woman refused abortion - Mod Note in first post.

RobertKK

takamichinoku wrote: »

I can pick list loads of progressive things quite unrelated to the point at hand here too. I won't, because it's silly.

By the way, if you really want to battle the notion of having antiquated views, you should stick to regressive things, not just static ones or ones that are arguably much better than they were in the past.

Abortion is not progressive, it is backward countries that have issues where the result is two lives instead of one.

beanie10

beanie10 wrote: »

Your being pedantic. Using contraceptive will drastically reduce the chances.

Contraceptives have a 1% failure rate. Out of this failure rate 99% of the its human error ie. taking antibiotics while on the pill, wrongly fitted condom, forgetting to take pill etc.

It's a 1% failure rate when used correctly. When you account for human error the failure rate is much higher than that.

lazygal

RobertKK wrote: »

Abortion is not progressive, it is backward countries that have issues where the result is two lives instead of one.

Is forced gestation progressive?

Molester Stallone II

lazygal wrote: »

How can a foetus with no brain survive outside the womb?

It can't, but there is no way under current Irish law that a termination will be allowed.
The mother has to go abroad, or go full term

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

RobertKK wrote: »

Unviable is subjective, a family member of mine was told her unborn would die within hours of being born, it was hinted to her she should consider an abortion by a health worker in Dublin.
Her own doctor was very supportive and told her once there is life there is hope.
The child is 8 years old now and off medication, yet it was suggested to her an abortion should be considered given the baby would die just after birth.

Life shouldn't be discarded like trash.

Lucky woman to be trusted with that choice and not forced to do something she didn't want to do, wasn't she?

lazygal

Molester Stallone II wrote: »

It can't, but there is no way under current Irish law that a termination will be allowed.
The mother has to go abroad, or go full term

Prolifers always seem to be able to pull miracle stories of women advised to abort who confounded those doctors and now their child is a precious addition to the family. Yet they ignore the women who don't have such stories about a baby with no brain living outside the womb.

Chattastrophe!

RobertKK wrote: »

Unviable is subjective, a family member of mine was told her unborn would die within hours of being born, it was hinted to her she should consider an abortion by a health worker in Dublin.
Her own doctor was very supportive and told her once there is life there is hope.
The child is 8 years old now and off medication, yet it was suggested to her an abortion should be considered given the baby would die just after birth.

Life shouldn't be discarded like trash.

Unviable is not subjective. Not in the slightest.

If I was told during a scan that the foetus was unviable, I'd be seeing at least a second immediate opinion, maybe a third.

If all confirmed that it was an unviable pregnancy, I'd be on the boat to England. Close to a grand worse off - to me, that's over a month of rent or creche fees - not throwaway money!

RobertKK

lazygal wrote: »

How can a foetus with no brain survive outside the womb?

Very rare and using such cases for law equals bad law.

Just like the X case legislation which is backward where it allows termination of pregnancy for 9 months.
Bad law means some argue the unborn should be killed as in the current case, that argument means a baby that is a day before being born naturally could be killed in the womb.

This is what we got from people who thought legislation for the X case was a good idea, it is backward law.

lazygal

RobertKK wrote: »

Very rare and using such cases for law equals bad law.

Just like the X case legislation which is backward where it allows termination of pregnancy for 9 months.
Bad law means some argue the unborn should be killed as in the current case, that argument means a baby that is a day before being born naturally could be killed in the womb.

This is what we got from people who thought legislation for the X case was a good idea, it is backward law.

So can an unviable foetus be aborted?

LiveIsLife

Mountainsandh wrote: »

No I think the point being made by most is that had the foetus been aborted at a much earlier stage, there would have been no need for that dilemma.
This is what happens in most developed countries, and the situation where the foetus reaches more than 20 weeks rarely occurs.

I think there is a need for a real referendum to change the constitution once and for all, not legal clauses and convoluted exceptions.
People need to be asked once and for all if abortion should be legally available here or not, if what is in the constitution is really who they are now, after all the revelations and awakening of the past 50 years.
Irish society has changed greatly, since the 1980s and before.

I was reading an article mentioning last night that statistically, less women opt for abortion in countries where it is legally available than in countries where it is illegal, according to the World Health Organisation.
There is a lot to read on the subject on the Who site, it is of great concern to them medically that abortion is still illegal in some parts of the world.

How backwards and shameful Ireland is to be counted in that list of countries still denying women the right to choose. How even more shameful when cases like this emerge.

Well if thats the case fair enough.

Do you have a link to the statistics? Not what I would have thought, I remember reading Russia wants to repeal its abortion laws to help stop its population dropping as close to 1 in 2 pregnancies result in abortion, and at one stage there were 2 abortions for every birth. Russia may be a special case though.

PopePalpatine

RobertKK wrote: »

We are living in a century where millions of unborn lives are killed every year, where those alive in certain parts of the world are beheaded, buried alive, blown to bits, shot dead, throats slit, shooting sprees, slavery, kidnapping, sexual slavery, exploitation, famine, starvation, children dying from diarrhea...
None of that is progressive, all of the above is wrong.

This is the century we are living in.

I'm going to need a hazmat suit to sift through this bullshit, but here goes nothing:

• Beheaded - I assume you're referring to ISIS, a bunch of medieval zealots. There's also the Saudi government, ANOTHER bunch of medieval zealots!
• Buried alive - Most likely, instances of this are honour killings - which are carried out by, you guessed it, medieval zealots!
• Blown to bits - Well, the two most prominent examples I can think of is jihadist bombers and the IDF. The former are, once again, medieval, the other are oppressive dickheads.
• Shot dead and throats slit - What's "progressive" about that? That's just plain murder 90% for the former and 100% for the latter.
• Shooting sprees - That's all over the shop. There's Breivik who killed over 70 in Norway, and he's some hardcore Christian MRA.
• Slavery - The countries which tolerate slavery have pretty much exclusively fundamentalist Islamic governments.
• Kidnapping - That's been going on since the dawn of civilisation. It's not just some sort of "modern evil".
• Sexual slavery - Can all marriages up until the time marital rape became illegal be considered "sexual slavery"?
• Exploitation - I agree that's terrible, and the exploiter is pretty much exclusively driven by greed. A case in point would be the Magdalene prison camps.
• Famine - Also terrible, but unfortunately they're natural disasters. All humanity can do is mitigate the results.
• Starvation - Usually linked with famine, and a bit of slavery and/or exploitation too.
• Children dying of diarrhoea - I doubt anyone who could be described as "progressive" is rubbing their hands gleefully at the thought of this.

RobertKK

lazygal wrote: »

So can an unviable foetus be aborted?

There are very often natural abortions, not legally allowed by medics under current law.

efb

I hear the unviable foetus story from so many pro lifers. So many miracle babies out there!

RobertKK

RobertKK wrote: »

Very rare and using such cases for law equals bad law.

Just like the X case legislation which is backward where it allows termination of pregnancy for 9 months.
Bad law means some argue the unborn should be killed as in the current case, that argument means a baby that is a day before being born naturally could be killed in the womb.

This is what we got from people who thought legislation for the X case was a good idea, it is backward law.

I will agree with you that its a bad law, made by politicians who are absolute wimps. What we should have had is a referendum regarding the removal of the eighth amendment from the constitution.

Corkfeen

RobertKK wrote: »

Very rare and using such cases for law equals bad law.

Just like the X case legislation which is backward where it allows termination of pregnancy for 9 months.
Bad law means some argue the unborn should be killed as in the current case, that argument means a baby that is a day before being born naturally could be killed in the womb.

This is what we got from people who thought legislation for the X case was a good idea, it is backward law.

It's good law to force a person to carry an unviable foetus? It's inhumane tbh and there's a reason why the likes of the UN are highly critical of our abortion legislation. Frankly, our law is bad. It has taken about twelve months from legislating for X in a rather inadequate way, for a case to emerge that shows our health system and our state in an entirely negative light negative light. It's bad law when a rape victim is forced to carry when she requests an abortion at 8 weeks.

PopePalpatine

Robert, google anenecephaly when you have the time. Maybe you could see why a woman wouldn't want to carry an anenecephalic foetus.

RobertKK

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I'm going to need a hazmat suit to sift through this bullshit, but here goes nothing:

• Beheaded - I assume you're referring to ISIS, a bunch of medieval zealots. There's also the Saudi government, ANOTHER bunch of medieval zealots!
• Buried alive - Most likely, instances of this are honour killings - which are carried out by, you guessed it, medieval zealots!
• Blown to bits - Well, the two most prominent examples I can think of is jihadist bombers and the IDF. The former are, once again, medieval, the other are oppressive dickheads.
• Shot dead and throats slit - What's "progressive" about that? That's just plain murder 90% for the former and 100% for the latter.
• Shooting sprees - That's all over the shop. There's Breivik who killed over 70 in Norway, and he's some hardcore Christian MRA.
• Slavery - The countries which tolerate slavery have pretty much exclusively fundamentalist Islamic governments.
• Kidnapping - That's been going on since the dawn of civilisation. It's not just some sort of "modern evil".
• Sexual slavery - Can all marriages up until the time marital rape became illegal be considered "sexual slavery"?
• Exploitation - I agree that's terrible, and the exploiter is pretty much exclusively driven by greed. A case in point would be the Magdalene prison camps.
• Famine - Also terrible, but unfortunately they're natural disasters. All humanity can do is mitigate the results.
• Starvation - Usually linked with famine, and a bit of slavery and/or exploitation too.
• Children dying of diarrhoea - I doubt anyone who could be described as "progressive" is rubbing their hands gleefully at the thought of this.

People are dying from simple things, humans have found new way to kill over the past century.
The abortion pill is made by the same company that produced zyklon b to gas the jews.
The US has people in parts of Pakistan and elsewhere living in terror due to drones being overhead 24/7 waiting for a target to appear so they can blow that person to bits, which has led to hundreds of children killed by Obama, he is so lovely if we were to believe the stupid media.

We have so much intentional killing in this world and that includes abortion which is just part of a larger problem we have in the world with intentional killing and the disregard for life.

We are not progressing as a human race when it comes to killing.

RobertKK

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Robert, google anenecephaly when you have the time. Maybe you could see why a woman wouldn't want to carry an anenecephalic foetus.

That is always used, very rare, making law based on rare cases leads to bad law.

myshirt

lazygal wrote: »

How can a foetus with no brain survive outside the womb?

Of course they can. Haven't some of them grown up to post comments on this thread here today.

RobertKK

Corkfeen wrote: »

It's good law to force a person to carry an unviable foetus? It's inhumane tbh and there's a reason why the likes of the UN are highly critical of our abortion legislation. Frankly, our law is bad. It has taken about twelve months from legislating for X in a rather inadequate way, for a case to emerge that shows our health system and our state in an entirely negative light negative light. It's bad law when a rape victim is forced to carry when she requests an abortion at 8 weeks.

Tell that to the child when he or she is older and able to debate you. Tell that person it is backwards that he or she is alive.

takamichinoku

efb wrote: »

I hear the unviable foetus story from so many pro lifers. So many miracle babies out there!

Pro life groups seem to have no problem claiming a pregnancy with any kind of foetal abnormality has been declared unviable. Would have far less of an issue with them if there wasn't such a love of half truths and misleading statistics.

Calina

LiveIsLife wrote: »

Well if thats the case fair enough.

Do you have a link to the statistics? Not what I would have thought, I remember reading Russia wants to repeal its abortion laws to help stop its population dropping as close to 1 in 2 pregnancies result in abortion, and at one stage there were 2 abortions for every birth. Russia may be a special case though.

There are confounding factors in that western European countries which permit abortions also tend to have significantly better contraception provision and education in the use of same. Said education is not usually subject to parental decision or religious schools.

There's also an iron curtain factor afair; it's been ages since I read the documentation on it - but abortions have been easier to procure in some countries than contraception leading to a higher abortion rate in those countries. I think what Russia needs to do in that respect is look at their rates of contraception rather than their rates of abortion.

efb

takamichinoku wrote: »

Pro life groups seem to have no problem claiming a pregnancy with any kind of foetal abnormality has been declared unviable. Would have far less of an issue with them if there wasn't such a love of half truths and misleading statistics.

Well if you can't accept their anecdotal evidence what hope is their for humanity???

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

RobertKK wrote: »

Tell that to the child when he or she is older and able to debate you. Tell that person it is backwards that he or she is alive.

Tell a rape victim or a woman carrying an unviable foetus or a fourteen year old or someone living under direct provision that allowing her to terminate her pregnancy is only different from drone attacks and famine in degree.

Corkfeen

RobertKK wrote: »

People are dying from simple things, humans have found new way to kill over the past century.
The abortion pill is made by the same company that produced zyklon b to gas the jews.
The US has people in parts of Pakistan and elsewhere living in terror due to drones being overhead 24/7 waiting for a target to appear so they can blow that person to bits, which has led to hundreds of children killed by Obama, he is so lovely if we were to believe the stupid media.

We have so much intentional killing in this world and that includes abortion which is just part of a larger problem we have in the world with intentional killing and the disregard for life.

We are not progressing as a human race when it comes to killing.

Overall violence has entirely declined, this is not disputed. Just to use Ireland as an example, a couple of decades back. A man could easily get away with beating his wife. Marital rape was legal up until the late eighties. Society has progressively become less violent. We may be overexposed to news but violence has declined. When did a war last kill 15 to 60 million people?

This is not to say that I approve of drones for example but to say that we are the most violent generation is ridiculous. It also ignores the centuries that bordered upon constant warfare. Or even aspects of our own culture from decades ago which included corporal punishment,magdalen laundries and covering up sexual abuse. We had a complete disregard for the living at times in decades gone by.

Now we object to how the state behaved with this woman and you imply that we are inhumane for highlighting inhumanity. The fact that we don't wish to stand by and condone such behaviour. I don't view bodily autonomy as murder as you appear to. It's not a very rational conclusion to be blunt. A woman was suicidal, she was forced to carry a foetus until it was viable. That's bloody sadistic.

RobertKK

Gustavo CoolS Quote wrote: »

Tell a rape victim or a woman carrying an unviable foetus or a fourteen year old or someone living under direct provision that allowing her to terminate her pregnancy is only different from drone attacks and famine in degree.

What crime has the unborn committed?

Most abortions are for family planning reasons, maybe from affairs, a one night stand, stupidity.

But we only hear arguments about unviable lives, rape victims, teenagers...what wrong has the unborn done in the cases of rape and teenagers that he/she should be killed?

takamichinoku

RobertKK wrote: »

That is always used, very rare, making law based on rare cases leads to bad law.

So because they're rare cases, they don't warrant legal provisions?

How exactly would a woman pretend she had an anenecephalic foetus inside her? Can't see how a well-written law covering for the abortion of unviable pregnancies would be "bad law", what with the requirement of really clear evidence.

lazygal

RobertKK wrote: »

What crime has the unborn committed?

Most abortions are for family planning reasons, maybe from affairs, a one night stand, stupidity.

But we only hear arguments about unviable lives, rape victims, teenagers...what wrong has the unborn done in the cases of rape and teenagers that he/she should be killed?

How many unwanted unborn children have you helped after they're born? Should women remain pregnant regardless of her personal circumstances or wishes?

PopePalpatine

RobertKK wrote: »

What crime has the unborn committed?

What crime has the woman committed?

Gods forbid a female acquaintance of yours ever gets pregnant as a result of rape.

RobertKK

Corkfeen wrote: »

Overall violence has entirely declined, this is not disputed. Just to use Ireland as an example, a couple of decades back. A man could easily get away with beating his wife. Marital rape was legal up until the late eighties. Society has progressively become less violent. We may be overexposed to news but violence has declined. When did a war last kill 15 to 60 million people?

This is not to say that I approve of drones for example but to say that we are the most violent generation is ridiculous. It also ignores the centuries that bordered upon constant warfare. Or even aspects of our own culture from decades ago which included corporal punishment,magdalen laundries and covering up sexual abuse. We had a complete disregard for the living at times in decades gone by.

Now we object to how the state behaved with this woman and you imply that we are inhumane for highlighting inhumanity. The fact that we don't wish to stand by and condone such behaviour. I don't view bodily autonomy as murder as you appear to. It's not a very rational conclusion to be blunt. A woman was suicidal, she was forced to carry a foetus until it was viable. That's bloody sadistic.

In the past century, humans have killed more than any other century. tens of millions in world wars, tens of millions by communist regimes, millions in other wars, countless with abortion.
North Korea as a nation exists which the UN described being as bad as a certain German regime.

There is no reason why we won't have another large war and many millions more die, to think we have progressed is being blind to the reality, the disregard for life from conception to our last breaths has increased.
It leads to a mindset where some think abortion is a choice and where people have a problem that there are now two lives instead of one, and the fact we have two lives instead of one is seen as being backward.