We’ll have The Flying Spaghetti Monster. We win!

I wouldn’t worry about God. He’s fairly washed-up that this stage, just a photo-op for him I’d say.

As a pro-lifer I cringe to see the acts taken by the religious pro life campaign. It takes all legitimacy from the argument in my view, when people bring their magic friend who lives in the clouds into the debate. There needs to be more of a discussion on the facts of the issue. It doesn’t help the debate when the pro-choice side use sexist arguments against the male populations say in the debate (I’m fully aware I can’t get pregnant). But, equally, the pro choice argument isn’t helped when you see men all dressed up and carrying a cross on their back to the Dail like Jesus.

PS. Atheists who scoff the arguments from the pro choice campaign on the grounds of rejecting religious ideology should read Christopher Hitchens views, very interesting from an Athiest despised by most religious groups.

Worth a watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8HhTKzmvas

Hi there, can anyone point me in the direction of The Daily Edge? I seem to have got lost and there’s lots of scary people with red faces in here

Kev could you get in touch with @geoffsshorts on twitter. He has been looking for a pro-life aetheist to do a guest blog post for quite some time now.

Kev, without any doubt Hitchens would support the proposed Irish law to allow limited abortion. He supported abortion after rape or because of fatal abnormalities. Hitchens would not have advocated sending women and their doctors to jail for having an abortion. His position was that a women should be encouraged to have the “unwanted child” and the state should then pay towards its upbringing. His position was one of support and certainly not for jailing. He didn’t like abortion, but who does?

I fully agree, being pro-life in my view includes looking out for the life of the mother also. The proposed legislation for the X Case would have been good in his books (not that I want to speak for a dead man, I can see how he could have a problem perhaps with the inclusion suicide cases). It’s just the abortion for the sake of convenience (which is the major undertone in the pro-choice debate) would be morally wrong from a humanist perspective. We are learning more about early embryonic development, enough to know that we probably can’t assume that a child past a few weeks is nothing more than “just a load of cells”

@Septh- Cheers, but I want nothing to do with the pro-life campaign as it’s currently mobilised in Ireland. It’s a very delicate issue that I too have yet to figure out where I morally stand on all the issues.

Kev. Whether you dislike abortion or not is one thing but if you are a Humanist are you seriously telling me that you think a women who doesn’t want to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term should be jailed? That’s the main issue here. We are trying to get the law changed, not people’s perception of morality. It’s beyond my comprehension how any freethinker could oppose a women’s right to chose to carry a pregnancy to term or not. Fascism comes easy to religious people, it doesn’t to Humanists.

It’s not a “child”, it’s a foetus. It’s not viable and never will be until about 24 weeks. That can’t be improved upon because the foetus is not developed enough to survive until then. Science isn’t going to discover a soul.

I’m growing a uterus in my utility room using stem cells I got off a guy in the pub. When I’ve installed it, I’ll let you know what I think about all this kerfuffle.

I don’t know what you mean. Why shouldn’t you get a say? If two people buy ingredients for a cake, make it together and put it in one of their ovens, does that person have the right to throw the cake out before it’s cooked?

My taxes, my choice. And to all these people going on about the right of the mother, the Irish people voted on accepting the rights of the unborn child as equal to the mothers. I’m pro-choice but can accept the law as it stands.

I wasn’t born in 1983. I am currently the Irish people. Do you know how many people died and reached voting age in that time? The 8th amendment may well no longer be the will of the Irish people.

On top of which, where is the amendment that says the right of a man or an infertile woman or a child is equal to that of a foetus or a mother? Are mothers and foetuses worth more or less than the above?

As for the men having a choice thing – firstly, I think they’re certainly entitled to an opinion. But secondly, I don’t think a father has equal say over whether a woman actually has an abortion.

And sorry to point out the glaringly bloody obvious Peggy but in your scenario, only one of them has a bloody oven and it’s surgically attached to them.

Sorry Steph, you, in isolation, are not the Irish people. You are one of millions and every-one has a right to an opinion. Peggy, you made me laugh.

I agree with Steph. Isolation, you say?

Sorry, that should have read “one of” the Irish people. And I know everyone has a right to an opinion but my point re the 8th amendment stands. Irish opinion and Irish people have changed. A quick google and a quick calculation suggests that approx 800,000 of the people who voted then have died. And that nearly 2,000,000 new voters have been added to the electorate. I’d say that’s fairly significant when declaring that a thirty year old referendum represents the opinion of the electorate.

Stephanie, by that logic we should have referendums on everything every 25-30 years. It’s unworkable and the government have scope to adequately legislate so need yo refer it to the people for a fourth time.

I agree that having a referendum on absaloutley everything every 20 years is totally implausible, but in fairness, we’ve had several heavily publicised deaths linked to (I’m not saying caused by) but linked to the wider abortion debate. We’ve had the ECHR ruling, several protests, countless debates and petitions and then the week-long hearing in the Senate chamber last week. I don’t think Steph is being irrational by suggesting that people’s attitudes have changed rapidly and I think it’s time our constitution reflected that.

I reckon a fairly huge amount of people right now – especially women of childbearing age – weren’t able to vote in 1983, and my bets are that most of them would like to get rid of the 8th amendment. Sure even the guy who passed it said he deeply regrets passing it.

Stephanie is, thankfully, not in isolation at all.

The 8th Amendment passed in 1983, meaning that anyone over the age of 18 then is now at least 48, past child bearing age..

In the meantime we managed to have two referendums trying to undo the X case and remove suicide as a valid reason, and guess what? They both failed..

How come its ok to have 2 referendums on so many other things but not that bloody idiotic pro life amendment which was pushed through in the most dodgy way ever?

My oven,, my rules

If its ok to have multiple European referendums on the same thing then I think it should be a choice for the people of Ireland to decide via a referendum. Look either way, when its passed women who don’t want to have one are not forced to have one so what’s the bloody problem?!

They seem to have loads of referendums for any old thing, think it is about time they let the Irish people have our say on this one again.

@ Stephanie, good point about the wretched Eight Amendment which introduced the pernicious Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution. It’s a bad idea to have an anti- woman Roman Catholic dogma enshrined in our Constitution.

There is a need in 2013, 30 years later, for the women now affected to have the opportunity of voting to repeal Article 40.3.3 of the Constitution.

To be honest it would be at least two referendums for every potential issue that arises, just incase we don’t vote the right way the first time.

Yes we should have referendums far more often. Switzerland has several each year. Even Thomas Jefferson believed the US constuction shud b scrapped every 19years

Peggy that is really a dreadful analogy. How about it is only ever going to be one of their ovens, and the person who owns the oven is too poor to pay the electricity and doesn’t know if the other one will be there to help with the bills.

And it takes 9 months to bake, and the person who’s oven it is might die during that time, and if that person doesn’t, at the end of the 9 month baking period her oven turns into her womb and the cake turns into a baby and she has to push it out through her vagina. And instead of eating a nice cake, she is raising a child for 18 years.

Yeah, bad analogy.

I like cake.

Totally agree Barry, these people aren’t Pro-Life. Anyone who’s Pro-Life would not protest against abortion if a mothers life was in danger. Effectively, they are campaigning to ensure women who are in danger of dying whilst pregnant, do just that. If you don’t agree with abortion, don’t have one, but get your pompous self-righteousness out of my face. Stop calling yourself Pro-Life when you are not

These guys are protesting to try and subvert democracy..

The Irish people have been asked twice to remove the suicide clause from the constitution. On both occasions we voted to keep it (Note we only voted on the 8th amendment once, 30 years ago, both of these referendums are more recent – indicating a change in attitude). Now, I’ve heard some doozies of excuses from the anti choice side, but the fact remains, if they couldn’t get their shit together to vote suicide out at least once, then tough. Keeping suicide in has been confirmed.. It’s not like Lisbon where the second time had a different result. The Irish people voted to keep suicide in there both times.

The only thing that this proves is that rather than being the majority, the anti choicers are the minority. The suicide clause stays in – as the people decided. The anti choice side can like it or lump it.

And yes – protesting against legislation for which the sole aim is to protect the mothers life too is not pro life no matter which way you want to dress it up..

Also, isn’t it overwhelmingly arrogant to assume YOU should be a voice for ANYONE else?

Niall the Government still does not have he courage to legislate. They are dragging their heels with “expert panels” and other useless costly (jobs and fees for the boys) exercises.
The other problem is that FG is riddled with The Order of the Knights of Saint Columbanus and they will block and obstruct legislation like they have been doing ever since the x case.

Pro choice is the only way

@colm, what about the rights of the unborn baby?

It’s called a foetus, not an unborn baby. Stop using emotive language to turn it in to something it’s not.

Abortion on demand it is the mothers body it is her choice just as it is to have a tatoo or piercing

Hi Oaklane, What about my right to bodily integrity? When someone can answer both those questions with a perfect solution that respects both rights (probably a foetus transplant or something very sci-fi-esque) then I’m on board. In the mean time both pro-choice and pro-life movements choose to prioritise the rights of either the mother or the foetus, that’s if you think a foetus has any rights, which for me they don’t until able to live independently outside the womb (but that’s just me).

In my case I’m going to choose to prioritise the rights of the walking, talking, independently breathing, speaking, thinking woman.

A girl gets pregnant and can’t support or care for a child at present so she should be forced to serve full term and give the child up for adoption…?leaving the chance the child will have mental problems when it finds out the truth..

“Abortions for all!”
“Boo!”
“Very well, no abortions for anybody.”
“Boo!”
“Mmm… abortions for some, miniature Amercan flags for others.”
“Yay!”

If the mother dies so does the embryo/ foetus, why haven’t the anti-choice brigade figured that out yet? Why choose to sacrifice a woman’s life for a foetus that is dying anyway like in Savita’s case, or force the sacrifice a woman’s mental and physical health for a non-viable pregnancy, or a pregnancy resulting from rape? Surely it should be the woman’s choice? No one should be allowed to make that sort if choice for her (unless she cannot make it herself – say in a coma).

Not that simple

Why wouldn’t they??

I really must say I don’t see the problem here. I mean I know photo ops like the ones above are blatant publicity stunts but many people simply can’t get babysitters. And it’s a good walk for the kids. I do get annoyed when I see their parents making them hold signs, same for either pro-choice or pro-life protests. I really don’t think anyone under the age of, say ten, can be remotely capable of understanding the concept. And I doubt anyone under the age of 18 is able to avoid being indoctrinated into a particular opinion.

Oh I don’t know, maybe cause a child has a right to innocence, a right to a childhood without having to be embroiled in their parents very adult orientated debate!!! They care about the unborn alright and “cherish their innocence”, that is until they leave the womb and can be used for their pr propaganda machine! Vile!

Stephanie, I have a problem with any parent who decides to include their child in something they have no place in! And the above photo is quite timid compared to Youth Defence targeting of primary schools with their Santa posters and kids holding placards in the freezing cold!

Double the numbers to report in media… :P

I do have a problem with publicity stunts like the one above but as long as kids aren’t being used as camera fodder I don’t think it’s practical for every parent who ever goes to a protest on an adult issue to leave their kids at home.

That said though this debate does affect children too. In 2011 a total of 37 girls under the age of sixteen had abortions in the UK.

Elana, a kid is too young to understand the implications and the bigger picture of the event their mother/parents pushed them to support or to attend as such they have no place at such protests.

The kid doesn’t understand that while the catholic bishops and the likes of youth defense seem to think its ok for a women to be forced to give birth to a baby from a rape the Jewish community doesn’t agree with this mindset in the same way and neither do many other religions or groups.

The kid doesn’t understand that if a women is pregnant and has been told that if the baby is born it will die, they don’t on any level understand the extremely upsetting pregnancy that mother will go through knowing that effectively she is going to be giving birth to a baby that will not live.

They don’t understand the mental suffering this can cause a women. They don’t understand she’ll have to go to another country so she doesn’t have to go through such an awful time in her life.

Its exactly like people in the north bringing kids to the flag protests, they kids don’t understand the bigger picture and implications and as such have no place at the protests.

Thanks Barry, put much more eloquently than I could ever hope to! Spot on!

Yeah, stop bringing them to mass I say!

It’s a vigil not a riot. My children fully understand why they will be there

There will be lots of children there like the last time. I’m sure they are told how precious the right to life is regardless of religion.

Elana,

Depending on your kids age its much more likely your kids don’t understand why they are attending the event, Its likely that you’ve TOLD them why they are attending the event.

As I’ve said young kids even young teenagers likely do not understand the much wider implications of the event, they are merely going along with what you’ve told them.

Its effectively like claiming a kid knows gay people are bad when as a parent you’ve told them that all their life, sure they’ll agree with you but that doesn’t meant they understand why and actually think about the other side of the coin,.

Children are not mentally or emotionally capable of understanding this issue. Quite a few adults aren’t either.

My children fully understand. Iv explained it all to them

These people bringing small kids to protests are unfit parents exposing children to something they don’t understand..
Worst parents ever

I know, how dare parents encourage their children to respect life

I could explain thermodynamics to a 5 year old but that still doesn’t mean that they would understand it!

Hi Elana (formerly Annie),

I assume you’ve given your kids all the information required and informed them that there is an opposing opinion and given someone with an opposing opinion a chance to speak to your kids? Because if you haven’t then they understand why they’re there all right, but it’s because of what you think. However, they do not understand why you think that or why there is even a protest about this. For them your position is the default position and everyone else is crazy. I know I’d probably bring my kids to an event like this but I’d bring them because I’d want them to see what a protest is like and because it’s hard to find babysitters. I would never presume to think a child can fully understand this issue.

Give us a shout when they’re fully grown and we’ll see what they think then.

Elana, explaining something to a child doesn’t mean they understand it, explaining thermodynamics to a kid doesn’t mean the grasp or understand it.

Now look at something as simple as a small amount of simple maths in school, as a parent you should know well that explaining it doesn’t mean they understand it. Now think about trying to explain a 6th year maths issue to a 6 year old because thats what we are effectively talking about.

No child is going to understand or grasp this matter because they’ve not yet lived their life, they just won’t get the wider implications of both sides of the argument at such a young age.

What you are doing here is forcing your belief on this subject onto your kids and then dragging your kids to such an event with the claim they fully understand it.

In my view thats just wrong, just leave the kids at home.

@Elana : I’d say what you told them was totally unbiased!

Protection needs to be put in place to ensure the mothers safety first, without whom the foetus/unborn baby wouldn’t even exist! What about in the case of rape or in cases such as that of Savita?

Irish Pro Choice use of Children at rallies http://cf.broadsheet.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/A39vQyJCQAANdbY.jpg

Irish Pro Life use of Children at rallies
http://files.broadsheet.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/902535071.jpg

Have you also discussed with them pregnancy due to rape and incest, fatal foetal abnormalities and the fact so many affected women are forced to travel every month because their government is terrified of the Catholic Church and fundamentalist lobby groups. Or, have you given your children a fluffy idealistic version of the situation. If it is the latter they are not fully informed and should not be there.

Elana / Annie do you mind me ask how old your children are?

@elana so what if its “just a vigil”, its irrelevant. Children should not be introduced to an adult topic full stop, they should be kicking balls and playing with dolls (no sex preferences) not being dragged out by their parents in the cold to stand around and be used as a prop for some ideological reason! Frankly anyone on either side that introduces their child to this should be in front of the courts in my opinion!

Would hate to be one of your kids with the biased reframing you do!

My personal feelings are that I don’t agree with kids being at protests of such a sensitive nature. The reason I feel this way was because I was dragged to a “pro life” rally as a kid by the nuns that ran our school. As soon as I was old enough to understand I was pro choice. I resent having been used to boost numbers in such a cynical and emotionally manipulative way. So I don’t think it’s fair to do that to a child.

That’s the problem. You’ve explained it to them. I think we can all agree that you aren’t objective

Where is the hypocrisy? It is a family life event, family is life and children are part of their family. You are deranged if you think a family cannot go to a protest or demonstration together. Bit of a control freak perhaps?

A good example of this is the language used by some of the Catholic bishops compared to the pragmatic and sensible statement released by the Church of Ireland relating to the need to legislate for abortion in certain circumstances. Many of the Catholic bishops are still living in the dark ages when it comes to women.

Sadly it always comes back to power and control. Why are religions do afraid of women?

Iris, perhaps it’s a jealousy?
In this life the true creators are indeed women. No matter how much men want to be in control, the process of pregnancy is something that they can’t really have any part of (besides the initial donation).
So they go out of their way to try and control women to try and compensate.. That’s my theory anyway..
Thankfully these days we have plenty of enlightened males who are no longer so concerned with exerting their dominance over women :)

Free buses to the prolife vigil that is. There aren’t any free buses to the prochoice protest. Although I do have a few free seats in my car up from Cork on Friday evening if anyone cares to join me.

I understand that in some cases people are being asked for donations if they are taking the buses. I can’t see what the issue is.

And if some individuals have sponsored a bus, I would have thought that the “why” was fairly obvious.

The anti-choice campaigns have massive funding from rich Americans. Let’s be honest.

According to the YD Facebook page, you can get details about the buses from Unite4Life. A quick whois query of their domain (unite4life.net) shows they’re from America. So, Youth Defence is – as usual – being supported by funds from overseas.

http://www.ewhois.com/unite4life.com/

Registrant:
Unite4Life
1400 NE 136th Ave. Suite 201
Vancouver, Washington 98684
United States

Stephanie, its well known the likes of Youth Defense receive an awful lot of funding from groups in the USA.

Conor: I think you’re barking up the wrong tree there.

Unite4Life is a badge of convenience being used by the various prolife groups that are coming together to support the vigil. I don’t think it has anything to do with the American group unite4life.com which you referenced. This group, if you bothered to look it up, is a teen depression advocacy organisation…

By the way, do you have any problem with pro choice groups receiving money from America?

Bah, you’re right of course. That’s a whois result for a .com, not the .net address. Mea culpa! Think I need a coffee…

No, I have no problem with groups receiving funds from anywhere – but I do expect the groups in question to be at least open and honest about where the money is coming from.

I have a problem with any anonymous donation to any political lobbying group. Apparently so does the Standards in Public Office commission. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/1218/1224327960405.html

I find all this fake outrage hilarious. Why is it people want to talk about who pays for busses? Silly and immature mischief making.

They aren’t free really they constantly send letters to my home looking for donations of €50 and up and yet paint the pro-choice lobby as money grabbers. (All the people that are brainwashed by them would fork out hundreds to donate – the god fearing strategy) I’m sure the money that they collect is put towards the “free” buses.

That was in response to Stephanie’s query about the buses.

Seriously Niamh, could we just leave out the ad hominem attacks about brainwashing etc. There are people on BOTH sides of this debate (and in the middle) who have deeply held views that are motivated by their perception of human rights and of the common good.

I would leave it out if it wasn’t true. I know from personal experience that some people are brain washed into their beliefs.

Hitch a lift on the Vigil bus from your local Church and slip away to the other side on arrival!

That’d be one awkward bus ride home!

I think they are actually looking at changing the name. I’m pretty sure there is a poll ongoing now. The group started after the Youth Defence ad campaign last year and just grew legs, I don’t think the original founders were really thinking what would come of it. Hence the reason it targets YD in particular.

Whats pissing me off is the actual stuff I get in the post! Anyone else get a glossy flyer for their pro life / anti choice vigil / protest?

Caught some oul’ wan stuffing some of that lying Youth Defence propaganda through my letterbox about a month ago. I regret nothing about the very public and vocal demolition of her twister ideology I engaged in. Got even better when neighbours on either side of me came out to join in :)

What it proved more than anything was when faced with reasoned logic and fact, they cannot argue at all just fall back into “you’re a baby-killer” mode.

Thankfully I’ve had nothing through the door.. I have a big No Junk Mail sign (not that I would expect them to respect that) but if they do try stuffing one in my letterbox they will feel my wrath down the phone..

Yes John! That, or “well, women shouldn’t be having sex then” (which is the crux of it all, really)

I find the “women shouldn’t be having sex then” argument hilarious.. It’s usually (although not always) put forth by men, which begs the question – if all women of childbearing age had sex solely for procreation, how would men cope?
Not even priests who take a vow of celibacy can keep it in their pants.. If women cut off the sex in order to avoid pregnancy, there would be some terribly frustrated men walking around..

Exactly, it’s much easier to use contraception than ever have to go there. But if a woman needs to go there then it is none of my business to judge her!

That’s because they don’t.. Hopefully James Connolly will be along to confirm, but the only time I have heard the term is “inducing labour”, and that’s done if the pregnancy is gone overdue by too long or indeed if there’s trouble with mother or baby..

@ Conor, I am not a medical person but I understand that in cases of infection, induction may be a life saving procedure. If the foetus is at too early a stage of development, per 24 weeks, the effect is that the foetus is not yet viable and the inevitable consequence is that the foetus expires after induction because it is so premature.

One method of induction is by administering oxytocin but I am subject to correction by James Connolly or other practically experienced person. So induction can have the consequence of terminating the foetus , an abortion, but I agree that the more common use of induction is when birth is overdue.

Erm, sorry if women’s pesky rights to bodily autonomy bores you, but aside from anything else, IT’S A SILENT VIGIL

Get your rosaries off our ovaries.

Last time, the organisers told the Irish Times there was 10,000 there. When the IT quoted this, Youth Defence went on about how IT was reporting 10,000 at the march…

The logic astounds me.

Blah, Blah, Blah. I’m pro choice and pro life. I’ve been listening to waffle like yours for 20 years. Thank God Ireland is changing.

I’ll rationally call myself pro abortion if thats what you like to designate it. Funnily enough pro lifers dont like being called anti choice. If you want to call a spade a spade declare yourself to be anti choice Anthony.

The pro choice guys have to make their own way, no big American churches paying for us..

Shanti:

Really? Are you so sure? The Irish Council for Civil Liberties supports legislating for abortion in Ireland (see: http://www.iccl.ie/news/2013/01/08/rights-watchdog%E2%80%99s-expert-legal-guidance-to-shape-ireland%E2%80%99s-new-abortion-law-.html). In 2010 alone, it received $2.8 million from one American foundation, and a total of $7.7 million over the past 10 years (See http://www.atlanticphilanthropies.org/grantee/irish-council-civil-liberties).

By any stretch of the imagination, that is a massive injection of cash for an Irish NGO. It’s also perfectly above board and there is nothing nefarious about it. But if the shoe was on the other foot, we’d never hear the end of it.

The Council for Civil Liberties supports abortion, alongside how many other campaigns?
Now, if you had shown me Pro Choice Ireland, Action on X or equivalent receiving substantial donations you might have a point, but instead you point to a multi purpose group who’s concern is civil liberties.

My point still stands, the only buses getting pro choice protesters to protests are standard public transport, not buses paid for out of the several groups operating out of one address on Capel Streets’ generous donations from the US.

Oh look, Tracy was able to trace the funding of an organisation that supports safe and legal abortion.

Were you able to trace the funding for the buses yet?

@ Anthony, re “foetus” etymology is merely an aid to meaning not some kind of definition. I will explain. A foetus is not born and may never be born. A baby, child, young person, human being, an innocent child, and an adorable baby have all been born. Birth is biologically, legally and even religiously relevant.

Of course, Alice in through the Looking Glass met the character who testily informed her than when he uses words , he uses them to mean what he wants them to mean but that is an abuse of language in the same way as describing your pontification above as “enlightened” would be.

You can call it my auntie Biddy if you want, I still think women should have the right to choose.

Anthony, when you try to use etymology of ancient words to prove a point in the present day, that called a logical fallacy and holds no weight.

“Funny isn’t it that if a woman wants the child , it’s a baby , if she doesn’t want it , it’s a foetus or embryo. I don’t know if I’d call it ‘funny’ per she, but it’s not surprising. A woman who wants a baby is placing a value on the foetus because she wants it to be a baby, and it eventually (all going well) will be a baby. Entirely subjective and not relevant.

Hell yeah, I’m pro abortion IF THE WOMAN WANTS TO TERMINATE HER PREGNANCY, hence pro-choice. Again, what’s your point?

“If abortion is nothing but removal of tissue then why should anyone bother about it ? It would be analogous to having a vigil against appendectomies!” Yeah! Or stupid tumour removals! Again, your point?

“No doubt the abortion providers who are eager to start killing Irish babies… Hyperbole fail. Science fail. Law fail. You just fail. Sorry

There are around four different events pages I think.

Well three apparently anyway! https://twitter.com/YouthDefence/status/291082562066075648

so certainly more than 52 online followers (i find a like page with 970 likes)

Yup. Not disagreeing, just pointing out how they came to the conclusion. Especially when there are free buses from an unnamed donor who may have a financial interest in abortions staying in the UK or being illegally imported to Ireland. Also when the buses are collecting the catholic right from mass.

Wow. Just wow.

You think that buses might be paid for by somebody with a financial interest in keeping abortion in the UK??? Seriously???

We have now reached a ridiculous level in this discussion. Talk about conspiracy theories…

Last years conspiracy theories are this years truths…..and so the cycle continues.

Hi Tracy,

I think it’s a distinct possibility and one that can’t be discounted. Especially given the history of corruption in Ireland. If you want to declare it impossible go ahead, I expect you’ll be able to send us the donation records to back it up any day now.

Did you mean the Catholic Right, or bring them straight from mass?
whats the problem the Catholic Church opposes abortion as do many catholics its no secret.

as for ur wild accusation id be very curious as to who would have a financial interest in keeping abortion in england. You made the accusation so back it up urself instead of forcing people to disprove it.
There are plenty of irish people who donate to these organisations, i used to get their letters in the post all the time looking for money.
the theory that its pro life americans is also plausible, but why the wild accusation its a sign of insecurity.

my original post was a snarky comment on the implication that because there were more pro choicers on facebook… if they update it with the actual figure (i looked hard and cant find 52) the tone of the comment in the piece changes entirely

And the majority of followers for Irish “pro life” groups on Facebook and twitter are American..
Stephanie – help me out here, which US organisation was it recently that made it public that they were funding the Irish anti choice effort?

Hi Frank! Big difference between accusation and speculation. Just so you know.

It’s *Stephanie and it’s *utmost and I won’t bother with the rest.

As for having “respect for life”, this is semantics used to imply pro-choice people are not pro-life. They are, I certainly am.

What you actually are is anti-abortion and do not have sole rights to declaring yourself “pro-life”. Especially when going to a vigil which is being held to actually oppose life saving legislation. Have you explained that to your children? That what is being legalised is only abortion where the life of the mother is at risk? And as for the rest of your claims about your kids, I frankly don’t believe you. Particularly about the “fully informed” part since you do not possess the relevant medical detail nor do most people. Which is why I am for the CHOICE being between a woman and her doctor since they and they alone know all the relevant detail.

Annie, let’s see can we get anyone to sign up to “I don’t respect life”….Where did your kids get their genes for “processing information”?

Anti abortion# bad parent unfit to raise children

Yes I have explained it to my children. And your right lets call a spade a spade. You want to call me anti abortion? No problem. I’m anti abortion. Therefore your pro abortion.

They not only respect the born, they respect the unborn.

How adult of you. You claim I lied about my children been intelligent. What a brave woman you are

@elana,you really should take your head out of your ar*e

Well, when their mother doesn’t understand the difference between been and being then perhaps she isn’t the best judge..

Annie/Elaine. It seems you also have multiple personalities judging by your posts. Why are you so concerned with the non voice of other people’s foetus’?
When it is legalised, don’t have one! That will be YOUR choice. Simple. Get your nose out of other peoples business. The same can be said for the Catholic Church interfering in politics and matters of the state. It’s the woman’s choice, no one else’s so let them bloody have it. Jesus Christ suffering Mary johosafats!!

BOOM Shanti! That being/been comment made my day:) Knocked her arse down! Also Elana/Annie; it’s “you’re pro-abortion”, not “your pro-abortion”.

Maybe Annia/Elana hasn’t English as her first language or she could be an English football player. :)

Annie you’ve made the most basic error a “prolife” person can be. Just because we are on opposite sides of a debate does not mean we have opposite opinions. Pro-abortion implies you are for abortion in all circumstances. I’m not. Not at all. There are probably only three circumstances under which I myself would have one.

However, I am for women being allowed to make the choice whether or not abortion is right for them. That is what it is to be pro-choice. Get it? Also since you seem to be declaring yourself anti-abortion in all circumstances, would you care to explain to your kids why it is you think a woman with an ectopic pregnancy has to die? Also if you could explain to the rest of us how that’s “pro-life”, that would be nice too.

Ah Stephanie, we all know that the anti choicers stance on that one – it’s not an abortion.. Even though it is technically an abortion, in every sense of the word..
Remember – in order to be anti choice you must be capable of Olympic standard mental gymnastics..

Anti abortion# bad parents unfit to raise children

Except there wasn’t 10,000.

Great post Paddy!

@ the realist
Being a bit of a realist myself, I presume your name is self administered. Your formula is a bit illogical, if I’m reading it correctly:
If you are pro abortion you should be given children, if you are anti abortion, you are unfit to have children?! Society wouldn’t last for long.

I would really like to see the age demographics for both events to compare what portions of the population support which side. I’ll have to rely on the photos as I wont be in Dublin unfortunately. If I was I am sure I would be at the pro choice vigil.

@ : Conor Farrell
Have a read of this, it’s very interesting on the science of crowed estimating. My figure was my guess on the street on the night.
http://thethirstygargoyle.blogspot.ie/2012/12/vigil-for-life-im-going-with-7000.html?m=1

There wasn’t 10000. Since you’re in the business of ignoring numbers, here’s another number the anti-choice choose to ignore. 4000. At least 4000 Irish women travel to the UK for terminations each year. Abortion is not illegal UK so these women have done nothing wrong. Yet they are made to fell ostracised and ashamed by anti choice rethoric.

Hi Paddy,

Just wondering why, if you are pro the life of a mother, will you be attending a vigil against legislation designed to enable doctor’s to save her life?

@paddy,it is because they would make a child suffer just to please their own moral desires..sickening mind set they have

Women will be really thankful for your sincere concern while denying them one of the most important choices in their lives and condemning them to something they do not want. A big thank you to you from women. Could yo also by any chance stop being concerned about women and their (as opposed to your) babies and show interest in your own life and those who surround you?

The true minority also stand right there. Who in their sensible mind would consider 60-80% of the population supporting legislating for the X case as a majority? In the end, all of those people were not surveyed during masses so they do not count.

Was this the small gathering with te bishops and crosses and speakers playing crowd noises?
Yeah Paddy, pull the other one, and remember – thou shalt not lie..

All this numbers count is bullsh*t.
Of course there’ll be more anti-abortion protesters because the essence of their campaign is to interfere in the lives of others, whereas the essence of the pro-choice campaign is minding ones own business.

@ Thomas Blake
I’m a great fan of numbers, made my living from them for some time. I gave you the link which gave the best scientific answer available to the numbers present.
As for the 4000, it was more like 4250, and that’s not counting deaths from abortifacient use. These may not have broken the law of the land in the UK, but their action is not allowed in Ireland, at the moment. If the government has its way however, despite FG’s promise, if is only a matter of time before the culture of death has its way in Ireland. This is why the vigil takes place next Saturday. I might say Thomas, like your namesake who had to feel the truth before he believed it, perhaps if you could hold the 4250 foetuses in your hand, perhaps your view might change! For the record I still love the mums and their lost babies, but if preventing legislating for suicidal presentation adds another 10,000 annually to that figure, ill be in Dublin Saturday.

@ Miss Terry
Hi Terry, I am in favour of legislation that enshrines the existing medical council guidelines. These guidelines were used last year in our hospitals to save 26 mothers, even though their babies were lost in the process. The basic difficulty that should by now be understood is that there is a difference between loosing the baby as a result of some LIFE saving procedure necessary for the mother, and a procedure that sets out deliberately to destroy the child. We in the pro life side do not accept that suicidal presentation, should be sufficient cause to go after the child.

@ Ciara Clinton
I like to point out Ciara that almost half of those lost in abortion are women, and I’m sure they would thank me for valuing them.
I would suggest Ciara that in many instances the ” most important choice” the women, and men, made was to engage in sexual activity without being open to having a baby.

@ Paddy, I have never heard of any support for the 4250 women from the anti choice side. I also find the claim that you have sympathy for these women false, since you had no problem referring to them as criminals in your original comment. The fact is this, those women have actually been effected by Ireland’s law on abortion. For them it’s more than just an ideological stance. They deserve help and support, yet they are left isolated. In the recent debate, religious groups were given a day to discuss the issue. A group representing women that travelled to the UK, because they had a non viable pregnancy were ignored. Another example of how some in the debate are pushed aside. Another example of how out dated the law is. Women that have already suffered because they know the foetus won’t survive outside the womb, have no choice but to allow the pregnancy take the full course, otherwise they are branded criminals.

Paddy you’re a Jesus freak, end of!

Paddy, that article also says there were 850 at the March for Choice, when it is well established that the numbers were in the thousands. Not a very good piece on the “science” of crowd-size estimating, at all.

“” I would suggest Ciara that in many instances the ” most important choice” the women, and men, made was to engage in sexual activity without being open to having a baby.”"

Well, does not this all tell the whole story which is sex-policing people? How old are you Paddy? People do not consider sex policing a good thing nor new generations considers sex to be merely there for creating babies and, hence, do not agree with your stance to punish women with babies for having sex. Your idea was shared by people in France when they had this type of police, but it was a century ago I think? Sorry, this is the 21st century. I know it is hard for you not to know when your neighbors have sex and grow bellies but at the same time one would think no need to hide behind babies to further your agenda. As I said, it is very sad that women are bullied like this.

@ NoddyFingers
The numbers are important, because politics is all about numbers, and they set the legal agenda.
Your comment on pro choice minding their “own” business is interesting. It reflects a generation devoted to a narcissistic existence, me, my decision, my life, my choice, my body etc. I believe creating a just community/society is what will make my life better. There are none more entitled to justice than the millions killed in the womb deliberately every year.
@ Thomas Blake
I think you will find that many of those who return from the sad trip to England, often heartbroken or suicidal, will find their best support from those who are pro life. The organisation called Rachel’s Vineyard comes to mind. Whereas many of those pro choice are convinced there are no problems.

“…there is a difference between loosing the baby as a result of some LIFE saving procedure necessary for the mother, and a procedure that sets out deliberately to destroy the child.”

Ya see, here’s another example of anti-choicers changing things to suit their agenda. Youth Defence are notorious for it on their Facebook page.

When a pregnancy is terminated, it is an abortion, regardless of intent (a therapeutic abortion, in the case of saving the mother’s life, if we want to be correct about it all). Yet, Youth Defence continually say that a termination is never needed to save a mother’s life, but in the same breath will say that a termination will be given if the mother’s life is in danger.

So which is it? You can’t have it both ways.

If they want to be taken remotely seriously, anti-choicers need to stick with what they’re saying instead of chopping and changing things and twisting their words and logic every time they’re called out on their nonsense.

@ Ciara Clinton
It’s true Ciara, I believe there is a place for everything under the sun. But I’m not too interested in sex-policing, but if you do have sex I believe you are responsible for your actions, to yourself and any new life you may create.
I think if you stepped back from the issue, you might see that it is your generation is obsessed with sexual activity, not mine. And indeed your generation that gets its sex guidelines from the pornography industry, rather than from your parents. As a result your generation has been more successful at separating sex from love, procreation, expressions of caring, responsibility, intimacy, and self giving; than any previous generation. You deny a woman’s natural propensity toward nurturing, and men’s instinct to protect and provide. The sad thing is you will be too old when you believe the likes of me. Women were always good at seeking positive traits in men, suitable for marriage, now they are bullied to be like men, to suppress their womanhood, to be available to men without commitment. Which generation got the best deal?

@ Conor Farrell
Conor, there is no confusion here, I’d recommend you get a copy of the guidelines from the medical council.
We do use two terms, induction and abortion, to help clarify the difference.
Abortion is when the purpose of roving the child, is to get rid of the child, and it targets the child when it would not have led to the death of the mother. Induction is when the child has to be removed as part of a life saving procedure for the mother. Out difficulty with the expected legislation is the inclusion of the threat of suicide. As soon as we accept abortion in this case, we cannot prevent the law progressing to abortion on demand. Every country with abortion started with a little that progressed to abortion on demand, we have no reason to believe Ireland is any different.

Hear hear Paddy. You keep telling women what is in their best interest or you know they will not know what instincts they were given by the heavenly authorities and need your expertise lol

Section 21.1 of the Medical Council Guidelines: “Abortion is illegal in Ireland except where there is a real and substantial risk to the life (as distinct from the health) of the mother.”

[http://www.medicalcouncil.ie/Registration/Guide-to-Professional-Conduct-and-Behaviour-for-Registered-Medical-Practitioners.pdf]

So, even the Medical Council call it abortion, even if it’s saving the life of a mother, because that’s what it is. ‘Abortion’ and ‘termination’ are synonymous. You need to stop making things up as you go along.

Paddy.. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour..

Inducing means bringing on birth / labour, abortion means ending foetal development pre birth – including spontaneous abortion – which you would use the euphemism “miscarriage” for.. It’s still a euphemism though..

As for obsessions with sex, you anti choicers have this mental block about abortion, you seem to think its only young single women who have them.. What about married women who don’t want kids and experience contraceptive failure? What about women who already have enough kids and don’t want any more? What about women who have health conditions which mean having babies would be detrimental to their health? (maybe not kill them, but permanently affect them adversely), what about women who want their babies but their babies aren’t made for this world? What about women who have been raped and cannot live with the idea that they carry the product of that rape?
Oh no that’s right – as far as you’re concerned motherhood is all women’s sole desire in life, they’re just walking incubators after all..

And as for removing suicide, TOUGH. The people have spoken, TWICE. It’s going in. If you don’t like democracy there’s plenty of theocracies in the Middle East if you would prefer.. Personally, I would rather ensure that no woman has to take her own life because some nosey Parker who doesn’t know her reckons aborting is wrong.

Wow. Just wow.

So we’re down to: ladies should be ladylike and menfolk should be manly, and then society will magically be healed of all ills?

I know, and the scary thing is he’s blissfully unaware of the blatant misogyny of his message..

Appeal to tradition: “Oh it was so much better in the bygone days”.. Except more women died in childbirth, more women died of botched abortions, women couldn’t use contraception and so popped out scores of children like brood mares, they had to leave their jobs when they got married (whether they had kids or not), they were chained to the home, divorce was illegal so she had better hope he doesn’t beat the living day lights out of her, and oh yeah – spousal rape wasn’t a crime..

Yes.. It was so much better in your day Paddy wasn’t it?

Paddy, the 1950’s called and they want their opinions back.

“I believe there is a place for everything under the sun.” Paddy that sounds like something from the 16th century. …… Oh you are from the 16th century!

@ Shanti Om
If misogyny consists of believing men and women are different and complementary, then I’m a misogynist. But what is funny at times is the principles people now consider very modern, were defined and expounded by Kant the german philosopher, and others, back in the 18th century.
Deaths in previous generations were due to lack of medical knowledge. My day Shanti is very close to your day, its just that our values are chosen differently.
The reason people here don’t like seeing families at the vigil, is they like to think that all people of childbearing years should opt for “the culture of death” they subscribe to. Sorry to disappoint you.

How did any of that address what I said Paddy?
No. Women fought for equality. Women fought for their freedom. Women fought to have their free will respected.
Of course we aren’t the same, I’m the one who faces disastrous health consequences if I ever get pregnant. You have no idea what that means because you wish to ignore it, like everything else I put to you. Instead you wish to trot out the same tired old fallacies..

Well, to go with Stephen Frys mispronunciation, you can cling to all the phalluses you like – it doesn’t change the facts, the Irish people have voted to keep suicide as a clause in the constitution. It must be legislated for, no amount of lies will change that.

“Culture of Death”, a term thought up by the Roman Church, an organisation responsible for more deaths and acts of genocides then any other, to denigrate those who do not follow their creed.
Paddy Scully, a member of Sen. Ronan Mullen’s astroturf PR group “Catholic Comment”, is trying to change the debate here, from a discussion about legisation for abortion where there is a risk of suicide, something that will only effect a tiny number of women who would no longer have to travel to Britain at their hour of need, to a debate on abortion on demand in an attempt to confuse the two, a strategy being persude by other relgious and nominally secular pro-life groups, who’s coordinating these groups? Well, all roads lead to Rome.
Yet another example of the Roman Church refusing to actually engage with the world. They may decry all those who do not bow before Rome as the “culture of death”, yet it is is world rejecting creed, that believes that the world is death and that complete devotion to Rome and its creed, regardless of how much harm you cause to others in the world, is the key to survival that is truly obsessed with death.

@ David Jordan
Ah David, thanks for the comment. It is true the Catholic Church is a very old organisation, but what deaths and genocides are you referring to? Perhaps you are referring to the deaths that occur daily in the catholic hospitals all over the world serving the sick and poor of every colour and creed. Or is it those suffering with aids being cared for in catholic hospices in Africa, etc.
In your comment you say, “where there is a risk of suicide, something that will only effect a tiny number of women”, this I agree with. The government, on the back of the flawed x ruling, will for the first time introduce abortion, for a situation that rarely if ever occurs. We will have widespread abortion in Ireland, if the tail that is Labour, successfully wags the dog that is FG, and FG reneges on its pre election promise.
The majority reading here will love that, but I believe the majority in the country will say otherwise when given a chance to vote.
As I said the church is old, and is supported by more than 1 billion worldwide. It was there before us and will continue after us. Personal dislikes of the church, of modern movements, will not change its moral stand in the world. Our societies here in the modern first world, may be taking on “-isms” that lead to their own destruction, and chief among those today is narcissism.
I just hope the weather is good for Saturday!

Er, Paddy.. Hate to break it to you but the Irish people have already voted on this in 1992.
Then we voted on it again in 2002, just to be sure like, you know the way we like to vote twice.. And on both occasions we voted to keep the suicide clause in the constitution. The government introducing legislation is just them finally listening to the majority.

If the anti choicers couldn’t get it together to vote to exclude the threat of suicide on at least the second time then tough luck. That’s democracy. Perhaps the fact it didn’t go your way proves that anti choice don’t represent the majority..

If we are going to vote on anything it should be the 8th amendment, that was 30 years ago and we only got one shot..

“what deaths and genocides are you referring to? “”

Well the three that primarily spring to mind would be the Crusades, the genocide of the native peoples of South America and the Inquisition. There are countless other examples throughout history, pretty much any time the CC looked to extend its reach around the globe!

Are you living in blissful ignorance of the bloody and brutal history of your organisation? If you need more recent examples then you need only to look at the treatment of women and children in the care of the CC in Ireland in the last century.

@ Jimbo Murphy
For miles back in this thread of comments, I’m being attacked for defending life based on the age old principles of an ancient movement. It is quite ironic that the persons making the argument, just like myself, are descendants of a people who practiced infanticide, as they offered children as sacrifices to theIr gods. Today their descendants are clamouring for abortion as a sacrifice on the alter of self-convenience; and I’m being accused of being old fashioned and ancient?
There were many things done wrong in the church, but much of the mud you are slinging is historical revisionism at its best.

@ Jimbo Murphy
In brief, the first crusade was a military response to an attack. It also put to good use the energies of otherwise overtrained nationalistic knights who were looking for a fight at home or abroad.
South America was a conquest by nations, over other nations. The priests were there as military chaplains, who like all Christians took the opportunity to teach the locals about Christ, and again try to dissuade them from sacrificing their children.
And the inquisition, is your understanding of this derived perhaps from that dubious historian Monty Python. But you are at least referring to a time when church and state were too entwined.
And finally the abuse, the last few weeks of the Jimmy Seville case should have made it clear that abuse of this nature was a societal flaw, which did effect the church. Individuals did despicable deeds, and where the church was guilty, was in the slowness of their understanding of what had to be done to protect children. The same is true of the BBC and many other organisations.
But all of this is typical of argument as carried out online, mention all of the things, enemies of the church have used, to distract from the fact that people are arguing in favour of the killing of the innocents, and winning the great thumb war!

And what about what the church is doing today?
They go into developing nations under the guise of charitable works, but in reality it’s consumer expansion because they bring them the word of god, and god always wants money..

If you go to Africa today it’s like Ireland was when we bowed to the church, there’s people who have next to nothing trying to give the most to the collection plate and genuflecting to priests – who live in lavish mansions and drive new cars while their congregation scrape by..
The Catholic Church is the modern day Pharisees. Jesus wept..

And you failed to address the point about democracy Paddy. The Irish people have spoken, the church no longer speaks for them.

And how many, on this ‘working day’, were already retired and therefore free to go to the protest, unlike the many working young people in Ireland who will ACTUALLY be directly affected by laws based on religious dogma?

@ Shanti Om
Shanti, I think I’ll rely on my understanding of the Catholic Church, from those I trust, and not from someone filled with hate for that church. I notice you love to quote scripture, so did another when he tempted Christ.
You need to begin to discern the difference between the church, and basic moral and ethical behaviour, neither of which I hope are exclusive to Catholics.
As for democracy, you are the one arguing for abortion, which I would say flies in the face of the child’s 40.3.3 rights. If another vote is required by people to overwrite the flawed x-case, then so be it.

@ Dee Writeful
Two items Dee, I have no interest in implementing religious dogma in this country. I do however have interest in moral ethical laws that protect the mother and the child. I think you are being very unfair to the multitude of faiths, atheists and agnostics, to imply that these groups in society have no interest in ethics and morals. These are a natural part of human dialogue, and I certainly won’t claim to have a monopoly of such positive human inclinations. Secondly, you’re being ageist if you believe that the goodwill of the children in the world, is exclusively the domain of those in childbearing ages, or worse still, have a uterus.

Paddy, I have a Masters Degree in History, so don’t even try to lecture me on the history of the CC as your post shows your understanding of its history to be laughable.

@ Jimbo Murphy
It would be interesting to see that piece of paper. If you have a specific problem, pick one issue and we can see whose broad sweep statement is more accurate.
I’m a professional is really a poor argument, in my profession we say, if you want something to be really messed up, get a professional to do it. Your own professions biggest difficulty is the widespread abuse of revisionism.

21% of UK pregnancies terminated. 21%. Astounding how some of the contributors on here who so passionately want to kick off a process that could see 1 in 5 Irish pregnancies ended feel so morally superior to those who would defend the unborn. Strange logic, that.

Wheres that data from Vincent? Please provide the link to it as I want to read whatever british government department wrote on the subject.

Conor- ask Gavan Reilly from the Journal. He provided the link. I dont have it anymore. For reference it came from the British Department of Health. I should clarify/ correct, I should have said 19%. Miscarriages need to be taken out of that 21% and I didn’t do so. Apologies.

Thanks, I think its the 2011 report for England and Wales.

@ Vincent – The logic is not that strange if you don’t want children being born to mothers/families who don’t want them and can’t care for them.

Also, morals are very fluid. For example, I morally feel like I could and would NEVER tell a woman whether or not to have a medical procedure. That is between herself and her doctor, and anyone else she chooses to involve.