Abortion in Ireland: 2 years on

seamus

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

The alternative is backed by our leading health officials. Pregnancy is safe. Not perfect, things can go wrong as in any medical situation but the numbers are very very low.

Tell me what illness you are referring to please or is this your usual method of throwing out arguments with zero backing?

Long-term consequences from pregnancy affect about 90% of women who bring a pregnancy to term. These vary from the benign, such stretch marks, to the severe, such as depression, chronic incontinence or SPD.

Abortion up to 12 weeks on the other hand carries an immediate complication rate of about 7% (of which 99% are minor), and long-term consequences are statistically nil.

There is no competent doctor on this planet who will back up your assertion that pregnancy and abortion are equally safe.

Igotadose

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Groups spending less time picketing hospitals, demonising women and doctors and trying their best to make sure kids are kept as in the dark about the goings on of sex , but putting their efforts in to actual education and improving peoples lives would be a start.

Its almost as if they dont actually care about the people at all..........

Why should they? They did nothing once the Eighth was passed in 1983. Problem exported and sorted. Sex ed? Nah. Contraception? Sterilization? Easier/healthier adoption support? Fostering support? Nope.

Oscar Madison

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

And yet nobody can ever put a name to a single Irish instance, even though there are scores of well-known pro-life activists. Funny that...

I would consider myself very pro-life especially after I saw my little girl looking out from her Mothers womb
during a scan many years ago now but I voted for it! It's a hard decision to make for those who have to make it I'm sure!

ELM327

Bannasidhe wrote: »

First time I ever heard a Mormon being called a "super woke" feminist. :P

She may not be one but that's the general type of person who pushes the "only men are to blame for pregnancy" nonsense.

seamus

seamus wrote: »

Long-term consequences from pregnancy affect about 90% of women who bring a pregnancy to term. These vary from the benign, such stretch marks, to the severe, such as depression, chronic incontinence or SPD.

Abortion up to 12 weeks on the other hand carries an immediate complication rate of about 7% (of which 99% are minor), and long-term consequences are statistically nil.

There is no competent doctor on this planet who will back up your assertion that pregnancy and abortion are equally safe.

Oh would you stop. Your including stretch marks? Really? That's pathetic. Are these your numbers by the way? I also assume being fair and all, that the study you rely on was for Europe if not Ireland and didn't include third world nations.

All the mental affects are equally so in abortions. Counseling is very much recommended following an abortion for a reason.

No sane doctor would push abortion as the easy option that people here try to.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Seven Septs wrote: »

Individual voters though. A large amount of non Catholics voted No. Regardless of whether they had a body with financial clout.

Did the Iona institute, Love Both influence my vote, absolutely not. Same for most No voters I'd imagine.

The vote was very much a personal conscience thing for both No and Yes voters. People did what they thought was right on both sides. Bringing their background, life experience, reading of what the legislation would look like etc into it.

It was a democratic vote and is now the law of the land.

Considering a large amount didn’t vote No overall (the result was close to a landslide), I don’t think it could be said that a large amount of non-Catholics voted no. The areas with higher percentages of no voters would also be the more religious corners of the country.

Of course some non-Catholics people would have voted no, but if you crunch the numbers, I think there’ll be a strong correlation between being a practicing Catholic and voting no.

Seven Septs wrote: »

Well people weren't lying about saying a lot were voting No, or Yes. 1/3 of the population voted NO. That's a lot of voters. And yes a lot of that one third weren't religious.

1/3 of the people who voted, voted no, not 1/3 of the population.

Bannasidhe

Niner leprauchan wrote: »

Oh would you stop. Your including stretch marks? Really? That's pathetic. Are these your numbers by the way? I also assume being fair and all, that the study you rely on was for Europe if not Ireland and didn't include third world nations.

All the mental affects are equally so in abortions. Counseling is very much recommended following an abortion for a reason.

No sane doctor would push abortion as the easy option that people here try to.

Do you have stretch marks?

They are commonly described as " disfiguring skin condition that can have a deep psychological impact" (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) by experts who advise not trivialising them as

It is very important not to trivialise conditions like stretch marks. Like many disfiguring skin conditions or scars, stretch marks can have a lasting psychological, or emotional impact.

They may cause people to feel self-conscious, socially anxious, and can lower self-confidence, increase social isolation, and lead to body image issues.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-38692922#:~:text=Like%20many%20disfiguring%20skin%20conditions,lead%20to%20body%20image%20issues.

And here you are - trivialising a disfiguring skin condition and the effect that can have as pathetic.

Bannasidhe

ELM327 wrote: »

She may not be one but that's the general type of person who pushes the "only men are to blame for pregnancy" nonsense.

She isn't one but you wanted to get a dig in is perhaps a more accurate statement no?

ELM327

Bannasidhe wrote: »

She isn't one but you wanted to get a dig in is perhaps a more accurate statement no?

If it's a dig then it;s a true dig.



Anyone pushing that nonsense deserves such a dig too

Laser Disk

6000+ aborted babies?

That is grim.

ELM327

Laser Disk wrote: »

6000+ aborted babies?

That is grim.

0 aborted babies.


6666 terminated pregnancies and aborted fetuses.


This was in line with what was happening before the 8th.

Laser Disk

ELM327 wrote: »

0 aborted babies.


6666 terminated pregnancies and aborted fetuses.


This was in line with what was happening before the 8th.

If you abort a healthy baby merely because it's a inconvenience then you are a terrible human being.

ELM327

Laser Disk wrote: »

If you abort a healthy baby merely because it's a inconvenience then you are a terrible human being.

Again, no one is aborting babies, people are aborting fetuses
Aborting an actual baby is murder. A fetus is not a baby, the same way an acorn is not an oak tree.

Laser Disk

ELM327 wrote: »

Again, no one is aborting babies, people are aborting fetuses
Aborting an actual baby is murder. A fetus is not a baby, the same way an acorn is not an oak tree.

Whatever helps you sleep at night. But if you have any deceny you'll eventually realise aborting babies is wrong.

Bannasidhe

Laser Disk wrote: »

If you abort a healthy baby merely because it's a inconvenience then you are a terrible human being.

An embryo is not a baby. It doesn't even become a fetus until around 11 weeks.
There is no way of knowing of it is healthy or not - or even that it will develop into a baby.
It is estimated that 1 in 4 pregnancies are miscarried and 85% of those are in the first trimester.

Terrible human beings let living breathing children drown because they are inconvenient - get protection for all refugees who are minors into our Constitution and I'll back you all the way.

ohnonotgmail

Bannasidhe wrote: »

An embryo is not a baby. It doesn't even become a fetus until around 11 weeks.
There is no way of knowing of it is healthy or not - or even that it will develop into a baby.
It is estimated that 1 in 4 pregnancies are miscarried and 85% of those are in the first trimester.

Terrible human beings let living breathing children drown because they are inconvenient - get protection for all refugees who are minors into our Constitution and I'll back you all the way.

probably best to ignore them. im sure they wont be around long.

Laser Disk

Bannasidhe wrote: »

An embryo is not a baby. It doesn't even become a fetus until around 11 weeks.
There is no way of knowing of it is healthy or not - or even that it will develop into a baby.
It is estimated that 1 in 4 pregnancies are miscarried and 85% of those are in the first trimester.

Terrible human beings let living breathing children drown because they are inconvenient - get protection for all refugees who are minors into our Constitution and I'll back you all the way.

Why can't you do both? Protect living and unborn children?

ELM327

Laser Disk wrote: »

Why can't you do both? Protect living and unborn children?

You can't be an unborn child. Children are born.

ELM327

Laser Disk wrote: »

Whatever helps you sleep at night. But if you have any deceny you'll eventually realise aborting babies is wrong.

ROFL.
Aborting babies is wrong.
Yet again, these are not babies, they are embryos or fetuses

Laser Disk

ELM327 wrote: »

ROFL.
Aborting babies is wrong.

You know, on some level my words are affecting you. Else you wouldn't feel the need to argue.

chicorytip

Six thousand slaughtered in just two years. Think about that.

ohnonotgmail

chicorytip wrote: »

Six thousand slaughtered in just two years. Think about that.

it is tactics like that that helped you lose the referendum.

Bannasidhe

Laser Disk wrote: »

You know, on some level my words are affecting you. Else you wouldn't feel the need to argue.

Why aren't 1 in 4 miscarried fetus' given death certificates?
Because they are not deemed to have 'died'.

Bannasidhe

Laser Disk wrote: »

Why can't you do both? Protect living and unborn children?

How about we start with the born ones.

uptherebels

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Using that criteria, it's wrong to force your views on someone who wishes to strangle someone

Society force's views and makes value judgements on people in numerous ways

Except you need to compare like with like. Strangling someone affects another actual person.

Bannasidhe

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Flashbacks to 'everyone I know is voting No and none of them are religious' posts from May 2018. Fun times.

.

Is it time for a pro-life argument bingo card yet?
There must be one knocking around here somewhere.

omerin

I didn't vote, didn't think there was a point it was so clear cut what way it was going. Unfortunately in the course of my life the amount of competent politicians could be counted on one hand and there would still be some fingers spare. They had a relatively straight forward job to construct a compromise in the legislation that would allow abortions in certain cases and not to let it be seen as a form of contraception. They failed. I'm not going to go into this further as it has been done to death.

It was a particularly sad day when they announced the stats, and they will continue to advise on the numbers in the years to come. There are no winners. Education needs to be ramped up across the board.

ELM327

chicorytip wrote: »

Six thousand slaughtered in just two years. Think about that.

Think of all the sperm that get slaughtered every day.
Or all the eggs that get slaughtered as each menstrual cycle passes for each eligible woman. Both of these are potential lives too. The same as an embryo or fetus

amdublin

Laser Disk wrote: »

You know, on some level my words are affecting you. Else you wouldn't feel the need to argue.

Well okey dokey, just make up your own rules as you go along. Say 'em out loud and they are true. Is that the way it works for you?

LorelaiG

I'd love to see the stats from Women on Web to say how many imported pills into the country to perform termination at home themselves.

I think that would give a truer statistic than just going on the stats they have on people who travelled to the UK.

I would still vote yes.