Strike For Repeal?

Tigger · 07-03-2017 11:55PM

Very interesting , I think that it was testified that in the Irish case the child
Had no chance
Don o why people worry about the dead woman if I was brain dead and my body could be used to help my unborn child I'd be happy
Well I'd be brain dead but useful

SafeSurfer · 07-03-2017 11:57PM

jameorahiely wrote: »

mahamageehad wrote: »

While the thought of a waiting list may be horrible, we're talking about a time sensitive procedure in most cases unfortunately. Clinics in the UK were turning Irish women away earlier this year because Jan and Feb are the busiest times for abortion. Source: https://www.her.ie/news/uk-abortion-clinics-will-begin-turn-away-irish-women-331776

The want/need issue is a more interesting topic to me. The pro-choice case argues that want and need are the same thing in the case of abortion, but most only support it until a certain time. Many pro-lifers would agree with abortion in a case where it's "needed" (usually when the mother's life is at risk) but would abhor the idea of someone "wanting" an abortion. Both sides have grey areas and in my experience, most people fall just left or right of the middle.

Currently the possibility of an abortion comes down to two things, the 8th amendment and the Protection of Life during Pregnancy Act. The 8th amendment puts the life of the foetus on par with the mother and therefore restricts what the legislation can allow for. The Protection of Life during Pregnancy Act defines in what circumstances a woman in Ireland can get an abortion - life-threatening physical illness, medical emergency and suicide-risk. Two doctors need to certify that it's necessary. Unfortunately it doesn't cover every case, and that, for me, is the issue. What about the 14 year old that was raped, but she's not "quite" suicidal enough? What about the couple that have been trying for a baby, only to fall pregnant with a child that won't be able to survive outside the womb? There was also that disgusting case a while ago where they kept a brain-dead woman alive as a macabre human incubator. That was a direct result of the 8th amendment.

Really, doctors and lawmakers and other educated, diverse people (men and women) should be arguing this out on moral, ethical and legal grounds. There are plenty of case studies from other countries. Why should something like this come down to popular vote? It seems almost disrespectful of the complexity of the situation. As long as the 8th amendment is in the constitution, it'll always be treated as a bargaining chip. In my opinion, the 8th should be repealed. The Protection of Life during Pregnancy Act (which only allows for extremely limited abortion as above) would then become the legislation we rely on. It would allow us in time to open up the conversation to talk about rape victims, or fatal fetal abnormalities and more, without immediately phrasing it as allowing or banning abortion.

Does the 8th cover Nebraska too, where abortion is legal?
Another disgusting case where a woman was used as an incubator :rolleyes:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3063170/Doctors-moms-body-functioning-baby-survive.html

Seems like a happy outcome in tragic circumstances. The baby survived as the family wished and the mothers organs were donated and helped 3 others to survive.

retro:electro · 08-03-2017 12:05AM

I'm 100% pro choice but am starting to dispise the Repeal campaign. I don't identify with their approach and find them far too militant and not open to any genuine convsersation. They're damaging the campaign with their excessive militance. I'm pro choice, and in theory I think it's a great idea to march, but I feel like tomorrow will be hijacked by vain narcissists taking selfies and hashtaging Repeal on Instagram to let the world know omg look how liberal I am you guys.
For me the campaign has lost its core.

eviltwin · 08-03-2017 12:08AM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Seems like a happy outcome in tragic circumstances. The baby survived as the family wished and the mothers organs were donated and helped 3 others to survive.

She's still dead though, happy doesn't really seem the appropriate word here.

SafeSurfer · 08-03-2017 12:13AM

eviltwin wrote: »

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Seems like a happy outcome in tragic circumstances. The baby survived as the family wished and the mothers organs were donated and helped 3 others to survive.

She's still dead though, happy doesn't really seem the appropriate word here.

Happy in the circumstances I think is appropriate. Happy for the baby who lived, happy for the family who wanted the baby to live, happy for the 3 people who received organs allowing them to live. I'm happy with happy.

eviltwin · 08-03-2017 12:14AM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Happy in the circumstances I think is appropriate. Happy for the baby who lived, happy for the family who wanted the baby to live, happy for the 3 people who received organs allowing them to live. I'm happy with happy.

All because of one woman who died. She mattered. Her family I'm sure were devastated by her loss.

mahamageehad · 08-03-2017 12:16AM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I presume the fear that a lot of people have is once the eight amendment is removed from the constitution society will never have the opportunity to express their opinion on the matter again. It will be left to the whims of politicians with an eye to the latest opinion poll or hard case rather than medical experts or the will of the people.

Yeah, and to be honest I understand why people might be wary. But then again, we have to trust the government to make certain decisions for us, why should this be different? The law needs to update and change with the times.

jameorahiely wrote: »

Does the 8th cover Nebraska too, where abortion is legal?
Another disgusting case where a woman was used as an incubator :rolleyes:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3063170/Doctors-moms-body-functioning-baby-survive.html

I'll forgive the daily fail link. :rolleyes: There is no comparison between the cases. In the Nebraska case, the family asked for the doctors to try and save the baby. In the Irish case, the pregnancy wasn't as far along, and the family had to bring an application to the High Court to allow them to end the life-support. Doctors admitted that the likelihood of the foetus developing enough to survive outside the womb were almost non-existent, but felt their hands were tied as they were fearful of prosecution.

mahamageehad · 08-03-2017 12:18AM

Anyway, I'm getting off point. As per my earlier comments in this thread, I am for repealing the 8th but I think the strike will at best be useless and at worst actually hurt the cause.

thee glitz · 08-03-2017 01:07AM

Earthhorse wrote: »

So you'd be okay with abortion if women had to pay to get one here?

No - I pointed oat the government wasn't forcing people to pay for abortions abroad.

Delirium wrote: »

Women who wish to abort due to fatal foetal abnormality also have to travel.

Earthhorse · 08-03-2017 01:12AM

thee glitz wrote: »

No - I pointed oat the government wasn't forcing people to pay for abortions abroad.

So what's your point?

08-03-2017 01:13AM

The repeal side are a big irritating

_Whimsical_ · 08-03-2017 02:22AM

Apparently tomorrow is an international women's strike day labelled A Day Without Women... and it seems it's as mad as it sounds.
You can strike for literaly any women's issue you want.

Here's the public service announcement for it from the US featuring an inclusive bunch of women including the overly aggressive stereotypical lesbian.

https://www.facebook.com/womensmarchonwash/videos/1456980240981917/

"What are YOU striking for?"

And of course everyone's favourite liberal billionaire George Soros has funded most all the groups who've started the initiative.

Dick phelan · 08-03-2017 03:23AM

Because of the nature of the Repeal Campaign i'v gone from being on the fence being about 80% sure i'd vote to keep the 8th, their childish publicity stunts, complete unwilling to argue their points without uttering some complete rubbish like "if you don't want an abortion don't have one" completely missing the entire argument their opponents are making. Also regarding the images used by the pro life side one could argue perhaps that if you think graphic images of abortion aren't appropriate how can you argue the procedure is? Perhaps a lot of people don't like being confronted with reality you notice it with the language used, words like "Choice" A medical procedure, clump of cells ect all serve to dehumanize the reality of abortion. If your getting upset over images of abortion perhaps you shouldn't be advocating it.

dodderangler · 08-03-2017 03:35AM

Strikes don't do nothing for no one.

Faugheen · 08-03-2017 05:09AM

The worst thing about this is, I wouldn't be at all surprised if one of the ringleaders brings up the Tuam babies as if it's supposed to help their cause.

I'm pro-choice, but the repeal campaign is full of people who really have no idea what's going on.

That Bus4Repeal thing that's going on are handing out abortion pills too. That sends out the wrong message completely!

Badly Drunk Boy · 08-03-2017 08:09AM

dodderangler wrote: »

Strikes don't do nothing for no one.

I don't see how this is a strike. Call it a march or a protest but I can't see how it is a strike. It's not a protest against employers, and I can't see many women refusing to do domestic duties at home for this.

08-03-2017 08:20AM

Excellent opinion piece in the IT, hits the nail on the head.

"Here is what Repealers won’t listen to, and what sticks in the craws of those of us hectored by them: The abortion issue is not clear-cut. Lots of us are somewhere in the middle. So talk to us, engage with us.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/why-the-repeal-the-eighth-march-will-backfire-1.3001535

zanador · 08-03-2017 09:20AM

Dick phelan wrote: »

Because of the nature of the Repeal Campaign i'v gone from being on the fence being about 80% sure i'd vote to keep the 8th, their childish publicity stunts, complete unwilling to argue their points without uttering some complete rubbish like "if you don't want an abortion don't have one" completely missing the entire argument their opponents are making. Also regarding the images used by the pro life side one could argue perhaps that if you think graphic images of abortion aren't appropriate how can you argue the procedure is? Perhaps a lot of people don't like being confronted with reality you notice it with the language used, words like "Choice" A medical procedure, clump of cells ect all serve to dehumanize the reality of abortion. If your getting upset over images of abortion perhaps you shouldn't be advocating it.

Your decision about such an important issue is based on the actions of a group of people you don't like as opposed to the actual issue?

I don't like to see pictures of aborted foetuses waved around the streets because I think that they are designed to stir up atavistic emotion rather than create proper discourse on the subject - I don't think that the motives of the people who show them are anything other than judgemental and lacking in empathy. You don't have to agree with abortion, you can vote against it every time the issue comes up, but to wave around those posters is not about abortion it is about that person reveling in self righteous outrage and their inability to feel compassion.

I understand that they believe abortion is murder. Even if they were right to be waving pictures of foetuses at people who have had, or are thinking of having abortions, (which I don't think they are) who in their right minds think that it is appropriate behaviour to be waving them around in public where vulnerable people (who've just had miscarriages, are children etc, and for me are contemplating/have had an abortion) can be severely psychologically affected by them.

Delirium · 08-03-2017 09:30AM

cisk wrote: »

Excellent opinion piece in the IT, hits the nail on the head.

"Here is what Repealers won’t listen to, and what sticks in the craws of those of us hectored by them: The abortion issue is not clear-cut. Lots of us are somewhere in the middle. So talk to us, engage with us.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/why-the-repeal-the-eighth-march-will-backfire-1.3001535

I don’t believe in abortion as a knee-jerk reaction to a crisis situation. Equally, I do not judge anyone who has ever come to the decision that an abortion is the best choice for them at a given time. That is their own business, borne out of their own individual circumstance.

However, urging women to view abortion as a “human right” or a “freedom” as opposed to what it should be – a viable last-resort option in a desperate situation – is a recipe for making the crisis even worse in the long-run.

I fail to see how allowing for a woman who becomes pregnant due to rape the option of aborting makes the crisis worse.

jameorahiely · 08-03-2017 10:02AM

Dick phelan wrote: »

Because of the nature of the Repeal Campaign i'v gone from being on the fence being about 80% sure i'd vote to keep the 8th, their childish publicity stunts, complete unwilling to argue their points without uttering some complete rubbish like "if you don't want an abortion don't have one" completely missing the entire argument their opponents are making. Also regarding the images used by the pro life side one could argue perhaps that if you think graphic images of abortion aren't appropriate how can you argue the procedure is? Perhaps a lot of people don't like being confronted with reality you notice it with the language used, words like "Choice" A medical procedure, clump of cells ect all serve to dehumanize the reality of abortion. If your getting upset over images of abortion perhaps you shouldn't be advocating it.

One of the reasons why they don't like the pictures is the same reason the don't like a pregnant woman seeing an ultra sound before the abortion proceedure. It humanises the foetus. The can pretent it's some concern about women with misscarriages seeing them, but they don't seem to be able to make the connection of the upset caused by "you misscarried your baby, we're campaigning to voluntary get rid of ours". Phrases such as "abortion on demand" upsets them, they would prefer "abortion on request" according to Clare Daly.

CaoimheSquee · 08-03-2017 10:05AM

Abortion IS clear cut. Either you trust women to make a decision that is the best for their future or you don't.
Obviously there will be some that will make decisions not agreeable to our own ethics or morals, just like SOME men will shirk their parenting obligations, but the alternative is forced pregnancy and labour. I accept that, and sadly of course, but it is imperative to protect the majority of women and allow them to make a choice for their own life, health and bodies. If you do not support that then you believe that women are in the majority potentially all out to get an abortion where possible, and inherently bad if given the chance, or more importantly, a choice. I find that incredibly sad. I can guarantee you this is not the case. Have you ever read what an abortion entails? It is really not pleasant.

Richard Hillman · 08-03-2017 10:07AM

A lot of these people are purely sociopaths who deep down all they really care about is winning.

Just look at their logo "Repeal the 8th" inside of a love heart. There is nothing Love Heart about abortion. There are so many genuine sociopaths involved in the movement. People with real mental health issues who only care about "winning". Take up a sport or something and let the grown ups have the important conversations

Zulu · 08-03-2017 10:18AM

CaoimheSquee wrote: »

Abortion IS clear cut. Either you trust women to make a decision that is the best for their future or you don't.

This is the type of polarising that is causing the repeal campaign to loose momentum.

It's not about "trusting" women :rolleyes: FFS. I appreciate why you'd want to make it so simple: thats a lovely little strawman to build, and then everyone can get behind "oh you don't trust women", but that's childish and dishonest. And it's bloody transparent.

The "you're with us or against us" attitude isn't going to win the middle ground, but rather push more of the middle ground to a "no". Good luck with that.

whisky_galore · 08-03-2017 10:21AM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Just look at their logo "Repeal the 8th" inside of a love heart.

The Strike for Repeal logo looks a lot like what the British Union of Fascists had.

fatknacker · 08-03-2017 10:30AM

"I don't like the people involved in the repeal campaign, so I'm against repealing the 8th amendment out of spite"

08-03-2017 10:37AM

fatknacker wrote: »

"I don't like the people involved in the repeal campaign, so I'm against repealing the 8th amendment out of spite"

Who's said that?
I'm talking about people on the fence, people who don't know, people who haven't made up their minds.

keano_afc · 08-03-2017 10:38AM

kylith wrote: »

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.

They asked them to remove the banners because the reality of what abortion is upset them.

If someone find images of abortion graphic and upsetting, maybe they need to reevaluate what it is they support.

Ostrom · 08-03-2017 10:40AM

Zulu wrote: »

Repeal campaign is a sad joke.

Anything more specific to add?

Zulu · 08-03-2017 10:47AM

Ostrom wrote: »

Anything more specific to add?

Yeah a good bit; read the thread.
Cool conversation bro.

20Cent · 08-03-2017 10:49AM

Can't get my head around two attitudes found about this.

"I want the 8th repealed but I'm against the strike or repeal campaign."
How the hell do you think there will be a referendum sitting at home thinking about it!

Then there's

"I want repeal but hate the feminists who take selfies in reprleal t shirts so would vote agaist it".
That means you are actually against repeal don't let dislike or otherwise of one side dictate how to vote decide yourself.

Strike For Repeal?

Comments