The Students' Union & Abortion

andrew

I think having been born is a nice line. If a foetus has been born (ie. left the womb) then it's alive. If the foetus hasn't been born, then its not alive and never has been, so it's alright to abort it. This whole drawing the line at x weeks is a rubbish cop out IMO.

claire h

AlanSparrowhawk wrote: »

As a last resort, any sort of unexpected unprotected sex or times of uncertainty can be remedied, quite easily imo, with the 'morning after pill'.

Pregnancy is always a risk and consequence of sex between 2 virile fertile young things but we all know this.

Unplanned pregnancies do happen. We know this.

Abortion is the last resort. Ideally no one would be in position where they had to make a decision about whether or not to carry a baby to term, but sometimes they do find themselves in that position. The idea that there are a whole lot of people who don't want to let people make that decision - that there are a whole lot of men in particular who can't quite bring themselves to let women have control over their own bodies and their own choices and then moralise in the most sanctimous self-righteous way possible - is terrifying and disgusting and unfortunately all too real.

So very very very glad I have never got knocked up by anyone who thinks the way the "abortion is murder" folks in this thread do. I so very much hope you tell any girl you sleep with, regardless of whether you're using several kinds of contraception or not, that you have these opinions. That you don't think that girl has the right to make a decision about her own body and her own life. That you think you, as someone who's never going to have to make that decision, are in such a position of moral superiority that you can say no one should ever be able to make that decision because you've decided that choosing whether or not to bring a baby into the world is something that women have no right to do. You want to talk about 'sanctity of life' when you've pretty much decided that half the species isn't intelligent enough to make a decision for themselves? You want to sleep with someone you don't think deserves a say in whether or not she has a baby? And then you want to pretend you're decent human beings instead of self-righteous misogynists? Really?

(Cue tedious and predictable 'accusations' of feminism, blah blah blah.)

ApeXaviour

Liquorice wrote:

I hope all the lads who are RARRGH NO ABORTION either aren't doing the horizontal tango with anyone or else have agreements with the lassie over what will happen if your seed takes seed.

Liquorice wrote: »

I just noticed that plenty of lads here seemed to have strong opinions on abortion & I'm just curious as to whether they would refuse to have a sexual relationship with someone who isn't also against abortion, or whether they'd trust contraception enough in such a situation, or if they're totally celibate, or what.

I don't think being able or allowed to personally assess whether abortion is ethically acceptable should require the possession of a womb as a prerequisite.
To give an analogy, I'm not old, terminally ill or in the medical profession. But I still think I could speak with moderate depth on the implications and issues surrounding euthanasia, and proceed to take a thought out stance on the issue.

I'm not sure what exactly you are asking. I agree with Alan's first statement, it appears to be a veiled swipe at men. With care from both parties in the area of contraception, the risk of pregnancy should be minimised.

In the case that pregnancy does occur, yes women carry the physical burden, but with it they have complete authority and control, and men have no say... If the woman decides to carry the child to term against the man's wishes, he is left with a huge long term financial burden. He is forced into fatherhood in a way that a woman simply can't be (forced into motherhood). I'm not suggesting it should be any other way, I'm just trying to show that it is not by any means burdenless for the father.
The other scenario is where a budding father-to-be is of the belief that abortion is ethically reprehensible, and then the foetus is terminated against his wishes. Something again that simply can't happen to women in this society. Even if he was pro-choice, I would think his level of disturbance would be comparable to that of a miscarriage.
Edit: again, not suggesting it should be otherwise. But at least let men have their opinions, and not dismiss them because they are men. In the case of unplanned pregnancy, they are in a very real, and potentially a very life altering situation too, except they have no choice.

dan719

claire h wrote: »

Unplanned pregnancies do happen. We know this.

Abortion is the last resort. Ideally no one would be in position where they had to make a decision about whether or not to carry a baby to term, but sometimes they do find themselves in that position. The idea that there are a whole lot of people who don't want to let people make that decision - that there are a whole lot of men in particular who can't quite bring themselves to let women have control over their own bodies and their own choices and then moralise in the most sanctimous self-righteous way possible - is terrifying and disgusting and unfortunately all too real.

So very very very glad I have never got knocked up by anyone who thinks the way the "abortion is murder" folks in this thread do. I so very much hope you tell any girl you sleep with, regardless of whether you're using several kinds of contraception or not, that you have these opinions. That you don't think that girl has the right to make a decision about her own body and her own life. That you think you, as someone who's never going to have to make that decision, are in such a position of moral superiority that you can say no one should ever be able to make that decision because you've decided that choosing whether or not to bring a baby into the world is something that women have no right to do. You want to talk about 'sanctity of life' when you've pretty much decided that half the species isn't intelligent enough to make a decision for themselves? You want to sleep with someone you don't think deserves a say in whether or not she has a baby? And then you want to pretend you're decent human beings instead of self-righteous misogynists? Really?

(Cue tedious and predictable 'accusations' of feminism, blah blah blah.)

I am pro choice but I find your attitude disgusting tbh. A woman has every right to do what she wishes with her body, but if she becomes pregnant the father is also entitled to have some say in her decision to have an abortion. The fetus has the potential to become a human life and if a man is willing to take responsibility for that life, he has to have some right to do so.

Of course if that is not the case then I can't see any argument as to why a father should have to be involved in the financial costs of raising a child. If a woman is the sole holder of the 'right to decide', then she is sure as hell the only person who has any responsibilities due to her decision.

of course in today's uber PC world to accuse women of being selfish, hypocritical and arrogant just isn't on.

P.S Your attitude isn't feminist in the sense of equality between the sexes (i.e. original feminism). Rather your attitude is that of the modern femme terrorist, who is convinced that as a result of previous patriarch dominance it is time to become (excusing the language) 'ball-busters'. Men and woman have different strengths and weaknesses, and diffferent roles within society. If that isn't the case, why isn;t there a load of female blockies/labourers etc on the dole.

Agent Smith

Personally, i'm Pro-life, however i do think for the general Population, Abortion should be Safe, legal and Rare.

(cant remember where i heard that, it could even have been the west wing)


interesting legal Question. is there any legal basis where you are breaking the law by traveling to another duristiction to do something /have something that is illegal here? Not nessisarly abortion, but in general.

ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI

Agent Smith wrote: »

Personally, i'm Pro-life, however i do think for the general Population, Abortion should be Safe, legal and Rare.

(cant remember where i heard that, it could even have been the west wing)


interesting legal Question. is there any legal basis where you are breaking the law by traveling to another duristiction to do something /have something that is illegal here? Not nessisarly abortion, but in general.

I don't believe so, no, not in general. Though in special cases things have been explicitly made illegal, for example, recently the law was changed so that if you go to another country and have sex with someone who is over the age of consent in their country but not in Ireland, it is illegal.

AlanSparrowhawk

claire h wrote: »

(Cue tedious and predictable 'accusations' of feminism, blah blah blah.)

It's a bit early in the thread for name calling.

claire h

dan719 wrote: »

I am pro choice but I find your attitude disgusting tbh. A woman has every right to do what she wishes with her body, but if she becomes pregnant the father is also entitled to have some say in her decision to have an abortion. The fetus has the potential to become a human life and if a man is willing to take responsibility for that life, he has to have some right to do so.

Are you seriously, genuinely and truly saying, that if a woman doesn't want to carry a baby to term and the father wants her to, she should have to?

I think in a healthy relationship, women will discuss with their partners what they want to do and take their opinions into account. But ultimately it's still their body until the baby's born. And almost always they will be the one left with the responsibilities of minding the child if the relationship breaks up (which is, of course, a separate though related issue). If a man is completely opposed to abortion to the point where he would a) leave someone for having an abortion or b) emotionally blackmail or manipulate someone into not having an abortion despite their wishes, that is something he needs to discuss with - and warn - future partners about before sleeping with them.

It's a different situation where a couple have agreed to have a child and then the relationship breaks up and (almost always) the woman is left with a child to support. For starters, the child's born. It exists. It's a separate entity. It is physically possible for parenting to be shared equally. I would like to think that in a world, and in a country, where options were more readily available - where abortion was free and legal and safe, where the morning-after pill was not available only on prescription (which is disgraceful), where sterilisation for both sexes was more affordable and safe, etc, situations where men didn't want to have children couldn't be resolved by pointing to conception as the moment choices were made and that there could be a way of ensuring that women who opted to have a child regardless of the father's wishes couldn't then turn around and demand money from him. Deciding not to have a child is quite different from deciding to have a child: the latter brings another person into the world who has to be taken care of. If two people promise to take care of that child, then they should absolutely be held to that promise. But it would be nice if they had the opportunity to make that promise, instead of the assumption that it was made when they slept together.

AlanSparrowhawk

Agent Smith wrote: »

Personally, i'm Pro-life, however i do think for the general Population, Abortion should be Safe, legal and Rare.

In your case I'd definitely legalize abortion.

AlanSparrowhawk

claire h wrote: »

Are you seriously, genuinely and truly saying, that if a woman doesn't want to carry a baby to term and the father wants her to, she should have to?

I think in a healthy relationship, women will discuss with their partners what they want to do and take their opinions into account. But ultimately it's still their body until the baby's born. And almost always they will be the one left with the responsibilities of minding the child if the relationship breaks up (which is, of course, a separate though related issue). If a man is completely opposed to abortion to the point where he would a) leave someone for having an abortion or b) emotionally blackmail or manipulate someone into not having an abortion despite their wishes, that is something he needs to discuss with - and warn - future partners about before sleeping with them.

It's a different situation where a couple have agreed to have a child and then the relationship breaks up and (almost always) the woman is left with a child to support. For starters, the child's born. It exists. It's a separate entity. It is physically possible for parenting to be shared equally. I would like to think that in a world, and in a country, where options were more readily available - where abortion was free and legal and safe, where the morning-after pill was not available only on prescription (which is disgraceful), where sterilisation for both sexes was more affordable and safe, etc, situations where men didn't want to have children couldn't be resolved by pointing to conception as the moment choices were made and that there could be a way of ensuring that women who opted to have a child regardless of the father's wishes couldn't then turn around and demand money from him. Deciding not to have a child is quite different from deciding to have a child: the latter brings another person into the world who has to be taken care of. If two people promise to take care of that child, then they should absolutely be held to that promise. But it would be nice if they had the opportunity to make that promise, instead of the assumption that it was made when they slept together.

if this subject is a little too personal and evocative for you to discuss maturely perhaps you should reconsider contributing.

dan719

claire h wrote: »

Are you seriously, genuinely and truly saying, that if a woman doesn't want to carry a baby to term and the father wants her to, she should have to?

If a woman wants to carry a pregnancy to term and a father is against it then should the father have to financially support that child by law?

They are the same question. I am not claiming that a father's opinion has the same weight as that of the mothers, but it does have some weight.

Also in regard to your questions a) and b);

a) A man has every right to leave a women if she an abortion. If a man sees that as murder (and he might) well then why should he be expected to continue a relationship with her? Do you think a women should be exempt from any and all consequences stemming from her decision?

b) Emotional blackmail has no place in a relationship. However I find women are far more adept at it than men.

Pet

AlanSparrowhawk wrote: »

if this subject is a little too personal and evocative for you to discuss maturely perhaps you should reconsider contributing.

Whoah, that's....possibly the most patronising thing I've ever seen you write, Kev. But then, you are the most sexist person I've ever, ever encountered. Even my grandfather was more enlightened than you.

claire h

dan719 wrote: »

If a woman wants to carry a pregnancy to term and a father is against it then should the father have to financially support that child by law?

They are the same question. I am not claiming that a father's opinion has the same weight as that of the mothers, but it does have some weight.

They're not the same question, actually. But I'm agreeing with the idea of fathers not having to support that child by law in those particular circumstances.

claire h wrote:

[In a world]... where options were more readily available...situations where men didn't want to have children couldn't be resolved by pointing to conception as the moment choices were made and ...there could be a way of ensuring that women who opted to have a child regardless of the father's wishes couldn't then turn around and demand money from him.

a) A man has every right to leave a women if she an abortion. If a man sees that as murder (and he might) well then why should he be expected to continue a relationship with her? Do you think a women should be exempt from any and all consequences stemming from her decision?

Oh, he absolutely does, yes. But what I'm saying is that he should tell her before they get into a situation where she might have to make a decision about having an abortion. That she should know before having sex with him that if she firmly believes in her right to have an abortion if she so chooses, it will mean ending her relationship with him. That she can make decisions accordingly. I'm not suggesting she be exempt from the consequences of deciding whether or not to have an abortion by any means.

Alansparrowhawk banned for a week. Pet, cop on - report posts if you've a problem with them.

In order to allow an adult debate I'm leaving the thread open but seriously, if people can't do this I've no problem in closing it.

dan719

claire h wrote: »

They're not the same question, actually. But I'm agreeing with the idea of fathers not having to support that child by law in those particular circumstances.





Oh, he absolutely does, yes. But what I'm saying is that he should tell her before they get into a situation where she might have to make a decision about having an abortion. That she should know before having sex with him that if she firmly believes in her right to have an abortion if she so chooses, it will mean ending her relationship with him. That she can make decisions accordingly. I'm not suggesting she be exempt from the consequences of deciding whether or not to have an abortion by any means.

It is the converse of the question, at least as I see it.

Do you honestly believe that a man should tell a woman before sleeping with her his stance on abortion? What else should adults disclose? How realistic is this stance in a society where one night stands are common place?

P.S Donal would you mind banning me until next Fri, as otherwise I will quite possibly fail my repeats. Bear in mind I voted you 'most helpful'.;) *Unashamedly sucking up*

claire h

dan719 wrote: »

Do you honestly believe that a man should tell a woman before sleeping with her his stance on abortion? What else should adults disclose? How realistic is this stance in a society where one night stands are common place?

So you think a guy who has a one-night stand with a girl he didn't bother to discuss his beliefs with should have the right to make sure she carries his kid to full term? I don't think it's too much to expect that adults discuss certain topics before sleeping together. No, it doesn't always happen, and yes, much of my argument has been assuming that these are people in a relationship rather than two people who slept together. Because the idea of someone ever thinking they had the right to force nine months of pregnancy onto someone they had a one-night stand with is pretty appalling. And I'm having trouble believing that anyone really thinks that a scenario like that would be anything but horrible.

ALincoln

Why should the SU take a neutral stance...when sometimes it is a perfectly appropriate solution?

Also, it is absolutely legal to distribute information regarding abortion.

Thirdfox

claire h wrote: »

So you think a guy who has a one-night stand with a girl he didn't bother to discuss his beliefs with should have the right to make sure she carries his kid to full term? I don't think it's too much to expect that adults discuss certain topics before sleeping together. No, it doesn't always happen, and yes, much of my argument has been assuming that these are people in a relationship rather than two people who slept together. Because the idea of someone ever thinking they had the right to force nine months of pregnancy onto someone they had a one-night stand with is pretty appalling. And I'm having trouble believing that anyone really thinks that a scenario like that would be anything but horrible.

I wasn't going to contribute anything until I read your post Claire and I must say I find your views quite repugnant. Thank goodness we've moved on from cases like Nicolaou v. An Bord Uchtala where “it is rare for a natural father to take any interest in his offspring”. Unmarried/married fathers nowadays have just a tiny bit more rights as to their offspring and society recognises that no, a man isn't strange for having an interest in his child.

Though I am personally pro-life (a misnomer as I believe the other side isn't really "pro-death" nor am I "anti-choice"), I do believe that abortion should be legalised for those who feel they have no other options here in Ireland - similar to Agent Smith's view - let's minimise the need for them.

As for discussing abortion before sleeping with someone - I wonder have you ever done that with in previous relationships you had? I certainly have not, yet I suppose by choosing the partners I have they know that if I ever impregnated anyone I would stand by the consequences and would expect them to do so too (and also that I would take all precaution not to impregnate someone until it was the correct time to start a family).

Not all men are beasts who wish to simply bed as many women as they can. Some (quite a few?) are responsible people who would feel tremendous pain at the thought of having to lose a child. In your post you seem to make a mockery of how the father may feel about an abortion, and that his opinions are worthless - I would like to inform you that, though it may have happened that I have XY chromosomes instead of XX ones, I would feel just as devastated emotionally (though not physically obviously) as a girl who has just lost her child. The legal situation in most common-law countries around the world leaves a lot to be deserved in terms of paternal rights in my opinion.

I would have more to say but really, I hope I have conveyed enough of my feelings across to you - though I suppose I should address your last post - turning the question on its head (though I'm not a big supporter of one night stands anyway) - so you think that a girl who has one night stands should be given the sole responsibility of deciding whether or not to abort/kill/remove a foetus/child?

And to make sure we don't get side-tracked - I have no problems with the SU giving advice about abortion to the student populace. The more info the better I think. Let people make informed choices about something that will have a potentially huge impact on their lives.

shay_562

I'm indecisive about how I feel about abortion on a personal level, largely because I'm aware that I'll never have to make a real decision on it - I'm not a woman, nor will I ever get a woman pregnant. (Except for Eliza Dushku. Man, I would get her so pregnant...)

So I'm just chiming in to say that I think claire h was right a few pages back when she pointed out how twisted it is that it tends, quite often, to be men who are the most fervently anti-abortion when they're the ones who suffer the least of the consequences. In the real world, it's women who have to carry the child and give birth to it, and women who (in the vast majority of cases) end up doing the bulk of looking after the child afterwards. The lack of fathers' rights cuts both ways - while I agree with Thirdfox and Dan that there are many good fathers who will feel the loss of a child just as acutely as the mother, it's also much easier for men to cut and run if raising the child gets to be too much for them, with much less social stigma attached to men who abandon their children than women. As Dan said, the sexes aren't equal, in biology or in societal treatment.

So since it's the woman who'll have to take on the bulk of the burden, and women who ultimately get to make the decision in a practical sense (which I agree on some level sucks for the dad, but on another level is the only solution that doesn't involve chaining your pregnant girlfriend in a closet for 9 months to stop her getting an abortion), I reckon it should be each individual woman's choice to deal with the complex moral issue of abortion as she sees fit.

As for how any of this ties into the SU, I don't think any Welfare Officer ever has been "pro-abortion" - none of them would greet a pregnant student with "Hey! Have you heard about all the great benefits of abortion?". But I think that part of being a good welfare officer involves informing students about all the care options available to them - one of which, for better or worse, is travelling to England to have an abortion.

j1smithy

Bartron Prime wrote: »

Man did THAT go off-topic fast.

The SU is not strictly 'neutral' in this area. Following a referendum many years ago, policy from which can obviously be overturned by another referendum, TCDSU is pro-choice.

I think this highlights perfectly two of the biggest problems with TCDSU and SU's in general. The SU should have no policy older than 4 years, referendum or not its an entirely different student body they represent with different old values imposed upon them without a say.

Secondly, it shows the SUs willingness to take a political stance in an issue that has nothing to do with them and no benefit to the student body, just like the coke ban or the flag. Yes the welfare officer should provide all information to those seeking advice that she can legally. It should stay out of national issues and focus on providing student services and dealing with student issues, what they are paid to do.

Instead what you get are Bacik like folk who use the organisation to promote their own ideology. The whole lot should be cleaned out and started from scratch.

Brian

shay_562 wrote: »

I'm indecisive about how I feel about abortion on a personal level, largely because I'm aware that I'll never have to make a real decision on it - I'm not a woman, nor will I ever get a woman pregnant. (Except for Eliza Dushku. Man, I would get her so pregnant...)

Is this some kind of vengeful impregnation for effing up Dollhouse?

@j1smithy - if the SU were to start tabula rasa every 4 years, students would get even less done thanks to the Union, due to having to vote in continual referenda over whether or not to sell lollipops on campus.

johnl

AlanSparrowhawk wrote: »

if this subject is a little too personal and evocative for you to discuss maturely perhaps you should reconsider contributing.

A candidate for the post of the year.

Kopf

Dónal wrote: »

Alansparrowhawk banned for a week. Pet, cop on - report posts if you've a problem with them.

In order to allow an adult debate I'm leaving the thread open but seriously, if people can't do this I've no problem in closing it.

You tell 'em, Dode!

Tricity Bendix

Baza210 wrote: »

vengeful impregnation

lol.

shay_562

Baza210 wrote:

Is this some kind of vengeful impregnation for effing up Dollhouse?

Haven't watched Dollhouse yet. I'm too afraid - my love for Eliza Dushku (stemming largely from Faith, and a little bit from Bring It On) can't take another Wrong Turn/Tru Calling-esque battering, and it seems a pity to let go of the last lingering threads of my heterosexuality for the sake of a TV show.

j1smithy wrote:

Secondly, it shows the SUs willingness to take a political stance in an issue that has nothing to do with them and no benefit to the student body, just like the coke ban or the flag. Yes the welfare officer should provide all information to those seeking advice that she can legally. It should stay out of national issues and focus on providing student services and dealing with student issues, what they are paid to do.

One could argue that a system that forces impoverished students to pay for a trip to England in order to gain access to a medical procedure that's perfectly legal in almost every other developed country is a 'student issue'. Women are most likely to get an abortion in their teens or early 20s (because they're poorer and less capable of raising a child). Students tend to be in their teens or early 20s. To say that there's no issue of student welfare or student-related issues in the abortion debate is just kinda wrong.

johnl wrote:

AlanSparrowhawk wrote:

if this subject is a little too personal and evocative for you to discuss maturely perhaps you should reconsider contributing.

A candidate for the post of the year.

Yeah, nothing says "post of the year" like patronising, borderline-misogynistic twaddle. Woop, etc. (I say "misogynistic" not because I'm a crazy feminist, but because it seems a tad dodge that just about the only girl to contribute to the abortion conversation has a man almost immediately turn around and tell her she's being too emotional and immature, while being cheered on by a bunch of slack-jawed lackeys, also male)

jingx3

Black king captures white knight.

Captain Flaps

It kind of amazes me that anyone would object to people getting as much information from both sides as possible. I don't see how the SU giving out information about Abortion services could possibly be construed as promoting Abortion. I mean, this isn't 1950's Catholic Ireland.

Coming to a decision about an unwanted pregnancy is tough enough without a million interest groups pushing their own agenda on you. I'd agree with ZWEI VIER ZWEI in that I think the pro-choice side IS more neutral; all the info, make up your own mind. Most (not all, and please don't feel that I'm generalising) pro-lifers I've ever spoken to seem determined to highlight how abortion is evil etc etc etc, without any firmer stance than "You're killing babies, you monster" etc.

I'd consider myself pro-choice, but I'm completely against using abortion as a form of contraception. It should be a difficult process to discourage people who won't necessarily appreciate that it's a pretty big deal.

Boston

shay_562 wrote: »

Yeah, nothing says "post of the year" like patronising, borderline-misogynistic twaddle. Woop, etc. (I say "misogynistic" not because I'm a crazy feminist, but because it seems a tad dodge that just about the only girl to contribute to the abortion conversation has a man almost immediately turn around and tell her she's being too emotional and immature, while being cheered on by a bunch of slack-jawed lackeys, also male)

We all as men, but mostly as bastards, need to change our ways.

ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI

Boston wrote: »

We all as men, but mostly as bastards, need to change our ways.

What a horrible woman...

All I read was "Nag nag nag, moan moan moan, oh, did I tell you about the time I was almost raped?"

Ron DMC

ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI wrote: »

What a horrible woman...

All I read was "Nag nag nag, moan moan moan, oh, did I tell you about the time I was almost raped?"

And did you see her photo? :O

Man, feminists annoy me.