Seeing as I have spent a good part of the last twenty years in maternity hospitals I know exactly what I am talking about, comparing a miscarriage to an abortion is the same as comparing a person dying naturally to murder.

Women dying in agony in childbirth and as a result of septic miscarriage is pretty ‘natural’ too Fionnuala, would you like to defend those?

Heres a video of the demo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMJEc8-n_1o&feature=youtu.be

always with the personal attacks Nick. Don’t be intimidated by her bullying, Fionnuala., you are entitled to have your say.

That demo was v v lame. All those unions and all that publicity and they can only get 300 people.

Comparing a spontaneous abortion to a medical or surgical abortion you mean Fionnuala?
I’m sorry, I can’t believe you spent that much time in a maternity hospital if you don’t know that abortion refers to the death of a foetus or embryo in utero, regardless of cause..

It’s just your bias and nothing more.. Yes, one is natural and the other two are deliberate, but the medical definition of abortion covers all three.

Nick you called not only your own baby a blob but also a parasite that was stealing your nutrients. I have debated with you before and you twist peoples words to try and get sympathy for yourself. You have no compassion to ny mother who miscarriages because you dont believe that they lost a baby but some awful parasite that is stealing their blood.

Mairead, I’ve asked her about that before. She says a foetus becomes a baby when the mother makes that decision in her own mind. Very scientific

Without US funding.

Or free iPads!

“We need more than a Gathering” – yes, you need a crowd. If that’s the sum of the people who can be arsed to protest then the movement’s dead in the water.

@peter and daisy: ye actually think that the majority of the tens of thousands who attended the pro life gathering were tempted there by the prospect of free iPads and money from the yanks? Do ye realize how ridiculous ye sound? Honestly. It’s clear to anyone with two brain cells to rub together that that is obviously complete nonsense. The state of ye. I would laugh if it wasnt so tragic.
Spot any chemtrails recently? Any yetis I should be aware of?

Never mind tens of thousands hippo the people have spoken Twice on this issue. 85% of last referendum want Supreme Court ruling implemented. So point ur yanks at James gate and abide by Ireland’s constitution

Except for the 7 million given to the NCFW from Chuck Feeney an AMERICAN billionaire.

I think you mean the NCWI, Fionnuala? And as you may have noticed, they’re not exactly a single issue lobby group like Youth Defence, but a coalition of women’s organisations who vote on their own policies. Abortion is one of many women’s issues they deal with.

Groups like Choice Ireland and the Abortion Rights Campaign are more comparable to your own YD, as they are single issue lobby groups. And they, unlike YD, have never had their donation forms in dollars – nor is there a dedication international organisation to raise money for them. But nice try!

You are an american Nick, how come it is ok for you and Chuck Feeney to support legalised murder in our country Youth defence get its money from Donors who are packing out meetings every night for the last few weeks. It is a pity that none of your supporters (since you claim to have support) dont think your cause is important enough to make a donation to.

Because my Irish partner and I plan to start our family in Ireland, where we lived for an extended period before he was forced to emigrate by work? There’s a big difference between woman like myself and Savita, who are living under the Irish legal system and American Republicans who can remains blissfully ignorant.

And Youth Defence is being investigated for taking money from American donors. If you really have so many supporters in Ireland, why was your donation form in dollars?

And bless your heart, Fionnualla, “legal murder” is a contradiction in terms. Maybe legal homicide is what you intended to get to?

Not to mention that you believe I’m the mother of an Irish child who died of natural causes. Should you not be campaigning for me to have the same rights as any woman whose Irish child has died? Funny that you’re not….

Look at my previous comments, all well received. But no, I’m anti-abortion so I must be a troll.

Where did the comment where you said this go Andy?:
“If a woman want’s to off herself on account of being pregnant, then by all means have her strapped up until post birth. Then if she wants to abort her life, at least it’s only her that’ll be affected.”
I got it in my email but I don’t see it here.. It seems rather deliberately controversial and trying to raise anger – sometimes that’s considered trolling..

Andy just keeps diggin. Kevin Shaw is another busy troll. Please ignore them, unless you want to try debating someone who has their fingers in their ears. Some people need to get out more. If only they were a little bit more ‘pro-life’.

Andy this lot always stoop to personal insults, it must be hard to constantly argue that ripping a another human being apart limb from limb( as one abortionist) put it, is ok. And of course if a abortion actually kills the mother like Jessie May Barlow last December, they say, big deal it was her choice.

Fionnuala.
There’s no ripping limb from limb in an abortion.
The vast majority of abortions happen while those limbs are merely buds.. Plus, the abortion is the thing that makes the heart stop. The only thing that could possibly do what you are complaining of is the vacuum, and I hate to be the one to break it to you, but they are carried out daily in our maternity hospitals, they’re standard procedure after an incomplete miscarriage (which is technically a spontaneous abortion).

Please, if you are going to contribute to the debate, try to stay away from logical fallacies like the misleading vividness above.. It merely makes your argument look ill informed.

“I have been there, and I have seen these totally formed babies as early as ten weeks…with the leg missing, or with their head off. I have seen the little rib cages…” – Deborah Henry, Former Clinic Worker

“The vacuum machine is used [for first trimester abortions] and the vacuum tubing empties into a tiny little cheesecloth sack. That little cheesecloth sack is about this big and in it are the products of conception. That’s what we called it. We sent those down to pathology. In my second year of residency, I spent two months on a pathology rotation, which is an interesting thing, and I had to come face to face with the contents of those sacks. We were studying embryology of the ovary…I, personally, then had to search through the jumbled-up mass of tissue to find the fetal gonads, to be sure to include them on the slide so that we could study them. The jumbled-up mass of tissue was easily identifiable as the torn and shredded body of a tiny human being….half of the aborted fetuses were males…Even though these discoveries made me uncomfortable, I continued to do abortions. There were times when I personally sat there and opened up containers, five, six, seven containers at a time, and would open them up and stand and look at the [contents.]” – Dr. McArthur Hill, Former Abortion Provider

Thank you for informing Shanti Mairead, She seems to find it hard to tell the difference between dying naturally and murder.

“One of the girls called me into the lab as she was cleaning up, and on the end of the cannula, which was the instrument at the end of the hose, was a little baby’s foot. It was about half an inch long. This foot was perfectly formed. I couldn’t believe it. I was so amazed at the sight of it. It was all black and blue…The baby’s body was completely ripped apart because of the abortion.

”I know that the Lord has forgiven me, but I can never erase those things from my mind. The sounds of those bones breaking. The sight of those babies…You tell me that this baby doesn’t feel anything. I will tell you differently.” – Deborah Henry, Former Clinic Worker

Actually, these days, they much prefer to induce a chemical miscarriage, but let’s not let facts get in the way!

Yeah, the majority of abortions (up to 90% in the UK and Wales) are medical and not surgical abortions.. They involve taking a drug and then having a miscarriage..
It’s the drug that stops the foetal development, that is the abortion. The removal is a separate procedure and takes place when a woman miscarries naturally as well.

By the way, your logical fallacy is misleading vividness. This is a blatant attempt to emotionally manipulate the debate rather than deal in facts.

As I said to someone else above, if you take issue with the removal aspect of an abortion then perhaps you should be picketing our maternity hospitals for offering the exact same service to women who spontaneously aborted, because the vacuum is not the abortion.. By framing it as such you are simply lying.

…and the wishes of Bunreacht na hÉireann. I’m sick of saying this at this stage, and I have no doubt anti-choicers will ignore legal fact as usual, but I’ll give it a shot anyway. The X case decision was an interpretation of the Constitution…the Supreme court is the mouthpiece of the Constitution…therefore X case legislation is only providing legal/medical clarity, the right to abortion where a mother’s life is at risk (X case decision) is already contained within Bunreacht na hÉireann. Denying the fact that the legislation is necessary is EXACTLY the same as saying that a budget isn’t necessary every year, or a parliament/president isn’t necessary. As long as its in the Constitution the Oireachtas have no choice but to legislate, regardless of public opinion (not that it makes a difference given the pro-choice majority in Ireland)

As pointed out earlier, hospitals are already carrying out abortions where women’s lives are at risk

Clearly not as X case legislation has yet to be introduced. Even it that is the case though, whats with the opposition to X case legislation? All it does is ensure that what you claim already happens, actually happens

It was reported on this very website!

Dr Sam Coulter Smith of the Rotunda Hospital in Dublin told the Committee there had been six terminations in the Rotunda last year in order to save the life of the mother. Dr Rhona Mahony (pictured) of the National Maternity Hospital said there were three terminations in the hospital last year where the woman’s life was at risk and the foetus was not viable

So if you have such respect for Dr Mahony, why are you so reluctant to listen to her plea to be protected by legislation for doing her job?

Because she seems to be doing it already perfectly well

I’d love to know what the thumbs down to my second last comment are for; Are you all opposed to abortions to save the mother’s life? Or do you think I just made the whole thing up??

Chuck, Nick believes that ALL pregnancy should end in the safest way possible..Abortion… True..
She stated that twice yesterday….
I’v also come to realise that most of the commenters on here no matter what way they “dress it up” or twist it really only want abortion on demand
most admitted yesterday that x case was only stepping stone
a starting point..
So they all have their agenda, not really caring about women, just Abortion..

Bless, Bridget, I specifically said that the “best” option was what the woman chose – you’ve drawn a lot of your own ideas out of nowhere, simply because you were embarrassed because you claimed dying in childbirth was just tough luck.

And she is, Chuck. But she is concerned about the chilling effect of the legislation. I guess it’s easy to ignore since you’re neither a doctor nor will ever be a pregnant woman.

Bridget and Chuck: ye are talking to yourselves at this point. Twisting other people’s words and ignoring what others have to say will get you no where. If you want a proper debate, act accordingly.

Nick read back your comments..

Nick never once stated ” tough luck” but don’t let that stop you writing your nonsense,

Bridget we all know you’re crazy when it comes to abortion are the americans bank rolling you to come here and spout all this.as i said yesterday you and all the other pro lifers do more damage to your pro life campain in the eyes of the public than any of the pro choice crowd could dream of.

Eleen i have discovered on here that people don’t want debate.. They just want abortion…

Shane..
Sorry to disappoint you but I’m 100% irish, with no “agenda” but my own, with no connections to “america” or any group (but I do support anyone who is pro life…)
(Though maybe you or some others can’t say the same)
Just an ordinary citizen who has an opinion who obviously is not entitled to share on here because we’re all delude, women hater,etc etc etc..
The names and abuse i have seen people getting on here in the few months i’v been on is horrendous…

I did. I said abortion is the safest option for women to end a pregnancy (and it is – far fewer women die having abortions than in childbirth.) You then abandoned any pretense of caring about women’s safety and said it was about “right or wrong.”

I don’t blame you for wishing you could rewrite what you actually said!

Bridget.
If you don’t want an abortion then don’t have one. You don’t really have the right to tell another person that their body is no longer theirs to control.

And you still haven’t answered the question that I keep asking you (this will be the third time).

You claimed that the referendums which kept suicide as a valid reason to grant termination were voted for by the pro life people..

In 1992, keeping suicide in was accompanied by the right to travel and the right to information – did the pro life side vote yes on those too, and if so – why? Surely it goes against what they wanted? (But hey, if we didn’t have the UK our Maternal mortality rate would be through the roof from backstreet abortions).

Then in 2002 the people voted not to exclude suicide again, this would have come alongside legislation which would have given 12 years for abortion..

So please, explain exactly how an anti choicer voted to keep the risk of suicide as grounds for abortion – despite the fact that they say this is “on demand”.. Perhaps it just goes to show that the majority isn’t anti choice, perhaps the rest of the country is willing to grant women the freedom to decide what happens to their own bodies..
“To split yourself in two is just the most radical thing you can do, so girl if that shit ain’t up to you then you simply are not free”

An unimpeachable study of pregnancy-associated deaths in Finland has shown that the risk of dying within a year after an abortion is several times higher than the risk of dying after miscarriage or childbirth.(1)

This well-designed record-based study is from STAKES, the statistical analysis unit of Finland’s National Research and Development Center for Welfare and Health. In an effort to evaluate the accuracy of maternal death reports, STAKES researchers pulled the death certificate records for all the women of reproductive age (15-49) who died between 1987 and 1994–a total of 9,192 women. They then culled through the national health care data base to identify any pregnancy-related events for each of these women in the 12 months prior to their deaths.

Since Finland has socialized medical care, these records are very accurate and complete. In this fashion, the STAKES researchers identified 281 women who had died within a year of their last pregnancy. The unadjusted mortality rate per 100,000 cases was 27 for women who had given birth, 48 for women who had miscarriages or ectopic pregnancies, and 101 for women who had abortions.

Except that when they controlled from pre-existing mental health conditions, they found that suicidal women are more likely to seek abortions (which makes sense – you’d be unlikely to seek to parent if you felt your life was over.) By ignoring that factor of the research and claiming that abortion causes mental health problems, you are being intellectually dishonest.

Oh you couldn’t stay? Makes the effort of all those Americans you tell us that were flown in across the Atlantic to attend the pro life gathering a couple weeks ago look quite special doesn’t it?

Not really..
So some fanatical yanks with no respect for the democratic will of the Irish people came over for a protest.. Doesn’t say anything about me, aside from the fact that I’d been at work all day and had reasons why I needed to be elsewhere.. My apologies for having a life.. Cheers for your snide comment though, it’s very revealing..

Hippo you’ve just been s*•t on. And deservedly so!

Hippo you’ve just been sh*t on. And deservedly so!

I couldn’t attend due to my work.
Argue about the numbers and where the money comes from as has been happening down below, sure why not, we’re like magpies, something shiny and we’re distracted.
It doesn’t matter where either side gets its money from. It doesn’t matter how many attended each rally. It doesn’t matter that there’s 2 referenda, court judgements and the will of the Irish people to at least legislate for X. None of that matters.
What matters is that we cannot efficiently teach our children what contraception is without having a Catholic argument about it. We cannot even talk about the actual issue here without diverting off to some other obscure issue, that vaguely has nothing to do with anything.
I sound like a parrot with Alzheimer’s at this stage:
As long as you are sending women to the UK, the Netherlands, as long as you are asking women to take their life into their hands by ordering termination kits over the internet, nothing else matters.
It doesn’t matter because the problem exists, and dealing with it the way we are is like telling a child “no, sorry but we’ll have to send you to France for your Appendectomy”. It is wrong, it is immoral, it is against ethics and it prevents those of us who work in the area from doing our jobs, which is: to care for people. We cannot do that while there are 12 women today alone queuing up in a clinic in the UK.
So I’ll repeat myself (yet again) for those who don’t seem to understand:
NOTHING.
ELSE.
MATTERS.

James..
Quote you from yesterday

“legalisation for x a starting point”

” married couple who don’t that they can restart parenting after sending youngest of to university”…
That’s in your opinion a reason for ABORTION…

And You say to object to abortion is ” it is wrong, it’s immoral, against ethics”

Something’s not right there!?!?!?!?

What’s not right is that you are presuming it isn’t already happening Bridget.
It’s never upto me to dictate to a family what is right for them, the only thing I dictate is letters. My job is to provide care, not judge. Right now, I can’t care in the majority of cases because the law won’t let me.
I’m not talking about right to life issues here because there are far better qualified people than I who can argue that with you. I’m talking about standard of care.
A scary prospect for you Bridget: last year more women had an abortion in Ireland (in UK) than men who suffered from Colon, prostate and testicular cancer put together. I’ll repeat that Bridget, more women had an abortion last year than men suffered from the biggest three cancers that effects them put together.
You cannot open a newspaper without seeing an add for testicular cancer, there is an entire screening programme for colon cancer on the way, yet we cannot provide basic services for these women.

James..
Unfortunately i know it does happen..

But I’m afraid that it is exactly what we are talking about, simply “the right to life”, and if you are dictating letters on anything similar to above then that is indeed very sad..

Indeed I am no lawyer or medical professional and I may not be able to argue my point as well as others but as a human and a citizen of this country I feel I have the right to try and keep abortion out…
Please continue to give your very best professional help, we would be lost with out our doctors help but remember there is always two patients when treating a pregnant woman
..
As for the cancer statement I have lose 3 very close family members to it and I know all the suffering involved but that has nothing to do with abortion…

“Keep abortion out”
In the UK? Where it belongs? That pretty much shows that you do not even understand what it is you are arguing about. As the former chair of the Supreme Court, Catherine McGuinness said, Ireland has abortion, it’s just carried out elsewhere.
Sorry but no, it is not the right to life that we are talking about – because everybody’s opinion differs on the matter, it’s the right to care. There are already generally accepted procedures and protocols around the world that deal with termination and deal with it more than efficiently.
I’m sorry for your losses, but I disagree, cancer and abortion are very much linked – the cancer services which used to be the worst in the world, are now some of the best – it shows that we can deal with major social issues, and deal with them very, very efficiently. It shows that the only thing stopping us from allowing women access appropriate care is us. Men and, ironically, women!

James…
you don’t need to quote pro McGinness to me to prove people go to the UK, it is well known..

I am sorry to say but it is very mush The Right To Life plain and simple that we are talking about and I can’t understand why you refute that?!?!..

I am very aware and understand exactly what I’m saying, if some woman are determent to have an abortion then she will travel, but that does NOT mean we have to allow it in Ireland..

I would not say that cancer is a social issue, I would call it a disease…

Cancer services try to save lives…

Abortion services Do not its aim is to end the life of the unborn and in some cases the mother..
Read the finish report that someone quotes below….
Give “appropriate care” to both your patience”..

Bridget, I am glad you acknowledge the abortion statistics of the NHS as being accurate!
I refute that it has anything to do with the right to life because we have that issue sorted and have had it sorted for years.
I disagree with you (shock) that just because a woman is determined enough to travel doesn’t mean we should allow it here – I would argue all the more reason to remove the barrier – if it’s already happening then clearly the ban isn’t working.
Cancer is a health and a social issue.
Abortion services that end the life of the mother are not abortion services, they are abattoirs. In my time, the only women who have come close to loosing their life after an abortion are those that attend underground clinics. The “clinicians” in these clinics are not regulated, are not controlled, and from some of their work that I’ve had the misfortune to help rectify, I can surmise that they don’t know one end of a woman anatomically from the other.
As for give care to both your patients, I don’t need to take lessons on giving care to patients from someone who is not sufficiently trained.

ok so what you are saying is…you know women have abortions and that if they want one you cannot stop them, but as long as it doesnt happen on Irish soil you are happy…???? so what about the poor unborn child? i thought you were pro-foetal-life?? For centuries women have had abortions they will continue to do so…the rates remain fairly constant around the world and arent really influenced to a great degree by laws that make it easier or my difficult to obtain. the differences from country to country are how women are cared for, if they must do DIY abortions (and they will) they are at higher risk for injury or death. You can argue its right or wrong all year but women are going to have abortions anyway. And believe it or not they are thinking of the potential child too in the decision, they want to be a good position to parent….ready, able, working so they can afford a home/food/cloths/education for the child, in a stable caring relationship etc

James…

1: Hmm “agree with Abortion statistic for the NHS”
I’m sorry where exactly did I say that,

I didn’t think you were the type of person to create a whole sentences or jump to conclusions like some others on here…

but whatever,

it’s actually dreadful the amount of abortions preformed under the pretence of suicide in the UK…
Tragic really…

2: Again Not a right to life.?!?! .”we already have that issue sorted for years”.. I must have missed that.. I actually always though that an abortion ended a life therefor it was a right to life issue!

Emma.. ” think of the potential child”… Believe it or not but you actually become a parent when you become pregnant.. If there was no baby then you would not be pregnant…

James..

3: I personally in my Non-Medical opinion cannot see how “cancer and abortions are linked”…
Unless you mean that both attend a doctor, visit a hospital and receive a treatment because after that I can not possible see how they are linked… Cancer service is to try to save a life, where abortion service is to end a life…

4: I was going to give a long comment on how your moral compass may be slightly off, working with “A majority of patients that you cannot care for etc” and how you may need a gentle reminder from someone like me,
but as you say YOU are the doctor and therefore you already know that you still have 2 patience..

The only reason we know women go to the UK to get abortion is through the NHS statistics, therefore if you acknowledge that women are travelling to UK, you acknowledge the NHS statistics. Ireland does not keep its own official record.
The reason the amount of abortions carried out under the pretence of suicide is because their law is (contrary to popular belief), quite restrictive. If abortion is to be allowed it is to be allowed honestly and openly.
Abortion does end the “life” of a foetus, correct. I did not say that, not did I say it wasn’t a right to life issue, I said that is not what I am discussing, as there are far better people than you or I who can discuss that far more efficiently than either of us ever will.
It is about standard of care. Not all cultures or religions believe the foetus is sacred, every pregnant mother here has a different opinion on abortion, and that is never going to change.
I’m going to ignore your cancer comments because you are deliberately misinterpreting me, and I don’t have the time or the energy to deal with your misrepresentations.

Bridget.
My job is not to treat the majority of patients, it is to treat all of patients. If I cannot, I refer them to a service that can.
In respect of termination, I cannot refer them to an appropriate service in Ireland, I can only recommend that they go to the IFPA and speak with a counsellor there who is qualified to deal with crisis pregnancy.
The models that are used in most countries where termination is freely available are more than appropriate to treat both patients – whether you agree with it or not is beside the point being entirely honest.
Also — not a medical doctor – doc of advanced nursing practice!

Ok James
I can assure you I was not deliberately trying to misinterpret you I genially could not see your link between abortion and cancer…

As far as I was concerned I was talking about the right to life…

However..

We know the numbers of abortions..in 2011 97% of the 189,931abortions performed in England were on mental health grounds..
We know that when it was introduced in Britain, it was intended to be very restrictive.
Even lord David Steel who introduced abortion laws there said it would be a mistake to introduce it here on the grounds of suicide..

Professor Anthony Clare stated that in Bermuda where he worked the “threat of suicide was exploited”..

In California the 1967 act allowed on similar grounds and 3 yrs later 98% of 61,572 abortions were on those grounds..
Things always get worse..

We know it will be “used under pretence”.. Abused.

Used as a repeat contraception, to get rid of an inconvienence etc.. you’ve read the stories I’m sure..

And that has been my point since I started on the journal.

It will be abused and misused here by many many people the same as England and elsewhere ..
Do you really want that?!?. Or maybe I shouldn’t ask that..

You say that “not every culture or religion thinks life is sacred etc”

Well James this is Ireland..
This is our constitution,
This is our culture,
we DO value life..
Irelands main Religion values life..
Our people value life..

So why in all honestly should we change that to suit the few to be abused by the many “under pretence” ..?!?!

Yes Bridget, it is our constitution. And in two referendums seeking to overturn the X Case that you personally don’t agree with, the majority of Irish people have said no.
We have been asked to exclude suicide as grounds for access to abortion twice, you are yet to explain how on earth this and the now constitutionally enshrined right to travel and information was a “pro life” result.

The people have spoken, it is our constitution and we decided. We didn’t change our mind, we rejected the efforts to further limit access on both occasions, and guaranteed overseas access and information on one.
It’s high time our elected representatives got on with ensuring that a) our legislation is in line with our constitution and b) statutory framework is out in place so that everyone knows where they stand.

You will never have to access it (I hope), but you cannot tell another woman that she must stay pregnant if she does not want to. Forcing her overseas is just refusing to deal with the fact that other people do not share your opinion on the subject. At least the pro choice side respect your decision to never have an abortion!

Bridget, I give up!
You’re either deliberately trolling or genuinely brainwashed! I hope it’s deliberately trolling for your sake!

Can’t believe you stooping to insulting James.. Not nice or professional..:(

I don’t believe I insulted you at all, but ok. Whatever.

And your attitude towards women is exactly what is wrong with this little country Andy.

A single persons attitude? Not the deficit or bail-out, but my attitude. Well, I didn’t know I was so important.

This is not a discussion about the bailout or TD’s. This is about women or as you have labelled us… trampy! And yes your attitude towards women is quite frankly disgusting.

Oh and Andy is yours a single persons attitude or mine?

Poor Andy that’s got to hurt !

I was thinking the same Dermot only I wanted him to clarify first.

Thank you. I have previously channelled communication through the National Women’s Council but this is a useful method of conveying views.

I’m sorry, is that a joke? Please do yourself a favour and even have a cursory glance at the child mortality and abortion rates detailed by the WHO. The complete opposite is true. To save you time, skip to the stats of the UK, US, and take your pick from any of the EU countries and compare them to any of the counties where it is illegal. Controlling for other factors such as unreported abortions etc shows that what you have said is completely false.

Show me the rally for tax-payer funded contraception and ill attend

Please cite a reference for that seemingly untrue statement, Caitriona.

@ Hippocrateeth – don’t bother with these people, statistics mean nothing when they point to the complete opposite of what they’re saying.

“The truth is what I say it is, not what the facts say” is a common line they use. They are the equivalent of adamant holocaust deniers who thumb down people who say it happened.

@andy – here are some quotes from a recent WHO report.

(p22) “The use of modern contraception has resulted in a lowering of the incidence and prevalence of induced abortion even where abortion is available on request. The decline in abortion prevalence with the increase in the level of contraceptive prevalence has been examined by several authors (35, 36). Recent data from 12 countries in eastern Europe and central Asia,where induced abortion used to be the main method for regulating fertility, and from the USA, show that where the use of modern contraceptive methods is high, the incidence of induced abortion is low (37). Rates of induced abortion are the lowest in western Europe, where modern contraceptive use is high and abortion is generally legally available on request.
Meeting the unmet need for family planning is, therefore, an effective intervention to reduce unintended pregnancy and induced abortion.”

(p90)” Restricting legal access to abortion does not decrease the need for abortion, but it is likely to
increase the number of women seeking illegal and unsafe abortions, leading to increased morbidity and
mortality. Legal restrictions also lead many women to seek services in other countries/states (24, 25),
which is costly, delays access and creates social inequities. Restricting abortion, with the intent of
boosting population has been well documented in several countries. In each case, abortion restrictions
resulted in an increase of illegal and unsafe abortions and pregnancy-related mortality, with insignificant net
increase in the population (26–29).”

http://extranet.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/70914/1/9789241548434_eng.pdf

http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/70914/1/9789241548434_eng.pdf

Thanks Simon. Appreciate your rationality rather than the screaming going on here

Thanks to our laws an ectopic pregnancy can either be aborted (have yet to meet a woman that this was done for) or they can wait until her Fallopian tube is about to rupture and perform a laparotomy, remove the Fallopian tube and the ovary..

All that, whereas in the UK standard treatment is a medical abortion..

here here. Life is complicated, pregnancy and parenting are not things to be taken lightly.

Sorry for the typos, the comment was too long and I am useless at typing on an iPhone

Don’t worry about the typos, it’s the errors of law you should be embarrassed about

For example, You say that if a foetus were a person then intervention to save the mother’s life wouldn’t be permitted. This is wrong. The Irish courts have already noted with approval an English case in which conjoined twins were seperated leading to the immediate death of one to give the other a greatly extended life

At the moment, I can think of three women I know of who do not live in this state and who have had abortions. Two are married with two and three children and one is single. There was no damage to their health physical or mental. The two are still happily married and the single one is still single lol. Their family and friends know about that and no one judges them. No one thinks they did something wrong (on the contrary actually) and no one tried to shame them. They walk with their heads high and they do not try to prove anything to anyone or produce unnecessary explanations. The simple reason is that the country’s law states that all abortions are acceptable until three months of gestations after what medical reasons are necessary (including foetal abnormalities). This shows that all scaremongering is simply that-scaremongering. Now, you can red thumb this or bite your keyboard or phone, but this is a fact and it works in 90% of countries worldwide. Now, a sane person will never say that 90% of world population accepts killing babies. Whatever your reasons to want to deny women things (some obviously think that having a baby is a great punishment for sex, etc.), you know better.

It was in Michelle harte’s case.

When abortion laws change in a country eventually so do people’s attenuated…
What they would have been horrified at and rightly so would now become quite the normal
Again just look at the eg above, UK America, Canada..
Babies born alive left to die (or drowned as in recent case in Canada) as far as I rem..
Partial birth abortion etc..
Madness..
No values or respect for life..

Spotlight fallacy.. Focus on the extreme negatives which are statistically insignificant, in order to push your views..
Same justification that’s used for racism y’know..

Infanticide and partial birth abortion are both illegal even in Canada Bridget, nobody here is suggesting we adopt such extreme practises.

So Shanti, did you cry “spotlight fallacy” on any of those cynically manipulated stories about Savita Halappanavar?

No Chuck, because that wouldn’t count as one.. Perhaps you don’t understand the concept of logic?

Exactly! God is inherently pro-choice..

Did he text you or something?

Well God aborts more pregnancies than all the worlds abortion clinics.. He’s also into infanticide and ripping pregnant women apart if you would care to read the bible..

You’re not God (judging by your spelling and grammar anyway) so your opinions on what God may or may not support are meaningless.

Grand, well I guess it makes sense that you would get your morality from there then

Chuck, really? Anyone who claims to believe in a ‘god’ claims their god leads them trough signs, etc. Same applies here but the god I believe in is one of love and freedom.
Hippocrateeth, I’m not sure what you mean. My spelling and grammar is actually perfect (not one flaw in it) so thats a pretty ridiculous argument. Also you’re right, I’m not God. I never claimed to be God. I, like anyone who believes in a god/higher power, believe that signs are given and God leads me through my life on the right track since I was rescued from the evil of the Roman Catholic Church some years ago

Well Tomàs, I don’t think your blood-thirsty religious views have any place in forming legislation

How pro life of you! I guess it’s easy to be cavalier about pregnant women committing suicide if you’ll never be pregnant.

Andy, I’m just not going to bother with you. You clearly just insult others when they present opinions to you.
Chuck, you’re 100% wrong about the whole blood-thirsty thing. I am a dedicated blood donor and the majority of my donations are set aside for new-born babies. I wear my IBTS pin right next to my pro-choice one. I’m sure that may confuse you. And as for forming legislation, my opinion is irrelevant actually, as is yours and as is the opinion of every other man on this planet. When anti-choice, misogynistic bigots but-out of a woman’s private life and reproductive rights, so will I. But until then I will assist where possible in women asserting their right to reproductive rights and choice

Sorry Tomas, you can pay yourself on the back all you like but I still don’t think yours personal religious views should influence state policy. Also, I’ve got some bad news; I have a vote

I guess it’s easy for you to be cavalier about a abortion Nick, since no-one will ever abort you

My mother is pro choice, actually. And I love her, so the idea of her being forced to have me against her will is a bit upsetting. But then, I suppose not everyone sees their mum as a person rather than as a forced incubator.

@ Chuck….lol…

Nick, are you saying its bit too late??

Not*

large numbers of women are ‘Pro Life’ too, Graham
& most of the ‘trolling’ you refer to is coming from the ‘Pro choice lobby.

That’s there CHOICE Zoe. That’s all pro choice women want and about the trolls please read above comments mostly from men. Some of them are vile.

Zoe, if you wish to be pro life then that is your choice and I respect that, I will never, ever campaign for enforced abortion, because I am pro choice.
Your choice, my choice, Nicks choice, Fionnualas choice, Bridget’s choice, Emma’s choice.. Each woman’s choice, whatever is best for her, in whatever situation she finds herself in.

Whereas you expect every other woman to live by your rules. You seek to exert control other women’s lives and bodies, not personally, but by your ideals. You wish to force women who find themselves pregnant to continue the pregnancy and give birth – regardless of their circumstance (except perhaps if there’s a strong chance that she’s going to die – but not if she’s going to kill herself).
You don’t care if she was raped and the idea of carrying her rapists baby makes her feel even worse than the act of rape itself.
You don’t care whether she’s been told her baby has no hope of survival and she can’t bear knowing that all her much wanted child will ever feel is pain.
Nor do you care that women who feel desperate will seek out illegal abortion anyway and could end up dead themselves.

That’s the major difference between the two stances. One simply gives more precedence to the already living, breathing woman and her decisions, whereas the other presumes to speak for not yet sentient beings and control others.

Sarah Catt’s choice?

no its NOT ‘null & void’ Ellis, – far from it

the ongoing developments in Ultrasound & Medicine, are revealing to us in greater clarity & detail, the world of the Unborn Child. Using this technology we can see the rapid development & complexity, of that tiny human life.
I believe science & medicine, ultimately, will reinforce & strenghten the ‘Pro Life’ argument.
This debate, far from being ‘null & void’ – has only just begun!

That waffle has nothing to do with what Ellis said, Zoe. No matter how far science develops, I don’t think men are going to be getting pregnant and having to worry about abortions any time soon…

the ‘waffle’ is called science, – jessica
the technology of Ultrasound is constantly developing, – & will add a new dimension to this debate.
the pro life ‘dogma’ referred to above, is backed up by science & medicine.
Our understanding of the world of the unborn child, is only beginning.

How will development in ultra sound technology move the debate along?! HD 3D images of foetuses for you to shove in women’s faces and intimidate them with is it?!

An ultrasound will alert women to whether their baby has any fatal deformities I guess.. It won’t fix them. Nor will it reduce the number of weeks gestation required before the foetus is capable of survival without the uterus. It will just give us more detailed pictures.. Which is a tad superficial I feel..

“Not will it reduce the number of weeks gestation required for a foetus to survive without a uterus”

Yeah, science won’t do that at all…..

Science might Chuck. But Zoe was claiming that ultrasound technology was what was going to change things. Ultrasound will not make one iotas difference to the amount of time a foetus needs to gestate in utero before it can survive birth.. Advances in incubators, or creating synthetic wombs and placentas might change this, but ultrasounds won’t..

Somehow that comment makes me just as uncomfortable as those who claim the opposite. And note it’s not only men who seemingly want to control (other) women’s reproductive and bodily rights.

You know you’re making a bad argument when even John Waters is making a better one (not that any of you will bother to read this)

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/0907/1224323695587.html

I assume sterile women are also commanded to shut up?

@reginald: don’t be ridiculous. human rights issues (and this is such) are for men and women to consider.

And for someone whose whole point boils down to ‘men’s opinions don’t matter on this issue’ you sure wasted a hell of a lot of comment space here making yours heard.

I dont mind what opinion either men or women have to offer whether they are pro-abortion or anti-abortion. Hippo I’ll still be very comfortable in the knowledge that neither your opinion nor that of any anti-abortion woman nor any anti-abortion group will ever affect me or the choices I make as your opinion is irrelevant when it comes to my body and my choices.

Good news, you’re marching for something we already have

Do we Chuck? So why was this lady’s daughter forced overseas when she was given the diagnosis she was for her much wanted baby?

Could it be due to the lack of clarity in legislation? Clarity that you and your anti choice buddies would oppose..
Maybe she could have had a termination here, but the doctors weren’t sure and told her to travel instead. I think they would have a better understanding of it than you, in fact, I think it’s pretty safe to assume that’s the case..

Thank you Reginald :)

And the same people who say that will also say that most women who abort are married, middle-class and already have one or two children so it’s kinda a non-issue, right?

Lol. Soldiers in arms. Ye’re all as thick as each other anyway!

I don’t even know what point you’re trying to make

Its a huge number for a picket, I pass by the ‘pro-life’ picket of the IFPA often and there are seldom more than half a dozen there and even their pickets of the Marie Stopes clinic in Belfast have seldom broken a 100

Irrelevant. The nation already spoke in two referenda.

With the last one being what, ten years ago? More? Maybe those of us who couldn’t vote back then want a say now?

@andrew- the pro-life rally I witnessed was the biggest rally I’ve seen on the streets of Dublin, despite the times we live in.

That’s because of the funding that goes into the anti choice/ pro religious dogma movement.

Says you, Geoff.

Says fact Kevin.

Zed- you say it too? It must be fact so.

Er, the anti choice site takes its donations in $$$s, there are American groups openly stating that they financially support the Irish anti choice cause, and Geoff Shorts has been good enough to analyse the following of “pro life” groups on twitter. The Facebook comments on the anti choice pages are predominantly from Americans too..

Sorry to burst your bubble there..

Shanti- and which sites would they be, exactly?

Youth Defence and the Life Institute. Up until recently their donate buttons only gave dollars as an option..

There’s a really simple reason behind the larger crowds at the “pro-life” rallies (excluding financing). The reality is this is going ahead, irrespective of the wishes of the pro-life group. Why go and protest for something which is going to become a reality very soon? There’s no incentive. This legislation will happen. It’s not a question of if – it’s a question of when.

What Shanti means is that “until it was exposed by Geoffsshorts”. Funny how they changed it quite quickly after that!

@shanti…”up until recently”….oh dear.

@brian- I would suggest the ball is very much in play re: the conditions surrounding the suicide provision. Reason enough for a high turnout, I would have thought.

Until it was pointed out by pro choice groups and YD started being investigated for accepting foreign donations. Must have been a coincidence that they changed it then, right, Kevin?

Yeah – YD keep ignoring requests from SIPO to disclose the source of their donations, and vehemently deny that they are a lobby group..

@andrew: it’s not a huge number for a picket. It was a small picket. It was a small picket for a reason. It wasn’t intended to be so small. Accept it graciously. Call a spade a spade if you’re able to do that.

@geoff: why do you think the pro-life movement is well funded? And conversely, why isn’t the same being done for the pro abortion group? I struggle to think who can profit from abortion remaining legal but i have no problems thinking who stands to gain profit by legalizing it. Although, Huggies and Pampers have been running in some pretty bad crowds recently. I would leave money to raise awareness for the pro life movement because I think protecting unborn babies happens to be a worthwhile cause! Amazing isn’t it! maybe id request for some of the money to go to sustaining support groups that actually support women when theyre in a crisis and not just make the matter worse by killing their baby who has its own identity and genetic fingerprint.

There is no one who financially benefits from abortion becoming legal in Ireland. In fact, Ryanair would lose a massive source of revenue, as would UK clinics (as Irish women, unlike British women, have to pay full price.) So if we’re talking financial motivations, wouldn’t surprise me if Ryanair had sent all their workers!

Actually the crowd was put at 1,000.

agree Brian, – it was a pretty poor turnout.
No doubt the media will double or treble their figures for them.
Considering the Pro Life rally in January, got up to 30,000 people.
I think that just says it all.
The government needs to listen, to the huge pro life voice that is out out there, all over the country.
And not go by ‘newspaper opinion polls’ or what the ‘Irish Times’ are telling us.

Yes, forget listening to the democratic will of the people as expressed in two referendum!

The ‘X’ case judgement of 1992 is regarded by many people as flawed.
(i) NO medical evidence was heard in this case,
& (ii) it also sets NO time limits to the termination of a pregnancy.
As former taoiseach John Bruton recently said; it is incompatible with our current constitution, – which is based upon the equal & inherent value, of all human life before the law.

If so many people thought it was flawed, why was it reinforced by the 1992 and 2002 referendums? Democracy means that sometimes votes don’t go your way.

if you want to have another referendum, bring it on. Im pro-choice but ive NO problem with democracy..we’ve had referendums and still the government hasnt acted upon those votes. And the pro-life rally, i was there about 40% were religious (nuns priests) who wont be having babies, and another 40% were elderly (70+) who wont be having babies, of course they pushed the 20% of young men and women and children to the front so the cameras caught them. I have no problem with pro-lifers standing up for what they believe in. But we have voted, and no laws have been introduced yet. A more up to date vote wouldnt do any harm.

about ”40% of the pro life rally were nuns & priests” !
how did you cone up with that figure?

Yeah – the media and their pro choice bias, our national and allegedly impartial news media have the rally a barely 20 second mention, whereas they covered the “pro life” vigil more extensively.. Would you say that RTE have displayed a bias toward the “Pro life” side?

Shanti,
in fairness, the Pro Life rally had up to a crowd of 30,000 people, – so naturally, that will mean more RTE/media coverage.

And the rally last year that took up a sizeable chunk of the corner of Merrion Square (extending down the road in 3 directions) that had a truck on the corner and nothing more – just people.. How much coverage did RTE give that?
The pro choice rally in Dublin earlier in 2012, got coverage here – none on RTE..
That damn pro choice bias strikes again huh?

Actually, I’d love it if there were no unwanted pregnancies. As I’m sure you agree, you’ll join me in advocating for free contraception and to oppose cuts to child benefit, yeah?

Cuts to child benefits cause pregnancy?

Well, I’ve also read that the real reason why crime rates have dropped so dramatically in NY over the last 20-30 years is because of the reduction in the number of unwanted children.

I don’t cite this as justification but merely to point out that you lot seem to be quite content to ignore what happens after a child is born. I think it’s quite likely that the abortion rate would go down if there was better societal support for women and children.

Cuts to child benefit lead to abortions. You seem (unsurprisingly) very unfamiliar with the stories of women who travel, Chuck.

You make it sound like a sky TV package.. It’s never that easy and for you to suggest that it would be shows your lack of empathy and knowledge on the subject.

Read the last line of my quote again…

Shanti it IS that easy sometimes. There IS such thing as selfish, irresponsible and spiteful women.

But I can’t understand why it isn’t ALWAYS that easy. They say it’s just a cluster if cells? You, personally, say its just like a heavy period – so why isn’t it an easy decision?

It’s not a pleasant choice and the world is filled with “what if”s.
Having the judgement of people like you doesn’t help. Everyone knows it has the potential for life and if someone doesn’t wrestle with that idea then they have issues that are far beyond this discussion. And they would be extremely low. The majority have valid reasons for them, but it seems some have no respect for women’s bodies or their bodily integrity.

Firstly, I don’t think you know what ‘bodily integrity’ means.

Secondly, I went to college with several girls who shrugged off abortions as “just get[ing] rid of it”

Thirdly, it doesn’t have the potential for life, it IS alive after implantation. And what about later on in the pregnancy when that infamous heart starts beating? Still not alive? What mad definition of life have you come up with??

Sorry, but if your life depends upon my body then you need my permission.

@Shanti- A toddler is dependant on its mother & father for food & sustenance. It can’t survive on its own. They can kill it if they decide it doesn’t have their permission to live? I ask because I’m pretty sure they’d get arrested.

The toddler can be taken into care of the parents decide they don’t want it.
A foetus is 100% dependent upon the woman it resides within, you can throw out all the nonsense comparisons you like, it’s not the same and never could be.
If a foetus is living inside another person, using their blood supply, and wreaking havoc on their body physically, emotionally, hormonally, and mentally then it’s completely different to a toddler, who can be cared for by anyone.

And there we have it! Permission to keep on living should be 100% in the gift of women to withdraw right up until birth.

What a fascist, selfish opinion. And you still don’t know what “bodily integrity” means

I support the right of a woman to place her child into care after birth, so I’m not sure how that’s inconsistent – parenthood is an incredibly difficult if rewarding responsibility. I oppose it being forced on anyone.

Uh, yes – wanting to control supply of your own blood is “fascist?” Guess you’ll be requiring all people to donate blood then.

Bit if a tangent, Nick, but would you support the rights of men to wash their hands completely of parenthood?

Theoretically, yes. The practicalities are obviously a bit concerning – as I know women who have been convinced to continue a pregnancy by partners who then abandoned them, so I’m not sure how it could be done in practice.

Ideally, however, a couple would make the decision together (I know if I became pregnant, I’d absolutely consider my partner an equal part of the decision), but I do recognise that this isn’t always practical or the best option (in abusive relationships, for example).

No, not theoretically. I mean practically.

Does a man have a right to say “I want nothing to do with this” and to sever all emotional and financial ties upon learning of a pregnancy

Chuck men do wash their hands of parenthood quite often. You think that because a woman gets a court order stating said man must pay a certain amount every week then they just do it. Not all do as there are very few judges that will impose a custodial sentence. After all parenthood is a lot more than just giving financial support so you are quite wrong in your statement.

It is interesting how “pro life” groups are always so quick to claim that they believe that fathers should be obligated to take on more of a burden – but I must have missed their protest on child support.

As usual, no answer to a straight-forward question

Hippo you’ll be quoating the bible next considering the Hippocratic Oath was wriitten around the 5th Century BC

How many doctors take the Hippocratic Oath these days?

I thought they took a Duty of Care oath instead?

Conor I believe they take the oath based on the Declaration of Geneva.

Hippo the Hippocratic Oath was amended under tge Declaration of Geneva in 1948. This declaration has been amended many times since. There is now no mention of any anti abortion sentiment to reflect the times we now live in.

Yes

Yep. Works pretty well, this whole ‘allowing women to determine what happens to their own bodies’ thing.

Yes.. I would like my bodily autonomy respected. Pregnancy would be very risky for me, I use contraception, but were it to fail, I would not feel safe in this country at present.

Yes. We might even surprise you and CHOOSE to continue the pregnancy… hence the term “Pro-Choice”. All anti-choicers want to do is control women. They don’t give a crap about the baby once it’s born because they don’t spend a penny of their American donations on safe sex initiatives or to help women in crisis or mothers in difficulties.

Jessica, how can something with a different DNA sequence be a part of your body?

@jessica- I think it’s the whole “killing a baby thing” that comes with the whole ” letting women determine what happens to their own body thing” that’s an issue for some people.

It can’t live without her body, not until 21.5weeks gestation at the earliest (known)..

I hope you took a long run-up before you jumped to all those conclusions, Daisy

I don’t care about controlling women’s bodies. If I did I’d protest cosmetic surgery clinics, sex-change therapy and hair salons. I’d probably also be against the morning after pill, IUD, the pill, birth control implants and contraceptive injections. Im not though. It’s just the killing I’m opposed to. I think that requires a good reason and declaring open season on the unborn just because a woman says so isn’t a good enough reason

I’ve no idea where you pulled that idea that I don’t care about children from. That’s just something you’d like to be true, because it would paint anti-abortionists in a bad light. But you’ve no proof, because it’s not true

@shanti- people on life support machines in intensive care can’t live without the technology….do you go round unplugging the machines? You’re not a nurse, are you?

That’s a machine, not another persons body.. Try again.

@shanti: Oh you wouldn’t feel safe in Ireland at the moment? Ok, let’s bring in abortion and make the babies the ones who face the firing squad. That’s essentially what it comes down to no matter how you dress it up. You coward. Deal with your own messes, don’t make a separate child from you deal with it just because you don’t have the cop-on to avoid conceiving him/her. And yes, it is a him or her you are choosing to kill because its gender is determined very soon after conception.

Is that all women are to you, Kevin? Technology to support foetuses. People on life support aren’t forcing anyone else to physically suffer to keep them alive. But your comparison of women to technology speaks volumes.

Er Hippo..
I have a health condition that makes pregnancy extremely risky for me. As I said, I work on the prevention is better than cure principle, but I’m so happy to see that you would rather that me and the foetus died in pregnancy than I had access to a safe abortion.. Thanks for your ill informed prejudice..

@daisy: I’m going to let you in on a little secret- the majority of people who are pro-life want to prevent a situation whereby innocent babies are being slaughtered by abortion ‘doctors’ like is the situation in the UK and USA and many other places. Get a grip and stop your bs hyperbole about controlling women. Are you that delusional you can’t see why people would not want to have small foetuses chopped up in their mothers womb and hovered out and thrown away? Why is this so hard to believe? Honestly? That’s what I believe. And there’s no American giving me money to think that. (or is that what they want you to think? oooooohhhhh). No.

So I’m assuming you’re cool with medical abortions then? As the hoovering and chopping out is your problem? (otherwise, why would you use graphic imagery which doesn’t describe the majority of abortions?)

@niall: so you want to see those stats replicated in Ireland? You actually want there to be so many crises pregnancies that women are constantly having to undergo a dangerous surgery which has been clearly shown to have serious consequences to long term mental health? You want that? And so does shanti, and so does daisy, and so do the rest of the so called pro-choice gaggle. Ye’re sick people. I’m genuinely worried that ye exist. Good luck to ya.

You have issues with the vacuum?
Then get your ass to the nations maternity hospitals, it’s standard procedure after an incomplete miscarriage too..

Sorry, the Irish people have been asked whether we wanted to exclude the risk of suicide as grounds for termination twice. And we said no.
We also voted for the right to travel and the right to information..
All that this rally was about was for the government to finally do what they are legally obliged to do.

So you want to make decisions based on head count rather than a democratic process? The real maths show that the majority of this nation disagrees with you Benny. The Americans paying for the buses to transport you pro-lifers around don’t get a vote. Sorry about that.

Zed- democracy is a head count!!!! Pro-choicers are excellent Democrats right up to the point whereby poll after poll shows that the vast majority of Irish people, male & female are against Abortion on Demand. Suddenly democratic mandate loses its relevance for some reason. Ever notice that?

@Kevin when has anyone said anything should be decided without a referendum? Most prochoicers I know talk of getting the long overdue legislation in this year and then starting to campaign for a referendum in the future. Whats the issue with that?

If you want to tout numbers fair enough, how about 150,000, at least 150,000 irish women have traveled to the UK to have abortions. enough women to fill the Aviva stadium 3 times over.

@J- thank you for those numbers. As compelling an argument as any offered on here by any pro-lifer as to why Ireland should do all it can to protect the unborn. I mean if that number occurs when it’s illegal how many would there be if you could do it at home. Frightening statistic.

I know that Kevin. We have had two referenda where the will of the majority of voters in this nation has not been enacted. It happened to be in a polling booth and not via a head count but ultimately it’s the same thing. But you guys would prefer to base our constitution on the will of headcount of people who turn up at a rally. Now that’s daft.

And just think.. If those women could not travel to the UK they would be forced to use unsafe methods of abortion (because the legality doesn’t stop it happening).. Our MMR would be through the roof wouldn’t it?

@Benny actislly all independent polls show the opposite, vast majority now support choice for women

@shanti- or they wouldn’t have the abortion.

Really? When a woman really doesn’t want to be pregnant she will find a way to terminate, and without medical supervision this is dangerous.

Other countries where abortion is restricted (that don’t have neighbours to take care of it) have huge MMR rates for this very reason..

Well, that’s wishful thinking, Kevin, since academic research has shown otherwise, particularly the World Health Organisation research on prevalence of abortion rates.

And you would be surprised at the number of Irish women who are desperate and yet cannot afford to travel and so are forced to access illegal abortions. But I guess if something happens to them, no biggie?

Sorry, whose going to force them to have abortions?

Ah, so if a woman has an illegal abortion, she deserves what she gets, Chuck? You have previously compared women having abortions to murderers and rapists – this would indicate that you think women who access abortion should be incarcerated,

Are you reading comments in a parallel universe or something? I never said those things, and you didn’t answer my question

Women will have abortion regardless. Most people dislike the idea of women being harmed by illegal abortions, but I guess not everyone is “pro life.”

Your question of “who is forcing women?” – the government, by reducing child benefit. People like you, from limiting the options of poor women, not wealthy ones.

The only people trying to “force” women to do anything are the anti choicers who wish to force women to continue pregnancies and give birth against their will.

I like your wee disclaimer at the end there. Just in case god is reading.

Here here

Two referendums Stephen..

People like you, Stephen do far more damage to the pro-life argument than any of those protestors on the streets of Dublin tonight. You’re an embarrassment to reasonable people who think the pro-life argument will be won by rational debate rather than extremist ranting which allows the movement to be characterised as zealots beholden to the Church.

Tut tut tut. That’s the kind of behaviour that will see you end up burning in Hell for all eternity.

How many of those 10,000 were bussed and flown in from all over the country/USA?

Face facts, the ‘pro-life majority’ is 90% Americans.

I actually worry for some anti-choicers state of mind when legislation is brought in this year

@shanti- I’m curious as to what you think happens next? By all accounts the X-case will be enacted into law. The supremacy of the life of the mother will be enshrined into law and genuinely suicidal women will be afforded the opportunity to terminate. The two referenda will have been honoured. You’ll happily sit back and agree that the will of the nation has been adhered to and leave it at that, yes?

The many-headed hydra that is the Irish ‘pro-life’ movement gets most of its funding from the USA, a fact they don’t like to admit. They literally flew people in from the USA to swell their numbers at that rally, as well as hiring coaches to get people from all over Ireland to attend and bribing them with competitions to win iPads.

Personally I would like to see a referendum on repealing the 8th amendment, but lets walk before we run.
Ultimately it should be a democratic decision, and will have to be. Widening abortion access would require this amendment be repealed anyway.

Ah now Kevin be nice to Jessica. Like you said this can only be won by rational reasonable debate, not by hurtful comments. Hypocritical much?

I am right in what I say, Ireland are the pro life majority and there is nothing hurtful about my comments. Poking some fun yes, but being derogatory to them in a personal manner? Never.

By the way this article is an embarrassment to them, and a great triumph for the pro life cause in Ireland, which gives facts and does not play around with semantics like the pro abortion lobby do.

@kevin some might be happy with suicide, rape etc. being the terms for choosing an abortion, some won’t be but either way I fail to see why those that won’t should just stop campaigning. Democracy is built on protest

Stephen you are a scream.. Facts like trying to claim that abortion causes breast cancer? Like weaselling the suicide issue by saying “abortion is not treatment for suicidal thoughts” (but conveniently ignoring that if the pregnancy is what’s causing the woman to want to kill herself it would be rather relevant)..

Yes facts.. Pity none of them are backed up by evidence

Pro Life Facts? LIke Lebanese testicle transplants?

That’s the BEST. FACT. EVER!!