The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Ismisejack

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Oh good another user who does not actually understand the word murder. It means to kill unlawfully. In a context where abortion is legal, no one is killing anything unlawfully. So the word murder does not apply.

But it seems your mis-use of language is manifold, and not limited to not knowing what murder is. Calling people "anti life" and "anti children" is so blatant a plunge into linguistic propaganda and misrepresentation that you you excel everyone on the thread so far at both.

As far as I know EVERY person on BOTH sides of this issue value the sanctity and preciousness of human life. Acknowledgement of that likely goes against your agenda so you will not do that.

The difference between the sides lies solely in WHEN we think an entity attains that "human life". No mere biological life, but that level of "Life" that is more than mere taxonomy. That moment that elevates us (at least in our own human estimation) over all other life on this planet.

Some people think that is at conception. Some when the heart starts beating. Some later. Some earlier even thinking the sperm itself is sacred and contraception and masturbation are "sinful" or wrong.

The difference is of course that some of us can explain and argue where we think that line lies and why. Some other merely assert it or scream it or misuse terms to attack people they do not agree with as you have here.

But by all means try. Drop the ad hominem rhetorical tools of misrepresentation and tell us on what basis, other than an appeal to mere taxonomy, you think we should have any moral and ethical concerns for a 12 week old fetus. "You can not have abortion without killing life" tells us nothing. You can not take an anti-biotic, eat pretty much any meal, write on paper, or many other things without "killing life" either. Clearly there is more than merely "killing life" in play in our morality and ethics therefore. And I would be curious to see if you even know what that something is.

You are indeed anti life as you propose terminating the life of another innocent human being. If you left all alone a life is born however if you intervene with a surgical knife or whatever it results in a child not getting it’s one chance at life, as you’ve killed it. You can’t deny it, abortion ends life, fact

eviltwin

Ismisejack wrote: »

You are indeed anti life as you propose terminating the life of another innocent human being. If you left all alone a life is born however if you intervene with a surgical knife or whatever it results in a child not getting it’s one chance at life, as you’ve killed it. You can’t deny it, abortion ends life, fact

WE KNOW :rolleyes:

pleas advice

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

...
But by all means try. Drop the ad hominem rhetorical tools of misrepresentation and tell us on what basis, other than an appeal to mere taxonomy, you think we should have any moral and ethical concerns for a 12 week old fetus. "You can not have abortion without killing life" tells us nothing. You can not take an anti-biotic, eat pretty much any meal, write on paper, or many other things without "killing life" either. Clearly there is more than merely "killing life" in play in our morality and ethics therefore. And I would be curious to see if you even know what that something is.

you're pretty much begging the question there, Nozz....

taxonomy is the answer to your question, plain and simple

nozzferrahhtoo

Ismisejack wrote: »

You are indeed anti life as you propose terminating the life of another innocent human being. If you left all alone a life is born however if you intervene with a surgical knife or whatever it results in a child not getting it’s one chance at life, as you’ve killed it. You can’t deny it, abortion ends life, fact

Wow so much wrong in such a short paragraph. Lets go through it in order.

Firstly as expected you did not answer the questions and discussion points in my last paragraph.

Second I am not proposing terminating anyone or anything. I would much prefer to live in a society with ZERO abortions. But I believe women should have the choice themselves.

Third we terminate life all the time. You did it last time you ate. The last time you used paper. The last time you treated an infection. We terminate life ALL THE TIME. So if you want to argue one termination of a life is worse than another, you need more substance to your (non)argument there.

Fourth, with the proposed terminations up to 12 weeks surgical knives will likely have nothing to do with anything. Ever after 12 weeks however you might want to educate yourself on the equipment used.

Fifth if you leave it alone MAYBE a life is born. You can not say it would be. Do you know what the statistics even are on miscarriage in the first 12 weeks? Nature aborts fetuses left alone quite remarkably often you know.

Sixth no one here that I have seen has EVER denied that abortion terminates life. So you are rebutting claims no one here is actually making. What people are claiming is that "Human Life" is a phrase that has other meanings outside mere biological taxonomy. And those meanings, especially the ones that influence our moral and ethical concerns, are precisely the things the fetus at 12 weeks lacks. Not just partially or slightly lacks. But ENTIRELY lacks.

But if you want to NOT dodge my challenges this time I am happy to repeat it..... Drop the ad hominem rhetorical tools of misrepresentation and tell us on what basis, other than an appeal to mere taxonomy, you think we should have any moral and ethical concerns for a 12 week old fetus.

Or is shouting "Human" at it pretty much the sole argument you have to offer here? That and "intolerant" when people do not simply roll over and agree with you of course.

nozzferrahhtoo

pleas advice wrote: »

you're pretty much begging the question there, Nozz....

taxonomy is the answer to your question, plain and simple

No, it is not. Because that is circular. Taxonomy calls it human. It is human because taxonomy.

Take some analogies. Borders do not define ownership. Yet it is borders we use to define what IS owned. DNA does not define inheritance. But using DNA we can measure if you should inherit.

In other words there is a difference between a word that defines what something is, and a word that defines to what that something applies. The word "Human" or "person" does not define rights or who or what should get it. We do that. And then we label that something later. You are mixing up the labels with the concepts. Badly.

Calling something "Human" is just a label, like a border. It does not define what rights are, what gets them, or why. You need something more than that.

Plain and simple.

Ismisejack

(Reply to nozz)
We should allow a fetus the right to life, I can’t think of any other rights a fetus should have but enlighten me if you can. Killing a human outside the womb is illegal and killing a human inside the womb is the same , so why should killing a human inside the womb be permitted?

david75

Wow. Went from ‘damn women looking for bodily autonomy these past 40 years and holding me up in traffic damn them’

To

‘MURDERERS!!’


In no time at all.

Ajsoprano

I don’t think I’d have the heart to abort a baby. I have flip flopped on the issue over the years.

Why not just give him/her up for adoption to give him/her a snowballs chance. It should be gay adoption we are pushing for. We could end institutional orphanages if there was gay couples who wanted kids getting kids.

I think it’s a decision made under pressure that will be reflected on in hindsight for the rest of your life.

There’s no real right or wrong in it. There’s a feminist side and a Jesus side and both sides have an agenda more important to them than the issue of abortion. They just want to win.

I’d vote yes for health reasons but no for lifestyle reasons.

Other cultures have abortion but in other cultures a girl can turn up at her boyfriends house with good news and it can be fairly normal for the boy to say “not my problem get an abortion”.
How’s that for women’s rights.

nozzferrahhtoo

Excuse me if I number your premises and moves here, as it will make it easier to answer your question.

Ismisejack wrote: »

1. We should allow a fetus the right to life
2. Killing a human outside the womb is illegal
3. killing a human inside the womb is the same
4. why should killing a human inside the womb be permitted?

The flaw in your premise lies in the third part. It is NOT the same. It is not the same for a multitude of reasons. But the most important one I could mention is that a fetus at 12 weeks lacks the faculty of consciousness and sentience entirely.

Not slightly like someone brain damaged.
Not compromised like someone in a coma.
Not switched off entirely like a dead adult.

But ENTIRELY. It is simply not here, not built, never created, never existed.

So no, it is not the same. Killing a child that has been born (or even in the weeks before it is born) is killing a sentience and conscious agent.

Termination of a fetus at 12 weeks is not.

So it is your error in premise 3 that answers your question in point 4 above and explains why your outright assertion in point 1 is simply that, an assertion. With no support or argument to carry it.

SusieBlue

Ismisejack wrote: »

(Reply to nozz)
We should allow a fetus the right to life, I can’t think of any other rights a fetus should have but enlighten me if you can. Killing a human outside the womb is illegal and killing a human inside the womb is the same , so why should killing a human inside the womb be permitted?

When I’m out and about wearing my ‘Repeal the 8th’ jumper it’s people with opinions like yours that I hope to p*ss off.

Ajsoprano

WhiteRoses wrote: »

When I’m out and about wearing my ‘Repeal the 8th’ jumper it’s people with opinions like yours that I hope to p*ss off.

Why do you want to piss people off? Surely you want women to get rights you think they should have?
Or do you just want to piss people off?

SusieBlue

Ajsoprano wrote: »

Why do you want to piss people off? Surely you want women to get rights you think they should have?
Or do you just want to piss people off?

Oh of course not, the whole point of me wearing it is to raise awareness for women to have more rights and full bodily autonomy.

I’m just aware of the fact that a very minor percentage of society sees me as an inferior murderer, these people’s opinions will never be changed but I wouldn’t even waste my breath trying to, but I’m glad at the very least that it annoys them.

splinter65

WhiteRoses wrote: »

When I’m out and about wearing my ‘Repeal the 8th’ jumper it’s people with opinions like yours that I hope to p*ss off.

Why do you think that your jumper pisses people off at all?
When the jumpers were distributed at the start I got the impression that a lot of people who bought them put them away quickly because of this type of immediate response

https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/57m6xz/why_arent_you_wearing_a_repeal_jumper_you_fascist/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=comment_list

Do you still wear yours? I haven’t seen one in over a year.

david75

Ajsoprano wrote: »

I don’t think I’d have the heart to abort a baby. I have flip flopped on the issue over the years.

Why not just give him/her up for adoption to give him/her a snowballs chance. It should be gay adoption we are pushing for. We could end institutional orphanages if there was gay couples who wanted kids getting kids.

I think it’s a decision made under pressure that will be reflected on in hindsight for the rest of your life.

There’s no real right or wrong in it. There’s a feminist side and a Jesus side and both sides have an agenda more important to them than the issue of abortion. They just want to win.

I’d vote yes for health reasons but no for lifestyle reasons.

Other cultures have abortion but in other cultures a girl can turn up at her boyfriends house with good news and it can be fairly normal for the boy to say “not my problem get an abortion”.
How’s that for women’s rights.

Don’t want an abortion? Don’t have one.

Doesn’t mean you should make another woman’s choice for her. You’re not living her life. You don’t know her circumstances nor anything about her life.

But please stop suggesting she’ll have one just cos a baby is inconvenient.
You undermine your argument and disrespect any woman that makes that choice. Nobody makes the choice lightly.

SusieBlue

splinter65 wrote: »

Why do you think that your jumper pisses people off at all?
When the jumpers were distributed at the start I got the impression that a lot of people who bought them put them away quickly because of this type of immediate response

https://www.reddit.com/r/ireland/comments/57m6xz/why_arent_you_wearing_a_repeal_jumper_you_fascist/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=comment_list

Do you still wear yours? I haven’t seen one in over a year.

As I said, I imagine it p*sses off people who don’t see value in me having an opinion and see abortion as murder.
I still wear mine, I’ve seen plenty while out and about.
The reaction I get from it is mostly positive, I’d get a few people genuinely asking questions and looking for information too.
I’ve only had 3 negative reactions and all of those people shouted and roared at me that I’m a murderer.
One actually accused me of the slaughter of innocent babies.
They were all extremely rude, disrespectful and aggressive and all of these reactions came about as I was going about my business in the city center, it’s not like I was campaigning for repeal at the time or anything.
Go figure.

splinter65

WhiteRoses wrote: »

As I said, I imagine it p*sses off people who don’t see value in me having an opinion and see abortion as murder.
I still wear mine, I’ve seen plenty while out and about.
The reaction I get from it is mostly positive, I’d get a few people genuinely asking questions and looking for information too.
I’ve only had 3 negative reactions and all of those people shouted and roared at me that I’m a murderer.
One actually accused me of the slaughter of innocent babies.
They were all extremely rude, disrespectful and aggressive and all of these reactions came about as I was going about my business in the city center, it’s not like I was campaigning for repeal at the time or anything.
Go figure.

I know a ****load of them were purchased but I definitley got the impression that senior repeal the 8th people didn’t like the whole “you’re a Nazi and a fascist if you don’t buy a jumper and wear it” atmosphere that hung around it and subtly distanced themselves from that scene.
There was the unfortunate photo that went viral of girls posing lewdly in front of a statue in a rural church somewhere while modeling the jumpers that seemed to piss EVERYONE off, including repeal advocates.
Here it is

http://theliberal.ie/disgraceful-outrage-as-pro-choice-repeal-activists-purposely-disrespect-statue-of-our-lady-in-kildare-church/

Ajsoprano

david75 wrote: »

Don’t want an abortion? Don’t have one.

Doesn’t mean you should make another woman’s choice for her. You’re not living her life. You don’t know her circumstances nor anything about her life.

But please stop suggesting she’ll have one just cos a baby is inconvenient.
You undermine your argument and disrespect any woman that makes that choice. Nobody makes the choice lightly.

That doesn’t really make sense.
Say if I read the paper and see a lad stole a car. Should I not have any feelings on the subject because I didn’t steal the car or I didn’t have my car stolen?

SusieBlue

Ajsoprano wrote: »

That doesn’t really make sense.
Say if I read the paper and see a lad stole a car. Should I not have any feelings on the subject because I didn’t steal the car or I didn’t have my car stolen?

You don’t have to gestate, give birth to or rear a car for 18 years so the point is invalid.

Having your car stolen is obviously a very sh*t thing to happen but nowhere near the scale of having to bring an unwanted pregnancy to term.

You can of course have your opinion on the matter, but you shouldn’t get to dictate what another person does with their own personal car (or womb).

david75

Ajsoprano wrote: »

That doesn’t really make sense.
Say if I read the paper and see a lad stole a car. Should I not have any feelings on the subject because I didn’t steal the car or I didn’t have my car stolen?

Emmm

I kiiiinda see the argument you’re trying to make?
(I really don’t)


To respond in kind, women want to take the wheel of their own car now and have had enough of someone else deciding where they drive and get out of their car you don’t own it and won’t pay the motor tax nor nct for its upkeep so f**k off basically.

Get it? Now you’re motoring

pleas advice

if you don't want to leave litter on the beach, don't litter on the beach. but don't tell me what to do with my litter?

splinter65

So the referendum is nearly upon us and the people will have their say and will get exactly what they vote for and will have to stand over the result, one way or the other.
If the 8th isn’t repealed, what will be the plan for the repeal lobby?
I’m pro life but I’m not culturally Irish even though I’m an Irish citizen and I’m quite detached from all things Irish so I’ve no strong “OMG old Ireland is disappearing what will we do?!?” feelings about it.
If the 8th is repealed ( I’m not too sure it will be)
I will be very interested to see the path Ireland turns onto as I think it will be the most seismic thing to ever have happened here since the birth of the state.
I think that legislation will be introduced and very soon abortion will be widely available with no restrictions to around 20 weeks.
It will start at 12 weeks and arguments will ensue and it will creep up steadily.
Only time will tell what the long term consequences will be though.
The 1 in 5 statistic in the UK is pretty stark.
Where do people see abortion in Ireland in 10 years time? (Subject to repeal)

david75

In the run up to marriage equality we had the same mouthpieces saying we’ll have gays marrying each other to adopt kids to abuse them and What’s to stop someone marrying their sister? Or their dog?? Where does it stop?!?! These were actual arguments put forth.

It’s the same scare tactics and hysterical nonsense lost that campaign for those against it. We’re seeing the same here and again the same people making the same mistakes and undermining their own campaign with such nonsense.

I’m glad Irish people are smarter than falling for this bull****. I’m sad that there’s an deranged element of Irish people that are trying to push it. Again.

PhoenixParker

pleas advice wrote: »

if you don't want to leave litter on the beach, don't litter on the beach. but don't tell me what to do with my litter?

More like if you want to donate your kidney to save someone's life, go, do it and you're wonderful for doing it but don't tell me I have to donate my kidney and remove my right to say no or back out.

Bannasidhe

splinter65 wrote: »

I know a ****load of them were purchased but I definitley got the impression that senior repeal the 8th people didn’t like the whole “you’re a Nazi and a fascist if you don’t buy a jumper and wear it” atmosphere that hung around it and subtly distanced themselves from that scene.
There was the unfortunate photo that went viral of girls posing lewdly in front of a statue in a rural church somewhere while modeling the jumpers that seemed to piss EVERYONE off, including repeal advocates.
Here it is

http://theliberal.ie/disgraceful-outrage-as-pro-choice-repeal-activists-purposely-disrespect-statue-of-our-lady-in-kildare-church/

You do know that the Liberal.ie is literally owned by Leo Sherlock, son of Cora Sherlock and one of a family of rabid pro-lifers? As a source it's up there with Breitbart.

And your impression is wrong.

splinter65

david75 wrote: »

In the run up to marriage equality we had the same mouthpieces saying we’ll have gays marrying each other to adopt kids to abuse them and What’s to stop someone marrying their sister? Or their dog?? Where does it stop?!?! These were actual arguments put forth.

It’s the same scare tactics and hysterical nonsense lost that campaign for those against it. We’re seeing the same here and again the same people making the same mistakes and undermining their own campaign with such nonsense.

I’m glad Irish people are smarter than falling for this bull****. I’m sad that there’s an deranged element of Irish people that are trying to push it. Again.

SSM was only ever going to make a difference to a minority group.
This is going to be huge.
I’m already hearing of people (on both sides) writing to their GP to demand to know his/her stance on the abortion pill.
More people are demanding to know (on both sides) if the medical card will be covering abortions.
It seems a poll of GPs has revealed that 2/3 will NOT be administering the abortion pill.
The GPs are also saying that their conscience privilege also means that they can refuse to refer a woman to a GP who WILL administer the pill.
That’s ever before the nurses get their say.
That’s just the tiny tip of the iceberg Dav

splinter65

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You do know that the Liberal.ie is literally owned by Leo Sherlock, son of Cora Sherlock and one of a family of rabid pro-lifers? As a source it's up there with Breitbart.

And your impression is wrong.

Well that incident in a Catholic Church did happen. It was one of two incidents in churches with repeal jumpers that was condemned by decent repeal campaigners.
Are you saying that it didn’t happen or that it wasn’t condemned?
Liberal may be right wing but it’s very popular and widely read by all walks of life. So what?

david75

splinter65 wrote: »

SSM was only ever going to make a difference to a minority group.
This is going to be huge.
I’m already hearing of people (on both sides) writing to their GP to demand to know his/her stance on the abortion pill.
More people are demanding to know (on both sides) if the medical card will be covering abortions.
It seems a poll of GPs has revealed that 2/3 will NOT be administering the abortion pill.
The GPs are also saying that their conscience privilege also means that they can refuse to refer a woman to a GP who WILL administer the pill.
That’s ever before the nurses get their say.
That’s just the tiny tip of the iceberg Dav

Thats same poll said the vast majority of GPS support the referendum and want to be able to do their job and give best healthcare. I can give you the link and I’d hope you read it rather than the cherry picking from it that has been going on.

Oldtree

david75 wrote: »

Thats same poll said the vast majority of GPS support the referendum and want to be able to do their job and give best healthcare. I can give you the link and I’d hope you read it rather than the cherry picking from it that has been going on.

Please. Its always better to link in a post straight away, I find.

NuMarvel

splinter65 wrote: »

I think that legislation will be introduced and very soon abortion will be widely available with no restrictions to around 20 weeks.
It will start at 12 weeks and arguments will ensue and it will creep up steadily.
Only time will tell what the long term consequences will be though.

Well, the long term consequences of allowing abortion on request up to 20 weeks is pretty easy to see from international experience - most women will have abortions within the first 12/13 weeks. Going to the British statistics, Irish women are no different.

And it makes sense when you think about it. If a women has decided that she wants an abortion, there's no reason she would intentionally wait until later on in the pregnancy to have one.

Of course, it's all rather moot, because the 12 week timeframe will be the status quo for some time to come. That's how it's been in most European countries, for decades in some cases, and Ireland will be no different. Once this legislation passes, barring some major unforseen consequence, most Irish politicians will be happy to leave it well enough alone.

david75

Oldtree wrote: »

Please. Its always better to link in a post straight away, I find.

Here you go. Read the headline. And how it’s been presented here in this thread.
Then read the artlicle itself which is totally disjointed from the headline. how is it possible that would happen? Cherry picking nirvana for the pro life campaign

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/twothirds-of-gps-will-refuse-to-provide-abortion-pills-36682050.html

pleas advice

the time limit of 12 weeks may not be changed any time soon, but the restrictions on what abortions are permissible after that point, and the conditions imposed both before and after the 12 week limit, may well change, in fact, if not necessarily in law.

marsbar1

While I think women should have the right to do what they choose I also think that if abortion is permitted in Ireland it will be the death of the Ireland we all knew. As an immigrant I like the catholic values in Ireland even though I am not religious. Is is really that much trouble to travel to England, Wales or even Scotland?

NuMarvel

pleas advice wrote: »

the time limit of 12 weeks may not be changed any time soon, but the restrictions on what abortions are permissible after that point, and the conditions imposed both before and after the 12 week limit, may well change, in fact, if not necessarily in law.

It's easy to say something may happen. I might win the Lotto tomorrow. But I know that's highly unlikely to happen.

So instead of talking about what may happen, tell us what you think is likely to happen, and why.

Oldtree

marsbar1 wrote: »

Is is really that much trouble to travel to England, Wales or even Scotland?

Yes it is. The values you speak of no longer represent the majority of the people in Ireland and I think you are wearing rose tinted spectacles that show you an Ireland you want to see.

You are speaking about Irish women that need our care through what is a traumatic time for them.

pleas advice

NuMarvel wrote: »

So instead of talking about what may happen, tell us what you think is likely to happen, and why.

If the referendum passes, I think whatever restrictions are are put in place, after a time they will be loosened, in practice. You only have to look at abortion law in Britain, and abortion in practice in Britain to see an example of this, and I have no reason to believe it would be any different here

Oldtree

david75 wrote: »

Here you go. Read the headline. And how it’s been presented here in this thread.
Then read the artlicle itself which is totally disjointed from the headline. how is it possible that would happen? Cherry picking nirvana for the pro life campaign

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/twothirds-of-gps-will-refuse-to-provide-abortion-pills-36682050.html

I've reread the article three times, but it's oddly worded.

Am I sumising correctly that the doctors who would not provide the service, do so as they have no training to provide such a service, but are nonetheless in favor of the repeal of the 8th and in essence GPs providing the service?

NuMarvel

marsbar1 wrote: »

While I think women should have the right to do what they choose I also think that if abortion is permitted in Ireland it will be the death of the Ireland we all knew. As an immigrant I like the catholic values in Ireland even though I am not religious. Is is really that much trouble to travel to England, Wales or even Scotland?

"I'm against abortion!! Why can't they just go to England to do it?"

You might be an immigrant, but you have the Irish hypocrisy on abortion down to a tee. :rolleyes:

And btw, yes, it is that much trouble. It puts women's health at risk by splitting continuity of care between two jurisdictions, with legal restrictions on the information that can be shared. But even if it was no trouble at all, I see zero point in expecting women to do it just so someone else can pretend Ireland is abortion free.

dark crystal

marsbar1 wrote: »

While I think women should have the right to do what they choose I also think that if abortion is permitted in Ireland it will be the death of the Ireland we all knew. As an immigrant I like the catholic values in Ireland even though I am not religious. Is is really that much trouble to travel to England, Wales or even Scotland?

Good.

NuMarvel

pleas advice wrote: »

If the referendum passes, I think whatever restrictions are are put in place, after a time they will be loosened, in practice. You only have to look at abortion law in Britain, and abortion in practice in Britain to see an example of this, and I have no reason to believe it would be any different here

Ireland's laws will be more like mainland Europe than Britain's so comparisons to Britain aren't like for like. Are there examples of other European countries loosening restrictions after the on-request timeframe, and if so, what effect did this have on abortion rates after that timeframe?

david75

marsbar1 wrote: »

While I think women should have the right to do what they choose I also think that if abortion is permitted in Ireland it will be the death of the Ireland we all knew. As an immigrant I like the catholic values in Ireland even though I am not religious. Is is really that much trouble to travel to England, Wales or even Scotland?

Amazing all these new posters. I’ll bite.

Which Ireland that you knew do you speak of? The one that hid hundreds of priests that raped kids and protected them for prosecution? Or the one that imprsioned women for their entire lives for having babies outside marriage?

Good ole Ireland. It’s values like that we need to stop women making their own choices right?

Bannasidhe

splinter65 wrote: »

Well that incident in a Catholic Church did happen. It was one of two incidents in churches with repeal jumpers that was condemned by decent repeal campaigners.
Are you saying that it didn’t happen or that it wasn’t condemned?
Liberal may be right wing but it’s very popular and widely read by all walks of life. So what?

Well I guess I mustn't be 'decent', what ever the hell that means, because I reckon if celibate clerics feel they have the right to tell women what they can and cannot do with their own bodies than that makes the workplaces of those clerics a legitimate place to protest.
No organisation has oppressed the women of Ireland as much as the Roman Catholic Church. Boo Hoo for them if some women are no longer cowering in fear of the pulpit.

Sure - get your information from a source proven to be both biased and guilty of countless acts of plagiarism aka stealing other people's work while neither acknowledging them or paying them. It will sit comfortable along side your other main sources cited - 'I'm hearing' and 'I get the impression'.

Yer Da sells Avon

marsbar1 wrote: »

Is is really that much trouble to travel to England, Wales or even Scotland?

Ignoring the very obvious trauma associated with having to travel, it can be prohibitively expensive for some, especially at short notice. I suppose there's no harm in saving up for a few weeks and having a much later abortion than would otherwise be the case though, eh?

Rubberchikken

Im irish. I love my country. Not a big fan of some of my country men/ women but that's another thread.
But i do not want to see any more women having to leave this country to avail of a service that in 2018 should be here, be legal, be safe and be capabke of being availed if without shame.

RobFowl

Oldtree wrote: »

david75 wrote: »

Here you go. Read the headline. And how it’s been presented here in this thread.
Then read the artlicle itself which is totally disjointed from the headline. how is it possible that would happen? Cherry picking nirvana for the pro life campaign

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/twothirds-of-gps-will-refuse-to-provide-abortion-pills-36682050.html

I've reread the article three times, but it's oddly worded.

Am I sumising correctly that the doctors who would not provide the service, do so as they have no training to provide such a service, but are nonetheless in favor of the repeal of the 8th and in essence GPs providing the service?

You seem to be quite confused. Simply GPs as a whole are pro repeal but at the same time feel they are not the appropriate ones to provide the service. This would be in keeping with the practice in the rest of Europe where it is a service provided in specialist clinics or hospitals.

erica74

marsbar1 wrote: »

While I think women should have the right to do what they choose I also think that if abortion is permitted in Ireland it will be the death of the Ireland we all knew. As an immigrant I like the catholic values in Ireland even though I am not religious. Is is really that much trouble to travel to England, Wales or even Scotland?

Great, I can't wait to see the death of that Ireland.
What "catholic values" in particular do you like?
Yes, it is that much "trouble".
A woman should be free to access abortion services and after care in the country she lives in to ensure that she is safe, her health is prioritised and she receives all the necessary care and support throughout the whole process.

average_runner

A quick question and I haven't found the answer?


Is this something the state will provide or you got to pay for It?

splinter65

average_runner wrote: »

A quick question and I haven't found the answer?


Is this something the state will provide or you got to pay for It?

It will have to be available free to medical card holders.

splinter65

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Well I guess I mustn't be 'decent', what ever the hell that means, because I reckon if celibate clerics feel they have the right to tell women what they can and cannot do with their own bodies than that makes the workplaces of those clerics a legitimate place to protest.
No organisation has oppressed the women of Ireland as much as the Roman Catholic Church. Boo Hoo for them if some women are no longer cowering in fear of the pulpit.

Sure - get your information from a source proven to be both biased and guilty of countless acts of plagiarism aka stealing other people's work while neither acknowledging them or paying them. It will sit comfortable along side your other main sources cited - 'I'm hearing' and 'I get the impression'.

The pictures in both incidents went viral.
All over the twitter machine and Facebook.
The girls involved certainly didn’t come out to answer their many detractors or stand up for themselves and either defend or explain their actions.
They got very little support.

So, ok, If you want to say that it’s admirable for people to go on privately owned property and abuse and trash someone else’s things and post pictures on the internet looking for praise, then that’s your prerogative. Your absolute right.

nice_guy80

who actually cares about social media?

what is important are the facts

5000 Irish women a year go to the UK or Europe to have abortions

they shouldn't have to do that and should be given the proper care in Ireland if they make that decision

The Pro life campaign will say the 8th saves lives, but 5000 abortions are still being carried out so its kind of a pointless section of our constitution

they'd be better off channelling energies into proper unbiased counselling and support for pregnant women and partners and try to bring down the number of abortions

pitifulgod

splinter65 wrote: »

The pictures in both incidents went viral.
All over the twitter machine and Facebook.
The girls involved certainly didn’t come out to answer their many detractors or stand up for themselves and either defend or explain their actions.
They got very little support.

So, ok, If you want to say that it’s admirable for people to go on privately owned property and abuse and trash someone else’s things and post pictures on the internet looking for praise, then that’s your prerogative. Your absolute right.

Looking at the image, no actual "trashing" involved. Politically charged photos in locations that represent the very organisation that is trying to restrict their rights. It might be uncomfortable for you but it's not criminal as you're pretending it is. It's politically charged statements. It wasn't particularly high profile as you portray it. I suspect you wouldn't be using the liberal if it was.

In relation to the liberal, personally I wouldn't use sites that have been found guilty of plagiarising actual journalists. They've got a clear agenda and couldn't even be bothered writing most of their news stories.