire history of the state up until January this year)

    Wrong. It was never regarded as murder since (at least) the passage of the 1861 Act which predates this state.

    I'm partial to your abracadabra,

    I'm raptured by the joy of it all.



  • #783
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,834 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    It is a serious assault no doubt. The potential effects on a woman are worse though. The law and society's attitudes in general reflect that.

    So rape of men isn't as bad as rape of women because they can't get pregnant? So, by that argument, is rape of post menstrual or sterile women not as bad as rape of fertile women? What about rape of pre-pubescent children?


  • #784
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,637 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    So rape of men isn't as bad as rape of women because they can't get pregnant? So, by that argument, is rape of post menstrual or sterile women not as bad as rape of fertile women? What about rape of pre-pubescent children?

    That resembles the thinking behind the attempted justification of child sex abuse by clerics. TBF very few actually went that far, but I definitely remember an elderly (Italian?) priest being quoted as saying that sex with children didn't count as breaking the rule on celibacy.

    Establishing a hierarchy of victimhood is always a dodgy activity, but FWIW I think one could argue that male rape may in some ways be worse for the victim because of how our society sees rape. We know how hard it is for women to report a rape and/or to seek psychological help afterwards - how much harder must that be for a man when "she" is almost as automatic a pronoun for referring to rape victims as it is for talking about pregnancy!

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • #785
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,834 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Serious question:

    Would you deny a rape victim a late term abortion? And force her to give birth to her rapists child? Perhaps with the shock of her experience, perhaps denial of the situation, she only decided to abort at 40 weeks? Would you be happy to force her to give birth? To look at her child and see her rapist? To live her life with the knowledge that she left her child to adoption?

    Strictly speaking, abortion applies to pregnancy, not to the foetus itself. At 40 weeks, no matter what how it is aborted, will have to be birthed to be removed from the body. Therefore, at 40 weeks, live birth is the most efficient method of abortion.


  • #786
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    How many of that 10k just made terrible decisions? The majority I would imagine. I'm not judging the ones who need it for medical reasons/rape etc. but I am judging the ones who were just plain irresponsible / stupid.

    Can you detail out a bit of this opinion about women who were just plain irresponsible or stupid please? And what qualifies you to make a judgement on what constitutes a terrible decision.

    If you could back this opinion with some evidence on the actual reasons that women give for having abortions please.


  • Advertisement
  • #787
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,637 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    ....... wrote: »
    Can you detail out a bit of this opinion about women who were just plain irresponsible or stupid please? And what qualifies you to make a judgement on what constitutes a terrible decision.

    If you could back this opinion with some evidence on the actual reasons that women give for having abortions please.

    Not to forget that we must surely all have seen enough examples of people who were just not able to care for a child for all sorts of reasons ending up having one all the same to realise that "Because I am not able to parent a child at this stage of my life" is probably a very good reason to terminate a pregnancy.

    This notion that women should stay pregnant purely because they messed up on their contraception, to teach them a lesson or something, just beggars belief really. There is nothing less respectful of human life than using a child to punish the woman's carelessness.

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • #788
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Plenty of people who became pregnant through "stupidity" or whatever you want to call it ended up having the child.

    The reason for the abortion is unlikely to be "I was stupid", its more likely to be "I can't afford a child", "I'm not emotionally ready", "it will negatively impact work or study" All are valid reasons to have an abortion.

    Funny when an unplanned pregnancy results in a birth no one tells the parents they were stupid or irresponsible, it's generally reserved for those who choose not to continue. I wonder why that is?


  • #789
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    [SNIP]

    Mod note: if you wish to discuss moderation decisions please take it to PM or DRP.
    On thread is not the place.


  • #790
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,834 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    robindch wrote: »
    Statistics from Russia indicate that - around ten years ago anyway - abortion remained a regular alternative to contraception - and abortions often outnumbered live births in the country.

    https://www.rferl.org/a/Abortion_Remains_Top_Birth_Control_Option_Russia/1145849.html

    I'm not sure your point behind posting is. Form your link:
    "Young women who think that having an abortion is an easy thing are wrong," Latypova tells RFE/RL's Tatar-Bashkir Service. "An abortion is not only an operation. It's a deep psychological trauma for a woman. This is an operation that causes a woman physical and moral pain. I don't think it's the right decision."

    Despite an abundance of new family-planning options, Latypova says lack of public awareness and prohibitive expenses -- like $25 monthly packs of birth control pills -- mean many women still see abortion as their only choice.

    "Students and young girls can't afford birth control. Many girls are afraid to talk about it with their mothers and ask for money," she says. "An unplanned pregnancy can cause them enormous stress. They immediately opt for an abortion, and don't even tell their parents or boyfriends."

    It agrees with eviltwin's point that abortion is painful, messy, traumatic and physically gruelling, and explains that it is only so prevalent in Russia because of lack of awareness (no sex education in schools) and expense of proper contraception. Your only example of a place using abortion as contraception is a country where people don't know and can't afford any better.


  • #791
    Mark Hamill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,834 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Not questioning mods here but I just want to state that:

    "Look dude sorry for your loss"

    Was not meant to be disrespectful in anyway, it was simply colliquial language that I use every day. I genuinely hope that poster & family are ok.

    Im gonna leave here for now. It seems the echo chamber of A&A is not ready for harsh truths at this moment. Peace all.

    Where you waiting long for a way to pretend to martyr yourself and escape this discussion?


  • Advertisement
  • #792
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Well lets not get into semantics. I understand it is not murder in the legal sense of the word (although it was for the entire history of the state up until January this year) forgive me if I use a word that has been in use to describe abortion for so many years I need to adjust!

    What abortion is without question is killing. It is killing when we abort a pregnancy in the first week, it is killing at 12 weeks, it is killing at 24 weeks and it is killing at 40 weeks. The only difference is how sentient the human life form is. I was given the example of a tapeworm earlier in the discussion. If I were to stamp on a tapeworm I would be killing it. Theres no getting away from that word.

    I beleive a woman has the right to kill a 40 week old child inside her body because it is just that - her body. She gets to make decisions about her body, not me not you and not the state.

    MOD: AS PER THE CHARTER. THE USE OF TERMS LIKE "MURDER" IN THIS CONTEXT ARE INFLAMMATORY AND BEST AVOIDED. FOLLOWING THE USE OF THAT TERM WITH THE WORD "KILLING" 6 TIMES AND THEN "KILL" IS POURING PETROL ON IT.

    TONE IT DOWN OR MODERATION WILL ESCALATE.


  • #793
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,637 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Killing a tapeworm would not be state-endorsed murder though. Those were your words.

    Also if it is her body, is she committing state-endorsed "murder" of her own body?

    If it's a "child", as you said above, should she have the right to kill it? Ending the pregnancy doesn't necessarily mean the death of the child: at 40 weeks it's just an induced birth. So why do you think she should be allowed to kill this child, if that is what it is (and at 40 weeks I think it probably is)?

    I have asked this question three times now, I believe, and have not yet got an answer, just a repetition of "because I am prochoice". Which is a statement of fact, not an explanation.

    While I realise that the poster is entitled not to reply, it is odd to then see him post as below :
    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Well here we disagree. I believe that while the fetus/baby is in the woman's body, the fetus/baby is part of the woman's body. I believe in complete bodily autonomy, her body, her choice. It appears I am more pro choice than yourself. Thanks for your honesty in answering the question.
    I mean, why the need to say this at all? Why should poster Hotblack be surprised that poster Kidchameleon "appears" to be more prochoice than them? Unless of course.... :D

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • #794
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,458 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Mark Hamill wrote: »
    I'm not sure your point behind posting is [...] It agrees with eviltwin's point that abortion is painful, messy, traumatic and physically gruelling,
    Yes indeed, the article I quoted makes that very obvious point very well - a point which, as it applies during the later stages of pregnancy, I completely agree with.

    The point from eviltwin which I was replying to was the bit which I quoted which was eviltwin's claim that abortion is never used as contraception.
    eviltwin wrote: »
    I'm so tired of this abortion for contraception argument. Clearly anyone who thinks that's how it will be used has never had an abortion.
    Allowing for some fluidity of language, I'm afraid that's not really true in Russia where - owing to widespread poverty and an absence of government support - regular contraception is often not used, so when a woman becomes pregnant, the foetus is often aborted via pill to avoid having to deal with the hassle and cost of a real baby later on.

    In comparison to a later-term abortion, early-term abortion by pill is relatively cheap and trouble-free and - again allowing for some fluidity of language here - amounts to the use of abortion as a means of contraception.

    Also, my own fairly extensive experience of Russia over twenty years or so suggests that this is the case too - abortion seems to be considered a fairly normal part of life in that country and I don't ever recall any Russian person getting very worked up about it, except when it's denied.


  • #795
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,637 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    robindch wrote: »
    Yes indeed, the article I quoted makes that very obvious point very well - a point which, as it applies during the later stages of pregnancy, I completely agree with.

    The point from eviltwin which I was replying to was the bit which I quoted which was eviltwin's claim that abortion is never used as contraception.Allowing for some fluidity of language, I'm afraid that's not really true in Russia where - owing to widespread poverty and an absence of government support - regular contraception is often not used, so when a woman becomes pregnant, the foetus is often aborted via pill to avoid having to deal with the hassle and cost of a real baby later on.

    In comparison to a later-term abortion, early-term abortion by pill is relatively cheap and trouble-free and - again allowing for some fluidity of language here - amounts to the use of abortion as a means of contraception.

    Also, my own fairly extensive experience of Russia over twenty years or so suggests that this is the case too - abortion seems to be considered a fairly normal part of life in that country and I don't ever recall any Russian person getting very worked up about it, except when it's denied.

    Yes but you're ignoring the historical reasons by which abortion became the main method of contraception there: a very authoritarian government decided to create that situation rather than allow women to import the American-invented contraceptive pill.

    For decades women there basically had no other choice. So obviously it became part of normal female life there. That's entirely different from women themselves choosing to use abortion as a birth control method when they have other possibilities open to them.

    And if you know Russia as well as you say, it's disingenuous of you not to include that rather important difference but to just conflate the situations in the two countries.

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • #796
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,458 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Yes but you're ignoring the historical reasons for which abortion became the main method of contraception there : a very authoritarian government decided to create that situation rather than allow women to import the American-invented contraceptive pill.
    I'll agree that if the Russian government spent less time being massively corrupt, less time invading its neighbours and less time and energy developing new atomic weapons, it would have more cash available for health programs including contraception - lack of cash for health care being the topic of ongoing protests in the country.

    eviltwin claimed that "abortion as contraception" never happens - the evidence suggests that it does, allowing for the fact that the claim, as originally worded, was very broad.

    Please feel free to make a more specific claim if you believe that the general claim is undecidable or excessively ambiguous as stated.


  • #797
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    Ill be banned if I discuss it further.... I wish there were less restrictive avenues of discussion...


  • #798
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Ill be banned if I discuss it further.... I wish there were less restrictive avenues of discussion...

    This is just a cop out.

    Its possible to have a discussion respectfully and within the parameters of this forum, particularly if you have factual evidence to support your opinion.


  • #799
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Ill be banned if I discuss it further.... I wish there were less restrictive avenues of discussion...

    As long as you keep to the terms of the charter you are quite safe to discuss anything you wish.
    Keep it respectful towards fellow posters. Avoid use of emotive/inflammatory language (this is a sensitive subject and emotions run high). If you are expressing a personal opinion make that clear. If citing facts back them up with evidence.
    Same restrictions apply to every poster and the majority have no trouble discussing things.


  • #800
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,637 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    robindch wrote: »
    I'll agree that if the Russian government spent less time being massively corrupt, less time invading its neighbours and less time and energy developing new atomic weapons, it would have more cash available for health programs including contraception - lack of cash for health care being the topic of ongoing protests in the country.

    eviltwin claimed that "abortion as contraception" never happens - the evidence suggests that it does, allowing for the fact that the claim, as originally worded, was very broad.

    Please feel free to make a more specific claim if you believe that the general claim is undecidable or excessively ambiguous as stated.
    The claim I am making (and I suspect evil twin too, by default) is that abortion is never the preferred option for women when they have a genuine alternative.
    IOW When they are able to make an informed choice and have easy and reliable access to other methods of birth control.

    Women in the Soviet Union had little access to or information about the contraceptive pill, and had decades of regular access to abortion before the pill was even invented, so that in the absence of anything like an information campaign about the pill - indeed there was some official resistance to the contraceptive pill as I said - women continued to use the method their mothers and older female relatives were familiar with, namely abortion.

    https://www.hse.ru/data/2014/06/02/1324958898/42SOC2014.pdf

    That's so different from the situation in Ireland that to use a comparison to Russia in a discussion about Ireland without pointing that out is IMO either disingenuous or ill informed.



    What that does not show though is your implied claim that Russia is an example of women choosing to use abortion as a means of birth control despite other methods being available to them in practice.

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • #801
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Ill be banned if I discuss it further.... I wish there were less restrictive avenues of discussion...

    I have received a private message from this poster inviting me to ask questions via pm.

    I would like to know why my previous questions have not been responded to, and why the poster wishes to continue the conversation "behind the scenes" rather than simply respond here?

    The questions I have already asked were asked in regards to a post made here, on a public forum, so I would appreciate a reply on the same media.


  • Advertisement
  • #802
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,637 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Ill be banned if I discuss it further.... I wish there were less restrictive avenues of discussion...

    What makes you unable to explain why you are prochoice despite believing that abortion is state-enforced murder though?

    I mean, you've already made the statement, so no need to go over that again, you can just tell us why you're pro-choice despite it, right? What could you possibly be sanctioned for in an explanation of why you're pro-choice?

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • #803
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    volchitsa wrote: »
    What makes you unable to explain why you are prochoice despite believing that abortion is state-enforced murder though?

    I mean, you've already made the statement, so no need to go over that again, you can just tell us why you're pro-choice despite it, right? What could you possibly be sanctioned for in an explanation of why you're pro-choice?

    Could you quote the post where I made that statement please.


  • #804
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    ....... wrote: »
    I have received a private message from this poster inviting me to ask questions via pm.

    I would like to know why my previous questions have not been responded to, and why the poster wishes to continue the conversation "behind the scenes" rather than simply respond here?

    The questions I have already asked were asked in regards to a post made here, on a public forum, so I would appreciate a reply on the same media.

    Ok. What questions would you like me to answer and I will answer them here.


  • #805
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    robindch wrote: »
    Yes indeed, the article I quoted makes that very obvious point very well - a point which, as it applies during the later stages of pregnancy, I completely agree with.

    The point from eviltwin which I was replying to was the bit which I quoted which was eviltwin's claim that abortion is never used as contraception.Allowing for some fluidity of language, I'm afraid that's not really true in Russia where - owing to widespread poverty and an absence of government support - regular contraception is often not used, so when a woman becomes pregnant, the foetus is often aborted via pill to avoid having to deal with the hassle and cost of a real baby later on.

    In comparison to a later-term abortion, early-term abortion by pill is relatively cheap and trouble-free and - again allowing for some fluidity of language here - amounts to the use of abortion as a means of contraception.

    Also, my own fairly extensive experience of Russia over twenty years or so suggests that this is the case too - abortion seems to be considered a fairly normal part of life in that country and I don't ever recall any Russian person getting very worked up about it, except when it's denied.

    I was talking in an Irish context. I don't know the first thing about access to contraception in Russia or anywhere else. For an Irish woman I can't see how abortion after abortion would be preferably to reliable contraception which is relatively easy to come by.


  • #806
    volchitsa
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,637 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Could you quote the post where I made that statement please.

    Sorry, typo on my part - state condoned, not state enforced.
    Nobody is suggesting abortions should be obligatory.

    ”I enjoy cigars, whisky and facing down totalitarians, so am I really Winston Churchill?” (JK Rowling)



  • #807
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Ok. What questions would you like me to answer and I will answer them here.

    Post #786

    Im not sure how to quote both what you said and what I asked in one post so will reproduce both quotes here:
    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    How many of that 10k just made terrible decisions? The majority I would imagine. I'm not judging the ones who need it for medical reasons/rape etc. but I am judging the ones who were just plain irresponsible / stupid.
    ....... wrote: »
    Can you detail out a bit of this opinion about women who were just plain irresponsible or stupid please? And what qualifies you to make a judgement on what constitutes a terrible decision.

    If you could back this opinion with some evidence on the actual reasons that women give for having abortions please.

    Those questions.


  • #808
    Kidchameleon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Kidchameleon


    With all due respect, I believe I have already answered those questions but I will restate my answers. Please don't hesitate to seek clarification if I miss something.
    ....... wrote: »
    Can you detail out a bit of this opinion about women who were just plain irresponsible or stupid please?

    With so many options readily available for consenting adults to prevent pregnancy, it is my opinion that it is stupid an irresponsible to end up pregnant if it is unplanned. It is stupid in the sense that it is easy to prevent pregnancy - I and most other responsible adults have gone our whole adult lives without any unplanned pregnancy's. It is irresponsible in the sense that unplanned pregnancy's and everything that comes after, cause great emotional pain for the expectant parents and almost always, their immediate family, not to mention the burden on the tax payer that can result.
    ....... wrote: »
    And what qualifies you to make a judgement on what constitutes a terrible decision.

    It is not dissimilar to driving without a seat belt, it is just silly and irresponsible, in my opinion.

    Call me a prude if you wish, but it is my opinion which I am entitled to as you are to yours. We all judge people daily, we are human.
    ....... wrote: »
    If you could back this opinion with some evidence on the actual reasons that women give for having abortions please.

    I already did, see post #723
    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Abortion cannot be used for contraception. If we are in abortion territory, it is already too late for prevention. Honestly, I do not have figures for how many of those 10k were for family planning reasons but any studies I have read regarding reasons for abortion procedures, rape / incest / heath risks tend to be the least likely reasons for abortion. Family planning (which is a very broad term of course) is over 90% of the time cited as the reason for aborting. I'd love to see figures for Ireland but I don't expect we will get them any time soon.

    https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/def...ll/3711005.pdf

    https://www.contraceptionjournal.org...fulltext#s0040

    Granted, these figures are not from Ireland (we will not have studies like this in Ireland for some years) but they were both carried out in a country with a very similar culture to Ireland. It is an educated guess on my part that the figures would be similar in Ireland although I cant say for sure.


    ***


    Lastly, I ask that you do not discuss any PM's I send you in public. I would imagine you would not like that done to yourself. Please treat others respectfully even if you disagree with them.


  • #809
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,903 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    With so many options readily available for consenting adults to prevent pregnancy, it is my opinion that it is stupid an irresponsible to end up pregnant if it is unplanned. It is stupid in the sense that it is easy to prevent pregnancy - I and most other responsible adults have gone our whole adult lives without any unplanned pregnancy's. It is irresponsible in the sense that unplanned pregnancy's and everything that comes after, cause great emotional pain for the expectant parents and almost always, their immediate family, not to mention the burden on the tax payer that can result.

    Contraception is not 100% effective, this PDF provides some more details. Sex education in relation to contraception remains weak in this country which has been exacerbated by historical restrictions on access to contraception and the morning after pill. While unplanned pregnancy can be traumatic, the massive stigma attached to it in this country has made it far worse. In my opinion, the greatest stupidity lies with a society that has up until very recently had an extremely unhealthy attitude towards sex and sexuality, reproductive rights and family planning.
    Call me a prude if you wish, but it is my opinion which I am entitled to as you are to yours. We all judge people daily, we are human.

    Your words, not mine, but I think the prudish attitude exhibited by many has been a cause of great harm in this country.


  • #810
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,903 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    ....... wrote: »
    I have received a private message from this poster inviting me to ask questions via pm.

    Mod: Please do not post any content or details about private messages in the public forum. Please see the following FAQ in relation to this.


  • Advertisement
  • #811
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    With all due respect, I believe I have already answered those questions but I will restate my answers. Please don't hesitate to seek clarification if I miss something.

    Great!
    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    With so many options readily available for consenting adults to prevent pregnancy, it is my opinion that it is stupid an irresponsible to end up pregnant if it is unplanned.

    Ok - but you realise that all methods of contraception carry failure rates right? And that the failure rates are usually quoted with an "ideal" usage, but that in reality, people get sick, miss the bus home, have a bout of diaorhea, take some other medication that interferes with etc and so the "typical" use is the important number here.

    So just to put this in context - lets use the perfect versus typical use of the combined contraceptive pill, because thats a method of contraception with a very high perfect use figure quoted - 99%.

    From here:
    Contraceptive pill
    Combined contraceptive pill

    Perfect use: more than 99% effective . Fewer than 1 in 100 women will get pregnant in a year when using the combined pill correctly.

    Typical use: around 91% effective .Around 9 in 100 women using the combined pill will get pregnant in a year.

    So, even if 100% of women are using the combined pill - and are being "responsible" around 9 of them will get pregnant in one year.

    According to this link:

    27% of Irish women use short acting hormonal contraception such as the pill.

    Im going to use very rough figures here to illustrate the point I am making, but we have about 5 million, roughly half are women and about 1.3 million are fertile. If 27% of fertile women are using the pill then that gives us about 350k women on the pill. And in 1 year with typical use that could mean 32,000 get pregnant. Do you consider these women to be stupid or irresponsible? Are the men also considered stupid and irresponsible?

    A similar numerical exercise could be done on various contraceptions and what it shows is that the numbers of pregnancies we would expect for contraception failure goes WAY above an abortion rate of 10k per year. So most of these women must in fact be carrying on with the pregnancy.

    I presume you are also aware that not everyone is suitable for all types of contraception and that the only guaranteed contraception is abstinence? Do you advocate abstinence for all of those who do not wish to get pregnant?

    There are also many people who do not have access financially or are prevented from having access to contraception due to their partners beliefs/control/access to money. Are these people considered stupid and irresponsible to you also?
    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    It is stupid in the sense that it is easy to prevent pregnancy - I and most other responsible adults have gone our whole adult lives without any unplanned pregnancy's.

    How do you know this? Have you polled "most" other adults?

    As I know you have not, we can consider you to be extrapolating on a sample size of 1. Not a great stat.
    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    It is irresponsible in the sense that unplanned pregnancy's and everything that comes after, cause great emotional pain for the expectant parents and almost always, their immediate family, not to mention the burden on the tax payer that can result.

    Really? You know that contraception in Ireland was only available for married women from the late 70s up to the mid 90s and completely unavailable before. So most people in Ireland today over the age of 25 are the result of unplanned pregnancies. I dont see a lot of great emotional pain when I look around at the population. In fact, having an abortion is cheaper for the tax payer in terms of upfront payment, however giving birth produces a whole new citizen to pay taxes so its considered better for people to have babies - unplanned or not, in order for taxes to be in good order.
    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    It is not dissimilar to driving without a seat belt, it is just silly and irresponsible, in my opinion.

    Can you flesh out this comparison please, as I dont quite get the point?

    Driving without a seatbelt is prohibited by law, do you think having sex without using contraception when you dont wish to have children should also be?
    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Call me a prude if you wish, but it is my opinion which I am entitled to as you are to yours. We all judge people daily, we are human.

    I called you nothing, although you are displaying quite an uninformed opinion. Simply stating that this is your opinion doesnt cut it - you need to be able to show why. So far, you have not.

    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    I already did, see post #723

    #723 - where you give some links to studies about the reasons people have abortions.

    The main reason given is socioeconomic reasons (not family planning as you incorrectly extrapolate).

    From the second link you gave, socioeconomic reasons in the US cover:
    Can't afford a baby now; unemployed; can't afford basic needs of life; can't leave job to take care of baby; would have to find a new place to live; not enough financial support from partner; partner unemployed; on welfare; would interfere w/education or career plans; I'm a student or planning to study

    So it seems like this is sensible family planning to me - unless you think its better for people who cannot afford children to have them?

    Can you explain why having a child you cant afford is less stupid or irresponsible (your words) than having an abortion?
    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Granted, these figures are not from Ireland (we will not have studies like this in Ireland for some years) but they were both carried out in a country with a very similar culture to Ireland. It is an educated guess on my part that the figures would be similar in Ireland although I cant say for sure.

    This article tells us that
    There is little difference between the reasons women from Ireland present and the reasons women from the UK present; they are diverse and multifaceted.

    They may involve financial hardship, knowing one’s family is complete, inadequate partner or family support, domestic violence or simply a woman feeling she is not in a position to care for a baby at that point in her life.

    While some abortions take place of pregnancies that were planned and wanted, such as those for foetal anomaly, the majority of the women we see were trying to avoid pregnancy when they conceived. In fact, the majority of women from Ireland we treat were using some form of contraception when they conceived.

    Which of the reasons stated do you feel are stupid and irresponsible and why?
    Kidchameleon wrote: »
    Lastly, I ask that you do not discuss any PM's I send you in public. I would imagine you would not like that done to yourself. Please treat others respectfully even if you disagree with them.

    Then please dont sent me argumentative unsolicited private messages.

    It doesnt happen to me that people discuss my pm's in public because I do not try to argue with people via pm unsolicited.

    And if you feel I have been disrespectful then please use the report button function.

    Overall I think that using an enforced pregnancy as a punishment for being stupid or irresponsible (ie, making a mistake) is a pretty bad idea for a society and Im not sure why you would want to punish someone that way. No one is perfect, you have said yourself, we are human. We make mistakes. So for women to be the recipients of punishment for mistakes involving pregnancies seems both unfair (why not the men?) and short sighted. Why not just support them with the appropriate healthcare?


Advertisement