Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Options
1…272273275277278…325

Comments

  • Options
    #8222
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    Edward M wrote: »
    You can believe what you like, but the law doesent agree with you even now!

    Plus murder is a legal term so belief isn't relevant.


  • Options
    #8223
    ELM327
    Registered Users Posts: 21,994 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    volchitsa wrote: »
    I'm a bit concerned that you feel "attacked" like that, elm (I don't know anything about the incident except what you've said just now, just to be clear) but it's such an emotional issue that there can be a massive gap and misunderstandings over quite strange issues sometimes.

    Just to take your example, I'd agree completely that a partner is always going to be part of any decision, but the question is if whether they should have a legal position, because that would be really problematic.

    Because when it comes down to it, if the partner's legal right is limited to being informed, that's one thing (though what if he's not the father?) but if you mean he has a right to have a say, then how exactly is that right going to be exercised? By tying the woman down so she can't abort? Or indeed by tying her down so an abortion can carried out against her wishes? Or do you see this right as only a one way thing, where the partner would want to stop the woman? That isn't always the case, IMO.

    And yet I can see how it seems, intuitively, correct that the partner should have a say. But it's nothing like buying a car or even changing jobs, it's the woman's body, and it's hard to see how that can be legally given into the control of someone else.

    It's one reason why the repeal side is probably not in the (with hindsight) easier position of the Marref campaigners, because it's just not a simple position to get across, and perhaps there is no equivalent feelgood factor either. But we can't go adding things in that would inevitably lead to the sorts of abuses we have actually seen with the current laws, just because it seems like a good way to reassure the undecided.
    I'm not talking about giving an equal choice to the man, or even making anything a legal requirement at all. All I'm saying (and all I said in that group) was that if it was a relationship then it's a large decision and should be discussed as a couple. Obviously as it's the woman's body the woman has the casting vote.

    My concern is that - I as a strong repeal voter - was discouraged by the militants, what will it do for the on the fence voter?
    optogirl wrote: »
    Angry hairy feminists? FFS
    You know what I meant it's a turn of phrase.
    I'm talking for the people that witchhunted me out of the group for having a slight inclination that in a relationship two partners talk about large issues together.
    volchitsa wrote: »
    What worries me is what is the "extreme" on the pro choice side?
    (I mean the real extreme, not the made-up "abortion until 5 minutes before birth because the woman wants promotion at work" extreme that the prolife side likes to portray)

    I can't see one, so unless I'm the extreme (and I probably am but then I don't think I'm extreme at all, is the point) it worries me that people can't see that pro choice is, in reality, the middle ground between forced abortion and forced pregnancy.

    It's not the extreme of thought, moreso the attacking of people who agree with them but express a slight inclination that a male deserves to be a (minor) party to the discussion.

    Your last statement is correct, which is why I am pro choice. But a small part of me (thankfully a very small emotive reaction towards the treatment I was given) woudl like to vote no to spite those people. And that is the worry. Every yes vote is precious and we don't want to turn people off by our antics. Leave that to the no side!!


  • Options
    #8224
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    There is quite a good chance that voting repeal will lead to no change ....

    Wait until all those rural TDs have to be seen to be voting for abortion in the Dail ....

    Have said all along that repeal was a stupid way to approach this, amending it to have basic outlines about when it is and isn't OK to have an abortion and let the public vote and put it in the constitution was the way to go. Now you have no idea what you are voting for if you vote yes. You know for certain if you vote no.

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/no-guarantee-a-yes-vote-will-lead-to-abortion-up-to-12-weeks-watchdog-36838099.html

    The booklet states the legal effect of a Yes vote would be that the Oireachtas has full authority "to pass laws regulating the termination of pregnancy".

    "These laws need not limit the availability of termination to circumstances where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother. Any law may be changed by the Oireachtas," the commission says.

    It also reinforces the fact that TDs and senators may not be able to reach agreement on what type of legislation should be passed, in which case the existing laws will apply even if the Eighth Amendment is repealed.


  • Options
    #8225
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Deleted User wrote: »
    If you believe the unborn is a human being, then it is murder

    But if someone believes abortion is murder, why the silence about the thousands of women who travel? Or the hundreds who import pills?

    In fact, some "pro lifers" have gone so far as to say the law should be changed so that women aren't criminalised if they have an illegal abortion. How is that compatible with the belief that abortion is murder?

    However you look at it, society doesn't regard abortion as being the equivalent of murder. There is political will and public support for the prosecution of murderers. The same cannot be said for women who have illegal abortions.


  • Options
    #8226
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,458 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    professore wrote: »
    There is quite a good chance that voting repeal will lead to no change ....

    Wait until all those rural TDs have to be seen to be voting for abortion in the Dail ....

    Have said all along that repeal was a stupid way to approach this, amending it to have basic outlines about when it is and isn't OK to have an abortion and let the public vote and put it in the constitution was the way to go. Now you have no idea what you are voting for if you vote yes. You know for certain if you vote no.

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/no-guarantee-a-yes-vote-will-lead-to-abortion-up-to-12-weeks-watchdog-36838099.html

    The booklet states the legal effect of a Yes vote would be that the Oireachtas has full authority "to pass laws regulating the termination of pregnancy".

    "These laws need not limit the availability of termination to circumstances where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother. Any law may be changed by the Oireachtas," the commission says.

    It also reinforces the fact that TDs and senators may not be able to reach agreement on what type of legislation should be passed, in which case the existing laws will apply even if the Eighth Amendment is repealed.


    Even if no law is passed afterwards repeal of the 8th will have a positive effect on maternity care.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8227
    baylah17
    Closed Accounts Posts: 790 ✭✭✭baylah17


    Deleted User wrote: »
    If you believe the unborn is a human being, then it is murder
    But we know with certainty that the 12 week old fetus is NOT a human being, so thats cleared that up


  • Options
    #8228
    ELM327
    Registered Users Posts: 21,994 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    professore wrote: »
    There is quite a good chance that voting repeal will lead to no change ....

    Wait until all those rural TDs have to be seen to be voting for abortion in the Dail ....

    Have said all along that repeal was a stupid way to approach this, amending it to have basic outlines about when it is and isn't OK to have an abortion and let the public vote and put it in the constitution was the way to go. Now you have no idea what you are voting for if you vote yes. You know for certain if you vote no.

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/no-guarantee-a-yes-vote-will-lead-to-abortion-up-to-12-weeks-watchdog-36838099.html

    The booklet states the legal effect of a Yes vote would be that the Oireachtas has full authority "to pass laws regulating the termination of pregnancy".

    "These laws need not limit the availability of termination to circumstances where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother. Any law may be changed by the Oireachtas," the commission says.

    It also reinforces the fact that TDs and senators may not be able to reach agreement on what type of legislation should be passed, in which case the existing laws will apply even if the Eighth Amendment is repealed.
    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Even if no law is passed afterwards repeal of the 8th will have a positive effect on maternity care.
    +1, and this for me is the most important part of the whole referendum.


  • Options
    #8229
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ....... wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    The moment a fetus becomes a human is entirely subjective, hence why this is so contentious.


  • Options
    #8230
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,458 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The moment a fetus becomes a human is entirely subjective, hence why this is so contentious.

    it is not contentious legally. Legally a foetus is not a person.


  • Options
    #8231
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    baylah17 wrote: »
    But we know with certainty that the 12 week old fetus is NOT a human being, so thats cleared that up

    Really? Where are you getting this from? Maybe I'll actually learn something today.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8232
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Deleted User wrote: »
    If you believe the unborn is a human being, then it is murder

    Except what you quoted the keyword being "unlawful".

    It isn't outright illegal to have an abortion in Ireland, it is just extremely strict, I think there has been around 60 legal abortions here in the last 3 or 4 years.

    Tell me how that's murder, if abortion is legal, it removes the "unlawful" aspect.


  • Options
    #8233
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    professore wrote: »
    There is quite a good chance that voting repeal will lead to no change ....

    Wait until all those rural TDs have to be seen to be voting for abortion in the Dail ....

    Have said all along that repeal was a stupid way to approach this, amending it to have basic outlines about when it is and isn't OK to have an abortion and let the public vote and put it in the constitution was the way to go. Now you have no idea what you are voting for if you vote yes. You know for certain if you vote no.

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/no-guarantee-a-yes-vote-will-lead-to-abortion-up-to-12-weeks-watchdog-36838099.html

    The booklet states the legal effect of a Yes vote would be that the Oireachtas has full authority "to pass laws regulating the termination of pregnancy".

    "These laws need not limit the availability of termination to circumstances where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother. Any law may be changed by the Oireachtas," the commission says.

    It also reinforces the fact that TDs and senators may not be able to reach agreement on what type of legislation should be passed, in which case the existing laws will apply even if the Eighth Amendment is repealed.

    It's highly unlikely there will be no change after repeal. Nearly everyone agrees there should be some change, even if it is just for cases like FFA. TDs who will object outright to any legislative change are in the minority, so the status quo won't be maintained.

    As for putting grounds into the constitution, that's been discussed ad nauseum. The issues with that approach have been well highlighted, and no one advocating this approach has been able to explain how they would mitigate for those issues.

    If people want to see change, then a Yes vote is the only viable option to make change happen. Because what we can be certain of with a No vote is that the status quo will be maintained and that helps or protects no one.


  • Options
    #8234
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Murder is a matter of fact not a matter of opinion. Abortion is not murder. If it was the law would treat both the same. It doesn't

    It might not be on the same level as murder but it's a crime at the moment under Irish law with pretty serious penalties.
    22. (1) It shall be an offence to intentionally destroy unborn human life.
    (2) A person who is guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on indictment to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years, or both.

    (3) A prosecution for an offence under this section may be brought only by or with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions.


  • Options
    #8235
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The moment a fetus becomes a human is entirely subjective, hence why this is so contentious.

    In the eyes of the law, upon birth (or at the stage of viability), so it isn't entirely subjective, it's an emotional estimate of when it becomes "human".

    When it has full human rights applied and awarded to it, I would consider it human, until then, it is of human nature.


  • Options
    #8236
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #8237
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    Even if no law is passed afterwards repeal of the 8th will have a positive effect on maternity care.

    How? I'm not for or against, just wondering? Do you mean people taking legal challenges? Surely without any legislation, the current legal precedents would remain in place?


  • Options
    #8238
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #8239
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    In the eyes of the law, upon birth (or at the stage of viability), so it isn't entirely subjective, it's an emotional estimate of when it becomes "human".

    When it has full human rights applied and awarded to it, I would consider it human, until then, it is of human nature.

    So I presume you'd be fine with abortions up until 9 months yeah?


  • Options
    #8240
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    ....... wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    You think a 9 month old healthy fetus 1 hour before birth shouldn't be offered any right to life?

    I disagree. My view is that abortion is a necessary evil.

    I'm OK with 12 weeks - because you have to draw the line somewhere, FFA and mother's life in danger. I think other than that it should be defined as an unborn child and given human rights - as in all practical senses a 1 month old baby is no more human than an 8 month old fetus.


  • Options
    #8241
    baylah17
    Closed Accounts Posts: 790 ✭✭✭baylah17


    Deleted User wrote: »
    So I presume you'd be fine with abortions up until 9 months yeah?
    You should avoid preumpions
    I am in favour of terminating a pregnancy at any stage if the life of the mother is at risk, at 9 months that would be called inducement or C Section.
    Next....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8242
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    Deleted User wrote: »
    So I presume you'd be fine with abortions up until 9 months yeah?

    This has been done to death on this thread several times already on this thread.
    This referendum is for 12 weeks on request so muddying the waters by talking about aborting a full term fetus is just deflecting.
    It has nothing to do with what we are voting on.


  • Options
    #8243
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    In the eyes of the law, upon birth (or at the stage of viability), so it isn't entirely subjective, it's an emotional estimate of when it becomes "human".

    When it has full human rights applied and awarded to it, I would consider it human, until then, it is of human nature.

    I agree. And that's why this imaginary line when a fetus becomes human - and let's face it it is imaginary - since babies are effectively helpless for several months after birth you could make an argument they aren't human either - but they are so "cute" ....

    Make that call and write it into the referendum and put it in the constitution. End Of Debate.

    What we are doing now people will still be fighting about the ins and outs of abortion in 10 years time.


  • Options
    #8244
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    This has been done to death on this thread several times already on this thread.
    This referendum is for 12 weeks on request so muddying the waters by talking about aborting a full term fetus is just deflecting.
    It has nothing to do with what we are voting on.

    I'm sorry, it isn't about 12 weeks. That's factually incorrect. It's about some group of politicians imagining that's what MIGHT happen if they can all agree. Like the Bertie Bowl or the Dublin Metro. The Referendum Commission themselves say this.

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/no-guarantee-a-yes-vote-will-lead-to-abortion-up-to-12-weeks-watchdog-36838099.html

    I will probably vote yes. But am very unhappy about it.


  • Options
    #8245
    kylith
    Registered Users Posts: 17,736 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    If you believe the unborn is a human being, then it is murder

    Well, the law disagrees, so that is very much a matter of personal opinion. Calling people who disagree murderers is not on.


  • Options
    #8246
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    Deleted User wrote: »
    So I presume you'd be fine with abortions up until 9 months yeah?

    Absolutely of course yeah, on demand too.


  • Options
    #8247
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,458 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    professore wrote: »
    How? I'm not for or against, just wondering? Do you mean people taking legal challenges? Surely without any legislation, the current legal precedents would remain in place?

    the current precedents are based on the existence of the 8th. once the 8th is gone we can have better precedents.


  • Options
    #8248
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    baylah17 wrote: »
    You should avoid preumpions
    I am in favour of terminating a pregnancy at any stage if the life of the mother is at risk, at 9 months that would be called inducement or C Section.
    Next....

    So you value the life of the mother over the life of the unborn. I can get behind that.


  • Options
    #8249
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    This has been done to death on this thread several times already on this thread.
    This referendum is for 12 weeks on request so muddying the waters by talking about aborting a full term fetus is just deflecting.
    It has nothing to do with what we are voting on.

    I completely agree.

    But the argument that I was presented with was that there is no difference in a fetus right up until birth.


  • Options
    #8250
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    the current precedents are based on the existence of the 8th. once the 8th is gone we can have better precedents.

    Not a legal expert but that sounds like it could be true.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8251
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    professore wrote: »
    I agree. And that's why this imaginary line when a fetus becomes human - and let's face it it is imaginary - since babies are effectively helpless for several months after birth you could make an argument they aren't human either - but they are so "cute" ....

    Make that call and write it into the referendum and put it in the constitution. End Of Debate.

    What we are doing now people will still be fighting about the ins and outs of abortion in 10 years time.

    Well, yes, they are helpless, but any willing adult can take on said care and responsibility for that baby. It doesn't have to be the mother.
    Unfortunately, you can't transfer a pregnancy to another person. Only the person pregnant can bring the baby to term.
    So the scenarios there are quite different.

    Putting things like this into the constitution is exactly what got us into this mess in the first place.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement