The 8th amendment referendum - part 4

Overheal

pone2012 wrote: »

That's not true though...I am vocal about not voting because of the fact that there's both provision that's drastically needed yet simultaneously provision that is outright unnecessary and reduces the value of an unborn human life to little more than transactional

I am quite frankly disgusted with how the government handled this... because bundling the two of those together is not something that's needed bor required

You think I don't see that? Not every person who speaks out about the 12 weeks unlimited proposal is against any provision.... personally that section just shifts the accountability...and I can assure you that people will abuse that as a means of "hindsight contraception"

I know of nobody that's had a FFA, rape case or indeed anything that could be labelled as a "crisis"

I know a whole lot of stupid men and women who decided they were irresponsible and hopped over to the UK to "fix it"...and in from a small town of 5000... But you generally won't hear about those cases... because abortion isn't something people tend to brag about

If anyone believes that period won't be abused... they have their head in the sand.

And to claim men are controlling because they don't want their baby Aborted against their wishes is a statement veiled with feministic tones. That's not an insult at all... because #1 you've no basis to say it and #2 it victimises women and blames men... which is generally what feminists do

Here's the objective view. If men and women are so against procreation to the point they'd abort if it happened....then they shouldn't have sexual intercourse to begin with. Because when you strip away all the nonsense and subjective sense of entitlement, what you find is the primary biological purpose of coitus is procreation.

“Never have sex for pleasure or intimacy again! Vote No!”

Yeah not arguing with the biology, but I can see why this might not be the best angle of attack for the No side to sway undecideds.

Cantona's Collars

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Not sure if this has been posted (not been following the thread today) but the Liberal have been going crazy with their articles! I mean, a misleading, scaremongering article posted every half hour or so. I think it's safe to say that Sherlock is a bit worried...

I never read an article on that site,I had a quick look there and the headlines alone were enough to have me close the tab.

Just her

Graham wrote: »

All of the fact checks state the 1 in 5 is inaccurate. There are no accurate figures.

Ok well I've just looked up a fact check and it says it could neither support nor refute the claim . It didn't say it was inaccurate. How are people coming up with other figures?

It's down to not having figures for miscarriages from what I can read? How can miscarriage rates be incorporated successfully anyway? Some pregnancies that were miscarried early would have been aborted if they had gone on longer, and some wouldn't.

davedanon

AMKC wrote: »

So has everyone made their mind up on what way they are voting? Its 7 and a half hours till the voting stations open and I am still undecided but am leaning one way more than the other and a part of me just wants to spoil my vote with a line in the middle of the page. This is the first time since I have been able to vote in 20 years that I find the whole thing very boring, uninteresting and do not have a problem if people do or do not vote. It is the first time I have thought about spoiling my vote. I will sleep on it and decide tomorrow whenever I vote.

F*ck off then and stay in bed. Twat.


Mod-Banned

Hotblack Desiato

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

I never read an article on that site,I had a quick look there and the headlines alone were enough to have me close the tab.

They're a lunatic outfit run by Cora Sherlock's brother, famous for plagiarism, copyright infrigement and downright lies.

Overheal

PARlance wrote: »

Wow. You do know that you can call your local station. Save the emergency number for emergencies ffs.

If the Yes side was doing it would it be an emergency since they want to try and murder the babies

NIMAN

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

You may be refused admission to the polling station, failure to comply will result in arrest by the garda in attendance.

I've never seen a Guard in, or near, my local polling station. Ever.

Stonedpilot

Alot of people online gonna vote No. Maybe the liberalist and government brainwashing has failed?.

As a lady who use to work as a Doctor in the UK said on Claire Byrne "If people seen how horrific abortion actually really is I think they would all vote No".

Words to bear in mind!.

i find myself wondering what all of the ppl deeply concerned about what irish women do with their own bodies will do with themselves from tomorrow onwards.

i mean theyll have a lot of time freed up all of a sudden, and they all have internet access so theres that

on the other hand...and its just my own personal pov obv...but theres not exactly a huge range of useful tasks youd actually trust them to do, like

its a pickle.

Overheal

Stonedpilot wrote: »

Alot of people online gonna vote No. Maybe the liberalist and government brainwashing has failed?.

As a lady who use to work as a Doctor in the UK said on Claire Byrne "If people seen how horrific abortion actually really is I think they would all vote No".

Words to bear in mind!.

Having seen it (even in its accurate context, not misleadingly labeled or misrepresented or used to claim the sale of baby parts etc etc etc) and I would still vote Yes given the chance.

circular flexing

Overheal wrote: »

Having seen it (even in its accurate context, not misleadingly labeled or misrepresented or used to claim the sale of baby parts etc etc etc) and I would still vote Yes given the chance.

Yep me too. It doesn't really matter how "horrific" the procedure is, what matters is that women will have a choice with what they want to do with their bodies.

jigglypuffstuff

Overheal wrote: »

“Never have sex for pleasure or intimacy again! Vote No!”

Yeah not arguing with the biology, but I can see why this might not be the best angle of attack for the No side to sway undecideds.

Again...I would reiterate I'm not a "no voter" nor am I suggestiong that everyone never have sex for pleasure

What I am saying is that if the end result of said pleasure is enough to make you want to terminate the life of an unborn... perhaps your pleasure is best derived from a supplementary activity. I'm being very specific here

Let's be realistic....from an ethical standpoint it's hard to argue it. People will never be detached from their preconceived notions about what they feel "entitled" to...but that doesn't really change the fact that if someone is that adverse to pregnancy to the point they'd terminate an unborns life... there's an option which means a little self sacrifice will avoid it all.

This option is not explored because it would mean sacrifice on the individuals behalf...and people generally don't like sacrifice... but that's not the point really. When you reduce it to objective facts it's utility is workable to the point it would save unborns lives

pleas advice

Deleted User wrote: »

i find myself wondering what all of the ppl deeply concerned about what irish women do with their own bodies will do with themselves from tomorrow onwards.

i mean theyll have a lot of time freed up all of a sudden, and they all have internet access so theres that

on the other hand...and its just my own personal pov obv...but theres not exactly a huge range of useful tasks youd actually trust them to do, like

:rolleyes:

its a pickle.

...

Cantona's Collars

Stonedpilot wrote: »

Alot of people online gonna vote No. Maybe the liberalist and government brainwashing has failed?.

As a lady who use to work as a Doctor in the UK said on Claire Byrne "If people seen how horrific abortion actually really is I think they would all vote No".

Words to bear in mind!.

If people saw any kind of surgery they wouldn't like it but sometimes it's necessary to save someone's life.

Hotblack Desiato

If we're judging by how horrific something is, we'd ban birth.

After my first born emerged there were blood spatters on the wall two metres away. Grade 3 tear which needed a surgical vaginal repair.

Pregnancies 2, 3, 4 miscarried in the first trimester, nobody even pretends to care about that, but if they were aborted in the first trimester it would have been horrific :rolleyes:

Pregnancy 5 came out the sunroof, it's glossed over but it's major surgery with a long recovery time and has implications if you want to be pregnant again.

pleas advice

circular flexing wrote: »

Yep me too. It doesn't really matter how "horrific" the procedure is, what matters is that women will have a choice with what they want to do with their bodies.

if it was their bodies, only, do you really think anyone would have a problem?

seriously and honestly?

Grayditch

It's been special.

Ken.

Mod-And on that note with 5 hours left till the polls open we will lock this up. Personally I would like to thank everyone that has contributed over the 4 threads. Remember, whichever way your swayed to get out and vote. You can't bitch about the result if you don't take part.


Please don't start any new threads till after the polls close at 10 pm Friday evening.