Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

aloyisious

Tomorrow Dublin city centre might be worth avoiding as things may get heated below the collar. The Rally For Life starts at Parnell Sq at 2PM. There are 2 counter demonstrations to the Rally For Life Demonstration, one at Parnell Sq East [Repeal The 8th] at 1.30 PM & one at the Spire [Rally For Choice - the counter demo] 2-3PM.

Absolam

aloyisious wrote: »

There's [possibly] a new group titled Ireland 2025 giving it's point of view

You should give them a link to here, sounds like they might enjoy it. Or maybe here, it's hard to tell.

aloyisious

There was a respectable figure in attendance at the RFL Rally, quite a multi-thousand turnout indeed, beyond what I imagined would be available from Ireland. It seemed a quantity were from Northern Ireland and more from foreign fields. The band [which paraded in 2 sections] seemed to be European, with their Lion Rampant [definitely not Scotland] flags. The 1st section got as far as the GPO & tried to march back against the rally flow but were stopped in their tracks & U-turned by Gardai to prevent snags, as one pro-choice person informed a GS Inspector of the attempted change in authorised rally route.

A minor disagreement did occur when an elderly gent on the rally near the same spot came across the first pro-choice people, a male and female couple on the path with a banner, he pushed his poster up against the face of the woman. When she took hold of it from him and didn't return it, he was totally flummoxed. It was handled well by rally stewards supplying him with a new poster and moving on.

Absolam

The Times reckons between ten and twenty thousand attendees on the pro life side. It includes a quote from one of the pro choice campaigners, relatively recently arrived from the US, and from one of the pro life marchers, from Scotland, so it seems we have international support for both sides which is not terribly surprising...

aloyisious

Me's a think 10,000 would be, as they say, on the conservative side and the other figure would be, as they would also say, truer.

Nick Park

Absolam wrote: »

The Times reckons between ten and twenty thousand attendees on the pro life side.

I was near the front of the march. Shortly after arriving at Merrion Square I did a quick head count and estimated 3 to 4000 had arrived at that point - but it was being announced that the tail end of the march was still back at the Customs House.

smacl

Nick Park wrote: »

I was near the front of the march. Shortly after arriving at Merrion Square I did a quick head count and estimated 3 to 4000 had arrived at that point - but it was being announced that the tail end of the march was still back at the Customs House.

How do you count them? I've seen some reasonable techniques based on average crowd density over street area from photography from an elevated position but never sussed how anyone could calculate this from the ground. Not questioning your numbers, just how you arrived at them.

Nick Park

smacl wrote: »

How do you count them? I've seen some reasonable techniques based on average crowd density over street area from photography from an elevated position but never sussed how anyone could calculate this from the ground. Not questioning your numbers, just how you arrived at them.

Divide an area into similar sized squares (you can do this in a street by counting lampposts or doorways). Take cross sections of a square both lengthwise and widthwise (pick a square that is neither particularly sparsely populated or densely packed). Multiply the 2 cross sections, then multiply by the number of squares. Cut your total by 25% to produce a conservative figure.

Nick Park

aloyisious wrote: »

A minor disagreement did occur when an elderly gent on the rally near the same spot came across the first pro-choice people, a male and female couple on the path with a banner, he pushed his poster up against the face of the woman. When she took hold of it from him and didn't return it, he was totally flummoxed. It was handled well by rally stewards supplying him with a new poster and moving on.

I would be surprised if there were no such incidents. The whole point of a counter demonstration would seem to be to provoke a response.

The section of the march I was in generally obeyed the stewards' instructions and kept smiling and avoided confrontation. In fact the only person I saw breaking through the police cordon was me! I spotted the gang from Atheist Ireland and went over to shake hands with Michael Nugget.

It was rather funny. I was telling Michael it was good to see him, even if I think he's totally wrong, and people on both sides of the cordon were shouting, "Nick, you're on the wrong side!"

aloyisious

Nick Park wrote: »

I would be surprised if there were no such incidents. The whole point of a counter demonstration would seem to be to provoke a response.

The section of the march I was in generally obeyed the stewards' instructions and kept smiling and avoided confrontation. In fact the only person I saw breaking through the police cordon was me! I spotted the gang from Atheist Ireland and went over to shake hands with Michael Nugget.

It was rather funny. I was telling Michael it was good to see him, even if I think he's totally wrong, and people on both sides of the cordon were shouting, "Nick, you're on the wrong side!"

Umm yes. the people outside the GPO next to the Muslims with the 3 BOOKS listed on their stand. It seemed mostly dignified, incl the gent quietly praying on his rosary beads in the midst of the counter-demonstrators on the central plinth near the spire.

recedite

Nick Park wrote: »

I spotted the gang from Atheist Ireland and went over ....

Were they there in a personal capacity, or in an official capacity representing AI?

Repealing the 8th does not seem to be one of their campaigns, unlike reading the bible.

nozzferrahhtoo

^ They have an information stand at the GPO every Saturday I believe. He posted on his face book "1 July at 13:47" a photo and message saying "At the Atheist Ireland information table at the GPO in Dublin now". So sounds like they were just there anyway in their normal capacity.

Nugent posted a photo of one of the slogans in the march on his Facebook. Something like "U2 were once the unborn". Whether that was a slogan FOR or AGAINST abortion however is anyone's guess. I know a few people who would see a world without Bono a very good argument for abortion.

Nick Park

recedite wrote: »

Were they there in a personal capacity, or in an official capacity representing AI?

Repealing the 8th does not seem to be one of their campaigns, unlike reading the bible.

They did make a submission to the Citizen's Assembly. But they do also have a regular Saturday gig at the GPO.

I am seeing reports of around 70,000 so even if that's a bit exaggerated I would expect there was at least 30k+. It will be played down though as it don't suit the agenda around these parts.

Atomic Pineapple

There's wildly varying reports of numbers and the organisers failed to hire an independent group to monitor numbers despite many offering to do so. Given the protest in 2013 had figures of around 40 - 50k and that crowd seemed to be far larger than the one on Saturday I think more conservative numbers are more believable.

My guess would be 20 - 30k

recedite

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

^ They have an information stand at the GPO every Saturday I believe. He posted on his face book "1 July at 13:47" a photo and message saying "At the Atheist Ireland information table at the GPO in Dublin now". So sounds like they were just there anyway in their normal capacity.

OK, so it seems they were neither in the demonstration, nor in the counter demonstration.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Nugent posted a photo of one of the slogans in the march on his Facebook. Something like "U2 were once the unborn". Whether that was a slogan FOR or AGAINST abortion however is anyone's guess. I know a few people who would see a world without Bono a very good argument for abortion.

Joking aside, and taken at face value its obviously pro-life. But then he is completely entitled to give any personal opinion on facebook, without it meaning that Atheist Ireland is taking sides in any pro-life/pro-choice campaigns.

Ann_Landers

Kole Round Spectator wrote: »

I am seeing reports of around 70,000 so even if that's a bit exaggerated I would expect there was at least 30k+. It will be played down though as it don't suit the very the agenda around these parts.

Don't know about on here but on the RTÉ news site, the pro-life march enjoyed much more prominent news coverage than the Repeal march. The pro-life march was one of the top stories on the day it happened, whereas the Repeal march story was much more buried on the site. They are similar stories so should have equal footing but that wasn't the case. So spare us the victimhood.

Re: attendance, both marches are thought to have pulled in about 20,000 people. I was at the Repeal march and the footage of the pro-life march doesn't show a crowd that looks bigger in any significant way. And there was a large contingent down from Northern Ireland at the pro-life march. I'm sure there were NIers at the Repeal march but probably not as many, as the pro-life march was billed as an All-Ireland Pro-Life march.

PopePalpatine

Those pro-choicers and their shrillness, it doesn't do them any favours with the middle ground.

I swear I've seen that "Objective Prolifer" guy around these parts before...

aloyisious

Bussing into town, 3 Nth American-accented people got on [one with a maple-leaf T shirt] whom I saw later on walking on the rally. There were several [maybe 12] black hand written signs on what looked like very large white linen sheets all with messages against abortion spread out along the rally. Due to style similarity, I reckon they were from one source. One was encouraging as its first four words were of acceptance of a change in constitutional law made here in May 2015, [*** ******** is ok] not so the rest of the wording on it spelling out no change on abortion and the 8th.

..........................................................................................................................................................................................

Edit.... Lol at the coded meanings: [Promiscuous Immoral Feminazis and Effeminate Males] mentioned in PopePalpatine's post link above..... Confusion accidentally created ended. Ta for the link, first I ever heard of the acronym SJW.

Absolam

aloyisious wrote: »

One was encouraging as its first four words were of acceptance of a change in constitutional law made here in May 2015, [*** ******** is ok] not so the rest of the wording on it spelling out no change on abortion and the 8th.

Lol at the coded meanings: Feminazis and effeminate males.....

Wait... are the coded meanings what you're avoiding telling us was on the signs, or coded meanings from something else?

Delirium

Contraception failing one in four women, say experts

One in four women who had an abortion in 2016 were using the most reliable methods of contraception, says the British Pregnancy Advisory Service.

More than 14,000 women, who were treated at BPAS clinics, became pregnant despite using the pill or a long-acting contraceptive.

They often spotted their pregnancy late because they hadn't expected their contraception to fail.

No method of contraception can ever be 100% effective.

But long-acting methods are said to have a very low failure rate (99%).

aloyisious

Delirium wrote: »

Contraception failing one in four women, say experts

Ta for putting that piece of BBC news out here, Dilirium. Had a minor WTF moment when I read: But long-acting methods are said to have a very low failure rate (99%) til I read further [reversible - effective].

It still reads that the 99% effective long acting anti-pregnancy contraceptive method is failing and causing 25% of the pregnancies ended by abortion. That could mean a lot of women relying on it might be shook-up on reading the report, wondering what they can rely on with a degree of [edit] TRUST . I can see that part of the BPAS study stated as factual being used to slam contraception as a failure for women, alongside possible extrapolation from the other portion of the percentage pie, 75 % being failed by other contraceptive methods. There are a lot of variables in the study which may be ignored in the interest of disseminating "facts" extrapolated from the report.

Nick Park

aloyisious wrote: »

That could mean a lot of women relying on it might be shook-up on reading the report, wondering what they can rely on with a degree of faith.

Lamenting a decline in faith in the A&A Forum? What is the world coming to?

Pherekydes

Nick Park wrote: »

Lamenting a decline in faith in the A&A Forum? What is the world coming to?

Yep. Faith in real stuff: real medicine, real science, real statistics.

aloyisious

Nick Park wrote: »

Lamenting a decline in faith in the A&A Forum? What is the world coming to?

I'm not absolutely sure.....

aloyisious

One of the groups set up to defend the 8th amendment had a post on it's F/B page earlier that one in five women in the UK have abortions and was thankful that the 8th prevented this happening to irish women. As a result of the abortion location [the UK] mentioned I had a look at the number of irish women who travelled to the UK in 2015 for abortions and see it's listed at over 3,400.

In 2015 the number of babies born here was 65,909. Even allowing for multiple births to X amount of the women there's still a sizeable number of women having babies here. One must presume the 8th amendment is indeed doing an excellent job in ensuring that the ratio of Irish women having abortions is so low, approx 1 in 18 [3,400 versus 65,909] allowing for the chance of multiple birth-mothers, instead of the UK's 1 in 5 figure provided by the group defending the 8th

My working out the ratio of Irish abortion V birth figures [1 in 18] above is due to the fact that the 3,400 abortions listed as performed on irish women in 2015 were done in the UK. We all know the number of abortions carried out here is miniscule by comparison.

https://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi1ztPNppHVAhXrI8AKHcRyBI8QFggnMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thejournal.ie%2Fabortion-irish-women-uk-travelling-2773671-May2016%2F&usg=AFQjCNG-xutoEl6a7fxfBHlW0S3XAK01RQ

Cabaal

Interesting case

http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/baby-boy-born-pregnant-with-his-own-twin-brother/

Does removing the fetus in fetu count as an abortion? Its a fetus so in many people's views its life is equal to the born baby and the mother....so by their own logic it shouldn't be removed because in doing so it "died".

aloyisious

I found it a little unsettling that Leo mentioned an estimated/probable referendum time period on the 8th while he was abroad. It leaves me wondering if the question was a "plant" for a "safe" revelation.

Delirium

Irish Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (an anti-abortion group) have been cautioned by Kilkenny Gardai after complaints from the public.

GARDA THREAT

On Friday, August 18, 2017, the Irish Center For Bio-Ethical Reform (ICBR) received an email message (excerpted below) from one Gary Gordon, Sgt. KC7, of the Kilkenny Garda Station:

The reason I am inviting you to come to the Garda Station is to formally put the allegations made by two complainants on the 30th of July 2017, that you breached Section 7 of the Public Order Act 1994, by displaying a sign or visible representation, which was obscene with intent to provoke a breach of the peace, or that you were reckless as to wether a breach of the peace may be occasioned. I will put the allegations made by the complainants to you in the normal manner, after caution and invite you to make a reply.

ICBR AGREES TO MEET WITH GARDA

We are willing to meet with Garda officials to discuss this matter, but it is Garda who need to be cautioned, not we. The Garda misreading of the Public Order Act (POA) must be corrected and formally putting such correction to the Kilkenny Station will be our purpose in meeting, accompanied by counsel, should we choose to be represented at such meeting, for discussions which we reserve the right to record.


ICBR CAUTIONS GARDA

Should ICBR be unlawfully threatened with arrest and/or the confiscation of abortion-related signs after caution to your officials, we will proceed against your agency in civil court as we recently did against Sussex, UK police, winning an award of nearly 400,000 pounds in damages and fees and a public apology, under the UK POA, which is largely indistinguishable from that of Ireland.

Source (press release from ICBR regarding caution)

FYI, there's photo on the top of the page of the group with one of their foetal images on a banner for those that would rather avoid the pic.

aloyisious

Delirium wrote: »

Irish Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform (an anti-abortion group) have been cautioned by Kilkenny Gardai after complaints from the public.



Source (press release from ICBR regarding caution)

FYI, there's photo on the top of the page of the group with one of their foetal images on a banner for those that would rather avoid the pic.

It looks [to me] like the Centre is not wholly an Irish group and might be an off-shoot of a larger body or umbrella organisation. It's statement is worded and reads like something issued by a multinational group, something from across the waters.

The notion of them being allowed record any interview in a Garda station is for public consumption, likewise the mention of bringing or not bringing an SC with them to the station as a legal rep. Legal representation shouldn't be seen as an optional extra, or used as an agent against the Garda decision to issue them an invitation to attend at the station.