Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Sarky

Judging by some of the medical ethics students I've been "debating" on Twitter, I wouldn't be so sure

Corkfeen

Sarky wrote: »

Judging by some of the medical ethics students I've been "debating" on Twitter, I wouldn't be so sure

There's the issue,admittedly I engage in some of these debates but there's the inevitable factor that 160 characters can't contain your sheer annoyance with imbeciles who perpetuate myths and creative interpretations of the history(and odd bit of sociology and biology) of every bloody thing.

Sarky

No, I'm fairly sure they're just terrible debaters as well as morons.

Gumbi

Going out of your way to torture yourself, Sarky

Bobby42

Todays Drogheda independent has a full page graphic ad from the life institute/ family and life crowd.

Full of the usual lies and propaganda.

Keeping it classy as always.

Obliq

This showed up on my face book yesterday. I was a bit stunned by the first figure in the article, wherever they're getting that from ? And the recent figures from the British Stats office seem a bit mad too.... must go have a search. Interesting.

"Three quarters of all foreign women attending British clinics for abortions give an address in Ireland. That works out at nearly 7,000 Irish women each year. There are undoubtedly more Irish women obtaining abortions in other countries, including Holland, America and Australia.

In fact, according to the most recent figures released by the British statistics office, in the first three months of last year there were 1,667 abortions performed in Britain on Irish women. During the same period, there were 13,894 births in Ireland. By that ratio, one in nine Irish pregnancies end in a British abortion.

Economic researchers estimate that the Irish exchequer benefits to the tune of over £60,000 a year in the transport taxes alone paid by those travelling for an abortion. Airlines and ferry companies earn around £7,500 per day from these same women."

http://www.irishhealth.com/clin/pregnancy/features2.html?artid=1106

Right, well the figures can't be for last year anyway. They don't come out till July 11th http://www.statistics.gov.uk/hub/release-calendar/index.html?newquery=*&lday=0&lmonth=0&lyear=0&title=Abortion+Statistics%2C+England+and+Wales&pagetype=calendar-entry&uday=&umonth=&uyear=

rainbow kirby

Obliq wrote: »

Airlines and ferry companies earn around £7,500 per day from these same women.

I suddenly have an image of Michael O'Leary as anti-choice campaigner :pac:

Obliq

Thank you, thank you this woman. Bloody brilliant - I am bowled over. Someone go post it in t'other forum will ya?

http://www.associationofcatholicpriests.ie/2013/06/the-abortion-issue-jo-osullivan/

"In all conscience, I don’t think I have the right to say “You must go through with it because somebody else has decided it’s God’s will that you do”.
Does that make me a supporter of the killing of babies?
No. I would never, in a million years, support the destruction of human beings. But when it comes to the protection of already living beings over potential lives, I have to come down in favour of those already alive.
Even if I WERE to see the termination of a developing life as a killing, the justice system does not assume that in each and every case the person who has ended another person’s life is guilty of murder. A person has to be tried to determine whether a killing may have been self-defence. Yet we wish to say that every woman who has a termination- no matter what she perceives to be the consequences of allowing a baby to develop inside her- is guilty of murder. No argument for self-defence is ever permissible. Is that just?
It used to be a source of pride to me that I lived in a Catholic country. But that was before I opened my eyes and realised that “Catholic”, in the Irish context, really meant that we hid away and denied anything that didn’t fit in with the “clean-living, pure- we all think with one mind ” picture we wanted to paint of ourselves. Those who had pregnancies outside of marriage were locked up like criminals; children who had nobody to rear them properly were put out of sight in institutions; youngsters who were taught to be totally obedient to their elders were brutally abused by some of those they particularly had to obey and that abuse was covered up by those who should have known better. The list goes on.
I no longer want to live in a “Catholic Country”. I want to live in a country which is accepting of all religions and none – a country where all who sincerely seek the truth feel welcome and valued in their diversity-where no-one feels either superior or inferior because of his/her beliefs."

Bertser

Don't have it myself, but the Life Issues Institute put a half page ad in the Wicklow People on Page 17 (maybe other newspapers too?), basically about how in Britain they introduced a similar bill and now there is 'abortion on demand'. Should never be allowed to put these things in newspapers.

Galvasean

The Black Oil wrote: »

Caroline Simons was doing the media rounds today, or at least calling for a free vote and that its absence was a threat to democracy, etc.

A threat to a democracy where 74% of people are in favour of the legislation and have already voted in favour of abortion via referendum twice.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

I find this gives a strange insight into the nuts and bolts of the effect of aspirational Constitutional wording on real cases.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/former-dpp-questions-suicide-clause-in-abortion-bill-1.1439033


<...>As DPP in 1992, Mr Barnes had a role in the drama that culminated in the landmark X-case judgment. Early that year, a family told gardaí their 14-year-old daughter had been raped by a neighbour and was pregnant. They said they intended to bring her to the UK for an abortion.

Mr Barnes referred the matter to the then attorney general, Harry Whelehan. He sought an injunction to prevent the girl leaving the jurisdiction, believing the 1983 amendment required the State to do so to protect the unborn child’s life. The High Court granted the injunction but the case ultimately ended up in the Supreme Court.

My point, incidently, is not to demonise Eamonn Barnes. It's just that the process is so deadpan sort of "better take legal advice on this one".

_rebelkid

Does anyone have the links to the news articles about the 2 women (can't remember their names) who were refused abortions and died in the 80's? I remember them being posted here in the Silvio times, but I can't for the life of me find them.

Thanks in advance

Stark

Sheila Hodgers was one of them. Not sure about the other.

_rebelkid

Sheila Hodger (1983) and Michelle Harte (2010). Found 'em at 4 this morning Thanks Stark.

Mentioned those cases on the YD Facebook page.... got banned

_rebelkid

http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0623/458345-abortion-referendum/

A Government Minister has ruled out the possibility of holding a referendum on the Protection of Life during Pregnancy Bill 2013.
Minister of State for Finance, Brian Hayes said he did not think Article 27 would be used to hold a referendum on the bill.

_rebelkid

From twitter user @daimbars:

"Fetuses Feel Pain at 20 Weeks, and 4 Other Anti-Abortion Myths"
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/06/science-house-abortion-ban-fetal-pain

Claim: Virtually no rape victims conceive.

Source: Dr. John Willke, former National Right to Life president

Why it's bunk: In a 1999 article, Willke, an "expert in human sexuality," used some really fuzzy math to argue that fewer than 400 victims of sexual assault get pregnant annually. (The reason? Hormones and stuff.) This idea, also found in medieval texts, has been repeated by lawmakers who don't believe abortion bans should make exceptions for rape.

Claim: Abortion can lead to PTSD, bipolar disorder, panic disorders, major depression, alcohol and drug abuse, agoraphobia, and suicide.

Source: Priscilla Coleman, professor of human development and family studies at Bowling Green State University

Why it's bunk: Her 2009 study in the Journal of Psychiatric Research failed to screen whether her subjects had those disorders before their abortions. The paper has been criticized for its "fundamental analytical errors," yet it has been used to justify state laws that require abortion providers to warn women of these effects.

Claim: A fetus can feel pain 20 weeks after conception.

Source: Dr. Kanwaljeet "Sunny" Anand, professor of pediatrics, anesthesiology, and neurobiology at the University of Tennessee

Why it's bunk: Anand argues that because fetuses can respond to stress or other stimuli at 20 weeks, abortion after that point causes them "severe and excruciating pain." The bulk of the scientific literature on the subject, however, finds that the brain connections needed to feel pain are not in place until at least 24 weeks, which is also the earliest possible time a fetus becomes viable outside the womb. Anand's testimony has been used to justify state and federal laws banning abortions after 20 weeks; those efforts have passed in nine states since 2010.

Claim: Having an abortion significantly increases your risk of breast cancer if you've been pregnant before.

Source: A 1994 paper published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Why it's bunk: Subsequent research led the institute to conclude that abortion is not in fact associated with an increase in breast cancer risk. The original claim resurfaced in early 2012 after abortion foes attacked Susan G. Komen for the Cure for funding cancer screenings at Planned Parenthood.

aloyisious

_rebelkid wrote: »

Sheila Hodger (1983) and Michelle Harte (2010). Found 'em at 4 this morning Thanks Stark.

Mentioned those cases on the YD Facebook page.... got banned

I take it that's an example of YD not letting a pertinent fact get in the way of their "truthful" advertising

Sierra 117

Obviously, facts can't be allowed to get in the way of forcing women to remain pregnant in order to deliver "da babees!"

Bobby42

Facts can't be trusted anyway. They have an inherent liberal bias.

aloyisious

I've been tempted for some time now to ask the Pro-lifers posting here what would be the specific act/s and actions they would take to ensure a pregnant woman stayed alive to the time of delivery, in the event that the woman threatened suicide if she was not allowed an abortion, and she was then refused it after making the threat. So I'll pop the question now, seeing as how so many Pro-lifers seem sure that any woman threatening to commit suicide is bluffing.

I think I'll also put that question to those Pro-life politicians who oppose the safety of pregnant womens lives.

Bannasidhe

aloyisious wrote: »

I've been tempted for some time now to ask the Pro-lifers posting here what would be the specific act/s and actions they would take to ensure a pregnant woman stayed alive to the time of delivery, in the event that the woman threatened suicide if she was not allowed an abortion, and she was then refused it after making the threat. So I'll pop the question now, seeing as how so many Pro-lifers seem sure that any woman threatening to commit suicide is bluffing.

I think I'll also put that question to those Pro-life politicians who oppose the safety of pregnant womens lives.

We asked them that and the long version is: 'they should be placed in a psychiatric facility where they can receive the support they need to aid them in coming to terms with the situation' - pregnant women that is, not pro-birthers.

Short version: 'lock 'em up, tranc them if need be, and brain shrink them into passivity -just make sure they give birth at all costs.'

eviltwin

Seeing so many YD posters up at the moment, the Navan Road is flooded with them.

One in particular has the slogan "Horrific: legislation will allow abortion until birth" or something similar.

Termination of pregnancy is not always abortion!!! The misinformation these people are allowed to peddle is ridiculous.

Do groups that do mass poster campaigns like this not need permission?

lazygal

Some politicians think they just need to be 'minded' until the birth. We could pay for the minding through their labour, say washing clothes or something?

aloyisious

There is a requirement for permission from DCC to put up posters around the Kildare St/Merrion St area, so i assume that similar rules apply in other parts of the city under DCC control.

eviltwin

lazygal wrote: »

Some politicians think they just need to be 'minded' until the birth. We could pay for the minding through their labour, say washing clothes or something?

The irony being that once the baby is born you are on your own.

The child has a disability? Well, we'll cut your resource hours, respite care and have massive waiting lists.

You're a single parent? Well you'll have to survive on welfare because we won't be able to give you money towards childcare if you want to work or go to college.

robindch

eviltwin wrote: »

One in particular has the slogan "Horrific: legislation will allow abortion until birth" or something similar.

Technically, I think that's true as the legislation -- and the referendums it's based upon -- don't mention any time limits.

In a more reasonable debating climate, perhaps this issue could be addressed, but with the pro-life side behaving as they are, that's unlikely to happen.

lazygal

eviltwin wrote: »

The irony being that once the baby is born you are on your own.

The child has a disability? Well, we'll cut your resource hours, respite care and have massive waiting lists.

You're a single parent? Well you'll have to survive on welfare because we won't be able to give you money towards childcare if you want to work or go to college.

You never wanted a child? Suck it up, all wimmins love the tinneeee baaaybees.
Never wanted stretch marks or invasive abdominal surgery or postnatal depression or an episiomoy? But sure Ireland's one of the safest places in the world to have a precious tiny baby, there's no overcrowding or pressure on the system or women being actively managed in labour to fit the hospital's schedule, what are you worried about?

Because the relative safety of our maternity services should be a consideration when deciding on whether abortion is the right option. :rolleyes:

lazygal

robindch wrote: »

Technically, I think that's true as the legislation -- and the referendums it's based upon -- don't mention any time limits.

In a more reasonable debating climate, perhaps this issue could be addressed, but with the pro-life side behaving as they are, that's unlikely to happen.

The pregnancy is aborted/terminated, not the child. I had a termination of pregnancy at 39 weeks, and my child is hale and hearty. If a woman's life was threatened, of course a pregnancy would be terminated, resulting in a live birth (of course is the foetus is alive and not suffering from a fatal abnormality). The stupid is strong in this group.

eviltwin

lazygal wrote: »

The pregnancy is aborted/terminated, not the child. I had a termination of pregnancy at 39 weeks, and my child is hale and hearty. If a woman's life was threatened, of course a pregnancy would be terminated, resulting in a live birth (of course is the foetus is alive and not suffering from a fatal abnormality). The stupid is strong in this group.

Exactly. Termination of pregnancy is not always an abortion. I think I've heard a few TD's say that later on in a pregnancy the baby will simply be induced which happens every single day in our maternity system.

UDP

eviltwin wrote: »

Termination of pregnancy is not always abortion!!!

Whats the point they are trying to make with this?