Abortion under the spotlight in the European Court of Human Rights

hotmail.com · 16-12-2010 04:41PM

seamus wrote: »

We're not discussing my viewpoint (and no, in the post you quoted, I didn't state my stance).

By your logic, since it's OK to kill someone to save your own life, then that makes it OK to kill someone in all circumstances. Right?

Unless of course you don't consider a foetus to be a human being, at which point I have to ask you whether this is a blanket, "It's not human till it comes out" opinion, or is it something less tangible?

Personally I don't consider the fetus a living being no. And I see no issue with abortion at all and I wouldn't ever judge a woman that gets an abortion. If a woman had 20 abortions in her life, it wouldn't bother me.

Rhamiel · 16-12-2010 04:42PM

<snip>

hotmail.com · 16-12-2010 04:43PM

sensibleken wrote: »

whats your stance on abortion. pro life or pro choice. I ask because im having a hard time following how your trying to construct a tautology

Oh in favour of course.

I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of some people being in favour of abortion in some case, but not in others. As if, well it's not really abortion if the mother is suicidal. Joke, either come out as in favour of it or against it. There's no ifs and buts.

If you believe aborting is fetus is wrong, then you must apply that reasoning to all women.

prinz · 16-12-2010 04:44PM

checkyabadself wrote: »

To be in favour of the pro life stance is fine. To want to force others to adhere to your (or any) moral stance is repulsive. What satisfaction can come from forcing others to live by a creed, where they are denied the right to be the master of their own bodies. I'd love to hear an answer from an anti-abortion advocate, on what they think about making decisions for others? Have they any idea that they aren't impartial and thus may be doing someone an injustice?

It's called society. We make decisions for others every day. Everyone has a right to an opinion and a vote, thankfully.

prinz · 16-12-2010 04:46PM

hotmail.com wrote: »

Oh in favour of course.
I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of some people being in favour of abortion in some case, but not in others. As if, well it's not really abortion if the mother is suicidal. Joke, either come out as in favour of it or against it. There's no ifs and buts. If you believe aborting is fetus is wrong, then you must apply that reasoning to all women.

For all your talk of logic you consistently fail to apply it to other scenarios. This would suggest it's not logical at all.

seamus · 16-12-2010 04:46PM

hotmail.com wrote: »

If you believe killing a person is wrong, then you must apply that reasoning to all scenarios.

This is effectively what you're saying. Happy with that? This is moral absolutism - that an action's morality never changes. You're comfortable to say that something which is wrong, is always wrong regardless of circumstances?

If you say that a foetus is never a person, then I assume you believe that until the foetus has emerged from the womb, it's fair game to abort? Even up to ten months?

CathyMoran · 16-12-2010 04:48PM

I believe that if the mother is suicidal then she should get medical help to deal with the pregnancy - not to abort it. I do believe that the pregnancy is alive and is human.

hotmail.com · 16-12-2010 04:50PM

seamus wrote: »

This is effectively what you're saying. Happy with that? This is moral absolutism - that an action's morality never changes. You're comfortable to say that something which is wrong, is always wrong regardless of circumstances?

If you say that a foetus is never a person, then I assume you believe that until the foetus has emerged from the womb, it's fair game to abort? Even up to ten months?

Resorting to moral absolutism to make an argument. I think I give up.

toomevara · 16-12-2010 04:51PM

Once again it takes proper grown ups from the real world to resolve another juvenile, peurile Irish mess......

donfers · 16-12-2010 04:52PM

whatever the rights and wrongs of abortion it is absolutely galling that the Council of Europe, the british pregnancy advice board and a Lithuanian national who has been living in Ireland for a few years can attempt to override the democratic will of the Irish people based on the referendum results of 1992

Campaign for a referendum here in Ireland by all means and let the people of Ireland decide but to try to exert pressure by sneaking it in the back like that says a lot for the integrity of the people involved

hotmail.com · 16-12-2010 04:52PM

prinz wrote: »

For all your talk of logic you consistently fail to apply it to other scenarios. This would suggest it's not logical at all.[/QUOT]

You haven't dealt with my underlying argument. You don't seem to see the hypocrisy of being in favour of abortion in some cases and not in others. I give up.

sensibleken · 16-12-2010 04:53PM

hotmail.com wrote: »

Oh in favour of course.

I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of some people being in favour of abortion in some case, but not in others. As if, well it's not really abortion if the mother is suicidal. Joke, either come out as in favour of it or against it. There's no ifs and buts.

If you believe aborting is fetus is wrong, then you must apply that reasoning to all women.

I disagree. No one is arguing that if the mother is suicidal its not abortion. some can argue that sometimes to save the life of a mother that an abortion is neccesary but it should not be allowed if someone just wants one.

Its like saying you can have certain drugs if you require it but not just because you want them.

There are plenty of ifs and buts. No ethical decision is so clear cut

I am not supporting this stand point but it is not hypocritical to favour restricted access

hotmail.com · 16-12-2010 04:54PM

donfers wrote: »

whatever the rights and wrongs of abortion it is absolutely galling that the Council of Europe, the british pregnancy advice board and a Lithuanian national who has been living in Ireland for a few years can attempt to override the democratic will of the Irish people based on the referendum results of 1992

Campaign for a referendum here in Ireland by all means and let the people of Ireland decide but to try to exert pressure by sneaking it in the back like that says a lot for the integrity of the people involved

But is this not a matter for the courts and the law and not the people?

Woman has right to decide the health of her own body....We have to have a referendum on that?

argonaut · 16-12-2010 04:54PM

I take a kinda pragmatic view about this. Here's the thing - the "pro-life" and "pro-choice" sides are never going to agree. It's not really a scientific argument, it just comes down to when technical, biological life becomes "life" - in the sense where it becomes murder to kill it.

So the obvious position is to be pro-choice. Err on the side of personal freedom. And by all means provide decent sex education in schools, cheap contraception, any and all ways to make abortions unnecessary, but sometimes, in some situations, it's a woman's last and only hope. You might even consider it murder, but live and let live.

And I know it's not that simple, by the way - it must seem absurd to a pro-life person that you effectively shrug and ignore what they consider murder, but it takes a resigned kind of recognition that the debate will never be "resolved", in any real sense. Because what's life?

So yeah, to sum up the above ramblings - let people get abortions. You may consider it awful, and that's your right, but don't force your morality upon people.

Incidentally, that's an interesting problem with our frequent referenda on the topic - if it's a rights issue (which it is, either from, depending on your point of views, the "child"'s or the woman's) then surely it shouldn't be subjected to the whim of the majority?

*recedes back into lurkdom*

EDIT: hotmail.com beat me to the point on referendums. The tyranny of the majority and so on.

common sense brigade · 16-12-2010 04:54PM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024297/Mothers-anger-turns-delight-baby-survives-abortion.html
Heartwarming story of mother who got a second chance and her babies fight for life. ooops sorry am i being emotional again.

Nodin · 16-12-2010 04:55PM

donfers wrote: »

whatever the rights and wrongs of abortion it is absolutely galling that the Council of Europe, the british pregnancy advice board and a Lithuanian national who has been living in Ireland for a few years can attempt to override the democratic will of the Irish people based on the referendum results of 1992

Campaign for a referendum here in Ireland by all means and let the people of Ireland decide but to try to exert pressure by sneaking it in the back like that says a lot for the integrity of the people involved

Reading the news - its a great man.

"In a judgment delivered in Strasbourg this morning, the ECHR concluded Ireland had breached the woman's right to respect for her private life given the failure to implement the existing Constitutional right to a lawful abortion in Ireland."
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1216/abortion.html

prinz · 16-12-2010 04:55PM

hotmail.com wrote: »

You haven't dealt with my underlying argument. You don't seem to see the hypocrisy of being in favour of abortion in some cases and not in others. I give up.

You don't have an underlying argument other than the result matters above all else and the circumstances are irrelevant. Of course when this line of thinking gets applied elsewhere you cannot back it up whatsoever. I think you had better give up, or at least get a new argument.

hotmail.com · 16-12-2010 04:56PM

prinz wrote: »

You don't have an underlying argument other than the result matters above all else and the circumstances are irrelevant. Of course when this line of thinking gets applied elsewhere you cannot back it up whatsoever. I think you had better give up, or at least get a new argument.

I do give up. The argument is lost on you.

donfers · 16-12-2010 04:57PM

Nodin wrote: »

Reading the news - its a great man.

"In a judgment delivered in Strasbourg this morning, the ECHR concluded Ireland had breached the woman's right to respect for her private life given the failure to implement the existing Constitutional right to a lawful abortion in Ireland."
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1216/abortion.html

I am aware of that so please answer the following then

will you be satisfied if the existing constitutional right and that alone is implemented?

prinz · 16-12-2010 04:59PM

hotmail.com wrote: »

I do give up. The argument is lost on you.

I think that's the right course of action to take. It's not only me it's lost on by the way.

silverspoon · 16-12-2010 05:00PM

donfers wrote: »

whatever the rights and wrongs of abortion it is absolutely galling that the Council of Europe, the british pregnancy advice board and a Lithuanian national who has been living in Ireland for a few years can attempt to override the democratic will of the Irish people based on the referendum results of 1992

Campaign for a referendum here in Ireland by all means and let the people of Ireland decide but to try to exert pressure by sneaking it in the back like that says a lot for the integrity of the people involved

*sigh*

What's 'absolutely galling' is that the rights recognised by this case pre-existed it. It was not an attempt to 'override the democratic will of the Irish people based on the referendum results' but an attempt to ensure the Irish government enable this democratic will to be realised in legislation. This is exactly the aspect of this case that I am most worried about being distorted and looks like it's not without reason.

prinz · 16-12-2010 05:01PM

silverspoon wrote: »

What's 'absolutely galling' is that the rights recognised by this case pre-existed it. It was not an attempt to 'override the democratic will of the Irish people based on the referendum results' but an attempt to ensure the Irish government enable this democratic will to be realised in legislation. This is exactly the aspect of this case that I am most worried about being distorted and looks like it's not without reason.

In fairness in at least one of the cases it could be argued that it was. I am glad the courts left that in our own hands to deal with.

donfers · 16-12-2010 05:04PM

argonaut wrote: »

I take a kinda pragmatic view about this. Here's the thing - the "pro-life" and "pro-choice" sides are never going to agree. It's not really a scientific argument, it just comes down to when technical, biological life becomes "life" - in the sense where it becomes murder to kill it.

So the obvious position is to be pro-choice. Err on the side of personal freedom. And by all means provide decent sex education in schools, cheap contraception, any and all ways to make abortions unnecessary, but sometimes, in some situations, it's a woman's last and only hope. You might even consider it murder, but live and let live.

And I know it's not that simple, by the way - it must seem absurd to a pro-life person that you effectively shrug and ignore what they consider murder, but it takes a resigned kind of recognition that the debate will never be "resolved", in any real sense. Because what's life?

So yeah, to sum up the above ramblings - let people get abortions. You may consider it awful, and that's your right, but don't force your morality upon people.

Incidentally, that's an interesting problem with our frequent referenda on the topic - if it's a rights issue (which it is, either from, depending on your point of views, the "child"'s or the woman's) then surely it shouldn't be subjected to the whim of the majority?

*recedes back into lurkdom*

EDIT: hotmail.com beat me to the point on referendums. The tyranny of the majority and so on.

first bold, surely the obvious position is to err on the side of not murdering an unborn child, "personal freedom" is an interesting choice of words, it implies that we can do whatever we want which we can't which takes me to your second bold which again points to an anarchistic anything goes society, the whole basis of law and order, of society, even civilisation itself is based around morality being forced upon people, to just disregard that notion for the purposes of this argument is preposterous in my view

The Waltzing Consumer · 16-12-2010 05:05PM

common sense brigade wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024297/Mothers-anger-turns-delight-baby-survives-abortion.html
Heartwarming story of mother who got a second chance and her babies fight for life. ooops sorry am i being emotional again.

The Daily Mail? :rolleyes:
Trash

argonaut · 16-12-2010 05:05PM

I think we can all agree on one thing - that this shouldn't be subject to referendum, right?

I'd say this even if the majority of Irish people were pro-choice - it's not an issue to be decided by majority vote.

Wazdakka · 16-12-2010 05:08PM

Thread needs poll..

I'm actually curious about what side would win if this went to a nationwide vote in the morning and was implemented as law by Monday.

I would have thought that giving Irish women the choice would have been voted in by a landslide..
But I've been wrong in assuming that the Irish people are capable of acting and voting as an intelligent, progressive and open minded entity before

The Waltzing Consumer · 16-12-2010 05:08PM

argonaut wrote: »

I think we can all agree on one thing - that this shouldn't be subject to referendum, right?

I'd say this even if the majority of Irish people were pro-choice - it's not an issue to be decided by majority vote.

Any change to our constitution has to be through a referendum I think, so the abortion issue would be a constitutional issue.

donfers · 16-12-2010 05:08PM

silverspoon wrote: »

*sigh*

What's 'absolutely galling' is that the rights recognised by this case pre-existed it. It was not an attempt to 'override the democratic will of the Irish people based on the referendum results' but an attempt to ensure the Irish government enable this democratic will to be realised in legislation. This is exactly the aspect of this case that I am most worried about being distorted and looks like it's not without reason.

*sigh*

the point I am trying to make is surely the "pro-choicers" wanted a preferable outcome than that which says "things are fine as they are in Ireland, all youz need to do is implement the changes suggested in 92 referndum"

that this result is being distorted as a victory for the "pro-choicers" is interesting as nothing has really changed

prinz · 16-12-2010 05:11PM

argonaut wrote: »

I think we can all agree on one thing - that this shouldn't be subject to referendum, right? I'd say this even if the majority of Irish people were pro-choice - it's not an issue to be decided by majority vote.

As long as it would impact upon our Constitution it should be. Of course to remove the references in the Consitution we would need a referendum anyway...

prinz · 16-12-2010 05:12PM

Wazdakka wrote: »

Thread needs poll..

Been countless polls on this before. AFAIK all have ended in a majority for the pro-choice side. Generally the polls are too black and white though.

Abortion under the spotlight in the European Court of Human Rights

Comments