The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Rogelio Tinkling Cue

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

Kathy Newman much?

What I'm saying is that people choose whether or not to be sexually active and that carries inherent risks.

and what if you do everything possible to negate these risks, but still get pregnant?
you are aware that no contraception is 100% affective yes?

v638sg7k1a92bx

bubblypop wrote: »

the 8th amendment is not about abortion.
if it is repealed then leglisation will be enacted to cover abortion.
repeal is about so much more, maybe if you actually read the issues facing womens healthcare you might see that.

the 8th should be repealed even if abortion was not an option after.

So just to clarify, it the 8th is repealed abortion will still be illegal in Ireland? If so, how does that address the healthcare issues?

Triceratops Ballet

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote:

So just to clarify, it the 8th is repealed abortion will still be illegal in Ireland?

Yes

Ave Sodalis

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

So just to clarify, it the 8th is repealed abortion will still be illegal in Ireland?

Yes, until legislation is drafted.

nozzferrahhtoo

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

It's not a checkmate, I just don't see the reason for the healthcare facade. It just clouds and confuses the issue further. If your in favour of abortion on request then just say so instead of taking the imaginary victim who has been raped or terminally ill and say "this is all abortions".

Why act like the two are mutually exclusive? You are not uncovering some great conspiracy here. People have been very upfront, open and honest about their position on "abortion on request" (As you call it. Choice based abortion would be more honest as it implies choice is PART of the access to abortion, not the sole mediator of it as your label implies) since the start of the thread.

Right now we are discussing repealing the 8th and allowing such things to be legislated for. While this opens up the discussion on abortion too, it is not the primary focus of the debate except to the no lobby. But no one here, despite your implications, is being shady about the fact that the discussion on abortion as a whole will be opened up. We just do not feel we need to start pointing out things as obvious as water being wet.

It is when it comes to actual legislation that we need to talk more about abortion itself, and lobby out politicians as to what we want included in such legislation. And as many people have had to point out to you, we can not enact legislation that contradicts the constitution.

But we can talk about abortion now too and we have been. But BOTH are arguments about why the 8th need to be repealed. And finding people who focus on one, and then acting like you are outing them for some hidden agenda about the other.... likely only makes you look bad. Not them.

The thread is mainly just people who are able to separate the two topics, and know exactly which one we are about to vote on at this time. There is no "facade" here. Except possibly from you given the mask is slipping and the condescending and simplistic "abstinence" narrative on pregnancy is coming out. A narrative that contrived wilfully and dishonestly to ignore two main things:

1) Not all women who are pregnant chose to be pregnant, from failed contraception to rape to errors of sheer ignorance pregnancies happen all the time without being planned, chosen or expected and

2) Many women who seek choice based abortion DID actually choose to be pregnant. The personal, emotional, physical, social, or economic reasons for why they seek abortion came AFTER the pregnancy came. So the "you had a choice to be pregnant" narrative of high horse-ism fails here. A woman who gets pregnant and her partner cuts out, or her job is terminated, or who has a sudden change in health of circumstances very much chose to be pregnant and now very much wishes not to be for good reason.

So the "keep your legs closed" narrative, even if wrapped up and presented as sweetly and feux innocently as you like, fails on a number of levels from sheer arrogance to sheer errors from being simplistic. I would pocket it before pushing it any further if I were you.

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

What I'm saying is that people choose whether or not to be sexually active and that carries inherent risks.

Playing sport carries inherent risks too. But when someone gets injured we do not rush to their side on the back of our trusty steed of high horseyness to admonish them from on high about how they knew what they were getting themselves into.

Life is risks. One after the other. And condescension and tutting at people who fall on the wrong side of a risk helps no one. Be it a sports injury or a pregnancy we can and SHOULD move to offer people options and choices and paths forward. Including abortion.

January

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

Kathy Newman much?

What I'm saying is that people choose whether or not to be sexually active and that carries inherent risks.

So yeah you have an issue with people having sex for pleasure. Ok. Thanks

Rogelio Tinkling Cue

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

So just to clarify, it the 8th is repealed abortion will still be illegal in Ireland? If so, how does that address the healthcare issues?

are you aware of what the 8th amendment says?
if it is repealed, then yes, womens healthcare will not be affected by whether or not she is pregnant.
women can then have a say in their treatment.
abortion can be legislated for afterwards.
if repealed the current laws stand until changed.

v638sg7k1a92bx

bubblypop wrote: »

and what if you do everything possible to negate these risks, but still get pregnant?
you are aware that no contraception is 100% affective yes?

The only guarantees in life are death and taxes. At some stage people need to take some form of personal responsibility.

swampgas

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

The only guarantees in life are death and taxes. At some stage people need to take some form of personal responsibility.

Having an abortion often is taking personal responsibility.

I can't think of anything more personal, to be honest.

Rogelio Tinkling Cue

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

The only guarantees in life are death and taxes. At some stage people need to take some form of personal responsibility.

are you suggesting that me & my partner should not have sex until I have the menopause?
do you not think that sex is part of a loving healthy relationship?

nozzferrahhtoo

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

The only guarantees in life are death and taxes. At some stage people need to take some form of personal responsibility.

They do. Taking responsibility means considering ALL your options, working out the short and long term implications of each one, and then choosing the right one for you no matter how hard it might be. Including abortion.

Giving people options and letting them choose from them IS taking responsibility. Making those choices for them is the opposite. That is Nanny Stateing and taking responsibility FOR them.

Taking responsibility means choosing for yourself. It does not mean "Do what Rogelio Tinkling Cue would do".

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

Women already have that choice, repealing the 8th is not going to change that.

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

Birds and bees.

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

The only guarantees in life are death and taxes. At some stage people need to take some form of personal responsibility.

But only the "don't have sex" type of responsibility apparently. Not the "get an abortion if you're not in a position to be a parent" type?

Meeeeanwhile, in the real world the Irish Pharmacy Union has put forward proposals in line with the outcomes of the Citizens Assembly, which international evidence suggests would reduce the number of abortions. I'm sure every pro-life group and individual in the country will be applauding them.

Easier and cheaper access to contraception, not sitting in judgement on people for having sex.

January

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

The only guarantees in life are death and taxes. At some stage people need to take some form of personal responsibility.

I did. I was using contraception it didn't work so I had an abortion to protect the children I already have. There's responsibility for you.

Bannasidhe

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

The only guarantees in life are death and taxes. At some stage people need to take some form of personal responsibility.

By people you mean 'women' as the 8th has as much impact on men's healthcare as being pregnant has on their bodies. Zero.

At least be honest and say women when you mean women.

baylah17

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

What I haven't been able to get to the bottom of is that if all the health risks, rape, cancer etc was addressed. Would choice* life advocates still be in favour of repealing the 8th?

*amended

Another one claiming to be not sure and then following the established PL/Iona of asking the same question in different ways over and over again looking for a "Gotcha" moment!
Predictable but bloody annoying

v638sg7k1a92bx

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Yes, until legislation is drafted.

So how will repeal address the health care issues mentioned?

Triceratops Ballet

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote:

So how will repeal address the health care issues mentioned?

Genuine question, what do you think the 8th amendment does?

baylah17

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Yes, until legislation is drafted.

So how will repeal address the health care issues mentioned?

Grow up, asked and answered , over and over, how much are Youth Defence/Iona paying you to try and disrupt Social Media Discussions?

NuMarvel

baylah17 wrote: »

Another one claiming to be not sure and then following the established PL/Iona of asking the same question in different ways over and over again looking for a "Gotcha" moment!
Predictable but bloody annoying

More fool us for engaging with this for this long. It just encourages them.

ohnonotgmail

NuMarvel wrote: »

More fool us for engaging with this for this long. It just encourages them.

in fairness it was called early but we let it play out.

gctest50

New signup to boards.ie in.................... 3......2......1

Rogelio Tinkling Cue

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

So how will repeal address the health care issues mentioned?

do you understand at all what the 8th amendment says??
The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.

so any medical treatment that the mother requires, has to take into consideration the foetus ( at any gestation)
eg, cancer treatment etc etc
xrays, mri scans, anything the woman needs cannot affect the foetus.
does this explain it any more for you??

robarmstrong

It's like a revolving door here almost like shift work, one after the other "I'm on the fence here just asking questions guys!" And then reveals (both intentionally and unintentionally) themselves to be very clearly pro-life just stirring the pot.

As I'm obviously Sherlock Holmes here who wants to be my Watson?

v638sg7k1a92bx

Believe what you will but this is the first time I've participated in a conversation in this detail, on on this issue.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

So how will repeal address the health care issues mentioned?

Fair enough not to read the whole thread, it's very long and busy and repetitive. Could you please read the sections to which you're actively contributing though?

electro~bitch wrote: »

That legislation would be impossible because it would contradict the constitution, specifically the 8th amendment. The 8th amendment impacts all maternity care because of the way it's worded, which is very awkward for the PLC. The 8th amendment needs to be repealed in order to draft the legislation you're in favour of.

bubblypop wrote: »

the government cannot enact legislation that is unconstitutional.
therefore the 8th amendment has to be repealed.

This:

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

So how will repeal address the health care issues mentioned?

is liking asking somebody why they're clearing all that debris and bushes from the land on which they claim to want to build a house, sure clearing it isn't building a house.

Maybe I have too much faith in people but I refuse to believe you're genuinely that confused.

v638sg7k1a92bx

robarmstrong wrote: »

It's like a revolving door here almost like shift work, one after the other "I'm on the fence here just asking questions guys!" And then reveals (both intentionally and unintentionally) themselves to be very clearly pro-life just stirring the pot.

As I'm obviously Sherlock Holmes here who wants to be my Watson?

I didn't realise that pro lifers owned this thread.

maybe i am being naive here!!
I tend to believe these posters that come on, then as time goes on I am not so sure.......

v638sg7k1a92bx

Misael Echoing Horse wrote: »

Fair enough not to read the whole thread, it's very long and busy and repetitive. Could you please read the sections to which you're actively contributing though?





This:



is liking asking somebody why they're clearing all that debris and bushes from the land on which they claim to want to build a house, sure clearing it isn't building a house.

Maybe I have too much faith in people but I refuse to believe you're genuinely that confused.

But there is no guarantee that you will get the legislation you're in favour of after the 8th has been repealed.

robarmstrong

a bit of humour in these dark times

Ave Sodalis

Rogelio Tinkling Cue wrote: »

But there is no guarantee that you will get the legislation you're in favour of after the 8th has been repealed.

No but the 8th needs to go anyway, as has been explain.