Ireland votes to repeal 8th amendment, legalising abortion

[ENMaker]

https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0526/966122-eighth-amendment-referendum/

 

That link is whatever, it's not finalised yet but there's just 3 constituencies left to declare and yes is at 67.3% so it's certain it's going through, every constituency so far has voted yes and the closest margin was 12% with near a majority 20%+ margins so this is quite comprehensive.

 

Winter no likey.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Iowa just passed a 6 week abortion ban and Trump will get another scotus nominee. You country can drink itself to death for all I care

I do hope I'm alive to see declining birth rates contribute to the Islamic take over of Western Europe. That will be satisfying to watch

[Sunshine Jesse]

Most of my comments on this issue are about the nature of the debate itself. I don't really hold a strong enough opinion on it to make a point.
 

Iowa just passed a 6 week abortion ban and Trump will get another scotus nominee. You country can drink itself to death for all I care
I do hope I'm alive to see declining birth rates contribute to the Islamic take over of Western Europe. That will be satisfying to watch

I get the strangest feeling that your opinions on this issue aren't as directly causally related as you might believe.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

MFW, I owe shard an apology. He was right about everything

[Sunshine Jesse]

Could you please explain how those facts are linked as strongly as you seem to believe?

 

I want to hear your actual argument, because what you said on this matter appears to just be meaningless drivel. This is debates, not the drool-on-the-keyboard-out-of-anger forum.

[Nathanael D. Striker]

Iowa just passed a 6 week abortion ban...

Which spits in the face of Casey v. Planned Parenthood (we talked about this awhile ago, Winter), so I highly doubt it's going to survive a judicial review, but of course forcing a judicial review on the matter is the point being made, I imagine.

 

Anyway, I didn't keep tabs on this issue, but it seems some of my friends (who aren't Irish btw) are happy about the result.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Which spits in the face of Casey v. Planned Parenthood (we talked about this awhile ago, Winter), so I highly doubt it's going to survive a judicial review, but of course forcing a judicial review on the matter is the point being made, I imagine.

 

Anyway, I didn't keep tabs on this issue, but it seems some of my friends (who aren't Irish btw) are happy about the result.

8th Circuit is 91% GOP nominees, and including one of Trump's that called abortion the worst evil since slavery. This isn't 9CoA where the Liberal Justices can pull rulings out of their asses based on tweets. 

 

I mean your friends are most likely political similar to you, which would imply they're lefties....so not shocking

Could you please explain how those facts are linked as strongly as you seem to believe?

 

I want to hear your actual argument, because what you said on this matter appears to just be meaningless drivel. This is debates, not the drool-on-the-keyboard-out-of-anger forum.

Ireland actually has one of the highest fertility rates compared to the rest of the Western Europe, and correlated, had a very strict abortion law that prohibited any abortions. They're planning to legalize up to 12 week, with a number of other steps which would put them in line with Germany and Italy.

 

You could do a 2 stage least square test by comparing late term states (legal up to 24 weeks in UK) to T1 states (Germany, Italy and a couple others) to prove causality)

 

For us, the US is currently below the Sub Prime Fertility rate, but if you translate about 95% of abortions committed last year to live births we'd be slightly over the level of births we need to not have a declining population

 

95% isn't out of my ass:  This report reviews available statistics regarding reasons given for obtaining abortions in the United States, including surveys by the Alan Guttmacher Institute and data from seven state health/statistics agencies that report relevant statistics (Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Minnesota, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Utah). The official data imply that AGI claims regarding "hard case" abortions are inflated by roughly a factor of three. Actual percentage of U.S. abortions in "hard cases" are estimated as follows: in cases of rape, 0.3%; in cases of incest, 0.03%; in cases of risk to maternal life, 0.1%; in cases of risk to maternal health, 0.8%; and in cases of fetal health issues, 0.5%. About 98.3% of abortions in the United States are elective, including socio-economic reasons or for birth control. This includes perhaps 30% for primarily economic reasons and possibly 0.1% each for sex selection and selective reduction of multifetal pregnancies.

 

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html

 

Now I've taken the bait of a yes vote jabroni, but it was pretty much Enguin's intent in the OP. So have a rotten day and funk off I guess :)))

[Sunshine Jesse]

Yeah but how's that related to an Islamic takeover at all? And what's your evidence that birth rates will really decline enough to accelerate this by any significant amount?

 

Come on, Winter. Work harder. Your logic doesn't link up as intuitively as you think it does.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Yeah but how's that related to an Islamic takeover at all? And what's your evidence that birth rates will really decline enough to accelerate this by any significant amount?

 

Come on, Winter. Work harder. Your logic doesn't link up as intuitively as you think it does.

???

 

Declining population = tighter labor market = more visa grants to immigrants

 

Highest source of Immigrants in WE comes in the form of Islamic Refugees

 

Seriously? Where have you been.  We're seeing it in the US actually, Capital owners are jabroniing about labor markets being tight and needing more H1B. You can see it with the de-whitening of WE. 

 

It could be any group of immigrants, but I hope it's young Muslim males because they're the most likely to destroy western European identity. Which is more than what these sorry sobs deserve

[Dad]

 

So have a rotten day and funk off I guess :)))

 

I don't have a problem with the rest of your argument since you supported it.  This is the part I have a problem with.  Act like an adult.  I won't ask twice.

[Nathanael D. Striker]

8th Circuit is 91% GOP nominees, and including one of Trump's that called abortion the worst evil since slavery. This isn't 9CoA where the Liberal Justices can pull rulings out of their asses based on tweets.

 

But do realize that The Supreme Court tends to hold precedence in the highest regard. There may be more examples of The Supreme Court going against precedence, but Brown v. Board of Education comes to mind. Also, Casey v. Planned Parenthood did slightly change the precedence of Roe v. Wade, but it didn't over turn it. That is something to consider as the inevitable legal battle shapes up.

 

I mean your friends are most likely political similar to you, which would imply they're lefties....so not shocking

 

Well, they are Democrats while I'm an Independent. I do side with them on the issue, but I try to use additional arguments than "my body, my choice" that some of them use such as Casey v. Planned Parenthood (haven't read the whole thing, but I have a generalised understanding of it).

 

But I think we may be getting a bit off-topic here.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

I don't have a problem with the rest of your argument since you supported it.  This is the part I have a problem with.  Act like an adult.  I won't ask twice.

Shrugs, his actions put him in the same league as Nazis in my eyes. IIRC you were ok with punching Nazis. I'm merely not overly concerned about an advocate for infanticide having a good day. Warn me if you must, but I'm not interested in letting you muzzle my views

But do realize that The Supreme Court tends to hold precedence in the highest regard. There may be more examples of The Supreme Court going against precedence, but Brown v. Board of Education comes to mind. Also, Casey v. Planned Parenthood did slightly change the precedence of Roe v. Wade, but it didn't over turn it. That is something to consider as the inevitable legal battle shapes up.

 

Well, they are Democrats while I'm an Independent. I do side with them on the issue, but I try to use additional arguments than "my body, my choice" that some of them use such as Casey v. Planned Parenthood (haven't read the whole thing, but I have a generalised understanding of it).

 

But I think we may be getting a bit off-topic here.

Casey is a load of bullshit, viability isn't a set term, what was viable in 1992 (when Casey was a thing) isn't the limit of viability right now. So all those 24 week old infants that were aborted under Casey but are barred today are actually human. 

 

 

[Sunshine Jesse]

???

 

Declining population = tighter labor market = more visa grants to immigrants

 

Highest source of Immigrants in WE comes in the form of Islamic Refugees

 

Seriously? Where have you been.  We're seeing it in the US actually, Capital owners are jabroniing about labor markets being tight and needing more H1B. You can see it with the de-whitening of WE. 

 

It could be any group of immigrants, but I hope it's young Muslim males because they're the most likely to destroy western European identity. Which is more than what these sorry sobs deserve

How does legal abortion equate to a declining population in the context of Ireland, or Europe in general? I get it in the US, but not in the context of Europe. You said it yourself that Ireland's fertility rates were among the highest. How would abortion impact them that much? I want specific numbers.

 

I also take issue with this:

 

For us, the US is currently below the Sub Prime Fertility rate, but if you translate about 95% of abortions committed last year to live births we'd be slightly over the level of births we need to not have a declining population

 

You'd need statistics from ~15 years ago for this to be relevant to the claim of abortion equating to a smaller workforce, unless you think babies can work from the moment they leave the womb.

 

Abortion might not have had such a large impact on the fertility rates back then. And if so, there's a lot more to this issue than you might be giving it credit for, and things are linked a lot less strongly than you seem to believe.

 

Shrugs, his actions put him in the same league as Nazis in my eyes. IIRC you were ok with punching Nazis. I'm merely not overly concerned about an advocate for infanticide having a good day. Warn me if you must, but I'm not interested in letting you muzzle my views

Don't get this thread closed, you idiot. This is your chance to convince someone on the fence. Don't squander it.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

How does legal abortion equate to a declining population in the context of Ireland, or Europe in general? I get it in the US, but not in the context of Europe. You said it yourself that Ireland's fertility rates were among the highest. How would abortion impact them that much? I want specific numbers.

 

I also take issue with this:

 

 

You'd need statistics from ~15 years ago for this to be relevant to the claim of abortion equating to a smaller workforce, unless you think babies can work from the moment they leave the womb.

 

Abortion might not have had such a large impact on the fertility rates back then. And if so, there's a lot more to this issue than you might be giving it credit for, and things are linked a lot less strongly than you seem to believe.

 

Don't get this thread closed, you idiot. This is your chance to convince someone on the fence. Don't squander it.

 

 

Ireland is a little higher than the rest of Europe

 

 

 

     Legal on request      Restricted to cases of maternal life, mental health, health, rape, fetal defects, and/or socioeconomic factors      Restricted to cases of maternal life, mental health, health, rape, and/or fetal defects      Restricted to cases of maternal life, mental health, health, and/or rape      Restricted to cases of maternal life, mental health, and/or health      Restricted to cases of maternal life      Illegal with no exceptions      No information

 

There's a very strong correlation, and a significant causation when you compare a treatment groups inside western Europe.

 

(The reason for doing is to have common trends. Ethiopia and Germany don't share common development stages, but Ireland and Germany and the UK pretty much do). It's not perfect, but the effect is still there

 

The pro-life campaign claimed that the 8th saved about between high 4 to low 5 figures of lives yearly. That's now gone. In the US, about 60-70% of abortions happen in the first trimester. So let's take the most optimistic approach. About 8000 terminated yearly. That'd drop Ireland into the same rate as the rest of WE

 

 

---

 

Let's look at a different Graphic

 

 

 

Map of countries by fertility rate (2015), according to CIA World Factbook 6–6.99 Children 5–5.99 Children 4–4.99 Children 3–3.99 Children 2–2.99 Children 1–1.99 Children

 

15 years ago, the # of abortions in the US were 848,163. If 95% of those children were born, we'd be green. 

 

---

 

Like I said, to me they're nothing short of Nazis. Convincing them isn't my intention. 

[Nathanael D. Striker]

Casey is a load of bullshit, viability isn't a set term, what was viable in 1992 (when Casey was a thing) isn't the limit of viability right now. So all those 24 week old infants that were aborted under Casey but are barred today are actually human.

 

You do recall the reason viability wasn't strictly defined, right? Come on Winter, we had a peaceful discussion in this before. If you want to blame something for the shifting goal post, blame technology. I found it smart that the Supreme Court set it as they did in Casey only because, in a general understand, it tried to balance with sides while maintaining as much of the Roe v. Wade precedent as possible. Otherwise, the trimester system would have stayed in place, which you must admit is worse than the shifting goalpost from Casey.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

You do recall the reason viability wasn't strictly defined, right? Come on Winter, we had a peaceful discussion in this before. If you want to blame something for the shifting goal post, blame technology. I found it smart that the Supreme Court set it as they did in Casey only because, in a general understand, it tried to balance with sides while maintaining as much of the Roe v. Wade precedent as possible. Otherwise, the trimester system would have stayed in place, which you must admit is worse than the shifting goalpost from Casey.

You were also never able to answer my question:

 

Let me pose it to you again: If personhood is determined by viability

 

And viability in 1980 was 30 weeks, but is 20-23 weeks today. Were 25 week old fetuses aborted in 1983, viable today, not human?

 

---

 

Trimester System would be better actually. 

 

http://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx

 

T1:

 

Should be legal // Should be illegal // Depends (vol.) // No opinion

 

  % % % %

 

In the first three months of pregnancy   2012 Dec 27-30

 

61 31 6 3

 

In the second three months of pregnancy   2012 Dec 27-30

 

27 64 5 4

 

In the last three months of pregnancy   2012 Dec 27-30

 

14 80 4 2

 

 

You see about the same split as Ireland had, people suppor 2/1 in the first Trimester, and strongly oppose afterwards. But dems just filibuster a 20 week abortion ban which is at the end of the second and near the start of the third, so I doubt the abortion lobby cares

 

You could get a constitutional amendment through with those numbers

[Dad]

 but I'm not interested in letting you muzzle my views

 

 

What are you talking about?  I literally said I don't have an issue with your argument.  I have an issue with your behavior in the thread.  If you can't debate while following the rules, then you can step out like anyone else.  

[Nathanael D. Striker]

You were also never able to answer my question:

 

Let me pose it to you again: If personhood is determined by viability

 

And viability in 1980 was 30 weeks, but is 20-23 weeks today. Were 25 week old fetuses aborted in 1983, viable today, not human?

You do know that's a stupid question meant to trap people, right? It's a human fetus, so of course it's a funking human. That's not the issue though, in spite of what you claim. Sadly, viability isn't the only issue since autonomy is also at play, but viability, I think, is meant to play a role in determining when the fetus's autonomy comes into play. Because of course autonomy a major topic in this argument, and is one of pro-life's favorite talking points.

 

I don't expect this answer to be satisfactory, especially since I didn't put as much thought into it as I should have, but yeah.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

If you're willingly terminating a human there's another word for that

 

It's not a stupid question at all, because now you've admitted the fetus is human

 

Can a bus driver who drives 30 miles over the speed limit, drives his bus over a railguard, but then doesn't offer a hand to a passenger who then falls off the cliff to his death be prosecuted under murder or manslaughter charges?

What are you talking about?  I literally said I don't have an issue with your argument.  I have an issue with your behavior in the thread.  If you can't debate while following the rules, then you can step out like anyone else.  

I explained that. Enguin and others like him acted like Nazis. And I gave him the same greeting I would give to any Nazi I came across

[Sunshine Jesse]

who cares (i do)

 

That's pretty fascinating. I'm glad your argument is more nuanced than it appears at first glance.

 

I don't really have much to add. The rest is just rhetoric.

[Nathanael D. Striker]

If you're willingly terminating a human there's another word for that

 

It's not a stupid question at all, because now you've admitted the fetus is human

 

Knew you'd pull this trap. What did you think I'd call a fetus? A dog? A cat? Some strange alien creature? It's a human fetus, biologically. If you wish to use that as your main talking point, then I suggest you don't as it'd be pointless for this discussion. You should know better than that, my good sir. As your other question, your point is? Also, learn to phrase your questions better please.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

"A meaningless clump of cells" is the usual lefty answer

[ENMaker]

The pro-life campaign claimed that the 8th saved about between high 4 to low 5 figures of lives yearly. That's now gone. In the US, about 60-70% of abortions happen in the first trimester. So let's take the most optimistic approach. About 8000 terminated yearly. That'd drop Ireland into the same rate as the rest of WE

 

They made a lot of claims, the details of the one you're referencing were basically to say that over the 33 years (at the time) since the abortion act was introduced, over 100,000 lives had been "saved" by it.

 

This conclusion was reached by taking the abortion rates of four other European countries (in three cases starting from 1994 and for Portugal 2007 as it was only legalised there then, the 1994 starting point being justified by them assuming it would have taken a further ten years to legalise abortion fully in Ireland had the amendment not passed, another element of guesswork to this already very flawed "science") applying them to Irish births over the same period, adding them all up and finding the average. The highest imagined equivalent was 196,000 based on the England & Wales rate (data was already combined presumably because of the UK though Scotland doesn't feature, don't know why) , lowest was 58,000 based on Portugal's, and then two more in between which were 75,000 for Belgium and 121,000 for Spain.

 

You can see it here, it's about as threadbare a bit of research as you'll find. https://prolifecampaign.ie/main/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/ProLifeCampaign_Actuarial_Report_and_Commentary_7September2016.pdf 

 

It's quite obvious they just wanted to get their 100,000 number so they found a way to get to it and then cut out all the other countries listed earlier in the study for no stated reason (the only reason they appear at all is I presume to make this whole thing seem a bit more credible), creating an arbitrary subsection of an already arbitrary subsection of nations with legalised abortion just to make up a figure based on guesswork that would be nice and round for a soundbite.

 

It's not necessarily an inaccurate figure but the way it was arrived at is pretty invalid and contrived, they obviously reached their conclusion and then built back from there rather than actual concise effort leading to this conclusion.

[Delibirb]

Declining birth rates isn't a bad thing. If that is your only or major issue with legal abortions (which I recognize it is not in your case, Winter) then it's an uninformed reasoning.

 

Birth rates are supposed to decline, its natural, its an indication that the population is doing well and safely reaching the maximum capacity for its environment. It's got to slow down so that it can go back and forth relatively stably around the maximum population number.

 

I don't think there's any reason to discuss with you on any of your other points, Winter, because you still can't create productive discussion, you still use traps and loaded rhetoric, you still cherry-pick what you want to acknowledge, and you still get hyper-defensive and needlessly stand-offish, trying to change people's minds rather than show them your own. This isn't a reasonable debate, even though it really could be if you honestly wanted it to be.

[Ryusei the Morning Star]

Declining birth rates isn't a bad thing. If that is your only or major issue with legal abortions (which I recognize it is not in your case, Winter) then it's an uninformed reasoning.

 

Birth rates are supposed to decline, its natural, its an indication that the population is doing well and safely reaching the maximum capacity for its environment. It's got to slow down so that it can go back and forth relatively stably around the maximum population number.

 

I don't think there's any reason to discuss with you on any of your other points, Winter, because you still can't create productive discussion, you still use traps and loaded rhetoric, you still cherry-pick what you want to acknowledge, and you still get hyper-defensive and needlessly stand-offish, trying to change people's minds rather than show them your own. This isn't a reasonable debate, even though it really could be if you honestly wanted it to be.

If it reached maximum capacity people would not be clamoring for more Visas. The US is currently in very tight labor market (which is a good thing, wages will rise), but if it stays this tight (1) safety nets will fail (2) markets will become insolvent

 

The rest of this post is a just outsourced claims and fancy works. I'm sorry you find any logical construct that challenges your view as a "trap"

 

It really isn't a trap. You can just admit they're human and still aren't entitled to life (Thomson is a well known feminist ethics big name who did this very thing).

 

I've not been accused of anything (before your post) to be defensive about. Jesse asked me to source how abortions dropped the US from a self sustaining population to one that's below the SFR, and I did so

They made a lot of claims, the details of the one you're referencing were basically to say that over the 33 years (at the time) since the abortion act was introduced, over 100,000 lives had been "saved" by it.

 

This conclusion was reached by taking the abortion rates of four other European countries (in three cases starting from 1994 and for Portugal 2007 as it was only legalised there then, the 1994 starting point being justified by them assuming it would have taken a further ten years to legalise abortion fully in Ireland had the amendment not passed, another element of guesswork to this already very flawed "science") applying them to Irish births over the same period, adding them all up and finding the average. The highest imagined equivalent was 196,000 based on the England & Wales rate (data was already combined presumably because of the UK though Scotland doesn't feature, don't know why) , lowest was 58,000 based on Portugal's, and then two more in between which were 75,000 for Belgium and 121,000 for Spain.

 

You can see it here, it's about as threadbare a bit of research as you'll find. https://prolifecampaign.ie/main/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/ProLifeCampaign_Actuarial_Report_and_Commentary_7September2016.pdf 

 

It's quite obvious they just wanted to get their 100,000 number so they found a way to get to it and then cut out all the other countries listed earlier in the study for no stated reason (the only reason they appear at all is I presume to make this whole thing seem a bit more credible), creating an arbitrary subsection of an already arbitrary subsection of nations with legalised abortion just to make up a figure based on guesswork that would be nice and round for a soundbite.

 

It's not necessarily an inaccurate figure but the way it was arrived at is pretty invalid and contrived, they obviously reached their conclusion and then built back from there rather than actual concise effort leading to this conclusion.

That study is somewhat flawed given that they didn't count Germany which has the same 12 week ban that Ireland will likely pass now. 

 

England for example allows it up to 24 weeks

 

That likely inflates the numbers a bit

 

---

 

That aside, the rest of their points are pretty fair, assuming that abortion would be legalized in other catholic heavy countries with similar religious preferences isn't an unreasonable one. 

 

If your critique is them not including a county most similar to what Ireland will now become like, fair, but their analysis isn't that off