Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Obliq

Exactly. You can't determine Ireland's abortion rate because many Irish women give UK addresses when having an abortion there. It also does not include the pills that women here access on the internet, unbeknownst to statistical analysis. Also not including back-street abortions.
Of course having no abortion here means that women are forced to have children they don't want, and I'm not aware of any studies showing the rate of giving up babies for adoption in comparison to other countries. Perhaps the Magdalene Laundries have some records? :mad: Financially speaking, obviously many Irish women are deterred from travelling for an abortion they might otherwise have had. That it cuts down on our abortion rate, does not make it right.

Obliq

robp wrote: »

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.

True, it is not a medical reason, but Down syndrome is a medical condition and it is a valid reason. Financially and emotionally, a potential parent may not be able to cope with supporting a child/adult with Down syndrome. Perhaps she/they are in poor health themselves, perhaps the long-term quality of life for this potential person is something that they know they can't provide. I will not judge these people. Only 1.3% of abortions occur after 21 weeks in the UK.

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?

The right to life is contingent on where you were born and what animal you are. It's pointless me telling you again what I believe when you are still not discussing the fact that universal concepts have to include views from people who do not agree with you. Who let you decide whether I can or cannot have an abortion in my country? We who agree with having a choice to have an abortion here are not being given a say in the matter, and as you can see, that pisses me off - I will continue to argue this point till I die or I get my say.

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.

She notes a whole lot more than that. Dipping in to find something you can't do anything about and dismissing the rest, is pretty typical of your "debating" style, no?

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?

To answer to the comment in bold - I haven't, and I didn't see anyone else do that either. There's no point in answering your last question, since you haven't answered my previous question on the same topic, which was/is a valid argument in an abortion debate. To remind you:

"THIS is what I would like to debate with robp. I would like to get down to the reason that ropb feels that an unborn human life has somehow more value than that of a pig or a cow. I would like to see the reasoning for his/her values, and I IMAGINE that we would hear a Christian interpretation of the "sanctity of human life" as opposed to the right to life of a pig (for eg.)"

Obliq

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLWnoQjTNiw

If you can sit through watching William Binchy, or indeed Mary Robinson, depending on your views, this is 11 minutes of fun. Footage of debate post 1983 amendment to the constitution, when the Catholic church had one of it's last hurrahs :mad:

I wonder what would happen if this had been put to the people now, with a 2012 stance in rural Ireland re the infallibility of the church on morality? I was 11 at the time and didn't get to vote on the constitution. Am I the only one who thinks this rail-roaded amendment needs a reworking?

Bannasidhe

Obliq wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLWnoQjTNiw

If you can sit through watching William Binchy, or indeed Mary Robinson, depending on your views, this is 11 minutes of fun. Footage of debate post 1983 amendment to the constitution, when the Catholic church had one of it's last hurrahs :mad:

I wonder what would happen if this had been put to the people now, with a 2012 stance in rural Ireland re the infallibility of the church on morality? I was 11 at the time and didn't get to vote on the constitution. Am I the only one who thinks this rail-roaded amendment needs a reworking?

I thought it at the time. It was awful.

Obliq

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I thought it at the time. It was awful.

Still is.

Hotblack Desiato

In retrospect the 1/3rd NO vote was the first sign that Roman Catholic hegemony in Ireland was ending.
There's no way the vote on such an amendment would be 2/3 vs. 1/3 today, even if the horrifying consequences of the X and C cases hadn't arisen.
Unfortunately due to extreme political cowardice the Irish people have never been given the opportunity to vote for less restrictive abortion law, only for more restrictive abortion law.
It should tell our politicians something that in two referendums in the last twenty years, the Irish people have decisively voted not to make our restrictive abortion laws even more restrictive. We also voted in two referendums to make explicit the right to travel for an abortion and to receive information on abortion.
It is clear that the idea that the majority of Irish people are opposed to abortion under any circumstances is nothing more than a myth, however thus far no politician has the guts to legislate for the extremely limited abortion rights the constitution currently allows, never mind propose a referendum on a less restrictive position.

robindch

Here are two priests on the Late Late show 13 years ago. The guy on the left is Iggy and knows the game is up. The guy on the right is from central Vatican casting.

Was the country really this mad?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwVGOJi-skc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GnqETOMi40

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJB3b1-q1gI

Obliq

Good grief, what an unctuous bas*ard. Respect for poor Fr. Iggy though - seems to be living in the real world. I find it hard to believe that was only 13 years ago.

This English TV show from the sixties is fascinating as well - two women of 1960s Ballyfermot speaking up and speaking out on their need for contraception in a time when it was nearly as restricted to them as abortion is now.
http://www.euscreen.eu/play.jsp?id=EUS_B96B0E80CB8645E295DDE2F0C2D794FB

doctoremma

BPAS have launched a new awareness campaign in the UK. These posters are all over Manchester. Any others here seen them?

MagicMarker

That ad doesn't even make sense.

Delirium

MagicMarker wrote: »

That ad doesn't even make sense.

I presume it's a call on people to stop calling women who've had abortions murderers, sluts etc.

Obliq

In case anyone wishes to do this:

Initiative from the National Women's Council of Ireland -

"Take action and ask your TD to make legislation for the X Case a priority for the government. Your action will make a difference to ensure that we do not have to wait another 20 years for legislation to implement the constitutional right to an abortion in cases where the life of the mother is at risk. TDs need to hear from the 79% of the population who believe abortion should be available in certain circumstances. Thank you for your support!"

http://www.nwci.ie/takeaction/

Very, very easy and quick. You click on a map for your constituency and an automated email (can change it to a personal one) can be sent to every TD that is representing you.

MagicMarker

koth wrote: »

I presume it's a call on people to stop calling women who've had abortions murderers, sluts etc.

Yeah, it makes more sense now that I realise it's not an anti-abortion ad campaign, had no idea who BPAS were!!

The Mad Hatter

robindch wrote: »

Here are two priests on the Late Late show 13 years ago. The guy on the left is Iggy and knows the game is up. The guy on the right is from central Vatican casting.

Was the country really this mad?

<snipped as a special favour to Jernal>

Short version?

Turtwig

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Short version?

People who quote videos shouldn't be entitled to summaries. :pac:

The Mad Hatter

Jernal wrote: »

People who quote videos shouldn't be entitled to summaries. :pac:

Happy now?

Turtwig

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Happy now?

Obliq

Honestly, it's worth watching, just to see how a priest who endorses the infallibility of the church isolates pretty much the entire Irish Catholic population from being welcome in the Roman Catholic Church versus one that lives in the real world. Once you start watching, it's seriously compelling!

It's also topical, considering ropb's suggestions (by default to his position) that the 8th ammendment to the constitution (to insert the words “The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.”) apparently had nothing to do with the Catholic patriarchy's thumb screws, at all. :rolleyes:

The Black Oil

'No one who uses contraception is respecting their body'.

Seriously?!

Obliq

The Black Oil wrote: »

'No one who uses contraception is respecting their body'.

Seriously?!

Apparently so! But when someone delivers that kind of imperative with a slimy smile on their face, it's an acceptable assumption in my book that they have a screw loose and/or are taking the piss.

13 YEARS AGO! Would he get away with it now without being heckled and someone suing him for irreparable brain damage?

robindch

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Short version?

"Ye gods, was it really like that?"

Hotblack Desiato

Obliq wrote: »

13 YEARS AGO! Would he get away with it now without being heckled and someone suing him for irreparable brain damage?

Tubridy would do his level best to soft-soap the RCC and paint any secular/atheist panellists as 'militants'. Then bring John Waters on...

Hotblack Desiato

Obliq wrote: »

Good grief, what an unctuous bas*ard.

He's so repressed, it's not funny. I actually feel sorry for him.

Hotblack Desiato

Obliq wrote: »

This English TV show from the sixties is fascinating as well - two women of 1960s Ballyfermot speaking up and speaking out on their need for contraception in a time when it was nearly as restricted to them as abortion is now.
http://www.euscreen.eu/play.jsp?id=EUS_B96B0E80CB8645E295DDE2F0C2D794FB

Thank you for that. It seems incredible now but families of that size weren't all that unusual then. Would have liked to hear from the third woman at the end, but the other two were clear that they'd already done their bit for RCC and Ireland :rolleyes: is it any wonder they were living in poverty when they had 9 or 10 or 11 kids. My mother-in-law was born in the 30s and there were 14 of them. You really wonder how people survived at all... (of course not all of them did, 3 of the 14 didn't survive childhood) The brutal nature of RCC doctrine is exposed, they don't care how many kids are born to live short lives of suffering, so long as they're baptised it's +1 for God :mad: and to think they say atheists are devoid of morals, compassion, humanity.

Bannasidhe

ninja900 wrote: »

Thank you for that. It seems incredible now but families of that size weren't all that unusual then. Would have liked to hear from the third woman at the end, but the other two were clear that they'd already done their bit for RCC and Ireland :rolleyes: is it any wonder they were living in poverty when they had 9 or 10 or 11 kids. My mother-in-law was born in the 30s and there were 14 of them. You really wonder how people survived at all... (of course not all of them did, 3 of the 14 didn't survive childhood) The brutal nature of RCC doctrine is exposed, they don't care how many kids are born to live short lives of suffering, so long as they're baptised it's +1 for God :mad: and to think they say atheists are devoid of morals, compassion, humanity.

One of my fondest memories of the late 80s is of hearing a group of women from West Belfast belting out 'I've got rhythm, I've got music, I've got 12 kids -who could ask for anything more!'

I agree completely ninja - I hear a lot about the life of the unborn but given we have children alive now - in Ireland - who are neglected, abused, hungry, living in poverty I find the millions being spent lobbying to 'protect potential' people to be disgusting.

Bannasidhe

Sums it up for me.

fitz0

http://www.aljazeera.com/video/europe/2012/11/201211312153530375.html

Many countries are condemned in the West for organised religion and its effect on peoples lives. Societies throw their arms up in horror if countries like Iran or Afghanistan deny women basic rights. They tend, however, not to mention Ireland.

In Ireland, a woman cannot have an abortion if she has been raped. She cannot have an abortion if the man who made her pregnant is beating her. She cannot have an abortion if the baby will die outside her body.

She cannot even have an abortion if the fact of being pregnant is in some way threatening to her life.

The absolute ban on abortion in Ireland creates some very stark choices for women.

The choice has traditionally been for women to travel, often alone, to England for a termination.

There is just one small organisation which exists to help women who want an abortion but cannot afford it, but it is in England.

Requests for financial help have tripled in three years, mirroring Ireland's financial crisis, as women discover they are pregnant with a baby they cannot support and with no recourse to help where they live.

Al Jazeera's Laurence Lee reports from Dublin

There's a video after the jump. I'm glad someone's reporting on this from outside Ireland.

Bannasidhe

fitz0 wrote: »

There's a video after the jump. I'm glad someone's reporting on this from outside Ireland.

Hopefully it will be reported widely as if there is one thing our governments have traditionally been concerned with, its what the neighbours think of us.

Obliq

fitz0 wrote: »

There's a video after the jump. I'm glad someone's reporting on this from outside Ireland.

Just saw this and was about to post it:-) Beaten to it by 3 hrs, that's unlike me! Very interesting though eh? Love that this has been said abroad

Tipsygypsy

I cant believe that those clips from the Late Late were only 13 years ago. Absolute madness. I struggle to understand how the Catholic church retains any followers when I see things like that. And the fact that they have control over most of our schools.... I despair. I wonder what is taught in the wedding preparation thing as regards family planning now, has it changed or are newlyweds still being told to abstain if they're not looking to conceive?