• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please contact us.



Sabina Higgins: Allow Abortion For Cases of Foetal Abnormalities - Inappropriate Intervention?

Skyrocket

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
3,904
The wife of the President has injected herself into the abortion debate by claiming that it is "an outrage" that women pregnant with an unborn baby that has a foetal abnormality do not have the choice to terminate the pregnancy.

"It's wonderful what has been achieved by the midwives and nursing association … they really fought for this (greater breastfeeding rates)and onwards for the breastfeeding, for 100pc (uptake) - unless there's some reason that they can't - and for all of the other things, the choice, the whole thing of the choice in the abortion and health," said Sabina Higgins.

"There has to be the choice that you know that...what do you call it ... that foetal abnormality that the person or persons should be made carry you know and sit in you know… these are really outrages against women and outrages against the world and nature," she said.

The Irish Independent saw fit to editorialise these remarks and presume that she meant to say "fatal" foetal abnormalities rather than just foetal abnormalities.

Exclusive audio: Abortion law 'an outrage' says wife of President - Independent.ie

Is it appropriate for the wife of the President to involve herself in a matter of public controversy, especially since it relates to the constitution which her husband is obliged by his oath of office to uphold and maintain?
 


Boy M5

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
21,731
If she spoke as a private citizen she's certainly within her rights & let's face it constitutionally she hasn't got a state position. Martin McAleese did some bridge building leveraging off of his wife's position?

Funny this story gets traction & the Zapper mileage caper doesn't?
 

drummed

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
37,442
There's no legal or constitutional restriction on her expressing an opinion so what is considered 'appropriate' is a matter of convention and nothing more.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,494
The wife of the President has injected herself into the abortion debate by claiming that it is "an outrage" that women pregnant with an unborn baby that has a foetal abnormality do not have the choice to terminate the pregnancy.

"It's wonderful what has been achieved by the midwives and nursing association … they really fought for this (greater breastfeeding rates)and onwards for the breastfeeding, for 100pc (uptake) - unless there's some reason that they can't - and for all of the other things, the choice, the whole thing of the choice in the abortion and health," said Sabina Higgins.

"There has to be the choice that you know that...what do you call it ... that foetal abnormality that the person or persons should be made carry you know and sit in you know… these are really outrages against women and outrages against the world and nature," she said.

The Irish Independent saw fit to editorialise these remarks and presume that she meant to say "fatal" foetal abnormalities rather than just foetal abnormalities.

Exclusive audio: Abortion law 'an outrage' says wife of President - Independent.ie

Is it appropriate for the wife of the President to involve herself in a matter of public controversy, especially since it relates to the constitution which her husband is obliged by his oath of office to uphold and maintain?
Wives should not be silenced by virtue of positions their husbands happen to hold.
 

White Horse

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
7,065
Would her comments be as prominently reported if she wasn't the wife of the President?

Whatever about the truth of her comments, she is setting a very bad example.
 

Gurdiev77

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2016
Messages
2,658
The wife of the President has injected herself into the abortion debate by claiming that it is "an outrage" that women pregnant with an unborn baby that has a foetal abnormality do not have the choice to terminate the pregnancy.

"It's wonderful what has been achieved by the midwives and nursing association … they really fought for this (greater breastfeeding rates)and onwards for the breastfeeding, for 100pc (uptake) - unless there's some reason that they can't - and for all of the other things, the choice, the whole thing of the choice in the abortion and health," said Sabina Higgins.

"There has to be the choice that you know that...what do you call it ... that foetal abnormality that the person or persons should be made carry you know and sit in you know… these are really outrages against women and outrages against the world and nature," she said.

The Irish Independent saw fit to editorialise these remarks and presume that she meant to say "fatal" foetal abnormalities rather than just foetal abnormalities.

Exclusive audio: Abortion law 'an outrage' says wife of President - Independent.ie

Is it appropriate for the wife of the President to involve herself in a matter of public controversy, especially since it relates to the constitution which her husband is obliged by his oath of office to uphold and maintain?
why not ? She is a citizen , a woman and a mother . She is also unlikely to have undue influence .
 

drummed

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
37,442
Would her comments be as prominently reported if she wasn't the wife of the President?

Whatever about the truth of her comments, she is setting a very bad example.
Women expressing their personal opinion is a bad example? Are you one of those Sharia law fans?

Bad example to who exactly?
 

stakerwallace

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2011
Messages
13,434
The husband of the last President seemed to get involved in coaxing some paramilitaries into a more peaceful mode in the North. Is that not true? I don't see any problem with anyone expressing their opinion as I'm grown up enough to take it for what it is: an opinion and not some sort of magisterial unquestionable pronouncement.
 

stakerwallace

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2011
Messages
13,434
Just as well we don't have Sarkozi's missus here and she off making films with Woody Allen while Michael D Sarkozi is at home doing his washing in the Aras
 

MichaelR

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
2,056
I disagree with her opinion but strongly support her right to express it. She is not the President of Ireland and her Constitutional rights should not be affected by the position her husband holds.
 

gerhard dengler

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Messages
47,552
Higgins wife is the same person who visited a person convicted before an Irish court, serving their sentence in an Irish prison.

It is reasonable to assume that what she says and does - is all done in the knowledge of her being the spouse of the current President.
 

cricket

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
14,029
Higgins wife is the same person who visited a person convicted before an Irish court, serving their sentence in an Irish prison.

It is reasonable to assume that what she says and does - is all done in the knowledge of her being the spouse of the current President.
Visiting a prisoner ................... imagine that !
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
88,291
Would her comments be as prominently reported if she wasn't the wife of the President?

Whatever about the truth of her comments, she is setting a very bad example.
I would suggest that whether she is setting a bad example depends precisely on the truth of her comments.
 

freewillie

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
7,491
Of course if she had spoken against changing the law most of the scrotes would be pilloring her
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,494
Yes but would anyone take any notice of what she says if it was not for her husband and the position he holds?
Maybe not but that's hardly within her control. If someone were arguing that her views should be given any more weight than any other citizen, that would be silly. But it's equally silly to expect a woman to withhold her opinions for seven years because her husband has a particular job.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,494
Higgins wife is the same person who visited a person convicted before an Irish court, serving their sentence in an Irish prison.

It is reasonable to assume that what she says and does - is all done in the knowledge of her being the spouse of the current President.
Yes, I think she probably knows who her spouse is.

The issue is why who her spouse is ought to affect what she says or who she sees.
 

gijoe

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
15,426
Or course we all know that this is in effect the President speaking his opinion via his spousal mouthpiece in order to get around the 'political interference'.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,494
Or course we all know that this is in effect the President speaking his opinion via his spousal mouthpiece in order to get around the 'political interference'.
You might want to revisit your definition of 'we all know'.

Unless it suddenly means 'some of us suspect without evidence', then your post is factually wrong.
 

livingstone

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
24,494
Seems like Sabina is merely piggybacking on the prominent post of her pint-sized spouse in order to give her a soapbox to promote her personal views, similar to the way in which his issue used the Higgins name as a springboard into the Seanad.
Did you expect his daughter to change her name by deed poll before running for election to the Seanad?
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top