Abortion Discussion, Part the Fourth

lazygal · 17-10-2019 9:18am

Cabaal wrote: »

Nonsense,
Religious dogma fueled the NO side, pretty much all the no groups had religious funding and/or religious foundations. In many cases, the same people involved previously opposed marriage equality too.

They tried to hide the religious aspect, but the reality is it drove their compaign.

They're not bothering to hide their religion now. Iona and Youth Defence are busy pushing Gript. No secular groups opposed repeal of the 8th.

Igotadose · 17-10-2019 9:20am

Cabaal wrote: »

Nonsense,
Religious dogma fueled the NO side, pretty much all the no groups had religious funding and/or religious foundations. In many cases, the same people involved previously opposed marriage equality too.

They tried to hide the religious aspect, but the reality is it drove their compaign.

You're wasting energy. Truth doesn't matter to pro-life.

smacl · 17-10-2019 9:36am

Cabaal wrote: »

Nonsense,
Religious dogma fueled the NO side, pretty much all the no groups had religious funding and/or religious foundations. In many cases, the same people involved previously opposed marriage equality too.

They tried to hide the religious aspect, but the reality is it drove their compaign.

Yes indeed. Reminded of American religious nutters flying over to exorcise a doctor's clinic which he deemed had demonic possession due to abortions being carried out there.

What worries me most about the pro-life campaign is that it is driven by foreign money from sources unknown trying to unduly influence Irish society. We need much greater transparency on who precisely is trying to pull strings here and why?

17-10-2019 11:19am

lazygal wrote: »

They're not bothering to hide their religion now. Iona and Youth Defence are busy pushing Gript. No secular groups opposed repeal of the 8th.

Have a seen a few posters earlier in the thread point out that Gript and contributors have moved to an anti immigrant stance also.
https://mobile.twitter.com/soundmigration/status/1180451165571633158

LorelaiG · 17-10-2019 11:32am

end of the road wrote: »

only in certain circumstances really. i would suggest that for others such as economic and social reasons, it's more a discretionary allowence/privilage.

No. It's a right. Not a privilage. A right.

Hotblack Desiato · 17-10-2019 11:50am

end of the road wrote: »

correct and for clarity, a constitutional guarantee was my preferred option as i suspect it was for some others. i think i even mentioned it around the time.

But only yesterday you said you would have supported repeal were it not for the legislation.

end of the road wrote: »

it was defended in terms of it saving unborn lives yes . that continued to be the case to the end. but it was accepted that over all it was of itself bad legislation that had to go of it's own merrits. but the proposed legislation meant we could not vote to remove it at that time.

end of the road wrote: »

at that time refers to the 2018 referendum, where we could not vote to remove the 8th because of the legislation the government had outlined to bring, and which they have brought in, which is the proposed legislation i refer to as the reason for keeping the 8th, as it was only proposed legislation at the time before the result was announced.

More flip-flops than a beach in Tenerife.

SusieBlue · 17-10-2019 11:53am

end of the road wrote: »

agreed, but that was only a very small part of the pro-life campaign and many of us ignored it ourselves. not vicious or hateful though.

BS of the highest order, they spread fake news, exploited statistics and used an emotionally manipulative poster campaign designed specifically to guilt, scaremonger and shame people.
Not one single thing they did was honest and they were happy to throw decent, vulnerable people under the bus just so that they could continue living in their fantasty that Ireland is an abortion free country (it isn't and never was).

only in certain circumstances really. i would suggest that for others such as economic and social reasons, it's more a discretionary allowence/privilage.

In your opinion. An opinion which many others do not share.
Your opinion is no more valid or superior than mine or anyone elses, therefore you should not be allowed to force that opinion onto other people who do not share your beliefs.

And has already been explained to you, those behind the NO campaign protested and opposed every single attempted to change that dangerous law from the minute it was voted in back in the 80's.
They wanted to prevent women from traveling abroad, and they wanted prosecute those who managed to escape. They opposed POLDPA.

And you really expect us to believe they would have supported a change to the law to allow for the "hard cases"? (every case is a hard case).
Pull the other one.
They have been dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st centuary and not a minute too soon. Their days of dictacting and pontificating their superiority are over. Everyone sees them for what they are now after their disgraceful, offensive displays in the run up to the referendum.

Hotblack Desiato · 17-10-2019 12:01pm

smacl wrote: »

Yes indeed. Reminded of American religious nutters flying over to exorcise a doctor's clinic which he deemed had demonic possession due to abortions being carried out there.

That's insane.

"Abortion centre" it's a GP's surgery ffs.

The Irish Post can fcuk right off. :mad:

What worries me most about the pro-life campaign is that it is driven by foreign money from sources unknown trying to unduly influence Irish society. We need much greater transparency on who precisely is trying to pull strings here and why?

Yet the same bunch have Soros conspiracy theories as their go-to explanation for anything they don't like.

SusieBlue wrote: »

BS of the highest order, they spread fake news, exploited statistics and used an emotionally manipulative poster campaign designed specifically to guilt, scaremonger and shame people.

They put a particularly explicit and offensive poster right outside my kids' primary school (and in a tidy towns area where all parties have for years agreed to not poster.) Someone ripped it down that night...

Not one single thing they did was honest and they were happy to throw decent, vulnerable people under the bus just so that they could continue living in their fantasty that Ireland is an abortion free country (it isn't and never was).

They went on about "women hurt by abortion" but were happy to scream "murderer" at Yes campaigners in the street, and much more vicious stuff than that online.

aloyisious · 17-10-2019 12:13pm

end of the road wrote: »

agreed, but that was only a very small part of the pro-life campaign and many of us ignored it ourselves. not vicious or hateful though.

only in certain circumstances really. i would suggest that for others such as economic and social reasons, it's more a discretionary allowence/privilage.

The rub in the sentence is that you mean the application of what you call a discretionary allowance/privilege was to be left to the discretion of a person not related to the woman or the foetus in her womb. That sounds like you're equating it with a Dept of Social Affairs decision to deny a person a social payment on discretionary grounds: sorry, your application is being refused as it doesn't fit Dept guidelines.

As for the very small part of the pro-life campaign, did the management even try to control or expel that very small part from the campaign? As we've seen, ignoring a problem minority won't make it go away or behave in a more social manner.

end of the road · 17-10-2019 1:24pm

Screw Attack wrote: »

Small part of the campaign? My ass. This law is still pretty hard on abortion (up to 12 weeks). It's a fertalised lump of cells. There's no brain, and it can be terminated without remorse. It's religious crap, and yet Pro life freaks are against it. Not surprising really.

Sure, fella, sure. You say you'd acquiesce on "certain circumstances" but you're pretty comfortable with it being completely banned in general. You give the game away when you believe a tiny spec of goo is a human being.

it's an unborn, slowly forming human being. we are all only a lump of cells ultimately so that line doesn't work for you.
it's non-religious non-crap, supported by some religious yes, but lots of non-religious, all based on the understanding of humanity and it's formation, and the concistent belief that being able to end that life at one stage, but not at another, doesn't make any concistent sense.
plenty of pro-life people, probably most in reality, are as far from freaks as it gets, and i have never been against a total ban on abortion either.
so, lots of swings and lots of misses by yourself i'm afraid.

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

But only yesterday you said you would have supported repeal were it not for the legislation. More flip-flops than a beach in Tenerife.

yes i see i did, i should have been clearer.

aloyisious wrote: »

The rub in the sentence is that you mean the application of what you call a discretionary allowance/privilege was to be left to the discretion of a person not related to the woman or the foetus in her womb. That sounds like you're equating it with a Dept of Social Affairs decision to deny a person a social payment on discretionary grounds: sorry, your application is being refused as it doesn't fit Dept guidelines.

As for the very small part of the pro-life campaign, did the management even try to control or expel that very small part from the campaign? As we've seen, ignoring a problem minority won't make it go away or behave in a more social manner.

any management i suspect wouldn't have been able to control or expell that minority from the campaign.
i think really that one can't ultimately stop someone from campaigning under a particular banner such as pro-life or pro-choice, or any other braud campaign.

nozzferrahhtoo · 17-10-2019 1:29pm

end of the road wrote: »

it's an unborn, slowly forming human being.

So if it is forming to be one, that means it is not one. You can not be X and be becoming X at the same time.

end of the road wrote: »

being able to end that life at one stage, but not at another, doesn't make any concistent sense.

It does if that attributes to coherently afford it value exist at one stage, but not at the other. Then it is entirely consistent, coherent and valid to claim it is ok to end it at one stage but not the other.

Unfortunately any time I have brought up those attributes specifically you have screamed "irrelevant" and ran away from the conversation entirely, ignoring my posts.

So, lots of swings and lots of misses by yourself i'm afraid.

Hannibal_Smith · 17-10-2019 1:45pm

end of the road wrote: »

agreed, but that was only a very small part of the pro-life campaign and many of us ignored it ourselves. not vicious or hateful though.

What about the demonstrations outside maternity hospitals? That was pretty vicious and hateful.

aloyisious · 17-10-2019 1:59pm

lazygal wrote: »

They're not bothering to hide their religion now. Iona and Youth Defence are busy pushing Gript. No secular groups opposed repeal of the 8th.

Are they behind gript as an advertising agency or means of getting their messages out now? I saw a short video on F/B yesterday about the film being shown in the Omniplex in Galway and noted the headline over the video stated it was funded by and sponsored by gript.

robindch · 17-10-2019 2:05pm

Mod:

Screw Attack wrote: »

[...] My ass [...] Sure, fella, sure [...]

No need for that kind of uncivil rhetoric - keep the tone down, please.

lazygal · 17-10-2019 2:13pm

aloyisious wrote: »

Are they behind gript as an advertising agency or means of getting their messages out now? I saw a short video on F/B yesterday about the film being shown in the Omniplex in Galway and noted the headline over the video stated it was funded by and sponsored by gript.

Iona and Gript are producing content together. Maria Steen is in the videos.

end of the road · 17-10-2019 3:25pm

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

What about the demonstrations outside maternity hospitals? That was pretty vicious and hateful.

what i saw of them were certainly not vicious or hateful, but peaceful protests.
protests are always going to upset, offend, or disrupt some, but that is the price to pay for democracy.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

So if it is forming to be one, that means it is not one. You can not be X and be becoming X at the same time.

It does if that attributes to coherently afford it value exist at one stage, but not at the other. Then it is entirely consistent, coherent and valid to claim it is ok to end it at one stage but not the other.

Unfortunately any time I have brought up those attributes specifically you have screamed "irrelevant" and ran away from the conversation entirely, ignoring my posts.

So, lots of swings and lots of misses by yourself i'm afraid.

i never ran away or ignored your points, however given i already answered them originally, then there isn't much more i can say to you.

nozzferrahhtoo · 17-10-2019 4:10pm

end of the road wrote: »

i never ran away or ignored your points

You did both. Last time you claimed you didn't I cited examples of both. I can do so again.

end of the road wrote: »

however given i already answered them originally, then there isn't much more i can say to you.

You did not answer them though. As I said you simply shouted "irrelevant" at my points and the ran off. you never once answered them then, and you have not done so now.

Again, you have declared it inconsistent to think it alright to end a life at one stage and not at another. My answer to that is to point out that if the attributes change between the stages, then it is very consistent.

Your response is, as per your usual MO which you use WHILE denying that very MO, is to dodge and ignore the point. You most certainly did not, have not, and I suspect can not answer or rebut it.

Calina · 17-10-2019 4:28pm

And so Stormont may be recalled.

aloyisious · 17-10-2019 6:58pm

Calina wrote: »

And so Stormont may be recalled.

Peregrinus posted on page 105 that the Sec State for N/I has powers to activate the UK Parliaments voted introduction to N/I of the law as it applies in the other part of the UK if there is no local Govt in N/I, as there was before S/F and DUP had their row and ended the sitting of the power-sharing administration there.

If that is the absolute on the matter, then if SF decline to agree to serve with the DUP in any re-opened Stormont there can be NO power-sharing N/I Govt, it seems to me the Sec State can go ahead and activate the Westminster decision.

It seems to me that part of the avoidance route that local abortion legislation would also have to be introduced by a working Govt in N/I in order for the DUP to succeed in stopping the activation of the Westminster vote from becoming the law of the land in N/I.

As I see it now, it's up to the Pro-choice people in N/I to start knocking on doors if they want the laws governing them to be equal to that in the rest of the UK and similar to that in the republic.

However, if the Sec State decides there are more important matters to deal with in the present, he may put the activation on a list of to-do items. No doubt the Westminster Brexit affair will be at the head of the list, esp with the DUP likely to be on the warpath after todays deal between Boris & the EU Admin.

peregrinus post: Delay, certainly. What the just-passed law says is that, if the NI executive and assembly are not back up and running by a certain date, the SoS for NI (who has the power to legislate for NI when the assembly is not operating) must make regulations extending equal marriage and access to abortion to NI. However SFAIK no time limit for making those regulations is specified.

This is not going to be a quick process. The new legislation does not say that NI law on these subjects in NI is to be the same as it is in England and Wales (or Scotland, or Ireland - all three jurisdictions have different legal laws in relation to both matters). It just sets out a broad principle, but leaves the details of how that principle is to be given effect in legislation to be worked out later.

This would normally take a while. There'd be reviews of the current law on marriage and on abortion, to see in what respects they fail to comply with the principles, or meet the standards, set out in the new legislation. There would normally be a consultation process, in which the government issues a paper discussing the issues, suggesting ways in which they might be addressed through legislation, and inviting observations from interested stakeholders. There'd then be draft legislation published, and comments invited. Finally, the legislation could be made. It could take a year or more (or less) and, crucially, how fast the process goes depends in part on how enthusiastically the government approaches it. So if they want to soft-pedal it, there is certainly scope for that.

Igotadose · 17-10-2019 7:01pm

aloyisious wrote: »

Peregrinus posted on page 105 that the Sec State for N/I has powers to activate the UK Parliaments voted introduction to N/I of the law as it applies in the other part of the UK if there is no local Govt in N/I, as there was before S/F and DUP had their row and ended the sitting of the power-sharing administration there.

If that is the absolute on the matter, then if SF decline to agree to serve with the DUP in any re-opened Stormont there can be NO power-sharing N/I Govt, it seems to me the Sec State can go ahead and activate the Westminster decision.

And, if indeed the DUP vote against the Johnson deal, why shouldn't HMG direct the SecState for NI to do exactly that? Not like HMG's being supported by the NI Westminsterans...

aloyisious · 18-10-2019 12:52am

Igotadose wrote: »

And, if indeed the DUP vote against the Johnson deal, why shouldn't HMG direct the SecState for NI to do exactly that? Not like HMG's being supported by the NI Westminsterans...

Face-value effect of being seen as part of the union. He's already distrusted by the DUP, by HRH and his own party [the conservative and unionist party of GB and N/I] and they are not even the official opposition.

Loafing Oaf · 18-10-2019 1:03am

aloyisious wrote: »

Peregrinus posted on page 105 that the Sec State for N/I has powers to activate the UK Parliaments voted introduction to N/I of the law as it applies in the other part of the UK if there is no local Govt in N/I, as there was before S/F and DUP had their row and ended the sitting of the power-sharing administration there.

If that is the absolute on the matter, then if SF decline to agree to serve with the DUP in any re-opened Stormont there can be NO power-sharing N/I Govt, it seems to me the Sec State can go ahead and activate the Westminster decision.

It seems to me that part of the avoidance route that local abortion legislation would also have to be introduced by a working Govt in N/I in order for the DUP to succeed in stopping the activation of the Westminster vote from becoming the law of the land in N/I.

As I see it now, it's up to the Pro-choice people in N/I to start knocking on doors if they want the laws governing them to be equal to that in the rest of the UK and similar to that in the republic.

However, if the Sec State decides there are more important matters to deal with in the present, he may put the activation on a list of to-do items. No doubt the Westminster Brexit affair will be at the head of the list, esp with the DUP likely to be on the warpath after todays deal between Boris & the EU Admin.

peregrinus post: Delay, certainly. What the just-passed law says is that, if the NI executive and assembly are not back up and running by a certain date, the SoS for NI (who has the power to legislate for NI when the assembly is not operating) must make regulations extending equal marriage and access to abortion to NI. However SFAIK no time limit for making those regulations is specified.

This is not going to be a quick process. The new legislation does not say that NI law on these subjects in NI is to be the same as it is in England and Wales (or Scotland, or Ireland - all three jurisdictions have different legal laws in relation to both matters). It just sets out a broad principle, but leaves the details of how that principle is to be given effect in legislation to be worked out later.

This would normally take a while. There'd be reviews of the current law on marriage and on abortion, to see in what respects they fail to comply with the principles, or meet the standards, set out in the new legislation. There would normally be a consultation process, in which the government issues a paper discussing the issues, suggesting ways in which they might be addressed through legislation, and inviting observations from interested stakeholders. There'd then be draft legislation published, and comments invited. Finally, the legislation could be made. It could take a year or more (or less) and, crucially, how fast the process goes depends in part on how enthusiastically the government approaches it. So if they want to soft-pedal it, there is certainly scope for that.

I think the DUP realise this is a fait accompli, and this latest flurry is just about signalling to their supporters that they 'did everything in their power' to stop it.

Hannibal_Smith · 18-10-2019 7:59am

end of the road wrote: »

what i saw of them were certainly not vicious or hateful, but peaceful protests.
protests are always going to upset, offend, or disrupt some, but that is the price to pay for democracy.

I don't know of any other group that stand in front of a hospital holding up pictures of hearts or cancer tumours.

Youre brushing it under the carpet as an 'oh well people got upset that's just the price of democracy'. The people who are upset are the parents going in to avail of health care. Targeting them is pure vicious. Making them pay a price for your democracy is pure hateful.

My own best friend was going through a miscarriage at the time. That's the kind of people you're 'just upsetting'. Have a word with yourself, it's pure vicious targeting people like that.

Bredabe · 18-10-2019 1:54pm

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I think the DUP realise this is a fait accompli, and this latest flurry is just about signalling to their supporters that they 'did everything in their power' to stop it.

Leitrim ARC along side the local sfmp are certain that everything will go to plan and at midnight on tue, abortion will be legal.

From my reading of the wm ruling, there is NO hope of the dup being able to fulfill it before tue. There is no way they will get a sf candidate for the executive or a cross party agreement on I think, security between now and tue.

If I know it cant be done, then they knew this from the beginning.

aloyisious · 18-10-2019 10:43pm

Bredabe wrote: »

Leitrim ARC along side the local sfmp are certain that everything will go to plan and at midnight on tue, abortion will be legal.

From my reading of the wm ruling, there is NO hope of the dup being able to fulfill it before tue. There is no way they will get a sf candidate for the executive or a cross party agreement on I think, security between now and tue.

If I know it cant be done, then they knew this from the beginning.

As abortion will no longer be illegal in N/I from Tuesday, I hope there are facilities available in N/I for what will come and they are ready for the protestors outside their buildings otherwise the flights will continue to the UK.

Loafing Oaf · 18-10-2019 11:03pm

aloyisious wrote: »

As abortion will no longer be illegal in N/I from Tuesday, I hope there are facilities available in N/I for what will come and they are ready for the protestors outside their buildings otherwise the flights will continue to the UK.

AFAIK 'liberal' abortion is not due to come on stream next week.
https://www.rte.ie/news/uk/2019/1008/1081757-ni-abortion/

The UK Government has published guidelines for medical professionals on abortion law and termination of pregnancy in Northern Ireland.

It relates to the interim period between decriminalisation and new regulations being implemented from April next.

The NIO said there were no plans for abortion services being made routinely available during that time frame.

lazygal · 19-10-2019 8:28am

Shocking findings that contraceptive provision reduces abortion rates. Bit shook tbh.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/opinion/abortion-iud-contraception.html#click=https://t.co/55Wv7so2mB

aloyisious · 19-10-2019 11:50am

lazygal wrote: »

Shocking findings that contraceptive provision reduces abortion rates. Bit shook tbh.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/opinion/abortion-iud-contraception.html#click=https://t.co/55Wv7so2mB

Reading from US history that a court there decided some decades back that the right to privacy in the constitution guaranteed women there the right to use IUD's after some-one tried to get them banned from use. Lost the link I saw where 20 odd states had banned/prevented legal use of IUD's. If the present surge against the legality of abortion clinics were to continue, I'd see the Pro-life campaign there going after the IUD's again to ensure there was no interference in what they claim is God's plan for humans, if they don't already "advise" women it was "unsafe" to use IUD's.

Bredabe · 19-10-2019 11:53am

aloyisious wrote: »

As abortion will no longer be illegal in N/I from Tuesday, I hope there are facilities available in N/I for what will come and they are ready for the protestors outside their buildings otherwise the flights will continue to the UK.

Are there not blanket bans on protesting outside of clinics in place in the uk? like those in place in Ealing and I'm told Dundalk/Drogheda?

Bredabe · 19-10-2019 12:01pm

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

AFAIK 'liberal' abortion is not due to come on stream next week.
https://www.rte.ie/news/uk/2019/1008/1081757-ni-abortion/

From what I hear from Belfast, ppl for now are happy to be able to access pills legally.
Of course some will have to travel but now they dont have to hide it and my colleagues in Belfast while not happy about this, feel its ok for now. Especially as an amount of those people will be able to access procedures in the republic.

smacl · 19-10-2019 12:20pm

lazygal wrote: »

Shocking findings that contraceptive provision reduces abortion rates. Bit shook tbh.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/opinion/abortion-iud-contraception.html#click=https://t.co/55Wv7so2mB

Very good article. I thought the point about reducing risk of contraceptive failure by using longer term methods such as implants was well made. Great idea for the medics frame this by by asking "are you planning on having a baby in the next year?"

Igotadose · 19-10-2019 1:28pm

smacl wrote: »

Very good article. I thought the point about reducing risk of contraceptive failure by using longer term methods such as implants was well made. Great idea for the medics frame this by by asking "are you planning on having a baby in the next year?"

Paywalled. Anyone with a summary? Thanks.

aloyisious · 19-10-2019 2:23pm

Listening to coverage of the Westminster Brexit deal vote on RTE, interviewer on RTE asking Michelle O'Neill S/F if she had heard anything about DUP calling a sitting of the assembly for Monday next to put a motion to the floor about abortion, Michelle said she heard of the move but thinks that it is a DUP manoeuvre. I gather that she sees it as a DUP stunt. From what I know of the chances that the egg will hatch, I concur.

Actually it's day old news: Arlene Foster is backing the idea of Baroness O'Loan https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/stormont-assembly-to-sit-on-monday-to-discuss-abortion-reform-after-mlas-sign-recall-petition-38605559.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-50094689

From BBC article: Laws on abortion and same-sex marriage in Northern Ireland will change unless devolved Govt is restored by Monday. The recall will not affect the impending law changes as it would need a Northern Executive to be appointed too.

volchitsa · 19-10-2019 5:46pm

Igotadose wrote: »

Paywalled. Anyone with a summary? Thanks.

Not a summary but an extract:

The recent decline in Delaware’s abortion rate is pretty stunning. ... the biggest of any state in the country. It was also in keeping with a larger trend: The abortion rate has fallen to its lowest level since the Supreme Court legalized abortion nationwide, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

... Abortions don’t appear to be decreasing because of reduced access (although that is a problem in some places). The rate seems to be falling because of increased use of effective birth control.

That’s why I want to highlight Delaware. It has been arguably the most aggressive state in expanding access to long-acting forms of birth control, like IUDs and other implants. Less than a decade ago, Delaware had the nation’s highest rate of unplanned pregnancies, and its governor at the time — Jack Markell, a Democrat — came to believe it was a major cause of economic hardship for mothers and their families.

“We launched this effort several years ago because we feel so strongly about the link between unintended pregnancies and reduced economic opportunities,” Markell told me yesterday....

(Currently) When a woman of childbearing age goes to the doctor in most places, she gets standard queries about her smoking, drinking, seatbelt use and allergies. In Delaware, she is now also asked: ‘Do you want to get pregnant in the next year?’

If her answer is no, clinics are being trained to ensure she gets whatever form of birth control she wants that very day, whether a prescription or an implant in her arm. … Working with an organization called Upstream, Delaware has rolled out the program to nearly every medical provider in the state over the past three years. It’s having big effects on the number of women requesting and receiving contraception.

(...)
“Birth control pills are currently the most popular contraceptive among American women, followed by condoms. These methods are especially susceptible to human error and have high failure rates. Of 100 women who rely on birth control pills, about six get pregnant every year,” Sarah Kliff, then of Vox, wrote in 2016. “By contrast, long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) like IUDs and implants … are 20 times more effective at preventing pregnancy than the pill.”

(...)

Igotadose · 20-10-2019 3:54pm

So, by midnight today Abortion is Legal in NI.

What I'm finding amusing is that if NI aligns with UK in its abortion regulations (and there's no reason I can see that it wouldn't,) NI will have a far more liberal abortion regime than here in Ireland. Women might eventually travel north for their terminations. UK doesn't have the 3 day nonsense cooling off privilege, none of this 12 weeks or you need consultants, nada. Hopefully once NI is sorted ROI can progress its legislation.

per this article: https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/1021/1084614-stormont-assembly-abortion/

the anti-choice side in NI is going to do some grandstanding in Stormont, but the assembly won't be restored so the legislation goes into effect. And, most importantly: "If the Stormont Executive is restored at some point after tomorrow, MLAs will not be able to take retrospective action to block the Westminster legislation."

Of course, politicians can always make mischief. I expect a raft of litigation once women start asserting their rights in NI. Further, I don't know if the NHS in NI is equipped yet to provide termination services, and I expect the entrenched god-botherers in NI will do their nefarious best to delay, obstruct, ...

aloyisious · 21-10-2019 1:27pm

Sitting listening to RTE news. It seems the NI AG, John F Larkin, QC, is involved in the discussion in the assembly, hopefully he will advise those present that dissemblers there cannot overturn the legal effect of the incoming Westminster legislation which does away with the N/I law on abortion and gives same-sex marriage equality with straight marriage in civil law.

volchitsa · 21-10-2019 2:52pm

aloyisious wrote: »

Sitting listening to RTE news. It seems the NI AG, John F Larkin, QC, is involved in the discussion in the assembly, hopefully he will advise those present that dissemblers there cannot overturn the legal effect of the incoming Westminster legislation which does away with the N/I law on abortion and gives same-sex marriage equality with straight marriage in civil law.

You think Larkin is going to do anything other than take the prolife side? Why?

Igotadose · 21-10-2019 3:25pm

volchitsa wrote: »

You think Larkin is going to do anything other than take the prolife side? Why?

The pantomime assembly has apparently fallen apart. The SDLP showed up, sprayed, and left. So, onward to women's rights being supported in NI. Abortion services to be available in NI starting in April. As of tonight,
all the prosecutions under the barbaric abortion laws are abandoned, medical professionals can provide information to women, travel and accommodation costs covered regardless of income. FFA abortions can be performed in NI.

Oh, and same-sex marriage and opposite sex civil partnerships are legal now, too.

Great day for human rights in NI. Kind of hard to believe.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/1021/1084614-stormont-assembly-abortion/

volchitsa · 21-10-2019 4:36pm

DUP you mean, I think? The SDLP's official stance, as per Colm Eastwood, was that this was a stunt by the DUP. I know Daniel McCrossan said he was going but I think he's in a minority in that.

And yes, a great day for human rights and normal progressive attitudes in NI. And I'm still pinching myself too.

aloyisious · 21-10-2019 5:23pm

volchitsa wrote: »

You think Larkin is going to do anything other than take the prolife side? Why?

No, not Pro-life, just I think it would have been directly related to his job: The Attorney General for Northern Ireland is the chief legal adviser to the Northern Ireland Executive for both civil and criminal matters that fall within the devolved powers of the Northern Ireland Assembly.... That quote on AG's job is from Wiki.

I think his advice would have been along the lines of: there is no assembly, there is no devolved Govt, there can therefor be no legal devolved Govt or Assembly moves by people in Stormont against the legislation. It seems the SDLP walkout meant that there could be no way a vote could be taken on the appointment of a new speaker. No speaker = no assembly = no devolved Govt = DUP stalemated. Game time runs out at midnight. It Seems SF did not attend, though I'm not sure as I haven't heard anyone say yea or nay. SF stated the recall was a DUP stunt.

Funny thing is that the AG's job must also be part of the NI civil service to guarantee he still has a job when there is NO sitting Assembly or existing Devolved Govt.

Question: Does anyone have any info on Dawn McAvoy and Both Lives Matter: like how opposed they are to abortion? Her name popped up on a reply I got to a question I put to the net re the sitting.

Loafing Oaf · 21-10-2019 7:59pm

just some info on the 'interim' abortion regime in NI (according to the Irish News) that comes into effect at midnight

Legal abortions for those women who have received a diagnosis of a fatal or serious foetal abnormality
Women from the north will be able to travel for abortions to England and have their medical, travel and accommodation needs met
Doctors can inform or signpost women to services by supplying them with a phone number for a "central booking service" in England
Any previous cases brought in the north under the 1861 abortion act, including that of a mother who bought abortion pills online for her then 15-year-old daughter, will be dropped

Igotadose · 21-10-2019 8:02pm

aloyisious wrote: »

Question: Does anyone have any info on Dawn McAvoy and Both Lives Matter: like how opposed they are to abortion? Her name popped up on a reply I got to a question I put to the net re the sitting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Both_Lives_Matter

Pro-lifers, nothing particularly interesting about them, just one of many feeders at the pro-life trough.

aloyisious · 21-10-2019 8:09pm

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

just some info on the 'interim' abortion regime in NI (according to the Irish News) that comes into effect at midnight

Legal abortions for those women who have received a diagnosis of a fatal or serious foetal abnormality
Women from the north will be able to travel for abortions to England and have their medical, travel and accommodation needs met
Doctors can inform or signpost women to services by supplying them with a phone number for a "central booking service" in England
Any previous cases brought in the north under the 1861 abortion act, including that of a mother who bought abortion pills online for her then 15-year-old daughter, will be dropped

Re the doctors, I never put thought into how the medical professions were prevented by the law there from any sort of prescribing treatment for women seeking help on abortions. Its good to read about the cancellation of prosecutions. I think the woman who was the 15 year old girl had a case in the courts recently on the ban.

robindch · 22-10-2019 12:02am

Ding!

"Abortion: NI politicians' bid to halt law changes fails"

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-50115449

aloyisious · 22-10-2019 12:18pm

Just for historical research on the closure of the NI assembly [collapse of devolved govt] in 17 Jan 2017 and sittings from the election on 02 March 2017, I looked for sittings of it and found none despite talks between the parties over the two disputed points [language and fuel]. I noted that the number of MLA's was reduced by 18 [108 to 90] and that the Unionist majority was cut to 01.

It seems to me that despite the urgency of the abortion issue according to the DUP and others in the assembly, they were clearly unable to bring it to the floor in Stormont. They knew from July 17 this year the change was coming. Pressure on the UK Govt was there from July 2018 due to a UK Supreme Court decision on the matter and I think two votes were held [Nov 2017 & July 2018] on the issue of making changes to the law in N/I as the MLA was not doing so.

I listened to Baroness O'Loan today explaining how things had happened yesterday and I thought "what a load of unreality".

@volchitsa: Re the NI AG, my understanding of what he intended to do was wrong. He went to the assembly to tell those there that they could make changes in the chamber rules on sitting number and powers allotted them to affect the incoming Westminster legislation but the idea was blocked by the sitting speaker who informed those there that, due to house rules, he could not allow them to do anything. The speaker is Robin Newton, a DUP party member so I'd say he won't be popular in the Foster household or party HQ.

Odhinn · 22-10-2019 7:28pm

THE HOTTEST ticket on the island of Ireland in the wake of the legalisation of same-sex marriage and abortion in Northern Ireland is for a place in the queue to see the look on Arlene Foster’s face, WWN can reveal. With packed queues tailing back for 10 miles, Foster’s mug along with those of her DUP colleagues are for once in their political careers in high demand and a welcome sight, however, such is the demand that tickets are now rumoured to be selling for 5-figure sums.

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2019/10/22/ireland-queuing-to-see-the-look-on-arlene-fosters-face/?fbclid=IwAR2w0kIL7CZBOn6jCxGuhfKGmANKzPm0B87Qu22bbOAaeWDTZNotIbtktJo

Loafing Oaf · 23-10-2019 1:39pm

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/northern-irish-gps-face-legal-uncertainty-as-abortion-decriminalised-1.4059576

“It is the duty of citizens to hold their elected representatives accountable for the decisions they have made,” said the bishops, who particularly criticised Sinn Féin, Alliance, the SDLP and the Greens.

Kind of closing off voting options for your flock in NI there:p

Cabaal · 24-10-2019 8:48am

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/northern-irish-gps-face-legal-uncertainty-as-abortion-decriminalised-1.4059576

Kind of closing off voting options for your flock in NI there:p

and this,...

“The unavoidable truth is that our locally elected representatives had the time and the power to prevent this draconian Westminster abortion legislation being introduced over the heads of local citizens but chose not to do so.

and if the DUP would accept the Irish Language Act I'm sure they could have a government......so we're back to blaming the DUP

aloyisious · 26-10-2019 8:56am

The new non-prosecution outlook in N/I: https://www.thejournal.ie/northern-ireland-abortion-3-4863800-Oct2019/

Plus former PSNI Ombudsperson apologises for AND withdraws a claim she made a day earlier on Morning Ireland show that 90% of abortions in N/I were caused by use of the morninp-after pill following on from a fact-check of her statement: https://www.thejournal.ie/abortion/news/

Bredabe · 26-10-2019 12:56pm

aloyisious wrote: »

The new non-prosecution outlook in N/I: https://www.thejournal.ie/northern-ireland-abortion-3-4863800-Oct2019/

Plus former PSNI Ombudsperson apologises for AND withdraws a claim she made a day earlier on Morning Ireland show that 90% of abortions in N/I were caused by use of the morninp-after pill following on from a fact-check of her statement: https://www.thejournal.ie/abortion/news/

90% of abortions caused by MAP! sooooooooooo much I could say about this but I'll stick with :eek::eek::eek::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:.
I assume(hope) she was paid to say things like that and those aren't her working beliefs.

Abortion Discussion, Part the Fourth

Comments