Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael pause talks for Christmas after making 'progress' today

Joan, I’m not sure where you got the idea that you should be able to dictate what one person does with their own body, however you’re wrong. Completely and utterly wrong.

Here here Sharon. I find abortion to be abhorrent as well. Nearly as much as the fact that we as a nation export the problem to our neighbours.

I am pro choice, but I feel it is incredibly inappropriate for anyone on any side of this sensitive issue to put up a billboard. It’s already illegal. This should be discussed with caring friends, family member and counselling professionals.

Nick while i agree with you that the billboards are in poor taste at the very least and grossly offensive at worst, I don’t understand why you think we should only debate the issue of abortion with “caring friends, family member and counselling professionals.” If this was in the case of a crisis pregnancy then yes this would be good advice but this is not a pregnancy this is a national issue. Just because an issue is sensitive doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be publicly debated and considering that you have commented here in a public forum on the issue I am a little confused by your comment.

I distinguish between debating abortion in general and someone’s abortion specifically. While you can believe abortion is wrong and argue for policies on that basis, I totally disagree with the idea that we should debate this issue through billboards. I would never give money to an organisation which planned to put up a billboard of a smilling woman and said “you’ll be totally fine with an abortion!”, which is basically the pro choice equivalent of these billboards. Everyone has their own abortion experience and to generalise that all women are hurt or all women are totally fine afterwards is just wrong.

So yes, I believe in healthy factual debate, but I think these billboards are simply trying to guilt individual women who have had abortions rather than make a positive contribution. I also believe women who are going through this process should be able to talk to friends and family about it, rather than being assaulted by a billboard campaign designed to guilt them. Frankly, I would be disgusted if I faced an unwanted pregnancy and any stranger tried to seek me out and talk to me about it. Are those really contradictory?

Yeah I can see where you are coming from now.

If they are genuinely trying to influence people with an unclear view on this very sensitive issue, I would be surprised if this strategy of militant offensiveness is succeeding. If they just want to upset certain people and get attention for themselves it is succeeding but their arrogance on a very personal and sensitive issue is shameful, even more so considering the need for the assertion of their position at all in a country in which the law is clearly opposed to abortion. If there was another referendum pending one could perhaps see their motivation but all that an independent person can draw is an intent to upset, offend and create attention for themselves, its shameful.

At least we know the type of mentality that operates “YouthDefence” more like the Nazi Youth party.

It would also seem that the outright ban on broadcast advertising on religion in Ireland which was affirmed by the ECHR in their decision that EU member states can regulate freedom of expression on sensitive areas of morality and religion could be extended to at least graphic ads involving abortion and other sensitive issues. The Public can be adequately informed on the facts and opinions in support of either position without graphic imagery and offensive tag lines prominently posted in public.

@Nick Beard

So well said and true, no woman has an abortion ‘willy nilly’, and they will never forget it.
I meant to say I am pro choice. Bacik is only doing her job, this is a subject that should be discussed.

You are correct Fagan’s, this does apply to more than just abortion. The lack of any clear avenue of complaint shows a huge loophole in the ASAIs powers. It shows that you can get away with thinly veiled attempts to shame certain sections of society provided there is no commercial element or religious aspect..

So if for example YD (as they are also anti immigration and homophobic) decide to run a campaign that very much suggests that the LGBT community are responsible for something they aren’t, or that it is somehow a choice to be homosexual / transexual, it appears that they are free to do so, and that no one can do anything about it..

Freedom of speech does come with responsibility, and it is also a HUMAN right, not a corporate right.

If they are entitled to put it up there, then we are entitled to complain, so who’s rights are being neglected here?

I don’t live in the USA, Sorcha. Do your research a bit better if you’re going to get personal on websites.

Sorcha, be a dear there and read the Journals comments policy.. Personal attacks are not permitted – you trying to make insinuations about another users location when it has not been mentioned here is a tad weird and stalky anyway..

Stick to what people *say*. Anything else is merely a poor reflection on you.

Still doesn’t end well for them.

Ah, but saying that just doesn’t have the dramatic effect of claiming it rips babies in two, does it? So I guess it comes down to whether you think you need to make dramatic, if factually misleading, statements to convince people of your point.

No John it doesn’t, but 30-50% of pregnancies end this way anyway, whether wanted or not..

As Nick said, it’s far less dramatic to compare an abortion to something that happens quite frequently at that stage of pregnancy anyway..

I think you might be a bit too Eager there Andrew…..you’re not a thinking human being when you sleep?
Ahem – here’s something based on research – http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2007/05/01/thinking-during-sleep/

Sleep does not mean coma.

@John, I think free speech deserves to be protected – so yes, anyone that wants to make a public statement where it is defensible should be free to do so.
In this case though, a group has taken a particular approach – while they may deny it, I would argue that many feel that this is an approach taken from high moral ground, judging people who have made difficult decisions and throwing shame and guilt at them from their high chairs. All the time lumping those who have had abortions into “baby killer” status (unless of course their story becomes a pro-life tragedy in which case YD can use the story to sell their message of shame). I think this is not defensible – to use a few isolated situations where people have chosen abortion – in my opinion (and I acknowledge that this is unresearched) the pain many who choose abortion feel is most likely to be that from Ireland’s pretty monochrome Catholic culture.

If there was a pro-choice poster out there saying “Abortion is an awesome method of birth control” I would hope that there would be as much firey debate and reasonable defacing of posters too…..

@ Tomy Iona. I stand corrected on detail, but the principle remains the same. Sentience is by necessity absent in a state of sleep, as one is unconscious.

Jesus Christ man make an effort! The reason we don’t swallow the absolute tripe that YD have to say is because we have information at our fingertips!
http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/dreaming/Lucidity%20Institute%20Research%20Papers.pdf#page=163

All it takes is a little search and a little sense to read something so you know that there is validity to it. While I know the point you’re trying to make you can hardly use a sleeping adult as a potential metaphor for a cluster of cells with a limited or non-existent nervous system.

@ Tomy.

But I can use it as a metaphor, because the only difference is a period of time. Unlike the beasts of the field, we don’t live solely in the moment. We are species capable of comprehending linear time, the past, the present and future, and the being that the baby in the womb is as part of that timeline, if no extreme action to alter that fact is taken.

And as pregnant women carrying clump of cells around with them, curiously I’ve never met a woman who ever gave birth to anything other than a human baby. They certainly never gave birth to something anyone called a clump of cells. Our collective human history is littered with sorry tales of one bunch of humans denying the humanity of others, and all that that allowed for. I see no good reason whatsoever for embracing that philosophy just because it makes our lives easier.

Abortion can be a necessary evil, but being an evil, needs to be kept to a necessary minimum.

You can use it as a metaphor if you want to be WILDLY inaccurate and present a completely invalid argument.
Usually metaphors make a comparison – actually, that’s a necessity. Contrasting something means that you can highlight differences – what you’ve done with what you call a metaphor is absolutely nothing.

I don’t say this to be rude to you, though you may take it as such – I say this because I’m absolutely completely sick of people deciding to stick to their guns despite the obvious shmacking them like a 4 day dead trout across the face!

With such a divisive issue there are a lot of people presenting their opinion as fact, using emotive arguments that are not representative and just spewing out inaccuracies that it takes the legs out from under anything that is valid as well as tainting opinion with points which should not be out in the public domain.

As for your reference to a clump of cells – it’s a stage in development of a human. I haven’t suggested that women give birth to clumps of cells. I’m saying that there is a belief (often if not always theological) that the moment of conception is the moment life begins.

Whether this can be denied or not is not really the discussion – for all but those who need help, the idea of killing a grown child as a life choice is not going to happen – but at what point is there a child rather than a lump of cells which are neither sentient not conscious (I think this sentence might point out how your sleeping adult is not a metaphor).

I feel there is something more to your point and I’d like to say more to try to clarify but I really don’t know where you’re going here….

Andrew, the reason we are capable of experiencing linear time is because we contstructed it.. The only thing that actually exists is the moment, everything else is a memory or a hope.

Perhaps you are unaware – or perhaps you choose to ignore that 91% of abortions in the UK last year took place within the first 13 weeks, 78% within the first 10 weeks http://mediacentre.dh.gov.uk/2012/05/29/abortion-statistics-england-wales-2011/
At this point the foetus has no lungs, the brain has not developed enough for “pain” to be processed, and there’s a 30-50% possibility that it could well have miscarried.

Just think, 30-50% of those abortions may well have ended in miscarriage anyway..

Thats a far cry from your sleeping comparison.. The person sleeping was capable of doing so without relying upon another persons blood supply for oxygen (in the absence of lungs), waste removal, nutrients, hydration, etc, their brain was at a stage capable of dreaming..

All of this is a bit of a red herring anyway, as this article was about Ivana Bacik trying to ensure that campaigns without a commercial element may be regulated by the ASAI, in effect safeguarding against further exploitation of this loophole by other extremist groups.

@ Shanti. I disagree. Time didn’t neet to be constructed. With or without us, time passes – it is not something in the eye of the beholder. Time for the dinosaurs surely passed, as they were once extant, and then eventually weren’t, long before we came on the scene. And even if there were only the moment, inside that moment, is our awareness of what has transpired, and what has yet to be. No matter what way you paint it, we are not beings that live in the moment. If we truly did that, we would have no memories, and no hope ever, as you would have it.

As for the statistics cited, it matters not a jot to me. I take the reasonable view, that given that is possible that there is a life at stake, we should err on the side of caution and protect that life much in the same way we would protect the life of one of us already walking and talking types. I take the reasonable view that conception is not the moment of life, but that successful implantation is, as no child ever grew to term in a petri dish, nor is likely to – although we might need to acknowledge the prescience of Huxley’s Brave New World, in time. I take the reasonable view that we should do unto others what we would have others do to us (I have never once encountered a person who wished their parents had aborted them). I think it reasonable to expect adults to take full responsibility for their actions, and while sex for its own sake is great and healthy, it is disingenuous in the extreme to pretend that we don’t risk the creation of another life when we have sex, for fundamentally, that is it’s purpose. All these things I hold to be reasonable.

As for the specific point of the article, I think that many people here should be careful of what they wish for, for at some point in the future, the likes of Youth Defence will use the very same measures Ivana Bacik is looking to bring in, for their own ends. That is the way of these things. Remember, the first ’83 referendum was the YD types trying to even further lock down the pro-life components of the Constitution, and look what that got them in the end…

Andrew, for a large part of my life I wished I had been aborted.. Mainly because during my childhood it was evident that my mother was not cut out for raising children, as adults our relationship is fine – but I suffered a lot of physical and emotional abuse, just because you never met one doesn’t mean they don’t exist..

And as has been pointed out to you repeatedly, pregnancy involves asking a lot of the mother. Her body will undergo all sorts of changes, physically, emotionally, hormonally etc.. There are several risks associated with pregnancy, it also worsens a number of existing health conditions and can kickstart latent health issues.
There is no other circumstance comparable to it. If you were forced to give a bone marrow sample for a relative that you had never met, would you feel a tad put out by it?
Because by enforcing pregnancy you are basically forcing a woman to take a risk and change her body forever – without her consent.
I should point out, I am more in favour of contraception than abortion, but I am pro choice, I support whatever decision any pregnant woman makes.

Lastly, I am not advocating censorship, as I said below, I fully support any individuals freedom of expression, but YD are a registered business, and the ASAI shoud have powers to act if a misleading campaign is broadcast publicly. This loophole leaves billboards and other public advertising spaces wide open for abuse provided that there is no commercial element.

@ Tomy.

Let me try to be more clear. I use it in this sense – A person sleeping cannot express a preference to the outside world / A foetus cannot express a preference to the outside world. A person sleeping cannot defend themselves if someone comes to do them harm in a sudden fashion / A foetus cannot defend themselves if someone comes to do them harm in a sudden fashion (or any). A person sleeping is dependent on other people/society. They are dependent on others to not do them harm, to the police forces to keep them from harm, the ESB to keep their alarm clock going, the Gas company to keep them warm, and so on an so forth./ A foetus is similarly dependent, albeit in an entirely more intimate and existential fashion with their mother. While I normally have time for issues of degree, and while I can see why people could reasonably and correctly say the degree of dependency in this instance is vastly different , I find myself bounced into taking a more absolutist position, as being an agnostic, I only know that there is this life, and that all life should be encouraged, in whatever form, whatever the difficulties, for it is all I, as an agnostic know. As I said to Shanti above, in the end, my position is informed by my ignorance, I don’t know when life begins for certain – I have an opinion certainly but given the stakes are so high – indeed, the stakes don’t go any higher – it seems inescapable to do anything other than to err on the side of caution. And having done that, having to accept that I must place myself somewhere in normal circumstances I would have no desire to be – interfering in someone else’s life.

Moving on, my albeit brief glance at your links re: lucid dreaming seem to be entirely contingent on understanding consciousness in the context of the dream the sleeper is having. There was nothing there spoke of how the dreamer could be asleep and conscious/sentient enough to interact with the outside world in the same way that they would if they were awake. IMO, you are trying to work a scientific theory/fact far too hard.

I hope that goes some way to clarifying my position.

Come one now – you’ve just completely side-stepped there. But I’ll move on because these things are simply distractions on the validity of the debate.

In saying: “I take the reasonable view, that given that is possible that there is a life at stake, we should err on the side of caution and protect that life much in the same way we would protect the life of one of us already walking and talking types”…. you have hit quite hard on a number of points that are regularly debated. In doing so, though it’s obvious that you haven’t really thought this through in a truly open way.

Phew – I don’t even know where to start with what you’ve just said… there’s just so much which presents your view as anything but reasonable. You’re contradicting yourself all over the place….

Also, wrt having never met a person who wishes they were aborted…. This is a comment based again on personal experience. Nobody you know ever committed suicide? It’s very possible that they expressed this very sentiment.

Amazingly though, I would say you’re argument has some validity. I have never met a person who has expressed delight in not having been miscarried OR aborted….

@ Shanti.

I’m sorry you’ve had a tough time of it. However, do you feel that way now? Or are you glad/thankful that regardless of that struggle, you have a life worth living now?

To be clear, I don’t support forced parenthood. I do support life and all its terrible potential. I have no desire to see children suffer horrible childhoods, but moreso, I do not desire to deprive individuals of life.

With regard to the bone marrow question, I certainly would donate – and not because it was a relative, but because it was someone in need and it was the right thing to do.

With regard to me enforcing a pregnancy, I would counter by pointing out that nobody forced a woman to have sex in a fashion that leads to pregnancy. It is my experience, that when it comes to sex, for some reason that defeats me, people, men and women alike, wish to give themselves a pass when it comes to ultimate responsibility. I can only speak for myself, but I would sooner take the responsibility for my actions whatever their outcome rather than visit them on another, which in the end, is what abortion amounts to. I have absolutely no comprehension as to why others don’t feel likewise. Again, I would remind you, that in all cases other than rape, when a couple have sex, the woman consented with the man, to run the risk of creating another person. Why is that not enough consent?

Human Rights are vital. But their sister ship of Human Responsibilities must sail alongside at all times too.

Er, Andrew, when you are in danger and you are asleep you wake up.. It’s a left over from the time before we had the guards, ESB, etc looking after us.. Survival instinct.. It’s hardwired, and not everyone needs an alarm clock, some people have a strong circadian rhythm.. I always wake up before my alarm is due to go off..

@ Tomy.

I fail to see how I sidestepped it. One of two or several things might be at play here. I failed to make myself clear (definitely possible). You constructed a straw man analysis of my position, leading to apparent contradictions/vagueness (can’t speak to that one way or the other). Or something else, possibly both preceding scenarios at play simultaneously.

Maybe it’s because reasonable is in the eye of the beholder. However, far too much of the reason of the pro-choice position, IMO, is predicated on ‘because this is what I want’. In all other issues, I would happily concur that that is sufficient. But on this one issue, it’s not nearly enough.

As for your assertion that I have not thought this through in a truly open way, feel free to explain why you think this is the case. I have time, if you have. I honestly fail to see any contradictions in my position. Again, please highlight even one of them.

@ Shanti. Many people have been killed in their sleep. Many have been stabbed or shot before they even knew what was happening.

As for waking up before the alarm clock, I always have to wait for mine, only then to ignore it. Which given the late hour this evening, is probably what I’ll by doing tomorrow. :)

Oh Andrew, ever heard of contraceptive failure??
I have had condoms split. I have also had 2 suspected miscarriages – thankfully, because I would rather not have to have an abortion, but if I get pregnant I risk worsening two health conditions that at present are manageable, but if worsened would severely affect my quality of life. Not to mention the fact that I don’t actually want kids..

I use contraception, but the barrier method is the only one I can use. You see, the oestrogen is the thing that worsens those conditions, so hormonal contraceptives are a no no for the exact same reason..

The reason I am pro choice is because I realise that it is not a black and white situation, it is a very complex one, and for that reason I am not in a position to make decisions for another woman or judge her for the decisions she makes.

@ Shanti.

Contraceptive failure I have heard of. Experienced it, no (given the amount of it about, maybe it’s me that’s doing something wrong!). It is my experience that far too many people blame contraceptive failure when they really mean ‘took their eye off the ball.’ We’ll never really get honest statistics on the actual failure rate of contraceptives as any study would be entirely dependent on the end users being entirely honest, which is not an attribute our species is overflowing with.

File Under: “None of my business”, but surely Tubal Ligation would be the way to go for you, if you don’t want children? (health complications arising notwithstanding) – You can enjoy your sex life, and be risk free of pregnancy.

I don’t dispute the whole topic is complex, but if you can’t kill someone post birth, then if you perceive the foetus has personhood before birth, your hand is forced on the issue, whether you like it or not.

” nobody forced a woman to have sex in a fashion that leads to pregnancy” – what are you smoking and can I have some of it?!

“I’m sorry you’ve had a tough time of it. However, do you feel that way now? Or are you glad/thankful that regardless of that struggle, you have a life worth living now?”
Sounds to me like you’re suggesting that the end justifies the means. How come that doesn’t extend to the abortion debate in the direction opposite to the one you want to steer things?

“I do support life and all its terrible potential.” – I know where I WANT to go with this but I think it might be immature – I’m sure with just a little thought you can guess though…..

“I have no desire to see children suffer horrible childhoods, but moreso, I do not desire to deprive individuals of life.” – this one is REALLY tempting too…….

“I can only speak for myself, but I would sooner take the responsibility for my actions whatever their outcome rather than visit them on another, which in the end, is what abortion amounts to.” – to AGAIN mention one of the crux point of the debate which you appear to fail to grasp – you seem to think that life begins at conception (if not, when does it begin?), or at least that if you have sex, have the kid because you’ve taken it on to have kids by having sex.

How far do you take this argument? Do you use contraception? If you do then aren’t you denying life? Or do you regard that as different – sort of a pre-abortion?

” I have absolutely no comprehension as to why others don’t feel likewise. Again, I would remind you, that in all cases other than rape, when a couple have sex, the woman consented with the man, to run the risk of creating another person. Why is that not enough consent?”
You might not believe this, but as a man I have had to consent to sex before it doesn’t just mean that women are lying on their backs waiting to grant permission… Swear to god(ish)….

And AGAIN you’re inability to analogise is almost funny at this stage. If I were to get into a car and have the responsibility of driving, I would accept that. I would also have to accept that there is a measurable chance of getting killed by another driver. That in no way means that when my spine is severed and my skull cracked open with blood all over the cheap floormats that I will shrug my shoulders and say “sure I deserved it, I knew the risks” nor would I deserve people landing at my funeral saying “sure he should’ve known”!

Now, before you say this isn’t a fair metaphor, let’s remember you’re earlier one.. mine succeeds in drawing parallels where you’re just should not have gone full term….

“Human Rights are vital. But their sister ship of Human Responsibilities must sail alongside at all times too.”
Eloquently put – some might say… not me though.
Yes, people should take responsibility for their actions. I think most right thinking people who encounter an unexpected pregnancy would accept it and move on. I can’t say I know anyone who has had an abortion. Those who decide to go through with such a decision (either way) are quite simply not going to do it without giving it the full weight of the decision (except maybe the few who would use it in a more contraceptive way – but these will know how to get an abortion through other available routes)

And now for Atheist irony closing comment:
Thank God for an increasingly more secular Ireland….

@ Andrew: “File Under: “None of my business”, but surely Tubal Ligation would be the way to go for you, if you don’t want children? (health complications arising notwithstanding) – You can enjoy your sex life, and be risk free of pregnancy.”

Wait now, this really confuses me – I’d really like to hear where you think life begins – I can’t see how you can reconcile the idea of the potential for life being in having sex (regardless of whether protected or not) and then go on to encourage sterilisation?

Surely every little sperm is sacred (and therefore the womany bits too?) On the one hand, prevent children but on the other hand, regard a single complete cell, splitting into a clump of cells as a sleeping born person?! I don’t know how you reconcile these ideas.

@Shanti – it’s only in you’re last post that I realised you were a lady. It’s great that such a debate has gone on without reference to gender…..

I haven’t said that I would opt for an abortion, and while I don’t want kids now, that’s not to say I know for sure I will never change my mind, your suggestion is rather permanent. I’m not an absolutist.

And post birth is entirely different. Post birth is *born*!! No longer entirely dependent upon the mother. Indeed, from 24 weeks on the foetus has a 50% or higher chance of survival outside the womb..

You are failing to recognise that a woman is more than an incubation service.. You may want to pass judgement upon others and be cynical about their honesty regarding contraceptive failure – that is your opinion, as long as you recognise that it is not fact then that’s fine. But I’ve seen two condoms literally split right open – and end up as a ring around the penis. It can happen, even the manufacturers warn that it can.

I have to say the idea that people use abortion as contraception is quite misguided. I know two women who have travelled, and they both described it as a horrible experience (not one they regret, but certainly one they would not choose to repeat).. Not sure why someone would choose to subject themselves to the side effects of those drugs as well as the idea of what they were doing.. Not to mention the cost.. Surely prevention would be far easier? I suspect that this is a spotlight fallacy thrown about by the same people who try to assert that all abortions are done surgically..

Ah Tomy, one of the many reasons a pseudonym carries benefit.. I have been able to witness first hand some of the blatant mysogyny on this website for that precise reason (disclaimer- I make reference to other articles, not anyone here), there are certain commenters who speak to you very differently when they assume that you are male!

@ Tomi.

I’m seeing a lot of heat, but not much fire here.

Re: Sex: In my innocence, I thought it was axiomatic that it is possible to engage in sex in various and many satisfying ways. Apparently you are far more prudish than me. My apologies for my libertine tendencies.

Re: End justifies the means. It MIGHT do, if it protects life. If it doesn’t, then it’s not justified. Simples. *Am not a pacifist*

Re: Life begins when?. It’s now becoming apparent, you are not reading my posts, or not reading them attentively enough. I said, IMO, life can be said to begin when the fertilised egg implants into the wall of the uterus, and not before then. That’s why I pointed out that a fertilised embryo in a petri dish isn’t human life, because while it remains there, it can never be anything other than what it is right there. It will not grow, it will not develop. I even mentioned how Huxley’s Brave New World might challenge that criteria in the future.

Re: Car crashes/spines severed/skulls etc. I have absolutely no idea where you’re going with this, nor even how it applies to what I wrote. To try get you back in the game, bear this in mind – the fundamental purpose of sex is to make babies. The fundamental purpose of cars is to get you from A to B, not to have car crashes. And you have the temerity to chastise my use of analogies? Remove the mote from thine own eye, before calling your brother blind….

Nope, in the final analysis, there’s no explanation as to how my position contradicts itself. Rather, proof positive that you aren’t following my posts closely enough. It’s going to be a bit hard to have this conversation if you’re not following it.

@ Tomy.

I think I have it. Your whole perception of my posts is jaundiced by some attitudinal difficulty with the Catholic Church and its ethos. Newsflash – I’m not Catholic. For the last time. Read my lips – I’m not Catholic. Sperms are not sacred, neither are ova. Got it yet?

Conversely, be advised that my position is not jaundiced by the Catholic Church. You should try being agnostic some time. Although some of my best friends are atheists, I do find them more often than not, just as domatic as their theistic brethern. Agnosticism Rocks Dude! Try it sometime. It’s liberating.

Andrew,
At implantation??

You do realise that at first the body rejects the embryo, in fact, your antibodies go into overdrive and your immune system tries to take out what it perceives as a parasitic invasion. Until the placenta is formed even the body doesn’t recognise the embryo as human.
Implantation is literally just the embryo hooking on to the endometrium. And more often than not, that is shed with the next period..

May I sugest that perhaps you are attributiing life a tad too early..

@ Shanti.

Re: Tubal Ligation. I fully understand why you would wish to reserve the right to change your mind at some point in the future. However, I would contend that if you wish to reserve that right, you must accept the responsibility that ensues. Like i said previously, rights and responsbility must operate in some semblance of balance. Anything else reduces our lives to pit fights between the competing rights of each other, and/or subjecting ourselves to undue repression under a guise of ‘responsibility’.

With regard to seeing a woman as an incubation service, I have to disagree. I absolutely don’t. I do see people, men and women alike, as being ultimately responsible for their actions however. To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, if people decide to turn their back on the fire and burn their behinds, then they will just have to sit on their blisters.

As for abortion as a means of contraception, certainly there’s a lot of anecdotal hustle and bustle about it, but the facts are somewhere in a no man’s land. According to the NHS website: “The Department of Health data also indicate that the proportion of all abortions that are considered repeat abortions has increased from 30% to 34% since 2000. In absolute terms, this was estimated to equate to 52,663 repeat abortions in 2000 and 64,445 in 2010.” In a time when contraception is freely available, the fact that repeat abortions are increasing, is somewhat peculiar.

It also reported that the number of abortions in 2010 was 189,000 (lower than the 2007 figure of 198000) which surely must be either a) an awful lot of people having contraceptive failure b) getting pregnant is not any less dangerous despite medical advances (given that threat to life of the mother is a valid reason) or c) people being for want of a better term, feckless. At the very least, one would be inclined to think that contraceptive manufacturers need to be brought to book under the Sales of Goods and Services Act for selling shoddy goods.

189000 abortions in a population of 60,000,000 in one year, is not what anyone could call ‘rare’ as in ‘safe, legal and rare’. Safe and legal, maybe. Rare, definitely not.

@ Shanti.

Re: Implantation. I disagree. It is the one point in which, if all things being equal, and the body does not reject the embryo as it on occasion does, the embryo is now de facto, IMO, a person growing. And just as an old person in their last years, is very often, weak, defenceless and dependent, but a person nonetheless, so too is the implanted embryo.

I think you put far too much store in the conditionality and precariousness of the embryo’s existence in the womb. Just because it’s first days are full of jeopardy and hazard, makes it no less human. If that were the case, then a similar assertion could be made for our entire species and its precarious existence on this rock, with its meagre 100kms of life-sustaining atmosphere, as it revolved around the sun, perpetually running the risk of colliding into some other large rock that would do us all in, in an instant.

I cannot believe that in the twenty first century, people are still peddling this idea that women only have limited rights over their own bodies. This is the same arguement that was used to allow your husband to beat you or rape you once you were married, the same logic that allows fathers and brothers to commit honour killings. Andrew might see a denial of the humanity of the unborn, but I see women being told their bodies aren’t their own, that the rights of an entity that resembles a mix between a seahorse, a shrimp and a tadpole takes priority ownership of their own body.

He seems to feel that sexual activity means people (well, women) have consented to giving someone else ownership of their body. Sounds just like the arguement that by getting married, you allow a man to have sex with you whenever he wants to me.

@Nick – thanks for summing that up in a way that has changed my reply here. I was getting close to flaming and I’d prefer to stick with the issues rather than getting diverted off on some poor analogy.

I will say though that I can’t understand how someone can put sex down to simply reproduction. Sometimes even women actually ENJOY sex….. It’s one of the things that makes human beings unique, to have sex for fun and not just to produce babies. Of course responsibility needs to be taken here; but it certainly should not be a case of “tough shit” if reasonable precautions are taken. Before this is interpreted as such, this is not advocating abortion as contraception.

@Andrew – Everyone in this country has felt the influence quite a lot of the Catholic church, that simply cannot be denied.

They certainly never gave birth to something anyone called a clump of cells.

Andrew seems convinced that no one educated in foetal development could believe it’s not just like a sleeping adult. Actually, many women who are or have been pregnant do see a difference. As well as some doctors, so it’s not like it’s a concensus of the educated.

@ Tomy.

Again, I am flummoxed by your resolute failure to address what I post, rather than what you would like to think I posted. You and many others here seem to think that sex is about having fun first, and making babies second. That is simply not the way it works. The reason why sex is pleasurable is to encourage you to have it, so that you…..make babies. What is so terribly controversial about this? Am I saying something that isn’t factually true?

As for not saying ‘tough shit’ if reasonable precautions are taken, while I can sympathise with people in that position, if you don’t say it to the couple, then you are saying it to the foetus that is aborted.

On a wider issue, I’d be genuinely glad if someone can explain to me how they they rationalise the arbitary nature of the gestational limits that are imposed on abortions, and why that should vary from one country to another. Surely a foetus doesn’t become a baby 12 weeks sooner in France than the UK, simply by dint of the English Channel?

As for feeling the influence of the Catholic Church, you are of course right, but remember, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

@ Lisa.

I do know women who lost their babies through miscarriages. Both were profoundly saddened by the event, and didn’t remark that they had lost a clump of cells, but rather that they had lost the baby. Not my words, theirs.

Also if you read my posts above, you will see that I deem life having begun after implantation, and not before. In the early scenario you cited, previous to implantation, it would depend on the individual in question if she felt pregnant with baby, (if it is at all possible that she knew at that stage, in the first place). I myself have had heard contradictory opinion from women as to how soon they knew they were pregnant.

There is something particularly ironic about a man trying to speak to two women who have had miscarriages about how women perceive miscarriages. And that’s something I object to in this debate – a lot of men end up telling women about our experiences.

@ Nick. This is not me telling you how I perceived the women after their miscarriages. This is me telling you that’s what they said. Now if you prefer, you can call me a liar, and I’m making it up, but honestly, if we’re reduced to that, then the whole discussion becomes pointless.

Regardless, and as I said in a previous post that seems to have gotten eaten by the Journal Post Eating Monster, have a great weekend, Nick.

I don’t think you’re a liar. I think you can and should admit that your lived experience of this will never be equal to that of women who have been pregnant and therefore, maybe chill with the lecturing us.

But that would require not implying moral superiority, so guess we’re out of luck,

@ Nick.

You seem to think I’m only speaking to women, despite the many times I’ve stated my remarks are meant for both men and women. If you can’t take on board what I’m saying because it doesn’t fit with your prejudicial dogma as to what opinions may have as valid, then there’s not a great deal of point in us persisting with the discussion.

So we’re clear:

Where men have been shown to have fathered a child, they should have their wages garnished at source to provide for the upkeep of that child. At the very least, it might put manners on some tomcats out there who like to indulge in the notion that there is no relationship between sex and babies.

With regard to women, given, as you have correctly they stated that they are at the very least literally left holding the baby for 9 months, and all the emotional and physical baggage that ensues, I can only encourage them to be far more circumspect and conservative (dread word) about who they sleep with. Like I said before, the biggest problem at the moment is men and women alike thinking they can be entirely certain of separating sex from babies. It’s not possible, shy of sterilisation, and even that’s not certain. Now while, as far as I’m concerned people can enjoy as much or as little uncertainty in their lives as they so desire, I do think that stops when a third party is brought in.

As for chilling about lecturing people, I’m not lecturing, I’m advocating a position. Just. Like. You.

And like I said, until you’ve walked in my shoes, and in the shoes of other men, you’d do very well to remember that the female experience is not the sole keystone on this issue. While only a woman can bring a child to term, it is only with a man that she does so. And that’s not going to change any time soon.

FWIW, Andrew, and I do kind of hate having to trot out my gestational history to wave at you and your Knowing What Women Think, I felt like I lost a potential baby when I had my miscarriage, and I grieved for that. But the actual … well, what came out – not an actual baby. No. I understand other women may think about it differently, but doesn’t that show it’s not some kind of objective universal truth?

@ Lisa.

You’re dead right it’s not fair. But its most unfair to the baby, who in all of this, has done nothing – good, bad or indifferent.

Regards.

And *sigh* I am not a “pro-abort”. I am, in fact, pregnant. Willingly. I don’t think anyone should have an abortion if they don’t want one, I don’t think it’s a good solution for everyone, but I don’t think all pregnant women should have to carry to term either. Like a …ooh, what’s it called again? Choice! That’s it!

I’m more than happy to provide counselling to any women who are unhappy with the results of their unwanted pregnancy, whatever course they took. You’re happy to do the 3am feedings for the women you forced to continue pregnancies, right?

I’d prefer certain people to have abortions than to give birth to a baby who will be neglected,abused and god knows what else. Plants are also alive by the way,they just function on a different level.

Andrew, how interesting it is that on your FB profile you clearly embrace science and its discoveries with one hand, while frivolously rejecting other scientific discoveries with the other.

Sounds like Catholics who pick and choose what they want to believe from the instruction book to their religion, doesn’t it?

Confused little boy.

@ Ronan. Unfortunately, with me being an agnostic, you’re not speaking for me when you talk of sky fairies etc. I don’t see a clump of cells, I see a human being growing, and being utterly defenceless while it is.

As for women having choice over their bodies, what about the girls in the womb? Don’t they get a choice in things? It’s not like they’ve chosen to force themselves on their mothers. They are a victim of happenstance, and no more than that.

@ Itchy McScratch. So what you’re saying is you’d prefer the killing of someone, rather than see them neglected or abused? I can’t say I agree with your hierarchy of evils there. As for plants, they are certainly alive, but they’re never going to turn around to you one day, become sentient, and ask you how your day was (no matter how long you wait). Your observation is entirely irrelevant.

@ Winston. What scientific discoveries did I reject? I’m intrigued. And again, I must point out, I am a devout agnostic. Not Catholic, not Protestant, not Muslim, nor Atheist. Agnostic. One does not need to be a theist to see the profound moral problems with abortion. Only those with lazily formed opinions could think otherwise.

As for being a confused little boy, I’m not the one hiding behind a pseudonym on the web. Just saying, is all.

FYI, it might serve you well to only speak of what you know about for certain, when it comes to speaking of others. All else just makes your prejudice shine through.

Andrew, maybe you should come back to us when you are pregnant but dont want to be. Oh, thats right, that will never happen to you!

@ Tommy C. What’s your point? You’d do very well to remember that no woman ever got pregnant without a man. Pregnancy lasts 9 months. Parenthood lasts a lifetime.

Yes, parenthood does last a lifetime, Andrew. But by advocating for adoption to be available but not abortion, you have basically created a situation where only women are “forced to take responsibility.” Which is why, as a man, your words ring a bit hollow.

Believe me Nick, you have no idea what you’re talking about. You clearly have a very impoverished view of men.

No, I don’t. There are amazing single fathers out there and I salute them. That doesn’t change that you advocate adoption but not abortion, which conveniently for you, as a man, happens to exclude you from having to “take responsibility.”

Like I said Nick, you have no idea.

Have a great weekend.

I have no idea of what? What you’ve said? Yes, I do. And it very much lets men off the hook. Even if you’re actually a wonderful father, you’re still letting men off the hook.

@ Nick. You have no idea of what it is to be a father. You have no idea what it is to be a man. So how about you stop lecturing me about stuff I can’t speak to, and you don’t lecture me about stuff you can’t speak to.

And I fail to see how I’ m letting men off the hook. Like I’ve said elsewhere, all men that father children should have their salary garnished at source. Once they get the message that there are consequences to their actions, and there is no such thing as a free ride (pun intended), we may find that men will conduct themselves more responsibly. But like I’ve said many times, I don’t really care what other people, men and women alike, get up to in their private lives, as long as innocent third parties aren’t left carrying the can for it.

And while it’s through that only women can die through pregnancy, 94% of all workplace deaths in the EU are male (97.3% in the UK), owing to the hazardous nature of the jobs. This business of gender-centric thinking is a bit of a cul de sac, IMO.

While I don’t know anything about the experience of being a father, I don’t think I spoke to that experience. At all. And while workplace deaths being male is a legitimate discussion, it’s not one for this thread.

What is for this thread is that the logic you use is the same logic which has been used to deny women ownership of their bodies for hundreds of years. And I can’t see how you can avoid gendering that.

And it doesn’t work. There are so many Irish women who think their abortion is shameful and feel guilty about it, but think there is no possible way they can bring another mouth to feed into their homes (note: I am not saying this is a universal experience, just one I’ve seen a good few times). And I, at any rate, think they should be able to do that. What these ads do best is shame women.

You do know that here in Ireland, we don’t subscribe to the American “free market of ideas” view of free speech, right? Free speech comes with a responsibility to be honest and to choose appropriate times and places. Advertising speech is particularly limited. There’s a lot of people banding around “free speech” who seem to have a very limited understanding of what free speech is in the context of advertising in Ireland.

Not to mention, Ivana called for a debate on the role of the ASAI. I fail to see in ANY way how that violated your freedom of speech…