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

Zubeneschamali

HonestKevin wrote: »

We need tougher laws against rapists.

Feel free to campaign for that in some other thread.

Any other thread.

_Dara_

RobertKK wrote: »

This from the opening post:



But a doctor who objects to providing abortion will still have to be complicit in abortion by sending the woman to a doctor who will perform the abortion.
Which doctors who oppose abortion have said is an issue.
This is what doctors against repeal have said. They really aren't being allowed to conscientiously object as they still have to be complicit with the abortion that happens.

Yup. And?

HonestKevin

I'm creating a hypothetical situation not a strawman argument.

If a woman gets pregnant by a black man and she decides she does not want a black baby, should she be supported in her choice to abort the baby based solely on the babys skin color?

That's a fair question.

A straight question deserves a straight answer. Here's my straight answer - I don't support that choice. The governments proposed legislation is asking me to support that choice, and i don't support it. In the UK, the woman would not get away with that reason for an abortion, but here we are proposing that she could get away with it.

RobertKK

_Dara_ wrote: »

Yup. And?

It is self explanatory.

ELM327

HonestKevin wrote: »

I'm creating a hypothetical situation not a strawman argument.

If a woman gets pregnant by a black man and she decides she does not want a black baby, should she be supported in her choice to abort the baby based solely on the babys skin color?

That's a fair question.

A straight question deserves a straight answer. Here's my straight answer - I don't support that choice. The governments proposed legislation is asking me to support that choice, and i don't support it. In the UK, the woman would not get away with that reason for an abortion, but here we are proposing that she could get away with it.

Strawman post.
Reported.

REPEALSHIELD - ACTIVATE
(do not engage)

ELM327

RobertKK wrote: »

This from the opening post:



But a doctor who objects to providing abortion will still have to be complicit in abortion by sending the woman to a doctor who will perform the abortion.
Which doctors who oppose abortion have said is an issue.
This is what doctors against repeal have said. They really aren't being allowed to conscientiously object as they still have to be complicit with the abortion that happens.

I think each GP should be forced to admit their position publicly, in the event of a REPEAL vote.
That way, if you are a repeal voter you can choose a better suited GP and the same for a pro life voter

optogirl

HonestKevin wrote: »

I'm creating a hypothetical situation not a strawman argument.

If a woman gets pregnant by a black man and she decides she does not want a black baby, should she be supported in her choice to abort the baby based solely on the babys skin color?

That's a fair question.

A straight question deserves a straight answer. Here's my straight answer - I don't support that choice. The governments proposed legislation is asking me to support that choice, and i don't support it. In the UK, the woman would not get away with that reason for an abortion, but here we are proposing that she could get away with it.

'get away with' ... do you think that people enjoy having abortions and will come up with any old excuse just so they can get one? I can't think of a single person I know who would do so because of the colour of the baby's skin but perhaps there are some headers out there who think like that - however we can't legislate for one hypothetical racist when making important decisions about women's healthcare. If the same woman needed, but refused, a kidney because it came from a black person that would be utterly foolish too but we couldn't force her to take it.

Zubeneschamali

HonestKevin wrote: »

A straight question deserves a straight answer.

Yeah, but then I'd get threadbanned.

Which is probably what you are really here for.

HonestKevin

HonestKevin wrote: »

So in 2018 Ireland, we're proposing that a woman can walk into a GP and say she doesn't want a black baby and she should be given an abortion pill?

Of course she doesn't have to give a reason, but she can tell the doctor that's why she wants the abortion and the doctor has to facilitate her because the legislation allows for abortion up to 12 weeks for ANY reason.

Why are you shoehorning in this racist angle? To what end? Yes voters are racists now?

robarmstrong

RobertKK wrote: »

This from the opening post:



But a doctor who objects to providing abortion will still have to be complicit in abortion by sending the woman to a doctor who will perform the abortion.
Which doctors who oppose abortion have said is an issue.
This is what doctors against repeal have said. They really aren't being allowed to conscientiously object as they still have to be complicit with the abortion that happens.

No they won't, all that happens is that administrative staff will refer patients to another doctor.

Conscientiously objecting to something means you specifically want no part in it.

HonestKevin

HonestKevin wrote: »

I'm creating a hypothetical situation not a strawman argument.

If a woman gets pregnant by a black man and she decides she does not want a black baby, should she be supported in her choice to abort the baby based solely on the babys skin color?

That's a fair question.

A straight question deserves a straight answer. Here's my straight answer - I don't support that choice. The governments proposed legislation is asking me to support that choice, and i don't support it. In the UK, the woman would not get away with that reason for an abortion, but here we are proposing that she could get away with it.

Genuine question, do they need a reason at all in the UK?

_Dara_

RobertKK wrote: »

It is self explanatory.

Yes, but what’s the upshot? If the 8th is repealed, doctors will have a duty to do referrals.

Again, and?

nice_guy80

ELM327

Deleted User wrote: »

Genuine question, do they need a reason at all in the UK?

NO!
It is abortion on demand.
I've known 2 women to get the procedure done, and accompanied one of those.
At no point were they required to give a reason, (other than being Irish).

craicattack

I posted this in a reply on reddit when the rubberbandits were encouraging men to vote yes. Was wondering if anyone else felt the same.

"As a pro choice lad who will be voting to repeal, many female repeal supporters have crapped the bed when talking about a mans vote. I've seen many pro-life lads online being told "shur what would you know, you're a man who wouldn't have to go through this.", "A man should have no say in what a woman does with her body", "This isn't a mans choice it's a womans."

Yeah, but the repeal side sure as hell could use the vote from the lads. They say all that stuff but now it's "please all men this issue effects you go out and vote repeal!" Getting sick of it tbh. And I know it's not all the same people saying the same things, I'd just rather the "what would you know you're a man" stuff was never used as an argument point. Because it's alienating half the population, it's alienating men who are still on the fence, and it makes me feel like my vote for repeal doesn't really matter. I agree this is primarily a woman's issue, but men are not completely unaffected by it.

The repeal crowd should be trying to empathize with men who's wives/girlfriends/female family may have had an abortion. Not just insulting them because of their gender."

ELM327

optogirl wrote: »

'get away with' ... do you think that people enjoy having abortions and will come up with any old excuse just so they can get one? I can't think of a single person I know who would do so because of the colour of the baby's skin but perhaps there are some headers out there who think like that - however we can't legislate for one hypothetical racist when making important decisions about women's healthcare. If the same woman needed, but refused, a kidney because it came from a black person that would be utterly foolish too but we couldn't force her to take it.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yeah, but then I'd get threadbanned.

Which is probably what you are really here for.

Deleted User wrote: »

Why are you shoehorning in this racist angle? To what end? Yes voters are racists now?

His post was reported for strawmanning.
It's pointless replying to him as these posts (and this one) will probably be deleted soon

HonestKevin

Deleted User wrote: »

Why are you shoehorning in this racist angle? To what end? Yes voters are racists now?

Well apparently, no voters "aren't compassionate" and "don't trust women". That's shoe-horning if ever there was.

I'm pointing out that what is being proposed is a breakdown of human rights. You can't deny that there are women out there (and their families) that don't want a black baby in the family. And the proposed legislation facilitates their racist position. Even pro-repealers should be opposing this. Its a complete breakdown of human rights.

RobertKK

ELM327 wrote: »

I think each GP should be forced to admit their position publicly, in the event of a REPEAL vote.
That way, if you are a repeal voter you can choose a better suited GP and the same for a pro life voter

Yeah, I don't think forced, but maybe a register of doctors who will, so doctors who oppose abortion aren't put into a position where they feel their values have been compromised by sending a woman to another doctor for a procedure they oppose.

Zubeneschamali

Deleted User wrote: »

Genuine question, do they need a reason at all in the UK?

They need a reason on the paperwork, but they just fill in "woman's health" and drive on.

Some of the No crew were saying the proposed legislation is the most deadly and murderous anywhere because it leaves out that fig leaf.

robarmstrong

RobertKK wrote: »

Yeah, I don't think forced, but maybe a register of doctors who will, so doctors who oppose abortion aren't put into a position where they feel their values have been compromised by sending a woman to another doctor for a procedure they oppose.

Their values haven't been compromised. They just think they have because they don't really understand what conscientiously object means. All a doctor has to do is say "no, I conscientiously object to this procedure" and that's that.

I don't know why they continue to use it as an argument, it's grasping for straws at best, if they don't want to perform an abortion, they don't have to and I fully support that. All that would happen is that the woman goes to another doctor/GP, simple as.

craicattack

craicattack wrote: »

I posted this in a reply on reddit when the rubberbandits were encouraging men to vote yes. Was wondering if anyone else felt the same.

"As a pro choice lad who will be voting to repeal, many female repeal supporters have crapped the bed when talking about a mans vote. I've seen many pro-life lads online being told "shur what would you know, you're a man who wouldn't have to go through this.", "A man should have no say in what a woman does with her body", "This isn't a mans choice it's a womans."

Yeah, but the repeal side sure as hell could use the vote from the lads. They say all that stuff but now it's "please all men this issue effects you go out and vote repeal!" Getting sick of it tbh. And I know it's not all the same people saying the same things, I'd just rather the "what would you know you're a man" stuff was never used as an argument point. Because it's alienating half the population, it's alienating men who are still on the fence, and it makes me feel like my vote for repeal doesn't really matter. I agree this is primarily a woman's issue, but men are not completely unaffected by it.

The repeal crowd should be trying to empathize with men who's wives/girlfriends/female family may have had an abortion. Not just insulting them because of their gender."

I don't know, but I would assume that the women who say men don't & can't understand are referring to the 8th amendment.
The 8th amendment affects women's healthcare in a way that men's can never be. That's not a men vs women thing, it just is the way it is.

So, I doubt too many women believe abortion doesn't affect men, I'm sure most know that it does. But the issue of the 8th amendment, that's what men can't really understand, be cause they will never be treated the same as women. They should be delighted!

nozzferrahhtoo

craicattack wrote: »

"This isn't a mans choice it's a womans."

I think it is a bad line of reasoning to say this has nothing to do with men. BUT I would add something more important to that that has nothing to do with abortion itself.

We are not directly voting here on abortion or womens bodies. We are voting on a change to our constitution.

And that makes it everyone's business, regardless of what the actual topic is. The constitution belongs to us all. And there aint no one gonna tell me I can not vote on that just because of the contents of my pants.

SusieBlue

RobertKK wrote: »

This from the opening post:



But a doctor who objects to providing abortion will still have to be complicit in abortion by sending the woman to a doctor who will perform the abortion.
Which doctors who oppose abortion have said is an issue.
This is what doctors against repeal have said. They really aren't being allowed to conscientiously object as they still have to be complicit with the abortion that happens.

I would say that even with the 8th in place currently, there are No voting doctors treating women who will end up in the UK. There is nothing they can do about it now and there is nothing they will be able to do if the 8th is repealed.

They have a right to object to treating her but they have absolutely no right at all to object to her seeking treatment somewhere else.

The fact that this is even being brought up is ridiculous.
If a doctor doesn't want to be involved that's grand, the fact that he feels he has a right to moan about the fact she'll seek that treatment elsewhere pretty much sums up all that is wrong with LoveBoth.
This isn't about the doctor. This is about the woman.

RobertKK

craicattack wrote: »

I posted this in a reply on reddit when the rubberbandits were encouraging men to vote yes. Was wondering if anyone else felt the same.

"As a pro choice lad who will be voting to repeal, many female repeal supporters have crapped the bed when talking about a mans vote. I've seen many pro-life lads online being told "shur what would you know, you're a man who wouldn't have to go through this.", "A man should have no say in what a woman does with her body", "This isn't a mans choice it's a womans."

Yeah, but the repeal side sure as hell could use the vote from the lads. They say all that stuff but now it's "please all men this issue effects you go out and vote repeal!" Getting sick of it tbh. And I know it's not all the same people saying the same things, I'd just rather the "what would you know you're a man" stuff was never used as an argument point. Because it's alienating half the population, it's alienating men who are still on the fence, and it makes me feel like my vote for repeal doesn't really matter. I agree this is primarily a woman's issue, but men are not completely unaffected by it.

The repeal crowd should be trying to empathize with men who's wives/girlfriends/female family may have had an abortion. Not just insulting them because of their gender."

The constitution belongs to all the Irish people whatever side one is on, and people who say such a person shouldn't have a say on whatever part of the constitution, are being fundamentally wrong.
We are voting on what is in the constitution, it is up to every Irish adult to decide irrespective of sex or viewpoint, as what is in the constitution belongs to every Irish citizen and it is the Irish citizen who changes it or keeps it as it is.

nozzferrahhtoo

Sweet Divine Hay-zoos.... did I just agree with Robert? Right I am going to go lie down or something. Actually no I am going to go run all the way home because I have to train for this run on Friday. Until tomorrow all!

HonestKevin

bubblypop wrote: »

So, I doubt too many women believe abortion doesn't affect men, I'm sure most know that it does. But the issue of the 8th amendment, that's what men can't really understand, be cause they will never be treated the same as women. They should be delighted!

Maybe men don't know, but men should be allowed support the women who are pro-life. We should be able to get behind them and let them know they've got our support. That's where men do come into it.

gmisk

craicattack wrote: »

I posted this in a reply on reddit when the rubberbandits were encouraging men to vote yes. Was wondering if anyone else felt the same.

"As a pro choice lad who will be voting to repeal, many female repeal supporters have crapped the bed when talking about a mans vote. I've seen many pro-life lads online being told "shur what would you know, you're a man who wouldn't have to go through this.", "A man should have no say in what a woman does with her body", "This isn't a mans choice it's a womans."

Yeah, but the repeal side sure as hell could use the vote from the lads. They say all that stuff but now it's "please all men this issue effects you go out and vote repeal!" Getting sick of it tbh. And I know it's not all the same people saying the same things, I'd just rather the "what would you know you're a man" stuff was never used as an argument point. Because it's alienating half the population, it's alienating men who are still on the fence, and it makes me feel like my vote for repeal doesn't really matter. I agree this is primarily a woman's issue, but men are not completely unaffected by it.

The repeal crowd should be trying to empathize with men who's wives/girlfriends/female family may have had an abortion. Not just insulting them because of their gender."

I can kind of see where you are coming from to a degree.
I would say "the what would you know you are a man" as you put it group is a loud minority, and do the efforts to being in repeal no favours tbh. It is really not fair to lump all men together.
I am a gay man btw so really have no particular reason to be strongly in favour of repeal but I am when I think of my niece, friends etc.

I recommend reading the in her shoes facebook page to see how this is affecting the woman of Ireland (and there partners, husbands, boyfriends etc) there are a couple on there told directly from a male perspective which I found very effecting.

gmisk

HonestKevin wrote: »

Maybe men don't know, but men should be allowed support the women who are pro-life. We should be able to get behind them and let them know they've got our support. That's where men do come into it.

Men should be also be allowed to support there partners, wives etc who are pro-choice as well...what is your point exactly?

RobertKK

SusieBlue wrote: »

I would say that even with the 8th in place currently, there are No voting doctors treating women who will end up in the UK. There is nothing they can do about it now and there is nothing they will be able to do if the 8th is repealed.

They have a right to object to treating her but they have absolutely no right at all to object to her seeking treatment somewhere else.

The fact that this is even being brought up is ridiculous.
If a doctor doesn't want to be involved that's grand, the fact that he feels he has a right to moan about the fact she'll seek that treatment elsewhere pretty much sums up all that is wrong with LoveBoth.
This isn't about the doctor. This is about the woman.

They don't have to refer any woman to go to the UK for an abortion.
What is proposed is they will have to refer a woman if the referendum is a Yes and the proposed legislation is passed. It is an issue for doctors who don't want repeal to win.
It is also women doctors who oppose, not just male doctors.
People have a right to conscientiously object, but the fact they have to refer a woman to a doctor who will perform the abortion, does defeat the conscientious objection.

kylith

HonestKevin wrote: »

No its not acceptable. But neither is killing the unborn baby who is innocent. Our government should be supporting tougher laws against rapists. What they are proposing will not deter rapists any bit. If anything abortion would help rapists, because if the woman has an abortion, the rapist gets to avoid having to pay child support. There's little doubt that rapists will be voting yes in the upcoming referendum.

We need tougher laws against rapists. We shouldn't judge unborn children based on what they fathers did. That's what 1950's Ireland did.

So if it’s unacceptable to make a woman have her rapist’s baby against her will AND unacceptable to end the pregnancy what would you suggest?

Yes, we do need stiffer sentences for rape, but that’s still no help to a woman who is pregnant because of rape.