Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

lazygal

Obliq wrote: »

I had asked about "Women Hurt" and included the link to RTE news that had "Women Hurt" as being invited. Perhaps they've changed their minds?

Women Hurt aren't giving 'evidence' :rolleyes: at the committee hearings proper. There's a private session before every committee sits, during which groups like this might be invited to speak, but it doesn't go on the official report and won't form part of official committee business and deliberations. AFAIK Billy Timmins invited them in, which is every TD/Senator's prerogative, to brief the members of the Oireachtas, but they, like every other interest as opposed to expert group, won't be giving oral/written evidence before the committee on Friday/Monday/Tuesday.

Obliq

lazygal wrote: »

Women Hurt aren't giving 'evidence' :rolleyes: at the committee hearings proper. There's a private session before every committee sits, during which groups like this might be invited to speak, but it doesn't go on the official report and won't form part of official committee business and deliberations. AFAIK Billy Timmins invited them in, which is every TD/Senator's prerogative, to brief the members of the Oireachtas, but they, like every other interest as opposed to expert group, won't be giving oral/written evidence before the committee on Friday/Monday/Tuesday.

Ah, thanks. Bit disingenuous of Jerry Buttimer not to mention that in his reply eh? Nothing new there from a politician I suppose

Morag

Much of the paternalism of this analogy is also characteristic of the actions and statements of those parliamentarians who wish to thwart current efforts to legislate on abortion in Ireland. It is they who know what course of action is right for a woman experiencing a crisis pregnancy, they who feel entitled to deny legislation that might save her life, and they who feel self-righteously “moral” in prohibiting choices in traumatic circumstances, whether these be rape, incest, or fatal foetal abnormalities. The possibility of a woman knowing what is best for her, her capacity for making moral judgements — these are denied by the Irish philosopher kings, who assume to possess moral knowledge superior to the rest of us.

Even if we accept Plato’s belief that political power should be vested in a small, knowledgeable elite to ensure the sound steering of the ship of state, it is clear that the group of mutineer politicians are ill-placed to act as captains in the current context. Rather than steering the occupants of the ship safely into harbour, these representatives gamble with the lives of women, as indeed, have generations of political leaders before them.

Women in Ireland have been denied treatment for cancer, have been forced to carry unviable foetuses to full term, and have been sent home from hospitals with dead foetuses inside them — all in the name of the moral guardianship of the state.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/modern-day-philosopher-kings-seek-to-deny-women-the-right-to-act-for-themselves-1.1394814

I never though to see a piece about Plato and abortion.

Delirium

Pro-life activists threaten to slit throat of TD

Ms Doherty told TV3’s Vincent Browne this week about threatening emails she has recently received.

“The level of abuse and physical threats that I am getting at the moment, even though people know exactly where I’m standing, It is off the wall”.

She said she was having “normal conversations” with some people about the proposed legislation but in relation to other people, she added: “I have a number of people at the moment who are going to burn my house down with my children in it, they are going to spit at me when I walk inside my church grounds at Sunday morning at Mass.

“I received an email which I’m sure we all did last week where I’m going to have my throats [sic] cut from my neck to my naval and my entrails are going to spill out. There are some very strange people in this country who call themselves Christians.”

Pro-Life continues to be an ironic title I see.

Sarky

Cutting someone open from neck to navel is more disemboweling than throat-slitting. They really are fuzzy on the definitions of just about everything, aren't they?

Delirium

Sarky wrote: »

Cutting someone open from neck to navel is more disemboweling than throat-slitting. They really are fuzzy on the definitions of just about everything, aren't they?

It's hardly surprising considering that biology/anatomy isn't one of their strengths :P

lazygal

Just proves that so called prolifers are pro birth. I don't get their weird fetishisation of the unborn, its creepy. And I say this as someone who's gestating a preborn child as I type.

Turtwig

The behaviour of a few extreme numpties doesn't show that pro-lifers are pro-birth.

lazygal

Jernal wrote: »

The behaviour of a few extreme numpties doesn't show that pro-lifers are pro-birth.

What else would you call them? They want every foetus delivered, regardless of whether its alive, the woman wants to or the physical or mental side effects. If they spent as much time campaigning for rights for those born, I might see them as pro life, but they only care about the preshus tiiineeeee unborn baaaaaayyyyybbeeeess.

Turtwig

lazygal wrote: »

What else would you call them? They want every foetus delivered, regardless of whether its alive, the woman wants to or the physical or mental side effects. If they spent as much time campaigning for rights for those born, I might see them as pro life, but they only care about the preshus tiiineeeee unborn baaaaaayyyyybbeeeess.

Not all of them are that stupid and devoid of empathy. We wouldn't judge all Christians by Pat Robertson.

Sarky

It'd be really nice if the pro-life people who weren't batsh*t insane would speak a little louder.

Gbear

Sarky wrote: »

It'd be really nice if the pro-life people who weren't batsh*t insane would speak a little louder.

Crazy people aren't as self-conscious.

Nodin

Sarky wrote: »

It'd be really nice if the pro-life people who weren't batsh*t insane would speak a little louder.

....to be heard over the din of the loonies, the uninformed and the god-botherers it would have to be quite a bit louder.

Bannasidhe

Nodin wrote: »

....to be heard over the din of the loonies, the uninformed and the god-botherers it would have to be quite a bit louder.

And there you have it in a nutshell = the story of Ireland.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Morag wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/modern-day-philosopher-kings-seek-to-deny-women-the-right-to-act-for-themselves-1.1394814

I never though to see a piece about Plato and abortion.

I hate to be a pain in the hole*, but I think that piece has it almost exactly wrong. It's a beautiful image, and might even remind us of that famous statement of Dev's that Whenever I wanted to know what the Irish people wanted, I had only to examine my own heart and it told me straight off what the Irish people wanted..

I find that the article even reminds me of Jules' great lines at the end of Pulp Fiction, in the way that it's trying to say ".... you're the righteous man and I'm the shepherd and it's the politicians that's evil and selfish." I'd like that. But that **** ain't the truth.

Politicians aren't running from this because they think they have greater expertise in ethics than the general population. They're running from it because they don't think that a poll that suggests 78% of Irish people have a coherent view on abortion amounts to a hill of beans. If FF (for the sake of argument) thought that they could gain electoral advantage from proposing a referendum to change the Constitution so that legislation could be enacted allowing for abortion of a non-viable fetus, they'd be in like flint.

Politicians know voters the way that hookers know their clients. They know what we really want. They can detect pointless rhetoric, like the irrelevance of a whole load of cut-and-paste text about women making decisions about their own bodies, as if we weren't talking about the extent to which doctors would be allowed to make decisions on behalf of their patients.

The law that binds politicians and us wasn't imposed by a king. It was voted in by the public. So far as we know, it allows abortion at any stage for someone who's suicidal. But it doesn't allow abortion of an unviable fetus, unless there's some real risk to the life of the mother ('mother' being the term that the Irish people voted in.) If that's wrong, there's no consensus about what's right. And not much capacity to deliberate on the issues to build such a consensus. If there's one thing that unites pro-life and pro-choice, it's a fear of having to acknowledge some reality that would require them to change their position.

The truth is, you're the weak, and I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm trying, Ringo. I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd.







* the sincerity of this statement may vary, depending on your timezone

Obliq

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

I hate to be a pain in the hole*

The truth is, you're the weak, and I'm the tyranny of evil men. But I'm trying, Ringo. I'm trying real hard to be the shepherd.

nagirrac

Sarky wrote: »

It'd be really nice if the pro-life people who weren't batsh*t insane would speak a little louder.

I happen to believe most people are pro-life. I am very pro-life.. if I were walking and saw a woodlouse in my path, I would try and avoid walking on it. I grieve for roots I cut through in my garden and the pain it causes their host. However, I don't extend that love of life to the unborn of any species, anymore than I grieve for the brain cells that now died, hopefully to be replaced.

There is far too much to be concerned with in lives already born.

There is something unique about a new expression of life, an individual that makes its way through reproduction to personhood, that is hard to define. We should strive to make life as good as possible for those people, rather than bringing more unwanted into the world.

Turtwig

nagirrac wrote: »

I happen to believe most people are pro-life. I am very pro-life.. if I were walking and saw a woodlouse in my path, I would try and avoid walking on it. I grieve for roots I cut through in my garden and the pain it causes their host. However, I don't extend that love of life to the unborn of any species, anymore than I grieve for the brain cells that now died, hopefully to be replaced.

There is far too much to be concerned with in lives already born.

There is something unique about a new expression of life, an individual that makes its way through reproduction to personhood, that is hard to define. We should strive to make life as good as possible for those people, rather than bringing more unwanted into the world.

Right, so you're pro-death so. :pac:


Anyone in the mood for some headdesking?
The abortion hearings have begun. What's more fun to see though will be how in one week's time what's said at this hearing has been utterly distorted.

Beruthiel

Harassing Alan Shatter at his home.
These people don't know where the line is.

aloyisious

Beruthiel wrote: »

Harassing Alan Shatter at his home.
These people don't know where the line is.

I like the Oireachtas Committee link in the Alan Shatter report.

IMO, the "women hurt" group being given a private hearing by some of the Oireachtas members is all and good, but I'm thinking that as a group they could be seen as an advocacy-group. It's in print that advocacy groups could not be allowed a hearing before the committee. I'm not against any woman having a chance to speak to an Oireachtas member, as any woman can change her point of view on abortion having had one, but to do so as part of a group has to be advocacy, whether or not it's before a single Oireachtas member or an Oireachtas committee.

It's not the first time that a woman has changed her point of view on this topic, after having an abortion. Roe V Wade is a case in point. Speaking of this, this is from a US group about the Cardinal O'Malley - Boston College matter story........... https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&ved=0CEoQqQIwAw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lifenews.com%2F2013%2F05%2F16%2Fhelp-stop-irelands-roe-v-wade-boston-college-promotes-abortion%2F&ei=Qf-VUdThJsbE7AbM94H4DA&usg=AFQjCNEtXbhJNHfsQQamczBQQNT7jbnThA&bvm=bv.46471029,d.ZGU

Turtwig

OMG!

Jeez,

I mean come on.

So many questions already have come from people who clearly haven't read the bill!

Some pressing on the absence of a provision for fatal foetal abnormalities.

Delirium

via twitter:

Ronan Mullen says Separtion of Powers means the Oireachtas can veto the Supreme Court ruling in X Case. Don't. Even. Know. Where. To. Start

Source

aloyisious

koth wrote: »

via twitter:

He's a barrister and Senator, so I'd like him to take his thoughts to the ultimate and prove them.

It seem's from the printed word of the Oireactas Committee hearings that Senator Walsh was hot and bothered, and refused to return to his seat after several requests. I "googled" Senator Walsh and think this is the gent referred to.... https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&ved=0CD0QFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youthdefence.ie%2Flatest-news%2Fsenator-jim-walsh-says-attack-on-yd-offices-appalling%2F&ei=TAmWUc6ZBciK7AbCx4HYAQ&usg=AFQjCNGyK0C1C5sOat8Jboh3eynHEyWxRg&bvm=bv.46471029,d.ZGU

I happened by the Life House around the time that the posters were placed on the shutters, and as in the photos in the senator's piece, the shutters were down. I can only say that I'm surprised that some-one "managed" to smear the locks, windows etc as he described, given that fact.

Bannasidhe

aloyisious wrote: »

I like the Oireachtas Committee link in the Alan Shatter report.

IMO, the "women hurt" group being given a private hearing by some of the Oireachtas members is all and good, but I'm thinking that as a group they could be seen as an advocacy-group. It's in print that advocacy groups could not be allowed a hearing before the committee. I'm not against any woman having a chance to speak to an Oireachtas member, as any woman can change her point of view on abortion having had one, but to do so as part of a group has to be advocacy, whether or not it's before a single Oireachtas member or an Oireachtas committee.

It's not the first time that a woman has changed her point of view on this topic, after having an abortion. Roe V Wade is a case in point. Speaking of this, this is from a US group about the Cardinal O'Malley - Boston College matter story........... https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&ved=0CEoQqQIwAw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lifenews.com%2F2013%2F05%2F16%2Fhelp-stop-irelands-roe-v-wade-boston-college-promotes-abortion%2F&ei=Qf-VUdThJsbE7AbM94H4DA&usg=AFQjCNEtXbhJNHfsQQamczBQQNT7jbnThA&bvm=bv.46471029,d.ZGU

I was listening to some of the women on Morning Ireland the other day and while I am sorry that they are having issues it does seem to me to be that a 'I feel guilty that I had an abortion therefore no other woman should be allowed to suffer as I am so say no to abortions' agenda is being pushed

I was particularly taken with the woman who was fine with her first abortion but has suffered from massive guilt after her second...very uncharitable mumbles were heard from my direction.

I did something once of which I am a little bit ashamed (I was in my late teens) and still feel a bit guilty that I didn't think it through before going ahead* therefore I think this thing I did should be illegal as many other people do this thing too and it's a bad thing and some of them will be very sorry they did it so we should throw them in jail for 14 years if they try and do it...or they can do it in England sure that place is godless anyway but that doesn't mean they will get off scot free, oh noes I did it in England but the shame of it follows me. It has marked me for life.













*an ill considered tattoo in case ye were wondering.

swampgas

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I was listening to some of the women on Morning Ireland the other day and while I am sorry that they are having issues it does seem to me to be that a 'I feel guilty that I had an abortion therefore no other woman should be allowed to suffer as I am so say no to abortions' agenda is being pushed

I was particularly taken with the woman who was fine with her first abortion but has suffered from massive guilt after her second...very uncharitable mumbles were heard from my direction.

I was thinking along similar lines - if the argument was "I got married and now I really regret it" or "I got divorced, and now I really regret it" or "I took out a big mortgage, and now I really regret it", would the correct response be to outlaw marriage, divorce and mortgages?

The galling thing is these women had a choice, and they now want to deny other women the same choice they had. It's really quite perverse. With choice comes the possibility of regretting that choice. You really can't have risk free choices in life.

Morag

The thing is if services were available here it would take the pressure of women in a crises pregnancy situation, who when the look at traveling for an abortion it's so much effort to try and see if you can and get money so that its a real option and once you start organising it, it is harder to then change your mind.

Women do, some get as far as the booking in at the clinic and change their mind but it would be easier if you had time to think and consider with out that extra added pressure.

Sierra 117

Bannasidhe wrote: »

*an ill considered tattoo in case ye were wondering.

Harlot! I bet you wore skirts that showed off your ankles too!

Bannasidhe

Sierra 117 wrote: »

Harlot! I bet you wore skirts that showed off your ankles too!

A skirt??? :eek:

Are you implying I am a cross-dresser? Not that there is anything wrong with being a cross-dresser but if I had to wear a skirt I would be very cross indeed. Nooo - technically I am a transvestite.




I do have a tattoo on my ankle which hurt like unlubed buggery (I imagine) but don't regret in the slightest.

IT-Guy

Bannasidhe wrote: »

A skirt??? :eek:

Are you implying I am a cross-dresser? Not that there is anything wrong with being a cross-dresser but if I had to wear a skirt I would be very cross indeed. Nooo - technically I am a transvestite.




I do have a tattoo on my ankle which hurt like unlubed buggery (I imagine) but don't regret in the slightest.

To paraphrase the Billy Ocean tune..."baby, love really hurts without lube"

On topic, though the legislation is yet to be passed, there's a small glimmer of glee about me these days now that the anti-abortion regime will have to be relaxed and maybe, just maybe the right thing will be done for a change in legislating for X. After that fatal foetal abnormalities need to be covered.

I love seeing people and institutions being forced to do something they know they should have done but haven't out of laziness, ineptitude or sheer cowardice. Slightly perverse but well deserved of those it applies to

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Morag wrote: »

The thing is if services were available here it would take the pressure of women in a crises pregnancy situation, who when the look at traveling for an abortion it's so much effort to try and see if you can and get money so that its a real option and once you start organising it, it is harder to then change your mind.

Women do, some get as far as the booking in at the clinic and change their mind but it would be easier if you had time to think and consider with out that extra added pressure.

Perhaps, but I'd suggest the immediate observation is that planned domestic legislation is only to cover cases where women don't really have much of a choice, as what's provided for is terminations where there is some medical imperative. Whatever testimony Women Hurt might make is really only of relevance if a Constitutional amendment was being framed. Unless I'm wrong, these Oireachtas hearings are just about the published Bill and not about any wider agenda.