8th amendment referendum part 3 - Mod note and FAQ in post #1

JennyVin

wexie wrote: »

Show me where he said anything about abortion at 27 weeks?

I did not say at any stage that the member mentioned 27 weeks. OTHER members did.

In fact, the member is still making the assertion

Overheal wrote: »

It can also kick in the womb but that doesn’t mean it’s alive. Have to be born to be alive. Don’t confuse a life in the making with a living breathing thing.

Are you still defending them now?? This thread is a sight to behold. It's quite something.

pjohnson

JennyVin wrote: »

I did not say at any stage that the member mentioned 27 weeks. OTHER members did.

In fact, the member is still making the assertion



Are you still defending them now?? This thread is a sight to behold. It's quite something.

Well until Birth it is a fetus so.....

pleas advice

Schrödingers fetus?

bootpaws

JennyVin wrote: »

You think men will vote no out of hate and spite? And why will the women be voting no?

To be fair, there was a man much earlier in this very thread who said he would've voted no "just to wind up the lefties" only for the fact that he has a daughter whose healthcare would be affected if the 8th remains.

I rarely see such an attitude from women opposed to abortion. If nothing else, at least they appear to genuinely believe the harmful views they hold.

gctest50

Should really print this out before it gets deleted and paste it up :





https://mobile.twitter.com/john_mcguirk/status/971083360452956160

pjohnson

bootpaws wrote: »

I rarely see such an attitude from women opposed to abortion. If nothing else, at least they appear to genuinely believe the harmful views they hold.

Until they need one of course.

eviltwin

gctest50 wrote: »

Should really print this out before it gets deleted and paste it up :





https://mobile.twitter.com/john_mcguirk/status/971083360452956160

What's it say? I can't open it.

bootpaws

pjohnson wrote: »

Until they need one of course.

Obviously! They're the exception. Their case was a once off etc etc

pjohnson

gctest50 wrote: »

Should really print this out before it gets deleted and paste it up :





https://mobile.twitter.com/john_mcguirk/status/971083360452956160

I love that John fella since I heard him on The Last Word. If all comedians were as good.

B0jangles

eviltwin wrote: »

What's it say? I can't open it.

wexie

pjohnson wrote: »

Until they need one of course.

Neyite posted this a few pages back, have a read of it, some have an abortion and go straight back to being prolife because :

bootpaws wrote: »

Obviously! They're the exception. Their case was a once off etc etc

It's an interesting eye opener into the mindset of some of these people

RobertKK

pitifulgod wrote: »

And I can cite legal professionals that made similarly outrageous statements during the Marriage Referendum that remain untrue. Or the fact that we were warned in 1983 of the endless issues the eighth amendment would cause? By people such as Mary Robinson. I'm inclined to not trust the people who can't even realise the damage caused by the eighth. Eg you or the handful of solicitors Save The Eighth managed to find.

I suspect a former referendum chairman, a high court judge, European court of Justice know more about the law than either of us.
As they say, abortion here will be less restrictive than England if the proposals for abortion are brought in.
They say the government could have put in proposals for the hard cases and kept the 8th amendment, but gave into more extreme views...


https://twitter.com/Toibin1/status/994911191586623489

pjohnson

eviltwin wrote: »

What's it say? I can't open it.

Apparently John is using a fake nurse to show how abortions in England traumatised him. Except his nursing certificate that John proudly posted is misspelt, and doesn't actually call him a nurse but an orderly :pac:
A fake orderly was traumatised at carrying out abortions.

eviltwin

pjohnson wrote: »

Apparently John is using a fake nurse to show how abortions in England traumatised him. Except his nursing certificate that John proudly posted is misspelt, and doesn't actually call him a nurse but an orderly :pac: a fake orderly.

Caught rapid

gctest50

eviltwin wrote: »

What's it say? I can't open it.

i should have pasted in the deaktop link :




https://twitter.com/john_mcguirk/status/971083360452956160

gctest50

pjohnson wrote: »

Apparently John is using a fake nurse to show how abortions in England traumatised him. Except his nursing certificate that John proudly posted is misspelt, and doesn't actually call him a nurse but an orderly :pac:
A fake orderly was traumatised at carrying out abortions.

there's more :

“I would always have a concealed firearm, but sometimes I would rob petrol stations of £300-£400 in cash with a knife or baton. I would only produce a firearm if things got out of hand.”

Mr Pattern was connected to 19 crimes from video store robberies to firearms charges

wexie

gctest50 wrote: »

Should really print this out before it gets deleted and paste it up :

https://mobile.twitter.com/john_mcguirk/status/971083360452956160

That thread would be hilarious if it wasn't for the fact people actually take this eejit seriously.

'he was never in prison'

'oh actually he was, here's an interview where he admitted it'

NuMarvel

RobertKK wrote: »

http://www.rights.ie/more-info/


Full statement in link, but the legal people say abortion up to 6 months, as wording is similar to the English abortion law.

At least one of those people was the legal adviser to the Pro 8th campaign back in 1983, so maybe they might be a wee bit biased...

gmisk

wexie wrote: »

That thread would be hilarious if it wasn't for the fact people actually take this eejit seriously.

'he was never in prison'

'oh actually he was, here's an interview where he admitted it'

I have honestly forgot about how hilarious that whole thing was.... He just kept digging... No apology nothing....
Honestly think he has given a huge hand with his behaviour in general to the yes campaign

wexie

gmisk wrote: »

I have honestly forgot about how hilarious that whole thing was.... He just kept digging... No apology nothing....
Honestly think he has given a huge hand with his behaviour in general to the yes campaign

What I really don't understand is that there's nobody around him that says :

here listen John....I know you mean well and all...but maybe it'd be better if we found you a position in the back office.

I'm not complaining or anything, I just don't understand why anybody would let a buffoon like that be a spokesman (person) for anything....at all....ever...

B0jangles

wexie wrote: »

What I really don't understand is that there's nobody around him that says :



I'm not complaining or anything, I just don't understand why anybody would let a buffoon like that be a spokesman (person) for anything....at all....ever...

He's the best they've got, dammit!

NuMarvel

RobertKK wrote: »

They say the government could have put in proposals for the hard cases and kept the 8th amendment, but gave into more extreme views...

Plenty of people have said that. Not a single person to date has produced an alternate referendum wording that would allow for this without causing more problems. I guess we can add these 200 lawyers to that list too.

This is just another smokescreen to muddy the waters. None of these people actually want to allow abortion in exceptional cases. I'm sure if I looked some of them have even objected to the current abortion laws.

The 8th is bad law by any objective measure and in 35 years, no one's been able to propose a viable alternate. I see no reason for keeping a law that doesn't work in the off chance someone, someday, somewhere, might, maybe, perhaps, possibly (but probably won't) come up with something slightly better.

Mrsmum

pjohnson wrote: »

Well until Birth it is a fetus so.....

I think you need to get Senator Catherine Noone, Chairman of the Oireachtas Committee on the 8th Amendment on message .

"Senator Catherine Noone takes the next step and is happy to concede that "of course abortion means the termination of a child’s life" (RTE Radio1 Today with Sean O'Rourke 18/1/2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYKuivX5s1Y .)

Sofiztikated

RobertKK wrote: »

I suspect a former referendum chairman, a high court judge, European court of Justice know more about the law than either of us.
As they say, abortion here will be less restrictive than England if the proposals for abortion are brought in.
They say the government could have put in proposals for the hard cases and kept the 8th amendment, but gave into more extreme views...


https://twitter.com/Toibin1/status/994911191586623489

The wonderful thing about legislation is that it can be changed, if found to be poor.

RobertKK

NuMarvel wrote: »

At least one of those people was the legal adviser to the Pro 8th campaign back in 1983, so maybe they might be a wee bit biased...

What about a former chairman of the referendum commission?
A former high court judge and former judge on the European court of Justice?
A Barrister for the UN High Commission on Human rights?

One of the persons who signed the document said she would have voted Yes if it had been more restrictive but she can't vote for what the government is proposing.
The 8th amendment could have been amended for the hard cases, instead of what is on the cards.

RobertKK

Sofiztikated wrote: »

The wonderful thing about legislation is that it can be changed, if found to be poor.

Like the UK law has been, every vote gets defeated even though 24 weeks is so backwards.

pjohnson

wexie wrote: »

What I really don't understand is that there's nobody around him that says :



I'm not complaining or anything, I just don't understand why anybody would let a buffoon like that be a spokesman (person) for anything....at all....ever...

He just reminds me of that fella who wanders about town shouting "the cats are rebelling". You kinda feel sad as he is clearly not fully there but it is very funny what they shout about.


And he is their leader :pac: surely they have anybody that can vaguely manage to not aid the opposition?

RobertKK

NuMarvel wrote: »

Plenty of people have said that. Not a single person to date has produced an alternate referendum wording that would allow for this without causing more problems. I guess we can add these 200 lawyers to that list too.

This is just another smokescreen to muddy the waters. None of these people actually want to allow abortion in exceptional cases. I'm sure if I looked some of them have even objected to the current abortion laws.

The 8th is bad law by any objective measure and in 35 years, no one's been able to propose a viable alternate. I see no reason for keeping a law that doesn't work in the off chance someone, someday, somewhere, might, maybe, perhaps, possibly (but probably won't) come up with something slightly better.

The government didn't even try, they used abortion pills as an excuse for unrestricted abortion, which the former judges say is more liberal up to 12 weeks than the UK law, then similar to the UK law after 12 weeks to 24 weeks.

pitifulgod

RobertKK wrote: »

What about a former chairman of the referendum commission?
A former high court judge and former judge on the European court of Justice?
A Barrister for the UN High Commission on Human rights?

One of the persons who signed the document said she would have voted Yes if it had been more restrictive but she can't vote for what the government is proposing.
The 8th amendment could have been amended for the hard cases, instead of what is on the cards.

Mary Robinson was the UN High Commissioner(far higher than simply being a barrister for it) of Human Rights and Mary McAleese was a professor of law, did loads for human rights. Both are opposed to the 8th. You're making out the proposed legislation is extreme. It's pretty moderate.

Sofiztikated

RobertKK wrote: »

Like the UK law has been, every vote gets defeated even though 24 weeks is so backwards.

92 ℅ occurred before week 13 in 2016.