I’ve rarely seen a protest where there weren’t children. It’s not always easy or cheap to get a baby-sitter and women shouldn’t miss out on attending these sort of events just because they have children.

Ok, but then why not wait till the kids are back at school? Primary school children are only off for Easter it could’ve been done next week if baby-sitting is that big an issue. This was done on purpose to trot their kids in front of camera; picture 3 has 4 children far too young to have formed views on such a volatile issue holding placards. I’m not buying that one Maria.

Maria, I don’t know if you’re genuinely naive or just trying to defend this pack of clowns but there’s bringing your kid along because you can’t get a sitter and there’s having the kids front and centre at the protest like this lot.

I’ve seen these sort of protests before and there are often kids present even when there are no cameras. Great to see so many young women willing to make the effort to make their feelings known.

Well then I congratulate the protestors on their integrity but its still not right to foist such an extreme opinion like this on someone who is not old enough to make such a complicated decision for his/her self and certainly not in such a public manner, cameras or no.

I’m just wondering, why were none of you upset when children were involved in protests agains the household charge on 31 March http://www.thejournal.ie/gallery-5000-attend-anti-household-charge-demo-in-dublin-402790-Mar2012/ or at the SPARK demo on 5th April? http://www.thejournal.ie/changes-to-single-parent-payments-proposed-in-social-welfare-bill-408114-Apr2012/

Different rules for right-on causes?

I was talking to someone about this below Chuck, I never said I wasn’t upset, mainly because I never read those articles. Obviously now it’s hard for me to objectively say whether or not I would have passed comment at that at the time of reading it, but I’d like to think I would have, as I feel the same about it as I do about this.

Were the children placed front and centre for the pictures as they have been here (also I didn’t actually look at either of those articles anyway)? And is austerity a topic which is likely to provoke a strong emotional reaction when protested by children? No. This is an obvious move to try and guilt trip people into thinking that being pro-choice means they’re hurting children and being anti-abortion doesn’t mean they’re hurting women. Both patently untrue.

Yes Stephanie, they were. Take a look. And is there some spectrum of emotiveness that makes it OK/not OK to involve children? I’d love to know where it is & who the arbiters are? And Im very sure that SPARK make use of children for photo ops

Brendan, take a look at the comments and you’ll see I specifically named people on this site who said in the past that said they didn’t want children involved in anti-abortion protests and invited them to condemn it for these protests. They passed

Well, yes. I’d say there is. By the nature of both spectrums and emotions though, it’s hard to pin point. Something which I’m quite certain you were prepared to utilize in your argument.

The very fact that it annoys people to see children being used in this argument more than in others proves that. Also I’ve been to a fair few protests in my time, I don’t have kids myself but I’m fairly sure that when I do I won’t be taking them along to demonstrate for something they didn’t understand. Judging by the ages of the kids in these pictures, they don’t understand what’s going on. I’d say most adults don’t understand the issue, mostly because the women who have been through it are too shamed to talk about it because of the way Irish law treats them. I wonder if any of those protestors read the stories printed in the Irish Times and if any of them would have felt differently afterwards. I know I didn’t fully understand the issue until I talked to women who were making the decision. I thought I did, but I honestly didn’t grasp the whole picture. Not having had one myself I probably still don’t.

People talk about the unborn not having a voice, but I don’t see the women who have had abortions getting much of a say either.

“People talk about the unborn not having a voice, but I don’t see the women who have had abortions getting much of a say either.”

Emmm didn’t you just mention the three page article in the Irish Times??

“The very fact that it annoys people to see children being used in this argument more than in others proves that. ”

Ok, well it annoys me to see children being brought to the SPARK protest. Does that make them wrong?

“I’d say most adults don’t understand the issue, mostly because the women who have been through it are too shamed to talk about it because of the way Irish law treats them.”

This is convenient for you. No-one is allowed to have an opinion unless they have an abortion. Bravo

“People talk about the unborn not having a voice, but I don’t see the women who have had abortions getting much of a say either.”
Emmm didn’t you just mention the three page article in the Irish Times??
“The very fact that it annoys people to see children being used in this argument more than in others proves that. ”
Ok, well it annoys me to see children being brought to the SPARK protest. Does that make them wrong?
“I’d say most adults don’t understand the issue, mostly because the women who have been through it are too shamed to talk about it because of the way Irish law treats them.”
This is convenient for you. No-one is allowed to have an opinion unless they have an abortion. Bravo

Yup, I mentioned the three page article in the Irish Times, the first of its kind, that came out less than a month ago. Can you name any article like it that has appeared in national media before that one? Because I can’t and believe me I’ve looked for them.

Using kids at the spark protest makes it wrong in your opinion, using kids at any protest is wrong in my opinion. Using kids at this particular protest only is wrong in some people’s opinion. It is all about opinion but my point is that instead of very few people being a bit annoyed about kids being used as camera fodder in one protest, in this case lots of people are very very annoyed about this particular protest. That does make a difference.

At which point did I say you’re not allowed to have an opinion unless you’ve had an abortion? If that was my point then I myself wouldn’t be entitled to an opinion. Twist my words all you will Chuck, I’ll pop right back on here and untangle them.

Yup, I mentioned the three page article in the Irish Times, the first of its kind, that came out less than a month ago. Can you name any article like it that has appeared in national media before that one? Because I can’t and believe me I’ve looked for them.
Using kids at the spark protest makes it wrong in your opinion, using kids at any protest is wrong in my opinion. Using kids at this particular protest only is wrong in some people’s opinion. It is all about opinion but my point is that instead of very few people being a bit annoyed about kids being used as camera fodder in one protest, in this case lots of people are very very annoyed about this particular protest. That does make a difference.
At which point did I say you’re not allowed to have an opinion unless you’ve had an abortion? If that was my point then I myself wouldn’t be entitled to an opinion. Twist my words all you will Chuck, I’ll pop right back on here and untangle them.

So, you’ve never heard any pro-abortion messages beyond one article? You haven’t been listening very hard. Have a listen to the Irish Family Planning Association. It won’t be hard, they are very loud. “Legal and safe” seems to be the only phrase they know, at times

The fact that a lot of people are annoyed about this was exactly my point – this cause is being treated differently to any other cause.

You didn’t explicitly say that people aren’t allowed to have an opinion, I extrapolated that from when you said not having had an abortion you don’t grasp the whole picture. It stands to reason that the opinions of people who don’t grasp the whole picture are of little value. Well how can anyone who isn’t in full possession of the latest information in the field of obstetrics ever grasp the whole picture?

That was my first thought when I saw this too. It reflects on YouthDefence almost as badyl as their cause…

Yawn, as if you really care, just a deflective tactic. Do you think abortion – the killing of children – is ok?

Look up a definition of abortion there chief.

Killing of children? When did abortion become infanticide?
We are talking about embryonic life, many of which abort naturally in early development.
And given the embryo lacks a nervous system, shouldn’t the carrier of that embryo have the choice as to what is best for her own life at that time? It should be a woman’s human right to have the choice as to when she feels fit to give birth. This is not about denying potential life, it is valuing life – the life of the woman and/or what children she already has or hopes to have in the future, if any.

Killing kids in the womb & using their pregnant mothers for profit is the ultimate form of abuse.

Couldn’t agree more that the kids should not be involved!!

Kids are always brought along to protests and used to advance the message of whatever group is there.

It’s done by both sides to be fair.

Looks like another case for Invisible Children….

Well put.

Education has got us to the point where we understand the unborn child is a human being. That’s a good thing :)

We always knew the unborn child is a human being …. What are you on ?

The unborn child is not a human being, it is a foetus. It has the potential to become a human being. At the moment of conception, and for a time after it, it is nothing more than a bundle of cells, it is still not a person, the idea that this rapidly growing bundle of cells can have a human idendity, a soul, is a religious concept – and wrong.
Medical experts agree that the foetus is generally viable after 5 months, some survive sooner some die later, it isn’t an exact science but we can all agree in the second half of the 20th century alone medical science has increased the chances of premature babies survival chances. They don’t become people, humans, untill they are born.
If someone were to choose to have an abortion, this would be carried out in the early stage of the pregnancy, most countries that allow abortions have gestional time limits so that late term abortions are not allowed. I’ve heard scare stories before where it was claimed late term abortions could be obtained in one country but it turns out this was not quite the case, they could, but only in exceptional circumstances where two doctors have to agree.
People may argue that abortion is wrong, not it isn’t, that’s merely an opinion, its a medical procedure, it’s no more right or wrong than an appendectomy. To suggest that women are better off without abortion in Ireland is also wrong as we have established that thousands travel abroad to get one each year, so clearly they felt strongly enough to travel and pay for an abortion that, had it been available in their own country, they could have availed of the services here. (and generated much needed income) They also greatly outnumber these protesters.
Abortion is something you either do or don’t agree with, personally I’ll never need one but if someone I love does I’d like them to have the option. If you disagree thats fine I have a solution, don’t have one. But as I said, if someone I love finds themself in that situation don’t you dare tell them they can’t have one because you don’t agree with it. I’ll respect your beliefs, please respect mine.

Brian W
I am pro choice . Pregnant means an unborn baby …. unless you are a horse or a cat or a dog etc, but as humans we have a baby humans. I will not get dragged into religious concepts or ideas about souls but each to their own . I just feel that a woman has a right to choose if it is an unplanned pregnancy. Anyway , I would support any ones decision which ever way they chose and I would not judge them there after …

I agree with Brian. Pregnant does not constitute a child. Up to a period of time it is just a zygote or a collection of cells. There is an interesting study which shows a correlation between a reduction in crime in the states in the 80′s and the rise in legalised abortion. It makes sense, reducing the numbers of children born to parents who don’t want them or are unsuited to them logically reduces the number of children in volatile homes.

@Brian

I agree that society is better off when abortian is readily available, but I do think you’re glossing over a few of the more saliant points.

‘They don’t become people, humans, untill they are born.’ Let’s be honest, this is pretty fuzzy logic. In the same way that it’s not right to say that fertized egg is a ‘person’. I think it’s way off to say that a 5,7, whatever month old foetus is just a ‘collection of cells’ etc. What magical transformation takes place at birth? I’ve seen new born babies and there’s not a whole lot going on. I’ve seen paretns swoon when a baby smiles intensly at them….and then five minutes latter the baby is looking at the fridge in exactly the same way. They’re pretty much vegetables that just eat, shit and sleep for a long time after they are born. It’s about 4-5 months before they become self aware. So I believe you could argue that they still only have the potential to become human beings for some time after they are born.

Just to be clear I’m not advocating infanticide. I’m making the point that the rational of the pro-choice argument is not as consistent and scienfically based as they would like it out to be. I personally do not agree with abortion and if my girlfriend and I were to become unexpectedly pregnant I’m pretty sure we’d be devastated if she were to have a miscarriage.

I think we do young mothers a great disservice by telling them that the ‘potential person’ or whatever inside them is just a bunch of cells, as if it’s a tumour or something!

Aside from that I enjoyed reading your post and found a lot of your arguments quite compelling.

This is the 21 century science has progressed proving the humanity of the child within the womb unforunately a small element of society ignore this & like white Americans dehumanization of black people for financial gain babies are disposed of for profit.

@Brian Callinan I can see your point, I’m lucky enough to have grown up children of my own at this stage, and we also had a miscarraige so I can appreciate what that feels like. I would hope that nobody would advocate infanticide and I certainly wasn’t. No disrespect to you or your girlfriend, but its easy now to say you’d never consider such a thing as abortion, you don’t really know untill you’re faced with it. What if you’re told at an early stage that the foetus has a disease an will not survive? This happened a friend of mine many years ago, she gave birth to one son who survived for a few days, defying the odds. It was a million to one thing and couldn’t happen again, but a few years later it did and she couldn’t go through it again, abortion wasn’t an option in this backwater so she had to travel to an other country to get compassion. That to me is disgusting.
I understand how you may feel mothers may be offended by my description of foetuses and “bundles of cells”, they are, but I deliberately used those terms to counterbalance the flowery speech used by the likes of Youth Defence who like to imbibe the foetus with humanity from the exact moment of conception, just take a look at some of the language used here. This is a collection of cells that grow into a foetus which has the potential to become a person who can be anything he or she wants to be.

Brian and Brian
I too have grown up children and I would be devestated if any of them decided to abort a grandchild of mine …. However ! If it was found that the foetus was somehow undeveloped and the chances of life diminished greatly , then there is no other alternative, or if the girlfriend / daughter in law said no I can not go through with this pregnancy I would have to accept that choice . I do agree with Brian W that no one knows how they will react to an unplanned pregnancy.The shock is something else ,however after all is said and done , I have never met a mother who has regretted the birth of their baby. I deliberately said Mother because I have a son who has never met his father …. He wanted me to go to England ,I chose not to and he walked away…. That is another side to issues revolving pregnancy and birth and abortion …. Emotions of men and women and relationships , add to the mix then religion …. That is why I am pro choice ,it is too much of a responsibility for me to take on other peoples issues. Live and let live and hope that the decisions you make are for the best, but live with the choice with no regrets and no one judging you. This why I am Pro Choice .I do not live any one elses life so therefore how can I make those type of rules for them….I will say practise safe sex always , but even that is not always ”safe” or abstain from sex, but that’s no fun. Pregnant = baby in my book , not a collection of cells… and yes all they do is eat shit and sleep….So do teenagers if that is the case :) .

@Brian Walsh

To be honest Brian, I feel you’ve avoided the central question I raised entirely. I’ll address your points first and then try to be a little more explicate in terms of what I’d like to hear your thoughts on.

If the doctors say the baby is a lost cause and will proably die a few days after birth then most ratioanl people would agree that an abortion would be a reasonable option. I don’t think we’re adding much to the debate by discussing such cases.

As for terms to use for a foetus, It’s not that mothers will be offended by the term ‘collection of cell’, it’s just that I feel it’s very inacurrate. It’s a general term could be used for anything. A block of cheese is a bunch of cells. So when you call it a bunch of cells I think you as guilty of clouding the arguments as a pro lifer is when calling an aborted foetus a ‘dead baby’. Granted the ‘dead baby’ phrase is def a more volatile phrase.

So I explained quite clearly in my last post why I thought your statment that a foetus becomes a person at birth to be inaccurate. Do you agree now that it’s not a cut and dried and you first stated? If not please explain why.

So the rational for allowing abortions up to 20 weeks is that the foetus can’t survive outside the womb any earlier than that. What if (probably more a question of when if we’re honest) science advances to the stage that a foetus can survive outside the womb after 15 weeks or 10 weeks? Would you agree that the timescales for abortions would have to be revised downwards? If not then you really do have to provide a logical argument for why it should stay at 20 weeks? Since you seem to be struggling to argue the pre-post birth difference, I’m anticipating that you’ll have a hell of a time trying to explain what makes 20 weeks so special.

Look forward to hearing back from you.

@Brian Callinan Ok, lets take the first point you make. If doctors agree that a pregnancy is “unviable” and an abortion may be the only option to a mother then most rational people may agree but she still has to travel from this country to another to get that compassion. I find that disgusting.
Now your second point. Humans are mammals, vertebrates, just like many other animals, dogs , cats, chimps , pigs, dolphins etc. Each of these gives birth to their young in a similar way but only humans have an arrogance to assume they are somehow above all others, we’re not, we’re just another animal procreating. You may feel its inaccurate to call the early foetus of any mammal a bunch of cells, a group of cells but thats exactly what it is. If a chimp becomes pregnant today those cells start growing untill that bundle of cells becomes a recognisable foetus, the same with a dog or a dolphin or a human.
That foetus does not exist as a person, as a human being, and I understand this is also a legal defination in many jurisdictions, untill it exists outside its mother, outside the womb and draws a breath on its own. This may sound harsh and clinical but we humans are just one more species on this planet, of course every pregnancy is special to every parent and filled with wonder, hope and aspirations for their son or daughter’s future.
I don’t know the exact details of when abortions can be carried out, if you say 20 weeks I won’t argue with you. I couldn’t agree with you more that science will allow babies born younger to survive, but I do think it will reach a point where science can only do so much. I think 10 or 15 weeks will be impossible as the tiny lungs simply won’t be there to be developed.
I never mentioned 20 weeks, and as I said know nothing about the legal timeframes of when an abortion can and can’t be carried out but I would expect something like this is not done on a whim and, like all medical procedures, there are as many safeguards in place as possible but, at the end of the day, the goal is the termination of the pregnancy.
Oh and yes, that block of cheese is still still a bunch of cells, as are you and me. Isn’t nature wonderful?

I never said that a human foetus was somehow a special case. Once a dog/puppy whatever is born it is no longer a foetus in the same way that once a baby is born it is no longer a foetus. If a dog is pregnant it is pregnant with a dog foetus etc. I don’t see how this has any bearing on the point I made. A ‘group of cells’ is not ‘exactly what it is is’. It’s a foetus once it has entered the womb and started the process of cell division. ‘Group of cells’ -> vague/non-descriptive term. ‘foetus’ -> specific/detailed term. Your still dancing around the point that we don’t know when a fertilised egg should be classed as a ‘bunch of cells’ or a foetus or a life. Legal definitions should be secondary to scientific definitions and since you’re arguing that the law as it stands in this country is wrong I find it frustrating that you’re now quoting legal definitions of other jurisdictions as if that proves your point. No scientist that I’m aware of has successfully argued that life begins at birth or at any other point before or after that. As I said the baby is no more human just because it’s now outside the womb and has started to breath with it’s lungs.

In the absence of a clear guidlines from the world of science you have to admit that we don’t know when a life begins. As such I don’t see how anybody can be too sure of where they stand on the issue of abortion until that fundamental quesiton has been answered.

….and thus ! the difference between men and women ….

@Brian Callinan Look the point I was making was that we humans are nothing more than mammals, vertebrates, and at times we get a little ahead of ourselves. At the end of the day we are just another animal on this planet but we like to believe we are somehow special. After conception as the cells rapidly divide they enter the embryonic stage of development and, yes looks just like a bunch of cells. Only after about 9 week does this begin to look like what we may recognise as a foetus. The foetus continues to grow and develop within the womb untill birth.
The question of at what stage does life begin, at conception, 9 weeks or birth is another thing altogether. Do you want a legal, spiritual, religious or scientific definition, because its a different answer to different people. As I said I understand legally a child must draw a breath on its own outside the womb to exist, to live. You protested this point but after the 1998 Omagh bombing a mother died carrying twins, it was ruled that Avril Monaghan’s twins, although viable, did not legally exist as they did not breathe on their own outside their mother. The spiritual or religious definitions of when life begins, I don’t know. Its generally accepted that life begins at birth, when the baby draws that first breath. After all you celebrate your birthday on the day you were born, not the day you were conceived or 9 weeks after it.
You’re not wrong Susie…

Brian + Brian
I am never wrong :)
I may not always be correct or right …. I am still pro – choice. too emotive otherwise. We are only here for a short time in the greater scheme of things, and all we can try to do is our best …. Take care .

@Susie Your kids are very lucky to have you. I couldn’t agree more that life is too short, I’ve seen too much compassion missing in this country thanks to our church but if in the future someone I care about should find themselves in the situation where an abortion is a serious option then I hope its available to them with no stigma but compassion.
P.S. I ‘aint paying either.

Thanks Brian W :)

Most of those pics are of miscarriages and not abortions.

Thats probably even worse. Don’t suppose if you know if the parents of the miscarried babies gave their permission for the photos to be taken then misrepresented as aborted foetuses?

No idea. Im only making an assumption there because any one who works in an abortion clinic is going to be pro-choice so wont be taking pics.

Not that you’re paranoid or anything…..

I work in a maternity hospital.

And have you seen many people taking photos of miscarried babies?

Nope but I see them every single day. My heart goes out to any woman who has lost a baby or had a miscarriage by the way. I cant imagine how horrific that is for anyone.

Eh, Im pro-choice, NOT anti-abortion. Im sure if I were anti abortion then id be having a field day but Im not so i respect a womans decision making capability.

You’re just making up some parallel conversation that I’m not a part of! Answer the question I actually asked instead of the one you pretended I asked. Here it is again;

“Yeah, so the photos you mentioned? You said that they are probably coming from people taking photos of miscarriages, then you say that you see this stuff every day – well, if ANYONE was going to see these photos being taken then surely it would be you??”

Jaysis, youre like an English language student. YES CHUCK, IF SOMEONE WAS TALKING PICS THEN ID SEE THIS HAPPENING IF IT WERE HAPPENING WHEN THE POTENTIAL PHOTOGRAPHER AND I WERE IN THE SAME ROOM AT THE SAME TIME AS THE POTENTIAL PHOTOGRAPHER WAS TAKING PHOTOGRAPHS BUT I HAVE NOT SEEN THIS HAPPEN Im not sure if youre aware but there are hospitals all over the world or are you?

Yes same way the Jews and RTE and BBC continuously bombarding us with programmes depicting the atrocities of the Nazi concentration camps. These files and photos are tame compared with the images of the mutilation of the unborn before and after-birth (partial birth abortion). Please God your late grandmother is seeing abortion for what it is and is weeping copious tears in heaven.

Yeah Ciara, all your colleagues wait for you to leave the room to take their mislabelled pictures for their secret woman-hating clubs.

Or maybe the photos really are what they purport to be?

I don’t see how asking you to stay on-topic makes me an English language student. Or why that’s a bad thing to be

Maybe im missing something here Chuck, but why would an anti-abortionist be working in an abortion clinic? Just to take snaps? They would take part in such a thing?

Ifyou assume that a person would only take a photo as part of an argument against abortion, then it implies a certain level of disgust at abortion on your part

I make no claims about the motivations of the photographer. I’m just pointing out the paranoia and illgic in what Ciara says

Well said Mart !!

“Pseudo-moral positions!” If a personal opinion on abortion (irrespective of your position) is not a moral one than I don’t know what is. I really like how you label anybody who expresses an opinion which could be labelled as anti-abortion as an idiot and a narrow minded fool. I also love how you dismissively suggest that anti-abortion equates to an inability to grasp the complexity of human life!! Please enlighten us with more of this intellectual pollution; no seriously I’m taking notes!

Against murder don’t kill (but let other people do it?!)

I’m neither for nor against abortion- it’s certainly not a black and white issue. I don’t think the phrase ‘live and let live’ applies either to be fair.
We have a social responsibility to each other and it’s in everyone’s interest that the best possible solution is reached.

Liam, its up to a women to decide which solution is the best for her, no one else should get to decide for her.

I’ll probably get flamed for asking this, but here goes..

Ciara, do you see abortions as being an acceptable and viable form of birth control? There needs to be a level of bloody personal responsibility too.. it shouldn’t just be an option that somebody can choose every time they haven’t practised safe sex. And you say only the woman has a say in the matter.. well that’s certainly progressive.

Mart, I welcome debate and argument on most issues, this is no different!! No, I dont see it as viable birth control however it is the only option for a pregnant woman who does not want to be pregnant. It isnt up to me to tell a woman what she should or shouldnt do. On the issue if the man involved, as a man does not have to carry the pregnancy, adjust his life for 9 months, give birth and in the vast majority of cases give up a job or career to take care of a child, then it is ultimately the womans decision.

He does however have to pay maintenance costs or otherwise faces the very real threat of legal action if he is the one that decides that he doesn’t want to be a father.

and if he’s against abortion then as far as he’s concerned you’ve just murdered his child. I personally am pro-choice but claiming that it’s a woman’s choice to do what she wants is short-sighted.

Maintenance in this country is a joke. If men were made to be responsible and pay for their kids then there’d be no need for all the welfare payments! By the way, Im very much pro-fathers rights.

Even if they did have to pay, they still do not have to be pregnant and give birth so its the womans choice.

What fathers rights are you pro Ciara? Every single one of your comments on this page have been about the women having the right to do whatever they want.

When the child is out of the womb and can no longer needs the mothers body to survive then thats when a child needs its dad. Before that, its living off the womans body. How is a foetus in the womb reliant on the father for anything? It isnt.

I never said a foetus is reliant on a father. You don’t seem to be rebutting any of my questions or comments, any chance of some output on what fathers right you said you’re in favour of? or about a father who may feel like his pro-choice partner had murdered his child?

Also your argument that its a woman’s choice because she’s the pregnant one doesn’t wash, if we didn’t have adoptive facilities would you argue that single parents could kill off the children they dont want?

Brendan, Im adopted and Im still pro-a womans right to chose.. I do not think a woman should have no other choice when she is pregnant but doesnt want to be, other than continuing with the pregnancy and giving birth.

Again, as the man plays no role in the actually pregnancy, carrying the foetus, providing the foetus with nutrition, labour, pushing out a baby, feeding the baby, then he will not have a say in what the woman decides that SHE wants to do for HERSELF!
Some men may feel that she has murdered his child but he is not the one who makes the decision on whether she continues with the pregnancy.
A man cannot lock a pregnant woman up just so she cannot terminate Her PREGNANCY.

So essentially the father doesn’t get a say because a woman is capable of terminating the baby on the sly and there’s nothing he can do about it? I’ll ask a third time, what father’s right are you in favour of?

“Again, as the man plays no role in the actually pregnancy, carrying the foetus, providing the foetus with nutrition, labour, pushing out a baby, feeding the baby, then he will not have a say in what the woman decides that SHE wants to do for HERSELF!”

Saying that men play no role is a bit harsh considering most men do assist their wives through pregnancy. Also saying the woman can do what’s best for herself because she’s the primary (ok only) cargiver of the child during pregnancy that she has ultimate free reign is like giving amnesty to every parent who has abused their children because they’re the primary caregiver of the child.

Yes Brendan, thats exactly what Im saying! You have no rights over the foetus in the womb as its not reliant on you for anything., whether physiologically, emotionally, morally or socially
I am in favour of the rights of fathers to be dads to their born children who deserve to have their dad in their life!

Children can be taken from abusive parents and put into foster care, a foetus in the womb is reliant on the woman WANTING to give birth or not. Other options are hers to take if she wishes.

Up until 13 weeks, right Ciara? Then her wishes are no longer the overriding factor and she should be forced to carry the pregnancy, right? You said so yourself

Thats despicable. I hope you never become a mother with that attitude.

“You have no rights over the foetus in the womb as its not reliant on you for anything”

My neighbour’s children aren’t reliant on me for anything but if they were mistreated I’d still feel merited in standing up for them. And the parents “you don’t have to provide them with nutrition, labout over them, feed them” wouldn’t be a sound defence.

Great, you’re view on father’s rights extends to their rights to be a father, that’s helpful.

I’m almost pro-life at this point if these are the reasons people want abortion legalised. Goodnight

I know this is an emotional debate on all sides but lets try not to stick to the topic and not make the arguments too personal. Wishing infertility on someone isn’t nice.

Your neighbours kids are born, running around and part of society! They can be cared for by anyone around them! A foetus in a womans womb is is completely different!
Theres no way you were pro-choice anyway, you have given no circumstances as to when you’d support a womans decision to have an abortion and youve criticized every possible scenario I have put forward here.

Im glad that you dont know anyone who has ever decided to have an abortion, she’d have gone to term if she had to sit and listen to your constant babble.

Good luck.

Its alright Stephanie, I wont stoop to his level.
I try and empathise with people who go through traumas in their lives or i try to put myself in their situation however some obviously dont really give a damn about how others who are faced with these situation feel.

Its complete lip service.

Ciara, if a foetus isn’t human life then what’s so traumatic about an abortion? Surely it’s no more of a big deal than the morning after pill or condoms?

Chuck, I have never had an abortion so I cant tell you that . I have heard from some that its a tough decision to make but that they are glad they made it as it was right for them at the time. Im sure having your fallopian tube removed due to an ectopic pregnancy is traumatic too and thats also a type of abortion.
Im sure gynae cancers which feed from pregnancy hormones are traumatic too but women cant terminate here to allow them to have radiation or chemo for their cancers.

You’re just completely muddying the waters to avoid answering. Cancer or an ectopic pregnancy bring special traumas which have no connection to the woman’s belief that abortion ends human life, but if she does believe that then that’s another trauma for her. However, it doesn’t make the treatment any less necessary

You’ve been arguing for abortion on demand (which accounts for the majority of abortions). Now, you say you have sympathy for anyone suffering that trauma………but you also say that you don’t know what’s traumatic about it? So your sympathy is grounded in nothing? (Up until 22 weeks, at which point you tell her that sympathy or no, she now HAS to go through with the pregnancy)

You seem confused

Oh please Chuck. No women skips merrily off to have an abortion as though she was popping her morning pill. It’s a difficult decision made in a difficult situation. Of course it is traumatic.

That doesn’t mean it’s necessarily the wrong decision. Few people are lucky enough to sail through life without at some time being faced with a decision where none of the available options are particularly desirable. Nobody enjoys being faced with hard choices. All anyone can do is make what they believe to be the best decision in the circumstances and at the time.

So do you think that every woman who has an abortion is grand with it? From my experience with friends who have had abortions, I have 1 who regrets her decision and i have 4 who dont. Some regret getting into the situation where they had to make the decision but they do not regret having an abortion. My sympathy is grounded in being able to understand how difficult a decision it must have been for any woman to make.
See, I can empathise with how a woman who has an unwanted pregnancy might feel, I can put myself into her shoes. Im not remotely confused here. I believe that a woman should be allowed to make the decision for herself wheether or not she wishes to remain pregnant. Up to a certain stage a tablet is taken to terminate, after that a D&C and after that is at around 24 weeks when a foetus is dismembered to remove from the womb. If a woman wants to go through that, then she can as i cannot tell her what to do. She has to live with the consequences of her own actions just like the rest of us. You will never have to make this decision for yourself and cannot even begin to empathise with someone who finds themselves in the situation so maybe thats why you have no sympathy and cant imagine yourself how these women might feel.

“Oh please Chuck. No women skips merrily off to have an abortion as though she was popping her morning pill. ”

Why not? (which is the question i was asking all along) Instead of telling me that it IS a hard decision. Tell me WHY

(As an aside, I’ve met at least one girl who was very casual about her abortions. And I’m using the plural on purpose)

Ciara – maybe I have empathy for the person being “dismembered”, as you put it?

You’ve had another change of heart. “after that is at around 24 weeks when a foetus is dismembered to remove from the womb. If a woman wants to go through that, then she can as i cannot tell her what to do.”

Earlier you drew the line at 12 weeks. Then you legislated for 22 weeks. Now it’s up to the mother at any stage?

So back to the very first thing I asked you; Are you ok with legalising abortion on demand at 8 1/2 months?

If a woman decides she wants to have an abortion at 38 weeks shes gonna go and do it regardless!
I do not think abortion should be allowed after 22-23 weeks but I think abortion should be allowed here up to 16 weeks. If a woman wants to abort after that, she should be given all the info in regards to whats involved.
How many times do i need to say that Id draw the line at 12 weeks FOR ME?? I could not terminate after that stage.

“If a woman decides she wants to have an abortion at 38 weeks shes gonna go and do it regardless!”

And if a murderer wants to murder you…… You still prosecute them though, right?

“How many times do i need to say that Id draw the line at 12 weeks FOR ME?? I could not terminate after that stage.”

And how many times do I have to ask why? Could it be because you consider a foetus to be human life at that stage? If so then how can you want it to be legal to kill them for no reason other than someone else’s desire? If not, what’s the big deal?

Ok Chuck, I’ll try to handle the ‘why not’, though I don’t know why I bother, since you just dismiss anything anyone says anyway.

Every situation is different, but here are some possible reasons.

Because the woman may want children, but for whatever reason this pregnancy is very, very difficult for her. That means there is inner conflict about what to do and that is a trauma in itself.

Because there are real options and choices available – and she has to pick the right one for her and the people she loves, while a clock ticks insistently in the background. That’s hard. It’s traumatic.

Because, at a time when she is faced with a very real crisis, the number of people close to her, people she trusts, that she feels she can confide in and speak to may be very small – or non-existent. That’s lonely and traumatic.

Because in the country it means having to create a web of lies, and remember them, and keep them up indefinitely. Hard, hard, hard.

Because of that clock again…. it’s ticking, ticking, ticking. You need money. You’ve no money. To pay for this something else has to go by the wayside. What? How? Who will notice? Hard, hard traumatic choices.

I could go on…. you won’t care anyway so I won’t bother.

Questioning is not dismissing

“Because the woman may want children, but for whatever reason this pregnancy is very, very difficult for her. That means there is inner conflict about what to do and that is a trauma in itself.”

An inner conflict is a trauma? We have different definitions of a trauma. And if she wants children then is using condoms not just as traumatic? Im being serious

“Because there are real options and choices available – and she has to pick the right one for her and the people she loves, while a clock ticks insistently in the background. That’s hard. It’s traumatic.”

Again, making a decision is not traumatic it’s just part of being an adult. We all have to make hugely important decisions

“Because, at a time when she is faced with a very real crisis, the number of people close to her, people she trusts, that she feels she can confide in and speak to may be very small – or non-existent. That’s lonely and traumatic.”

Loneliness is trauma? You’re really stretching the definition now

“Because in the country it means having to create a web of lies, and remember them, and keep them up indefinitely. Hard, hard, hard.”

A web of lies?? One lie. Certainly far fewer lies than someone who feels they can’t come out, or who went to england to join their army, or who is having an affair. All of those people face opprobrium but at least the first two aren’t harming anyone else…… (also, the country? Urban areas too, surely?)

…which leads me onto the one thing you avoided mentioning; the baby. You make no effort whatsoever to address the point at which life begins. Birth? If so, why? Maybe 22 weeks? Conception? Implantation? When does it begin and why? I want that answered before I worry about someone who is faed with the ‘trauma’ of decision making

I mean, if you’re looking for a reason to say abortion is traumatic then I’m giving it to you on a silver plate; Because it’s ending a human life. It’s the one thing you didn’t say!

What right have you to say what someone else finds traumatic?

Chuck, you have obviously never been pregnant, had a pregnancy scare so cannot put yourself in the shoes of a scared traumatised woman. Your definition of trauma might be very different to mine or to a woman who has gone through something like this, so you cannot begin to understand the implications of a pregnancy on a woman, regardless of her circumstances. You’ll never be faced with having to make this decision so maybe you should just count yourself lucky that you’ll never have to consider an abortion.

Im sure if Chuck had to travel abroad to have his genitals poked around in, he;d probably find that a tad traumatic.

Katherine – What right have you to say that one person’s right to life is void because someone else wishes it?

Ciara – You know nothing about me, so maybe a bit less of the childish personal crap and a bit more answering direct questions on the issue, eh?

If speaking from experience and empathy is childish then so be it. You know little about me but I guarantee that you never have had nor will have, a pregancy scare where you will need to make a decision such as this.

“Need” is an objective word. I suspect you are using it in place of “want”

And less of the “you know nothing about me” talk. I didn’t say anything personal about you, it was the other way around

100 is a small number.

It’s (conservatively) estimated there are about 150,000 Irish women who have had abortions, so it’s not like it’s exactly rare. There are about 1.5 million women in the country between the ages of 16 and 64, so that’s about 10%.

These are not some mad harridan murderous sluts, it is in fact statistically unlikely that you are not close to a women who has had an abortion. There women are your sister, your girlfriend, your aunt, your mother, your daughter, your niece. The more vocally anti abortion you are, the more likely it is that there is woman close to you has had an abortion that you don’t know about – because they certainly won’t be confiding in you.

Isn’t that just the transcript from the IFPA video?

I have to say, it’s pretty unpersuasive. if I think a foetus is human life, why would I think it’s ok for my sister to kill it but not a stranger? Do you think my beliefs are that shallow?

No, it’s not a transcript. I looked up the number, looked up the census results, and figured it out. I don’t have a clue what video you are talking about, this issue doesn’t really exercise me sufficiently that I watch videos about it.

I wasn’t trying to be persuasive, nor was I trying to tell anyone what they should think is right or wrong, nor was I commenting on your beliefs or anyone else’s. I wan’t even replying to a post of yours, so I’ve no clue why you thought it was aimed at you.

However if you want to personalise it, my only point was that people who are as vocally anti-choice as you are are the last ones who will know whether their sister, their mother, their niece, their wife or any other women close to them has had an abortion, because they are not going to be confided in.

I don’t mean anything in particular about that, so please don’t go telling me what I am saying, what I believe, what you think I am saying about you or anything or anyone else. It’s just a point I wanted to make. End of. Good night.

Well said, most sensible comment on this topic

Isn’t that true of every single protest ever?

Yes it does apply to every protest.
If you’re against smoking, drinking, paying the household tax, whatever… fine you don’t smoke, drink, etc. and try persuade your family not to also…… but don’t go campaigning for a law forcing EVERYBODY else not to smoke, drink, etc even if they want to.

You protest against something, or to have something a certain way, but it doesn’t mean you can push what you want to protest for for yourself on other people who do not want it.
e.g. Agree or disagree with gay marriage, people are free to protest for it if they want it that way… but you wouldn’t say they are allowed to say every gay person HAS to therefore marry because that’s what they want and are protesting for?

If they wanted to demonstrate in favour of that I think they can if they want, I’ll just ignore them. By the way, a lot of people have been campaigning to persuade the rest of us not the pay the household tax. Do you want them to shut up too?

But on the issue at hand, if someone believes that abortion is killing people then I don’t think it’s unreasonalbe to make their feelings known in public

Soooo why not make assault legal then? Don’t wanna do it then don’t do one

I’m not sure why your equating abortion with assault?. So if a priest rapes you Jesus would prefer you have the child? That way two lives can be ruined instead of one.

Keep your religion out of my beliefs, churchy. I don’t care what your Jesus thinks

I wouldn’t say I’m equating assault with abortion. It’s only classified as ‘assault’ if you survive so they aren’t really equal. I’m comparing them.

Because when you assault someone that is a living breathing thinking being. Abortion isn’t. A foetus is not people.

Same querstion to you then Scarr, do you allow abortion on demand at 8 1/2 months. if not, why not? Where do you draw the line?

Some people really seem to think so!

Many women who get abortions are victims of rape. Do you think they want to be reminded of a traumatic experience in their lives every time they look at the child?

And just because we’re pro-choice, we’re not pro-abortion. I personally can’t imagine having an abortion but I fully support any woman who wishes to have one, whatever her reason.

why would you want to kill a baby????

Nobody in their right mind would want to kill a baby. A foetus, however, is not a baby.

You keep mentioning the church because you want to think that they are pulling the strings. But they aren’t. Plenty of us secularists think life is something that should not be dealt with in a cavalier fashion

Mother’s right to life > Right to life of the unborn

Mother’s right to privacy < Right to life of the unborn

See? No church.

To be fair you have a point Chuck, I did generalise and for that I apologise, but it is a little difficult to cater for everyones tastes. Like you I’m definately in the secularist camp but I did take the time to check the Youth Defence website and these folks, apart from haveing a few roof slates missing, are in the religious camp. They have pictures of the late Pope John Paul II all over the site with the quote “It is God’s will to give effective daily help to Youth Defence”. They seem to run a slick site that claims to Educate, Demonstrate, Campaign, Communicate and Lobby about their objective which they say is to keep Ireland abortion free.
Yes Chuck a very slick site, all those magazines, leaflets, cards and DVD’s must set them back quite a few bob to keep such an operation running with little income… Makes you wonder…

Ah here, don’t waste your time on Youth Defence! The old adage about not reasoning someone out of something they were never reasoned into applies!

Condoms, the pill, the sponge, the patch, the coil, LARC injection, the morning-after pill, cervical cap, diaphragm, spermicide, female condom….. how much choice do you need?

Enough choice to abort an unwanted pregnancy, thanks.

Why stop there?

http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/02/22/medethics-2011-100411.full

There’s plenty of would-be adoptive parents who’d be delighted to pay

As an adopted person, I would never treat a woman who had an abortion in any way inferior to a woman who gave her kid up for adoption and I would never judge her.

Anyone for tenuous?

Anyone going to mention the tenuous link again that a man providing sperm suddenly trumps the woman having to be pregnant and have her life turned upside down? I dont think the 2 can really be compared.

Tenuoser and tenuoser….

I never said anything about men’s rights trumping women’s rights, or about you judging people.

You said that people who were anti-abortion should pay to raise the children. I said that there’s plenty of adoptive parents who would happily pay. What’s hard to follow there?

Whats hard to follow about a woman WANTING or NOT wanting to give birth to a baby regardless of if theres someone out there who wants it? Woman dont give birth to give their babies away unless they are surrogates and for you to simplify it by just suggesting that theres someone who will pay for it is madness.
If youre sticking to the subject of money, why dont we all just pay loads more tax to pay for these women to have their babies and raise them?

Some women just do not want to be parents! End of!

“If youre sticking to the subject of money, why dont we all just pay loads more tax to pay for these women to have their babies and raise them?”

We do

I brought up money to answer your ridiculous assertion that people who oppose abortion should be made to pay for the upbringing of children. I gave a perfectly logical answer, which is why you changed the subject

What makes you think that people who bother to go out and stand for the rightsa of others to live would not support the right to State support for single mothers? I’ve been in the Pro-Life movement for twenty years and the people I meet on Pro-Life demonstrations are the very same people I worked with on a whole range of human rights issues and in soup kitchens, homeless peoples hostels, etc.. The anti-life people never seemed to turn up when the hard work needed to be done. They still don’t turn up. They prefer philosophising on their bourgeois chat pages! Pathetic.

Im not anti-life. I am however pro-a womans life to chose whether or not she wants to be pregnant.

Up to a certain point, right Ciara?? Im still waiting for an answer on that one!

Because i said I couldnt go through a D&C again Chuck, that is why i draw the line at 12 weeks.

If some Gary Glitter-type perv wants to abuse some children he just goes to the far east so what’s different in doing it here?

Tim – thanks so much for showing me this video tim. here i was thinking abortion was a pleasent experience. i have to ask can you be anymore condescending? do you think people here dont know what abortion consists of or how traumatic it is? like someone already said here, pro choice does not mean you automatically support abortion. it means you support the mothers right to choose. you also have ignored most of my last post and twisted what i said about parents forcing their kids into protesting…just because im pro choice i shouldnt care about children that are alive?? nice logic.if these kids were holding homophobic signs you would condemn the parents for allowing it. just because the protest supports your view should not blind you from what is clearly wrong. i wont bother asking you again about a child that was raped by her father…..i presume you will just ignore it like that first time.

also i forgot to mention. i noticed that it dies not say anywhere here the reason why these abortions took place. were they miscarriages? nothing like ignoring facts for a nice video eh. must say im trying to read the site on my phone so i might have missed the explanation.

Please see this for authentication of the video, showing that these are real abortions of real human beings: http://herestheblood.com/documentation/

By trying to dismiss these abortions as miscarriages, you attempt to disassociate your idea of abortion from the reality of abortion. This is the horrible truth, and it happens approx 50 million times every year. We are killing innocent human beings in the 20th and 21st century on a scale never witnessed before. Shame on us.

In terms of girls who are impregnated after suffering incest, abortion provides a perfect means for the perpetrator to carry on their awful crimes. This happens regularly – the father brings his daughter for the abortion, leaving him free to carry on his crimes after he covers them up with the abortion.

When conception does occur after rape/incest, a new human being has been created. This innocent human being should not be given the death sentence because of the crime of their father. As a human being they are entitled to their right to life. Punish the offender, not the innocent human being.

Here’s a page about someone conceived in rape: http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/index.html

The woman who suffers the incest/rape deserves the utmost care (financial, material and emotional). We cannot feel enough compassion for her. Interestingly, despite the fact that abortion proponents would have us believe victims of sexual assault are rushing into abortion clinics, of the victims who do conceive most chose to give their babies life.

The Elliot Institute found 73 percent of rape victims chose to give birth to their babies.

In 1981, Dr. Sandra Makhorn conducted a major research of pregnant rape victims in the USA. Of the 37 women, 75 – 85% choose to give life to their children.
Pregnancy and Sexual Assault, New Perspectives on Human Abortion. Makhorn. 1981

Most women in Dr. Makhorn’s study felt that abortion was an act of violence and that issues relating to the rape experience, not the pregnancy, were of primary concern in counselling and rehabilitation. The baby is entirely innocent and is not to blame for the crimes of the father. Many women in the study spoke about this and emphasised their desire to protect the innocent child in their wombs from such a brutal death. Lastly, there was a realisation that abortion does not make you unpregnant.

Early in the pregnancy there may be feelings of resentment and hostility towards the child. In her study, Dr Susan Mahkorn found that negative attitudes consistently changed to positive ones as the pregnancy progressed; the overwhelming majority of the women had a positive view towards the child by the time of delivery as well as much improved self-images.

What’s funny about that? Sacrificing one life to save another is certainly justifiable but does it really make you Lol?

“Can the pro-life brigade please rename itself the anti-women’s-rights brigade. Pro-life is emotive and misleading”

As long as you call yourself ‘Up With Baby Killing’, since everyone I’v ever met is in favour of choice

Still, I admire the honesty of your argument. You say it’s harrowing for a woman to ‘lose a baby during pregnancy’ (I’ve no ideawhy you brought that up). If it’s a baby she loses, doesn’t that mean aboriton is killing a baby?

I don’t think you should drag your kids along to ANY protest. I don’t give a shit what they’re protesting. Making toddlers hold signs that they cannot possibly understand is just wrong. It’s also weak. Your scared people won’t listen to your point so you use your baby/toddler to try guilt trip? What if something kicked off or got aggressive? Your children could get hurt? How is this responsible? If YOU disagree and want to protest then do it yourself,you shouldn’t force your views on your children. If you raise them to be free thinkers then they can developed their own opinions

That’s meant to be for Ciara above.

Why are my posts not appearing/??!!!! Pro life are only pro the potential life of a foetus, pro-choice put the woman first and do not judge her for deciding what is right for her.

Ciara – Not sure if you’re referring to your earlier comments (they’re all still visible – though if you’re using an old version of our apps you can only see a certain number at a time) or other replies to Diego; there’s nothing on our server side so if you submitted any comments that aren’t appearing, sadly it looks like a software problem on your end. :(

Aw crap! New laptop time maybe?/

which protest was this?

Lads, you’re talking about two different things there: the article Sean is linking to WAS published last week, but there were two demonstrations – one in March (as pictured in last week’s article) and another larger one in February.

I’m going to delete the ad hominem elements of this discussion. Try to keep it on-topic, please.

Thanks Gavan

It IS a womans right to decide if shes going to be an incubator for 9 months and put her life on hold for those months too. You cannot tell women that they must continue with a pregnancy. We are entitled to life our lives as we see fit. Its very young girls who commit suicide in Ireland NOT women who have had abortions. There are many middle aged women who already have children who have abortions. How dare you tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her womb.

Well said Paul. Maybe you could be the man who tells a woman that she has to carry her rapist’s baby You could also explain that any attempt to do otherwise is morally repugnant to you.

T be fair though, I am one of those poor ignorant souls who falls into the pro choice category, so i might find it difficult understanding any reply you might offer.

Cliff, aside from the rarity of such a scenario, it is often, often conveyed that the birth of a child offers respite to the mother after such a traumatizing incident. Speak to any person who is the child of a rapist father and see if their life is any less valuable or if it were possible to go back, abort themselves out of existence. Abortion on top of rape is not good for any woman. It makes matters worse, and again, destroys an innocent child’s life.

Paul, just how many children of rapists do you know?

And how many women who have been raped do you know? Jesus man, dont pretend to have an understanding on something you know nothing of. You’ll never have the fear of being raped or being pregnant when you really do not want to be so you can never even attempt to understand how any of these scenarios feel.

The funny thing is Paul, i’m not in the habit of asking people if they were the product of rape, I’ve found that it tends to make people a bit edgy at dinner parties.

It sounds like you’ve done some research in this area though, or at least i assume you’ve, at the very least, read studies on the subject….

You know what- i;m not going any further here- either you’re a troll or you are ignorant/stupid/insane to such a degree that any form of logical argument will be lost on you.

Have a wonderful evening.

Cliff, I am sorry you think my argument stupid but the funny thing is that I have yet to hear a simple justification for terminating an embryo in the context that the embryo which you and I were once has no right to life. I always wonder at what point you consider it a human being? My answer is simple – conception. Pro-choice varies hugely. It is not united on this. Some even consider it permissible to abort an eight or nine month old unborn baby when other babies can theoretically live outside of the womb much earlier than this.

Paul, I personally draw the line at 12 weeks. A foetus can live independently but with a lot of care for many many months outside the womb from about 6 months so your ‘much earlier’ statement is incorrect.

Paul, you believe that life begins at conception? Look up molar pregnancies. These begin at conception too but they are tumours so this disproves the ‘Life begins at Conception’ theory.

Ciara, you said ” You cannot tell women that they must continue with a pregnancy.”

I’d like to know if you’d allow abortion on demand at 8 1/2 months?

Rape, medical necessity etc I’m fine with. It must be very traumatic having to travel to undergo the procedure.

But should people who have consensual sex not have to face their responsibilities? If you’re sexually active, u know pregnancy is a possibility. Why should anyone be allowed terminate just because it doesn’t suit them?

Again, I’m all for this legislation, as long as it is only for the special cases. The “it’s my body, 9 month incubator, etc” argument is complete crap. You shouldn’t be having sex unless u can deal with the unlikely possibility of pregnancy.

It’s total bull that some people think its ok to fix a drunken mistake, or whatever your excuse is, with abortion…

Also, I’m not some born again who only believes in post marital sex. I lost my v at 17. But I always knew that if I got unlucky and the contraception didn’t work, I’d man up an face my responsibilities.

Chuck, I said that personally Id draw the line at 12 weeks. At 8 1/2 months a foetus is viable and can live independently outside the womb so no, I do not think thats ok.
DrRob, thats really good for you but again, you dont have to be pregnant!! Most people are having sex but not everyone should be having kids! Accidents happen and people must do what is right for them. Its not up to us to judge their decision. We can legislate for guidelines but we cannot legislate for other peoples decisions.

Ciara stated the following message which I would like to rebuke:

‘Paul, you believe that life begins at conception? Look up molar pregnancies. These begin at conception too but they are tumours so this disproves the ‘Life begins at Conception’ theory.’

It is surprising that you think that little sentence ‘disproves’ what you claim to be a theory. Here are a few quotes from academic research.

“Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).
“Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being.”
[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]

“The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote.”
[Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]

“The development of a human begins with fertilization, a process by which the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote.”
[Sadler, T.W. Langman's Medical Embryology. 7th edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1995, p. 3]

“Almost all higher animals start their lives from a single cell, the fertilized ovum (zygote)… The time of fertilization represents the starting point in the life history, or ontogeny, of the individual.”
[Carlson, Bruce M. Patten's Foundations of Embryology. 6th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996, p. 3]

Ciara I just saw that you already answered the question I asked (it hadn’t shown up when I posted the question)

On the one hand you say;

“Paul, I personally draw the line at 12 weeks.”

But you also say;

”You cannot tell women that they must continue with a pregnancy.”

Those two statements are completely contradictory. You DO want to tell women that they must continue with their pregnancy once they reach 13 weeks, which really isn’t much time at all.

Your use of the phrase “man up” says a lot. I am of the belief that wherever possible (and in the parameters of possible I include whether it would be traumatic for her to do so – e.g. consult a rapist, she shouldn’t have to do that) a woman should consult the father of the child before going through with an abortion but you simply cannot have any idea of what is going on inside a woman’s head when she’s faced with an unexpected pregnancy. Like it or not the implications of having a child, planned or unplanned, healthy or unhealthy, are completely different for the father and mother by the sheer biological implications on her body.

And Paul, claiming that someone must be medially or scientifically ignorant to be pro-choice is a wildly vague accusation to make. Ignorant of what exactly? Embryology? Foetal development? Physiology? Which area of science in particular are you referring to? Because I would be willing to bet that the majority of people in the medical field would like to see abortion legalized here. Granted many would require very specific circumstances but they’d still be for it. Drives me nuts when people use vague references to science to back up a moral (and usually in this case religious) argument. I’d have a lot more respect for you if you stuck to the moral basis for your argument.

Also the most recent piece of research you quoted there dates back to 1995. That research is 17 years old. The oldest piece dates back to 1975! And I haven’t even checked out the background of the authors yet, who knows to what piece of bias that would lead me to! The study of foetal development has come on leaps and bounds even since 1995 as new technology has become available. You can’t pick and choose the bits of “science” that support your argument and leave it at that.

Paul! Look up molar pregnancy! its a tumour that occurs in the womb at conception! Ectopic pregnancy is a pregnancy that occurs outside the womb which can be fatal also so for those who say abortion under no circumstance, Id like to hear you say that to a woman who may die due to a ruptured fallopian tube.
I work in a maternity hospital Paul. I see this every single day.

Chuck, I said personally. So if I were faced with an abortion, Id do it by the 12th week. If i were legislating for abortion, Id draw the line at 22 weeks at which time its understood that the foetus could potentially live outside the womb but with a lot of help however, I cannot make the decision for a woman who may be pregnant with a baby who will not live past birth. Most women terminate before week 16 anyway.

You’ve just completely changed your position!

You said earlier that you “draw the line” (your words) at 12 weeks. Well either you draw it or you don’t!

Your answer throws up more questions;
“Faced with” an abortion? You mean if you wanted one, right? (because if it were medically necessary to preserve your life then timing would not be relevant)

You’d have it by 12 weeks but make it legal up until 22 weeks? Well, why? Why would you have it by the 12th week? Does something happen then? Why are you ok with forcing a woman to carry a baby at 23 weeks? What’s happening in that grey area between 12-22?

“Most” women is very, very vague. There is no shortage of cases of women who didn’t know they were pregnant until much later, even unto labor.

One other question Ciara. You say you’d legislate for 22 weeks because that’s when the baby can survive outside the womb. As medical science advances, would you reign in that legal time-limit to give women a smaller window beyond which you’d force them to carry to term?

Maybe if we legislated for early abortions here (12-14 weeks???) then so many women wouldnt be going to the UK for abortions later in their pregnancies? They could get the info here, make the decision within a few days/weeks of realising they’re pregnant so then they focus on the decision rather than the logistics of getting to another country to have an abortion. Im sure the stress in trying to get an appointment before the type of abortion is limited to them doesnt help them focus.

Ciara, you are straying off the question – Chuck has punched a big hole in your logic.

It is not for you to legislate anything regarding a child’s life. The child has a basic right to life which is an independent and unadulterated right.

It’s like you have some compulsion that stops you answering the questions you are actually asked and answering some other question that no-one asked you

Once again; “One other question Ciara. You say you’d legislate for 22 weeks because that’s when the baby can survive outside the womb. As medical science advances, would you reign in that legal time-limit to give women a smaller window beyond which you’d force them to carry to term?”

And here’s another; what do you say to women who find out at 23 weeks that they are pregnant? (It happens often enough. And even if it was really, really rare, you’d still have to deal with it sooner or later)

I said PERSONALLY!! If i had to make the decision, i would do it before 12 weeks!
Ask me the medical advances questions if and when they ever occur.
Yes Paul , a child has an independent right to life when it is an independent child and can be raised and nurtured by someone other than its mother!
Sorry Im taking so long to reply but my laptop has a 10” screen and its taking me forever to scroll up through these messages to post a response!
At 23 weeks a foetus is considered viable! You cannot c0mpare that to a 1st trimester or even up to 16th week of a pregnancy which is when the majority of abortions occur. Late abortions only occur when there is something wrong with the foetus and it may not be ‘compatible with life’.

“I said PERSONALLY!! If i had to make the decision, i would do it before 12 weeks!”

Yeah I know. I asked you some questions based on that. Why would you not do it at 15 weeks? You said you’d legislate for 22 weeks. What do you say to a woman who finds out at 23 weeks that she is pregnant?

“Ask me the medical advances questions if and when they ever occur.”

You know as well as anyone that medicine is always advancing. Do you legislate on the assumption that science will just stop right now? Is it not better to plan and be far-sighted?

I wouldnt personally do it at 15 weeks because that involves a D&C and as Ive already had the procedure done, Id not like to have it done again as it was quite traumatic, thanks for asking though Chuck.
I would tell a woman at 23 weeks that her foetus is viable and can potentially live outside the womb. I would also tell her that its too late for her to have a termination if she was living in a country that did not legislate for abortion past 22 weeks!
But maybe she could go to a country that allowed late term abortions, just export the issue like we have done in ireland to date.

“I would tell a woman at 23 weeks that her foetus is viable and can potentially live outside the womb. I would also tell her that its too late for her to have a termination if she was living in a country that did not legislate for abortion past 22 weeks!
But maybe she could go to a country that allowed late term abortions, just export the issue like we have done in ireland to date.”

Interesting piece of moral gymnastics there Ciara

You said you would legislate for 22 weeks. That was the figure you came up with. Now you say that yes, you would stick by that date………..but you would also advise people to go abroad to circumvent the law that you yourself came up with. Are you involved in some bet to see how hypocritical you can be?

By the way, if someone has chosen to go abroad then they haven’t been exported. They’ve exercised a choice

No chuck I was merely towing the ‘irish solution to an Irish problem’ line.

I’m asking for the Ciara solution

……….and it appears to be a secret

Why teenagers but not 20 year olds? And what ‘defects’ exactly? An how late into the pregnancy can these ‘defects’ be discovered? You’re opening the scary door

While a foetus is dependent on the body its in and cannot live independently of the woman then it is subject to the will of another. You cannot equate the rights of a 5 month old foetus with the rights of a woman.

Ok, second time to try and reply to this. I don’t twist anything, i follow the meaning of what you say

And speaking of twisting, you say I keep “asking this question of women who post here”/ Tha creates the false impression that I am targetting women who have an opinion. I’m not. I have asked the same question of both men and women who are pro-abortion on demand, it has nothing to do with gender. I keep asking because they don’t answer. Look at Ciara’s responses above, look at Shanti Om’s in the past. They just won’t answer the question. I would remind you that Susan B Anthony (amongst others) put forth that one of the biggest reasons for the women’s rights movement in general was to protect the unborn. I am no more of a woman hater than she was

Now to what you said about the issue itself;

It’s not rare at all for a woman to discover late into her pregnancy that she is pregnant. I personally know number of women who were well past 24 weeks and have provided links in the past to stories about women who made it all the way to labour without realising they were pregnant. Even if it WAS rare (which it isn’t) that wouldn’t mean court can ignore the problem. Sooner or later (sooner) cases would arise where a woman found out post-24 weeks that she was pregnant and the law can’t be vague when you are dealing with the right to life. Ignoring the issue is cowardly

You mentioned sexual assault victims. I’m not sure why. This is the category of women least likely not to realise that they are pregnant. As a matter of course, women presenting at Sexual Assult Treatment Units are offered the morning after pill and/or a pregnancy test (whichever is appropriate). I imagine that a woman who was raped would have pregnancy to the forefront of her mind compared to a woman who, say, didnt realise that the condom burst or that she was on the wrong pill. Suffice to say, most pregnant women weren’t raped.

However, you are the fisrt described pro-choice person on this site who I’ve seen actually deal with that issue, so fair play for that. You face up to the fact that your opinion would force at least some women to carry to term when they did not want to. We only disagree on the number, which really isn’t important.

I am in full agreement with the Supreme Court that where the continuation of a pregnancy places the woman’s life in danger then an abortion must be offered, including where the risk of suicide (regardless of the reason) presents a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother. I’d quersiton whether this even needs legislation The Supreme Court has said that the right to life of the unborn is secondary to that of the mother (but superior to her right to privacy). This is only logical, since the baby is doomed anyway.

The only thing I disagree with you on is when life starts. Why 22 weeks? You say it’s down to viability but that’s too vague. Rip a child from the womb at 23 weeks and it will die without medical intervention, so viability is a man made thing. Do we review the legislation every year to see if we can push it back to 21 weeks or further? This is not the stuff of science fiction http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/02/14/what-do-artificial-wombs-mean-women (Ive seen other articles that put this a lot closer to reality) And anyway, why does dependence nullify the right to life? A newborn is completely helpless, as are people in a coma and the severly handicapped. Is their right to life less than mine? Is there levels of independence? I think that there is.

It’s a very grey area. I agree with the courts again, which have ruled that life begins at implantation. At that stage the process of growth and change begins which 1) Cannot be suspended and 2) ends sooner or later in irreversible termination (death).

???????