S
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?
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?
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?
"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.
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.
Some on the left and some feminists are, but not all.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.
I think we disagree on who “The Left” are.Basically this entire campaign is an attempt by the left to stamp into law more radical feminist dogma into Irish culture.
Broadly speaking, yes.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.
I agree and it is disturbing. This aspect of abortion is not given any coverage here.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 think that’s a bit glib. It is never a casual decision.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.
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.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.
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.
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!
I think we disagree on who “The Left” are.
I agree and it is disturbing. This aspect of abortion is not given any coverage here.
I think that’s a bit glib. It is never a casual decision.
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.
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.
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!
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.
Abortion at any stage for whatever reason a woman wants.
ripping apart a baby without the aid of pain relief
Even if she is almost full term and the baby is capable of live outside the womb?That is a perfectly reasonable idea. No woman should have to carry a child if she does not want to.
I would have voted for her, her stance on abortion not withstanding, as the alternative was worse.Anyone stupid enough to support Hillary Clinton
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?
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.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.
Do you think that a) such a late term abortion should be allowed and b) you should have absolutely no say in the matter.
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.You haven't actually responded to my view. Thats ok I'm just pointing that out.
I agree. It need not be a life long commitment for the mother.One thing I would like to add, that's not really considered very often, is the possibility of adoption.
That is a perfectly reasonable idea. No woman should have to carry a child if she does not want to.
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 would have voted for her, her stance on abortion not withstanding, as the alternative was worse.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?