Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Coir Argues Lisbon Will Introduce Abortion

Options
  • 28-05-2008 5:19am
    #1
    ,8,1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 256 ✭✭


    The Anti-Lisbon group Coir is among many who argue that Lisbon will introduce abortion to Ireland one way or another, because of the new powers it gives to the European Court of Justice and the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

    Fianna Fail responded yesterday saying this is not true, that the dated provisions of the Maastrict Treaty will save us from EU-imposed abortion on demand.

    Coir and others argue however that because our Constitution and Supreme Court will become subservient to their EU counterparts, the Maastrict provisions are no longer relevant.

    RTE did not provide an article on this story for some reason, but the 6.01 news clip is available for viewing.

    Someone's lying here, and my guess is that it's the supposedly conservative Fianna Fail.

    The abortion issue vis a vis Lisbon gets shot down very quickly. All of the nuances of the question should be properly debated, not least by our own Government and media. I myself believe the potential to force abortion on Ireland without a specific referendum is very real.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Moriarty
    Registered Users Posts: 6,007 ✭✭✭Moriarty


    ,8,1 wrote: »
    Coir and others argue however that because our Constitution and Supreme Court will become subservient to their EU counterparts, the Maastrict provisions are no longer relevant.

    "Will become"?

    Either they're not aware that the EU courts have had primacy over the Irish courts and constitution since 1973 when we became members of the EC - in which case they're woefully ill-informed and not worth listening to - or they're fully aware of this and are attempting to spread fear uncertainty and doubt amongst the population in which case they're not worth listening to.

    What do you think?


  • Options
    #3
    ,8,1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 256 ✭✭,8,1


    Not really valid Moriarty. While Ireland may have lost some primacy to the EU in 1973, I don't think it's anywhere near the scale that the Lisbon Treaty allows today.

    Either way any decisions made by an EU Court would have to go through the Irish Constitution. That is the fundamental point here. That process of passing the Irish Constitution and consulting the public is no longer required after Lisbon.

    Where a clash with our Constitutional "protection of the unborn" would invoke a referendum that will no longer be the case.

    The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights basically replaces the Rights Section of Bunreacht na hEireann, and the ECJ basically replaces the Supreme Court. That means loss of self-determination on a whole range of Constitutional issues, including abortion.


  • Options
    #4
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    ,8,1 wrote: »
    Not really valid Moriarty. While Ireland may have lost some primacy to the EU in 1973, I don't think it's anywhere near the scale that the Lisbon Treaty allows today.

    Either way any decisions made by an EU Court would have to go through the Irish Constitution. That is the fundamental point here. That process of passing the Irish Constitution and consulting the public is no longer required after Lisbon.

    Where a clash with our Constitutional "protection of the unborn" would invoke a referendum that will no longer be the case.

    The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights basically replaces the Rights Section of Bunreacht na hEireann, and the ECJ basically replaces the Supreme Court. That means loss of self-determination on a whole range of Constitutional issues, including abortion.

    I'd say you need to provide a bit more evidence here than a very loose assuertion.

    Have you read the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights?

    The Constitution cannot contradict itself and this means nothing of the sort. The EU treaty cannot override provisions of our constitution any more than they can prevent us having other constitutional referenda. I would suggest that if you want this tack to be taken seriously that a cogent argument might better serve your case than yet another scaremongering tactic.

    But if your issue here is with loss of primacy then why not run with that instead of the kitchen sink approach that the NO side has been using.


  • Options
    #5
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    is_that_so wrote: »
    Have you read the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights?
    Thats a funny question to be asking a fringe issue lobby like the pro life movement..
    They only want to scaremonger with wishy washy unbacked up generalisations like post one in this thread.

    I wish people making points would present facts and not fiction.
    Thankfully-most readers are inteligent and know rubbish when they see rubbish.
    FFS-the bit in our constitution regarding abortion is not being ammended by this treaty referendum.
    Thats being ignored here just as laughably in other threads our opt out of the common defense part of the treaty is.

    I suppose the idea by some aggitators is,if you repeat misinformation often enough people might get confused enough to believe it.
    I've more faith in peoples inteligence.


  • Options
    #6
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,075 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    This is in force post-Lisbon:
    ON ARTICLE 40.3.3 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF IRELAND


    THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES

    HAVE AGREED upon the following provision, which shall be annexed to the Treaty on European Union, to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community:

    Nothing in the Treaties, or in the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, or in the Treaties or Acts modifying or supplementing those Treaties, shall affect the application in Ireland of Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution of Ireland.

    Article 40.3.3 is the part of our constitution which covers abortion.

    So, anyone claiming that Lisbon will allow for abortion either has not read the treaty, has read the treaty and is too stupid to understand it or ignoring the truth for political purposes. Whichever reason it is, they're not worth listening to.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    ,8,1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 256 ✭✭,8,1


    They only want to scaremonger with wishy washy unbacked up generalisations like post one in this thread.

    I am not scaremongering. I am making reasonable predictions based on the content of the Lisbon Treaty. Of course the pro-abortion Yes side supported by Fianna Fail don't even want to hear that.
    FFS-the bit in our constitution regarding abortion is not being ammended by this treaty referendum.

    No, but it is being effectively made powerless. Why would the section on abortion in the Irish Constitution need to be modified in the first place? That just illustrates your lack of understanding. There's no need to change any element of our Constitution because it will all be stripped of authority after Lisbon.

    The new inserted clause on becoming subservient to the terms of the Lisbon Treaty does that.

    The Constitution of Ireland and the Supreme Court will no longer be the authority after Lisbon - the Fundamental Charter and the ECJ will.
    I suppose the idea by some aggitators is,if you repeat misinformation often enough people might get confused enough to believe it.
    I've more faith in peoples inteligence.

    And I suppose the best Yes approach is to just keep all these issues under the carpet until it is too late, all the while lazilly dissing naysayers , right?
    Have you read the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights?

    Thats a funny question to be asking a fringe issue lobby like the pro life movement..

    Yes I have, and it seems ready-made for an abortion case based on "privacy" or why a EU Citizen in Germany can't get an abortion in Ireland too.
    But if your issue here is with loss of primacy then why not run with that instead of the kitchen sink approach that the NO side has been using.

    I don't think so. Let's look at the real-life implications of loss of primacy, shall we? That is the sensible thing to do. Since loss of primacy on fundamental levels relating to our Constitution and Supreme Court has been determined, let's ask ourselves "what's coming next?"


  • Options
    #8
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ,8,1 wrote: »
    I am not scaremongering. I am making reasonable predictions based on the content of the Lisbon Treaty. Of course the passively pro-abortion Yes side supported don't even want to hear that.



    No, but it is being effectively made powerless. Why would the section on abortion in the Irish Constitution need to be modified in the first place? That just illustrates your lack of understanding. There's no need to change any element of our Constitution because it will all be stripped of authority after Lisbon.

    The Constitution of Ireland and the Supreme Court will no longer be the authority after Lisbon - the Fundamental Charter and the ECJ will.



    And I suppose the best Yes approach is to just keep all these issues under the carpet until it is too late, all the while lazilly dissing naysayers , right?



    Yes I have, and it seems ready-made for an abortion case based on "privacy" or why a EU Citizen in Germany can't get an abortion in Ireland too.
    To be frank with you,I've never understood this passion to keep "it" out of the island and ignore the fact that "it" is done in holyhead instead.Surely a soul in Ireland is no different than a soul in holy head.
    You've lost hearts and minds long ago on that one.It's like the condoms...
    I'm entirely unconvinced of your fears that "it" will be made available in the ROI as our constitution is prime here.
    Thirdly-the only thing stopping me as a citizen of this country from having an abortion is the fact that I'm a man.


  • Options
    #9
    Time Magazine
    Registered Users Posts: 8,452 ✭✭✭Time Magazine


    28.jpg

    Seriously, what more than a provision that says 40.3.3 is safe could you want?


  • Options
    #10
    Time Magazine
    Registered Users Posts: 8,452 ✭✭✭Time Magazine


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Thirdly-the only thing stopping me as a citizen of this country from having an abortion is the fact that I'm a man.

    You'd also need someone to sleep with you first, BB ;)


  • Options
    #11
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    ,8,1 wrote: »
    I am not scaremongering. I am making reasonable predictions based on the content of the Lisbon Treaty.
    Apart, of course, from the explicit statement in that Treaty that it won't have any effect on Ireland's constitutional position on abortion.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    ,8,1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 256 ✭✭,8,1


    To be frank with you,I've never understood this passion to keep "it" out of the island and ignore the fact that "it" is done in holyhead instead.

    This is the point isn't it; you're basically pro-abortion any way and you don't care if your weak assurances are wrong.

    The Irish people should know about the implications Lisbon has on abortion law in this country, they should have a right to know our Constitution and its provisions are being downgraded, regardless of the fact that you just happen to agree with legalised abortion.

    Abortion law, if it is to be changed in this country, should be done through a specific referendum presented to the public; not hamfisted by stealth with no discussion. If we adopt the Lisbon Treaty, it is the latter route we will be going down.

    Apart, of course, from the explicit statement in that Treaty that it won't have any effect on Ireland's constitutional position on abortion.

    There are some dated provisions from the 1992 Maastrict Treaty but I do not think they hold water in the new post-Lisbon legal landscape (which is radically different compared to 1992). The fact that the Irish Constitution and Supreme Court are becoming subservient to EU bodies changes the whole ballgame.
    http://www.ireland.com/cartoons/turner/2008/0528/28.jpg

    Seriously, what more than a provision that says 40.3.3 is safe could you want?

    Is that the best you can do? Wow, that's pathetic.


  • Options
    #13
    turgon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    I totally agree about abortion being in the treaty. Like, Kathy Sinnot just never lies so we can always trust her. The treaty also has a sub-clause of a sub-clause of a sub-clause of a sub-clause of a sub-clause that allows execution during war. But get this:

    The Lisbon Treaty will introduce compulsory contraception for cattle and pigs (only for Ireland and Bulgaria though), with a view to diminishing Ireland's agricultural capacity until 2020, when a general ban on livestock will come into effect. All unemployed farmers from this measure will be forced then to move to Germany to work in weapons factories and military shipyards. These measures will complement the new ban on eating meat and rare species of broccoli, a ban being put in 10 member states only. The uneaten broccoli will then be enriched into weapons grade chlorophyll, which will be manufactured into explosives, and used to make Switzerland into a lake.

    Its all true I swear. Just ask Kathy Sinnot and Libertas, their bound to back me up ;)


  • Options
    #14
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    turgon wrote: »
    I totally agree about abortion being in the treaty. Like, Kathy Sinnot just never lies so we can always trust her. The treaty also has a sub-clause of a sub-clause of a sub-clause of a sub-clause of a sub-clause that allows execution during war. But get this:

    The Lisbon Treaty will introduce compulsory contraception for cattle and pigs (only for Ireland and Bulgaria though), with a view to diminishing Ireland's agricultural capacity until 2020, when a general ban on livestock will come into effect. All unemployed farmers from this measure will be forced then to move to Germany to work in weapons factories and military shipyards. These measures will complement the new ban on eating meat and rare species of broccoli, a ban being put in 10 member states only. The uneaten broccoli will then be enriched into weapons grade chlorophyll, which will be manufactured into explosives, and used to make Switzerland into a lake.

    Its all true I swear. Just ask Kathy Sinnot and Libertas, their bound to back me up ;)

    I am Kathy Sinnot-and-Libertas, and I endorse this statement.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw
    hmm...damn, that's a bit of a giveaway...


  • Options
    #15
    BMH
    Closed Accounts Posts: 804 ✭✭✭BMH


    ,8,1 wrote: »
    The Irish people should know about the implications Lisbon has on abortion law in this country, they should have a right to know our Constitution and its provisions are being downgraded, regardless of the fact that you just happen to agree with legalised abortion.
    Numerous replies have been made, backed up with evidence, that show that these "implications" are non-existant.
    ,8,1 wrote: »
    Abortion law, if it is to be changed in this country, should be done through a specific referendum presented to the public; not hamfisted by stealth with no discussion. If we adopt the Lisbon Treaty, it is the latter route we will be going down.
    You have no evidence of this.
    ,8,1 wrote: »
    There are some dated provisions from the 1992 Maastrict Treaty but I do not think they hold water in the new post-Lisbon legal landscape (which is radically different compared to 1992). The fact that the Irish Constitution and Supreme Court are becoming subservient to EU bodies changes the whole ballgame.
    You have no idea what you're talking about, so perhaps you should listen to someone else instead. It's pretty hard to be unambiguously wrong with regards a political opinion but you seem to have managed it.


  • Options
    #16
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    ,8,1 wrote: »
    This is the point isn't it; you're basically pro-abortion any way and you don't care if your weak assurances are wrong.
    Don't personalise the debate. This is your only warning.
    Is that the best you can do? Wow, that's pathetic.
    Is there, or is there not, a protocol in the treaty that explicitly recognises the relevant section of our constitution and explicitly states that the treaty has no affect on it?


  • Options
    #17
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ,8,1 wrote: »
    This is the point isn't it; you're basically pro-abortion any way and you don't care if your weak assurances are wrong.
    Actually I'm quite anti abortion in most cases.
    The Irish people should know about the implications Lisbon has on abortion law in this country, they should have a right to know our Constitution and its provisions are being downgraded, regardless of the fact that you just happen to agree with legalised abortion.
    Give facts please not baseless opinion.
    I can categorically say our constitution cannot be over rode by an EU treaty-thats why we are voting to accept this treaty ffs!
    This treaty specefically contains a line that could not be simpler outlining it's agreement with our current constitutional position on abortion.
    You cannot insert a piece into a constitution that directly conflicts with another part of it.
    Abortion law, if it is to be changed in this country, should be done through a specific referendum presented to the public; not hamfisted by stealth with no discussion. If we adopt the Lisbon Treaty, it is the latter route we will be going down.
    How?
    Pretend I'm at the doorstep and you have to convince me.
    Now I'm waiting.
    There are some dated provisions from the 1992 Maastrict Treaty but I do not think they hold water in the new post-Lisbon legal landscape (which is radically different compared to 1992). The fact that the Irish Constitution and Supreme Court are becoming subservient to EU bodies changes the whole ballgame.
    Frankly thats Bull and I'd be surprised if you think that I wouldn't think that you are deliberately repeating that misinformation.
    It is impossible for a treaty to do the opposite of what a treaty says it will do without there being a new treaty.
    This treaty is explicit on our constitutional position on abortion.
    It's that simple.
    Is that the best you can do? Wow, that's pathetic.
    Frankly-You are not in a position to describe as pathetic something presented to you as a plain irrefutable fact when your essays so far are devoid of all facts.


  • Options
    #18
    turgon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    Not taking sides, I'm just putting this out there. The proposed amendment of the constitution includes (as the constitution always has) the following text
    Proposed amendment wrote:
    No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union referred to in subsection 10 of this section, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the said European Union or by institutions thereof, or by bodies competent under the treaties referred to in this section, from having the force of law in the State.

    I just don't know how abortion fits in here. Maybe theres some veto Ireland has at EU level. I just don't have a clue, but posted just to add the quote and see what can be made of it.


  • Options
    #19
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    What part of
    Nothing in the Treaties, or in the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, or in the Treaties or Acts modifying or supplementing those Treaties, shall affect the application in Ireland of Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution of Ireland.
    is unclear?


  • Options
    #20
    IRLConor
    Subscribers Posts: 4,075 ✭✭✭IRLConor


    turgon wrote: »
    Not taking sides, I'm just putting this out there. The proposed amendment of the constitution includes (as the constitution always has) the following text
    No provision of this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by the obligations of membership of the European Union referred to in subsection 10 of this section, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the said European Union or by institutions thereof, or by bodies competent under the treaties referred to in this section, from having the force of law in the State.

    I just don't know how abortion fits in here. Maybe theres some veto Ireland has at EU level. I just don't have a clue, but posted just to add the quote and see what can be made of it.

    Even though that bit is in force, the EU still can't use it to bring in abortion into Ireland since they have (in the bit I quoted above in post 6) prohibited themselves from doing so.

    The portion you quoted above says that EU laws aren't affected by our constitution. However, to make an EU law which contravenes Article 40.3.3 is impossible since they've agreed not to.


  • Options
    #21
    ,8,1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 256 ✭✭,8,1


    I totally agree about abortion being in the treaty. Like, Kathy Sinnot just never lies so we can always trust her. The treaty also has a sub-clause of a sub-clause of a sub-clause of a sub-clause of a sub-clause that allows execution during war. But get this:

    The Lisbon Treaty will introduce compulsory contraception for cattle and pigs (only for Ireland and Bulgaria though), with a view to diminishing Ireland's agricultural capacity until 2020, when a general ban on livestock will come into effect.
    Its all true I swear. Just ask Kathy Sinnot and Libertas, their bound to back me up

    I am Kathy Sinnot-and-Libertas, and I endorse this statement.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw
    hmm...damn, that's a bit of a giveaway...

    Is cheap sarcasm the Yes side's only currency of argument?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ,8,1 wrote: »
    Is cheap sarcasm the Yes side's only currency of argument?
    Well they have facts aswell.I'd advise ignoring both though if they trouble your conscience that much.
    In my opinion though if you have to resort to that course of action somethings wrong.


  • Options
    #23
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,792 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Thread closed. ,8,1 - this is a discussion forum. If you don't want a discussion, go somewhere else.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement