Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
ABOUT HALF OF voters support unrestricted access to abortion up to 12 weeks, according to two opinion polls released today.
A poll carried out by Kantar Millward Brown for the Sunday Independent shows that 63% of people are in favour of holding a referendum on repealing the Eighth Amendment, with 24% against and 13% undecided or refusing to answer.
When asked if there should be unrestricted access to abortion up to 12 weeks, as recommended by the Oireachtas Eighth Amendment Committee, four in 10 people (40%) who took part in the poll said this was ‘about right’, 33% said it ‘went too far’, 19% were unsure and 8% said it ‘did not go far enough’.
In December, the committee – which was tasked with examining the Citizens’ Assembly’s recommendations - voted in favour of repealing the Eighth. Cross-party members came to the majority-decision after hearing testimony from medical and legal experts, as well as personal stories, over the course of three months.
In a separate poll carried out by Behaviour & Attitudes for the Sunday Times, 48% of people said they support repealing the Eighth Amendment, while 30% don’t, 17% are unsure and 4% said they won’t vote. When you exclude the ‘don’t know’ answers, the Yes vote is 62%.
In terms of unrestricted access to abortion up to 12 weeks, 43% are in favour, 35% are not and 22% are unsure. When you exclude the undecided voters, the Yes vote is 55%.
‘Work to be done’
Despite the latest poll results, Minister for Social Protection Regina Doherty this afternoon said that she believes there is “a job of work to be done” if people wish for the referendum on the repeal of the Eighth Amendment to pass.
Advertisement
Speaking to RTÉ News, Doherty said that the government has to work towards explaining to people where the 12-week period came from.
“If nobody does anything, I don’t think this referendum will pass. We need to sell, as advocates of people who want to see the Constitution changed and the 12-weeks imposed, that needs to be sold to people and the reasons why that 12-weeks figure was come at,” Doherty said.
In a separate statement issued later that day, Minister Doherty moved to expand on her remarks, saying:
“I believe the referendum can and will pass. I, and members of the Government, will campaign for it. But we can’t be complacent, which is why I said earlier that we have a job of work to do to sell it.
Many people aren’t aware of the medical and scientific evidence that was presented to the Citizens’ Assembly, and the Committee on the Eighth, which helped us arrive at the current proposal. We need to help people realise that there is clear medical evidence to support the committee’s recommendations in relation to 12 weeks.
That needs to be explained clearly to people with reasons and evidence, so there is a job of work to be done there.
‘Compassionate healthcare’
Speaking about the results of the polls, Orla O’Connor of the National Women’s Council of Ireland said: “Few people think about abortion and pregnancy care until for some personal reason they have to.
“Yet so many people I talk to are very eager to join this conversation for change. They want compassionate healthcare for women. They know the Eighth is a barrier to this.”
O’Connor said the 12-week period is “the minimum for a considerate process where pregnancy can end as early as possible and at the same time ensure that no woman’s decision is rushed”.
Meanwhile, Dr Ruth Cullen of the Pro Life Campaign said: “It makes no sense talking about doing away with all constitutional protections for unborn babies through repeal and in the same breath arguing that meaningful protections for the right to life could somehow be provided for in legislation.
“The vote on repeal is about whether we introduce abortion on demand or not. It is about nothing else.”
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Close
381 Comments
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic.
Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy
here
before taking part.
@BillRochdayle: One extreme is “Everyone must have an abortion”. The other extreme is “Nobody may have an abortion. The middle ground of these extremes is individual choice.
@KEV: yeah agreed repeal would be the best course it is the popular opinion, its laughable fg catherine noone jumping on this, when she has been silent for years leading up to this but what can we expect from an up and coming neo liberal. A better example is to look at Deputy Coppinger, Deputy Smith, solidarity PBP’s and the majority of irish’s support for the repeal the 8th to see real activism and protest.
@Andrew Eager: “Those aborted never get a choice. That’s the problem.”
Why? They were never aware of any such choice to begin with. A potential life doesn’t lose anything by not being brought into existence… it just isn’t. It’s not meaningful to say they never got a choice.
@Search Eagle: As much as folks like to pretend otherwise, we are talking about humans growing and developing. We also don’t let children vote, and dont make them legally culpable for their actions. Human existence is a matter of ongoing change – any insistence that there is a meaningful difference in the humanity of a fetus, baby, child or adult is entirely self-serving and to my mind, dishonest.
@Andrew Eager: if the woman is 100% certain that she wants to have that non viable embryo/foetus removed from her womb,then isn’t it better that she has it done in a safe,legal environment ? Or do you prefer her having her swallow a few pills alone,& without medical supervision ?
@Peter Smyth: I have never seen anybody suggesting that everybody should have an abortion. The fact is that there is no middle ground in this matter. Abortion is either right or wrong. If it is wrong then it is wrong in all circumstances. It is ridiculous to suggest that is permissible to take the life of the child in the womb in some circumstances but not others. Why discriminate ? Abortion is never necessary and always wrong. Vote No!
@Michael Daly: the referendum is not to decide whether or not abortion should be allowed, it is purely to decide whether or no to remove the 8th amendment. Even if the referendum is passed, abortion will still be illegal here.
@Are U Rosie too: an embryo to someone who wants to abort it, a baby to someone who wants to keep it. I don’t think any woman who has had a miscarriage says “I lost my embryo”
@Peter Smyth: Actually, it’s just ordinary, decent people with consciences who believe it’s wrong to kill unborn babies before they get to pull their first breath who want to retain it in full.
@KEV: Except that people in this country are inherently Catholic and indoctrinated by the church – nobody agrees to that and yet that’s the situation. Plus, Island populations lacking cultural exchange do not support change. Loath me, but I predict a no-repeal.
@psychiatrist: the same argument was made before the marriage equality referendum. The public overwhelmingly saw through the spin then and they’ll see through it here too. Same as the oireachtas committee. and the citizens assembly. We already have abortions here. For those that don’t tick a box, we export them. The public are sick of appeasing the extremists. They’ll pass it and pass it well because it’s the right thing to do.
@Tyrone Williams: You are being either disingenuous or extraordinarily naive. What would be the point of the referendum if not to clear the way to legislate for abortion? And,of course, the plan then is to provide access to abortion in line with the Oireachtas Committee’s proposals for abortion on demand in the first 12 weeks.
@Liam Egan: if you know of someone killing children, report them to the gardai, shall every woman of childbearing age be forbidden to travel abroad, just in case they travel to get a abortion?
@KEV: I’ve said it before and I will say it again – all the indicators are that the referendum will be defeated. A few months ago Amnesty International published a poll showing overwhelming support for repeal – it now looks very like that poll was rigged to get a favourable result. The truth is now dawning on the Government that the reality is very different and Regina Doherty’s statement is the start of damage limitation for what is going to be a very embarrassing result for the administration.
@Clarissa: I said I lost the pregnancy after all four of my miscarriages. 1 in 4 pregnancies end in miscarriage most women walking around you have experienced it. Some will be open about it some will be private, some will refer to it as a lost baby some will refer to it as a lost pregnancy, some will hold the pain forever and some will just get on with life and although it was a sad time it was just one of those things that happen. Whatever phrase they use and whatever people they tell it’s their choice because it is their pain. Please don’t get caught up on the terminalogy people choose to use it trivialises the debate.
@Bee Johnson: it’s just it’s hard not to notice that the pro-choice side always refer to it as an embryo or a fetus. I’m sure if they themselves miscarried when initially being happy they were pregnant did not refer to it as an embryo or a fetus. I’m pointing out that they change the terminology on the same thing based on how they want to get their pro choice pout across. If anything they are trivialising what other people view as a potential baby in order to make it morally okay to kill it. Something I just will never agree with it.
@Francis Mc Carthy: Emotional? I think killing a baby would make anyone emotional. I think if you don’t feel emotion about that, you must be a sociopath.
@Clarissa: a 7 week old embryo is NOT a baby.
A baby is a term that is given to a newborn right up until it’s 1st birthday..Quit with the emotional BS…
@KEV: repeal isn’t the middle ground. It is in fact, the extreme pro abortion ground, because it strips the unborn of their protection, opening them up to abortion attack, and their certain death.
Pro abortion extremists (Coppinger, Zappone, Kate O’Connell, Boyd Barrett, Brid Smith, Ailbhe Smith, Colm O’Gorman, B Howlinand co) desperately want to repeal the 8th in order to usher in full abortion on demand.
Thats why they are so desperate to destroy the 8ths protection. If the 8th goes, unborn Irish babies will die by abortion in increasing numbers.
Politicians can’t be trusted on abortion, most of the most voval pro aborts can’t either.
The 8th has, and will, save lives from abortion. Look at Britain to see the alternative 200,000 aborted dead yearly. (1/5 of all pregnancies).
Don’t be conned by the “trust women” trite, empty, slogans. KEEP the 8th.
@Peter Smyth: ” individual choice” is death for the child aborted. NO choice there for him/her, just abortion death.
Don’t trust politicians or the media anti 8th, pro abortion crowd on this one. They lie to push their 12 week (and beyond) abortion death on demand agenda.
@Paula Hannon: It not ok for the no side to use Down Syndrome but the yes side can use Savita. Most people have sympathy for Savita but 12 weeks without restrictions is not the answer.
@Sighle A. Ni Chuana: At least they’re honest. I think it was meant for their ears only though & not for wider public consumption. Wouldn’t want to let the cat out of the bag & admit what it’s all about.
@DPentony: anti abortion campaigners were asked nicely to stop weaponising Downs. By DSI. Major difference. That’s even apart from the lies they use in relation to it.
@KEV: Our legislators who are mightily paid to legislate are too cowardly to legislate on this issue.
It should never have ended up in the constitution.
@Ismise Máire: read the hse report. It clearly identifies the 8th as a contributing factor in her death, and recommended legal and constitutional change should be considered
@Mark Hayden: That is just the HSE trying to muddy the waters to cover their own ass. They didn’t pick up that she had sepsis which is not exclusive to pregnancy. The HSE are well known for not accepting responsibility don’t the fight medical negligence cases to the steps of the High Court knowing full well that they are at fault disgraceful putting already traumatised families through that. They should accept responsibility when they are at fault.
@Paula Hannon: Savita’s death has nothing to do with the 8th amendment, in fact if the 8th is repealed, women in her position would be worse off.
The 8th amendment has a clause that allows for abortion when the mothers life is at risk. Unfortunately due to our incompetent politicians no clear law has been enacted to legislate for this. It was delayed reactions by the medical team due to the confusion caused by poor/lack off legislation that caused the death of Savita.
@Tyrone Williams: At least with the 8th in place, the doctors could claim that they were acting in accordance with the constitution, once it is removed, until legislation is enacted, they will no longer have even this small protection.
By the way, I will be voting Yes, not because I favour abortion, but because I believe that the constitution is not the correct place for this, politicians need to step up and do their job and stop hiding behind referenda.
@DPentony: Ask Deborah Behan why she got rid of her Repeal the Eight monikor if she is so determined for the appeal to succeed. She is a government sponsored troll.
How can abortion be considered as a compassionate healthcare to a woman? How can people twist language and make something evil seem as a good thing? Or do they really believe their own twisted words?
Healthcare is a big issue in Ireland. But rather than focusing on already healthy women and their healthy unborn babies (which mainly need just monitoring), focus on improving healthcare for those who really need it.
@Ania_on_coffee: I don’t get your point? I fully agree that our healthcare system is a bit shambolic, but are you seriously saying that if a woman wants a termination, because she is ‘healthy’ , she shouldn’t be accommodated? There is a lot wrong with your logic
@Ania_on_coffee: firstly you either had too much coffee or not near enough.
If you’d bothered to read ANY of the abundant background material on this issue, you’d find out just what is meant by an abortion on compassionate grounds.
As for the mainly healthy babies you mention, well, like, those aren’t the ones that compassionate abortion grounds are concerned with.
@Ania_on_coffee:
While I fully respect your choice not to have a termination using the word evil kind of contradicts your point of language being twisted. Consider 2 women both aged 40 one has been through 3 rounds of IVF and is over the moon to finally be pregnant the other has found herself already a mother of 4 children with a unplanned but never the less much wanted pregnancy. Both women have been given the sad news that due to their age and health complications they both have a 20% chance of dying as a result of the pregnancy. Woman 1 makes the decision with her partner and doctor that a 20% chance of her loosing her life means an 80% chance both will survive and it is a risk she is willing to take. Woman 2 however after discussing it with her parenter and doctor is of the opinion that although she would very much love to have this baby she has 4 born children who need her now and she decides that 20% chance of her loosing her life and her children being without their mother is a risk that she is not willing to take. Now I’m not trying to convince you that abortion would ever be right for you but to just consider for one second that perhaps you do not have the right to judge a women on the health choices she makes for her or her family anymore then you would accept her opinion if your child was on life support and while discussing the health options for your child with your doctor she was to storm in and demand her opinion should be taken into consideration .
@Kieran Walsh: Yes that is exactly what I’m saying, that abortion is not healthcare, certainly not abortion on demand. If a woman has a medical condition that is worsened by pregnancy, then medics should look into working on this. The purpose of doctors and biomedical scientists is to improve the quality of life, and to save life than to get rid of it.
@Ania_on_coffee: “abortion is not healthcare” – at least you’re somewhat right here, in so far as the woman literally needs to be in the brink of death right now before being granted access to one.
Scary situation. Easy to be high and mighty about this one until you find yourself in that position.
@Bee Johnson: Becoming pregnant for a woman when she is older- is not a death sentence. Secondly, no doctor can give definitive statistics about life or death. Human life is quite unpredictable in fact.
I’m not judging women, I’m judging the action of murdering innocent life. I consider it extremely unjust towards the unborn baby, how it’s life is dependent upon the circumstances of the parents or their attitude towards pregnancy, as you gave examples of two women.
@Ania_on_coffee: “I’m not judging women, I’m judging the action of murdering innocent life.” – which so coincidentally happens to be judging the women also, as it is the woman who might request the “murdering of innocent life”.
I’m not judging you, I’m judging the action of forcing moral grandstanding onto an already marginalized demographic.
@Bee Johnson: But I respect arguments like yours a lot more than stupid accusations by people.
The real difference between the two women in your example is the fact that one is afraid of leaving 4 children behind in case of (uncertain) death, and another has not much to lose.
But we should evaluate the morality of an action by focusing on the intention. To save life or not kill it, is a moral intention, we both agree on that. Abortion always has the intent of deliberately ending life, so it cannot be made ‘right’ under any circumstances.
@Ania_on_coffee: thank you for sharing your ‘opinion’. In a functioning democracy you are entitled to one. And also in a functional democracy women have rights that do not change simply by becoming pregnant. Women are not simply vassals. In a functioning democracy their bodily autonomy remains in place regardless. In Ireland, thanks to our constitution that is not the case. The 8th needs to be repealed – as soon as possible. It does not belong in our constitution.
@Ania_on_coffee: such simplistic reductionism. So if a woman is pregnant and gets a diagnosis of FFA, and continuing the pregnancy could be seriously detrimental to her long term health, then a termination would potentially save the woman’s long term health when the fetus is non-viable anyway.
By your logic the pregnancy should be carried to term, the baby delivered stillborn, and the woman’s health put at risk.
Talk about “loving both”.
@Quango: I’ll give you an example of why it is possible. Even people that we love – can sometimes do bad things. But somehow we don’t stop loving them, and we condemn their action rather than the person.
@Ania_on_coffee: “condemning their actions” like blaming a 14 year old rape victim for not wanting to continue with the resulting pregnancy?
An argument devoid of any compassion.
@Ania_on_coffee: An uneducated fool like you wouldn’t know anyway. Your racist commenting on here proves that. Go out your apron back on and be a housewife if you want, stop getting in the way of other women.
@Quango: How is the foetus non-viable when a woman has frontal fibrosing alopecia? If a foetus is non-viable then taking it out of a woman is not the same as abortion.
@Gary Casserly: Racist commenting? What are you on about, do you have proof? ‘Go out your apron back on’ – so you call me uneducated while you cannot even spell or construct sentences.
@Quango: Is your issue rape or the fact that a girl is 14?
A 14 year old is developed physically as a 17 year old. She can give birth to a healthy baby.
Rape is a separate issue, and very serious. I think we should listen to rape victims who got pregnant. But my view about abortion stays the same.
@Ania_on_coffee: the example from my comment is completely plausible, and the expectation illustrated of how that pregnancy would unfold is exactly in line with the ideology which you are promoting.
Your response is attempt to skew the debate off topic, and stinks of the not-in-my-back-garden grand standing we see so prevalent today.
Admit it, you would have the woman carry the pregnancy to term, risk her health, and have the birth delivered stillborn anyway.
@Ania_on_coffee: my issue is with the very real X case from the early 90’s where a 14 year old rape victim was detained for attempting to travel to the UK for a termination.
Compounding the trauma which that victim underwent already you would force her through the mental, emotional and physical turmoil of being pregnant and giving birth to her rapists baby.
@Dave Doyle: What’s wrong with judging women? What’s wrong with judging men? What’s wrong with judgement? ” Everybody judges all the time. Now, you got a problem with that, you’re living wrong.”
@Ania_on_coffee: You think a grown woman life, a woman with a husband, family, friends, commitments, etc. is not much to lose to continue a pregnancy. But apparently when it’s an embryo or foetus that’s at most the size of a lime, and absolutely can’t survive outside the woman’s body, it’s morally unacceptable to end the pregnancy to protect the woman’s life. Says it all really.
@Carol Oates: A newborn baby is fully dependent on an adult for survival. A newborn is lighter than a watermelon. A newborn baby doesn’t have the life experiences of a grown woman. It is still human, just like the unborn, and equal to the life of a woman.
@Ania_on_coffee: Absolute nonsense. A new born bady is not reliant on a single human being’s body for survival. A new born baby can be cared for by anyone. When was the last time you saw a woman handing her 12 week foetus to someone to babysit for a couple of hours before safety taking it back into her care? If you don’t know the difference between a 12 week foetus and a new born baby, you don’t really understand the basics of biology.
@Kieran Walsh: no i think that the point is not to end the life of a healthy innocent baby. #savethe8th #punishtherapistnotthechild
#humanrightsforall
#fathershouldhaverightstoo
@Carol Oates: I understand far more than basic biology since my degree is biomedical. If you want to debate biology with me, then go ahead. I know the physiological difference between a 12 week foetus and a newborn. Genetically they are exactly the same, but they are at different developmental stages.
It is natural for a newborn to be cared primarily by the mother, and father. If it was normal to be cared by ‘anyone’ then we wouldn’t have a society and civilization.
@Ania_on_coffee: The Joint Committee on The Eight Amentment of the Constitution sat for quite some time and examined all the scientific evidence put in front of them, naturally scaremongering, unscientific evidence and religious hoo-ha was discounted. The concluded the need for changing our current laws based on several points including the medical and scientific evidence presented.
On Point 2.37 The Citizens Assembly recommended that termination of pregnancy should be lawful, up to 22 weeks gestation, on socio-economic grounds. The Assembly also recommended that termination of pregnancy should be lawful, up to 12 weeks gestation, without restriction as to reason.
The Citizens Assembly made many other recommendations including the need for better services for pregnant women and more effective ways to avoid crisis pregnancies.
The Committee recommended the introduction of a scheme for the provision of the most effective method of contraception, free of charge and having regard to personal circumstances, to all people who wish to avail of them within the State.
The Committee recommended a thorough review of sexual health and relationship education, including the areas of contraception and consent, in primary and post-primary schools, colleges, youth clubs and other organisations involved in education and interactions with young people. Sufficient time must be provided in the school’s curriculum for such education and it should be taught by suitably qualified personnel. The information should be provided in an impartial and factual manner that is independent of school ethos.
@Ania_on_coffee: “Abortion is not healthcare” Abortion can be healthcare, as we’ve seen recently in this country, and denial of it in some circumstances can certainly prove fatal. It’s misrepresentation to say something like this.
May I ask if you’re a member of any organisation or religious group? Are you a practicing Catholic? Cards on the table.
“No doctor can give definitive statistics about life or death”. Rubbish. Yes they can, it does however depend on what statistics you’re requesting. Life is 100% fatal, nobody survives it.
“I’m not judging women, I’m judging the action of murdering innocent life”. Nonsense, when you use inflammatory language like “murdering innocent life” you’re hardly being neutral, are you? Judging women and provoking a deliberate response is precisely what you’re doing, you’re not respecting anyone you’re attempting to shame those who disagree with you. Morality is not yours to judge.
@Ismise Máire: But you are punishing the woman or girl who was raped and doesn’t want to carry or give birth to her rapist’s child. Pregnancy and birth leave emotional, physical, and mental scars. Not to mention having people ask who’s the dad and having to lie or admit a deeply personal trauma. Then what about when the rapist serves their sentence, if they are convicted at all, and is awarded access? Don’t say it wouldn’t happen because I heard it directly from a judge that it absolutely can. I have absolute respect for any woman who decides to keep a child of rape and she should get every bit of support and protection she deserves, but it’s monstrous to deny a rape victim an abortion if she requests one.
@Ania_on_coffee: to go back to your original comment “how can abortion ever be considered compassionate healthcare” well for one in the case of Savita. When her cervix was open and a miscarriage was inevitable and at 17 weeks gestation her baby was far from viable. She asks for a termination because as a health professional she knew the risk of sepsis she was refused because there was still a feotal heartbeat . She died because of a direct result of the 8th and this has been confirmed by more then one doctor who reviewed her case. If she was your sister or mother or daughter would you brand her a murderer or say she had nothing to loose by respecting the 8th and not intervening medically for her own health. I very much doubt her husband or parents felt she had nothing to loose. I think perhaps along with your biomedical degree you should perhaps learn a little about empathy as it seems you have very little.
@Ania_on_coffee: What is the norm for care of a newborn is irrelevant. A newborn is not physically reliant on the body of a single human being for it’s existence. It can survive separate from the mother once cared for. An embryo or up to 12 week foetus can not. It survival is dependant on the body of the woman and in some cases the body of the woman against her wishes. You would think, someone with your claimed background would know these things.
@Dave Doyle: No problem at all with people judging me. It does strike me that people who choose elective abortions are judging the foetus unworthy of life and not as important as their own needs and wants, so I’m rather puzzled as to why you have such a problem with judgement.
@Andrew Eager: the majority of women who’ve had abortions,would already have brought ‘life’ into this world,many would have done it multiple times..best to let these decisions to the woman and her doctor…
@Bee Johnson: Savita Halappanavar, was pregnant and she went to a doctor to request an abortion. She wanted an abortion due to fear of mental trauma, and she had no symptoms at the time. Later her physical health became poorer. The doctor failed to diagnose her with an infection even though her white blood count was elevated. Her infection progressed, and she was admitted to a hospital. Her baby was monitored whether it had a heartbeat, and whether it was alive. It was still unknown that she had an infection, they thought it was simply symptoms of a miscarriage.
Only when the infection spread to other organs and when she had a fever, the infection was diagnosed. But her infection was resistant to antibiotics. She died of sepsis. There is no evidence that abortion would have saved her life. Her case is an example of medical negligence. If her infection was diagnosed on time, her life could have been saved.
“Delay or refusal to terminate the pregnancy does not in itself seem to be the cause of death. Even if the law permitted it, it is not as if her life would have been saved because of termination,” she said. “Severe septicaemia with disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), a life-threatening bleeding disorder which is a complication of sepsis, major organ damage and loss of the mother’s blood due to severe infection, is the cause of death in Savita’s case. This is what seems to have happened and this is a sequence which cannot be reversed just by terminating the pregnancy.” – Dr. Divakar — president-elect of the Federation of Obstetric and Gynaecological Societies of India
@Jed I. Knight: Pregnancy is not a disease or a medical condition, and a foetus is not a parasite that deteriorates the health of a mother. A woman may require medical treatment which can cause harm to the foetus, -this is why in many cases ‘medical’ abortion is carried out. This only suggests serious flaws in medical research. In modern day and age we should have medical treatment that can ensure the health of both the mother and the baby – and this is what needs to be worked on.
Doctors do give statistics. But even doctors and surgeons often encounter very strange events, of the survival of a patient that was strongly predicted to die. Statistics are not certainties, and it is wrong to be making decisions based on statistics alone – especially when the decision involves ending human life.
The fact that you even ask the question about my religious background – suggests to me of your own weakness. In case you run out of arguments to debate me, you can then attack me personally? Yes I am a Christian. But this is not a card that I use.
@Carol Oates:
Are you suggesting that I don’t know that a 12 week old foetus cannot be born prematurely and survive? Is this the best you can do?
Yes a very young life still needs the nutrients from the mother’s body. The environment of a womb allows for the development of a foetus, in order to be able to physically survive in the environment outside the womb. Note a key word here – environment. This is the difference between a newborn and a foetus, apart from developmental differences. One is in the womb and one is in the world. The environment of a womb does not diminish the human condition of the unborn, likewise the environment of the real world does not make a newborn more human than a foetus.
@Ania_on_coffee: keep going, Ania, I reckon her husband will sue you soon enough. You are becoming more outrageous and disrespectful by the minute. Is it just coffee you’re on?
@BillRochdayle: Why do you see calling someone a Not-In-My-Backyard-ist as an insult, because that’s what the so-called pro-life side are, a bunch of hypocrites, happy to have women travel or procure unsafe and illegal abortions, as long as they can close their eyes and pretend it doesn’t happen, because of the almighty 8th
@Ania_on_coffee: Could you show me where I claimed pregnancy was a disease or medical condition, and when you can’t retract your comment or apologise please.
If you wish to argue with the medical and legal community then by all means, I invite you to do so. In fact if you feel so strongly about this I assume you made a submission to the Citizens Assembly? Didn’t you?
The idea that the medical community come across these events where people who are supposed to die, don’t, does happen. They’re called anomalies – not miracles. They’re extremely rare and in most cases have an explanation. Bear in mind there are quite literally thousands of people in rural USA who claim to have been anally probed by aliens, as statistical evidence of ET, or anything else this is poor to say the least.
Your damn right I’m asking about your religious background, if it mattered so little you’d let everyone else live their lives instead of preaching to them. And I’m asking more. Remember Jesus is watching. Have you and others joined this and other forums, social media etc. in order to push an anti-abortion agenda when the topic arises? No fudging, it’s a yes or no answer.
@Ania_on_coffee: Look, that’s the recommendation of the Citizens Assembly, as Jedi indicated you’ve clearly been sitting here for the past few weeks waiting for an abortion topic to arise. Whoever you’re representing has hung you out to dry.
Where exactly did I say that you said pregnancy is a disease/medical condition, or if a foetus is a parasite? I have nothing to apologise for.
Healthcare is required in cases when there is a medical condition such as a disease, in prevention/treatment of disease, or when testing for a medical condition. You said that abortion is a form of healthcare. So, in relation to pregnancy, where does the aspect of a medical condition come into play, I wonder?
The answer to your question about whether I am representing a pro-life group/being funded – No.
You see, it is too easy to veer off the debate and get personal, which is exactly what you do. I simply don’t see you as a worthy opponent in debate.
By the way, it’s “You’re damn right”, not “your damn right”.
@Dave Doyle: No, and neither will you. What’s your point? You seem entirely perplexed and stumped by the notion that there might be more than one person involved in a pregnancy.
@Andrew Eager: two people involved but only one gets pregnant.If that person doesn’t want to bring that pregnancy to full term,& for whatever reason,then her right to her bodily autonomy has to come first..
@Ania_on_coffee: Every medical association in the industrialised world defines reproductive care and abortion as healthcare. Anti choice folks do not get to change the definition.Awww
@Ania_on_coffee: We’re being led to believe that an account from someone claiming to be from the Ukraine which has only been active a few weeks and posted relatively banal posts suddenly came to life when the topic of abortion came up.
This person claims to be Ukrainian yet her english is so good she can spot grammar mistakes like the difference between “you’re and your”. When asked if ” she and others joined this and other forums, social media etc. in order to push an anti-abortion agenda” she answered evasively. She answered “whether I am representing a pro-life group/being funded – No.”, that wasn’t what she was asked and suggests the original question was therefore true. I actually know it is and had been told of this several week ago but, obviously, not the identies bening used.
Incidentally abortion in the Ukraine is legal on request during the first twelve weeks of pregnancy. Between 12 and 28 weeks, abortion is available on a variety of grounds, including medical, social and personal grounds, and for any reason with the approval of a commission of physicians. It’s somewhat hypocritical for someone from there to come here and criticise us on changes to our abortion laws.
@Jed I. Knight: “When asked if ” she and others joined this and other forums, social media etc. in order to push an anti-abortion agenda” she answered evasively.”
Saying clearly “no” to your moronic question is evasive, is it?
@Jed I. Knight: and, by the way, just because someone is from “the Ukraine” (you didn’t Wikipedia the correct use of language when it comes to Ukraine, did you? Tut tut tut), that somehow means, I’m your xenophobe-addled mind, that they can’t speak fluent English?
Well, given that your own standard of English is piss-poor, I can see why you’d be amazed at someone from another country being able to speak it fluently.
The pro-abortion, anti-immigrant, Star Wars fanboy… aren’t you a fine hodgepodge of idiocy.
@Jonathan of Toast: Such aggression, one would almost think I hit a nerve. Ok as you asked nicely I’ll attempt to address your concerns regarding me in the order you ranted them, bear with me there are quite a few. I must point out at this point that I can only be honest, you may or may not appreciate this.
Xenophobe and Star Wars fanboy? I can assure you I’m not a xenophobe, that would be very hypocritical of me as my father was not Irish and I have a son living abroad, in fact my first grandchild is due later this year. We’re very excited. Star Wars fanboy? Yeah, you jumped to the obvious, and wrong, conclusion there. I got that moniker because of a severe respiratory condition, I tend to sound a bit like Darth Vader and have to take nebulisers which add to the similarity. Sorry, but the image you have of a fat Star Wars teenager in a basement being waited upon by an elderly mother is probably more indicative of your own situation…
I’m really not sure what you meant by the ‘pilchard’ reference, I’m assuming it was meant as some sort of insult, so if it helps I suppose you can consider me insulted.
Tubby fingers and getting all worked up…? I suppose I could do with loosing a little weight, and I’m told meditation is very effective to aid stress reduction. But then I wasn’t the one posting five consecutive posts complete with insults. Have you tried meditation?
There you go with more insults, you seem to be highly strung, I really feel you’d benefit from meditation. As you may have guessed by now I’m probably old enough to be your father (enough said on that, a horrible thought for both of us) this also means I’ve been around since before Bill Gates got any ideas. While one may ‘Google’, one does not ‘Wikipedia’, it would be akin to saying one ‘Britannicaed’, one may refer to or cite Wikipedia. (although this isn’t recommended in academic papers)
Now, one very important point that I must point out is an assumption you’ve made and language you’ve used, that of ‘pro-abortion’. Please point out where I said or even gave the impression that this is my view, then if you wouldn’t mind, withdraw that remark and/or apologise please. In fact, while I’m an atheist and, obviously have no religious views, abortion is not for me, having said that I cannot deny it to the next person, and I’m not about to question them on their reasons why. I’m ‘pro-choice’. I had a very good friend many years ago who desperately wanted children, she became pregnant and it quickly transpired the foetus had a FFA, extremely rare and unheard of at the time. The birth and the psychological trauma almost killed her. It took her years to get over it but, as she wanted children she spoke to the doctors and was assured it was a one in a million thing and couldn’t occur again. So she got pregnant again. She had the checks to be sure… and it did happen again. She couldn’t cope, she went everywhere, spoke to everyone. Tough, sorry but nothing they could do. Some privately suggested or implied England, an abortion. So that’s what she did. This time she didn’t recover. Without going into details she died a few years ago. So please understand when I say I’m Pro-Choice, I’m not anti immigrant, to be that would be to be anti my own existence.
A conspiracy theorist? I’m afraid with a background in the sciences and having picked up a few degrees along the way this is the last thing I am, I want proof, credible, tangible evidence. Conspiracy theory stuff is sometimes amusing but at the end of the day, nonsense.
Now I’m going to have to make an admission here I had no idea what ‘hot pockets’ were and had to resort to google, did you know those things contain 35g of fat? My cardiologist would have, well heart failure. Anyway, sorry, I’ve never even seen one let alone eaten one.
@Francis Mc Carthy: “hun”, “pet”, Vince Clarke picture.
I see, I see, I see. Roll out the cliches.
Can you quote exactly where I said that you did kill an infant? I think you’ll find that I asked a question, Franny.
What’s an Erasure fan who can’t figure out what to do with commas (never mind understand the difference between a statement and a question) supposed to do?
@Jonathan of Toast: And you presume to have the temerity to look down that pathetic excuse for a nose at others and question their beliefs, to laugh at and insult them. Yes it’s true, I have a number of chronic conditions. I’m dying. Maybe a few years, they’ll be unpleasant as my heart and lungs deteriorate, maybe not. I really do look forward to seeing my first grandchild, it’s something to aim for and look forward to.
What a pathetic excuse for a human being you are, if you’re an example of what pro-life is then I really want no part of it, if I was ever in any doubt (I’m not) you’ve put my mind at ease. I felt sorry for you and tried to be polite in my response, I explained why I have my beliefs. I wasted my time on a waste of time.
the unborn child has a right to protection from the state ,this is clearly stated in the constitution ,no to repeal ,every unborn child has the natural right to life ,not a death sentence .
@Anthony Gallagher: This is the question though isn’t it, Anthony. Who has more rights, a feotus or a citizen. And at what point do those rights start and end? The majority of people would, sanely, say that a woman has more rights than that of her womb.
Why would a majority “sanely, say that a woman has more rights than that of her womb.” That would be insanity.
Surely there would be equal rights unless the life of the mother was in danger.
If those in opposition to abortion can get the humanity of the unborn across to the public in spite of the mass media dehumanising propaganda the debate shouldn’t even be close. To support abortion most people have to deny the humanity of the subject of the killing.
@Kieran Walsh: all oc this has been debated over and over. Have ypu even read the 8th Amendment? Both the mother and child are protected under the amendment and as you probably know Ireland is one of the safest countries in which to be pregnant. Before you use Ms Halapanavar’s death; she didn’t die because of no abortion; she died because of negligence in diagmosing she jad sepsis.
@Fran Lonergan: so a sperm and an ova meet. Two cells become four, become 8 etc. Our constitution says that life is equal to the woman it lives it. I respectfully disagree and will vote accordingly.
@Anthony Gallagher: Well said, the reality is that an unborn child is not a woman’s property or body part but responsibility and the love and care that emanates from this is what defines parenthood and the family, that is my solemn belief and why the right to life supersedes all other exigencies no matter how compelling they may be.
And that is your prerogative, however, in your comment, you have already dehumanised the subject of the killing.
So that really only proves the point I made, to justify the killing, it must first be dehumanised and abortion advocates are well aware that that has to be achieved.
@Dave Doyle: It doesn’t. But they along with men have inescapable responsibilities towards the unborn when it comes to procreation. Play the chauvinist card all you like.
@Sighle A. Ni Chuana: have you read the report properly as to why she developed sepsis in the first place? And why there was a delay in commencing the treatment.? I think you have taken very selective pieces to suit your own agenda.
@Fran Lonergan:as ANY pregnancy/childbirth can result in fatal injuries to the woman-then she has a right to protect herself -and if that means ending that pregnancy,asap-then so be it
She has it within her own hands not to get pregnant; when it comes to killing another human I think her rights should be measured against the competing right of the subject of the killing.
@Dave Doyle: Thankfully never and if this world was the way we wanted it to be nobody should have to make it, instead we are left with this moral dilemma which calls to the fore our core values regarding life or liberty and where our priorities lie. My consciencous alliegance lies with the right to life of the unborn, there is however a compelling argument to be made to the contrary which I can empathise with but cannot support. Just because I follow my conscience does not make me anti women anti liberty or anything of the sort and I don’t entertain those who insinuate otherwise.
@Kieran Walsh: A “foetus” fyi is a potential future citizen that unfortunately has not reached a stage of self determination and accordingly should be afforded the pertinent rights and protection from the state as all citizens.
@Anthony Gallagher: answer the question about child care, who is going to care for all the unwanted children? Had you not thought about that? Answer the question above that was out to you and stop refusing to address an issue you raised.
@Seth Cheffetz: I’m sure the answer lies among all the loving couples/individuals worldwide who would love to have children or more children of their own but for various reasons cannot but would be more than willing to adopt.
@Fran Lonergan: you do know that contraceptives fail,yes ? When they do fail,then she will have that embryo removed from her womb…you do put up some pathetic sh!te :)
@Fran Lonergan: Good point, in this current entitlement driven society of ours certain (not all) pro choice followers of a more leftist disposition would aspire to a society where there is action without consequence and freedom without responsibility, a dangerous mindset if infiltrated in the collective mindset.
@Gary Casserly: ejaculating and fertilisation are totally different things Gary. Once the sperm is fertilised the cycle begins and a baby starts to grow, did you not study biology in school. Who will look after the unwanted babies?? Ahh, plenty of people will if they are not wanted. There are plenty people that have kids they don’t want and there are plenty of people that would love to be able to conceive and can’t and will adopt that baby. The baby in the womb is an independent person and if women don’t want to fall pregnant then they should abstain or do everything in their power to not fall pregnant, if they do fall pregnant then they should not kill it because it is an inconvenience to their life at that point in time.
@Fran Lonergan: “play adult games,accept adult responsibilities” -eh? sex isn’t as game…and the woman is being responsible if she decides that an abortion IS best for her….
@League of shadows: I don’t care what you’ll ‘”entertain” or won’t “entertain”. You come up with some find words about your conscience and “compelling argument” Yet when you deny the right of women to choose what is best for them, its all bollix.
@Dave Doyle: You come up with some fine profanities for your argument too, however it doesn’t make it ethically superior to mine. It all comes to respecting liberties or protecting life in a horrible moral dilemma. Where your preference lies is what you value more, that I’m afraid is the salient reality of the situation.
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: wrong! When the majority (99.9%) of abortions are carried out,the foetus is NOT viable..(you need to look up the meaning of ‘viable’ ..)
@Kieran Walsh: every individual human has its entire genetic code, unique to them, laid down in every one of its cells, from conception. Study the unoque DNA.
Unique, got it ? thats why police use it to identify people.
There, in every cell, from conception. killed by abortion.
@Francis Mc Carthy: Read what I said. I know what viable means. I said that if the baby wasn’t Ripped from its mother’s womb it would be viable if it was allowed to continue to develop like it is supposed to.
Grasping at straws to justify the killing of unborn babies.
Its about time All the people of Ireland of all walks of life stood up and got out from under the Cloak of the Church..Repeal the 8th and let Women who need to have an Abortion have one without being afraid of all the Stigma that goes with it today. .We need to vote of our own free will and not be led by Individuals into voting their way …The people of Ireland need to ask themselves …will my Daughter..or my Granddaughter in the future need to access an Abortion …Not every woman will…. but for those who do we need to make it easier for them ….
@In the paper: Ehhhh…….you’re full of crap. This country is under the cloak of the Church? Yeah that must have been how the Marriage Referendum was passed. Must also be how you find anti-Catholic articles in the mainstream media almost every day of the week. Also, do you honestly think a referendum on this issue would even be considered if the country was still under the cloak of the Church? Finally, you do know that there are atheists out there who oppose abortions??
@In the paper: the whole getting out from under the churches cloak argument is dead and an insult to the Irish people we make our own decisions and very few today vote for or back issues influenced by catholic dogma as shown in the marriage equality vote.
@Nick Drake: well actually despite the past few years of scandals in the Church, there are still a significant number who will do what their local PP says they should, because unfortunately a lot of those people have been quite literally brainwashed for so long that they will literally ask their priest how they should vote
And guess what that white collar guy is gonna tell them?!
@Tricia Lowry: it’s actually scary how many still are influenced by the church. I’m shocked that some of them are young women of child-bearing age, who I can only assume were schooled by Iona.
@Clare Love: You wish that was the case. You can have a pro-life viewpoint without being a Catholic. You can also be Catholic without having been schooled by a Catholic school. You also can be a woman who’s an atheist and be pro-life!! Mad isn’t it?
@In the paper: I see you are using gbe advice of the pro abortion lobby “link prolife to the Catholic Church”. Just another tactic that people are sick listening to and realise they have nothing else to contribute to the debate.
@Pat Bateman: whilst it is valid, and people who mention it should not be derided, it is definitely worth having this most important of referendums. It also means that the campaign to repeal still has work to do to get us there.
@In the paper: I’ve been in a church at most ten times in the past thirty years for funerals, weddings and baptisms of friends and family. I know you think it’s important to portray the pro-life demographic as populated by god-fearing folk, but pretty much everyone now knows that’s a nonsense and that ‘even’ the secular-minded can find elective abortion morally and ethically wrong through an assessment of all the facts and perspectives to hand.
@Thomas McGilly: yes we have all those real life scenarios in our country. That’s why we can’t really go by all these polls. It’s a long way off getting the 8th repealed yet but I’m hoping there’s more common sense than religion or whatnot by the time the referendum comes round.
@In the paper: This is not a religious issue it is a MORAL ISSUE which is why many atheists support retaining the 8th amendment.(#athiests for the 8th). Retaining the 8th gives protection to future generations of Irish unborn children sure you couldn’t do a nicer thing for them. We cannot trust politicians to do this.
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: your morals are happy that over 1,000 Irish women are procuring ‘unsafe’,illegal abortions in Ireland every year…
Your morals are happy that over 2,000 Irish women are choosing the slightly riskier surgical abortion in the UK,instead of the safer medical procedure…#loveboats
@Francis Mc Carthy: It wasn’t safer for the women who died after abortions in supposedly safe clinics or for those who had on going mental health problems following abortions. Of course if you deny to yourself what you are really doing killing your own flesh and blood then you may escape the mental anguish of what you have done.
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: more women have died from going through with a full term pregnancy than have died from procuring a safe,legal 1st trimester abortion..Women can get mental health problems from becoming pregnant,too .Did you not know about this ? Most women don’t have any mental health problems after procuring an abortion.However,they still have to put up with people like you
@Francis Mc Carthy: Looks like the TRUTH about abortion touched a nerve. Pro aborts will not be able o sell the killing of unborn babies that easily to the Irish people by using language that tries to dehumanize unborn children. What kind of person would kill their OWN FLESH AND BLOOD.
the people of Ireland should oppose this evil viciousness.
As the Catholic Church, and many others, bravely does, to their great credit, despite vicious opposition from pro abortion media/political ideologues, who have NO problem killing the unborn child in the womb..
our pro abortion media are disgusting. KEEP THE 8TH, to protect lives.
@Francis Mc Carthy: Pro choice is choosing to end the life of the unborn child.
To answer your question about treatment of pregnant women.
For instance if a pregnant woman developed cancer then of course she should be treated for the cancer if that treatment caused her to miscarry then so be it. That was an unintentional consequence of the treatment not a DELIBERATE act to end the life of the child.
Nobody has a problem with that type of circumstances.
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: you’re ‘pro abortion’ – that is refreshing to see..
Pro choice people understand that a certain percent of women will not want to bring a pregnancy to full term.
We want them to be able to procure an abortion in a safe,legal setting…
Anti choice people want women to procure unsafe,illegal abortions-force rape & incest victims to go through with a pregnancy-and force women to go full term with a FFA pregnancy…
Your lot are ‘pro suffering’,'pro illegal abortions’,'pro surgical abortions’ |\\7 pro death
@Francis Mc Carthy: Can you read? How dare you misrepresent what I said. I am pro life and it is the 8th amendment that protects BOTH the mother and her unborn baby. The mother will always receive any necessary treatment to save her life and every effort will be made to save the baby as well.
Abortion is the DELIBERATE killing of the unborn baby.
You are deliberately twisting peoples words to try and justify the killing of unborn babies.
It is you who should be ashamed what kind of person would kill their OWN FLESH AND BLOOD. Is that not SHAMEFUL.
@Thomas McGilly: ” individual choice” is death for the child aborted. NO choice there for him/her, just abortion death.
Don’t trust politicians or the media anti 8th, pro abortion crowd on this one. They lie to push their 12 week (and beyond) abortion death on demand agenda.
@psychiatrist: actually, this country is now under the cloak of the viciously bigotted, anti Catholic media in Western Europe pushing relentlessly their secular, pro abortion agenda.
Politicians, fearful of a belt of bad publicity, jump to their agenda, afraid to incurr secularist wrath.
The campaign to repeal the 8th Amendment will be defeated. They simply don’t have the lead they need three months out to sustain a majority at the end of May. The NO side always gains during the campaign and this will be no different. In fact, the gains for NO will probably be much bigger once people are fully informed of the extreme abortion proposals they want to replace the 8th with (abortion with no term limits on vague mental health grounds, taxpayer funded abortions, the possibility of sex-selective abortions and abortion on the grounds of disability, to name but a few).
@Emma Murphy: The decision on whether or not a woman has one is very much up to them to make so the option should be there for those who want to go through with it, whatever their reason.
@Emma Murphy: you can dream, Emma. But stop with the scaremongering about sex-selective abortions etching. And please do a little more research. Maybe even talk to someone who has endured the harsh realities of the 8th. Or better still, read the committee’s submissions to be better informed.
@Clare Love: disagree on Committee submissions no study on when human life begins key question
Never asked science ansewers definitivEly human life begins at conception
@League of shadows: in the majority of cases,most men are involved when a woman makes her final decision…why would a woman have to tell some complete stranger that she is going to be having a termination…?
@League of shadows: Nobody should be forced to have a kid they mightn’t want just because their partner wants one. It’s either meant to be or it’s not meant to be. If it’s meant to be then great. If it’s not meant to be then you should find someone you’ll want to have kids with.
@Tony: ‘most’ men ARE involved when a woman makes the FINAL decision on whether she does or doesn’t go through with the pregnancy..in other words,they’re in a relationship..you can look these stats up…
@Emma Murphy: our pro abortion media and their political allies, will do everything they can to destroy the 8ths protection of the unborn, as they push their abortion agenda like Britains 200,000 aborted dead per year.
Our politicians can’t be trusted. The 8th has saved countless lives since 1983, and should continue its good life saving work.
@Emma Murphy: The no side support lowered during marriage equality referendum. The gap is absolutely enormous at the moment. A landslide. How you think it will go from a landslide yes to a no in two months is beyond me.
People who don’t support repeal much like marriage equality outwardly say what the popular vote is. Privately they hold different opinions and the referendum is the only poll worth considering.
Most reasonable people realise that the planeloads of home to vote emigrants were committing voter fraud but the authorities chose to turn a blind eye and did nothing about it.
@Mick Rick Jones: A few thousand Irish women had abortions last year. Nearly 150000 Irish women had abortions in the last 30 year’s. Statistically it’s likely quite a few women you know such as friends, family members or work colleagues, have had abortions. Almost 1 in 10.
@Mick Rick Jones: “ALL women are such saints, aren’t they ? They NEVER abort babies for trivial, selfish or reasons of inconvenience – would they ?”
A baby isn’t an “inconvenience”, it’s a lifelong commitment. There’s a weird vibe from certain posters here. It seems less about protecting “babies” and more about punishing people for having sex.
Gap is closing.
I would urge everyone to google an image of a baby at 12 weeks. See their little bodies and decide could you poison this little baby and stop their heart beating.
@Pconor: Should google meat being processed too, google an abattoir. Do you eat meat? I want you to watch that, watch videos of animal slaughter, watch the entire video and don’t look away. Do it now.
@Pconor:
I don’t need to google that image. I had a miscarriage at 11-12 weeks , and unfortunately the image of which you speak is burned onto my heart and soul. That baby was very much wanted and grieved over. It my head and heart it was a baby, but there is no way in reality it was a baby with the same right to life as a woman. It was something quite different to a baby that was born at term.
It is grossly insulting and insensitive I feel, to use images of a 12 week old foetus in this debate, or images of children who have Downs Syndrome. I have no idea what will be the outcome of the referendum, but I wish you would have some sensitivity around the things you say. You will have your say at the ballot box, just as I will.
@Pconor: ah are you the one that’s being reported for posting disturbing images of a miscarried foetus post D&C?? And passing it off as an abortion pic?
Medical term for miscarriage: spontaneous ABORTION.
The only thing achieved by these images is upsetting every women who has had to undergo a D&C after a miscarriage.
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: It is porn. No other words to describe the scam that portraying the results of miscarriages pretending they are aborted feotuses.
@Joan Ryan: We lost our first. Miscarried at 6 months. My wife might as well have given birth. All we were told was IT wouldn’t have survived. Nothing else. Left to go on our merry way. We were naive.
@Dave Doyle: You missed the point I was talking about the actual procedure of an abortion. If you Google it I am sure you can find it online. Stop grasping at straws saying that the pictures the pro-life campaigners are showing are as a result of miscarriage. There is no shortage of aborted babies to show aren’t there thousands of them in OTHER COUNTRIES every year.
@Pconor: Google an image of a chimpanzee fetus at the same developmental stage and it’s almost indistinguishable from a human fetus… If your point is that just because something looks vaguely like a human it should be given the same rights as one I wouldn’t Google early stage mammalian fetal development where a human fetus looks pretty much like a feline of canine one…
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: I’m not grasping at any straws. the pro-birthers are, they use the pictures of miscarried feotuses as abortion porn.
I’m not in the least interested in googling your porn.
@MichaelandMary O’Grady: yeah and over 3000 of them are exported by our lovely island.
I won’t go in to the “abortion/miscarriage” definition with you again cos it clearly didn’t hit home with you the last time you pulled that stunt.
@Clare Love: People have a choice if the laws and constitution in this country don’t SUIT them perhaps they should CHOSE to move to a country where the laws are more suitable to their needs and the killing of unborn babies is allowed
@Dave Doyle: u can see 3D Ultrascan of moving babies in the womb — and then see them dead from abortion.
Pro aborts NEVER mention the baby aborted to death, in case people see the reality of dead, aborted babies. Pro aborts selectively twist the language to hide abortion reality.
But the 3D Scans of aborting babies in the womb, don’t lie.
On one of the FB pages that supports the Repeal the 8th movement a discussion took place the other night that was a real eye opener.
It started with a woman stating while she doesn’t agree with abortion, or could ever see herself having one, she supports the right of women to choose what is right for them.
The thread ran into hundreds of comments, 90% of which were from women. A huge number of those comments were from the point of view that though many women personally don’t see abortion as being right, they will support the Repeal movement, in that no woman takes the decision to abort easily, no woman goes out to have an abortion for the fun of it. Abortion is a fact of life in Ireland. Like it or not. Why should any woman be forced to endure an unwanted pregnancy, just because it may go against the moral objection of others? Why should any woman be forced to make a journey on her own, without support, to have a medical procedure that will have taken much thought and soul searching on her part? Why should any one reduce any pregnant woman to the status of no more than a machine, because this is the way your morals leads you?
The Repeal the 8th is all about choice. About every woman’s bodily autonomy. About every woman’s right to decide for herself what is best for her. It is not about abortion, it is about the right to decide.
@Dave Doyle: “Its not about abortion, it is about the right to decide”.. Actually it IS about abortion. There will be certain people you can decieve with that statement, Dave. The abortion industry is based on deception and lies.
@Sinead Hanley: The Repeal the 8th movement is all about CHOICE.
Those who think women have no rights to bodily autonomy, or the right to choose, those pro-birthers, see it in terms of abortion.
Like it or not, abortion is a fact of life in Ireland. Women are choosing. But they can’t choose in their own country. Their medical treatment is restricted to the point of death because of the 8th amendment.
And you support this.
@Dave Doyle: Its easier say CHOICE than ABORTION isnt it. Ye want abortion on demand and a huge part of the population are very uncomfortable with abortion which they see as the ending of a tiny life. Abortion doesnt make a distressed vulnerable woman unpregnant. It makes her the mother of a dead baby.
@Sinead Hanley: no such thing as ‘unpregnant’ really. An abortion ends a pregnancy so a woman who has one is no longer pregnant. There is no dead baby. Whether a woman is a mother or not depends on whether she has given birth to a baby. We don’t refer to woman whose pregnancies end as a result of miscarriage ‘mothers of dead babies’ for several reasons. One is that it is a horrible, hurtful thing to say. So please, even if you can’t feel any compassion, choose your words more carefully.
@EvieXVI: “whether a woman is a mother or not depends on whether she has given birth”.. Tell that to the thousands of mothers who lost their much wanted babies through miscarriage, who never got a chance to hold their babies. If they are not mothers to you, (cos you say they didnt give birth) then what are they? Please chose your words more carefully.
@kevin: That is exacrly why Coveney supports repeal. The Constitution currenly prohibits middle ground thinking. Legislation can deal with complexity and compromise in a way that constitutional absolute cannot.
@Terry McClatchey: what is the line in the referendum going to state? If it’s just one question then why do we have pulls on whether you support repealing the eight and up to 12 weeks for abortion as a second question? Your either for abortion or against abortion at the end of the day..
@Lad: the government will publish the heads of a bill that will legislate for abortion before the referendum. So the people who vote for remove can see what will be put in its place.
@Lad: You don’t get it, do you? All the keep the 8th campaigners are doing, is expressing a severe case of Nimbyism, because fact is, whether you like it or not, abortions have been happening as long as humans are around, and they’ll continue to happen, the only question is, do you care enough about women to allow them access to safe abortions in their own country, or are you content in plugging your ears, closing your eyes, and pretend that abortions don’t happen, while thousand’s of women are forced to travel abroad and face judgemental @rsh0les like you
@Lad: A simple binary question. Repeal the 8th v retain the 8. IF repealed, legislation is then the place to deal with the complexites of gestational boundaries, medical inputs and impacts of rape, incest and ffa etc. Those are complex matters that cannot be reduced to a managable referendum question.
@Lad: If the vote to repeal the 8th amendment is successful, you will never again have a say on this issue because you will have handed over to the politicians the power to legislate whatever aay THEY like. That legislation can be changed anytime depending on who is elected in the future.
@Larissa Caroline Nikolaus: I’m NIMBY about many things, murder, child sex abuse, rape. These are all things that are facilitated abroad in some places in some shape or form, through cultural prejudices and legal malfeasance. If you are consistent, then you will be happy for those same things to be permitted here, and that we should rid ourselves of any prohibition of these on our Statute books.
Let’s be quite clear. The country’s electorate is not made up of lemmings. Just because another country is doing or not doing something, is not in and of itself, a reason for us to follow likewise. You’re going to have to do a lot better than “because other folks are doing it.”
@Andrew Eager: Where does our government tell it’s citizens to do those things that you have mentioned ,Andrew? They don’t… However,they do tell our women on where to go for a safe,legal abortion..
@Dublin_Den: I agree Dublin_Den, that’s what I was trying to point out to Larissa – just because something is the norm elsewhere, doesn’t make it legitimate. If that was the case, we’d have to accept that the Saudi attitude to women reporting rape was legitimate, which of course, we all know, is entirely nonsense.
The word ‘ fundamentalist’ is thrown around a lot mainly aimed at people who want to preserve life in the womb except in cases of real medical necessity where the mothers life is threatened. Who would an impartial observer say was a fundamentalist. Would it be the person who permits tearing a developing baby apart limb by limb, finishing by crushing the head, and just or permits chemical poisoning unto death of the developing baby. Or would a fundamentalist be one who supports preserving life where practically possible. All of our rights are conditioned by the rights of others, even as grown adults.
@Rob_Kennedy: A fundamentalist on this issue is anyone who thinks they have the right to demand that women see the issue only from their point of view. It is really fundamentalist when it is men telling women what they must do when pregnant. It is those who believe their morals are far above any woman’s right to choose, and those morals gives them the right to decide for other women.
If you believe that women have the right to decide what is best for them, then vote to repeal the 8th.
If you don’t believe that women have the right to decide what is best for them, then vote to retain the 8th.
It’s that simple.
@Dave Doyle: By that measure, fundamentalist would have to include those that deny that the foetus in a human female’s womb is anything other than a human.
@Adam Reid: All that is required for evil to thrive is that GOOD PEOPLE DO NOTHING. Go out and vote to save the 8th you don’t want to be thinking later I helped to let 8th is happen by not voting.
There is, of course, only one poll that matters. I am confident that when people see the immediate threat to the life of the child in the womb up to 12 weeks if the 8th Amendment is repealed they will baulk. Vote No!
@DJ François: The Amendment is about keeping the Eighth or replacing the Eighth with an enabling article enabling the Oireachtas to legislate for abortion on demand up to 12 weeks gestation. An Taoiseach’s use of ‘enabling ‘ has unfortunate connotations as anyone who learned history in school will know that Hitler as leader of a minority government in 1933 persuaded the German Parliament to pass an Enabling Act enabling him to rule by decree. This Enabling Act was the basis of Hitler’s dictatorship until his suicide in 1945.
@DJ François: And why,I wonder, do they want to repeal the 8th? Oh yes, now I remember. To legislate for abortion on demand up to the 12th week. I think you’ll find I am well up with what’s going on. You, on the other hand, were just trying to be smart and failing miserably.
We need clear definitions from both the medical and the legal profession on “what is considered a life” and “ what is considered taking a life and then again on “what grounds are justified in taking a life”. We take life in war which is apparently justified, we take life in executions which is apparently justified, in abortion we also take life and in many juridstictions it is justified (or legal) given certain paramarers. So lets drop the fudge and the pretence …. the question is “is it justified” and if so in what circumstances. The people have to decide and in doing so they can not be lead by vested interests. People have to decide. Remember, never allow the freedom to form your own opinion to be taken away from you. You must ignore the spin and misinformation of vested interests.
The public do not know what legislation the government will bring in,and future governments can change it.thats a big problem because the public cannot trust politicians.
@@mdmak33: If the 8th is repealed it doesn’t matter what legislation they say they will bring now as it can be extended right up to birth at the stroke of a pen at any time in the future and the Irish people will NEVER again have a say.
@DJ François: Not so Repeal means giving the Oireachtas a ‘ blank cheque’ to draw up any kind of abortion law they wish. The lives of future generations of children will be effectively in the hands of the 150+ members of the Dail. A government majority in the Dail and Seanad and a pro-gov. President could legislate for mandatory abortion/ one child families or a pro-life majority could vote punitive penalties on all who seek or carry out abortions. The electorate would be powerless to prevent either possibility. Be very careful what you vote for. It could turn out to be very different to what you want.
Expect constancy from ideologues and dogmatic thinkers – they dont have a consistant view – simply a demand.
They don’t care if it makes sense – the basis of all injustice and revolution – totalitarianism
Demands that men and women be exactly equal – against reality = crazy
Demand that we ignore the baby in the equation = crazy
Demand that we have equality of outcome when men and women make different choices = crazy.
Demand we accept gender is a social construct = crazy
Demand we accept trans genders are not social constructs but based on “birth” = contradictory and crazy.
etc etc….
All these ideologies are linked and flawed equally – they stem from profound anti-science anti-science anti-rational social pressures from bitter lobby groups – without a fully thought through rational….
Say what you want. Its not black and white. Its not a vote for murder. But this comes down to a vote about choice. I would never be in favour of an abortion due to anything other than a fatal abnormality but I also understand that my morals are my own and I cannot force them on others. People will continue to go to the UK so why not keep them home?
@Fran Lonergan: Is it morally acceptable we allow females travel to the UK for an abortion or should we check every female who’s travelling abroad to see if she is pregnant before allowing her to travel?
@Kerry Blake: if you believe, like scientists, that human life begins at conception then abortion is the intentional killing of human life. That is the only purpose of abortion; to kill human life which,without direct intervention to cause its death, would continue to live. That being so abortion is intrinsically of itself always wrong and no circumstances can justify it
@Kay Kehoe: That’s your opinion, most people can see that there is little in life that is so black or white.
And you are wrong to say that there is no scientific consensus about when human life begins. It has been debated by scientists, and theologians, for centuries. ‘Conception’ isn’t even a single moment, and there is no consensus about when this occurs.
If you want to believe something, fine, but please don’t resort to blatant untruths.
@EvieXVI: Sorry This is the opinion of scientists like US gynaecologist who was the medical mastermind behind the campaign to legalize unrestricted abortion across US. In 1973, year of the Roe v Wade judgment legalizing abortion, this doctor Nathanson was asked to lead a research unit in New York into fetology. His researches led this Abortion King to declare , ‘Fetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception. As a scientist, I know, not believe , know that human life begins at conception’ and never did another abortion. Professor Reville UCC explaining that human life is a continuum beginning at conception and ending in natural death wrote in 2008, ‘Each point on the continuum is fully human with the full human properties appropriate to its stage of development.’
@EvieXVI: my point is simple. As I said already, there is no consensus. Even if this opinion is taken as fact, it ignores the fact that ‘conception’ is not a simple, single instant, but, again, a point of contention. All a bit mundane and irrelevant, perhaps, but better to stick to facts, surely?
@EvieXVI: Hi Evie, can you point to a scientist who believes human life does not begin at conception? We’ve had two scientific opinions to the contrary of your assertion now.
This referendum is not about whether or not abortion should be legalised. It is about whether or not the constitution is the way to deal with such issues.
Even if the Yes vote wins, abortion will still be illegal in Ireland.
I am totally against free abortion up to 12 weeks. At 12 weeks the helpless baby is fully formed. There are so many people out there who would love to adopt one doesn’t have to keep the baby after it is born
@Larissa Caroline Nikolaus: because thats how human biological nature and nurture works.
u can see the child on 3D Ultrascan formed, — before abortion kills them.
killing babies by abortion in the womb is still killing.
Pure propaganda! Hitler used the same tactics to convince an overwhelming majority of Germans that it was necessary to murder millions of Jews. Here we are falling for it again so we can have a legacy of murdering millions of babies.
It’s somewhat disturbing, if not alarming, to note the amount of accounts which are only a few weeks old, a month or two at most. These have made a few comments on trivial issues, always being polite but rarely engaging. However, when a topic related to abortion arises suddenly they emerge and begin posting in earnest- and every one is Pro – Life. They’re seeding forums like this and I’m told others too, I’ve been told of similar cases involving social media. This is clearly a planned campaign.
Fingers crossed the Yes side don’t get their May date. Although in that event i reckon Leo would box clever and push it to the autumn. If the students are gone for the summer it won’t pass. Hopefully there’ll be some sort of delay ;)
Noones pro abortion Committee — supposedly “impartially hearing” from experts. What a biased farce, a Committee stacked with its mind already made up.
They heard from 28 “pro choice” (ie pro abortion) witnesses, like say BPAS, the British abortion supplier, and 3 token prolife people, dragged in late, when the lopsided pro abortion bias became too embarrassing, even for Noone and her fellow pro aborts “on their journey” towards abortion on demand, like Leo.
Interesting to see pro abortion Fine Gael cheerleader Regina Doherty “selling” 12 abortion on demand “to people” .
She, and her fellow pro aborts, are living proof that ONLY the 8th can now protect unborn children from abortion, before Doherty and her ilk, “do a job of work” on them.
So, keep the 8th. Dump the Fine Gael pro aborts out of office, before they do more damage.
@Mick Rick Jones: the pro abortion NWCI guff about “compassionate healthcare” is nonsence.
Killing healthy babies deliberately by abortion is not “compassionate”. In fact, very often it is driven by selfish lack of compassion for an inconvenient pregnancy and results in a dead aborted baby.
The NWCI Orla O’Connor pro abortion pushers are, incredibly, funded by every taxpayer.
Any woman, or womens group, who genuinely opposes abortion, should disaffiliate NOW from this pro abortion front group.
Remaining only adds your name to their pro abortion anti 8th drive, which will result in abortion on demand, their aim.
@Search Eagle: not when as the scientists know human life begins at conception. If you wish I can fill one of these posts with names and quotes of scientists, embryologists, etc who believe human life begins at conception. Know I gotta this you are never going to agree to abortion. However I don’t blame you. The two Committees and the media studiously avoided the question when does human life begin. I now know why this question is not and won’t be asked.
No point arguing when we both truly understand the other side’s point. It’s all been said, you’ll never convince the other side, if they’ll come around to your way it’ll be done by them alone and for the right reasons.
Interesting how the Fine Gael spin doctors got R Doherty to radically change her pro abortion, anti 8th tune between the 1 and 6 o’clock News bulletins (“it won’t pass/will pass”).
BIG spin panic at FG spin HQ with Dohertys “won’t pass” gaff.
Government to make cabin homes in back gardens exempt from planning
Christina Finn
8 hrs ago
56.4k
70
Good Morning
The 9 at 9: Wednesday
Updated
15 mins ago
1.1k
The Morning Lead
Government to make cabin homes in back gardens exempt from planning
Christina Finn
8 hrs ago
56.4k
70
Your Cookies. Your Choice.
Cookies help provide our news service while also enabling the advertising needed to fund this work.
We categorise cookies as Necessary, Performance (used to analyse the site performance) and Targeting (used to target advertising which helps us keep this service free).
We and our 148 partners store and access personal data, like browsing data or unique identifiers, on your device. Selecting Accept All enables tracking technologies to support the purposes shown under we and our partners process data to provide. If trackers are disabled, some content and ads you see may not be as relevant to you. You can resurface this menu to change your choices or withdraw consent at any time by clicking the Cookie Preferences link on the bottom of the webpage .Your choices will have effect within our Website. For more details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
We and our vendors process data for the following purposes:
Use precise geolocation data. Actively scan device characteristics for identification. Store and/or access information on a device. Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development.
Cookies Preference Centre
We process your data to deliver content or advertisements and measure the delivery of such content or advertisements to extract insights about our website. We share this information with our partners on the basis of consent. You may exercise your right to consent, based on a specific purpose below or at a partner level in the link under each purpose. Some vendors may process your data based on their legitimate interests, which does not require your consent. You cannot object to tracking technologies placed to ensure security, prevent fraud, fix errors, or deliver and present advertising and content, and precise geolocation data and active scanning of device characteristics for identification may be used to support this purpose. This exception does not apply to targeted advertising. These choices will be signaled to our vendors participating in the Transparency and Consent Framework.
Manage Consent Preferences
Necessary Cookies
Always Active
These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work.
Targeting Cookies
These cookies may be set through our site by our advertising partners. They may be used by those companies to build a profile of your interests and show you relevant adverts on other sites. They do not store directly personal information, but are based on uniquely identifying your browser and internet device. If you do not allow these cookies, you will experience less targeted advertising.
Functional Cookies
These cookies enable the website to provide enhanced functionality and personalisation. They may be set by us or by third party providers whose services we have added to our pages. If you do not allow these cookies then these services may not function properly.
Performance Cookies
These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not be able to monitor our performance.
Store and/or access information on a device 102 partners can use this purpose
Cookies, device or similar online identifiers (e.g. login-based identifiers, randomly assigned identifiers, network based identifiers) together with other information (e.g. browser type and information, language, screen size, supported technologies etc.) can be stored or read on your device to recognise it each time it connects to an app or to a website, for one or several of the purposes presented here.
Personalised advertising and content, advertising and content measurement, audience research and services development 133 partners can use this purpose
Use limited data to select advertising 103 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times an ad is presented to you).
Create profiles for personalised advertising 75 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (such as forms you submit, content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (for example, information from your previous activity on this service and other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (that might include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present advertising that appears more relevant based on your possible interests by this and other entities.
Use profiles to select personalised advertising 74 partners can use this purpose
Advertising presented to you on this service can be based on your advertising profiles, which can reflect your activity on this service or other websites or apps (like the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects.
Create profiles to personalise content 36 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service (for instance, forms you submit, non-advertising content you look at) can be stored and combined with other information about you (such as your previous activity on this service or other websites or apps) or similar users. This is then used to build or improve a profile about you (which might for example include possible interests and personal aspects). Your profile can be used (also later) to present content that appears more relevant based on your possible interests, such as by adapting the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find content that matches your interests.
Use profiles to select personalised content 32 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on your content personalisation profiles, which can reflect your activity on this or other services (for instance, the forms you submit, content you look at), possible interests and personal aspects. This can for example be used to adapt the order in which content is shown to you, so that it is even easier for you to find (non-advertising) content that matches your interests.
Measure advertising performance 124 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which advertising is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine how well an advert has worked for you or other users and whether the goals of the advertising were reached. For instance, whether you saw an ad, whether you clicked on it, whether it led you to buy a product or visit a website, etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of advertising campaigns.
Measure content performance 59 partners can use this purpose
Information regarding which content is presented to you and how you interact with it can be used to determine whether the (non-advertising) content e.g. reached its intended audience and matched your interests. For instance, whether you read an article, watch a video, listen to a podcast or look at a product description, how long you spent on this service and the web pages you visit etc. This is very helpful to understand the relevance of (non-advertising) content that is shown to you.
Understand audiences through statistics or combinations of data from different sources 72 partners can use this purpose
Reports can be generated based on the combination of data sets (like user profiles, statistics, market research, analytics data) regarding your interactions and those of other users with advertising or (non-advertising) content to identify common characteristics (for instance, to determine which target audiences are more receptive to an ad campaign or to certain contents).
Develop and improve services 79 partners can use this purpose
Information about your activity on this service, such as your interaction with ads or content, can be very helpful to improve products and services and to build new products and services based on user interactions, the type of audience, etc. This specific purpose does not include the development or improvement of user profiles and identifiers.
Use limited data to select content 37 partners can use this purpose
Content presented to you on this service can be based on limited data, such as the website or app you are using, your non-precise location, your device type, or which content you are (or have been) interacting with (for example, to limit the number of times a video or an article is presented to you).
Use precise geolocation data 42 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, your precise location (within a radius of less than 500 metres) may be used in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Actively scan device characteristics for identification 24 partners can use this special feature
With your acceptance, certain characteristics specific to your device might be requested and used to distinguish it from other devices (such as the installed fonts or plugins, the resolution of your screen) in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Ensure security, prevent and detect fraud, and fix errors 82 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Your data can be used to monitor for and prevent unusual and possibly fraudulent activity (for example, regarding advertising, ad clicks by bots), and ensure systems and processes work properly and securely. It can also be used to correct any problems you, the publisher or the advertiser may encounter in the delivery of content and ads and in your interaction with them.
Deliver and present advertising and content 92 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
Certain information (like an IP address or device capabilities) is used to ensure the technical compatibility of the content or advertising, and to facilitate the transmission of the content or ad to your device.
Match and combine data from other data sources 65 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Information about your activity on this service may be matched and combined with other information relating to you and originating from various sources (for instance your activity on a separate online service, your use of a loyalty card in-store, or your answers to a survey), in support of the purposes explained in this notice.
Link different devices 48 partners can use this feature
Always Active
In support of the purposes explained in this notice, your device might be considered as likely linked to other devices that belong to you or your household (for instance because you are logged in to the same service on both your phone and your computer, or because you may use the same Internet connection on both devices).
Identify devices based on information transmitted automatically 81 partners can use this feature
Always Active
Your device might be distinguished from other devices based on information it automatically sends when accessing the Internet (for instance, the IP address of your Internet connection or the type of browser you are using) in support of the purposes exposed in this notice.
Save and communicate privacy choices 60 partners can use this special purpose
Always Active
The choices you make regarding the purposes and entities listed in this notice are saved and made available to those entities in the form of digital signals (such as a string of characters). This is necessary in order to enable both this service and those entities to respect such choices.
have your say