Abortion under the spotlight in the European Court of Human Rights

ScumLord

Deleted User wrote: »

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.

Personally I don't like the thought of abortions, I like to see nature run it's course and think if you get yourself up the duff well that's it, natures caught you out and the circle of life continues on it's merry way. But at the same time I see people who shouldn't be parents ruining the next generation and then of course there's the very real problem of over population and poor resource management in general meaning the next generation could be in for a horrible life.

There are many factors that could play into deciding either way but ultimately unless it's going to be my child and my responsibility I can't make that choice for some one else. So I'm pro choice even though I'd never make that choice myself.

I don't believe a person magically gets a soul at the moment of conception either. Being born is the start of life and it's the first test every living thing on this planet has to go through.

orourkeda

ScumLord wrote: »

Personally I don't like the thought of abortions, I like to see nature run it's course and think if you get yourself up the duff well that's it, natures caught you out and the circle of life continues on it's merry way. But at the same time I see people who shouldn't be parents ruining the next generation and then of course there's the very real problem of over population and poor resource management in general meaning the next generation could be in for a horrible life.

There are many factors that could play into deciding either way but ultimately unless it's going to be my child and my responsibility I can't make that choice for some one else. So I'm pro choice even though I'd never make that choice myself.

I don't believe a person magically gets a soul at the moment of conception either. Being born is the start of life and it's the first test every living thing on this planet has to go through.

If you believe this to be the case, surely it can't magically get a soul the day the child is born either.

Surely in order to be born one needs to be conceived.

ScumLord

orourkeda wrote: »

If you believe this to be the case, surely it can't magically get a soul the day the child is born either. When would this start and why?

I don't think it's magically picked up a soul in the birth canal but it's past the first test of life and made it out into the world to become another hungry mouth. It's out and making it's own demands on the world that the rest of us can fulfil.

poppyvalley

Weathercheck wrote: »

It is interesting debate.

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

Should'nt the choice be er....I dont want to become pregnant so which of the many choices of contraception will I use. Except in the case of rape. It all boils down to personal accountability.

Demonique

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 see you've crawled out from under your rock

strobe

poppyvalley wrote: »

Should'nt the choice be er....I dont want to become pregnant so which of the many choices of contraception will I use. Except in the case of rape. It all boils down to personal accountability.

Contraception isn't 100% effective.

marienbad

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. I know what your saying, you prob will never have an abortion but you dont mind if it happens next door...that kinda thing?

It dos'nt amount to the same thing at all,there are loads of people who would never contemplate having an abortion themselves, but have a fundamental difficulty imposing that view on others in such a private matter.

Jester Minute

marienbad wrote: »

It dos'nt amount to the same thing at all,there are loads of people who would never contemplate having an abortion themselves, but have a fundamental difficulty imposing that view on others in such a private matter.

This privacy nonsense was the foundation for the US Roe V. Wade case. I see it's being trotted out again for our this case. Surprise surprise. There is no right to privacy in the case of killing.

Now this lady, C, she wanted to pre-emptively strike the unborn child just because. The fact is, she could have (and should have) continued as normal with the child. If she got sick again, Irish law allowed for her to be treated, even if this may harm the child in some way. Chemotherapy - whatever. This claim to require clarification is bogus. They want abortion on demand and this is a good step for them.

This is about big business. Planned Parenthood, MS etc.. all want to cash in on the Irish market.

Jester Minute

Demonique wrote: »

I see you've crawled out from under your rock

Beg your pardon? I know you not, so which rock I crawled out from under is nothing to you.

marienbad

Jester Minute wrote: »

This privacy nonsense was the foundation for the US Roe V. Wade case. I see it's being trotted out again for our this case. Surprise surprise. There is no right to privacy in the case of killing.

Now this lady, C, she wanted to pre-emptively strike the unborn child just because. The fact is, she could have (and should have) continued as normal with the child. If she got sick again, Irish law allowed for her to be treated, even if this may harm the child in some way. Chemotherapy - whatever. This claim to require clarification is bogus. They want abortion on demand and this is a good step for them.

This is about big business. Planned Parenthood, MS etc.. all want to cash in on the Irish market.

Big business, my ass, why not just implement the referendum the the Irish people voted on and jub done.

Why do you dismiss the right to privacy as nonsense ? would you regard it as nonsense in connection with what you read, how you vote, your sexual proclivities , or is just in regard to abortion ?

Sardonicat

Jester Minute wrote: »

This privacy nonsense was the foundation for the US Roe V. Wade case. I see it's being trotted out again for our this case. Surprise surprise. There is no right to privacy in the case of killing.

Now this lady, C, she wanted to pre-emptively strike the unborn child just because. The fact is, she could have (and should have) continued as normal with the child. If she got sick again, Irish law allowed for her to be treated, even if this may harm the child in some way. Chemotherapy - whatever. This claim to require clarification is bogus. They want abortion on demand and this is a good step for them.

This is about big business. Planned Parenthood, MS etc.. all want to cash in on the Irish market.

Lady C was advised that a pregnancy could cause a return of cancer which would be much more difficult to cure. i.e., there is a high possibility she could die even after treatment.

Now, I have never been in this position, so I will not judge this woman who was facing the possibility of having aggresive treatment that could leave her child severely disabled, requiring 100 times the support and dedication of an abled body child without a mother to care for it. I don't know what I would do in her situation. She has nothing but my sympathy.

Jester Minute

marienbad wrote: »

Big business, my ass, why not just implement the referendum the the Irish people voted on and jub done.

Why do you dismiss the right to privacy as nonsense ? would you regard it as nonsense in connection with what you read, how you vote, your sexual proclivities , or is just in regard to abortion ?

A referendum might be a good idea.

There is no right to privacy so you can do wrong. There is no right to do wrong. A lot of things that are morally wrong are not legislated against. But killing people is. What I read, how I vote is my business. But once I decide to involve other people, then the law must protect the others from myself. This includes the unborn baby, children, and in general all people's right not to be killed or harmed in any way. Privacy has got nothing to do with it. I can kill my wife in private, but it is still a crime. Similarly, a mother can kill her unborn child in private. It's still wrong, and it's still a crime.

strobe

orourkeda wrote: »

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.

If people are going to come out on either side of a debate though they have to present their reasons and they have to be prepared to do so truthfully and be prepared to accept those reasons will come in for criticism and be willing to try and defend them.

It is NOT enough to say "I agree/disagree with x. I have my reasons and they are none of your business".

There is no reason people that do this should be listened to by anyone.

Progress is not made in this way.

Napper Hawkins

I would just like to ask all the pro-lifers on here :

What was it like when you adopted that orphan you have now and how has it impacted on your life? Good or bad? Raising a child is a tough job as far as I can tell.

And if you haven't yet done so, then what's keeping you?

Serious question.

marienbad

Jester Minute wrote: »

A referendum might be a good idea.

There is no right to privacy so you can do wrong. There is no right to do wrong. A lot of things that are morally wrong are not legislated against. But killing people is. What I read, how I vote is my business. But once I decide to involve other people, then the law must protect the others from myself. This includes the unborn baby, children, and in general all people's right not to be killed or harmed in any way. Privacy has got nothing to do with it. I can kill my wife in private, but it is still a crime. Similarly, a mother can kill her unborn child in private. It's still wrong, and it's still a crime.

and who decides what is wrong ??

Jester Minute

Sardonicat wrote: »

Lady C was advised that a pregnancy could cause a return of cancer which would be much more difficult to cure. i.e., there is a high possibility she could die even after treatment.

Now, I have never been in this position, so I will not judge this woman who was facing the possibility of having aggresive treatment that could leave her child severely disabled, requiring 100 times the support and dedication of an abled body child without a mother to care for it. I don't know what I would do in her situation. She has nothing but my sympathy.

Abortion is always going to kill the child.

If the mother had the child, she may or may not have a relapse of cancer. That remains only a possibility. There are no grounds for a pre-emptive strike against the innocent life of the child.

Leave the unborn child in peace. In the (unlikely) event that the cancer does return, the medical people can deal with that at the time using medical treatment that respects the lives of both and does its best to protect and save both.

What we are talking about in the C case is a pre-emptive strike on an innocent unborn child because the mother was not willing to do what was right and just, and which is what every good mother does: put the life of her child before her own.

strobe

marienbad wrote: »

and who decides what is wrong ??

Magic Sky Daddy.

Keith186

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 .

"You didn't kill Kenny, you bastard".

Jester Minute

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

I would just like to ask all the pro-lifers on here :

What was it like when you adopted that orphan you have now and how has it impacted on your life? Good or bad? Raising a child is a tough job as far as I can tell.

And if you haven't yet done so, then what's keeping you?

Serious question.

I am a single male with no job (hence my being up at 2.25am). I am not in any position to be adopting anyone.

marienbad wrote: »

and who decides what is wrong ??

Well, apart from the little voice of conscience, by which we all know that killing is wrong, we do still live in a (nominally) Christian country. At this moment in time, the majority of people in Ireland would be against baby-killing and the laws reflect that.

strobe

strobe wrote: »

Magic Sky Daddy.

Jester Minute wrote: »

we do still live in a (nominally) Christian country.

QED

Napper Hawkins

Jester Minute wrote: »

I am a single male with no job (hence my being up at 2.25am). I am not in any position to be adopting anyone.



Well, apart from the little voice of conscience, by which we all know that killing is wrong, we do still live in a (nominally) Christian country. At this moment in time, the majority of people in Ireland would be against baby-killing and the laws reflect that.

Well why don't you get yourself a ****ing job and back up your pro-life stance by adopting? Hop to it.

And **** your medieval, mumbo jumbo religion too, you reckon Irish people are superior to people of other nations where abortion is legal?

Baby-killing...for ****s sake.

marienbad

Jester Minute wrote: »

I am a single male with no job (hence my being up at 2.25am). I am not in any position to be adopting anyone.



Well, apart from the little voice of conscience, by which we all know that killing is wrong, we do still live in a (nominally) Christian country. At this moment in time, the majority of people in Ireland would be against baby-killing and the laws reflect that.

Glad to hear you say that, deserves two cheers , the part saying ''and the laws reflect that'' , so when we draw up the legislation in line with the referendum of 17 years ago and now reiterated by the ECHR we can all go home happy.

Star Bingo

yet more pointless expenditure of jism. we're the ultimate nanny state ffs, nan would never turn away a grandchild lets put that phrase to more apt use. you lot just want coke n hookers

Demonique

Jester Minute wrote: »

I am a single male with no job (hence my being up at 2.25am). I am not in any position to be adopting anyone.

Hurrah for people without uteri telling women what to do with their bodies

Jester Minute

Demonique wrote: »

Hurrah for people without uteri telling women what to do with their bodies

I don't have to be a woman to know that abortion is wrong and to desire that it not be introduced to this country. Plus it's not just about the mother's body, the baby has its own body.

Jamiekelly

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEFWDYB0rWo

Its a tricky issue.
The one thing I am gonna say is I fucking hate the people that are like "oh if abortion was legal then people would just stop using condoms and get an abortion anytime they get pregnant".
People are retarded if they think people who get abortions are doing it for the laugh. Its not as if its easy on them. Its most likely one of the worst days of their lives when they go to get an abortion and people have the nerve to make them out to be killing children for the fun of it.

As for the "every life is precious" argument. My hole. 45 babies are born every minute in the world, and on average 11 of those babies will die before their first birthday due to bad healthcare, living conditions, lack of food etc.
Its a chemical reaction. Thats all it is.


Sorry for my slightly off the wall opinion but I am pro choice and proud of it

ebixa82

Without stereotyping I find people who are pro-life also:

1) believe in God and all that organised religion crap

2) believe that recreational drugs are destroying society and much more harmful than alcohol.

3) listen to Joe Duffy (and not for the sheer comedy of the contributions of his supporters)

Gross generalisation but there you OK.

Women should absolutely have the right to chose. It's a no-brainer.

I'm pretty sure if a poll was done across the general population then the Pro-Choice side would win. And that includes all the OAP catholic church lovers out there.

A more accurate reflection of societal views could be achieved by a poll on some place like boards where the majority of posters are of child making age and who have the potential to be faced with such a decision..

It's not as if banning abortion in Ireland prevents people from taking a cheap Ryanair flight or a ferry over to blighty. It just greatly inconveniences them and makes the whole process much more traumatic and stressful.

It also has led to an increase in the number of women buying abortifacients over the internet which is a whole other problem altogether!

scientific1982

ebixa82 wrote: »

Without stereotyping I find people who are pro-life also:

1) believe in God and all that organised religion crap

2) believe that recreational drugs are destroying society and much more harmful than alcohol.

3) listen to Joe Duffy (and not for the sheer comedy of the contributions of his supporters)

Gross generalisation but there you OK.

Women should absolutely have the right to chose. It's a no-brainer.

I'm pretty sure if a poll was done across the general population then the Pro-Choice side would win. And that includes all the OAP catholic church lovers out there.

A more accurate reflection of societal views could be achieved by a poll on some place like boards where the majority of posters are of child making age and who have the potential to be faced with such a decision..

It's not as if banning abortion in Ireland prevents people from taking a cheap Ryanair flight or a ferry over to blighty. It just greatly inconveniences them and makes the whole process much more traumatic and stressful.

It also has led to an increase in the number of women buying abortifacients over the internet which is a whole other problem altogether!

I'd be the exception to your rule ebixa82. And this issue is far from a no-brainer.

pels

It's when reading threads like this you see what a sexist and non-civilized country Ireland is.

Bah, disgusted.

common sense brigade

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.

Your wrong there are hardly any adoptions in Ireland, yet 4,000 women travelled away to England last year to have abortions. They could have had these babies adopted. I dont think people who adopt do so to get a cutsey accessory baby.
Why should women that get pregnant and decide 'they are not emotionally ready for a baby'time isint right''careers just taking off'.etc . why should these women be allowed to decide that they cant go through nine months of pregnancy. Its only nine months and its not fun being pregnant. But for the sake of a measly nine months of your life to give a life. I have a baby and a career. I am not a religious nut sitting at home each day watching pro life videos. If there is a referendum lets see the outcome then. I dont know a single Pro Abortion Choice person in all of my professional friends in their 30's. Live in Co Clare. Maybe we are unusual but as I said a referendum will show what the consensus is. If the outcome is Pro Life side, it is not good enough to say we are all loonies. Also Men should have a say in what happens to their babies.

Since life begins at conception, abortion is akin to murder as it is the act of taking human life. Abortion is in direct defiance of the commonly accepted idea of the sanctity of human life
No civilized society permits one human to intentionally harm or take the life of another human without punishment, and abortion is no different.

scientific1982

pels wrote: »

It's when reading threads like this you see what a sexist and non-civilized country Ireland is.

Bah, disgusted.

The terms pro-choice and feminism are not mutually inclusive.

Nodin

Jester Minute wrote: »

Abortion is always (......) is what every good mother does: put the life of her child before her own.

Aha. Our legal muse is back again.

Jester Minute wrote: »

At this moment in time, the majority of people in Ireland would be against baby-killing and the laws reflect that. .

...and in this case, all the Court has done is to tell the state to legislate based on existing rulings of Irish law.

curlzy

I'm really glad I started this thread. I'm still pro-choice and always will be, but it's really interesting to see all the different opinions. I'm just hoping we hold another proper referendum with the question being :"Will we make abortion legal and available to all". I'd say the pro-choice would win.:D

rainbow kirby

curlzy wrote: »

I'm really glad I started this thread.

That's got to be a first, someone being glad to start an abortion thread in AH

common sense brigade

I'm really glad I started this thread.

Really glad you did too. Its very interesting. And aside from all the obvious arguments it does show both sides of the argument care. Just in different ways. Hope we can all discuss it again on here if we have a referendum.

prinz

ebixa82 wrote: »

Without stereotyping........

Good start.....

ebixa82 wrote: »

I find people who are pro-life also:
1) believe in God and all that organised religion crap
2) believe that recreational drugs are destroying society and much more harmful than alcohol.
3) listen to Joe Duffy (and not for the sheer comedy of the contributions of his supporters)

LOL wut?

ebixa82 wrote: »

Gross generalisation but there you OK.

Your intention not to stereotype was a resounding success... can I try?

Without stereotyping I find people who are pro-choice also:
1) Love to congratulate themselves on how modern and forward thinking they are.
2) Have never really put a real effort into considering the whole issue as a sociological one.
3) Listen to Adrian Kennedy.

Gross generalisation but there you go.

Excellent that really progressed the debate and added to the understanding of where other people are coming from.

ebixa82

common sense brigade wrote: »

Your wrong there are hardly any adoptions in Ireland, yet 4,000 women travelled away to England last year to have abortions. They could have had these babies adopted. I dont think people who adopt do so to get a cutsey accessory baby.
Why should women that get pregnant and decide 'they are not emotionally ready for a baby'time isint right''careers just taking off'.etc . why should these women be allowed to decide that they cant go through nine months of pregnancy. Its only nine months and its not fun being pregnant. But for the sake of a measly nine months of your life to give a life. I have a baby and a career. I am not a religious nut sitting at home each day watching pro life videos. If there is a referendum lets see the outcome then. I dont know a single Pro Abortion Choice person in all of my professional friends in their 30's. Live in Co Clare. Maybe we are unusual but as I said a referendum will show what the consensus is. If the outcome is Pro Life side, it is not good enough to say we are all loonies. Also Men should have a say in what happens to their babies.

That does sound a bit strange. I would genuinely say that I would not know one of my friends (professionals mid 20s-mid 30s) who would be openly pro-life.

Also wrt men having a say, I'm pretty sure in the vast majority of cases men would be supportive (and relieved) of a women choosing to have an abortion if pregnancy was due to a fling/one night stand/affair etc.

prinz

ebixa82 wrote: »

That does sound a bit strange. I would genuinely say that I would not know one of my friends (professionals mid 20s-mid 30s) who would be openly pro-life..

I've taken the liberty of underlining the important word. Very few people are. It's not something I personally would be bringing up in conversation either with the result that not many people would regard me as being 'openly pro-life'.

I would genuinely say that it's usually the ones who are less vocal about abortion are the ones least comfortable with the notion of abortion on demand.

common sense brigade

I'm pretty sure in the vast majority of cases men would be supportive (and relieved) of a women choosing to have an abortion if pregnancy was due to a fling/one night stand/affair etc.

Have to say I have more faith In Men than this. My sister and I was brought up by my two uncles. They would not have been delighted had my mother had an abortion. They say that My sister and I enriched their lives. For cases whereby the father really wants his child should he not be allowed have a say if the women wants an abortion. I think so.
Another uncle of mine went through a divorce. His wife did not want to keep the children so he through agreement from her kept them and raised them. She went on to have another child and The childs father died tragically) and again she felt that she couldnt look after the child properly and my uncle offered to take that child too and treated her as his own daughter. she grew up with her siblings and sees my uncle as her father. My uncle never stigmatised his ex wife and she was always welcome to see the children whenever she wished. Men here are better than people give them credit for and should have a say in what happens if a woman wants abortion. There is obviously men out there who would have wanted the ex girlfirend/ one night stand etc to let him keep his baby rather than abortion.

marienbad

common sense brigade wrote: »

Your wrong there are hardly any adoptions in Ireland, yet 4,000 women travelled away to England last year to have abortions. They could have had these babies adopted. I dont think people who adopt do so to get a cutsey accessory baby.
Why should women that get pregnant and decide 'they are not emotionally ready for a baby'time isint right''careers just taking off'.etc . why should these women be allowed to decide that they cant go through nine months of pregnancy. Its only nine months and its not fun being pregnant. But for the sake of a measly nine months of your life to give a life. I have a baby and a career. I am not a religious nut sitting at home each day watching pro life videos. If there is a referendum lets see the outcome then. I dont know a single Pro Abortion Choice person in all of my professional friends in their 30's. Live in Co Clare. Maybe we are unusual but as I said a referendum will show what the consensus is. If the outcome is Pro Life side, it is not good enough to say we are all loonies. Also Men should have a say in what happens to their babies.

Just a couple of points , the figure travelling to the uk is now 7000, and that is not counting those women who give english adresses.

you say ''why should these be allowed to decide they cant go through nine months of pregnancy'', apart from the perjorative ''these women'', the breathtaking arrogance of that sentiment is beyond me . Who should decide ? You ? I can take it you would be in favour of any and all methods to prevent them having an abortion including the right to travel,as that is the impliciit logic of your view.

As for all the concern on adoption issues ,give me a break, this country condemned generations of children to lives of institutional horror even though there were loads of people willing to adopt, but were deemed unsuitable simply because they were the wrong religon !

And then you say ''the referendum will show what the concensus is'' which is, on the surface a reasonable stance, the problem is the referendum has shown concensus and is still not implemented. So do you argree it is time the Dail hopped to it and implemented the will of the people as outlined yet again by the ECHR ?

marienbad

prinz wrote: »

I've taken the liberty of underlining the important word. Very few people are. It's not something I personally would be bringing up in conversation either with the result that not many people would regard me as being 'openly pro-life'.

I would genuinely say that it's usually the ones who are less vocal about abortion are the ones least comfortable with the notion of abortion on demand.

I am sure the reverse is true, those that have had, or friends of theirs who have had an abortion are the least likely to discuss it.

those who are pro choice but have not had to make that choice are like most ''liberals'' in favour of these issues but they are not central to their lives.

to those that oppose this issue,it is usually a central aspect of their belief system and is not a political issue but a moral one with the obligations that that entails.

common sense brigade

the problem is the referendum has shown concensus and is still not implemented

correct me if im wrong was the consensus here that abortion should be allowed only in cases of medical emergency? If im wrong apologies. I agree with abortion if mothers life is in danger so yes we should be doing this.
But I do not believe in abortion for any other reason that is my opinion.
'These women' was not meant to offend. I didnt mean it the way you read into it. Apologies.

prinz

marienbad wrote: »

I am sure the reverse is true, those that have had, or friends of theirs who have had an abortion are the least likely to discuss it..

Quite possibly true but nothing to do with my point... unless the only people pro-abortion are those who have gone through it etc. That's obviously not the case.

marienbad wrote: »

those who are pro choice but have not had to make that choice are like most ''liberals'' in favour of these issues but they are not central to their lives..

In my experience these people also tend to be the most vocal in an attempt to show just how hip and "liberal" they are. I find these days especially amongst younger people the more conservative types tend to keep their opinions to themselves.

marienbad wrote: »

to those that oppose this issue, it is usually a central aspect of their belief system and is not a political issue but a moral one with the obligations that that entails.

Yes, does that mean these people are going to be discussing it any more regularly than anyone else? What about people who are anti-abortion by demand and are also not involved in any particular belief system by which I take it you mean religion.

By the by supporting abortion as some sort of personal freedom in an attempt at having a "liberal" society is also part of a belief system. Plus there are many people with belief systems (bordering on the religious) that explicitly allow them to condone abortion in all it's forms, so that really gets us nowhere.

MagicSean

orourkeda wrote: »

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?

The problem in her case was that Ireland have not introduced any method by which the decision that a direct threat to her life can be made.

Napper Hawkins wrote: »

I would just like to ask all the pro-lifers on here :

What was it like when you adopted that orphan you have now and how has it impacted on your life? Good or bad? Raising a child is a tough job as far as I can tell.

And if you haven't yet done so, then what's keeping you?

Serious question.

What a load of irrelevant crap.

Demonique wrote: »

Hurrah for people without uteri telling women what to do with their bodies

I couldn't give a **** what they do to themselves. It's the child inside that I'm worried about. Also, what about the fathers rights?

ebixa82 wrote: »

Without stereotyping I find people who are pro-life also:

1) believe in God and all that organised religion crap

2) believe that recreational drugs are destroying society and much more harmful than alcohol.

3) listen to Joe Duffy (and not for the sheer comedy of the contributions of his supporters)

Gross generalisation but there you OK.

Half of number 2. The rest don't apply to me.

ebixa82 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure if a poll was done across the general population then the Pro-Choice side would win. And that includes all the OAP catholic church lovers out there.

Yes. Lets call this poll a referendum.

marienbad

prinz wrote: »

Quite possibly true but nothing to do with my point... unless the only people pro-abortion are those who have gone through it etc. That's obviously not the case.



In my experience these people also tend to be the most vocal in an attempt to show just how hip and "liberal" they are. I find these days especially amongst younger people the more conservative types tend to keep their opinions to themselves.



Yes, does that mean these people are going to be discussing it any more regularly than anyone else? What about people who are anti-abortion by demand and are also not involved in any particular belief system by which I take it you mean religion.

By the by supporting abortion as some sort of personal freedom in an attempt at having a "liberal" society is also part of a belief system. Plus there are many people with belief systems (bordering on the religious) that explicitly allow them to condone abortion in all it's forms, so that really gets us nowhere.

You could well be right, but in my experience the pro-life side are far more vocal and active and in yours the reverse is true. But we have no way of knowing really, but it does seem to indicate that we talk to our own rather than reaching out to try and understand the other point of view.

marienbad

common sense brigade wrote: »

correct me if im wrong was the consensus here that abortion should be allowed only in cases of medical emergency? If im wrong apologies. I agree with abortion if mothers life is in danger so yes we should be doing this.
But I do not believe in abortion for any other reason that is my opinion.
'These women' was not meant to offend. I didnt mean it the way you read into it. Apologies.

Yes that is my understanding of the decision also, now what of the points on adoption etc.:)

Thinspired

It is interesting to see the viewpoints of both sides of the debate, sure I may as well throw my two cent in... I don't disagree with abortion but I do think it's something that has to be very carefully considered before a final decision is made. As an Irish woman, if I found myself pregnant sure it'd be traumatic having to head overseas to get an abortion. But the fact that I'd have to go to so much effort/expense would probably make me think it through a lot more than if there was an abortion clinic just down the road where Sarah/Kate/Mary had all been before.

The more you think something through the less likely you are to make a rash decision you could later regret, whether that's to keep the baby or not. You're also less likely to be pressured into a quick decision by someone else, be that family or the father-to-be.

So for that reason I don't have an issue with abortion not being available to anyone in Ireland. But when, as the ECHR and the Supreme Court before it already decided, it's a case of a woman who has been raped and is suicidal, or an ill woman whose life is at risk by virtue of being pregnant (which is the same thing) then of course they should be able to abort in Ireland.
Our Constitution already guarantees the equal right to life of the mother so what these cowardly governments have been saying for 18 years to women is: Yes you are legally entitled to have an abortion since you could die without one, we know you're suicidal/seriously ill - but hey, if you want to actually get one you're going to have to organise a flight to England, book an English clinic and then find your own way back home. Oh and also organise your own post-abortion counselling if you want it. Good luck to ya. We're certainly not going to do it because we're terrified of legislating.

The real ones at fault here are the spineless members of government. If this had been legislated for we could have avoided the ECHR case. But that's just my humble opinion!

common sense brigade

As for all the concern on adoption issues ,give me a break, this country condemned generations of children to lives of institutional horror even though there were loads of people willing to adopt, but were deemed unsuitable simply because they were the wrong religon !

Im not sure what your point is? Just because this happened here in the past (albeit the recent past ) thats no reason to legalise abortion. Maybe we need to change adoption laws here also and also give fathers more rights to their children. I really feel strongly fathers should have a say. if 7,000 women had abortions last year , there may have been a small percentage of fathers who wanted to keep their baby. even if its tiny like 2% why do those men have no voice. and the baby that would have had life. and also way more than 7,000 people here in Ireland trying to adopt. They have to go abroad to adopt children.

mloc

Early term fetus is not a baby.

I don't care what your book of fairy tales tells you; it's wrong, and you're wrong.

prinz

mloc wrote: »

Early term fetus is not a baby.
I don't care what your book of fairy tales tells you; it's wrong, and you're wrong.

Great contribution. What have you got to say when an atheist tells you it is?