Because Fine Gael don’t want to p*ss off their largest demographic (elderly voters) by legalising abortion

Edit: I should add – No government in the last 20 years has wanted to p*ss off the elderly Catholic demographic

She was initially against civil partnership, however later changed her opinion and voted in favour of it.

It is gay marriage she is against, however FG quickly distanced themselves from her comments last year saying they were her personal opinion. With lobbying from I’m certain her opinion will evolve like Obama’s did and like many other politicians opinions on this topic have evolved. You win people to your side by making good arguments, not calling them names.

So what if she’s against gay marriage? So are a lot of people and the fact it’s illegal backs that up. Luckily she’s the one in power. She’s the one that was voted in. She’s in charge and you can’t do diddly squat!

Tom she was voted in with the rest of fg on a 5 point plan that ended up being a lie. Why prevent gay marriage. What purpose does that position serve? You seem proud of her marginalising the people supporting it. It makes no sence.

What has this article got to do with Gay Marriage or Gay Rights

Tom, she also spoke out against gay marraige whilst being the spokesperson for Equality.

All the FG party, are arrogant and full of self importance. It’ll be their downfall, a heavy one too!

As a woman she respects the right to life. Abortion is wrong.

She could hardly respect it as a man!

But what is a lifetime? Is it 5 minutes, 5 hours, 5 days, 80years+? I say it is exactly the lenght that it lasts for. In NICU’s (Neo Natal Intensive Care Units) accross the country today there are children living their lives exactly as you have described it, most will make it out and home, most of those will grow in time to be healthy adults, some unfortunately will never get beyond the NICU. A lifetime can be short or it can be long and someone in a shortlife time can acheive much more than someone with a long lifetime.

It’s a very slick move to link the objection to terminating human life to religion as if only Catholics see the wrong in it. Secular people also see the wrong in it. Hard cases make bad law and the medical profession are making necessary choices daily.

Hard cases don’t make bad law for dealing with hard cases (as every case which qualifies under X guidelines would be). But if you actually believed in a right to life, you’d have a bit of concern that the women who would meet this criteria could very well die without abortion access.

Puzzled by the Catholic reference by tomnewnewman.org at neither I nor the orginal poster mentioned it. @ Nick the 1983 amendment seems to have been framed to allow normal common interventions to take place where the life of the mother is at risk. In practice intervention is left as late as possible and beleive you me I know this from experience. X interpeted the amendment in a way that the original drafters of the amendment never intended it to be interpeted but thats what we have. I do not beleive that it will be possible to legislate for X and to keep normal practice in place i.e. that after a particular point in a pregnancy if issues arise the baby is delivered to protect the life of the mother. What is to stop someone in the late stages of pregnancy far fetched and all as the idea might be from obtaining a declaration from the courts that they are entitled to an abortion nothwithstanding any legislation enacted rather than the delivery of the baby purely because they meet the criteria based on the ruling in X. This aspect of the X ruling I am extremely uncomfortable with.

No, I don’t think the drafters of the 1983 Amendment envisioned the situation where the Attorney General would force a 13 year old rape survivor to remain in Ireland rather than access an abortion. I also don’t think the original drafters of the Bunreacht na hEireann envisioned workplace equality for women or that women could serve on juries, but if you read a lot of Irish Supreme Court cases, the constitution has moved with the time.

What is to stop a woman from accessing a late abortion because she meets the X criteria? I’m not sure you understand how this works. There are several conditions which can arise late term which provide deadly to a woman’s health. If delivery can be induced instead, I very much doubt that a woman who has been happily pregnant for eight months will suddenly decide she wants an abortion rather than a delivery. You really don’t seem to believe women can make good choices, do you?

As for you being worried about X, I’m very sorry, but two constitutional referenda have approved this decision. There are plenty of bits on the Bunreacht na hEireann I’m not overly fond of (marital family? woman’s place in the home?) but if you can just decide to nullify a bit because you don’t like it? We’re not a democracy.

Nick, I have read and reread your reply many times. Believe you me I am well aware of conditions that can be fatal to a woman’s health in the later (and not so later) stages of pregnancy, trust me getting a phone call from your wife from the maternity ward who is at 25 gestation to tell you that the plans to rest her until week 28 are out the window due to out of control preeclampsia and delivery is to take place the following day gives me a bit more insight than the average man on this.
While you might not like it and accuse me of not trusting women to make decisions (I do trust them) I think I am entitled to express my concern about the open ended nature of the X case vis a vis the cut off time for the provision of an abortion but that seems to be something that no one wants to discuss it or address it.

Well, due to your own experiences, I’m sure you understand why it’s so necessary to legislate. While I don’t believe women will make careless decisions, it seems the expert group will recommend the approval of two specialists before an abortion can be accessed.

This seems to be clearly preferable to forcing cancer patients to travel abroad while ill for abortion access (like Michelle Hart).

@Nick Beard,
cases like Michelle Hart don’t apply to the X-case. Her life was never threaten by the pregnancy. It was a case that her medication was a risk to the pregnancy. Abortion was never required from a medical perspective. The rational thing to do is to continue with the medication and let nature take its course. Its the better choice as at least its possible the pregnancy may overcome the risk.

You seem to be misinformed. For several kinds of hormonal cancers, pregnancy itself is actually a harmful risk factor. Ms Harte very much wanted the pregnancy and was advised by doctors to terminate, but was denied by the Cork University Hospital because her life was not in “immediate threat.” Unfortunately, since she died a year later, there was clearly serious medical issues.

Women like Michelle Harte should be able to know their options and their risk factor and, with a doctors advice, terminate a pregnancy. Anything else cannot in aseriousness be described as “pro life”

nick beard an american who lives in london seems to have nothing else to do but fly over to ireland for marches and to constantly campaign for the legalisation of abortion in ireland. at least lucinda creighton is irish citizen. also we had the world expert on cancer in pregnancy here in dublin who confirmed that there is never a need to ask mum to terminate even if she has cancer. this was also verified by professor crown who tweeted that he never had to advise a mum to terminate because she had cancer. nick is just making up rubbish because she believes that a baby is nothing more than a parasite.

What about the agony of the baby being aborted & the suffering of post abortive mothers?

Agree. It will be shifted from government to government until they are forced to make changes. I just hope we get the chance to have our voices be heard during this planned constitutional convention. However I have some doubt over the selection of people to represent the “public’s voice”

Did she ever mention her religious opinions when she talked about abortion? If so maybe you could post a lunk to it.

Hear Hear!!!!

the voice of reason, well said !

Has she ever mentioned her religious faith when discussing abortion?

You believe in imaginary sky buddies, you do you, you do, so I’ve proven why abortion should be legal. Whoo Hoo!!

We don’t need to prove why abortion should be legal for maternal health reasons, as it’s a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT.

So your fine about them dictating everything else to you, just not abortion because you don’t agree with it? How dare the Irish state drag it’s feet and interfere in right of a woman to do what she thinks is best for her and her own body and what right have you or anybody else to dictate to anyone what they do with their own body?

Ed, ignore the troll who doesn’t know (1) the difference between the ECHR and the EU and (2) that the X case guidelines have been supported in two referenda.

Like the last 2 we had? That mandated legislation for the X case?

Ireland has proven itself time and time again to have rely on the EU to drag it kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

Not the people of Ireland by the way, just the cowardly pieces of terd that pass for government ministers here.

So if a good chunk of Dublin Southeast were opposed to the constitutional rights to assembly or freedom of speech, she should ignore those as well? Not how constitutional rights work.

So less than 6000 people in Dublin South are dictating that the X case ruling should continue to be ignored is that it? Would you call that democracy?

Hi

Ms Creighton isn’t going to decide the government response to the X case, she has expressed her opinion on the issue. Its unfair of the ICCL to single her out.

As Minister for European Affairs, and an Irish TD and public representative, the judgements of the European Supreme Court and how it is implemented into government should be on the forefront of her mind. This has nothing to do with South East Dublin. This is a national issue that is being discussed by a European court. How does this NOT affect the Minister for European Affairs????

Hi there,

Maybe you misread me, I didn’t say that it doesn’t affect her.

nick beard an american who lives in london seems to have nothing else to do but fly over to ireland for marches and to constantly campaign for the legalisation of abortion in ireland. at least lucinda creighton is irish citizen. also we had the world expert on cancer in pregnancy here in dublin who confirmed that there is never a need to ask mum to terminate even if she has cancer. this was also verified by professor crown who tweeted that he never had to advise a mum to terminate because she had cancer. nick is just making up rubbish because she believes that a baby is nothing more than a parasite.

“parasite” is actually a scientifically accurate term to apply. It may not be popular to say so but that doesn’t make it any less true.

Not every pregnancy is the ideal that is portrayed in Johnson and Johnson adverts.

And Nick’s nationality is irrelevant.

That maybe your opinion but the people of Ireland have spoken. They stated they wanted a law change.

What this wants is undemocratic… Since has only a wish to serve her narrow view of the world and not the democratic view which is now part of our constitution she should be deemed unfit for her position of junior minister.

Her junior ministerial post is to enact the laws set by the people. The people have spoken, do your job

Myles every catholic in Ireland has disobeyed the 3rd commandment. “No graven images or likenesses”. So if your a catholic how do you square that circle if they are so important to you.

‘thou shall not kill’ , I assume you’re a vegetarian so…??

“Fifth Commandment of The Lord” ? Who would that be then? As far as I know the said ‘Lord’ isn’t in the government, didn’t stand for election and has no right to be commanding anybody least of all any ‘elected’ TD, Creighton has a job to do and if for any reason be it religious or political she can’t or won’t do it then she needs to be sacked and replaced by someone who has the balls to proceed with what has been asked of them by the Council of Europe, the Irish government’s cowardice in dealing with the issue of abortion is just pathetic. This has rumbled on and on for over 20 years and it only shows what a bunch of cowards these politicians really are when it comes to taking hard decisions, for Creighton to make such a statement is just unacceptable, she should get on and do her job. As for ‘thou shalt not kill” really, is this the same Lord who is always threatening to ‘smite’ those who disagree with him and tells his followers to massacre whole tribes and cities in his storybook, oh and not to mention all the burning in hell etc etc?

I wonder why the Catholic Church is against a woman’s right to control her own body? I wonder why its against abortion?

What I know of the Catholic Church in Ireland is that it physically and sexually tortured children and that it incarcerated and enslaved women.

and what about people that dont believe in god should they still obey the ten commandments

@Myles – because you quote from something you believe does not make it true. Unfortunately, many will attack your belief in God when really the issue is not your belief in God at all. It might be the lens through which you view the issue but the true issue here is that the state has a responsibility to act on something and they have failed to do so.

What does the bible have to do with autonomy of a women’s body, pro life or pro choice it is for the individual on there specific situation to decide and not the role of the state nor church to interfere in this decision

And yet surprisingly “Thou Shall Not Enslave Another Human Being” nor “Thou Shall Not Rape Another Human Being” aren’t Commandments…

The fetus is not a person.

Andrew,
Plenty of people refer to bring pregnant with a baby — few if any refer to being pregnant with a foetus

Thank you, Chris. Your sophisticated scientific arguement was outstanding (hint: we also celebrate birthdays as birth rather than conception days and when you miscarry, no death certificate is issued.) Linguistics just make a silly argument in this debate.

@Andrew, Academic debates about personhood adds nothing to the argument. It is entirely absent up to 8 years of age. Its very convenient to use the label ‘fetus’, I wonder do you call your own young family members by the correct scientific term too (neonate)? An unborn is a human life and has intrinsic moral value. Its well recognised.

@ Robert A neonate is a newborn. In the human species we generally refer to neonates as new born babies. Born: possessing from birth the quality, circumstances, or character stated. Birth: the act or process of bearing or bringing forth offspring. We could dance around each other using scientific or academic descriptions but a fetus is not a person. A woman, on the other hand, is a person and as such her life should not be put in danger by cowardly legislators.

The Bunreacht na hEireann allows for abortion when there is a real and substantial risk to the health of the mother. All anyone is asking politicians to do at this point is legislate the procedure for that.

She is a public representative ignoring the twice stated wishes of her country and spitting in the face of democracy and our judiciary.

You might want to look again at the 13th and 14th amendments….

What about the protection of the innocent, born woman? Why are they always considered last in an abortion debate?

Insightful analysis, what’s wrong with being pro German now?

Creator?

Yes creator? Whos that??

If fate is predetermined by “the creator” then he must have wanted the debate to go on all your life. Does he allow people to allow it in Northern Ireland?

He must also have wanted abortion to exist, because it does.

Creator, I think that was that babylonian she-god character from Ghostbusters.

Creator?? That’s a heavy metal band right??

life is predetermined by the ‘Creator’ ??
please!!, in this day and age is that what people believe?

‘running off to a foreign entity.”

…..Europe is not foreign. We are a part of Europe. We share a currency, and in some spots, their languages and religions. We are IN Europe.

‘saving the country from economic ruin is more important’

…than legislating to save the life of a seriously ill pregnant woman who’s life is in danger? Glad to know my life has a price tag on it. At what stage of a grevious illness does economic sovereignity become more important than me being able to live?

‘pro-abortion cabal.’
…that makes zero sense. There is no such thing as pro-abortion. That suggests we love abortion and want everyone to consider having one. e.g. I am pro-marraige equality. I want all gay/straight couples to receive equal recognition and the same legal and adoptive rights as all other married couples. They are not the same thing at all. What I am, is pro-access to safe and legal abortion. That does not mean I want people to have one. Hell, I really hope there is never a situation when women have to have one, as I imagine it’s not entirely pleasant. But criminalising abortion just makes desperate, scared and pregnant women even more desperate, not to mention making it very awkward for women who are seriously ill already and require a termination to sustain their life.

‘giving it away’….err? Please clarify what you mean by that so I can mock you properly.

That’s just SUCH a lovely way to discuss the women who would be affected by the X case, including those whose medical conditions have turned a much wanted and planned for pregnancy into a nightmare no family should have to face.

You’re CLEARLY a caring and compassionate person, not at all motivated by wanting to control women’s bodies.

F##k it! “Give it away”? Annette is that your definition of what woman does. What about rape? Thats not even giving never mind giving away. You need a computer & library membership. Please Annette educate yourself you are not well informed of the human species.

“If she didn’t care enough about it when she was giving it away”
Your comment suggests that the only women who pursue abortion are ones who don’t think in any way about anything.
Can we assume that you’re just not aware of rape, failing contraception, rohypnol then?
There are more reasons for abortion than as birth control.
You also seem to think that having sex is something to be frowned upon? I’d love to know why anyone would think that.
In terms of calling it murder – that debate is all about at what point a fertilised egg becomes a person.

Oh dear, have you had therapy?

Rita, abortion is not the black and white issue that you think it is. There are several reasons why women could want or need one, namely social/economic, medical, fetal abnormalities, rape,because the pregnancy is a threat to their health etc. However all that has been discussed here is the failure of the state to legislate for something clearly stated in the Constitution – if abortion is legalised in Ireland, it will only be within the strict limits of the X case, it will not become widely available on social/economic grounds as some seem to think. You think abortion is murder, well thats your own opinion and is largely a subjective viewpoint, however you are entitled to it. Remember abortion is legally available in the vast majority of countries across the world, in these countries, nowhere is it considered murder, if it was it wouldn’t be legal. The law does not regard the foetus in the same way as a living person, it may appear callous, but that’s how it is. A woman who decided to have an abortion for whatever reason in Canada, Sweden or New Zealand (as examples) or a doctor who carries out an abortion in these countries are not guilty of murder as it is a legal procedure, a standard medical service available to the women who need it. Finally your description of abortion is totally off the mark – this is not how abortions are carried out. You clearly think they take place in the 3rd semester and salt/chemicals are used – a gruesome procedure only carried out in some, if any US clinics. Not typical in any way. More and more abortions take place today early on in pregnancy and are medical ones, rather than surgical – its surgical ones that appear to raise the ire of the anti abortion groups.