Post 8th Discussion

MsDaisyC

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2017
Messages
4,517
If a new mother doesn't want to be a mother she shouldn't be forced to, should she be allowed to kill her child?
She becomes a mother when the baby exits the womb and killing children is illegal, so I'm going to go with no, duh. :rolleyes:
 


Brenny

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
1,233
She becomes a mother when the baby exits the womb and killing children is illegal, so I'm going to go with no, duh. :rolleyes:
When it's in the birth canal, it's okay to say "kill it, i don't want it"?
 

petaljam

Moderator
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
33,431
If a new mother doesn't want to be a mother she shouldn't be forced to, should she be allowed to kill her child?
Gosh if only someone had thought to frame the issue in those terms during the repeal campaign. That would undoubtedly have swung it for anti choice, it's such a convincing point. Astonishing that nobody thought of it. :rolleyes:
 

Brenny

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
1,233
Is it? Where is that written in Irish law?
There was a question mark at the end of my sentence. I was asking a question in response to petaljam's statement that no women should be forced to proceed with a pregnancy if she doesn't want to.

Once a woman is past the 12 week mark then she DOES have to proceed with a pregnancy unless there is health factors relating to the fetus or mother. My question was one of ethics not legality, if no pregnant woman should be forced to proceed with a pregnancy then how late can she say no? Just before the point of delivery?

BTW, i voted yes. I wanted abortion to be safe, EARLY AND RARE. I always swore to myself after voting that I'd never allow it to be trivialized.
 

MsDaisyC

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2017
Messages
4,517
There was a question mark at the end of my sentence. I was asking a question in response to petaljam's statement that no women should be forced to proceed with a pregnancy if she doesn't want to.

Once a woman is past the 12 week mark then she DOES have to proceed with a pregnancy unless there is health factors relating to the fetus or mother. My question was one of ethics not legality, if no pregnant woman should be forced to proceed with a pregnancy then how late can she say no? Just before the point of delivery?

BTW, i voted yes. I wanted abortion to be safe, EARLY AND RARE. I always swore to myself after voting that I'd never allow it to be trivialized.
Why are you asking such ridiculous questions then? No woman goes through 40 weeks of pregnancy and hours of labour only to decide on the cusp of birth that she wants an abortion.
 

Brenny

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
1,233
Why are you asking such ridiculous questions then? No woman goes through 40 weeks of pregnancy and hours of labour only to decide on the cusp of birth that she wants an abortion.
You always begin with an extreme example to work out where boundaries are. Abortions have been preformed at 39 weeks. Personally, i think the legal aspect to it all is secondary to the ethical. Making it legal only makes it safer, if a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy then she'll do it regardless of the law.

Canada has very liberal laws and very low rates of abortion. Societal attitudes are what's most important, that's why i ask about extreme examples - to ascertain what is taboo and what isn't
 

MsDaisyC

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2017
Messages
4,517
You always begin with an extreme example to work out where boundaries are. Abortions have been preformed at 39 weeks. Personally, i think the legal aspect to it all is secondary to the ethical. Making it legal only makes it safer, if a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy then she'll do it regardless of the law.

Canada has very liberal laws and very low rates of abortion. Societal attitudes are what's most important, that's why i ask about extreme examples - to ascertain what is taboo and what isn't
Straight from the antichoice playbook. There is legislation in place so taboos are a red herring. Women and girls in Ireland won't be getting abortions at 39 weeks of pregnancy.
 

Brenny

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
1,233
Straight from the antichoice playbook. There is legislation in place so taboos are a red herring. Women and girls in Ireland won't be getting abortions at 39 weeks of pregnancy.
Do you think the option should be there to get an abortion at 39 weeks?

I'm not anti-choice, I'm pro-discussion.
 

MsDaisyC

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2017
Messages
4,517
Do you think the option should be there to get an abortion at 39 weeks?

I'm not anti-choice, I'm pro-discussion.
Abortion at 39 weeks is called giving birth.
 

Brenny

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
1,233
Abortion at 39 weeks is called giving birth.
Not everyone would agree with you and very late term abortions occasionally do occur and these instances are usually used by the pro-life side whenever they want to tell a horror story.
late term abortions in UK

By the way, I've posed extreme examples to the pro-choice side as well. One poster once told me that even the morning-after pill was murder so I asked him/her if it is murder if I choose not to have sex with my wife when she is ovulating. He said I was ridiculous and trolling, but both of us are frighteningly fertile and my wife conceived on two different occasions after coming off the pill only one month.

I only want to remove the polemicists and let everyone recognise that this is an issue with 1000 shades of grey and everyone should be agnostic when approaching it. I don't think the morning-after pill is murder but I think abortion at 39 weeks is.

So what about the 38 weeks in between? How can something be merely a collection of cells and okay to abort one day and yet the next day if you terminate it can be considered murder? I've never been able to resolve this matter and I'm suspicious of anyone who is black and white.

I agree that women should be able to choose, but I'm interested in why the rates are so high in some countries (Russia has a rate of 53 abortions per 1000 women) and so low in other countries where it is completely legal (Switzerland has a rate of 7.3 per 1000 women and Austria even lower - about 2 per 1000 women). Why is this? What can we do to be more like Switzerland, legal but low, or should we even be concerned about rates of abortion.

Also, is abortion always about a woman's choice? Are women really choosing to abort so many female foetuses in China and India?
 

MsDaisyC

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2017
Messages
4,517
Not everyone would agree with you and very late term abortions occasionally do occur and these instances are usually used by the pro-life side whenever they want to tell a horror story.
late term abortions in UK

By the way, I've posed extreme examples to the pro-choice side as well. One poster once told me that even the morning-after pill was murder so I asked him/her if it is murder if I choose not to have sex with my wife when she is ovulating. He said I was ridiculous and trolling, but both of us are frighteningly fertile and my wife conceived on two different occasions after coming off the pill only one month.

I only want to remove the polemicists and let everyone recognise that this is an issue with 1000 shades of grey and everyone should be agnostic when approaching it. I don't think the morning-after pill is murder but I think abortion at 39 weeks is.

So what about the 38 weeks in between? How can something be merely a collection of cells and okay to abort one day and yet the next day if you terminate it can be considered murder? I've never been able to resolve this matter and I'm suspicious of anyone who is black and white.

I agree that women should be able to choose, but I'm interested in why the rates are so high in some countries (Russia has a rate of 53 abortions per 1000 women) and so low in other countries where it is completely legal (Switzerland has a rate of 7.3 per 1000 women and Austria even lower - about 2 per 1000 women). Why is this? What can we do to be more like Switzerland, legal but low, or should we even be concerned about rates of abortion.

Also, is abortion always about a woman's choice? Are women really choosing to abort so many female foetuses in China and India?
We did that 2 years ago.

The points you raise are not relevant in Irish law, so find somewhere else to play.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
33,839
Twitter
No
It is an American thing. The American evangelists see the anti-abortion activism as a global thing so they are forever going on about Roe vs Wade and having to be reminded that Roe vs Wade has no business being discussed anywhere outside the US jurisdiction and is inherently irrelevant to other legal jurisdictions.

The mechanics of this error are simple. Most of the funding comes from the US for these hard right socially reactionary funding sources in the US and they are always a little hazy on the subject of other countries anyway and many couldn't even point out a border outside the US on a map of physical geography.

So they end up debating Roe vs Wade as if it was somehow relevant in other countries' laws- primarily because Roe vs Wade is the main enemy of US based activists.

It's the globalisation of the stupid.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
33,839
Twitter
No
The number of predominantly student-age US evangelical groups who sent their little wingnuts to our Republic, lying on the immigration applications that they were just tourists visiting, which meant they broke Irish law by advocacy and campaigning while they were in the state, was noticeable.

All of them appeared to be of an age where everything is very black and white, whereas most of us over the age of 30 will have learned that life contains many shades of grey.
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
33,839
Twitter
No
Anyone who disagrees with the O'Taliban is a satanist according to the O'Taliban's lights. Saves the tedium of having to prepare compelling argumentation or to win a debate.

You can cut through all that by suggesting that anyone who disagrees with your worldview is obviously owned by satan. It is pygmy-thinking.
 

redmonite

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
1,539
It is an American thing. The American evangelists see the anti-abortion activism as a global thing so they are forever going on about Roe vs Wade and having to be reminded that Roe vs Wade has no business being discussed anywhere outside the US jurisdiction and is inherently irrelevant to other legal jurisdictions.

The mechanics of this error are simple. Most of the funding comes from the US for these hard right socially reactionary funding sources in the US and they are always a little hazy on the subject of other countries anyway and many couldn't even point out a border outside the US on a map of physical geography.

So they end up debating Roe vs Wade as if it was somehow relevant in other countries' laws- primarily because Roe vs Wade is the main enemy of US based activists.

It's the globalisation of the stupid.
But surely the constitution is not the place to have abortion law, it's a matter for the legislature ?
 

Lumpy Talbot

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
33,839
Twitter
No
Was saying that in the early 1980s, door-to-door. I'm only referring to Ireland. Couldn't care less what happens in Pilgrim County, USA.
 

MsDaisyC

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2017
Messages
4,517
But surely the constitution is not the place to have abortion law, it's a matter for the legislature ?
It never was which is why the 8th was such a clusterfock from the start. It took 35 years to get rid of it and women's healthcare is no longer a constitutional issue - It shouldn't be a legal issue either, but we'll continue to work on that.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom