nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Strike For Repeal?

fatknacker

Anyone gonna? I've the day off anyway but I probably wouldn't have stroked if I hadn't, although I would like everyone to have abortions. Whoops, I mean, choice for abortions.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

keano_afc

freshpopcorn wrote: »

The repeal side aren't doing a good job with their campaign in my opinion.
They need to attract the voter who's on the fence and their failing to do this.
One example, When people asks the following question.How many weeks should abortion be allowed up until their response is generally we just want the eighth repealed and the government legislate for when it's allowed. People want to know are their supporting abortion up to 10,12, 20 or 36 weeks before they'll cast their vote.

The campaign is a mess because depending on who you talk to the aims are different. Just today I was talking to someone from the Coalition to Repeal the 8th who after a bit of pressing admitted that they were pro-abortion and that meant no limits and no restrictions. When I pointed out that other supporters have said they wanted UK style 24 week laws, she then changed her mind and said that was her own personal opinion.

They are certainly turning people off, and having people like Claire Daly go on national tv and spout "ball of cells" nonsense isnt helping their cause.

meeeeh

I actually thought Claire Daily was very good and I am nowhere near socialist persuasion. But it's true that she doesn't need to convince me and to make it worse I can't even vote.

Thinking about it there might be a point of finding more conservative women (or men) who are in favor of slightly more liberal laws than currently existing to try to persuade people to vote for repeal.

Zulu

freshpopcorn wrote: »

People want to know are their supporting abortion up to 10,12, 20 or 36 weeks before they'll cast their vote.

keano_afc wrote: »

T...When I pointed out that other supporters have said they wanted UK style 24 week laws, she then changed her mind and said that was her own personal opinion.

They are certainly turning people off, and having people like Claire Daly go on national tv and spout "ball of cells" nonsense isnt helping their cause.

Well thats exactly it. Its a shambles because they can't attract the moderate viewpoint.
It's emerging that what was billed as appealing to moderates (most people have no issue with abortion in certain circumstance, or before a certain time point), is rapidly becoming a thinly veiled "no-holds" abortion that looks to be driven in the background by the more nuttier feminist brigade.

And it's exactly because of that they're losing the common ground with the populus.

osarusan

freshpopcorn wrote: »

One example, When people asks the following question.How many weeks should abortion be allowed up until their response is generally we just want the eighth repealed and the government legislate for when it's allowed. People want to know are their supporting abortion up to 10,12, 20 or 36 weeks before they'll cast their vote.

The government has already legislated for it - the 2013 Act.

There would currently be no issue with the number of weeks - abortion on demand would still be illegal.

Very poor campaigning if the Repeal side are not making people aware of the existing legislation and what the 2013 Act contains.

Dick phelan

If i was an employer i would severely discipline or even fire anyone calling in sick because of this, its hardly the employers fault the government won't deal with this issue, bunch of idiots throwing the toys out of the pram, i bet half of the people there are students so don't have a job in the first place. Clowns.

meeeeh

As an employer I would discipline people claim sick leave when they are fine. However we would accommodate people taking time off if possible for whatever reason including to protest.

I am not so sure the optics of this will work well. In Poland there was immediate danger that insane laws could be passed and the situation really isn't comparable.

suicide_circus

Load of people went on long term strike to protest water charges....

Tigger

Dick phelan wrote: »

If i was an employer i would severely discipline or even fire anyone calling in sick because of this, its hardly the employers fault the government won't deal with this issue, bunch of idiots throwing the toys out of the pram, i bet half of the people there are students so don't have a job in the first place. Clowns.

students and the unemployed make up all these midweek protests
i'm pro choice in many instances but these nutters making it a men v women thing (it isnt most pro life hard core are women) will cause the middle ground to worry about things that probsably arent relevant

btw premature 24 week babys survuve in a significant number of cases so i'd like a scientific debate on what stage the fetuses gain rihts. then a discussion on fatal fetal abnormnalities .

freshpopcorn

osarusan wrote: »

The government has already legislated for it - the 2013 Act.

There would currently be no issue with the number of weeks - abortion on demand would still be illegal.

Very poor campaigning if the Repeal side are not making people aware of the existing legislation and what the 2013 Act contains.

The vast majority of people support abortion when the woman's life is at risk and that is already in place.
When ever I heard of somebody on the repeal campaign being asked how many weeks do you think abortion should be legalized up until?
They generally reply we need a repeal and then the government can legislate.
Voters in my opinion want to know how many weeks their voting for in my opinion.

hungry hypno toad

I wonder how many of the protesters would be alive if we had free abortions for all for the last 50 years.

meeeeh

hungry hypno toad wrote: »

I wonder how many of the protesters would be alive if we had free abortions for all for the last 50 years.

Almost all of them. Abortions are prevented with education and good health care and not by pretending they don't happen.

osarusan

freshpopcorn wrote: »

The vast majority of people support abortion when the woman's life is at risk and that is already in place.
When ever I heard of somebody on the repeal campaign being asked how many weeks do you think abortion should be legalized up until?
They generally reply we need a repeal and then the government can legislate.
Voters in my opinion want to know how many weeks their voting for in my opinion.

They should be told that if the 8th amendment disappeared from the Constitution tomorrow, abortion on demand would still be illegal under the 2013 Act. So the answer is 0 weeks.

Abortion would be only legal in cases where the pregnant woman's life is at risk - the difference with the current situation being that a genuine risk of suicide (after evaluation by a psychiatrist) is one of the criteria that constitutes a risk to her life.

freshpopcorn

osarusan wrote: »

They should be told that if the 8th amendment disappeared from the Constitution tomorrow, abortion on demand would still be illegal under the 2013 Act. So the answer is 0 weeks.

Abortion would be only legal in cases where the pregnant woman's life is at risk - the difference with the current situation being that a genuine risk of suicide (after evaluation by a psychiatrist) is one of the criteria that constitutes a risk to her life.

But, if we repealed the amendment,Wouldn't the government be then be able to legislate for abortion up to XX abortion of weeks?

osarusan

freshpopcorn wrote: »

But, if we repealed the amendment,Wouldn't the government be then be able to legislate for abortion up to XX abortion of weeks?

Yes.

There is no way anybody can campaign for what a still-unelected government might legislate for at an unknown time in the future.

I suppose that there could be something in the constitution about how abortion on demand, while currently illegal anyway, will never be legal beyond 14/16/18 weeks or something like that.

freshpopcorn

osarusan wrote: »

Yes.

There is no way anybody can campaign for what a still-unelected government might legislate for at an unknown time in the future.

I suppose that there could be something in the constitution about how abortion on demand, wile currently illegal anyway, will never be legal beyond 14/16/18 weeks or something like that.

The only way I can see it being repealed is if people are told that in the future will be aloud up to a certain amount of weeks.

__Alex__

"Hey boss, not sure where you stand on this contentious issue but I'm striking tomorrow in support of the 'Repeal the Eight' campaign. We cool?" said nobody ever.

mzungu

__Alex__ wrote: »

"Hey boss, not sure where you stand on this contentious issue but I'm striking tomorrow in support of the 'Repeal the Eight' campaign. We cool?" said nobody ever.

Considering hours worked is one of the main reasons for the disparity, losing that time tomorrow probably won't do much for reducing the gender "wage gap". :pac::pac:

The Legend Of Kira

In relation to the Repeal bus going around different parts of the country at the moment, as some people know will there is another bus going around also counter protesting the Rosa group, just saw this post from Twitter that Gardai in Galway asked the counter protesters to take down their banners, from a free speech point of view Id strongly condemn this , whatever side the debate you re on ; I think people on both sides have a equal right to make & present their arguments .

https://twitter.com/laurafleur/status/839167039503806464

[Deleted User]

Even if I did want it repealed (which I don't) why on earth would I lose a days pay, fall behind in work and annoy my employer when it would make absolutely no difference.

kylith

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

In relation to the Repeal bus going around different parts of the country at the moment, as some people know will there is another bus going around also counter protesting the Rosa group, just saw this post from Twitter that Gardai in Galway asked the counter protesters to take down their banners, from a free speech point of view Id strongly condemn this , whatever side the debate you re on ; I think people on both sides have a equal right to make & present their arguments .

https://twitter.com/laurafleur/status/839167039503806464

They asked them to take down the banners because they were too graphic. If they're anything like the pictures YD used to have up when they were on College Green I can see why. Photos of stillborn foetuses are not appropriate for public display. There is nothing to stop them from using other banners.

Galwayguy35

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

In relation to the Repeal bus going around different parts of the country at the moment, as some people know will there is another bus going around also counter protesting the Rosa group, just saw this post from Twitter that Gardai in Galway asked the counter protesters to take down their banners, from a free speech point of view Id strongly condemn this , whatever side the debate you re on ; I think people on both sides have a equal right to make & present their arguments .

https://twitter.com/laurafleur/status/839167039503806464

Who's this fool Laura Silver with her "Galway Police" drivel.

__Alex__

osarusan wrote: »

I get the impression that there are many people who don't know about the 2013 Act, and who consequently think that repealing the 8th amendment will see us fall into that black hole.

Yes, this is a good point. The Repeal campaign is frustrating to me because a lot of the people involved don't seem to have read up on things first. I support abortion laws being extended myself but I find myself not always agreeing with vocal Repeal campaigners. And some are quite militant and I think this militance is off-putting to many and could actually prevent the achievement of the campaign's objectives.

_Whimsical_

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

In relation to the Repeal bus going around different parts of the country at the moment, as some people know will there is another bus going around also counter protesting the Rosa group, just saw this post from Twitter that Gardai in Galway asked the counter protesters to take down their banners, from a free speech point of view Id strongly condemn this , whatever side the debate you re on ; I think people on both sides have a equal right to make & present their arguments .

https://twitter.com/laurafleur/status/839167039503806464

I agree with you in principle however in this instance the banners contained graphic and upsettng images. Personally I think that's too much for small kids or people feeling very sensitive about the issues of abortion or miscarriage. While I absolutely support their right to campaign and put their view forth I do understand why there's a problem with graphic pictures being displayed publicly where people don't have a choice to expose themselves to them or not.

thee glitz

osarusan wrote: »

Yes.

There is no way anybody can campaign for what a still-unelected government might legislate for at an unknown time in the future.

There's also no way of knowing what legislation might be handed down from the EU to implement, or made part of some vote-on-until-correct treaty.

Outlaw Pete

kylith wrote: »

Photos of stillborn foetuses are not appropriate for public display.

Sure they're only "clumps of cells" shortly after a woman has a "medical procedure".

osarusan wrote: »

I get the impression that there are many people who don't know about the 2013 Act, and who consequently think that repealing the 8th amendment will see us fall into that black hole.

Absolutely and LON was seemingly playing on that fact just yesterday and so I replied to her with the following:

https://twitter.com/CineIreland/status/838764449876045824

Or perhaps she genuinely didn't know about the act, which while worrying, isn't all that surprising.

thee glitz

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Or perhaps she genuinely didn't know about the act, which while worrying, isn't all that surprising.

Did you get a reply?

Outlaw Pete

thee glitz wrote: »

Did you get a reply?

Nope. But I didn't expect one tbf as she never engages with people who disagree with her on Twitter. Mutes them usually.

Widdershins

No, I have to earn a living and I work for myself and nobody would know I was on strike. And the campaign's all over the place and that's a bit off putting. *runs*

[Deleted User]

Big Jim Larkin wrote: »

How exactly are unemployed people and students going to strike?

Hmmmm. Maybe by refusing to give in to their carnal desires for 24 hours?

meeeeh

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Sure they're only "clumps of cells" shortly after a woman has a "medical procedure".

Well if they are not then they deserve the dignity of not being used as a cheap prop in advertising campaign. It might be also upsetting to someone who had miscarriage.

However this would be beyond compassion, understanding or consideration of extreme pro life groups. Louise O'Neill is an idiot but extreme prolifers are much worse.