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

BoJack Horseman

dudara wrote: »

only to be told I am second class

If you are 2nd class, who is 1st class?

Who above you enjoys a greater right to abort an unborn child?

If you claim to be on the wrong end of a hierarchy, who is on the top exactly?

It wasnt me123

RobertKK wrote: »

More info on the poll by Millward Brown.

Compared to their last poll on the 8th amendment:

Yes 45% (-18%)
No 34% (+10%)
Undecided 18% (+5%)
Rest wouldn't give opinion 4%

Recent trends as seen in other polls have continued, becoming a closer battle.

I can't disagree with your figures as I can't get up the poll results from google (I'm not very techie).

Just don't assume that all the undecideds and the rest are No voters. They could all vote yes and it will be 65 to 35. We won't know until the 26th. All we can do is put our opinions forward and see what happens.

I think it will be Repeal all the way - body autonomy for all

BoJack Horseman

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Odd wording!

"potential"

What is the potential of it becoming something else?

Can a fetus turn into a teddy-bear? A Toyota Yaris? A piece of breaded haddock?

Or, will a fetus always turn into a baby?

The use of the word "potential" implies there could be some doubt as to the outcome.

Ever heard of a fetus that developed into anything other than a baby?

What odd linguistic knots people use.

It is a potential person, if the pregnancy continues. It absolutely cannot be considered a person at <12 weeks, and certainly cannot be valued as equal to the living breathing woman carrying it. This is the prevailing view across the vast majority of the developed world, but Irish people were conditioned to believe a foetus is a poor little innocent baby and that women seeking abortion were murdering sluts.

Alos, can you please answer the question I posed to you:
How would you suggest legislating for rape cases?

Flying Fox

Flying Fox wrote: »

I really hope you're right. I'm in Dublin and conscious I may be in a bit of a bubble, so I find it interesting to hear how its looking in rural areas.

Live in rural Meath, plenty of support for repeal from talking to people, but good few for no.

Retain side were out in Kells today according to a friend mainly men in their late fifties and early sixties handing out leaflets from what they seen with plenty of people arguing with them.

BoJack Horseman

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Odd wording!

"potential"

What is the potential of it becoming something else?

Can a fetus turn into a teddy-bear? A Toyota Yaris? A piece of breaded haddock?

Or, will a fetus always turn into a baby?

The use of the word "potential" implies there could be some doubt as to the outcome.

Ever heard of a fetus that developed into anything other than a baby?

What odd linguistic knots people use.

No a foetus does not always develop into a baby, miscarriage for example prevent this.

dudara

dudara wrote: »

Never mind the EU. If this referendum fails, I will put pressure on my TDs, my Seanad members and every political avenue that I can access to get another chance. I did not spend 40 years of my life in this country only to be told I am second class because I happen to have a womb.

I call on everyone reading this to keep up the unrelenting pressure.

It may I fear take a few more preventable deaths, or families having their wishes denied to get another vote on it.

SusieBlue

AnneFrank wrote: »

A 12 week old foetus in the womb is not a clump of cells or an idea of a child that is spoken about here, to lots of people it's a child.

Yet ANOTHER sly dig at how a poster here rationalised his own miscarriage. It seems like you can’t help yourself but to passive aggressively that the p*ss out of it.

Why are you continuously bringing it up?
You clearly have a massive issue with how he dealt with his grief, and you bizarrely feel as if you are entitled to feel offended by it, so why not take it up with him, rather than use his circumstances to refute other people’s arguments?

Where’s the Love Both for him? Or is it treatment only for people who happen to agree with you?

Wrongway1985

threescompany wrote: »

Me too.....
I was undecided initially but when it became unrestricted I decided, I will be voting no as i could never vote for unrestricted abortion.

The time scales being set are to allow for maximum care, people don't get abortions on a whim sadly abortions occurring after 12 weeks it is likely that something has gone drastically wrong. What to your mind is unrestricted abortion and why prior did you accept repeal?

AnneFrank wrote: »

A 12 week old foetus in the womb is not a clump of cells or an idea of a child that is spoken about here, to lots of people it's a child.

How many of your friends/family over the years have broadcast they were having a baby immediately at conception? It's the norm people keep quiet till the 10-12 week period! that mere concept is the acceptance that prior to then...very much potential life as opposed to a certain child.

SusieBlue

SusieBlue wrote: »

Yet ANOTHER sly dig at how a poster here rationalised his own miscarriage. It seems like you can’t help yourself but to passive aggressively that the p*ss out of it.

Why are you continuously bringing it up?
You clearly have a massive issue with how he dealt with his grief, and you bizarrely feel as if you are entitled to feel offended by it, so why not take it up with him, rather than use his circumstances to refute other people’s arguments?

Where’s the Love Both for him? Or is it treatment only for people who happen to agree with you?

Maybe a case of

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjPsQNGlNQg

Wrongway1985

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Some side we on road to Ed Sheeran concert in Cork last night, wasn't bothered to listen was it yes or no, tbh sick of posters and hearing about it at this stage

I'm sick of Ed Sheeran and hearing about him at this stage :pac::pac:

AnneFrank

SusieBlue wrote: »

Yet ANOTHER sly dig at how a poster here rationalised his own miscarriage. It seems like you can’t help yourself but to passive aggressively that the p*ss out of it.

Why are you continuously bringing it up?
You clearly have a massive issue with how he dealt with his grief, and you bizarrely feel as if you are entitled to feel offended by it, so why not take it up with him, rather than use his circumstances to refute other people’s arguments?

Where’s the Love Both for him? Or is it treatment only for people who happen to agree with you?

Susie you seem to read things that are not there.

SusieBlue

AnneFrank wrote: »

Susie you seem to read things that are not there.

No I don’t. Stop playing dumb. Everyone can see what your doing. I can respect your posts even though I disagree with them, but there is no need to be so unkind.
How someone else deals with a miscarriage that happened to them should not be used to score points.

spookwoman

Seeing people bring up the unrestricted 12 weeks abortion excuse. So what if someone has an abortion for their own person reason within those weeks.
We don't know the reasons behind it, it could be no money, is it right to force someone to have a child they cannot afford and bring that child up in poverty?
Is it right to force someone to have a child because when they don't have the support? We don't know if its a failed relationship, no family etc. We cannot expect family to be there all the time to look after someone else kids, they have their own lives.
Is it right to force someone who is not ready and does not want to have a child? How many people out there would want to be forced into raising a child against their will?
Is it right to force someone to have a child against their will full stop! No contraception is 100%, it's next to impossible to get your tubes tied.
You can talk about adoption but that woman is still forced to carry and deliver against their will. Pregnancy changes people, it changes their bodies it can change their health and it can endanger it.
I and no one else can know what that person is going through and the only person who can make the decision to have an abortion is the woman herself. It should be her choice and no ones elses.

Wrongway1985

FutureGuy wrote: »

Will put it out in the open. I'm an atheist but I would like to understand something.

There's a mosque in Dublin opening its doors to the homeless during the upcoming cold snap. This is sure to save lives.

Why isn't the Catholic Church doing the same with its churches? These people are at risk of dying and yet the church does nothing. It's not for want of space or money so why not? Why aren't mass-goers asking their local priest the question?

AnneFrank wrote: »

It would save alot of our national resources if they did die

AnneFrank post here suggests you are a hypocrite. You have no problem sentencing actual living beings to death but will post here claiming that you consider life.

ArmaniJeanss

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Ditto.

The free for all the government are pushing crossed a line for me.

I was ok with adding provisos like; rape/incest & FFA to the existing allowance for a risk to the wellbeing of the mother.

I was ok with that, most of the country is.
However, the free for all being offered does not sit well with me.

I'll be voting 'No'.
So will my wife, as will all my family, as are most people I know.
Outside the metro-Dublin bubble, I can see a silent ground swell against the reason-less killing of the unborn.

Despite the polling, I think the referendum will be narrowly defeated.

You're with Billy Timmins and LucindaC here dude - the people you spent most of your early boards.ie life eloquently opposing.

Think again, ultimately I reckon you are a Yes voter - Repeal the absolute fcuk out of the 8th and then fight for the legislation you are most comfortable with. There's very few of us think the proposed legislation is 'perfect', but please don't let its inadequacies lead you to think that a No vote will lead to a better alternative - it'll just solidify the 8th as is for another 30 years. It's the worst outcome for you.

_Dara_

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

I honestly think he just lost his balance with the height of the ladder and the small amount of push between them.

Very easy to happen really. I don't think it's really a case of acting it up or assault either.

Would love to know what the actual story with the bearded fella is though.

It’s a weird one alright. Is that dude guarding the pole or what?

Dressing gown

1 in 6 pregnancies ends in miscarriage after the mother has found out she is pregnant. It is estimated that many more pregnancies result in miscarriage before a woman even knows she is pregnant (source NHS).

So not every 12 week old Fetus results in a baby.

This is why most people don’t announce their pregnancies until after the 12 week mark.

This is not England. If it was, abortion would have been legal here since 1967. We are culturally very different in that respect. There will not be a 1 in 5 stat (which has been debunked and includes the figures for Irish women obtaining abortions) here. To suggest there will is comparing apples and pears.

Dressing gown

Please if your problem is the 12 week ‘unrestricted’ point, do some homework on the constitution vs legislation. There is zero wiggle room for anything enshrined in a countries constitution. It is rigid. There is no scope for change. This remove/leave referendum is what we have. That is our option. No fiddle around with the eighth a bit. It is a terrible amendment that is causing an enormous amount of harm to women of Ireland all of the time (go back 20 pages and see the poster denied an X-ray today because she is of child bearing age and needs a gp to prove she is not pregnant before treatment can begin). The constitution must be adhered to. On that point England does not even have a written constitution. That’s how different we are.

Law is flexible. It’s purpose is to reflect the socially acceptable behaviour of a nation. There are plenty of people opposed to the 12 week limit so campaign for that to the politicians. They are not stupid. Fine Fáil thinks there are enough supporters politically to take the no side of the debate. We can adapt the law far more quickly and easily than the constitution. Please talk to your lawyer (=solicitor/barrister) friends about this if you don’t alteady understand it.

applehunter

Dressing gown wrote: »

This is not England. If it was, abortion would have been legal here since 1967. We are culturally very different in that respect. There will not be a 1 in 5 stat (which has been debunked and includes the figures for Irish women obtaining abortions) here. To suggest there will is comparing apples and pears.

debunked where?

AnneFrank

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

AnneFrank post here suggests you are a hypocrite. You have no problem sentencing actual living beings to death but will post here claiming that you consider life.

This was from a different thread,different subject,totally out of context,pathetic really

PlaneSpeeking

AnneFrank wrote: »

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

AnneFrank post here suggests you are a hypocrite. You have no problem sentencing actual living beings to death but will post here claiming that you consider life.

This was from a different thread,different subject,totally out of context,pathetic really

No reply yet as to my question of why YOU get to decide that I must remain on pain because I cannot access medical treatment because of a "mythical" foetus that will never exist????

bootpaws

It's absolutely insane that it's so normal to insist women carry through pregnancies they don't want, yet I've never heard anybody who wasn't my own Doctor so much as utter the word "tokophobia." No one in this damn country so worried about zygotes and foetuses seems to have a single thought about how traumatic pregnancy can be for women, especially if it's a pregnancy they do not want.

For some women it is a real and terrible phobia, and unlike many phobias, there's not much about it that's irrational. Pregnancy is not 9 months of swanning about with some swollen ankles, cravings, and a lovely glow. Men will never know the unsettling worry of literally having something inside you that you don't want there, that is completely out of your control. It's making you sick, it's making your body change, it's causing nosebleeds, vomiting, backaches, headaches, migraines, dehydration through vomiting, heartburn, foot pain, leg pain, sleeplessness, sweating, emotional distress x100, a constant urge to urinate, constipation, haemorrhoids, breast pain, congestion, cramping, bleeding gums, not to mention strange, excess vaginal discharge and mucus plugs. Lovely, right?

This isn't even all of it. But the way people have been speaking in this debate, as if pregnancy is some minor inconvenience and sure who cares if you want it or not, what about the 2 inch long developing potential for life in there? Now THAT'S valuable! Shut up, Meg!

Putting a woman through all of the above and more, before eventually going through a painful labour, during which due to the 8th she won't have much say in anything done to her to get the baby out? This is a f**king nightmare.

Please, please, I beg you, stop prioritising a potential life over quality of existing life. I am sick of having to beg for my rights, there was a time I was too proud to do it. But it's what this country has pushed me to. Do not force this on women who don't want it.

Zubeneschamali

mohawk wrote: »

The silent No voters interest me I have to say. if you feel that you are doing the right thing why not say it?

In the SSM debate, this was pretty easy to answer - voting No was shameful, and no-one wants to admit to being a bigot, but it is much easier to vote "No to sodomy" in the privacy of the voting booth.

This time, I am not seeing it. The No story is that they are saving lives and Yes are murdering babies. Why would anyone who believes that be shy about saying it to a pollster?

I think there are plenty of "shy" voters on both sides who are not talking about it in real life to avoid extremely awkward conversations with family members, friends and co-workers. But that is on both sides, and wouldn't skew the polls either way.

Zubeneschamali

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Ever heard of a fetus that developed into anything other than a baby?

Sadly, many end in a miscarriage rather than a baby.

Andrew Beef

The argument that “abortion is happening in the UK anyway; make it safer by allowing it to happen here” is utterly ridiculous.

I want to see the 8th repealed but will be voting No because I don’t want to see unrestricted access to abortion up to 12 weeks. Why? Because it is morally wrong. If perfectly healthy people want to end the lives of perfectly healthy unborn children, let them travel to a jurisdiction that allows it. Making things convenient for them is not our concern; discretionary abortion shouldn’t be easy and we are right to keep it from happening on our doorstep.

Zubeneschamali

Andrew Beef wrote: »

Making things convenient for them is not our concern; discretionary abortion shouldn’t be easy and we are right to keep it from happening on our doorstep.

Bah! Not while you're under my roof, young lady!

Triceratops Ballet

ASISEEIT wrote:

Its stopping it here . Only a fool would say that having abortion available here would not increase numbers of women having abortions. Its like saying that having more pubs and off licenses doesn't increase alcholism

Well that's bs, they have no pubs/off licence trade in places like Iran yet alcoholism is a big enough problem there.

Wrongway1985

AnneFrank wrote: »

This was from a different thread,different subject,totally out of context,pathetic really

It's a different thread sure but how is it taken out of context it would be better for national resources apparently if people in homeless situations were dead according to you it doesn't sound very remorseful, you'll condone women in troubling scenarios on abortion though.

What's pathetic is how you couldn't explain why?It's fine to throw that out elsewhere but it doesn't fit your stance here?

B0jangles

Andrew Beef wrote: »

The argument that “abortion is happening in the UK anyway; make it safer by allowing it to happen here” is utterly ridiculous.

I want to see the 8th repealed but will be voting No because I don’t want to see unrestricted access to abortion up to 12 weeks. Why? Because it is morally wrong. If perfectly healthy people want to end the lives of perfectly healthy unborn children, let them travel to a jurisdiction that allows it. Making things convenient for them is not our concern; discretionary abortion shouldn’t be easy and we are right to keep it from happening on our doorstep.

Abortion up to 12 weeks is ALREADY HERE as long as you have internet access and a postal address. It's just not as safe as it should be. Are you ok with women taking the pills without medical back-up if anything goes wrong?

That's what is happening right now and the 8th does not and cannot do anything to prevent that.

With respect, your morals are your business, no-one else's. No-one should be forced to live by your moral code, nor should you be forced to live by theirs. This means they get to choose whether or not abortion is the right answer for them and you get to choose never to have one yourself.

PhoenixParker

Andrew Beef wrote: »

The argument that “abortion is happening in the UK anyway; make it safer by allowing it to happen here” is utterly ridiculous.

I want to see the 8th repealed but will be voting No because I don’t want to see unrestricted access to abortion up to 12 weeks. Why? Because it is morally wrong. If perfectly healthy people want to end the lives of perfectly healthy unborn children, let them travel to a jurisdiction that allows it. Making things convenient for them is not our concern; discretionary abortion shouldn’t be easy and we are right to keep it from happening on our doorstep.

What we have is unrestricted abortion.
Nobody has ever been prosecuted for importing and using abortion pills. There is a law on the books, but as it's never been prosecuted it can hardly count as a restriction.

Similarly the right to travel to the U.K. without restriction is constitutionality guaranteed.

What the government is proposing increases the restrictions.

It obliges a woman to talk to her doctor, confirm how far along she is and wait 3 days before accessing abortion. It provides the opportunity for a doctor to intervene if they see doubt or co-ercion.

If you are concerned about unrestricted abortion, surely that is an improvement?