Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Nodin

The Communications Minister Pat Rabbitte has reacted angrily to comments made by a Fianna Fáil Senator at their Ard Fheis today.

The Government is currently ironing out the draft legislation on abortion which will bring Ireland in line with the Supreme Court Ruling on the 'X case'.

Senator Terry Leydon used the debate on education at the party's gathering to call for a continuation of pro-life policies and told party members that without pro-life policies there won't be a need for education and childcare policies.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/rabbitte-slams-ff-senators-inflammatory-comments-592687.html

I've bolded the relevant bit.....Evidently he's on to the real intentions of Irish women...

Turtwig

Women are out to sabotage society. Their first phase is demolishing the need for education.
Amazingly, that's almost not a strawman by me.

Bannasidhe

Jernal wrote: »

Women are out to sabotage society. Their first phase is demolishing the need for education.
Amazingly, that's almost not a strawman by me.

Sistahs - we have been rumbled!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YR5ApYxkU-U

lazygal

I've just emailed Micheál Martin, calling on him to either publicly denounce Senator Leyden's comments or ensure the Senator apologises in the Seanad next Tuesday.


As an irrational pregnant woman :rolleyes: I'm actually really genuinely upset by how he views women like me.

Bobby42

Wait,

is the argument that if they legislate for the X case there will just be so much abortion that the country will run out of children so there will be no need for an education system?

Have I read that right?

Because that argument so beyond ridiculous I'm beginning to think it has to be a parody.

Bannasidhe

Bobby42 wrote: »

Wait,

is the argument that if they legislate for the X case there will just be so much abortion that the country will run out of children so there will be no need for an education system?

Have I read that right?

Because that argument so beyond ridiculous I'm beginning to think it has to be a parody.

Afraid not

Senator Leyden told the gathering that without pro-life policies there will not be a need for education and childcare policies.

He said: "Just to say, what is more important, pre-school schooling or the right to life?

"Without the right to life, you have no pre-schooling, you have no school.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/ff-senator-without-the-right-to-life-you-have-no-school-592671.html

aloyisious

@Bobby42: Yup. that's the take I get from Senator Leyden's statement to the floor. I think he might have a rethink, either voluntary or otherwise, and await the "my statement was taken out of context" response from him when he see's the reaction to it. I don't hold out much hope for a full retraction and apology for his "foot in mouth" statement. FF might point out that he's a Senator and not a shadow minister nor a spokesperson for the party. Embarrassing when one of the items the party is proposing at the conference is the retention of the Senate.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Nodin wrote: »

So, seeing as theres no significant cases in evidence, you've no real basis for stating that the existence of two versions makes any difference whatsoever in this instance. Excellent, I concur.

Sorry, I obviously wasn't clear. When I said I was seeking common ground, it wasn't an invitation to try putting your fist up my ass.

I've already given a specific Supreme Court Judgment that took the Irish wording to be significant in a case relating to the 8th Amendment. Your substantive question was answered quite a while ago.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Bobby42 wrote: »

Wait,

is the argument that if they legislate for the X case there will just be so much abortion that the country will run out of children so there will be no need for an education system?

Have I read that right?

Because that argument so beyond ridiculous I'm beginning to think it has to be a parody.

Its more that El Tel is a traditional machine politician. If he's making headlines, he'll be happy.

drkpower

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

I've already given a specific Supreme Court Judgment that took the Irish wording to be significant in a case relating to the 8th Amendment. Your substantive question was answered quite a while ago.

It is only where the English and Irish texts conflict that the Irish text take precedence. As that didn't happen in the case you mentioned, your point about the Irish supremacy is irrelevant to this entire thread, and debate.

I happen to agree that the Irish supremacy thing should be changed but it is utterly irrelevant to this ðebate.

Turtwig

Fianna Fáil being their classic old selves.:rolleyes:

The Fianna Fáil Ard Fheis has overwhelmingly passed three motions committing the party to a "pro-life" position, and opposing any legislation widening the grounds for abortions. Lorcan Price of Roscommon told delegates it was "disingenuous and deceitful" to suggest that abortion could help a pregnant woman. He said the evidence before the Oireachtas Committee said abortion was not a treatment for suicidal feelings. The Government was accused of "arrogance" in pressing ahead with legislation despite the evidence heard by the committee. Geraldine Smith said what had happened in other countries proved that there was no such thing as limited abortion. She criticised the National Women's Council for its attitude to the group Women Hurt, saying there was no excuse for a taxpayer funded organisation ignoring women who regretted abortions. She said they needed a party that was pro-women, pro-baby and pro-life. One delegate, Christina Murhill, said Fianna Fáil was being too strict on the issue, in particular in cases where the foetus was not viable. She urged delegates to reject the motion. Eugene Doyle of Kildare said Labour and the "pro-abortionists" saw the current bill as the only way of getting abortion on demand. Fianna Fáil leader Micheal Martin said he does not believe there should be another referendum on the abortion issue. Mr Martin said he wanted to be constructive, and to approach the Government's proposals in a non-partisan way. He said the motions about the issue this evening would inform the Parliamentary Party in reaching a decision on the Government's legislation. Asked about the possibility of a free vote, as proposed by Senator Averil Power, Mr Martin said his job was to bring the party to a position on the issue, and he expected that would be possible. Mr Martin is due to give his televised leader's address this evening.

Source.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

drkpower wrote: »

It is only where the English and Irish texts conflict that the Irish text take precedence. As that didn't happen in the case you mentioned, your point about the Irish supremacy is irrelevant to this entire thread, and debate.

I happen to agree that the Irish supremacy thing should be changed but it is utterly irrelevant to this ðebate.

Erm, if we're discussing a Constitutional provision, it clearly can't be utterly irrelevant.

I'll agree its irrelevant when someone explains why the genitive case of "beo" is of significance if we want to understand what the term "unborn" means, when interpreting the 8th Amendment.

(Note in case of misunderstanding, I don't want to know anything at all about the genitive case of "beo". Like yourself, I'd rather live under a Constitution that didn't require the Supreme Court to know anything about the genitive case of "beo" either.)

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Jernal wrote: »

Fianna Fáil being their classic old selves.:rolleyes:

I'd say it's genuinely hard to tell whether Fianna Fail are correctly making a judgment that there's political capital to be made out of this, or whether their annihilation in Dublin at the last election means that the urban political mood is absent from their deliberations.

One quibble. When they say

<...>evidence before the Oireachtas Committee said abortion was not a treatment for suicidal feelings.

Aren't they pretty much stating facts?

drkpower

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Erm, if we're discussing a Constitutional provision, it clearly can't be utterly irrelevant.

Of course it can. It is only relevant if there is a conflict between the English and Irish texts. In the case you cited, there was no such conflict. Therefore, it is utterly irrelevant.

Nodin

Jernal wrote: »

Fianna Fáil being their classic old selves.:rolleyes:

The Ard Fheis earlier overwhelmingly passed three motions committing the
party to a "pro-life" position, and opposing any legislation widening the
grounds for abortions.

One of the motions opposed any legislation introducing the risk of suicide as a ground for abortion.

(my bold)
http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0427/386860-fianna-fail-ard-fheis/

......sad.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

drkpower wrote: »

Of course it can. It is only relevant if there is a conflict between the English and Irish texts. In the case you cited, there was no such conflict. Therefore, it is utterly irrelevant.

I've a feeling you are redefining the term "irrelevant". In black and white, in the Decision I linked, the Supreme Court brought the Irish wording into their deliberations. That simply means it was relevant. This is the Supreme Court we're talking about. You know, people with an actual function with respect to interpreting the Constitution.

My criterion for establishing irrelevance stands. Why are we painfully repeating this process? Surely Groundhog Day was two months ago. Is it only happening now because of the weather?

Nodin

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

I've a feeling you are redefining the term "irrelevant". In black and white, in the Decision I linked, the Supreme Court brought the Irish wording into their deliberations. That simply means it was relevant. This is the Supreme Court we're talking about. You know, people with an actual function with respect to interpreting the Constitution.
..............

Clutching at straws. Some times its best to let go and move on.

Morag

Nodin wrote: »

(my bold)
http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0427/386860-fianna-fail-ard-fheis/

......sad.

So they votes to as a political party ignore the supreme court and two referendum grand so, who'd vote for a political party which doesn't believe in democracy.

Bannasidhe

Morag wrote: »

So they votes to as a political party ignore the supreme court and two referendum grand so, who'd vote for a political party which doesn't believe in democracy.

The Collective 'us' - like fecking borg we are when it comes to if it ain't FF it must be FG and if it ain't FG it must be FF...:(

Bit like if you ain't a Catholic you must be a Protestant now that I think about it.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Nodin wrote: »

Clutching at straws. Some times its best to let go and move on.

Pointing to where the Supreme Court have referenced the Irish text while defining the term "unborn" isn't clutching at straws. It's demonstrating the point.

Morag wrote: »

So they votes to as a political party ignore the supreme court and two referendum grand so, who'd vote for a political party which doesn't believe in democracy.

I suspect we'll find out. I doubt this would be the defining issue for many, come the next election. It's why you'd wonder why they're giving it any attention at all. Perhaps they see it as a way of amplifying the tensions between FG and Labour.

drkpower

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

I've a feeling you are redefining the term "irrelevant". In black and white, in the Decision I linked, the Supreme Court brought the Irish wording into their deliberations. That simply means it was relevant. This is the Supreme Court we're talking about. You know, people with an actual function with respect to interpreting the Constitution.

You don't appear to understand the distinction here. While the sc considered the Irish text, the interpretation was consistent with the English text. So there was no question in that case of the Irish version being preferred by the court.

You're initial problem was that the Irish text was favoured by the court. Now, when it was explained to you that that was irrelevant in the context of abortion law, you have shifted the ground to being upset that the court considered the Irish text at all, even when their consideration of the Irish text led them to believe that the meaning if the Irish text meant the same as the English text.....!

What would you like to get upset about next?

Nodin

There seems to have been a massive amount of holistic thinking going on there....

Delegates also opposed legislation that would introduce the “risk of suicide
as a threat to life of the mother and legitimises abortion in Ireland”.

and then

A fourth motion calling for a constitutional referendum before any
legislation was introduced to permit abortion or termination on the grounds of risk of suicide was not moved.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/delegates-affirm-fianna-f%C3%A1il-status-as-pro-life-party-1.1375441

GCU Flexible Demeanour

drkpower wrote: »

You don't appear to understand the distinction here. While the sc considered the Irish text, the interpretation was consistent with the English text. So there was no question in that case of the Irish version being preferred by the court.

You are straining language beyond the point that it holds meaning.

Can I recap on what the Supreme Court said. I'm adding the bolding

http://www.supremecourt.ie/supremecourt/sclibrary3.nsf/(WebFiles)/7AA962985D72B1A28025768F0034FF30/$FILE/Roche%20v.%20Roche.pdf

<...>In my view the subsection 3 of Article 40.3. is clear in its intent. It is intended to protect human life before birth. The key words in the English version are "life of the unborn" and in particular, in my view the much more apt expression, "mbeo gan breith chun a mbeatha (beo in its genitive case). I think "ceart na mbeo gan breith chun a mbeatha" can be fairly interpreted as meaning the right of life not yet born to live or to its life.<...>

You explain to me why the Irish text is "much more apt", and then we might have a basis for a decision.

Unfortunately, to do that we'll have to each acquire sufficient expertise in Irish to have a conversation on that. Which supports my point, unchanged since the start.

Bannasidhe

Interesting article here http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/fiona-de-londras-laura-graham-abortion-legislation-887536-Apr2013/ by Prof. Fiona de Londras and Laura Graham on the 'floodgates' opening.

Fiona is Irish, an ex UCD law lecturer and internationally recognised expert in the field of human rights.

Nodin

There are growing indications that Fine Gael and Labour ministers will
finalise proposals on legislating for the X Case in time for Tuesday's Cabinet
meeting.


The main issue to be resolved remains the threat to a woman's life from
suicide. However, both parties are confident that agreement can be reached.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0428/387000-abortion-legislation/

Theres more detail on whats being proposed in the article.

Obliq

"THERE'S been a lot of abortion-related numbers in the news this week. Much fevered talk about 12 doctors or six consultants (two obstetricians and four psychiatrists) required to assess a suicidal woman with a crisis pregnancy. Lots of speculation about the possibility of six Fine Gael deputies voting against the X Case legislation.

So let's talk numbers. Here's one – the capacity of Croke Park is 82,300. The estimated number of women who have travelled from Ireland to England for an abortion since 1980 is 150,000 (that's based on the number of women who gave an Irish address, the figure is in all likelihood higher).

For anyone who has trouble getting their heads around numbers, the number of Irish women who have travelled to England would fill Croke Park twice over. And just like the thousands of citizens who crowd into the stadium on match days, those women make the sorrowful journey from every part of the island's cities, towns and villages. From each of the 26 counties. They're teenagers, they're in their 20s, 30s and 40s. They're mothers, sisters, daughters, friends – and every day, 11 of them make the trip across the Irish Sea.

They're all around us. Everywhere but on the airwaves, that is. While experts and pundits and politicians fight yet another abortion war, all but very, very few of the 150,000 stay silent. To speak publicly about their experience is to invite upon themselves a world of grief.

So the voices of the thousands of experts on the reality of seeking a termination go unheard as the debate rages.

And still there are those who don't see this as a human rights issue, that this self-imposed silence is a burqa by any other name. And that talk of "floodgates opening" is meaningless.

The floodgates opened long ago."

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/real-experts-on-abortion-are-the-women-living-in-silence-29225515.html

Back to reality - thanks Lise Hand

Obliq

An interesting and provocative woman, as always:

lazygal

Always good to be reminded of the great Nell. Maria Gorretti was a particular favourite of a Sister Marie who popped in and out of our primary school. I wonder if that nun had a reason for such devotion.

Dades

Religious spam - now nuked - nothing to see here now!

Bannasidhe

Dades wrote: »

Religious spam - now nuked - nothing to see here now!

Awwww - I was just about to take the green marker to it...