Abortion Discussion, Part Trois

ohnonotgmail

end of the road wrote: »

i did answer it.



there were nasty individuals on both sides of the debate. they only represented themselves and not you or me or the majority. the 'too posh to push' slogan has been around for years. i remember hearing that years ago

I remember Trump saying something similar. Nobody believed him either.

aloyisious

Now for the Roman Catholics who voted yes in all good conscience in the abortion referendum, Bishop Kevin Doran has the solution. “If they knew and intended abortion as an outcome when they voted Yes then they should consider going to confession,” he told RTÉ’s Today with Sean O’Rourke show.
“Ultimately all sin is about deciding the impact on your relationship with God.
“It’s about people taking responsibility for their own relationship with God and the church.”

EDIT: He seem's to have ended his interview with this piece [which I missed initially and found elsewhere] He added he did not think the result was going to change people’s core values. There was now a difference between faith - which was personal - and religion, which was communal, he said. For far too long there had been a reliance on the faith model in schools and there wasn’t a tradition of faith formation in dioceses.

SusieBlue

I think its worth noting as well that the speakers they chose to represent them during debates were very poor - and I'm not talking about their TD's, Maria Steen et al.

Where to start?
There was the woman on the Prime Time debate whose daughter had an FFA, I frankly found her insufferable and she was extremely rude and condescending towards the other mother who had chose to give birth to her FFA baby in the UK.
One crucial element that woman forgot to recognise was that even with a Yes vote, she would still have been allowed to carry her baby to term here should she wish, that choice won't be taken from her.
Yet here she is, on national telly, advocating the choice be removed from a woman in her exact circumstances. It was horrible to watch.

We then had the various women who had abortions and regretted them - but at least they had the CHOICE. A choice they didn't want other women to have.

And we also had the woman on Claire Byrne who claimed her 12 week old baby miscarried and came out full size, perfectly formed, with her head in her hands smiling. I'm sorry - and I know this won't be popular - but that simply is NOT possible.
I'm happy for her to rationalise what happened to her in any way she needs to, to deal with her undeniable grief. But what she was saying was completely inaccurate.
And once again, a Yes vote would change absolutely nothing for her.
My mam voted No and I watched that debate with her, and even she rolled her eyes at it.

Then there were the various doctors, who were more concerned with their own personal beliefs being upheld than they were about their patients welfare.
I couldn't believe the own goal they scored when their Doctor admitted that he would REFUSE to refer a patient elsewhere for an abortion should the referendum pass.

None of their speakers were likable or relatable in any way. And the outcome of the referendum would have had absolutely no effect on the choices they made in their own circumstances. And that's what it all boils down to.
That's without even touching on how abysmal Ronan Mullen and Peadar Toibín were.

aloyisious

unfortunately wrote: »

I believe Donegal the geographic county voted yes, but part of the constituency was cut off. But the reason it was more No is definately due to the lack of young people. I am from Donegal and live in Dublin I went home to vote but the number of my hometown friends that live abroad and hence cannot vote is ridiculous. I have a hard time naming people I went to school with who is still in the town and its one of the bigger towns.

From today's irish Examiner, one 3-part tweet amongst many made by Noel Sharkey @juniorDoctorIE:
1) Donegal is the most deprived county in Ireland, with the highest unemployment rate and not even a train service to connect us with the capital.
2) Donegal people are forced to live and work elsewhere. Many of our Yes voters cast their vote in Dublin, Galway, etc. where they also canvassed and leafleted for
3) Over 2.5k of our Yes votes in South Donegal were added to the Sligo/Leitrim total because of redrawing of constituency boundaries.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/discover/thread-donegal-man-explains-the-reasons-why-his-county-voted-no-845488.html

Zubeneschamali

aloyisious wrote: »

3) Over 2.5k of our Yes votes in South Donegal were added to the Sligo/Leitrim total because of redrawing of constituency boundaries.

That region includes Ballyshannon and Bundoran, 2 of the top 10 biggest towns in Donegal, and although the urban-rural divide was not as great this time as in 1983, it still exists.

aloyisious

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

That region includes Ballyshannon and Bundoran, 2 of the top 10 biggest towns in Donegal, and although the urban-rural divide was not as great this time as in 1983, it still exists.

So basically, if the constituency boundaries hadn't been re-jigged, the result may well have been 26 out of 26. Mind-boggling to find that the populations of both towns can be moved for paper-counting results on local political needs for the parties and can rebound on national politics: the altruism :rolleyes:

recedite

aloyisious wrote: »

He seem's to have ended his interview with this piece [which I missed initially and found elsewhere] He added he did not think the result was going to change people’s core values. There was now a difference between faith - which was personal - and religion, which was communal, he said. For far too long there had been a reliance on the faith model in schools and there wasn’t a tradition of faith formation in dioceses.

Its an interesting admission; basically he is saying that most catholics are not actually RC but are "a la carte catholics".
Also he's blaming the catholic schools for this. But in separating "the schools" from "the diocese" he fails to admit that they are integrated, and the catholic schools are the main faith formation tool of the diocese.

In terms of strategy, what's happened is that religious control has become overstretched, and the ethos of the schools too dilute. I think we'll see more of an effort now from the bishops to withdraw their sphere of influence into a much smaller number of schools, with a more concentrated RCC ethos. That means divestment is on the way. Minister Bruton will claim the credit for this, but in fact it will be a "strategic withdrawal" by the RCC. Once upon a time they could control the whole country, but no more.

Another interesting spin-off from the Referendum result is the pressure now being exerted by English labour party MPs on the British govt. to impose abortion on NI.
But...

DUP leader Arlene Foster said: “The legislation governing abortion is a devolved matter and it is for the Northern Ireland Assembly to debate and decide such issues.
“Some of those who wish to circumvent the assembly’s role may be doing so simply to avoid its decision.

recedite

I know a good few people in the protestant communities both north and south, and I'd say that whereas in 1983 they were at the most liberal end of the contentious social issues (abortion, divorce, gay rights, women priests) nowadays they are often at the least liberal end. That's not because they have changed their views, rather its because they haven't changed very much.
Basically they have been leap-frogged by the RC flock, while the RCC itself remains "behind".

end of the road

King Mob wrote: »

Again, accusing foreigners or planing to abort based on gender. Is that a claim you are OK with?

it's a valid point to make in relation to abortion in general, yes. whether such could happen in ireland or not, it's probably likely it couldn't. but i would never 100% rule it out long term.

pauldla wrote: »

Thanks for your reply.

That may be true, perhaps. But just to take the 'too posh to push' slogan, if it is being used by people on the No side, and if it is a reprehensible thing to say, than surely others on the No side should call them out on it? Can we see any examples of that? If not, could their silence be seen as a tacit support of the mindset that allows the use of 'too posh to push'?

no . people on one side of a debate may often see statements from people on the same side but we don't always have the time to call them out on those statements.

King Mob wrote: »

Incidentally, you have missed a question I put to you in my earlier reply. I'll repeat it now: Can you give examples please of the Yes campaign wanting 'unrestricted abortion'?

this site has plenty of people supporting the unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks.

ohnonotgmail

end of the road wrote: »

it's a valid point to make in relation to abortion in general, yes. whether such could happen in ireland or not, it's probably likely it couldn't. but i would never 100% rule it out long term.



no . people on one side of a debate may often see statements from people on the same side but we don't always have the time to call them out on those statements.



this site has plenty of people supporting the unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks.

that seems like a restriction to me.

end of the road

SusieBlue wrote: »

I think its worth noting as well that the speakers they chose to represent them during debates were very poor - and I'm not talking about their TD's, Maria Steen et al.

Where to start?
There was the woman on the Prime Time debate whose daughter had an FFA, I frankly found her insufferable and she was extremely rude and condescending towards the other mother who had chose to give birth to her FFA baby in the UK.
One crucial element that woman forgot to recognise was that even with a Yes vote, she would still have been allowed to carry her baby to term here should she wish, that choice won't be taken from her.
Yet here she is, on national telly, advocating the choice be removed from a woman in her exact circumstances. It was horrible to watch.

We then had the various women who had abortions and regretted them - but at least they had the CHOICE. A choice they didn't want other women to have.

And we also had the woman on Claire Byrne who claimed her 12 week old baby miscarried and came out full size, perfectly formed, with her head in her hands smiling. I'm sorry - and I know this won't be popular - but that simply is NOT possible.
I'm happy for her to rationalise what happened to her in any way she needs to, to deal with her undeniable grief. But what she was saying was completely inaccurate.
And once again, a Yes vote would change absolutely nothing for her.
My mam voted No and I watched that debate with her, and even she rolled her eyes at it.

Then there were the various doctors, who were more concerned with their own personal beliefs being upheld than they were about their patients welfare.
I couldn't believe the own goal they scored when their Doctor admitted that he would REFUSE to refer a patient elsewhere for an abortion should the referendum pass.

None of their speakers were likable or relatable in any way. And the outcome of the referendum would have had absolutely no effect on the choices they made in their own circumstances. And that's what it all boils down to.
That's without even touching on how abysmal Ronan Mullen and Peadar Toibín were.

it would have effected these people in the form of abortion on demand being introduced. this was never about "choice" or "compassion" or any of the rest of the fluffy language, it was about repealing the 8th and what followed that.

recedite wrote: »

Its an interesting admission; basically he is saying that most catholics are not actually RC but are "a la carte catholics".
Also he's blaming the catholic schools for this. But in separating "the schools" from "the diocese" he fails to admit that they are integrated, and the catholic schools are the main faith formation tool of the diocese.

In terms of strategy, what's happened is that religious control has become overstretched, and the ethos of the schools too dilute. I think we'll see more of an effort now from the bishops to withdraw their sphere of influence into a much smaller number of schools, with a more concentrated RCC ethos. That means divestment is on the way. Minister Bruton will claim the credit for this, but in fact it will be a "strategic withdrawal" by the RCC. Once upon a time they could control the whole country, but no more.

Another interesting spin-off from the Referendum result is the pressure now being exerted by English labour party MPs on the British govt. to impose abortion on NI.
But...

it will depend on which the tories want more. abortion in northern ireland or to remain in power. i suspect remain in power, so this issue won't be touched. if they tried to force it through, the DUP would pull the plug on the coalition and the tories may likely not get back in . of course then in that situation assuming labour were voted in then they may force it through. interesting times ahead possibly?

NuMarvel

end of the road wrote: »

this site has plenty of people supporting the unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks.

A reminder of the question you're responding to: Can you give examples please of the Yes campaign wanting 'unrestricted abortion'?

People on this site aren't representatives of the Yes campaign. Supporters, sure, but not representatives, so what they say here isn't evidence of anything the Yes campaign groups has said or supports.

And as ohnonotgmail says, even if is was, a term limit of 12 weeks, is a restriction.

mcmoustache

recedite wrote: »

Another interesting spin-off from the Referendum result is the pressure now being exerted by English labour party MPs on the British govt. to impose abortion on NI.
But...

Christ on a stick but that's some hyperbole. Abortions aren't mandatory. People can choose not to have them.

SusieBlue

end of the road wrote: »

it would have effected these people in the form of abortion on demand being introduced. this was never about "choice" or "compassion" or any of the rest of the fluffy language, it was about repealing the 8th and what followed that.

Ok, please explain, coherently to me, how the No FFA mother who saw through her pregnancy in the comfortable care of Ireland was affected by the Yes FFA mother travelling to the UK to have her pregnancy induced?
Please explain the effects it would have had on that woman. I'm all ears.

end of the road

mcmoustache wrote: »

Christ on a stick but that's some hyperbole. Abortions aren't mandatory. People can choose not to have them.

not at all, the poster is correct and you took him up wrong. what he meant is that labour are calling for the government to by-pass devolution and implement laws in relation to abortion in northern ireland. so it would be technically imposing as it's going against devolution.

ohnonotgmail

end of the road wrote: »

not at all, the poster is correct and you took him up wrong. what he meant is that labour are calling for the government to by-pass devolution and implement laws in relation to abortion in northern ireland. so it would be technically imposing as it's going against devolution.

they dont have a government up there and haven't for some time. its time that westminster took back control. the DUP are unfit for government.

storker

end of the road wrote: »

it would have effected these people in the form of abortion on demand being introduced. this was never about "choice" or "compassion" or any of the rest of the fluffy language, it was about repealing the 8th and what followed that.

What follows repealing the 8th is...choice.


_

seamus

end of the road wrote: »

not at all, the poster is correct and you took him up wrong. what he meant is that labour are calling for the government to by-pass devolution and implement laws in relation to abortion in northern ireland. so it would be technically imposing as it's going against devolution.

Devolution is only possible with a devolved government.

There might be nothing quite like the prospect of legal abortion to light a fire under the DUP and force them back into Stormont.

But SF might then stonewall to allow London bring it in.

recedite

seamus wrote: »

There might be nothing quite like the prospect of legal abortion to light a fire under the DUP and force them back into Stormont.
But SF might then stonewall to allow London bring it in.

It wasn't the DUP that walked out, it was SF. And the issue they are stonewalling over is non-implementation of their Irish Language Act.


Direct rule would involve input from both Westminster and Dublin, but for various political reasons it has not been invoked yet. I doubt that the English Labour party MPs who are calling for abortion in NI fully appreciate all the details. They probably just woke up to a news story saying "The Irish have changed their minds about abortion".

end of the road

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

they dont have a government up there and haven't for some time. its time that westminster took back control. the DUP are unfit for government.

westminster are doubley not fit for purpose. northern ireland has enough governance that it can function in a basic manner. devolution is the only way.

storker wrote: »

What follows repealing the 8th is...choice.


_

no it's abortion on demand up to 12 weeks with a higher time limit for serious cases. choice is a misnomer given we don't give people the choice to end another's life until now.

seamus wrote: »

Devolution is only possible with a devolved government.

There might be nothing quite like the prospect of legal abortion to light a fire under the DUP and force them back into Stormont.

But SF might then stonewall to allow London bring it in.

maybe, but the DUP can also threaten to pull the coalition with the tories as i said earlier. i would be surprised if the tories value abortion in northern ireland over remaining in power and keeping labour out.

uptherebels

end of the road wrote: »

no it's abortion on demand up to 12 weeks with a higher time limit for serious cases. choice is a misnomer given we don't give people the choice to end another's life until now.

t.

Yes we did they had the choice to travel to the uk

SusieBlue

SusieBlue wrote: »

Ok, please explain, coherently to me, how the No FFA mother who saw through her pregnancy in the comfortable care of Ireland was affected by the Yes FFA mother travelling to the UK to have her pregnancy induced?
Please explain the effects it would have had on that woman. I'm all ears.

Hi EOTR, still waiting on a reply to this.

end of the road

SusieBlue wrote: »

Hi EOTR, still waiting on a reply to this.

you would have to ask that question to the lady in question. i gave you an answer as to how i think it might effect her but ultimately that's just my personal view.

SusieBlue

end of the road wrote: »

you would have to ask that question to the lady in question. i gave you an answer as to how i think it might effect her but ultimately that's just my personal view.

No, you didn't give an answer. You gave a broad, blanket statement.
You said:

end of the road wrote: »

it would have effected these people in the form of abortion on demand being introduced.

That isn't an answer. If you are going to make a statement, you need to back it up. Your reply is a cop out. Colour me stunned.

ohnonotgmail

end of the road wrote: »

it would have effected these people in the form of abortion on demand being introduced. this was never about "choice" or "compassion" or any of the rest of the fluffy language, it was about repealing the 8th and what followed that.

How does a woman having an abortion affect another living human? How, for instance, could it possibly affect you?

end of the road

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

How does a woman having an abortion affect another living human? How, for instance, could it possibly affect you?

abortion takes the life of another human being. it doesn't need to effect me personally but it will have effects on society. the same as someone killing anyone i don't know, it won't effect me personally but it doesn't mean it isn't wrong and that society should say no to allowing it.

ohnonotgmail

end of the road wrote: »

abortion takes the life of another human being. it doesn't need to effect me personally but it will have effects on society. the same as someone killing anyone i don't know, it won't effect me personally but it doesn't mean it isn't wrong and that society should say no to allowing it.

I'm going to ignore the taking of another life nonsense. How does it affect another human that is not involved in the abortion? or as susieblue said

Ok, please explain, coherently to me, how the No FFA mother who saw through her pregnancy in the comfortable care of Ireland was affected by the Yes FFA mother travelling to the UK to have her pregnancy induced?

The answer clearly is that it doesnt.

SusieBlue

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

The answer clearly is that it doesnt.

I'm just going to take it that he doesn't have an answer because he cannot prove it whatsoever.

ohnonotgmail

SusieBlue wrote: »

I'm just going to take it that he doesn't have an answer because he cannot prove it whatsoever.

That is just easier. There is nothing to be gained by continuing with him.

aloyisious

end of the road wrote: »

it would have effected these people in the form of abortion on demand being introduced. this was never about "choice" or "compassion" or any of the rest of the fluffy language, it was about repealing the 8th and what followed that.



it will depend on which the tories want more. abortion in northern ireland or to remain in power. i suspect remain in power, so this issue won't be touched. if they tried to force it through, the DUP would pull the plug on the coalition and the tories may likely not get back in . of course then in that situation assuming labour were voted in then they may force it through. interesting times ahead possibly?

But the beauty of that is that only women wanting or needing it for their health and lives would partake in N/I. We know from the visits to Dublin and other southern cities on anti-abortion rallies that as devout christians, the majority of women and girls there would have no truck with abortion so there'd be no worry there, what with the British mainalnd already having clinics to take care of the "problem child", like they do for the south til the end of this year.