Another abortion referendum?

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

The_Banker

Registered User
Messages
342
At the risk of opening up a 30 page debate that will eventually be locked I am wondering what peoples opinion is in the abortion debate that seems to have kicked off in the media.

Labour (from what I can make out) appear to be happy to legislate for abortion in limited circumstances i.e. the mothers health in in danger.
FG seem to have differing views with various TDs saying different things. They feel the church has a right to lobby politicians.
FF have been very vocal in protecting the churches right to speak out on the need for another referendum.

Personally my opinion would be that the government should legislate for the right to abortion where the mother has been raped, health is in danger or there is no chance the child will survive after childbirth.

With abortion just a €19.99 flight away we have been exporting our problem with Ryanair acting as the spout, releasing the pressure that would build up on a social level if there were no facilities available to mothers with unwanted pregnancies.

As for the Catholic Church I feel they have lost their moral authority to dictate/advise/lobby politicians that we elect on legislation in this country. They didn’t lose it when their priests raped and abused children (that happened in other institutions) but they certainly did when they covered it up.
 
This cant end well. The thread that is, not the possible referendum!

I believe in the right to choice.
 
The_Banker said:
As for the Catholic Church I feel they have lost their moral authority to dictate/advise/lobby politicians that we elect on legislation in this country. They didn’t lose it when their priests raped and abused children (that happened in other institutions) but they certainly did when they covered it up.
Click to expand...

Not for a second am I excusing any coverups, but basic freedom of expression concepts would suggest that clergy should not be muzzled either. No-one has any problem apparently with disgraced politicians lobbying for specific causes.
 
The_Banker said:
Personally my opinion would be that the government should legislate for the right to abortion where the mother has been raped, health is in danger or there is no chance the child will survive after childbirth.
Click to expand...

Its an issue that polarizes people yet isn't black and white.I would be against abortion except in the instances listed above.

As for the church's moral authority,it pains me to say it as a former practicing catholic but they no longer have any high ground from which to dictate or preach,their treatment of the abused both as children and as adults is sickening and despicable,the manner in which the current pope and senior clergy have behaved is beneath contempt,all they are concerned with is maintaining the wealth the church has accumulated both here and in rome.

They are as far removed from the Carpenters son and his preaching as is humanely possible,any resemblance betwixt the vatican and the Nazarene is purely lip service at this stage.
 
The abortion referendum will come again. We can talk, walk, baulk and if the referendum is not passed there is always the UK and other near countries. Ultimately, it is the woman who will decide whether to have an abortion or not. I wonder if the referendum vote should be confined to women only?
 
T McGibney said:
Not for a second am I excusing any coverups, but basic freedom of expression concepts would suggest that clergy should not be muzzled either.
Click to expand...
+1 to that.

Knuttell said:
Its an issue that polarizes people yet isn't black and white.I would be against abortion except in the instances listed above.
Click to expand...
I agree. I can see strong arguments on both sides.

Leper said:
I wonder if the referendum vote should be confined to women only?
Click to expand...
Why, should men have no say as to what happens to their unborn child?
 
truthseeker said:
This cant end well. The thread that is, not the possible referendum!
Click to expand...
I'd have to agree with that.
Leper said:
I wonder if the referendum vote should be confined to women only?
Click to expand...
Well that's just silly. Abortion is not a women's issue, it's a societal issue.
T McGibney said:
. . basic freedom of expression concepts would suggest that clergy should not be muzzled either.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Rabbitte et al should not decide who can participate in the debate.

The FF/PD government fecked up the 2002 abortion (Protection of Human Life in Pregnancy) referendum - which was meant to undo the flawed x-case judgement - by including protection for destructive embryonic stem-cell research. This compelled a sizeable cohort of pro-lifers to vote against, and it was narrowly defeated (<0.5%). Otherwise we wouldn't be facing this again. Labour want to legislate for that flawed judgement and more. A new referendum makes more sense (to me anyhow).
 
truthseeker said:
So you agree with forced pregnancy?
Click to expand...

I don't agree that one parent should have no say in whether their baby lives or dies.
If a woman is pregnant at the moment, or even after this referendum if it's passed, and there is no health issue, then she will not be allowed to have an abortion so she will be forced to carry the baby to term. That's a forced pregnancy so yes, I'm in favour of forced pregnancy if the alternative is to kill an unborn child.

This isn’t a religious issue for me; I’m an atheist. I don’t think a person has the right to kill an unborn child because they don’t want to be a parent. Adoption is always an option if that’s the case.
 
There are roughly 40 cases a year where an abortion was needed to save the life of the mother yet over 4,000 women travel to the UK annually to have an abortion so it does not appear that the vast majority seeking it are doing it for that reason.

[broken link removed]
 
Shawady said:
There are roughly 40 cases a year where an abortion was needed to save the life of the mother yet over 4,000 women travel to the UK annually to have an abortion so it does not appear that the vast majority seeking it are doing it for that reason.

[broken link removed]
Click to expand...

The point is, the moral position of 'abortion under certain circumstances' is not tenable. Either the right to life is more important or it isnt. If a woman who is pregnant through rape or incest is allowed have an abortion because she doesnt want to be a parent then so should any other woman. Otherwise we are punishing women for the method under which they became pregnant. In that case its not about the life of the child anymore, its about the moral behaviour of the woman.

Im ok with the position that someone does not agree with abortion, fine, I will never force them to have an abortion. But I dont like that they will force me to go through with a pregnancy.

Incidentally, there is no way for a married woman to give a child up for adoption so a forced pregnancy for a married woman will result in a woman who doesnt want to parent raising a child - not a good outcome for either I dont think.

Anyway I am going to step out of this discussion because it goes nowhere except into the land of heated emotivism.
 
This thread will not end well.....

The only contribution to the debate I will make is this. A relative of mine who spent more than four years trying to get pregnant finally managed it and was over the moon. A few months ago, she went for a routine scan where the foetus was diagnosed with a severe anomaly. The foetus had a strong heart beat but was severely deformed. Three medical opinions including one in the UK confirmed that there was a chance that the baby would survive and be born at full term, but that it would be in severe pain, have to undergo invasive surgeries and would more than likely only live for weeks if even that. There was zero chance of long term survival or decent quality of life. My relative was given the choice of carrying to full term or have a termination. She chose to have a termination and so being the caring society that we are, we made her pack a bag and sent herself and her husband skulking off to England to that they could get the procedure carried out over there.

People may or may not agree with abortion and I don't really care if people think my relative is a murderer but making her feel like a criminal for trying to do the right thing by herself, her husband, her 7 year old son and her unborn child is disgusting and is a damning indictment on this Country's cowardice in dealing with this issue.
 
truthseeker said:
The point is, the moral position of 'abortion under certain circumstances' is not tenable. Either the right to life is more important or it isnt. If a woman who is pregnant through rape or incest is allowed have an abortion because she doesnt want to be a parent then so should any other woman. Otherwise we are punishing women for the method under which they became pregnant. In that case its not about the life of the child anymore, its about the moral behaviour of the woman.
Click to expand...
I agree that the absolutist position is not tenable but I don’t agree that the opposite absolutist position is tenable. Rape and incest are not voluntary acts and so have no bearing on the morality of the woman. If the life of the mother is in danger then it’s not a moral debate either, it’s a medical one.

truthseeker said:
Im ok with the position that someone does not agree with abortion, fine, I will never force them to have an abortion. But I dont like that they will force me to go through with a pregnancy.
Click to expand...
If the alternative is you killing an unborn child then I think it is.

truthseeker said:
Incidentally, there is no way for a married woman to give a child up for adoption so a forced pregnancy for a married woman will result in a woman who doesnt want to parent raising a child - not a good outcome for either I dont think.
Click to expand...
Yes, there’s a case to be made for married parents being allowed to give children up for adoption.

By the way, why do the father’s wishes not come into this debate at all? If the mother wants to about the child then that’s her right but if he wants to keep it he can’t. If he doesn’t want the child and she does he still has to support it for 18 to 23 years.
 
Sunny said:
This thread will not end well.....

The only contribution to the debate I will make is this. A relative of mine who spent more than four years trying to get pregnant finally managed it and was over the moon. A few months ago, she went for a routine scan where the foetus was diagnosed with a severe anomaly. The foetus had a strong heart beat but was severely deformed. Three medical opinions including one in the UK confirmed that there was a chance that the baby would survive and be born at full term, but that it would be in severe pain, have to undergo evasive surgeries and would more than likely only live for weeks if even that. There was zero chance of long term survival or decent quality of life. My relative was given the choice of carrying to full term or have a termination. She chose to have a termination and so being the caring society that we are, we made her pack a bag and sent herself and her husband skulking off to England to that they could get the procedure carried out over there.

People may or may not agree with abortion and I don't really care if people think my relative is a murderer but making her feel like a criminal for trying to do the right thing by herself, her husband, her 7 year old son and her unborn child is disgusting and is a damning indictment on this Country's cowardice in dealing with this issue.
Click to expand...

Very good post. I agree 100%
 
Everything in me just recoils against the idea of abortion. To me a child is a human being from the minute of conception and so every argument is subordinate to that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top