#google savita halappanavar

[mangled-by-disuse]

#you guys are so weird and obsessed #do you understand that I'm talking about women and their FREEWILL in their sexual behaviour right?

"... And in this context, I can't possibly see how the limitations of free will (sorry, FREEWILL) for a minority of women might be a relevant topic."

buddy friendo pal a thing does not need to be a universal experience to be a relevant one. Rape and coercion affect enough women (AND men, why is it always the pro life crowd who assume reproductive rights are a Women Only Zone) to make "nobody forces you to have sex" a comically out of touch statement.

This is WHY people bring up rape, coercion, and mothers who are underage or otherwise not able to give meaningful consent. Not because we think they're the majority of reason birth control and abortion are needed, but because if any of those cases exist, then "just don't have sex then" ceases to function as an argument to reduce reproductive healthcare access. I'm not actually fighting for reproductive rights for my own hedonistic lifestyle, there's a very real chance I'm infertile and also I actually was celibate for a good number of years. My investment in reproductive rights is that birth control and abortion have always been part of society because THEY ARE NEEDED, and if they're only needed for a minority of people, so the fuck what? You need the infrastructure in place for people who have no other recourse, as well as for people who took necessary precautions but found themselves in an unpredictable situation. Even if I agreed with you that celibacy was a necessary precaution, you still need a backstop for when precautions fail.

(also may I present to you the radical notion that free will doesn't stop at the bedroom door, and people should also have the free will to use the tools at their disposal to mitigate risk. Or to provide them. you know, because free will )

Anyway, point is: I'm not obsessed with rape, you're literally the one who made an argument based on "all sex is freely entered into".

also to be clear this is not the biggest issue with your argument it's just the most obviously silly one

waiting for a politician to asssert your "bodily autonomy" "reproductive freedom" or whatever lingo those people use those days is CRAZY because literally no one forces you to have sex with anyone

You are de facto "free from sex" by your own very decision to not engage in sexual activity with anyone

What you guys actually want is "sex without reproductive consequence" access. This is a better term to objectively convey what you want.

But I get why some of you may be uncomfortable with it because it debunks the feminist ideal of being in "control" of their sexuality. Truth is many of you are not any more sexually disciplined than men. You want to have accesss to casual sex as much as they do. Just without the risk of pregnancy. That's why it's so funny to see (radical) feminist screech about how men are too sex obsessed...and then turn around begging to upkeep birth control & abortion : if you guys weren't obsessed with accessing to sex you wouldn't make those cause the crux of your movement. You love & need sex as much as those moids.

And by enabling casual you de facto allows to mediocre men fancying acess to women's body. Which somehow pisses you off because "how dare mediocre men think they deserve access to female body for sex??!" right? But you can't whine about the consequences of a cause you cherish.

And yes, more & more feminist are speaking up in favor of celibacy and more against sexual liberation, which is good. But the fact a significant portion of them still get veeeery uncomfortable if not angry when (non feminist) women argue that celibacy is actually a form of birth control and that "reproductive control" is irrelevant to the access to chemical substances or procedures altering your reproductive system. This behavior makes me believe this whole "vive la celibacy" is nothing but a posture and that self proclaimed feminist are aren't as much interested toppling the status quo as they pretend to be.

[sniperghostwarrior3blog]

Savita Halappanavar: Her tragic death and how she became part of Ireland's abortion debate - thejournal.ie

thejournal.ie

Savita Halappanavar: Her tragic death and how she became part of Ireland's abortion debate thejournal.ie Investigations into her death did not specifically examine whether Article 40.3.3 had any act or part in her illness but two of the three recommended further scrutiny of the law of the day. How then did a much-wanted pregnancy end in heartbreak for one ... and more »

from sniper-ghost-warrior-3 - Google News https://ift.tt/2r9LCZt via IFTTT

[capseycartwright]

today is international women’s day, and it’s also the day of strike for repeal in ireland. i can’t really participate in the strike or protests, but i feel like sharing this video and telling my tiny number of followers about this campaign is doing something for something that does affect irish women on a daily basis. 

ireland has absolutely draconian abortion laws. there is no other way of describing the criminal laws enshrined in our constitution which legislate for the prosecution of any woman who seeks an abortion in ireland or abroad. as far as i’m aware, the maximum sentence is a jail term of fourteen years - fourteen years imprisonment for a medical treatment. 

eleven irish women a day travel to the united kingdom to seek an abortion. these are estimated statistics because many women are afraid to speak out about this because it is illegal, it is stigmatised by irish society. but thats still an estimated eleven women a day being forced to leave their own country to seek a medical procedure denied to them by their own health system.

women have died unnecessarily because of the eight amendment (which projects and organisations such as repeal are fighting to have repealed and amended by the irish government) and you only have to google ‘x-case’ or savita halappanavar to see the trauma and damage caused to people’s lives by laws that forbid irish women a choice in their own reproductive care. 

on iwd, spare a thought for the eleven irish women that travelled to the uk today alone to have an abortion, and think of the people who have spent their entire lives fighting against an amendment introduced by a state still controlled by the thinking of the catholic church, and stand in solidarity with irish women who are striking today in the hope that someday, our government will actually repeal a horrific amendment that has denied irish women their reproductive rights for decades.

[ebola-chan-love]

Week in pictures: From Nipah virus in India to Ebola in DRC - Aljazeera.com

Aljazeera.com

Week in pictures: From Nipah virus in India to Ebola in DRC Aljazeera.com Week in pictures: From Nipah virus in India to Ebola in DRC. A photo roundup of some of last week's events, including Paris protests, heatwave in Pakistan and floods in Sri Lanka. 10 hours ago. A woman looks at a new mural of Savita Halappanavar with ...

ebola - Google News http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&fd=R&ct2=us&usg=AFQjCNF3wac5gLndPYRr-oRNkpXxihg6uw&clid=c3a7d30bb8a4878e06b80cf16b898331&ei=bb8MW8igF-q_3AHvyprYAQ&url=https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/inpictures/week-pictures-nipah-virus-india-ebola-drc-180527100950446.html

[graesays]

My views on this topic are irrelevant

This week, the people of Ireland went to the polls after they were given the option to repeal the country’s 8th constitutional amendment. Social media has obviously been bombarded on both sides of the argument and ultimately the people of Ireland decided overwhelmingly to repeal the 8th. I’m probably not going to elaborate on this topic beyond this blog, and you’ll find out why at the end (ooh, intrigue!)

So for those out of the loop, the 8th amendment of the Republic of Ireland constitution treats both pregnant women and their unborn foetuses equally in the eyes of the law, ultimately resulting in the country having the most restrictive anti-abortion laws in Europe (with the exception of Poland). The result is that women in Ireland have had no access to abortion in pretty much every scenario, and that has meant either facing crippling debt and other societal and economic problems to travel to the UK to get an abortion, or face the utter horror of back alley abortions. A situation that has led to a groundswell of people coming out in support of abolishing this amendment, with some travelling back to Ireland from all over the world to cast a ballot.

The debate however, as you would probably expect, has been toxic. The church as ever has come down hard on the side of retaining the amendment, and they have as always resorted to spreading false information and graphic imagery in the face of vulnerable people in the name of spreading the love of the lord our saviour. In fact, the no campaigns advertising got so graphic that Google had to step in and bad adverts from both sides, a move which the no campaign claimed was biased against them and them alone, somehow. So with Google preventing ads and traditional print being about as effective an advertising platform as putting your ad on a slurry pit, social media became the battleground for the debate and regardless of your opinion (or lack thereof) there was no escaping a debate on the matter. Not even for yours truly.

So seeing as I’m segueing into the meat and bones of this blog, I suppose I’d best nail my flag to the mast, not that any of you will be shocked. I’m firmly on the side of pro-choice activists (keep this exact wording in mind, it’ll be important later), after all, it’s not my body so who the fuck am I to tell others what to do with it. I don’t think I’ll encounter a situation where I will change my stance on this because; A) I don’t plan on being a father, and B) I don’t plan on influencing a pregnant partners decision either way if I do somehow end up in that position (I won’t, but it’s always safer to have a backup plan eh?). I don’t intend it to be this way, but the vast majority of my circle of friends also share this sentiment so I wasn’t expecting my views on this matter to be challenged, but up steps a former colleague of mine who I do consider a friend, but also is a deeply religious person, and ultimately takes the opposite view on this matter.

The debate started in earnest when I wrote something on Facebook that countered points he’d made in a post from the No campaign stating that the vote was a matter of life and death. My writing explained how that post was more of an argument for repeal rather than against it because this was a matter of life and death for women (the plight of Savita Halappanavar, who died after being refused an abortion during a septic miscarriage was a key feature of Yes campaigning). He responded to that post sharing the talking points that you would expect (hitting a particular low when I made the point that safety of women seeking abortions should be considered a valid reason to make them legal so that back alley abortions would be eradicated, and he responded by using the example of road speed limits as a law that is repeatedly broken but isn’t subject to appeal and asked on that basis why abortion should be legalised just because its something that happens despite it being illegal), and the back and forth went on before he wrapped up by saying how great it was to debate between two opposing views.

I don’t share that sentiment in this instance. He’s right on the grounds that people with opposing views should debate more often (especially if there’s a chance that people could be swayed towards the side of progress), but this particular debate was utterly irrelevant, hell, it was even less relevant than your typical Facebook debate usually gets, and do you know why? because it was two cis-gendered men talking exclusively amongst each other about an issue that will never, ever affect them personally.

You know the slogan of the disabled people’s movement that I so love and admire, “nothing about us, without us”. That is a quote that literally applies to every single minority group that exists, yet always seems to be applied the least in regards to women’s rights. Men always seem happy to wade in and share their views on matters that in every single case should be deferred to women. Abortion rights? IVF for lesbian couples? Abolishing the tampon tax? You bet your arse that 99 times out of 100, the dissenting voice will be a mans. The problem exists on the other side too though, way too many times women with unique and personal experiences of huge value to a debate will be robbed of the chance to contribute them as men hog the soapbox and the plaudits.

Women have so much more to contribute to a debate about abortion rights than any man can ever hope to have. That’s just the nature of this thing. Same goes for LGBT* people when discussing the discrimination they face. Same for BAME people. Same for Disabled people. If you belong to any of these groups and decisions are being made that affect your very livelihood then you would be rightly pissed off so stop doing it to Women. Views that seek to nullify their experiences de-legitimatises them, as does co-opting their arguments as your own, as does debating the issue without involving them. Let’s pack it in, listen to what the women who’s opinions you value have to say on the matter, and signal boost them.

[feenyxblue]

She's not from the US, but Google Savita Halappanavar.

I don't think people realize how some people need abortions because they want to be pregnant. I really genuinely want a child. However, if abortion becomes criminalized, it becomes incredibly dangerous for me to be pregnant. I am physically ill and have multiple health problems that make me susceptible to having various pregnancy complications, miscarriage, and birth defects (that lead to stillbirth). Hell, I have a higher chance of maternal mortality than most women. Banning abortion puts me at severe medical risk. Miscarriage is now under legal suspect and is continuing to be seen as "potential" abortions or just flat out manslaughter; I could be interrogated by the police or even prosecuted in the court of law for having a miscarriage. I could have a pregnancy complication that cannot be resolved because a law prevents me from having an abortion, and I could, at best, be rendered infertile or, at worst, end up dead. I could be forced to go through an excruciatingly long and painful birth so that I can hold a dead infant in my arms because the law wouldn't let me get a "late-term" abortion. The list is endless. Don't let anyone tell you pregnancy is a safe procedure. It is not. Abortion is healthcare.

[party-hard-or-die]

Ireland, Enthusiastic About Gay Rights, Frets Over Abortion

CARRIGTWOHILL, Ireland — When it comes to the Roman Catholic Church, Judy Donnelly has been something of a rebel over the years. Like much of Ireland, she supported contraception, voted in a referendum to legalize divorce and, three years ago, backed same-sex marriage.

That last vote was joyously celebrated around the country and the world, placing Ireland, which elected its first gay prime minister last year, at the vanguard of what many called a social revolution.

But when it comes to the historic decision on legalizing abortion, which will be put to the nation on Friday, Ms. Donnelly says she will vote no, as will enough of her countrymen and women, including lawmakers across the political divide, to throw the referendum result into doubt. Polls for the May 25 vote have narrowed so tightly in recent weeks that “yes” and “no” campaigners are not able to confidently predict a victory.

Ms. Donnelly, 46, who works in a pub in Carrigtwohill, found no contradiction in giving gay men and lesbians their marital rights, a triumphant affirmation of their social inclusion — Ireland decriminalized homosexuality only in 1993 — while denying what many say is a woman’s right to decide what to do with her body.

“It’s just not the same,” she said, pausing as she struggled to articulate what exactly was the difference between the two. “It’s about values and morals. It’s just not the same,” she repeated, before lapsing into silence.

The curious dynamic underscores the complex reality that even if Ireland is becoming more culturally liberal in many respects, opposition to abortion is more deeply ingrained. The reasons are complicated and nuanced: a history of female oppression; the church’s continuing grip over sexual education; a malaise over discussions about sex and sexual health; and very private experiences around miscarriages, fetal deformities, adoption difficulties and spousal disagreements over whether to keep a baby.

A big part of the problem, many Irish say, is that there is a legacy of sex being a taboo subject and that the negative consequences of sexual activity, including infections or unplanned pregnancies, are seen through a moral lens rather than as health issues. Even though 40 percent of children in the country are born to unmarried mothers and fathers (about the same as in the United States), many say there is still some stigma around unmarried mothers.

Ironically, it took a gay prime minister, Leo Varadkar, to call for this referendum that will essentially ask voters to repeal a 1983 amendment to the Constitution that gives a fetus the same right to life as the mother and allow unrestricted terminations of pregnancies for up to 12 weeks.

“I know I come across as a hypocrite,” said Darren Haddock, 48, a cabdriver who initially planned to vote in favor of abortion because he saw it as a woman’s right. But now, he said, “We’re talking about hurting a life.”

The referendum on gay marriage was different, he said. “The time was right for Ireland to come out of the Dark Ages, to break the shackles from the church, and it was a victory for people to stand up to it,” he said.

Ms. Donnelly, who recently divorced, voted in favor of same-sex marriage because her sister-in-law was part of the first gay couple to get married in England. Another cousin is gay, and recently got married, too.

When it came to abortion, she reflected on some of her other relatives who had miscarriages, having wanted children badly. “And then you have people who cross over to England to get an abortion,” she said, although she said there were some exceptions, as in the cases of rape or incest. “But just because you made a boo-boo doesn’t mean you get an abortion.”

Still, she voted in three previous referendums allowing women to have abortions if their lives were in danger, to travel abroad for the procedure and to have access to information about it. The legalization of abortion, she said, would “make it easier for people to say, ‘Oh, I’ll just go and rid of it.’”

Ms. Donnelly spoke as an older woman slowly pushed a baby carriage up the street, carrying two baby dolls under plastic wrapping to protect against a cold drizzle. Mr. Haddock recalled seeing the woman nearly four decades ago, when he was a child. She had had several miscarriages, he explained, and hadn’t stopped pushing the carriage ever since.

For Una Mullally, who edited the book “Repeal the 8th,” a reference to the Eighth Amendment that essentially bans abortion in Ireland, the answer to the dichotomy over gay and women’s rights is control.

“Misogyny is much more embedded in Irish life than homophobia,” she said. “Ireland has a terrible history of oppressing women, and the legacy of the Catholic Church is control,” she added, referring to the thousands of unmarried women who became pregnant and were placed into servitude or mental asylums since the 18th century until as recent as the mid-1990s.

Even when the country in 1985 legalized condoms to be sold without prescriptions, she said, it was to deal with the AIDS epidemic, rather than to give women their reproductive rights. “Women’s autonomy has always been viewed with suspicion or through a lens that is very bizarre,” she said.

In Cork, Ireland’s second-biggest city, placards for opposing campaigns were attached to almost every street lamp, but the mood was subdued. Most people interviewed for this article didn’t want their names published; many of them hadn’t even spoken about the subject with their friends, let alone their families.

“Oh God, no,” exclaimed a 24-year-old barista named Maedhbh who worked in a coffee shop and wore a nose ring and a bright yellow sweatshirt with the words “Bitter Lemon” printed on it.

“My grandparents don’t want to engage in it,” she said, just as her grandfather Paddy walked in. When asked about the referendum, he stopped in his tracks and pretended to be hard of hearing. “You could be shot for giving an answer,” a customer standing nearby said smirking, before rushing out the door. “There’s a saying in Irish: ‘Whatever you say, say nothing.’ ”

While the church’s influence has fallen drastically in most spheres of Irish life, its hold on sexual education remains strong — the institution still controls most schools in the country.

Even young, internet-savvy Irish in their early 20s spoke about receiving more of a lesson in biology, and a cursory one at that, than instructions about sexual health and safety.

“When we were 16 we had two lads, monks, come in to talk about abstinence, and that one in 10 people get pregnant and that you can still get STDs from wearing condoms,” said Ben Collins, a 22-year-old college student, who plans to vote to legalize abortion. “It was basically fear. The Catholic influence is so big here, but you don’t even realize it.”

Deirdre Allinen, 32, recalled sitting in a classroom and having nuns wheel in a television before being a shown a grisly video about abortion. “Then we’d say the rosary and stand around praying,” she said. “The way it’s taught to us, it’s still in me. The curriculum is still hidden in our brains. It took me a long time to shake it off.”

As a result, Ireland has never had a conversation about sex being a positive thing, said Will St Leger, an artist and an H.I.V. activist who is on a crusade to reform sex education in schools.

“A lot of these issues around sexual health and reproductive rights all stem from a lack of information and shame,” he said. “That’s the biggest element — what we do with our bodies and with other people carries shame.”

“We see ourselves as global, checking in at airports, L.G.B.T., Eurovision,” he said, and Ireland as a mecca for tech giants like Google, Facebook and Apple. “But this crushing theocratic doctrine put on Irish society has permeated right to the core,” he added, “even to the person who doesn’t go to church: that sex is seen as a sin. It’s in our D.N.A.”

The dearth of a proper national conversation is part of the reason Ireland is seeing a surge in sexually transmitted diseases, Mr. St Leger said, with 15- to 24-year-olds, for example, making up half of Ireland’s number of reported annual chlamydia infections.

The nation is also in the throes of an H.I.V. crisis, he added, pointing to opinion polls that show one-quarter of respondents are not properly informed about the virus. At least a quarter of respondents still believe they can catch it by kissing or sitting on a toilet seat. And for all the excitement around the vote on same-sex marriage, Mr. St Leger pointed out, the government has since 2009 cut the budget in half for Gay Men’s Health Service, which provides H.I.V. testing, screenings and treatments for sexually-transmitted infections, and outreach.

The same-sex marriage vote was “all about love and relationships,” he said. “But we don’t talk about sexual health.”

Still, sexual education has improved from Ms. Donnelly’s time, when nuns taught her class: “If a lad sat on your lap, you’d put a newspaper on your lap. That was the contraception of the day.”

In recent years, Ireland has seen some of the biggest turnarounds in public opinion in the Western world. In 1992, for example, while homosexuality was still considered a crime in the country, participants in a gay pride parade in Cork wore masks so as not to embarrass relatives. In 2018, Ireland has a gay prime minister, same-sex marriage is allowed and some of the world’s most progressive bills concerning lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are being put forward in Parliament.

Similarly, attitudes toward abortion shifted drastically after Savita Halappanavar died in 2012 of complications from a septic miscarriage. She had asked for a termination, but the hospital refused her request, initially judging that her life was not in danger. The baby was stillborn, and Ms. Halappanavar died a few days later.

For many voters, the referendum over abortion is, ultimately, a deeply private choice.

In 2015, after the same-sex marriage vote, “it was like Glastonbury; it was party central,” recalled Mr. Haddock. But next week, he said, “no matter who wins or loses, there’s not going to be a party.”

The post Ireland, Enthusiastic About Gay Rights, Frets Over Abortion appeared first on World The News.

from World The News https://ift.tt/2KFJrVL via Breaking News

[newestbalance]

Ireland, Enthusiastic About Gay Rights, Frets Over Abortion

CARRIGTWOHILL, Ireland — When it comes to the Roman Catholic Church, Judy Donnelly has been something of a rebel over the years. Like much of Ireland, she supported contraception, voted in a referendum to legalize divorce and, three years ago, backed same-sex marriage.

That last vote was joyously celebrated around the country and the world, placing Ireland, which elected its first gay prime minister last year, at the vanguard of what many called a social revolution.

But when it comes to the historic decision on legalizing abortion, which will be put to the nation on Friday, Ms. Donnelly says she will vote no, as will enough of her countrymen and women, including lawmakers across the political divide, to throw the referendum result into doubt. Polls for the May 25 vote have narrowed so tightly in recent weeks that “yes” and “no” campaigners are not able to confidently predict a victory.

Ms. Donnelly, 46, who works in a pub in Carrigtwohill, found no contradiction in giving gay men and lesbians their marital rights, a triumphant affirmation of their social inclusion — Ireland decriminalized homosexuality only in 1993 — while denying what many say is a woman’s right to decide what to do with her body.

“It’s just not the same,” she said, pausing as she struggled to articulate what exactly was the difference between the two. “It’s about values and morals. It’s just not the same,” she repeated, before lapsing into silence.

The curious dynamic underscores the complex reality that even if Ireland is becoming more culturally liberal in many respects, opposition to abortion is more deeply ingrained. The reasons are complicated and nuanced: a history of female oppression; the church’s continuing grip over sexual education; a malaise over discussions about sex and sexual health; and very private experiences around miscarriages, fetal deformities, adoption difficulties and spousal disagreements over whether to keep a baby.

A big part of the problem, many Irish say, is that there is a legacy of sex being a taboo subject and that the negative consequences of sexual activity, including infections or unplanned pregnancies, are seen through a moral lens rather than as health issues. Even though 40 percent of children in the country are born to unmarried mothers and fathers (about the same as in the United States), many say there is still some stigma around unmarried mothers.

Ironically, it took a gay prime minister, Leo Varadkar, to call for this referendum that will essentially ask voters to repeal a 1983 amendment to the Constitution that gives a fetus the same right to life as the mother and allow unrestricted terminations of pregnancies for up to 12 weeks.

“I know I come across as a hypocrite,” said Darren Haddock, 48, a cabdriver who initially planned to vote in favor of abortion because he saw it as a woman’s right. But now, he said, “We’re talking about hurting a life.”

The referendum on gay marriage was different, he said. “The time was right for Ireland to come out of the Dark Ages, to break the shackles from the church, and it was a victory for people to stand up to it,” he said.

Ms. Donnelly, who recently divorced, voted in favor of same-sex marriage because her sister-in-law was part of the first gay couple to get married in England. Another cousin is gay, and recently got married, too.

When it came to abortion, she reflected on some of her other relatives who had miscarriages, having wanted children badly. “And then you have people who cross over to England to get an abortion,” she said, although she said there were some exceptions, as in the cases of rape or incest. “But just because you made a boo-boo doesn’t mean you get an abortion.”

Still, she voted in three previous referendums allowing women to have abortions if their lives were in danger, to travel abroad for the procedure and to have access to information about it. The legalization of abortion, she said, would “make it easier for people to say, ‘Oh, I’ll just go and rid of it.’”

Ms. Donnelly spoke as an older woman slowly pushed a baby carriage up the street, carrying two baby dolls under plastic wrapping to protect against a cold drizzle. Mr. Haddock recalled seeing the woman nearly four decades ago, when he was a child. She had had several miscarriages, he explained, and hadn’t stopped pushing the carriage ever since.

For Una Mullally, who edited the book “Repeal the 8th,” a reference to the Eighth Amendment that essentially bans abortion in Ireland, the answer to the dichotomy over gay and women’s rights is control.

“Misogyny is much more embedded in Irish life than homophobia,” she said. “Ireland has a terrible history of oppressing women, and the legacy of the Catholic Church is control,” she added, referring to the thousands of unmarried women who became pregnant and were placed into servitude or mental asylums since the 18th century until as recent as the mid-1990s.

Even when the country in 1985 legalized condoms to be sold without prescriptions, she said, it was to deal with the AIDS epidemic, rather than to give women their reproductive rights. “Women’s autonomy has always been viewed with suspicion or through a lens that is very bizarre,” she said.

In Cork, Ireland’s second-biggest city, placards for opposing campaigns were attached to almost every street lamp, but the mood was subdued. Most people interviewed for this article didn’t want their names published; many of them hadn’t even spoken about the subject with their friends, let alone their families.

“Oh God, no,” exclaimed a 24-year-old barista named Maedhbh who worked in a coffee shop and wore a nose ring and a bright yellow sweatshirt with the words “Bitter Lemon” printed on it.

“My grandparents don’t want to engage in it,” she said, just as her grandfather Paddy walked in. When asked about the referendum, he stopped in his tracks and pretended to be hard of hearing. “You could be shot for giving an answer,” a customer standing nearby said smirking, before rushing out the door. “There’s a saying in Irish: ‘Whatever you say, say nothing.’ ”

While the church’s influence has fallen drastically in most spheres of Irish life, its hold on sexual education remains strong — the institution still controls most schools in the country.

Even young, internet-savvy Irish in their early 20s spoke about receiving more of a lesson in biology, and a cursory one at that, than instructions about sexual health and safety.

“When we were 16 we had two lads, monks, come in to talk about abstinence, and that one in 10 people get pregnant and that you can still get STDs from wearing condoms,” said Ben Collins, a 22-year-old college student, who plans to vote to legalize abortion. “It was basically fear. The Catholic influence is so big here, but you don’t even realize it.”

Deirdre Allinen, 32, recalled sitting in a classroom and having nuns wheel in a television before being a shown a grisly video about abortion. “Then we’d say the rosary and stand around praying,” she said. “The way it’s taught to us, it’s still in me. The curriculum is still hidden in our brains. It took me a long time to shake it off.”

As a result, Ireland has never had a conversation about sex being a positive thing, said Will St Leger, an artist and an H.I.V. activist who is on a crusade to reform sex education in schools.

“A lot of these issues around sexual health and reproductive rights all stem from a lack of information and shame,” he said. “That’s the biggest element — what we do with our bodies and with other people carries shame.”

“We see ourselves as global, checking in at airports, L.G.B.T., Eurovision,” he said, and Ireland as a mecca for tech giants like Google, Facebook and Apple. “But this crushing theocratic doctrine put on Irish society has permeated right to the core,” he added, “even to the person who doesn’t go to church: that sex is seen as a sin. It’s in our D.N.A.”

The dearth of a proper national conversation is part of the reason Ireland is seeing a surge in sexually transmitted diseases, Mr. St Leger said, with 15- to 24-year-olds, for example, making up half of Ireland’s number of reported annual chlamydia infections.

The nation is also in the throes of an H.I.V. crisis, he added, pointing to opinion polls that show one-quarter of respondents are not properly informed about the virus. At least a quarter of respondents still believe they can catch it by kissing or sitting on a toilet seat. And for all the excitement around the vote on same-sex marriage, Mr. St Leger pointed out, the government has since 2009 cut the budget in half for Gay Men’s Health Service, which provides H.I.V. testing, screenings and treatments for sexually-transmitted infections, and outreach.

The same-sex marriage vote was “all about love and relationships,” he said. “But we don’t talk about sexual health.”

Still, sexual education has improved from Ms. Donnelly’s time, when nuns taught her class: “If a lad sat on your lap, you’d put a newspaper on your lap. That was the contraception of the day.”

In recent years, Ireland has seen some of the biggest turnarounds in public opinion in the Western world. In 1992, for example, while homosexuality was still considered a crime in the country, participants in a gay pride parade in Cork wore masks so as not to embarrass relatives. In 2018, Ireland has a gay prime minister, same-sex marriage is allowed and some of the world’s most progressive bills concerning lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are being put forward in Parliament.

Similarly, attitudes toward abortion shifted drastically after Savita Halappanavar died in 2012 of complications from a septic miscarriage. She had asked for a termination, but the hospital refused her request, initially judging that her life was not in danger. The baby was stillborn, and Ms. Halappanavar died a few days later.

For many voters, the referendum over abortion is, ultimately, a deeply private choice.

In 2015, after the same-sex marriage vote, “it was like Glastonbury; it was party central,” recalled Mr. Haddock. But next week, he said, “no matter who wins or loses, there’s not going to be a party.”

The post Ireland, Enthusiastic About Gay Rights, Frets Over Abortion appeared first on World The News.

from World The News https://ift.tt/2KFJrVL via Everyday News

[joannafaustus]

Yes, her name was savita halappanavar, you can google her. That is exactly what happened.

The gop are going to get several women needlessly killed.

If they haven’t already.

I’m starting to think hospitals in red states have hushed certain things up.

Texas hospitals, particularly. Because they started this before Roe vs Wade was over ruled.

They were the canary in the mine.

[ebola-chan-love]

Week in pictures: From Nipah virus in India to Ebola in DRC - Aljazeera.com

Aljazeera.com

Week in pictures: From Nipah virus in India to Ebola in DRC Aljazeera.com Week in pictures: From Nipah virus in India to Ebola in DRC. A photo roundup of some of last week's events, including protests in Paris, Pakistan heatwave and Sri Lanka floods. 40 minutes ago. A woman looks at a new mural of Savita Halappanavar with ...

ebola - Google News http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&fd=R&ct2=us&usg=AFQjCNF3wac5gLndPYRr-oRNkpXxihg6uw&clid=c3a7d30bb8a4878e06b80cf16b898331&ei=rMEKW_jRK8_8zAbc14mICA&url=https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/inpictures/week-pictures-nipah-virus-india-ebola-drc-180527100950446.html

[theivorybilledwoodpecker]

Wow...just, wow...

There's a whole lot of ignorance to unpack there.

So you say that you support abortion to save the pregnant person's life. Yet prolife representatives don't agree with you. Let's get one thing straight. Abortion simply means the termination of a pregnancy. Miscarriages are often called spontaneous abortions. These are incredibly different than elective abortions, but the terminology used is similar. In 2019, Candice Keller and Mike Dewine introduced a bill that would force doctors to try to implant the fetus of an ectopic pregnancy in the pregnant person's uterus. Which is medically impossible and would have killed the person.

Recently Brian Seitz introduced a bill that, if passed, would make terminating an ectopic pregnant illegal.

And Warren Hamilton has stated his opposition to exceptions for ectopic pregnancies.

People have died from being denied an abortion:

Savita Halappanavar

Agnieszka T.

Izabela Sajbor and the other women mentioned in this article

And if you're still under the illusion that prolifers only want what's best for pregnant people, look at this post:

There was Bobby Franklin, who introduced a bill that would have caused every miscarriage to be investigated as a homicide.

Chelsea Becker was jailed for a stillbirth.

Marshae Jones was charged for her miscarriage after she'd been shot.

Brittany Poolaw was convicted for her miscarriage.

So maybe you personally see the difference between elective abortion due to ectopic pregnancy or a miscarriage, but the people prolifers put in power do not. They will kill people because they want to.

As for teenagers knowing enough about sex, sex ed varies greatly from state to state, with some states teaching almost nothing but abstinence. And there's a difference between mentally knowing something and having the maturity level to not only make a calculated judgment, but to become a fucking parent. If a 15 year old isn't allowed to leave the class without a hall pass, they're not ready to have a baby.

As for rape victims, if you ban them from having an abortion, you are an accessory to rape. You are punishing them for their rapist's actions. You are forcing them to risk their health and lives. You are retraumatizing them every single day of that pregnancy. I know you're young, but deep down you know that is psychopathic.

There are organizations to help those in poverty...so why is there still homelessness? Why do people die of easily curable diseases? Why is there still starvation? Because the organizations can't help everyone.

Prolifers don't mention those "increased risks" associated with abortion because they don't often exist when abortion is performed in a safe manner. Infections and internal organ damage is common when an abortion is performed unsafely. But when performed safely, abortions are safer than giving birth.

An abortion ban won't stop abortions. It will only stop safe abortions. So I guess prolifers want women to experience that? Do yourself a favor and research abortions pre Roe v. Wade.

Abortion certainly doesn't cause breast cancer.

My sources for the common conditions in pregnancy? I mean did you even google it?

And I'll end with this. Most of your concern with abortion seems to be that babies are bring murdered. They are not. Fetuses are being aborted. A fetus is not a baby any more than am acorn is a tree or an egg is a chick. It cannot survive outside of another person.

Now, you are free to believe fetuses are babies. You're wrong, but you're free to believe that. But you are not free to force another person to be pregnant. No one can force another to let someone live inside them. To restrict their movements and give up health and possibly life for another person.

Prolifers don't like abortion? Fine. They don't need to get one. If they want they can pop babies out like Pez Dispensers. But they do not get to force everyone else in the country to subscribe to their views.

@theivorybilledwoodpecker

Okay, that may be true. Deaths that may occur due to child birth is common, unfortunately. But how does this justify abortion? A mother’s death during birth is just as tragic as a baby in the womb getting mutilated during a suction (aspiration) D&C.

Now, ectopic pregnancies. I never heard of that term before and after doing my research on what that is, I came to the conclusion that abortion is a necessary procedure that needs to happen so that the mother can be relieved of her pain. That for me is an exception. But most abortions are mostly done to healthy fetuses and that is not what I support, whatsoever. Mothers who are assured of an healthy path of their pregnancy get abortions when they go in for check-ups and STILL, they want to murder their unborn child.

And even if the mother is at an high-risk pregnancy, abortion is less likely to happen anyway. That’s why C-Section exist. According to Dr. C. Everett Koop (former Surgeon General of the United States), "Protection of the life of the mother as an excuse for an abortion is a smokescreen. In my 36 years of pediatric surgery I have never known of one instance of where the child had to be aborted to save the mother's life. If towards the end of the pregnancy complications arise that threaten the mother's health, the doctor will induce labor or perform a Cesarean section. His intention is to save the life of the mother and the baby. The baby's life is never willfully destroyed because the mother's life is in danger."

And removing a nonviable or dead pregnancy is not an abortion. In miscarriages, they wouldn’t do an abortion, they would make you stillbirth the child to get it out. 😐 Septic uteruses are more likely to cause a miscarriage. And to note, after 6-7 weeks, the risk of a miscarriage is less than 5%. Most abortions occur between 10-12 weeks or later- long after the majority of miscarriages would occur.

“Pregnancy due to rape or incest.”

I hate when you guys do this. You take one of the most traumatic experiences that anyone can go through to push the agenda of murdering babies. But anyway, instead of punishing the child because of another’s heinous crime, can we actually condemn the person who actually committed it? The baby did nothing. The baby is just as much as a victim the mother is. That’s unjust. It doesn’t matter how one was conceived. That baby can grow up and become a good person. Hell, even a bad person. We don’t know. But do not assume one’s future by the way one was conceived. Come on now.

The pregnant person is a child.

Valid point but not really. Child pregnancy or teen pregnancy? Teens, nowadays have the knowledge of how sex works. That’s why “this trend in teen birth rates has continued even as the economy has recovered, and birth rates for teens have fallen faster than they have for all women ages 15 to 44 (58% and 4% declines, respectively, from 2008 to 2018).” Why? “Less sex, use of more effective contraception and more information about pregnancy prevention,” according to the Pew Research Center.

The person is trans and cannot continue taking hormones while pregnant.

Source? If I’m not mistaken, pretty sure they can keep taking their hormones if it doesn’t harm the baby. But I could be wrong. I’m not really sure how that works.

Pregnant person can be at a increased risk of cardiovascular issues, depression, diabetes, etc.

Again, Source? And has it ever occurred to you that anyone who has an abortion is at a increased risk of breast cancer, depression, suicidal thoughts, guilt/shame, damage to internal organs, pelvic infections, etc? No? Hell, even may have long-term injuries that might complicate their future pregnancies? How come you pro-choicers never bring this up?

“The pregnant person may not have the financial stability to support her child. May lead to starvation or homelessness.”

Sigh. Just as there are shelters where homeless people can go and lay their heads and feed themselves, there are pro-life organizations out there who are more than willing to help these women out because that is what being pro-life is about. Pro-life is pro-women.

Here are the organizations that I am talking about:

Live Action (specialty: investigative reports, Pro-Life news) https://www.liveaction.org/news/

Students For Life (specialty: youth advocacy. linked to Christianity but will welcome members with other/no religion) https://studentsforlife.org/

Susan B. Anthony’s List (specialty: email updates and contacting representatives) https://www.sba-list.org/

Secular Pro-Life(specialty:exactly what it says) https://secularprolife.org/

40 Days For Life (specialty: protesting and support for Moms) https://www.40daysforlife.com/

Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising PAAU (specialty: youth action, direct action, protesting) https://paaunow.org/

Also, my mother had me when she was 18. She was homeless and didn’t have anywhere to go. She was left by her mother, my grandmother, to fend for herself on the streets. And let me tell you, the streets is no place for a pregnant teenager. Do you think I should have been aborted?

Now, I am 18 years old. Graduated high school and on my way to college, very excited to major in Literature and English. Made friends, traveled to different places, making a life for myself. That’s why I’m pro-life. Every life deserves to live.

Forgot your other excuses as to why women should kill their own babies. But I think I got my point across already. 😁

[theivorybilledwoodpecker]

A man I once knew. And all the politicians pushing for no or almost no exception abortion bans, like Warren Hamilton. And Candice Keller and Ron Hood who, in 2019, introduced a bill that would force doctors to remove an ectopic pregnancy from the fallopian tube and implant it in the pregnant person's uterus. Guess what this would do? Kill people!

Which is where we come to Brian Seitz. He introduced Bill 2810, which would make it a felony to terminate an ectopic pregnancy. That's the problem I have with him. He wants to murder people.

So, let's cover one thing. Abortion in it's simplest terms means the termination of a pregnancy. This is why miscarriages are sometimes called spontaneous abortions. My mother's first pregnancy was a miscarriage that didn't leave her body. She had to have it removed. Guess what that was described as? An abortion. I agree that the treament for these types of miscarriages and for ectopic pregnancies aren't the same as a person terminating a pregnancy for other reasons, but the people prolifers put in power clearly either do not grasp the distinction or don't give a fuck. I'm guessing both.

Google "women charged for miscarriage," and you'll see that prolifers simply cannot grasp that miscarriages are common.

There was Bobby Franklin, who introduced a bill that would have caused every miscarriage to be investigated as a homicide.

Chelsea Becker was jailed for a stillbirth.

Marshae Jones was charged for her miscarriage after she'd been shot.

Brittany Poolaw was convicted for her miscarriage.

I'll admit I was wrong about the cancer treatment, and I'm glad for that.

You're wrong about a septic uterus usually being the result of abortion. Yes, it can absolutely be caused by that, but it can also be caused by a dead fetus being left inside a person's body, surgery elsewhere that grows infected and the infection spreads, etc. Maternal sepsis is one of the leading causes of death among pregnant people, and no it's not because they're all trying to get abortions.

You want to know who died from being denied an abortion?

Savita Halappanavar

Agnieszka T.

Izabela Sajbor and the other women mentioned in this article

And if you're still under the illusion that prolifers only want what's best for pregnant people, look at this post:

What would have happened if she couldn't afford an attorney, huh?

And all of this isn't even beginning to cover the people who died before Roe v. Wade.

Look, I get it. I was once prolife myself. I had the misfortune of attending a cult like church as a kid, and it took me years to realize how many lies were being pushed down my throat. The prolife movement is full of lies. It wants people to believe that pregnancy is safe. That fetuses are more sentient than they actually are. But you need to start questioning what you've been told because it's all about to change.

Most people never had to see people die because a doctor wasn't legally allowed to trear them. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, we will see people die of perfectly preventable conditions. We will see rape victims commit suicide because their state won't allow them abortions. We will see people charged for miscarriages. Politicians and doctors will hem and haw over whether a certain person meets the exceptions, and by the time they finally decide, it might be too late.

We cannot afford to agree to disagree.

Despite what prolifers like to say about prochoicers not accepting pregnancy as a choice, I've never heard someone who's prochoice say everyone should get abortions. I have, however, had prolifers say it's never okay to have an abortion. So I guess prolife means they think pregnant people should just die if complications arise?

[alipeeps]

@casper-ghostly A woman with a dead child in her womb literally under no circumstances could have an abortion, because an abortion requires a living baby to be killed.

@tinycatholic​ Wrong and wrong. Abortion is not “killing a living baby”, abortion is literally the premature ending of a pregnancy. The purpose is not to kill a “baby” it is to end the pregnancy, and the foetus/embryo etc might be alive at the time of the abortion or might not. It absolutely still IS an abortion even if the foetus is dead or dying and there literally already have been cases of women DYING because anti-abortion laws meant they could not have an abortion, even though the foetus was dying/dead, which then lead to sepsis. Google Savita Halappanavar for a prime example.

Just as ending an ectopic pregnancy IS also still an abortion. It is prematurely ending the pregnancy (also, nowadays salpingectomy is not necessarily required for termination of ectopic pregnancy - it is often carried out via medication abortion and the procedure is literally no different from medication abortion for any other reason). You trying to differentiate what is and what isn’t an abortion so that you can feel justified in condemning/banning one while admitting the necessity for another is just intellectually dishonest.

I genuinely think we need to talk about adoption less in the discussion about abortion, because it takes the focus off the act itself.

Even if adoption was not an option, it is never permissible to end an innocent human life. In the end it doesn't make a difference. This is a big person dismembering a very small, defenseless person.

It's a lot less palatable to people, but saying "there are other options" almost legitimizes that murdering your child is an actual option we could consider.

[kadeedoes]

That’s 100% not true, but ok.

Savita Halappanavar, denied an abortion after the death of her child in utero, died of sepsis.

Marshae Jones, charged with manslaughter after getting shot in the stomach by another person and losing her pregnancy.

Erika Christensen, upon finding out her baby would die within minutes of birth, was forced to travel to a different state to have an abortion, as she was too late in her pregnancy. Thank god she had over $10,000 in savings. Colleen Kortendick had the same situation - her procedure and travel cost $20,000. These procedures are impossible for poor women - I’m sure that has nothing to do with the extremely high infant and mother mortality in the United States.

Purvi Patel was given 20 years in prison for a stillbirth at 23 weeks, even though she had gone to the hospital for medical care. No drugs were found in her system, but she was charged with feticide...because one time she googled “abortion drugs”.

These are just the stories on 1 page of google searches. All these women had to find loopholes in the law to get care, were charged for the losses for their children, or died. These do not include the women who tried to commit suicide after rape or loss of spouses, or tried to self abort after terrible circumstances, and end up in jail. How many women would turn to suicide if they were raped and knew they would have to raise their rapists child, maybe even share custody or pay child support to that person?

In Michigan, a girl was raped at the age of 12 and gave birth - she now has to share custody of her 8 year old child with her rapist (her name is protected because of her age at the time of the crime). Jessica Stallings was raped by her step-uncle multiple times, suffered a miscarriage and lost a child to a genetic disease, and had 2 living children before 18. She fled the step uncle, only to find that once he was released from prison on other charges, must share custody with him, even though genetic testing proves she’s the victim of both incest and rape (too young to consent). She stated suffering the abuse at 12 years old. Thank god these women are alive, but I don’t know if could live a life where I had to share custody with a man who started abusing me before 13.

And you don’t believe that abortion is allowed even in cases of rape or incest. You should tell that to the over 100 girls in El Salvador between the ages of 10-14 years old who were impregnated just in the 3 months of Covid lockdown. Many of these girls’ bodies aren’t grown enough to carry their children to term - would you sentence them to death? That’s just the girls who were found. They have no options.

I know you like to think that the laws would protect your life if Roe was overturned, but they wont. Over turning Roe v Wade means it’s not up to you or your doctor what’s best for you. It’s up to prosecutors and attorneys and police. What doctor would ever take the risk of helping you if they could lose their license and go to jail for doing so?

Your comment is full of cruelty and ignorance of what actually happens in the real world. I would love to live in a world with no rape, no incest, no abuse, no suicide or mental illness, and no deadly fetal defects. But we don’t.

I don’t know how to explain to even “pro-life” people, or “abortion only in case or rape or incest” people, just how important Roe v Wade is.

I cannot count on both hands the number of women I personally know who have been sexually assaulted or raped. But none of them ever went to the police or reported their assault. Sometimes, the men who assaulted them threatened them. Sometimes, they were personal friends or family members, and they didn’t want to destroy their relationships with those friends with a rape claim against a mutual friend.

Most of the time, they know that the police would never take them seriously - they were drinking, they entered the man’s house of their own free will, they felt drugged but not sure what with and were afraid of being drug tested.

But if any of them had gotten pregnant, none of them would’ve qualified for abortions, as none of them could actually prove they were raped.

When you put limitations on which women can get abortions and which can’t, you’re stating that someone else will have to make that determination, and may face legal consequences for making the wrong decision.

What cop will agree that a woman was raped and deserves an abortion, only for a jury to decide 2 years later in a court case that the man was not guilty? Will the cop be charged with assisting murder?

What doctor would preform an abortion if it’s the mother’s word against the father’s that they were the victim of rape?

Will young adults be required to start DNA testing every child in the womb to prove that they were the victim of incest from predatory uncles or fathers? If it injures the fetus but then isn’t a result of incest, who’s at fault for that injury?

[aridara]

No. If I drink alcohol, or take meds, in the same room as a thousand babies, not one of them dies. You're speaking nonsense.

Also: google "Savita Halappanavar" for just one example.

#RepealTheEight won in Ireland.