The Dilemma of the Undecideds in the abortion referendum

brianhere

I don't work for Iona I'm afraid!

oscarBravo

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't get to make a vote here, but it seems if unsure you should vote no. Because vote for yes is end of discussion, but vote for no just means wait a couple of years and try again.

I've never understood the "if you don't know, vote no" idea. If, at this stage, you genuinely can't make up your mind whether or not something needs to change, then not voting at all makes much more sense.

If you want to change the Constitution, vote yes. If you don't want to change the Constitution, vote no. If you don't know, don't vote.

SusieBlue

brianhere wrote: »

I don't work for Iona I'm afraid!

Your attitude to forcing pregnancy on children and rape victims is frighteningly similar to theirs, though.

AnneFrank

Anyone know what time polling stations are open at tomorrow ?

Hitman3000

LovebothDorg Twitter page is seeking 'volunteers' to act as security and check the ID of voters. I hope someone alerts them to the fact that voter intimidation is illegal and only the polling officer/clerk can seek ID. Seems democracy is something the No campaign have an issue with also.

Hitman3000

AnneFrank wrote:

Anyone know what time polling stations are open at tomorrow ?

7am till 10pm.

blanch152

AnneFrank wrote: »

Fetal intracardiac potassium chloride injection

A pill can do that? Wow.

blanch152

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't get to make a vote here, but it seems if unsure you should vote no. Because vote for yes is end of discussion, but vote for no just means wait a couple of years and try again.

You have got it the wrong way round.

A vote for NO is the end of discussion, as the Constitution will remain unchanged, probably for a generation.

A vote for YES is the start of discussion, as the Dail will debate legislation that may or may not change the law.

zeebre12

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Thats just casting aside all the women that need or feel an abortion is the best option for them at the time in their circumstances.

Why would you want to dictate what's best for these women that you don't know ( and ones you do know but worn tell you)

So a woman then that has a few children at home decides one day she doesn't want them anymore because they cost too much and decides to kill them. That's her best option for them at the time in their circumstances. Same logic.

spacecoyote

ArthurDayne wrote: »

I have to say -- I have never got truly angry over a post on this site until I read the above. A raped woman should be forced to allow the foetus implanted in her by a rapist to develop into a person because maybe that person will go on to be a public figure? What??

As for child rape. In the case where a 15 year old girl, who has already undergone the unspeakably terrible trauma of being raped, is begging to have an abortion before having to go through the added mental and physical trauma of continuing with a pregnancy forced upon her by a rapist --- you would force her against her will to continue with the pregnancy? You would force that upon a child who makes it very clear she does not want to --- and you would do so on a 'you will thank me one day' basis? Tell me, what punishment should she be given if she performs the abortion herself via other means? To juvenile hall with her or just the asylum?

And what of her parents -- if a compassionate and loving father who actually listens to his daughter decides to take his daughter to England for the abortion -- what does that make him in your eyes? A murderer?

Is the Sword Of The Morning wishing he had Dawn in his hand right now

LeinsterDub

zeebre12 wrote: »

So a woman then that has a few children at home decides one day she doesn't want them anymore because they cost too much and decides to kill them. That's her best option for them at the time in their circumstances. Same logic.

Breaking an egg isn't the same as killing a chicken

zeebre12

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Breaking an egg isn't the same as killing a chicken

So you don't believe that a foetus is a life at 8 months? Only a child when it's outside the womb cam it be regarded as life?

LeinsterDub

zeebre12 wrote: »

So you don't believe that a foetus is a life at 8 months? Only a child when it's outside the womb cam it be regarded as life?

It doesn't matter what I believe, the government have proposed 12 weeks in legislation. But for the record if the foetus isn't viable outside the womb I don't believe it's alive.

DarkScar

LeinsterDub wrote: »

It doesn't matter what I believe, the government have proposed 12 weeks in legislation. But for the record if the foetus isn't viable outside the womb I don't believe it's alive.

I a person on life support alive?

DarkScar

blanch152 wrote: »

A vote for NO is the end of discussion, as the Constitution will remain unchanged, probably for a generation.

They've already hinted that if it's No then very soon pretty much the same proposed legislation will be offered as an amendment referendum.
Which I would be 100% behind.

Hitman3000

DarkScar wrote:

They've already hinted that if it's No then very soon pretty much the same proposed legislation will be offered as an amendment referendum. Which I would be 100% behind.

A hint? Can you back this up. It's only the No campaign that have been pushing this strategy that I'm aware of.

MayoSalmon

That is some logic right there...as a undecided this kind of logic really pushes me to the no camp. The mind boggles at the hoops the yes folks jump through to dehumanize human life. Like it's one thing to talk about zygotes and all that lark but to consider a let's say 18 week baby as not life is just bizarre.

Overheal

AnneFrank wrote: »

I'm so sick of canvassers shoving leaflets in my face, i'm voting no as i do not believe injecting a foetus to paralize it, and then an injection to it's heart to kill it, is healthcare.
Can't wait till tomorrow is over, one way or the other.

That’s not how abortions happen at 12 weeks, and already how abortions would happen today in Ireland when the mothers life is at risk so I don’t know what you’re voting against

DarkScar

Hitman3000 wrote: »

A hint? Can you back this up. It's only the No campaign that have been pushing this strategy that I'm aware of.

Sure: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/repeal-campaigners-will-not-accept-a-no-vote-says-minister-1.3430112

Overheal

DarkScar wrote: »

I a person on life support alive?

They are already alive, living, breathing, and sovereign. Next red herring please.

volchitsa

DarkScar wrote: »

Sure: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/repeal-campaigners-will-not-accept-a-no-vote-says-minister-1.3430112

Behind a paywall for me, but going by the title it's just a claim about prochoice campaigners not giving up on the case of a NO, not a commitment from the government to do anything about it.

fergus1001

zeebre12 wrote:

So you don't believe that a foetus is a life at 8 months? Only a child when it's outside the womb cam it be regarded as life?

It is life and would be delivered, you have a bit of reading to do don't you

Overheal

zeebre12 wrote: »

So you don't believe that a foetus is a life at 8 months? Only a child when it's outside the womb cam it be regarded as life?

The fetus is viable and can be delivered premature at 24 weeks and beyond. 8 months is certainly within this frame.

Whiplash85

Please Vote no and give the unborn a voice tomorrow so they can have a voice in the future.

DarkScar

MayoSalmon wrote: »

That is some logic right there...as a undecided this kind of logic really pushes me to the no camp. The mind boggles at the hoops the yes folks jump through to dehumanize human life. Like it's one thing to talk about zygotes and all that lark but to consider a let's say 18 week baby as not life is just bizarre.

There was a woman on TV3 last night who nearly had a seizure trying to force out any word at all to describe what is actually gestating inside a woman. She called it a "pregnancy" every single time until the word simply sounded ridiculous and she switched to "foetus".

DarkScar

Overheal wrote: »

They are already alive, living, breathing, and sovereign. Next red herring please.

Ah, so they are the same "alive" and then you add in two qualifiers out of the blue. What's special about breathing? If they're on a ventilator or ECMO they're not breathing themselves, are they?
Sovereign? Any definition of that you got that isn't circular logic?
Where did those goalposts go again?

Overheal

DarkScar wrote: »

Ah, so they are the same "alive" and then you add in two qualifiers out of the blue. What's special about breathing? If they're on a ventilator or ECMO they're not breathing themselves, are they?
Sovereign? Any definition of that you got that isn't circular logic?
Where did those goalposts go again?

Same goalpost. Same logic. Sorry you’re not onboard.

By no natural nor man-made means does a fetus breathe.

LeinsterDub

DarkScar wrote: »

Ah, so they are the same "alive" and then you add in two qualifies out of the blue. What's special about breathing? If they're on a ventilator or ECMO they're not breathing themselves, are they?
Sovereign? Any definition of that you got that isn't circular logic?
Where did those goalposts go again?

Viable: has all the necessary organs required for life developed

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/when-does-a-baby-s-brain-start-to-function-and-other-scientific-answers-on-abortion-1.3506968?mode=amp

The very beginnings of our higher brain structures only start to appear between weeks 12 and 16 Crucially, the co-ordinated brain activity required for consciousness does not occur until 24-25 weeks of pregnancy

While most organs are indeed present as very basic structures by week 12 of pregnancy, they are in fact missing many crucial components and some, such as the eyes, liver and pancreas are only beginning to develop

DarkScar

Overheal wrote: »

Same goalpost. Same logic. Sorry you’re not onboard.

By no natural nor man-made means does a fetus breathe.

A child on ECMO doesn't breath either, even on a ventilator they wouldn't be breathing on their own. Sounds like you would allow it to be "aborted" then at any age.
Your logic. Sorry you didn't think it through.

DarkScar

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Viable: has all the necessary organs required for life developed

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/when-does-a-baby-s-brain-start-to-function-and-other-scientific-answers-on-abortion-1.3506968?mode=amp

So what? I agree totally that a foetus becomes a human being at some stage during pregnancy, probably around the UK abortion limit.
Try to get Overheal for example to give a straight answer on that.