At Least 25,000 Attend Anti-Abortion Vigil

Pompey Magnus · 21-01-2013 02:18AM

jill_valentine wrote: »

My point is that a lot of the people who consider themselves pro life are, when you dig into it a little, not awfully concerned about the potential child at all. Really, they don't want abortion to be available because, to their mind, there should be some negative consequences associated with sexual choices - even if an alternative situation is available.

If that is the case then those people need to do more research on abortion, if it is punishment for sexual choices they want then there are plenty of potential negative physical and mental repercussions available to girls who go through with the procedure, maybe they might find those as being more fitting and lasting punishments than one which ultimately ends with something that most girls will grow to love.

starlings · 21-01-2013 02:41AM

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

If that is the case then those people need to do more research on abortion, if it is punishment for sexual choices they want then there are plenty of potential negative physical and mental repercussions available to girls who go through with the procedure, maybe they might find those as being more fitting and lasting punishments than one which ultimately ends with something that most girls will grow to love.

Do you have links to this research on "negative physical and mental repercussions", and are they reliable?

Did it occur to you that the only socially acceptable response to having had an abortion is shame and regret? That women might feel they have to play damsel in distress to be referred for an abortion in the first place and to continue the role afterwards? That it's such a personal, private matter that women only feel free to discuss their feelings honestly with their loved ones?

Ironically, this means I can't show reliable evidence of women not suffering these negative repercussions because the women who have confided in me about their abortions did so in the knowledge that I was listening to them as a friend, not as someone out to use them as skewed statistics to prove a point. Unscientifically, I can report that they are all doing just fine, thanks.

jill_valentine · 21-01-2013 03:03AM

We have found that there are no mental health consequences of abortion compared to carrying an unwanted pregnancy to term. There are other interesting findings: even later abortion is safer than childbirth and women who carried an unwanted pregnancy to term are three times more likely than women who receive an abortion to be below the poverty level two years later.

Unfortunately, when it comes to domestic violence, being denied an abortion makes a really big difference. Turnaways were more likely to stay in a relationship with an abusive partner than women who got abortions. A year after being denied an abortion, 7% reported an incident of domestic violence in the last six months. 3% of women who received abortions reported domestic violence in the same time period. Foster emphasized that this wasn't because the turnaways were more likely to get into abusive relationships. It was simply that getting abortions allowed women to get out of such relationships more easily.

The Turnaway Study found no indication that abortion could be linked with increased mental health disorders. There were no statistical differences between turnaways and women who had abortions when it came to developing clinical depression.

But turnaways did face a greater health risk from giving birth. Even late stage abortions are safer than giving birth. The researchers said at the APHA meeting:

We find physical health complications are more common and severe following birth (38% experience limited activity, average 10 days) compared to abortion (24% limited activity, average 2.7 days). There were no severe complications after abortion; after birth complications included seizure, fractured pelvis, infection and hemorrhage. We find no differences in chronic health conditions at 1 week or one year after seeking abortion.

http://io9.com/5958187/what-happens-to-women-denied-abortions-this-is-the-first-scientific-study-to-find-out

Not that any of that will make a blind bit of difference, I'm sure.

123 LC · 21-01-2013 03:05AM

COYVB wrote: »

This is the most baffling thing about it. Bringing in a Pro Choice law for abortion would in no way change anything about the way Pro Life people go about their day to day lives. They'd still be against abortion, and that's absolutely fine, because nobody would force or encourage them to have them - that's where the CHOICE bit comes in. It's always really confused me how they don't get that.

Allowing other people to do things that your religion doesn't allow doesn't have any affect on those who follow that religion. None at all.

do you really think that all the anti abortion people are religious? i mean what's so hard to understand, some people are against abortion, against the killing of children that havn't a voice.

if there is a referendum if there are 3 options -yes to abortion on demand of the mother, no to abortion in all cases, or yes to abortion only if the mothers life is at risk-, then the third option will be picked. But if it's a simple yes or no, then the no to abortion side will win. This is what i've gathered from the polls anyway.

Pompey Magnus · 21-01-2013 03:12AM

starlings wrote: »

Did it occur to you that the only socially acceptable response to having had an abortion is shame and regret? That women might feel they have to play damsel in distress to be referred for an abortion in the first place and to continue the role afterwards? That it's such a personal, private matter that women only feel free to discuss their feelings honestly with their loved ones?

Nope that wouldn't occur to me, funnily enough if a person appears to me to be upset I would not automatically jump to the assumption that it is just some cynical ploy for them to look good, but maybe that is just me.

Pompey Magnus · 21-01-2013 03:17AM

jill_valentine wrote: »

http://io9.com/5958187/what-happens-to-women-denied-abortions-this-is-the-first-scientific-study-to-find-out

Not that any of that will make a blind bit of difference, I'm sure.

From a quick google search:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/is-that-new-abortion-study-biased-you-bet.-but-dont-expect-the-media-to-tel

While the media have credulously parroted the group’s findings, there’s just one small problem: No one has actually seen the study. It’s not publicly available. The group presented their findings at an academic conference earlier this month, but their research hasn’t been published in any journal and hasn’t been peer-reviewed.

Not that any of that will make a blind bit of difference, I'm sure.

jank · 21-01-2013 05:12AM

lazygal wrote: »

Yes. Its her uterus not mine or anyone else's. Are you OK with women choosing to control their reproductive system?

I suppose they will be paid for by the state?

lazygal wrote: »

What's your view then? Do women have the right to control what's in their uteruses or not?

Why do people have the outlook that getting pregnant is like catching some kind of disease?

padd b1975 · 21-01-2013 07:13AM

Namlub wrote: »

Do you honestly think you're adding anything to the discussion with comments like this? I'd have a lot more time for the pro-life side if their arguments didn't just descend into hysteria time and time again...

How do you feel about the phrase 'the chioce whether to terminate a life or not'?

lazygal · 21-01-2013 08:21AM

jank wrote: »

I suppose they will be paid for by the state?

Why do people have the outlook that getting pregnant is like catching some kind of disease?

Pregnancy is difficult and has lifelong health consequences, as does childbirth. The way some people go on, usually those who never have or will be pregnant, you'd think it had no physical or mental side effects whatsoever.

kraggy · 21-01-2013 09:25AM

Can someone confirm something for me? You know Mickey Harte et al who were at the protest at the weekend, are they against abortion full stop?

i.e if a case like Savita's were to happen again, would Mickey Harte et al let the woman die again because of their beliefs?

blacklilly · 21-01-2013 09:51AM

kraggy wrote: »

Can someone confirm something for me? You know Mickey Harte et al who were at the protest at the weekend, are they against abortion full stop?

i.e if a case like Savita's were to happen again, would Mickey Harte et al let the woman die again because of their beliefs?

No 1 we do not know if Savitas life could have been saved by having an abortion.

No.2 An abortion is the deliberate killing of an unborn human being.

No 3. I do not know any pro life person who is against the termination of a pregnancy if the mothers life is it risk. This differs from the intentional killing of an inborn human being in that the desired end result be that both baby and mother survive.

Annasopra · 21-01-2013 09:56AM

padd b1975 wrote: »

So when you say your position is the opposite of pro life, what exactly do you mean?

Anti life??

Obviously pro choice!

Annasopra · 21-01-2013 10:00AM

Min wrote: »

I say well done to everyone who turned out, I didn't attend but I was happy to see such a good turn out.

People seem to believe opinion polls, remember the polls on social issues showing how easily the childrens referendum would be passed by, something like 80%...way off.

Lots of people don't believe in suicide being a reason for abortion, we have pro-choice people who seem to not understand that people -men and women can lie or act in a manner to get what we want, pro-choice who believe in the suicide argument are abhorred at this notion that women can lie to get what they want. They should learn something about human nature...

Fine Gael promised not to bring in legislation for abortion, they will pay over this if Enda breaks his promise so he can snuggle up to Eamon Gilmore, given power is more important than keeping their word in what is a life and death issue.
Lord Steel over in England never invisioned the liberal abortion regime that resulted when mental health was allowed to be used as a reason for abortion.
The FG part of this government doesn't have a mandate from its voters to legislate on what is a very contentious issue.
FG can legislate and FF will be getting a lot of their votes back, that went to FG in the last election, already happening with the latest poll putting the gap between FG and FF into single figures.

At the end of the day what does it really matter when a woman can travel?

Winty · 21-01-2013 10:03AM

blacklilly wrote: »

No 1 we do not know if Savitas life could have been saved by having an abortion.

No.2 An abortion is the deliberate killing of an unborn human being.

No 3. I do not know any pro life person who is against the termination of a pregnancy if the mothers life is it risk. This differs from the intentional killing of an inborn human being in that the desired end result be that both baby and mother survive.

No1 She would have had a much higher chance with all medical science behind her and the Doctor could have done more if the priest had not put his hands in handcuffs

No 2 it's not a human yet just a bucket of cells

No 3 Are you sure? Maybe you could think of 1

blacklilly · 21-01-2013 10:16AM

Winty wrote: »

No1 She would have had a much higher chance with all medical science behind her and the Doctor could have done more if the priest had not put his hands in handcuffs

No 2 it's not a human yet just a bucket of cells

No 3 Are you sure? Maybe you could think of 1

I take it you know all the details of the enquiry into her death then,maybe you should talk to the coroner

lazygal · 21-01-2013 10:19AM

blacklilly wrote: »

I take it you know all the details of the enquiry into her death then,maybe you should talk to the coroner

Did you not post in a manner that suggested you know the details?

TomoBhoy · 21-01-2013 10:20AM

blacklilly wrote: »

No 1 we do not know if Savitas life could have been saved by having an abortion.

No.2 An abortion is the deliberate killing of an unborn human being.

No 3. I do not know any pro life person who is against the termination of a pregnancy if the mothers life is it risk. This differs from the intentional killing of an inborn human being in that the desired end result be that both baby and mother survive.

more than likely had she it removed quicker she might not have had such a bad infection, my wife had nearly something simlier when they left some of the placenta in her, could have killed her

blacklilly · 21-01-2013 10:33AM

TomoBhoy wrote: »

more than likely had she it removed quicker she might not have had such a bad infection, my wife had nearly something simlier when they left some of the placenta in her, could have killed her

You are speculating here though. I am not a doctor and therefore I will wait to see the outcome of the enquiry before commenting.
At present if a mother's life is at immediate risk due to pregnancy, the pregnancy is terminated

blacklilly · 21-01-2013 10:39AM

lazygal wrote: »

Did you not post in a manner that suggested you know the details?

You might refer me to said post

TomoBhoy · 21-01-2013 10:42AM

blacklilly wrote: »

You are speculating here though. I am not a doctor and therefore I will wait to see the outcome of the enquiry before commenting.
At present if a mother's life is at immediate risk due to pregnancy, the pregnancy is terminated

I'm. Not a doctor but I know what the procedures that are followed re an infection !

St.Spodo · 21-01-2013 10:45AM

The game is up for the woman-controllers. Despite nearly two months of preparation, free buses from every part of the country and huge funding, they could only muster approx. 15,000 on a Saturday afternoon. Support for X Case legislation in Ireland is now a majority opinion and the anti-choice lobby will have to accept democracy and like it.

blacklilly · 21-01-2013 10:49AM

TomoBhoy wrote: »

I'm. Not a doctor but I know what the procedures that are followed re an infection !

Tomo with all due respect what you're doing is speculating with respect to this case. No doubt there will be a discussion on here when the details of the enquiry are released,until then we really shouldn't comment
I believe that if the doctors knew her life was at immediate risk the pregnancy should have Bern terminated so I'm not disagreeing with you on this.

blacklilly · 21-01-2013 10:51AM

St.Spodo wrote: »

The game is up for the woman-controllers. Despite nearly two months of preparation, free buses from every part of the country and huge funding, they could only muster approx. 15,000 on a Saturday afternoon. Support for X Case legislation in Ireland is now a majority opinion and the anti-choice lobby will have to accept democracy and like it.

Where are you getting 15,000 from?

St.Spodo · 21-01-2013 10:52AM

blacklilly wrote: »

Where are you getting 15,000 from?

http://www.wsm.ie/c/turnout-vigil-life-dublin-jan2013

Neutronale · 21-01-2013 10:53AM

seven_eleven wrote: »

Yep, and if you look at all the pictures of it 90% of them are old bitter religious people, some even brought kids a long and made them hold up signs etc. Disgusting.

The music that pumped from the loudspeakers prior
to the speeches was not 'Hail Queen of Heaven' or the soporific chant of the
rosary but the pumping, energising beat of modern pop.

The volunteers who pressed pro-life pledges into people's hands were young,
good-looking and enthusiastic.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/slick-prolife-rally-aims-to-get-the-public-on-side-3358352.html

blacklilly · 21-01-2013 10:58AM

St.Spodo wrote: »

http://www.wsm.ie/c/turnout-vigil-life-dublin-jan2013

Ok so ignore the official garda count then.

deise111 · 21-01-2013 10:59AM

What annoys me about all these pro-lifers is that they only seem to care about the embryo/baby when its in the womb. I don't think they give a seconds thought to what the circumstances might be for mother and baby if she has to go through with the pregnancy, nor do the care.
Therfore i believe it should always be left up to the woman to make the decision as only she know the actual circumstances of the situation.

jhegarty · 21-01-2013 11:01AM

blacklilly wrote: »

Ok so ignore the official hards count then.

But but but they have an app. :rolleyes:

St.Spodo · 21-01-2013 11:03AM

jhegarty wrote: »

But but but they have an app. :rolleyes:

Lol, there's no way you could possibly fit 25-30,000 people on Merrion Street South, especially with the street as narrowed as it was.

Pompey Magnus · 21-01-2013 11:05AM

deise111 wrote: »

What annoys me about all these pro-lifers is that they only seem to care about the embryo/baby when its in the womb. I don't think they give a seconds thought to what the circumstances might be for mother and baby if she has to go through with the pregnancy, nor do the care.
Therfore i believe it should always be left up to the woman to make the decision as only she know the actual circumstances of the situation.

Can you give one example from modern Ireland of a child whose circumstances would have been better if it had been aborted? Just one example please.

At Least 25,000 Attend Anti-Abortion Vigil

Comments