Another abortion referendum?

Status
Not open for further replies.
T McGibney said:
.

Sinn Fein, harbourer of rapists and abusers, have called for abortion for victims of rape and abuse.
Click to expand...

No they have not called for abortion for such victimes. They have said that they agree that in the case of a women who has become pregnant as a result of rape or incest that that women should have the right to have an abortion. Which is the exact opposite of what you have written in that sentence.

It was you that made the point that because Sinn Fein have (or may have) harbored a single rapist that they cannot speak about abortion and my point to you is that if you follow that logic the Catholic Church who covered up for many many members who were sexual abusers and who judged women and who made women slaves in laundries for money and who abused children born as a result of rape or incest and put them in industrial schools for money, then they too, to follow your logic, may not comment.

I for one would be most interested to know the Catholic viewpoint on a women's right to choose whether to keep a child or terminate when she is carryring a child as a result of rape or incest. Indeed I'd like to know your viewpoint.
 
Bronte said:
I for one would be most interested to know the Catholic viewpoint on a women's right to choose whether to keep a child or terminate when she is carryring a child as a result of rape or incest. Indeed I'd like to know your viewpoint.
Click to expand...
Of more relevance, I would like to know the Catholic Church's (and the anti-abortion posters on here - I did ask a few pages back...) view on:

Faced with a 17 week pregnant woman miscarrying on a Monday morning but with a still live foetus; for every hour that passes in an active miscarriage, her risk of infection increases; infection can usually be managed and is very unlikely to lead to death: ~ May she have a termination if her life is not immediately at risk?
 

When you won't even bother reading my earlier posts (as evidenced by the manner in which you spectacularly missed the point in paragraph 2 above, which I clarified earlier), I don't see why I should bother submitting myself to questioning by you.
 
T McGibney said:
Note that Sinn Fein's hyprocrisy was being discussed on this thread long before I made any comment about them.
Click to expand...
Really? I don't see it - unless you count a very obvious tongue in cheek 'Pro-death?' followed by a smiley? Every other mention of SF that I can see was just factual - who emailed and what reply they got. Maybe my scanning of the 9 or so pages missed the discussion of SF hypocrisy so could you let me know which number posts you're referring to?
 

This is where we agree. Unfortunately those who have been using this stat are really using it to say it is safe here for a pregnancy, they are implying it is safe because of a prohibition on abortion. Every single one who has used it has compared it to the UK with the note that the UK has liberal abortion rules.

If, and let's be honest most weren't, they were simply pointint out that it is safe to be pregnant here then fine...but why mention the UK? Of course they were countering a concern that it was unsafe for a pregnancy, but that was a concern regarding a position where the mother's health was in danger and would she have the say on whether or not an abortion would be performed. As we've learned we genuinely don't know, but the general impression is probably not and probably not until her condition really deteriorates.

People weren't saying this happens every day, or even every year, they were saying what they've argued for decades that it could happen. Whether or not there is a direct link in Savita's case remains to be seen, but the question still remains for women that if they are pregnant and their health of concern can they ask for an abortion? Do they have the right to determine their own lives and we have to honestly answer: probably not.

So they myth that is being debunked isn't a myth created by those who have protested or called for legislation, it's a myth created by those who oppose abortion because they are not listening to what people are saying. They're accusing them of having an agenda, they're accusing them of scaremongering, they're accusing them of not having the full facts. And then they dishonestly manipulate a statistic to counter the very myths they created in the first place.

If they myth is are women scared that if they were in a similar circumstance and their health was in danger that the lack of law and lack of clarity could mean that their wish for an abortion could mean they die, then that's not a myth that's a reality for half the population of this country. They were not commenting on the maternity care in general.

So you're right you can't use those statistics to argue for or against abortion and I only did so tongue in cheek. But I do think that if you were to use the figures at all for pro or anti-abortion, then I certainly don't think they support the latter position in any way shape or form.
 
T McGibney said:
When you won't even bother reading my earlier posts (as evidenced by the manner in which you spectacularly missed the point in paragraph 2 above, which I clarified earlier), I don't see why I should bother submitting myself to questioning by you.
Click to expand...

Forgive me but really I don't understand what earlier posts you're referring to. Truthseeker posted the Sinn Fein response to an email she sent and you now bring in the fact that a member of Sinn Fein may or may not have been a sexual abuser to I think prove the point that they don't have any moral authority to speak on abortion, but I don't see what that fact has to do with Sinn Fein policy on abortion.

You don't have to submit to any question of mine naturally enough, in the interest of this debate I was trying to elicite your viewpoint. It's a cop out if you won't give it, in my personal opinion. If you have a view point, which I assume you do why not share it. I would most welcome all viewpoints as I strive to understand this issue, I don't have to agree with them though. But it might help this debate and help us all to understand each other?
 

As a pro-lifer I did offer a perspective on this - not sure if pre or post your question - but basically if a woman is miscarrying (which is definitive to my limited knowledge - i.e. the pregnancy doesnt ever recover) the life of the foetus is lost (give or take some days) and for the safety of the mother a termination should take place - no point risking a viable life for an unviable one - or even the health of a viable life for an unviable one.

While I'm liberal on most things I do think the foetus, while viable, has rights, isnt ending the life of one for your own convenience a tad selfish?

Maybe this is contradictory but in the case of rape etc, why is the morning after pill not standard?, again limited knowledge but I gather it can prevent conception taking place at all (and fair enough maybe it can end life in the 2 cells goes to 4 stage, but we'll never know for sure in any given case and in the circumstances I think the woman deserves the benefit of the doubt).

I'm also curious about how people can be so het up about life before it exits the womb and not too bothered after that - e.g. awfully disappointing turnout in the childrens referendum. Lots of children suffer neglect or worse in Ireland and beyond, maybe better for all concerned if they'd never been conceived, which is why the CC view on contraception is so bonkers, especially in African contexts where the use of condoms could help a lot in the AIDS epidemic.
 

This would require all rapes to be reported and reported within 72 hours. Currently only 6%-8% of rapes are reported to the guards at all.

The argument for abortion after incest or rape doesnt really make any sense. Either abortion is murder or it isnt. If it is, then the method of conception should be irrelevant. Anyone who agrees with abortion after rape or incest is really just agreeing to a limited version of abortion on demand.
 

I never said Sinn Fein should not speak on abortion. I did point out their position is hypocritical.

I don't wish to outline my own views on abortion as unlike you I post using my real name and am easily identifiable. It is also a difficult subject for people to discuss dispassionately. Whether or not that's a cop out is for others to judge.
 
T McGibney said:
I don't wish to outline my own views on abortion as unlike you I post using my real name and am easily identifiable. It is also a difficult subject for people to discuss dispassionately. Whether or not that's a cop out is for others to judge.
Click to expand...

I forgot you use your own name and your reply is absolutely perfectly understandable. And for that reason I'm sorry for saying it was a cop out for you.
 

But cant the morning after pill be bought over the counter now?, why wouldnt someone take it automatically? Re "method of contraception" - isnt the idea of contraception before conception, so I dont think abortion should be lumped in with contraception in that sense.
 
Betsy Og said:
- but basically if a woman is miscarrying (which is definitive to my limited knowledge - i.e. the pregnancy doesnt ever recover)
Click to expand...
I don't believe that is correct; and I don't think 'miscarrying' is a medical term.
Betsy Og said:
which is why the CC view on contraception is so bonkers, especially in African contexts where the use of condoms could help a lot in the AIDS epidemic.
Click to expand...
The CC view on contraception is irrelevant in this regard; the CC view would also be opposed to adultery and extra-marital sex, if people listened to such there would be no AIDS.
truthseeker said:
The argument for abortion after incest or rape doesnt really make any sense.
Click to expand...
I would agree with that. I don't believe that the right to life of the unborn should be predicated on how conception transpired. The morning after pill is licenced in Ireland on the basis that it can prevent conception.
 

I may have misunderstood your original post, when you asked why the morning after pill wasnt standard, I took it to mean a standard part of the process of reporting a rape - whether it be to a doctor or a guard. Yes, it is available over the counter, and presumably people dont just take it automatically because they are traumatised, dont think of it, dont want to have to say they need it in case someone asks why etc......

On method of contraception - I was talking about method of conception, not contraception. I was just meandering on about the fallacy of the argument that abortion is ok in cases of rape or incest.
 
michaelm said:
the CC view would also be opposed to adultery and extra-marital sex, if people listened to such there would be no AIDS.
Click to expand...

This is great information. My nephew is looking to begin a career in medicine, but I think I might just advise him to pick up some CC docterine as it appears it qualifies you as an OB/GY and an epidemiologist.
 
michaelm said:
I don't believe that is correct; and I don't think 'miscarrying' is a medical term.
Click to expand...
michaelm, what is your view on my question above? I have rephrased with the correct medical term.
 
Latrade said:
This is great information. My nephew is looking to begin a career in medicine, but I think I might just advise him to pick up some CC docterine as it appears it qualifies you as an OB/GY and an epidemiologist.
Click to expand...
You're on a roll today . My point was, on the off-chance you missed it, people don't listen to the CC.
orka said:
michaelm, what is your view on my question above? I have rephrased with the correct medical term.
Click to expand...
I'm not a medical person but your question may not be as clever as you think. Like, what does 'at the start of a clinical spontaneous abortion' mean. One cannot know such. These are evolving situations, there may be a show or leaking fluid but this may abate or cease, allowing the pregnancy to continue or this may accelerate resulting in a premature delivery. I would trust that the clinical team would endeavour to sustain the pregnancy where practical but that care for the mother would be paramount. If the mother's life was considered to be at risk then delivery might be induced should that be deemed the best course. In the event of possible infection a clinical diagnosis should be made to that effect and appropriate medication (broad-spectrum antibiotics, or whatever) should be administered.
 
truthseeker said:
Actually
Click to expand...
Brilliant . Not wanting to be further waylaid by pedantry I will choose my words more carefully in future. For clarity, the gist of my point was that it is silly to blame the spread of AIDS in Africa on the CC, that if people followed the CC line (and I'm not suggesting that they should) AIDS would never have gotten a foothold in the human population. My point was, on the off-chance you missed it, people don't listen to the CC.
 

The other relevant point of course is that only 17% of Africans are Catholics. (2005 figures) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholicism_in_Africa
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register