Tweeting an abortion

baby_lemonade

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

I rather think it sounds like the police don't wish to acknowledge their responsibilities there.

Surely the Protection from Harassment Act would cover this?

On the other hand - couldnt some sympathetic group take out a blanket injunction forbidding these anti-abortionists being within a certain distance of vulnerable women?

Nope, they've been taken to court and the judge said it's free speech and doesn't constitute an offence under the public order act.

At least they've stopped harassing women outside the clinic I suppose
(They've moved from the clinic to the town centre as they think it will get them more exposure for their cause).

Personally I regard it as a hate crime.

unholyangel

baby_lemonade wrote: »

..which is underhanded and misleading, in my opinion.

There are actually many doctors here who refuse to sign the papers for an 'abortion on demand' as they have every right to do. Equally of course there are many who would sign.

I'm not saying it would happen in this particular case, but if the father (who appears to have been written out of the script) disagreed with the baby being aborted he could probably legally attempt to stop the abortion if he chose to, as there is no mention of physical or mental health issues in the mother.

An interesting case, which will no doubt get many peoples backs up on either side of the debate. I'm just amazed at this woman's bravery (or foolishness) at putting the contents of her womb up for public discussion!

The father may be able to temporarily stop the abortion, but ultimately their challenge would fail due to the human rights of the mother.

And while I might have sympathy for men in that situation, until we can figure out a way to make babies without using womens bodies as incubators, thats exactly the way it should be and I really wouldn't expect any supposedly developed country to make womans humans right contingent on her partners permission.

gettingtheresometime

Personally I think this thread should be shut down now.

Not as I'm either pro or anti abortion (one woman shoes and all that) but I think this is one of the every few subjects that social media / Internet forums doesn't discuss well.

So shut it down now rather than later

baby_lemonade

unholyangel wrote: »

The father may be able to temporarily stop the abortion, but ultimately their challenge would fail due to the human rights of the mother.

And while I might have sympathy for men in that situation, until we can figure out a way to make babies without using womens bodies as incubators, thats exactly the way it should be and I really wouldn't expect any supposedly developed country to make womans humans right contingent on her partners permission.

Roe vs Wade..

Could be reversed at any time..

moneyistooshorttomention

Arguing to have the thread shut down now - in case a critic comes on - sounds to me like a critic just HAS come on and is arguing for the thread to be shut down now in case etc etc...:cool:

qwert_yuiop

Callie22 wrote: »

The laws in Ireland are just so backward on this.

In the Irish republic, the only way to change the law is for a referendum to be held and the public to vote to alter the constitution to then allow the government to debate this.
In Northern Ireland, the electorate would need to elect a large majority of members to the devolved government who had declared a wish to extend the 1967 abortion act to Northern Ireland. This is also unlikely as parties do not see this as important enough an issue.

You have to remember Ireland is only a short ferry ride or even shorter flight from Great Britain, so Ireland has never really had to face up to the fact that there is a demand for abortion. If we were a thousand miles out in the Atlantic rather than 18, we'd have had to have accepted this a long time ago. Same as Poland - they're about to ban abortion, meaning women will simply take the train to Germany.

Rosemary7391

gettingtheresometime wrote: »

Personally I think this thread should be shut down now.

Not as I'm either pro or anti abortion (one woman shoes and all that) but I think this is one of the every few subjects that social media / Internet forums doesn't discuss well.

So shut it down now rather than later

You've probably got a point.. although I'm really curious as to the reasons why someone would think protesting against abortion (peacefully, in a suitable place ie not right outside the clinic/hospital) is a hate crime or harassment. I've not come across that viewpoint before.

baby_lemonade

Rosemary7391 wrote: »

You've probably got a point.. although I'm really curious as to the reasons why someone would think protesting against abortion (peacefully, in a suitable place ie not right outside the clinic/hospital) is a hate crime or harassment. I've not come across that viewpoint before.

..because in my opinion it's a medical issue. Between the patient and their doctor. It's no-one else's business.

gettingtheresometime

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

Arguing to have the thread shut down now - in case a critic comes on - sounds to me like a critic just HAS come on and is arguing for the thread to be shut down now in case etc etc...:cool:

No argument and I haven't got a hidden agenda.

Just enough experience to know this is a topic where never the twain shall meet and it usually gets abusive to boot

Rosemary7391

baby_lemonade wrote: »

..because in my opinion it's a medical issue. Between the patient and their doctor. It's no-one else's business.

On an individual level, yes it is between patient and doctor. But whether it should be allowed or not and the rules surrounding that are for society to decide? So people should be able to campaign for the current rules to be more or less restrictive than they currently are, possibly in light of medical advances or changing understandings, or just because they disagree. I think that's important - it is after all how we got the current rules!