Choice Ireland picket rogue crisis pregnancy agency, WRC.

by Passerby Sat Aug 18, 2007 19:22

The sign that they attempted to erect would have as legitimacy giving the private profiteering
propensities of the present Minister for Health, saying that they hide behind the issues relating
to pregnancy services for women by using and abusing misinformation. They discussion needs
opening out. it is legitimate to be concerned at the privatisation of the health services. Abortion
information regulation is necessary as is a good national health system whereby if a woman
needs those medical services she can access them freely, safely and legally.

The other reports on the issue are excellent and highlighting how a service dedicated to the
very vulnerable can be abused is something that Choice Ireland should be proud of.
We need open discussion on women's rights and girls rights and not this continuing
hiding behind silly ideologies that reduce half of our population to a notion of reproductive
viability. We need supports for women in need and a proper free pre-school service for
single and lone parents. It should not be so difficult to discuss the issues pertinent to women
without many using abusive language and old insults to cut and deter argument. Well done
Choice- and thanks for highlighting the issues, again.

by pat c Sat Aug 18, 2007 19:43

Heres some interesting news which is appropriate to this storyline. Disproves a lot of the nonsense peddled by the "lifers". Full article at link.

A new study on Danish women has shown that using abortion pills to terminate pregnancies during the first trimester is no more hazardous to future pregnancies than surgical terminations. The study is published in the New England Journal of Medicine and is the work of scientists in Denmark and the US.

Zhang and colleagues concluded that:

"We found no evidence that a previous medical abortion, as compared with a previous surgical abortion, increases the risk of spontaneous abortion, ectopic pregnancy, preterm birth, or low birth weight."

In an accompanying Journal Watch article, Dr Robert W. Rebar, comments that:

"As long as induced abortion is available, it will be used by some women who fail to use contraception or have contraceptive failures and do not desire pregnancy. This study indicates that the risks for subsequent adverse pregnancy outcomes are not appreciably different for medical and surgical abortion."

by E.Goldstein - Airstrip Two Sun Aug 19, 2007 11:24

"Safe Abortion" and "Surgical Termination" are euphemisms much like "Friendly Fire" and "Collateral Damage"; technical-sounding terms designed specifically to hide ugly aspects of the whole truth. Whatever your view on the use of it, or the status of a pre-person/foetus/unborn child, abortion is still the killing of a life-form.

Not disagreeing with the condemnation of the misuse of language; I'd just like to see the same intellectual standard for both sides. And, while the suggestion of regulation could sound noble, this also sounds suspiciously like the restriction of free speech and the exchange of opinion and ideas.

Just because ideas and opinions might be unpopular or uncomfortable is not justification for curtailing them.

by Equality Sun Aug 19, 2007 13:11

I want to hear free speech on abortion and regulation of information services. i am awaiting
the day when the woman who heads up our department of health and children removes her
head from the sand and acknowledges that providing a full dedicated range of maternity
services to women and girls involves the recognition that things can go wrong in a pregnancy
and at a vulnerable time to further isolate the person/couple involved by making them travel to
another jurisdiction (with expense) is inhumane and frequently removes the necessary support
of extended family from them. I await the day when the current woman who heads up our
department of health and children acknowledges that we need a health system that offers
women and girls (both low income and migrant ),help and support in medical abortion; and does
not, as is her propensity try to profit out of the misery of others by dedicating private
women's health centres to provide those services. I also await the day when the whole
issue of health and reproduction is not veiled in this useless language that a male-dominated
church and state reduce women to- viable reproductive entities or the sacred feminine.
Having supported three friends through infant death due to foetal anomlaies and buried a
friend who was in the fifth month of her pregnancy , I am running out of patience.
The way we view women and the language we use is veiled alright, it is veiled in fear
and obfuscation of issues relating to life and death . It is veiled by the abuse of language
which creates shame around sexuality and it is veiled by those who would rather speak of
war and profit than facing the issues that have blighted generations of Irish women,
including the profiteering of the magdalean laundries, the death of ann lovett and the
refusal to countenance that the right to termination of a foetus is a human right afforded
to women in most catholic countries, except Ireland which spends more money on
GAA and drink than any other state in the union.

Ms Harney will have to confront the issue when the EHCR rules on current cases
against the human rights abuses of her Department and in so doing she would need to
account for her failures in this area over her term of office.

by de Selby Sun Aug 19, 2007 20:10

nice piece on the picket in todays Sun.Tribune, along side an investigative piece into the WRC by the same journalist. May be online at http://www.tribune.ie, but I'm having difficulty accessing the site at present. Fair play to Choice Ireland on what was, I feel, a good days work.

by anon Sun Aug 19, 2007 22:53

Clashes at crisis pregnancy clinic
http://www.tribune.ie/article.tvt?_scope=Tribune/News/H...=News

You'd be pregnant if they left a bit behind'
http://www.tribune.ie/article.tvt?_scope=Tribune/News/H...=News

by Sceptic Sun Aug 19, 2007 23:37

"Church and state reduce women to- viable reproductive entities or the sacred feminine." - Equality

It is wrong to portray it as an issue that divides the sexes. Very many women, more so than men in my experience, are opposed to a liberal abortion regime. Further the State is not male dominated in this sphere. Women are well represented in policy making circles in the domain of health matters. it is more a matter of holder people having more conservative views than younger one, in general. Furthermore western liberal feminists tend to shy away from any discussion of the scandalous levels of female foeticide and
female infanticide in India, China and other areas outside of the west. Have you any views on this yourself Equality?

by Don. Mon Aug 20, 2007 01:13

"Church and state reduce women to- viable reproductive entities or the sacred feminine." - Equality

The state is decided by the people. Women are people. So this sentance should say "women reduce women to- viable reproductive entities or the sacred feminine."

Also, the church doesnt control our consitution. Nor does the Dail. We do. Democracy trumps minority values.

by Democracy Mon Aug 20, 2007 09:34

Like the US we vaunt our supposed democratic principles of parity in representation.
The protection of minorities.
Raising the status of women.
Equality in representation.

We have the lowest gender representation in the EU.
Political parties do not push for 40-50% gender balance as a matter of course.
Bertie Ahern appoints men to cabinet and semi-state bodies (and senate).
The issue of reproductive rights are decided by men for men's convenience.

We are the only state in the EU that has a co-equality clause in our legislations re
reproductive rights, this means that a woman or girl is perceived to be co-equal with
a foetus (even if it is unviable).

This indicates that no we do not live in a representative democracy.
Women's voices are unheard.
The state and the woman who heads the Health dept openly nurture ignorant , anti-human
rights legislations because they cannot be bothered addressing the issues in a normal
human way. They openly allow the development of ignorant opinion and abuse
of women and girls through their allowance of legislations which underscores their
fundamental sexism which says:

A girl or woman of reproductive age is forced to continue with a pregnancy
even in the case of best medical knowledge and advice and if she seeks
genetic counselling or medical abortion she mus travel to another jurisdiction
to achieve it. This is effectively the human rights abuse of the individual by the
State and transpose this thinking to the case of an 11 or twelve year old victim of
ovarian cancer or child rape and see how far it gets.

Address abortion rights now.
Transpose the human rights of the child to bodily integrity and privacy into the statute.

by Equality Mon Aug 20, 2007 09:54

Presuming a position on human rights of abortion based on a comment on a thread is
not listening to what is being said. I have never advocated a liberal abortion regime, in that
or any other comment - if you read the 'equality 'comment, you will see quite clearly that
I called for free, safe and legal abortion, a full range of pregnancy information and services.
and abortion to be part of a viable national health service, this is tied into my political
belief that the PD Minister for Health is incapable of conceiving of those services in any
other way than in a profiteering fashion and I am opposed to a two tier profit system in
medical abortion rights.

as To China, I do wonder how our newspapers consistently admire that empire when it
was built in a manner that advocated female foeticide. But in Ireland we build our
economic systems on the repression of women and girls in relation to their
reproductive rights and enforce pregnancy on children through our co-equality clause
and our criminal laws which fail to protect kids from sexual abuse, and we do not
have adequate rape or trauma centres in place to support kids who are attacked.
access to full services for pregnancy should be a right available to all and state abdication
of care to the girl or woman is evident in its refusal to provide these services within a
viable free health system.

by Niav - Choice Ireland Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:31

First 2 photos show Michael Larkin erecting sign to cover the name of the offices.

by Niav - Choice Ireland Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:37

Banners and placards at Saturdays demo

by Niav - Choice Ireland Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:40

Louise Maguire and Michael Larkin of the WRC talk to pro choice activists.

by Don. Mon Aug 20, 2007 12:32

Theres an awful lot of men an these pro-choice things. Should their opinion not be counted because they are male?

To poster "Democracy".

The idea of forcing the Irish people to have a certain amount of women in the Dail, is border line Fascism. Women dont for women, hence it isnt proportional. If you dont like it, then run for the next general election.

As I have said before, the Dail cant reduce the restrictions on abortions , even if the majority of TDs were pro-choice. We would need a referendum. Which I doubt would happen soon.

by Godot - wsm (pers cap) Mon Aug 20, 2007 12:43

A referendum to appeal the 8th amendment would be needed to introduce free, safe, legal abortion. Successive governments however have failed to brig in promised legislation resulting from the x case in situations were there is a threat to the womens life.

by Mark P Mon Aug 20, 2007 12:55

Abortion (if introduced) will never be free under our current Health Service.

The reason the government have not had the referendum needed to legalise abortion is not through any failure of the government, it is more to do with it being a wasted exercise.
The overwhelming majority of people in Ireland are against abortion. This is a well established fact.

Any referendum on abortion would be a waste of tax payers money at this time as its result would be a well polled foregone conclusion. A resounding 'NO'

by Niav - Choice Ireland Mon Aug 20, 2007 13:37

A recent M-R-B-I poll found that more than half of people aged between 18 and 25 are favour of abortion on request. These are the very same young people who would have not voted in any of the previous abortion referendums. There is increasing support for abortion rights among young Irish people.

by ck Mon Aug 20, 2007 13:46

"A recent M-R-B-I poll found that more than half of people aged between 18 and 25 are favour of abortion on request"

full details please? - questions asked, numbers polled etc. any links.

by Niav - Choice Ireland Mon Aug 20, 2007 14:16

The TNS MRBI poll commissioned by the ‘Safe and Legal in Ireland’ Campaign showed that 43% support abortion if it's in a woman's 'best interests' but the majority (51%) remain against terminations in this country. The survey reveals that those who support a more liberal abortion policy are 52% male, 48% female, most likely to be aged 25-34, and lower-middle class to working class. They are also most likely to live in Dublin or Munster. The telephone poll surveyed 1,000 adults and was carried out between 29TH May and 8th June 2007, weeks after the controversial Ms D case. This is a breakdown of the main results. The age breakdown is not available online. For more details see www.safeandlegal.blogspot.com

When a pregnant woman's life is at risk because of the threat of suicide?

Agree 69% Disagree 25% Depends 2% Don't Know 3% Refused 1%

When the foetus cannot survive outside the womb?

Agree 75% Disagree 20% Depends 2% Don't know 2% Refused 1%

When the pregnancy seriously endangers the woman's life?

Agree 82% Disagree 14% Depends 2% Don't know 1% Refused 1%

When the pregnancy is the result of rape?

Agree 69% Disagree 24% Depends 3% Don't know 3% Refused 1%

When the pregnancy is the result of sexual abuse by a family member?

Agree 73% Disagree 22% Depends 1% Don't Know 2% Refused 1%

When there is evidence that the child will be profoundly deformed (physically and/or mentally)?

Agree 56% Disagree 37% Depends 3% Don't Know 3% Refused 1%

When a woman decides its in her best interests to do so?

Agree 43% Disagree 51% Depends 3% Don't Know 2% Refused 1%

A Crisis Pregnancy Agency survey on abortion in 2004 showed that amongst under 45s, 51% of respondents were in favour of the right to abortion in any circumstances while 39% said they believed it should be permissable 'under some circumstances'.

by Sceptic Mon Aug 20, 2007 14:35

On Harney you can't have it both ways - saying there are not enough women in politics and then rejecting the women who do come forward. Implicit in this is that it is not the gender of the office holders that matters but their politics hence undermining the case for gender quotas and the like. The National Women's council is fond of saying that there are more women in politics in sub Sahara Africa then in Ireland and isn’t this disgraceful etc. But it’s the standard of Governance that really determines the quality of people’s lives and the standards in Africa are absolutely woeful. There are other much more important factors at play than this gender balance so beloved of some feminists. More generally you still ignore the female feticide in China and India but if things like that happened here you would really have something to complain about. Abortion is contested because there are conflicting rights involved. Ignoring totally any issues except the women’s right to choose will not do. Its not patriarchy that is the problem – it is that the issue is too inflammatory to move on for the present. The situation might be unsatisfactory but the people at large don’t want it altered – the political classes know this and won’t broach it. Messy and all as it might be the current position reflects the will of the people. It’s the real world reality outside of the somewhat rarefied world of gender politics in the colleges and the media.

by equality Mon Aug 20, 2007 14:41

The political classes are mandated individuals.
Mary Harney is despicable, her betrayal of pensioners and victims of Neary speaks to her
expedience.

young women are asking for regulation they form part of the electorate and thus should be heard.
{an aged occupier of the FF tent does not speak for me}

as to the women on the street, they were angry over the 'D' case, make no mistake about that.
The politicians in the Dail will address the issue of providing a range of pregnancy services
and an adequate health system for those who require it because it is a necessary requirement
for a developed country. Enough speaking of equal access to power and democracy,
in this country it is an illusion, we fund sport and roads!

by John Mon Aug 20, 2007 15:13

In what way is abortion pro-child, as one of the placards at the demo says? Does it refer to the child which is aborted or to a different child? If the former, its clearly absurd. If the latter, its meaningless.

by dr nick Mon Aug 20, 2007 18:35

"The people behind these agencies are anti sex, anti contraception, anti choice and anti women."

Anti-contraception....yes
Anti sex......no, not once during my consultation with the wrc was I led to believe that what I did was wrong.Most pro lifers believe sex is completly healthy and natural, and are not at all 'anti'- it. They just believe that it should be kept within the confines of a commitied loving union.
Anti women........during my dealings with the wrc I dealt with three different women and hence it is pretty much a women ran operation(except for the one lone man at the dorset st branch). Its a service ran by women so I would hardly call it anti-women.This idea that pro life people are anti-feminism is a complete fabrication. Just because someone believe that it is wrong to get rid of a child in utero doesnt make them anti women?!

Saying this though,the WRC while entitled to their views should not inflict it so graphically and forcefully onto women that seek their help.

by Godot - wsm (pers cap) Mon Aug 20, 2007 19:58

The WRC is run by people involved with the Christian Solidarity Party. They're against sex unless its to produce a child (and even then they look down on it if its outside marraige) e.g sex for pleasure, artifical contraception, homosexuality etc Don't you think disrespecting women by giving them totally false information in order to manipulate their actions can be considered anti-women?

by bríd Mon Aug 20, 2007 22:17

Picket at the Rogue Agency on Dorset St

the blonde woman is from wrc

by bríd Mon Aug 20, 2007 22:20

Picket at the Rogue Agency on Dorset St

by Johnny - CYM (per cap) Tue Aug 21, 2007 03:22

Women should have the right to choose and the right to equality in every aspect of life.

Good work so far and keep up the fight!

Equality?

by Anne Tue Aug 21, 2007 07:06

The clinic believes that it is acceptable to terrorise and traumatise vulnerable women, because their mental health is not worth the life of a fertilised egg.

Sounds anti-woman to me.

by Plato Tue Aug 21, 2007 08:00

"The clinic believes that it is acceptable to terrorise and traumatise vulnerable women, because their mental health is not worth the life of a fertilised egg."

These are very serious accusations. Provide proof or withdraw. Wild statements and accusations do not belong in rational duscussion and only do a disservice to all.

by Praxia Tue Aug 21, 2007 09:13

The government believes that the life of a 12 year old girl is less important than the life of
a foetus she is carrying that may have no chance of survival and are willing to appoint
bodies of lawyers to argue the theory. ireland is in breach of european and international
human rights law .

as to the shouting person above- i am not surprised that people are angry.
women are not listened to and indeed kept out of any decision making apparatus, which is
why our government is largely composed of men with beer bellies, sport fixations and greens
who unable to'rock the boat' revert to ecumenical answers on medical abortion.

Male domination necessarily views the woman as viable or reproductive, this is evident
in their response to neary, hepc and lack of infrastructure for rape crisis and maternity
units with choice in birthing plans.Ireland has not transposed the basic rights of the Child
into law, nor has the state done anything constructive on protection or child-trafficking.

by W. - Choice Ireland (pers cap) Tue Aug 21, 2007 09:55

The proof is in the second Tribune article linked to above. Or in the tapes that Newstalk 106 has broadcast of its undercover investigation into the clinic. Or in the tapes from Choice Ireland's own undercover investigation. Vulnerable women shown horror videos and threatened with colostomies, for Christ's sake. The blonde woman in the pictures above actually acknowledged to me personally during Saturday's demo that they are traumatising women. She simply believes they are justified in doing so. Do you?

by Sceptic Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:30

Differences in wages outcome on their own can and do have explanations due other than to discrimination. For instance despite incentives few women want to do the heavy sort of work at building sites or driving large trucks. These are well paid jobs tend to be held by males. On the other hand over representation of women in treaching, nursing and other public service has benefits not measured by wage rates alone - eg. excellent pensions, maternity arrangements, flexible working hours. There are powerful legal mechanisms in place sot ensure equal work if instances of discrimination are upheld. Also the equal right of the unborn to life is a constitutional position not a Government one as such.

by krossie - wsm personal capacity Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:43

Women earn less than men in every country in the world on average and the gap may be growing

It is significant that the gap is a lot less in the public sector, amongst unionised workers and younger women...

Have a gander at me talk below

kp

by Chris Murray Tue Aug 21, 2007 11:21

I re-read the first paragraph of the above report again and would like people who have
continued this campaign to envisage the counsellors (who do not sound like they are
registered with the I.A.P.C) giving false and misleading information to a schoolchild
who, in a crisis pregnancy has no-one else to turn to. This detrimental and directed counselling
would have the most appalling effect on someone who is already in a very isolated and
vulnerable position. There is a need for a mean average level of qualified non-directional
counselling to kids and women and a proven need for regulation of services to women
and girls who are in this postion.The present Minister for Health and Children
has not addressed the issue which in the light of the 'D' case and the allowance for
legislating for 'X' shows a complete disregard for the health and safety of young girls
and women.

by Fiery S Tue Aug 21, 2007 14:35

"Political parties do not push for 40-50% gender balance as a matter of course."

The Progressive Democrats have achieved 50-50 gender representation for three consecutive Dail terms.

by CMurray Tue Aug 21, 2007 15:16

The PD's are gone now, largely. There was toward the end a horrible reversal in equality terms.
Despite rejecting everything they stood for... the issue of why things such as reproductive rights do not
make the political agenda is because they are not high on top of the male cliques who drive
that agenda. Anyway, the thread is pertaining to a group called Choice Ireland who are pointing out
that regulation in information and counselling services are needed in this country. That is
something I personally wholly support and am glad to see. Achieving the balance in gender terms
also presuppouses that the issues that women highlight through their own
experiences of maternity care, education, women in the home, immigrant women and media
representation of women are carried through into political change- they are not.

The Labour and PD party would have formed both sides of the Political Spectrum on
Gender balance at organisational level, it is a pity that the issues are not translated into
positive political change for women. This requires grass-root organisation. The rest of the
parties, particularly FF seem to revel in tokenism and completely gender-imbalanced
selections and agendas, firmly rooted in the old boys club approach to party politics!

by Geraldine Rooney Tue Aug 21, 2007 15:34

I agree with abortion in cases where the health of the mother is at risk or where the woman has been raped.
I do not agree with abortion on demand however. This has nothing to do with reproduction rights. I simply do not want to see abortion becoming an accepted part of family planning or a substitute for contraception.

The differences over what constitutes life is also a problem. I consider late abortions (up to 28 weeks) to be nothing short of murder and the act itself barbaric. 10-12 weeks is where I would draw the line.

I do not support this clinic. I oppose scaremongering and zealotry from all quarters.

by dill Tue Aug 21, 2007 17:39

Geraldine, you say abortion is not clear -cut, that it is equal to murder in many cases and yet you
consider 10 to 12 weeks to be an acceptable limit. Which is it - 10 or 12 weeks? After all you're talking about murder as opposed to an acceptable medical procedure.
Like so many pro-choice people you fail to see your support for abortion for what it is - support for
killing a human being. Otherwise you would be able to say EXACTLY when a foetus somehow becomes a human being - not approximately.

All religions and belief systems share one thing in common - the belief that to be a worthwhile man/woman one must be selfless. At the heart of abortion is self-interest, often dressed up as concern for the child (somehow) or the mother but self-interest primarily.

by Eva Tue Aug 21, 2007 20:11

Yeah, yeah, yeah. We're heard all these arguments over and over ad nauseum from Christian Fundamentalists and Femmo Hysterics. A debate I won't contribute to. There is this much though and I think anyone proposing we should have a choice must agree: it's all a choice. To keep a baby or to kill it. There are risks either way and neither way is easy. But what about some tolerance for other people? Why not choose to respect other peoples right to choose and stop marching around like a bunch of Monty Python characters?

There is something very distasteful about this picketing. I know you would agree if those other idiots from the militant pro-life brigade turned up, complete with pictures of aborted foetuses outside some corresponding office on the pro-choice side.

It's all just adding to the hysteria around an issue that is awfully painful for a lot of people. Why play politics with unborn children? Why cause pain and hurt to people, who though perhaps misguided, are only following their conscience? I think when you all grow up and get over your 'issues' (if ever) you will see the foolishness of seeking to resolve such a sensitive issue in this manner.

by Ois - WSM Tue Aug 21, 2007 20:49

There is no corresponding office on the pro-choice side. No one on the pro-choice side systematically lies to and deceives people.

by bedazzled Wed Aug 22, 2007 00:17

oh really. so your tellin me that the likes of the ifpa and abortion providers marie stopes etc give women real info on abortion apart from the fact of where they can go to get one? have you ever attended a so called non directive counselling agency? have you ever had a scan of your baby blacked out so you can't see the image when you take it with you to england to show the abortion provider, in case viewing the very simple humanity of the child will dissuade you from paying the lovely cost for such a procedure?
the reason why ireland does not have abortion(nor ever will) is because our medical profession are staunch in their position on uppholding always dignity and respect for all human life, including the unborn child.
if choice ireland are really genuinely are concerned for women's welfare then regulation on all crisis pregnancy agencies should be called for.
you cant deny that it is in the financial interest of agencies such as these to up the number of abortions they perform.
check out how much it actually costs to have an abortion. do the math.

by AM Wed Aug 22, 2007 06:52

Agencies that provide abortion referrals ARE regulated. I don't see where Choice Ireland are objecting to this.

It's only anti-abortion agencies like the WRC that are free to operate without any legal oversight.

by Prochoice unapologetic Feminazi Wed Aug 22, 2007 11:58

Femmo Hysterics? Feminazis?
I cant believe such misled and ignorant and uneducated people even read indymedia, let alone have the audacity to post in response to an issue they clearly dont understand.

by C Murray Wed Aug 22, 2007 14:00

The article is about Choice Ireland calling for regulation of services available to women (and
girls) of reproductive age. The article is also about access to those services and also it
is about the Minister of Health and the refusal of the State to address the issue of legislating for
'X'. Some of the comments refer to the issue of poverty and marginalisation. None of them
have advocated a liberal abortion regime, none of them have gone onto the tangents consistently
offered by people attempting to veer the discussion into theological/philosophical debate
or indeed to use PR and fear messages against women (and Men) activists who have worked
very hard to highlight the inequities in provision of the full range of pregnancy services to those who
require them.[Without having to travel to another jurisdiction, without having adequate post
abortion counselling services, without having adequate infrastructure in place to deal with
crisis pregnancy to young girls in care who are funded by the HSE to travel to the UK
for abortion services, without adequate provision for rape and trauma units]
Instead rolling trolls are referring to newsmedia from the US to propagandise against
what is not alone the 'Right to Choose' but the right to humane , supported care in the event of
the need for termination, in a properly equipped environment , where family members, if needed
can continue the supports to the woman/girl.

Please refer yourself to the Deirdre De Barra letter and the Judgement in the 'X' case
as regards the State's Legal obligation to Provide these services to women and girls.

by cable Wed Aug 22, 2007 14:27

Sure, abortion is 'barbaric', but so are pregnancy & childbirth. We need proper, true information about all the choices available to women in order that we can make informed decisions about possible life-changing events.
I don't think more female politicians will necessarily help women's rights - there are plenty of women opposed to women's 'right to choose', as there were against votes for women earlier.

by word watcher - you don't know how lucky you are, boy Wed Aug 22, 2007 14:57

as several commentors noted above, language and definition is everything in this kind of debate. witness how US Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, a mormon, is talking to his 'pro-life' christian right supporters....

''But for those trained to hear the subtleties, Mr. Romney was acknowledging something more. He implied an opposition to the birth control pill and a willingness to join in their efforts to scale back access to contraception. There are code phrases to listen for - and for those keeping score, Mr. Romney nailed each one.

One code phrase is: “I fought to define life as beginning at conception rather than at the time of implantation.” The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists defines pregnancy as starting at implantation, the first moment a pregnancy can be known. Anti-abortion advocates want pregnancy to start at the unknown moment sperm and egg meet: fertilization. They’d also like you to believe, despite evidence to the contrary, that the birth control pill prevents that fertilized egg from implanting in the womb.''

more...
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/21/3302/

by Anne Boelyn Wed Aug 22, 2007 16:15

'Women should have the right to choose and the right to equality in every aspect of life'

So im presuming that Johhny and ois and the rest of the majority male pro choice faction will respectfully refrain from voting if a referedum comes to vote? Or will you make up your own mind to what women want,as it seems you already have as you are consitenly ignoring the predominatly female pro life posts on these boards?

"Women earn less than men in every country in the world on average and the gap may be growing"

If you think legalising abortion will change this then you have absolutely no idea what it is to be an independent carrer minded women living in Ireland today.Seeing sexual rights as the key to womens liberation is completly wrong.Women are already pigeonholed into being just that.....sexual objects/beingsThe only way we will be seen as being equal to men is moving away from our sexual stereotype. Twinning women rights to abortion just reinforces this stereotype. We have to stop foccusing on womens bodies (,we have brains as well you know)

It would be really intresting to see a public debate between choice Ireland and life Ireland on this topic...any plans like that in the pipeline?

by Niav - Choice Ireland (personal capacity) Wed Aug 22, 2007 17:19

"It would be really intresting to see a public debate between choice Ireland and life Ireland on this topic...any plans like that in the pipeline?"

As far as I am aware, when contacted by the media, the Women's Resource Centre/British Alternatives Pregnancy Services/etc.... have declined to comment. Ireland AM, on TV3 covered the issue of rogue agencies this morning and the WRC did not provide a spokesperson. Pro choice activists have debated anti choice activists many times in college campuses, on talk radio shows etc... As Choice Ireland is a pro choice group and is advocating for free, safe and legal abortion services to be introduced into Ireland, I don't really see the point of us organising a debate with anti choice activists that are vehemently opposed to abortion.

by Godot - an evil oppressiv eman - wsm (per cap) Thu Aug 23, 2007 10:52

"So im presuming that Johhny and ois and the rest of the majority male pro choice faction will respectfully refrain from voting if a referedum comes to vote? Or will you make up your own mind to what women want,as it seems you already have as you are consitenly ignoring the predominatly female pro life posts on these boards?"

Of course pro-choice men would vote in a referendum. A vote to legalise abortion would then leave the choice open to women themselves whether or not they wish to have an abortion. It's not a case of men making up womens minds for them or ignoring their views - if you don't want an abortion, don't have one (pro-choice...get it?), a referendum would merely allow women to decide for themselves.

by cable Thu Aug 23, 2007 16:19

Of course the issues aren't entirely black & white BUT the woman's right to become a mother or not must have priority. Often abortion is the lesser evil, especially as an informed choice as early as possible, with the 'morning-after pill' being an excellent remedy. A high proportion of spontaneous miscarriage occurs during the 1st 2 weeks of pregnancy, often unknown to the woman.
Remember that motherhood doesn't suit everyone; some people have a vocation for childlessness. Sometimes birth is the beginning of a severe puerperal psychosis which is horrendous for mother & child. We need to consider the rights of actual human beings over those of potential humans.

by T Fri Aug 24, 2007 21:52

""The Progressive Democrats have achieved 50-50 gender representation for three consecutive Dail terms."

Heh, not hard with two TDs, is it?

by shoegirl Wed Aug 29, 2007 23:00

Having been on every side of this arguement and back again at some point in my life I am disappointed in the way in which Choice Ireland have chosen to lay down the debate. I remember for years many anti-abortion groups were heavily (and correctly) criticised for doing nothing to assist women in the situation of crisis pregnancies. It would appear to me that agencies (and "rogue" is not really the correct word for such an agency - the agencies setup at the beginning of the agencies by pro-abortion activist were just as "rogue" by any meaning of the word as these agencies are today) are well-intentioned, if misguided by their ideology.

But this has applied to every point in the debate at some point or other.

I don't see the difference between this protest and the blatant intimidation made by Youth Defence outside IFPA clinics a few years ago. They are intended to intimidate as much as "inform." This kind of protest is less than helpful and has only served to continue the bitter divide between "pro-life" and "pro-choice." The polarization has equally intimidated the electorate.

While it is definitely true that there is strong support for abortion on demand amongst the under 25s, these groups are also the least likely to vote. Those most opposed are unfortunately those most likely to vote. So it would make most sense if groups like Choice Ireland concentrated their efforts on lobbying those in power with the might to make it happen.

by regretful Thu Aug 30, 2007 14:05

"but they are known to use manipulative tactics, provide misleading information and intimidate women".
I once ignored these 'awful' people and listened to the pro choicers.............and did the liberating thing by taking the boat and getting rid of 'my inconvenient problem'. 20 years later, I still have nightmares. Yes I grew up and looked at the big picture and realised a little baby wouldn't have been a bad thing. Might have been a blessing really. Who are these young men holding pro choice banners? They will NEVER know how it feels to give birth or to abort. Take them out of the argument. This is wimmin's business. Abortion kills not only the baby, but the woman's spirit.......eventually...........believe me:(

by G.H. Thu Aug 30, 2007 19:24

It's amazing the number of women one meets who want an abortion who were anti-abortion until they became pregnant. Then, all of a sudden, they're pro-choice and, whether you like it or not, the majority of them are not 'regretful' but relieved. I have been involved in the pro-choice movement going on for 30 years now (aaargh!) and when I meet women I know had abortions 20 - 25 - 30 years ago, the overwhelming majority say that it was the right decision for them when they made it. Of course, we have all made decisions in our lives that, had the circumstances been different, we might have made differently. But we make the decisions in circumstances not of our choosing.

It's important that women take responsibility for their decisions and not try to live other women's lives for them. Adopting an "I'm sorry I made the decision I made so I want to stop you making your own decision" is not good for anyone - for yourself or for other women.

I'm quite fed up of the irregular verb "to have the right to an abortion". It seems to many to be declined thus:
"I have a right to an abortion because I really need one"; "you might have a right to an abortion because maybe you need one"; "she/they don't have a right to an abortion because I don't believe they need one".

by AM Fri Aug 31, 2007 06:53

To equate Choice Ireland with Youth Defence is nonsensical. Choice Ireland aren't trying to stop anyone making their own decision about having an abortion. They are trying to shut down a clinic that tries to take that right away from women by lying to them about the procedure. More power to them, I say.

by Elisa O'D Fri Aug 31, 2007 20:03

As from today the wrc is no longer called the wrc but 'abbey family planning' or so it says in the new edition of the yellow pages......different name but same big ad and number

by maria g Fri Aug 31, 2007 22:11

Hi i'm sorry to hear how hurt you are by your abortion. You are not alone in your pain. Here are two websites you may find helpful.

www.silentnomoreawareness.org

www.rachelsvineyards.org

maria.

by Candida Sat Sep 01, 2007 08:52

Interesting that it run from Staten island by Priests- do they support women priests
and they have quite a press budget going there are the figures publlished- or are
these concerns like those of the ex-WRC (name co-opted from the Women's
Resource Centre in UCD) another twisted catholic profit-making organisation, directed
by men and seeking to feed off the trauma of vulnerable people?

Also the neat Opus Dei allusion to the 'Vineyard' always works.
People should be made aware that expensive 'weekend by weekend' retreats
which probably involve induction and profit should be:
1.Investigated.
2. Avoided
cos they seek to damage and profit from private trauma.
(bit like Dorset Street, really)

by maria Sat Sep 01, 2007 18:25

both are non denominational organisations ran largely by women who have had abortions.

by GH Sat Sep 01, 2007 18:28

Both start from a position that abortion is always wrong and that part of getting over the pain that some women feel after abortion is admitting that it is the abortion itself that was wrong - as opposed to the circumstances in your life that maybe forced you to have an abortion. Of course many women, like regretful, may have ended up having an abortion they did not really want either because their bloke did not stand by them or even forced them to end the pregnancy. Or maybe the bloke was ok but their parents weren't. Or maybe they just did not have enough money to have a child, or another child just then and felt they had to end a pregnancy that they might have otherwise wanted.

But the majority of women who have abortions do so because they know that it is the only option that is available to them if they want to have some control over their life and not be at the mercy of their biology and they are not regretful afterwards.

Regretful, if you are really messed up because of the abortion you had 20 years ago, you should go the IFPA. They provide free post-abortion counselling that does not start with the idea that you did wrong - a position which will never help you get on with your life.

by GH Sat Sep 01, 2007 18:36

that they are religiously motivated. For example, the silentnomoreawareness homepage says [and this is a direct cut and paste]

"The campaign, a joint project of Priests for Life and Anglicans for Life, has three main goals:

Make the public aware that abortion is harmful emotionally, physically and spiritually to women and others;
Reach out to women who are hurting from an abortion, let them know help is available;
Invite women to join us in speaking the truth about abortion's negative consequences. "

And Rachel's Vineyard also works on an inter-denominational but clearly Christian basis, [again this a direct cut and paste]
"Rachel's Vineyard is a non-profit 501(c) 3 organization. All contributions are tax deductible. We work in close partnership with Priests for Life and Gospel of Life Ministries."

by mrs doubtfire Sat Sep 01, 2007 22:30

"cos they seek to damage and profit from private trauma."

at least we are finally admitting that abortion causes trauma to women.

this is a direct copy and paste from a well known abortion provider' website who are based in the uk.

Telephone Consultation £60 According to your cheque guarantee limit (either £50 or £100) we can accept the following payments as part of our Easy Payment Scheme:
One to one Consultation £70
(This is separate to fees for any treatment) Deposit Cheques 1-3
Cheque guarantee card limit:
£50 £100 £50 £100
Medical Abortion up to 9 weeks £395 £250 £100 £50 £100
Surgical Abortion
up to 12 weeks, non-anaesthetic £465 £320 £170 £50 £100
up to 14 weeks, conscious sedation £525 £380 £230 £50 £100
14 + 1 to 19 weeks, conscious sedation £665 £520 £370 £50 £100
19 + 1 to 24 weeks, conscious sedation £1445 £1300 £1150 £50 £100
up to 14 weeks, general anaesthetic £565 £420 £270 £50 £100
14 + 1 to 19 weeks, general anaesthetic £695 £550 £400 £50 £100
19 + 1 to 24 weeks, general anaesthetic £1445 £1300 £1150 £50 £100
Sterilisation with abortion up to 13 weeks £1195 £1050 £900 £50 £100
Emergency contraception £30

end of paste

I think it is fairly safe to say here that the abortion providers are the ones that make profit from abortion, one can see this regardless of ones own personal stance on the issue.

by not regretful Sat Sep 01, 2007 22:33

I had a look at those websites and they ARE religiously based and start from the point of view that abortion is always wrong under every circumstance.

by SLI supporter Sat Sep 01, 2007 22:35

The only reason abortion providers can charge is that it is not available on the health service like it should be. You could say what Mrs Doubtfire does about all private health providers.

Make abortion free on the health service and end the profit motive!

by Gaz B -(A)- - wsm pers cap Sun Sep 02, 2007 00:21

The state should pay so that all women, regardless of income and socio-economic background have equal access to the procedure. Abortion primarily only exists for those Irish women who can currently afford air travel, ferry, accomoodation, time off work and the for procedure itself. Late term abortions and the risks that accompany them are also reduced if women don't have to spend weeks saving money, getting overdrafts/loans etc.

by AM Sun Sep 02, 2007 07:58

Crisis pregnancy causes trauma.

by John Cage Mon Sep 03, 2007 15:19

It is not in the states' interest to have potential citizens' terminated, so that would improbable.

by dr nick Mon Sep 03, 2007 15:24

" the ex-WRC another twisted catholic profit-making organisation to feed off the trauma of vulnerable people? "
"cos they seek to damage and profit from private trauma (bit like Dorset Street, really)"

How does the wrc/abbey family planning make profit from the service it provides to women at the moment? Whatever we say about the wrc in dorset street it is quite safe to say that it is not motivated for financial reasons.

"directed by men "
Once again baseless assertions.The wrc is a women ran service.All the women I spoke to in the wrc were young women in their thirties.Also there is no denying that Irish pro life groups are predominatly female.The same cannot be said for pro choice groups.

by Godot Mon Sep 03, 2007 15:40

The WRC is registered to Michael Larkin from the Christian Solidarity Party. Back when it was called Aadams it was owned by another party member Eamonn Murphy. The chairperson for the Pro-Life campaign and Youth Defence are male

by Gaz B -(A)- - wsm (pers cap) Mon Sep 03, 2007 18:18

"It is not in the states' interest to have potential citizens' terminated, so that would improbable."

Free, safe and legal abortion would hardly be detrimental to the state. I doubt Brian Cowen sits in the Dept of Finance slamming his fists on the table thinking that only if it weren't for Irish women having abortions, thereby denying him "potential citizens", he'd have the tax revenue for a decent health service or social housing. Over 5,000 Irish women travel abroad for the procedure annually. It's not as if providing the option for women on these shores is going to threaten the state - that's just nonsensical, almost as nonsensical as the portrayal of the pro-choice movement as a bunch of males forcing their opinions on women while the pro-life movement is somehow a recreated as a bastion of feminism defending the interests of Irish women.

What should be in the states interest is the welfare of its citizens. Pro-lifers use womens welfare issues to to try and justify what is primarliy a personal moral position. All of these welfare issues that they continually trot out in favour of continued prohibition would be significantly improved by the introduction of free, safe and legal abortion:

1. "Abortion profiteers" - simple solution, bring in state funded legal abortion.
2. Womens mental health - legalise it, stop sweeping the issue under the carpet, end the stigma and provide full counselling services.
3. Womens physical health - stop exaggerating about the possible effects. Regulate it and providing it free & legal in this state to reduce the number of late term abortions and their associated possible risks.

Plus there should be free access to multiple forms of contraception, including the morning-after pill, more creche facilities etc.

The states role is not to legislate for morals, it is (or should be) to protect the welfare of those within it. Anytime the state has been used to try and legislate for morals, whether its access to abortion, divorce, contraception or homosexuality it's been disastrous.

by John Cage Mon Sep 03, 2007 19:39

I dont think it's a moral issue from the states' point of view, it's grow or die.

Most women who get pregnant didn't want to get pregnant when they had sex but thats how we are all here. Free socially exceptable abortion would kill Ireland in 25 years.

It's never gonna happen, ever.

http://www.savethemales.ca/

by gemma Mon Sep 03, 2007 19:44

'over 5,000 Irish women travel abroad for abortions annually'- did you just pluck this figure out of the air? there is actually no way to pin down such a figure. this is a common ploy thatf pro abortion people commonly use to make-believe that there is more of a demand for abortion than there actually is. Statistics gathered from uk abortion clinics and others cannot be trusted to be reliable or impartial.
If such a volume of women actually were going for abortions we would consequentially see the results in Irish hospitals. Many british women give
Taking this figure and applying it since 1992( thats 15 x 5000) there will approximately have been at least 75,000 irish abortions. And assuming that this women have only had 1 abortion that is at least 75,000 Irish women who have had an abortion.. say between the age of 13 and 60, at least 75,000 Irish women have an abortion...come on...
Give me some real facts...If this many Irish women have had abortions we would see the effect in our society and we would hear about it.
These lies are not fooling any one.

by Gaz B -(A) Mon Sep 03, 2007 20:18

"Free socially exceptable abortion would kill Ireland in 25 years."
Care to explain how?

"Statistics gathered from uk abortion clinics and others cannot be trusted to be reliable or impartial. f such a volume of women actually were going for abortions we would consequentially see the results in Irish hospitals."
The figure is 5,585 according to British Department of Health. Why would we see the results in Irish hospitals? People don't want to see or know about how may women currently choose to have abortions, thats why the state sweeps the issue under the carpet by forcing people to travel abroad - An Irish solution to an Irish problem.

"These lies are not fooling any one."
Well...the pro-Life Campaign believes them...and welcomes them because the number decresed slightly.
http://www.prolifecampaign.ie/news/press/20070619.php

by Plato Tue Sep 04, 2007 10:39

"Well...the pro-Life Campaign believes them...and welcomes them because the number decresed slightly"

So if pro-life people believe them, they are gospel are they? I wonder do they hold the monopoly on truth on any other matters.
Obviously the decrease in the figures was welcomed and not the figures themselves.

by C Murray Tue Sep 04, 2007 13:32

'morals and ethics and carnal forbearance'- the state must grow or die...
eh?

Would ye be asking the women you hope to be getting pregnant, in the interests of creating a 'state'
how they feel about the whole lie down and do it for Ireland thing'???

This thread is about:-
1. A rogue agency , formerly called WRC (nicked by the profiteers from :-The Women's Resource
Centre' in UCD).
2. It is about the human right to abortion , the necessity for termination in certain circumstances.
3. Its about the provision of the full range of pregancy services to irish women and girls.
4.Its about not having to travel to another jurisdiction, to enable familial and partner support.
5. its about facing the hypocrisy of the Health Dept who have not legislated for 'x', when
the judgement clearly indicated that abortion should be a matter of legislation.

Its also about a group of activists, who include many women speaking up to their rights
and the rights of their kids to access free, safe and legal abortion in Ireland.
(cf Choice Ireland Founding Documents)

I do notice that a lot of the people who have attempted to derail the thread into a
badly grasped and wholly uneducated theological debate have refused to look at
the human rights of the pre-consent child to privacy and bodily integrity and
in so doing are creating through their ignorance the exact scenario which has
led to the death of Ann lovett, the 'X'case and the association of sex with shame.

The woman and female child have the right to access the full range of medical and pregnancy
services in this country , is it cowardice on the part of our gender imbalanced legislature or
complete inability to confront the issues?

by John Cage Tue Sep 04, 2007 14:35

"It is not in the states' interest to have potential citizens' terminated, so that would improbable."

In This Thread: people do not understand that their opinions may differ from other people's opinion.

I don't really mind if abortion is legalised.
I don't want the state to pay for it.

by Duty of care Tue Sep 04, 2007 15:07

The state has a duty of care to its citizens, this entitles the woman or girl who requires
sex education/ abortion services/contraception to that care. she should not have to travel cos
a bunch of dissolute gambling addicts run the country and are afraid to'rock the boat'
when it comes to human rights= the state has a duty of care, which will be outlined to
the state in the upcoming judgements of the European courts of human rights regarding
rights to medical abortion.

by shoegirl Tue Sep 04, 2007 15:57

Yes they are trying to intimidate. And the tactics are identical - which is why I think its disappointing to see CI using them. The only way clinics like this will close down is if they cease to have clients - and no better way to do that than to protest outside: why do you think the anti-abortion lobby has been doing this in the US for so long? Its a highly successful if highly controversial tactic. And if CI want women to have a real choice then they should concentrate on direct lobbying rather than picking sideline fistycuffs like this.

Information on this issue is highly subjective and largely dependent on the ideological position of whoever is making the statement. Even published medical studies are highly biased either way. The truth is that we don't really know what the long term impacts are and to a large extent they depend on the individuals involved and separate factors. To some extent the entire debate over so-called rogue agencies is highly hypocritical of a pro-choice movement which bravely set up in the face of huge legal threats, agencies in the early 90s that to all intents and purposes were "rogue" agencies.

We need to get back to objective debate rather than potshots and accusations re: the religious persuasion of those making their views heard. What matters is what we do now and how society here decides to tackle this issue.

by Gaz B -(A)- Tue Sep 04, 2007 22:51

"So if pro-life people believe them, they are gospel are they? I wonder do they hold the monopoly on truth on any other matters. "

My original comment was made in response to a claim that the 5000 plus figure is a "lie" that is "fooling no one". It's not just pro-choice campaigners that accept it but the Pro-life Campaign, British Dept of Health, Irish government etc. ...but apparrently we are all being fooled because we'd somehow "see the results in Irish hospitals".

5,585 is only the figure for British clinics, it doesn't include women travelling to mainland Europe.

by Plato Wed Sep 05, 2007 09:13

"5,585 is only the figure for British clinics, it doesn't include women travelling to mainland Europe."

True and sad.

by Chris Thu Sep 06, 2007 15:59

You can't know whether or not u've done 'the right thing' - just forgive y'self & do yr best to have a good life. The planet is getting crowded now, if that's any consolation. I had an abortion years ago, & tho' it wasn't without trauma, it was my un-coerced choice at the time & I'm glad I had the choice. If religion is getting to u, remember God will forgive you whatever you've to regret/repent. The attitude of 'pro-lifers' is very damaging to sensitive women who've had an abortion. They need to be a mite more Christian, as in Christ's attitude, rather than in the attitude of established religion.

by C Murray Thu Sep 06, 2007 17:53

Taking it from the comment re Chris having an abortion, I am assuming that its a female
contributor- therefore thats two women contributors of the same name writing on the
Choice thread re established religion and woman's choice- maybe add in a letter or intial.
am saying this to relieve confusions, cos I certainly would never take a quasi-counselling role
and give advice to someone who clearly needs the aid of a professional counsellor.
The thread was discussing the rogue clinic and the issue of professional counselling
which should be offered in a non-partisan, free and non-directional manner. it has descended
somewhat into a free for all bb style chat room which is again derailing the points made
by C.I and the issues re women's rights and free /safe and legal abortion are in the link
at the top of the page entitled- 'Founding Documents.'

by Chris McCabe Sun Sep 09, 2007 16:43

The issue is to do with all the emotional baggage that surrounds abortion, & if it's any help to 'regretful', it's given in a spirit of good will & healing for her pain; if that's 'incorrect' to you, well, nuts!

by NEW PLACE - nill Thu Feb 26, 2015 23:24

HI THE PACE IN THE PHOTO Aadams’, it was owned by Eamonn Murphy, another fundamentalist Christian party member. HAS NOW MOVE TO THERE NEW PLACE WRITE NEXT TO FAMILY PLANING CLINIC THERE PLACE IS PINK THAT THE NEW PLACE Aadams’, it was owned by Eamonn Murphy, another fundamentalist Christian party member. BLUE THE NO NAME ON THERE NEW PLACE UP DATE 2015 STILL DOING THE SAME AS BEFORE IN DUBLIN NEXT TO THE CHURCH ST LUCKS UP BY THE HOSPITAL

by Rua Fri Feb 27, 2015 09:06

I know one woman who went over to london,a marie stopes clinic to have an abortion,she had to get the money together in cash and get a pre ordered taxi over there,she was met by the most uncaring,nonchalant abortionist,he didnt even give her proper anaesthetic,it was a different type of drug that would put you out but you would still be awake,as they didnt have any anaesthetic left.The girl who got her abortion and says she doesnt regret the abortion itself was traumatised for many years after the procdure.The procedure itself was painful and the pain afterwards was unbearable,she was only given a paracetemol by a chatty and laughing black nurse,who couldnt give two hoots or emphatize what she was going through...

Abortionists are profiteers plain and simple and anybody who says different is a fool,regardless of whether you are on the pro life side or not..

by racistwatch Fri Feb 27, 2015 18:04

Hey Rua you racist, did the fact that the nurse was black really make a difference?
Why even mention that fact?
why not just say that the nurse on duty didn't care?

by Rua Fri Feb 27, 2015 19:02

I happened to mention she was black,so what,big deal,where is the racism in that?Moronic...You are looking for racism,even when it's not even there,the point i was making was not that she was black,it was the fact her and the abortionist showed no EMPAHTY to my friend,and just handed her a paracetemol,they didnt even properly INFORM her that they were not going to fully knock her out,just give her a drug that she would be out of it a bit,but still FULLY CONCIOUS.........

The point im really trying to make is that, these abortionists and abortionist nursing assistants do not CARE AT ALL...I seen a piece in the Irish Times newspaper where marie stopes took out a newspaper ad in that paper suggesting they would ''care for the irish girls travelling abroad'',i felt sick reading it,i felt it was serious propoganda...Care for them?Like what???Hand them a paracetemol when they are bent over in two in agony...And tell them well yknow theres no anaesthetic left but we have this other drug that will knock you out,and lie to you about it when it doesnt fully knock you out ,you are still conscious..Yeah that's real care and empathy right there,she was all chats and laughs and did not give one s**t of an emotion to that girl who just went through the MOST TRAUMATIC experience of her life...

Thats my point.

Whether you are on the pro life or abortion side of the argument,it's pretty cold to treat people like that!

And just to add..To suggest im a racist is ridiculous; the abortionist himself was a muslim looking guy and you didnt see me mentioning that,i could have mentioned she was an irish nurse or a filipino nurse if she was irish or filipino,and i would mention it,what is the big panic?

To idly and lazily throw around words like oh you ''racist'' is ridiculous,racist is the most abused and overused word by people like you,its like its your full time job to sniff out these imaginary racists...

If she was a nurse with an irish accent,i would have mentioned it..........Would you have called me a racist then????Probably not.. :)

It just shows how ridiculous you are..

by racistwatch Sat Feb 28, 2015 13:08

stop digging racist.

by Rua Sat Feb 28, 2015 19:17

Get off your moral high-horse.. How did you deduct im a racist from mentioning she was a black lady?I didnt call her the n-word did i?? If she was irish,and i happened to mention she was irish(which i would),you wouldnt have bothered calling me a racist,now would you??? You have to examine your own extreme behaviour.. Knee jerk reactions and calling me a racist is not on....

by racistwatch Sun Mar 01, 2015 00:50

Dig Dig.......

by Rua Sun Mar 01, 2015 15:47

I am digging,and what im finding is an irrational,extreme individual who will glady slur anybody a racist...Beware of ''racistwatch''. If you mention a nurse is black,he will be foaming at the mouth like a rabid dog accusing you of being a racist...

Before this devolves into a mud-slinging match,i would like to remind you to stick to the issue of christians and the expressed views on abortion,this is what this is about.

by Rational Ecologist Wed Mar 04, 2015 11:59

After a long black/dark night, the orange early morning sun revealed a thick, sweet, white coated meadow; the green of the grass the yellow of the primula, obscured by a late-spring frost. My fingertips turning blue, I blew on my numbing hand and thought the better of it. The red glow of the embers a larger temptation than the bitterness of this iced morning. I removed my pink scarf and my ass found the familIarity of my fading grey sofa. A warming, rich roast, black coffee and a some dark chocolate a better choice to start this day; this day of colour and cold.