At Least 25,000 Attend Anti-Abortion Vigil

VinLieger

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Genuine question to all those who sneer at the pro life people for being so anti-woman that they would have the temerity to tell a woman what to do with her own body:

If a female friend, who you know to be pregnant, called over to you to visit and during the course of the visit requested you open a bottle of wine, would you have any problem with serving her with as much alcohol as she wanted up until you felt it would be hazardous to her own physical wellbeing? Would you feel that denying her drink, simply because she was pregnant, would be you "telling her what to do with her own body"?

I would at first advise her of the consequences of alcohol exposure to a developing foetus, which I imagine almost everyone on both sides of the debate would do, but if she still insisted on me serving her wine I would flat out refuse.

Now that would absolutely be me exercising whatever limited power I have whilst she is in my house to tell her what she can and can't do with her own body, but I would be interested in finding out who those who feel the mother should have final say with regards her own body would react.

Would the little inhuman ball of cells or parasite as some call it ever figure in your decision to serve drink to the fully developed human carrying it?

Poor analogy and has absolutely nothing to do with medically neccessary abortions that save the life of the mother

Artful_Badger

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Genuine question to all those who sneer at the pro life people for being so anti-woman that they would have the temerity to tell a woman what to do with her own body:

If a female friend, who you know to be pregnant, called over to you to visit and during the course of the visit requested you open a bottle of wine, would you have any problem with serving her with as much alcohol as she wanted up until you felt it would be hazardous to her own physical wellbeing? Would you feel that denying her drink, simply because she was pregnant, would be you "telling her what to do with her own body"?

I would at first advise her of the consequences of alcohol exposure to a developing foetus, which I imagine almost everyone on both sides of the debate would do, but if she still insisted on me serving her wine I would flat out refuse.

Now that would absolutely be me exercising whatever limited power I have whilst she is in my house to tell her what she can and can't do with her own body, but I would be interested in finding out who those who feel the mother should have final say with regards her own body would react.

Would the little inhuman ball of cells or parasite as some call it ever figure in your decision to serve drink to the fully developed human carrying it?

You cant stop her from drinking, but if she intends of having the child then it would be irresponsible to drink while pregnant and I would see myself as doing her a favour by withholding my participation in it.

Doing something that will have a negative impact on a child that will be born is quite different than terminating a pregnancy to stop a child being born. One involves an impact on a child the other doesnt.

Pompey Magnus

VinLieger wrote: »

Poor analogy and has absolutely nothing to do with medically neccessary abortions that save the life of the mother

I didn't mention abortion, I made it clear that the point relates to criticism of the pro life movement telling a woman what she can or can't do with her own body. I am interested to see if that applies across the board.

smash

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

My educated friends can share their views in their own chosen forum, they don't need me to do it for them.

Then why mention them? You said the views expressed here are not those of your educated friends. So what are the views of your educated friends? Don't cop out now... tell us!

Artful_Badger

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

I take part in this site and this forum, so clearly I don't believe it is "beneath me" (thanks for putting words in my mouth by the way).

However, those who come out to post on this topic at every hands turn seem incapable of remaining rational or civil, so unfortunately the quality of debate is poor in that instance.

I value any opportunity to discuss my opinions and listen to the arguments of others, but what is happening here, and on most online abortion discussions, is largely abuse and shouting each other down, with a liberal helping of stereotyping.

This is AH, the quality of the debate isnt going to be on par with the Dail I'm afraid. Should you be interested in a heavier debate there are forums on here to facilitate that. But stating that those with the opinions worth hearing are the ones who keep quiet is just absurd. You dont like the debate here then dont participate. I'm still waiting for you to say which forums your educated and cultured friends use to debate these topics that are meaningful.

Pompey Magnus

Artful_Badger wrote: »

You cant stop her from drinking, but if she intends of having the child then it would be irresponsible to drink while pregnant and I would see myself as doing her a favour by withholding my participation in it.

So you take it upon yourself to decide for her what is best for her and her child, even if she did not agree?

Miss Lockhart

smash wrote: »

Then why mention them? You said the views expressed here are not those of your educated friends. So what are the views of your educated friends? Don't cop out now... tell us!

You miss the point entirely. You will not hear the views of such people on debates like this (and they are a varied group with varied opinions) because they are not willing to engage in a shouting match or battle nonsense allegations and accusations.

Already my own words, not even expressing any view on the topic, are being twisted and words are being put in my mouth. Why do you think I would choose to share my opinion or discuss my views here in that case? Why would any rational person?

You can consider it a cop out all you want, just as you can take offence where none is meant.

Cathyht

The pro choice group have only a small interest in 'necessary' abortions. They want abortion on demand. It is misleading to mention saving the life of the mother as a means to introducing it.

Anyone who has seen a tiny baby fighting for breath in a sluice bucket, treated like garbage, would be quite traumatised and would not support abortion, as in just a 'choice'. It is very, very grim. Unfortunately in another country I have seen this, not been part of it, there was nothing I could do to save this baby. I will never forget it.

I will feel like a criminal for witnessing it for the rest of my life, just as I would had I watched an old, or helpless, or sick person die gasping alone in front of me, without holding and comforting them. There is another entity there, a heart beating. Could you look that tiny life in the face and coldly watch him or her die and say, it is ONLY the mother's choice? My heart says, I want no part of ending a human baby's life, I will not be party to it, I will not condone it.

Miss Lockhart

Artful_Badger wrote: »

This is AH, the quality of the debate isnt going to be on par with the Dail I'm afraid. Should you be interested in a heavier debate there are forums on here to facilitate that. But stating that those with the opinions worth hearing are the ones who keep quiet is just absurd. You dont like the debate here then dont participate. I'm still waiting for you to say which forums your educated and cultured friends use to debate these topics that are meaningful.

At no point have I said anyone's opinion is not worth hearing. More words in my mouth.

I am merely saying that those who shout the loudest hold certain opinions (on both sides of the issue) and many others choose not to engage and share their views because of the way in which they conduct themselves.

It has nothing to do with AH - AH has hosted many an excellent debate.

Artful_Badger

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

So you take it upon yourself to decide for her what is best for her and her child, even if she did not agree?

No I dont take it upon myself to decide for her. I take it upon myself to decide my own actions not hers. I cant force her to stop drinking, but I will tell her its not good for the child she intends on bringing into the world as any decent individual would I think.

Artful_Badger

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

At no point have I said anyone's opinion is not worth hearing. More words in my mouth.

I am merely saying that those who shout the loudest hold certain opinions (on both sides of the issue) and many others choose not to engage and share their views because of the way in which they conduct themselves.

It has nothing to do with AH - AH has hosted many an excellent debate.

There is never any rational debate on this subject because the only people who protest, who go on TV or who repeatedly post online about it are the rabid hardliners on both sides. This thread is good example.

Meanwhile everyone else keeps their mouth shut. If either side really wanted to hear what the general public think they would carry out a civil debate.

You implied the only discussing is done by rabid hard-liners while everyone else kept their mouth shut. I'm not putting any words in your mouth just repeating what you have said. You said if anyone is interested in public opinion the dont listen to whoever is discussing the topic. Absolute nonsense.

Still waiting for the forums the educated and cultured use btw. I'm starting to think now there are none such forums, and there really is no meaningful debate to be done by the general public. So its all the same, what you see here IS public opinion and IS meaningful. Well as meaningful as the general public is gonna get anyway. Should you wish to see rational debate by all means start debating rationally.

Miss Lockhart

Artful_Badger wrote: »

You implied the only discussing is done by rabid hard-liners while everyone else kept their mouth shut. I'm not putting any words in your mouth just repeating what you have said. You said if anyone is interested in public opinion the dont listen to whoever is discussing the topic. Absolute nonsense.

Still waiting for the forums the educated and cultured use btw. I'm starting to think now there are none such forums, and there really is no meaningful debate to be done by the general public. So its all the same, what you see here IS public opinion and IS meaningful. Well as meaningful as the general public is gonna get anyway. Should you wish to see rational debate by all means start debating rationally.

What you decide I am implying and what I actually type are two different things.

What is here is a section of public opinion. Unfortunately, the manner in which a large proportion of that section choose to engage in discussion means another rather large secton won't engage with them so, imo, things often appear distorted.

As I said, I did not mean forum in the online sense, but in the sense of legitimate ways of public and political lobbying and hosting debate.

I have given my opinion on the problems with these debates. You disagree and I respect your view so I will leave you to continue your discussion.

smash

Miss Lockheart, there are 2 sides here. Pro life and pro choice. Your educated and cultured friends fit into one of those categories. By not engaging because they don't like a style of debate is worse than those who you consider to be extreme. If they are so educated and cultured they wouldn't let this bother them and they would put their well thought out educated views in the public domain.

Artful_Badger

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

What you decide I am implying and what I actually type are two different things.

What is here is a section of public opinion. Unfortunately, the manner in which a large proportion of that section choose to engage in discussion means another rather large secton won't engage with them so, imo, things often appear distorted.

Thats the fault of those who refuse to engage not those who do. As I said its only those with strong views who try to achieve something, all the others just arent bothered. Thats why things appear distorted.

As I said, I did not mean forum in the online sense, but in the sense of legitimate ways of public and political lobbying and hosting debate.

Political lobbying and hosting debates ? The most political lobbying is done by those you consider hard-liners. Hosted debates are the realm of the politicians and those you consider hard liners too. These are not forums for the average Joe to engage others to discuss their views, just opportunities to view others pre rehearsed agendas.

I have given my opinion on the problems with these debates. You disagree and I respect your view so I will leave you to continue your discussion.

Perhaps join in the discussion.

Loafing Oaf

Cathyht wrote: »

My heart says, I want no part of ending a human baby's life, I will not be party to it, I will not condone it.

Even when it's medically necessary to save a woman's life?

Miss Lockhart

smash wrote: »

Miss Lockheart, there are 2 sides here. Pro life and pro choice. Your educated and cultured friends fit into one of those categories. By not engaging because they don't like a style of debate is worse than those who you consider to be extreme. If they are so educated and cultured they wouldn't let this bother them and they would put their well thought out educated views in the public domain.

First of all there is a large grey area in between.

Secondly, they, as do most varied groups, fit into both categories and neither.

You can imply and deduce anyting you want about my opinion and those of the people I know in real life. You are entitled to your opinion. I have given mine and I will leave you to your discussion.

smash

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

First of all there is a large grey area in between.

Secondly, they, as do most varied groups, fit into both categories and neither.

You can imply and deduce anyting you want about my opinion and those of the people I know in real life. You are entitled to your opinion. I have given mine and I will leave you to your discussion.

You didn't give your opinion about the topic, just the people involved.

Pompey Magnus

Artful_Badger wrote: »

No I dont take it upon myself to decide for her. I take it upon myself to decide my own actions not hers. I cant force her to stop drinking, but I will tell her its not good for the child she intends on bringing into the world as any decent individual would I think.

So when this woman is in a location where you can exercise a certain level of authority you would agree that withholding certain expectations on the grounds of what you judge to be for her own good or the good of the entity developing inside her is acceptable, even if she doesn't agree with your judgement, and this does not amount to you telling her what she can do with her body as you acknowledge that she is free to go elsewhere to fulfill those expectations, just not where you have authority or responsibility?

Miss Lockhart

smash wrote: »

You didn't give your opinion about the topic, just the people involved.

Just to clarify, my opinion is on the conduct of a majority of those involved. I will give my opinion on the topic when I feel it will be listened to (not necessarily agreed with) and when I will not have to take part in a tiresome game of semantics.

smash

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

Just to clarify, my opinion is on the conduct of a majority of those involved. I will give my opinion on the topic when I feel it will be listened to (not necessarily agreed with) and when I will not have to take part in a tiresome game of semantics.

It will always be listened to. It sounds like you are afraid of not being agreed with though.

Artful_Badger

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

So when this woman is in a location where you can exercise a certain level of authority you would agree that withholding certain expectations on the grounds of what you judge to be for her own good or the good of the entity developing inside her is acceptable, even if she doesn't agree with your judgement, and this does not amount to you telling her what she can do with her body as you acknowledge that she is free to go elsewhere to fulfill those expectations, just not where you have authority or responsibility?

There is no authority to exercise, I only decide my actions. And I do so because it will impact on the child that will be.. I am not telling her to do anything in relation to her own body nor do I have any authority over her. I am telling her I am not doing something that will impact on the child.

Were she booked in for an abortion then there will be no impact on another being. So you can burst a gut trying to turn this into me forcing my view onto her actions in relation to her body but its never going to be. No more than pulling someone out of traffic is forcing your morals on someone else.

Cathyht

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Even when it's medically necessary to save a woman's life?

In countries where there is legalised abortion. How many are medically necessary to save a woman's life? The vast percentage are simply to end the life of a baby. Perhaps the baby was inconvenient, not considered worth giving a chance for circumstantial or financial reasons. How many unplanned babies turn out to be blessings, yes I know many may bring some hardship and also many planned babies bring hardships. How many of us walking around, living, loving, having good and bad days, how many were 'planned'. Though we to all intents and purposes live in a 'classless' society, I hear terms referring to the 'unplanned' of one socio-economic background as being terminated under different terms than another. This debate has a dark side, and that is; Who deserves to live, also 'unworthy' lives. There is a cruelty and lack of empathy regarding this incredible miracle as a parasite. Something we are unable to create from scratch without the unknown, Xfactor of 'Life'. This harshness and cruelty calls itself many things; practicality, planning. And then the scalpel can be employed to end the great possibility that IS life. In any circumstances, this introduction of death, this intentional act of bringing death IS murder.

Nobody knows what gifts a baby brings. Babies can be adopted, or make a person grow up and become less selfish. From morning to evening conditions change. The millionaire and middle class of the morning can be the pauper of the evening, and vice versa. You can never hold state, or wealth over life. To end a life, in my opinion is not something I would ever choose. And though we can all see, I am not saying that to enter into some head banging debate, slinging personal comments against another. It will be taken and twisted and turned to something ugly, what I have said. Because people read not what is in front of them, but they read their own injustices, insecurities and prejudices. I am stating my true beliefs, which have formed through valid experiences, and I have expressed my genuine feelings behind them.

Now I am 'unfollowing' thread for I will not enter into a wrangling match over my truth.

ToxicPaddy

Maybe an overly simplified outlook on things:


Pro-life = No abortion of any kind whatsoever. End of!!

Pro-Choice = The "option" to have an abortion if they choose but not forcing
anyone to do anything.


Surely people should be given the choice to do whatever they feel is
necessary and best for them and not be dictated to by others. By dictating
what people are allowed and not allowed do, within reason (i.e the law of the
land), certain individuals are essentially trying to control peoples lives, tell them
what is good for then and force them to do what these indviduals want them to do.

There have been referendums in Ireland, the majority have spoken and they
have voted for abortion to be legalised in Ireland in certain cases. So why do
the minority insist on claiming that they are right and none should be allowed
at all?

Last time I checked, we had a democratically elected Government, granted,
not exactly a very efficient or effective one, but still elected by the people.
So shouldn't they do what we, the voters, tell them.

We have told them we want we want, abortion to be legislated on, the
Supreme Court have also issued a ruling on this, so yet again, I ask, why are
the minority of the country saying they are right?

This is a legal issue that will allow doctors to do their job with legal certainty.
Nothing to do with religion, moral issues etc.

Its a legal issue!!

lazygal

Cathyht wrote: »

In countries where there is legalised abortion. How many are medically necessary to save a woman's life? The vast percentage are simply to end the life of a baby. Perhaps the baby was inconvenient, not considered worth giving a chance for circumstantial or financial reasons. How many unplanned babies turn out to be blessings, yes I know many may bring some hardship and also many planned babies bring hardships. How many of us walking around, living, loving, having good and bad days, how many were 'planned'. Though we to all intents and purposes live in a 'classless' society, I hear terms referring to the 'unplanned' of one socio-economic background as being terminated under different terms than another. This debate has a dark side, and that is; Who deserves to live, also 'unworthy' lives. There is a cruelty and lack of empathy regarding this incredible miracle as a parasite. Something we are unable to create from scratch without the unknown, Xfactor of 'Life'. This harshness and cruelty calls itself many things; practicality, planning. And then the scalpel can be employed to end the great possibility that IS life. In any circumstances, this introduction of death, this intentional act of bringing death IS murder.

Nobody knows what gifts a baby brings. Babies can be adopted, or make a person grow up and become less selfish. From morning to evening conditions change. The millionaire and middle class of the morning can be the pauper of the evening, and vice versa. You can never hold state, or wealth over life. To end a life, in my opinion is not something I would ever choose. And though we can all see, I am not saying that to enter into some head banging debate, slinging personal comments against another. It will be taken and twisted and turned to something ugly, what I have said. Because people read not what is in front of them, but they read their own injustices, insecurities and prejudices. I am stating my true beliefs, which have formed through valid experiences, and I have expressed my genuine feelings behind them.

Now I am 'unfollowing' thread for I will not enter into a wrangling match over my truth.

Cathy, it is not the job of women with unwanted pregnancies to provide 'gifts' for childless couples. It is not the job of women with unwanted pregnancies to remain pregnant to satisfy someone else's belief that 'life' must be preserved at all costs. It is not the job of women with unwanted pregnancies to agree meekly with what you say about wealth, or circumstances, or genuine feelings. If you don't want an abortion, I would fight for you to be able to not have one. But there are women with the money to avail of abortion services travelling to other countries from Ireland every single day to abort, or kill as you see it, unwanted pregnancies. Poor women are not able to do this. They may be struggling to feed the children they have or even themselves, yet you want forced pregnancy and birth for such women? That's an appalling imposition to place on any woman, and to glibly suggest she see such a crisis as an opportunity to provide someone else with what you call a 'gift' is a terribly simplistic 'solution'. We tried this before, and the 'gifts' were sold to American couples, and to Irish couple, and who knows who else.

GalwayGuy2

Poor women are not able to do this. They may be struggling to feed the children they have or even themselves, yet you want forced pregnancy and birth for such women?

That's one of the reasons why I'd like abortion on demand to be on the medical card (I don't have any real knowledge of the medical system, so perhaps something else would be better). The people who need it the most are the people who aren't able to get it, even if it was on demand as there is a cost in England (I think).

Loafing Oaf

Cathyht wrote: »

Now I am 'unfollowing' thread for I will not enter into a wrangling match over my truth.

In other words 'Lalala I'm not listening"...

COYW

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

That's one of the reasons why I'd like abortion on demand to be on the medical card (I don't have any real knowledge of the medical system, so perhaps something else would be better).

Are you for real? We have a massive deficit in our health budget as it is without throwing abortion on demand onto the list of freebies. I am pro-choice in special cases but abortion on the medical card is a complete no-no for me.

lazygal

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

In other words 'Lalala I'm not listening"...

Cathyht wrote: »

The pro choice group have only a small interest in 'necessary' abortions. They want abortion on demand. It is misleading to mention saving the life of the mother as a means to introducing it.

Anyone who has seen a tiny baby fighting for breath in a sluice bucket, treated like garbage, would be quite traumatised and would not support abortion, as in just a 'choice'. It is very, very grim. Unfortunately in another country I have seen this, not been part of it, there was nothing I could do to save this baby. I will never forget it.

I will feel like a criminal for witnessing it for the rest of my life, just as I would had I watched an old, or helpless, or sick person die gasping alone in front of me, without holding and comforting them. There is another entity there, a heart beating. Could you look that tiny life in the face and coldly watch him or her die and say, it is ONLY the mother's choice? My heart says, I want no part of ending a human baby's life, I will not be party to it, I will not condone it.

I don't believe a word of this story.

When and where did you see this happen? Was it an illegal abortion, of the type women suffered through before safe and legal abortion became available? Did you report it to the authorities? Did you stay with the woman to make sure she received all necessary after care? What do you do to help women with crisis pregnancies now? Do you retell this macabre tale in pregnancy advice clinics, with accompanying videos, by any chance? Your story is amazingly close to one told to a friend of mine who was caught out with this bull by a so called 'advice' service, luckily she was able to tell them where to go and got proper help.

lazygal

COYW wrote: »

Are you for real? We have a massive deficit in our health budget as it is without throwing in abortion on demand onto the list of freebies. I am pro-choice in special cases but abortion on the medical card is a complete no-no for me.

Is it not more expensive to treat a pregnant woman, with all the hospital visits, antenatal and postnatal care, provide money for children in poverty until the age of 18, provide housing and other benefits? Or should a women in poverty with an unwanted pregnancy not be able to have a medical procedure other women can pay for so they don't have to endure an unwanted pregnancy?

I'm not saying poor women should be pressured into abortion as a cost saving measure. I just think in Ireland right now access to abortion depends on having the cash, rather than whether you need it. There's women going to moneylenders, scrimping and depriving their children, to get abortions. That's not fair, to my mind.

GalwayGuy2

Originally Posted by COYW
Are you for real? We have a massive deficit in our health budget as it is without throwing in abortion on demand onto the list of freebies. I am pro-choice in special cases but abortion on the medical card is a complete no-no for me.

Yes, I can see where your coming from. But as long as we have a rather weak sex-ed and a low income group, there will be some who will need an abortion while not being able to afford it.