Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Sycopat

Jernal wrote: »

The stigma against mental health isn't as pronounced as it used to be, but suppose it was extremely pronounced. Would it be fair to say that people who campaign for mental health awareness and equality of sorts, don't give a crap about physical health?

No, but in such a society a group that campaigns for 'health awareness' but only campaigns on physical or mental health issues and ignores one aspect could be described as not giving a crap about the aspect it's ignoring.

I don't think Bannasidhes issue is the specific focus of these groups, it's that the claim a broader focus than they actually have. They claim 'children' but in practise only mean 'pre-birth'.


To try an analogy of my own (cos' everyone else is doing it ):
If I put ads out claiming to buy any car for 200euro, no questions asked, and you tried to sell me a random banger you'd be rightfully pissed off if I refused you on the grounds I only accept cars made in 1971 with a full service history and in working order.

Its a subset of what I've claimed, but it's such a specific subset I'd be liable for false advertising.

The Black Oil

TomCo wrote: »

I found this photo set yesterday from that event.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/paul_reynolds/sets/72157632177916694/with/8246434639/

You can clearly see the age demographic is solidly in the OAP bracket. Gives me a lot of hope that this anti-choice nonsense is generational.

The text on the pictures is interesting too:

Interesting to see this comment on the RTE is anti-Catholic one.

'Organisers tried to block this man from view, I overheard them say 'we have to get him out of here'

Wonder if this is true. They must have been a little concerned about how it might affect their brand.

Obliq

Btw - that "vigil for life" thingy is giving away free ipads to encourage people to attend!!

Taken from YD page: "Check back here for further information! You will all be witnesses to history! The best 2-minute video, best single photo, and best image set will win an Ipad! The Press is against us in this fight to save our babies, so everyone is a reporter at this historic event. Help us tell the world with great pictures and video!"

Oh boy. The actual "vigil for life" page has nearly 1000 likes and is giving it loads. Hmmm, I'm not banned off there...... Don't have the bleedin energy to argue with those muppets tonight. Maybe tomorrow. https://www.facebook.com/VigilforlifeIreland

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Sycopat wrote: »

They claim 'children' but in practise only mean 'pre-birth'.

Again, a line that sounds credible to us, but won't have any impact on them. Because they can simply respond that no-one is calling for legislation to enable children to be abused, where a campaign is active in calling for legislation allowing abortion.

If their judgement is that the immediate threat that they need to devote their attention to is abortion, there's no particular case to say they are wrong. It's just a silly, begrudging argument.

Kiwi in IE

Obliq wrote: »

Btw - that "vigil for life" thingy is giving away free ipads to encourage people to attend!!

Taken from YD page: "Check back here for further information! You will all be witnesses to history! The best 2-minute video, best single photo, and best image set will win an Ipad! The Press is against us in this fight to save our babies, so everyone is a reporter at this historic event. Help us tell the world with great pictures and video!"

They are not fighting to save THEIR 'babies'. They are anti abortion. Therefore when it is legalised they won't be availing of the service. Their fetuses will be just fine! They are fighting to force their beliefs on those who don't share them.

Turtwig

Obliq wrote: »

Btw - that "vigil for life" thingy is giving away free ipads to encourage people to attend!!

Taken from YD page: "Check back here for further information! You will all be witnesses to history! The best 2-minute video, best single photo, and best image set will win an Ipad! The Press is against us in this fight to save our babies, so everyone is a reporter at this historic event. Help us tell the world with great pictures and video!"

Oh boy. The actual "vigil for life" page has nearly 1000 likes and is giving it loads. Hmmm, I'm not banned off there...... Don't have the bleedin energy to argue with those muppets tonight. Maybe tomorrow. https://www.facebook.com/VigilforlifeIreland

Aww dang I can't see anything about Ipads. If I could I'd report them to facebook for running a competition directly on FB.

Obliq

Hiho, hihoo, it's off to work I go......how do you do screen shots on linux?? Feck it. Never needed to before.

Obliq

Jernal wrote: »

Aww dang I can't see anything about Ipads. If I could I'd report them to facebook for running a competition directly on FB.

Ooops, bit big. Sorry. Can't be arsed trying to get the Gimp to fix it - the screenshot crop was tricky enough for this hour of the evening. Do thy worst, with my blessing :-)

lazygal

'Warriors of the unborn' makes them sound like crusaders engaged in some sort of weird foetus worship. What's so unimportant about being a warrior for born people too? Or are they able to fight their own battles?

Obliq

Oh that woman is total nutjob. I have been on the receiving end of her "battle 4 de baibees" before now. She turns up in every post.

The Black Oil

'Warriors of the unborn unite'.

When's the trailer out?

lazygal

Warriors of the Unborn sounds like a heavy medal band, come to think of it.

Kiwi in IE

I have just looked at the YD Facebook page for the first time. Really? Are they serious? What is wrong with those people? 70 000ish people have liked that page. If there are 70 000 people who are that deluded, the country has no hope catching up to the 21st century on this issue and others like it!

jank

:rolleyes:

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Really. There is no evidence to prove God exists - there is ample evidence of the existence of hungry children.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs178/en/index.html

A nice strawman there. Of course there are hungry children but what you implied is that ALL pro-lifers blame their parents lack of work ethic or education for their children being hungry. A typical stereotype portrayal of a group you happen to disagree with.
Don't Atheists eat babies? Sure arent all Irish drunk all the time... and so on...

You are better than that Bannasidhe.

Bannasidhe

jank wrote: »

:rolleyes:

A nice strawman there. Of course there are hungry children but what you implied is that ALL pro-lifers blame their parents lack of work ethic or education for their children being hungry. A typical stereotype portrayal of a group you happen to disagree with.
Don't Atheists eat babies? Sure arent all Irish drunk all the time... and so on...

You are better than that Bannasidhe.

No I bloody well didn't.

jank

Do you want me to start a Panto?

Bannasidhe

jank wrote: »

Do you want me to start a Panto?

I thought you already had.

ShooterSF

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I have just looked at the YD Facebook page for the first time. Really? Are they serious? What is wrong with those people? 70 000ish people have liked that page. If there are 70 000 people who are that deluded, the country has no hope catching up to the 21st century on this issue and others like it!

But does it show how many of them 70,000 are Irish? Also I wouldn't put it past Youth Defence, given their history, of creating accounts to like the page so they seem popular. I can imagine looking through them would be something similar to Lisa and Bart looking through the list of voters for Bob.

Mark Hamill

Jernal wrote: »

With all due respect, this is irrelevant. We're comparing one category of children with another. A more relevant question would have concerned, penguins chicks born in snug conditions with penguin chicks born into much more harsher struggles.

But thats why its relevant. A group claims to be pro child, and yet is only very pro one category, and almost negative any other.

I know what you are saying and I would agree if the pro-birth organisations (YD, the Church and the like) were just charities, but we both know they are not. They are religious and political organisations using sweeping emotive language to try and get people to do what best suits their organisations thirst for power. Pointing out the massive inconsistencies between these groups religious/philosophical claims and their actual actions is a valuable thing to do.

Nodin

jank wrote: »

Do you want me to start a Panto?

No, as this stage you should produce the quote that backs your statement, should it exist. Should that not exist, you may proceed to garner attention by a humorous Widow Twanky style monologue.

Sarky

Humorous?

Dades

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Again, a line that sounds credible to us, but won't have any impact on them. Because they can simply respond that no-one is calling for legislation to enable children to be abused, where a campaign is active in calling for legislation allowing abortion.

If their judgement is that the immediate threat that they need to devote their attention to is abortion, there's no particular case to say they are wrong. It's just a silly, begrudging argument.

Have been following all this and was just going to post something like the above.

From the POV of "pro-lifers" they only see a fetus as a teeny-tiny child, and therefore their priority is to allow them to escape without being legally murdered. As there is legislation (however inadequate) protecting the child as soon as it is born, the first cause is by far the more urgent one.

I think to bring any arguments about "what about the child" you'd have to have hard facts about what these individuals and organisations have done to the detriment of children who made it out of the womb. (Religious indoctrination, anyone? :pac:)

fitz0

ShooterSF wrote: »

But does it show how many of them 70,000 are Irish? Also I wouldn't put it past Youth Defence, given their history, of creating accounts to like the page so they seem popular. I can imagine looking through them would be something similar to Lisa and Bart looking through the list of voters for Bob.

If you go into the Facebook advert buying section and set your target audience to the US or to Ireland and put in Youth Defence as an interest you come up with the following stats.





So you see, the US YD likes are almost double the Irish likes.

stanley 2

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

As for the 'young women' picture, I can see around 5 women that might be considered young-ish and 2 or 3 more that could be charitably described as relatively young. The other 50 odd are the usual reactionary geriatrics.

sounds abit agist would you object if they were black or ect

fitz0

stanley 2 wrote: »

sounds abit agist would you object if they were black or ect

The YD facebook post clearly says 'Why did so many young women attend the recent pro-life vigil in Dublin?'

Seems to me you're looking to be offended.

robindch

The counter-rally comes to the attention of the Irish Times:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2013/0117/breaking20.html

Irish Times wrote:

Pro-choice groups have organised a counter-demonstration in Dublin on Saturday to coincide with a major pro-life rally.

Pro-choice groups are planning to hold a silent protest at 4.30pm on Merrion Square. The protest will coincide with the “Unite for Life” vigil which has been organised by a number of leading pro-life groups. The vigil will include speeches from Pro Life Campaign’s Caroline Simons and the Life Institute’s Niamh Ui Bhriain.

The counter-demonstration was announced through the Facebook page 'Unlike Youth Defence, I trust women to decide their lives for themselves' and so far has over 200 people saying the will be attending. Pro Life Campaign’s deputy chairwoman Cora Sherlock said she is expecting to a calm and respectful day.

“We live in a democracy. Everyone has the right to express their opinions. They can turn up and be silent or they can turn up and say things. It doesn’t really matter that much,” she said. Ms Sherlock added that the groups are hoping for a large turnout for their event. “There are buses coming from across the country, so certainly we are expecting over 10,000 people to turn up. Hopefully the weather will hold up for us.”

Counter-demonstration organiser Sarah Malone said she was planning the event for around a week now, as she is “offended and outraged” that the vigil is being organised to protest legislation against the X case. “The level of outrage is so high that we can’t just sit by and watch as this happens. It is undemocratic for them to present themselves as a majority when it is clear through a series of polls and referenda that that is not the case and it’s outrageous that they would apply pressure on legislators not to legislate for something the people clearly want,” she said.

“We are going to be silent, which will hopefully rule out any chance of confrontation. We don’t want this to turn into a shouting match.”

The counter-demonstration is to be joined with an abortion rights campaign planning day, which is running from 10.45am to 5pm. Independent TD Clare Daly, who has spoken at many pro-choice rallies, said she will not be attending the counter-demonstration, as she will be speaking at the conference. “Everyone has the right to protest, but the pro-choice protest needs to get more organised. That’s what the conference is for,” she said. “I didn’t even know there was a counter-demonstration taking place and the conference was organised since before Christmas.”

Turtwig

Letter to the Irish Medical Times.
Godwin time!

Dear Editor,
What is this madness that has gripped our Government? On November 11, the Children’s referendum was passed under the slogan ‘every child matters’ and now the Government wants to enact a law to allow doctors to terminate unborn babies in the womb.
Indeed, the State, by enacting a law legalising abortion, is in fact recognising that the unborn child has no innate right to life, as the purpose of this law is to divest the unborn child of his or her right to be born into this world, as nature intended.
Is this not willful discrimination against innocent human beings because of their age or where they reside, or maybe because of the circumstances of their parents? Of course the child has no escape, has no defence, cannot raise a voice in protest against this sentence at the hands of a medical practitioner who is allowed to terminate him or her under the law of the land. Justice is forgotten, the strong may kill the weak.
The effects of such an evil practice will not only kill an innocent child but will harm his or her mother and father and the wider family, and will debase the respect for life in society. It will sully the medical profession — doctors are healers, not killers, and as the ‘Dublin Declaration’ on maternal healthcare of December 8 affirms, “direct abortion is not medically necessary to save the life of the mother”.
Remember the words of Pastor Martin Niemöller about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power. To paraphrase: ‘They came first for the Communists, then they came for the Jews, then they came for the Catholics, but I didn’t speak up because I did not belong to any of those groups, and then they came for me and there was no one left to speak up for me.’
Wake up, people of Ireland — if you love your country please take a stand and speak up on behalf of the defenceless unborn child against such an unjust law. Who will be next in line to be deleted?

old hippy

"if you love your country" :rolleyes:

If I was capable of such a feat, I'd show my romantic inclinations by introducing sex education, not just at secondary level but for adults, as well. And of course, birth control and abortion. And I'd still respect me in the morning.

aloyisious

There's a large billboard poster in Bray from the Pro-life campaign side and I think it's has been used before in Pro-life campigns. It has an image of a feotus in the womb (X-ray Scan type photo) with the words "look after me today, so I can look after you later" or words to that effect.

fitz0

This Dublin Declaration - does anyone have any information on this? I remember it in the papers but I can't recall the details. Their website is remarkably silent on who was involved beyond a single picture with no names.

It's not a government site, its registered by proxy in Arizona, so what credibility does the Committee on Excellence in Maternal Healthcare have? It's a very 1 dimensional website, no explanations or anything.