34 thoughts on “No Affiliation

  1. Kieran

    Love Both posters I saw on this morning didn’t have any printers mentioned on them. In fact, many posters from both sides didn’t. Tear ’em all down. Huzzah.

  2. Cian

    This is another of those ‘facts’ has a grain of truth behind it – if you ignore the use of ‘baby’;
    ~97% of UK abortion are carried out under part C – the mother’s health. So you could infer that the foetus is healthy (or at least not known to be unhealthy).

    1. Listrade

      No. It has no truth. Zero. One stat is being used to claim an entirely unrelated and wholly false statement.

      It’s not even mere misrepresentation, it is an outright lie.

      1. Cian

        Wait a minute. There are a number of reasons where most people are in agreement that abortion is okay and others where people have a problem, in (approximate) order:
        1. Where the woman’s life is in danger
        2. Fatal Foetal Abnormalities
        3. Rape
        4. Where the woman’s health is in serious danger
        5. The baby would be disabled
        6. When a woman chooses to for other reasons (financial, enough children, not ready, etc.)

        In all of these except #2, the foetus is healthy (or at least not known to be unhealthy).

        In the UK very few abortions are because of #2 – so it is not unreasonable to assume the rest would be healthy.

        1. Listrade

          Agree and disagree with some of that, but strongly disagree on whether it’s reasonable to assume the foetus is healthy.

          We can assume nothing as there is zero evidence to state the condition or health of the foetus. No test is performed. Law of averages dictates that some of the “97%” won’t be “healthy”.

          Vast majority of that 97% is performed in the first 9 weeks, so it’s too early to even have a test or scan to confirm anything on health.

          Simple fact is the health or condition of the foetus is not known for any of those abortions.

          There is zero, none, zilch, nada evidence to make any such assumption, let alone state it as a fact.

          It is an out and out lie.

          1. Sentient Won

            “Simple fact is the health or condition of the foetus is not known for any of those abortions.”

            So what you’re saying is these abortions have nothing to do with healthcare.

          2. Cian

            I see you point.
            But the abortion isn’t being carried out because there is something wrong with the foetus. The abortion is being carried out because the woman assumes the foetus is healthy but she is choosing not too have it.

          3. Listrade

            I don’t think we can make any assumption as there isn’t any detail.

            We don’t know if or how many of those abortions are because the mother has had previous miscarriages (54% have been pregnant in the past through to delivery, 38% previous abortions), or other histories with foetal ill health.

            So we can’t even say the mother assumes they are healthy.

            There is nothing in any of the abortion stats to make any assumption on the condition of the foetus.

      2. rotide

        I can’t see how this is an outright lie.

        Saying that most abortions take place before there’s been a chance to asses the health of the foetus so there is potential health problems is kinda the same ballpark as the pro life position that these foetuses are potential babies. I doubt this statistic would hold up in court but assuming 3% is the number of abortions carried out for FFA and similar then it’s hard to fault the message.

        1. Listrade

          It is stated as fact that 97% of abortions are to healthy babies. No caveats, no vague wording where you could argue a grey area. That’s the key. There is no evidence to support that statement. They would have known that when making the sign and so they are deliberately making a false unsupported statement. I’ve no interest in semantics, they are lying.

          We can try and make assumptions based on the statistic that 97% of abortions in the UK are category C, but we do so without evidence and ignoring law of averages dictating that there is little chance that all of the 97% were healthy. Therefore, not only zero evidence to support the claim, but also statistically unlikely.

          So when someone states something that they made up based upon an unrelated statistic, I’m happy to call it a lie and McGuirk a liar.

          1. Royal M

            @Listrade: How did you go from “No. It has no truth. Zero” to using the law of averages to conclude it’s “statistically unlikely”? Serious question

          2. Listrade

            I’ll do my best.

            The main point is we cannot say as a fact that 97% of abortions are to healthy babies.

            I’d strongly disagree that it’s an assumption you can make from the available statistics.

            All we do know is that 97% of abortions are carried out under category c as in risk to mother’s health. That doesn’t mean the foetus is healthy. Given that the vast majority of those abortions are carried out in the first 9 weeks, we have no information at all on the foetus, there wouldn’t have been a scan or a test at that point.

            Just because there is a separate category for FFA and genetic issues, again it doesn’t follow that category c implies the foetus is healthy.

            Remember the sign is stating that every single one of the category c abortions is to a healthy foetus. My point on law of averages is that this is unlikely to be true.

            20% of pregnancies end in miscarriage. 30% of pregnancies the foetus has some abnormality.

            Therefore, it’s likely that a reasonable percentage of the 97% weren’t viable and weren’t “healthy” based on those statistics.

            We don’t know. However, as the person is making the claim is doing so under a regulated referendum campaign you would expect them to be held to a higher standard on what they state as a fact.

            It isn’t a fact. There is no evidence to even begin to support it as a fact and (law of averages etc) would dictate that it is highly unlikely that every single category c abortion was a healthy baby.

      1. cupofteaanyone

        And sure once abortions are legal here the stats over there will look a little better.

  3. ReproBertie (SCU)

    There was another one on Mobhi Road yesterday with sketches of the 1916 lads saying “they said to cherish all the children equally”. No affiliation on that one either and, strangely, no mention of these historic pro-lifers willingness to shoot people to get their way.

  4. Shane Duffy

    How does the saying go; When you’re explaining you’re losing…?

    Lads n lassies, get out of the echo chamber here before it’s too late and actually do something about it.

      1. Lush

        You don’t know that.
        Shane could be canvassing, he could have donated.
        It’s frustrating and upsetting to be watching this all unfold from afar.
        And there seems to be do little reference to the fact that this is a referendum to repeal a clause and that the amendment hasyet to be debated.
        Hats off to Listrade and Cian for continued levelheadedness.

        1. rotide

          What’s interesting about the dialogue round here lately is that Cian (who I know to be a reasonable poster, neither far left or far right) is increasingly being made to look like some sort of radical by merely posting facts and intelligent questions such is the radicalisation of both side in the comments.

        2. Yep

          Shane is also unaware as to what posters are doing outside of posting here. It’s the snide that gets to me.

    1. rotide

      I actually agree with Shane here.

      also FWIW, I’m currently taking a break from doing something about it

  5. Diddy

    I think it’s fair to say the majority of foetus aborted are healthy. Anecdotally to women in late teens early 20’s who get pregnant unexpectedly..

    So this is about a woman’s right to choose. And the yes side want abortion on demand up to 9 weeks. That’s the reality. Vote on !

  6. king Adolf von bonkwurst

    that’s terrible I have just coughed up my soy latte. I have to pick up Fiachra from Glasnevin Educate together later.

  7. Nigel

    I think we’re a week away from them reclassifying murder victims and war casualties as late-term abortions.

  8. Tom

    The stat is believable so what is the issue? Does it change any of the arguments for choice? I think some people find the truth a little uncomfortable.

Comments are closed.