Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

Fighting Tao

Shurimgreat wrote: »

They don't want control. People are free to turn their back on the church any time. The church state a position and its up to people to adhere to to or not.

My main point is for such hatred of the church, its still going strong. Very few people do not take sacraments for their children.

The church only survives because of the people.

They want a ban on people having choice. Did you miss that during the referendum? Removing choice is controlling.

Shurimgreat

Shurimgreat wrote: »

I'm an athiest but also not a church hater like you. I'm tolerant towards people's beliefs but I don't spend my time hating religions. People are entitled to believe what they like or not as we are in a free country.

To be for or against abortion has nothing to do with religion. People mostly come to personal conclusions on this.

Most people against abortion are so because they believe the feotus is 'alive' when it is conceived. I believe we are born & then we die, there is nothing else, no soul etc.
Until a foetus can survive outside the womb, I don't believe they are a living human being. I believe that because I believe there is nothing else, no greater power, nothing giving us life, no part of us that lives on when we die, so therefore no part of us alive, until we can survive ourselves.
What is it that makes aethists anti abortion?

spookwoman

Shurimgreat wrote: »

They don't want control. People are free to turn their back on the church any time. The church state a position and its up to people to adhere to it or not.

My main point is for such hatred of the church, its still going strong. Very few people do not take sacraments for their children.

The church only survives because of the people.

It's only recently people are leaving the church but remember our parents were indoctrinated and many still expect the tradition to be passed on. Some people would remain just to have some peace in the family. Its also in our schools and its only in the last few years that some schools will accept unbaptized kids.
Also you can't leave the church the feckers removed that option

dudara

spookwoman wrote: »

and so it begins

Anti-abortion groups to target women at GPs
Anti-abortion activists are rushing to create “crisis pregnancy centres” that will target women seeking terminations in the Republic next year.

The revelation that activists have already started fundraising for such agencies, which will adopt tactics used by US anti-abortion groups, has led to cross-party calls for a ban on the harassment of women seeking abortions and medical staff performing them.

Up to 20 Irish anti-abortion activists will be flown to the US this summer to be trained in tactics including “pavement counselling”, which can involve harassing women trying to access abortions outside hospitals or clinics.

Activists have also started appealing for funds to set up crisis pregnancy clinics as near as possible to premises that will offer terminations in Ireland after the law is changed.…



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/ireland/anti-abortion-groups-to-target-women-at-gps-crfjl8ltf

I really couldn’t imagine such sh*te-hawking anti-social behaviour being tolerated here. Any remaining sympathy for their cause would go through the floor.

spookwoman

dudara wrote: »

I really couldn’t imagine such sh*te-hawking anti-social behaviour being tolerated here. Any remaining sympathy for their cause would go through the floor.

Never know that lot from icbr pro life are still causing problems in Dublin

Shurimgreat

It wasnt me123 wrote: »

When my daughter was born, to get into a local national school (in rural ireland, limited options) you had to be baptised. You had no option.

The sacrements are then run through the school and the children do them as part of the class. Very difficult for a child to opt out and be different. I didn't care if she did them or not.

Now she has a choice, I love that word. She says she is now an athiest, and I'm not far away from that also. She doesn't participate in any church ceremony unless specifically asked to attend.

I won't be having a catholic funeral, I have discussed it with my family. I plan on being cremated and scattered and no prayers.

What about you? In the interest of openess, are you going to answer your questions?

I will answer them later.
The point is I don't post realms and realms about hating and despising the church. I have no feelings good or bad towards the church in the context of this referendum and their standpoint is irrelevant to me.
My position on the referendum is/was clear. I'm strongly in favour of abortion in the cases of FFA, rape, incest and serious risk to the mothers life. The 12 week unrestricted abortion provison to deal with a small number of rape cases is a blunt instrument and will lead to the termination of far more innocent healthy foetuses than hard case one. My position is similar to Sein Fein policy currently although theirs may change. And Sein Fein are about as far removed from the RCC as you can get. I was hoping if the No side won better more targetted legislation would be proposed. Instead Simon Harris, Vatadkar and co suggested Vote Yes or it would be another 35 years beford there was another chance. And they say the No side do scaremongering!

Shurimgreat

Shurimgreat wrote: »

My position on the referendum is/was clear. I'm strongly in favour of abortion in the cases of FFA, rape, incest and serious risk to the mothers life. The 12 week unrestricted abortion provison to deal with a small number of rape cases is a blunt instrument and will lead to the termination of far more innocent healthy foetuses than hard case one.

What is it about rape cases that makes you believe they are not innocent healthy fetuses?

Fighting Tao

bubblypop wrote: »

What is it about rape cases that makes you believe they are not innocent healthy fetuses?

Too much attention makes people crave more. All these circles have been completed already.

Fighting Tao

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Too much attention makes people crave more. All these circles have been completed already.

You will have to explain that a bit I'm afraid!

Fighting Tao

bubblypop wrote: »

You will have to explain that a bit I'm afraid!

Same conversations repeated. One of the same participants.

Wrongway1985

Graces7 wrote: »

The cheering was appallingly inappropriate and offensive. What was being voted on WAS abortion. Sounded like a football crowd.

That was quite clear, Your assertion is to make it sound like people were celebrating the prospect of having an actual abortion which I mean c'mon that is laughable I feel sorry for you using that as another excuse to justify being on the wrong side of history.

swampgas

dudara wrote: »

I really couldn’t imagine such sh*te-hawking anti-social behaviour being tolerated here. Any remaining sympathy for their cause would go through the floor.

I agree, Ireland is a very small, well connected place compared to large chunks of the US. Ireland is also far more socially cohesive; we are inclined to seek and respect broad levels of consensus. Most Irish No voters would, I imagine, be very uncomfortable with US-style anti-abortion activism. I just don't see it working here, there would probably be a fairly severe backlash against those involved in it at community level too.

Dyr

dudara wrote: »

I really couldn’t imagine such sh*te-hawking anti-social behaviour being tolerated here. Any remaining sympathy for their cause would go through the floor.

They don't want sympathy from the public, what they want is committed nutters that they can fund.

I'm pretty sure the existing public order laws could deal with these numpties if they started their american style carry on

spookwoman

Bambi wrote: »

They don't want sympathy from the public, what they want is committed nutters that they can fund.

I'm pretty sure the existing public order laws could deal with these numpties if they started their american style carry on

Not much being done in dublin to stop the nutters. they are out every day

Cupcake_Crisis

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Lots of posts here and not enough time to answer them all.

The Yes side continue to bring up mother and baby homes. These homes are all extinct because of A. Abortion and the like and B. Wider families no longer feel ashamed about single mothers which of course is a positive thing. Church, state and the people worked together in olden days in Ireland. Famillies dumped babies and mothers in these homes to get rid of them.

So some simple questions to the faux outrage church haters on here, from an athiest.

Were you married in a church?
Are your kids babtised?
Did they make their communion?
Are they confirmed?
Do you regularly attend church occasions such as for taking these sacraments?
Or do you stay true to your church hating principles and stay well clear of the church?

I'm not expecting too many answers. Its possible to justify anything these days by hating the church. All I am expecting is even more faux outrage which if it could be harnessed would power Ireland for generations. The level of fake and likely hypocritical outrage is amusing at this stage.

I suspect I could summarize most answers as follows by the way:
I post on boards.ie saying I hate the church yet I attend significant church occassions. Once they are over I go back to hating the church.

I honestly don’t understand why we’re still harping on about the same thing, but to answer your questions-

I don’t like the church, I’d consider myself an atheist. However I will still attend a religious ceremony out of respect for family and friends and I would expect them to show me the same respect when it comes to any non religious milestones I have.

It really is very simple. It’s about being tolerant towards other people’s life choices. I don’t have to agree with them or invite them into my own life but I can be respectful towards them.

Achasanai

Shurimgreat wrote: »

My position on the referendum is/was clear. I'm strongly in favour of abortion in the cases of FFA, rape, incest and serious risk to the mothers life. The 12 week unrestricted abortion provison to deal with a small number of rape cases is a blunt instrument and will lead to the termination of far more innocent healthy foetuses than hard case one. My position is similar to Sein Fein policy currently although theirs may change. And Sein Fein are about as far removed from the RCC as you can get.

There were definitely those who voted Yes who had issues with the 12 weeks. Indeed, this is being used by the No side as reason for blocking forthcoming legislation. But it can also be understood as people accepting 12 weeks because of the reality of the situation (12 week pills being available, as well as being impossible to deal with rape/incest without having a general 12 week period). You might fill us in on how the legislation might have been worded to allow those pregnant because of rape/incest to terminate.

Shurimgreat wrote: »

I was hoping if the No side won better more targetted legislation would be proposed. Instead Simon Harris, Vatadkar and co suggested Vote Yes or it would be another 35 years beford there was another chance. And they say the No side do scaremongering!

I think this is because the only time for the last 35 years that the No side mentioned anything about targeted legislation was in the run-up to the referendum. 35 years and not a word. The only time that legislation was brought in was when the 8th amendment was shown to be a horrific and unworkable law, and these legislative acts were brought in by those on the Yes side. But please, by all means, tell us what targeted legislation you would have brought in (perhaps based on previous suggestions by the No side over the last 35 years).

_Dara_

swampgas wrote: »

I agree, Ireland is a very small, well connected place compared to large chunks of the US. Ireland is also far more socially cohesive; we are inclined to seek and respect broad levels of consensus. Most Irish No voters would, I imagine, be very uncomfortable with US-style anti-abortion activism. I just don't see it working here, there would probably be a fairly severe backlash against those involved in it at community level too.

I agree. I have a family member who is, quite frankly, a total weirdo. He was a No voter that most No voters bear little or no resemblance to. On hearing about an US abortion clinic shooting on the news a good few years back in the presence of family, he said “Good!”. His utterance was met with universal disgust and there would have been other pro-life family members in the room. That kind of extremist viewpoint is anathema to most Irish people.

Overheal

dudara wrote: »

I really couldn’t imagine such sh*te-hawking anti-social behaviour being tolerated here. Any remaining sympathy for their cause would go through the floor.

Their practices are only existent in the US because they grew organically over decades and through legal frameworks and court rulings that have since established precedents and protections for them.

Ireland is a clean slate.

This is possibly one of the best reasons abortions should be provided at hospitals and not outpatient facilities: no matter what you go into a planned parenthood for, you’re attacked, yelled at, spit on, and the locations are all to regularly vandalized or firebombed. Nobody is going to do that do a general hospital.

Igotadose

Overheal wrote: »

Their practices are only existent in the US because they grew organically over decades and through legal frameworks and court rulings that have since established precedents and protections for them.

Ireland is a clean slate.

Hopefully the high court quickly dispenses that challenge to the Referendum results and indicates it's attitude to future legal obstructionism - you can be sure it's coming, US-backed fetus filchers are very experienced and seemingly have infinite resources and time on their hands, unlike the ACLU an Planned Parenthood in the US.

In some ways with the referendum, the 'simple' part is done and now comes the slog through the morass to getting legislation and infrastructure in place. The fetus filchers will be blocking anything and everything they can with each breath they take.

somefeen

Igotadose wrote: »

Hopefully the high court quickly dispenses that challenge to the Referendum results and indicates it's attitude to future legal obstructionism - you can be sure it's coming, US-backed fetus filchers are very experienced and seemingly have infinite resources and time on their hands, unlike the ACLU an Planned Parenthood in the US.

In some ways with the referendum, the 'simple' part is done and now comes the slog through the morass to getting legislation and infrastructure in place. The fetus filchers will be blocking anything and everything they can with each breath they take.

To be fair, aside from the outside backing of those campaigns that's just democracy and freedom of speech. If the government is making laws you don't agree with you should be well within your rights to oppose them.

Achasanai

Overheal wrote: »

Nobody is going to do that do a general hospital.

Never say never






I blocked out the name in case there are issues with that.

ohnonotgmail

Achasanai wrote: »

Never say never






I blocked out the name in case there are issues with that.

She has already been mentioned on this thread. Ciara Sherlock, no relation to cora that i can see.

Achasanai

Not Ciara: Enda.

ohnonotgmail

Achasanai wrote: »

Not Ciara: Enda.

ah right. Brother of Cora and Leo

spookwoman

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

How many of them are there?

enda is leo and coras brother
Ciara is no relation

Overheal

Well, if that's the case that's the case. Faith-based private hospitals operate in the US with limited issue, though they generally operate at the permit of government anyway to some degree. I don't know enough about Ireland or especially the healthcare system or those kind of ties to say what leverage the government has to counterbalance that though. In the US for example, you may be interested to know that the States are legally entitled to set whatever drinking age they wish, but to qualify for federal roads funds (big, big money, to maintain and build interstate highways, bridges, etc) the state must impose a drinking age of 21 or higher. Similarly and more in tune to this subject, a State that wants to say, remove the type of funds that Planned Parenthood can get out of medicare medicaid and social security (usually for non-abortion services like womens health or family planning stuff, or abortions that are listed as exclusions in the Hyde Amendment (google it if interested)) must forfeit *all* funds that medicare medicaid and social security fund to the state under the title for family-planning and abstinence-only sex education programs. In South Carolina for example our bat**** crazy governer tried to forfeit $34M in said annual funds to spite the $52k that PP gets of it at 3 in-state locations. The state legislature promptly vetoed him. I think it was an election-year publicity stunt, but that's hardly the point, other states have gone through with it before (mad bastards).

tl;dr if such hospitals piss off enough people they open themselves to being pissed off right back.

As for Crisis Pregnancy centers I urge folks to study up if you haven't already, they get up to an awful lot of scaremongering and deception tactics:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NNpkv3Us1I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NNpkv3Us1I

* I was particularly incensed at those that reportedly misinform a woman in crisis to wait her out of her legal period to make a choice.
** Oliver makes fun of the woman who claims condoms are about 20% ineffective but that basically aligns with CDC data on typical usage.

Igotadose

Pettiness from the RCC in NI: https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/bridetobe-so-stressed-she-ended-up-in-hospital-after-priests-message-cast-doubt-on-ceremony-36977869.html

(personally I think they're overreacting - can't you get another priest to officiate- but if indeed the priest in question is withholding doing the ceremony because the couple are pro-choice, he should be de-frocked or whatever they do, reassigned to a war zone, whatever.)

ELM327

Igotadose wrote: »

Pettiness from the RCC in NI: https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/bridetobe-so-stressed-she-ended-up-in-hospital-after-priests-message-cast-doubt-on-ceremony-36977869.html

(personally I think they're overreacting - can't you get another priest to officiate- but if indeed the priest in question is withholding doing the ceremony because the couple are pro-choice, he should be de-frocked or whatever they do, reassigned to a war zone, whatever.)

In fairness the quicker the public realise the controlling nature of the RCC (and other religions) the quicker they (religion) will die out.


Therefore I'm fully supportive of the priest

Nettle Soup

I haven't been following this thread much in recent days - too busy enjoying the weather.

I will say that I feel this wonderful country can achieve anything now. The Yes vote was historic. I feel we have thrown off the shackles and can look forward to more and more social progress. We are strong people and have learned many harsh lessons since independence. Our politicians need to catch up somewhat but the future looks good.

Nettle Soup

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Were you married in a church? No
Are your kids babtised? No
Did they make their communion? No
Are they confirmed? No
Do you regularly attend church occasions such as for taking these sacraments? No
Or do you stay true to your church hating principles and stay well clear of the church? I go to funerals. That's it.

Answers above. I am atheist and I took some difficult decisions in my early 20s (I am 49 now). It was tough going to be honest. Some of my family did not talk to me for years. I stayed the course though and things are quite different now. Now the excuses that non-believers give me for forcing their kids to do Roman sacraments disgust me. It's cowardice.