Repeal the 8th?

[S.L.F]

There are hard-line views on both sides of this debate. Personally, I'd rather not impose my morality on everyone else, or have anyone else's hard-line morality imposed on me. I mean, I think the world is already way over-populated and that is resulting in massive amounts of pain and suffering, mostly in less developed or equitable nations. How much do you value the long term viability of the species, or one individual in a developed country versus hundreds in the third-world?

If it is over populated why should we be concerned with things like wars or suicide?

Why is murder a crime?

As for imposing your morality on people, do you think abusing babies/children is wrong?

Should someone carrying a foetus with zero chance of survival be forced to continue to carry that and run a high risk of never being able to conceive again? That seems a pretty barbaric practice to me. Why should they be deprived of the choice to have children just to endure some futile exercise? I have family who were in that position, you want to tell the children they've had since they shouldn't have been allowed to exist?

The point is that medicine has not yet got to the point where it is 100% correct all the time, so you cannot say "zero chance of survival" because doctors and medics have been wrong before and they will be wrong again.

"you want to tell the children they've had since they shouldn't have been allowed to exist?"

No idea what you are talking about here.

 

[S.L.F]

Excuse my ignorance here - but obviously I've heard this slogan being banded about the last couple of years.
And I've just read an article in Irish times with girls living abroad who are determined that people should be allowed have an abortion for ANY reason.

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-...k-from-australia-to-vote-for-repeal-1.3060808
(The first girl in that link claims it was one of the reasons she left Ireland which seems a little OTT to me but anyway)

So is this what would happen if we repeal the 8th? That people can get an abortion for ANY reason? (i.e. they're just not in the mood to have a baby, for example)

Or would there have to be some mitigating circumstances to allow it?

The left and feminists generally speaking are determined that women should have complete control of reproduction, while men get left holding the child support demands while not having any automatic rights to see nor bring up their children.

Basically this entire campaign is an attempt by the left to stamp into law more radical feminist dogma into Irish culture.

Anyone with a single iota of common sense will understand that when a woman is expecting it is not a clump of cells she will produce it is a baby.

For anyone to stop that baby from being born it is simple killing.

For those of you who don't know when an abortion is being carried out they never give pain relief to the baby because that would mean acknowledging it is a living being.

That's why they strive so hard to stamp "women's rights" onto this as compared to "I can't be bothered looking after this child" which is more accurate.

Most women who travel do so not because they've been raped or have a child that may or may not die but because they are not bothered to look after their own flesh and blood.

 

[Leo]

"you want to tell the children they've had since they shouldn't have been allowed to exist?"

No idea what you are talking about here.

I'm repeating what doctors told my relatives, that in their case carrying a foetus with zero chance of viability to full term would result in a very high likelihood that they would never be able to have children in future. You seem to be of the opinion that they should have taken that chance, thus likely denying their children existence.

 

[Leo]

For those of you who don't know when an abortion is being carried out they never give pain relief to the baby because that would mean acknowledging it is a living being.

No, it's mostly because it would be a complete waste as the necessary nervous pathways have not been developed to carry the electrical signal to the brain.

 

[Purple]

The left and feminists generally speaking are determined that women should have complete control of reproduction, while men get left holding the child support demands while not having any automatic rights to see nor bring up their children.

Some on the left and some feminists are, but not all.

The Swedish proposal in which a man can opt out of fatherhood if he so chooses (they call it male abortion) looks like a good idea and nobody dies!

Basically this entire campaign is an attempt by the left to stamp into law more radical feminist dogma into Irish culture.

I think we disagree on who “The Left” are.

Anyone with a single iota of common sense will understand that when a woman is expecting it is not a clump of cells she will produce it is a baby.


For anyone to stop that baby from being born it is simple killing.

Broadly speaking, yes.

For those of you who don't know when an abortion is being carried out they never give pain relief to the baby because that would mean acknowledging it is a living being.

I agree and it is disturbing. This aspect of abortion is not given any coverage here.

That's why they strive so hard to stamp "women's rights" onto this as compared to "I can't be bothered looking after this child" which is more accurate.

I think that’s a bit glib. It is never a casual decision.

Most women who travel do so not because they've been raped or have a child that may or may not die but because they are not bothered to look after their own flesh and blood.

Even if that was true there are still the minority who are travelling because they have they've been raped or have a child that may die or will die.


It is a very complex and difficult issue but I agree that it is not just a women’s issue, it is a broader societal issue.

 

[S.L.F]

No, it's mostly because it would be a complete waste as the necessary nervous pathways have not been developed to carry the electrical signal to the brain.

Since they are going to be killed anyway why bother eh!

You've not been keeping up with what the left is trying to do here.

Abortion at any stage for whatever reason a woman wants.

No mention of pain relief anywhere there.

Some on the left and some feminists are, but not all.

The Swedish proposal in which a man can opt out of fatherhood if he so chooses (they call it male abortion) looks like a good idea and nobody dies!

Swedish proposal not law....it has not gone anywhere but to be discussed.

I have extreme doubts that it will go beyond talking stage.

I think we disagree on who “The Left” are.

Anyone who think socialism is a good thing, thinks women are oppressed in the West (despite having more privilege than the majority of males), thinks politics is an "old boys club".

Anyone with Marxist tendencies.

Anyone stupid enough to support Hillary Clinton

I agree and it is disturbing. This aspect of abortion is not given any coverage here.

The reason they won't give it coverage is because if it is discussed people won't think "Clump of cells" they'll think "Human Being" and turn pro-life two minutes later.

I think that’s a bit glib. It is never a casual decision.

It would be less casual if people were shown an ultra scan of the baby moving of it's own accord before it was torn apart and ripped out of the womb.

Even if that was true there are still the minority who are travelling because they have they've been raped or have a child that may die or will die.

It is a very complex and difficult issue but I agree that it is not just a women’s issue, it is a broader societal issue.

In Ireland in 2015 there were 26 abortions carried out in the Irish state to help save the life of the mother and that was under the 8th.

My own feeling is we should not just butcher babies because someone isn't bothered to look after a child.

People need to see all aspects of what abortion is including finding out what sort of mental health issues exist after women have an abortion in later life.

 

[S.L.F]

I'm repeating what doctors told my relatives, that in their case carrying a foetus with zero chance of
viability to full term would result in a very high likelihood that they would never be able to have children in future.

If you can say to me 100% that doctors are completely infallible and never make mistakes then we can discuss what you have said as being 100% fact.

But you can't can you!

You seem to be of the opinion that they should have taken that chance, thus likely denying their children existence.

Ah now I understand what you mean.

If we are going to go down the likely route the we should also discuss the possibility of the expectant mother being likely to commit suicide or having mental health issues down the road.

You don't know what would have happened if she had carried it to full term, neither did the doctors.

But when the baby was removed from the womb it was killed.

That's just fact.

 

[Leo]

If you can say to me 100% that doctors are completely infallible and never make mistakes then we can discuss what you have said as being 100% fact.

But you can't can you!

If you want 100% facts, then we need to eliminate humans from the argument entirely.

Ah now I understand what you mean.

If we are going to go down the likely route the we should also discuss the possibility of the expectant mother being likely to commit suicide or having mental health issues down the road.

So you clearly don't get what I mean. And that's also a fact, unlike your assertion that a fetus at any stage has developed the necessary biology to transmit pain signals, let alone interpret them as something to cause discomfort. But hey, why let the facts get in the way.

 

[cremeegg]

Abortion at any stage for whatever reason a woman wants.

That is a perfectly reasonable idea. No woman should have to carry a child if she does not want to.

 

[cremeegg]

ripping apart a baby without the aid of pain relief

That is a simple and true description of what abortion involves.

 

[Purple]

That is a perfectly reasonable idea. No woman should have to carry a child if she does not want to.

Even if she is almost full term and the baby is capable of live outside the womb?
You are in a very small minority if that is your view.

What about the father of the child, should he have no say?

In most countries a woman does not have to become a mother if she does not wish to and to force her to do so is considered barbaric and yet a man has no say as to whether he becomes a father, whether he wants to or not. That is unjust.

 

[Purple]

Anyone stupid enough to support Hillary Clinton

I would have voted for her, her stance on abortion not withstanding, as the alternative was worse.

 

[Betsy Og]

FWIW, and with no major interest in the topic, I doubt any proposal allowing for abortion after the initial weeks (cluster of cells time) would get passed in Ireland. Possible exceptions for fatal foetal abnormality. Not convinced that rape, incest & alleged suicidal risk are good reasons for later term abortions. Its not that I wouldnt have huge sympathy for the expectant mother, but I also could not ignore the child and its right to life. The child, however unfortunate its conception, does not deserve capital punishment. The bit I struggle with is that "dividing line", where along the pathway from conception to birth is it ok to call a halt, but I suspect I'm much earlier on the timeline than the "my body" brigade.

 

[cremeegg]

Even if she is almost full term and the baby is capable of live outside the womb?
You are in a very small minority if that is your view.

I dont think you understand my view. Which is is that abortion is the destruction of human life, and that no woman should have to carry a child against her will.

What about the father of the child, should he have no say?

I will have to think about this. However it does not strike me as a fundamental question.

 

[Purple]

I dont think you understand my view. Which is is that abortion is the destruction of human life, and that no woman should have to carry a child against her will.



I will have to think about this. However it does not strike me as a fundamental question.

So you are married and have a child and your wife is expecting your second baby. It's due in two weeks and you are looking forward to it.
Your wife tells you over dinner that she has changed her mind and is going to have an abortion tomorrow.
Do you think that a) such a late term abortion should be allowed and b) you should have absolutely no say in the matter.

 

[cremeegg]

You haven't actually responded to my view. Thats ok I'm just pointing that out.

As for the scenario you paint, well actually it is not too far removed from my own actual experience. My wife comes from a culture with very different perspectives on abortion than Ireland's. When new were expecting our first child I was shocked to discover that my wife considered it natural to have a scan for any issues the baby might have and that if there was an indication of for example Downs Syndrome she would consider an abortion the obvious next step.

Do you think that a) such a late term abortion should be allowed and b) you should have absolutely no say in the matter.

To at least partially answer your question, based on my experience. I didn't even occur to me that the state should have any role in any decision we might make. There was no question of "allowed", who would have the right to "allow" or "disallow"

As to the question of whether the father should have a say. Well in the context of the relationship I certainly think that the father should have a full say equal to that of the mother. If he didn't that would surely be the end of the relationship.

However if a woman became pregnant as a result of a casual sexual encounter, or the relationship had ended before the pregnancy was known, then I don't see that the father has much claim to a say.

 

[Firefly]

The abortion debate as we all know gets quite heated. One thing I would like to add, that's not really considered very often, is the possibility of adoption. Luckily we've been able to conceive but there are countless couples up & down the country who can't and who could offer the babies of an unwanted pregnancy a loving home.

 

[Purple]

You haven't actually responded to my view. Thats ok I'm just pointing that out.

I agree that it is the destruction of a human life. I don't see how it can be OK to abort a baby but a few days later, after the child is born, is it not OK to kill it.

It is not just the mothers decision as it is not just the mother involved in the equation because;
a) The father is involved as even in the scenario of a pregnancy as a result of casual sex the father will have a legal obligation to the child until it is an adult.
b) The baby is involved. Under Irish law we recognise the right to life of that child. I don't think we should dismiss that.

 

[Purple]

One thing I would like to add, that's not really considered very often, is the possibility of adoption.

I agree. It need not be a life long commitment for the mother.

 

[S.L.F]

That is a perfectly reasonable idea. No woman should have to carry a child if she does not want to.

Must be wonderful to control the reproductive process for both men and women.

In most countries a woman does not have to become a mother if she does not wish to and to force her to do so is considered barbaric and yet a man has no say as to whether he becomes a father, whether he wants to or not. That is unjust.

I cannot see anyone changing this.

I would have voted for her, her stance on abortion not withstanding, as the alternative was worse.

Trump won because the left made him attractive.

She represented more of the same stuff which has been pushed.

He represented a possible change.

If you want to know why he won here have a watch of Jonathon Pye explaining why he won

I dont think you understand my view. Which is is that abortion is the destruction of human life, and that no woman should have to carry a child against her will.

You can't have both views.

Either a child can be torn apart at a whim or it can't.

You haven't actually responded to my view. Thats ok I'm just pointing that out.

As for the scenario you paint, well actually it is not too far removed from my own actual experience. My wife comes from a culture with very different perspectives on abortion than Ireland's. When new were expecting our first child I was shocked to discover that my wife considered it natural to have a scan for any issues the baby might have and that if there was an indication of for example Downs Syndrome she would consider an abortion the obvious next step.

Cull the weak from the herd eh!

That's what a certain group did in the 1940's.

To at least partially answer your question, based on my experience. I didn't even occur to me that the state should have any role in any decision we might make. There was no question of "allowed", who would have the right to "allow" or "disallow"

Surely murder is wrong?

As to the question of whether the father should have a say. Well in the context of the relationship I certainly think that the father should have a full say equal to that of the mother. If he didn't that would surely be the end of the relationship.

Enforceable views or just worthless opinions with the hope she might not tear his baby apart because she is not bothered to have a baby?

However if a woman became pregnant as a result of a casual sexual encounter, or the relationship had ended before the pregnancy was known, then I don't see that the father has much claim to a say.

Why not?

If he is liable for child support if she chooses to have the baby why should he not get a say whether he is to be made a father against his will?

I agree that it is the destruction of a human life. I don't see how it can be OK to abort a baby but a few days later, after the child is born, is it not OK to kill it.

Or even as the question why do people think certain abortion is perfectly okay at certain stages of abortion but not others.

Either what is in there is human or it is not.

b) The baby is involved. Under Irish law we recognise the right to life of that child. I don't think we should dismiss that.

The 8th recognises that if the mother's life is in danger and killing the child will help then it is legal to terminate the life of the child.

26-28 babies were killed because of that reason in 2015 or 2016 (can't remember which).