Abortion meeting and free speech
Deputy Tóibín described threats and cancellation of meeting space for women, including rape survivors, who wanted to speak publicly about abortion experiences. The Minister agreed people on all sides should be treated respectfully and said the public must hear arguments from both sides if the House is to make mature decisions.
My question is on the Referendum Commission and the programme for Government. This week, a number of women who are rape survivors who have had abortions and regretted them or who brought their children to full term wish to have a public meeting in Dublin to explain their experiences. They did not go to universities because in previous years universities would not let them on campus. A prominent Dublin hotel gave them a room but after a barrage of aggressive threats against the hotel, the room was not made available to them.
They then got another room in another hotel and the exact same thing happened: they were prevented from speaking in the room. Posters were put up around the city and a political party in this Chamber had its members go around and tear them down. The members publicised their activities on Facebook and said these women-----
Comment on this
-----who are rape survivors were offensive to them and they therefore chopped up the posters.
Comment on this
These are rape survivors and they have been silenced, censored and shouted down. If it were any other group of people, there would be outrage in this Chamber and in the media, yet we are dealing only with silence.
Comment on this
I agree with the Deputy. It is vital, as we come to debate an issue that has been extremely divisive in our community over many years, that people are treated with respect on all sides. I know there are very strongly held views on all sides about this. I know it is an issue in respect of which people find it hard at times to be restrained. However, if we are to make mature decisions on this, the public must be given an opportunity to hear the arguments on both sides. It is right that the House should appeal for such an approach because, otherwise, people will be branded into one area or camp or another and will not have a chance to sift through what are genuine arguments that must be reconciled in this debate. I therefore agree with the Deputy that we need to find a way for people to have their voices heard without being shouted down.