Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

Options
1…223224226228229…247

Comments

  • Options
    #6752
    ELM327
    Registered Users Posts: 21,380 ✭✭✭✭ELM327


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    This is what was inserted into the Constitution:
    “Provision may be made by law for the regulation of termination of pregnancy.”

    What's wrong with that?
    Not to mention it was written on the ballot paper.
    You don't have to be eagle eyed to read what is written on the page before checking the yes or no box!


  • Options
    #6753
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    eagle eye wrote: »
    I did think there would be change but didn't think they'd insert something into the Constitution.

    Wasn't very responsible of you to vote without fully understanding what you were voting on.


  • Options
    #6754
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,527 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    NuMarvel wrote:
    What's wrong with that?

    There is nothing wrong with that.
    I'm saying that I'm against abortion of a healthy fetus if the reason for it is irresponsibility.
    As I've explained already there are plenty of drugs and other contraceptives available. Even after the fact you can sort yourself out before it gets to the stage that you are pregnant.


  • Options
    #6755
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    eagle eye wrote: »
    I did think there would be change but didn't think they'd insert something into the Constitution.

    All that's in the constitution now is that the oireachteas (I.e. the dail and seanad) can legislate for the regulation of termination of pregnancy. They removed the constitutional right to life of the unborn, they did not insert a constitutional right to abortion or anything like that.

    That is separate from the legislation, which allows for termination of pregnancy in the first trimester without distinction as to reason and under circumstances thereafter. That can be changed without a referendum, it's not in the constitution.

    The wording of the amendment would have been right over that box you ticked in the polling booth, whatever about avoiding the media debate and missing the very widely broadcast details of the then proposed legislation, seriously probably read the actual voting slip in general. I mean sound for voting yes but I'm not even 100% sure you didn't accidentally vote no.


  • Options
    #6756
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users Posts: 17,501 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    eagle eye wrote: »
    As I've explained already there are plenty of drugs and other contraceptives available.

    Do you know what these drugs are and how they work?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6757
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,527 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    amcalester wrote:
    Wasn't very responsible of you to vote without fully understanding what you were voting on.
    As it turns out now I was aware. I voted to repeal a law and nothing was put in it's place in the Constitution.


  • Options
    #6758
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,017 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    eagle eye wrote: »
    As it turns out now I was aware. I voted to repeal a law and nothing was put in it's place in the Constitution.

    So what's your problem then? It was made perfectly clear what legislation was planned for after a Repeal vote, wasn't it?

    If it becomes clear that that legislation is throwing up problems, it can be changed. Because the detail of it is not in the constitution.


  • Options
    #6759
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    eagle eye wrote: »
    As it turns out now I was aware. I voted to repeal a law and nothing was put in it's place in the Constitution.

    No, you weren't and it would appear that you are still not fully aware of what you voted for.

    Not exactly being a responsible member of society now are you?


  • Options
    #6760
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    eagle eye wrote: »
    There is nothing wrong with that.
    I'm saying that I'm against abortion of a healthy fetus if the reason for it is irresponsibility.
    As I've explained already there are plenty of drugs and other contraceptives available. Even after the fact you can sort yourself out before it gets to the stage that you are pregnant.

    I'm sorry but its extremely frustrating to see the same ill thought out, throwaway "solutions" being suggested again and again as they were before the referendum.
    "Just use a condom, Just put it put for adoption, Close your legs if you don't want a baby" et al were all trotted out repetitively before the referendum.

    You suggested adoption as an option yesterday when you clearly have no knowledge of how adoption in this country even works, you have no answer as to why you think irresponsible people should be trusted to rear children they DO NOT want, you are happy to have these kids dumped in state care, and you clearly don't have a clue how contraceptives or the morning after pill works.

    You care more about punishing irresponsible people than you do about the kind of lives these children will be born into.

    Its a bit late in the day to be suggesting all these "alternatives" (that have all been proven unworkable) when your vote has already been cast and the outcome decided.
    You really should have considered all this before May 25th.


  • Options
    #6761
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,527 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    volchitsa wrote:
    So what's your problem then? It was made perfectly clear what legislation was planned for after a Repeal vote, wasn't it?
    If it becomes clear that that legislation is throwing up problems, it can be changed. Because the detail of it is not in the constitution.
    It appeared from what I was reading here that something had been put in the Constitution.
    I was unhappy, and I still am, that somebody can abort a healthy fetus because they were highly irresponsible.
    Like take a pill, use another contraceptive, take a morning after pill. No excuse for letting it go that far along.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6762
    Call me Al
    Registered Users Posts: 3,020 ✭✭✭Call me Al


    eagle eye wrote: »
    There is nothing wrong with that.
    I'm saying that I'm against abortion of a healthy fetus if the reason for it is irresponsibility.
    As I've explained already there are plenty of drugs and other contraceptives available. Even after the fact you can sort yourself out before it gets to the stage that you are pregnant.

    People's contraception (regular and emergency!) fails. It happens.
    That doesn't make them irresponsible.
    So how do police your assessment of irresponsibility?
    I heard some anti-repealers promoting the idea that in some cases women would have to go before a panel who would judge whether or not she was actually raped.
    Is this the approach you would prefer for irresponsibility?


  • Options
    #6763
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users Posts: 17,501 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    eagle eye wrote: »
    take a morning after pill

    *sigh*

    Do you know how the MAP works?


  • Options
    #6764
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,126 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    eagle eye wrote: »
    It appeared from what I was reading here that something had been put in the Constitution.
    I was unhappy, and I still am, that somebody can abort a healthy fetus because they were highly irresponsible.
    Like take a pill, use another contraceptive, take a morning after pill. No excuse for letting it go that far along.

    You do know that in the US over half the women who get terminations were using contraceptives? Contraceptives are far from useless but they're far from perfect.


  • Options
    #6765
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    eagle eye wrote: »
    It appeared from what I was reading here that something had been put in the Constitution.
    I was unhappy, and I still am, that somebody can abort a healthy fetus because they were highly irresponsible.
    Like take a pill, use another contraceptive, take a morning after pill. No excuse for letting it go that far along.

    Contraceptives fail. All the time.
    Taking the MAP makes no difference if you have already ovulated that month and is unsafe and dangerous to take on a regular basis.
    Please educate yourself.

    Why do you think irresponsible people make good, caring, stable parents to children they do not want?


  • Options
    #6766
    Call me Al
    Registered Users Posts: 3,020 ✭✭✭Call me Al


    eagle eye wrote: »
    It appeared from what I was reading here that something had been put in the Constitution.
    I was unhappy, and I still am, that somebody can abort a healthy fetus because they were highly irresponsible.
    Like take a pill, use another contraceptive, take a morning after pill. No excuse for letting it go that far along.

    MAP doesn't always work, especually if you've already ovulated.


  • Options
    #6767
    wench
    Registered Users Posts: 1,630 ✭✭✭wench


    eagle eye wrote: »
    It appeared from what I was reading here that something had been put in the Constitution.
    I was unhappy, and I still am, that somebody can abort a healthy fetus because they were highly irresponsible.
    Like take a pill, use another contraceptive, take a morning after pill. No excuse for letting it go that far along.
    There are no perfect methods of contraception.
    Even with "responsible" usage, some women will get pregnant.


    https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/contraception/index.htm


  • Options
    #6768
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,527 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Call me Al wrote:
    Is this the approach you would prefer for irresponsibility?
    No.
    If you are irresponsible, like you didn't try and make sure it didn't happen the I don't think you should be allowed abort.
    I don't think you should be policing it anymore than they have to put the reason on the form of how they got pregnant and why they want to abort.
    If they are willing to lie about, that is their business.
    Why on Earth you bring rape into this is beyond me. I've made it very clear what I'm against. I've made it clear that there are many good reasons for an abortion too.


  • Options
    #6769
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    eagle eye wrote: »
    No.
    If you are irresponsible, like you didn't try and make sure it didn't happen the I don't think you should be allowed abort.
    I don't think you should be policing it anymore than they have to put the reason on the form of how they got pregnant and why they want to abort.
    If they are willing to lie about, that is their business.
    Why on Earth you bring rape into this is beyond me. I've made it very clear what I'm against. I've made it clear that there are many good reasons for an abortion too.

    Or we could just trust the woman that she isn't in a position to have a child right now, not cast any judgement, and let her request a termination for the reasons she herself finds necessary, up till the 12 week mark.

    There are no "good" and "bad" abortions.
    It is what it is. It doesn't become something different if there happened to be contraception used, because there is the same end result.


  • Options
    #6770
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    eagle eye wrote: »
    No.
    If you are irresponsible, like you didn't try and make sure it didn't happen the I don't think you should be allowed abort.
    I don't think you should be policing it anymore than they have to put the reason on the form of how they got pregnant and why they want to abort.
    If they are willing to lie about, that is their business.
    Why on Earth you bring rape into this is beyond me. I've made it very clear what I'm against. I've made it clear that there are many good reasons for an abortion too.

    Who gets to decide if she was "responsible" enough? What if contraception was used but didn't work, will you want to then know why it didn't work?

    Was it user error, manufacturer defect etc. Your ideas are ridiculous and unworkable, and actually have no purpose other than making you feel better yourself.

    Can we extend this to voting too? Have people in the polling station ask voters why they voted they way they did, and if they haven't voted responsibly their vote is not accepted.


  • Options
    #6771
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    eagle eye wrote: »
    If you are irresponsible, like you didn't try and make sure it didn't happen the I don't think you should be allowed abort.
    So now you're veering into idealism, not practicality.

    You're entitled to that moral judgement, but you have to acknowledge that it's impossible to enforce a rule that says, "abortions only for responsible people".

    It is possible to be entirely responsible and still have an unwanted pregnancy.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6772
    Sycamore Tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 796 ✭✭✭Sycamore Tree


    What are the Iona nutters up to these days?

    I hope they are doing lots of confessions to atone for all the lies they told during the referendum(s).


  • Options
    #6773
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    eagle eye wrote: »
    No.
    If you are irresponsible, like you didn't try and make sure it didn't happen the I don't think you should be allowed abort.
    I don't think you should be policing it anymore than they have to put the reason on the form of how they got pregnant and why they want to abort.
    If they are willing to lie about, that is their business.
    Why on Earth you bring rape into this is beyond me. I've made it very clear what I'm against. I've made it clear that there are many good reasons for an abortion too.

    Why bother with that exercise in complete futility? Make rape victims, people living in a domestic violence situation etc fill that out on a form just so that you can feel better that the bold girls having risky sex are very mildly inconvenienced by having to lie on the form?

    Why are some reasons good enough for an abortion and others not? Because of the inherent humanity of the foetus? If so, where's the line? How physically I'll do you have to be for it to be worth a termination? If you get dragged into a field and raped does that get you as much as getting raped when you were passed out at a party? And how the Christ do you legislate for that?

    If it's not the foetus then what is it?


  • Options
    #6774
    Call me Al
    Registered Users Posts: 3,020 ✭✭✭Call me Al


    eagle eye wrote: »
    No.
    If you are irresponsible, like you didn't try and make sure it didn't happen the I don't think you should be allowed abort.
    I don't think you should be policing it anymore than they have to put the reason on the form of how they got pregnant and why they want to abort.
    If they are willing to lie about, that is their business.
    Why on Earth you bring rape into this is beyond me. I've made it very clear what I'm against. I've made it clear that there are many good reasons for an abortion too.
    The reason I brought up the panel approach (rape was completely beside the point) suggested by anti-repeal campaigners is because it involves strangers sitting down making moral/value-judgements (which are invariably nothing to do with healthcare) on women who are requesting medical treatment.


  • Options
    #6775
    dotsman
    Registered Users Posts: 3,635 ✭✭✭dotsman


    orourkeda1977 wrote: »
    People who didnt like the brexit result want a second referendum.

    Why wouldnt people who dont like the abortion result seek a second referendum.

    Its equally absurd. I voted no.


    It's not about people "not liking the brexit result" wanting a second referendum. It's about the fact that it won by only a tiny margin, with lots of uncertainty, unknowns and lies in the debate prior to the vote. In the 2.5 years since, a lot has happened, a lot more things have become clear a lot of lies have been exposed and there is now reason to believe that the result no longer reflects the current will of the people.

    The people who "don't like the abortion result" don't want a second referendum. Nobody is asking for that - where did you get that crazy idea from? A second referendum would make no sense as there was a huge majority in favour of repeal, the people mostly knew and understood the topic they were voting on, and nothing has really changed in the 7 months since.


    orourkeda1977 wrote: »

    51.9% was enough to win.

    The margin was irrelevant

    The margin is extremely very relevant when it comes to determining the impact people changing their minds has. If a there are only 5 voters of a difference between win/loss of a referendum, then once 5 voters subsequently change their mind, their is an argument to be made that the result no longer reflects the democratic will of the people and another one should be held. If there are 5 million votes separating the sides, then you need to change 5 millions peoples minds (all in the same direction) before that argument can be made.


  • Options
    #6776
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,527 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    SusieBlue wrote:
    There are no "good" and "bad" abortions. It is what it is. It doesn't become something different if there happened to be contraception used, because there is the same end result.
    I think there is huge difference between being negligent and responsible.
    If somebody uses contraception and it doesn't work I'm not against them having an abortion.
    I'm against somebody who doesn't even try to prevent it happening from having an abortion.


  • Options
    #6777
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 33,938 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    eagle eye wrote: »
    I think there is huge difference between being negligent and responsible.

    You'll have to clarify your terminology a bit.

    Going into a polling booth and voting to change the constitution, the fundamental legislative basis for the state, while having little or no clue about what it is you're actually voting on, would that be negligent or irresponsible?

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Options
    #6778
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    eagle eye wrote: »
    I think there is huge difference between being negligent and responsible.
    If somebody uses contraception and it doesn't work I'm not against them having an abortion.
    I'm against somebody who doesn't even try to prevent it happening from having an abortion.

    Why?

    In both a pregnancy is being terminated.


  • Options
    #6779
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    eagle eye wrote: »
    I think there is huge difference between being negligent and responsible.
    If somebody uses contraception and it doesn't work I'm not against them having an abortion.
    I'm against somebody who doesn't even try to prevent it happening from having an abortion.

    How do you prove that?

    TBH it should be none of your business what another person does with regard to their own healthcare.

    Most of us knew very well what we were asked to vote for and it was very clear what was being proposed as legislation if the 8th was repealed. That is what has been put in place (with the exception of the three day wait which I think is unnecessary).


  • Options
    #6780
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,527 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    amcalester wrote:
    In both a pregnancy is being terminated.
    Why?
    I don't think there should be will nilly abortions.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #6781
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    eagle eye wrote: »
    I don't think there should be will nilly abortions.

    How do you police that? What are your metrics for a valid termination and an invalid one?

    "Have you got your receipt for those condoms you said you used"....Nope sorry no abortion for you hussy!

    :rolleyes:


Advertisement