The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Peatys

Cabaal wrote: »

Can I ask, since you support the 8th do you also think article 42.2 of the constitution should be fully followed and enforced by the Irish state?

What does the article say?

.......

This post has been deleted.

optogirl

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

I'm not a "pro-lifer" actually. I agree with abortion in certain cases and I thought originally that's what would be proposed.

But I can't and won't vote for what's being pushed now, abortion up to twelve weeks without restriction where the front line treatment is a two stage pill with a woman pumping blood out of herself at home. That's criminal medical negligence.

'pumping blood out of herself' ? Is that the medical term?

SusieBlue

Mint Sauce wrote: »

Whilst I have nearly always been for abortion in exceptional circumstances, ie, rape, incest, fatal fetal abnormalities, risk of life to the mother, etc, I am not sure if I like Leo Varadkars or the Governments current wording, and it sits slightly uncomfortably with me.

Firstly the unrestricted 12 weeks. Whilst I am not totally one sided to prolife, as per my opening paragraph, and do agree to the argument to some extent, of womans body, her choice, 12 weeks, where there is definitely life present, I dont think I can be in support of.

Then, a yes vote which allows the Government responsibility to legislate, thats all well and good, but how far could they take this legislation, I would be interested in hearing what this planned legislation would be, before making a decision.

Whilst legal abortion here, would mean women no longer having to travel, maybe without proper after medical or psychiatric care, or obtaining dodgy tablets over the internet, which can only be a good thing, I fear the current wording, leaves the whole thing open, to be to far more liberalised, and allowing abortions for what might be totally a lifestyle choice, maybe based on the gender, none fatal genetic conditions, etc, rather than the exceptional circumstances debate/argument.

With all that in mind, my current thoughts, of what might have been a Yes vote, are currently leaning towards a No, and feel that Leo Varadkar and the Government are currently trying to engineer a get out clause, until I can learn or research more.

There will always be those who abuse the system.
Do we abolish social welfare for everyone because a small portion of the country are career dole claimers and are totally work shy?

As for your part about "lifestyle reasons"...I trust women to make the best, most informed decision for herself and her circumstances.
I don't believe forcing motherhood on someone who doesn't want it is in the best interests of ANYONE, let alone the innocent child.
Would you like to be brought up by a mother who never wanted you?

Most conditions, fatal or otherwise, cannot be picked up at 12 weeks. They are generally found at the anomaly scan, which normally occurs around week 20. Gender is also determined at this scan.
So that rules out health conditions (FFA or not) and it being used for selecting gender preference with the current 12 week recommendation.

seamus

Deleted User wrote: »

Well they linked a video and that seems legit

The video was heavily edited and presented in a way to make it appear like Planned Parenthood were secretly selling aborted babies for profit.

The reality is that the foetal tissue that PP made available was consensually donated by those who attended the clinics, and the money charged was basically the handling and processing costs of the tissue, no profit was made from it.

Several investigations into the allegations found no wrongdoing on the part of Planned Parenthood, and the pro-life activists who filmed and produced these videos were successfully sued for slander and breach of privacy.

optogirl

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

I'm not a "pro-lifer" actually. I agree with abortion in certain cases and I thought originally that's what would be proposed.

But I can't and won't vote for what's being pushed now, abortion up to twelve weeks without restriction where the front line treatment is a two stage pill with a woman pumping blood out of herself at home. That's criminal medical negligence.

really? - so comments like this former classic of yours are just heat of the moment? 'This referendum is purely to facilitate Tara Flynn types to bang strange men without a condom and without consequences'

FutureGuy

Abortion happens.

It’s just that women are being punished for it.

Simple as that.

Mint Sauce

WhiteRoses wrote: »

There will always be those who abuse the system.
Do we abolish social welfare for everyone because a small portion of the country are career dole claimers and are totally work shy?

As for your part about "lifestyle reasons"...I trust women to make the best, most informed decision for herself and her circumstances.
I don't believe forcing motherhood on someone who doesn't want it is in the best interests of ANYONE, let alone the innocent child.
Would you like to be brought up by a mother who never wanted you?

Most conditions, fatal or otherwise, cannot be picked up at 12 weeks. They are generally found at the anomaly scan, which normally occurs around week 20. Gender is also determined at this scan.
So that rules out health conditions (FFA or not) and it being used for selecting gender preference with the current 12 week recommendation.

As would I, and cant imagine voicing an opinion, to someone I knew, who was seeking an abortion for what ever reason. I would like to think I would respect someones decision, dispite my own believes.

FutureGuy

FutureGuy wrote: »

Abortion happens.

It’s just that women are being punished for it.

Simple as that.

Women already have choices;

They choose to have sex.
They can choose to use contraception.
They can choose to use the morning after pill.

If we were voting for abortion for Rape, Incest or medical reasons then I would vote no. What we are voting on is if women can have a 4th option because she couldn't be bothered to choose one of the first three options.


Incidentally committing suicide is illegal, so where are the woman's choice and the rights of her body in that issue?

nozzferrahhtoo

Mint Sauce wrote: »

Whilst I have nearly always been for abortion in exceptional circumstances, ie, rape

Could you describe to me how such a system would function? A methodology by which we could offer abortion in cases of rape in a way that would not be functionally indistinguishable from abortion on demand?

Mint Sauce wrote: »

12 weeks, where there is definitely life present, I dont think I can be in support of.

Could you explain what you mean by "there is definitely life present" at 12 weeks? There is definitely life present from conception. Not 12 weeks. So perhaps I mean something different to you there?

Mint Sauce wrote: »

how far could they take this legislation, I would be interested in hearing what this planned legislation would be, before making a decision.

Everything I have seen and heard suggest they are likely to adopt the recommendations of the Citizens Assembly. And I am inclined at this time to believe that. As for POTENTIALLY how far could they go? No idea! Perhaps the more law inclined will be able to tell us if any other laws exist in Ireland that would preclude them from adopting, say, the Canada Model?

But I suspect we are talking about theoretical potentials here, and not something that is even remotely likely to occur in reality.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

Women already have choices;

They choose to have sex.
They can choose to use contraception.
They can choose to use the morning after pill.

If we were voting for abortion for Rape, Incest or medical reasons then I would vote no. What we are voting on is if women can have a 4th option because she couldn't be bothered to choose one of the first three options.


Incidentally committing suicide is illegal, so where are the woman's choice and the rights of her body in that issue?

do you think a woman using contraception should always take the morning after pill the next day just in case the contraception didnt work?

astrofool

Mint Sauce wrote: »

Whilst I have nearly always been for abortion in exceptional circumstances, ie, rape, incest, fatal fetal abnormalities, risk of life to the mother, etc, I am not sure if I like Leo Varadkars or the Governments current wording, and it sits slightly uncomfortably with me.

Firstly the unrestricted 12 weeks. Whilst I am not totally one sided to prolife, as per my opening paragraph, and do agree to the argument to some extent, of womans body, her choice, 12 weeks, where there is definitely life present, I dont think I can be in support of.

Then, a yes vote which allows the Government responsibility to legislate, thats all well and good, but how far could they take this legislation, I would be interested in hearing what this planned legislation would be, before making a decision.

Whilst legal abortion here, would mean women no longer having to travel, maybe without proper after medical or psychiatric care, or obtaining dodgy tablets over the internet, which can only be a good thing, I fear the current wording, leaves the whole thing open, to be to far more liberalised, and allowing abortions for what might be totally a lifestyle choice, maybe based on the gender, none fatal genetic conditions, etc, rather than the exceptional circumstances debate/argument.

With all that in mind, my current thoughts, of what might have been a Yes vote, are currently leaning towards a No, and feel that Leo Varadkar and the Government are currently trying to engineer a get out clause, until I can learn or research more.

FG are probably the most "pro-life" viable party around (barring going the extreme right) and found it very hard to legislate on even the X-case. This vote is probably going to be for the most restrictive form of abortion that the public will vote for, knowing their political base won't go any further anyway. If you find it too far, you're putting yourself on the political fringes of society.

Even FF are swinging the other way (the populist party), and Labour/SF/Greens have always been in favour. The non-relevant social democrats are about the only party close to your views.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

do you think a woman using contraception should always take the morning after pill the next day just in case the contraception didnt work?

If they were really hell-bent on not having a child then yes, surely that would be the better option than having to go through an abortion.

nozzferrahhtoo

Deleted User wrote: »

Incidentally committing suicide is illegal

Is it? Which law is that exactly?

SusieBlue

Deleted User wrote: »

Women already have choices;

They choose to have sex.
They can choose to use contraception.
They can choose to use the morning after pill.

If we were voting for abortion for Rape, Incest or medical reasons then I would vote no. What we are voting on is if women can have a 4th option because she couldn't be bothered to choose one of the first three options.


Incidentally committing suicide is illegal, so where are the woman's choice and the rights of her body in that issue?

So much ignorance in one post. You are aware of course, that contraception isn't 100% effective?

WhiteRoses

WhiteRoses wrote: »

So much ignorance in one post. You are aware of course, that contraception isn't 100% effective?

Like I said previously, Take the morning after pill if you really don't want a child.

Would it not be better to do that than go through the hell of an abortion?

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

If they were really hell-bent on not having a child then yes, surely that would be the better option than having to go through an abortion.

you are aware of the effects of the morning after pill? Of course you are, what a silly question.

nozzferrahhtoo

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Is it? Which law is that exactly?

I see the law was changed back in 93. Only applies to assisted suicide now.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you are aware of the effects of the morning after pill? Of course you are, what a silly question.

So you would rather people go through an abortion than popping a pill?

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

So you would rather people go through an abortion than popping a pill?

an abortion before 12 weeks IS popping a pill. again, your ignorance is astounding.

Ave Sodalis

Deleted User wrote: »

Like I said previously, Take the morning after pill if you really don't want a child.

Would it not be better to do that than go through the hell of an abortion?

You can't keep taking the morning after pill... you have an extremely limited amount of times you can take it during your life

SusieBlue

Deleted User wrote: »

Like I said previously, Take the morning after pill if you really don't want a child.

Would it not be better to do that than go through the hell of an abortion?

You are also aware of the severe health implications of taking the morning after pill? Say a woman has sex once a week, you are suggesting she take the morning after pill a couple of times a month?

Bannasidhe

Deleted User wrote: »

Women already have choices;

They choose to have sex.
They can choose to use contraception.
They can choose to use the morning after pill.

If we were voting for abortion for Rape, Incest or medical reasons then I would vote no. What we are voting on is if women can have a 4th option because she couldn't be bothered to choose one of the first three options.


Incidentally committing suicide is illegal, so where are the woman's choice and the rights of her body in that issue?

Women do not always choose to have sex.
Contraception is not 100% effective.
I'm sure women in rural communities are just beating a path to the village pharmacy to get the morning after pill.

What physical repercussions are there for men who choose to have sex, and choose not to use contraception?

And incidentally it isn't.

CRIMINAL LAW (SUICIDE) ACT, 1993

AN ACT TO ABOLISH THE OFFENCE OF SUICIDE, TO MAKE IT AN OFFENCE TO BE AN ACCOMPLICE TO SUICIDE AND TO REPEAL SECTION 9 OF THE SUMMARY JURISDICTION (IRELAND) AMENDMENT ACT, 1871 . [9th June, 1993]

BE IT ENACTED BY THE OIREACHTAS AS FOLLOWS:

Short title and commencement.

1.—(1) This Act may be cited as the Criminal Law (Suicide) Act, 1993.

(2) This Act shall come into operation one month after the date of its passing.

Suicide.

2.—(1) Suicide shall cease to be a crime.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1993/act/11/enacted/en/print

Mint Sauce

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Could you describe to me how such a system would function? A methodology by which we could offer abortion in cases of rape in a way that would not be functionally indistinguishable from abortion on demand?

Honestly, dont know. Maybe this would be part of proposed legislation

Could you explain what you mean by "there is definitely life present" at 12 weeks? There is definitely life present from conception. Not 12 weeks. So perhaps I mean something different to you there?

What I mean is the how far the unborn life is developed. Yes life is there long before this stage, but weather that is conception or inception that another debate.

Everything I have seen and heard suggest they are likely to adopt the recommendations of the Citizens Assembly. And I am inclined at this time to believe that. As for POTENTIALLY how far could they go? No idea! Perhaps the more law inclined will be able to tell us if any other laws exist in Ireland that would preclude them from adopting, say, the Canada Model?

But I suspect we are talking about theoretical potentials here, and not something that is even remotely likely to occur in reality.

Thats the problem, How far can we believe or trust the government?

strandroad

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Like I said previously, Take the morning after pill if you really don't want a child.

Would it not be better to do that than go through the hell of an abortion?

If your contraception fails you might not know until weeks later.

Educate yourself.

nozzferrahhtoo

Deleted User wrote: »

I see the law was changed back in 93. Only applies to assisted suicide now.

That is what I thought. So there are factual errors in your post. You might want to start there with a re-think. So women CAN commit suicide, yet they can not access the removal of non-sentient tissue from their own body. And you in some way think this is.... what.... a good thing?

Deleted User wrote: »

So you would rather people go through an abortion than popping a pill?

Not what the user appears to be saying at all. Rather what is being said is that the effects of the MAP mean you can not simply be popping them after every sexual encounter "just in case". And with various forms of contraception there is no way to tell it has failed.

So assuming people are not going to simply be popping MAPs every morning they ever have sex, clearly your narrative is not likely to take hold in the heads of pro-choice supporters.

But what is also interesting is that abortion, when accessed early enough in the process, IS actually just a matter of popping a different pill. The same pill people are obtaining illegally off the internet. So your "rather people have abortion than a pill" narrative is double likely to fail here.

Actual surgical abortions only happen later in the process, and talking about pills AT ALL at that stage is just going to add more red to the pond of herring.

ohnonotgmail

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

an abortion before 12 weeks IS popping a pill. again, your ignorance is astounding.

You just don't get an abortion you know, its not a case of popping down to Dunnes and buying a packet of the shelf and job over.

At 12 weeks its also not a case of popping a pill, see here
https://www.pregnancychoicesdirectory.com/peoplesstories/abortion/1196/a-medical-abortion-at-12-weeks

There is also untold psychological damage that the mother can suffer from including depression.

I am shocked that you would prefer people to have an abortion than taking the morning after pill.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Like I said previously, Take the morning after pill if you really don't want a child.

Would it not be better to do that than go through the hell of an abortion

Quite aside from the effects of the morning after pill on the body of the woman taking it (it's very obvious you're unaware of those so I don't need to ask), I'm interested in what exactly you think the morning after pill does?

Also suicide isn't illegal in Ireland. That "where's her choice then??" argument became a moot point 25 years ago.

I'm so looking forward to six more months of thoroughly informed debate like this.

Ave Sodalis

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

You can't keep taking the morning after pill... you have an extremely limited amount of times you can take it during your life

How many abortions do you think someone can have?

WhiteRoses

WhiteRoses wrote: »

You are also aware of the severe health implications of taking the morning after pill? Say a woman has sex once a week, you are suggesting she take the morning after pill a couple of times a month?

You are aware of the medical problems associated with abortions, both physical and mental?

kylith

Deleted User wrote: »

Women already have choices;

They choose to have sex.
They can choose to use contraception.
They can choose to use the morning after pill.

If we were voting for abortion for Rape, Incest or medical reasons then I would vote no. What we are voting on is if women can have a 4th option because she couldn't be bothered to choose one of the first three options.

You would vote against abortion for rape, incest, or medical reasons?

Women do not always choose to have sex.

Women do not always have the choice of using contraception, in the cases of rape, for example. Contraception can fail, even when used correctly.

A woman may not realise her contraception has failed until it is too late for the MAP. A woman who has been raped may be too traumatised or in denial and not take the MAP.

Deleted User wrote: »

If they were really hell-bent on not having a child then yes, surely that would be the better option than having to go through an abortion.

Have you ever taken the morning after pill?

Effects include :
nausea
abdominal pain
fatigue
headache
menstrual changes
dizziness
breast tenderness
vomiting

Do you think this is the kind of thing a woman should be taking, perhaps several times a week, in case her contraception fails?

kylith

kylith wrote: »

You would vote against abortion for rape, incest, or medical reasons?

Women do not always choose to have sex.

Women do not always have the choice of using contraception, in the cases of rape, for example. Contraception can fail, even when used correctly.

A woman may not realise her contraception has failed until it is too late for the MAP. A woman who has been raped may be too traumatised or in denial and not take the MAP.

Have you ever taken the morning after pill?

Effects include :
nausea
abdominal pain
fatigue
headache
menstrual changes
dizziness
breast tenderness
vomiting

Do you think this is the kind of thing a woman should be taking, perhaps several times a week, in case her contraception fails?

Typo, I would vote Yes for medical reasons, Incest and Rape.

The effects you mention from the morning after pill is also associated with Abortions.

however, there is a greater risk of psychological damage with an abortion.

nozzferrahhtoo

Mint Sauce wrote: »

Honestly, dont know. Maybe this would be part of proposed legislation

Unlikely because there IS no workable system that I can think of. Nor can anyone else I have ever asked. There seems to only be three ways to do it:

1) Await a conviction for rape. But this might not come. Or it might take way too long.
2) Merely a filed accusation of rape with the Police. This would incentivize false accusations of rape by people who want abortions.
3) Merely take the woman's word for it she was raped: Functionally indistinguishable from abortion on demand.

If there is an option 4 I have never yet heard it. Which of the above 3 do you think you would like put into legislation?

Mint Sauce wrote: »

What I mean is the how far the unborn life is developed.

Then we are on the same page so far! That is great.

So what do you think has occurred in week 0-12 upon which to mediate your concerns? I know what I mediate mine on but they do not come online until much later.

Suffice to say if abortion on demand came into Ireland I would personally like to see 16 weeks. But I would not lose a WINK of sleep over 12 or 20.

Mint Sauce wrote: »

Thats the problem, How far can we believe or trust the government?

Enough to believe they have no interest in political suicide. Which even being SEEN to discuss the possibility of a model like, say, Canada would certainly be. I believe heavily in the effects of self-preservation.

I see no reason to think they would have any interest, or benefit from doing anything but adopting something very very close to the recommendations of the assembly.

I distrust government too. But not to the point that I would feel paralyzed from allowing them to do anything at all. Trust is contextual judgement call, not a sweeping denigration.

SusieBlue

Deleted User wrote: »

You just don't get an abortion you know, its not a case of popping down to Dunnes and buying a packet of the shelf and job over.

At 12 weeks its also not a case of popping a pill, see here
https://www.pregnancychoicesdirectory.com/peoplesstories/abortion/1196/a-medical-abortion-at-12-weeks

There is also untold psychological damage that the mother can suffer from including depression.

I am shocked that you would prefer people to have an abortion than taking the morning after pill.

Its already been explained to you that you can't just take the MAP a few times a month.

I see you realise how serious of a procedure abortion is, that's great that you can see that. Do you think women are so stupid they'd just go and get an abortion without weighing up their options?
Do you think they'd rather book in for surgery rather than just use contraceptive?

Do you really think a woman would get an abortion unless she felt she had no other choice?

Your post reeks of wanting to save women from themselves, as if they're not capable of making their own informed decisions.

ohnonotgmail

Deleted User wrote: »

You just don't get an abortion you know, its not a case of popping down to Dunnes and buying a packet of the shelf and job over.

At 12 weeks its also not a case of popping a pill, see here
https://www.pregnancychoicesdirectory.com/peoplesstories/abortion/1196/a-medical-abortion-at-12-weeks

There is also untold psychological damage that the mother can suffer from including depression.

I am shocked that you would prefer people to have an abortion than taking the morning after pill.

Your link refers to a medical abortion. That is not what has been proposed.
before 12 weeks it is popping a pill. and that is what has been proposed. Nobody suggested popping to dunnes. it is done under medical supervision. You would know that if you had a clue what you were talking about.

WhiteRoses

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Its already been explained to you that you can't just take the MAP a few times a month.

I see you realise how serious of a procedure abortion is, that's great that you can see that. Do you think women are so stupid they'd just go and get an abortion without weighing up their options?
Do you think they'd rather book in for surgery rather than just use contraceptive?

Do you really think a woman would get an abortion unless she felt she had no other choice?

Your post reeks of wanting to save women from themselves as if they're not capable of making their own informed decisions.

Having lived in the UK I have seen how women use abortions, especially young girls from 16 years of age. For many it is nothing more than a supermarket product they can use whenever they need it.

I have seen young girls abort a child only to have a child 6 months later.

I dont want to see Ireland become the next England with morals and decency being replaced with liberal ideals.

Also there is the issue that once the law has been repealed there is nothing stopping any govermnet ujpping the age upwards whenever they want, how long until we are at 24 weeks?

Ave Sodalis

Deleted User wrote: »

You just don't get an abortion you know, its not a case of popping down to Dunnes and buying a packet of the shelf and job over.

At 12 weeks its also not a case of popping a pill, see here
https://www.pregnancychoicesdirectory.com/peoplesstories/abortion/1196/a-medical-abortion-at-12-weeks

There is also untold psychological damage that the mother can suffer from including depression.

I am shocked that you would prefer people to have an abortion than taking the morning after pill.

Getting the morning after pill isn't a case of popping down to your local chemist and asking for one. They take you into a room on your own to ask you a lot of questions. You cannot get the MAP more than 3 times in your life.

Bannasidhe

Deleted User wrote: »

Typo, I would vote Yes for medical reasons, Incest and Rape.

The effects you mention from the morning after pill is also associated with Abortions.

however, there is a greater risk of psychological damage with an abortion.

Why are embryos implanted as a result of rape or incest less deserving of life than those implanted as a result of contraception fail?

I'm honestly not buying your concern for women line tbh - do you have any medical qualifications by the way? Are you a psychologist or psychiatrist that you can speak with authority about psychological damage or is it a case that you think women who have had abortions should have psychological damage?

Do you think women in crises pregnancies do not suffer psychological damage?

What about women with children they don't want? Do you think neither woman or children can be psychologically damaged in this scenario?

Or how about the suicidal women forced to seek permission from a panel to get an abortion? Any potential for psychological damaged there?

SusieBlue

Deleted User wrote: »

Having lived in the UK I have seen how women use abortions, especially young girls from 16 years of age. For many it is nothing more than a supermarket product they can use whenever they need it.

I have seen young girls abort a child only to have a child 6 months later.

I dont want to see Ireland become the next England with morals and decency being replaced with liberal ideals.

Also there is the issue that once the law has been repealed there is nothing stopping any govermnet ujpping the age upwards whenever they want, how long until we are at 24 weeks?

So you don't trust women, and just because a very select few may abuse the system, we won't allow anyone to have it. Right.

Cabaal

Deleted User wrote: »

You are aware of the medical problems associated with abortions, both physical and mental?

There's issues with every sort of medical procedure, does that mean we should ban them too? Thats a very silly way of looking at things.

This is about choice, this isn't about forcing any women to have an abortion. This is about allowing women in certain situations to have rights and control over their own body's.

kylith

Deleted User wrote: »

however, there is a greater risk of psychological damage with an abortion.

Says who?

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/8413/9611/5708/Abortion_Emotional_Effects.pdf
In 2008, the American Psychological Association’s Task Force on Mental Health and Abortion (TFMHA) evaluated all empirical studies on the emotional effects of abortion that had been published since 1989. It concluded that • The relative risk of mental health problems is no greater among adult women who resolve unplanned pregnancy with a single, elective, first trimester abortion than it is among those who give birth.

Deleted User wrote: »

Typo, I would vote Yes for medical reasons, Incest and Rape.

The effects you mention from the morning after pill is also associated with Abortions.

however, there is a greater risk of psychological damage with an abortion.

As Nozz says allowing abortion in cases of rape is not workable:
1) Await a conviction for rape. But this might not come. Or it might take way too long.
2) Merely a filed accusation of rape with the Police. This would incentivize false accusations of rape by people who want abortions.
3) Merely take the woman's word for it she was raped: Functionally indistinguishable from abortion on demand.

Deleted User wrote: »

Having lived in the UK I have seen how women use abortions, especially young girls from 16 years of age. For many it is nothing more than a supermarket product they can use whenever they need it.

I have seen young girls abort a child only to have a child 6 months later.

Impossible.

optogirl

Deleted User wrote: »

For many it is nothing more than a supermarket product they can use whenever they need it.

Please provide evidence for this rather than 'I know a girl who...'

Please accept that women are not ethically impaired dopes who are queuing up to have abortions just because they can. What business is it of yours anyway? Nobody is going to force you to have one.

kylith

kylith wrote: »

As Nozz says allowing abortion in cases of rape is not workable:
1) Await a conviction for rape. But this might not come. Or it might take way too long.
2) Merely a filed accusation of rape with the Police. This would incentivize false accusations of rape by people who want abortions.
3) Merely take the woman's word for it she was raped: Functionally indistinguishable from abortion on demand.



Impossible.

What is impossible?

Ave Sodalis

Deleted User wrote: »

I have seen young girls abort a child only to have a child 6 months later.

Ah, I see...

Bannasidhe

Deleted User wrote: »

Having lived in the UK I have seen how women use abortions, especially young girls from 16 years of age. For many it is nothing more than a supermarket product they can use whenever they need it.

I have seen young girls abort a child only to have a child 6 months later.

I dont want to see Ireland become the next England with morals and decency being replaced with liberal ideals.

Also there is the issue that once the law has been repealed there is nothing stopping any govermnet ujpping the age upwards whenever they want, how long until we are at 24 weeks?

And I have seen terrified, suicidal, women and girls arrive in England desperate for a way out of the crises they find themselves in.

You would condemn more women to that??
What about your concern for their psychological welfare?

I see you are another one who seems to believe - despite all the information that has emerged - that Ireland was some bastion of morality an decency.

optogirl

optogirl wrote: »

Please provide evidence for this rather than 'I know a girl who...'

Please accept that women are not ethically impaired dopes who are queuing up to have abortions just because they can. What business is it of yours anyway? Nobody is going to force you to have one.

The number of abortions carried out in England and Wales last year was the highest in five years, driven by growing numbers of women in their 30s and 40s who are terminating a pregnancy, official figures show.

More women are having multiple abortions, according to the annual statistics released by the Department of Health. Almost four in 10 terminations are now carried out on women who have undergone the procedure before. Fifty women had each had eight terminations, the figures revealed.


In all, 185,824 abortions were carried out on women and girls in England and Wales last year. That was 1,253 (0.7%) more than the 184,571 performed in 2014, and the largest number since the 189,931 carried out in 2011.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/17/abortion-rate-england-and-wales-five-year-high

Guy:Incognito

pleas advice wrote: »

Some people believe an unborn human has rights, is it really that hard to understand?

Presumably there's a list of these people so that any children born as a result of unwanted pregnancies that are living in poverty because the parents couldn't afford them or are abused in the home can be dropped off to be cared for by the people that wanted them to exist so badly? Or does your concern end once the mother is forced to go through with the pregnancy?

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

And I have seen terrified, suicidal, women and girls arrive in England desperate for a way out of the crises they find themselves in.

You would condemn more women to that??
What about your concern for their psychological welfare?

I see you are another one who seems to believe - despite all the information that has emerged - that Ireland was some bastion of morality an decency.

As I said, if they were desperate to not have children they could have used the morning after pill.

If they really dont want to have children or run the risk of having children then the answer is to not have Penatrive Sex.

Bannasidhe

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Ah, I see...

A wee miracle.
Like when people used to get married and along would come baby 6 months later.

gallifreya

Deleted User wrote: »

Women already have choices;

They choose to have sex.
They can choose to use contraception.
They can choose to use the morning after pill.

If we were voting for abortion for Rape, Incest or medical reasons then I would vote no. What we are voting on is if women can have a 4th option because she couldn't be bothered to choose one of the first three options.

Yes, I had a choice to have sex. Some women don't.

My first son is in the world now due to double contraceptive failure (condom broke, morning after pill failed).

Third son was born at 5.10am and I ‘delivered’ my IUD 20 minutes later. I was able to make a ‘choice’ to continue with both those unplanned pregnancies because my circumstances allowed.

Had I been in a more precarious financial position, if my job hadn’t been secure and didn’t top up maternity leave benefit, or if I didn’t have the support systems necessary to help out with childcare, that choice could have gone the other way. It could have gone the other way purely to survive and not leave my family homeless or destitute. The UK figures show upwards of 50% of abortions are cited due to contraceptive failure.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/06/half-abortions-due-failed-contraception-new-report/