The 8th amendment referendum - part 4

nullzero

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Tommy Cooper: Doctor, it hurts when I do this (waves arm)

Doctor: Don't do that.

To hell with context.

jimgoose

nullzero wrote: »

To hell with context.

"...vote NO!!" :pac::pac::pac:

Wrongway1985

Just on some of the radio debates there is a trend of people coming on, they vote No fair enough but have the lovely notion that the government should go back and rejig things to THEIR ideal outlook on the topic. They truthfully think about it...this is not going to happen!

The TDs representing the No side voted against the Protection of Life during Pregnancy act it would be delusional to rely on these same people to stir the pot to cater for those in Rape or FFA situations...and even if a bill of the sort came to fruition they would vote against it!!

BarleySweets

jill_valentine wrote: »

A lot of the No side is a venn-diagram-is-a-circle extreme right wing faction. I think it's deadly dangerous to assume they'll simply melt away after this, rather than learning the lingo to blend in, and finding new angles of attack and masks to wear. Both Britain and the US got complacent about this stuff when it looked like the bad guys were defeated, and they're both staring down the barrels of something very dark indeed now.

I'm very fearful that Yes will win and everyone will dust their hands, put up a Mission Accomplished banner and take their eye off the ball. Zealots don't really get bored. In this referendum, we've seen glimpses of what I think is a much bigger monster under the surface, and we should be very wary of it.

Don’t be wasting your life worrying about these headcases. The extreme right always start out portraying pragmatic, rational arguments but can’t help themselves when it comes to revealing their ultimate end goals. In this case it’s “don’t murder innocent babbies!”, which sounds appealing, until they let slip what they’re really worried about: “abortion will be a genocide on white Irish babies”.

Regarding the Trump/Brexit, low turnouts were a big reason for their victories (not helped by the Hilary/Remain campaigns being bog-standard, arrogant and triumphant, which pretty much encouraged low turnouts by assuring their supports that they’d already voted or ignoring entire population bases that they felt would be totally irrelevant to the election outcomes). So this is why we all need to get everyone we know to actually vote. No excuses. Get them into the ballot box, before work, after work, whenever.

But one thing is clear about the extreme right, their biggest enemy isn’t people arguing with them or debating them or proving them wrong or even bashing them. Their biggest enemy is that once society realises their end game, collectively we switch off. Low taxes and economic stability sound appealing to pretty much everyone, genocide and racist policies, not so much. Apathy is their biggest enemy. Apathy towards their end game. If we collectively stop arguing with them. If we all ignore them. They become “man shouts at cloud”. If we debate with them, they become “legitimate opposition may have a point in this particular situation”. Don’t give them a platform.

Kind of like the Adpocolypse in the Simpsons:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SlKao_Pox5A

January

nullzero wrote: »

They could just not get pregnant.

So... you're saying.... if you don't want a baby, then don't have sex?

.......

This post has been deleted.

antiskeptic

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Having seen what people are prepared to do to their own bodies, absolutely not.

Lovely looking surgery receptionist on one of those "plastic surgery" . Her good-bit-bigger-than-average nose was the thing that made her pretty but otherwise unusual looking face special

"Nooooo!!!" I screamed at the telly when the surgeon she worked for offered to do a freebie on it, for the camera.

Gone. Just another bland, if pretty, girl.

If people were able to choose that they would have a good looking, intelligent, non disabled baby - who wouldnt choose that over the opposite?

The question is whether they ought be allowed to do so. Society turned into a bland version of it's former self is something society has a stake in. The individual need not be able to trump societies interests.

First, no more downs syndrome. Then....

Zubeneschamali

nullzero wrote: »

So late term abortion for cleft lip is an option you want to be available in Ireland?

No, abortion will be an option up to 12 weeks. I am suggesting that the sort of person who might abort a child for a cleft lip should consider their options during that 12 week window.

joe40

nullzero wrote: »

PhoenixParker wrote: »

And there may indeed be some women who feel tgey can't cope with the feeding difficulties, operations, and hospital visits that are needed with a cleft palate.

You're not painting a particularly flattering picture of women there.
How inconvenient to have to take a child to hospital for treatment.
If somebody were to actually think that way then perhaps parenthood and by extension conception of a child is something they should avoid.
That's the thing about being a parent, you come last every time, your own convenience isn't on the table once a baby is born.

I absolutely agree with this.

That is why children should be born to mothers or couples that have the love and resources required so that the child will have any opportunity.
This is especially true is a child has a disability.

Condemning a child to a lifetime of neglect by forcing women to go through unwanted pregnancies solves nothing

I do not take abortion lightly, but sometimes terminating a pregnancy is the best outcome for all.
I know for some that will be hard to accept, and if you see a foetus as equivalent to a fully formed human I get that.

However for people that will view a foetus as equivalent to a  fully formed human, why do you not advocate jail for mothers that have abortions

Instead as a society we gave a constitutional right to travel.

SusieBlue

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

Just on some of the radio debates there is a trend of people coming on, they vote No fair enough but have the lovely notion that the government should go back and rejig things to THEIR ideal outlook on the topic. They truthfully think about it...this is not going to happen!

The TDs representing the No side voted against the Protection of Life during Pregnancy act it would be delusional to rely on these same people to stir the pot to cater for those in Rape or FFA situations...and even if a bill of the sort came to fruition they would vote against it!!

"Vote no, demand a better solution from the government!!" ......

Which they will also vehemently oppose should that happen.
They have already admitted to wanting to force 12 year old children to carry their rapists child.
We can't trust a word they say.

woejus

antiskeptic wrote: »

Having seen what people are prepared to do to their own bodies, absolutely not.

Lovely looking surgery receptionist on one of those "plastic surgery" . Her good-bit-bigger-than-average nose was the thing that made her pretty but otherwise unusual looking face special

"Nooooo!!!" I screamed at the telly when the surgeon she worked for offered to do a freebie on it, for the camera.

Gone. Just another bland, if pretty, girl.



The question is whether they ought be allowed to do so. Society turned into a bland version of it's former self is something society has a stake in. The individual need not be able to trump societies interests.

First, no more downs syndrome. Then....

Your one was forced to get a nosejob?

Sardonicat

Trasna1 wrote: »

I disagree. Without the 8th these groups will be marginalised and deemed irrelevant to the discussion. Aside from the hardcore, this will fizzle out -although they may reform under an anti assisted dying campaign, which will probably be the last conservative domino to fall.

They were around before the 8th too. That's how we ended up with it. I don't think they'll achieve much apart from marginalise themselves further but they're going no where without an extremely nasty fight. Im not talking about the average conservative leaning no voters who have genuine concerns about abortion. I'm talking about those with the money and power behind these groups that hijack people's fears. These people are happy to let women die, raped women and girls forced to carry to term. People like this don't give a sh1t about babies in or out of a womb. You need to ask yourself what actually it is about the current status quo that is so valuable to them and the lengths they would be prepared to go to maintain it.

nullzero

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, abortion will be an option up to 12 weeks. I am suggesting that the sort of person who might abort a child for a cleft lip should consider their options during that 12 week window.

It's not detectable until the 13th week.

But are disabilities grounds for abortion in general in your view?

erica74

SusieBlue wrote: »

I think we can safely trust every citizen with regards to their own personal healthcare.

The whole "trust women" slogan is often misrepresented - we aren't asking to trust every single woman on every single issue, we are asking to trust them with their own healthcare for their own body.

I'm sure someone will be along to say "oh should we trust women to rob cars and murder strangers in the street too?????" :rolleyes:

Cupcake_Crisis

....... wrote: »

Are we back to bum sex?????

Ah Christ. Not again.

.......

This post has been deleted.

woejus

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

Ah Christ. Not again.

thatsmyfetish.gif

smokingman

I'm surprised Iona et all haven't been giving out about the Muslims yet given that Sharia law allows abortion and they'll all probably vote yes.
For reference, "ensoulment" doesn't happen for 120 days according to their beliefs.

pjohnson

....... wrote: »

Are we back to bum sex?????

Bum Sex for some
Abortions for others


This slogan might have helped the "No"

woejus

smokingman wrote: »

I'm surprised Iona et all haven't been giving out about the Muslims yet given that Sharia law allows abortion and they'll all probably vote yes.
For reference, "ensoulment" doesn't happen for 120 days according to their beliefs.

Iona may feel they're above taking spiritual guidance from a medieval theocracy. They're more about Iron Age theocracies, known experts in gynaecology and obstetrics.

nullzero

....... wrote: »

Its as valid as any other reason IMO.

It's a nasty opinion tbh.

erica74

antiskeptic wrote: »

First, no more downs syndrome. Then....

Disability will not be grounds for abortion.

Sardonicat

pjohnson wrote: »

Bum Sex for some
Abortions for others


This slogan might have helped the "No"

Are the No side only against Bum sex between people of the same sex?

BarleySweets

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

I was veering towards voting No in the hope that the government would then introduce some form of middle ground legislation rather than the 'free abortion for all' type scenario we could end up with if the yes vote succeeded even though part of me believed that I should vote yes as its not my call and that the decision should be an individual one made by the person in question.

However, given the horrible nature of the No campaign/side I am now firmly voting YES, I do not want to be associated with the type of people who would rather guilt people (most of them religious weirdos) into voting No by placing hundreds of white wooden crosses along a 20km stretch of road in Donegal and then yesterday, some bright spark has parked a 20ft container/trailer with a full size banner on it asking 'Will Friday 25th turn out to be bloodiest in Irish history' along with a picture of a foetus beside the slogan. They have firmly turned me against their campaign with their grotesque pictures and slogans and now I have to explain to my 7 year old what the huge **** off banner 50m from my house is all about.

If you’re interested in why the draft legislation is how it is check out my post history, I’ve written a couple of posts today on why a 12-week limit is both the minimum & maximum needed for abortion legislation to be considered acceptable to all scenarios.

Cupcake_Crisis

Sardonicat wrote: »

Are the No side only against Bum sex between people of the same sex?

It’s okay between a man and a woman though, right? RIGHT?!?!

pjohnson

Sardonicat wrote: »

Are the No side only against Bum sex between people of the same sex?

Good point

pjohnson wrote: »

Heterosexual Bum Sex for some
Abortions for others

gmisk

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Hey man dont knock it til you tried it!!


(Disclaimer - I am a fully paid up member of the gay lifestyle with the gay agenda)

Trasna1

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

I was veering towards voting No in the hope that the government would then introduce some form of middle ground legislation rather than the 'free abortion for all' type scenario we could end up with if the yes vote succeeded even though part of me believed that I should vote yes as its not my call and that the decision should be an individual one made by the person in question.

However, given the horrible nature of the No campaign/side I am now firmly voting YES, I do not want to be associated with the type of people who would rather guilt people (most of them religious weirdos) into voting No by placing hundreds of white wooden crosses along a 20km stretch of road in Donegal and then yesterday, some bright spark has parked a 20ft container/trailer with a full size banner on it asking 'Will Friday 25th turn out to be bloodiest in Irish history' along with a picture of a foetus beside the slogan. They have firmly turned me against their campaign with their grotesque pictures and slogans and now I have to explain to my 7 year old what the huge **** off banner 50m from my house is all about.

I never really believe anyone who says I was going to vote X but the X campaign turned me off so I'm now voting y. It's generally someone trying to justify their vote, which of course is needless since it never needs to be justified.

The above is a trait more associated with "converted" no voters (I was going to vote Yes but...) but the sentiment is the same.

jimgoose

Should we all be having bum sex, Father??

Zubeneschamali

antiskeptic wrote: »

Lovely looking surgery receptionist on one of those "plastic surgery" . Her good-bit-bigger-than-average nose was the thing that made her pretty but otherwise unusual looking face special

"Nooooo!!!" I screamed at the telly when the surgeon she worked for offered to do a freebie on it, for the camera.

Gone. Just another bland, if pretty, girl.

If only there was some way to stop stupid girls doing stuff to their own bodies that is their business and not yours.

I know! Let's amend the constitution to ban plastic surgery for women!