The 8th amendment referendum - part 4

ohnonotgmail

DarkScar wrote: »

So what? Guards and ambulances are subject to the law (allegedly) just like everybody else. Are you claiming the law does not apply to them?

a guard has the power to get you to move on. And i'm not sure what an ambulance would be doing on a footpath.

DarkScar

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Try going to the UK and murdering someone. See how you get on when you get back here. Or better, try going with someone looking for euthanasia

Will they try you here for the murder? That's the only way your scenario has any possible relevance.

DarkScar

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

a guard has the power to get you to move on. And i'm not sure what an ambulance would be doing on a footpath.

Nope, guards have to abide by the law as much as anybody else.
Nice lame nitpicking attempt on the second one though. You are aware people can stand on a road though, right?

Ave Sodalis

DarkScar wrote: »

Will they try you here for the murder? That's the only way your scenario has any possible relevance.

Nice avoidance of the second scenario, and missing the point.

spookwoman

gandalf wrote: »

If I didn't live here I'd be having a right old laugh at the state and antics of the no campaign. They are like the most outrageous characters from Father Ted on crack cocaine.

I don't know about Fr Ted I was thinking Norman Bates with regard to how some see sex. Its like mummy caught them spanking the monkey and they were punished so now they see sex as a bad thing.

ohnonotgmail

DarkScar wrote: »

Nope, guards have to abide by the law as much as anybody else.

are there any limits to your ignorance re matters legal? A guard has the power to make you move on. They have the power to make you leave an area.

DarkScar wrote: »

Nice lame nitpicking attempt on the second one though. You are aware people can stand on a road though, right?

and that makes it ok for an ambulance or other vehicle to run you over?

barry181091

These two videos of a no and yes family on Claire Byrne are extremely weird. Are they actors? They genuinely seem scripted and two sets of actors, along with the creepy background music.

Atoms for Peace

I just cannot take the no side seriously, either it's whisy whasy emotional clap trap or father Ted esque parody.

Dressing gown

barry181091 wrote: »

These two videos of a no and yes family on Claire Byrne are extremely weird. Are they actors? They genuinely seem scripted and two sets of actors, along with the creepy background music.

Totally agree I was just thinking the same thing. I’ve seen the family from the no side before-they were on last week but it was the father doing most of the talking. It’s totally bizarre.

FingerDeKat

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

I just cannot take the no side seriously, either it's whisy whasy emotional clap trap or father Ted esque parody.

almost like a carry on no movie

DarkScar

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

are there any limits to your ignorance re matters legal? A guard has the power to make you move on. They have the power to make you leave an area.

Anybody in Ireland has the power of arrest. Gardai can only tell people to move on if they are causing a disturbance... so you're admitting Yankee was causing a disturbance now. OK!

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

and that makes it ok for an ambulance or other vehicle to run you over?

According to you they can do nothing at all. Nobody in Ireland can as they have respect your freedom of speech.
Apparently.

eviltwin

barry181091 wrote: »

These two videos of a no and yes family on Claire Byrne are extremely weird. Are they actors? They genuinely seem scripted and two sets of actors, along with the creepy background music.

Gaye and Gerry Edwards are definitely not actors.

ohnonotgmail

DarkScar wrote: »

Anybody in has the power of arrest. Gardai can only tell people to move on if they are causing a disturbance... so you're admitting Yankee was causing a disturbance now. OK!
According to you they can do nothing at all. Nobody in can as they have respect your freedom of speech.
Apparently.

why not just answer the question instead of trying to tell me what i'm saying. I already know what i'm saying.

Cupcake_Crisis

DarkScar wrote: »

Whether they do or not (I've met none with that schizophrenic attitude) it's still utterly illogical. It's either right or wrong on its own merits, where the law applies isn't to be decided by the individual any more than any other crime (if it is a crime).

I have that “schizophrenic attitude” and have applied it to my life, specifically when it came to my unplanned pregnancy. It works extremely well in practice. So well that I apply it to pretty much every aspect of my life.

DarkScar

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

why not just answer the question instead of trying to tell me what i'm saying. I already know what i'm saying.

No, you don't. You might know what words you're typing but their meaning turns out the be the opposite of what you think.
Are you admitting he was causing a disturbance or not?

DarkScar

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

I have that “schizophrenic attitude” and have applied it to my life, specifically when it came to my unplanned pregnancy. It works extremely well in practice. So well that I apply it to pretty much every aspect of my life.

So you don't care whether any law exists if it doesn't affect you personally. That's fine, at least you've the honesty to admit it.

Dressing gown

eviltwin wrote: »

Gaye and Gerry Edwards are definitely not actors.

Did you see the videos though? The way it was filmed made it look so sanitised on both families parts. I’m wondering was that intentional given the backlash to the hysteria last week...

ohnonotgmail

DarkScar wrote: »

No, you don't. You might know what words you're typing but their meaning turns out the be the opposite of what you think.
Are you admitting he was causing a disturbance or not?

No i'm not. He was standing still. He was raising his voice but then so was ganley. What offence do you think beardy committed before ganley assaulted him? And being a prick is an offence.

Dressing gown

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

No i'm not. He was standing still. He was raising his voice but then so was ganley. What offence do you think beardy committed before ganley assaulted him? And being a prick is an offence.

Guys you are going around the houses on this one-maybe agree to disagree?

ohnonotgmail

Dressing gown wrote: »

Guys you are going around the houses on this one-maybe agree to disagree?

where is the fun in that?

Lackey

Just watched Claire Byrne, she showed two families whose babies had FFA, one voting no, one voting yes.

Both were heart breaking.

I can understand why the family chose to go full term with their pregnancy despite knowing what the outcome would be.
I can also understand why the other family chose not to.

But what I don't understand is why the family that chose to go full term are voting no,
No one will make anyone have an abortion in this circumstance,

They are just denying the people who do not wish to go full term with a baby who has FFA the right to chose not to go full term/forcing them to source an UK hospital ?

Cupcake_Crisis

DarkScar wrote: »

So you don't care whether any law exists if it doesn't affect you personally. That's fine, at least you've the honesty to admit it.

When it comes to laws like the 8th, when it’s banning something that is legal in the majority of jurisdictions, yeah, I pretty much don’t tbh.

January

Lackey wrote: »

Just watched Claire Byrne, she showed two families whose babies had FFA, one voting no, one voting yes.

Both were heart breaking.

I can understand why the family chose to go full term with their pregnancy despite knowing what the outcome would be.
I can also understand why the other family chose not to.

But what I don't understand is why the family that chose to go full term are voting no,
No one will make anyone have an abortion in this circumstance,

They are just denying the people who do not wish to go full term with a baby who has FFA the right to chose not to go full term/forcing them to source an UK hospital ?

One had a choice and the other didn't... they had to travel for their choice... and that there lies the crux of the issue.

Bridge93

So Ganley is absolutely positive it'll be a no vote. Went door to door in Galway and there wasn't a single yes voter. Not a single one. That's very impressive, not unbelievable at all. Oh and the recent polls are fake apparently

retro:electro

Lackey wrote: »

Just watched Claire Byrne, she showed two families whose babies had FFA, one voting no, one voting yes.

Both were heart breaking.

I can understand why the family chose to go full term with their pregnancy despite knowing what the outcome would be.
I can also understand why the other family chose not to.

But what I don't understand is why the family that chose to go full term are voting no,
No one will make anyone have an abortion in this circumstance,

They are just denying the people who do not wish to go full term with a baby who has FFA the right to chose not to go full term/forcing them to source an UK hospital ?

This is what I don’t get. That was their decision to bring the pregnancy to term and if that’s what they wanted then more power to them. But their vote is denying other couples the ability to grieve differently. Couples who may not be able to cope with such devestating news. They had a choice and they chose to continue. Others shouldn’t be punished for not wanting that option.

Dressing gown

retro:electro wrote: »

This is what I don’t get. That was their decision to bring the pregnancy to term and if that’s what they wanted then more power to them. But their vote is denying other couples the ability to grieve differently. Couples who may not be able to cope with such devestating news. They had a choice and they chose to continue. Others shouldn’t be punished for not wanting that option.

I absolutely do not want to come across as disrespectful as both families have clearly been through a hellish time. But I could not help but notice the little boy that died in the family that are appealing to no voters was called John Paul. To me it explains why they are appealing to the no vote. It is what they believe is the right thing to do.

Barnaboy

Folks, the last few posts have drifted off topic, apparently you seem to think this thread is about the referendum. Apologies folks, please take that discussion elsewhere.

Now where were we, oh yes Declan Ganley and the ladder video, tremendous entertainment.

Please continue....

DarkScar

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

No i'm not. He was standing still. He was raising his voice but then so was ganley. What offence do you think beardy committed before ganley assaulted him? And being a prick is an offence.

He stated incredibly clearly for everybody to hear that he was there to physically obstruct the campaigner. He was shouting it at him FFS. I suppose he said that by accident and was just chillin' down the arch with a Bucky in reality?

SusieBlue

retro:electro wrote: »

This is what I don’t get. That was their decision to bring the pregnancy to term and if that’s what they wanted then more power to them. But their vote is denying other couples the ability to grieve differently. Couples who may not be able to cope with such devestating news. They had a choice and they chose to continue. Others shouldn’t be punished for not wanting that option.

I wonder how they’d feel if the shoe was on the other foot.
If there was mandatory early inductions for non viable pregnancies, and they were forced to travel to the UK to have the ability to carry the pregnancy to term like they wanted to.
I don’t think they’d like to be denied that choice on such a personal decision.

DarkScar

Bridge93 wrote: »

So Ganley is absolutely positive it'll be a no vote. Went door to door in Galway and there wasn't a single yes voter. Not a single one. That's very impressive, not unbelievable at all. Oh and the recent polls are fake apparently

Gombeen. If he didn't have oodles of cash we'd never have heard of him.