Abortion Discussion

Obliq

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I used to but I sold that house.

I grew up in a basement flat. We used to peer out at the upstairs world that had light, and plants and things. Pre wi fi though.

_rebelkid

Pro Life Campaign somehow think it's ok to get people to encourage Hospitals to breach medical law, all while breaking both National and European Data law themselves.

Here's their e-card crap.

They are in breach of their own privacy statement seen here, the Data Protection Act Section 2 (i) sub section c (i), therefore contravening Section 2A of Act, and for icing on top of their law breaking cake, Article 6b of European Directive 95/46/EC.

Sulla Felix

With the dearth of cogent opposition from the religious, perhaps we can indulge in a little infighting? I think the secular pro-choice/abortion umbrella is sufficiently broad that we can find some ground to start ripping each other apart...

So, to start, and because I've wanted to post this passage for a while, I give you Christopher Hitchens. Page 76 of this nifty pdf version of God is not Great for those who want to follow along.

http://www.evolbiol.ru/large_files/hitchens.pdf

As a materialist, I think it has been
demonstrated that an embryo is a separate body and entity,
and not merely (as some really did used to argue) a growth
on or in the female body. There used to be feminists who
would say that it was more like an appendix or even—this
was seriously maintained—a tumor. That nonsense seems
to have stopped. Of the considerations that have stopped it,
one is the fascinating and moving view provided by the
sonogram, and another is the survival of "premature"
babies of featherlike weight, who have achieved "viability"
outside the womb. This is yet another way in which science
can make common cause with humanism. Just as no human
being of average moral capacity could be indifferent to the
sight of a woman being kicked in the stomach, so nobody
could fail to be far more outraged if the woman in question
were pregnant. Embryology confirms morality. The words
"unborn child," even when used in a politicized manner,
describe a material reality.

The last line certainly is in direct conflict with a lot of the pro-choice posters here, myself included.

oceanclub

Sulla Felix wrote: »

With the dearth of cogent opposition from the religious, perhaps we can indulge in a little infighting? I think the secular pro-choice/abortion umbrella is sufficiently broad that we can find some ground to start ripping each other apart...

So, to start, and because I've wanted to post this passage for a while, I give you Christopher Hitchens. Page 76 of this nifty pdf version of God is not Great for those who want to follow along.

http://www.evolbiol.ru/large_files/hitchens.pdf

The last line certainly is in direct conflict with a lot of the pro-choice posters here, myself included.

Of course the next section reiterates the fact he is pro-choice:

However, this only opens the argument rather than closes it. There may be many circumstances in which it is not desirable to carry a fetus to full term. Either nature or god appears to appreciate this, since a very large number of pregnancies are “aborted,” so to speak, because of malformations, and are politely known as “miscarriages.” Sad though this is, it is probably less miserable an outcome than the vast number of deformed or idiot children who would otherwise have been born, or stillborn, or whose brief lives would have been a torment to themselves and others. As with evolution in general, therefore, in utero we see a microcosm of nature and evolution itself. In the first place we begin as tiny forms that are amphibian, before gradually developing lungs and brains (and growing and shedding that now useless coat of fur) and then struggling out and breathing fresh air after a somewhat difficult transition. Likewise, the system is fairly pitiless in eliminating those who never had a very good chance of surviving in the first place: our ancestors on the savannah were not going to survive in their turn if they had a clutch of sickly and lolling infants to protect against predators. Here the analogy of evolution might not be to Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” (a term that I have always distrusted) so much as to Joseph Schumpeter’s model of “creative destruction,” whereby we accustom ourselves to a certain amount of natural failure, taking into account the pitilessness of nature and extending back to the remote prototypes of our species.
Thus, not all conceptions are, or ever were, going to lead to births. And ever since the mere struggle for existence began to abate, it has been an ambition of the human intelligence to gain control over the rate of reproduction. Families who are at the mercy of mere nature, with its inevitable demand for profusion, will be tied to a cycle that is not much better than animal. The best way of achieving a measure of control is by prophylaxis, which has been restlessly sought since records were kept and which has in our own time become relatively foolproof and painless. The second-best fallback solution, which may sometimes be desirable for other reasons, is termination of pregnancy: an expedient which is regretted by many even when it has been undertaken in dire need. All thinking people recognize a painful conflict of rights and interests in this question, and strive to achieve a balance. The only proposition that is completely useless, either morally or practically, is the wild statement that sperms and eggs are all potential lives which must not be prevented from fusing and that, when united however briefly, have souls and must be protected by law. On this basis, an intrauterine device that prevents the attachment of the egg to the wall of the uterus is a murder weapon, and an ectopic pregnancy (the disastrous accident that causes the egg to begin growing inside the Fallopian tube) is a human life instead of an already doomed egg that is also an urgent threat to the life of the mother.

P.

Sulla Felix

Never said he wasn't? That was more or less the point of the quote, he's pro-choice yet believes something that most of the pro-choice posters including myself find unpalatable.

oceanclub

Sulla Felix wrote: »

Never said he wasn't? That was more or less the point of the quote, he's pro-choice yet believes something that most of the pro-choice posters including myself find unpalatable.

That's OK, but I find that pro-lifers out there so selectively quote him. Already one PLC person on Twitter is linking to your article as proof that Hitchens was pro-life.

P.

Morag

Yes well one expects that sort of thing from Cora Sherlock.

Delirium

Morag wrote: »

Yes well one expects that sort of thing from Cora Sherlock.

somewhat appropriate that her twitter profile banner is Alice in Wonderland :pac:

_rebelkid

On the subject of Cora, I asked her how she she thinks what PLC are doing is withing the law:

@CoraSherlock can you please explain to me how incitement to breach legislation is a legitimate purpose to hold and process information?

She told me to take my problem up with the "relevant body". As she is Deputy Chairperson of PLC, and PLC are the Data Controller and Processor, she IS the relevant body.

I think I'll send it to her again, and see if she responds.

aloyisious

_rebelkid wrote: »

On the subject of Cora, I asked her how she she thinks what PLC are doing is withing the law:


She told me to take my problem up with the "relevant body". As she is Deputy Chairperson of PLC, and PLC are the Data Controller and Processor, she IS the relevant body.

I think I'll send it to her again, and see if she responds.

Maybe she want's you to take it up with a higher authority

lazygal

aloyisious wrote: »

Maybe she want's you to take it up with a higher authority

Breda O'Brien referred to higher courts too. Can't take religion out of their position, no matter how much they try to hide it.

Morag

Clare Daly has introduced a bill during private members time to call for an amendment to the protection of life in pregnancy bill, to include fatal fetal abnormalities.
She's called for legislation to be put through and send to the supreme court to test for constitutionality.

Lingua Franca

Fingers crossed for it. TFMR should be a support group, not a lobby group.

Piliger

Morag wrote: »

Clare Daly has introduced a bill during private members time to call for an amendment to the protection of life in pregnancy bill, to include fatal fetal abnormalities.
She's called for legislation to be put through and send to the supreme court to test for constitutionality.

It doesn't have a chance of progress IMHO. The Govhas a lot on its plate with coming out of the bail out and the next budget etc. I can't see them taking risks and expending political capital on this so soon after the referendum. And I would actually agree with them, for now.

Lingua Franca

HSE confirms 10 maternal deaths in 2012

[Posted: Wed 20/11/2013 by Niall Hunter, Editor www.irishhealth.com]

Exclusive

It has now emerged that 10 women died while under the care of maternity units in Ireland last year, following the release for the first time by the HSE of annual national figures on the number of maternal deaths in Ireland.

The statistics, released to irishhealth.com under Freedom of Information, also show that there were 12 maternal deaths in Ireland in 2011.

The rate for last year was 10 times the 'official' number reported by the Central Statistics Office, which only recorded one maternity death for 2012, believed to be that of Savita Halappanavar.

http://www.irishhealth.com/article.html?id=22911

Confirmation that Ireland's reputation for being the 'safest place in the world to have a baby' was down to under reporting.

_rebelkid

Update on Cora-watch:

Her only response was favouriting all of my tweets. Seems like lawyers don't like it when an insolent 19 year old knows more about the law than they do...

Bannasidhe

_rebelkid wrote: »

Update on Cora-watch:

Her only response was favouriting all of my tweets. Seems like lawyers don't like it when an insolent 19 year old knows more about the law than they do...

I do like smart ass kids.

_rebelkid

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I do like smart ass kids.

Well the, we're going to have a whale of a time!

Corkfeen

She also is rather unwilling to release the stats on the geolocation of the ips who choose to send the emails.:D

Sarky

Cora sherlock, hiding something and dodging hard questions? Well I never.

aloyisious

Morag wrote: »

Clare Daly has introduced a bill during private members time to call for an amendment to the protection of life in pregnancy bill, to include fatal fetal abnormalities.
She's called for legislation to be put through and send to the supreme court to test for constitutionality.

DQ and Iona will oppose that tooth and fang. Their anti-abortion stance includes the saving of "Babies" lives in cases of FFA.

mbiking123

old hippy wrote: »

So, you're not going to answer my question then? Instead you want me to read that vile piece of misogynist, homophobic, racist trash again? No thanks, read it cover to cover 30 years ago and that's enough for me.

I don't know what you want

Do you believe in Padre Pio and his miracles - for example ?

if you don't believe in religion there is probably nothing I can do to make you believe. You put your faith in something, you probably have put your faith in science 'big bang' theory. Huge gaps in that one, but if that's what you have faith in.


hence ->

Question - How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb?

Answer - None. Unless you can prove light bulbs exist, they don't believe in them.

Of course if you just changed the bulb, and turned it one they'd see it, but, you can't convince them of that!

Turtwig

mbiking123 wrote: »

Question - How many atheists does it take to change a light bulb?

Answer - None. Unless you can prove light bulbs exist, they don't believe in them.

Of course if you just changed the bulb, and turned it one they'd see it, but, you can't convince them of that!

I normally get jokes. I don't get this one.

mbiking123

Sarky wrote: »

Cora sherlock, hiding something and dodging hard questions? Well I never.

She is on the ball ! I can see from twitter she said that B Howlin when he was minister for health in 94 he stated it was impossible to legislate for the x case. She knows her stuff !

With people like Cora around there will be no abortion in Ireland;)

Turtwig

Holy Crap! This is the abortion thread!?
Now I'm all confused. I'm just starting to make sense of NFl too!

Cabaal

mbiking123 wrote: »

With people like Cora around there will be no abortion in Ireland;)

Yeah, she's doing a excellent job, i mean ireland went from no abortion to the current legislation.

Clearly shes stopped abortion.... Oh wa

Sarky

mbiking123 wrote: »

She is on the ball ! I can see from twitter she said that B Howlin when he was minister for health in 94 he stated it was impossible to legislate for the x case. She knows her stuff !

With people like Cora around there will be no abortion in Ireland;)

That would be the X case that was legislated for just a little while ago, wouldn't it? As a direct result of that rather silly 8th amendment shoehorned into the constitution by short-sighted anti-choice dingbats like Cora? Remember how the government legislated for that? The X case she thought was impossible to legislate for? It wasn't all that long ago.

Please, tell me again how she knows her stuff when she's fighting legislation that was directly mandated by an amendment she blindly holds up as perfect. While you're at it, you can explain how there's no such thing as an ectopic pregnancy because "people like Cora" are around. Bonus points if you resort to tired old cliches like 'tsunami of death' or 'floodgates'.

_rebelkid

mbiking123 wrote: »

She is on the ball ! I can see from twitter she said that B Howlin when he was minister for health in 94 he stated it was impossible to legislate for the x case. She knows her stuff !

With people like Cora around there will be no abortion in Ireland;)

How is she "on the ball"? She is a lawyer who is actively breaking legislation, and someone who thinks abortions is terrible but it ISN'T murder. Seems quite conflicted to me.

People like Cora like to make noise. They like people to say "go on Cora!", or "we're with you Cora" and with the cross section of Pro Life people that Ireland has, more than enough people will endlessly congratulate her for "saving the babies", when in fact all she has done is allow the legislation to come into force.

She's done as much to prevent terminations in Ireland as I have!

Sarky

I suspect if you have ever worn a condom you've done a lot more to prevent abortions than Cora.

Delirium

Jernal wrote: »

I normally get jokes. I don't get this one.

It's okay, it's not a joke. It's just stupid