2 in 3 support limited abortion in NI

15 Comments
This discussion is now closed.
Sort by
This discussion is now closed.

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  22 Oct 2008
Yes I agree with that. Unfortunately we do not live in a perfect world and there will always be the 2 extremes. I think it is a subject that needs a lot of attention and re-thinking but I suspect that those who COULD bring about the introduction of proceedings towards new (and better) legislation are probably unsure of appraoching the subject. They risk alienation form both sides and it can be very difficult to appease both sides when they are both calling for extreme courses of action
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  22 Oct 2008
Thank you for the clarificaiton anonymous - NOW, you have addressed my points and relieved my of the need to repeat myself once again. I would ope no-one would advocate placing a pregnancy in priority over a raped girl or a woman. I would agree that there needs to be some system in place that allows easy access to terminations for those who need them - and of ourse I don't expect that you take reponsibility for that. I know I certainly wouldn't be qualified to do so. You're not obligated to change the world either - altho litle seems to be achieved unless caring concerned amnd commited citizens actually try.
I don't think anyone who is human and compassionate agrees with the idea of women having their suffering prolonged by not having access to abortion. A legislaive system that best serves both group of women would seem to be the best solution yes.
legislative framework is the phrase I was looking for - Thanks. The rampant "pro-lifers" who would not countenance abortion under any circumstnaces along with the rampant "pro-choicers" who beleoive in abortion on demand for the full nine months of pregnancy are simply fanatics - without the intellience to open their minds to change and without the sense to change the subject to something else, IMHO.
Lacey.
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  22 Oct 2008
And also, I have not suggested abandoning the idea of legislation, I have stated that at the moment, the system is flawed such that any legislation brought in WOULD be a dream. BOTH issues need to be addressed in order to reach the right kind of legislative framework we desire, but today, the hostiltity between pro choicers and pro lifers is such that NO framework could be devised up. It is an ongoing debate with neither side willing to give an inch to the other - how can we POSSIBLY work with that...?
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  22 Oct 2008
Anonymous given that I have already addressed the issues raised in your post then i think you will find that it was unnecessary to repeat yourself. if you read my post properly then you will clearly see that I have NOT advocated punishing these women, nor have I attempted to assign some kind of priority to the unborn over those who have been raped. What I said was, both sides of that coin are wrong. There needs to be some system in place that allows easy access to terminations for those who need them, while at the same time ensuring this isnt abused. now, it is not my job to decide on how to do that. These discussion borads are purely for thrashing out ideas and inforamtion, without an attached obligation to actually try to change the world. I have simply stated that I do not agree with the idea of women who have been raped having their suffering prolonged by not having access to abortion. At the same time, I do not agree with the way a lot of women abuse the existing system. I have NOT tried to prioritise one over the other. Both parties need to be looked at individually and a legislaive system needs to be reached that best serves both of them.
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  21 Oct 2008
Sorry, I didn't mean to repeat myself but I don't believe you have seen my points.
If it is not right to punish a raped woman for the faults of the judicial system - then why do you advocate doing so. Is it, in your eyes, somehow less wrong to punish a raped women for something, than is not her fault then to ensure she has her right to abortion upheld simply because again thru no falt of her own, legislation might be weak enough to have loopholes?
The woman has committed no crime - the rapist has. As for "punishment" as regards the foetus or pregnancy, how is that relevant when it will be aborted in the case of rape, (if the woman wishes), anyway. A blanket legalisation will do nothing to solve the problem - I agree. Which is legislation has to be very careful and precise. Abandoning as just a dream because you think people will abuse it is rather like saying people abuse welfare benefits, controlling it is only a dream so we may throw our hands up at it simply allow people to suffer in poverty and starve on the streets. A civilised society and human decency does NOT do that.
Lacey.
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  21 Oct 2008
Yes anonymous you appear to be repeating yourself. I have already addressed the issues raised in your post. You are correct that it is NOT right to punish a raped woman for the faults of the judical system, but neither is it right to punish the unborn for the same reason. Do you believe it is right to punish one and not the other? You say that the woman cannot be punished for flaws. I say that the unborn are also entitled to protection from such punishment. A blanket legalisation will do nothing to solve the problem. And the dream of correct legisaltion is just that - a dream. People WILL abuse the system.
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  21 Oct 2008
This survey wasn't advocating a free for all access system, at all. Did you read the article?
However, punishing raped women for faults in the judicial system is entirely reprehensible - why should they suffer becuase of the judicial systems flaw. I could never advocate that.
Entitlement is of litle use if a women is still going to be denied her right to an abortion. To throw your hands up and say "Ah well you have right but its someone elses fault that we can deny them to you" just makes a circus of all rights and I could never advocate that a raped women be made to pay for the flaws in the justice system.
I am not the judge of who has or hasn't been reckless or careless - I am not in their private lives and have no wish to be.
Denying raped or abused women access to abortion becuase some may abuse the system - simply thru weak or inappropiate legislation (which is not their fault anyway) is rather like denying ALL elderly free medical care becuase some Irish elderly might benefit. Which is a situation we have here which is causing uproar.
What does address the root cause of the problem? And remember waiting for the judicial systme to change and you'll wait forever while women have their rights denied.
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  21 Oct 2008
Yes anonymous that IS a good point, and we need to be in touch with the reality of the situations presented to us. But the fact that rape cases rarely make it to trial is hardly justification for allowing a free for all access system. That does not solve anything. The problem lies in the judicial system, NOT in the system in place for abortions. If a woman has been raped then she is entitled to have an abortion, and if that abortion cannot be brought about because her case has not gone to trial, then surely that is the fault of the justice system, and why should the unborn be made to pay for such a flaw? I hear what you are saying re a speedy process, but allowing women who have been reckless and careless access to as many terminations as they wish just so that those who HAVE been raped can benefit from the same accessibility is NOT the solution. It is an archaic approach and it does not address the root cause of the problem.
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  21 Oct 2008
The legislation - in cases of rape/incest or abuse must be brought in with the greatest of care and not as an ad-hoc or panic measure.

In cases of rape or abuse, in order for abortion, if it is what the woman wants, to be carried out in a timely manner, surely then the case must be brought forward and decided upon in a matter of weeks.I don't know about the judicial system in the North but here it takes literaly years.

Besides, onyl a tiny pecentage of rape cases ever go to court and still less to trial, therefore allowing abortion only in cases of proven conviction for rape (as well as illness obviously) simply overlooks or discards those women who cannot bring the case to court or bring a conviction.
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  21 Oct 2008
I do not have a problem with the legalisation of abortion for those who have been raped. I believe that those poor women have gone through enough without being forced overseas for their terminations. What I DONT agree with is the lack of legislation that tends to come with legalisation. All you have to do is look at the countries that DO allow abortions, and you will see that abuse of the system is rife. Legalisation for a specific group SOUNDS good but reality is often very different. I would fully expect that were we to introduce such legalisation, legislation (or lack thereof) would seriously let the unborn down. I believe that this is a valid concern, and we must proceed with caution. A blanket ban is no good, but a blanket legislation that allows easy access for those looking to right their mistakes could be just as detrimental.
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  20 Oct 2008
Anonymous, did you read the article at all.
It is about LIMITED support for abortion - FOR circumstances SUCH AS RAPE
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  20 Oct 2008
ah yes, another person who is trying to convince us all that ALL abortions are carried out by women who have been raped. What about the women who got pregnant because they didnt bother to take precautions, and are willing to allow their unborn pay for their carelessness with their lives? What about the women well in their thirties who are on their 2nd or 3rd or 4th abortion? Yes there are a MINORITY of females who have abortions because they were impregnanted against their will or their contraception failed but I wonder would you defend the other 90% of females so fiercely?
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  20 Oct 2008
What hyposcrisy - loving fetuses is positive - even if that means a raped 13 year old has to leave the country so she doesn't end up having her rapists baby.
Love the fetus but once its born and ends up in a rape/or incest situation, then they don't matter.
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  20 Oct 2008
And clearly EIGHTY percent of these with "no love at all" for babies.
 

- Posts

Anonymous  ·  20 Oct 2008
One in five of those surveyed felt that abortion should not be legalised in any circumstances. - Clearly 20% of people with no love or any regard for women AT ALL.
 
This discussion is now closed.