Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

old hippy

jank wrote: »

Keep up the good work Robin, Ireland has been bad and needs to be punished! Oh the shame...



Didn't take long...

Oh, does the uberpatriot feel angsty because his country is in the spotlight?

This is Ireland's shame and if you can't or won't see that, you're part of those who wish to brush all our ills under the carpet.

Shame on you, a chara.

JimiTime

old hippy wrote: »

Oh, does the uberpatriot feel angsty because his country is in the spotlight?

This is Ireland's shame and if you can't or won't see that, you're part of those who wish to brush all our ills under the carpet.

Shame on you, a chara.

For a group of people that regularly diss The Daily Mail, you love a bit 'o' tabloid.

Sierra 117

Your constant snide remarks are tiresome, Jimi. How about contributing to the discussion?

Bannasidhe

JimiTime wrote: »

The truth is, that you don't know what the facts of the Savita case are yet, but wont let that get in the way of opportunism.

Also, if you are talking about being against abortion as a religious belief, then I think you'll find you're mistaken there also.

You keep telling yourself that Jimi if it helps you sleep at night.

Zillah

jank wrote: »

Keep up the good work Robin, Ireland has been bad and needs to be punished! Oh the shame...

Didn't take long...

Do you have anything to contribute that isn't a pointless passive aggressive remark?

Sarky

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You keep telling yourself that Jimi if it helps you sleep at night.

I'll bet it does. Not having to think about right and wrong like a human being is a great weight off the mind. He can go sleepy-byes secure in the knowledge that his imaginary friend takes care of details like that.

jank

old hippy wrote: »

Oh, does the uberpatriot feel angsty because his country is in the spotlight?

This is Ireland's shame and if you can't or won't see that, you're part of those who wish to brush all our ills under the carpet.

Shame on you, a chara.

Shame on me for what? For not stooping into our usual tabloid insecurities on what others think of us? Do you honestly think that this is a hot topic of debate in India or elsewhere, where Ireland needs to be 'shamed' into action by views from abroad.

We should certainly be pushed into action because of the lack of legislation on the books regarding the x case NOT because of an image problem to some bloggers in India.

If people demanded more of their peers and politicians rather than looking over their shoulder worried about what others think of them, then we can be a serious nation.

This is true with ANY major negative story that comes from Ireland, be it the housing crash, the IMF bailout, Ryan report, etc....

I have noticed many Journalists including those in RTE ringing up other journalists in other countries to ask them 'their' opinion on the matter at hand and how 'bad does it make us look, what does the ordinary Greek, German, Spanish person think of Ireland, are we good or bad....'.

I find it bizarre! Maybe I have been living in Australia too long but you don't find that attitude here. Most countries don't seek constant approval from their peers, they just get on with it. Posting news items from websites around the world achieves nothing, just feeds people sense of Guilt. I would say Catholic guilt but I an not in the right forum for that.;)

robp

Sarky wrote: »

I'll bet it does. Not having to think about right and wrong like a human being is a great weight off the mind. He can go sleepy-byes secure in the knowledge that his imaginary friend takes care of details like that.

If passive aggression belong to any post surely it is this one. Plain nasty and unnecessary comment tbh.

JimiTime

Sierra 117 wrote: »

Your constant snide remarks are tiresome, Jimi. How about contributing to the discussion?

It does contribute. It says, pick up a mirror you hypocrites.

JimiTime

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You keep telling yourself that Jimi if it helps you sleep at night.

So you know the facts of the Savita case, and being against abortion is a religious belief.

Have I got that right?

Nodin

jank wrote: »

Agreed, for once, so lets concentrate on that shall we rather screaming from the rooftops that certain people have blood on their hands.

Ireland is very good at mass hysteria but very bad at actually doing and problem solving. I wonder will it be different this time around.

The political class do indeed have blood on their hands, as does every whiner and holy joe who aided and abetted them.

Rev Hellfire

robindch wrote: »

Ireland is not receiving much positive press today. Here's a random selection of stories from around the world:

Bikya Masr (Egypt): http://www.bikyamasr.com/80774/india-women-shocked-over-ireland-death-after-abortion-refusal/
Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/11/14/ireland-probes-death-ill-woman-seeking-abortion/
Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/14/savita-halappanavar-death-irish-woman-denied-abortion-dies_n_2128696.html
Los Angeles Times: http://www.latimes.com/news/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-death-mother-refused-abortion-ireland-debate-20121114,0,7244973.story
New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/15/world/europe/hospital-death-in-ireland-renews-fight-over-abortion.html
New Zealand Herald: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10847524
Reuters (worldwide): http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/14/us-ireland-abortion-idUSBRE8AD1QD20121114
The Hindustan Times: http://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/Europe/Thousands-rally-in-Ireland-after-Indian-woman-denied-abortion-dies/Article1-959507.aspx
The Jakarta Globe: http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/afp/death-sparks-criticism-of-irish-abortion-laws/556257
The Star (Canada): http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1287525--abortion-debate-flares-in-ireland-after-woman-denied-quick-termination-dies
The Sun Daily (Malaysia): http://www.thesundaily.my/news/541490
Time Magazine: http://world.time.com/2012/11/14/ireland-abortion-scandal-death-of-a-pregnant-woman-prompts-soul-searching/
Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/abortion-debate-flares-in-ireland-over-death-of-critically-ill-woman-denied-quick-termination/2012/11/14/4b53b4d4-2e52-11e2-b631-2aad9d9c73ac_story.html

You know you've screwed up when the likes of India and Egypt call you up on it.

Nodin

JimiTime wrote: »

It does contribute. It says, pick up a mirror you hypocrites.

Don't mind them Jimi. Its just people are shocked to see you go on about something other than gays.

Sarky

robp wrote: »

If passive aggression belong to any post surely it is this one. Plain nasty and unnecessary comment tbh.

Why not just forgive me? Last I heard, it's a catholic country.

Nodin

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

You know you've screwed up when the likes of India and Egypt call you up on it.

....you know when you appear on certain things, its probably nothing good. Like the time we were on the headlines of Al Jazeera, for instance...

Rev Hellfire

Nodin wrote: »

The political class do indeed have blood on their hands, as does every whiner and holy joe voter who aided and abetted voted for them.

Fixed it for you.

Zillah

JimiTime wrote: »

So you know the facts of the Savita case

We know the husband's testimony. I find it inconsistent that you would dismiss the perfectly plausible testimony of a living human being, but accept the outlandish second-hand magical tales supposedly told by individuals dead thousands of years.

and being against abortion is a religious belief.

Not exclusively, but you're verging into insulting everyone's intelligence if you're hoping to distance the anti-abortion movement from religious conservatives.

pauldla

Nodin wrote: »

....you know when you appear on certain things, its probably nothing good. Like the time we were on the headlines of Al Jazeera, for instance...

Perhaps this is why the Lord limits himself to only appearing on pieces of toast these days.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

So, tell us, where does this fit in with the natural and imprescriptible rights of the child, which 57% of people who bothered to vote apparently felt deserved their very own Article of the Constitution? What's the best interest of the child (which is meant to be the overriding consideration, n'est pas) in situations where the mother's health is at risk?

Just, to be clear, I do mean this to be provocative. But I'm not just trolling for entertainment. I've no problem at all with legislation ensuring that pregnant women get necessary treatment, including terminations when needed. I just feel that it is pointless blaming the Government for the confusion of the public on these issues.

For all we know, these natural and imprescriptible rights (which is essentially a religious concept) may apply from the moment of "ensoulment", which I'd imagine is shortly after conception. That's what (most of you) voted for, bearing in mind that our Constitution recognises the Holy Trinity as the source of all legitimate authority.

This incidently, is the kind of thing that some of us in the recent No camp were trying to communicate. Well done Ireland. You recently confirmed an essentially religious conception of children's rights, while leaving the religious basis for your civil laws unchanged. Now you see where you end up by giving priority to a whole load of feel-good baloney, while leaving fundemental concerns untouched.

Of course, the real driver in all this will be the international coverage. We'd tolerate baloney if it was all among ourselves. Sure haven't we tolerated it for years. Maybe if the Times of India complained about the Constitutional status of the Irish language, we be able to finally get rid of another bit of nonsense that we don't need.

Nodin

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

So, tell us, where does this fit in with the natural and imprescriptible rights of the child, which 57% of people who bothered to vote apparently felt deserved their very own Article of the Constitution? What's the best interest of the child (which is meant to be the overriding consideration, n'est pas) in situations where the mother's health is at risk?
.......

Seeing as they were waiting for the child to die here, rather than waiting to see if it died, I fail to see how that comes into it.

Lingua Franca

The Black Oil wrote: »

The neck of YD to come out and say that using her death is reprehensible. As if they are somehow above such behaviour.

Indeed, as if they haven't been all over the death of Manon Jones. But you see when they do it it's for a greater cause.

Skrynesaver wrote: »

Because there are, in effect, no secular Irish hospitals, the only non-catholic hospital I am aware, the Adelaide, was closed and all Irish hospitals particularly those affiliation to the NUI , have a catholic slant on their ethics committees.

In this instance the fact that the organiser and chair of the meeting that came up with the Dublin Declaration, Eamon O’Dwyer holds a post as professor emeritus of obstetrics and gynaecology at NUI Galway would seem to indicate that rabid catholicism has a role in the university hospital in Galway.

Defending the Christian Brothers

The Irish Times - Thursday, November 6, 2003

Madam,

As one, most of whose first- and second-level education was provided by Christian Brothers, I write in their defence.

As a public servant, my father was obliged to transfer periodically from one major town or city to another. Hence, I attended five schools run by Brothers, from De la Salle Brothers initially to four Irish Christian Brothers' schools.

In none of these did I observe any pupil being subjected either to abuse or violence by teachers. Of course, there was limited corporal punishment, but was not this the norm in those days?

I believe the Brothers' ambition was for those whom they taught to succeed in life. And what success they achieved! One only has to look at the number of Christian Brothers' boys who play leading roles in the professions, business and public life in Ireland to appreciate the contribution that the Irish Christian Brothers have made to this State.

Indeed, whether they will admit it or or not, many men owe their success to the opportunity provided to them by the Christian Brothers. For my part I am proud to have been one of their protégés. Instead of vilifying them, Irish people should be forever grateful. -

Yours, etc.,

EAMON O'DWYER,
Professor Emeritus of Obstetrics and Gynaecology,
Lower Taylor's Hill,
Galway.

http://www.irishsalem.com/religious-congregations/christian-brothers/defendingthebrothers-06nov03.php

robp wrote: »

Interesting that you would make such sweeping judgment of the integrity of a man enormously more qualified on the topic than yourself.

We all know who Eamon O'Dwyers is and what he does so yes, we can all make sweeping and informed judgements on his integrity.

robp wrote: »

Do you think I am spoke person of the CC?

No, I suspect you're in Youth Defence and/or the Life Institute or similar. You certainly employ a lot of their debate tactics.

jank wrote: »

Keep up the good work Robin, Ireland has been bad and needs to be punished! Oh the shame...
Didn't take long...

Are you being serious or slagging this time? It's hard to tell. You claimed you weren't being serious right here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=81756890 but you're still at it.

JimiTime

Zillah wrote: »

We know the husband's testimony. I find it inconsistent that you would dismiss the perfectly plausible testimony of a living human being, but accept the outlandish second-hand magical tales supposedly told by individuals dead thousands of years.

Leaving aside the rest of your BS, what is the husbands testimony Zillah? Or at least, what is your understanding of it?

Not exclusively, but you're verging into insulting everyone's intelligence if you're hoping to distance the anti-abortion movement from religious conservatives.

I'm not distancing it at all. I am rather delighted in fact that Christianity at least is associated with being against it, though not so much delighted at some of the methods employed by some conservative groups. The fact is though, that to be against the killing of unborn children is NOT exclusive to religion and to actually call it a 'religious belief' is simply wrong.

seamus

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

So, tell us, where does this fit in with the natural and imprescriptible rights of the child, which 57% of people who bothered to vote apparently felt deserved their very own Article of the Constitution? What's the best interest of the child (which is meant to be the overriding consideration, n'est pas) in situations where the mother's health is at risk?

If the mother dies, the foetus dies. If the foetus is aborted, the mother lives.

Either way, the only outcome for the "child" is death. So the latest constitutional amendment does not come into it.

The constitution also does not define a foetus as a "child". The constitution defines rights on the "unborn" specificially, which implies that they are not yet a "person". Irish law specifically does not recognise a foetus as a "child" until 24 weeks/500g. Nice try at derailing the debate, but you're missing a good few facts.

Zillah

JimiTime wrote: »

Leaving aside the rest of your BS, what is the husbands testimony Zillah? Or at least, what is your understanding of it?

I'm sure you've read the same articles I have. She was told the fetus was dying and that there was nothing they could do to save it. She was in terrible pain and asked repeatedly over the course of three days for the pregnancy to be terminated if she was going to lose the child anyway. They refused repeatedly and told them that one reason was that this is a Catholic country. She later died from an infection caused by having her cervix dilated for so long, and that resolving the miscarriage earlier with an abortion would have drastically lowered the chances of that infection.

Is there any of that you contest?

Er, also she and the infant came back from the dead and said that the Mother Mary had shown them the light and then they both ascended bodily to heaven

The fact is though, that to be against the killing of unborn children is NOT exclusive to religion and to actually call it a 'religious belief' is simply wrong.

I accept that. One can be forgiven, however, for assuming it is likely a person is religious should they express strident opposition to abortion. Not exclusive, but likely.

Morag

Did you know that White is the Hindu colour for mourning?
It is being asked that if you can, please wear white, to any of the vigils/marches/protests you are attending this weekend as a mark of respect and solidarity, member of the Hindu communities will be attending.

Obliq

Sharrow wrote: »

Did you know that White is the Hindu colour for mourning?
It is being asked that if you can, please wear white, to any of the vigils/marches/protests you are attending this weekend as a mark of respect and solidarity, member of the Hindu communities will be attending.

Saw that. Am frantically trying to find something white with no stains on. White is not a good colour for this damp, mucky rural life. :rolleyes:

zirafute

JimiTime wrote: »

The fact is though, that to be against the killing of unborn children is NOT exclusive to religion and to actually call it a 'religious belief' is simply wrong.

Yes but mainly very religious people are against abortions as it's seen as murder in many religions not only Catholic. And I would agree that there are religious people who aren't against abortions the majority people against abortions are religious so it is a religious belief.They think it's murder because of their religion.

JimiTime

Zillah wrote: »

I'm sure you've read the same articles I have. She was told the fetus was dying and that there was nothing they could do to save it. She was in terrible pain and asked repeatedly over the course of three days for the pregnancy to be terminated if she was going to lose the child anyway. They refused repeatedly and told them that one reason was that this is a Catholic country. She later died from an infection caused by having her cervix dilated for so long, and that resolving the miscarriage earlier with an abortion would have drastically lowered the chances of that infection.

Is there any of that you contest?

No. As far as I'm aware, medical protocol should have meant that her cervix should not have been left dilated for so long etc. What is not clear yet, is if the professionals in questions hands were tied, or if they were just incompetent. Some have a desire it seems to simply conclude its because the docs hands were tied by the abortion issue. If it IS a case that his hands were tied etc, then we need to make sure that this is rectified EXTREMELY PROMPTLY.

What I take exception to, is that in the midst of the ignorance on this case, certain groups just saw an opportunity to exploit and pretended it was an emotional outpouring for this poor woman. They rushed to judgement, as it suited their ends.
Of course, If this does conspire to be about hands being tied, then as an anti-abortionist, I would want these hands untied, and such women to be saved. I would also be disgusted IF it so conspired, that our law prevented this woman being saved. I hope any anti-abortionist would feel the same.

I accept that. One can be forgiven, however, for assuming it is likely a person is religious should they express strident opposition to abortion. Not exclusive, but likely.

I agree, but the position itself is not a 'religious belief' as was asserted by the poster.

Bannasidhe

JimiTime wrote: »

I agree, but the position itself is not a 'religious belief' as was asserted by the poster.

Vatican position on abortion:

In a world overwhelmed by a kind of "culture of death", as John Paul II describes it in the encyclical Centesimus Annus, n. 39, the evil of abortion is like an avalanche sweeping away even those who are not fully aware of it

http://www.priestsforlife.org/magisterium/pcfintheserviceoflife.htm

Statement by Praveen Halappanavar

having been told she was miscarrying, and after one day in severe pain, Ms Halappanavar asked for a medical termination.

This was refused, he says, because the foetal heartbeat was still present and they were told, “this is a Catholic country”.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2012/1114/1224326575203.html?via=mr

No- no connection between religion and refusal to terminate pregnancies. Nothing to see here people - move on and stop being nasty about the religious fundamentalists who have blocked the introduction of legislation mandated by the Irish electorate 20 years ago. It's just a coincidence....

keane2097

There should be no ambiguity in the law that would allow a fundamentalist doctor to even consider the idea that he could argue his hands were tied.