Did anybody here attend the Rally For Life/repeal the 8th marches in Dublin?

freshpopcorn

I heard a good bit about these online at the weekend. Did anybody on Boards attend either of these?
I think it was official the Rally for Life and the counter march was organised by the repeal side. I know in my local town their was a bus organised by the Rally for Life group. According to the net their was meant to have be a good turn out for the Rally for Life protest. This was discredited by repeal the 8th side but either side always tend to think they've a massive group and the other side is smaller.
From social media it appears to the same people commenting from both sides all the time in my experience with the typical comments getting all the likes. Outside of the internet/news articles I have never really heard many people on about it to be honest.
It will be a very interesting to see how a vote on this will go in my opinion it will all depend on what people are voting for. One thing I have noticed is repeal votes seem to be alienating the on the fence voters more so than the pro-life campaign.

DrumSteve

I think it'll be repealed.

Had the prolifers at the door the other day and they do themselves no favours.

B.A._Baracus

I, for one, did not.

MilesMorales1

I did. Even if it does nothing, we're making ourselves heard.

freshpopcorn

MilesMorales1 wrote: »

I did. Even if it does nothing, we're making ourselves heard.

Nice to know. Was their many people at it?

Synthol

The world is overpopulated but we force women to breed unwanted children and enter this world, then the children are abused and grow up criminals.

MilesMorales1

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Nice to know. Was their many people at it?

I thought there was. Lot of people, good spirit.

DrumSteve

Synthol wrote: »

The world is overpopulated but we force women to breed unwanted children and enter this world, then the children are abused and grow up criminals.

Strong tarring of everyone with the one brush there

Uriel.

Synthol wrote: »

The world is overpopulated but we force women to breed unwanted children and enter this world, then the children are abused and grow up criminals.

Whatever about abortion... We typically don't force women (or men) to breed unwanted children. In most cases it's lack of personal responsibility that leads to an unwanted child

keano_afc

There was no Repeal march, don't believe the crap peddled in the media.

I was at the pro-life march. Very well attended from what I saw, Gardai were pretty slow moving us along though. When we got to Merrion square the last of the marchers were still on the quays. Great atmosphere, lots of youth making their voices heard. I'm not Catholic so wouldn't be a big fan of the religious iconography or the Marian devotion, but we're on the same side at the end of the day. All in all a good day out.

511

Synthol wrote: »

The world is overpopulated but we force women to breed unwanted children and enter this world, then the children are abused and grow up criminals.

Correction: Africa and Asia are overpopulated. Europe needs higher birthrates.

freshpopcorn

keano_afc wrote: »

There was no Repeal march, don't believe the crap peddled in the media.

.

Was it more of a counter protest?
All I saw online basically were people with signs(pro-life) looking at women with signs and coat hangers(Repeal).

Annasopra

freshpopcorn wrote: »

One thing I have noticed is repeal votes seem to be alienating the on the fence voters more so than the pro-life campaign.

I heard this said a lot on this site during the marriage equality campaign. It actually wasnt true at all in that case. So I am very very doubtful about it in this case.

Stephen15

511 wrote: »

Correction: Africa and Asia are overpopulated. Europe needs higher birthrates.

Ireland has the highest birth rate in Europe

Donal55

Synthol wrote: »

The world is overpopulated but we force women to breed unwanted children and enter this world, then the children are abused and grow up criminals.

Blessed be the Fruit.

freshpopcorn

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I heard this said a lot on this site during the marriage equality campaign. It actually wasnt true at all in that case. So I am very very doubtful about it in this case.

I never had a doubt about the marriage referendum passing. I found during the marriage referendum everybody on Yes side was on the same page. However if you ask people in the repeal campaign what circumstances they want abortion legalised they can all give you different answers and don't agree with one another.

Outlaw Pete

Synthol wrote: »

The world is overpopulated but we force women to breed unwanted children and enter this world, then the children are abused and grow up criminals.

Nonsense.... lots of children who are unwanted go on to have productive and happy lives despite not being initially wanted.

Phil Lynott was born after a failed abortion (for example) and despite his mother's wish for him not to have been born (initially at least) she went on to love him just as much as any mother who planned their child's birth.... if not even more so in fact.

wordofwarning

Uriel. wrote: »

In most cases it's lack of personal responsibility that leads to an unwanted child

No true. Around 50-66% of abortions are due to contraceptive failures eg the pills not working for some reason or condom failure. No all contraceptives are effective. In fact condoms are quite ineffective at preventing pregnancy versus IUD

AFAIK I don't think we were once told in sex ed in school that IUDs had pretty much a zero failure rate versus condoms which have a high failure rate

Outlaw Pete

Looked like a decent sized crowd but sure if people want to dismiss views... let them.

https://twitter.com/KatyRobinson198/status/881217325676072961

gctest50

Sums it up in one photo :

" Not one fertile person "


http://twitter.com/earley/status/881145355789840385

Varik

Stephen15 wrote: »

Ireland has the highest birth rate in Europe

And it's still below the replacement rate.

Outlaw Pete

gctest50 wrote: »

Sums it up in one photo :

" Not one fertile person "

How about these?

gctest50

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

How about these?

]

Bunch of filthy militant anti-choice scum ?

Outlaw Pete

gctest50 wrote: »

Bunch of filthy militant anti-choice scum ?

And the mask slips.

gctest50

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

And the mask slips.

What mask ?

nice_guy80

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

How about these?

putting the youth defense out the front of a protest doesn't count

they were all up for the day with their grandparents

sabat

gctest50 wrote: »

Sums it up in one photo :

" Not one fertile person "


http://twitter.com/earley/status/881145355789840385

That's just blatant lying. I saw a good part of the march on my way into work and it was about as representative of the population in terms of age, gender and race as you could get.

RayM

freshpopcorn wrote: »

According to the net their was meant to have be a good turn out for the Rally for Life protest. This was discredited by repeal the 8th side but either side always tend to think they've a massive group and the other side is smaller.

It was a high turnout, as marches go, but probably nowhere near the 70,000 claimed by the organisers (and unquestioningly parroted by RTE). Maybe a bit closer to ten thousand than "the ten thousands", which is still very high. The majority of those participating were elderly and male, and there was a lot of religious iconography too (not that there's anything wrong with religious iconography, but carrying statues of the Virgin Mary down O'Connell Street is a bit "extra" if you ask me). There were a lot of priests present too, including a certain Fr Brian McKevitt (editor of Alive! magazine) in his full Dominican regalia. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's interesting that a genuine Christian like Fr Peter McVerry, for example, doesn't feel the need to prance around the north inner city in a gigantic white frock, swinging his rosary beads around and telling people what to do with their own bodies.

freshpopcorn wrote:

One thing I have noticed is repeal votes seem to be alienating the on the fence voters more so than the pro-life campaign.

I don't know - I think the sight of elderly men shouting "murderer" at young women might be a bit alienating to people who are genuinely on the fence. Also, picking a child with Down Syndrome up and shoving her into the faces of counter-protesters might alienate people too. Both of those things happened at yesterday's march.

gctest50

sabat wrote: »

That's just blatant lying. I saw a good part of the march on my way into work and it was about as representative of the population in terms of age, gender and race as you could get.

And how many of them had a uterus and were aged between say 18 and 40 ?

freshpopcorn

They got a good crowd and the one thing for certain is most of these people will vote. I was actually expecting the marriage referendum to pass with a greater vote. I think the people who voted against the marriage referendum will probably vote to keep the 8th. I can see a good few constituencies voting go going by the marriage referendum results. Even if I view pro life pages. I've friends who seem to be into the pro-life campaign. These wouldn't be religious people and would have being Yes voters in the marriage referendum. So, I honestly have no idea how it would go to be honest. It would take a good vote in Urban areas for it to be repealed.

Richard Hillman

Why are they still going around with the "Repeal" jumpers? It has pretty much been confirmed that it won't be repealed and we will instead have the option to amend the amendment.

Synthol

511 wrote: »

Correction: Africa and Asia are overpopulated. Europe needs higher birthrates.

What the hell are you talking about? Ever heard of something called population density? Density is what matters, basically overcrowding.

freshpopcorn

sabat wrote: »

This isn't really a response to my point which was merely highlighting the disingenuous use of a photo by a pro-repeal blogger but even if the vote was restricted to women of child bearing age I would guess the margins would be broadly similar to the general population.

I never understand this view of only allowing women of child bearing age vote. If we did things like this we'd have only left gay people vote in the marriage referendum.

Eyes Down Field

I think the referendum on the 8th should be decided by women only. As a man, Why should I have a say in what a woman choses to do with her, body, her life.

Outlaw Pete

Eyes Down Field wrote: »

As a man, Why should I have a say in what a woman choses to do with her, body, her life.

Do you think a woman should be able to abort pregnancies at seven months? No, you don't, like most normal people and so therefore even YOU think a woman should not always be able to do what she wants to with "her body". People parrot that slogan because that's all they have but it has never been able to stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

ALL opinions on abortion come down to fetal development. There is no adult on Planet Earth that has an opinion on abortion that is not based solely on fetal development (excluding fta, risk to life etc etc... of course). All the other bull**** is just background noise as even the staunchest of prochoice don't believe women should be able to abort any stage of a pregnancy. Which is why women in the UK (for example) have been imprisoned for killing their unborn babies after 24 weeks gestation.

Now, you ask why should you (a man) have a say in any abortion referendum?

Well, 50% of a baby's DNA comes from it's father. In fact, human beings use use more DNA from their fathers than we do our mothers and so why shouldn't men have a say in what happens babies as they develop in the womb given that?

Besides, even if that wasn't true. All citizens of a country should have a say in something as important the rights of our offspring at gestational stage. How we treat our most vulnerable says so much about us and there are no more vulnerable human beings on this Planet than those in the womb.

gctest50

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Do you think a woman should be able to abort pregnancies at seven months? No, you don't, like most normal people .........

So if it's just between a woman and her doctor (with no criminal law restricting abortion at all etc etc ) they won't be aborting pregnancies at the 11th hour

since they're normal people


.

_Whimsical_

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Looked like a decent sized crowd but sure if people want to dismiss views... let them.

https://twitter.com/KatyRobinson198/status/881217325676072961

Actually that picture looks like the crowd was made up of a pretty varied swathe of society. I'm seeing quite a lot of women between 18 and 45 let's say. Certainly it is clear from that that its not a majority of older people attending.

freshpopcorn

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

Actually that picture looks like the crowd were made up of a pretty varied swathe of society. I'm seeing quite a lot of women between 18 and 45 let's say. Certainly it is clear from that that its not a majority of older people attending.

I'm actually amazed at the people I know who support the pro-life movement. Their the complete opposite to what the internet portrays.

Guy:Incognito

Quite a lot of middle aged men are very concerned with what young women do with their bodies. (Pic taken from a Facebook site shared by a middle aged man who's the father of a couple of my mates)

https://imgur.com/U7IsbyM

_Whimsical_

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I'm actually amazed at the people I know who support the pro-life movement. Their the complete opposite to what the internet portrays.

I think a lot of people have more nuanced views than they feel are represented by the pro life or pro choice sides right now. Unfortunately we seem incapable of any sort of mature conversation about it or teasing out the issues in public. I'd love to see a proper, respectful debate about it but we always get a mud slinging "goodies vs baddies" approach.

_Whimsical_

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Quite a lot of middle aged men are very concerned with what young women do with their bodies. (Pic taken from a Facebook site shared by a middle aged man who's the father of a couple of my mates)

https://imgur.com/U7IsbyM

There are pictures of the entire crowd in this thread and is quite clear from them that there wasn't a single majority really amidst the couple of hundred faces visible.

If one side feels their grasp of the facts adequately supports their stance there's no reason for unrepresentative photos. You'll find fifteen or so middle aged men at pretty much every single event in Ireland. That there were several men in attendance is all we can accurately gather from that pic.

martingriff

Eyes Down Field wrote: »

I think the referendum on the 8th should be decided by women only. As a man, Why should I have a say in what a woman choses to do with her, body, her life.

So if you partner was pregnant you be happy if she just went and had a termination. After all it's her body why should a man (you) have a say

Guy:Incognito

How does it affect your life if someone you don't and will never know , has a procedure you will never know the person had, to terminate a pregnancy they didn't want and you didn't know existed in the first place?

Would all this wasted energy not be better put to use improving the lives of people that are suffering or struggling through life? Or are those people not worth your time?

Guy:Incognito

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

There are pictures of the entire crowd in this thread and is quite clear from them that there wasn't a single majority really amidst the couple of hundred faces visible.

If one side feels their grasp of the facts adequately supports their stance there's no reason for unrepresentative photos. You'll find fifteen or so middle aged men at pretty much every single event in Ireland. That there were several men in attendance is all we can accurately gather from that pic.

The picture was the main one that showed up on 2 separate pages he shared. I didn't go beyond the first pic they themselves shared.i don't share the views of these groups so have no desire to delve in to their Facebook pages .

Guy:Incognito

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

I think a lot of people have more nuanced views than they feel are represented by the pro life or pro choice sides right now. Unfortunately we seem incapable of any sort of mature conversation about it or teasing out the issues in public. I'd love to see a proper, respectful debate about it but we always get a mud slinging "goodies vs baddies" approach.

How about the simple solution of you stay out of my life and I stay out of yours. If you don't want an abortion youre free to not have one. The availability of abortion will have no impact on your life unless you go out of your way to involve yourself. Just like all the things I don't involve myself with don't impact my life.

gctest50

martingriff wrote: »

So if you partner was pregnant you be happy if she just went and had a termination. After all it's her body why should a man (you) have a say

At the moment she can just get up and go abroad

Voting to keep things the way they are won't change that

martingriff

gctest50 wrote: »

martingriff wrote: »

So if you partner was pregnant you be happy if she just went and had a termination. After all it's her body why should a man (you) have a say

At the moment she can just get up and go abroad

True however my question still stands as her partner would he be happy that she just did it as it's her body he as a man should have no say

RDM_83 again

RayM wrote: »

It was a high turnout, as marches go, but probably nowhere near the 70,000 claimed by the organisers (and unquestioningly parroted by RTE). Maybe a bit closer to ten thousand than "the ten thousands", which is still very high. The majority of those participating were elderly and male, and there was a lot of religious iconography too (not that there's anything wrong with religious iconography, but carrying statues of the Virgin Mary down O'Connell Street is a bit "extra" if you ask me). There were a lot of priests present too, including a certain Fr Brian McKevitt (editor of Alive! magazine) in his full Dominican regalia. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's interesting that a genuine Christian like Fr Peter McVerry, for example, doesn't feel the need to prance around the north inner city in a gigantic white frock, swinging his rosary beads around and telling people what to do with their own bodies.



I don't know - I think the sight of elderly men shouting "murderer" at young women might be a bit alienating to people who are genuinely on the fence. Also, picking a child with Down Syndrome up and shoving her into the faces of counter-protesters might alienate people too. Both of those things happened at yesterday's march.

I do get why you would focus on the male participants because of the message you hope to send, but is there any evidence for the male thing? Any of the pro-life marches I've seen (never participated in any though) have more women than men so I would be surprised if this one is any different.

Ultimately I don't see the marches on either side making much difference, the most active friends of mine on the pro-choice side (weirdly) aren't citizens so won't have a vote and I know very few pro-life people and they keep it quiet.

I'm hopeful there will only be a lot of yelling and things won't descend into American style stuff.

Outlaw Pete

sabat wrote: »

That's just blatant lying.

Yet watch how much thanks that post gets in the coming days.

Truth is of little importance to some people.

gctest50

martingriff wrote: »

True however my question still stands as her partner would he be happy that she just did it as it's her body he as a man should have no say

So you have a couple that are together and she wants to terminate her pregnancy and he doesn't want that to happen ? It's a hard case but hard cases make bad law

It should be illegal for every woman just because of a quarreling couple ?

Guy:Incognito

martingriff wrote: »

True however my question still stands as her partner would he be happy that she just did it as it's her body he as a man should have no say

Very few who are actually in a relationship would just up and do something without discussing it with their partner and going over options. Forcing people to flee the country for a medical procedure , if anything , will only increase the numbers of abortions because for most they will be working, may have to arrange to go on a weekend etc, will be probably panicking about time constraints and will rush in to it much easier when having the added crap ,and expense ,of booking flights, hotels etc and will be more reluctant to seek follow up care when they get back too.

People who want abortions can, and will go to England. All our stupid laws do is increase the risk of issues for these woman and put more strain on them, physically, mentally and financially. It serves no other purpose than to allow people who dont want to have anything to do with abortions anyway pretend that Irish people don't have them.