Keep abortion out of Ireland

..People always have had them and always will.

FullblownRose wrote: »

I don't think it's anyone's business but the woman's when she chooses to become a mother, whether it's for the first time or if she already has children. As if women should never be allowed to set a limit on how much nurturing they feel able to provide. Surely women have a right to choose whether they want to bring a life into the world, with all the responsibility it entails, or not ? The idea that any of us have a right to tell someone they must go ahead and become a mother seems disgusting to me. And I am speaking as a mother, and a very proud one too.

Absolutely... its nobody's right to tell a women she should have children. Its her decision.


However when a women is pregnant, she is pregnant with a Child. That Child must be respected. And its everyone's responsibility to protect human life.

qrrgprgua wrote: »

Respect for human life goes above and beyond religion. It goes way beyond Christianity. Even the Hippocratic Oath recognises the humanity of the unborn.

You want to tie objection to abortion with our faith. You deny the obvious empirical reality of human life.

Pro Abortion advocates try to reduce the unborn child to cells.. esp pregnancies under 13 weeks. In the US they found when a women saw her child before going for an abortion many changed they mind.

The debate here in this Christian forum maybe underpined by our Christian views (after all over 90% if population in the last census is Christian in Ireland). But the respect for the Child is not a Christian value.. Its a Human value. What abortion has done is reduce the value of life to that of a law in a country. Many countries have different laws.. Any law that targets intentionally the unborn is immoral.

That is your opinion - based in religion - nobody is reducing the value of human life. When a child is born it is accorded the full protection of the law. When a foetus passes 14 weeks in utero it is given the full protection of the law in most jurisdicitions.

However, not everyone holds your view. We live in a democracy, not a theocracy.

SD

philologos wrote: »

Yet you've not realised that a democracy means all people have a say even pro-lifers. It seems like you want Government to be dictatorial pro-abortion-by-choicers.

That's not democracy. Its a childish intolerance of democracy when it doesn't suit you.

The last referendum to restrict abortion in Ireland on foot of the X case was rejected by the electorate.

This has nothing to do with childishness. Just a desire for un-elected, unaccountable religious interference to be removed from the legislative process.

Just because you disagree with a particular procedure does not give you the right to deny it to a citizen of the state, purely on religious grounds.

SD

qrrgprgua wrote: »

its not denied on religious grounds.. Its denied on Democratic grounds.

Accept the will of the people. who rejected it twice.

Abortion is not a Religious argument its a human one.

Incorrect - on foot of the X Case the govt. put a referendum to the people to essentially reverse the ruling of the Supreme Court and to prevent abortion in any circumstance. The electorate rejected that amendment.

Since then successive govt's have refused to legislate for abortion despite the ruling in the X case and the subsequent C case.

Not only do we need to legislate in this matter, we need to overhaul our constitution which is outmoded and no longer reflects modern Ireland.

SD

The will of the people? I don't accept that anyone voting for comfort and through ignorance and often religious pressure can control others to that extent. I don't see anyone taking responsibility for the children they might 'save' once they are born, either. The pro choice argument is also based on humanitarian grounds, although it mightn't seem like it to some people.

Unfair comparison.

PDN wrote: »

spacecookie555 wrote: »

People just need to mind their own imo. Instead of sticking your nose into everyone elses lives how bout you stick it back into your own and better yourself instead. The fact is you CANT change or control peoples free will, you never will so get over it.

As the saying goes God give me the strength to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can and the knowledge to know the difference between the two.

So, if people choose to kill other people, you can't change their free will and should just mind your own business and let them get on with it?

I dont see it as murder thats just my opinion. Would you call a horse breeder a murderer because he had to do an abortion because the horse was having twins? Probably not because it would save the horses life. Theres enough unwanted children in the world, children hungry, homeless, being abused - even in ireland, we should worry more about the children that do exist than those who do not imo.

PDN wrote: »

spacecookie555 wrote: »

I dont see it as murder thats just my opinion. Would you call a horse breeder a murderer because he had to do an abortion because the horse was having twins? Probably not because it would save the horses life.

Let's drop that red herring for a start. We both know that, in countries which permit abortions, genuine life-saving procedures constitute an incredibly tiny percentage of the abortions that occur.

Theres enough unwanted children in the world, children hungry, homeless, being abused - even in ireland, we should worry more about the children that do exist than those who do not imo.

So you think killing unborn children is going to better the lives of children who are currently going hungry and being abused?

Don't you think it might be more effective to challenge and confront the selfish attitudes that produce many abortions and also so much suffering for children?

I am neither pro life or pro abortion I am pro choice. Its a choice that should be left to the individual imo. I respect your opinion on this and I get where youre coming from but I think forcing someone to have a child they dont want is abhorrent and is going to lead to more neglect, abuse and overall more suffering children.

I know a girl who had an abortion because she was on the breadline and was a victim of severe domestic abuse at the time, she was cut off from family members and had no one really to turn to. She hadnt the strength to leave that relationship at the time and the reason for her abortion was because she would never subject a child to that misery. She did it to save the child any future suffering. I asked her about adoption and she didnt see it as an option because she wouldnt have had the strength to give it away had she held it and the child would have suffered unimaginably as a result.

She is now out of that relationship thankfully but she torments herself daily over her choice. Now she does not deserve anymore pain or abuse imo, imagine something bad you did in your life that you torment yourself over and imagine if complete strangers would abuse you because you made a mistake, its sounds crazy because it is. SHE had to make that decision and SHES the one who has to live with it, NOBODY ELSE but HER.

philologos wrote: »

StudentDad: the 1992 X Case ruling wasn't about abortion by choice but abortions where there was a risk to a mothers life. The 2002 Referendum was on this topic. It wasn't for legalising abortion as a matter of choice.

No it was for something worse. It was an attempt to completely ban abortion and erase the X Case ruling. The Supreme Court is still waiting for clarification on this matter through primary legislation.

SD

PDN wrote: »

spacecookie555 wrote: »

SHE had to make that decision and SHES the one who has to live with it, NOBODY ELSE but HER.

And that does not make the action right.

I know of a woman who suffered post-partum depression and killed her baby and her toddler too. Do you see that I could make the exact same kind of arguments that you and others are making here?

a) Look how much she suffered.
b) She has to live with the consequences of her actions, nobody else but her.
c) Nobody else has the right to make that decision for her.
d) Just because people's religious views lead them to think that it is wrong to kill babies and toddlers, they have no right to enforce their religious views on others.
e) It's nobody's business but hers.

But that doesn't mean that we should change the law to allow people to kill babies and toddlers. And that indicates that the arguments being repeatedly used by the pro-abortion lobby in this thread are pretty bankrupt.

No I do not at all see the similarities, post natel depression is a severe illness that needs to be treated with medication and other forms of treatment. In that case God bless that poor woman, I would see that as temporary insanity and no I wouldnt hold it against her, ive seen how that illness transforms even the most harmless people and yes SHE is the one who has to live with the fact that she killed her children.

You and I wont think about it every day but she will, you and I will forget it she wont, you and I will move on she never will. So no she does not deserve more abuse, she will destroy herself just fine without other peoples help.

Throwing the murder word around and thinking it will win every argument and silence every opposing opinion is just silly imo. The fact is you force mrs.x to have a child, are you going to take care of that child, are you going to feed it, protect it, educate it? No youre not, once that child is born you dont care any more because youve won your case and your beliefs havent been opposed. Now thats morally corrupt imo.

Btw Pdn please dont take offence thats not directed at you, just a general x case.

Sorry..went of on a tangent..I think it's a matter of differentiating between what is public business and what's not..murder isn't comparable, it's cold blooded, with nasty motives, it affects a sentient human being who has been born and is living a life out in the world, it always negatively affects others too..

FullblownRose wrote: »

To compare a pregnant woman who makes a choice to abort the pregnancy to a murdress is a very black and white and simplistic way of thinking.


Discomfort at the idea of a woman behaving non maternally doesn't give anyone a right to superceed her right to control her own reproduction. Women do not have to be constantly maternal with an endless capacity for bringing forth life. It might be convenient to imagine women who abort pregnancies are ''selfish'' and careless, despite statistics showing that contraception frequently fails, women fall pregnant after rape, etc.. women who have abortions come from different walks of life etc..and rarely if ever is it done for frivolous reasons- but if it was, perhaps that is not anyone's business, either. I don't know what is achieved by continuing to outlaw the procedure, as it continues to happen anyway, just in unsafe ways. Perhaps it makes pro-life people feel better, but it's just an illusion that there's no abortion in Ireland..

Isint that what the pill and Condoms are for... birth control.

So the pro-choice camp use abortion as a method of birth control?


Its not about making anyone "feel" better. Its about defending the rights of innocent. Your argument removes all rights from the unborn child.


Abortion has always happened.. Same as we have always had rape/ murder/ Abuse/ torture. Just because its happening it does not mean its right.


I have no objection to women controlling their reproduction. My objections are with what they have already produced.. the child that exists..