‘Our Capacity To Cause Pain’

at

127 thoughts on “‘Our Capacity To Cause Pain’

  1. MoyestWithExcitement

    Yes but, Abortion on Demand!!!!! Women will obviously start going for abortions like they go for haircuts because they’re heartless monsters who always said no when I asked them ou…I mean, nothing.

    1. Cup of tea anyone?

      I heard once that there are cases in america of young girls being addicted to abortion. Shocking stuff.

      1. Anomanomanom

        Oh AAD, Yeah iv heard of that Abortion Addiction Disorder. Only one cure I tells ya, impregnation and strap them to a bed till the birth. Sure no way could the mother still not want the child after a forced labour.

      2. sashh

        Don’t be so bloody stupid.

        1) it’s not easy to get in the US
        2) it’s really expensive
        3) not all ‘young girls’ are sexually active
        4) not all men who have sex with young girls are totally irresponsible and use condoms

        Think before you repeat dross

    1. ahjayzis

      On total repeal – reproductive health doesn’t belong in a country’s constitution.

      We also don’t need a new citizen’s assembly to debate this – we’re supposed to be electing the actual assembly of the people next week.

      Take it out and let our legislators actually legislate instead of hiding under the Bunreacht.

      1. Anne O'N

        Are you a mind reader? We elect and pay politicians to legislate. This buck passing delay tactic is utterly shameful!

      1. Steve

        Agreed – complete removal. No need for convention.

        Gov can’t legislate for this, it needs referendum. Get the whole thing out of the bunreacht.

  2. De_Selby

    Agreed powerful.

    As much as I love Broadsheet.
    It really irks me that Newswhip frequently has to anti-choicer Leo Sherlock The Liberal.

  3. ollie

    “We” aren’t doing this, our spineless government is.
    The last abortion vote was (I think) 33 years ago, therefore NO-ONE of childbearing age now had a vote then.
    So it’s not a case of those affected said no, it’s a case of those affected haven’t been asked, and all so a government can stay in power by not offending those women who can’t have kids anyway.

    1. ahjayzis

      It shouldn’t be up for a vote at all. We don’t put any other health issue, something so personal, to a majority vote by everyone else. Remove the Eight and the let the parliament be an actual parliament about it, the constitution isn’t supposed to be a cop-out like this.

      1. Kevin

        Hit the nail on the head. Government are too spineless to handle any contentious issue so they go with a referendum and hide behind the result, probably not caring what it is so long as they don’t make a decision. In that case, what is the point of them at all.

      2. ollie

        ahjaysis if this is left up to parliament it will never be legislated for, even with the amendment removed from the Constitution. Too many spinless Catholic church appeasing TDs around.
        The only solution is for it to be put to the electorate, the number of people who would vote against it drops every day.
        It’s the number one issue for me, all this crap about taxes, usc, and so on is meaningless as we have almost 200 billion to pay back to out lenders and ze Germans are in full control of our finances.
        The tax breaks given in October’s budget were allowed by europe to ensure that FG could stay at the helm.
        Sorry for going off subject

      3. newsjustin

        The constitution is to prevent governments making very major decisions without the consent of the people. It’s the reason governments can’t roll back private property rights or gay marriage.

        The right to life is one such issue that deserves to be in the constitution.

        1. ahjayzis

          But not other important issues – like funding and provision for health services, policing, education etc? What else do you think this generation should lock in for future generations to be bound by with no voice in the matter?

          ‘Moral’ and ‘conscience’ issues always come down to ones genitals and the genitals of who you love with you crowd.

        2. The Real Jane

          Well, except for women, of course, who don’t necessarily have a right to life if it conflicts with the right to life of a foetus.

      4. Lorcan Nagle

        We need a referendum to repeal the 8th, and then it becomes a job for lobbyists. It’s why many of us in the pro-choice movement have been working on that front already the rcent criticisms of Ireland’s abortion laws from the UN and EU are partially a result of our lobbyists.

        1. ahjayzis

          I’m worried we won’t get that choice – I’m worried they’ll offer us the chance to water down the 8th with get-outs for fatal foetal abnormality and rape only, and then back-slap each other n their bravery and continue to watch our women having to get the boat in order to have any bodily autonomy.

          The old story of trying to please two completely opposed viewpoints and ending up making matters worse for both perspectives.

          1. Lorcan Nagle

            <>

            That’s a valid fear. A lot of FG heads have been talking about not having a referendum until we decide what to replace the 8th with.

            <>

            Exactly, the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act was this in spades.

          2. Lorcan Nagle

            Ah balls, messed up the formatting on that last post. My first line is a reply to Ahjaysis’ first paragraph, and the second his second.

  4. De_Selby

    Sorry that should read

    As much as I love Broadsheet.

    It really irks me that Newswhip frequently carries “stories” and links to Leo (Coras brother) Sherlocks ironically named “The Liberal” “news site”

    1. missred

      It’s a pretty awful name alright, run by himself, with frankly very poorly written stories IMO. The Newswhip thing at the sidebar is based on what is shared most frequently by internet users though, so we can blame the readers for that.

    1. Cup of tea anyone?

      You wouldnt fly to the UK to get a tooth fixed would you? It would clearly cause a lot more distress.
      the level of emotional distress would be heightened due to not being treated by the local doctor you trust, There is no after care her, It is illegal, you are getting on a plane home rather than a short drive. You are far from family and friends here. And if they wanted the body they cannot get it home. It has to be left in the UK or smuggled in.

      But what was your point? It sounds like you think she had options so she doesn’t need to be allowed get it here.

      1. Joni2015

        It would be added hassle but hardly the biggest problem. The pro lifers make it sound like it’s the biggest injustice ever faced by civilisation.

        1. Cup of tea anyone?

          So what is your point?
          I think the injustice is that they cannot get it here. Not that they have to travel to get it.

      2. han solo's carbonite dream

        well they do fly further afield for cheaper teeth fixing….
        RTE has doc on it a few years back

        1. Cup of tea anyone?

          Abortion is not a one size fits all type of thing. If it is done in the first few weeks there is no body. it is a clump of cells.
          In the case of fatal fetal abnormality where a couple want their child to be born and it is in the second or third trimester but will not make it past the birth, it is a body.

          are you just confusing yourself for the hell of it?

          1. DubLoony

            +1 the reasons, circumstances all differ. Should be a discussion between the women, her medical team and who ever else she chooses to bring in. No-one elses business.

    2. Cathy

      Are you serious? My own country doesn’t trust me to make decisions about my own body.THAT is the problem. Women being shamed by legislation for dealing with the contents of their own wombs as they see fit. Would you be interested in hearing about my monthly period, or my persistent phlemghy cough? MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS. It’s a personal choice. Those of an anti choice persuasion can simply continue to not have abortions after we bring in the correct legislation. It doesn’t affect them at all.

      1. The Real Jane

        Yeah, exactly. It’s an outrage that people think that women are incapable of making these decisions – that somehow the likes of NewsJustin is better qualified to make decisions about the life and circumstances of a woman he’s never even met than she is herself.

        This society has a profound lack of trust in the mental, emotional and moral capacity of women. While, at the same time, outsourcing most of the caring responsibilities to us.

        Odd, eh?

    3. Lorcan Nagle

      Because there are people who can afford a 20 mile drive but not a flight. And there are people who aren’t permitted to leave Ireland. And there are women in abusive relationships who can more readily explain a few hours away but not a day or two. And the information on how to travel is restricted and if you don’t know who to ask you can’t get the information.

  5. Zuppy International

    So everybody’s now ok with indiscriminate in utreo murder?

    Isn’t that racist against children?

    1. Cup of tea anyone?

      What children?
      Do you weep at the thought of someone discarding their seed?
      Do you curse those women who go through their periods instead of having a baby as god intended?

      Yes there is a problem here but I think it might be with you.

      1. newsjustin

        This is an absurd notion that regularly crops up here. That sperm and ova are the same as an embryo, foetus or child. Scientifically illiterate and plain dumb.

        1. Cup of tea anyone?

          well it is an absurd notion that an embryo is the same as a fetus which is the same as a child.
          Zuppy speaks of Murder but you cannot murder what is not alive. and in almost every society where abortion is available, there is a limit to when you can get an abortion to before there is actually life in the womb.

          also Zuppy refers to racist against children. Isn’t that just the other end of the scale from my point?

          1. newsjustin

            So you’re both as wrong as each other? That’s your defence?

            Your idea that an embryo isn’t alive is fanciful (ok, just wrong) given that there is an entire branch of medicine devoted to keeping them alive.

          2. Cup of tea anyone?

            No my original point was that at the early sages of pregnancy the womb does not contain a child “hence the reference to seed”
            and an embryo is about as alive as a plant. It has no thoughts or feelings.
            and of course there is a branch of medicine devoted to bringing embryo’s to a stage where they become a person. Just like there is a branch of medicine that brings sperm and an egg to the stage of an embryo. That is not a valid argument.

            What you need to do is start a chart and on one side mark out the sperm and an egg, and the other mark out the birth. In between mark out all the development stages . Now mark out the exact point that the sperm and egg become more then a bunch of cells.

            Now say to yourself, Ok this not alive and not a person. why would I restrict a womans life at the sake of this? why would I force her to have a child she does not want for this.

          3. Cup of tea anyone?

            @ Mauric. maybe 9 or 10 weeks? But the HSE would have to get their finger out. No 90 week waiting lists.

          4. mauriac

            ha ! that’s a good point . the foetus/embryo/whatever would be starting junior infants before the HSE got an appointment sorted.

        2. well

          Sperm and Ova have unique genes though due to meoisis. One of the main prolife arguments is that it’s a unique being.

    2. Nigel

      This is incoherent, an emotionally and intellectually bankrupt response to what was described above. Be pro-life if you must, but for God’s sake get your act together and argue like a human being: this is important.

  6. newsjustin

    Wow. Aisling got so much information that supports her point of view from this overheard conversation.

        1. MoyestWithExcitement

          I just think you don’t like thinking about the real world human consequences of your stance on abortion. It’s much easier to think about statistics and “principles”.

          1. newsjustin

            Aisling has ignored the real world aspect in her story of the embryo that this couple apparently went to the UK to destroy. It might have added an interesting plot point.

          2. MoyestWithExcitement

            If it’s an embryo, it’s not sentient and thus did not suffer. Meanwhile its mother definitely suffered but you’d prefer to talk about her like a cold hearted murderer who “destroyed” it. You should be ashamed but obviously you’re not.

          3. newsjustin

            If this couple did as Aisling claimed they did, there is no doubt, they travelled to the UK to destroy the foetus that they had created.

            Surely as a pro-choice person you can recognise that is the reality of an abortion.

          4. MoyestWithExcitement

            I recognise that ‘destroy’ is a deliberate choice of words, an emotive one at that. You claim to be in this because you care. Here you are faced with a real life story about a woman who has *reluctantly* decided to end the life of the foetus inside her. (That’s also the reality of abortion) She is clearly suffering with the choice. You don’t care about her suffering though because you are a typical religious charlatan that claims to be caring but just wants everyone to do what he says by the proxy of said religion so he can feel like he’s in charge. This is all about *you*.

          5. newsjustin

            This is all about *the unborn child* which had its life ended in the UK. It’s also about the couple who decided to make that happen and the situation that fostered such a decision.

          6. newsjustin

            So Moyest, can you at least acknowledge that abortion is the destruction of a foetus?

            If you can’t admit that simple reality, how are you going to sell it to the Irish people?

          7. MoyestWithExcitement

            Yes, and you choose to hate the parents rather than understand why they made that choice because you’re seeing everything through your own personal prism of how the world should be. You are incapable of realising that other people might have other circumstances beyond your understanding and that doesn’t make them bad people. What’s your opinion on war, as a matter of interest? Specifically, collateral damage. What’s your take on that?

          8. MoyestWithExcitement

            “can you at least acknowledge that abortion is the destruction of a foetus?”

            Can you admit that abortion is the ending of the life of the non sentient foetus?

            “If you can’t admit that simple reality, how are you going to sell it to the Irish people?”

            Firstly, that’s not reality. That’s your emotive spin, i.e. PERCEPTION. Secondly, abortion is inevitable. The Irish people want it. It’s up to religious charlatans like you to sell your minority views to the rest of us.

          9. newsjustin

            Moyest, just admit it. It’ll do you good. Abortion is about ending/destroying/killing a foetus.

            And why do you assume I hate these (perhaps fictional) parents?

          10. MoyestWithExcitement

            I said abortion is the ending of the life of a non sentient foetus. Why can’t you admit that reality? And you clearly hate them because here you are, again, *insisting* I use the emotive word ‘destroy’. You can’t say ‘ending of life’ you *want* to use the word ‘destroy’. That’s spin. Anyone with half a brain can see what you’re doing.

          11. Lorcan Nagle

            Because evey single post you make about abortion drips of hatred for the women who’ve had abortions.

            Just like every post you make about the church’s involvement in schooling drips of hatred for the people who don’t want to have a faith they disagree with forced on their children.

            Just like every post you made in the run-up to the marraige equality referendun dripped of hatred for the LGBT community.

            We think you hate these parents because that’s what you tell us.

          12. newsjustin

            @Lorcan

            Hi Lorcan. I’m dissapointed that you perceive my alternative viewpoints around abortion, school of SSM (or any other issue) as hateful. I’m surprised too. I don’t think I’ve ever made a hateful comment about any of the above.

            Perhaps you could point to one?

          13. MoyestWithExcitement

            Like you asked me to “admit” your personal opinion is objective reality. As for your question to Lorcan, I already answered that when you asked me the same question above. You are deliberately trying to paint the parents as cold hearted murderers with your *insistence* everyone uses the word ‘destroy’. That shows your hatred.

          14. newsjustin

            Oh, so it’s the “all of them” response Lorcan.

            That’s not good enough. If you’re going to claim that I’ve shown hatred of people on here, at least have the decency to pick one ( just one ) example of this.

            @Moyest – clearly it’s not “destroy” you find problematic as you were happy to use it as long as it was clear that the foetus wasn’t sentient.

          15. Lorcan Nagle

            Every time you say “they chose to travel to abort the foetus they created”. That right there is hate.

          16. newsjustin

            No its not Lorcan. It’s just a statement of fact. The trouble is, you see opposing viewpoints as hatred.

          17. Lorcan Nagle

            By the letter of the defininion? sure, they did travel for the purposes of an abortion. But the language you use – the language you always use deliberately strips away all humanity from the parents and depicts the foetus/embryo/insert term of choice as a victim. You’ve used the term “killing babies” on multiple occasions.

            And that’s hatred. It’s not that you have a dissenting view, it’s that you attack people over and over again. And worse, you don’t even have the guts to just say awful things. You drape yourself in piety and faux concern over and over again. There’s plenty of concern for the poor babies, but never a word for the parents, no matter how desperate their circumstances.

            Just like before the referendum where your posts were concerned about the people who might have to marry the icky gay people, or be subjected to seeing peoelp with the same genitals kissing in public. There was never a word on how these people you were railing against were being denied happiness, agency or equality

            It’s nothing more than concern trolling.

          18. Dόn 'The Unstoppable Force' Pídgéόní

            God I love you Lorcan. That @3.35 was a beautifully accurate summation.

          19. newsjustin

            Yeah, I don’t think I use the term “killing babies”. It’s counterproductive. I also use pro-choice rather than any other term.

            To be fair, that the foetus is a victim of an abortion is a fair position to hold.

            I absolutely have not and never had used the insulting phrase you just used (“icky gay people”) or think along those lines. Nor have I ever had anything to say about people kissing, other than I’m all for it.

            I think you’re wrong when you accuse me of hating people. For the record, I don’t hate anyone.

          20. Lorcan Nagle

            Icky gay people wasn’t a direct quote. It’s just that every post you made had it as a subtext.

            Look, if you really don’t hate women who’ve had abortions, or gay people, or non-religious education, then you need to change your posting style. Because I’m not the only person who thinks that you hate all these things based on the way you post about them.

            And if you do hate them, just be honest, we’ll all respect you more.

          21. Lorcan Nagle

            Oh, and Justin. On you not using the term “killing babies”?

            https://www.google.ie/#q=newsjustin+killing+babies+site:broadsheet.ie

            From the top two results:

            newsjustin
            December 2, 2015 at 1:45 pm
            It can, of course, be insensitive to speak about a tragedy like this. But on the broader point of catholic’s (if we can generalise) compassion around the abortion question, it should be said that there is no amount of compassion that could convince someone who believes that abortion is a deliberate killing, that an abortion is a compassionate solution for anything.

            newsjustin
            February 3, 2016 at 11:13 am
            Most legislation in Ireland is based, however distantly, on basic Judeo Christian teachings and the teachings that influenced those. I don’t think abortion is mentioned much in the Bible though. So, I guess, you’re suggesting that Ireland’s laws are based on the “Thou shall not kill” commandment. Are you really suggesting not killing people is a strand we should remove from our legal system?

          22. newsjustin

            Of course it wasn’t a direct quote, because when challenged to find a direct quote that evidenced my “hatred”, you’ve failed utterly. But heh, it’s just newsjustin, he doesn’t share our views, let’s just say he’s hate-filled.

            Of course I don’t hate women or gay people, and I posted just yesterday (this week anyway)about my support for non-religious education as a choice for parents.

            People choose to see what they want to see I guess. I’ll take your comments on board though Lorcan.

          23. Lorcan Nagle

            There’s a saying: “If one person thinks I’m an ass, it’s there problem, but if everyone thinks I’m an as, it’s my problem”

          24. newsjustin

            Sorry Lorcan, my eyesight is not what it was. I can’t see where I’ve used the phrase “killing babies” in those quotes you’ve reproduced.

          25. Nigel

            In a way, none of that matters. The language you use, whether you call it a foetus or a baby or a clump of cells, whether you say destroy, terminate or abort. If women can have babies, then women can decide to not have babies. The responsibility of bringing life into the world goes hand-in-hand with the right to decide not to. Sure, there’s a cut-off point where it’s no longer reasonable to do so for anything other than medical reasons, but up to that point it’s her privilege and responsibility to make that choice. You accept that, or you don’t.

          26. newsjustin

            None of what matters? The language Lorcan is accusing me of using when I didn’t?

            I don’t accept it is the right of any person to end the life of another human, except in actual self defence or where treatment is required to save a life. We may see differently on this, but I don’t believe either of us is being hateful.

          27. Nigel

            It matters to you and Lorcan, I’m sure, for the rest of us it’s yet another dead end. I don’t think deciding not to have a baby is like killing, I think it’s just deciding to not have a baby. There’s an incredible power in that choice which men simply refuse to give to women. What you think about it matters least, what the woman thinks about it matters most,

          1. Nigel

            Personally, I think accusing someone of lying is a pretty serious charge. Do you have any actual grounds for the accusation besides some sort of feeling?

  7. MoyestWithExcitement

    “When they were climbing up the steps of the plane, I took their bag”

    She was clearly right beside them so I don’t know why you’re pretending to be surprised.

  8. Manta Rae

    This is absurd. Why would anyone who had gone through such a horrific and deeply personal ordeal be talking about it within earshot of other passengers in an airport of all places?

    A ridiculous and contrived tale, which does the repeal the eighth campaign no good at all.

    Almost as bad as the non-existent Spar guy…

    1. DubLoony

      “within earshot of other passengers in an airport of all places?”

      Because there are not in a hospital here, like they should be.

    2. The Real Jane

      “This is absurd. Why would anyone who had gone through such a horrific and deeply personal ordeal be talking about it within earshot of other passengers in an airport of all places?”

      Well, possibly they don’t feel ashamed and need to talk to each other more than they need to hide. In spite of your distaste for their actions.

      1. Manta Rae

        ‘In spite of your distaste for their actions’.Eh? You do not know my opinion on this subject. so please don’t pretend you do.

        All you know about me is my opinion of this ludicrous tale, i.e it’s a load of made-up nonsense and never happened.

  9. panga

    gas how prolifers loose interest once the child is born
    for each child born after a refused termination prolifers have zero accountability in the childs upbringing and offer no financial support
    they just walk away…smug, selfrighteous and self satisfied

      1. Mani

        So is denying women bodily autonomy. That’s fierce gas altogether. You’re the kind of fart slapped penis tugger that puts me off reading posts like this. Trying to hide your remedial misogyny behind a smoke screen of the kind of medical clap trap that would embarrass a Reiki aromatherapist. Do everyone here a favour and keep your useless debates within the confines of whatever dandruff-soaked cabal you spend your evenings with.

        1. newsjustin

          That’s quite creative. Maybe you and Aisling could workshop these ideas. There’s a book of short stories in it.

    1. Anne

      We need to repeal Ryanair being allowed to cram so many seats into a plane, that you hear people’s private conversations around you.

      And repeal the 8th too of course. :)

    1. Lorcan Nagle

      Even if this specific event didn’t happen, one just like it did. I’ve heard enough heartbreaking stories from friends. Hell, I’ve heard heartbreaking stories from total strangers who want to talk about this but don’t feel safe sharing their story until they know the person they’re talking to is pro-choice – and their family and friends aren’t

      1. joe

        so it doesn’t matter that she is telling a big fat lie to support her political campaign? because the debate isn’t emotional enough?

        1. MoyestWithExcitement

          You don’t know it’s a lie. Even if she didn’t see it happen, it definitely happened and has thousands of times. People need to understand the real life consequences of their “principles” and personalised stories are often the best way of making them see it.

  10. Dee

    I’m thinking of that couple today.
    This will change. This will be made better. It may take time, but we will remember the families, women and girls, that have had to take the lonely path, to the UK, for assistance.
    Abortion and pregnancy and babies. Yikes. Not a discussion many want to take part in.
    There is no winner in this. That is the awful thing here, regardless of what reason a termination of a pregnancy is performed.
    The service should be in Ireland. To suggest that this is something that Ireland can do without, is to suggest that the person seeking this service, should be punished by finding the service elsewhere. Personally, I believe, they have been through enough.
    There are no winners.

    1. Anne O'N

      +1 Dee. The sooner the better that dreadful article is gone from our constitution, and proper compassionate and practical legislation enacted. Every day that passes, more Irish women are being failed. So every day matters in the campaign for change

  11. Think about it

    They seem like a lovely couple that would have made great parents ! It’s a shame they saw it necessary to go anywhere for anything!

Comments are closed.