The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

B_Wayne

Calhoun wrote: »

I havent really read the comments but while i condemn them i don't really care about them.

Crap is on the internet folk from abroad are going to comment on it. My main concern is the crap she is spouting about Irish citizens. So get off your white night high horse trying to turn this whole discussion into a race argument.

Its crap like this video that will sink this referendum, especially if we have a doubling down on the whole conversation and crap like this video is not allowed be challenged because its "racist".

You literally just mentioned the comments you had seen in response to me commenting on the comments. :rolleyes: She said absolutely nothing wrong in my opinion, I think it's utterly wrong that we ever enshrined control over a woman's body into our constitution. She spouted no crap and said women should be at the forefront of this campaign.

In terms of why this video resurfaced at all today is because a racist scumbag tweeted it. So yep, I think there is very much so an element of racism in terms of finding a problem with what she said. She said what a lot of women do feel about the position the state presently puts them in.

In terms of her being from or not from Ireland, I don't think it remotely matters. We're currently going through Ms Y, a refugee who couldn't travel because she was not an EU citizen. She was raped, suicidal and wanted an abortion. Is her opinion less valid because she's not from Ireland? She might not have a vote but she is affected by our archaic policies.

Take offence all you want but I could send that video onto my seventy year old mum and I doubt she'd be disagreeing. She's pretty conservative too but her views on abortion have largely changed as of late. The reason being is that women have been open about how they feel. They have told their stories and have every reason to be outraged.

volchitsa

RobertKK wrote: »

But when there is an abortion, is the woman terminating her life, or that of a human life within her body?
Her body is not just one life, but two lives.
So while the argument is my body, my choice, the body that is being terminated is not her body per se.

If I came at you now with a knife, a bystander would presumably be entitled to hold me down, tie me down if necessary, to stop me, right?

Should we do the same to a pregnant woman who is determined to abort her pregnancy?

And since we don't, isn't that evidence that the majority of our society doesn't actually see the unborn as being the equivalent to a born person in the way you have tried to present it?

Calhoun

B_Wayne wrote: »

You literally just mentioned the comments you had seen in response to me commenting on the comments. :rolleyes: She said absolutely nothing wrong in my opinion, I think it's utterly wrong that we ever enshrined control over a woman's body into our constitution. She spouted no crap and said women should be at the forefront of this campaign.

In terms of why this video resurfaced at all today is because a racist scumbag tweeted it. So yep, I think there is very much so an element of racism in terms of finding a problem with what she said. She said what a lot of women do feel about the position the state presently puts them in.

In terms of her being from or not from Ireland, I don't think it remotely matters. We're currently going through Ms Y, a refugee who couldn't travel because she was not an EU citizen. She was raped, suicidal and wanted an abortion. Is her opinion less valid because she's not from Ireland? She might not have a vote but she is affected by our archaic policies.

Take offence all you want but I could send that video onto my seventy year old mum and I doubt she'd be disagreeing. She's pretty conservative too but her views on abortion have largely changed as of late. The reason being is that women have been open about how they feel. They have told their stories and have every reason to be outraged.

I was talking about the top couple of comments i scanned.

She said allot wrong but why are you even arguing this? know your place :P. I think its utterly wrong that in such an important democratic process like voting on a referendum that the rights of the otherside of the population don't matter. For now fact of the matter is both men and women get a say on what is enshrined in the constitution.

The fact of the matter is how it resurfaced doesnt really matter, i am sure it would have at some point as its exactly the type of thing the pro-life campaign would like to get out there. Are we allowed discuss the content of what she is saying or is that racist?

I think it matters where she is from, maybe not to you or I but to general population it might. The Mrs Y case is horrible but it is an outlier case and we don't really want to bring up the rabbit warren of refugees applying to Ireland even though we share no land border with Europe.

Believe it or not i don't really care what your old mother thinks, she was part of the god fearing generation which has us in the mess we are now. It still doesnt change the fact that what this video is playing on is identity politics, if you think for one minute that playing that game of male versus female is going to do anything but hurt your argument you are wrong.

Absolam

volchitsa wrote: »

If I came at you now with a knife, a bystander would presumably be entitled to hold me down, tie me down if necessary, to stop me, right?
Should we do the same to a pregnant woman who is determined to abort her pregnancy?
And since we don't, isn't that evidence that the majority of our society doesn't actually see the unborn as being the equivalent to a born person in the way you have tried to present it?

Weeeelll... a bystander would certainly be within the law to use force to restrain you in those circumstances, so arguably legal force could be used to restrain a woman from trying to kill an unborn person. The fact that, generally, we don't probably owes more to the fact that both are quite unusual circumstances, and people (to a large degree) are not legally obliged to intervene in those circumstances, even if they arguably have a moral obligation.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Consonata

Calhoun wrote: »

I think it matters where she is from, maybe not to you or I but to general population it might. The Mrs Y case is horrible but it is an outlier case and we don't really want to bring up the rabbit warren of refugees applying to Ireland even though we share no land border with Europe.

It isn't an outlier case for a few reasons, mainly the fact that the only difference between Mrs. Y and other Irish people seeking an abortion is means of travel.

For her it was a legal barrier, for if she left the country she may not have been able to return.

For others it is an economic barrier where they may not be able to afford the travel costs/accommodation/procedure that would be required when having the procedure in the UK

Now if your response to that is "well abortion is a privilege so costs are to be expected" then that is a whole other can of worms, but if you accept that Mrs. Y's case is terrible and should not have happened, then you should at least accept that she is not an outlier.

PopePalpatine

B_Wayne wrote: »

The most favourited response simply reads:

Some neckbeard on Twitter wrote:

What is this negro doing in Ireland?!

So stop bs'ing and claiming that it's not a racist pile on.

Isn't it funny that pro-lifers aren't being asked by self-described "fence-sitters" to disown the assholes on their side?

Calhoun

Consonata wrote: »

It isn't an outlier case for a few reasons, mainly the fact that the only difference between Mrs. Y and other Irish people seeking an abortion is means of travel.

For her it was a legal barrier, for if she left the country she may not have been able to return.

For others it is an economic barrier where they may not be able to afford the travel costs/accommodation/procedure that would be required when having the procedure in the UK

Now if your response to that is "well abortion is a privilege so costs are to be expected" then that is a whole other can of worms, but if you accept that Mrs. Y's case is terrible and should not have happened, then you should at least accept that she is not an outlier.

It is an outlier actually, its also a can of worms i dont think should be brought anywhere near this debate. If your telling me her only reason for not going abroad was that she wasnt sure she would be allowed back into her country of choice for refugee status, its ridiculous.

If she wanted the abortion so badly that she was suicidal surely she would have done anything possible to get rid of it.

The economic reasons i agree with you on.

Calhoun

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Isn't it funny that pro-lifers aren't being asked by self-described "fence-sitters" to disown the assholes on their side?

Not nearly as funny as the self righteous know it all pro-choice folk who look down on the little people in scorn.

If they would only come down off their high horses and lose the condescending attitudes we might have an actual discussion.

Regardless of what side folk are from engaging in identity politics in this discussion is not a good thing.

Consonata

Calhoun wrote: »

her country of choice for refugee status

This implies that shes like a customer in a shop and is picking out her favourite from the EU 27 which is faintly ridiculous. You think after coming all that way she is going to jeopardize her status?

Consonata

Calhoun wrote: »

Not nearly as funny as the self righteous know it all pro-choice folk who look down on the little people in scorn.

If they would only come down off their high horses and lose the condescending attitudes we might have an actual discussion.

The Irony here is pretty strong.

Calhoun

Consonata wrote: »

This implies that shes like a customer in a shop and is picking out her favourite from the EU 27 which is faintly ridiculous. You think after coming all that way she is going to jeopardize her status?

No i am saying its not wise to build an argument on abortion based upon a refugee. Its a mess of a topic and allot of hard questions not related to the abortion will come out of it.

Calhoun

Consonata wrote: »

The Irony here is pretty strong.

Why so because you disagree with what i am saying?

Consonata

So on the one hand

Calhoun wrote: »

If your telling me her only reason for not going abroad was that she wasnt sure she would be allowed back into her country of choice for refugee status, its ridiculous.

If she wanted the abortion so badly that she was suicidal surely she would have done anything possible to get rid of it.

and on the other hand we have

Calhoun wrote: »

No i am saying its not wise to build an argument on abortion based upon a refugee. Its a mess of a topic and allot of hard questions not related to the abortion will come out of it.

I can't keep track of these goalposts. Is her situation bad or is it not? You are simultaneously dismissing her plight out of hand (on what basis I don't even want to know) and then saying that "The Mrs Y case is horrible". You are changing your point to fit your argument, plainly arguing in bad faith.

Calhoun wrote: »

Why so because you disagree with what i am saying?

Oh don't give me the poor discriminated right wing rubbish. Either argue with class or don't bother.

Calhoun

Consonata wrote: »

So on the one hand



and on the other hand we have



I can't keep track of these goalposts. Is her situation bad or is it not? You are simultaneously dismissing her plight out of hand (on what basis I don't even want to know) and then saying that "The Mrs Y case is horrible". You are changing your point to fit your argument, plainly arguing in bad faith.



Oh don't give me the poor discriminated right wing rubbish. Either argue with class or don't bother.

Let me break it down for you, what happened to her in terms of the rape ect was terrible, if the reason she couldnt have an abortion abroad was because our authorities wouldnt allow her to leave the country that should not have happened.

However her being allowed to leave the country but not doing so because she might not get back in changes the dynamic. I wasn't aware if this was the case i was going on what you said.

I am not giving you the poor discriminated right wing rubbish, i have been arguing that identity politics shouldnt play a part in this conversation at all. This then became a case of holding the pro-choice to more account than we are pro-lifers. There are crazy folk on both sides as far as i am concerned but for the purposes of today we are only talking about the one that came up.

So again ill ask how is it Ironic? or is it just that you don't agree with what i am saying? Ok thought police tell the good folk of afterhours what they should think.

freshpopcorn

Can somebody answer this for me. Should we see a referendum on this in the next few years?

Consonata

Calhoun wrote: »

Let me break it down for you, what happened to her in terms of the rape ect was terrible, if the reason she couldnt have an abortion abroad was because our authorities wouldnt allow her to leave the country that should not have happened.

However her being allowed to leave the country but not doing so because she might not get back in changes the dynamic. I wasn't aware if this was the case i was going on what you said.

I am not giving you the poor discriminated right wing rubbish, i have been arguing that identity politics shouldnt play a part in this conversation at all. This then became a case of holding the pro-choice to more account than we are pro-lifers. There are crazy folk on both sides as far as i am concerned but for the purposes of today we are only talking about the one that came up.

So again ill ask how is it Ironic? or is it just that you don't agree with what i am saying? Ok thought police tell the good folk of after-hours what they should think.

How does it remotely relate to identity politics though? You have the case of the refugee, who can't leave due to her status in the country, and you have the lady who can't afford to leave due to socio-economic reasons.

Both women have an impediment to leaving the country which they cannot control, unless you are going to defer to some "bootstrap" logic. You have accepted that the case in terms of Mrs. Y was a terrible situation, yet do not accept that this situation is not unique. You are not being consistent with your outrage.

So again ill ask how is it Ironic?

Due to the fact you referred to pro-choice supporters as "self righteous know it all pro-choice folk who look down on the little people in scorn." and then went on to comment that people should "lose the condescending attitudes we might have an actual discussion."

Consonata

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Can somebody answer this for me. Should we see a referendum on this in the next few years?

There seems to be will in Fine Gael for it to be next year, once the Citizens Assembly report goes into committee next October.

I would be willing to bet that end of '17/beginning of '18, we'll have an idea when the referendum will be.

RobertKK

volchitsa wrote: »

If I came at you now with a knife, a bystander would presumably be entitled to hold me down, tie me down if necessary, to stop me, right?

Should we do the same to a pregnant woman who is determined to abort her pregnancy?

And since we don't, isn't that evidence that the majority of our society doesn't actually see the unborn as being the equivalent to a born person in the way you have tried to present it?

People would more than likely run away from a person threatening with a knife.

Do women advertise they are going to have an abortion? Are they as obvious as a person attacking with a knife?

Society is split, things being law doesn't mean it is right, in the past many things that were wrong were legal.

Calhoun

Consonata wrote: »

How does it remotely relate to identity politics though? You have the case of the refugee, who can't leave due to her status in the country, and you have the lady who can't afford to leave due to socio-economic reasons.

Both women have an impediment to leaving the country which they cannot control, unless you are going to defer to some "bootstrap" logic. You have accepted that the case in terms of Mrs. Y was a terrible situation, yet do not accept that this situation is not unique. You are not being consistent with your outrage.



Due to the fact you referred to pro-choice supporters as "self righteous know it all pro-choice folk who look down on the little people in scorn." and then went on to comment that people should "lose the condescending attitudes we might have an actual discussion."

The original video which we were discussing was related to identity politics.

The case of socio-economic problem is something that i would say happens on a regular occurence there for it is common. Ms Y's case as i said is an outlier, meaning it is unique and the chances of it happening again are slim when we compare it to the former problem.

The reason i was saying we shouldnt overly focus on the Ms Y case is because it throws up the arguments on refugee status ect which distracts from the important part of the discussion which is women not being able to get proper care in this country.

Due to the fact you referred to pro-choice supporters as "self righteous know it all pro-choice folk who look down on the little people in scorn." and then went on to comment that people should "lose the condescending attitudes we might have an actual discussion.

I was responding to a poster who was ignoring the discussion taking place at the time and engaging in similar identity politics. However as usual rather than discuss the topic at hand we have a dog pile as its not quite the agenda we want to discuss.

Consonata

RobertKK wrote: »

Society is split, things being law doesn't mean it is right, in the past many things that were wrong were legal.

The point is that it isn't law though. People aren't after keeping the status quo in this situation, in fact as far as I'm aware, retain in its entirety is only at like 15% polling wise. That suggests less a split, and more a consensus that something needs to change somewhere.

RobertKK

Consonata wrote: »

The point is that it isn't law though. People aren't after keeping the status quo in this situation, in fact as far as I'm aware, retain in its entirety is only at like 15% polling wise. That suggests less a split, and more a consensus that something needs to change somewhere.

A referendum based on the CA recommendations would be hard to pass.

Calhoun

Consonata wrote: »

The point is that it isn't law though. People aren't after keeping the status quo in this situation, in fact as far as I'm aware, retain in its entirety is only at like 15% polling wise. That suggests less a split, and more a consensus that something needs to change somewhere.

It would be folly to believe however that their is consensus for everything the citizens assembly has advised on.

What will win the day is what ever side is more rational and speak to the Irish people. If we go down the identity politic route again like we did with the marriage referendum, it might not go the right way.

Consonata

Calhoun wrote: »

The case of socio-economic problem is something that i would say happens on a regular occurence there for it is common. Ms Y's case as i said is an outlier, meaning it is unique and the chances of it happening again are slim when we compare it to the former problem.

But her case is not an outlier, you are only framing it so. Both women couldn't leave the country to have an abortion. There reasons are separate, the important point is that they couldn't have the abortion here. It isn't some other-worldly scenario, as frequently women can't just go away to the UK for a weekend to have an abortion. There's waiting lists, time off, familial circumstances, etc.

Consonata

Calhoun wrote: »

It would be folly to believe however that their is consensus for everything the citizens assembly has advised on.

What will win the day is what ever side is more rational and speak to the Irish people. If we go down the identity politic route again like we did with the marriage referendum, it might not go the right way.

I take it from that that your opinion is that the Pro-Gay Marriage side was not rational.

Consonata

RobertKK wrote: »

A referendum based on the CA recommendations would be hard to pass.

I doubt it. Placing the legislation in the hands of the Oireachtas is better surely than repeal in your opinion. Repeal has a permanence, whereas what the Oireachtas proposed does not, and it has the ability to change over time, depending on public opinion (which is a good thing in fairness.)

Calhoun

Consonata wrote: »

But her case is not an outlier, you are only framing it so. Both women couldn't leave the country to have an abortion. There reasons are separate, the important point is that they couldn't have the abortion here. It isn't some other-worldly scenario, as frequently women can't just go away to the UK for a weekend to have an abortion. There's waiting lists, time off, familial circumstances, etc.

I am not treating it as an outlier, the folk who are pushing this as a sign that Ireland needs to change are doing that. As they are differentiating it from all the other reasons for it to happen.

Both should be able to be sorted here but they are not.

Consonata

Calhoun wrote: »

I think it matters where she is from, maybe not to you or I but to general population it might. The Mrs Y case is horrible but it is an outlier case and we don't really want to bring up the rabbit warren of refugees applying to Ireland even though we share no land border with Europe.

Calhoun wrote: »

I am not treating it as an outlier, the folk who are pushing this as a sign that Ireland needs to change are doing that.

Loving these goalpost moves. Great target practice.

Calhoun

Consonata wrote: »

I take it from that that your opinion is that the Pro-Gay Marriage side was not rational.

There you go assuming things, you so want to label me dont you

At the time the argument was very dirty on both sides, both engaged heavily on identity politics of us versus them. I don't believe that will work this time, the issues at hand are nuanced and complex, if we treat it as black and white us versus them no matter what side does it i feel they will lose.

Calhoun

Consonata wrote: »

Loving these goalpost moves. Great target practice.

Not really under the terms of what has been provided in this thread, we are saying that Ms X case is so important because she was a refugee and was vulnerable in a number of ways.

As folk are focusing on the fact she is a refugee they are differentiating her from the women who cannot afford it. If we start to dig into the refugee question questions will be asked.

I think however, you dont actually want to debate more so label.