Your right to an Abortion

sambuka41

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I did not say or imply that at all. I'm sorry, but that's a bizarre interpretation of my post. I never said that you have no respect for human life - in fact I never mentioned your attitude to human life at all.

It came from your imagination. You can't have it both ways - is it a foetus or a human life that you are talking about aborting? I took you at your word when you said that you regarded it as a foetus, not a baby.

Your interpretation of me using the term foetus was that I viewed said foetus as a human waste product; that came across to me as saying I had no respect for human life because I didnt view it as a baby??

A foetus is a human life. I dont see a distinction???? You seem to not be able to acknowledge it as both. The same as I said earlier its at a different stage of development, that prior to a certain point is not sentient and personally I would not feel morally wrong in aborting. What that point is, I can't say for sure, I'd probably go along the guidelines from the medical community and prior to 12 weeks (again thats my personal view, I wouldn't impose that deadline on anyone else)

I also agree with drkpower, i think this is an issue of rights, and I would say that the already alive and existing woman's right supersede the foetus rights.

Monty Burnz

Another poster raised the thought experiment question that I posed. I did not bring it up again. And if I had, it would have been on topic anyway.

Suggestions that I'm trying to 'bend' the conversation are disingenuous and mean-spirited. I've been very disappointed with how I've been treated by mods on this thread. A mod has accused me of being insulting and ridiculing the views of others, but when challenged, offered no proof (because the accusation was wrong). The mod has not apologised for this false accusation.

In spite of my efforts to be polite and fair to every poster, I've been fairly hounded in this thread.

I'm sure nobody cares, I'm just venting. Apologies for going O/T, but I think I've been absolutely screwed over here.

Monty Burnz

sambuka41 wrote: »

Your interpretation of me using the term foetus was that I viewed said foetus as a human waste product; that came across to me as saying I had no respect for human life because I didnt view it as a baby??

No, I'm saying that it was not clear to me what point you were making based on how you phrased your post. I understand what you meant now.

sambuka41 wrote: »

I also agree with drkpower, i think this is an issue of rights, and I would say that the already alive and existing woman's right supersede the foetus rights.

Indeed, I've already stated that I agree with this.

Stheno

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Another poster raised the thought experiment question that I posed. I did not bring it up again. And if I had, it would have been on topic anyway.

Suggestions that I'm trying to 'bend' the conversation are disingenuous and mean-spirited. I've been very disappointed with how I've been treated by mods on this thread. A mod has accused me of being insulting and ridiculing the views of others, but when challenged, offered no proof (because the accusation was wrong). The mod has not apologised for this false accusation.

In spite of my efforts to be polite and fair to every poster, I've been fairly hounded in this thread.

I'm sure nobody cares, I'm just venting. Apologies for going O/T, but I think I've been absolutely screwed over here.

If you've a problem with a post report it. I don't see where anyone hounded you on the thread, several posters did point out the fallacy in your thought experiment.

Ellis Dee

I wonder is there any nation more expert in things gynaecological than the Irish? Ectopic pregnancies, foetuses, zygotes - we're all experts after all the media debate in the past nearly 30 years. I bet the average German or Italian or Russian wouldn't have the vaguest clue what we are talking about half the time, even allowing for the language difference, of course.;)

Kind of reminds me of what Oscar Wide once said about the person who knew the price of everything and the value of nothing.:)

iguana

OkayWhatever wrote: »

I'm against abortion completely.. It's my opinion. There's so many people out there who are unable to have children and would do anything for a child, I don't think it's right to abort a child who could be loved so much by another family. I think it's kinda selfish to be honest.

I've miscarried a planned baby which I mentioned upthread, I also believe I had a chemical pregnancy* 6 weeks ago (this is only the second time I've been able to admit to that). In between then I've experienced a type of (hopefully) temporary infertility as my husband was on medications which made it unsafe for us to conceive. We've been trying again for most of this year with no more success than the aforementioned chemical pregnancy. I'm having to come to terms with the idea that we may not be able to have our own baby, so I have an idea of what it's like to be unable to have children.

But that doesn't mean for one tiny minute that I'd dare to be so selfish as to expect some other woman, who I've never even met, to be my unwilling incubator. Please don't assume to speak for couples who can't have children. Even if you are part of one yourself it doesn't mean that you can speak for the desires of all childless couples, or that their desires are so selfish.

Besides, as I've also already mentioned upthread. There are tens of millions of orphans worldwide. All the infertile couples on the planet couldn't even begin to take care of them all. The world doesn't need unwanted children so badly that we have to force women through unwanted pregnancies.


*very early miscarriage before implantation

Ickle Magoo

Ellis Dee wrote: »

I wonder is there any nation more expert in things gynaecological than the Irish? Ectopic pregnancies, foetuses, zygotes - we're all experts after all the media debate in the past nearly 30 years. I bet the average German or Italian or Russian wouldn't have the vaguest clue what we are talking about half the time, even allowing for the language difference, of course.;)

Kind of reminds me of what Oscar Wide once said about the person who knew the price of everything and the value of nothing.:)

Surely countries that have introduced legislation in relation to abortion have had exactly the same conversations, debates, polls, calls for changes in legislation, etc, etc. They just happened 20+ years ago.

teaandtoast

Maple wrote: »

You have already been warned about your projecting of your experience and your generalisations.

This is your last warning, you will receive a ban next time around.

Maple.

in relation to your treat of banning me because i am expressing my opinion. I have the right to express my opinion like everyone else i am talking about my experiences i am not forcing any one to believe them. THis is a democratic country but its sad that many people don't know what democracy is, there is not much of democracy on boards.ie

Stheno

teaandtoast wrote: »

in relation to your treat of banning me because i am expressing my opinion. I have the right to express my opinion like everyone else i am talking about my experiences i am not forcing any one to believe them. THis is a democratic country but its sad that many people don't know what democracy is, there is not much of democracy on boards.ie

Teaandtoast, please read the charter, if you wish to discuss a mod warning with them do NOT do it on thread.

LaBaguette

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Surely countries that have introduced legislation in relation to abortion have had exactly the same conversations, debates, polls, calls for changes in legislation, etc, etc. They just happened 20+ years ago.

I'll speak for France here : we do have that debate once in a while, only it's the other way around : (mostly) religious guys fighting against abortion.

Frankly the Irish situation baffles me. When I heard about last week's protests, I had to check online because I could not beleive abortion was still illegal - and this has happened several times in the year I've been there.

I just does not make sense. If your religious/moral/whatever views compell you not to have abortion, don't. Just don't force that choice on people. It's THAT simple. And I'm still not fully understanding why the pro-life people are protesting - oh wait, maybe because they know that time goes forward and that they are bound to lose their hold on the women of Ireland ?

Stheno

Abortion is also illegal in Malta, and was in Portugal until 2007 iirc in Europe.

Other countries set strict limits, and have low cut off points in terms of the limit at which an abortion can be performed.

old but interesting link

Ickle Magoo

According to the stats around 1400 women a yr from NI travel to the mainland to procure an abortion - and according to this article, a survey found around 11% local GP's in NI reported having seen the results of amateur abortions...so the refusal to accept abortion will happen anyway seems to be as prevalent there as it is here.

Monty Burnz

LaBaguette wrote: »

maybe because they know that time goes forward and that they are bound to lose their hold on the women of Ireland ?

But who is 'they'??
The electorate?

K-9

LaBaguette wrote: »

I'll speak for France here : we do have that debate once in a while, only it's the other way around : (mostly) religious guys fighting against abortion.

Frankly the Irish situation baffles me. When I heard about last week's protests, I had to check online because I could not beleive abortion was still illegal - and this has happened several times in the year I've been there.

I just does not make sense. If your religious/moral/whatever views compell you not to have abortion, don't. Just don't force that choice on people. It's THAT simple. And I'm still not fully understanding why the pro-life people are protesting - oh wait, maybe because they know that time goes forward and that they are bound to lose their hold on the women of Ireland ?

Well the last major referendum was in the mid 80's and barring some minor changes and clarifications like the right to travel and information, that is where we are at.

Politicians don't want to deal with it and tbh I don't blame them. The loud and extreme voices on both sides take over in referenda, even Presidential elections here like the smear Norris campaign.

Monty Burnz

K-9 wrote: »

Politicians don't want to deal with it and tbh I don't blame them. The loud and extreme voices on both sides take over in referenda, even Presidential elections here like the smear Norris campaign.

Yup. Politicians hate to make any sort of unpopular decision that they can avoid, and whatever they decide in this area is going to be unpopular with someone. Personally, I do blame them on this one. Usually I'd give them some slack because of the failings of the voters who put them there, but not on this one.

Ickle Magoo

K-9 wrote: »

Well the last major referendum was in the mid 80's and barring some minor changes and clarifications like the right to travel and information, that is where we are at.

Politicians don't want to deal with it and tbh I don't blame them. The loud and extreme voices on both sides take over in referenda, even Presidential elections here like the smear Norris campaign.

Baring in mind the last time a referendum was discussed state coffers were used by those in government to try to influence voters - a move that was later declared unconstitutional - it seems that politicians are pushing their own private views in front of those of their electorate. I imagine finding any excuse to push back time-tabling a referendum that relaxes abortion laws is more an exercise in desperately holding off the inevitable, rather than not wanting to get their hands dirty.

LaBaguette

Monty Burnz wrote: »

But who is 'they'??
The electorate?

In this case, I meant "the pro-life guys who go out and protest to maintain the status quo", sorry if I wasnt clear.

Stheno

K-9 wrote: »

Well the last major referendum was in the mid 80's and barring some minor changes and clarifications like the right to travel and information, that is where we are at.

I'd not consider either the x case (which brought about the right to travel, and availability of information) or the 2002 referendum (which sought to limit the availability of abortion to women who were suicidal) to be minor referenda?

Given that no action has been taken to legislate for either it's possibly a moot point.

cdaly_

LaBaguette wrote: »

maybe because they know that time goes forward and that they are bound to lose their hold on the women of Ireland ?

Monty Burnz wrote: »

But who is 'they'??
The electorate?

Good grief no. The anti-choice / enforced-pregnancy / 'women can't be trusted with their own bodies' brigade...

K-9

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Baring in mind the last time a referendum was discussed state coffers were used by those in government to try to influence voters - a move that was later declared unconstitutional - it seems that politicians are pushing their own private views in front of those of their electorate. I imagine finding any excuse to push back time-tabling a referendum that relaxes abortion laws is more an exercise in desperately holding off the inevitable, rather than not wanting to get their hands dirty.

Unless Labour can do some convincing I can't see the coalition taking it on either. It's a pity as FG used to be quite a liberal party socially in the 80's and was willing to deal with issues like this and divorce. IIRC, the programme for Government mentioned the usual working group.

Still, maybe if they actually implemented the current legislation never mind no doubt make a balls of any new one.....................

Morag

K-9 wrote: »

Well the last major referendum was in the mid 80's and barring some minor changes and clarifications like the right to travel and information, that is where we are at.

Politicians don't want to deal with it and tbh I don't blame them. The loud and extreme voices on both sides take over in referenda, even Presidential elections here like the smear Norris campaign.

No the last one was in 2002 and the one before that was in 1992.
So I think that means we are due one next year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland

Monty Burnz

LaBaguette wrote: »

In this case, I meant "the pro-life guys who go out and protest to maintain the status quo", sorry if I wasnt clear.

Ah

I'd point out though that 'pro-life guys' suggests that it's a male thing. 'Pro-life' folks/people would be more accurate.

JamJamJamJam

K-9 wrote: »

Unless Labour can do some convincing I can't see the coalition taking it on either. It's a pity as FG used to be quite a liberal party socially in the 80's and was willing to deal with issues like this and divorce. IIRC, the programme for Government mentioned the usual working group.

Still, maybe if they actually implemented the current legislation never mind no doubt make a balls of any new one.....................

Credit is due to any political party who tackles such a sensitive topic, but if abortion becomes legal it won't go to Labour! :pac: :pac: :pac:


Sorry, I couldn't help it... In all seriousness though, I would love for the question of legalisation of abortion (and other topics like it) to be given a lot more attention by the large political parties, although I understand why it would be avoided. Even if it wasn't legalised first go, addressing it at all would be a start.

py2006

Fascinating thread. I'm learning a lot but don't feel confident enough to articulate any opinion yet with regards to yes v no v choice. (prob choice :P )

The whole I am a woman, its my body, my baby and I will do what I want with it and no man shall influence that is interesting.

Just to throw this out (not advocating it):

If an equally strong minded woman decides to keep the baby should she be upset if the father says, "Your body, your baby, I'm off".

Again, its just a thought that occurred to me while reading this thread.

Fluorescence

py2006 wrote: »

Fascinating thread. I'm learning a lot but don't feel confident enough to articulate any opinion yet with regards to yes v no v choice. (prob choice :P )

The whole I am a woman, its my body, my baby and I will do what I want with it and no man shall influence that is interesting.

Just to throw this out (not advocating it):

If an equally strong minded woman decides to keep the baby should she be upset if the father says, "Your body, your baby, I'm off".

Again, its just a thought that occurred to me while reading this thread.

Interesting question. Women can get rid of an unwanted child, whether via adoption or abortion, but a man is powerless - either his child is adopted/aborted or he's chased for child support if she becomes a single mother. I'll have to get back to you on that one.

Stheno

py2006 wrote: »

Just to throw this out (not advocating it):

If an equally strong minded woman decides to keep the baby should she be upset if the father says, "Your body, your baby, I'm off".

No, because due to maintenance laws here, once a man fathers a child, they can be sued for maintenance for that child, regardless of how much of a role they have in that childs life.

It's one of the aspects of family law that causes grief here (and in many other countries), that men do not have the choice to "insist" on an abortion/remove themselves from parental responsibility and are essentially dependant on a partner who becomes pregnant sharing the decision with them.

There is a concept where the father can essentially sign away any responsibility/rights, but it is not recognised here.

EGAR

I don't know what kind of nutcases read this thread but kindly use your real names when you email me and threaten me with hell . I had a good laugh at your emails and now they where they belong, in the trash folder.

Ridiculous is too mild a word and my advice is to get a life, no pun intended.

Wibbs

EGAR if you've received abusive PM's on this site, please report them and they will be dealt with.

rainbow kirby

EGAR wrote: »

I don't know what kind of nutcases read this thread but kindly use your real names when you email me and threaten me with hell . I had a good laugh at your emails and now they where they belong, in the trash folder.

If you're talking about PMs on here, if you receive anything abusive report it.

Fluorescence

Stheno wrote: »

No, because due to maintenance laws here, once a man fathers a child, they can be sued for maintenance for that child, regardless of how much of a role they have in that childs life.

It's one of the aspects of family law that causes grief here (and in many other countries), that men do not have the choice to "insist" on an abortion/remove themselves from parental responsibility and are essentially dependant on a partner who becomes pregnant sharing the decision with them.

There is a concept where the father can essentially sign away any responsibility/rights, but it is not recognised here.

There absolutely should be something like that in place here. However when you consider the enormous struggle Irish fathers are having getting rights to their kids, it's easy to think that we should tackle that first before working on getting them the ability to walk away. Really what it all boils down to is choice, and putting laws in place to respect and protect our choices as a society.