Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

PopePalpatine

Does anybody see the hypocrisy in David Quinn using Shane McEntee's death as an opportunity to complain about people calling him and Ronan Mullen names?

Hotblack Desiato

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/1228/1224328223403.html

Kenny made repeated inquiries on referendum

LETTERS: Enda Kenny made repeated representations on behalf of constituents in 1981 and 1982 seeking to expedite the introduction of the “pro-life” amendment to the Constitution.

Kenny was prominent among TDs in writing to the Department of the Taoiseach, on each occasion representing constituents on the issue.

On November 3rd, he wrote requesting “individual replies . . . as soon as possible” to 12 letters addressed to him by students at Sacred Heart School in Westport. The dozen letters, which had almost identical wording and were written on school notepaper, sought to know when the referendum would be introduced.

Kenny wrote again to the department in June 1982, making representations for a Co Mayo priest who had urged the TD to “press urgently for the referendum”.

In the one-paragraph letter, the priest wrote “the sooner this legislation goes through and is added to our Constitution the less chance there is of the ‘free thinking’ public’s ideas getting a stronghold on our youth and in our Country”.

Kenny forwarded the correspondence to then taoiseach Charles Haughey, adding: “I would appreciate your comments and up to date position regarding this complex matter.”

Is it any wonder he's dragging his feet now?

aloyisious

Abortion hearings in bigger venue due to level of interest

THE Oireachtas hearings on abortion have been moved to the Seanad chamber because of the huge interest in the contentious issue.

The Oireachtas Health Committee starts its abortion hearings next month, and it will be moved from the normal committee rooms of Leinster House. As many as 40 members of the Oireachtas could turn up to the hearings. Although the committee's membership is restricted to 15 TDs and six senators, any Oireachtas member is entitled to turn up and question witnesses.

The hearings will be broadcast live on the internet and on the Oireachtas TV station on the UPC cable network.

Input

Fine Gael senator Paul Bradford first raised the possibility of using the Seanad earlier this month, and committee chairman Jerry Buttimer confirmed that the initial three hearings, and possibly more, will be held in the Upper House.

"We'll see how it goes for the first three days before we decide if we need it for longer," Mr Buttimer, a TD for Cork South-Central, said.

The first two days will be given over to witnesses from medical and legal professions, with the final day reserved for the churches and advocacy groups.

Before Christmas, the Government outlined plans to legislate and regulate for abortion in cases where there is a threat to the life of the mother – including the highly contentious issue of the threat of suicide.

- Fiach Kelly

Irish Independent

....................................................................................................

On an aside to this post, t'was interesting to have seen a clip filmed in 1982 (or there-about's) on RTE last night with it's then reporter-employee Mary McAleese reporting on the issue (apparently aboard a passenger boat) to highlight the route taken by Irish Women in regard to unwanted pregnancy and abortion (with another woman shown in coated/head-scarfed silhouette).

lazygal

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Does anybody see the hypocrisy in David Quinn using Shane McEntee's death as an opportunity to complain about people calling him and Ronan Mullen names?

Nothing surprises me as regards what David Quinn and his ilk will stoop to.

aloyisious

ninja900 wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/1228/1224328223403.html



Is it any wonder he's dragging his feet now?

In today's Irish Times:

DP

lazygal

Neither side in heated abortion debate has monopoly on nastiness

‘Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me.”

Whoever wrote that nursery rhyme was singularly lacking in insight. Words are not inert. Names hurt and harm.

Journalists Justine McCarthy and Martina Devlin have written about hateful communications from allegedly pro-life people. Justine McCarthy was forced to complain to police about lies that included the claim that she had had an affair and aborted the baby in a private Dublin hospital. The abhorrent allegations were treated by gardaí with the seriousness they deserve.

However, no side has a monopoly on nastiness. After expressing pro-life views, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin was warned to be careful on the street. David Quinn of the Iona Institute (of which I am a patron) received a phone call from someone suggesting that he should be castrated and hung up in O’Connell Street. On Twitter, someone stated that Senator Rónán Mullen should be crucified with rusty nails.

You could dismiss the people who do these appalling things as cranks and nutters, but when such abuse becomes normalised on the internet, it then influences other commentary, which has become noticeably more contemptuous and dismissive. It spreads a net far wider than the current debate on abortion.

As someone with anti-abortion views, I am frequently described as a bigoted religious fundamentalist wishing to impose a theocracy. Those are the nicer comments.

People often talk about the need for greater tolerance. But it is important to realise that tolerance does not mean acceptance and affirmation of other people’s views. Tolerance is much grittier and messier than that. Tolerance means putting up with things of which you do not approve, in order to achieve a greater good, that of a society where human dignity and freedom are respected.

I would not expect people who believe that a woman’s right to bodily integrity and individual autonomy trumps all other rights and responsibilities to accept my views. I would hope they would tolerate them.

However, even in this sense of “putting up with”, there are limits to tolerance. We tolerate people’s right to express opinions, but not to carry out actions that breach human rights.

Limits to tolerance are obvious on matters on which we all agree. No one would suggest that anyone who opposed slavery could say, “Of course, I don’t support slavery in my own country, but I recognise other countries’ right to choose to enslave human beings.”

Suggesting to someone who is anti-abortion they should just not have abortions but still allow abortion legislation, is to miss the point completely.

It’s the same as suggesting to someone who doesn’t approve of female genital mutilation (FGM) that they just shouldn’t have it done to their daughter, but should not be so judgmental as to oppose laws permitting it for others. Such a suggestion would be seen as outrageous because it would mean tolerating an assault on a defenceless child.

Just to be clear, I am not equating FGM with abortion. There is no perfect analogy for abortion, because it involves a unique interplay between the rights of two human beings. However, I don’t see the life in the womb as the enemy of the mother, but as a son or daughter who, like the mother, has a right to all of our protection.

It would be wonderful if people who are pro-choice could see that for someone who believes that life begins at conception, there is no choice except to oppose the direct and intentional targeting of that life. It is not woman-hating, or fundamentalism, or any other malign motivation. It is upholding a basic human right.

To much acclaim, President Obama recently said: “This is our first task, caring for our children. It’s our first job. If we don’t get that right, we don’t get anything right. That’s how, as a society, we will be judged.”

I agree with him, except I believe becoming a parent starts from the moment of conception. Most of the time, the rest of the world seems to agree with me. For example, the chief medical officer states baldly: it is in the child’s best interests for a pregnant woman not to drink alcohol during pregnancy. The Health Promotion Unit’s advice on smoking in pregnancy is called “Give your baby a breather”.

It is only when extreme stress or a crisis descends on a woman, that it is suddenly no longer seen as a baby, but a choice. I don’t stand in judgment on women who have had abortions. I don’t know what I would have done myself as a younger woman. Therefore, my preferred option is to support women in crisis, so that abortion would never have to be perceived as the “least bad” option.

It has little to do with my religious beliefs. I know that, because during an agnostic period (which stemmed, ironically enough, from a miscarriage) I still abhorred abortion.

Tolerance is not the same as non-judgmentalism. A healthy democracy thrives on strongly held views. It is only when strongly held views degenerate into contempt for the people and groups who hold them that our society becomes a scarier place to be.


Breda 'Iona and Proud of It' O'Brien once again weighs in with her teachery I know best what the right thing is piece in today's Irish Times. Is it just me or is the nicey-nicey tone trying to soften the middle ground in the abortion debate to thinking she's reasonable enough?

Hotblack Desiato

^ Link to the above: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/1229/1224328248463.html

All except the last paragraph is Breda's...

PopePalpatine

A quick Google search tells me that Breda has a nice cushy job at Muckross Park College in D4. Yep, she totally represents the average Irishwoman. :rolleyes:

lazygal

PopePalpatine wrote: »

A quick Google search tells me that Breda has a nice cushy job at Muckross Park College in D4. Yep, she totally represents the average Irishwoman. :rolleyes:

I wonder what she'd say if one of her 14 year old students came to her looking for help because she was feeling suicidal as a result of pregnancy through rape. Compassion doesn't strike me as one of her obvious qualities.

Turtwig

For a moment there I'd thought Lazygal had gone a bit bonkers. Patron of Iona?:o

Obliq

Great article I missed on the 23rd Dec by Gene Kerrigan: http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/gene-kerrigan-the-facts-of-life-that-we-dont-discuss-3334364.html

"Last week, Senator Ronan Mullen equated abortion with a gunman's recent massacre of 20 children in Connecticut. He was condemned immediately, which wasn't fair. This is Mullen's genuine belief. Prominent anti-abortion activists speak of "the culture of death". The many and varied reasons for which women seek an abortion are brushed aside – such women, and those who respect their choices, are "agents of the culture of death".

What's puzzling is why the alleged "pro-lifers" don't follow the logic of their position. If there's the equivalent of a Newtown massacre every two weeks, as Irish women take the abortion trail to the UK, why is there not a clamour to close that trail?

Why no campaign to take the specifically pro-abortion clauses on travel and information out of the Constitution?

Why no proposals for draconian measures to stop women smuggling foetuses through customs, to murder them – as Senator Mullen might categorise it – in the UK?

Certainly, this would isolate the alleged "pro-lifers" from many who have no wish to be intolerant, but who have qualms about abortion."

lazygal

Obliq wrote: »

Great article I missed on the 23rd Dec by Gene Kerrigan: http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/gene-kerrigan-the-facts-of-life-that-we-dont-discuss-3334364.html

"Last week, Senator Ronan Mullen equated abortion with a gunman's recent massacre of 20 children in Connecticut. He was condemned immediately, which wasn't fair. This is Mullen's genuine belief. Prominent anti-abortion activists speak of "the culture of death". The many and varied reasons for which women seek an abortion are brushed aside – such women, and those who respect their choices, are "agents of the culture of death".

What's puzzling is why the alleged "pro-lifers" don't follow the logic of their position. If there's the equivalent of a Newtown massacre every two weeks, as Irish women take the abortion trail to the UK, why is there not a clamour to close that trail?

Why no campaign to take the specifically pro-abortion clauses on travel and information out of the Constitution?

Why no proposals for draconian measures to stop women smuggling foetuses through customs, to murder them – as Senator Mullen might categorise it – in the UK?

Certainly, this would isolate the alleged "pro-lifers" from many who have no wish to be intolerant, but who have qualms about abortion."

Asked my anti choice FG TD if he was going to introduce legislation to ensure unborn children aren't being taken out of the country to be killed in another jurisdiction. Strangely he hasn't bothered to respond.

Obliq

Good one missus! We should be putting it up to them like that. There's no room for politicians mouthing off about pro-life this/culture of death that, unless they're prepared to approach the issue of the 5,000 head-on.

Not to mention the IVF embryo selection process. In my estimation, more embryos are killed through this than through abortion each year - not a word from the pro-lifers because (IMO) that would be attacking women who WANT to be pregnant, and would get the backs up of a huge percentage of "catholic" Ireland.

The Black Oil

Not surprisingly, when Mullen's comments (and the culture of death ones) were put to a pro-life rep on the PK radio show just before Christmas she didn't distance herself from them. More of this to come, no doubt.

Obliq

The Black Oil wrote: »

Not surprisingly, when one Mullen's comments (and the culture of death ones) were put to a pro-life rep on the PK radio show just before Christmas she didn't distance herself from them. More of this to come, no doubt.

Well they should be standing over their beliefs. That's fair enough! What gets me is when they call abortion murder, they won't put their money where mouth is and call the 5,000 women per year murderers. Also the IVF participants/medical practitioners.

To me, it shows how worried they are about the part-time catholics and how they'd react to such a hard-line. They must know that most would come down on the side of compassion for born people's lives, and can't risk the argument.

We need to bring the argument to them.

lazygal

The Black Oil wrote: »

Not surprisingly, when one Mullen's comments (and the culture of death ones) were put to a pro-life rep on the PK radio show just before Christmas she didn't distance herself from them. More of this to come, no doubt.

I also heard Breda Iona O'Brien claim to be the only pro life voice on a radio show and enjoyed hearing her withdraw the remark when every other person there told her to cop on. That vile senator Mullen also accused Peter Boylan who's spent his career dealing with pregnant women, unlike Mullen, of campaigning for abortion. The anti choice brigade will smear whoever and whatever they need to in order to deny women a normal medical procedure, all dressed up as "don't Irish women deserve better' mock concern for the 'unborn'.

PopePalpatine

Speaking of abortion and Breda O'Whine-en:

Ken Mawhinney wrote:

Sir, – Since November 10th, 2012, there have been eight issues of the Saturday edition of The Irish Times. In six of these issues, the subject matter of Breda O’Brien’s column has been the abortion issue.

On another day (December 8th) she discussed the blurring of the line between journalists’ opinions and reporting, but the focus of her piece soon emerged as – yes – abortion.

Does your columnist have to return to this topic week after week? Has she only one string to her harp? – Yours, etc,
.

Gbear

lazygal wrote: »

I also heard Breda Iona O'Brien claim to be the only pro life voice on a radio show and enjoyed hearing her withdraw the remark when every other person there told her to cop on. That vile senator Mullen also accused Peter Boylan who's spent his career dealing with pregnant women, unlike Mullen, of campaigning for abortion. The anti choice brigade will smear whoever and whatever they need to in order to deny women a normal medical procedure, all dressed up as "don't Irish women deserve better' mock concern for the 'unborn'.

I'm sure that they think that the end justifies the means but as Penn Jilette says, "there is no end, there is only the means".

expectationlost

Oireachtas Committee on Health and Children

Tuesday, 8 January

Session 1: 9.30am – 11.30am:

Department of Health
Irish Medical Council

Session 2: 11.45am – 1.45pm

Dr Rhona Mahony, Master at the National Maternity Hospital
Dr Sam Coulter Smyth, Master at the Rotunda Hospital
Dr Mary McCaffrey, Kerry Hospital, Tralee

Session 3: 2.45pm to 4.45pm

Dr Anthony McCarthy, College of Psychiatry Ireland
Dr Joanne Fention, College of Psychiatry Ireland
Dr John Sheehan, College of Psychiatry Ireland
Professor Patricia Casey, Dept. of Adult Psychiatry, UCD & Mater Misercordiae University Hospital
Professor Veronica O’Kane, Dept. of Psychiatry, Tallaght Hospital

Session 4: 5pm to 7pm

Niall Behan, CEO of the Irish Family Planning Association
The Institute of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists
Maternal Death Inquiry Ireland

Wednesday, 9 January (legal hearings)

Session 1: 9.30am – 11.30am

Jennifer Schweppe, University of Limerick
Ciara Staunton, NUI Galway
Dr Simon Mills, Law Library

Session 2: 11.45am – 1.45pm

Bar Council of Ireland
Irish Council of Civil Liberties

Session 3: 2.45pm – 4.15pm

Professor William Binchy, Trinity College Dublin
Hon. Judge Catherine McGuinness

Thursday, 10 January

Session 1: 9.30am – 11.30am

Irish Catholic Bishops Conference
Church of Ireland
Presbyterian Church of Ireland
Methodist Church of Ireland
Islamic Cultural Centre of Ireland

Session 2: 11.45am – 1.45pm

Caroline Simons and Dr Berry Kiely of the Pro-Life Campaign
Dr Eoghan de Faoite and Dr Seán O’Domhnaill of Youth Defence
Patrick Carr and David Manley of Family & Life
Breda O’Brien of the Iona Institute

Session 3: 2.45pm – 4.45pm

Sinéad Ahern of Choice Ireland
Orla O’Connor, director of Action on X, National Women’s Council of Ireland

so should atheists/secularist/humanists be in there too? not that there not represented elsewhere on the list of invitess and the religious also aren't represented across the whole lists aswell

GCU Flexible Demeanour

expectationlost wrote: »

so should atheists/secularist/humanists be in there too? not that there not represented elsewhere on the list of invitess and the religious artn't represented across the whole lists aswell

Certainly, it would be interesting to see why they picked those particular groups. Why talk to the Islamic community, but ignore the Chief Rabbi?

Hotblack Desiato

Buddhists and Hindus are ignored as well and they're far larger than Jews these days.

The second largest religious view in Ireland is, of course, entirely ignored. It is 'no religion'.

Michael Nugent

Atheist Ireland has asked to be be invited to take part in the morning session on Thursday 10 January, when the committee is hearing from the Irish Catholic Bishops Conference, Church of Ireland, Presbyterian Church of Ireland, Methodist Church of Ireland, and Islamic Cultural Centre of Ireland.

Ideally, there should be no need to hear any specifically religious views, but if they are hearing religious views, then they should also hear nonreligious views.

We want to outline the case for the Government to approach this issue from an ethical secular perspective, and not on the basis of theological beliefs.

Our policy is that society should address ethical issues based on human rights and compassion, and applying reason to empirical evidence, and not on religious doctrines; and that individual ethical decisions should where possible be made on the basis of personal autonomy and individual conscience, while not infringing on the rights of others.

Also, as one example, Cardinal Brady has recently asked people to tell their public representatives that the right to life is conferred on human beings by ‘the creator’. We want to explain why we believe the Government should not legislate or regulate on the basis of imposing such theological ideas on citizens who do not share them.

If you would like to let the Health Committee members know you support this request, the members of the Committee are:

Jerry.Buttimer@oireachtas.ie, Catherine.Byrne@oireachtas.ie, Michael.Colreavy@oireachtas.ie, Ciara.Conway@oireachtas.ie, Regina.Doherty@oireachtas.ie, Robert.Dowds@oireachtas.ie, Peter.Fitzpatrick@oireachtas.ie, Seamus.Healy@oireachtas.ie, Billy.Kelleher@oireachtas.ie, Eamonn.Maloney@oireachtas.ie, Mary.MitchellOConnor@oireachtas.ie, Mattie.McGrath@oireachtas.ie, Denis.Naughten@oireachtas.ie, Caoimhghin.OCaolain@oireachtas.ie, Robert.Troy@oireachtas.ie, Colm.Burke@oireachtas.ie, John.Crown@oireachtas.ie, John.Gilroy@oireachtas.ie, Imelda.Henry@oireachtas.ie, Marc.MacSharry@oireachtas.ie, Jillian.VanTurnhout@oireachtas.ie

expectationlost

I presume Atheist Ireland still doesn't take a position on abortion, no less atheists in general, although i would guess your would try to support the high court ruling for a still very limited aborition, but can one add to the discussion while not having a position, or while trying not revealing it.

although you want your contribution to be a little meta

Atheist Ireland wishes to outline the case for the Government to approach this issue from an ethical secular perspective, and not on the basis of theological beliefs.

argueing for secular judgement rather then about abortion

Zombrex

expectationlost wrote: »

I presume Atheist Ireland still doesn't take a position on abortion, no less atheists in general, although i would guess your would try to support the high court ruling for a still very limited aborition, but can one add to the discussion while not having a position, or while trying not revealing it.

although you want your contribution to be a little meta argueing for secular judgement rathen about abortion

I think the position is basically this

Michael Nugent

Atheist Ireland has now been invited to take part in this hearing.

Thank you to anyone here who emailed the Oireachtas Health Committee, and thank you to the Health Committee for its prompt and courteous response to our request.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Michael Nugent wrote: »

Our policy is that society should address ethical issues based on human rights and compassion, and applying reason to empirical evidence, and not on religious doctrines;

What does this actually mean, in this case?

I've a feeling that the response will be a secular version of "that would be an Ecumenical matter".

PopePalpatine

^ It seems very clear to me.

expectationlost

A bilateral meeting between the church and Government Ministers is scheduled for next week as part of an ongoing “structured dialogue” process, while the Irish Catholic Bishops’ Conference will appear before the Oireachtas health committee on Thursday morning.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2013/0107/1224328510072.html

did AI ever go to these or just the humanists association

lazygal

Why do celebate men get to have a meeting with the government? What makes them so special?

Obliq

Michael Nugent wrote: »

Atheist Ireland has now been invited to take part in this hearing.

Thank you to anyone here who emailed the Oireachtas Health Committee, and thank you to the Health Committee for its prompt and courteous response to our request.

That's really good news.