Abortion Discussion

coolhull

Well, JimiTime, what do you have to say to Morag? Do you want to call her a murderer? I've noticed that all the Pro-lifers love to talk in abstract terms, but when they have to listen to a real person talking about a real abortion they've had, they go all coy, and their attitude is '' No, my comments weren't aimed at you''

Come on, Jimi, tell us what you think...

Nodin

Morag wrote: »

I didn't have my abortion for medical reason, I had one as I was not ready to be a parent and did not want to continue the pregnancy and had the abortion to preserve the live I had and the life I had planned for me.

I refused to take on any shame to do with it, you can think what you want about me, frankly I don't care. For many years I never spoke about it, I was one of thousands of women who have an an abortion and let a minority of people shame me and try to tell me I was a murder and I should never be allowed to have children.

The sooner we ignore those who are shame mongers the better.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/No-More-Shame/394506053931205

I'd replace ignore with either "shame" or "ostracise", limited as I am to two options as the charter doesn't permit reference or recommendation of illegal activities.

Brian Shanahan

JimiTime wrote: »

As for emotional manipulation. Well, we are dealing with the killing of unborn human babies. Its an emotional topic. Is it any wonder that those who are for abortion being legal want emotion removed from the practice of killing unborn human beings?

Unborn=not alive. By your own admission abortion is not killing.

Oh, and one of the reasons I am pro-choice is that my mother nearly died giving birth to me. For something so potentially dangerous, I do think that women should be given the choice (up until the point where there is a reasonable medical expectation of foetal viability).

Sarky

JimiTime wrote: »

I would desire people feel shame once the reality dawns yes. I would hope that such shame would lead to a grieving for the child, and that the attitude to abortion would then be directed towards making sure no-one else does it. Is that a problem?

Also, with regards to medical reasons, miscarriage etc. I have been close to such incidents, and there is absolutely no shame in such circumstances (For it was nothing of their doing), they certainly grieve for the loss of their child though.

Shame for a shameful act that leads to positive change is a very good thing. I'd be more concerned about shamelessness.

As for emotional manipulation. Well, we are dealing with the killing of unborn human babies. Its an emotional topic. Is it any wonder that those who are for abortion being legal want emotion removed from the practice of killing unborn human beings?

Wow. Just wow. Stay classy, you.

Mardy Bum

JimiTime wrote: »

Rant

Ah christianity :rolleyes:

aloyisious

From Wikipedia: The Mater Private Hospital (also known as MPH) is a private Catholic hospital in Ireland. Founded in 1986, it shares a campus on Eccles Street, Dublin 7, with its sister public hospital, the Mater Misercordiae Hospital. Its mission statement is "to continue the healing mission of Christ by providing the highest quality healthcare in an independent tertiary acute care facility, complementary to the services provided by the Mater Misericordiae Hospital".

I thought maybe the priest was getting the two mixed-up, but he's on the board of the Mater Public, though he might be on the Mater Private board as well.

The Dept of Health's opinion on the law is that while an individual can have "conscience-rights" a Hospital (being of a different entity) does not. Fr Doran might not be happy with a Doctor's opinion in this report:

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDIQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.independent.ie%2Firish-news%2Fhospitals-have-no-right-to-opt-out-of-abortion-law-priest-told-29482713.html&ei=zEADUriEBKWS7AbWwYGgBw&usg=AFQjCNHtVYMvqxM4rBTfFBZzhHADUYlymw&bvm=bv.50500085,d.ZGU

Nodin

"
The Mater can’t carry out abortions because it goes against its ethos. I would be very concerned that the Minister [for Health, James Reilly] sees fit to make it impossible for hospitals to have their own ethos.”



Father Kevin Doran, a member of the board of governors at the Mater Hospital quoted in today’s Irish Times.

Ethos, you say?

The three members of the board of Dublin’s Mater Hospital were key to the decision to stop trials of the drug for lung cancer patients.
They objected because female patients who get could get pregnant would have to take contraceptives under the treatment.
The subcommittee of the board – including Fr Kevin Doran – were delegated the task of examining the conditions attached to testing the drug.

Ah, that kind of ethos."
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/08/07/nothing-really-maters/

...a man who has his priorities in order. A google reveals he's written articles for "Alive" magazine, so obviously an intellectual of the 1st order.

lazygal

Will Fr. Doran be carrying out terminations himself? If not, he's unaffected by the need to object because his sky god told him to.

aloyisious

Nodin wrote: »

"
The Mater can’t carry out abortions because it goes against its ethos. I would be very concerned that the Minister [for Health, James Reilly] sees fit to make it impossible for hospitals to have their own ethos.”



Father Kevin Doran, a member of the board of governors at the Mater Hospital quoted in today’s Irish Times.

Ethos, you say?

The three members of the board of Dublin’s Mater Hospital were key to the decision to stop trials of the drug for lung cancer patients.
They objected because female patients who get could get pregnant would have to take contraceptives under the treatment.
The subcommittee of the board – including Fr Kevin Doran – were delegated the task of examining the conditions attached to testing the drug.

Ah, that kind of ethos."
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/08/07/nothing-really-maters/

...a man who has his priorities in order. A google reveals he's written articles for "Alive" magazine, so obviously an intellectual of the 1st order.

His dedication to the task meant he didn't recuse himself (as an interested party) from the sub-committee and leave the examination of the lung-cancer drug trials to experts and medical doctors :rolleyes:

circadian

Fr Doran is clearly high on his own (perception) of power.

Dr Boylan for health minister please.

JimiTime

Morag wrote: »

I didn't have my abortion for medical reason, I had one as I was not ready to be a parent and did not want to continue the pregnancy and had the abortion to preserve the live I had and the life I had planned for me.

I refused to take on any shame to do with it, you can think what you want about me, frankly I don't care. For many years I never spoke about it, I was one of thousands of women who have an an abortion and let a minority of people shame me and try to tell me I was a murder and I should never be allowed to have children.

The sooner we ignore those who are shame mongers the better.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/No-More-Shame/394506053931205

The desire is not to vilify, and say, 'You evil woman'. The hope, is that people realise what they have done to their own child. The website I linked to, in case you didn't go to it, was a network of PEOPLE who had actually survived the abortion process I.E. They were the fetus/unborn human that the abortion practitioner was trying to kill. In hearing their stories, I just hope that people can get closer to the reality of what abortion is doing I.E. snuffing out people like the ones telling their story. I hope shame eventually comes to people like yourself not out of any malice on my part, but as a positive change in your life. Its not about judging people, but hoping for change, so that it doesn't happen anymore.
'Wounds from a friend can be trusted, while enemies multiply kisses'.
I've no desire to see people suffer, but if my child died, I'd be a lot more concerned if my wife simply didn't care about it, than if her heart ached and she grieved. Similarly, I think it would be rather odd to desire people change their view on abortion, without actually feeling some sort of remorse if they've had one. Afterall, they will be realising that not only is their unique child gone, but it was destroyed at their own hand.
People may desire to spin this as the words as some heartless monster, but nothing could be further from the truth. I think its important for friends not to affirm my wrongdoing when they see it, but rather give it to me straight. I think on a societal level, it is important too.

Also, it goes without saying, that we should tackle the issues surrounding abortion too, and see WHY people get them. Set up support for those who need it, make sure we treat rape as a most heinous and serious crime, and all the other factors that we find should be dealt with to the best of our abilities.

swampgas

JimiTime wrote: »

The desire is not to vilify, and say, 'You evil woman'. <...>

Maybe you don't want to vilify, but it's hard not to see a major desire to vilify and shame women in much of the anti-abortion campaigning.

It's no good saying "I don't desire to vilify you" and then go on to say something which amounts to "you murdered your innocent child you evil woman - why don't you reflect on the error of your ways and REPENT, and promise never to do it again", which is what the rest of your post seems to say.

Obliq

JimiTime wrote: »

The desire is not to vilify, and say, 'You evil woman'. The hope, is that people realise what they have done to their own child.

Not "child". FETUS. Unformed, unfinished, nonsentient human lifeform. I have children. I know what a child is. I also know what a fetus is, and what size it is at the stage most abortions occur. You are doing yourself no favours whatsoever by using the word child.

I hope shame eventually comes to people like yourself not out of any malice on my part, but as a positive change in your life. Its not about judging people, but hoping for change, so that it doesn't happen anymore.

The bolded part is laughable. Plus, anyone who can wish emotional trauma on someone because they don't hold the same beliefs as themselves should be thoroughly shamed. You're all about the shaming aren't you? The door swings both ways, and I find your extreme emotional manipulation of a woman who had an abortion to be disgusting.

JimiTime

swampgas wrote: »

Maybe you don't want to vilify, but it's hard not to see a major desire to vilify and shame women in much of the anti-abortion campaigning.

It's no good saying "I don't desire to vilify you" and then go on to say something which amounts to "you murdered your innocent child you evil woman - why don't you reflect on the error of your ways and REPENT, and promise never to do it again", which is what the rest of your post seems to say.

I can't help it if someone reads something that isn't there tbh. The fact is, that this is about stopping abortion, NOT trying to vilify women. Shame is a natural progression from changing ones view on this topic. Think about it. You go from saying, 'Its ok to terminate pregnancies' to, 'Abortion is the killing of a human being growing in their mother'. I think of people like DR. Bernard Nathanson, who was one of the main protagonists of the abortion movement in the US, who after performing thousands of abortions, changed his outlook. I'm sure he had major shame as reality dawned on him. I can't see how anyone would read 'Your basically calling him an evil man' into that, and equally, I don't see how you could read, 'You are an evil woman' into my previous post.

Bannasidhe

JimiTime wrote: »

I can't help it if someone reads something that isn't there tbh. The fact is, that this is about stopping abortion, NOT trying to vilify women. Shame is a natural progression from changing ones view. I think of people like DR. Bernard Nathanson, who was one of the main protagonists of the abortion movement in the US, who after performing thousands of abortions, changed his outlook. I'm sure he had major shame as reality dawned on him. I can't see how anyone would read 'Your basically calling him an evil man' into that, and equally, I don't see how you could read, 'You are an evil woman' into my previous post.

Jimi - may I ask if you think anyone in the military should feel shame that they are in a job which could require them to take many lives?

swampgas

JimiTime wrote: »

I can't help it if someone reads something that isn't there tbh. The fact is, that this is about stopping abortion, NOT trying to vilify women. Shame is a natural progression from changing ones view. I think of people like DR. Bernard Nathanson, who was one of the main protagonists of the abortion movement in the US, who after performing thousands of abortions, changed his outlook. I'm sure he had major shame as reality dawned on him. I can't see how anyone would read 'Your basically calling him an evil man' into that, and equally, I don't see how you could read, 'You are an evil woman' into my previous post.

I think you need to look a little closer at the implications of what you said.

You can't insist that someone feels shame unless you feel that they did something wrong, something evil. People who do evil things are evil people. The implication is there, no matter how you want to dress it up.

The real issue here is that you want to impose your moral viewpoint on other people. You think abortion is wrong, and when someone disagrees with you and has an abortion, you want to insist, to force even, that woman to feel the shame and guilt that you think is appropriate. I think that's a form of evil in itself.

Obliq

19 minutes of your time Jimi. You might learn something.

Cabaal

JimiTime wrote: »

Also, it goes without saying, that we should tackle the issues surrounding abortion too, and see WHY people get them. Set up support for those who need it, make sure we treat rape as a most heinous and serious crime, and all the other factors that we find should be dealt with to the best of our abilities.

What "support" exactly do you propose to setup in these situations?

- A women is brutally beaten and raped and becomes pregnant with the rapists off-spring, she wants an abortion this has been fully discussed with her husband/wife/partner.

Lets not forget that if you "force" this women to go through with the pregnancy of the rapists off-spring then you ignore her wishes and you allow the rapists actions to continue to violate her body. You can't claim its a heinous and serious crime and then completely ignore the women's wishes and her wish to control her own body.

- A women finds she has an extremely high risk of dieing whilst pregnant or giving birth. She already has two children and she's worried if she proceeds with the pregnancy she'll leave them without a mother. She wants an abortion and this has fully been discussed with her partner. Both of them fully agree its not worth the risk to leave their current off-spring without a mother.

- A women finds that the fetus is not viable at 4 months, it will never live outside of her. She can't live with this situation and wants to have an abortion. This is something she has discussed fully with her husband and both of them want this.

Finally, JimiTime, answer me this. Are you religious in anyway? I just want to understand what the basis of your belief that abortion even in cases like above is wrong and shameful.

[EDIT] Actually scrub that, I see your views on gays on another thread. Your religious then I take it

JimiTime

Obliq wrote: »

Not "child". FETUS. Unformed, unfinished, nonsentient human lifeform. I have children. I know what a child is. I also know what a fetus is, and what size it is at the stage most abortions occur. You are doing yourself no favours whatsoever by using the word child.



The bolded part is laughable. Plus, anyone who can wish emotional trauma on someone because they don't hold the same beliefs as themselves should be thoroughly shamed. You're all about the shaming aren't you? The door swings both ways, and I find your extreme emotional manipulation of a woman who had an abortion to be disgusting.

The emotional trauma you allude to, is quite a natural thing when one realises what they've done. I can't really expect people who have had abortions to change their view without feeling shame for what they've done can I? The PEOPLE sharing their testimony on the site I linked to bring it home as to what is being destroyed in an abortion. You and I both have children (Congratulations to you). The children I look at and love on a daily basis began at conception, and if I had killed those growing humans at any stage, those two unique children I look at and love on a daily basis will have been snuffed out. The site I linked to tells the very real story of the people who would have otherwise been killed if the abortion had went 'right'.

swampgas

JimiTime wrote: »

The children I look at and love on a daily basis began at conception, and if I had killed those growing humans at any stage, those two unique children I look at and love on a daily basis will have been snuffed out. The site I linked to tells the very real story of the people who would have otherwise been killed if the abortion had went 'right'.

To be fair Jimi, there may have been many conceptions that failed in the first few weeks and you and your wife might not have even been aware of it. Do you lie awake at night wondering what happened to all those conceptions, that were "snuffed out" by simply being unlucky?

You seem to be making the classic emotive anti-abortion mistake of seeing children and bouncing babies where there are embryos and foetuses.

Cabaal

JimiTime wrote: »

The emotional trauma you allude to, is quite a natural thing when one realises what they've done. I can't really expect people who have had abortions to change their view without feeling shame for what they've done can I? The PEOPLE sharing their testimony on the site I linked to bring it home as to what is being destroyed in an abortion. You and I both have children (Congratulations to you). The children I look at and love on a daily basis began at conception, and if I had killed those growing humans at any stage, those two unique children I look at and love on a daily basis will have been snuffed out. The site I linked to tells the very real story of the people who would have otherwise been killed if the abortion had went 'right'.

and yet we can have lives seriously affected by the Irish states failure to provide support for women who need abortions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVlahoJMU1Q

The women in this video should in no way feel shame, she has done nothing wrong on any level, instead all those that are against abortion in such situations should hang their heads in shame as they are pathetic excuses for human beings.

Obliq

JimiTime wrote: »

The emotional trauma you allude to, is quite a natural thing when one realises what they've done. I can't really expect people who have had abortions to change their view without feeling shame for what they've done can I? The PEOPLE sharing their testimony on the site I linked to bring it home as to what is being destroyed in an abortion.

The emotional trauma that YOU feel about abortion is not to be inflicted on anyone else. Expecting or wanting people who have had abortions to change their views through shame is a prime example of emotional manipulation, and is therefore shameful in my eyes. I accept that you have your views and you can keep them. I see it as pointless (and wrong) to try and change you. It's unfortunate that you don't give me, or others the same respect.

As for the PEOPLE you mention - this is your first moot point. We are all here by happy accident/chance. All this testimony brings home to me is that it would be a difficult thing to know that your mother wished and tried to end the pregnancy that produced you. With these very few exceptions, I can safely say that all other aborted fetuses know nothing about it, as they are dead.

You and I both have children (Congratulations to you). The children I look at and love on a daily basis began at conception, and if I had killed those growing humans at any stage, those two unique children I look at and love on a daily basis will have been snuffed out. The site I linked to tells the very real story of the people who would have otherwise been killed if the abortion had went 'right'.

You are making a point here that is entirely irrelevant. Making up a point, actually. The two unique children I look at and love every day are the one's I decided to give birth to and welcomed their potential to be born during my pregnancies. You can't retrospectively look at those kids and say "if I had killed" because you didn't. Clearly. And neither did I. It's another moot point, and one I might just as well turn to every time I menstruate - "Woah, ANOTHER potential child down the drain - imagine how much I would have loved him/her".

Bannasidhe

JimiTime wrote: »

The emotional trauma you allude to, is quite a natural thing when one realises what they've done. I can't really expect people who have had abortions to change their view without feeling shame for what they've done can I? The PEOPLE sharing their testimony on the site I linked to bring it home as to what is being destroyed in an abortion. You and I both have children (Congratulations to you). The children I look at and love on a daily basis began at conception, and if I had killed those growing humans at any stage, those two unique children I look at and love on a daily basis will have been snuffed out. The site I linked to tells the very real story of the people who would have otherwise been killed if the abortion had went 'right'.

I think that highlighted sentence sums up how Jimi feels - women who have had abortions and who refuse to feel shame need to be forced to feel shame.

Time was when this was the attitude towards homosexuality too - hide away in shame. if you refuse to hide then face the consequences of a legal system that will punish you for engaging in 'shameful' acts (which cost us Oscar Wilde and Alan Turing among many others).

Shame as a weapon of conformity and control is a nasty, insidious form of bullying and nowt else.

Jimi - members of the military - should they feel shame for being in a job which can require them to kill? After all, if taking a life is wrong - then surely a job which may require one to kill is wrong...should we outlaw the military?

JimiTime

swampgas wrote: »

To be fair Jimi, there may have been many conceptions that failed in the first few weeks and you and your wife might not have even been aware of it. Do you lie awake at night wondering what happened to all those conceptions, that were "snuffed out" by simply being unlucky?

You seem to be making the classic emotive anti-abortion mistake of seeing children and bouncing babies where there are embryos and foetuses.

TBH, I know plenty of people who grieved for children they lost at embryo and foetus stage. Thankfully, I'm not aware of myself and my wife losing any children in such a way. The pertinent point though, is that we never lost any at our own hand. BTW, I'm not suggesting that it would impact a person the same losing a 2 year old, as losing a child at zygote stage. Nor do I think a person who has an abortion is a danger to my children. Just because I wouldn't grieve the same for my unborn child as for my 2 year old, does not mean that it is ok to kill that unborn child.

Bannasidhe

JimiTime wrote: »

TBH, I know plenty of people who grieved for children they lost at embryo and foetus stage. Thankfully, I'm not aware of myself and my wife losing any children in such a way. The pertinent point though, is that we never lost any at our own hand. BTW, I'm not suggesting that it would impact a person the same losing a 2 year old, as losing a child at zygote stage. Nor do I think a person who has an abortion is a danger to my children. Just because I wouldn't grieve the same for my unborn child as for my 2 year old, does not mean that it is ok to kill that unborn child.

Jimi - I am beginning to think you are ignoring me .

Should these young PEOPLE feel 'shame' as they are not only in a job which may require them to kill - they have been trained to kill by the Irish State and supplied with the necessary equipment at our expense?

gaynorvader

To any on the pro-life side of the camp. What should the punishment be for women that have illegal abortions?

swampgas

JimiTime wrote: »

TBH, I know plenty of people who grieved for children they lost at embryo and foetus stage. Thankfully, I'm not aware of myself and my wife losing any children in such a way. The pertinent point though, is that we never lost any at our own hand. BTW, I'm not suggesting that it would impact a person the same losing a 2 year old, as losing a child at zygote stage. Nor do I think a person who has an abortion is a danger to my children. Just because I wouldn't grieve the same for my unborn child as for my 2 year old, does not mean that it is ok to kill that unborn child.

I also know people who have struggled to keep pregnancies and it was difficult for them, but that is generally where the pregnancy is actually wanted. It might be hard for you to imagine, but sometimes a pregnancy is the very last thing a woman wants to be faced with.

Why do you keep using the phrase "unborn child" to refer to what is correctly (as you know yourself) an embryo or foetus?

I don't think it's "ok" (as in good) to terminate a viable foetus, but I think it is "ok" (as in acceptable/necessary) to terminate if the woman does not want to carry it through to term.

PopePalpatine

gaynorvader wrote: »

To any on the pro-life side of the camp. What should the punishment be for women that have illegal abortions?

"Treatment" which consists of working in a Church-owned laundrette.

Cabaal

PopePalpatine wrote: »

"Treatment" which consists of working in a Church-owned laundrette.

Hard work and washing clothes will wash the sins away, don't you know

aloyisious

There's a piece in the latest online version of the Irish Times which may be relevant to this latest episode in this National abortion debate...... (I've changed the layout format of the item to get it up as one paragraph, so please excuse my editing). It seem's the Govt had remarkable prescience.

Late change could allow Mater opt out of providing abortions. Draft legislation stated no institution could refuse to provide a termination, but a late change to the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act could enable the Mater hospital to opt out of providing abortions under the legislation. The draft legislation stated that no institution could refuse to provide a termination – but this was removed before the final Bill was published. At the time, Government sources explained the move by saying it was felt that the provision was unnecessary as it was “highly unlikely” an institution could refuse to provide termination.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/late-change-could-allow-mater-opt-out-of-providing-abortions-1.1487637