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

[tomthefan]

I'd just like to mention that I didn't put the ultrasound image of an normal 9 week old foetus inside spoiler tags.
Someone else did that.
It seems we're not to be encouraged to view foetuses in case we might get the notion from it that they're human.

[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.

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?

Why aren't you more bothered by all the 'babies' that die naturally before being brought to term? Many many women experience miscarriages at all stages of pregnancy. Some estimates suggest up to 50% of pregnancies are naturally aborted before 12 weeks, often before the woman knew she was pregnant in the first place. (No point in debating what the correct percentage is, it's more the issue that's worth addressing).
If you and the pro-life side focused your attention and money on these issues, you could actually save potential, wanted lives.

[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?

Why aren't you more bothered by all the 'babies' that die naturally before being brought to term? Many many women experience miscarriages at all stages of pregnancy. Some estimates suggest up to 50% of pregnancies are naturally aborted before 12 weeks, often before the woman knew she was pregnant in the first place. (No point in debating what the correct percentage is, it's more the issue that's worth addressing).
If you and the pro-life side focused your attention and money on these issues, you could actually save potential, wanted lives.

First of all you don't know how bothered I am about babies who die before term.
Secondly, it's a bit rich for people who support the killing of unborn babies to accuse those against the idea of not caring about babies.
Life can be short or long, just because it is very often short is no reason for suggesting that's an excuse to kill, is 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.

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

So how would you stop women accessing services in other countries? Answer the question.

[tomthefan]

So how would you stop women accessing services in other countries? Answer the question.

If the authorities had information that a parent was taking their child overseas for the purposes of having her genitals mutilated, do you think they would be justified in stopping them at the airport? Answer the question.

Me too

[Logorrhea]

No one is going to change this persons opinion. Its clear they are set in their views so why bother.
Its like arguing with someone of faith. No one wins and it becomes pointless pretty quickly.

I'll be voting. I hope that'll be enough.

[tomthefan]

No one is going to change this persons opinion. Its clear they are set in their views so why bother.
Its like arguing with someone of faith. No one wins and it becomes pointless pretty quickly.

I'll be voting. I hope that'll be enough.

If I had faith, it might be different, it's possibly because I don't that I find it so unacceptable to deprive another human of their short existence on this planet

[Peg Leg]

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

Not really, the constitution was amended to legalise exported abortion.

[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

Not really, the constitution was amended to legalise exported abortion.

There are still many illegal abortions in Ireland through pills.

[Peg Leg]

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?

Why aren't you more bothered by all the 'babies' that die naturally before being brought to term? Many many women experience miscarriages at all stages of pregnancy. Some estimates suggest up to 50% of pregnancies are naturally aborted before 12 weeks, often before the woman knew she was pregnant in the first place. (No point in debating what the correct percentage is, it's more the issue that's worth addressing).
If you and the pro-life side focused your attention and money on these issues, you could actually save potential, wanted lives.

Life can be short or long, just because it is very often short is no reason for suggesting that's an excuse to kill, is it?

It is, if in fact the case relates to saving a single mother of 2 other children and the pregnancy going full term places her life at risk.

Mr Boylan formerly of the NMH insists that it is a medical option that can save lives.

Education around sex, adoption, fostering etc. Needs to be improved massively one way or the other.

One way or another, it is not correct for me to prevent access to that option for anyone. So I will be voting yes.

[Peg Leg]

So how would you stop women accessing services in other countries? Answer the question.

If the authorities had information that a parent was taking their child overseas for the purposes of having her genitals mutilated, do you think they would be justified in stopping them at the airport? Answer the question.

Me too

This is a harsh longterm view but, I would hope those young girls who were mutilated for tribal or reasons of faith will grow up in a more open and tolerant society where they understand the injustice they were subject to and pass those leanings on to the next generation, preventing the same from occurring. Same with abortion really, I have a friend who made this decision which she regrets, but did so to prevent shame being brought on the family, never discussed it with her parents and has since learned that despite the catholic rhetoric, her parents would have supported her regardless.
You can be assured that she has a more open relationship with her own daughter and would hope for 2 things,
1. that she has empowered and thought her daughter to respect her body and insist on others to do likewise
B. That if her daughter were as a 16 year old to find herself in the same situation, her parents are always right there to support her.

It's always about education.

[Peg Leg]

I should also add, I know plenty of parents who should not be allowed have children. But thats a different issue.

[Peg Leg]

No one is going to change this persons opinion. Its clear they are set in their views so why bother.
Its like arguing with someone of faith. No one wins and it becomes pointless pretty quickly.

I'll be voting. I hope that'll be enough.

If I had faith, it might be different, it's possibly because I don't that I find it so unacceptable to deprive another human of their short existence on this planet

I would rather a shortened existence than a life of torture and neglect at the hands of parents who did not want me.

[Peg Leg]

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

Not really, the constitution was amended to legalise exported abortion.

There are still many illegal abortions in Ireland through pills.

Touche

[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.

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?

Had a feeling you were a WUM but that's settled it.

[BlueArmyOriginal]

No one is going to change this persons opinion. Its clear they are set in their views so why bother.
Its like arguing with someone of faith. No one wins and it becomes pointless pretty quickly.

I'll be voting. I hope that'll be enough.

If I had faith, it might be different, it's possibly because I don't that I find it so unacceptable to deprive another human of their short existence on this planet

No amount of ultrasound gifs or bellowing about dead babies is going to change the fact abortion is already in Ireland; we've just outsourced it to the Brits. Voting No isn't about saving babies or keeping Ireland abortion-free, it's imposing your belief on everyone which is wrong and puts women in impossible legal, medical and societal situations. A Yes vote today gets rid of these impossible situations and has absolutely no effect on you if you're pro-life.

Now back to rugby.

[tomthefan]

No amount of ultrasound gifs or bellowing about dead babies is going to change the fact abortion is already in Ireland; we've just outsourced it to the Brits.

We've no more outsourced abortion to Britain than we've outsourced FGM to Nigeria or wherever.

Voting No isn't about saving babies or keeping Ireland abortion-free

It is. Our abortion rates are a fraction of Britain's and will inevitably rise if it is legalised

it's imposing your belief on everyone which is wrong and puts women in impossible legal, medical and societal situations. A Yes vote today gets rid of these impossible situations and has absolutely no effect on you if you're pro-life.

The baby isn't an extension of the mother, it's a distinct human being and no one should have the right to end another's life because it isn't convenient.

[tomthefan]

No one is going to change this persons opinion. Its clear they are set in their views so why bother.
Its like arguing with someone of faith. No one wins and it becomes pointless pretty quickly.

I'll be voting. I hope that'll be enough.

If I had faith, it might be different, it's possibly because I don't that I find it so unacceptable to deprive another human of their short existence on this planet

I would rather a shortened existence than a life of torture and neglect at the hands of parents who did not want me.

Is that an argument for killing children in unhappy homes?

[The Doc]

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.

This could be never ending - I know Tom won't change his mind but I always get irritated by fallacies....

There is a difference between foetuses and babies. One is capable of self sufficient life and the other isn't. There is a reason we use specific words - and for the same reason the No side try to conflate these words as a form of emotional blackmail. Both from a medical and religious (if any of us are religious - I'm not) point of view there is a different meaning to foetus and baby. Medically, given the foetus is dependent on the woman, the priority needs to be given to the health of the mother. From a medical / scientific point of view, a first trimester foetus does not have many of the qualities the posters lie about - cells have not formed internal organs, there is no heartbeat because there is no heart, there is still a high possibility of natural miscarriage

From a religious / moral point of view - ask your local parish priest (or Imam) if they will perform a baptism or funeral service on a miscarried foetus - they will refuse to because they don't recognise it as fully imbued with humanity (despite what the posters of the religious right say).

So medically and from an organised religion point of view, a foetus is not necessarily equivalent to a baby or an adult. Now you may have your own view - that's fine - but just because you have "feels" about something doesn't make it in any way persuasive.

Finally - the argument that there are alternatives we should be looking (which has been made in day or two before the referendum) - the No side have had 35 years to think of alternative approaches. 35 years to address support for pregnant women, 35 years to address resourcing for disadvantaged women or children with birth issues, 35 years to address institutional rape and incest, 35 years to address cover ups. Yet all they have done is oppose support for women whose lives are at risk, oppose mental health considerations, oppose sex education in schools, oppose proper availability of contraception, oppose investigations into abuse, oppose marriage equality, right to travel, right to information - not even a comprehensive list

I'm sorry - get in the sea. And you can keep your pens

[tomthefan]

There is a difference between foetuses and babies. One is capable of self sufficient life and the other isn't.

Suggesting that being incapable of looking after oneself is an argument for abortion is about as morally bankrupt as it can get.
Anyway born babies will die too if there is no one to mind them. That goes for a lot of other people too, so that's no kind of an argument.

the argument that there are alternatives we should be looking (which has been made in day or two before the referendum) - the No side have had 35 years to think of alternative approaches. 35 years to address support for pregnant women, 35 years to address resourcing for disadvantaged women or children with birth issues, 35 years to address institutional rape and incest, 35 years to address cover ups. Yet all they have done is oppose support for women whose lives are at risk, oppose mental health considerations, oppose sex education in schools, oppose proper availability of contraception, oppose investigations into abuse, oppose marriage equality, right to travel, right to information - not even a comprehensive list

You'd swear that for the last 35 years that the women of Ireland had been enduring worse health than their English counterparts when the opposite is the case.
They have longer life expectancy, we have lower infant mortality and we have a vastly lower abortion rate. Why do we need to do what they do when what we're doing is patently better.