Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Obliq

Ronagig wrote: »

I jumped for joy when I found out I was pregnant
I loved the week where their hearts started beating
I marveled the week where they started producing alpha & beta waves - dreaming for them was a reality
I hugged myself the day they started moving & punching and kicking
I breathed a sigh of relief the week I knew their lungs had developed sufficient coating to reinflate after birth (JIK)
I grinned from ear to ear the day I finally put a face to them

I am however very much in favour of contraception, neither pro choice or pro life. I would love to see an option in the middle of the two where contraception was a right and abortions only happened pre heartbeat/brainwave activity & only if that was the last resort.

Thanks for your contribution Ronagig. I too would love if abortions only happened pre heartbeat and only if it was the last resort. Thankfully, most are performed at that time and I imagine it is generally a last resort. Also, I jumped for joy when I found out I was pregnant, both times, but they were wanted pregnancies.

It's unfortunate that there is no "middle of the road" option here - you either support the notion that it is ok to send Irish women abroad at a hugely traumatic time in their lives, or you support giving them the choice here at home. It is a pity it comes down to having to take a stand either way, as mild-mannered and gentle people everywhere are forced into making a decision that isn't easy at all, I know that.

Obliq

Nodin wrote: »

Grim, grim stuff.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20143558

Oh. If there was a profoundly upset smilie, I would use it now. My heart goes out to that poor child - same age as my eldest son. Oh, the horror.

Ronagig

Obliq wrote: »

Thanks for your contribution Ronagig. I too would love if abortions only happened pre heartbeat and only if it was the last resort. Thankfully, most are performed at that time and I imagine it is generally a last resort. Also, I jumped for joy when I found out I was pregnant, both times, but they were wanted pregnancies.

It's unfortunate that there is no "middle of the road" option here - you either support the notion that it is ok to send Irish women abroad at a hugely traumatic time in their lives, or you support giving them the choice here at home. It is a pity it comes down to having to take a stand either way, as mild-mannered and gentle people everywhere are forced into making a decision that isn't easy at all, I know that.

Thanks Obliq :)I don't mind making decisions and have mine made in this case but I do find it hard to understand why extreme stances have to be made on issues when most want the middle option. Idealistic? maybe but I'll keep plodding that road.
My first was a surprise - teenager now;)

Ronagig

Nodin wrote: »

Grim, grim stuff.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20143558[/QUOTE]

Oh that is terrible - What an ordeal to put the family through.

Obliq

Ronagig wrote: »

Thanks Obliq :)I don't mind making decisions and have mine made in this case but I do find it hard to understand why extreme stances have to be made on issues when most want the middle option.
My first was a surprise - teenager now;)

Well, people are debating this because it is something that the Irish government has been required to look at and legislate for by the European Court of Human Rights. The Irish government have been found to be illegally going against the will of the people in not legislating for providing access to abortion services for women whose lives are in danger by the continuation of a pregnancy. This has opened up the whole debate again, and I welcome it.

In my opinion, it is an extreme stance on the reality of women seeking abortion (in Ireland, at least 12 women every day) to say "No, that can't happen here, you must find the money and the strength to travel for an abortion, and travel back at a time when you most need help on a physical and emotional level". I find that stance to be VERY extreme.

The middle option can't happen (even if you agree with me on my point above). If you can reason for the middle option (and I have no doubt that most people agree with you here) then the anti-choice people claim that this will "open the floodgates" to abortion in Ireland that actually reflects the reality of so many women finding it necessary to end their pregnancies.

The extreme stance comes down to people of both sides taking positions contrary to each other, and having to argue in a reasoned fashion for either. I don't see your problem with it, bar that it is not at all ideal that we can't decide a cut-off point for abortion, when we can't even decide women should have a choice.

Of course it would be extreme to end an unborn baby's life just days before birth (and that only happens in extreme circumstances, as I'm sure you have researched), and of course it is extreme to deny there is ever a need for abortion in the face of 12 women a day who say otherwise. We have to live with the extremes and include them in our decision making.


My first boy was a surprise too btw, but I don't believe there are medals handed out for being happy about them?! Was just fantastically lucky to be in a position to cope with a baby.

Ronagig

Well Obliq, I don't remember looking for any medals??? & as I said decisions are easy I just don't like limited options. Congratulations on the birth of your first boy & other kids (I think you mentioned more than 1 birth). Isn't it a great country to live in that we can have this debate. I do seem to have annoyed you & that's a pity so before this goes any further I think we can call it a day

Obliq

Ronagig wrote: »

Well Obliq, I don't remember looking for any medals??? & as I said decisions are easy I just don't like limited options. Congratulations on the birth of your first boy & other kids (I think you mentioned more than 1 birth). Isn't it a great country to live in that we can have this debate. I do seem to have annoyed you & that's a pity so before this goes any further I think we can call it a day

No, you didn't annoy me at all! I'm really happy to talk with you about this and I'm sorry that I got you wrong in any way.

I suppose the comment I made about the medals was in relation to your own additional comment about your young one being a surprise, and you wanted that child in spite of the surprise! I'm sure many women who have had abortions, have also had wanted children, or will do in the future. I am a bit touchy, I'll admit, about people who say that they coped fine in a crisis pregnancy and can't imagine an instance where they might not have done. Sorry about the "medal" comment - it was uncalled for, and based on my experience of previous posts.

I do also believe this is a great country that we can now debate this, but IMO, it would be a better one if women weren't shamed into going abroad for abortions (that womankind has always needed).

Nodin

More acting the bollix

Health Minister James Reilly has got an extra month to set out his contentious plan to respond to a European court ruling on abortion.
Dr Reilly was scheduled to report back by the end of this month on the Government's proposed actions on foot of a European Court of Human Rights ruling on the abortion regime in this country.
But his department now admits the minister won't meet today's deadline and he now has until the end of next month.

The postponement was needed as an expert group set up to devise a response to the ruling still hasn't reported back -- nearly two months after its deadline.

The Government set up the group in January to examine a landmark abortion ruling from the European Court of Human Rights.
Two years ago, the Strasbourg Court ruled that there was no automatic right for women to have an abortion in a case brought by three women -- A, B and C -- who travelled to Britain to terminate their pregnancies.
The Irish Independent understands the group will propose the minister decides the limited grounds for abortion, rather than the Dail.
The setting up of a panel of medical experts to consider applications for abortions in extremely limited circumstances will be recommended.
But the plan would see the Minister for Health setting out the grounds in regulations.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/reilly-misses-deadline-for-response-to-abortion-ruling-3278622.html

Obliq

Nodin wrote: »

More acting the bollix


http://www.independent.ie/national-news/reilly-misses-deadline-for-response-to-abortion-ruling-3278622.html

FFS, what's the hold up?

Bannasidhe

Obliq wrote: »

FFS, what's the hold up?

My guess is they just don't want to bring in the required legislation.

Hotblack Desiato

Obliq wrote: »

FFS, what's the hold up?

Obliq

Um, I LOVE the pic, but you will have to explain! Other people's lateral thinking confuses me.....:o

Dades

This issue is a hot potato?

Obliq

Wayhaaay!! I get it! Thanks.

robindch

And in a change from our usual programming...

Here's today's caption competition:

Obliq

Is this like on QI, where if you give the most obvious answer, it comes up in flashy lights with an alarm? ......Ok, here goes -



All roads lead to rome?

Hotblack Desiato

*original reply snipped*
Bah. I reloaded the page before replying and used spoiler tags and all and still got gazumped!

robindch

Ok, that one was easy. Didn't need the flashing lights.

What about this one:

Turtwig

Dades wrote: »

This issue is a hot potato?

A hot spud. :pac:

Obliq

robindch wrote: »

Ok, that one was easy. Didn't need the flashing lights.

What about this one:

Oh dear. I didn't call myself oblique for nothing y'know. My aspergian traits are showing here - is that actually obvious to everyone else? Sigh

Oh wait....throne mud-hut.....throne room.....toilet??? Do I win something? ;-)

28064212

People in grass houses shouldn't stow thrones

pauldla

28064212 wrote: »

People in grass houses shouldn't stow thrones

Love it!

robindch

Dang, too easy.

28064212

robindch wrote: »

Dang, too easy.

Nice try, I got the email notification from the first post. Lunchlady Doris... grease me up woman!

pauldla

28064212 wrote: »

Nice try, I got the email notification from the first post. Lunchlady Doris... grease me up woman!

I saw it too, Robin...stand and deliver!

robindch

Nobody saw nothing

pauldla

robindch wrote: »

Nobody saw nothing

Whatever we saw, we saw nothing.

aloyisious

@nodin. This in one of your posts in this thread-topic.:
Poland's abortion law is among the strictest in Europe.
Terminations are only permitted in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother or foetus is in danger.

Are the Polish Authorities serious in their laws and wording of same, by including that a termination is allowed when the life of the foetus is in danger. Surely that's a complete contradiction in reality: termination of the foetus when it's life is in danger.

Edit: I "googled" the BBC report and saw the paragraph/sentences mentioning the above. It seem's rather strange, maybe it was a "Beeb" typo.

robp

Obliq wrote: »

You're in a subjective debate about the moral value of life. That is what I have been talking about anyway - and as I pointed out, you haven't entered into a discussion on those terms as it is probably the crux of the issue (and one that you have just admitted you want to avoid). Pro-life people constantly bang on about Christian values of the "right to life", as you well know. And as for your last sentence, what would you argue that they're based on then?

No, I don't agree at all that human life has "special" qualities to any animal except humans. What special qualities? Are we magical? We are only more intelligent/reasonable than other animals - some creature had to be eh?

My whole point is that we can morally agree that killing something is acceptable when we value our needs above that of a living being. The cow and the pig being killed for food are examples of when we do this. The family dog is an example of when we do not. And actually I do believe that the "right to life" has a very different meaning to a starving child in Africa, where their life/death is entirely contingent on society's emotional attachment to them. We just happen to be lucky to live here. Real equality does not happen, anywhere.

As well you know, something happens at birth. It is not magical, it is natural. The clue is in the word "newborn". I would not argue with the natural law of birth being a good starting point for the actual right to life. I am not a heartless person. It's not in me to see any animal suffer, and I would support late abortion for cases where the suffering of the foetus dying would be less than it's suffering if it had to undergo birth and a few hours/days of distress/pain. Again, as you well know, nearly all (with exceptions I'm sure - that prove the rule) late term abortions are for medical reasons.

And?? Your point? Please try reading the link I sent about the pro-life woman who became pro-choice - it's very interesting. No amount of banning abortion will make it go away as a choice, but she offers some USEFUL methods for lowering the abortion rate everywhere.

If you look at the stats you will see the late-term abortions are frequently for conditions such as Down syndrome. I don't accept that is a 'medical reason' as no one's life is threated.

Family dogs have little or no legal protection. We can keep them alive but are only obligation is not to be cruel to them. You can easily request your vet to kill your dog. You can not do the same to a person. I agree that our equality is not equal to say in certain parts of Africa but the situation out there is improving all the time. Equality is what we are striving for so you can't just dismiss it. Emotional attachment is a watery concept. We should move away from definitions like that allow people to be left behind and focus on fairer universal concepts. What does the right to life mean for you?

I skimmed over the article by the ex-pro-life woman on Patheos.
She notes that many zygotes are lost naturally and apparently its hypocritical of prolifers not to worry about them. This really made no sense to me. I have know about this fact for years, indeed from the mouths of pro-lifers themselves. We have always seen this as nature's way or self-selection. There is one hell of a difference between natural processes and abortion. Additionally, it is completely beyond our technological capabilities to do anything about these naturally lost zygotes at the moment and for a very long time.

Secondly she talks about a contraception with 'facts' provided by the Planned Parenthood spinout the Guttmacher Institute. It doesn't strike me as nonpartisan. Its worth noting that the pro-life movement is not intrinsically against contraception. Furthermore, we know from Ireland's very low abortion rate that abortion restriction can be linked to less abortions.

kylith wrote: »

The thing is that if one is religious then humans are automatically much, much more important than any other animal because the entire universe was made just for you (and they call us arrogant!). Whereas those of us who are evolutionists know that we're just an ape that had a lucky break, and therefore no better nor worse than any other living thing upon the face of the planet.

Its incorrect to frame the debate as one of pro-choice evolutionists vs pro-life. For instance I work in the study of human evolution full time. I know our evolutionary linage. It is very valid to argue what make human special from other species but not in an abortion debate! As the fact is, everything in our society religious or secular recognises we are different from other species so we work in that framework. On what basis do you propose we are recognised legally?

Ronagig wrote: »

I jumped for joy when I found out I was pregnant
I loved the week where their hearts started beating
I marveled the week where they started producing alpha & beta waves - dreaming for them was a reality
I hugged myself the day they started moving & punching and kicking
I breathed a sigh of relief the week I knew their lungs had developed sufficient coating to reinflate after birth (JIK)
I grinned from ear to ear the day I finally put a face to them

I am however very much in favour of contraception, neither pro choice or pro life. I would love to see an option in the middle of the two where contraception was a right and abortions only happened pre heartbeat/brainwave activity & only if that was the last resort.

I think you will find many pro-life people would actually agree with you about contraception.

28064212

robp wrote: »

Furthermore, we know from Ireland's very low abortion rate that abortion restriction can be linked to less abortions.

No, we don't know that at all, just like we don't know "that a significant portion of women who have actually taken this procedure would not be very positive about it all". You're totally twisting facts out of all recognition