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

Leo Varadkar announces abortion referendum

Options
1234568»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    The Assembly's constitutional recommendations aren't an issue for pro-choice campaigners. They've welcomed the recommendations. And going by comments on social media at the time, many campaigners didn't think the Assembly would go this far.
    So you disagree with the Independent? I imagine even that much disagreement is indicative that there's no lack of controversy so. You may also disagree with The London-Irish Abortion Rights Campaign who said: “We are disappointed that after six months of deliberations – which included the heartfelt testimony of women forced to travel for abortions – that the Citizens' Assembly has opted against recommending the Repeal of the Eighth Amendment", or Colm O’Gorman, Director of Amnesty In Ireland, who tweeted that he was “gravely concerned last session has introduced and inflated uncertainty [regarding the] repeal option at this stage before critical vote”. And that's before we even look at the opinions of the pro life side.

    No... I think the notion that there's nothing controversial in the proposal is entirely unfounded I'm afraid.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    No, the bit I quoted from your post was a quote from the IT.
    So it was your own opinion you were offering. Reassuring for The Old Lady at least.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    AnGaelach wrote: »
    What? They've shown themselves to be way out of touch with the electorate as a whole, the Repeal side didn't expect that outcome in their wildest wet dreams. Hell, even Sinn Féin (the most liberal of the 3 big parties) opened fire on them for not having the democratic mandate/the Dáil being a Citizen's Assembly.

    Both the political class and the electorate have proven to be much more resistant to those changes proposed by the CA.

    If it's phrased with a "12-week limit" that doesn't require any reason, I can see this being defeated by quite a large margin.

    Their constitutional proposal doesn't make any reference to a 12 week limit. In fact, the Assembly voted against the idea that specifics should be in the Constitution at all.

    And as for the Assembly being out of touch, based on the results of the first ballot, they seem to be right on the money. Support for leaving the 8th as is runs at an average of 15%; it was 13% in the Assembly.
    Absolam wrote: »
    So you disagree with the Independent? I imagine even that much disagreement is indicative that there's no lack of controversy so. You may also disagree with The London-Irish Abortion Rights Campaign who said: “We are disappointed that after six months of deliberations – which included the heartfelt testimony of women forced to travel for abortions – that the Citizens' Assembly has opted against recommending the Repeal of the Eighth Amendment", or Colm O’Gorman, Director of Amnesty In Ireland, who tweeted that he was “gravely concerned last session has introduced and inflated uncertainty [regarding the] repeal option at this stage before critical vote”. And that's before we even look at the opinions of the pro life side.

    No... I think the notion that there's nothing controversial in the proposal is entirely unfounded I'm afraid.

    The IFPA, Repeal the 8th Coalition, National Women's Council, and Amnesty International all welcome the outcome of the Assembly:

    The Irish Family Planning Association (IFPA) welcomed the overwhelming support from the Citizens’ Assembly for reform of Ireland’s abortion laws.

    The publication of the Citizen’s Assembly report on the Eighth Amendment has been welcomed by the Coalition to Repeal the Eighth Amendment.

    Amnesty International today welcomed the recommendations put forward by the Citizens’ Assembly

    NWCI has today welcomed the Citizens Assembly report on the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    The IFPA, Repeal the 8th Coalition, National Women's Council, and Amnesty International all welcome the outcome of the Assembly:
    So there are differences of opinion; like I said, that certainly indicates that the idea there is nothing controversial is the proposal is thoroughly unfounded.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Absolam wrote: »
    So there are differences of opinion; like I said, that certainly indicates that the idea there is nothing controversial is the proposal is thoroughly unfounded.

    I show you how all the main pro choice groups welcome the recommendations of the Assembly and you think it's proof of "differences of opinion". Grand so then.
    Absolam wrote: »
    like I said, that certainly indicates that the idea there is nothing controversial is the proposal is thoroughly unfounded.

    You've provided absolutely nothing to support your conclusion.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    I show you how all the main pro choice groups welcome the recommendations of the Assembly and you think it's proof of "differences of opinion". Grand so then. .
    Are they different from the opinions I quoted?
    NuMarvel wrote: »
    You've provided absolutely nothing to support your conclusion.
    Other than evidence of the fact that even within the opposing sides there are differences of opinion of course.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Absolam wrote: »
    Are they different from the opinions I quoted?

    No they're not, because you haven't shown any opinion from pro choice groups that objects to the result of the Assembly's deliberations. All you have shown are a group expressing disappointment at the results of one of the ballots (not even the final relevant ballot at that) and a person expressing concern at the process.

    So, to bring us back full circle, you have provided nothing to support the claim that the Assembly's recommendations are an issue of concern for pro choice groups. On the other hand, I've provided links to organisations welcoming the Assembly's recommendations, including may I add, organisations that count the group and the person referred to above as members.
    Absolam wrote: »
    Other than evidence of the fact that even within the opposing sides there are differences of opinion of course.

    As above, you haven't even provided evidence of that. However, even if you did, a difference of opinion doesn't back up your assertion. Having a difference of opinion doesn't make something controversial.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    No they're not, because you haven't shown any opinion from pro choice groups that objects to the result of the Assembly's deliberations. All you have shown are a group expressing disappointment at the results of one of the ballots (not even the final relevant ballot at that) and a person expressing concern at the process.
    Oh now, they're still different opinions, you can't pretend they're not just because you've now decided you want to only consider opinions from pro choice groups that objects to the result of the Assembly's deliberations. I never said they were, I said the recommendation was controversial, hence the opinions put forward in the papers.
    NuMarvel wrote: »
    So, to bring us back full circle, you have provided nothing to support the claim that the Assembly's recommendations are an issue of concern for pro choice groups. On the other hand, I've provided links to organisations welcoming the Assembly's recommendations, including may I add, organisations that count the group and the person referred to above as members.
    Hardly full circle; that the Assembly's recommendations are an issue of concern for pro choice groups is your assertion, not mine. If you'd like to go full circle my assertion was; I think it's fair to say it's extraordinarily controversial, hence the Times "the consensus in the Oireachtas is that the assembly's recommendations were an overly-liberal interpretation of the current thinking of middle Ireland on the issue." The Times which has been fairly consistently pro choice also asked "Why did members of the Citizens’ Assembly recommend a more liberal abortion regime than the Irish public would appear to want?" When we consider the full substantive recommendations of the Assembly we can see why the Independent noted an issue of concern for the pro choice camp; the Assembly "has voted in favour of changing the constitutional clause which effectively criminalises abortion – but stopped short of repealing the law entirely." I think we'll have no shortage of controversy over how much or how little of the Assembly's views are put before the public before we get to a referendum. And there will certainly be those who think placing a matter like this in the hands of career politicians rather than the people would be a grave mistake.
    NuMarvel wrote: »
    As above, you haven't even provided evidence of that. However, even if you did, a difference of opinion doesn't back up your assertion. Having a difference of opinion doesn't make something controversial.
    And the evidence for what I did say is above; we're seeing newspaper articles, people attacking the perspicacity of the Oireachtas, fifteen pages of this thread, all as a result. Practically the definition of controversial.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Absolam wrote: »
    Oh now, they're still different opinions, you can't pretend they're not just because you've now decided you want to only consider opinions from pro choice groups that objects to the result of the Assembly's deliberations. I never said they were, I said the recommendation was controversial, hence the opinions put forward in the papers..

    This all stated when you questioned my statement that pro choice groups welcomed the Assembly's outcome. I've backed up what I've said. The most you've done is shown that people expressed opinions on different matters, which hardly counts as a difference in opinion.
    Absolam wrote: »
    Hardly full circle; that the Assembly's recommendations are an issue of concern for pro choice groups is your assertion, not mine.

    You'll have to quote the post where I said that, because I'm sure I said the exact opposite.
    Absolam wrote: »
    If you'd like to go full circle my assertion was; I think it's fair to say it's extraordinarily controversial, hence the Times "the consensus in the Oireachtas is that the assembly's recommendations were an overly-liberal interpretation of the current thinking of middle Ireland on the issue." The Times which has been fairly consistently pro choice also asked "Why did members of the Citizens’ Assembly recommend a more liberal abortion regime than the Irish public would appear to want?" When we consider the full substantive recommendations of the Assembly we can see why the Independent noted an issue of concern for the pro choice camp; the Assembly "has voted in favour of changing the constitutional clause which effectively criminalises abortion – but stopped short of repealing the law entirely." I think we'll have no shortage of controversy over how much or how little of the Assembly's views are put before the public before we get to a referendum. And there will certainly be those who think placing a matter like this in the hands of career politicians rather than the people would be a grave mistake.

    And the part I responded to, by highlighting it in the quoted post was:

    "we can see why the Independent noted an issue of concern for the pro choice camp; the Assembly "has voted in favour of changing the constitutional clause which effectively criminalises abortion – but stopped short of repealing the law entirely."

    I've shown it's not an issue of concern. So yes, we have come full circle, unless you have something that shows that is an issue of concern.
    Absolam wrote: »
    And the evidence for what I did say is above; we're seeing newspaper articles, people attacking the perspicacity of the Oireachtas, fifteen pages of this thread, all as a result. Practically the definition of controversial.

    There's been very little said, here or elsewhere, about the Assembly's constitutional proposal; most of the comment has been about the legislative recommendations. So my assertion that the Assembly's constitutional proposal isn't controversial stands.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    This all stated when you questioned my statement that pro choice groups welcomed the Assembly's outcome. I've backed up what I've said. The most you've done is shown that people expressed opinions on different matters, which hardly counts as a difference in opinion.
    Actually, it started when you said you couldn't see anything controversial in their constitutional proposal, and I replied to that. You replied with your statement that pro choice groups welcomed the Assembly's outcome, which was something of a non sequitur, but I can see why you wanted to shift your ground.
    NuMarvel wrote: »
    You'll have to quote the post where I said that, because I'm sure I said the exact opposite.
    I'm sure your opinion is the opposite. Still, here you go.
    NuMarvel wrote: »
    So, to bring us back full circle, you have provided nothing to support the claim that the Assembly's recommendations are an issue of concern for pro choice groups.
    As you can see, I never made any such claim; the assertion originated entirely from you. Anyways, since we can all read what you said and I said, would you mind terribly if we moved past all the revisionist nonsense? I'm happy to stipulate that what you said is what's in black and white on the page already and can see no need to argue differently.
    NuMarvel wrote: »
    And the part I responded to, by highlighting it in the quoted post was: "we can see why the Independent noted an issue of concern for the pro choice camp; the Assembly "has voted in favour of changing the constitutional clause which effectively criminalises abortion – but stopped short of repealing the law entirely."
    I've shown it's not an issue of concern. So yes, we have come full circle, unless you have something that shows that is an issue of concern.
    You've shown you disagree with the Independents assessment, certainly. I'm inclined to agree that anyone who is pro choice and supports full repeal will be concerned that the proposal does not go far enough, but maybe I'm wrong, maybe everyone attending "Repeal the 8th" rallies in the last few weeks thought they were attending "Amend the 8th" rallies.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Absolam wrote: »
    Actually, it started when you said you couldn't see anything controversial in their constitutional proposal, and I replied to that. You replied with your statement that pro choice groups welcomed the Assembly's outcome, which was something of a non sequitur, but I can see why you wanted to shift your ground.
    I'm sure your opinion is the opposite. Still, here you go.

    I've dealt with this in my previous post. Sorry to hear that you missed the highlighted part, but I've been clear about what I was saying and responding to.
    Absolam wrote: »
    As you can see, I never made any such claim; the assertion originated entirely from you. Anyways, since we can all read what you said and I said, would you mind terribly if we moved past all the revisionist nonsense? I'm happy to stipulate that what you said is what's in black and white on the page already and can see no need to argue differently.

    I asked for a link to where I made this claim and you haven't been able to provide one. Only one of us is engaging in revisionist nonsense, and it's not me.
    Absolam wrote: »
    You've shown you disagree with the Independents assessment, certainly. I'm inclined to agree that anyone who is pro choice and supports full repeal will be concerned that the proposal does not go far enough, but maybe I'm wrong, maybe everyone attending "Repeal the 8th" rallies in the last few weeks thought they were attending "Amend the 8th" rallies.

    I've dealt with this in previous posts. Pro choice groups are in favour of the Assembly's constitutional recommendations. That is as plain as day. One comment in one newspaper before the Assembly's final constitutional recommendation was known doesn't support anything you say.



    I've been very clear about what I'm saying. If it hasn't sunk in at this point, it probably never will, so there's little point in me trying to engage any further. If you have something new to offer, I'll be happy to discuss. If you're just going to continue rehashing this issue, I refer you to this and my previous posts on the matter.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    I've dealt with this in my previous post <...> my previous posts on the matter.
    Like I said, what you said is what's in black and white on the page already, I've no intention in following you on your revisionist adventure.


Advertisement