https___adfam.ie_2018_09_25_cuiseanna-le-diultu-do-reachtaiocht-an-ghinmhillte__lang_ga_1.xml
1.1 2.1 2.2 3.1 3.2 4.1 5.1 6.1 6.2 7.1 7.2 8.1 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 11.1 11.2 12.1 13.1 13.2 13.3 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 15.1 16.1 17.1 18.1 19.1 20.1 21.1 22.1 22.2 22.3 23.1 24.1 24.2 24.3 25.1 26.1 26.2 26.3 26.4 26.5 27.1 28.1 28.2 29.1 30.1 31.1 32.1 32.2 33.1 33.2 34.1 34.2 35.1 36.1 37.1 37.2 37.3 38.1 39.1 40.1 40.2 41.1 42.1 42.2
Reasons to Reject Abortion Legislation With reference to the Updated General Scheme of a Bill Entitled Health (Regulaton of Termination of Pregnancy) Bill 2018. The following is a commentary on the various heads, and reasons why the Bill should be rejected. Head 1. Definitions; and Heads 4, 5, 6, 7, 19 “foetus”, in relation to a pregnancy, means an embryo or a foetus during the period of time commencing after implantation in the uterus of a woman and ending on the complete emergence of the foetus from the body of the woman “termination of pregnancy”, in relation to a pregnant woman, means a medical procedure which is intended to end the life of a foetus This Updated General Scheme obviously is being presented on the basis that it is legal to end the life of an embryo/foetus ‘during the period of time commencing after implantation in the uterus of a woman and ending on the complete emergence of the foetus from the body of the woman.’ That would appear to be based on the interpretation of the Supreme Court in the X Case in 1992, reinforced by the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013, and by the deletion of Article 40.3.3º in the Referendum held on May 25, 2018. I submit that that interpretation of the law is faulty. As the Referendum of May 25, 2018 is the most recent piece of legislation in regard to the matter, it is well to record here the wording of the successful Amendment: Provision may be made by law for the regulation of termination of pregnancy A number of points suggest themselves immediately. ‘By law’ is not defined. What precisely does that mean: by the Oireachtas, by Ministerial order, or by statutory instrument? It isn’t clear. Also to be noted is that ‘Provision may be made.’ The logic of that is that provision may not be made, that there is no legal requirement for it to be made. As to the expression ‘termination of pregnancy’, that has a number of meanings, and the Amendment doesn’t enlighten us as to which types of termination of pregnancy may be regulated by law. For years since the X Case judgement, the Courts have been urging the Oireachtas to define when human life begins, or at least to define from what point onwards does the law begin to protect and vindicate the right to life. It is of great significance that after the passing of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013, the Oireachtas passed the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Act 2014. That Act in Interpretation 2. (1) acknowledges that the human foetus is a human person. Furthermore, that Act passim endorses the use of DNA testing. DNA testing has been in use in the Republic of Ireland since 1994. Taking those 2 points together, it is to be concluded that the State recognizes, not just that the human foetus is a human person, but that the individual human being begins life at fertilization, because it is at that point, fertilization, that the DNA of the individual human being is set down. It must also mean that the State recognizes that a human being is a human person, because DNA testing would be completely invalid, if that weren’t the case, and it would lead to an ‘appalling vista’ if evidence from DNA testing were no longer admissible in criminal cases, or in paternity cases. Article 40. 1 of Bunreacht na hÉireann says the following: All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law. That is a recognition by the Constitution that human persons are equal before the law. When the X Case judgement was being decided, the law did not define either when human life begins, or whether human beings are human persons. Since the 2014 Act, it does, and therefore must affect the X Case judgement; and the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013, that allows ‘destruction of unborn human life’ in certain circumstances –– see sections 7, 8, 9, and 22. In 2001 a referendum was held here the result of which was to abolish the death penalty completely. That means that, whether a person is guilty of murder or not, he/she may not be executed for that crime. The human unborn is incapable of committing murder, but nevertheless, this General Scheme, in effect, is proposing the execution of innocent human persons. That goes against all the Republic’s equality laws going back decades, and it also goes against the Republic’s commitments to human rights internationally. The Convention on the Rights of the Child was adopted by the UN in 1989, signed by the Republic of Ireland, September 30, 1990, and ratified by the Republic of Ireland, September 29, 1992. That Convention took on board the following position from the Declaration on the Rights of the Child 1959: Bearing in mind that, as indicated in the Declaration of the Rights of the Child, “the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth” … The Convention continues: [The State Parties to the present Convention] Have agreed as follows: PART I Article 1 For the purposes of the present Convention, a child means every human being below the age of eighteen years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier. Accordingly, the Republic of Ireland has no legal grounds for permitting direct abortion in any circumstances, as referred to under Heads 4, 5, 6, 7 and 19, of this General Scheme. Head 15 Conscientious Objection That refers only to medical practitioners, nurses and midwives. Those who object directly to providing the ‘termination of pregnancy’ will be required to refer the woman in question on to someone who will perform it. That fails to respect the Constitutional rights of persons, and religious institutions –– see Article 44.2.1º, 44.2.3º, and 44.2.5º, and doesn’t make any mention of other staff involved in such situtations, such as anaesthetists, paramedical staff and cleaners. Head 18 Prohibitions against receiving certain payments or rewards or agreeing to do do. Minister Simon Harris is quoted in various newspapers as saying that the State will pay for ‘terminations of pregnancy’ to be permitted under this proposed legislation, if passed by the Oireachtas. Head 18 appears to cover that, but that is not as clear–cut as it is being reported. If direct abortions are to be paid for from the public purse, will taxpayers not have the right to opt out from paying part of their tax for that? Head 21. Section 10 of the Health (Family Planning) Act 1979 is to be repealed. In spite of assertions to the contrary, that wasn’t repealed in the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013. It refers specifically to abortifacients and to sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. As the Joint Committee on Health are expected to be dealing with the licensing of drugs, it is would be prudent for them, before they do anything foolish, to consider what has been said in the comment on Head 1 above. They also should take on board that not everybody agrees that the abortion pill is safe for women. http://www.lifenews.com/2018/08/17/the-abortion-pill-is-safe-22-women-have-died-411-got-infections-and-1041-women-hospitalized/ The Abortion Pill is Safe? 22 Women Have Died, 411 Got Infections and 1,041 Women Hospitalized Women’s health groups claim that abortion, and particularly the abortion pill, is safe, but data shows that abortion-inducing drugs are not risk-free. Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Whole Women’s Health and other abortion providers contend that abortion is safe and that attempts to educate women about the risks of abortion are disingenuous ploys intended to restrict abortion access. The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) most recent update shows that since the abortion pill was approved, 22 women have died, 97 women have suffered ectopic pregnancies, 1,041 women have been hospitalized, and 411 women have contracted infections after taking the abortion pill. “As of December 31, 2017, there were reports of 22 deaths of women associated with mifepristone since the product was approved in September 2000,” the FDA’s March 28 report reads. Those deaths included two ectopic pregnancies resulting in death and several cases of fatal severe infection. SUPPORT LIFENEWS! If you like this pro-life article, please help LifeNews.com with a donation! The abortion pill is 98 percent effective for women less than eight weeks pregnant and 96 percent effective for women eight to nine weeks pregnant. The pill is 91 to 93 percent effective for women who are between nine and 10 weeks along in pregnancy, according to Planned Parenthood. The pill costs roughly $300 to $800 depending on the state and the woman’s health care plan. “Safe, legal, and rare” is some stigmatizing bullshit. I will provide as many abortions as people need. If you need one #abortion or two abortions or twelve abortions, I’m here for you. #sorrynotsorry #shoutyourabortion https://t.co/1YV5GzVnD7 — Dr. Diane Horvath-Cosper (@GynAndTonic) July 25, 2018 The FDA notes that while it has received reports of serious adverse events in cases where women took abortion-inducing drugs, “adverse events cannot with certainty be causally attributed to mifepristone because of concurrent use of other drugs, other medical or surgical treatments, co-existing medical conditions, and information gaps about patient health status and clinical management of the patient.” Complications from the abortion pill, RU486, have also rose in Ohio, according to a July 20 Operation Rescue report. There were 106 complications due to pill-induced abortions in 2017, a 44-percent increase from 2016 and an 87-percent increase from 2014. Ohio abortion clinics saw 192 abortion medication complications between 2014 and 2017, and the abortion pill has caused 47 medical complications in 2018. LifeNews Note: Grace Carr writes for Daily Caller. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience.
1.1 2.1 3.1 3.2 4.1 5.1 6.1 6.2 7.1 7.2 8.1 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 11.1 12.1 13.1 13.2 13.3 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 15.1 16.1 17.1 18.1 19.1 20.1 21.1 22.1 22.2 22.3 23.1 24.1 24.2 24.3 25.1 26.1 26.2 26.3 26.4 26.5 27.1 28.1 29.1 30.1 31.1 32.1 33.1 34.1 34.2 35.1 35.2 36.1 36.2 37.1 38.1 39.1 39.2 40.1 40.2 41.1 42.1 42.2 43.1 44.1 44.2
Maidir leis an Scéim Ghinearálta Uasdátaithe de Bhille dar teideal An Bille Sláinte (Foirceannadh Toirchis a Rialáil), 2018, tá sa méid a leanas tráchtaireacht agamsa ar théacs Ceannteideal áirithe, agus na cúiseanna ar cheart daoibh diúltú don Bhille. Cúiseanna le Diúltú do Reachtaíocht an Ghinmhillte Ceannteideal 1. Mínithe; agus Ceannteidil 4, 5, 6, 7, 19 “féatas” i dtaca leis an toircheas, ciallaíonn sé suth nó féatas, ó i ndiaidh an ionchlannaithe i mbroinn na mná go dtí go dtagann an féatas amach ar fad as colainn na mná “foirceannadh toirchis”, i dtaca le bean thorrach, ciallaíonn sé cleachtas míochaine arb é is cuspóir dó deireadh a chur le beatha an fhéatais Is soiléir cad é an bonn atá leis an Scéim Ghinearálta Uasdátaithe a thabhairt le fios go bhfuil sé dleathach deireadh a chur le beatha sutha/féatais ‘ó i ndiaidh an ionchlannaithe i mbroinn na mná go dtí go dtagann an féatas amach ar fad as colainn na mná’. Is é bonn é: léirmhíniú ar Airteagal 40.3.3º ag an gCúirt Uachtarach i gCás X in 1992, agus gur acht dá réir sin is ea an tAcht um Chosaint na Beatha le linn Toirchis, 2013, agus toradh an Reifrinn ar Airteagal 40.3.3º a bhaint amach as an mBunreacht, Bealtaine 25, 2018. Déarfainnse libhse go bhfuil locht ar an léirmhíniú sin. Ós é Reifreann Bhealtaine 25, 2018, an blúire dlí is déanaí maidir leis seo, ní miste foclaíocht an Leasaithe ar glacadh leis a thabhairt ann seo: Féadfar socrú a dhéanamh le dlí chun foirceannadh toirchis a rialáil Músclaíonn sé sin roinnt pointí láithreach. Ní mhínítear ‘le dlí’. Cad is ciall leis go beacht: tríd an Oireachtas, le hordú Aire, nó le hionstraim reachtúil? Níl sé soiléir. Tugtar faoi deara chomh maith ‘Féadfar socrú a dhéanamh’. Is é loighic na bhfocal sin gur ceadmhach gan an socrú sin a dhéanamh, nach bhfuil sé riachtanach ó thaobh dlí socrú a dhéanamh. I dtaobh an leagain ‘foirceannadh toirchis’, tá cialla difriúla leis sin, agus ní insíonn an Leasú nua dúinn cé na cineálacha foirceanta toirchis atá le rialáil le dlí. Le blianta, ó tugadh an bhreith ar Chás X, tá na Cúirteanna ag tathant ar an Oireachtas a mhíniú cathain a thagann ann do bheatha duine, nó ar a laghad a mhíniú cén pointe a dtosaíonn an dlí ar an gceart chun beatha a chosaint agus a shuíomh le dlí. Tá sé an–suntasach gurbh amhlaidh a rith an tOireachtas an tAcht um Cheartas Coiriúil (Fianaise Dlí–Eolaíochta agus Córas Bunachair Sonraí DNA), 2014, tar éis an tAcht um Chosaint na Beatha le linn Toirchis, 2013, a rith. Admhaíonn Míniú 2. (1) den Acht seo um Cheartas Coiriúil gur pearsa dhaonna is ea an féatas daonna. Thairis sin, glacann an tAcht sin passim leis an Tástáil DNA. Tá an Tástáil DNA in úsáid i bPoblacht na hÉireann ó 1994 i leith. Ar an 2 phointe sin a thógáil le chéile, tá sé le tuiscint gur leis an ubhthoirchiú a thosaítear ar bheatha an duine dhaonna indibhidiúil, mar gur leis sin, leis an ubhthoirchiú, a leagtar amach DNA an duine dhaonna indibhidiúil. Ní foláir nó ciallaíonn sé chomh maith go n–admhaíonn an Stát gur pearsa dhaonna is ea an duine daonna, mar nach mbeadh an Tástáil DNA bailí, olc maith ná dona, murarbh amhlaidh a bheadh, agus b’uafásach an scéal é mura nglacfaí le fianaise na Tástála DNA i gcásanna coiriúla, ná i gcásanna atharthachta. Mar seo a ghabhann Airteagal 40.1 de Bhunreacht na hÉireann: Áirítear gurb ionann ina bpearsain daonna na saoránaigh uile i láthair an dlí. Is aitheantas é sin sa Bhunreacht gur mar gheall ar dhaoine a bheith ina bpearsana daonna atá siad cothrom le chéile i láthair an dlí. Aimsir na breithe ar Chás X, ní raibh míniú ar bith sa dlí ar cathain a thagann ann do bheatha duine, nó an duine daonna a bheith ina phearsa dhaonna. Ach is amhlaidh atá an míniú sin ann ó ritheadh Acht 2014, agus dá réir sin caithfidh sé fearadh ar an mbreith ar Chás X; agus ar an Acht um Chosaint na Beatha le linn Toirchis, 2013, a cheadaíonn ‘beatha dhaonna gan breith a dhíothú’ ar chúinsí áirithe –– feicigí libh ailt 7, 8, 9, agus 22. Reifreann dár tionóladh sa Phoblacht sa bhliain 2001, ba é an toradh a bhí air deireadh ar fad a chur le pionós an bháis. Is é rud a chiallaíonn sé sin, bíodh duine ciontach nó neamhchiontach i ndúnmharú abair, ní féidir pionós an bháis a chur air/uirthi. Ní féidir don bheo gan breith dúnmharú a dhéanamh, ach mar sin féin, is é rud a cheadódh an Scéim Ghinearálta seo, dáiríre, go gcuirfí daoine neamhchiontacha chun báis. Tagann sé sin trasna, ó bhonn, ar na dlíthe comhionannais go léir atá rite sa Phoblacht le blianta, agus tagann sé trasna chomh maith ar thiomantas na Poblachta do chearta daonna go hidirnáisiúnta leis na deicheanna de bhlianta. Sa bhliain 1989 a ghlac na Náisiúin Aontaithe leis an gCoinbhinsiún um Chearta an Linbh; shínigh Poblacht na hÉireann é sin, Meán Fómhair 30, 1990, agus dhaingnigh é, Meán Fómhair 29, 1992. An seasamh seo a leanas sa Ráiteas ar Chearta an Linbh, 1959, glacadh isteach sa Choinbhinsiún leis: Ag cuimhneamh dúinn ar rud a cuireadh in iúl sa Ráiteas ar Chearta an Linbh, 1959, “de chionn gan é a bheith lánfhásta ina cholainn ná ina mheabhair, tá cosaint agus cúram ar leith ag dul don leanbh, a n–áirítear ar an méid sin, cosaint chuí dhlíthiúil, sula saolaítear é, agus tar éis a shaolaithe” … Leanann an Coinbhinsiún air: [Na Stáit ar Páirtithe sa Choibhinsiún seo iad] tá aontaithe le chéile ar an méid seo acu: CUID I Airteagal I Chun críche an Choinbhinsiúin seo, is é rud a chiallaíonn ‘leanbh’: gach uile dhuine daonna faoi bhun 18 mbliana d’aois, mura mbaineann an leanbh lánaois amach níos túisce, faoin dlí a bhaineann leis an leanbh. Dá réir sin, níl bun ar bith dlí ag Poblacht na hÉireann leis an nginmhilleadh díreach a cheadú ar aon chúinse, mar a dhéanfaí dá nglacfaí le Ceannteidil 4, 5, 6, 7, agus 19, den Scéim Ghinearálta seo. Ceannteideal 15 An Diúltú Coinsiasach Ní luaitear sa chomhthéacs sin ach lia–chleachtóirí, banaltraí, agus mná cabhrach. Iad siúd a dhiúltaíonn go díreach ‘foirceannadh toirchis’ a dhéanamh, tabharfar orthu an bhean a iarrfaidh ‘foirceannadh toirchis’ a sheoladh ar aghaidh go dtí duine a dhéanfaidh é. Ní aithníonn sé sin cearta Bunreachtúla daoine, ná institiúidí creidimh –– feicigí libh Airteagal 44.2.1º, 44.2.3º, agus 44.2.5º, agus ní luaitear, in aon chor, baill eile den fhoireann a bheadh i gceist i gcásanna mar sin, ainéistéisithe, foireann pharaimhíochaine, agus glantóirí. Ceannteideal 18 Cosc ar ghlacadh le híocaíochtaí nó le luach saothair áirithe, ná ar aontú le glacadh leo Tá sé tugtha le fios ag nuachtáin dhifriúla go bhfuil ráite ag an Aire Simon Harris gurb é an Stát a íocfaidh as cuid den ‘fhoirceannadh toirchis’ a cheadófar faoin reachtaíocht seo atáthar a mholadh, má ritheann an tOireachtas í. De réir dealraimh, tá sé sin curtha san áireamh faoi Cheannteideal 18, ach níl téacs Cheannteideal 18 chomh cinnte de sin is atá na tuairiscí a tugadh ar ráiteas an Aire. Más é an Stát a íocfaidh as cuid de na ginmhilltí díreacha, an mbeidh de rogha ag cáiníocóirí gan cuid na nginmhilltí den cháin a íoc? Ceannteideal 21. (c) Tá alt 10 den Acht Sláinte (Beartú Muiríne), 1979, le haisghairm. Ainneoin go n–áitítear a mhalairt, níor aisghairmeadh é sin san Acht um Chosaint na Beatha le linn Toirchis, 2013. Is alt i dtaobh ginmhillteach é alt 10, agus déanann sé athdhearbhú ar ailt 58 agus 59 den Offences Against the Person Act, 1861. Tharla go bhfuil sé i gceist go mbeidh an Comh–Choiste um Shláinte ag cíoradh ceadúnú drugaí, ba stuama an mhaise dóibh staidéar a dhéanamh ar gach a bhfuil ráite sa tráchtaireacht romhainn ar Cheannteideal 1. Ba cheart dóibh a chur san áireamh chomh maith nach é gach uile dhuine a ghlacannn leis nach ndéanann an piollaire ginmhillte díobháil don bhean. Séamas de Barra Website: www.adfam.ie http://www.lifenews.com/2018/08/17/the-abortion-pill-is-safe-22-women-have-died-411-got-infections-and-1041-women-hospitalized/ The Abortion Pill is Safe? 22 Women Have Died, 411 Got Infections and 1,041 Women Hospitalized Women’s health groups claim that abortion, and particularly the abortion pill, is safe, but data shows that abortion-inducing drugs are not risk-free. Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Whole Women’s Health and other abortion providers contend that abortion is safe and that attempts to educate women about the risks of abortion are disingenuous ploys intended to restrict abortion access. The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) most recent update shows that since the abortion pill was approved, 22 women have died, 97 women have suffered ectopic pregnancies, 1,041 women have been hospitalized, and 411 women have contracted infections after taking the abortion pill. “As of December 31, 2017, there were reports of 22 deaths of women associated with mifepristone since the product was approved in September 2000,” the FDA’s March 28 report reads. Those deaths included two ectopic pregnancies resulting in death and several cases of fatal severe infection. SUPPORT LIFENEWS! If you like this pro-life article, please help LifeNews.com with a donation! The abortion pill is 98 percent effective for women less than eight weeks pregnant and 96 percent effective for women eight to nine weeks pregnant. The pill is 91 to 93 percent effective for women who are between nine and 10 weeks along in pregnancy, according to Planned Parenthood. The pill costs roughly $300 to $800 depending on the state and the woman’s health care plan. “Safe, legal, and rare” is some stigmatizing bullshit. I will provide as many abortions as people need. If you need one #abortion or two abortions or twelve abortions, I’m here for you. #sorrynotsorry #shoutyourabortion https://t.co/1YV5GzVnD7 — Dr. Diane Horvath-Cosper (@GynAndTonic) July 25, 2018 The FDA notes that while it has received reports of serious adverse events in cases where women took abortion-inducing drugs, “adverse events cannot with certainty be causally attributed to mifepristone because of concurrent use of other drugs, other medical or surgical treatments, co-existing medical conditions, and information gaps about patient health status and clinical management of the patient.” Complications from the abortion pill, RU486, have also rose in Ohio, according to a July 20 Operation Rescue report. There were 106 complications due to pill-induced abortions in 2017, a 44-percent increase from 2016 and an 87-percent increase from 2014. Ohio abortion clinics saw 192 abortion medication complications between 2014 and 2017, and the abortion pill has caused 47 medical complications in 2018. LifeNews Note: Grace Carr writes for Daily Caller. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience.