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; } } }

Child Item

Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

PopePalpatine

I didn't know whether to post this here or in the Sanctimony of Pro-Lifers thread in t'udder forum - a BBC article on Paraguay's "epidemic" of child pregnancies. Paraguay only allows for abortion if the mother's life is at risk. On average, two girls aged 14 and under become pregnant in Paraguay every day.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Cabaal

Yesterday, Taoiseach Enda Kenny says expert group on 8th amendment will be chaired by an "appropriate woman" - http://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/02/23/an-appropriate-woman/

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2016/02/24/fine-gal/

Cabaal

frostyjacks wrote: »

It's nothing to do with religion, or misogyny or lack of empathy. It's about a right to life, voted on by the people. I wonder how homosexuals would react if there was a concerted and sustained campaign to strike gay marriage from the constitution.

gay marriage?
I think you'll find there is no such thing, its simply "marriage". Our constitution mentions nothing about "gay marriage" like you're trying to claim.

Your wording is frankly insulting. Would you for example call African American's marrying as "Black Marriage" or "Negro Marriage"? No, of course not so why try to define it any differently here?

frostyjacks

lazygal wrote: »

I think you mean marriage. Gay marriage isn't mentioned in the constitution.

Semantics. The constitution allows gay marriage, which was approved in a referendum and has been respected by all. Now, what is the point of having referendums to put rights into the constitution if a powerful lobby campaigns against it further down the line? Respect the constitution, respect the vote of the people and respect the right to life.

[Deleted User]

What's an Appropriate Woman?

[Deleted User]

frostyjacks wrote: »

Semantics. The constitution allows gay marriage, which was approved in a referendum and has been respected by all. Now, what is the point of having referendums to put rights into the constitution if a powerful lobby campaigns against it further down the line? Respect the constitution, respect the vote of the people and respect the right to life.

Back of the cigarette packet maths would suggest that the majority of the country today have not voted on this matter.

Perhaps we should respect the vote of the people, by allowing them the opportunity to register that vote?

Cabaal

frostyjacks wrote: »

Semantics. The constitution allows gay marriage, which was approved in a referendum and has been respected by all. Now, what is the point of having referendums to put rights into the constitution if a powerful lobby campaigns against it further down the line? Respect the constitution, respect the vote of the people and respect the right to life.

By your logic we never should have had a referendum on marriage equality, instead we should have just respected what was in the constitution already. The constitution is not some unchanging document, its important that it reflects the views of the society we live in and right now when it comes to the 8th that doesn't appear to be the case (amongst other inclusions in it!). The only way to settle this issue is to allow the people to vote on it.

In relation to our constitution and respecting what is in it,. wasn't that one of the arguments put forward by Lolek Ltd & Co when they lobbied against marriage equality?
They didn't respect what people wanted to change, and when the country voted yes we still had people that didn't respect that outcome as they tried to delay the outcome over and over by going to the highcourt.

The bottom line is nobody has got to vote on the 8th issue thats below the age of 40, we the people are entitled to have our say. If as you say people should respect "life" then you have nothing to worry about as clearly no referendum will pass in your world.

rainbow kirby

Deleted User wrote: »

Back of the cigarette packet maths would suggest that the majority of the country today have not voted on this matter.

Perhaps we should respect the vote of the people, by allowing them the opportunity to register that vote?

And in particular nobody who is directly affected by it today has had their say on it. Even my mother was 21 when she voted against the 8th.

We're now at a stage now where nobody under 32 has even gotten to tell a government to feck right off when they tried to make things MORE restrictive.

PopePalpatine

Kole Round Spectator wrote: »

People are getting far too confident because of the time wasting vote that was passed last summer, abortion is a different animal completely altogether. The disgusting practice is detested by a large proportion of the population.

Wow, someone's butthurt. What other referenda were "time wasting" in your opinion? I'd hazard a guess the one to overturn the X Case wasn't, but the one to remove the RCC's "special position" in the constitution was.

Kiwi in IE

frostyjacks wrote: »

It's nothing to do with religion, or misogyny or lack of empathy. It's about a right to life

A lack of empathy driven by a misogynistic religion is precisely what it's mostly about.

robdonn

Deleted User wrote: »

Back of the cigarette packet maths would suggest that the majority of the country today have not voted on this matter.

Perhaps we should respect the vote of the people, by allowing them the opportunity to register that vote?

Back of the cigarette packet maths, just for the fun of it:

8th Amendment voted by referendum - 1983
Current year - 2016
That means that the youngest person today that voted in the referendum is now 51.

Population breakdown (as of 2014):
0-14 years: 21.4%
15-24 years: 11.9%
25-54 years: 44.1%
55-64 years: 10.1%
65 years and over: 12.4%

So people who were eligible to vote in the referendum are about 25% of today's population.
Taking away the roughly 25% who are note eligible to vote (under 18) and that leaves roughly 50% of the total population (about 66% of the electorate).

1983 referendum results
In favour of 8th - 67%
Against the 8th - 33%

The Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI poll - Feb 2016
In favour of 8th - 25%
Against the 8th - 64%
Undecided - 11%

================================================

Oh, and just to pre-empt the argument from Absolam about there being lots of things in our constitution that we did not have the opportunity to vote for (or against), that is very true. But it is also true that a nation's constitution should reflect the conscience of the current population and should be changed occasionally to reflect that. This also means that in about 30 years, if the country goes back to being full of conservative dickheads, the people can call for a vote to put the 8th amendment back in if they want.

Shrap

Cabaal wrote: »

Yesterday, Taoiseach Enda Kenny says expert group on 8th amendment will be chaired by an "appropriate woman"

I wonder was that to differentiate FG's approach with FF's notion that what the effect would be of removing the 8th is best examined by a "panel of judges" before ever agreeing to a referendum? Hilariously out of touch coming up to an election.

Huntergonzo

It's difficult to argue with religious extremists (respectfully known as 'people with sincerely held religious beliefs' if you're christian, 'terrorists' is the preferred word for Muslim extremists) on this issue because allowing women to have control over their own reproductive system is a huge setback to the control held by major religions. Their priority is their own power, always has been and always will be, the life and rights of a pregant women is totally immaterial to them.

The 8th amendment is one of the most horrific laws we have in our constitution, it's astonishing arrogance to claim that a fetus which is totally dependent on it's mother should also have the same rights as she does.

We need another referendum soon to remove the 8th and hopefully bring in abortion on demand (this is very wishful thinking of course).

[Deleted User]

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

A lack of empathy driven by a misogynistic religion is precisely what it's mostly about.

Bit rich talking about empty when you are in favour of giving people the right to kill their unborn children as they please. Aside from very very limited circumstances nobody should have the power to end the life of their unborn child.

Its brilliant that Ireland is one of the few countries left that has stuck to its guns and keeps this disgusting practice outlawed and if the people of Ireland have a conscience it will remain that way.

robdonn

Kole Round Spectator wrote: »

Bit rich talking about empty when you are in favour of giving people the right to kill their unborn children as they please. Aside from very very limited circumstances nobody should have the power to end the life of their unborn child.

Its brilliant that Ireland is one of the few countries left that has stuck to its guns and keeps this disgusting practice outlawed.

Yeah, it's fantastic! Other countries have no idea how much fun it is to force a woman to deliver a dying foetus, or take delight in watching a 12 year old girl destroy her body and mind carrying a rapist's child inside her!

galljga1

This is the Atheism and Agnosticism forum. Why are christians coming on here and attacking people for their beliefs and being all christiany and stuff. It's not fair.

Kiwi in IE

galljga1 wrote: »

This is the Atheism and Agnosticism forum. Why are christians coming on here and attacking people for their beliefs and being all christiany and stuff. It's not fair.

Haha! Did the flat earthers in the other forum inspire that post by any chance?

robdonn

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Haha! Did the flat earthers in the other forum inspire that post by any chance?

Heretic! The Earth is only 6000 years old, there was no time for god to flatten it.

galljga1

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Haha! Did the flat earthers in the other forum inspire that post by any chance?

Very disrespectful.

[Deleted User]

robdonn wrote: »

Yeah, it's fantastic! Other countries have no idea how much fun it is to force a woman to deliver a dying foetus, or take delight in watching a 12 year old girl destroy her body and mind carrying a rapist's child inside her!

Except of course when mistakes are made and that dying foetus survives. It's not the unborn child's fault that they were conceived through rape why should they be punished?

Just because other countries haven't the will to fight for the life of the unborn doesn't mean we should follow suit, in fact it should make us even more against it and keep Ireland free of abortion.

galljga1 wrote: »

This is the Atheism and Agnosticism forum. Why are christians coming on here and attacking people for their beliefs and being all christiany and stuff. It's not fair.

My opinions on this topic have nothing to do with me being Christian.

robdonn

Kole Round Spectator wrote: »

Except of course when mistakes are made and that dying foetus survives.

People die in dentist's chairs because of mistakes but we don't outlaw dentistry.

Kole Round Spectator wrote: »

It's not the unborn child's fault that they were conceived through rape why should they be punished?

Why should the child who was raped be punished by being forced to sustain a pregnancy that her body or mind can barely handle? You are concerned with the child that is yet to be born, I am more concerned with the one that is already here.

robdonn

Kole Round Spectator wrote: »

My opinions on this topic have nothing to do with me being Christian.

I don't think that comment was directed at you, it was in reference to a particular member in the Christianity forum who is trying his hardest to ban all atheists from discussions on the forum. A lot of the people in that discussion are also here.

Shrap

Kole Round Spectator wrote: »

Its brilliant that Ireland is one of the few countries left that has stuck to its guns and keeps this disgusting practice outlawed.

I'll give you a clue about appropriate use of the word disgusting, shall I?

General use:
It is a disgusting practice to force an outrageously traumatic and dangerous pregnancy/birth on a young child (countries where religious extremists view the life of a non-sentient human foetus as more important).

The State shirking responsibility towards women's health is a disgusting practice.

Keeping a dead woman on life support while her insides rot, in order to keep a foetus alive is a disgusting side effect of the 8th amendment.

Withholding proper health care from a woman who is miscarrying is a disgusting side effect of the 8th amendment.

Requiring women who's unborn children have died to continue to carry them to the point where induction is legal, as we don't have the services in this country to conduct a D&C, is disgusting.

Pherekydes

Deleted User wrote: »

What's an Appropriate Woman?

Breda O'Brien.

Huntergonzo

Kole Round Spectator wrote: »

Except of course when mistakes are made and that dying foetus survives. It's not the unborn child's fault that they were conceived through rape why should they be punished?

Just because other countries haven't the will to fight for the life of the unborn doesn't mean we should follow suit, in fact it should make us even more against it and keep Ireland free of abortion.

Why should the mother be punished by being forced through a pregnancy caused by rape, it's completely barbaric to suggest that she has no right to terminate such a pregnancy.

Also she could travel over to Britain for a termination but this is because of an appalling failure by her own state to look after her, it's exporting a harrowing problem and no empathetic person could support it.

What do you say to the fact that a couple of thousand Irish women travel for an abortion every year, despite it being outlawed in Ireland?

Kole Round Spectator wrote: »

My opinions on this topic have nothing to do with me being Christian.

I suspect that's a lie.

rainbow kirby

Kole Round Spectator wrote: »

keep Ireland free of abortion.

The greatest fallacy out there.

Pherekydes

rainbow kirby wrote: »

The greatest fallacy out there.

Yep. About half of all citizens die within a few weeks of conception. It seems God is the biggest abortionist.

Kiwi in IE

Shrap wrote: »

Requiring women who's unborn children have died to continue to carry them to the point where induction is legal, as we don't have the services in this country to conduct a D&C, is disgusting.

Please tell me you are mistaken? I can't believe that even this country would risk women's health, to the extent that a routine procedure which is used for the treatment and identification of many gynological problems, including endometrial and uterine cancer, is unavailable due to archaic, misogynistic religious ideation?

[Deleted User]

Huntergonzo wrote: »

What do you say to the fact that a couple of thousand Irish women travel for an abortion every year, despite it being outlawed in Ireland?

I think they are an absolute disgrace but unfortunately the UK's lax laws mean they can travel there for their abortions.

Huntergonzo wrote: »

I suspect that's a lie.

Well it isn't, the fact I'm a catholic has nothing to do with my views on abortion. I think its a barbaric practice that should be outlawed except in very specific circumstances such as the mother will definitely die without the procedure.

robdonn

Kole Round Spectator wrote: »

Well it isn't, the fact I'm a catholic has nothing to do with my views on abortion. I think its a barbaric practice that should be outlawed except in very specific circumstances such as the mother will definitely die without the procedure.

What if there is a 90% chance the mother will die? Or 80%? Or 50/50?

Huntergonzo

In fairness I've already committed the mortal sin of abortion today, I aborted something like 250,000,000 unborn babies only this morning and I may do it again sometime this evening, I NEED TO BE STOPPED!!!