Fight For Women's Right to Choose! (2 Viewers)

[Squiggle]

Sorry, that was just me rambling on about shit I didn't really know about. Again, I agree that preventative measures are ideal, as are people making responsible choices. However......

If I may ask Squiggle, what criteria do you think would merit an automatic refusal to obtain an abortion? This is probably a really leading question/ me looking for an opportunity to bark some more but I would like to know...

Like,would you deny an abortion to a broke single woman who takes all the necessary precautions but still gets pregnant? Would you believe her if she told you that story?

It's just that, like Marianne said, I really can't imagine a process where a woman's moral worth/level of responsbility is judged without completely compromising her dignity. I may be wrong but I imagine that such a process would not appeal to many women and many women with unwanted pregnancies would continue to feel compelled to travel abroad/get backstreet abortions rather than go through such a difficult and indignified process.

I take Marianne's point, and I can see what you are saying, but if the legislation has been well planned and set out there should be very few cases where a woman would need to take legal action. Medical assessments would be the best way to go, preferably, at least initially by the woman's own GP, and it would be very important to have follow-up counselling and education. There are other alternatives to abortion. There are many childless couples who would be delighted to adopt.

Perhaps the state needs to review the system so that lack of money wouldn't be an issue - with falling birth rates among Irish women and the rising cost of childcare perhaps it is time to revise the system so that it is no longer financially crippling for women (or indeed couples) to have a family (if they choose to) and for someone to stay at home and raise it (again, if they choose to).

Society is failing in its responsibility to properly educate and protect the vunerable. Families are failing in their duty to their children. Parents don't want sex education in our schools, but they don't want to take the responsibility for it themselves either. Something needs to be done about that too. Teaching girls to have respect for themselves and for their bodies, helping them to understand how their body functions and how to keep it healthy, making sure that there is somebody that they can talk to if they need advice or answers, these things could help to prevent unwanted pregnancy.

Jumping straight to "abortions for all" without first taking steps to even attempt to resolve the underlying social problems just doesn't make sense to me.

 

[billygannon]

Just following up on what I posted. I thought about it a bit.

There is a fairly fundamental question here in defining what is and isn't a person.

It's a cultural definition. Essentially the definition of a person or a human being is defined by the culture around it.

For instance, I was watching Bruce Parry's television programme where he stayed with cannibals in Papua New Guinea.
One guy he interviewed said he ate two humans. When Parry asked him how he felt about eating two other people, the guy replied that he didn't see them as people - as they had become evil spirits and were no longer people.
Essentially his culture had a way of defining humans as people and non-people.

In the West we pretty much assume every human is a person - and should be attributed fundamental human rights.
But what I believe this abortion debate brings up is defining when a person actually comes in to existence.

We claim that scientific evidence allows us to identify when a foetus becomes a baby. But the yardstick for this is undeniably a cultural definition.

We can't say a foetus becomes a person when they are conscious of their surroundings - that would mean a person who is in a coma is no longer a person.
Indeed, it can be said that a child in a womb is totally conscious of it's surroundings from a very early stage.

Indeed, we can't even claim that once a child is born that they are significantly different to a child within a womb. For the first three months of a babies life they are still totally dependent on their mother. Unlike most other animals who can almost fend for themselves straight from birth, we still need to be nurtured by the mother. The only reason we are born is because our brains become too big. Physically we should still be in the womb for the first three months!

I think what I'm getting at is this...

The definition of when a foetus becomes a person is defined culturally. If a person from a different credo or set of beliefs (not necessarily religious) defines it otherwise then there is a fundamental clash as to what and what isn't a human.
So is a person who believes a human life begins at conception entitled to believe that an abortion is a termination of a human life? Afterall they do have a very straightforward definition of when a human life begins.
If they are told that an abortion is legally okay, then they are being told that legally their definition of when human life starts is, well, wrong.
And as we know, legality is something that is totally tied up with cultural assumptions and beliefs.

It also leads to the question as to the ownership of the child in the woman's body. When is a child independent?
You could say they can only be truly independent after three months. But then do we treat conjoined twins as one and the same person, with the dominant twin having the decision of life or death over the weaker twin?
Or do we consider a person dependent on a life support machine to be part of that machine?

I just think there is a very big question which asks some very fundamental questions about what we consider to be human or non-human.

Anyway, for the record - I am pro-choice. Obviously there needs to be a sound case for the abortion. But I also believe abortion is a product of society and is only there because the rights of women are fundamentally flawed.

 

[broken arm]

the rights of women are fundamentally flawed.

interesting !ninjaaaa

 

[muffin]

i read last week somewhere that they are currently trying to reform northern irelands legislation for abortion so it will be in line with great britain as a whole.it will be interesting to see a)how long it actually takes them to pass it and b)if there are increased numbers of irish women travelling to get abortions.

im pro-choice and im shocked that anyone would think that the decision whether or not to allow an abortion should be made by anyone other than the woman herself..i dont plan on ever having an abortion and if the time came i honestly dont know if i could have one, but its not my right to make that decision for any other person than myself.

 

[BC]

I'm pro-choice coz I think the only person who knows if a woman is ready and able to have a kid is the women herself.

that happens to be my exact stance on the topic. well said and succinctly put.

 

[Scientician 0.8]

I think 'legal in certain well defined circumstances' sounds like the worst idea ever.
I mean, what then?
Who chooses if you're suicidal enough or if you really were raped, if you're poor enough or unstable enough? The courts? You have to go and sit in court, discuss the most intimate details of your life and have someone you've never met before decide how the rest of your life is going to go? How long will this take?
I'm pro-choice coz I think the only person who knows if a woman is ready and able to have a kid is the women herself.

Well now I did say,
"Ultimately though my say doesn't count for much because it's not my body and bar some amazing advances in body modification I'll never get pregnant so won't fully have to deal with this issue."

But I do have an opinion on abortion and I don't think it should be allowed except in certain circumstances. How those circumstances are ascertained or whether they should be ascertained is indeed problematic.

 

[broken arm]

at what point does the women give up 100% of the rights to determine the fate of her child?


p.s. i'm just asking questions....

 

[ernesto]

at what point does the women give up 100% of the rights to determine the fate of her child?


p.s. i'm just asking questions....

i think if she asks that she automatically be denied an abortion......seriously though, inneresting question

 

[egg_]

The definition of when a foetus becomes a person is defined culturally.

Correct!
Infanticide was an accepted fact of life in some societies in the past (e.g. Tikopia). Presumably they didn't regard an infant as a person until a certain stage of their development.

Hey, guess what? There is no absolute right and wrong.

 

[shitepipe]

you're not a human until you're in my phone book

 

[killy kill]

You're not a human 'till you own at least 3 albums by The Fall

 

[classic seanc]

Summarise now please.

 

[Mormon Nailer]

at what point does the women give up 100% of the rights to determine the fate of her child?


p.s. i'm just asking questions....

how would that question fit into a discussion about smacking?

I think the "it's my body and therefore it's my choice" argument is pretty weak. Logically it's a first cousin of Janer's "it's human life - no way ever" argument.

Both arguments are pretty absolutist and un-nuanced. However at least a absolutist pro life stance is logically consistant. The "it's my body argument" becomes pretty meaningless when you try to apply it to other areas of life.

The idea that there are competing rights in most circumstances is obvoius to most people. It's not contravertial to talk of how the right to free speech is balanced by competing rights individals have to privacy or not to be slandered. How is it that pro-choice proponents seem (deliberately I think) unable to see this.

 

[ITalkShite]

logically consistant

Logical argument + Irish people talking about abortion = unpossible

 

[Mormon Nailer]

Logical argument + Irish people talking about abortion = unpossible

can't argue with that!

 

[Scientician 0.8]

Here Mormon Nailer I got the cd. Thanks very much. My ma likes it too .

 

[guy of the tiger]

According to the laws of quantum physics a pregnant woman doesn't even have a baby inside her unless somebody is looking.

There is no baby independent of measurement

 

[billygannon]

how would that question fit into a discussion about smacking?

I think the "it's my body and therefore it's my choice" argument is pretty weak. Logically it's a first cousin of Janer's "it's human life - no way ever" argument.

Both arguments are pretty absolutist and un-nuanced. However at least a absolutist pro life stance is logically consistant. The "it's my body argument" becomes pretty meaningless when you try to apply it to other areas of life.

I think the idea that it's my body and therefore it's my choice is missing the point.
It is the woman's body and she therefore is entitled to do what she wishes with it.
People can do what they wish with their bodies - be it try to keep healthy and do regular exercise or harm themselves in some way. It's the one definite space in which every person owns - well, in most cases.
So essentially it is a woman's entitlement to carry out an abortion on her own.
But clearly this is not safe - especially after the the first trimester.
So what is being asked for by the pro-choice side of the argument is for access the facilities and support to carry out an abortion.

I don't believe the right to have free access to abortion services should be a fundamental human right.
Going back to the point that there is no empirical definition of when a human life starts, it would mean that if the right to access to abortion services were a fundamental right, then it would totally contradict the right the life of the baby in the womb to people who believe that the child in the womb is actually a person.
Therefore the right to access abortion services should be a decision made in a society, with the society having some sort of agreement as to when a child's life actually begins.
That decision should be made on sound argument and debate.

For me, having an abortion after sixteen weeks isn't right. I think a person is actually being killed in that case.

 

[MDR]

Billy - do you mind me asking whether your view has changed since you found out that you were becoming a father (sorry if that's too intrusive a question)? That question is open to any other parents actually as well.

 

[Unicron]

seriously though, inneresting question

I'm 27 now, is it ok for my mother to kill me?