Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Dades

Silvio.Dante taking another (longer) break for effectively trolling. He/she may genuinely hold to what he is saying but glib one-liners and refusal to acknowledge the realities presented are causing disruption.

Everyone take a breather, and preferably stop responding to Silvio's posts that this thread might get some dignity back.

Bannasidhe

Dades wrote: »

Everyone take a breather, and preferably stop responding to Silvio's posts that this thread might get some dignity back.

When you're right, you're right.

I think many of us were so gobsmacked by the level of ignorance of our political system and the blithe dismissal of the constitutional repercussions of what Silvio seems to think is a simple matter of a vote in the Dáil that we couldn't help responding...:(

_rebelkid

Bannasidhe wrote: »

When you're right, you're right.

I think many of us were so gobsmacked by the level of ignorance of our political system and the blithe dismissal of the constitutional repercussions of what Silvio seems to think is a simple matter of a vote in the Dáil that we couldn't help responding...:(

Not to mention the fact that he is inconsistent with his "argument". Has contradicted himself numerous times.

....and breathe

pauldla

I was just starting to like him.

Flier

Problem is it's fruitcakes like our friend here and his ilk in YD and the other tenants of their building who are making the most noise, and we know how sensitive our TD's are to what they perceive as 'public opinion'. I hope they realise that the vast majority are in favour of legislating for x, and don't try and protract the whole thing out for another couple of years. But I do thing the 'status quo' has changed - it's no longer no legislation on x, but an acknowledgment of the requirement to legislate for x, no matter how much some people don't want it to happen.

Obliq

Excellent That's made my day better. Now, here's an actually interesting article from people living in this century.

This one I found on Doctors For Choice facebook page: http://io9.com/5958187/what-happens-to-women-denied-abortions-this-is-the-first-scientific-study-to-find-out

"The women in the Turnaway Study were in comparable economic positions at the time they sought abortions. 45% were on public assistance and two-thirds had household incomes below the federal poverty level. One of the main reasons women cite for wanting to abort is money, and based on the outcomes for the turnaways, it seems they are right.

Most of the women who were denied an abortion, 86%, were living with their babies a year later. Only 11% had put them up for adoption. Also a year later, they were far more likely to be on public assistance — 76% of the turnaways were on the dole, as opposed to 44% of those who got abortions. 67% percent of the turnaways were below the poverty line (vs. 56% of the women who got abortions), and only 48% had a full time job (vs. 58% of the women who got abortions)."

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Doctors-For-Choice-Ireland/522714117761585 if anyone's interested in supporting them. They're on twitter and all that too, but newly joined up to facebook.

Banbh

The problem with the abortion debate is that it is not a conflict between good and evil. It is a case of choosing which is the lessser of two evils.

Unfortunately in a democracy we must make choices, define laws, draw lines - on this side it is permissible and on the other it is not.

There are those who, though they may be well-meaning, caring and concerned, shrink from making those mature decisions and rely on supernatural forces (as interpreted by elderly men living in isolation) to give absolute certainty to their lives.

In the real world, we citizens must choose, based on our human experience and values. It's not as easy but it's the best we have.

MrPudding

The folks in Mississippi are having a bot of a struggle...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/24/mississippi-abortion-clinic-legal-battle

MrP

loveisdivine

Banbh wrote: »

The problem with the abortion debate is that it is not a conflict between good and evil. It is a case of choosing which is the lessser of two evils.

Unfortunately in a democracy we must make choices, define laws, draw lines - on this side it is permissible and on the other it is not.

There are those who, though they may be well-meaning, caring and concerned, shrink from making those mature decisions and rely on supernatural forces (as interpreted by elderly men living in isolation) to give absolute certainty to their lives.

In the real world, we citizens must choose, based on our human experience and values. It's not as easy but it's the best we have.

I have to disagree with you here. I dont think it is about choosing the lesser of two evils. Because I dont think abortion is evil and I dont think a lot of other people do either. I feel like people just say that to try and placate the other side.

Also, a good chunk of the pro birth side are not well meaning and caring. Well they do care, but only about their own agenda.

Why does the issue have to be turned into some heart wrenching, horrible decision to be made? People chose to legislate for X easily, its the government making it hard.

Obliq

MrPudding wrote: »

The folks in Mississippi are having a bot of a struggle...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/24/mississippi-abortion-clinic-legal-battle

MrP

Yeah - a no-brainer as to why this legality will close the clinic.....

"Mississippi lawmakers have openly stated that the legislation, which requires the clinic's doctors to gain admitting privileges at local hospitals, is aimed at closing JWHO and thus ending abortion in the state."

....and further down the article:

"Such privileges are also difficult to obtain for abortion doctors in a state where many hospitals are affiliated with churches."

Banbh

Well 'evil' may be a bit strong but the phrase 'lesser of two evils' is well understood. Maybe not-a-good-thing-in-itself would be better, much in the way locking people in cells is not a good thing but better than the alternative.

Obliq

Long PDF, but very interesting:

Termination of pregnancy as emergency obstetric care: the interpretation of Catholic health policy and the consequences for pregnant women. An analysis of the death of Savita Halappanavar in Ireland and similar cases

Marge Berer

Editor, Reproductive Health Matters. Correspondence: mberer@rhmjournal.org.uk

“There is only one way to be sure a woman’s life is at risk, that is, after she dies.” (Christian Fiala, 2012)

https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/attachments/318686/237935.pdf

The Black Oil

Meanwhile in New Mexico...

Wtf?

Obliq

Oh wow. That's extraordinarily stupid :eek:

LittleBook

The Black Oil wrote: »

Meanwhile in New Mexico...

Wtf?

Not surprised once I read it was a female Republican representative :rolleyes:

Arizona Birth Control Bill Penalizes Women For Using Contraception For Non-Medical Reasons - Debbie Lesko (R-Glendale)

Law Requiring Ultrasound Before Abortion Heads To Gov Mcdonnell - Kathy Byron (R-Campbell)

Lingua Franca

That story was brought to my attention by American friends last night. They, being mostly a crowd of gaming 20 something males, are usually disinterested in the subject of abortion but that one news story had them going "over my dead body will I allow anyone to chip away at Roe vs Wade".

The lady rep. in question has said that it was meant to punish attackers and not victims, but I cannot for the life of me see how.

The Black Oil

Yeah, I thought that as well.

There's no war on women, right?

aloyisious

While it's not directly relative to the issue of abortion, the RC Church in the US is in a bit of a tizzy over this hospital's defence of a malpractice/wrongful death lawsuit..................

irishtimes.com - Last Updated: Friday, January 25, 2013, 10:13
Church concern at hospital foetus stance

Three Colorado bishops said today they will review a Catholic Church hospital's defence of a lawsuit that argues foetuses do not have legal status - apparently contradicting the Church's teaching on life issues.

Three Colorado bishops said today they will review a Catholic Church hospital's defence of a lawsuit that argues foetuses do not have legal status - apparently contradicting the Church's teaching on life issues.

The case stems from a malpractice and wrongful death lawsuit filed by Jeremy Stodghill in the 2006 death of his seven-month pregnant wife Lori at a Catholic hospital in Canon City, Colorado. Her twin foetuses also died.

Mr Stodghill filed the suit against Colorado-based Catholic Health Initiatives, which operates hospitals in 14 states, claiming physicians made no effort to save the fetuses by performing a caesarean section.

In its defense, counsel for the hospital said that under Colorado law, a foetus is not a person and that the twins likely would not have survived even with an emergency C-section.

In a letter, Denver Archbishop Samuel Aquila, Colorado Springs Bishop Michael Sheridan and Pueblo Bishop Fernando Isern said that Catholic institutions had "a duty to protect and foster human life", which they said begins at conception. "No Catholic institution may legitimately work to undermine fundamental human dignity," the statement said.

The bishops said that they would carry out a "full review of this litigation and of the policies and practises ... to ensure fidelity and faithful witness to the teachings of the Catholic Church."

Two lower courts sided with the hospital group, and Mr Stodghill has appealed to the Colorado supreme court, which has not yet decided if it will hear the case.

Reuters

Dades

^^ While the intent is noble - that's the fourth time that story has been referenced here!

28064212

Dades wrote: »

^^ While the intent is noble - that's the fourth time that story has been referenced here!

In fairness, it is an update. Previous stories didn't mention the bishops rowing back on the decision

LittleBook

Anyone in the IFSC with a camera? There's a mobile advertising truck parked in the taxi rank on Mayor Street. It has an anti-abortion ad from Precious Life.

Now I know we've seen plenty of these going around but what's striking about this one is that they've designed it in such a way that, at first glance, it looks like a Fine Gael anti-abortion poster.

"Fine Gael" is in HUGE letters followed by "The only way is to love them both?" with "Precious Life" in small print in the bottom corner. And, it appears to me, the Fine Gael colours/logo are implied in the "two hands" logo used in the ad.

Is it possible Fine Gael is involved in these ads or is it a clever manipulation on behalf of Precious Life?

Bannasidhe

28064212 wrote: »

In fairness, it is an update. Previous stories didn't mention the bishops rowing back on the decision

and it makes me laugh at the irony every time I read it.

The Mad Hatter

LittleBook wrote: »

Anyone in the IFSC with a camera? There's a mobile advertising truck parked in the taxi rank on Mayor Street. It has an anti-abortion ad from Precious Life.

Now I know we've seen plenty of these going around but what's striking about this one is that they've designed it in such a way that, at first glance, it looks like a Fine Gael anti-abortion poster.

"Fine Gael" is in HUGE letters followed by "The only way is to love them both?" with "Precious Life" in small print in the bottom corner. And, it appears to me, the Fine Gael colours/logo are implied in the "two hands" logo used in the ad.

Is it possible Fine Gael is involved in these ads or is it a clever manipulation on behalf of Precious Life?

I doubt it. They've got one at the Talbot Street entrance to Connolly Station too, on a billboard.

LittleBook

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

I doubt it. They've got one at the Talbot Street entrance to Connolly Station too, on a billboard.

There's also a billboard near Crumlin Village which I noticed the other day and, at a glance, assumed it was a Fine Gael ad.

OCorcrainn

I think it is wrong to equate anti-abortion with religion, there are plently of atheists out there who would be anti-abortion.

Bringing religion into the debate, and associating an individual who opposes abortion as someone who is religious undermines it, and the integrity of the one who puts it forth.

It is wrong to generalize.

Btw. Medical termination =/= Abortion

Sierra 117

A medical termination is an abortion. Try to dress it up all you want, it's still an abortion.

Flier

OCorcrainn wrote: »

I think it is wrong to equate anti-abortion with religion, there are plently of atheists out there who would be anti-abortion.

Bringing religion into the debate, and associating an individual who opposes abortion as someone who is religious undermines it, and the integrity of the one who puts it forth.

It is wrong to generalize.

Btw. Medical termination =/= Abortion

An abortion is the termination of pregnancy.
In so far as an abortion can be spontaneous (aka miscarraige), no they are not necessarly the same thing.
But a medical termination is the same thing as an induced abortion.
What some people choose to understand from the various wording may differ from this, but it doesn't make it true. It's all about the linguistics!

MrPudding

OCorcrainn wrote: »

Btw. Medical termination =/= Abortion

Seriously, you need to stop listening to the crap spouted by or on behalf of the pro-life people.

Miriam Webster wrote:

Definition of ABORTION

1 : the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus: as



a : spontaneous expulsion of a human fetus during the first 12 weeks of gestation — compare miscarriage
b : induced expulsion of a human fetus

Please excuse the misspelling of foetus.

The pro-life side try to convince people that medical terminations are not abortions, they try to do this so they can say there are no abortions carried out in Ireland. They are being deceitful.

MrP

Obliq

OCorcrainn wrote: »

I think it is wrong to equate anti-abortion with religion, there are plently of atheists out there who would be anti-abortion.

Bringing religion into the debate, and associating an individual who opposes abortion as someone who is religious undermines it, and the integrity of the one who puts it forth.

It is wrong to generalize.

Btw. Medical termination =/= Abortion

Oh boy. Ok, firstly - Medical termination IS an abortion. An abortion is the medical termination of a pregnancy. There is NO point in mincing around pretending it means anything else. Whether the abortion is for a medical reason or a social reason, the result is the same. It is the TERMINATION of the pregnancy resulting in the death of the fetus. End of story.

Secondly - Whatever your belief happens to be (in my case, atheist), if you are pro-choice, you cannot help "bring religion into the debate" because religion has waded into the debate all by itself. The 8th amendment to our constitution was brought to you courtesy of a right-wing Catholic Lobby group called the PLAC.

The CC continues to demand the right to be recognised as THE moral authority on the "sanctity" (a religious term) of human life FROM CONCEPTION. In 2012, they started yet another anti-abortion campaign trying to persuade our government to row back on their legislative duties to the Irish people who have twice voted YES to legislate for X. If the CC would butt the f*ck out of trying to mess with the constitution, where it has no business messing, then clearly, we would not need to include "religion" in any debate about abortion.

Please educate yourself as to the facts of the history of the Irish abortion debate before you get short shrift from the rest of us who already have.

Oh yes, forgot about miscarriages also being abortions. Therefore an abortion doesn't have to be a medical termination, but in the sense that I think you meant it, it is one.

Lingua Franca

OCorcrainn wrote: »

I think it is wrong to equate anti-abortion with religion, there are plently of atheists out there who would be anti-abortion.

Bringing religion into the debate, and associating an individual who opposes abortion as someone who is religious undermines it, and the integrity of the one who puts it forth.

It is wrong to generalize.

Btw. Medical termination =/= Abortion

Hello, and welcome to boards! Can you tell us which post you're responding to here?