Second coming of the Pope to coincide with General Election issue of 8th amendment?

eviltwin

martinjudge73 wrote: »

Well as I say to my daughters.. Guys that just want to have sex. but no kids are not men at all. When it comes to having kids.. You either want them or you don't. If you get pregnant I will unconditionally support my grandchildren. A dead child solves nothing.

You have to teach your children to be responsible for their acts. There are a lot of strings attached to having sex. So find the right person. I always tell them to find a guy who wants kids if you want to have sex.. If he does not want kids, then he won't respect them in the long run..

If your daughter wants an abortion she's going to have an abortion. She just might not tell you given your attitude.

martinjudge73

eviltwin wrote: »

If your daughter wants an abortion she's going to have an abortion. She just might not tell you given your attitude.

They are pretty practical girls. I somehow don't think abortion would ever enter their minds.. it would be the opposite,, they are mad about babies. That is what scares me a little. They said themselves they would never abort anyway. And I have always said I would never abandon them or judge them if they became pregnant, they would be supported 100%.

We can't run away from the consequences of choices you make in life. So its better to think before acting.. and thats what I tell my girls.

Since I have 3 first cousins who had crisis pregnancies in the 80's and who have adult kids now.. they also tell my girls to think first before jumping into bed with a guy.

I'm glad that Ireland is more open today.

stinkle

Also, it isn't just 'girls' having abortions, many women who have already had children don't want any more. Do you suggest wives and husbands never having sex again until shes through menopause once they've had enough kids? This attitude of slutty girls having to keep their knickers on is insulting.

martinjudge73

stinkle wrote: »

Also, it isn't just 'girls' having abortions, many women who have already had children don't want any more. Do you suggest wives and husbands never having sex again until shes through menopause once they've had enough kids? This attitude of slutty girls having to keep their knickers on is insulting.

So if you don't want kids.. you kill them?

eviltwin

martinjudge73 wrote: »

They are pretty practical girls. I somehow don't think abortion would ever enter their minds.. it would be the opposite,, they are mad about babies. That is what scares me a little. They said themselves they would never abort anyway. And I have always said I would never abandon them or judge them if they became pregnant, they would be supported 100%.

We can't run away from the consequences of choices you make in life. So its better to think before acting.. and thats what I tell my girls.

Since I have 3 first cousins who had crisis pregnancies in the 80's and who have adult kids now.. they also tell my girls to think first before jumping into bed with a guy.

I'm glad that Ireland is more open today.

I bet my mother says the same about me. I had a crisis pregnancy in my teens, had the baby, married the father, it all turned out grand. I still found myself having an abortion in my 30's though. You never can tell what will happen and doing one thing at a certain stage in your life doesn't mean you'll choose the same path at another stage. Your daughters will make their own choices regardless of what you want for them cause they are able to make up their own minds.

lazygal

martinjudge73 wrote: »

So if you don't want kids.. you kill them?

Well it's constitutionally protected that girls and women can travel to kill their kids once they're unborn. Do you think that should be repealed? Lots of us are into babies but that does not mean we should be forced to gestate a foetus against our wishes. Married women with born children have abortions too. And maybe go on to have more children after an abortion.

Cabaal

martinjudge73 wrote: »

Well.. Ask and see how many TD's will support a referendum. That will get you your statistics.

Err, that's not stats, that's TDs being careful so they don't loose votes so they won't say anything to upset 60+s

If you look at what most FF TDs actually voted on the marriage ref you'd likely find they were against marriage equality.

For example, take Kilkenny. No FF went door to door, no posters up supporting it and it was well known that Bobby Elyward would be voting no.

By your logic the Irish public had no interest in marriage equality.

Either provide creditable stats or stop spouting nonsense.

frostyjacks

How do you explain the Limerick vote last week? 2/3 majority was a pretty comprehensive rejection of the repeal movement. Would the result be any different at councils up and down the land? I doubt it. It's a dead duck.

lazygal

Nothing to be feared by those who foresee abortion mills up and down the land then, if we have a referendum on who has more of a say over my uterus, is there? Do we only have referendums where the outcome is a sure thing?

Pherekydes

Funny. In the Marriage equality referendum, Limerick county had a 54.75% Yes vote, compared with a 64.15% Yes in Limerick city.

There will be huge variations across the country when the issue is voted on.

Peregrinus

Pherekydes wrote: »

Funny. In the Marriage equality referendum, Limerick county had a 54.75% Yes vote, compared with a 64.15% Yes in Limerick city.

Why would that be funny? These are two easily-distinguished issues. There's no reason to think that people's views on marriage equality will be a reliable predictor of their views on abortion.

Pherekydes wrote: »

There will be huge variations across the country when the issue is voted on.

Indeed there will. But when you net them all out, there'll either be a majority in favour of repealing the eighth or there won't. And if the proposal is to repeal the eighth and say nothing about abortion in the Constitution, I don't see that there will be a majority in favour of repeal. (And I say this as someone who would favour simple repeal myself.)

Peregrinus

lazygal wrote: »

Nothing to be feared by those who foresee abortion mills up and down the land then, if we have a referendum on who has more of a say over my uterus, is there? Do we only have referendums where the outcome is a sure thing?

Ideally, we only have referendums where we think some good might come out of it. And previous abortion referendums have been appalling, polarising, divisive, corrosive exercises which have done nothing to contribute to a climate in which progressive development might be possible. Another one now would be no different.

Pherekydes

Peregrinus wrote: »

Indeed there will.

That was my point and only my point. Variation.

Why would Limerick be a bellwether for the entire country?

Peregrinus

Oh, I don't think it would be. But the contrast between the support for marriage equality and the (apparent) opposition to repeal of the eighth, both in Limerick, does point to the fact that they are distinct issues, and support for the former does not translate into support for the latter. And I think that's probably as true for the country as a whole as it is for Limerick.

Shrap

Hmm. May have been stupid in thinking this wouldn't turn into a rights/wrongs of abortion discussion.

I think it's nearly a given that Irish politicians in the main won't touch this issue unless they think there's a good chance of it passing (which it very well might do), but my original question (although a bit garbled) was do people think that the Pope making such an early threat or promise to come here is a nefarious move to help prevent a referendum being mooted by any party?

In other words, as the Pope is so "concerned" about Ireland and the way our society is progressing, does it strike anyone else here that an early announcement of a visit is actually in order to put "the fear of god" into our politics?

Peregrinus

Shrap wrote: »

Hmm. May have been stupid in thinking this wouldn't turn into a rights/wrongs of abortion discussion.

I think it's nearly a given that Irish politicians in the main won't touch this issue unless they think there's a good chance of it passing (which it very well might do), but my original question (although a bit garbled) was do people think that the Pope making such an early threat or promise to come here is a nefarious move to help prevent a referendum being mooted by any party?

My instinctive reaction is to say "no", because I don't think a "nefarious move" is necessary. Both instinct and experience will cause politicians of all stripes to run screaming from yet another abortion referendum. They have nothing to gain and much to lose from a referendum. Hence I don't think they need to be scared away from one.

Shrap wrote: »

In other words, as the Pope is so "concerned" about Ireland and the way our society is progressing, does it strike anyone else here that an early announcement of a visit is actually in order to put "the fear of god" into our politics?

Plus, I see no reason to think that this pope is particularly concerned about (or even aware of) Ireland. And holding the (legal) line against abortion is not really one of his central concerns.

Not that, if asked, he wouldn't say (a) abortion is a bad thing, and (b) it should be illegal. It's just that his interests, in terms of what he wants to achieve as pope, appear to lie elsewhere. He has a limited time as pope - he's already 78 - and he'll want to focus on what he wants to focus on; abortion laws have never been one of his central preoccupations; even if the eighth were to be repealed I don't see Ireland adopting anything other than a pretty restrictive abortion law and I expect if he did interest himself in the question at all that's what he'd be told; and at best a papal visit could only temporarily hold up a move to more liberal abortion laws, if they really were coming.

Bottom line; we/the western world/the western media may be preocuppied with the Catholic church's theology of sexuality. Francis, while he doesn't reject that theology, doesn't share the same preoccupation with it. If he has concerns about Ireland they will be his concerns, not ours, and if he visits Ireland it will be because of the state of the Irish church, not because of the state of Irish abortion law.

Mark Hamill

martinjudge73 wrote: »

What do you replace the eight amendment with?

Why would we need to replace it with anything?

Peregrinus

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Why would we need to replace it with anything?

Because whether you would replace it, and with what, is a factor which would inluence the prospects of the referendum being passed.

Cabaal

Peregrinus wrote: »

Because whether you would replace it, and with what, is a factor which would inluence the prospects of the referendum being passed.

We remove it and legislation in law like most country's, its utter nonsense its in our constitution

Peregrinus

Oh, I agree. But we are where we are, and this might be one of those areas in life where the best is the enemy of the good.

Which is more desirable - a refernedum to remove the eighth and not replace it which fails, or a referendum to remove the eighth and replace it with some text giving a wider (but not unrestricted) right to abortion which succeeds?

Even if you refuse to contemplate the possibility that a remove-and-not-replace referendum would fail, you must accept the fact that that others do contemplate that possiblity. And that fact is the answer to Mark Hamill's question.

Daith

Peregrinus wrote: »

Oh, I don't think it would be. But the contrast between the support for marriage equality and the (apparent) opposition to repeal of the eighth, both in Limerick, does point to the fact that they are distinct issues, and support for the former does not translate into support for the latter. And I think that's probably as true for the country as a whole as it is for Limerick.

This. Far different thing from asking the Irish people to allow two people to marry and asking them to repeal the 8th amendment.

Other than they're both "lefty liberal" views and at odds with the Catholic Church.

eviltwin

Shrap wrote: »

Hmm. May have been stupid in thinking this wouldn't turn into a rights/wrongs of abortion discussion.

I think it's nearly a given that Irish politicians in the main won't touch this issue unless they think there's a good chance of it passing (which it very well might do), but my original question (although a bit garbled) was do people think that the Pope making such an early threat or promise to come here is a nefarious move to help prevent a referendum being mooted by any party?

In other words, as the Pope is so "concerned" about Ireland and the way our society is progressing, does it strike anyone else here that an early announcement of a visit is actually in order to put "the fear of god" into our politics?

It's something I've wondered myself. Abortion aside I'm sure the passing of marriage equality was a shock. We were the first country ever to pass it by popular vote and that has to have been a surprise given our relationship with Catholicism here. Is it a coincidence an event on the family is happening here given the changes made in the past year? I don't think so.

Mark Hamill

Peregrinus wrote: »

Oh, I agree. But we are where we are, and this might be one of those areas in life where the best is the enemy of the good.

Which is more desirable - a refernedum to remove the eighth and not replace it which fails, or a referendum to remove the eighth and replace it with some text giving a wider (but not unrestricted) right to abortion which succeeds?

Even if you refuse to contemplate the possibility that a remove-and-not-replace referendum would fail, you must accept the fact that that others do contemplate that possiblity. And that fact is the answer to Mark Hamill's question.

From the point of pragmatism in getting a referendum passed, this may make sense. However, I don't think martinjudge73 was aksing in terms of getting a referendum through, but rather in what effect any change in legislation will have on the mortality rate. If the current, limiting, legislation isn't saving any lives, then it is redundant and can be removed.

Hotblack Desiato

Why is anyone thinking that a council vote is somehow representative of public opinion?

Councillors have no powers in this area, do not include a position one way or the other in their manifestos, and the public do not vote accordingly so there is no reason to believe the make-up of the council will reflect the public view on any such issue.

Pointless votes on things which are not within the remit of councils are one of the most annoying things about local government in this country

It is well known that politicians in general in this country are way behind the public opinion in terms of social issues, the marriage equality referendum result was proof of this.

Hotblack Desiato

Shrap wrote: »

In other words, as the Pope is so "concerned" about Ireland and the way our society is progressing, does it strike anyone else here that an early announcement of a visit is actually in order to put "the fear of god" into our politics?

I don't see why that would follow, and the public would not thank any politician who appeared to be swayed by the actions of a foreign state even if it is the Vatican.

One eyed Jack

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

It is well known that politicians in general in this country are way behind the public opinion in terms of social issues, the marriage equality referendum result was proof of this.

I'd say they were fairly on the ball myself, which is exactly why they called for a referendum on marriage equality when they did, because they could sense there was a possibility that the referendum would pass. There isn't that same sense that a referendum on the 8th amendment would pass, so many politicians don't want to go anywhere near the issue. They know well it'd be the divorce referendum all over again, without the possibility that it would pass.

They're quite comfortable with the fact that the same political pressure that was there for marriage equality, just isn't there for abortion.

I don't think that the Pope's visit would influence political will one way or the other tbh, it'd be simply a case of business as usual once he'd gone.

eviltwin

You can't compare marriage equality to abortion. Marriage equality was a straight yes or no for most people. Abortion isn't. Some people are in favour of abortion in some circumstances but not others or up to a certain limit....if a referendum was called purely to allow abortion for fatal abnormalities I believe it would pass, add in rape or abortion on demand and support will start to drop. We also have the safety net.of the UK. I would like the 8th repealed if only to remove the penalties for women having abortions here but I don't see much appetite for it. Most people still see abortion as something that only affects other people.

martinjudge73

When you see headlines... Josie Cunningham ‘had an abortion so she could have a nose job’. ..... You can understan why the majority dont want that level of liberation abortion laws in ireland. It makes a mockary of a childs life.

Mind you the child was better off death than have a mother like her.... But that is just me being cynical. No child should be treated like garbage to be discarded.

pS.. I could not care 2 fcks what any church says. But abortion is wrong

PopePalpatine

martinjudge73 wrote: »

When you see headlines... Josie Cunningham ‘had an abortion so she could have a nose job’. ..... You can understan why the majority dont want that level of liberation abortion laws in ireland. It makes a mockary of a childs life.

Mind you the child was better off death than have a mother like her.... But that is just me being cynical. No child should be treated like garbage to be discarded.

pS.. I could not care 2 fcks what any church says. But abortion is wrong

I see your Josie Cunningham and raise you a Savita Halappanavar.

lazygal

Why are some people so obsessed with the reasons why a woman choses an abortion? Plenty of idiots stay pregnant and give birth to children they don't care about, we don't have all the hand wringing about their motivations. The goal really does seem to be gestation and birth at all costs, regardless of the girl or woman who has to do the gestating.