Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Do you think a referendum on abortion would be passed?(not how you'd vote)

Options
24567…29

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    py2006
    Registered Users Posts: 9,847 ✭✭✭py2006


    Abortion never really sat well with me. Having said that I haven't given it a huge amount of thought.

    What worries me is if we have abortion available freely, without question, will see a huge amount of women aborting and after regretting. Or while not in their right mind or whatever.

    Should there me some sort of counselling beforehand?

    Perhaps that wouldn't be an issue?


  • Options
    #33
    desertcircus
    Registered Users Posts: 2,648 ✭✭✭desertcircus


    I suspect it would. One thing that the religious-conservative lobby seemed not to realise in the run-up to the SSM referendum was that their conduct in that would influence how they'd be regarded in any future abortion debate. They spent the campaign lying through their teeth and issuing ridiculous warnings about the horrors that would ensue, and when the time comes that they're issuing dire warnings about the perils of abortion, the people they're addressing will remember just how mendacious and dishonest they were. For a significant minority of the population, they've lost all credibility; for another significant minority, they never had any. The most ferocious campaigners against abortion liberalisation will be the most self-destructive.


  • Options
    #34
    MightyMandarin
    Registered Users Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    Amirani wrote: »
    Whatever your thoughts on Lucinda Creighton, and I myself disagree with her on a majority of issues, she's not an idiot.

    I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on this.

    I don't think Lucinda is stupid for her beliefs on this issue, but I think that when it comes to politics she has no idea what she is doing. Leaving a prosperous career in FG was one thing (and yes some people might think she was justified for standing up for her beliefs), but to set up her own party with an extremely thin policy platform, and to run 28 candidates of which a grand total of 0 were elected, exposed her as an amateur in politics.

    Unlike the Greens who bounced back after getting nobody elected to the Dail in 2011, I don't think we'll see the return of Renua, as she really has no idea what she is doing with her political career at the moment.


  • Options
    #35
    sm213
    Registered Users Posts: 280 ✭✭sm213


    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    How would you attach these strict regulations to a repeal though?

    I know you can't as they'd have to get rid of 8th amendment first but those would be the most likely conditions for people voting for it.
    I think the vagueness of it is what would stop people voting to repeal as then it's just abortion across the board.
    Could you repeal it with conditions attached? I'm not sure how it would work but I think it'll be a no until it's certain that there's boundaries.
    From other discussions on the topic a lot of people seem to want it restricted and then they'll vote yes.
    However that's just an anecdotal observation.
    I realise they have to vote yes to abortion first and then restrictions can be applied but it seems people are scared every woman will be getting abortions left right and centre.


  • Options
    #36
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    beach_walker wrote: »
    It's an odd one too as if you like at any pro-life march women are nearly always in the majority (from my experience).

    It all depends on what proposed legalisation is to follow. I don't think abortion on demand has a chance. Some very limited legalisation might get the referendum over the line.

    I don't think people would trust politicians enough for that. They'd basically be saying "Repeal this amendment and we promise we will pass legislation straight away to limit abortion."


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    sm213 wrote: »
    I know you can't as they'd have to get rid of 8th amendment first but those would be the most likely conditions for people voting for it.
    I think the vagueness of it is what would stop people voting to repeal as then it's just abortion across the board.
    Could you repeal it with conditions attached? I'm not sure how it would work but I think it'll be a no until it's certain that there's boundaries.
    From other discussions on the topic a lot of people seem to want it restricted and then they'll vote yes.
    However that's just an anecdotal observation.
    I realise they have to vote yes to abortion first and then restrictions can be applied but it seems people are scared every woman will be getting abortions left right and centre.

    You can't repeal with conditions. You'd have to amend it instead.


  • Options
    #38
    PressRun
    Registered Users Posts: 3,136 ✭✭✭PressRun


    py2006 wrote: »
    What worries me is if we have abortion available freely, without question, will see a huge amount of women aborting and after regretting. Or while not in their right mind or whatever.

    Those hysterical women just don't know what's good for them! :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #39
    beach_walker
    Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 976 ✭✭✭beach_walker


    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    I don't think people would trust politicians enough for that. They'd basically be saying "Repeal this amendment and we promise we will pass legislation straight away to limit abortion."

    Yeah, good point. I mean take the Seanad ref, lots of people while wanting it gone voted down the amendment because of the lack of thought the government had put into what was to replace it. I suppose that will form the "slippery slope" argument which to be fair, when looking at the introduction to other countries looks correct.


  • Options
    #40
    Berserker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,046 ✭✭✭Berserker


    I would vote 'No' myself but I believe that a referendum on the 8th would be passed with a comfortable majority, 65%-35%. I think that a referendum on "full" abortion would be a far closer affair.


  • Options
    #41
    py2006
    Registered Users Posts: 9,847 ✭✭✭py2006


    PressRun wrote: »
    Those hysterical women just don't know what's good for them! :rolleyes:

    Not sure about hysteria among women but if abortion is passed, should counseling be provided before, during and after the decision process where necessary?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,690 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Hmmm... I can say with certainty that it would be a very nasty campaign for the so called "Pro-lifers". If it were to pass, I suspect it would be by a slim majority.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Options
    #43
    AlexisM
    Registered Users Posts: 250 ✭✭AlexisM


    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    It must also be noted that a majority (56%) of people don't want abortion in any circumstances.
    That's not what the 56% is about. It's not 'under any circumstance' - it's 'should the mother be permitted an abortion under any circumstance that she wants' - i.e. on demand. 41% said yes to this (i.e. 41% agree with abortion on demand) and 56% said no to abortion on demand.

    I'm actually surprised at the 41% being so high for on demand - no mention even of time limits - although I'm sure if it was phrased differently, the % would have been lower.


  • Options
    #44
    Berserker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,046 ✭✭✭Berserker


    py2006 wrote: »
    Not sure about hysteria among women but if abortion is passed, should counseling be provided before, during and after the decision process where necessary?

    Of course and the procedure itself will be funded by the taxpayer. Another bill for middle class Ireland to pay.


  • Options
    #45
    sm213
    Registered Users Posts: 280 ✭✭sm213


    Little CuChulainn wrote: »
    You can't repeal with conditions. You'd have to amend it instead.

    So would it not be easier to amend the 8th amendment to make abortion illegal unless you are up to and including 12 weeks gestation and after that only for cases of rape/incest (as it could take longer than that to prove) or fatal abnormalities (which may only get detected by 20 week anomaly scan).
    I'm sure you'd have to include a counselling session to ensure you're of sound mind and fully educated on what will happen and possible consequences too.

    I think people would go for that.

    Although I see above someone mentioned only up to 8 weeks.
    There's just no pleasing people.

    Can we not just trust that women are not going to go on an abortion rampage?
    I don't think it's the easiest choice for anyone whether the pregnancy is wanted or not.

    I get some people don't agree with it but can those people just not get abortions? And let the people who do want/require them Do as they see fit?


  • Options
    #46
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,690 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Berserker wrote: »
    Of course and the procedure itself will be funded by the taxpayer. Another bill for middle class Ireland to pay.

    Surely cheaper than paying for primary, secondary and probably tertiary education, no?

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Options
    #47
    MightyMandarin
    Registered Users Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    AlexisM wrote: »
    Did you make the underlined bit up? It's not in the linked article and it's inconsistent with the male/female split you also quote. If 66% of men and 57% of women agree in cases of foetal abnormality, that probably about 62% across men and women. So if 62% agree in cases of foetal abnormality, how can 56% be against in ALL circumstances?


    I didn't make anything up. The last graph shows that 56% of people said 'No' when asked if women should be allowed an abortion in any circumstances.


  • Options
    #48
    AlexisM
    Registered Users Posts: 250 ✭✭AlexisM


    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    I didn't make anything up. The last graph shows that 56% of people said 'No' when asked if women should be allowed an abortion in any circumstances.
    That's not what the 56% is about. It's not 'under any circumstance' - it's 'should the mother be permitted an abortion under any circumstance that she wants' - i.e. on demand. 41% said yes to this (i.e. 41% agree with abortion on demand) and 56% said no to abortion on demand.

    I'm actually surprised at the 41% being so high for on demand - no mention even of time limits - although I'm sure if it was phrased differently, the % would have been lower.


  • Options
    #49
    MightyMandarin
    Registered Users Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    AlexisM wrote: »
    That's not what the 56% is about. It's not 'under any circumstance' - it's 'should the mother be permitted an abortion under any circumstance that she wants' - i.e. on demand. 41% said yes to this (i.e. 41% agree with abortion on demand) and 56% said no to abortion on demand.

    I'm actually surprised at the 41% being so high for on demand - no mention even of time limits - although I'm sure if it was phrased differently, the % would have been lower.

    Ok you added in the last part, but that doesn't change my point that a majority of people don't want abortion on demand.

    I'm actually surprised at the 41% for the opposite reason, because given the narrative portrayed by most politicians, the SU, feminists etc. one would be forgiven for thinking that abortion on demand was the popular belief in this country.


  • Options
    #50
    beach_walker
    Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 976 ✭✭✭beach_walker


    sm213 wrote: »
    I get some people don't agree with it but can those people just not get abortions? And let the people who do want/require them Do as they see fit?

    Do you really not see why? I mean it's fair enough people disagreeing over issues but it's worrying when people can't even understand the other side, even while disagreeing with it.


    [I don't want counters/what-ifs to the following, I'm not drawing explicit parallels. I'm just trying to show you were some might be coming from.] Many see it as a moral issue i.e. that it's just wrong. Think of the abolitionists to slavery (particularly in the US). They weren't happy to let states decide on the issue and merely stand by their beliefs by not engaging in the practice. They saw it as a societal wrong.

    Like I wouldn't be happy with a referendum tomorrow on introducing the death penalty. I think it's just plain wrong and completely unacceptable no matter the limited circumstances.

    I'm sure you have some issues like that. If this referendum has to happen, then it's better for everybody if you at least see where the other side is coming from.


  • Options
    #51
    AlexisM
    Registered Users Posts: 250 ✭✭AlexisM


    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    Ok you added in the last part,
    I didn't add anything - you omitted a pretty important part of the question...
    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    but that doesn't change my point that a majority of people don't want abortion on demand.
    That wasn't your point though - you said the poll showed a majority don't want abortion under any circumstances. Whereas it's actually a majority don't want abortion under any circumstance deemed necessary by the mother (i.e. completely unrestricted demand right up to 9 months). That is a massive distinction.
    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    I'm actually surprised at the 41% for the opposite reason, because given the narrative portrayed by most politicians, the SU, feminists etc. one would be forgiven for thinking that abortion on demand was the popular belief in this country.
    There are very few supporters of unrestricted abortion on demand even amongst strongly pro-choice people.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    MightyMandarin
    Registered Users Posts: 3,723 ✭✭✭MightyMandarin


    AlexisM wrote: »
    I didn't add anything - you omitted a pretty important part of the question...That wasn't your point though - you said the poll showed a majority don't want abortion under any circumstances. Whereas it's actually a majority don't want abortion under any circumstance deemed necessary by the mother (i.e. completely unrestricted demand right up to 9 months). That is a massive distinction.

    It's not an important part, unless you want to claim that women should have abortions against their will. The poll made no mention of time, so the question doesn't change when you omit the last part (which I did accidentally) as it only includes the consent of the mother, and it's pretty certain that consent would be accounted for if a woman were to have an abortion.
    I apologise for omitting it, but you're really clutching at straws here.
    There are very few supporters of unrestricted abortion on demand even amongst strongly pro-choice people.
    Again, the poll made no mention of time period, but most people who answered the poll presumably would've only considered the restrictions asked in the other questions. All I can go by is the most recent poll which is this one, and a majority of people don't want it on demand.


  • Options
    #53
    Ice Maiden
    Closed Accounts Posts: 600 ✭✭✭Ice Maiden


    Loath as I am to use the auld "Militant atheists are as bad as militant religious people" style tactic, I am compelled to do so in relation to this argument. The fanatics on either side of the debate are just impossible to reason with.

    And also, as a liberal, I find it extremely frustrating that if you're also a liberal, but admit you have some views on abortion that might chime more with a pro-life/anti-choice stance, you may as well admit you're a paedophile.

    I most certainly support choice but I am largely against abortion after a certain point in the pregnancy and I do not consider the life of an unborn baby (baby now, not collection of cells) to be worthless. Although I know it cannot always be as straightforward as that.

    I'm sure it seems hypocritical, but it is such a complex topic that it is not always easy to be consistent. That goes for various stances in the debate.


  • Options
    #54
    deseil
    Closed Accounts Posts: 333 ✭✭deseil


    beach_walker wrote: »
    Do you really not see why? I mean it's fair enough people disagreeing over issues but it's worrying when people can't even understand the other side, even while disagreeing with it.


    [I don't want counters/what-ifs to the following, I'm not drawing explicit parallels. I'm just trying to show you were some might be coming from.] Many see it as a moral issue i.e. that it's just wrong. Think of the abolitionists to slavery (particularly in the US). They weren't happy to let states decide on the issue and merely stand by their beliefs by not engaging in the practice. They saw it as a societal wrong.

    Like I wouldn't be happy with a referendum tomorrow on introducing the death penalty. I think it's just plain wrong and completely unacceptable no matter the limited circumstances.

    I'm sure you have some issues like that. If this referendum has to happen, then it's better for everybody if you at least see where the other side is coming from.
    Slavery, death penalty are state wise issues its not comparable.

    Children are brought up by one or 2 people who are solely responsible in every way for the rearing of a child, if one does not feel ready to take on this responsibility it should be a personal decision not a state decision.


  • Options
    #55
    CaraMay
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,652 ✭✭✭CaraMay


    The Young Wan wrote: »
    My friend is early 20s, and probably the most liberal person I know in many ways. But will not enter into a discussion about abortion at all - she is dead against it. We have not come as far as we think we have.

    You're not much of a friend if you think she's backward for not believing in abortion. I think it's a very primal response. You either agree with it in your gut or you don't.


  • Options
    #56
    Little CuChulainn
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,624 ✭✭✭Little CuChulainn


    sm213 wrote: »
    So would it not be easier to amend the 8th amendment to make abortion illegal unless you are up to and including 12 weeks gestation and after that only for cases of rape/incest (as it could take longer than that to prove) or fatal abnormalities (which may only get detected by 20 week anomaly scan).
    I'm sure you'd have to include a counselling session to ensure you're of sound mind and fully educated on what will happen and possible consequences too.

    I think people would go for that.

    Although I see above someone mentioned only up to 8 weeks.
    There's just no pleasing people.

    Can we not just trust that women are not going to go on an abortion rampage?
    I don't think it's the easiest choice for anyone whether the pregnancy is wanted or not.

    I get some people don't agree with it but can those people just not get abortions? And let the people who do want/require them Do as they see fit?

    Sure why not introduce the death penalty and trust the state to only execute guilty people?

    I can only speak for myself but I think that once a foetus reaches a certain level of development it should be afforded the same rights as any other person. I'm not a religious person, I just see a role in the state for protecting the vulnerable. I think that most people believe this to a certain extent. What's different for most people is the stage at which these rights should attach. If you want to put a specific limit on what stage an abortion can be obtained then there will need to be some sort of national consensus on what this will be, preferably before people go to the ballot box.


  • Options
    #57
    Niemoj
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,104 ✭✭✭Niemoj


    I really hope it would but I just don't think it would.


  • Options
    #58
    beach_walker
    Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 976 ✭✭✭beach_walker


    deseil wrote: »
    Slavery, death penalty are state wise issues its not comparable.

    *swish*


  • Options
    #59
    sm213
    Registered Users Posts: 280 ✭✭sm213


    beach_walker wrote: »
    Do you really not see why? I mean it's fair enough people disagreeing over issues but it's worrying when people can't even understand the other side, even while disagreeing with it.


    [I don't want counters/what-ifs to the following, I'm not drawing explicit parallels. I'm just trying to show you were some might be coming from.] Many see it as a moral issue i.e. that it's just wrong. Think of the abolitionists to slavery (particularly in the US). They weren't happy to let states decide on the issue and merely stand by their beliefs by not engaging in the practice. They saw it as a societal wrong.

    Like I wouldn't be happy with a referendum tomorrow on introducing the death penalty. I think it's just plain wrong and completely unacceptable no matter the limited circumstances.

    I'm sure you have some issues like that. If this referendum has to happen, then it's better for everybody if you at least see where the other side is coming from.

    I do see where the other side comes from.
    I get that it's a life. I understand there's people who desperately would love a child and can't that would possibly hate the idea at all.

    I have kids. I personally wouldn't get an abortion. I don't like the idea of it.
    My point is I'm not other women.

    Also as I've posted above I believe it would be repealed if there were restrictions. I don't think people would begrudge a woman, who has been told her baby will die outside the womb immediately or soon after birth, an abortion.
    That's just dragging out someone's grief otherwise.
    And who knows if I was ever in that unimaginable position what I would want to do.

    There does need to be restrictions in place. Ones like I've outlined above.

    Maybe I'm being naive but I don't think hoards of women are going to go aborting babies because they can.

    I doubt it's a walk in the park for anyone making that choice.


  • Options
    #60
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    The eighth amendment doesn't protect the unborn. All it does is make it difficult for girls and women who can't travel to access abortion. It also affects maternity care and options during pregnancy and birth. Abortion should be completely out of the constitution and legislated for like any other medical procedures. It's a medical procedure that will always be necessary.
    I know I would have abortion in certain circumstances. The eighth amendment just means I have to travel. It doesn't make me want to protect a foetus if I don't want to continue being pregnant.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    AlexisM
    Registered Users Posts: 250 ✭✭AlexisM


    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    It's not an important part, unless you want to claim that women should have abortions against their will. The poll made no mention of time, so the question doesn't change when you omit the last part (which I did accidentally) as it only includes the consent of the mother, and it's pretty certain that consent would be accounted for if a woman were to have an abortion.
    I apologise for omitting it, but you're really clutching at straws here.


    Again, the poll made no mention of time period, but most people who answered the poll presumably would've only considered the restrictions asked in the other questions. All I can go by is the most recent poll which is this one, and a majority of people don't want it on demand.
    Are you being deliberately obtuse? Your post said:
    MightyMandarin wrote: »
    It must also be noted that a majority (56%) of people don't want abortion in any circumstances.
    That's at one end of the 'how acceptable do you find abortion' spectrum - no abortion under ANY circumstance. At the very far end of the spectrum of abortion views is 'abortion on demand'. In between there are varying levels of acceptability - fatal foetal abnormality, rape/incest. demand with time limits etc. You have taken the polls findings of the most extreme pro-choice views and said that it applies to the most extreme anti-choice level. Bizarre...

    Anyway, you've recognised your omission so you should probably go back and edit your original post - I'm sure you wouldn't want to mislead anyone.


Advertisement