Pro Choice Action @ Dail 11.30 am

by Chris Murray - at home. Sat Dec 10, 2005 13:23 dotliath at eircom dot net n/a 4978026

Will try and make the action on Tuesday, however the youth has subsided somewhat,
hope older women are welcome.
I'll subtitle it :"Not quite pushing up the daisies yet".

Good luck , chris.

by pat c Sat Dec 10, 2005 14:56

i'll try and make it along. as a veteran of the 1983 anti amendment campaign my youth has retreated somewhat as well. maybe there could be a veterans section on the demo.

by Sandy Sat Dec 10, 2005 16:06

Is it safe to bring children? We know it won't be safe for children in their mother's womb who risk dying by having their limbs torn off, but what about older children????

by observer2 Sat Dec 10, 2005 16:20

What are yop talking about Sandy? Sure there won't be any of your friend George W's troops there so all the kids should be safe!!!!

Of course there may be some right wing ultra fundamentalist Roman Catholic opus dei youth defence types there,(you know the type, the ones who verbally abuse schoolgirls in O'Connell street) so on second thoughts maybe not bringing the kids is a good idea!!!!


Anyway Sandy, the choice is yours!!!

by pat c Sat Dec 10, 2005 19:15

you are quiet correct. the only danger to children will be from YD or other "lifers" who will be portraying their doctored photos of foetuses. YD scream abuse at anyone who even questions them let alone disagrees with them.

by Sandy Sat Dec 10, 2005 19:28

I agree with you on most issues. I just call abortion what it is, the ending of a babies life.

Also, the signs are not doctored. If one doesn't like what is on the signs, then they should do what I do and stand against the killing of small children

by pat c Sat Dec 10, 2005 19:32

i dont believe that foetuses are children, you do. we had better agree to disagree on that. i am surprised however that very few of the "lifers" are worried about childrens health after they are born. indeed they seem to want to put the childrens mothers health at risk by denying them access to contraception, especially in the developing world.

i

by Sandy Sat Dec 10, 2005 19:38

I am against war
I am for contraceptives
I am against the death penalty
I hate those who hate others because of their skin, religian, lack of religian, or orgin.
Yet I am called a fasisit and religious freek because I call abortion what it is, the ending of a humon life. You say it is not a humon, science and commen sence proves you wrong. If it is a humon, it can never be ok, except to save the mothers life to kill it.

by pat c Sat Dec 10, 2005 19:42

i dont call you a fascistfreak because you oppose abortion. maybe others do. but to call someone that just because they oppose abortion is bigoted.

by Sandy Sat Dec 10, 2005 19:43

How typical, I stand for a childs life and you call me a supporter of George W.
I would bet that on every other issue we agree on.

The diffrence here is I have the courage to stand for the truth while you blindly follow on abortion.

I am hated by so many, "pro choice" people yet I feed the homeless, I care for orphans and widows and you just sit back and name call.

by Mark Sat Dec 10, 2005 19:44

Thank you Pat

by Stumanchu. - poor Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:34 thespinz at hotmail dot com None of the above. home?

There was a debate at NUIMaynooth last Wed, the motion, which was carried was, 'The house belives that Abortion is wrong'. without going ionto too much detail I can tell you all that i was surprised, somewhat naively, at the sheer lack of sophistication shown by the pro-choice sidein comparison with the other group. It was they who came off seeming irrational and antiquated, with desperate seeming references toi the 'hypocracy' of the church in the light of the Ferns report etc, ironically they were the ones 'banging on' about God. The pro-life group on the other hand, were nothing if not articulate and clear-headed, couching, what is essentially the same old series of arguments in an effective and highly scientific-sounding presentation (little wonder as the pro-life groups seem to have quite a bit of cash at their disposal for the conducting of sociological surveys etc). personally, the arguments seemed to me to revolve essentially around the question's of 'What constitutes a person?', and 'At what point does a person gain human rights?'; whereas the pro-life group had at their disposal a solid defintion, whatever its merits, of what a person is, the other group seemed to be far more uncertain, the question was actually put to them and one of the debaters simply told the questioner that they were being 'facitious'. Doubtlessly this was true enough, though it did tend to miss entirely the underlying point that was being made.

by Niav Sat Dec 10, 2005 23:00

It wasn't surprising that the motion carried. Lets face the facts - it was organised by the Pro-Life society so I seriously doubt half way through the debate they were all going to change their opinions on abortion.

Getting back to the event on Tuesday it would be great if as many people as possible could come out and support us. We may be there for quite some time :o) Details to follow........

by observer2 Sat Dec 10, 2005 23:17

I apologise for presuming that you, Sandy, are anything like the large proportion of anti abortionists.

However youth defence as an organisation is correctly referred to as an ultra right wing conservative Roman Catholic organisation which has at the least close links to Opus Dei.

Unlike YD, I condemn the murder of children in Iraq by the U.S occupation force.

I believe in the personal conscience, and the right that where a pregnant woman is concerned she should be allowed to follow her own personal conscience in regard to this issue.

It seems that quite a lot of Irish women who travel abroad each year would agree with me.

Anyone who behaves in the fashion that YD behave deserve to be treated with contempt. I have witnessed their abuse of young girls at first hand.

It's time they,and the rest of the anti abortion movement,realised that the days of the Magdalene launderies are no longer viewed as an alternative to compassion and good medical care, of whatever form.!

by Sandy Sun Dec 11, 2005 03:38

Have you ever seen YD's stand on US and Iraq?

Let me ask you this, if YOU felt abortion was murder would you act much diffrently then YD?

Peace to you

by BODY Sun Dec 11, 2005 18:27 choice_ireland at hotmail dot com

Press Release for BODY.

Event: Pro-Choice action
Venue: Outside the Dail, Kildare Street.
Time: Tuesday 13th December 2005 11.30 am.
New Pro-choice group to launch with action outside the Dail.

This Tuesday will see the launch of a new group of Irish young people calling for a change in Ireland’s draconian abortion laws. BODY (Bold Open Divisive Youth) is a diverse group of young pro-choice activists, who are campaigning for the legalization of safe abortion in Ireland.

The pro-choice action will begin at 11.30 am outside the Dail when activists will erect a cage made of wire hangers. Imprisoned inside the cage will be 17 women and BODY have invited the leaders of every political party to ‘free’ them from the constraints of Ireland’s restrictive abortion legislation.

Commenting Ruth Donnelly said:

“Every day at least 17 women are forced to travel to the UK to access full reproductive health services. This is unacceptable. The financial and emotional strain placed on women seeking abortions is unnecessary and serves no other purpose than to placate those who would seek to control women’s bodies”.

Quotes end.

For further information and comment contact choice_ireland@hotmail.com

by Paddy - Consistent life ethic(inc animals) Sun Dec 11, 2005 18:52 achorusline19 at hotmail dot com

Forced to go abroad,i mean who forces these women,the reincarnation of marie stopes??? Yous want the unborn considered non persons?? As once too were women,blacks and native americans considered "non persons" under the STATES constitution in the States?? Oh let me guess,its just a bunch of cells,a glob of tissue,not human,the "negroe" was dehumanized so as to make slavery seem morally acceptable,oh hey,i dont have any right to force my moral"righteousness" upon others,so their you go,if it is ever legalized in Eire i and many others will bring infallible legal action to make sure my taxes dont go towards child slaughter,i mean free contraception and preventative contraception is fine,but not abortion,and will yous support sex selection abortions,oh i forgot they dont happen,or abortions because of genetic "defects" such as downs syndrome or cleft pallates??Oh they dont happen either,honestly you lot,wake up,look at the photos,oh i forgot their all 3rd trimester deaths or are fake,yeah right,and China is a country in a fairytale!!
NO wars,NO abortions,NO capital punishment,NO homophobia,NO animal exploitation(which contributes to 3rd world hunger on a huge scale)NO racism,
Just love,life and people. Love and light,homo paddy.xxx

by Tadhg Sun Dec 11, 2005 20:44

I'd like to wholeheartedly welcome this iniative. It's outrageous that Irish women have to travel to England to secure abortions, and is a testament to the moral cowardice of the political parties that have been in government over the last few decades.

Abortion should be safe, legal and rare.

We should not have to deal with the appalling prospect of women from both sides of the border having to travel abroad at what is obviously a traumatic time in their lives, and the even more frightening thought that poorer women outside the big cities are unable to secure safe medical care to deal with unwanted pregnancies.

by Sandy Mon Dec 12, 2005 02:51

"Abortion should be safe, legal and rare."

If nothing is wrong with it, why does it need to be rare?

by Random Mon Dec 12, 2005 03:00

Because maybe if there were less people like yourself around Sandy and if we had proper sex education in schools alongside the free distribtution of condoms, and free and easy access to the morning after pill - there'd be less of a need to access abortion.

by Sandy Mon Dec 12, 2005 10:34

You never answered the question, if there is nothing wrong with it, why would it need to be rare?
You just went on a personal attack. That is very typical "pro choice".
Stick to the issue, if there is nothing wrong with it, if it does not harm women and end a child's life, why would it need to be rare?

by pat c Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:11

i hope i havent launched a personal attack on you on any of these threads. it should be rare because it is a medical procedure and no medical procedure should be used too often or unnecessarily. if properaceess to contraception was available then the numbers of abortions would fall. this has been the experience in holland & scandanavia. i dont know of anyone who would advocate abortion as a form of birth control.

equally, i recognise that paddy is consistent in his beliefs though i disagree with him on abortion. paddy mentions china, i presume this is in relation to involuntary abortions, i oppose this just as i oppose the forced sterilisation policy of the indian and chinese governments.

by Sandy Mon Dec 12, 2005 16:34

"Because maybe if there were less people like yourself around Sandy "

I took that as a complament, thank you.

Let me ask you this Pat, is it a baby?
Do you think wisdom teeth removal should be rare?

I am so sick of comments like, "it should be rare", and "I would never do it, but others can"

It goes right to the core that there is something wrong with abortion.

I am not against contraception, in fact I would bet that on most other issues we agree on.

I was once very "pro choice", until I had the courage to look at abortion for what it really is.
I challange you to do the same

by pat c Mon Dec 12, 2005 16:54

"sandy
by pat c Saturday, Dec 10 2005, 6:42pm
i dont call you a fascistfreak because you oppose abortion. maybe others do. but to call someone that just because they oppose abortion is bigoted."

I posted the above comment, perhaps you missed it. the other comment, was rather mild and was in the midst of a heated debate. i can see that we share a lot in common.

we disagree on abortion. lets agree to disagree.

by Lindsey Mon Dec 12, 2005 17:59

Sandy you're right. When people say they would never choose abortion themselves, but still support a right to choose, they draw attention to the fact that they personally believe abortion is wrong. I have a problem with this contention because abortion is NOT wrong or dirty. In hight numbers it is, however, indicative of greater societal problems, such as inaccessible contraception, lack of education and sexual violence. It should therefore be rare, because rarity would suggest that the above problems would be solved.

There will always be accidents in consensual sex, for we are human. However, forced pregnancy (due to lack of legal, safe abortion services) when a woman does not feel she is in the right place in her life to reproduce is an incongruous form of punishment. Furthermore, how can you call yourselves "pro-life" when you don't take into account quality of life and bodily autonomy. I support safe and legal abortion on demand because I favor life that has personal integrity - not forced existences.

For the record, people who call themselves pro-choice oppose forced abortion in China for the very same reasons we support legal abortion in Ireland - because we support a woman's right to control her own reproductive destiny.

by Sandy Mon Dec 12, 2005 18:29

First of all thank you for the respectable post. I do appreciate it.
Pat, you are correct, I did miss that statement, thank you for that as well.

"we disagree on abortion. lets agree to disagree"

OK, I agree
Peace to you both

by Balmut Tue Dec 13, 2005 01:18 lokigaleas at gmail dot com

"I support safe and legal abortion on demand because I favor life that has personal integrity - not forced existences."

presumably you would prefer to be killed if you ever came to be in a vegative state?


I agree with you about abortion... we should also allow disillusioned single mothers kill their babies because let's face it their dignity and quality of life has been ruined. they were most likely forced into this by a horny marauding man... they had no access to sex education. why should we punish them for their mistake?
some people, like Jianna Giessen, deserve more punishment than others.
additionally, as animal farm impressed upon me, some animals are more equal than others.

with all this in mind, hopefully murder will become legal soon... because i think any person should be able to kill another person, whether they are an adult or child, if they have a devastating affect on my personal integrity. That person isn't worthy of a choice in the matter, because their rights are not as important as mine and are they really sentient beings next to me?

feel free to disabuse me of my notions.
however, i rarely get time to visit this forum. so i'll not be around to witness your deconstruction of my illogical thinking.
peace.

by Marie Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:10

I have just had my first child three weeks ago and having an abortion is crazy. It is on the same line of taking the freedom of choice away from an unborn innocent child. It has nothing to do with the catholic faith but genuinely, it should be outlawed as it is immoral. We should all be campaigning to preserve life and not end it.

by pat c Tue Dec 13, 2005 14:16

congratulations of the birth of your child i hope she/he is keeping well. it was your choice to have the child. however you should not try and prevent others from exercising their choice if they wish to terminate their pregnancy.

You have not gone into depth on the circumstances in which you think abortion should be outlawed. What if a mothers life is at risk? or her health? what about ectopic pregnancies? when a mother is ungergoing radiotherapy or chemotherapy? how about when a woman has been rape? the morning after pill, do you oppose this?

abortion is a complex manner and cannot be dealt with by using oneliners.

by Healthy. Tue Dec 13, 2005 14:57

People here are free to have an abortion when they wish- in England. Thats choice if you ask me.

by pat c Tue Dec 13, 2005 14:59

Its not much of a choice if you dont have the money to travel to England in the first place. Or the money to pay for the abortion. True choice means having safe and legal abortion available in Ireland through the Health Services.

by Relaxed Tue Dec 13, 2005 15:42

Ara, feck it anyway!

by Sara Tue Dec 13, 2005 17:18

Wouldn't the choice be prior to sex?

I may make the choice to play poker. Can I then say that I didn't make the choice to loss money?

I am pro choice. My choice is that people won't kill a baby in the mothers womb.

Before you go into rape (1% of abortions), conception during rape is rare due to high trama. Makes sence, doesn't it?????

by pat c Tue Dec 13, 2005 17:45

sara

people choose to have sex and sometimes that results in an unwanted pregnancy. due to lack of contraception or contraception failing. no contraception that i know of is 100% successful. the type of contraception with the highest failure rate is the only one approved by the catholic church: the rhythm method (i wonder if you could dance to it?). Typical failure rate: 15-25%. you can only use this method on certain days of the cycle.
source:
http://en.mimi.hu/sexuality/rhythm_method.html


as for rape please state the source of your statistics.

by Sara Tue Dec 13, 2005 18:14

http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/reasonsabortions.html

Pregnency is a result of sex. When 2 people engage in sex, one may become pregnent.

As stated by someone else in a previous post, when does it become a baby?
I think when a seperate identaty is formed with it's own DNA it is a baby. (science would agree with me)
And if it is a baby, can it ever be ok to kill it?

As far as rape, conception during trama is unlikly. That is just commen sence

by pat c Tue Dec 13, 2005 18:31

The information below is from a study conducted in the US, The National Violence Against Women Survey, jointly sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). You can read the full details of this study at the link below.

"According to the National Women's Study, approximately 5% of adult female rape victims become pregnant as a result of their assault, leading to 32,100 pregnancies a year among women 18 years of age or older. Approximately 50% of pregnant rape victims had an abortion, 6% put the child up for adoption, and 33% kept the child (the remaining pregnancies resulted in miscarriage )."

by Sara Wed Dec 14, 2005 01:06

Pat, thank you for providing that link, and I do stand correct with my 1% figure.

When I take the figures from that web page
"leading to 32,100 pregnancies a year among women 18 years of age or older. Approximately 50% of pregnant rape victims had an abortion"

and divide by 1.8 million abortions per year in the States (40 million since 73) I come up with 2% of abortions are conceved from rape which is also close to that very winded explanation above.

2% is a lot of woman, but a small % of total abortions. I would vote to allow that 2% (I still disagree with it) if that meant ridding the other 98% percent.

I wish we could rid the world of rape and make this a mute issue.

by pat c Wed Dec 14, 2005 11:22

I am glad that this dicussion has led to the emergence of light rather than heat. A small quibble: as the report states approximately 5% of rape victims became pregnant and 50% of those chose abortion, so the rate would 2.5%. But in studies of this size you get rounding and it may be due to this.

by Sara Wed Dec 14, 2005 17:31

I accept that Pat.

I also want to add that while I disagree(strongly) with your view on abortion, from reading many of your post, I respect you for your passion towards people.

Hopefully soon you will see that I am correct (smile) and we can work togeather on this.

Cheers to you

by S Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:32

I am glad to note the respectful tone of this thread, so I feel I can express my views on this emotive and difficult issue.
I believe that abortion ends a life. I believe that it is a sad occurance. But I still believe it should be an individual choice.

Since time began, women have used herbs and mechanical remedies to rid themselves of unwanted pregnancies, this has always been, it will always be, and shouting about it and making it illegal will not make it go away.

I think what is at the base of this issue for a lot of people is a black and white judgement - that abortion is wrong - so these women are automatically judged by them as being bad people. But as Jesus said, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"

We can't know the situation of someone's life that means they have to make this difficult decision -
maybe they were raped
Maybe they are in a domestic violence situation and not allowed access to contraception (not a rare as you might think) and don't want to bring more children into violence.

Then there are all the other factors which lead to abortion - these are the social factors - like that there is no free childcare, like that women are victimised in their jobs for having children, like the stigma and lack of support for single mothers. Like the fear and lack of options surrounding pregnancy and birth. Loads and loads - these are the causes, abortion is the symptom, i think.

I would like abortion to be rare - because it is sad that a potential life has to end.
But i don't think i can make that decision for a woman. and my shouting that abortion is wrong is not going to stop a single woman from going to england - it is only going to make them more ashamed and traumatised - across the board - whatever the reasoning - and i don't have the right to hurt other people in that way.

The only way to make abortion rarer is to enable and empower women to take control of their bodies and their lives - pushing for proper sex education and more free impartial pregnancy counseling - so that women don't rush off because they are ashamed.
Openly talking about the issue here is the way forward i think. taking the pro-life stance back from the too-religious who do not believe in contraception, or would force miss D into bearing a baby with no brain. Common sense open discussion. developing services for parents here, ending stigma around crisis pregnancies. Respect for individual well-informed and supported choices and - really - i would like there to be a consensus that a woman has a greater right to life and well-being than a foetus.

I have thought about this a lot.. and i think that it is something that most people hold to be true even if we don't acknowledge it...

Someone here said that they would legalise abortion in the case of rape.
This means that the person is being compassionate to the well being of the mother - acknowledging that even though they believe the foetus to be alive (and innocent of any crime) - the mother's life and well being is more important.

I think this is always the case. and as i cannot walk in someone elses shoes, i cannot judge for them. i can only respect and trust them and give them all the information to make the right decision for themselves.

Sorry for being long-winded and i hope it makes sense

by S Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:35

sorry - i see that this is an old thread - i'm going to post it on a newer thread - maybe it can be removed from here - thanks