Hi Louise, Choice Ireland makes that very point in our founding documents. http://choiceireland.org/node/10

Just read that, thanks. That seems more balanced than most polarised sides of the debate.

@ Choice Ireland,

Do you know who we can complain to about these billboards as the ASAI are unable to investigate?

What’s your opinion on the statement on these billboards then? I applaud your pragmatism though, wish other pro-lifers would take that view.

sorry to break it to you but if you think it should be available then you’re pro-choice, not pro-life.

Haha, that’s true. I think in fairness to her she meant her own personal opinion is that abortion is wrong but that she agrees with a woman’s right to choose. So yeh, she’s pro-choice.

I don’t know really. Personally I think they’re okay and they’re a good thing. I think they’ll make people think twice. If you feel guilty about getting an abortion then I think you need to assess why you feel that way and maybe it’s not right for you. There is always adoption if you can’t afford a child. If you can’t make up your mind and an ad is going to upset you then I think you REALLY need to reassess your plan.

I guess due to the fact it’s probable that I’m infertile I feel much stronger about pro-life. I believe people have free will (yes I’m bringing God into it) and He gave us free will. People have the God given right to choose.

I think the guilty feeling is more likely to be about the judgment of others. Like how a gay man might have felt guilty about expressing his sexuality before homosexuality was made legal in early 90s. I don’t think many women who have abortions feel guilty about potentially murdering a fetus. Because I believe anyone with that sort of sentiment wouldn’t choose to have an abortion. And adoption is all fine and grand but the social stigma that an unplanned pregnancy can have, having to carry a baby to term and then explain why you gave it up for adoption could be a horrible experience.

And I’m sorry about your own personal circumstances, I’m sure they influence your views and I respect that.

Martin I really appreciate your opinion and thank you for debating this issue without attempting to make me feel like less of a human being (which is what I’ve come to expect from others on such a sensitive topic)

I agree with what you’re saying, but is there really that much shame relating to adoption? Or unplanned pregnancy? I believe it’s so much harder to give your child up for adoption than to get an abortion.

Again, it’s individual choice but if these adverts really are making people think, then I agree with them.

Do you really think aborting a child simply because the woman is not ready for a child is right? It has potential to be a human being just like you and me. I really believe in giving that life a chance!

This is just my opinion and I would never condemn anyone for getting an abortion, I know it must be hard. But if these ads are helping people in that position to really think, then it’s a good thing.

If anything, it’s promoting a (mostly) healthy debate.

The women I think this will most adversely influence is women who have had abortions and now are told that they should feel guilty! And horrible! Plenty of women have abortions because they believe it’s the right thing for them, even if they do view it as immoral. I know I think they should have the right to make that trade off if it suits them.

“Do you really think aborting a child simply because the woman is not ready for a child is right? It has potential to be a human being just like you and me. I really believe in giving that life a chance!” I totally agree with you that adoption is so much harder and I think a lot of times “just give it up for adoption” is bandied around like it’s an easy option. It’s not and I have so much respect for it. But what it comes down to for me, is will I force a woman to sustain another human being (basically give life support off her body) for 9 months? I can’t do that and clearly, forcing women to go through pregnancy is something you’re uncomfortable with as well, even if you have doubts on the morality of abortion.

Thank you for sharing your experiences, Siobhan.

Dec hates women,he has reduced women to the role of incubator and comments on how women look.

This has nothing to do with the Catholic church, absolutely nothing. For me it’s about terminating the life of a poor child who doesn’t seem to enter the equation . What’s the difference between having an abortion and killing a child in its cot ? NONE.

Dec my cousin was pregnant 2 years ago, the baby was going to die either just before birth or just after, the baby had a serious illness in the womb and would suffer, also the life of the mother was at high rish of death. She had the trauma of having to travel to the UK to terminate the child she wanted. Its not all about women getting pregnant and having an abortion many other reasons people choose to go ahead with it.

Trying to paint all pro-lifers as under the influence of the church. Poor show.

That’s a completely different situation altogether and it’s where I’m in favour of abortion (as I think most people are). I just think that no one should have the right to end the life of what’s going to be a perfectly healthy child just because it doesn’t suit them. And before anyone says it my views have absolutely nothing to do with religion.

I love lamp, the pro-life group would want my cousin to go through with the pregancy, the baby would suffer and die and a high probability the mother would die to. She has 2 other children and a husband.

Youth Defence, the (admittedly extremist) organisation in question is opposed to abortion in circumstances where there is no chance of survival outside the womb.

Mark I would consider myself pro-life but what’s the point when the child will die anyway. I’m totally in favour of it when there is a genuine medical reason to carry it out not because it would be an inconvenience to a lifestyle.

Apart from the catholic church reference (church is a sick cruel joke) I agree 100%. Only the most ignorant person would presume to tell another person what to do with their pregnancy/body. End of.

it’s nothing to do with any church, murder is wrong, some women i know don’t believe the baby is a real person until at least 3 months!! from the moment of conception it is an amazing person, why kill an unborn baby!? i know of cases where the life of the mother is in genuine mortal danger, however when given that news myself more than 3 years back i opted not to have a tube removed with my still living baby in it, obviously causing it’s death if removed! i was nearly dragged down to a ward and told the choice was out of my hands, however i didn’t die as promised and my beautiful daughter is fit and healthy!! i wouldn’t have been a woman who had survived if i had listened i would have been a mother of a dead child! there is little or no excuse for killing a baby, if its that much bother giving birth don’t get pregnant, its not their lives they are playing with its their babies. i am not a catholic either before you try jump on the religion bandwagon again

You seem to have had a very difficult experience and ot’s wonderful that you were able to make a choice that was best for you, Sinead. It’s disappointing that you don’t feel the same consideration should be extended to other women.

if its that much bother giving birth don’t get pregnant, its not their lives they are playing with its their babies.- That sounds very unsympathetic to many women who find themselves in difficult situations. How much of your view is indifference to the fear and emotional pain some unwanted pregnancies bring?

Finally, I don’t think someone who has never experienced being unable to bring a pregnancy to term has the right to tell other women that we are “mothers of a dead baby.” I absolutely respect people’s rights to self identify as such, but please don’t put that label on us.

Lazy argument, brand everyone who opposes your view as a Catholic zealot is a recent trait that seems to find favour amongst a certain tranche of people. I get a shock every time I hear abortions described as medical procedures as though they were absolutely necessary in every case. Rarely to you hear pro-choice people speak of something like the Melbourne mix-up or the recent appalling Chinese forced abortion case. Even more rarely do you hear such people talk of fathers right on any abortion case. So a woman does not want to carry a child for 9 months but she can force a man to pay for it for the next 18 years, hardly any equality there?

In any case I find it hard to accept the view of someone who thinks it should be a persons right to have a baby partially birthed, have a hole drilled in its head so that its brains can be sucked out and all in the name of womens rights as it is only a ‘medical procedure’ and not actually the destruction of a life. It would be churlish of me to say there are never circumstances where the termination of a pregnancy is necessary but this is nothing short of infanticide.

Jim, most abortions happen before 12 weeks when the embryo/foetus is about 2 inches long. There is no sucking out of the ‘brain’ or drilling into the head.
The issue with forced abortion is completely different. That woman WANTED her child, she was held down against her will and had a needle inserted into her vagina and the pregnancy she wanted was terminated. the majority of women who abort do not want to be pregnant and abort very early in their pregnancy. Woman who terminate late are rare and are due to the foetus causing health issues for the woman or the foetus cannot survive outside the womb anyway.

Jim. I think you’re confused as to what “pro-choice” is about. In regards to the case in China recently – that woman was forced against her will to have an abortion. Pro-choice means giving women the CHOICE to make their own decisions. Therefore, this example is invalid.

Father’s rights in this case is a little more tricky – but I don’t see how any person should be allowed to have a say over another person’s body like that.

And here, your examples of what you think abortion to be are ridiculous. As it was pointed out down below, up to 90% of abortions are carried out before week twelve. A large majority of abortions are performed with PILLS – as in, they induce a miscarriage.

I’m sorry but this is something that effects thousands of women’s lives – you can’t just spout out loads of nonsense you picked up without actually researching it – that’s pretty insulting.

So fathers rights don’t count at all? I find that pretty insulting to be honest.

I’m perfectly aware of what abortion is and I’m not stupid enough to think that it only affects late term or crisis pregnancies. We now refer to a medical procedure with the explicit result being the ending of a pregnancy. I would suggest that yes of course we have such pregnancies every day in this country and that termination should be available. But do we have several thousand of them every year? Really? If so is there not another problem that we should be dealing with?

The justification is still there for late term abortions though and the argument is that it is better to do so because the life of the person would be short and awful. I work with such people every day who would fit into that description and if the technology had existed at the time to diagnose what was wrong they may never have been born. In any case, what are you terminating at that stage? A baby or a bunch of cells, albeit a bunch that even at twelve weeks have all the necessary credentials to be a perfect human being?

With regards to father’s rights – I’m sorry, I just don’t see how one person can have a final say on what another person should do with their bodies. That’s my stance on it. And it’s already law in every other instance that a person’s bodily autonomy be protected, so I don’t see why it should be different in this case. I’m not saying it’s NICE, it’s tragic – but I think a woman’s rights over her body trumps a man’s rights to have a woman carry his child. That’s not to say that the father shouldn’t have an input – but he cannot in all conscience FORCE a woman to continue a pregnancy – that’s just creepy.

I never said there were thousands of them every year – I said abortion affects thousands of women. And yes, as I’ve said in this comment thread already, the more we can do to stop unwanted pregnancies from happening the better. I think everyone is in agreement with this?

The rest of your argument is, frankly, beside the point. What pro-choice is about is giving a woman her full human rights. We’re arguing that women should have final say over their bodies and that abortion should be an option available to them if they wish to choose it.

You can actually be sympathetic to a man in this situation without feeling he deserves legal rights over someone’s body. Most women I know who have gone through this who were in healthy relationships have made their decision with a lot of input from their partner.

Are we to nurture a eugenics based society where the sick are culled and only the healthy desirables are kept alive because that’s what aborting a sick baby is. It’s incredible the amount of babies that were so called ‘not viable’ and turned out to have full and healthy lives. What does it matter that they’re sick, they should be loved and cared for. Even if a child was to die very soon after birth would they not deserve the dignity of a proper burial rather than being discarded in a dumpster outside of an abortion clinic. There’s no such thing as compassionate abortion. Why also would it be a trauma to travel to the UK, it’s only a bloody twenty minute flight. You are right of course, it should very well be traumatic knowing what you are about to do to your baby.

Or maybe they could just learn to act like a responsible human beings?

I really also doubt that the biggest problems these girls have in their lives is their abortions. While 5 to 8 unplanned pregnancies might rarely just be contraceptive bad luck, I would also hope counsellors would make sure there was no abusive or coercive situations in their lives.

i love lamp – how do you propose to teach them to be responsible? again, do you force them to carry their pregnancy to term? what if they try to abort themselves? do you arrest them until they give birth?

you simply want to police women’s bodies. who are you to say whether someone should have an abortion or not?

I love lamp fails completely to understand the complexities of human sexual behaviour. If we could all always act responsibly we’d be robots, or worse, right wing conservatives.

Education. Surely prevention is better than a cure. Martin I would have thought you would have suggested that seeing how you were going on about it being good for the prevention to antisocial behaviour in another article.

Where did any pro-choice person on here say that education isn’t part of the solution?

No one did and I didn’t state that you didn’t. I suggested that it was a solution and thought you would have suggested it.

they obviously ain’t paying for it!! or using their brains, let alone thinking about these babies they have disposed of!

Sinead, they might be ‘babies’ in your eyes but they arent in mine. I see miscarriages every day and they are not even nearly ‘babies’.

Freaked out at how obsessively people make so many presumptions about other people’s lives. It’s not healthy.

Ah, it’s just indicative of an absence of logic :)
Assumptions are dangerous territory, you nearly always get it wrong and always end up looking worse for it..
We all do it though, it’s a very faulty aspect of our psyche..

True :) (totally won’t let them off the hook though!)

It would be great if the choice was that easy but it’s not. Free will: I have the free will to do whatever I want so long as it does not interfere with you’re freedom. If I hit you then I have breeched you’re freedom. In the same way a woman has the freedom to choose anything she wants as long as it does not interfere with the freedom and right of the baby to live. The ultimate right is the right to life and without this all other rights have no meaning.

It seems to be all about the mothers feeling after her choice. What about the baby/ human beings pain and suffering during such sufferings. Just because we can’t hear little innocent babied cry dose not mean they agreed with their death sentence. I’m feeling sick at the thoughts of it. I do under stand in life and death situations.

Are you really contending that a foetus has the cognative capacity to either agree or disagree with their ‘death sentence’.

I wonder do my sperm agree with their death sentences? I can’t keep up with the paperwork either, millions a day :(

Maire, there is very little evidence that foetuses can feel pain. At least not until after week 22.
When up to 90% of abortions are carried out before week 12, the rest being predominantly in the case of fatal foetal abnormality, you may find that your concern is actually unwarranted..

Here’s the paper discussing that very issue :)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1440624/

@ Rudi
From the ASAI website
Quote:
“RE: Youth Defence Campaign
The primary objective of the ASAI Code of Standards for Advertising, Promotional and Direct Marketing is the regulation of commercial marketing communications in the interest of consumers.

Marketing communications that do not have a commercial element and which whose principal purpose is to express the advertiser’s position on a political, religious, industrial relations, social or aesthetic matter or on an issue of public interest or concern do not come within the remit of the Code.

We have received a number of complaints about the current Youth Defence campaign. However, as this advertising does not have a commercial element (e.g. a fundraising element) and is expressing the advertiser’s position on an issue of public interest, it is outside the remit of the Code.

We are therefore unable to investigate complaints about this campaign.”

I have a teenage sister who is pregnant. It is her fault she got pregnant and I really do not think its grounds for killing an otherwise perfectly healthy baby. There is always adoption.

I have asked her opinion on this multiple times and she agrees. She knows it’s her fault. Why should her child suffer? She knows it’s going to be difficult but she believes carrying her child is the right thing to do.

I totally respect your sister’s decision that this is right for her. I just would like to believe we can get beyond considering a conception to be a blameworthy action. I know I would personally hate to feel like my mother gave birth to me because she felt she had to rather than because I was wanted.

So Nick, would you think abortion was right because she ‘didn’t want you’?

Would you not think adoption is better?

Yes. I personally don’t think abortion is immoral. When I personally experienced a miscarriage, I became more pro choice. I simply don’t believe that development is meant to be flawless, since so many pregnancies end in miscarriages. If my body can end a pregnancy, why can’t my brain? I obviously can’t go back and not be born, but I do respect my mother’s right to not have given birth to me.

I think something which is glossed over in discussion about adoption is how there are demands for very specific infants. Infants without disabilities who had two white, college educated people are able to be placed easily, but there are plenty of older children, ethnic minorities and disabled infants which can’t be placed. It’s not necessarily a perfect solution. I have a lot of respect for women who go through it, but it can also have a very negative effect on women’s mental health and I would never DEMAND a woman go through that.

I think being thankful and grateful to our mothers for going on the scary journey of pregnancy is something we should all be. I think we should be humble. Not feel that we have a right to be here, like we can dictate over another human being. We’re here because we were extremely lucky, because our mothers endured pregnancy and birth for us.

Why can’t we be thankful and give our mothers and all women the power over their own bodies and their own destinies?

that’s a stupid argument for abortion!

I don’t think it was meant to be an argument for abortion. It was an example of how one famously “pro life” organisation (eg, the RCC) prioritise.

Brian was explaining that this particular group deemed a child who was raped having an abortion as being worthy of excommunication, but not the adult, pedophile who raped her (as in, the person older and wiser, and guilty of committing a crime that caused this 9 year old to fall pregnant).

It’s quite twisted really.. But the only argument that Brian could possibly be making is that the organisation in question may not necessarily be the best to judge morality based upon these actions.

@Sinead I wasn’t trying to use this as an arguement for abortion but to give an example of the mindset of the Catholic church and those it supports, those who whould very much argue against it. They stated that, in their eyes, abortion was a more serious crime than the rape of a 9 year old child and excommunicated the child, her mother and the doctors who preformed an abortion to save the childs life.
For the record I am pro choice, I don’t think abortion should be used as a form of contraception, but as I said earlier anyone who would do this is very foolish as there are other easier and cheaper forms out there. If someone should need an abortion I believe they should have access to one in this country, withouth any guilt, and not have to travel to the UK or mainland Europe.

Thank you Shanti, if I could afford a publicist…

No worries Brian, I saw a misunderstanding and simply sought to help clear it up (didn’t realise you were already replying!).. You wouldn’t want me as a publicist though.. I’ve got foot in mouth disease :)

Sinead, if your little girl.was raped and made pregnant, would you force her to continue with the pregnancy?

Yes a lifestyle choice as in they don’t want their lifestyle to change and are willing to kill a potentially healthy human being to accomplish it. No one in Ireland starves to death so your argument isn’t valid, if people are so worried about having another mouth to feed practice safe sex.

The most common reason women in the UK give for an abortion is contraceptive failure. Of all the reasons to oppose legalisation of abortion, the “well, you asked for it by having sex” argument is the weakest, due to the incredibly unnatural view of human sexuality it entails. A child should never be a punishment.

So me some evidence that says most abortions are down to contraceptive failure. I would agree that many of them are but I wouldn’t think most.

For obvious reasons, most people who get pregnant don’t have someone monitoring them at the time of conception. The only evidence we can really go off of is self reported, unless you have some kind of methodology that isn’t a wee bit pervy!

there is adoption, win, win there are lists and lists of people unable to have a child of their own and would do anything for a chance at being fantastic loving parents!!!

Sinead, are you aware of how many children ready to be adopted in Ireland? Over 5,000. Considering the population of Ireland, that is quite sizable. I have no idea where there are “lists and lists” of people wishing to adopt when there are children in need, but perhaps you could point me to some actual credible information which says all these children are currently in the process of being adopted and yet there are still long waiting lists?

Of course, not all of these children are infants, so maybe you’re arguing that infants should be produced so older children in foster care don’t have to be adopted? There are so many older children in foster care who desperately need loving homes; why are these never featured into a pro life argument?

Well show me a report were this has been stated as the main reason for the abortion.

It’s been self -reported as the main reason for unplanned pregnancy. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3515400.stm

I think we can all agree unwanted pregnancy is the most direct cause of abortion.

Fair enough but where it says 62% of the 3000 blamed issues with the pill and 70% of that 62% forgot to take it at least once a month. So it sounds like its more of a problem with forgetting to use the contraception than a problem with its effectiveness.

I love lamp, so some women forgot to take their pill but why didnt the men who had sex with these women use a condom?

I love lamp…if I had magical powers I’d turn you into a woman – you’d quickly change your tune lol.

I’m only going on what the report said. Only a small percentage was for not using contraception and and an even smaller figure for broken condoms.

Her point is that it’s a lot easier to say women should have to give birth to a child as punishment for having sex if your body and your life would never be on the line.

If people can’t afford a child then they shouldn’t be having sex. Abortion is not an answer to poverty or another form of birth control. No one in this country starves to death and if they did then they’re not taking advantage of the free fry up packages.

And on the “make a complaint” section of their website they have this:
Quote:
“RE: Youth Defence Campaign
The primary objective of the ASAI Code of Standards for Advertising, Promotional and Direct Marketing is the regulation of commercial marketing communications in the interest of consumers.

Marketing communications that do not have a commercial element and which whose principal purpose is to express the advertiser’s position on a political, religious, industrial relations, social or aesthetic matter or on an issue of public interest or concern do not come within the remit of the Code.

We have received a number of complaints about the current Youth Defence campaign. However, as this advertising does not have a commercial element (e.g. a fundraising element) and is expressing the advertiser’s position on an issue of public interest, it is outside the remit of the Code.

We are therefore unable to investigate complaints about this campaign.”

That’s the thing, a referendum is unnecessary. All it requires is a bill through the Dail.

Not as straight forward as that Daniel, the courts have held that it is permissible for a woman to be granted an abortion where a real and substantive treat to a women’s life exists. They interpeted a particular set of circumstances in the x case to meet that test. The question therefore is how do you define what constitutes a real and substantive treat to a woman’s life legislatively in the context of advancing medical research?

Im not qualified to assess that, but I have no doubt there are those that are, and I should hope that said experts would be capable of defining the criteria that would permit an abortion in the twenty years that have passed since the X case ruling.

Daniel, I was n’t asking you to tell me what the life threatening conditions were I posed the question in a general sense to illustrate the difficulties in defining in legislative terms in meeting the test. I certainly would not like to be the group of people charged with defining what those conditions are.

Oh and don’t forget the women whose pelvises they insisted on having doctors slice open to get around the tricky issue of contraception in relation to caesarian sections. That one’s my favourite.

So-called pro-life movement trying to impress delegates at TedFest to maintain the money train. Abortion would require constitutional change – unlikely. Then why the need for constant campaigning? Making masturbation illegal the next big thing?

Counselling is recommended after hysterectomies, too. Maybe we should ban those?

Anybody who murders their unborn child needs help. Help which unfortunately is too late for the poor aborted child.

It’s not a walk in a park but where’s the poster saying chemotherapy isn’t a walk in the park, there is other options. Or maybe just maybe this isn’t about the effect of a medical procedure on a person but more about the medical procedure itself.

why stop at abortions? why not make procreation between inferior specimens illegal too? i wonder how many of the women that get abortions for ‘inconvenient’ pregnancies (non life threatening or the result of rape) have any real understanding of what they are doing?

“i wonder how many of the women that get abortions for ‘inconvenient’ pregnancies (non life threatening or the result of rape) have any real understanding of what they are doing?” – I’m pretty sure most women in Ireland terminating a pregnancy have been told that it’s a child more than once or twice. I’m a bit baffled by this idea that if we tell women it’s a child (which apparently is a theory none of them have ever heard?), they won’t want abortions.

Revolting Peasant – the way you ask “i wonder how many of the women…have any real understanding of what they are doing?” makes you sound like you don’t trust women to understand what abortion is. There’s a lot of people who seem to worry that women will get abortions “willy nilly” without putting any thought into it at all.

It just sounds like a lot of people who don’t think women are capable of making informed decisions.

i didnt assume women didnt know, i wondered if they knew, i wonder do they ask themselves the question ‘what if i had been an inconvenient pregnancy?’

i wonder do they ask themselves the question ‘what if i had been an inconvenient pregnancy?’ – Well, as my mother is pro choice, I hope she would have made the decision which was best for her. I do love her quite a lot!

I also could have never been conceived, been miscarried (which happens fairly often in pregnancies), been stillborn, died from crib death or childhood leukemia, or even just born into a horrible situation in Africa. I will admit that the possibility that I might not have been carried to term doesn’t particularly weigh on my mind.

its obvious no one ever changes anyone elses mind in debates of this nature, it might not seem it but i am also pro-choice but for some reason i can see other sides of the argument, i would hate to have to face that decision

Oh, I can also totally see why people, especially those with strong convictions that it’s a person, could think abortion is immoral. I have no problem with that. For me, what it comes down to, is I don’t believe we can ever force one human being to grant use of their womb/blood to another human being without their permission.

I have considered my conscience, and even if it is a person, I cannot believe it’s ethical force a woman to give life support without her permission for 9 months.

fair enough, i would be more harsh than you in this regard, i dont see why they should have the choice for that reason, i favour economic or unhealthy situations as a more just reason, so maybe i simply dont understand…

Revolting Peasant, I’m sure they do ask themselves all those tough questions. It’s a tough situation and a tough idea to even think about, really. But that’s life. It’s complicated and it’s never perfect. Personally, as a woman, I’d be terrified to think that if I found myself accidentally pregnant that I’d be forced to carry it to term…I’d feel like a slave who didn’t own their body, and I wouldn’t be mentally stable that’s for sure.

The only thing that’s simple is whether we trust people to make their own decisions (in the case of abortion, a woman would have a doctor to consult and would have access to therapy, and probably has a family or partner to help her make the decision) or whether we, as a society, intervene. Is it really right for us to butt in on this kind of decision? Take me for example – if every fiber of my being was against it and my whole life had to chance so drastically it caused great stress to cope – would you feel comfortable telling me I had to go through with it? Even if I didn’t have economic reasons or was in an unhealthy situation? I’m the one who will have to live with the decision, so I’m the one who should be the one to make the decision – no?

And as I’ve pointed out many times before – in no other circumstance is a person legally compelled to use their body or any part of their body to aid another person. You’re not required by law to donate a kidney or even blood to someone who wouldn’t survive without it. So why is this different in the case of pregnant women? Why do we force them to sustain a life – even just a potential human life – to the detriment of themselves? Because pregnancy isn’t a walk in the park – it’s pretty tough and pretty dangerous too (not to mention expensive).

If I were to edit your post, it would read:
“To be perfectly honest, I think that….”
You have not polled most pro-choice people.

Revolting, not having a kid for financial reasons IS a lifestyle choice. i know a few girls who got pregnant young and decided that they didnt want to have to move home and go on welfare for the rest of their lives. Not every pregnant girl has the support of her family or the father. many people cant afford to have families and more importantly, not every woman WANTS to be a mother.

The irony. What is to stop the pro-choice side putting up their own posters?

Well…what’s stopping them is that they’re not funded the church and the pro-life organisations overseas.

Besides, this campaign is extreme – it’s not based in any kind of fact or science and it’s also very upsetting – I’d imagine it’s even more upsetting for people who DO regret their abortions or have any guilt about them at all.

It’s bullying – pure and simple. Sure, even a couple of pro-lifers on the Youth Defence facebook page have said so themselves.

And given that abortion isn’t even legislated for in this country – and is illegal in most cases – it’s a pointless campaign. I don’t see how they got it off the ground, to be honest. I’m shocked.

Perhaps they’re a little more considerate of other peoples feelings on the issue and believe its a personal choice that no one else should interfere in Jim?

Ok don’t answer my question then. To say that all the posters are funded by churches etc is rubbish. Are there no pro-choice groups funding anything in Ireland?

Choice Ireland are a non-funded organisation – run by activists. No other groups that I know of get funding either. So there’s your answer.

As was already said, I don’t think they’d feel a huge billboard campaign like this would be appropriate. They’re right. It’s not.

Is it even a debatable statement, though, to say women have a wide variety of reactions after an abortion? I don’t think you have to be pro choice to admit every woman has a different experience and Youth Defence is only representing one.

at the moment of conception, every detail is laid out for the future development of a human being – to be honest, what convinced me the most that development was not meant to be one smooth transition is the prevalence of miscarriages in pregnancy. The fact that so many pregnancies end this way means that my body can end a pregnancy at an early stage. Why can’t my brain?

Ok.. There’s quite a few children out there already born who would dearly love parents.. Why add to that number?
It simply makes each orphan or surrendered child out there even less likely to find the caring home they deserve.

And why leave out that the lungs do not form til after the point when the vast majority of abortions (up to 90%) have taken place?

Women tend to keep their pregnancies to themselves until after 12 weeks because until then there’s a rather high chance of spontaneous abortion, or miscarriage. Even nature aborts at this stage in pregnancy, and quite frequently too.

Of course there is potential, but that’s what it is: potential. There’s never any guarantee it will be fulfilled.

As I’ve said several times on this thread, the later term abortions are most frequently in the case of fatal foetal abnormalities, this is a different scenario altogether, would you not agree? If those babies will not survive, why insist that the mother carry around what is an essentially dead / dying child?

The human body regards the embryo as a foreign body and it attacks it – often leading in miscarriage. Creating life isn’t so simple and it’s downright stupid to disregard the mother’s body entirely in this debate. Just because there’s a potential human life being incubated doesn’t mean it will go anywhere. You have to deal with the realities.

And there are realities outside of biology too – just as real and just as important. Because humans are not just the sum of their biological parts – are they? We’ve evolved away from that.

It’s the height of arrogance to proclaim that “there’s always a better option than death. Give the child up for adoption if you can’t keep it”. Just shows how little you understand about human rights and the biological and psychological effects of pregnancy itself, never mind the dangers and the risks. The pro-choice side isn’t pretending that a potential life isn’t being terminated – but that we value a fully-formed human being’s rights over their own bodies and their own lives – and give that human being the choice to create life when and if they wish to.

To echo what Eleen has just said, did you know that taking an AIDS test during the first trimester will very likely give you a positive result?

This is because the test is not specifically a test for HIV or AIDS, it is a combination of tests, identifying antibody levels and viral load.

As the body initially sees the foetus as a parasite it generates antibodies to fight the perceived invader. Hence the antibody count is higher and the test confirms this. This is also the reason why HIV tests are taken in two rounds with a 6 month interval, false positives are extremely common.

This is also one of the reasons for miscarriages.. Again, interesting that you left that part out..

Youve studied embryology? Look up molar pregnancies so.

yes i know of a number of women who regret going through pregnancies. it’s a very taboo subject though so no one speaks about it.

you seriously think everyone should have their unwanted pregnancies because they’ll probably change their mind once they have the baby???? how naive. i wouldn’t want to be the kid whose mum did regret it even after i was born.

My grandmother never wanted children. There are lots of people who regret having kids. Mad to state that as fact!

I know several women who regret having their kid and the reason they didnt give them up for adoption is because theres more social stigma attached to giving a child away that everyone knew you were pregnant with rather than having an abortion at 8 weeks when no one was aware of it. As an adopted person, Im still pro-choice.

Is that not kind of a silly thing to say though? No disrespect to your friend or the pain that she feels, but don’t we all do that – Look back over past choices and wonder what would have happened if we had done it differently?

How many mothers look around at their single friends and wish they could be so carefree again? How many when their kids are a bit older and maybe not the angels they hoped for wish they hadn’t bothered? How many can’t cope with the strain of parenthood and wish they hadn’t given birth? And perhaps most importantly, How many would actually admit it?

Of course there will always be a “what if?” but that’s just life. It’s the responsibility that comes with decision making.

“Being a burden on someone shouldn’t be reason enough to terminate life” – Actually, it is applied to a wider society. If the only way you are to survive is to demand life support from another human being, the law will never require that another human being does so. Why should it be different before birth?

That moves more into the argument for euthanasia. The difference being that in the case of euthanasia, a person is making the free decision to have their own life terminated.

For example – if I ever get to a point where I don’t know where I am and I’m not able to feed, wash, dress myself or go to the toilet alone – I would like to be euthanised. If I was in indefinite intolerable pain and there was no relief, I’d want to be euthanised.

The difference with a foetus isn’t just that it has no voice, it’s that without hijacking someone elses body, it cannot survive. The life of the mother takes precedence until the foetus can survive ex utero, until then it is her decision whether or not to accept passengers in her body.

(ps, of the ~10% of pregnancies terminated after the 12 week mark, the majority are cases where the foetus has no chance of survival, I take your point about the fact life can be sustained if the foetus is delivered a little sooner than the 24 week stage, but this is even less common than abortions at this late stage in pregnancy)

To be honest, with that long list, it’s a little harder to accept that abortion is a particularly unnatural interference!

I remember hearing the story of my great grandmother – on her deathbed confessing she wish she’d never married because she never wanted so many kids.

Took her till her deathbed to admit it. That’s how taboo it is.

Are Youth Defence active in that campaign? I can’t find any mention of it on that website.

And?

The X case proved that the mother has as much right to life as the foetus, thus theoretically making an abortion legal in the case of a threat to the life of the mother. On the other hand our right wing governments over the past twenty years have yet to legislate that which was deemed a constitutional right.

So is it really illegal?

Pro-choice get a say because women are having abortions whether the anti-choice crowd like it or not.

Because everyone gets a say.. That’s the point of democracy..
Even those who can’t grasp this simple concept get a say, like you for example..

“Essentially, the mother has biologically undertaken a concordance with the foetus to provide nutrients and remove waste. The foetus has every right to accept these life-maintaining nutrients as it has contributed equally to the placenta.” – There’s quite a bit of inferred consent there. By having sex, I’m not agreeing to provide anyone nutrients, thanks.

Don’t worry Nick, you are male (I’m presuming), so you don’t need to worry about giving nutrients. *face palm.

If a woman wants to avoid pregnancy then simply take/use contraception! Whilst not 100% effective (nothing is), it greatly reduces chances, obviously. And if they want to be extra careful, avoid sex for 3 days around ovulation. Only the most intense nymphomaniac would not be able to resist sex for 3 days!

I’m sorry, are you actually promoting the rhythm method as a foolproof form of contraception? All……rightey….

And Eleen is right. You’re basically ignoring a woman’s right to have the right to decide who can and cannot live off of her own body.

While I think men can have an opinion in this debate, as a man it’s a lot easier for you to judge women and claim that having to carry another human being without consent should be punishment for having sex when you will never have to put your body on the line.

Andrew, so contraception is the womans duty is it? the man can leave it up to her? Im am a woman with my own life, hopes, dreams and desires. I will decide what feeds off my body and what grows in my womb. No one else will make that decision for me.

So you consider 14 girls as a reason to deny 1 in 3 women something they feel is the best decision for them?

That’s exactly how I feel about it and I just can’t get my head around why most people here are perfectly happy about the slaughter of babies

If any woman uses abortion as a form of contraception she’s a fool, surely thats a very expensive and invasive method when there are many other far easy forms available. These days any woman can just walk into Boots and get the morning after pill, thats assuming all other forms failed or were forgotten in the heat of the moment.
If several young girls are going to use abortion as a form of contraception abortion isn’t the problem here.

i love the hypocritical views. OH i am pro-life except for x,y,z. surely if abortion is wrong it is always wrong? the mother’s life is always at risk during a normal pregnancy. does that count as a good enough reason in your book?

“Oh look at me, I know one story of one thing that happened that backs up my argument and don’t really understand the concepts of anecdotal versus statistical evidence”

Abortion is not used, in general, as a method of contraception. To even suggest so is insulting to the 1000s of Irish women who face that tortuous journey abroad to have an abortion. Make it legal now!

I am against abortion, but if its needed for medical reasons because the mother or baby are at a very high risk of not surviving the pregnancy then they should have the option to have an abortion because its their and their babys life at a great risk, other than that I don’t believe it should be legal. I am entitled to my opinion on that and nobody can tell me my opinion is wrong and theirs is right, I have never and would never criticise people for their own opinions, I have stated what I think that and why and thats all I have to say on the matter because this could just go round in circles.

what I think and why**

Donna don’t be so silly.
Martin could you provide a link to said statistics.

http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3711005.pdf

One study there from US with over 1,000 women who’d had abortions. No mention of contraception in there that I can see…

Martin that’s not the greatest example as it is old and from a different part of the world. It does though say that through the better use of contraceptives and more access for the poor to family planning would have a positive impact in the reduction of carried out abortions.

In the discussion.

It’s 8 years old. Though you’ll tell me that in 8 years maybe everyone is using it for contraception even though not one person in that study was. As for other part of the world, yawn, google something from the UK yourself so. And every single pro-choice person acknowledges the role of education and contraception in preventing unwanted pregnancies and hence abortions. You’re not even listening.

I never said everyone was using it as contraception, you’re doing your little routine of making up stuff about what someone said to win an argument again.
I dont have to prove anything. You have to convince people that it should be legalised if you ever want it to happen. It’s funny that you say that seeing how I’m the only one on this page that has said it and I’m pro-life, lol.

I made that statement, you asked for statistics to back it up? And you know well the legal situation. Abortion is legal in Ireland. It just hasn’t been legislated for.

Sinead I agree with your comment up until you say you agree with abortion where the mother’s life is at risk. Let’s be clear that abortion is an operation where the sole objective of the procedure is to target and expunge the life of the child in the womb.

Necessary medical treatment is something much different. Use the example of a mother who has serious cancer of the uterus and needs an hysterectomy, this is not an abortion because, in this country at least, they will try to save the baby and the mother.

Use this analogy, say you’re saving two people from a burning building and one falls off a ledge into the flames. It was not your intention but it was a complication and risk of the situation.
Abortion on the other hand is simply pushing the other person into the flames to save one person.

@David I didn’t realise we could reply to topics so old. These billboards are put there by groups with a religious agenda, check their website. But I suspect you already know that. They want to dictate Irish law based on their religious views. Why not have Sharia law then? If its ok for one group to demand that laws be enacted based on their religious views why not do the same for an other?
If you or anyone belonging to you don’t agree with abortion, don’t have one, but don’t assume to decide what’s best for me or my family based on your beliefs, we don’t share them. And if you don’t like that do the Christian thing and forgive us.

Well, that’s why it’s important for you to have discussions with your partner about what the two of you think about an unplanned pregnancy is a wise move. But plenty of women are supported in their termination by their partners, so your comments do only apply to one specific (your) experience.

Ok.. What if you took all the necessary precautions and still got pregnant?
You could hope that you had a miscarriage.. Or you could take some drugs and be guaranteed to have one.

Surgical abortions are carried out later in the pregnancy, and most usually in the case of fatal foetal abnormality.
Now, when a woman is forced to have an abortion it is wrong, so why is it ok to force her to be pregnant?

Please don’t compare women to dolphins! The denial of abortion to Irish women is a human rights issue, as stated by the EU. It cannot be compared to an animal welfare issue. If thats the level you put the abortion arguement on, you have no idea what women go through.

You know the difference’s between a zygote, an embryo, a foetus and a baby are don’t you? Nah course you don’t, they’re all ickle babies to you

Do the people who’ve had abortions speak about it? No. Because if they did, they’d get vilified.

Yeah, the argument made for ads like these is that “the positive side of abortion is already told all the time.” Funny, I must have missed the billboard campaign.

But fair play to Ronan, at least he’s abandoned this whole “we represent women! even if they think they want abortions! we know better!” rubbish.

Infants are babies. Embryos and the early stages of fetuses can’t speak because they’re not babies (technically).

And what about the body treating the foetus as an invader and generating an immune response?

Pregnant women don’t exist in a vacuum – neither do zygotes, embryos, fetuses etc. That’s what we’re saying and what you’re kind of proving with your examples here. Life is a lot more complex and “unnatural”. The way you’re going on about this is as scientific and cold as you accuse pro-choice people of being. Women live in the real world and they’ll have plenty of “unnatural” factors to consider and deal with if they become pregnant. Why do you get to decide which factors to take into account and which to ignore?

Also, you’re cleverly ignoring the whole “treating women as human beings with human rights” argument which is what this is really about.

That I would agree with, but then again, contraception is always better than termination. It would be lovely to think that we could prevent all pregnancies that were unwanted but sadly we know that is currently impossible. Contraceptives can fail :(

Oh Nick you are clutching at straws in this debate. I stated that contraception will greatly reduce chances of becoming pregnant and, IF the woman wants to be extra secure and safe, avoiding sex for 3 days around the time of ovulation further increases her safety. I wasn’t promoting the rhythm method by itself.

Pregnancy should not be a “punishment” (in your words) for having sex, as contraception prevents pregnancy. If a woman has regular unprotected sex, yet does not want to become pregnant, then she is either ignorant of the benefits of contraception or else thoughtless regarding the (selfish) consequences. I am not judging from purely a man’s perspective, I am also judging from a little knowledge of the processes of fertilization and embryology, and I happen to back up my arguments with facts. You mentioned: “You’re basically ignoring a woman’s right to have the right to decide who can and cannot live off of her own body.” Yes, but you deny the foetus the moral right to not have it’s life supply cut off.

Ciara,
I have not said contraception is a woman’s duty but if she doesn’t want to become pregnant, well she definitely has some sort of responsibility regarding contraception. The man also has a responsibility. In time the foetus would also have hopes, dreams, desires. The mother’s life is as vital and important as her unborn child’s.

“Yes, but you deny the foetus the moral right to not have it’s life supply cut off.” There is absolutely no circumstances where there is a right to have a life supply from another human being without their consent. Sorry, but no.

“In time the foetus would also have hopes, dreams, desires.” – and you claim you understand fertilization and embryology? Foetuses do not have dreams. Yes, you are coming from the perspective of someone who will never have their body used against their will. Must be nice to know no one would ever force you to offer up your body without consent.

I believe that a woman who decides to have unprotected sex, and is aware of the potential consequences of her actions (including the nourishment of the embry and foetus for 9 months), is giving informed, voluntary consent to what will happen. Again going back to this sentiment; if you don’t want to become pregnant, use contraception! You said “There is absolutely no circumstances where there is a right to have a life supply from another human being without their consent. Sorry, but no.” Eh, in this day and age where preventative measures are readily available, that isn’t really an excuse…she essentially is giving consent. Must try harder. Sorry, but yes.

“Foetuses do not have dreams”…you are not reading my comments properly. I said IN TIME the current foetus would have dreams, desires etc. And just for your information, from my own opinion, hypothetically if I was in the position where I was nurturing an unborn child, MY unborn child, I would be filled with as much instinctive love and protection for it as physically possible. To kill something innocent that has come from your very own blood & flesh doesn’t bare thinking about. So yes I would put my body in the line. There is so much medical help and support available to ease the symptoms of pregnancy. If someone cannot put up with some morning sickness and back pain (although considerable symptoms) and avoid alcohol, for the LIFE of another, then that must be the height of selfishness.

“I believe that a woman who decides to have unprotected sex, and is aware of the potential consequences of her actions (including the nourishment of the embry and foetus for 9 months), is giving informed, voluntary consent to what will happen.” – How is that not sexist? You’re not a woman, you represent your own view and funnily enough, quite a few women on here have told you they’re not giving consent by entering into healthy, adult, loving sexual relationships. But you ignore that, confident in the knowledge that this will never happen to you.

The reason people are red thumbing you is because speak for yourself and you want to interfere in something a lot of people see as a private matter between them, their family and their doctor. The fact that all you can do is judge someone as selfish for something that you would never do shows a real lack of empathy for women. It’s fine for you to have your own view on this, but you only represent yourself, not men in general, women in general or foetuses. Yet you’ll try to legislate to affect all of us.

Okay first of all, what exactly is sexist about that comment? There is nothing in that comment that is derogatory or discriminative against women. I am saying that it is her adult responsibility regarding sex (and have also said earlier that the man also has a responsibility). There is nothing sexist about that so i suggest you retract that accusation.

“quite a few women on here have told you they’re not giving consent by entering into healthy, adult, loving sexual relationships”…Eh i have no problem with that whatsoever? They presumably use contraception if they don’t want to get pregnant, therefore they don’t give consent to become pregnant. That is 100% fine. You’re not a woman either pal, and you represent your own view. As I don’t represent the women who agree with abortion, you don’t represent those who oppose it.

You see it as interfering with a private matter between the individual, her family and the doctor. I see it as a very public issue which has lives at stake. Correct, I would never do it as I see it as selfish. I’m expressing this view because an unborn child can’t. It’s not just a personal view to me, I’m thinking of those that are denied life, that are killed. I’m basically trying to get across that yes, pregnancy is not easy and a lot of the time the circumstances around it aren’t either. But there is always a better option. State or foster care for example, whilst not ideal, IS a better option. It gives the child a chance. And a woman, with the right support and love, CAN get over whatever situation which may have made her consider abortion in the first place.

“If someone cannot put up with some morning sickness and back pain (although considerable symptoms) and avoid alcohol”

Man, you’ve never been pregnant, have you? I’ve had one pretty normal pregnancy (and am currently having another), and still ended up on hefty doses of beta-blockers because my body reacted to late pregnancy by pushing my blood pressure to the point where both I and the foetus were in danger. Let’s see what other fun stuff you can get: the aforementioned morning sickness (which for some people is minor and for some people requires hospitalization to rehydrate them because they can’t even hold down water), back pain, pelvic pain, sciatica, gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia (which can cause such fun outcomes as convulsion and death) , migraines, and an immune system so lowered that colds last forever and complications from flu could kill you. Oh, and then we move on to labour and delivery, which can include such hilarity as major abdominal surgery (emergency or otherwise) or tears ranging from minor to ripping through from your vagina to your anus. I love the way people like you regard pregnancy as a minor inconvenience that only the most selfish harridan wouldn’t want to subject their body to.

I know “pregnancy is not a disease” but it places a pretty hefty strain on the body nonetheless, in some cases one from which people don’t fully recover. I think having children has made me even more pro-choice as I cannot imagine forcing someone to go through it against their will.

I am a woman, actually, thanks. And while my partner and I have discussed it and use contraception, we think it’s absolutely none of your business what we choose to do about a pregnancy. Like Lisa, I’ve actually been pregnant and it’s a lot easier for men like you to talk about it in the theoretical.

“It’s not just a personal view to me, I’m thinking of those that are denied life, that are killed.” – Yes, I forgot. All foetuses had an AGM and made you their spokesperson!

Oh, and lest you suggest that all of the above are rare complications of pregnancy, I know at least one person that has had at least one of those in at least one pregnancy (apart from the death one, mercifully). Gestational hypertension and gestational diabetes in particular are extremely common. And I didn’t even get on to postnatal depression…

I am also intrigued by your suggestion that a woman having sex without contraception is “consenting” to carry a child to term. So in your magnanimous world, if a woman uses contraception but is in the small percentage of users where the contraceptive fails (or if she is raped and doesn’t consent to the sex in the first place) is she “allowed” to terminate the pregnancy? And if not, what’s the point of your initial argument, exactly?

Nick,
I assumed you were male from your name, apologies. Thanks for retracting your accusations of sexism by the way…oh wait. Well I’m glad to hear that you are using contraception if you don’t want to become pregnant at this moment in time. It’s the sexually active people that are irresponsible with contraception who are contributing to the detriment of society in this country. “Yes, I forgot. All foetuses had an AGM and made you their spokesperson!”…I will not respond to your comments anymore if you make childish remarks and bring down this debate to the childish level you want. Is this a sign that I’m winning? ;)

Lisa,
Sorry to hear about your high blood pressure during your last pregnancy and I hope this one goes smoother, congratulations by the way, genuinely. A lot of those symptoms are significant, yes, but can be medically maintained with relative success. But I can’t see a pro-choice argument about people not wanting to experience these symptoms, so they kill a child instead. That is a completely immoral solution. In the context of life or death, sciatica does not stick with me. And I have views on the small percentages of contraception that does not work, and rapes, but to be honest I really couldn’t be bothered delving deeper into those areas in this debate now, sorry

Er, my sister went deaf because of pregnancy.. Is that permanent enough for you?

I have a couple of conditions that prevent me from being able to use hormonal contraceptives, pregnancy would have the same effect as the pill / injection / implant / IUD. At present my condition is manageable and relatively low impact, but if a condom bursts?
It’s happened once before, and thankfully I miscarried. It’s not life threatening but it is permanent and extremely disruptive..

I wouldn’t qualify as my life “being in danger”, but I could go deaf and end up having grand mal seizures.. It would prevent me being able to drive or even continue with my business.
And I take it you didn’t bother looking up molar pregnancies like Ciara told you to? A pregnancy that will give you cancer, and affecting 1/1000 pregnancies..

But I guess they’re just minor inconveniences too..

You’re not “winning” at anything, you’re just throwing out your (albeit not as educated as you claim) opinion as though it is fact. You’re being rather selective with your “knowledge of embryology” by choosing to completely ignore the very well established and known FACTS about how pregnancy can affect the body..
Like Nick said, your knowledge is all theoretical, you will never be told that to get pregnant could kill you, make you deaf, drive you insane etc. these effects are far more permanent than the morning sickness and back aches (oh, nearly forgot, look up gestational scoliosis.. That’s pretty damn permanent too).

I can see a reply on my email but can’t see it on this message board, anyway I’ll reply here.

Shanti,
It’s pretty obvious that you are all backing each other up as you refer to each other in your respective comments. I’m not complaining, I find it amusing! You may have jumped to a conclusion, I had in fact looked up molar pregnancies. You will find that I had indirectly addressed that issue and any similar scenario in one of my first comments when I said that the only time abortion was acceptable was when the embryo/foetus was dead and giving birth would severely threaten the life of the mother. So I have answered that question. Please read everything instead of selectively coming to a narrow-minded conclusion, thank you. And I am sorry to hear of your sister, that’s a very unfortunate, if rare, side effect of pregnancy.

I actually haven’t claimed to be overly educated, again you’re fabricating ideas in your head. You’ll find earlier I mentioned that I was judging with “a little knowledge” on the subject. It was actually quite humble. And I have answered basically everything in a respectful yet passionate manner, backed up by facts. The comments I receive in return are selective, mis-informed and biased.

“But I can’t see a pro-choice argument about people not wanting to experience these symptoms, so they kill a child instead. ”

The argument is that THEY DON’T WANT TO BE PREGNANT/HAVE A CHILD and you’re telling them that it’s no biggie to go through something that has very real risks to their life, health, and quality of life because all that is apparently trumped by the rights of the foetus (it’s only your HEALTH) and anyway it’s mostly “manageable”.

Again, it’s very easy to say “ooh, yes, they’re unpleasant but they’re manageable” when you’re not being told that you’re at risk of having a stroke if the meds don’t work, or if you are hospitalized with hyperemesis and away from your family and other children, or if you actually can’t walk with pain even on the maximum safe dose of painkillers, or if as the result of birth trauma you can’t move your bowels properly for months after delivery. Not to mention that some of the complications *aren’t* manageable – eg full-blown pre-eclampsia, where the treatment is, er, stop being pregnant (my mum had it with me and I had to be induced a few weeks earlier, some babies end up being delivered premature because of it) – or can have long lasting health effects. I know someone who had a serious and long-lasting mental illness triggered by pregnancy.

It’s a different story if you WANT to be pregnant – sure, the minor and major discomforts are unpleasant, the risks are scary, the consequences could be nasty, but you go through it because you WANT THE CHILD (while still grumbling/freaking out as appropriate). And obviously there are situations where (as in Shanti’s case) a pregnancy would be actively dangerous whether wanted or not.

And FFS, terminating an 8 week pregnancy is *not* killing a child, at least not in everyone’s opinion. Like Nick I’ve also experienced a miscarriage (yes, I am an A-Z of gestational experience) and no, I don’t think that was a child. I think it was a potential child and because it was a wanted pregnancy I grieved for that lost potential family life I’d imagined, but it would in no way compare to the loss of my actual born son. And if I was in a situation where I was 8 weeks pg and my life was at risk, damn straight I’d prioritize me over the foetus. I’m not risking leaving my existing offspring motherless.

I’m not going to retract accusations of sexism. Sexism includes the belief that you know better than women what they should do with their wombs. If that bothers you, don’t make statements minimising pregnancy and women’s interest in their own bodies.

Direct Quote:
“Having studied embryology I am fascinated by the developments of the sperm and egg into a fully functioning human being. Regardless of which side of the fence you sit on in this debate, there is one thing you can’t deny: at the moment of conception, every detail is laid out for the future development of a human being”, END QUOTE
This quote gives the impression that you have “studied embryology”, people do not usually make these statements unless it is an area that they hold qualification in. Otherwise I could say I had studied theology rather than taking a passing interest in it.. I’m sure you can see where the misunderstanding stems from?
Referring to the comment you did make – “There always is a better option than death. Give the child up for adoption if you can’t keep it, but don’t kill it! The only way I can see abortion being acceptable is in the rare scenario whereby the child has no chance of survival and going through with the birth will kill the mother too.”
But in my case, where my life is not under threat, but I do not wish to become a mother for other reasons (ie, the reasons I came off the pill – as advised by my doctor, as it directly affects two conditions I have which are completely unrelated to pregnancy), if a condom bursts I should just run the risks and hand the baby off for adoption yeah?
And you assumed again, my sisters case wasn’t rare.. It’s a very real risk for any woman who has otoscelrosis, which is a condition that is hereditary and present in men and women. Oestrogen has a tendency to worsen existing complaints, as my doctor said to me when we discussed my options in light of my diagnosis. So it’s not just otosclerosis thats a risk factor, there’s many things oestrogen makes worse.
Now, the reply you cant find is because it’s below, its a reply to where you were whining about the fact that people who are pro choice disagree with you! You assume that we must all be working in tandem because we have referenced what each other have said *here*. We are individuals, and for my own part, my entire knowledge of these ladies is from the comments section of the journal, we agree on some stuff, it hardly means we’re “backing each other up and high-fiving each other and red-thumbing literally any comment I make, probably without giving it any consideration.”, I read your comments, I disagree with the majority of them, I agree that contraception is better – I even said that to you. FFS, I was pointing out to you that whining about the red / green thumbs is really petty.. This is usually pointed out to anyone who takes offence to them.. People are allowed to disagree with you and agree with others you know.. So perhaps its a select few still reading this article because it is no longer current and we are getting notifications of new replies, that doesn’t mean there’s a conspiracy against you.. The answer is in fact rather logical when you consider the variables..

Ps, I haven’t thumbed you up or down since your initial comment.. So stick that in your pipe and smoke it..

Direct Quote
“I actually haven’t claimed to be overly educated, again you’re fabricating ideas in your head. You’ll find earlier I mentioned that I was judging with “a little knowledge” on the subject. It was actually quite humble. And I have answered basically everything in a respectful yet passionate manner, backed up by facts. The comments I receive in return are selective, mis-informed and biased.” (emphasis added)

Actually, I’ve just taken the time to re-read your comments, twice each, specifically looking for where you said this.. You didn’t, indeed this was the first indication you gave that you weren’t attempting to speak as an authority on the subject, whether by implication or not.
And as has been pointed out, your “facts” are a tad incomplete.. Of course there’s a bias, yours is anti choice and mine is pro. Difference is, my stance caters for your stance, yours expects everyone to just go by your ideals.

Shanti,

Read more closely. It is the post from around 23 hours ago beginning with “Oh Nick you are clutching at straws in this debate. I stated that contraception…”

Further in my comment I said “I am not judging from purely a man’s perspective, I am also judging from a little knowledge of the processes of fertilization and embryology.” So stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

I said that the condition was rare because, of any woman I have ever come across who has been pregnant, none became deaf from it. Just saying from my experience. Whilst the risk is most certainly significant and real, yes, I think it is rare.

I have studied embryology, never said I was qualified in it though?

Anyway, as much as it was engaging initially, this debate has gone stale, boring and is just the same stuff regurgitated over and over again. You’re right, I wonder is there anyone else reading this still. I guess there will always be 2 sides who will never agree: one who views the woman’s rights, and the other who views something similar to infanticide. But I’m off on holidays to America on Friday and have things to do tomorrow so this is my last post here. Good luck.

p.s. the sexism claims are the last refuge of a frustrated feminist. I have never discriminated against a woman before and never will.

Fair enough Andrew, my mistake, and my apologies.
And yes, there will always be two sides. The issue here is that while your side is catered for, by its very stance it removes rights from others to make their own decisions based upon how they see it, which by it’s very nature is different to how you or anyone else opposing the procedure do. The pro choice side say “fine, by all means, you don’t have to agree with abortion, you don’t have to have them, that’s your choice”
But because you see it one way doesn’t mean the rest of the world has to agree with you.. Which is what those on the anti choice side of the argument expect, compliance with your views.