There's been too much talk about the hard cases.

[The Doc]

I know, and their particular targets are often women because its easy and fun, how we all lolled. Ruth Coppinger, Joan Burton, Clare Daly, Maureen O'Sullivan to take but a few are regularly singled out as figures of ridicule because of their hair, or the way the talk or the way the look or the way they have vagin... the way they believe in stuff, in ways that men aren't.

Can we separate general political commentary from the vote tomorrow. I'd hope people won't vote one way or the other to make a political point in the polls - the issue, for me, is more fundamental than that.

Political commentary is essential though. The vote tomorrow is only a small step in this process. The significant battle will be when the Bill to Regulate Termination of Pregnancy is brought before the Dail. I'm not confident that many people (on either side) realise this and when the 8th is repealed (as I believe it will be) people will head off thinking thats that. I'm more confident of the 8th being repealed than I am of the Bill being passed.

Agreed. Which is why a small Yes win is probably the worst outcome. It'll end up with a load of stalling on the legislation.



Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Oldschool]

Which is why a small Yes win is probably the worst outcome. It'll end up with a load of stalling on the legislation.

Spot on.
There's been too much talk about the hard cases over the years and not enough action.

[ronk]

It's time the men of Ireland stood up for the women of Ireland. Long overdue in fact.

Meh, until the men of Ireland stop voting in their droves for catholic centre right parties, the women of Ireland will be right where we've always put them.

Do you think it will change when they get the vote?

[tomthefan]

Nine week old foetus

Show Spoiler:

i saw a video of an aborted foetus of about that age.
It was lying on its back with its hands touching, on a paper towel, between kidney dishes filled with used instruments.
Someone touched its hands with tweezers and the unborn baby's arms shot apart.
As far as I am concerned, it's murder.

[paddyor]

There's really no need for the gif. If you believe life begins at conception, then it's murder. A lot of people don't and a lot aren't sure.

[tomthefan]

There's really no need for the gif.

Why's that now?

[fourthirtythree]

I'm a loving and devoted father of two young daughters, I also love my wife. If I had or do make her pregnant with number three we will have to go to England. No doctor should be forced to deny the healthcare which would preserve her life and allow her the enjoyment of it.

I don't even think we (or she) qualifies as a "hard case", but it's not that difficult to test the edge of a fundamentalist, hardline, sweeping law and find it wanting. That's what we are voting about today, what law is enacted is another fight. And I hope we do the right thing by women who have been harmed by a law which, in the best interpretation I can give of it, is reckless of women's lives and happiness.

Please vote yes.

[tomthefan]

I'm a loving and devoted father of two young daughters, I also love my wife. If I had or do make her pregnant with number three we will have to go to England. No doctor should be forced to deny the healthcare which would preserve her life and allow her the enjoyment of it.

I don't even think we (or she) qualifies as a "hard case", but it's not that difficult to test the edge of a fundamentalist, hardline, sweeping law and find it wanting. That's what we are voting about today, what law is enacted is another fight. And I hope we do the right thing by women who have been harmed by a law which, in the best interpretation I can give of it, is reckless of women's lives and happiness.

Please vote yes.

All human lives are of equal value.
All human lives should have equal rights under the law.
You call yourself a loving and deovted father but you would contemplate killing
one of your children so you can have a sex life.
Sex is important in a marriage but not as important as the lives of your children.
If you are so loving and devoted, double down on the contraception, have a vasectomy,don't have sex at high risk times of the month.
Don't expect society to take away the right to life for our unborn citizens so you can be irresponsible without consequence.
BTW if your wife's health would be jeopardised by pregnancy then I can't imagine that an abortion
would be entirely risk free either.

[The Doc]

All human lives are of equal value.
All human lives should have equal rights under the law.

Except that elsewhere the law recognises that rights are not absolutely equal - that there are times when two rights conflict, that there is a hierarchy. Killing someone in self-defence does not come with the "all human lives have equal rights" implications. Likewise it has already been established that the risk of death to a mother outstrips the rights of a foetus. Even in less serious cases - my rights to free speech are not absolute. I must temper them with the need to not incite hatred or violence.

Absolutism in terms of morality is problematic because that very hard line creates the so called "hard cases" mentioned in the title. It is this absolutism which forces the likes of Ronan Mullen (or whoever) to have to defend a position that would force a 12 year old rape victim to carry to term. The hand waving about "hard cases" is just an avoidance mechanism to dodge having to discuss the logical implications of the "absolute equality" position. Just as the 13th and 14th amendments were a fudge to try to avoid the very same implications

[Laighin Break]

All human lives are of equal value.
All human lives should have equal rights under the law.

Except that elsewhere the law recognises that rights are not absolutely equal - that there are times when two rights conflict, that there is a hierarchy. Killing someone in self-defence does not come with the "all human lives have equal rights" implications. Likewise it has already been established that the risk of death to a mother outstrips the rights of a foetus. Even in less serious cases - my rights to free speech are not absolute. I must temper them with the need to not incite hatred or violence.

Absolutism in terms of morality is problematic because that very hard line creates the so called "hard cases" mentioned in the title. It is this absolutism which forces the likes of Ronan Mullen (or whoever) to have to defend a position that would force a 12 year old rape victim to carry to term. The hand waving about "hard cases" is just an avoidance mechanism to dodge having to discuss the logical implications of the "absolute equality" position. Just as the 13th and 14th amendments were a fudge to try to avoid the very same implications

Tom, do you think a 12 year old rape victim should be forced to carry to term?

[tomthefan]

All human lives are of equal value.
All human lives should have equal rights under the law.

Except that elsewhere the law recognises that rights are not absolutely equal - that there are times when two rights conflict, that there is a hierarchy. Killing someone in self-defence does not come with the "all human lives have equal rights" implications. Likewise it has already been established that the risk of death to a mother outstrips the rights of a foetus. Even in less serious cases - my rights to free speech are not absolute. I must temper them with the need to not incite hatred or violence.

Absolutism in terms of morality is problematic because that very hard line creates the so called "hard cases" mentioned in the title. It is this absolutism which forces the likes of Ronan Mullen (or whoever) to have to defend a position that would force a 12 year old rape victim to carry to term. The hand waving about "hard cases" is just an avoidance mechanism to dodge having to discuss the logical implications of the "absolute equality" position. Just as the 13th and 14th amendments were a fudge to try to avoid the very same implications

Yes but in the case of killing someone we are starting from a position of equal rights and making hard choices from there.

What a yes decision would do, would be to convenience a relatively small number of "already borns" at the expense of the right to life for all unborns.

[tomthefan]

All human lives are of equal value.
All human lives should have equal rights under the law.

Except that elsewhere the law recognises that rights are not absolutely equal - that there are times when two rights conflict, that there is a hierarchy. Killing someone in self-defence does not come with the "all human lives have equal rights" implications. Likewise it has already been established that the risk of death to a mother outstrips the rights of a foetus. Even in less serious cases - my rights to free speech are not absolute. I must temper them with the need to not incite hatred or violence.

Absolutism in terms of morality is problematic because that very hard line creates the so called "hard cases" mentioned in the title. It is this absolutism which forces the likes of Ronan Mullen (or whoever) to have to defend a position that would force a 12 year old rape victim to carry to term. The hand waving about "hard cases" is just an avoidance mechanism to dodge having to discuss the logical implications of the "absolute equality" position. Just as the 13th and 14th amendments were a fudge to try to avoid the very same implications

Tom, do you think a 12 year old rape victim should be forced to carry to term?

Do you think it should be lawful to kill babies?

[Laighin Break]

Tom, do you think a 12 year old rape victim should be forced to carry to term?

Do you think it should be lawful to kill babies?

They are foetuses, not babies. And yes, I do think it should be lawful for them to be aborted.
Now your turn

[tomthefan]

Tom, do you think a 12 year old rape victim should be forced to carry to term?

Do you think it should be lawful to kill babies?

They are foetuses, not babies. And yes, I do think it should be lawful for them to be aborted.
Now your turn

Foetus is just the name we give humans before they are born, just as baby is the name we give humans afterwards.
You're no longer a baby but you're no more or less human than you were when you were one.
The same goes for foetuses.
And yes i don't think abortion should be lawful in cases of rape.
I was unclear on my feelings about that until recently.
But the bottom line is that two wrongs don't make a right.

[LeRouxIsPHat]

I honestly don't understand why anyone would vote no given that women are already travelling to England anyway. I don't see what a no vote actually achieves.

[Laighin Break]

I honestly don't understand why anyone would vote no given that women are already travelling to England anyway. I don't see what a no vote actually achieves.

You're either voting for legal abortions or voting for illegal abortions

[LeRouxIsPHat]

I honestly don't understand why anyone would vote no given that women are already travelling to England anyway. I don't see what a no vote actually achieves.

You're either voting for legal abortions or voting for illegal abortions

That's an excellent way of putting it.

[Hornet]

Do you think it should be lawful to kill babies?

So what do you propose for women, who will continue to travel abroad for terminations, if a no vote is carried? Pregnancy test at the airport/docks? Ban on all women of child bearing age leaving the state? Or are you, like many in the No campaign, happy for other nations to continue to provide a service that this State fails to offer. Is this not just the No campaign just burying it's head in the sand with it's NIMBY response to something that for many, both men and women, is a profound and difficult decision to make, (and believe me, I've been there). I hope there is a yes vote. My Partner, her Daughters and Granddaughters will be voting yes. I, as a UK citizen will not be voting, but I fully support my Partner and her family in their views.

[tomthefan]

I honestly don't understand why anyone would vote no given that women are already travelling to England anyway. I don't see what a no vote actually achieves.

By your logic, what's it achieving having a ban on female genital mutilation here since people can just travel to get it done on their daughter?

[tomthefan]

Do you think it should be lawful to kill babies?

So what do you propose for women, who will continue to travel abroad for terminations, if a no vote is carried? Pregnancy test at the airport/docks? Ban on all women of child bearing age leaving the state? Or are you, like many in the No campaign, happy for other nations to continue to provide a service that this State fails to offer. Is this not just the No campaign just burying it's head in the sand with it's NIMBY response to something that for many, both men and women, is a profound and difficult decision to make, (and believe me, I've been there). I hope there is a yes vote. My Partner, her Daughters and Granddaughters will be voting yes. I, as a UK citizen will not be voting, but I fully support my Partner and her family in their views.

If there weren't such barbaric abortion laws in other countries, such as yours, then people wouldn't be travelling for them.