The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

sean635

sean635 wrote: »

Yes, I do.
The value of the baby’s life and the circumstances of the conception are completely separate issues. Although rape is terrible, the foetus did not force it’self on the woman. Therefore I think it’s as immoral as any other abortion case.

Also I would never force a woman to carry a pregnancy. I would simply prohibit her from killing the baby. I believe it’s the rapist who has forced her to carry a pregnancy she doesn’t want.

Sorry but your contradicting yourself. The law as it stands forces a rape victim to carry a pregnancy they don't want.

erica74

sean635 wrote: »

What you’ve just described doesn’t great. But you know what sounds worse? Killing the baby.
Adoption is also an alternative to what you’ve just described

A woman has an abortion because she no longer wants to be pregnant. She does not want a baby, she no longer wants to be pregnant.

sean635

Flying Fox wrote: »

If that's the case then why do most countries in the developed world allow abortion? The majority of people in those countries are pro-choice. Do you really think they're all evil monsters?

Why are so many ordinary decent people ok with abortion?

I don’t think they’re all evil monsters (although some may be.) I think their introduction of abortion laws is the result of a leftist agenda which has been gradually pushed in developed countries in recent decades and is now experiencing some pushback. The data on the majority of people in these countries being pro choice is mixed. USA is 46% pro life.

Also it is not an arguement to suggest that because something is legal in one country, it is therefore moral and should be introduced to other countries.

robarmstrong

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The abuse of the thanks function on this thread is a disgrace.

How can this post get a line of thanks when I said nothing of the sort:



Link to where I said that please? Again:

Maybe it was a misquote? There was a poster who did actually say something along the lines as to what was quoted.

I respect the fact that you are in favour of all forms of therapeutic abortions for women.

mzungu

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I quoted him accurately based on this clip:

https://twitter.com/RTENewsAtOne/status/957983827288363008

He is right, the likelihood of a diagnosis by week 12 is unlikely as things stand. That does not make him a liar at all. At the 12 week period, results of that test are not going to be 100% reliable.

On the other hand, pro-life groups equating removal of the 8th with genocide is right up there on the lie scale, would you not agree?

kylith

sean635 wrote: »

Also I would never force a woman to carry a pregnancy. I would simply prohibit her from killing the baby. I believe it’s the rapist who has forced her to carry a pregnancy she doesn’t want.

By prohibiting abortion you _are_ forcing women to carry pregnancies.

SusieBlue

sean635 wrote: »

What you’ve just described doesn’t great. But you know what sounds worse? Killing the baby.
Adoption is also an alternative to what you’ve just described

No, no, and no.
There is no domestic adoption in Ireland. 5 newborn infants were adopted in this country in 2016 (most recent stats).
Yet roughly 4K women sought abortions. If you want to stop 4K abortions you need to find 4K adoptive parents.
And people simply aren’t adopting these days. The average family is smaller, and those who struggle to conceive have more options with fertility treatments such as IVF and clomid.

So what we’d really be doing is putting an extra 4K children into foster care. A foster care system which is already buckling under the pressure and cannot cope with what it’s already dealing with.

Regardless, none of this helps a woman who cannot or is unable to stay pregnant, so it’s a moot point.

Can I also just suggest that before you making flippant suggestions about putting a baby up for adoption you actually do research into adoption statistics in Ireland, I cannot understand why prolifers still continuously use this as a ‘great’ alternative when it isn’t even an option.

I’m blue in the face from repeating this and I know thread regulars are probably sick of me posting it but it’s very irritating to see the same nonsensical arguments repeatedly put forward when the poster put little to no research into the suggestion.
Please do your research.

Cally Caleigh

If the 8th is repealed, is the 12-week unrestricted access a given?
I know this was in the proposed legislation, but it's the 1 line I'm very uncomfortable with.
What happens after 8th is repealed, the proposed text is debated in the houses of the oireachtas and our TDs/senators and president have the final say on the text of the legislation, is that correct?
Can they make further amendments in the future without public consultation?
To be honest, I don't have a whole lot of trust or faith in our elected representatives (especially the current FF/FG government) to handle such complex legal issues, and respect the will of the public both now and future governments.
Hence my concern.

Outlaw Pete

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The abuse of the thanks function on this thread is a disgrace.

How can this post get a line of thanks when I said nothing of the sort:



Link to where I said that please? Again:

You said that in your first post by saying that women use medical issues as a smoke screen to have abortions. You've since said that your in favour of theputic abortions and as that includes rape then my apologies for any misunderstanding.

Also not to be personal but no one but you is stating that the changes to the 8th will allow people have abortions up to the week of delivery. I'm sorry but your missing the point of the reasoning for repealing the 8th which include pregnancy via rape.

sean635

sean635 wrote: »

I don’t think they’re all evil monsters (although some may be.) I think their introduction of abortion laws is the result of a leftist agenda which has been gradually pushed in developed countries in recent decades and is now experiencing some pushback. The data on the majority of people in these countries being pro choice is mixed. USA is 46% pro life.

Also it is not an arguement to suggest that because something is legal in one country, it is therefore moral and should be introduced to other countries.

It's no coincidence that the countries with restrictive abortion laws have traditionally had a strong Catholic/religious influence. In countries without this influence, legislators have primarily looked at the medical facts (as was the case with the Citizen's Assembly and the Oireachtas Committee).

I would recommend reading up on the evidence provided to the Citizen's Assembly.

sean635

robarmstrong wrote: »

So you wouldn't force her to carry the pregnancy... But you'd prohibit her from killing the baby.

So you'd force her to keep the pregnancy basically.

Thanks for that, only well and truly shot yourself in the foot there mate.

Also by voting to save the 8th you are effectively forcing her to keep that pregnancy.

Wanna try again?

Nope,
My position is that a woman’s desire to have a baby or not should influence her sexual decisions. Those decisions should never be made for her. Once conception has occurred, another human is now at stake and must be protected at all costs as the Eight outlines

When a rapist rapes and impregnates a woman, it is he who has forced the pregnancy upon her. The now conceived human although unwanted is a human none the less and nothing should supersede it’s right to life.

david75

Cally Caleigh wrote: »

If the 8th is repealed, is the 12-week unrestricted access a given?
I know this was in the proposed legislation, but it's the 1 line I'm very uncomfortable with.
What happens after 8th is repealed, the proposed text is debated in the houses of the oireachtas and our TDs/senators and president have the final say on the text of the legislation, is that correct?
Can they make further amendments in the future without public consultation?
To be honest, I don't have a whole lot of trust or faith in our elected officials (especially the current FF/FG government) to handle such complex legal issues.
Hence my concern.

It doesn’t matter what your comfortable with. We aren’t legislating on your comfort. Thousands of women a year are being forced to travel to a different country to get healthcare denied them here. But you’re uncomfortable?
Think you’ll find they’re far more uncomfortable than you.

Martina1991

sean635 wrote: »

What you’ve just described doesn’t great. But you know what sounds worse? Killing the baby.
Adoption is also an alternative to what you’ve just described

You think a rape victim should carry the pregnancy.
- A woman who would have to pay for maternity care and face the consequences of pregnancy like scarring, incontinence, hemorrhage, nerve damage, post natal depression to name a few.
- A woman who would have to face questions from family and friends asking when is she due, who is the father, what are you going to call it.
- The court proceedings for convicting her rapist (if she reports it).

Many pro-life people also sprout the idea of adoption, like its a simple solution to an unwanted problem.
- You think a woman should have to go through all of that only to hand the child over to the state.
-Less than 200 children were adopted in Ireland in 2016. There are countless children already in care and you want to add to it as a solution to unwanted pregnancies.

Your posts so far show zero compassion or understanding for any woman forced to carry a pregnancy against her will.

robarmstrong

sean635 wrote: »

Nope,
My position is that a woman’s desire to have a baby or not should influence her sexual decisions. Those decisions should never be made for her. Once conception has occurred, another human is now at stake and must be protected at all costs as the Eight outlines

When a rapist rapes and impregnates a woman, it is he who has forced the pregnancy upon her. The now conceived human although unwanted is a human none the less and nothing should supersede it’s right to life.

You're making a decision for her.

Stop avoiding the question, why do pro-lifers shrink away with this? It is plain and simple.

A woman is forced into having sex. She is raped. She falls pregnant due to this rape. She did not want the sex, she does not want the baby. You are in the belief that on top of being raped (forced to have sex against her will) she should also be forced to keep the resulting pregnancy. Am I right or am I wrong?

Stop sugarcoating it, answer the question, it's bolded and underlined to help you see it better so you can't avoid it.

kylith

sean635 wrote: »

Nope,
My position is that a woman’s desire to have a baby or not should influence her sexual decisions. Those decisions should never be made for her. Once conception has occurred, another human is now at stake and must be protected at all costs as the Eight outlines

When a rapist rapes and impregnates a woman, it is he who has forced the pregnancy upon her. The now conceived human although unwanted is a human none the less and nothing should supersede it’s right to life.

So women have to have their rapist’s children and women in long term relationships should have sex only for procreation?

robarmstrong

david75 wrote: »

Obvious troll is obvious.

Careful now, the mods won't appreciate you calling out a troll.

The correct procedure is to report their post, the mods will review it and let them continue their merry ways.

amdublin

sean635 wrote: »

Nope,
My position is that a woman’s desire to have a baby or not should influence her sexual decisions. Those decisions should never be made for her. Once conception has occurred, another human is now at stake and must be protected at all costs as the Eight outlines

Ah great. Another one of the "Keep your legs closed girls" brigade.


What if one just wants to have sex. And takes all precautions to avoid conception. There is nothing wrong with having a desire to make a sexual decision as you put it.
Sex is a good thing.

Cally Caleigh

david75 wrote: »

It doesn’t matter what your comfortable with. We aren’t legislating on your comfort. Thousands of women a year are being forced to travel to a different country to get healthcare denied them here. But you’re uncomfortable?
Think you’ll find they’re far more uncomfortable than you.

This is the type of post I'm talking about.
Someone outlines genuine concerns, or asks questions about the legislative process and aspects of it they're not comfortable with and a load of heavily pro-choice posters make sarcastic and rude comments at them because they don't agree with every tiny detail of their opinion.
You don't realize it's the 20% of undecided voters like myself who will sway the outcome of this referendum and insulting them + deflecting from the questions asked is certainly not going to convince them to vote for repealing.

sean635

Flying Fox wrote: »

It's no coincidence that the countries with restrictive abortion laws have traditionally had a strong Catholic/religious influence. In countries without this influence, legislators have primarily looked at the medical facts (as was the case with the Citizen's Assembly and the Oireachtas Committee).

I would recommend reading up on the evidence provided to the Citizen's Assembly.

Although these may be religiously motivated laws, there is an atheological argument for them.

The only question that matters is whether or not you consider the foetus a human life. Scientific evidence shows it most certainly is and more than a clump of cells. Although not sentient, it is a separate individual with it’s own dna, own beating heart and own detectable brain waves. A clear line can never be drawn as to when it’s a person, only as to when it’s a human. At conception

Madscientist30

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Madscientist30 wrote: »

And how much speaking out and campaigning have you personally done against child abuse of born children? Where are the marches for that, if the pro-lifers are against child abuse in all its forms? Once the baby is born pro-lifers are nowhere to be found. It's actually kind of sick.

Oh here come the idiotic arguments.

This debate is about abortion. Why do prochoicers always try and deflect away from the actual debate by trying to discredit those they are debating with. Even if I was a serial killer, it still wouldn't strengthen your position on abortion to point that out. Either you are right or you are wrong. What prolifers do or don't do for born children has no impact on that.


As it happens I do quite a bit for born children though, particular those with disabilities.

Its not about strengthening my point or discrediting you. It is just very puzzling. You stated abortion was a form of child abuse and you are against that. I just wonder why your aversion to child abuse focuses more on the unborn who are not sentient and not recognised as children legally than the sentient, born children who are being abused across the world. If you wish to work against child abuse in the world it just seems like you and other pro-lifers could make more impact and help more children focusing on the born than the unborn. It doesnt really make a lot of sense to me.

I wonder sometimes whether it is actually another motivation which drives some prolifers rather than genuine love and concern for children. Otherwise surely all these people that are so passionate about children would be registered to adopt/foster kids in care, supporting families in crisis pregnancies, helping disadvantaged kids get an education etc....

Annasopra

Cally Caleigh wrote: »

If the 8th is repealed, is the 12-week a given?

No.

david75

Cally Caleigh wrote: »

This is the type of post I'm talking about.
Someone outlines genuine concerns, or asks questions about the legislative process and aspects of it they're not comfortable with and a load of heavily pro-choice posters make sarcastic and rude comments at them because they don't agree with every tiny detail of their opinion.
You don't realize it's the 20% of undecided voters like myself who will sway the outcome of this referendum and insulting them instead of deflecting from the questions asked is certainly not going to convince them to vote for repealing.

You aren’t undecided. Youve sked the same hysterical questions repeatedly. And been Answered repeatedly and yet you persist.

SusieBlue

sean635 wrote: »

Nope,
My position is that a woman’s desire to have a baby or not should influence her sexual decisions. Those decisions should never be made for her. Once conception has occurred, another human is now at stake and must be protected at all costs as the Eight outlines

When a rapist rapes and impregnates a woman, it is he who has forced the pregnancy upon her. The now conceived human although unwanted is a human none the less and nothing should supersede it’s right to life.

The woman’s??? What about the man? Or did she spontaneously impregnate herself?

If you insist these consequences are bestowed on a woman I’m interested to hear what should happen the man.
The man has an opportunity to walk away, the legal system will do little to prevent this bar insist on maintence payment, which isn’t even strictly enforced.

So let’s see.... We need to come up with something that will limit a mans diet, and he cannot consume cigarettes or alcohol.
It needs to restrict his mobility, increase his bladder movements, cause fatigue and pelvic issues and make him gain 2-3 stone.
It will have to limit what he can do for work, limit his earning ability and stop him from traveling by airplane. He will have to go through all this for 9 months.
And at the end, it needs to come to an excruciating end with vast amounts of pain, stitches, possibly an anesthetic.
His body will never be the same.
After this, even though he will be recovering from all he went through, he will have to take on a huge responsibility that will eat into his personal freedoms, his income and his earning ability. For a minimum of 18 years.

So what do we suggest happens the man? Or is it only the woman we’re interested in punishing?

Cally Caleigh

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

No.

Why the large bold font?
Could you offer some explanation on why the 12 week is not a given if 8th is repealed and the circumstances where it could be entered into legislation?
I think I'm on the wrong website to be honest, I came here looking to be educated but just get shouted at, sarcastic comments, insults, etc.

robarmstrong

Cally Caleigh wrote: »

This is the type of post I'm talking about.
Someone outlines genuine concerns, or asks questions about the legislative process and aspects of it they're not comfortable about and a load of heavily pro-choice posters make sarcastic and rude comments at them because they don't agree with every tiny detail of their opinion.
You don't realize it's the 20% of undecided voters like myself who will sway the outcome of this referendum and insulting them instead of deflecting from the questions asked is certainly not going to convince them to vote for repealing.

Cally, I'm going to give you my side.

I am staunchly against abortion, my missus is 22 weeks pregnant and we are having a baby girl. We have suffered numerous mc's one of which was potentially life threatening. In each and every one of our pregnancies I have referred to them as my baby since day one.

I am voting to repeal because I don't want my daughter to suffer what hundreds of thousands of Irish women before her have suffered being chased and shamed out of their own country to seek out a medical procedure.

If she is going to have to have that medical procedure I would much prefer for her (although I won't like it!) to have it here, where she can be provided with aftercare, support, and whatever she needs going forward.

I am not going to deny my daughter the right to choose what she can or cannot do with her own body, nor will I force my daughter to contend with a pregnancy that she is unwilling to contend with for any reason.

I will not allow my personal beliefs to stand in the way of preventing my daughter's suffering. I will not let her experience what so many have experienced before her.

I hope this is of use to you.

sean635

DubInMeath wrote: »

Sorry but your contradicting yourself. The law as it stands forces a rape victim to carry a pregnancy they don't want.

I’m not.

I believe once the woman becomes pregnant, the life must be protected at all costs. Therefore a pregnancy should never be aborted. I believe a woman raped must give birth to her baby, but the rapist is responsible for her having to have a baby against her will. Not me

sean635

sean635 wrote: »

Although these may be religiously motivated laws, there is an atheological argument for them.

The only question that matters is whether or not you consider the foetus a human life. Scientific evidence shows it most certainly is and more than a clump of cells. Although not sentient, it is a separate individual with it’s own dna, own beating heart and own detectable brain waves. A clear line can never be drawn as to when it’s a person, only as to when it’s a human. At conception

If it's a human being from conception, do you also believe that taking the morning after pill constitutes murder?

Annasopra

sean635 wrote: »

When a rapist rapes and impregnates a woman, it is he who has forced the pregnancy upon her. The now conceived human although unwanted is a human none the less and nothing should supersede it’s right to life.

Nothing. Not the womans extreme trauma. Not the womans suicidality. Just nothing. How barbaric and cruel.

RobertKK

People should vote for what they believe and what they are comfortable with. You are voting for what you want in society, if you want unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks and no time limits for mental health and the unborn with life limiting conditions then vote to repeal.
If you don't agree with that then vote to retain the 8th.

Cally Caleigh

robarmstrong wrote: »

Cally, I'm going to give you my side.

I am staunchly against abortion, my missus is 22 weeks pregnant and we are having a baby girl. We have suffered numerous mc's one of which was potentially life threatening. In each and every one of our pregnancies I have referred to them as my baby since day one.

I am voting to repeal because I don't want my daughter to suffer what hundreds of thousands of Irish women before her have suffered being chased and shamed out of their own country to seek out a medical procedure.

If she is going to have to have that medical procedure I would much prefer for her (although I won't like it!) to have it here, where she can be provided with aftercare, support, and whatever she needs going forward.

I am not going to deny my daughter the right to choose what she can or cannot do with her own body, nor will I force my daughter to contend with a pregnancy that she is unwilling to contend with for any reason.

I hope this is of use to you.

Thank you for the personal story and congratulations to you and your partner on the pregnancy. I know there's some heated debate here but I mean that sincerely.
Having said that , the question I asked from my post you quoted was around the legislative process after the 8th is repealed and how proposed text would make it's way through government houses to become law. And if/when/how that text could be changed by future governments.