The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

petalgumdrops

Martina1991 wrote: »

What qualifies "pro life" supporters to force women to continue with their pregnancies.
Are they aware of every woman's circumstances?

You would need to ask a profile supporter that question. I was specifically told in this forum that I choose not to travel that the 8th had no impact whatsoever on my situation is that because to state that perhaps the 8th has at some point had a positive impact would to set seeds of doubt

petalgumdrops

NuMarvel wrote: »

No one is telling you what you should have done. The whole point of pro choice is that it is up to the woman what she chooses to do, including continuing with the pregnancy if she wants.

You're pretty much pro choice yourself, because you've said yourself many times a woman should be allowed to have the choice of having an abortion in the case of FFA.



Once more; we can't legislate for FFA while the 8th is in place. Politicians tried and were told by the attorney general that it would be unconstitutional.



You're allowed to question things, but it's a bit rich to complain about the lack of a respectful debate when you're ignoring the answers you're getting.

Case in point, you saying that FFA could be legislated for without the need for another referendum. That's simply not the case and the reasons have been explained. Yet rather than engage with that discussion, you ignore it and just repeat your assertion later on, as if it's fact.

On a point of voting what would you suggest No/undecided voters do if they are at odds with one particular aspect of repeal?

volchitsa

petalgumdrops wrote: »

volchitsa wrote: »

It's wonderful that everything was fine in the end, petal gumdrops, but I don't understand what difference you think the 8th made?

You're not seriously suggesting that you would have had a termination without the confirmation, are you?
Nor what difference the 8th made to that decision anyway?

If you collected data on ffa you will see that a CVS has been used to terminate on the basis of ffa. CVS collects placental cells that are ***in most cases*** a match for DNA of a baby but placental mosasacisms do happen. I'm not sure if you are suggesting that all ffa should need an CVS and an amnio to teterminate for a ffa

Say this was different and  I came here after my CVS and told you I had to travel to England to terminate my baby would you be saying the 8th had no affect on me at all. No you would use my story to higlight the narrative that the 8th has deterimental consequences for women. (It of course does) but I find it disrespectful to assume that the 8th can't have any positive outcomes at all. My son is proof of that. Yet it is being overlooked that yes I did want to terminate based on CVS but I did not bave the option. You seem to assume my son is here due to choice not because I did not have access to a termination.

I still don't really see your point - nobody would ever have terminated your pregnancy without your agreement. The fact that some people have terminated on the basis of the same test doesn't prove that your test results were as clearcut as theirs, and anyway even if they were, what difference does the 8th make? A woman in England would be just as entitled to ask for a second opinion as you were.

You seem to be saying that if you had been in England you would have terminated without a second opinion - that's not been my experience of being pregnant in a country where abortion was available. IMO doctors are just as careful as they are in Ireland, maybe more so because the woman's consent is genuinely needed, unlike Ireland.

petalgumdrops

bubblypop wrote: »

Well that's fair enough, if you are a refugee or an illegal immigrant in this country then I apologise.

But if that is the case surely you can see how unfair it is?

Why are prochoice groups stating that not every woman has the financial means to travel then?
This doesn't hold up to the fact you mention illegal immigrants/refugees

amdublin

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Why are prochoice groups stating that not every woman has the financial means to travel then?
This doesn't hold up to the fact you mention illegal immigrants/refugees

Is this not a fact? "Not all women have the financial means to travel

It seems clear to me. Unless I'm misunderstanding the question?

gctest50

Zerbini Blewitt wrote: »

Just came across this PrimeTime “debate” in 2013 between a women who had anencephaly detected in her pregnancy and Dr Berry Kiely (long time in PLC).
I saw this at the time it was broadcast and was not well & speechless for the rest of the evening.

I think this demonstrates the almost limitless depths of depravity & inhuman cruelty that can result from ideological beliefs not based on reason.
Or in other words, the beliefs of the average vocal pro-life (forced-birther).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXTEt3KSrYw

It looks like Dr, Berry Kiely there is keen to open a network of perinatal hospices

Lock them away, take their money until they deliver their baby with ffa

Sounds familiar that

Nice little money maker that, and they could bombard them with pure-in-heart stuff

horseburger

Madscientist30 wrote: »

A foetus is biologically human, that has already been said numerous times throughout the thread. It is not, though, a human being. A human being is defined as a man, woman or child. A foetus does not become a child until it is born. I'm not sure why you keep mentioning this "human" thing. Can you explain why you feel it is so important to continue to develop non-sentient human foetuses to ensure they are born, against the will of the woman carrying the foetud and regardless of the consequences? Do you have any proposals to alleviate the suffering and misery this would cause for many many people? Or do we not need to consider that because.....ehhhh.....it's human like. There is nothing at all behind your argument. Not one pro-lifer here has STILL ever answered the question about the fertility clinic on fire. Will you answer it?

If the issue is the question about whether it is right of wrong to end human life, why is it ok to end the life of a human foetus, but not a human man, woman or child?

The foetus is human, and is growing and developing at an earlier stage of human life cycle, just the same as anyone who is just born, is growing and developing at an earlier stage of human life cycle, compared to a 2 year old child or 20 year old person.

amdublin

You guys I went on my first canvass today!

Great group and great having done it. If you can join a local group I'd encourage you to Go For It!

Overall:
The majority positive yes!
A lot of doors unopened though
A lot of people (non nationals) not registered to vote - but positive
A small amount of undecided
One or two absolute No's and who were wise to all the no tricksy ways of twisting things - do you support the death sentence because that's murder just like abortion, why do you support abortion so

I feel good it will be pass. But it will be close. Cannot get complacent. Need to get out and have those conversations.

Please get out and canvass if you can

horseburger

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Never?

You then went on to try and justify that so don't tell me it was just a question and so you still have to answer my question.

That last part is just distraction and in no way relevant.



And I am asking you why not?



As is manslaughter. And yet, there would be at least a criminal investigation if a mothers actions led to the accidental death of a born child.


I am asking you. Why do YOU think it's not considered negligence when it's a human being affected.



No, because I know the answers. The answer is because a foetus is not considered a person. It's not considered a human.

Not one single time did I say that you cannot discuss the arguments for or against abortion. Not once.

First of all, he's American.

Second of all, he's talking about 20 weeks pregnancy which is NOT relevant. It is NOT suction. It is a pill.

Thirdly, he completely disregards the women who want an abortion and are happy with that decision. He has a complete disregard for genuine reasons for having an abortion.

He is not a balanced pro-life advocate when he completely ignores what's actually going to happen and talks about stuff that isn't going to happen in order to scare people. Funny enough, most of the pro-life campaign is like that.

I already answered you about the issue of miscarriages. My understanding is that miscarriages are an unfortunate unintended occurrence.

In fairness to Anthony Levatino, he seems to be talking in a way, where his perspective on the fundamental question about abortion, has changed.

So because Anthony Levatino is American, his perspective on the issue doesn't matter?

By that logic, the opinions of the people from outside Ireland - who spoke at the Citizens Assembly and Oireachtas Committee - don't matter.

There is no assurance that the recommendations of the Oireachtas Committee would be the legislation enacted. So as it stands there is nothing definite that abortion not being legislated for, for just 12 weeks without restriction.

Anthony Levantino and David Alton both made the point that when legislation was first introduced in other areas, that it later became available for less restrictive circumstances than originally intended.

What is a foetus if it is not human. If a foetus is not human, what else can grow in the womb of a human woman, as a result of the union of a human male sperm and human female egg?

How on earth can you suggest that a foetus is not human.

I said you seem to have a problem with me considering the arguments for and against.

Madscientist30

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Martina1991 wrote: »

What qualifies "pro life" supporters to force women to continue with their pregnancies.
Are they aware of every woman's circumstances?

You would need to ask a profile supporter that question. I was specifically told in this forum that I choose not to travel that the 8th had no impact whatsoever on my situation is that because to state that perhaps the 8th has at some point had a positive impact would to set seeds of doubt

It just seems a bit bizarre to "thank" the 8th for what was an extremely lucky set of circumstances for you and your baby. 99 times out of 100 (or more?) it would not have been a misdiagnosis and thanks to the 8th you would have been forced to carry your baby to term against your own stated wishes..... It's like being forced into a game of Russian Roulette and then so grateful to the gun for having an empty chamber when pointed at you that you think it should keep shooting at everyone else! Plus even if termination was available to you surely would have received a second opinion beforehand.

PhoenixParker

horseburger wrote: »

If the issue is the question about whether it is right of wrong to end human life, why is it ok to end the life of a human foetus, but not a human man, woman or child?

The foetus is human, and is growing and developing at an earlier stage of human life cycle, just the same as anyone who is just born, is growing and developing at an earlier stage of human life cycle, compared to a 2 year old child or 20 year old person.

Because unlike the child, woman or man, it cannot survive without being attached to another human being. That human being has the right to decide what they do with their body.

petalgumdrops

amdublin wrote: »

Is this not a fact? "Not all women have the financial means to travel

It seems clear to me. Unless I'm misunderstanding the question?

Because a poster implied unless I.was an illegal immigrant or a refugee that I had the choice to travel

gctest50

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Because a poster implied unless I.was an illegal immigrant or a refugee that I had the choice to travel

#it'sallaboutmeeee


If you had the money ( and time off etc etc ) you did have the choice to travel

pjohnson

petalgumdrops wrote: »

You would need to ask a profile supporter that question. I was specifically told in this forum that I choose not to travel that the 8th had no impact whatsoever on my situation is that because to state that perhaps the 8th has at some point had a positive impact would to set seeds of doubt

You keep saying this but I have no idea why its relevant or what you are trying to prove?

amdublin

petalgumdrops wrote: »

Because a poster implied unless I.was an illegal immigrant or a refugee that I had the choice to travel

I'm completely confused!

I'm assuming you did have the choice to travel.

Are you saying you didn't??

Ave Sodalis

horseburger wrote:

I already answered you about the issue of miscarriages. My understanding is that miscarriages are an unfortunate unintended occurrence.

And I counter argued it, which has not been addressed.

horseburger wrote:

So because Anthony Levatino is American, his perspective on the issue doesn't matter?

On an Irish matter, he has the freedom to talk about it but I don't believe any foreign representative has any place to be talking at an official capacity.

horseburger wrote:

There is no assurance that the recommendations of the Oireachtas Committee would be the legislation enacted. So as it stands there is nothing definite that abortion not being legislated for, for just 12 weeks without restriction.

We have gone over this in the last few pages.

horseburger wrote:

What is a foetus if it is not human. If a foetus is not human, what else can grow in the womb of a human woman, as a result of the union of a human male sperm and human female egg?

This has been answerd for you repeatedly.

horseburger wrote:

I said you seem to have a problem with me considering the arguments for and against.

No, and I'm not sure where you got that idea. I just don't like when people ignore or don't actually answer questions directed at them. Something you are still doing.

Sephiroth_dude

Zerbini Blewitt wrote: »

Just came across this PrimeTime “debate” in 2013 between a women who had anencephaly detected in her pregnancy and Dr Berry Kiely (long time in PLC).
I saw this at the time it was broadcast and was not well & speechless for the rest of the evening.

I think this demonstrates the almost limitless depths of depravity & inhuman cruelty that can result from ideological beliefs not based on reason.
Or in other words, the beliefs of the average vocal pro-life (forced-birther).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXTEt3KSrYw

Heartbreaking to watch that, your wan with the glasses has little or no empathy or clue of what shes talking about, I wonder would she have the same opinion if it happened to her.

petalgumdrops

amdublin wrote: »

I'm completely confused!

I'm assuming you did have the choice to travel.

Are you saying you didn't??

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

amdublin

Anyway the choice to travel is one thing.

More importantly the option for abortion should be here in Ireland and each individual makes their own personal decision.

Not "abortions for all"
And equally not "no abortions for all"

Choice for all.

petalgumdrops

gctest50 wrote: »

#it'sallaboutmeeee


If you had the money ( and time off etc etc ) you did have the choice to travel

I salute your compassion

amdublin

petalgumdrops wrote: »

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

Sorry ive been in and out all day. I do know your baby arrived safe right? which is fantastic news.

Please can you refresh me/us why could you not travel?
(Which btw you shouldn't have to do imo)

volchitsa

petalgumdrops wrote: »

amdublin wrote: »

I'm completely confused!

I'm assuming you did have the choice to travel.

Are you saying you didn't??

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

So are you saying that if you had been able to travel you would have terminated without even asking for a second opinion? Why would you have done that? Anyone I know with a significant problem that's been diagnosed has always wanted to be absolutely 100% sure before doing anything irreparable - and I don't just mean pregnancy, I mean any major illness. Do you need a law to stop yourself agreeing to get a limb removed on the basis of a single examination?

NuMarvel

petalgumdrops wrote: »

On a point of voting what would you suggest No/undecided voters do if they are at odds with one particular aspect of repeal?

I would suggest they properly research the aspect they are concerned about, especially with regard to the basis of that concern. I would also suggest they consider what practical difference their vote would make in relation to that concern, and also if there were other ways to address their concern.

What would you suggest?

amdublin

And sorry petalgumdrops have i missed another post.

Did you want to access a termination at all??

I am unsure if you did or not. I'm actually totally confused to be honest.

Sofiztikated

petalgumdrops wrote: »

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

I honestly don't understand your position.

kylith

horseburger wrote: »

What is a foetus if it is not human. If a foetus is not human, what else can grow in the womb of a human woman, as a result of the union of a human male sperm and human female egg?

How on earth can you suggest that a foetus is not human.

I said you seem to have a problem with me considering the arguments for and against.

No one is arguing that a foetus is not ‘human’. My kidneys are also ‘human’.

What we’re saying is that it is not a human being. It is not an individual. It is not a separate person from the woman. At 12 weeks it does not have a functioning brain, or liver, or lungs, or kidneys. Its ears are down by its jaw. It’s guts are outside its abdomen and its skin is transparent. It has zero chance of surviving outside the womb.

Based on the toll that pregnancy takes on the woman how is it ethical to force her to carry a pregnancy that she does not want?

kylith

petalgumdrops wrote: »

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

Why not?

pjohnson

petalgumdrops wrote: »

If you read my posts travelling was not an option for me

Your posts have never explained how not?

petalgumdrops

NuMarvel wrote: »

I would suggest they properly research the aspect they are concerned about, especially with regard to the basis of that concern. I would also suggest they consider what practical difference their vote would make in relation to that concern, and also if there were other ways to address their concern.

What would you suggest?

I completely agree with you.

But some people will want or feel that the unborn should have some rights. Should they dismiss this because of the greater good.

My position is I support so much of repeal but the crux of the issue for me is that at some point the unborn need to be protected(my opinion)

Perhaps I feel the amendent has the potential to become too liberal as the politicians will have future decision making - that is a fact. Whether there is appetite for that is not really significant.

baylah17

My toenails are human, I still clip them off .
My toenails are NOT human beings.