Abortion under the spotlight in the European Court of Human Rights

prinz

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

Does that not sound a bit silly considering a court of human rights just found the Irish Government guilty of breaching a womans human rights by forcing her to go to England for abortion?

They also found against two other women. Either way the ECtHR have just basically instructed the Government to clarify a messy situation and to comply with the law as it stands.

silverspoon

donfers wrote: »

*sigh*

the point I am trying to make is surely the "pro-choicers" wanted a preferable outcome than that which says "things are fine as they are in Ireland, all youz need to do is implement the changes suggested in 92 referndum"

that this result is being distorted as a victory for the "pro-choicers" is interesting as nothing has really changed

That's not the point I read you as making, and I still don't see that in your original post but fine.

I don't see it as a victory for 'pro-choicers' - I see it as a good outcome in ensuring laws recognised theoretically by the government are actually enacted and enabled. I'm glad that the ECHR did not attempt to extend the current status of abortion in Ireland because I don't think that it is something they should have any part of. It is a decision for the Irish people to make. I could not respect a decision made for us by the ECHR - either pro-life/choice - as it would have zero legitimacy.

You confuse me since your original point seemed to be that a decision like that was what the ECHR tried to do, and your response to my post was that the ECHR have effectively changed nothing.

common sense brigade

How in the world do you think pro-choice means pro-abortion. I know tons of people who would never have an abortion but would be pro-choice.

Point taken did not mean to insult I meant pro-chice! but it kinda amounts to the same thing doesnt it ?. I mean if you pro choice is that not a way of making yourself feel better than saying pro abortion. pro choice is easier to swallow maybe? then pro abortion. I know what your saying, you prob will never have an abortion but you dont mind if it happens next door...that kinda thing?

scientific1982

dizzywizlw wrote: »

Of course you then have to predict what 'all human life' will mean in the future.

Life begins at conception is a belief system not a fact...

No, you're wrong there. It is absolutely a fact that life begins at conception. If you're of the opposite opinion, then you lack even the most rudimentary knowledge of sexual reproduction.

rossie1977

bout time, every woman should have a choice about what happens with her own body

like someone said earlier, you against abortion don't get one but don't force your ideals and morals on everyone else

scientific1982

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

Does that not sound a bit silly considering a court of human rights just found the Irish Government guilty of breaching a womans human rights by forcing her to go to England for abortion?

Nope. Because thats just an opinion of a court of law. Opinions change over time.

prinz

rossie1977 wrote: »

like someone said earlier, you against abortion don't get one but don't force your ideals and morals on everyone else

I am against pyramid schemes and internet phishing scams too. Am I allowed to have an opinion on those?

The Waltzing Consumer

common sense brigade wrote: »

Point taken did not mean to insult I meant pro-chice! but it kinda amounts to the same thing doesnt it ?. I mean if you pro choice is that not a way of making yourself feel better than saying pro abortion. pro choice is easier to swallow maybe? then pro abortion.

Eh, no. But if that is your logic, I might as well call pro-lifers religious nutbags, selfish, interfering, busy bodies, who should mind their own f**king business.
But yeah, maybe saying pro-life is easier to swallow maybe?

silverspoon

common sense brigade wrote: »

Point taken did not mean to insult I meant pro-chice! but it kinda amounts to the same thing doesnt it ?. I mean if you pro choice is that not a way of making yourself feel better than saying pro abortion. pro choice is easier to swallow maybe? then pro abortion.

No - pro-abortion would theoretically be - if a pregnant woman is deliberating on her options, these being, keep the baby and raise it herself, have the baby and adopt it, and have an abortion, the pro-abortionist is touting the merits of abortion. Which is crazy, if the woman wants to, say adopt it.

Pro-choice is the idea that a pregnant woman, deliberating on her options, who wants an abortion, should have the freedom to choose that option.

There are varying degrees on this, rather as many pro-lifers would support the caveat of the option of an abortion in cases of rape, or the highly likely death of the mother in the event of carrying on with the pregnancy.

I imagine many pro-choicers would pinpoint a gestational stage beyond which an abortion is not an option, or in certain cases and not a carte blanche availablility of abortion on request.

The problem in Irish law is that there have been caveats recognised but nothing done about them, and for the purposes of this thread I would simply like to see these caveats properly implemented with a structural framework for women in the unhappy position as outlined by the State. I don't know whether that puts me in the pro-life 'with a but' side, or the pro-choice 'with an if' side.

rossie1977

prinz wrote: »

I am against pyramid schemes and internet phishing scams too. Am I allowed to have an opinion on those?

you can have an opinion on any thing you choose, just don't tell people what they can and cannot do with their own body

i detest smoking, cheese, eggs and other stuff, do i think i should force my morals on others?? course not, i choose not to smoke, if others want to kill themselves smoking let them go right ahead

prinz

rossie1977 wrote: »

you can have an opinion on any thing you choose, just don't tell people what they can and cannot do with their own body

No restricted substances? No prescriptions? Am I allowed to express my opinion as a vote?

Craebear

I believe abortion should be MANDATORY for scumbags.

donfers

silverspoon wrote: »

That's not the point I read you as making, and I still don't see that in your original post but fine.

I don't see it as a victory for 'pro-choicers' - I see it as a good outcome in ensuring laws recognised theoretically by the government are actually enacted and enabled. I'm glad that the ECHR did not attempt to extend the current status of abortion in Ireland because I don't think that it is something they should have any part of. It is a decision for the Irish people to make. I could not respect a decision made for us by the ECHR - either pro-life/choice - as it would have zero legitimacy.

You confuse me since your original point seemed to be that a decision like that was what the ECHR tried to do, and your response to my post was that the ECHR have effectively changed nothing.

the key words in my initial post were "attempt to override....." by amongst others a Lithuanian national and BritishPAS to bypass Irish constitutional law and referenda results and appeal to the Council Of Europe to not only legislate for existing abortion laws (that's fine) but to extend them. Thankfully the ECHR only saw fit to or were deemed capable of passing a judgement affecting existing laws...what with IMF and European Central bank intervention in Ireland in recent times, having the ECHR tell us to reform our constitutional laws would have been a step too far...they are effectively just telling us to implement them

The questions that now should be asked are

- how will this be implemented: it will only apply to very few but the PR will be interesting when it does happen

- what will the ECHR do if Ireland doesn't implement or employs more delaying tactics/fudges it

Nodin

rossie1977 wrote: »

bout time, every woman should have a choice about what happens with her own body

like someone said earlier, you against abortion don't get one but don't force your ideals and morals on everyone else

Wimmin???????....in charge of their own bodies????????????? Its that kind of thinking that caused the fall of Rome!!!!!!!

Biggins

Not read all the posts.

Government = useless.
Laws = antiquated.
Religions in Ireland = they suck!

The above is just an opinion and I could be a twat!

baldbear

Jaysus not another referendum on the cards? I can't wait to see the religious loonies to come crawling out.

prinz

baldbear wrote: »

Jaysus not another referendum on the cards? I can't wait to see the religious loonies to come crawling out.

Nope. Just a light under the governments ass to comply with the ones we've had already basically.

donfers

rossie1977 wrote: »

bout time, every woman should have a choice about what happens with her own body

like someone said earlier, you against abortion don't get one but don't force your ideals and morals on everyone else

I'm sorry but that's simplistic, naive, populist, cliched and plain wrong

What if a woman plies herself full of drugs? you ok with that? or pimps herself out as a prostitute? you ok with with that?

No one person is forcing their views/morals on another person.

there are concepts out there called "law" and "society" and "civilisation" that mean we can't do whatever we want with our own bodies

you can debate the rights and wrongs of drugs, prostitution and abortion until the cows come home but some aspects of these issues are illegal in Irish Society and if you don't accept that then you should either

a) leave or
b) campaign to have it changed

but in short

you can't legally do whatever you want with your own body and no one person is forcing their ideals and morals upon you, we are all simply abiding by the law withing the society we find ourselves

aDeener

rossie1977 wrote: »

you can have an opinion on any thing you choose, just don't tell people what they can and cannot do with their own body

i detest smoking, cheese, eggs and other stuff, do i think i should force my morals on others?? course not, i choose not to smoke, if others want to kill themselves smoking let them go right ahead

can ya tell them what they can and cannot do with the bodies of others? :rolleyes:

drkpower

rossie1977 wrote: »

you can have an opinion on any thing you choose, just don't tell people what they can and cannot do with their own body

Why do people continually trot this one out?

Unless you believe that a woman should be fully entitled to choose to terminate their foetus mid-delivery, you also believe that you can tell 'people what they can and cannot do with their own body.

If you do believe that a woman should be able to terminate the foetus mid-delivery, that's fair enough, at least there is consistency there; it is a fairly disgusting from of consistency, but it is consistency nonetheless.

Alphyra

Thankfully the European court has ruled against our total ban on it !

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1216/abortion.html

philologos

This ruling as far as I know only had to do with abortions in exceptional circumstances. It as far as I know isn't advocating abortion-by-choice.

prinz

Alphyra wrote: »

Thankfully the European court has ruled against our total ban on it !
http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1216/abortion.html

Read the thread..

ninebeanrows

It is interesting debate.

I personally would be in favour of Choice upto a certain extent of pregnancy.

And don't go into the foetus is alive from conception thing. I understand it all the debate.

Say Pro-choice for upto 6 weeks of pregnancy.

How many fetuses are lost up to this stage anyway? Unbeknown at times to the women.

There is more to gain from pro-choice than having no choice at all.

I do think if there was a referendum today it would be very close but i still think the fear instilled by the Catholic Church would hold too much resonance and it would fail by 55-45 or something like that.

philologos

So because people die anyway we shouldn't feel bad about killing? - This when applied to anything but pro-life issues would seem barbaric.

MagicSean

Alphyra wrote: »

Thankfully the European court has ruled against our total ban on it !

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1216/abortion.html

We don't have a total ban. The courts didn't change anything. They ruled that the country hasn't implemented our constitution properly.

Jester Minute

The Irish people have no appetite for abortion. I've examined each of the three cases, A,B, and C, and none of them had any grounds.

The woman, C, had no grounds whatsoever for an abortion. Current Irish law allows for her to be treated, should her cancer have returned, even if she was pregnant, and even at risk to the unborn child.

What she wanted to do was to kill the child directly just because.There was no medical need for that.

Nodin

Jester Minute wrote: »

The Irish people have no appetite for abortion. I've examined each of the three cases, A,B, and C, and none of them had any grounds. ..........................

O.


Well, You better ring up the Supreme Court, the EU Court and the rest and tell them that You Have Spoken, and that they should stop their nonsense forthwith.

Demonique

orourkeda wrote: »

Didnt we have a referendum on this issue?

The government didnt decide this it was decided by an electoral majority in Ireland.

By the way isnt killing an unborn a viloation of Human rights. Or is that different somehow?

What's a viloation? It sounds like some sort of sex act

Sofiztikated

Wait, does this mean the EU forced abortions are coming in!?!:eek:

I don't think I can could handle an abortion. What with my having a penis and that.

:pac:

Nodin

Sofiztikated wrote: »

Wait, does this mean the EU forced abortions are coming in!?!:eek:

I don't think I can could handle an abortion. What with my having a penis and that.

:pac:

Especially the One Euro Shop coathanger special. The last thing my friend Hirohito needs is his eyesight affected.

Jester Minute

Nodin wrote: »

O.
Well, You better ring up the Supreme Court, the EU Court and the rest and tell them that You Have Spoken, and that they should stop their nonsense forthwith.

I'd have thought the Irish people had just about their fill of Europe. I'm in the north of Ireland, but I've had my fill of Europe. They wreak your country and now they want to kill your children. After years of being dominated by the British, are the Irish happy to have Europe impose itself on them?

Anyway, there would be uproar if abortion was introduced. That seems obvious to me.

Demonique

common sense brigade wrote: »

Well I firmly believe that the baby has a right to life. If you don’t want to keep a baby there are plenty of loving couples out there dying to have children that cannot. I myself was born to a single mother in 1980, if abortion had been socially acceptable back then I may not have been here. Yes it is hard being pregnant for 9 months. I have a daughter myself. But why not put yourself out for nine months and give the baby a life through adoption if you do not want it. I agree in extreme medical cases were the mother’s life is endangered that abortion should be allowed. But it should not be allowed for women who find themselves inconveniently pregnant ‘and emotionally not able’ that is a cop out. Get up and get over it and if you cannot cope with a baby give another family a chance at happiness. My sister is currently undergoing fertility treatment for blocked tubes and the heartbreak she has endured for years trying to conceive breaks my heart. She would be a wonderful mother . I am a mother, when I held my baby in my arms the thought of anyone or anything harming her made me physically ill. I do not believe that the aborted baby does not feel the pain of dying. You can all dress it up how you like with medical jargon but can you all be sure that tiny baby slumbering in its mother’s womb does not feel the pain of being extracted .

There are plenty of children already in the adoption system that those couples could adopt but are too selfish to do so as they want a cyute widdle baybee. Pregnant women aren't broodmares for the infertile

Wait, so because your sister can't conceive other women shouldn't have the right to decide their own reproduction choices.

Nodin

Jester Minute wrote: »

I'd have thought the Irish people had just about their fill of Europe. I'm in the north of Ireland, but I've had my fill of Europe. They wreak your country
.......................
.

No, you'll find that was 100% Irish citizens....

Jester Minute wrote: »

.........and now they want to kill your children...........
.

Actually, they said 'legislate based on your own Supreme court decision', the mad feckers.

Jester Minute wrote: »

Anyway, there would be uproar if abortion was introduced. That seems obvious to me.

Abortion under limited circumstances was introduced about 17 years ago, going on memory.

Demonique

smk89 wrote: »

Considering most people using this forum are male, <25 and agnostic/atheist they may not represent the country as a whole. Personally I have a cup of tea in one hand and am waiting for the inevitable comparison to nazies to begin.

Female, 32, raised Catholic...







...Kick the Pope in the goolies

marco_polo

Jester Minute wrote: »

The Irish people have no appetite for abortion. I've examined each of the three cases, A,B, and C, and none of them had any grounds.

The woman, C, had no grounds whatsoever for an abortion. Current Irish law allows for her to be treated, should her cancer have returned, even if she was pregnant, and even at risk to the unborn child.

What she wanted to do was to kill the child directly just because.There was no medical need for that.

I have examined zero of the cases in any detail whatsoever, but I am fairly sure the decision in the third case had absolutely nothing to do with the legality of undergoing cancer treatment while pregnant, and everything to do with the absense of any legal framework to fro the woman to determine whether she had are medical grounds for an abortion or not

marco_polo

Jester Minute wrote: »

I'd have thought the Irish people had just about their fill of Europe. I'm in the north of Ireland, but I've had my fill of Europe. They wreak your country and now they want to kill your children. After years of being dominated by the British, are the Irish happy to have Europe impose itself on them?

Anyway, there would be uproar if abortion was introduced. That seems obvious to me.

Have one of these instead.

Demonique

common sense brigade wrote: »

Where do we draw the line do we allow abortions at 20 weeks
have you actually seen a scan of the development of a baby at 4 months (Yes its a baby not a fetus)
At the end of 4 months:Fetus is 6-1/2 to 7 inches long

• Weighs about 6 to 7 ounces
• Fetus is developing reflexes such as sucking and swallowing. Fetus may begin sucking his/her thumb
  Tooth buds are developing
• Sweat glands are forming on palms and soles
• Fingers are well defined
• Sex is identifiable
• Skin is bright pink, transparent and covered with soft, downy hair
  
• Although recognizably human in appearnace, the baby would not be able to survive outside the mother's bod

Can't survive outside the women's womb, abortion should be legal at that point


As to the rest, don't really give a s***

jimmycrackcorm

Abortions are like dying Africans in a famine disaster. Unless you can see it on tv it doesn't count

Demonique

Sulmac wrote: »

Saw that in school myself; an awful video which if anything made me less sympathetic to the pro-life cause because of the tactics they use.

Saw it a couple of years ago, made me go meh

fryup

have any Youth Defence nutters sabotaged this thread yet??

Star Bingo

my special purpose is in danger of bein devalued once again? sucks being a european state. lets just all have sex for the hell of it, eh? sure if you forget your pope endorsed johnny there's always the.. claw of death.

we save children around here, not murder em. not for the sake of some.. philanderer

Wazdakka

Wazdakka wrote: »

Fundamental mistake of most of the "Pro-Life" side.
It's not necessarily in favour of abortion.. It's being in favour of giving women the choice.

The verb "to choose" is transitive; i.e., it needs an object in order to make sense. The object in this case is abortion.

Someone said earlier that they don't believe "pro-choice" equals "pro-abortion". It's useful to create an equation to understand why it does. (Note: not my idea - I was never the best at Maths!)

People with a "pro-life" viewpoint see keeping the baby and giving it up for adoption as the two morally right decisions to take. Both involve giving birth.

People with a (for the sake of argument) "pro-choice" viewpoint also hold the above two as valid choices and hold up abortion as a third. We all understand that abortion is the ending of a human life (because the zygote/embryo/foetus possesses the DNA of a human being and is alive). We won't go into the dissent about cut-off points for aborting an infant's according to how far along in the gestation process he/she is. If one is for abortion in any case, then that person is more "pro-choice" than someone who is "pro-life".

The equations:
"Pro-life" = pro(keeping baby) OR pro-adoption
"Pro-choice" = pro(keeping baby) OR pro-adoption OR pro-abortion

We cross out what the two have in common...
"Pro-life" = pro(keeping baby) OR pro-adoption
"Pro-choice" = pro(keeping baby) OR pro-adoption OR pro-abortion

[So, the thing that makes a "pro-choice" position different from a "pro-life" one is that the former sees abortion as a right/justified.]

Therefore, [because there is nothing else to separate the two viewpoints,] we can say that
"Pro-choice" = pro-abortion

The choice in question equates to abortion.

rossie1977

donfers wrote: »

I'm sorry but that's simplistic, naive, populist, cliched and plain wrong

What if a woman plies herself full of drugs? you ok with that? or pimps herself out as a prostitute? you ok with with that?

No one person is forcing their views/morals on another person.

there are concepts out there called "law" and "society" and "civilisation" that mean we can't do whatever we want with our own bodies

again its not my place or yours to question if a woman fills herself with drugs or if she becomes a prostitute, society sees nothing wrong with a woman sitting at a bar all day drinking until she cannot stand and then going home with a stranger, him riding her while she is unconscious, thats fine

we live in a strongly conservative christian country where many laws were based on antiquated morals of the catholic church (to say otherwise is wrong), up until recently (last 20 years) it was illegal in this country to be gay, up until recently it was illegal in this country to sell playboy, up until recently it was illegal to sell condoms, the book Ulysses only became unbanned ten 10 years, the film exorcist was banned here, we have a f**king blasphemy law

we in this country love to berate those far away muslim countries where women and mens freedoms are non-existent but we are as backward here in many areas

orourkeda

marco_polo wrote: »

I have examined zero of the cases in any detail whatsoever, but I am fairly sure the decision in the third case had absolutely nothing to do with the legality of undergoing cancer treatment while pregnant, and everything to do with the absense of any legal framework to fro the woman to determine whether she had are medical grounds for an abortion or not

Were there actually medical grounds for this abortion or was it a precautionary measure? If there were legitimate grounds what were they?

As I understand it a woman can only have an abortion in Ireland if there is a direct threat to her life. If this wasnt the case why did take the case?

Star Bingo

see my issue would be if you become too embroiled in the technicalities you lose sight of the fundamentals n the emotional aspect. a bit like casual sex

Sardonicat

It's possible to be personally against abortion yet respect the right of another person to have an abortion. This would be my stance and I regard myself pro-choice. It's (abortion) not a choice I would like to make but that doesn't mean I have the right to impose that on anyone else.

By the way, regardless of which side uses them, insults are never going to help. Abortion is one of the most serious, if not the most serious, of issues today because it concerns human life and death, and those who argue for abortion find it important for other reasons. However, verbally abusing those who disagree or who have shown their disagreement through various actions does not bring back any of the dead infants who have variously received fatal injections, been sucked into a tube, disembodied, and/or decapitated. Nor will it get anyone extra rights.

Sardonicat

rossie1977 wrote: »

the book Ulysses only became unbanned ten 10 years,

What? I've had a copy for well over 20 years! (and, no, of course I haven't actually read it!)

orourkeda

rossie1977 wrote: »

again its not my place or yours to question if a woman fills herself with drugs or if she becomes a prostitute, society sees nothing wrong with a woman sitting at a bar all day drinking until she cannot stand and then going home with a stranger, him riding her while she is unconscious, thats fine

we live in a strongly conservative christian country where many laws were based on antiquated morals of the catholic church (to say otherwise is wrong), up until recently (last 20 years) it was illegal in this country to be gay, up until recently it was illegal in this country to sell playboy, up until recently it was illegal to sell condoms, the book Ulysses only became unbanned ten 10 years, the film exorcist was banned here, we have a f**king blasphemy law

we in this country love to berate those far away muslim countries where women and mens freedoms are non-existent but we are as backward here in many areas

We now know that he catholic church is not as influential as it once was. However, this does not mean that there will not still be a great deal of opposition to any proposed changes that would make Irelands abortion laws less conservative then they are now. Whatever peoples reasons for their opposition to this is irrelevant and is their own business entirely.

If it is on the basis of religious beliefs then so be it. I don't believe that they deserve to be chastised over it because playboy was banned some years ago or some other inane reason. People have their reasons.