The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Loafing Oaf

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

It is exploiting the child. Down Syndrome Ireland have said it is disredpectful to people with down syndrome and their families and these images are causing a huge amount of unnecessary stress.

But they are being ignored. Is there anything more they can do I wonder.

The Legend Of Kira

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

What exactly is horrible about the billboards & what if any type of pro life billboards would you find acceptable ? when they used some graphic posters in the past some people say its " horrible " & when they use non graphic images some people still take offence, for example this is a new billboard van being driven around town at the moment & some people are still taking offence over it even though there is no graphic images on display .

It is downright nasty. If the 12 week legislation comes in it is effectively lying. It is exploiting the child. Down Syndrome Ireland have said it is disredpectful to people with down syndrome and their families and these images are causing a huge amount of unnecessary stress.

One other poster pointed out something from an Irish times article- I wasn,t aware of till he/she mentioned it.

"" The Irish Times claims he is Joseph Cronin and his mam Catriona gave full permission to use his image.""

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106033987&postcount=6420


Given that the boys mother gave her permission for his image to be used in the billboard campaign, how is he being exploited once his parent/guardian consented to give permission to use his image ? if his image was used without any permission being given then yeah I would see issue with it- but once permission has being given Id see it as his mothers own personal business if she wants his image to be used, this new group the Irish times mentioned ( Disability voices for life ) if they want to campaign & give permission for images to be used in billboards I don,t see any issue with it .

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/child-with-down-syndrome-to-feature-in-anti-abortion-billboard-campaign-1.3372867

Annasopra

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You have done rather more than 'mention' it, you have been actively banging on about it.

If you did so much campaigning in '15 you would know that one of the strengths of that campaign was the disciplined way people kept on message and actively counteracted attempts at 'but if we allow this then ...*insert floodgates scenario here* scaremongering.

I see no counteracting from you - I see dissemination.

Yep. As I said earlier he is continuously spreading reasons to vote no.

Annasopra

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

One other poster pointed out something from an Irish times article- I wasn,t aware of till he/she mentioned it.

"" The Irish Times claims he is Joseph Cronin and his mam Catriona gave full permission to use his image.""

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106033987&postcount=6420


Given that the boys mother gave her permission for his image to be used in the billboard campaign, how is he being exploited once his parent/guardian consented to give permission to use his image ? if his image was used without any permission being given then yeah I would see issue with it- but once permission has being given Id see it as his mothers own personal business if she wants his image to be used, this new group the Irish times mentioned ( Disability voices for life ) if they want to campaign & give permission for images to be used in billboards I don,t see any issue with it .

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/child-with-down-syndrome-to-feature-in-anti-abortion-billboard-campaign-1.3372867

The child is being used because he has downs. That is how he is being exploited. Exploiting his condition.

Lots of disabled people and downs people are pro choice too by the way. This nonsense from so called pro life people about disability is sick.

freshpopcorn

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Yep. As I said earlier he is continuously spreading reasons to vote no.

Just making people aware of the issues that's coming up and I feel people aren't taking them seriously!
It's very easy to say reasons why to vote yes.

Sweetemotion

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You have done rather more than 'mention' it, you have been actively banging on about it.

If you did so much campaigning in '15 you would know that one of the strengths of that campaign was the disciplined way people kept on message and actively counteracted attempts at 'but if we allow this then ...*insert floodgates scenario here* scaremongering.

I see no counteracting from you - I see dissemination.

What has the SSM referendum got to do with this referendum?

I have no idea why the two are seen as the same.

NuMarvel

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

One other poster pointed out something from an Irish times article- I wasn,t aware of till he/she mentioned it.
....

Given that the boys mother gave her permission for his image to be used in the billboard campaign, how is he being exploited once his parent/guardian consented to give permission to use his image ? if his image was used without any permission being given then yeah I would see issue with it- but once permission has being given Id see it as his mothers own personal business if she wants his image to be used, this new group the Irish times mentioned ( Disability voices for life ) if they want to campaign & give permission for images to be used in billboards I don,t see any issue with it .

You're not saying much about how this material is misleading if not outright lying. Funny that.

Abortion on grounds of disability isn't in the committee's recommendations and the Institute of Obstetricians have said it's not realistic or feasible to get a diagnosis in within 12 weeks, meaning it won't be done under the on-request option.

The poster is telling us "don't let that happen here" yet no one on the anti-repeal side is telling us how it can happen here.

freshpopcorn

Sweetemotion wrote: »

What has the SSM referendum got to do with this referendum?

I have no idea why the two are seen as the same.

When the same sex marriage referendum passed. This referendum was called for basically because of how Ireland is changing with the result.
I also feel the No side can pick poles in this campaign this time that might stick. It's a total different referendum and I find some people are very complacent at the moment.

Annasopra

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Just making people aware of the issues that's coming up and I feel people aren't taking them seriously!
It's very easy to say reasons why to vote yes.

Tell us why you will vote yes then?

david75

Real children and adults from 10 years of age to over 40, who’s parents were same sex couples, spoke out in Marref and all were attacked by the no campaign. ‘Manipulating children/clearly brainwashed as a result of havin gay parents’ etc etc. Some horrible stuff was said to them and about them by those in the No camp.

Same people are now using kids with Down’s syndrome as a basis for their campaign.

Think about that.

Sweetemotion

freshpopcorn wrote: »

When the same sex marriage referendum passed. This referendum was called for basically because of how Ireland is changing with the result.
I also feel the No side can pick poles in this campaign this time that might stick. It's a total different referendum and I find some people are very complacent at the moment.

I can see your argument and why you said it.

I'm sure joey does too, but it's either you are fully with us or the enemy.

How can they not see this will push people away?

Annasopra

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I can see your argument and why you said it.

I'm sure joey does too, but it's either you are fully with us or the enemy.

How can they not see this will push people away?

I can see the argument too. There is some validity in what he is saying. It is the repetetiveness that made me question it. I think it is odd when someone claims to be one side but constantly subtly undermining that side. I have made my point and I will leave it now.

freshpopcorn

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Tell us why you will vote yes then?

To stop exporting the issue to the UK.
To make sure people have the support of their family/friends at home.
It's basic medical care that's available in most developed countries.
People's circumstances might be difficult be it financially or being in an abusive relationship and bring a baby into the world won't be the right thing to do.
Difficulty during previous pregnancies.
Having a large family to support already.
Being to young.
Just not the wright time in life.
Health reasons either for the mother or baby.
Off the top of my head.
Sorry it's not written better.

The Legend Of Kira

NuMarvel wrote: »

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

One other poster pointed out something from an Irish times article- I wasn,t aware of till he/she mentioned it.
....

Given that the boys mother gave her permission for his image to be used in the billboard campaign, how is he being exploited once his parent/guardian consented to give permission to use his image ? if his image was used without any permission being given then yeah I would see issue with it- but once permission has being given Id see it as his mothers own personal business if she wants his image to be used, this new group the Irish times mentioned ( Disability voices for life ) if they want to campaign & give permission for images to be used in billboards I don,t see any issue with it .

You're not saying much about how this material is misleading if not outright lying. Funny that.

Abortion on grounds of disability isn't in the committee's recommendations and the Institute of Obstetricians have said it's not realistic or feasible to get a diagnosis in within 12 weeks, meaning it won't be done under the on-request option.

The poster is telling us "don't let that happen here" yet no one on the anti-repeal side is telling us how it can happen here.

""  You're not saying much about how this material is misleading if not outright lying. Funny that. ""

I addressed the claim the billboard van is saying/quoting in an earlier post this evening .

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106033668&postcount=6402

nice_guy80

I see the fear and mongering have started in earnest. by one side.

where does it say anything in the oireachtas report about abnormal foetuses being aborted?

deflect. misconstrue the truth. play on people's emotions.
sick

Bannasidhe

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

""  You're not saying much about how this material is misleading if not outright lying. Funny that. ""

I addressed the claim the billboard van is saying/quoting in an earlier post this evening .

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106033668&postcount=6402

A cut and paste job is not 'addressing' - not even in a very large typeface.

The Legend Of Kira

Bannasidhe wrote: »

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

""  You're not saying much about how this material is misleading if not outright lying. Funny that. ""

I addressed the claim the billboard van is saying/quoting in an earlier post this evening .

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106033668&postcount=6402

A cut and paste job is not 'addressing' - not even in a very large typeface.

What is it you want addressed the figure of a 90% abortion rate the billboard truck is quoting or something else ?



If its the 90% abortion rate the truck is claiming, I googled their claim again to see what came in the google search- I found this article from the BBC who are also quoting a 90% abortion rate of unborn babies diagnosed with down syndrome .

Water John

Well those two statements cannot be mutually true, unless 90% of the people who don't ask whether the Foetus has DS are also aborted.

We don't in many things, follow the UK pattern. We don't have the same level of divorce, for example. Two quite different countries, socially in many ways.

NuMarvel

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I addressed the claim the billboard van is saying/quoting in an earlier post this evening

"the poster is telling us "don't let that happen here" yet no one on the anti-repeal side is telling us how it can happen here."

You haven't addressed that part of the claim, and considering we're talking about what will happen here, in Ireland, that's the most relevant part.

If you had an answer, you'd have provided it by now. Clearly you don't, hence your evasion and deflection.

Annasopra

The whole thing is a lie

1 How can 90% of babies be aborted? A baby is born human being
2 Its complete irrelevant nonsense given that the oireachtas is proposing legislation for 12 weeks.

pitifulgod

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

The whole thing is a lie

1 How can 90% of babies be aborted? A baby is born human being
2 Its complete irrelevant nonsense given that the oireachtas is proposing legislation for 12 weeks.

And it's going to incredibly hurtful for people with down syndrome or family members with it to have to deal with such billboards for the next 6 months. Kira doesn't seem to care about such things though.

captbarnacles

What are they worrying about? We'll still be exporting that issue to the UK. It will mean the people who cannot afford to travel and likely could in no way cope financially with a disabled child will have no choice but we know that is irrelevant to them.

Cabaal

pitifulgod wrote: »

And it's going to incredibly hurtful for people with down syndrome or family members with it to have to deal with such billboards for the next 6 months. Kira doesn't seem to care about such things though.

Just like it was very hurtful for single mothers and fathers when the started the crap of "Every child deserves a mother and father" back in 2015.

This made many single parents feel hurt

The Legend Of Kira

NuMarvel wrote: »

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I addressed the claim the billboard van is saying/quoting in an earlier post this evening

"the poster is telling us "don't let that happen here" yet no one on the anti-repeal side is telling us how it can happen here."

You haven't addressed that part of the claim, and considering we're talking about what will happen here, in Ireland, that's the most relevant part.

If you had an answer, you'd have provided it by now. Clearly you don't, hence your evasion and deflection.

" yet no one on the anti-repeal side is telling us how it can happen here."

If a future government ever decides to legalise for abortion access further then the current 12 week limit proposal, I know some might say " that,s scaremongering "  if its just about legalising for access for 12 weeks limit & 12 weeks limit only, then surely there would be proposals from some public figures/Tds for some sort of legal clause to be included that no future government can legalise for further abortion access beyond 12 weeks without consulting the people,  but at the present moment I don,t see anyone publicly calling for such a clause to be included funny that, a few months ago while giving an interview to Rte news the spokesperson for the abortion rights campaign went on record saying they want the recommendations of the citizens assembly at the minimum meaning they want more.

"" We want full abortion access, at the minimum we want the recommendations of the citizens assembly "" .

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/0930/908737-march-for-choice/

If the Tds on the repeal side want 12 weeks access & 12 weeks access only, they should be calling for a legal clause to ensure any future legalisation stays at 12 weeks only & goes no further-the fact that they aren,t calling a for a legal clause is telling .

Water John

There is every likelyhood, as I mentioned before, that the law would be stricter than 12 weeks. Irish Times today (behind a paywall) are saying one third of TDs for, one third against, and one third undecided.

Well just look at the USA, where they inserted the right of militia to bear arms into the original constitution. Specifics into the constitution is not a good idea.

Loafing Oaf

Water John wrote: »

There is every likelyhood, as I mentioned before, that the law would be stricter than 12 weeks.

No chance.

Water John

Oaf, well I told where I was getting my facts from. What have you got to back up what you are saying. Not being smart here. Just think the proposed legislation would not be a foregone conclusion, erring on the stricter side.

Loafing Oaf

Water John wrote: »

Oaf, well I told where I was getting my facts from. What have you got to back up what you are saying. Not being smart here. Just think the proposed legislation would not be a foregone conclusion, erring on the stricter side.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/spotlight-on-sinn-fin-as-clear-majority-of-tds-rejects-12week-proposal-36562750.html

Legislation to allow for abortion up to 12 weeks will not pass through the Dáil unless Sinn Féin changes its party policy.

And there is about as much chance of Man City not winning the league as of SF not doing that. Okay you're still not quite over the line then, but you only need a handful of the FG undecideds to support it and you're there.

Water John

Those figures look reasonable. Peader Tobin, I presume would be the only TD to break SF party ranks.

NuMarvel

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

If a future government ever decides to legalise for abortion access further then the current 12 week limit proposal...

In other words, it can't be done under the current proposals. I'm glad we finally got there.

This of course means that the pro life poster isn't a call to vote No in the referendum, but actually a call to legislate as per the Committee's recommendations. Have to say, I didn't see that one coming.

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

If the Tds on the repeal side want 12 weeks access & 12 weeks access only, they should be calling for a legal clause to ensure any future legalisation stays at 12 weeks only & goes no further-the fact that they aren,t calling a for a legal clause is telling .

There's already a constitutional provision to refer legislation to the people in a referendum in specified circumstances. It's called Article 27. If those circumstances aren't to your satisfaction, you're welcome to campaign to have them changed.