Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
Nokia may no longer be in the business of making devices, but the spirit lives on with Jolla (pronounced Yolla), a Finnish company made up of ex-Nokia staff who decided to go their separate ways in 2011.
Its recent release is the Jolla Tablet, a crowdfunded device which raised $2.2 million on IndieGoGo late last year.
We got to play around with it for a bit and we have to say, the interface and device does look promising.
The tablet itself has decent specs – 64bit 1.8 GHz Quad-Core Intel, 2GB of Ram, 32/64GB of storage with SD slot and a 4450mAh battery – and the design has curved edges which suggests it’s designed with landscape mode users in mind, but the interesting part is the software powering it.
The simplicity of Sailfish OS 2.0 which is entirely gesture based – you’re literally one or two swipes away from the home screen – could make it a dark horse in a tablet market that’s really beginning to heat up again.
The home screen revolves around an open tabs screen, showing you what apps and services you’ve opened recently. From there, it’s a swipe left to your notification screen (which has been enhanced to allow event views, messages,, a swipe right to a partner programme (in this case it was music app Deezer), and swipe top to bottom to get different themes for your tablet like work and sports.
You bring your selection of apps up on the screen by swiping up from the bottom. It’s similar to how the notification centre on iOS, Android and Windows Phone appears but on the opposite side of the screen. It does function nicely and the essential apps all appear to be there, meaning it is coming into its own and it promises a number of security features to keep everything safe.
Strong, local ecosystem
It’s open-source and its target is Android, which dominates the market. Its goal is to create “a strong, local ecosystem” and offer both an independent and competitive alternative to consumers and developers.
That’s also why it has a screen for partners. It wants to place them at the front of the experience and through that and other methods, delivering premium content is one, it’s hoping that developers will find it tempting enough to try it out.
If you’re expecting it to arrive here, you may be left disappointed as it’s looking at targeting developing markets like Russia, India and China as well as the US.
Yet Jolla is hoping that its uniqueness will help differentiate it from similar Android tablets and if they hit the right balance with sharing revenues with app developers – it announced it ready to licence the OS to manufacturers and other potential partners.
The software is expected to arrive on both phones and tablets in the second quarter of the year.
Quinton O’Reilly is at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona all this week. Follow all the goings-on at @TheJournalTech.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Another biased article from anonymous source. How about writing about the thousands of positive pro life stories? Advocating termination unrestricted to 3months is wrong, when babies body is small but fully formed…..VOTE NO.
@Pconor: plenty of women regret having an abortion, you won’t read their stories on here.
@Pconor: back to biology for you, it is not fully formed, because if it were it would survive outside of the womb. More nonsense from you, why are facts so hard?
@Mr Phil Officer: or maybe not as many regret their choice as what you’re led to believe.
@Mr Phil Officer: plenty of people regret having kids I’d say. Way more than had abortions: let’s hear from them.
I’ll tell you loads of positive pro life stories but only after a couple of pints.
@Mr Phil Officer: Where are they so?
@Pconor: Why are you bothered with the Journal when they do not divulge their source? You want the woman’s name to satisfy your hysteria?
@Paul Fahey: Ok so with your delusional opinions, how about the baby below that was born at 21weeks? Is that a clump of cells and not fully formed? Doesn’t deserve to live does she?
VOTE NO.
https://www.today.com/health/born-21-weeks-she-may-be-most-premature-surviving-baby-t118610
@Bryan Whaley: of course there are women who have guilt and regret about choices they made, but as soon as they mention the absolute relief that the abortion have them, they cannot be used by Iona. That is why you won’t see interviews with them, and they have to drag the religious nut from America who had an abortion just to publicise her regret.
@KEV: let’s here from the women who were forced to have an abortion by abusive and controlling partners.
@Gulliver Foyle: Never makes sense to me, the no side keep telling us about the thousands of women who regret their choice yet have to fly in an American to tell her story.
@Pconor: Post link to a picture of a baby born at 12 weeks looks like and how it’s survived to live a fulfilling life.
@Roy Dowling: look at your own picture and tell us if you are glad to be alive today or wished you were aborted.
@Greg Kelly: Well I’ll be honest Greg, I’m ginger sometimes it’s a 50/50 flip. but if I had your profile pic id think I’d rather be aborted. Jayses getting a woman/man must be difficult…..
@Roy Dowling: I’ll have you know Greg wrote the book on love: all quiet on the western front.
@Paul Fahey: And premature babies that need an incubator to survive outside the womb? At what point have you decided that their human rights kick in, biologically speaking?
@Pconor: is 21 weeks equal to 3 months? Wow, could you embarrass yourself any further? How many times are you going to show your lack of maths?
Further, if the lady in the article gave her name she would be abused from all over the world by pro life fundamentalists; just look on here or on your own previous posts where murder and killer is on every thread,
@ruairi: read PConors post, because he said fully formed at 12 weeks, but provided no evidence again. You are welcome to provide a link showing a fully formed 12 week foetus capable of living outside of the womb.
@Pconor: 21 is 12 backwards,same way most of your “facts” are. Also did you really just say “hey this totally irrelevant, once ever, thing happened let’s make law based on it”
@Paul Fahey: Neither is your thought process Paul but that doesn’t prevent you engaging your brain before you put your mouth in overdrive as usual. Have a nice day.
@Pconor: you’re delusional. Yes there are lots of pro life… and guess what… removing the 8th gives all WOMEN their OWN CHOICE for THEIR OWN FAMILY & HEALTH & BODY and not just … pregnant… get on with it or baby won’t live… tuff… uve to complete your pregnancy ….The choice here is the problem. It is a one sided choice as it stands. Keep ur baby or be damed!! #repealthe8th Women’s health deserves to be first in Ireland.
@Pconor: The picture used is of the girl three weeks after birth. This child is very very lucky to have no complications (according to the article). My niece was born at 25 weeks and I can tell you she suffered immensely but fought massively to live. She has cerebral palsy caused by a bleed to the brain(incredibly common as vessels and arteries are not yet fully formed). She is also one of the lucky ones. I witnessed many premature babies come and go from the hospital unit – some in coffins after suffering the tubes and the needles, the many machines used to sustain life. Others left with massive disabilities due to the bleeds – one deaf, blind and with severe physical disabilities. The story of the very premature baby that is perfectly fine is rarer than hens teeth.
@Paul Fahey: I think that’s unfair to say, pro abortion side are verbally attacking people left right and centre.
Neither side seems to be allowed express their opinions
And 21 weeks is just over 5 months pregnant, which of voted in will allow for abortion up to 6 months. 12 weeks of abortion on demand and a further 12 for abortion under circumstances, such as a woman expressing she is suicidal or health.
Abortion is already legal in Ireland under the protection of life during pregnancy act 2013 and are currently being carried out under both mental and physical health. This referendum is about abortion on demand and the money some people stand to gain
The whole legislation
@Pconor: Being born is a negative thing ,nowadays
@Paul Fahey: you really need to get off the social media and educate yourself in Biology. start by reading the link below which states that a baby is fully formed at 12weeks. VOTE NO.
http://www.bounty.com/pregnancy-and-birth/pregnancy/pregnancy-week-by-week/12-weeks-pregnant
@Paul Fahey: you seem to imply that a baby must be fully formed and/or be capable of independently sustaining it’s life in order to be a considered person, I am challenging that notion.
@Princess J.: and the healthy but unwanted unborn baby? Merely a choice? Condemned? The 8th is their only protection. Vote No.
@ruairi: It doesn’t actually matter whether the non viable foetus is a “person” .The fact of the matter is that No person can use another human’s body for any reason whatsoever without their consent. You can’t force me to give blood to an adult, even if they would die without it. Every person who has been born has the right to bodily autonomy. It does not matter whether one person’s body is necessary to keep another person alive. If someone says they do not want to allow someone else to use their body, or any part of it, that’s the end of the discussion. Article 1 of the UN Declaration on Human Rights states that. We give this right to a day old corpse..If you are pro life, you are basically advocating for giving pregnant women fewer rights than a day old corpse… You are also advocating for other people to be able to do what they want with women’s bodies. You should be ashamed of yourself…
@Miss T: the rate of serious life-long health issues is a considerable 25% at this age. That means 3 out of 4 are perfectly healthy however.
@Dermattg: You say the 8th is their only protection? How did the 8th protect the fetus in this story? It didn’t. The 8th does not protect anything, if an expectant mother wants an abortion she will get one, should she have to travel to England or take pills unsupervised in her own home. Removing the 8th will save the lives of these women in a vulnerable position.
@Ali Ní Dhomhnaill: where did I say that? I said if her name were publicized, which is a big difference. Why do you feel the need to make stuff up?
@Pconor: you said 3 months (12 weeks) and then offered up a story of a 21 week old who survived after birth. You need to get off social media and get your head in a basic maths book.
@Dermattg: what about if the mother took every precaution possible other than celibacy and still got pregnant? Still her problem and she should just get on with it? 80% of Irish women that travelled for abortions had used a contraceptive
@Pconor: A babies body is NOT fully formed at 12 weeks pregnant. A ‘baby’ cannot survive outside the womb until 24 weeks and that is with a lot of medical assistance, what would this woman do if she had to continue with her second pregnancy and end up possibly homeless or unable to feed her children. How is that fair on any of them?
@Paul Fahey: Viability is measured by the sophistication of the life-support systems around the baby, not biology.
@ruairi: no I am not, but you conveniently ignore the fact that Pconor states a 12 week old foetus is fully formed and I pointed out that a fully formed foetus would be able to survive afterward birth. So you agree a 12 week old foetus is not fully formed and PConor is wrong?
@Hapax: FFS, ok, do we have the technology for a 12 week old foetus to survive outside of the womb? The answer is NO, very much NO, now do try to be at least accurate.
@Hapax:This very subject is to do with abortion ,which then means that the cut off mark for ‘viability’ is at the 24 weeks mark..The reason for this is that the foetus has less than a 40% chance of survival.At 12 weeks,it has zero chance.
@Paul Fahey: Calm down. You haven’t invalidated my point: Viability is about technology.
But you are correct in saying that technology has not advanced far enough to enable a 12 week old fetus to survive on it’s own. So let’s kill it.
@Paul Fahey: I think PConor means “fully formed” as in all the appendages and vital organs are in place i.e. the form of the fetus is fully prescribed.
I think this is different to your point i.e. full development. On this, I would tend agree with pediatricians, a fetus is not fully developed up until about 2 years old – there are various physical developments up until then, such as closure of the back fontanel at 4 months, closure of the bypass connecting the atria of the heart at 1 year, fusion of the skull plates at 2 years, etc.
@Ali Ní Dhomhnaill: the protection of life during pregnancy act DOES NOT allow for abortion on the grounds of risk to mental or physical health. A woman must be at risk of dying before a termination can take place. Please do not give false information.
@Miss T: So it’s ok to kill those of us that maybe born with a disability and we may never have the opportunity to live and become productive citizens in our own way because we don’t conform to the PC look.
@Jenny Kelleher: that’s not ture I had a baby at 22 weeks and is now almost 17 years old.
@Francis Mc Carthy: Fair enough, someone can’t use someone else’s body. Where we differ, (apart from when a human becomes a human) is that I don’t believe someone can use someone’s body – in this case terminating their life – because it’s, say, inconvenient. If it was for ffa, or rape or incest I’d find the option of abortion hard to argue with. But our government never bothered to try to even propose legislation for that. I will probably vote No because I don’t agree with on-demand abortion; I think it will be abused as the statistics in the UK show it has there. To suggest that I advocate for other people to do what they want with women’s bodies is laughable, if it weren’t so serious. And it is rather sanctimonious of you to assert that I should be ashamed of myself.
@ruairi: you are now saying that women are terminating their pregnancies because it’s an ‘inconvenience’ to them -t’is no wonder i said ‘shame on you!’
were women shoving foreign implements up their vaginas and causing serious internal injuries ‘cos it was the ‘convenient’ thing to do..
a pregnancy is a ‘life altering’ event….why o why do folks want to force a woman to go full term with a pregnancy that she doesn’t want to go through with ? You’d swear that ye had her private medical records..
@Paul Fahey: you may want to pick up a scientific article because what you are saying is not correct.
@Francis Mc Carthy: yes yes yes repeal the 8th
@Pconor: I’m fully aware of the potential for stupid in getting involved in comments-section arguments but…what the hell, this needs to be said: did you actually read that article past that phrase you love so much?
Because if you did, you’d realise the meat of the subject contradicts the throwaway ‘fully-formed’ line (that any decent editor would have gotten rid of btw) parlously. Let’s read through it, shall we; even the next bullet-point (‘Their eyelids remain fused shut’) destroys the point you’re trying to make.
At 12 weeks, the skeleton isn’t fully-formed, nor are the organs. The only significant attribute it shares with an actual real human being – according to your precious article – is the ability to piss. Does that sound viable to you? In fact, your only saving grace is that this website doesn’t include citations from actual verifiable scientific sources. However, if you do go looking for them, you won’t find much help in any case.
Why don’t you get informed before you presume to judge the lives of other actual human beings and dictate what happens to their lives and bodies? And don’t @ me with any ‘buh what about the life and body of the foetus’; you won’t like where that goes.
*out*
@Paul Fahey: Back to biology for you. It is a fact it is fully formed at 12 weeks; it’s just growing in size for the remaining weeks. At the twelve week mark it’s not capable of surviving on its own. Why are the facts so hard for you? Why did you think the limit was set at 12 weeks? Answer: Because it’s fully formed.
The No crowd have had 35 years to make motherhood a very attractive option for every woman. 35 years to make economic and social reasons for abortion redundant but they haven’t. Hopefully they’ll put all their time, money and effort into ensuring that women with crisis pregnancies feel they don’t need to have an abortion because housing, healthcare, education and free childcare will be available to these women.
@Ciara Ni Mhurchu: Geez you would think if the “pro choice” crowd were as choice driven as they claim to be then they would be as heavily invested in making sure these things are available also..because that would mean the woman genuinely had more choices no? Its not just up to the pro life side. Society as a whole is failing if a woman feels she has no choice but to abort the life growing inside her.
@Chris Martin: see many of the “pro-life” side did try to help women many years ago. Their solution was to shove unmarried pregnant women into launderers, force them to to have their babies and then sell them on while the woman was punished on a daily basis?
See why many people would be dubious about trusting “pro-life” / anti-choicers/ pro forced birth/ love boats. They never have cared about women or even the foetuses, I mean they threw approx 800 babies into a septic tank in Tuam.
@Breda Jennings: it’s really worth looking at the comment section when the journal do a story on welfare and single mothers. Compare the comments here to the ones on that. Or social housing.
@Breda Jennings: And you know these were “pro lifers” how? Mind reader now are you? Nobody..including pro life people would ever tell you what happened to the Tuam babies was right or good. What happened in mother and baby homes all those years ago was horrific and should never happen again. Society failed women. Again. Now please tell me what that has to do with the abortion referendum?
@Breda Jennings: and of those who were made have abortions, the forced aborters? And all those who could have lived but were aborted? And do you not see the irony of you giving out about dumping babies bodies and then you go on and say you are on for disposing of babies/human bodies by voting yes. Where do you think the baby’s body parts go after an abortion Breda? They are dumped right? Disposed of right?
@Chris Martin: ah yes Chris but ye guys have had it your way in Ireland since forever and objectively women, pregnant or otherwise, in ireland have had it worse than in any other Northern European country.
You and your bible bashing majority did nothing to help poor girls, many of themselves still children, who got in trouble. You locked them up and ostracized them. The eighth amendment is just the recapitulation of that culture of misogyny: giving equal right to life to a fetus as to the sentient, self knowing individual who is accommodating them: even when the victim of rape or incest.
The Catholic Church and Irish government should have treated those women and the children they bore like royalty, instead they were treated like dirt. You had your chance and blew it.
@Breda Jennings: Thanks Breda, disgusting comment, but as long as you got your point across I suppose.
@Breda Jennings: and what happens to babies after being aborted?? Disposed of in not too dissimilar i suspect… i believe there should be change, but not repealed, there should be an option for extenuating circumstances, especially exceptional if a heart beat has developed.
@Breda Jennings: Actually it was the church that told women it’s not ok to be a single mother and they happily took your babies. Today it’s the same evil just a different face. Now they wear white jackets and take babies from you. Church or government, whoever has absolute power will abuse it. I’m shocked women are actually doing this willingly. Shows some people will always be sheep no matter who is the Shepard.
@Jonathan: oh go on, who in white coats takes your babies against your will in Ireland? Why lie? Why make up such utter rubbish?
@Fin Stack: the has been lots of scandals with aborted baby parts being sold on for research. The Pepsi was probably one of the biggest ones caught by media in the USA. Why were Pepsi buying aborted baby parts for research? Also vaccines use stem cells from aborted babies in research so there is a huge industry to be made out of this.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/obama-agency-rules-pepsi-use-of-aborted-fetus-is-ordinary-business
@Paul Fahey: read what I said don’t twist it
@A Piece of Chalk: That would be naive to assume so.
@Jonathan: “Caught by the media in the US” uses LifeSiteNews as a source. I thought I tasted foetus in my last can of Pepsi Max alright.
@A Piece of Chalk: there’s plenty of other media outlets that did stories on it. That’s just one
@Jonathan: I’m sure you enjoyed the taste. Is that what victory tastes like?
@Jonathan: or some can make up their own minds and know their own body and how much it can take …shocking eh .
@Siobhán Ni Mhurchú: The rape, ffa and abortion pills arguments have already been destroyed.
Selfish entitlement is not a reason to have an abortion.
@Jonathan: destroyed?? Pretty outrageous claim given the referendum is pretty finely balanced.
The reality Jonathan is that abortions are happening and there’s nothing you can do about it.
The “Irish solution to the Irish problem” is beneath us as a country, but not beneath many of our citizens it seems.
@Jonathan: CRAY CRAY!
@A Piece of Chalk: Yummmy :)
@Jonathan:”Selfish entitlement is not a reason to have an abortion.” <- oh dear!
you've destroyed nothing with your emotional hogwash & neither with your extremely dodgy links..
By the way,did you know that a line from an aborted foetus many moons ago,helped to make vaccines for rubella,chicken pox, hepatitis and rabies.
imagine how many lives have been saved by that
@Francis Mc Carthy: Snopes is an old couple and a cat. Not exactly reliable or even scientific.
@Francis Mc Carthy: yeah the deadly chicken pox!
@Francis Mc Carthy: drug addiction, homelessness, murder and rape are all happening. Doesn’t make it right.
Abortion is a problem in Ireland correct. What government initiatives have we seen to try and tackle this problem before they proposed abortion up to 6 months?
@Francis Mc Carthy: You seem to be showing signs of split personality….pushing the taking life of a (bay-bee) with one hand then praising the saving of a babies life with the other.
“Bro gan Breith” this means alive but not yet born. Even our beautiful irish language acknowledges the life of a baby. You may try but you cannot change human culture.
@Jonathan: “now they wear white coats and take your babies from you” go on you will have to elaborate, particularly in the context of comparing it to the church and the atrocities they perpetrated on the women and children of Ireland.
I wonder if you should read your post again.
@Chris Martin: It has everything to do with it! by taking away womens choice like this, its society dictating to and failing women all over again. Please tell me what you, as a member of a society that claims to now care about women, what you would like to see happen to women with crisis pregnancies, or no money, no means to support themselves or baby, abusive partner who keeps fathering babies that will be born into abuse/poverty, ends up in the system that will probably end up failing and damaging them. Come on, Chris, after the birth of unwanted babies, do you care what happens then? Or only that they’re born? Thats ALL that matters to you lot.
@Chris Martin: The No side have nothing but contempt and judgement to shower on women who enjoy recreational sex and may become pregnant.
The whole backbone of the No campaign is based on catholic doctrine, it was in 1983, it still is today. This doctrine considers sex to be a matter of procreation and nothing else.People shouldn’t have sex just for fun. If a woman’s contraception fails, well, tough titties, take your punishment like a good girl. You shouldn’t be having sex in the first place.
On many of the No side’s threads on social media you see this underlying censorious judgement comming through, mostly from pro birth men who seem to like to call women sluts and tramps.
@Stephen Adam: drug addiction, homelessness, murder and rape are all happening. Doesn’t make it right.
Abortion is a problem in Ireland correct. What government initiatives have we seen to try and tackle this problem before they proposed abortion up to 6 months?
If the right to life of the unborn is taken you need to ask yourself what are the legal implications that will follow. The Supreme Court already said that the unborn will have no rights if this passes. They can sell this referendum to you any way they like but don’t be distracted from what they are asking you to do.
@Jonathan: rape and murder aren’t comparable – no one is asking for those laws to be relaxed and Ireland is in line with international standards. You’re not comparing like with like.
The government did nothing because a majority voted conservative and pro life. Times have changed. If you elect politicians who bend whatever way the wind is blowing don’t complain when that wind blows against you.
I’m well aware of what we’re being asked to do – remove a badly drafted, religious driven, unworkable and discriminatory clause from our constitution. If I have a problem with subsequent legislation – I’ll write to my TD and vote accordingly in a General Elction. That’s how legislative democracy works.
@Dave Doyle: “The No side have nothing but contempt and judgement to shower on women who enjoy recreational sex and may become pregnant”
wow I hope you are helping the Yes side canvassing. We all have to take responsibility for our actions. If I murder someone I go to jail. If I crash a car into someone I can be sued. Such is life. If we knowingly sleep around or have unprotected sex we know the risks. Take responsibility!!
Murder is the taking of an innocent life…how is that not comparable. We are being asked to change the law to allow it to happen. I respect your opinion but I disagree with you.
You are taking the rights of happy pregnant women and babies away to give it to a minority of selfish entitlement driven women.
If a happily pregnant woman’s baby dies because of the hospital what will the legal implications be.
@Jonathan:not sure that we give the 4 in 1 vaccine to embryos..i’ll get back to you on that one..
@Jonathan:not sure that we give the 4 in 1 vaccine to embryos..i’ll get back to you on that one..
@Jonathan: “murder is the ‘unlawful’ ‘premeditated’ killing of one ‘human being’ on another ‘human being’ – try harder
@Paul Fahey: the church tricked people into believing this was the best way for them. Now abortionists are tricking women into thinking this is best for them. It’s 2018 as well Paul those days are long gone. Your still living in the past but unfortunately the past hasn’t taught you much.
@Abortion Saves Lives: a foetus is a stage of development is the life cycle of a human being. Try again.
@Abortion Saves Lives: no they put them in them instead
@Abortion Saves Lives: And if scientists say life on earth as we know it came from cells then I think you should follow you own ideology and protect life even it is an embryo.
@Ciara Ni Mhurchu: I totally agree – but the onus should be on all of us, not just the No side, to help women in crisis pregnancies.
Recently, Zappone announced a package to encourage people to have more children. I think it consisted of a box of nappies and wipes. Really, do they think this would make a difference? Could our government not do better than this? If a parent or parents are looking for a mortgage and are paying rent and childcare, the bank will say adios amigo. Not that there is a house there to buy in the first place. I think subsidized childcare would make huge difference, but also all the other things you mention. This is how we really support women in crisis pregnancies and families too.
@Jonathan: A woman IS a human being.
A woman’s ‘right to life’ isn’t debatable
Is an embryo a ‘human being’ -debatable
Does an embryo have a ‘right to life’ -debatable
Why do you want to give more rights to a human embryo than to any born human person when it comes to the use of someone else’s organs ? A born person needs the permission of the other human being to get the use of their organs to sustain their life ..so what makes the human embryo so “special” that it doesn’t need the permission of the woman for the use of her organs ? Is it the way that you worship the ‘almighty’ embryo ?
@Jonathan: The law, the Gardai, the State, take a very dim view of murder. You can face trial in a court of law and do a lot of jail timeif you commit murder.
The No side, those force birthers, throw the words “murder” and “killing” around a lot, emotive words that have no meaning in reality when it comes to abortion.
There is no “innocent life” been taken, there is no murder or killing taking place, except to give the No side something to hurl at those who believe talhat women should have the right to choose to do what they feel is right regarding their health, mental or physical, and their reproductive systems.
@Dave Doyle: ”The No side, those force birthers, throw the words “murder” and “killing” around a lot, emotive words that have no meaning in reality when it comes to abortion.”
And what about unemotive words like foetus and embryo. We can throw crap back and forward but the fact is a baby is a life.
Unless you have witnessed a new scientific breakthrough that none of us know about please. Please feel free to enlighten us if you have.
@Abortion Saves Lives: There is no debate. You can call it whatever scientific name you want but the fact is that it is alive and is made human DNA.
Women are already protected by law, for those that feel they are not, we have invented contraception.
@Jonathan: That’s nonsense Jonathan. Firstly a happily pregnant woman is losing nothing at all.
Secondly I’ll point out that we don’t put murder laws in the constitution – if they’re comparable I assume you’re happy with appropriate abortion legislation and will be voting to remove the 8th?
@Jonathan: i’ve my own unique DNA…but that doesn’t mean that i can demand you to take a risk with your life by giving up the use of one of your organs to sustain my life…lols
@Jonathan: REPEAL
@Stephen Adam: Not at all there if the right of the unborn is removed there will be legal implications for women and their babies. If a hospital was proved negligent during antenatal care resulting in death or injury to the foetus, what right would the mother have in regard to the loss of the baby?
Murder may not be in the constitution but the protection of life clearly is. And if technology has taught us anything lately it’s that life does not begin at birth. The protection of life should be extended to the most vulnerable in society, the life of the unborn, should in my opinion be protected under the constitution.
@Francis Mc Carthy: I don’t think babies just crawl into peoples womb and take them and their organs hostage. You are being very silly now.
Did you go to a catholic school? Did they not teach you sex education of how babies are made? Or how to prove that making one? It pretty straight forward.
@Jonathan: (prove)prevent*
Facebook, Google and YouTube all blocking “adverts” around Repeal the Eight… why doesn’t the journal do the same. Report facts not opinions!
@Eugene Tyson: But but but they do fact check stuff. They are a member of some fact check organisation they set up. Luckily they have very limited coverage as they are considered to be up there with the Sun.
@Eugene Tyson: Why do you read the Journal as it obviously causes you pain.
@Eugene Tyson: your opinion is on here for all to see, what’s the issue? We already know abortion will kill foetuses. Some undecided people want to know why they may vote Yes.
@Eugene Tyson: odd, because in your twitter page you are advocating the blocking of Associated Press, Kanye West and Donald Trump views. Seems you want to live in an echo chamber.
@Eugene Tyson: agreed
@Paul Furey: who said it causes me pain?
@Eamonn Dunne: But you can’t discern reason for voting Yes or no based on one person’s opinion. Opinions are opinions and facts are facts. It’s scaremongering and getting votes through sympathy rather than knowing the implications of voting Yes or no has on society based on the implications of what waiving this amendment brings or won’t bring.
@Paul Fahey: so I don’t want to hear their outlandish views on slavery and gun control. Hush money for prostitutes etc… yes and the journal has a mute button too so if you don’t want to hear my views you can and like wise I can to you. But what this has to do with abortion I don’t know.
@Eugene Tyson: This is exactly the implications your vote will have.This is factual.Vote yes and this woman and women like her will be able to make well informed descions for their health in their own country.Vote no and they continue to go to england or takeabortion pills alone terrified of going to prison or becoming ill due to complications.This is the cold hard truth.Her opinion may be she was right ,you may think she was wrong but it is a fact that this happened and will continue to happen regardless of whether it is lawful.
@Claire Maher: I’m not against anyone voting yes or no, that’s your right to choose which way to vote. My arugment is against the piece by the Journal trying to sway people into a voting stance by using a story that makes you sympathetic to one way or another way of voting.
Other agencies have decided to stop publically supporting one way or another by banning “adverts” – this article by the Journal is an “advert” of such, dressed up as an opinion piece.
I’m advocating that the Journal should stick to the facts on what exactly Repealing the 8th actually is, what it would mean for Ireland to introduce abortions; will it be open to everyone, or just people with medical conditions, will people have the choice to abort a child with a deformity, will it be the parents decision, the woman’s decision, the father’s decision, the doctors choice??? Will the doctor be able to revers a woman’s decision to have an abortion based on the baby being healthy? Will there be provisions for people who want an abortion but are refused, will the government bodies help these people get their unwanted babies into the adoption system, foster homes, etc.
What exactly will happen if abortion is brought in?
That’s the sort of articles and information required… not a sob piece about 1 persons experience with it – that’s an opinon, their point of view – it maybe factual – that’s not in question – but it’s not factual about the Repeal the 8th movement.
@Paul Fahey: Paul u need to come up for air man, your too emotionally invested. Your checking people’s profiles and all. Have you taken Michael Langs job or were you working together all along?
A friend of mine “suddenly found herself pregnant two years ago ” then she decided that her boyfriend who happened to be a father of two, who wasn’t much support to them or his ex, was not going to be of much use to her. She also felt that her parents didn’t need the hassle of this. She went on a holiday to London and had an abortion. She said she might keep the next one.
This is a true story and it is abortion on demand. I feel for those small percentage of people who need an abortion for medical reasons. I know if I vote yes abortion on demand is what we will have, So I am voting no.
@Geraldine Mcnamara: so the next X case is on you. Cool.
@Geraldine Mcnamara: agreed and the small % of people who genuinely need abortion for health IS AVAILABLE in Ireland. In 2016 there WERE abortions on health and medical grounds.
Of that total number, the procedures were carried out for a range of reasons:
8 procedures were due to a risk of physical illness
1 was due to a risk from suicide
16 were carried out because of emergencies arising from physical illnesses.
Source: The Journal
@Geraldine Mcnamara: why didn’t you tell her you would adopt the child before she did it. You could add the child to all the other children you’ve adopted & fostered. I assume there are many.
@Geraldine Mcnamara: people who ‘need’ an abortion ie those who’d lives are in danger( salvita) are already sorted by legislation. nobody else “needs” and abortion. They may want one…I too am concerned about future reasons to who can avail of abortion up.to.6 months! As well as Down syndrome, cleft palette is another reason women abort in England and elsewhere. There is no protection with a YES vote!
@Geraldine Mcnamara: how will voting no change this situation? Apart from the massive holes in your story, would an abortion pill not resolve this before this character could bring you into the story.
@Geraldine Mcnamara: please don’t pretend to care about the so-called hard cases when you intend to stick two fingers up to them on the 25th
@Gulliver Foyle:
Voting NO will force the government to redraft a sensible amendment to constitution in the place of removing all human rights from the unborn.
This amendment can make exceptions for the hard cases FFA / rape / incest.
That will then put an end to the emotional blackmail being used to force through abortion on demand throughout the backdoor.
All reasonable people agree with abortion in extreme limited cases that justify it – the problem is when abortion on demand is called for – this opens a can of worms and effectively classifies unborn human life as disposable – and grants the right to mothers to kill their healthy unborn children without restriction….
NO
@Geraldine Mcnamara: so tough to the small number of people who need an abortion for medical reasons. Who are you to take that option away from them? Voting no won’t stop people having abortions, it will just make things more bearable for women who have to make the difficult decision.
@HelloGoogleTracking..: That’s total conjecture and frankly completely unrealistic. The Seanad Referendum didn’t pass and we heard nothing more about it. No change, no reform.
You’re also not considering the likelihood of a general election in the next 9 months or so and the reluctance of TDs to campaign on this issue.
There’s simply no way this will be revisited if there’s a No vote for a lengthy period of time.
And as already discussed at length there is no practical way of legislating for the hard cases – especially rape.
I’d point out that none of the No campaigners have proposed an alternative to cover the hard cases. What do you suggest Google? Or will you give the usual answer “it’s not our job to do that…”
@Greg Kelly:”8 procedures were due to a risk of physical illness”
isn’t EVERY pregnancy a risk to the woman’s physical health ?
@KEV: and the next healthy aborted babys blood is on you.
@Stephen Adam:
That is all conjecture too. The current referendum is badly drafted and removes all human rights – this is not necessary to add exceptions for the hard cases.
Simply because you think another referendum wont be had – of course it will – this has to be tackled – and a NO vote would be a clear signal that abortion on demand is rejected.
Then redraft a amendment – bring to referendum – it will easily pass – job done.
I propose having explicit reference to FFA rape and incest as being ground to allow abortion.
Then draft legislation to regulate it – require a garda report for each criminal allegation – trust the woman – allow abortion – investigate the crime and the report to catch the criminal and ensure it is not being abused.
What is your objection?
@Bearded Grump: Probably because the “friend” never existed.
@Greg Kelly: Tell that lovely storey to Savitas husband……….
@Geraldine Mcnamara: Some friend you are. Such contempt for your own ‘friend’.
@HelloGoogleTracking..: That proposal has been assessed and dismissed.
You want to require a woman to make a Garda complaint in order to be allowed an abortion. And to do so within 12 weeks? That’s fantasy land stuff. As if the poor woman wasn’t already traumatised.
As for a 2nd referendum. Confidence/supply ends at Budget. So end of year. New wording could take several months to agree/draft. So not enough time before budget or before fall of gov. Then we’re into an election campaign. After which it’s a new gov. And who knows who’ll be in that.
If you think there’ll be a second referendum anytime soon you don’t know much about Irish politics. Never mind the fact the Dail committee expressly said your solution for hard cases isn’t workable.
@Bearded Grump: stupid remark, I was speaking about the issue. You missed the point that she had plenty of time to use contraception and choose a different partner. For the record I have two adopted sons, not that it should make a difference. As she was living in England, abortion was acceptable to her. She used it as a contraception like many others do.
@Geraldine Mcnamara: I think your friends needs to choose better partners and better friends in her life and then everything will be fine with her.
Thanks for the article as it has strengthened my no vote even further
@sally: so how does a no vote stop women taking the abortion pill?
@sally: How can a no vote get stronger?? It’s either yes or no..
The reality of Ireland for women under the 8th amendment who find themselves under very difficult circumstances and pregnant.
@Dave Doyle: it’s never black and white. Lots of grey. She should’ve had supports from her gp. They’ll be there after the 25th.
@Dave Doyle: and the reality of many more women and babies who are alive today because of the 8th amendment allowed them live and not be Aborted.
Somebody’s daughter
somebody’s son
Somebody
Let them live, vote NO
@Greg Kelly: the 8th saved nobody. Just exported it or in recent times as the case with this lady, left her isolated in her home.
@Dave Doyle: not really. stress we can get over, financial aid is available. Pregnancy us a temporary thing.
@Greg Kelly: funny – those of us with daughters and sons who are impacted by the restriction of the 8th understand biology, ignore a discredited churches, and trust their peers all disagree with you.
@KEV: Ireland has an estimated abortion rate of 1:20, its 1:5 in UK and most of Europe. The courts in the north agreed that abortion restriction in Northern Ireland has saved 100000 lives, it’s fair to say that number has been saved here too and more than likely multiples of that.
If Ireland does move to European norms it is calculated that the numbers of abortions in Ireland will rise to 18000 per annum
@Dave Doyle: did an email/whatsapp get whipped around the No camp about this article?
They’re very quick off the mark. Quite impressive.
@eric nelligan: the 1 in 5 claim doesn’t stand up. As for the rates here, do you honestly think women going to the UK and elsewhere all give their Irish addresses. Then there’s the pills, there’s absolutely no way of knowing how many have been used. It’s complete guesswork because it’s completely unregulated.
@Greg Kelly: but when I can’t get a parking space, or I’m late for work because of all the fking traffic or stuck in another bloody queue because of all these unaborted fetuses walking around, annoying the living piss out of the rest of us. I’m sorry but I’d rather not have to wait 6 months to get a table at my favorite restaurant.
For an easier, breezier uncongested life: Vote YES!
@KEV: incorrect. https://loveboth.ie/your-story-matters/
@Missyb211: you are very niave. Not everyone can just ‘get over’ stress. financial aid, have you any idea what’s involved in bringing up a child? There are many situations where it would be cruel for the child to be brought into the world, to live in poverty, neglect, or to be kept alive by machines in pain and suffering for a few short years. Does it ever occur to you that people opting for abortions are doing it to prevent a terrible life for someone?
@Missyb211: pregnancy is a life altering event that can have devastating physical/mental health problems for the woman ..you make it sound like a walk in the park…which it isn’t..
@Greg Kelly: Voting no will keep the status quo. Our sisters, aunts, mothers, wives, girlfriends, neighbours and friends will still travel to the UK to avail of terminations. So what’s the point in voting no? The only thing a no vote achieves is the continued and shameful punishment of Irish women having to travel abroad for a termination after making one of the most difficult decisions of her life. #Repealthe8th
@Sandra Creevey: I never heard such a terrible rational in all my life! i have 3 children one who has a rare genetic condition and let me tell you it is never cruel to let a person come into life! life is precious even short lived! parents abort ONLY fir their own reasons. I despair for our future with people of your thinking in it!
@Francis Mc Carthy: it is a walk in the park for the vast majority of nirmal people. It is the most natural thing in the world . You make it sound like the most difficult thing we face as humans, which it’s not! Mountain out of a mohill
@Missyb211: hahahaa…38 maternal related deaths in just 4 years ..don’t know how many injuries to women..you know,ones where the vagina needs stitching right up to the anus…but look,i just showed this to my wife and she just ‘shook her head’ at your nonsense..
Honestly….this is just relentless from the journal.
Hey journal – how about a story some day of some person who was very nearly aborted but at the last minute the mother decided to go ahead with the pregnancy. And now that person is living a happy life surrounded by a happy family.
And if you cant find anyone that fits the bill just make it up and quote it as anonymous like all the other pro-abortion stories you write.
@TradingDuck: or a story written by some miserable sod who wishes they were aborted, that would be good. Loads of them walking around.
@TradingDuck:
There are just as many children walking around who were not aborted because of pressure from the likes of you, who are living in miserable circumstances with very poor prospects in life.
What are you doing to help them ?
Where is your concern for this foetus now?
Or is it conveniently nothing to do with you?
Its sadly telling and hypocritical to see so called pro lifers concerned with categorised a foetus as a life but once that baby is born, that life ceases to be of any concern to them
@Bat Daly: What an odd statement. You’re trying to suggest that there are many walking around now who are miserable who would be better off had they been aborted.
Wow !!! That’s certainly a new angle from the pro abortionists. You sure you’ve actually thought statement that through?
And secondly – There is no hypocrisy in wanting a baby a chance at life. May I please see your evidence that pro lifers as a group are far less likely to care about living babies?
@TradingDuck:
Yes, i am saying that. Are you saying there are not?
Proves you are living in your own little world where everything if just fine.
Also, you didn’t answer my question.
What are you doing to help underprivileged kids who are brought into this world in this country who are hospital due to birth defects?
Or is it just none if your business now?
You exercise your right to vote but don’t give a damn about consequences.
@Bat Daly: Wow…so it would have been for their own good had they been aborted ?
Ill just leave that statement from you hang there so others can marvel at it.
So now I get it when people speak of pro abortion compassion is.
@TradingDuck:
What colour are the clouds in your perfect world?
Yes, there are people who would have preferred if they were aborted at birth.
How difficult is that for you to grasp in that little bubble you live in?
Also, speaking of letting things hang there, are you going to tell us which children’s charity you volunteer your time to?
What organisation for disadvantaged people are you donating to?
Your feckless principles no doubt never to extend you actually foing something that will cost you anything other than your vote.
@TradingDuck: so a story about someone who wasn’t affected in any way by the 8th amendment as the current law supports THEIR DECISION to continue with their pregnancy.
Looking forward to the cutting emotional piece coming later about the women who’ve had an abortion and now deeply regret it. Oh wait…..This is the journal. Silly me!! I was thinking of an unbiased news source.
@Alan Carmody: Wow, hard hitting response there Alan you must have had a good breakfast to be that sharp this early. Although I’m afraid to inform your one track mind, anything written by my mother wouldn’t be your cup of tea because she’s never had an abortion, that’s quite possibly because she had the sense to realise sleeping around with idiots is probably not a good life choice!
@LD: my point was that she might have regretted going full term, in your case at least. Subtlety in regards to humor is not valued on these boards, apparently.
Anyway, carry on. You and your mother sound like great craic.
@LD: Those stories aren’t relevant LD. and I’m not sure really why you expect the Journal not to have a position. It’s a private entity isn’t it? Just like you.
@Alan Carmody: Most on the journal despite many differences of views can distinguish between humour and your snide remark about my mother wishing she aborted me Alan.
@Stephen Adam: I more than happy for you to explain their irrelevance?
@LD: the proposal is to remove the 8th amendment. The 8th amendment affected the woman in the story above. The 8th did not affect and women who regret their abortion.
In the event of a Yes Vote People who regret their abortions would still be free to advocate against abortion itself. Abortions won’t be compulsory. Nothing changes from their point of view. Their stories are relevant as to whether or not to have an abortion. They’re not relevant to whether or not it should be legal to have an abortion.
Stories like the above are relevant however because the option to have an abortion is currently prohibited.
The current law means that one of the story tellers is affected (above) and one is not (regret). Therefore one story is relevant and one is not.
Simple logic.
@LD: Agreed , this is our daily pro abortion article, the journal at its best unbiased informative position, would be nice to have balance but you know yourself.
@Stephen Adam: I appreciate you have a simple view of the issue. But I would contend that the subject is far more complicated than that Stephen. I think media outlets have some obligation to journalistic integrity. That means at least giving all sides of the argument a fair hearing. If you only focus on stories like the above, it gives the impression that all women who have abortions are gratefully relieved and happily get on with their lives. on the subject of the vote, you know as well as I do this vote is not just about repealing the 8th, it is also about the legislation that will be brought in to replace it. Every story and opinion is valid on this debate. Its called balance
@LD: I see you studiously ignored my point on how the “I regret my abortion” stories are in no way relevant LD and instead decided to address something else entirely.
Our public service broadcasters must make some effort to be objective and present all sides of the argument – they’re funded by the tax payer.
In the real world private commercial entities are responsible to themselves, within the boundaries of the law. They’re entitled to take an editorial view on any particular issue. If you don’t like what you see switch the channel.
Journalistic integrity is a matter for the individual journalist and who they work for. Some people want to write opinion pieces others just want to report the news.
@Stephen Adam: If you were to studiously read the reply properly, you will in fact realise that I did address the issue. I don’t believe everything is about the law. I’m not interested in what the Journal are legally obliged to or not. My original point was made slightly in jest but I do genuinely feel the journal’s lack of balance to be disappointing. I comment here for that very reason because its the comments section that brings some balance.
@LD: How did you address the issue? How is a person who regrets their abortion relevant to this issue of the 8th amendment. They had an abortion – the 8th has had no effect on them. Their circumstances aren’t relevant to the issue at hand – you haven’t addressed that point.
As to whether the Journal has a viewpoint or not – I don’t know. Nor do I care. But I certainly wouldn’t read the comments for “balance” hundreds of anonymous trolls and lots of crackpots.
@Stephen Adam: I addressed the fact I believe every story about abortion to have relevance to a discussion on the topic of abortion. That’s what this is. A debate on abortion. Be my guest If you want to sit with your blinkers on trying to pretend its purely about repealing the 8th. You seem to suggest that no mention of the wider topic of abortion is relevant despite the fact that laws will be implemented afterwards to change the legality of abortion. What gives the moral high ground to label trolls and crackpots. I would agree not all the debates here are respectful. I just come here to have some reasoned debate and in fairness you have conducted yours with respect even in disagreement.
We know that as many positive pro-choice stories there are, they can be matched with just as many pro-life stories. Either way, we can see that women are capable of making the right choice for them. Why can’t we just acknowledge that women don’t make this decision lightly or casually, and Repealing the Eight could help a lot of women and medical professionals in the right circumstances?
@Cian Prendergast: and the unborn baby. No rights? No choice? Abortion results in 50% of those directly involved dying.
@Dermattg: Well I don’t think it should have the same right as the mother and that’s what the eighth amendment does. That’s why we need to Repeal the Eighth.
To the vote no crowd. On the 8th of March this year myself and my wife found out our baby had a fetal abnormality. It was not fatal. Due to fluid on the brain the prognosis was the baby would be born deaf,dumb and blind. Unable to walk. That was certain. He would survive birth but surviving past 24months was unlikely. We already have a daughter. All our lives would have been affected. The outcome as horrible as it was, was always the best option. Bringing back the ashes of a 24 week old baby was a harrowing experience. I ask you all, why should anyone have to travel for this? Why? Answer me why we can’t receive the healthcare we deserve in our own country?
@Danny Sherrard: Most will sympathise with your story……but in answer to your question, the main issue No people have is that abortions of healthy babies by healthy mothers will increase significantly. That’s the crux of the issue.
But we are not being given a choice of catering just for difficult cases….instead the govt seems to want to make us choose between 2 extremes. So you have to weigh up the advantages and disadvantages of both options.
And ultimately, those on the No side believe that saving those literally thousands of healthy babies every year is a price worth paying as there are overall far far fewer so called difficult cases when compared to healthy abortions.
@Danny Sherrard: you shouldn’t danny. Just shouldn’t. .
@TradingDuck: The number of abortions won’t change either way. Just the number of safe abortions.
@Cian Prendergast: You’re naïve if you think the number wont increase. Anything that is legalized is subsequently normalized and therefore availed of more often.
The only question is how much. Personally I believe it will increase a lot to be eventually in line with the UK of 1 in 5- but that’s just my view. Only time will tell.
If the numbers wouldn’t increase then everyone would be repealing. It would be an absolute no-brainer.
IN much the same way if we legalise cannabis you can be full sure it will be used more frequently by people.
@Danny Sherrard: they shouldn’t. But why have abortion on demand to cover cases like this, legislate for such cases and protect those lives that would otherwise be lost for convenience reasons. 180,000+ abortions in England and Wales per annum. Is this really what we want from a caring compassionate Ireland. Legislate for those genuine crisis situations but vote No to abortion on demand.
@TradingDuck: A woman who believes an abortion is the right choice for her is not gonna wait 9 months because of the eight amendment. This isn’t a casual decision. Online pills and oversea abortions are the reality right now. The only thing Repealing the Eighth will do is allow women is to seek an abortion safely in Ireland.
@Sean @114: yes but you still have to repeal so a legislation can be put in place with clear guidelines and laws as to who can and cannot avail of these services. If we don’t repeal it’s just a blanket ban and all cases when as we know every case is different. When this referendum is repealed we have to work together, pro life and pro choice, to find a system that is robust and works for all.
@Danny Sherrard: Heartbreaking story Danny. Unfortunately we are hearing more and more of these stories every day. My condolences to you and your family. #repealthe8th
@TradingDuck: Did you read the article? She was not a healthy mother!
@Sean Murnin: thank you
@Danny Sherrard: But Danny….the government has already told us what the new legislation will be.
If there was a genuine prospect of it legislating to only cater for so-called difficult cases then you would have a point. But we know that wont be the case.
You can argue that at some point in theory it might be….but the reality is that simply will not be the case.
The government have instead decided to make us choose between 2 extremes.
@TradingDuck: Did you actually read Danny’s post?
Obviously nothing sunk in. Anyone with an ounce of empathy would instantly feel for his predicament where a decision which would effect his whole family had to be made.
You just glossed over everything he said holding on to your selfish self centred so called principles.
@Danny Sherrard: “When this referendum is repealed we have to work together, pro life and pro choice, to find a system that is robust and works for all.”
Are you for real !!. The referendum is to take the decision of life and death, law and order out of the public domain. Were the Government interested in dealing with the questions responsibly by splitting apart medical issues from willful intent to end life before 12 weeks for no reason they would have first asked the questions directly to the public. Instead they bundled willful intent to end life in the womb with compassionate medical issues in an Oireachtas report thereby distancing the vote from its outcome.
What do you think would happen if they asked the direct question -
Do we legislate to end the life of a 12 week old developing girl or boy in the womb for no reason ? – Yes/No.
@Cian Prendergast: Legalizing it results in a culture shift in the mindset of people and how it is ethically viewed. People naturally become more immune to something the more prevalent it is,
That is why it will be availed of more often.
Honestly – if you think it wont be availed of more often that you are living in cloud cuckoo land. That’s the whole crux of it and the main driving force behind the No campaign.
@TradingDuck: The culture already exists! This is happening! This is the reality! Legalising it won’t change people’s personal opinions on it and it won’t encourage women to have abortions who wouldn’t otherwise.
If you think women aren’t going to have an abortion when they feel assured that it’s the right decision for them then you are living in cloud cuckoo land.
@Cian Prendergast: The culture may exist – but it will exist to a far greater degree if legalized. That is the point.
Attempting to deny that is just delusional.
@TradingDuck: Regardless of the eighth amendment, women will seek an abortion if they feel it necessary.
Attempting to deny that is just delusional.
@TradingDuck: The problem Trading Duck is that the “price you’re willing to pay” isn’t ACTUALLY being paid by you. You want others to pay it.
Maybe if you had some skin in the game that statement might hold water. But you don’t. You want to maintain a status quo that has no effect on you whatsoever but inflicts great hardship on others.
@Stephen Adam: By your logic anyone that doesn’t have the skin in the game shouldn’t vote.
There is a price to be paid by a sub-group no matter what the decision. The question is will it be the unborn babies – or will it be the difficult cases we read of.
Presumably you’re not a fetus so you also wont have skin in the game with the risk of being aborted should the yes vote pass. So I can level the exact same accusation back at you.
The reality is for most of us it will never be applicable anyway.
All we can do is vote on what we believe is for the greater good ethically.
And it is not just maintaining a status quo as you put it. You clearly didn’t read my central point. By voting yes it will significantly increase the number of abortions. That’s the issue.
@Cian Prendergast: I get that – but the point is MORE will seek it if repealed.
@TradingDuck: NO THEY WON’T! Abortion will never be a casual decision. If a woman wants to seek an abortion, she will – even if it means travelling overseas to get it. If a woman doesn’t want an abortion, she won’t – even if the option is available at her local clinic.
The culture exists already. People have formed their own opinions on the issue. At this point, legalising it only makes the option safer, not more desirable.
@Cian Prendergast: Well…we will have to agree to disagree. No one can tell the future … all either of us can do is give our best guess.
But 2 in 5 in the UK who get one have already gotten one previous. With that I mind you’d have to question just how it is viewed there. Its a legitimate concern people on the No side have,.
@Danny Sherrard: EXACTLY. So sorry your wife and yourself had to go through this, with the added trauma of having to leave your own country to do so.
@TradingDuck: @TradingDuck: I’m not claiming to have skin in the game one way or another. You’re the one who said that a price has to be paid – not me. My point is it’s very easy to talk about prices to pay when it’s not you planning to pay it.
As for the status quo being changed – it’s impossible to know what Ireland’s abortion rate is because it’s currently prohibited. We’ll find out when it’s legalised what the actual figure is.
In any event whether or not you support abortion the 8th is a mess which doesn’t belong in the constitution. I suspect it won’t be there much longer.
@Stephen Adam: But its a fact a price does have to be paid. That’s the reality of it.
And I agree it is easy to talk about prices to pay when it isn’t me. But for better or worse, we as voters have to decide what we believe is the greater good. That’s the thought process we all have to adopt as voters – even if it doesn’t effect us directly today. (And that’s not to say of course that it may very well effect us personally in the future)
@TradingDuck: I don’t really believe good has anything to do with it. My definition of “good” is different to yours. Who am I to declare what’s morally right or wrong?
@Stephen Adam: well….. you’ve been given a vote in this referendum to do just that. We are all entitled to voice our views on what we believe is morally right or wrong in a society which we all live in together.
@TradingDuck: “Its a legitimate concern people on the No side have,.”
So what?? You will not be affected by these decisions made by complete strangers.. If you did then how can you possibly live with the fact that thousands of babies already born die each week from poverty, war and starvation?? Because doing something about that would involve actions other than blabbing on a message board. If you actually admitted that you simply don’t trust women and want the punished for having sex when not trying to procreate you would get more respect. Roll on the 25th so this BS is over. SMH.
@Rob Cahill: Rob – you have just completely shown yourself to not understanding why people vote no. It always surprise me that people don’t get the basics given that its not actually that difficult.
You ask as to why its a concern for the no side??
Let me explain.
AN unborn baby does not have a voice – and certainly does not have a vote in this referendum (although I very much doubt you’d have many repealers amongst them if they did have a vote)
Given they do not have a voice, they need people to speak on their behalf.
It’s a moral obligation to speak up. Surely you can understand that?
So what would you do if you were walking down the road and saw some young girl being attacked?
Would you walk on by with your hands in your pocket whistling to yourself safe in the knowledge it doesn’t effect you directly?
Or would you feel a moral obligation to assist?
By the sounds of things you’d walk on by.
SO while I will not be directly effected, due to a moral obligation to assist others, I am speaking up on behalf of those that will i.e. the unborn.
It honestly beggars belief how this concept did not enter your head – and many like you might I add as its a frequent question being asked.
And as for this ‘trust women’ slogan, you’re the first person in a couple of weeks ive heard use that phrase. Most people by now realize it was a load of tosh and never stood up to scrutiny so stopped using it.
If you really expect me or anyone to trust people based on their gender alone then you’ll be waiting.
As to where you get this punishing women for having sex is something that came from your own head. Its a bit of a weird notion to be honest.
I know I certainly never implied anything of the sort.
@TradingDuck: I’ve been given a vote – I’ll be exercising it to remove poorly drafted discriminatory and unworkable laws. Morals really have nothing to do with it. I’m not so arrogant as to believe everyone should live by my moral code.
@TradingDuck: ha. Comparing a young girl being attacked to abortion. That’s a new one.
@TradingDuck: In those parts of the world where there are liberal abortion laws the abortion rates fall. The rates do not increase.
https://www.usnews.com/news/data-mine/articles/2018-03-21/abortion-rates-where-and-why-theyre-falling
@Danny Sherrard: So the valid analogy to explain moral obligation which was made quite succinctly went over your head?
Rriiiiight…life must throw many challenges your way I take it.
@Stephen Adam: Society dictates moral codes all the time. They’re usually called laws.
@TradingDuck: Not so valid analogy, An embryo having the same rights as a born human being is ridiculous. That seems to go over your head.
@TradingDuck: listen you can come up with whatever analogy you like to suit your own agenda. The 8th amendment means you can’t help that poor girl being attacked if she’s carrying a basket of eggs for fear of breaking them. Sounds silly doesn’t it.
@Rob Cahill: But because it has less rights doesn’t therefore mean it has basically no rights. That seems to go over your head !
And that is why people speak up on the unborns behalf. That’s the straighforward answer to your ‘So what’ question !
@TradingDucky you never “spoke” for any of my wives five pregnancies..and now you will never be”voice” for any of the ‘pregnancies’ that my daughters might have..Ye antis are hilarious..:
@Francis Mc Carthy: er…. there wasn’t a need to because the constitution defended the unborn. Duh !!
do the journal fact check these personal stories?
@Elvis Polkasalad: Facts? you must be new around here. They only check to see if it fits with their agenda
@Mark Railton: You can always find some pro-choice website where you can vent in an orgy of confirmation bias
@DJ François: ‘news’ organizations are supposed to impartially report the news, this article is not news, it’s pro-choice propaganda.
@Mark Railton: News organizations take editorial positions
If she made her own choice & can live with it then good for her. Same with anyone else who feels they’ll need to do the same. Vote yes & let options be available here rather than making them only available elsewhere.
How about a story about a woman who had an abortion, deeply regretted it and committed suicide as a result – this cases exist…..
Cover both sides of a question – objectively – you know…….journalism?????
@HelloGoogleTracking..: she’s dead..
The whole skew of this debate has been on whether the state needs to control womens bodies or not. The other side of the debate has been ignored. If a woman in Ireland partner refuses to support a child born of the relationship , the woman is pretty much condemned to poverty or relative poverty. The state will step in to support the lone parent but the benefits are mainly aimed at women on the lower income or unemployed bracket. It will not pay a mortgage. Childcare fees are crippling for working couples as it is. Lone parents are obliged to get a court order of support from the father (in order to access benefits) but if the father does not pay their are no sanctions unlike in the more developed economies like Germany. My friend visited his child in Germany and was jailed until he was up to date on support payments. Quite the shock as he had never thought of making any, presuming the state supported his former girlfriend and daughter as it would in Ireland.
If we can get Irish people to stop smoking in Pubs and to stop drinking and driving based on economic penalties; perhaps enforcing child support orders more stringently would encourage more thoughtful sexual behaviour. There would inevitably less women coping alone and therefore a huge reduction in abortions.
@Judy O’Shea: I agree totally. In Denmark, the government covers 3/4 of childcare costs. Even the UK has a subsidy for childcare. In Ireland, you just have to bare the brunt of the costs. Sometimes I think this is not a child-friendly country at all.
And if the man does a runner as you mention, then the woman has to do it alone.
I have always been supportive of my wife throughout her pregnancies (I almost delivered the first baby!) It hasn’t been easy for her, for us. Not just the anxieties that come with an unplanned pregnancy but will the real financial stress too. I can’t imagine how much worse it would be for a woman who has no supports.
Is the right for a woman to choose an abortion the best that we can offer her?
Is abortion on demand the panacea for the failings of society?
We can and should do better. I think the government should have given us a better choice. And they should do something to address the real issues that surround crisis pregnancies.
A very sad story for that girl . I wondered why that it was almost impossible for to adopt an Irish child for childless couples ? Some help has to be given to a girl like that so she has another option , . Yes or no , is a handy way out for the government ,
@Tricksy: Google Ireland adoption history.
@Tricksy: you missed the part where she didn’t want to be pregnant or become a mother at all . .
@Siobhán Ni Mhurchú: Ciara says if you don’t accept the risk of having a baby, abstain or use a condom. She only says this about men though.
Are you looking for sympathy.
Wouldn’t giving the child up for adoption a better option?? For the child and a family who cant have children??
@Siobhan Rosemary: why don’t you read the article.
If the journal is to be a serious publication it must stop allowing anonymous stories of any kind on any issue.
@retainthe8th: Serious publication it will never be, unless and until it hires more actual journalists.
Michael Lang must of sent in his invoice to the YES campaign yesterday, the financial controller had a heart attack, Michael was sacked and now he is on the Yes hit list. Where is Michael?
@Andrew Cosgrave: he has ibdeed been notae in his absence tge last couple of days
If she’s anonymous, why can’t her illness be revealed?
@dearg doom: It’s a small country, that much detail would probably identify her to anyone who knows her given all the other details in there.
@Jackie Lew: You can stop projecting now and come up with an argument. I have a girlfriend and we are happy together. I’m sorry that you thought that being against killing children and advocating for parental responsibility was somehow connected to a history of rejection and hatred of women.
Contraceptives can fail, they are not guaranteed to stop conception. There is still a risk in using them. If a man walks out on a woman after getting her pregnant in order to escape his responsibility to raise that child, I have no compassion for him either. Thats what my comments are getting at, the avoidance of parental responsibility does not give you the right to kill. Every parent should have a duty to their offspring. They don’t deserve death because of our mess ups.
I understand that this woman felt trapped and threatened financially by the pregnancy. But, should abortion have been the only answer or solution available to her? Is there more a societal support issue to be addressed here? Bearing in mind what the word “abortion” means, ultimately the unnatural and chemical cessation of the development of an already conceived human life. In my opinion We have become desensitized to the word “abortion” and what the act entails and results in. I understand It’s a complex issue on many levels for many women. But I cannot consent to abortion on demand in any and every situation (regardless of the stage of pregnancy) in good conscience. I’m voting NÍL.
@Jackie Lew: My compassion is for the most vulnerable members of society who are objectively innocent and absolved of any blame – unborn children. I don’t have compassion for grown women making bad life choices that could have easily been avoided, and then trying to murder their own child because of their poor ability to make such choices. Complete lack of responsibility is what’s wrong with you people. Actions have consequences, simple as that. Hilarious how you view the murder of the objectively innocent and vulnerable baby as ‘compassion’. The left wing brain is indeed frightening.
Heard a disgusting statistic today. 50% of women who baby is diagnosed as Downes Syndrome go to England for to have it aborted ….,.what horrible excuses for human beings they are and how offensive is that to Downes Syndrome people and their families who love and cherish them .
The pro choice side seem to think that babies just spontaneously appear in a woman’s womb when she least expects it. We never hear about how the baby got there in the first place (i.e. the mother’s “choice” to engage in activity that leads to pregnancy). How about teaching young women about dignity and the importance of a stable marriage relationship? I suppose that’s too “fascist”….
@Ireland Needs God: your username is Ireland needs god. Right okay then.
@Ireland Needs God: not always. sometimes we have miraculous conceptions, you know…..
I would give this anonymous one serious credit (as a No voter) for at least having the honesty of her convictions. She did not try and dress up the abortion pill process or minimise the physical description of the end result. The foetus expelled, as was her wish. Fair play to her for her candour. If only more Repealers were so honest.
@madabot: *woman, not one. Apologies for typo.
@K: You represent the typical attitude of no voters. No compassion, callous, misogynistic, presumptuous, judgemental, insular, backward… Despite the screaming in the comments, you’re a dying breed thankfully.
You hate women who have abortions to avoid impoverished single parenthood, you also hate single mothers who don’t have abortions because they’re poor… Your type hates everybody.
@Jackie Lew: You’re not even reading what I’m saying because you’re too busy using ad hominem attacks instead of presenting arguments. I never said anyone was a ‘slut moocher’ for keeping a child. I respect women who face the consequences of their actions head on. Not pathetic cowards refusing to face responsibility.
Use whatever mental gymnastics and medical terms you want to dehumanize the baby. It’s still murder.
@K: Ah yes, those evil women who dare to have sex, the contraceptive failure is on them. No men are responsible?
Let’s be honest, you hate women and take pleasure in those whose lives are in pain because it’s a f you to all the women who’ve rejected you and continue to reject you. Did it ever occur to you that they can sense the disgusting attitude you have towards them?
It’s not the fault of women that you’re undoable, we shouldn’t be deprived of our bodily autonomy and be placed secondary to a zygote because you have rejection issues.
@K: Your attitude is summed up in your first post. You dismiss the experiences and lives of real people, belittle those people as deserving of the punishment and condemnation whichever choice they make. A slut murderer if they choose abortion, a slut moocher if they choose (or are forced) to keep it. That’s your attitude. One of hate.
A zygote isn’t equal to a woman. We’re not incubators and shouldn’t be legally defined as such. Our medical care should be between us and our doctor. It’s nothing to do with you.
This issue is as divisive as the bloody treaty. There will be snipers on the parapet by the 25th of May
Well, Thank you for sharing your personal experience. It is pretty sure that abortion pills do work and help you terminate pregnancy and I agree with your decision.
There are people who regret having abortions. There are people who regret having kids (yes this is true). Its lack of choice to let people be adults thats thr problem. Surely its evident to the no campaign by now that if they win, all they have done is maintain the risk to women who can and will have abortions anyway, both in the UK and via Women on Web.
@K: That’s what you insinuated.
bless you. wishing you all the best. I hope for the best, for everyone.. i hope miscarriage and abortion can be completely avoided. and, here’s to those who still needs assistance to conceive like me – https://www.conceiveeasy.com/get-pregnant/unexplained-infertility-how-do-i-get-pregnant/
have your say