Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Turtwig

Nodin wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0308/375675-government-x-case-legislation/

Rolling ever onward....

Couldn't help but notice the clear lack of a crosshair over that woman. RTE is definitely Anti-Catholic! ! !

Nodin

lazygal wrote: »

The houses will rise mid July. If its not passed by then it'll move into the 'proposed legislation' group for next session. Not good.

Well spotted.

Nodin

Bichon Lover wrote: »

Well they are spreading their wings, interfering in the North now.

The DUP and SDLP are trying to ban private abortions and campaigners include " former MEP Rosemary Dana Scallon, and Fianna Fail Senator Jim Walsh." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-21635982
Not to mention Kathy Sinott.

On RTE, I heard the SDLP candidate in mid-ulster (Patsy Mc Glone) trying to play the pro-life card. 'the sdlp is a pro-life party' sez he. They came third....

PopePalpatine

Remind me to never vote SDLP if I move to NI.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Morag wrote: »

Dr Mary Favier Doctors for Choice at the seminar this week held with the national women's council gave that statement.

https://twitter.com/Doctors4Choice/status/308898559607062528
DoctorsForChoice ‏@Doctors4Choice


The whole tweet stream for that event is full of interesting facts.
https://twitter.com/Doctors4Choice


<

So she said "affluent" rather than "college graduate"?

It'd be interesting to know what they're actually basing those statements on; how they're establishing "affluence", and such.

Levito

I am pro-life, for good reason. Since 'choice' only really applies to the wealthy, but hardly ever to the poor. It is poor people who are pressured by society into an abortion, and so there is no real choice there. It would take an enormous amount of courage to fight that pressure, some do and fair play to them, doing their best, but for most the access is so easy and the lack of support from Fathers and society is what pressures them into the decision.

Choice therefore is a euphemism, it is used as a cover up, for the fact that society doesn't want to take responsibility for this, including the government. I commend Cura for the work that they do.

This pro-choice crew need to get real, women often don't feel they have a choice. That's why they do it. So if they had any real consideration for women and society, they would be pro-support, a campaign which attempts to create a culture where Fatherhood is not something to be feared, and having a family is a welcoming option.

Because at the end of the day, even though it's not the intentions of the pro-choicer's, it is poor children who are aborted, and so it carries the stench of eugenics.

Now I turn my attention to these slogans pro-choicers parade..

What century is this? - Exactly. Do we have to resort to violence in the womb, allowing the bloody dismemberment of the child, to deal with our issues? Surely we can do better than this. What century indeed. Oh how that backfires.

Pro-woman - Oh yeah right. Instead of giving her the support, just pressure her into an abortion clinic. No consideration at all. And we all know those who were pressured into it, often move onto to regret it. Where's the pro-woman in that?

Pro-child - This one is just ridiculous. I saw this in Galway not long ago. How can anyone seriously argue that it's better to be dead and have nothing, no chance, no life. Than to be alive and have something, some chance. It makes no sense. Intellectual dishonesty at its best.

Delirium

How is it pressuring women to have an abortion by offering them a choice to have, or not, an abortion?

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Levito wrote: »

It is poor people who are pressured by society into an abortion, and so there is no real choice there.

That's plausible, and possible. But what actual evidence do you have for it?

PopePalpatine

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

That's plausible, and possible. But what actual evidence do you have for it?

Some leaflet he picked up from his church. :rolleyes:

ShooterSF

Levito wrote: »

I am pro-life, for good reason. Since 'choice' only really applies to the wealthy, but hardly ever to the poor. It is poor people who are pressured by society into an abortion, and so there is no real choice there. It would take an enormous amount of courage to fight that pressure, some do and fair play to them, doing their best, but for most the access is so easy and the lack of support from Fathers and society is what pressures them into the decision.

So you are concerned people are being pressured into a decision and don't have free choice, so to fix that, you make certain they have no choice?

rainbow kirby

Is it not blatantly obvious that, under our current laws, it is lower income and migrant women that are truly the ones left with no choice due to inability to travel for financial/visa reasons?

eviltwin

I'd be interested to hear how you come to the conclusion that society pushes poor women into abortions Levito? It costs a lot of money to access abortion if you're an Irish woman. If anything I would imagine poorer women are the ones who are most affected by our laws having to borrow money or resort to money lenders.

I do agree there needs to be more support from certain sections of society. Sometimes it feels like you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. Have an abortion and you are a terrible woman but keep a baby and have to rely on State support and you are a scrounger.

Maybe if there were more supports like better childcare so young women could continue with college or work more women would keep their babies. I think everyone would agree that we don't want to see a woman feel forced to have an abortion by circumstance if deep down she really wants the child.

Ultimately though many women who have abortions are quite affluent, they have supportive partners who haven't been scared by fatherhood as you claim. They have abortions because they want them, because they don't want to be pregnant and all the support in the world isn't going to change their minds.

Sixtus

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Is it not blatantly obvious that, under our current laws, it is lower income and migrant women that are truly the ones left with no choice due to inability to travel for financial/visa reasons?

Agreed. With the cost of abortions running to 1000€ it can be impossible for women of lower socio economic backgrounds to afford a abortion, particularly with the stigma of abortion meaning that they cannot turn to family members for financial support. I'd be curious if Levito can provide supporting evidence to back up his clai;

Since 'choice' only really applies to the wealthy, but hardly ever to the poor. It is poor people who are pressured by society into an abortion, and so there is no real choice there. It would take an enormous amount of courage to fight that pressure, some do and fair play to them, doing their best, but for most the access is so easy and the lack of support from Fathers and society is what pressures them into the decision.

This pro-choice crew need to get real, women often don't feel they have a choice. That's why they do it. So if they had any real consideration for women and society, they would be pro-support, a campaign which attempts to create a culture where Fatherhood is not something to be feared, and having a family is a welcoming option.

So essentially what you are saying is "shotgun weddings all round".

What about the idea that two people having sex and if their is accidental procreation lets not force two people to raise a child together that neither of them want. Lets use birth control to ensure people raise children as and when they want and are ready for them. Then we don't have unwanted children in Magdeline Laundries.

Galvasean

Here's one for ye lot. I was passing by my place of work on Saturday and there was a 'pro-life' rally taking place on company property. Apparently this was given the go ahead by management. Personally, I think it's a very bad idea to politicize the business in such a way (it's a retail outlet) and a number of staff have expressed dismay and disgust about the whole thing. I seem to have been elected to take the issue up with management tomorrow.
Anyone got any suggestions on how to go about this in a level-headed manner?

krankykitty

I agree Galvasean, even if you agree with the protest topic it's a really bad idea to mix with business. Was it definitely given the go ahead by the management?

I think if it were me I would approach it from the point of view of concern for the business and how you could potentially lose custom from people on both sides of the fence, as even pro life customers may not think highly of a business who politicises things in this manner.

We can write letters/mails pretending to be customers of the business and complain about it so you have backup

Galvasean

krankykitty wrote: »

Was it definitely given the go ahead by the management?

I'll have to ask them to make certain as I'm only going by what staff told me. I'd say it was though, considering the pro-lifers were using the chairs from our staff room.

Bannasidhe

Galvasean wrote: »

I'll have to ask them to make certain as I'm only going by what staff told me. I'd say it was though, considering the pro-lifers were using the chairs from our staff room.

I certainly wouldn't give my custom to a retail outlet that allowed a pro-life rally on it's premises.

Galvasean

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I certainly wouldn't give my custom to a retail outlet that allowed a pro-life rally on it's premises.

And I am not entirely comfortable being employed by such.
I am not currently willing to divulge the name of said outlet (either publicly or via PM so please, no requests for the time being) until I have discussed the matter with management.

aloyisious

I read a small article in today's (Irish) Sunday Independent about a group of women (ever 100) in Northern Ireland who have signed a public letter stating that they have used abortion-inducing pills, in protest at the lack of abortion services (outside the NHS) in NI.

Article follow's: As the abortion debate intensifies in the Republic, dozens of women in Northern Ireland have launched a new protest which carries the risk of imprisonment.

More than 100 women in the North risk imprisonment after publicly admitting they have taken abortion-inducing pills, which are illegal there.

The women have signed a letter openly confirming that they took abortion pills bought on the internet from pro-choice charities, further fuelling the debate prompted by the opening of the first private clinic to offer legal abortions to women there.

The 1861 Offences Against the Persons Act makes abortion illegal in most cases and carries a penalty of life imprisonment.

Several men who have helped women obtain the pills have also signed the letter, even though the 19th century act also makes it a serious offence to help someone procure an abortion.

The North is the only part of the UK where women cannot get an abortion through the National Health Service except in extreme circumstances, such as when a mother's life is at risk. As a result, thousands of Northern Irish women have crossed the Irish Sea to have terminations in English hospitals and clinics.

Pro-choice campaigners claim an attempt by assembly members Alban Maginness of the SDLP and the DUP's Paul Girvan to amend the North's criminal justice bill to make abortions outside the NHS illegal will prevent the recently opened Marie Stopes clinic in central Belfast from providing non-surgical, early-term procedures.

In their letter, the women state that they "have either taken the abortion pill or helped women to procure the abortion pill in order to cause an abortion here in Northern Ireland.

"We represent just a small fraction of those who have used, or helped others to use, this method because it is almost impossible to get an NHS abortion here, even when there is likely to be a legal entitlement to one.

"We were delighted when Marie Stopes came to Belfast, as it meant that women who are unwell can access a doctor to supervise what we have done or helped others to do without medical help. And therefore have a right to a legal abortion here."


Edit: the Indo' article also had a one-liner at it's base indicating the article was possibly reproduced from a UK paper.

Morag

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

So she said "affluent" rather than "college graduate"?

It'd be interesting to know what they're actually basing those statements on; how they're establishing "affluence", and such.

She said college graduate as well, I was in the room live tweeting the event.

Morag

One of the candidates for the Meath by election has come out as pro choice.

http://seamusmcdonagh.wordpress.com/2013/03/06/what-seamus-mcdonagh-stands-for/

He stands unambiguously for the woman’s right to choose and the immediate legislation for the X case so that the death of another Savita Halappanavar will never again occur.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Morag wrote: »

She said college graduate as well, I was in the room live tweeting the event.

Grand. I'll ask it out straight, so.

Have we any idea where she's getting data on the educational attainment of Irish women who've had abortions?

....the immediate legislation for the X case so that the death of another Savita Halappanavar will never again occur

Has it actually been established that the primary reason for the death of Savita Halappanavar was the absence of legislation for the X case, or is he just grandstanding?

Obliq

Following up Aloyisius's comment yesterday.....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-21735029?SThisFB

Over 100 people, mostly women, have signed an open letter in protest at the proposed abortion amendment which would make it illegal to perform an abortion outside the NHS.

"Alliance for Choice, which published the letter, is concerned about further restrictions on the current law. It wants MLAs to have an informed and reasoned debate on abortion rights

Goretti Horgan from the Alliance for Choice organisation which published the letter, explained why she signed.

"The word woman or mother is not mentioned anywhere in the amendment," she said.
"It is entirely about restricting abortion without any reference at all to the women who are involved in this situation. That's why we felt that we had to make the politicians sit-up and realise that actually abortion is a reality of Northern Irish life and that they can't just keep on saying that nobody here wants abortion."

The amendment to change the law was tabled by the DUP's Paul Givan, who chairs the justice committee, and the SDLP's Alban Maginness."

The letter - Was only in facebook photo, so here ya go:


more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/10/northern-irish-women-risk-jail-over-abortion-drug-use?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

Brian Shanahan

Levito wrote: »

I am pro-life, for good reason. Since 'choice' only really applies to the wealthy, but hardly ever to the poor.

So removing from women the choice of having an abortion is not pressure, yet giving them the choice over whether or not to have an abortion is?

Please explain the logic here, because the only compulsion in the abortion debate is with the anti-abortionists (they are emphatically not pro-life, otherwise we'd see queues a mile long outside adoption agency offices, and not outside prisons calling for prisoners to be killed by the state {there is a massively high correlation between anti-abortionists and pro-death penalty campaigners}) who want to keep the right for a woman to choose what she does with her body stripped from her.

Peregrinus

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

. . . there is a massively high correlation between anti-abortionists and pro-death penalty campaigners . . .

Um, cite for this?

Brian Shanahan

Galvasean wrote: »

Anyone got any suggestions on how to go about this in a level-headed manner?

Tell the management that you got significant number of complaints from customers saying that if the anti-abortionists remained that they would take their business elsewhere.

Peregrinus

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Tell the management that you got significant number of complaints from customers saying that if the anti-abortionists remained that they would take their business elsewhere.

Galvasean doesn't say that he's had any complaints from customers about this. Making stuff up is pretty much the opposite of going about this in a level-headed manner.

Tell the truth, Galvasean. Say that it made you uncomfortable and that other staff members have told you they felt the same, and point out that if that's how you feel, members of the public and potential customers may well feel the same way, but rather than complain to the management they're more likely to take their business elsewhere without saying anything.

Something like this can be bad for staff morale because it is divisive, and it can harm the company's public image and hurt its reputation among consumers. Emphasise that you would make exactly the same points about a pro-choice policy on company property; it's just not appropriate (or wise) for the company to let itself be associated with one or other side in a highly divisive campaign.

Galvasean

Actually, apparently some customers did complain. You are right though Peregrinus, I did not state that (as I had not heard from them directly so did not feel it my place to comment on such).

oceanclub

Galvasean wrote: »

Here's one for ye lot. I was passing by my place of work on Saturday and there was a 'pro-life' rally taking place on company property. Apparently this was given the go ahead by management. Personally, I think it's a very bad idea to politicize the business in such a way (it's a retail outlet) and a number of staff have expressed dismay and disgust about the whole thing. I seem to have been elected to take the issue up with management tomorrow.
Anyone got any suggestions on how to go about this in a level-headed manner?

I can see why you don't mention your place of work, but is it a place that's open to the public or closed offices?

P.

Turtwig

Abortion is a highly emotive topic at the best of the times. With something that emotive you thread the very serious risk of seeing your property vandalised if the perception of your business is one where it has obviously taken the 'wrong' side.

People generally don't like religion or politics getting too intertwined in their personal lives. So I very much doubt that they'd be comfortable with rallies happening at a place where they're expecting to get away from it and possibly unwind or relax a bit.

Finally abortion is such a divisive issue that there's a good chance whatever stance you take that every third consumer who enters your premises will take offence to what they see.