nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Irish Government violating the human rights of women

MadsL

http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/irish-news/irish-government-on-notice-it-is-violating-human-rights-of-women-34246181.html

Kenny's approach seems to be muddying the issue with a citizen's convention. The NI High Court's decision today would indicate that a referendum should be held asap, with the citizen's voice being heard through vote rather than "convention".

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

masti123

If a referendum is made but people vote against it, is there another way of bringing it in?

c_man

masti123 wrote: »

If a referendum is made but people vote against it, is there another way of bringing it in?

A military coup d'etat.

Gaygooner

questionmark? wrote: »

No. It should be a joint decision between two adults where possible.

Yes. But ultimately is the woman's body that undergoes all the changes

Nomis21

I was a coach driver in London a few years back.

The company I worked for was Spanish owned and had a contract to collect girls coming to the UK from the airport and bring them to their hotel and the abortion clinic before taking them back to the airport. (As Spain also had a law against terminations at the time, but now Abortion during the first trimester is legal on demand.)

These girls, mostly poor and not speaking English, had to find over a thousand UK pounds to pay for and undergo the travel and their operation in London.

Anyone seeing a bus full of these frightened girls would quickly understand the need to respect the Human Rights of Women.

Amirani

masti123 wrote: »

If a referendum is made but people vote against it, is there another way of bringing it in?

For all the blustering on social media calling on the Government to "repeal the 8th" - there's very little chance that it passes a referendum in this country.

I'm ardently pro-choice, but the only people helped by a direct referendum on the 8th amendment right now are the Iona Institute and those that way inclined. It kills politically any prospect of more liberal laws on abortion in the near future.

The only way I can see this happening is through smaller steps - so I think the aim should be getting rape, incest and foetal abnormalities permitted before we have a direct referendum on completely liberal abortion laws. Obviously not ideal or particularly inspiring, but I still think overall opinion is too divisive on this to do otherwise. Maybe it can be framed in some other way that can achieve a better result, but I'm not sure what it is.

questionmark?

masti123 wrote: »

If a referendum is made but people vote against it, is there another way of bringing it in?

Damn democracy getting in the way!! Huh!

pconn062

Unfortunately Ireland is far too much of an immature country to tackle the abortion issue. Spineless politicians will continue to kick the can down the road, with support from the general apathy towards the issue from the Irish public. Meanwhile women carrying fetus's with no chance of surviving outside the womb will continue to be forced to carry to full term or travel to England to have a termination. It's a national shame, especially as the government continue to promote Ireland as a forward thinking, modern country.

questionmark?

pconn062 wrote: »

Unfortunately Ireland is far too much of an immature country to tackle the abortion issue. Spineless politicians will continue to kick the can down the road, with support from the general apathy towards the issue from the Irish public. Meanwhile women carrying fetus's with no chance of surviving outside the womb will continue to be forced to carry to full term or travel to England to have a termination. It's a national shame, especially as the government continue to promote Ireland as a forward thinking, modern country.

See right there you have one of the biggest issues of the debate. Abortion for all or abortion in certain cases such as what you outlined.

pconn062

questionmark? wrote: »

See right there you have one of the biggest issues of the debate. Abortion for all or abortion in certain cases such as what you outlined.

I agree it's a decisive issue, however I think that most people must agree that abortion in cases of rape, incest or in cases where the foetus cannot survive outside the womb is a necessity. Our draconian laws need to be updated in this regard at least. We can't call ourselves a modern European nation otherwise.

masti123

questionmark? wrote: »

Damn democracy getting in the way!! Huh!

Even if it's ruled to be infringing on human rights?

S.O

Amirani wrote: »

For all the blustering on social media calling on the Government to "repeal the 8th" - there's very little chance that it passes a referendum in this country.

I'm ardently pro-choice, but the only people helped by a direct referendum on the 8th amendment right now are the Iona Institute and those that way inclined. It kills politically any prospect of more liberal laws on abortion in the near future.

The only way I can see this happening is through smaller steps - so I think the aim should be getting rape, incest and foetal abnormalities permitted before we have a direct referendum on completely liberal abortion laws. Obviously not ideal or particularly inspiring, but I still think overall opinion is too divisive on this to do otherwise. Maybe it can be framed in some other way that can achieve a better result, but I'm not sure what it is.

If the polls are to be believed, a good number of polls over the last two years have showed a majority think there should be access to abortion in cases of rape/FFA/ threat to mothers life, if there is a referendum sometime in the next few years if there is reassurance that abortion access will only be allowed and legal in certain cases, not abortion on demand, I think it will pass.

c_man

pconn062 wrote: »

We can't call ourselves a modern European nation otherwise.

If we start bombing third world countries, flooding same with home-made weapons and provide banking facilities to the warlords we're flogging them to can we then join the mystical ranks of 'modern' European countries? Or is just abortion that defines it?

I realise it's a complex issue, and it's certainly more complex than "keeping up with the Joneses". Certain people in this country have a weird impression of our European neighbours. Yeah we're sound with them and all that, but let's not kid ourselves over their "modern" values, and the difference between what they do and they preach. Whatever happens, lets define and shape it in our own image and not in some post-colonial, doffing the cap to our superiors in Brussels stereotype.

pconn062

c_man wrote: »

If we start bombing third world countries, flooding same with home-made weapons and provide banking facilities to the warlords we're flogging them to can we then join the mystical ranks of 'modern' European countries? Or is just abortion that defines it?

I realise it's a complex issue, and it's certainly more complex than "keeping up with the Joneses". Certain people in this country have a weird impression of our European neighbours. Yeah we're sound with them and all that, but let's not kid ourselves over their "modern" values, and the difference between what they do and they preach. Whatever happens, lets define and shape it in our own image and not in some post-colonial, doffing the cap to our superiors in Brussels stereotype.

It was simply a turn of phrase. This is why I usually don't discuss abortion on forums, people will drag any other issue they can think of into it to avoid discussing the issue at hand. I was pointing out that we are one of the few first world countries with such draconian abortion laws. Nothing more, nothing less.

Ave Sodalis

c_man wrote:

Honestly, the pro-choice crowd haven't a hope in any referendum on the topic if this kind of language is brought up in debates.

Strictly speaking, he's not wrong. A foetus acts like a parasite. That may not be the most pleasant of terms but it doesn't take away from the fact that a foetus is parasitic. They still don't know for sure why a foetus isn't attacked by the woman's immune system.

The Randy Riverbeast

Ah an abortion referendum. I thought the last one was full of made up ideas with no backing. This one will be fun. a few sound bites, mentions of things that happen rarely while making it sound like the standard.

Annasopra

darkpagandeath wrote: »

lol, Was it not a FG/Lab government that introduced the 8th amendment ?

No. It was an FF proposal. The subsequent FG/Lab government opposed it but they were voted down.

Annasopra

ThinkProgress wrote: »

More power than whom?

Your vote will likely carry the same weight as everyone else. Regardless of which way you vote.

I was saying the female vote (irrespective of Y/N) is slightly more important than my vote as a male. Because I can never be forced to carry and birth a baby against my wishes...

We also shouldn't forget trans men in this debate. They too have wombs and could become pregnant.

MadsL

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

We also shouldn't forget trans men in this debate. They too have wombs and could become pregnant.

Well I guess I just learned something...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_pregnancy

FortySeven

super_furry wrote: »

Abortion isn't a man's issue and you can't make it one. No man will ever be forced to have a baby against their will.

Rubbish, this happens all the time!

FortySeven

Surely the easiest option is just to legalise abortion and those which are pro choice can have abortions if they choose to and those that are pro life can choose not to. Choice for all!

topmanamillion

The pro lifers will want this buried fairly quickly.

It's impossible to have any sort of debate when they can hire medical professionals as their spokespersons, who will back up vague medical references with "baby killer" religious mumbo jumbo.

While I would hate to see abortion become a method of birth control. I fully accept it is not a black and white issue. There are times when women need it for various reasons.

The 3 doctor panel of "experts" to decide on a woman's right to abortion was alway a ridiculous notion. One doctor acting ethically should be able to decide on the necessity.

Men are certainly heavily involved in the issue as ultimately it is also their constitution and possibly their child's life.

Tarzana2

PucaMama wrote: »

It's very much "on trend" at the minute to be all for choice.

Yes, that's why people are pro-choice - fashion. :rolleyes:

c_man

sup_dude wrote: »

Strictly speaking, he's not wrong.

No, course not. Just pointing out that that won't fly, and will have the opposite reaction by the general public than what you'd (presumably) want.

cnocbui

The_Valeyard wrote: »

Unless you can virgin Mary up a baby without the need of a man, then we get to vote also.

No. Men should only get 1/77760 th of a vote.

cnocbui

FortySeven wrote: »

Rubbish, this happens all the time!

Do you have photos?

VisibleGorilla

Fully legal abortion on demand, zero reason to not have this.

suicide_circus

pconn062 wrote: »

Unfortunately Ireland is far too much of an immature country to tackle the abortion issue. Spineless politicians will continue to kick the can down the road, with support from the general apathy towards the issue from the Irish public. Meanwhile women carrying fetus's with no chance of surviving outside the womb will continue to be forced to carry to full term or travel to England to have a termination. It's a national shame, especially as the government continue to promote Ireland as a forward thinking, modern country.

Hold on, we have gay marriage, we so to are mature.

pconn062

suicide_circus wrote: »

Hold on, we have gay marriage, we so to are mature.

That's what she said. :pac:

I'm so mature.

nozzferrahhtoo

josephryan1989 wrote: »

The majority will be influenced by what they consider is the best argument.

I wish that were true, but alas whenever this topic comes up the anti abortion side do not present that many arguments. We just get the kind of rhetoric like this user who throw emotive words like "murder" around in the hope the words will serve in place of any actual discourse on the matter.

I often tell of the time I went up to the anti abortion booths in Dublin City. You know the ones covered in pictures of fetuses and the like? And I asked them genuinely what their arguments were. I went up prepared to listen and not debate or answer back. I genuinely just wanted to know what the anti abortion arguments were.

All I got was "Dude, look at the pictures" and I said that yes, they were indeed unpleasant to look at.... but could they please tell me what the arguments were. After a pause and a look of confusion his mouth fell open and out fell "Mannn just look at the pictures mannnnnn".

So I am afraid my confidence that the issue will be decided by people hearing, and subscribing to, the "best argument" was somewhat crushed that day. As with the Homosexuality Marriage referendum it is likely to be actual arguments from one side.... put up against fallacious appeals to emotion on the other. And I can only hope that, like that referendum, the latter loses again.

questionmark?

masti123 wrote: »

Even if it's ruled to be infringing on human rights?

So if people, as in the citizens of a Republic voting in a change to the constitution, say no you want to over rule a democratic decision because you don't agree with it? Jesus!! If if the Pro Choice lobby talk like that they don't stand a chance of it getting voted for.