Strike For Repeal?

Glenster · 08-03-2017 02:37PM

Is it terribly selfish of me that I would strike for repeal today but its month end and if I didn't come in everyone's schedules for the next two weeks would be f'ed?

Any other day I'd do it.

Ericaa · 08-03-2017 02:38PM

Glenster wrote: »

Is it terribly selfish of me that I would strike for repeal today but its month end and if I didn't come in everyone's schedules for the next two weeks would be f'ed?

Any other day I'd do it.

Nah, they asked if you can't take a day off to wear all black or a black arm band instead.

RayM · 08-03-2017 02:40PM

MightyMandarin wrote: »

And yet again, you're assuming people voted against legalising divorce purely because the Church was against it.

I'm not denying that the Church had immense power in this country, I just think people deserve to be respected as voting with their conscience and their own moral code, not just blindly following the Church.

Unfortunately, it seems to be quite common on the repeal side, as it was in the marriage referendum, that if you vote No you must be doing so just because the CC wants you to, and it's incredibly disrespectful imo.

It's not disrespectful to say that the majority of people who oppose abortion, contraception, divorce, marriage equality, etc have been heavily influenced by the teachings of the Catholic Church.

zanador · 08-03-2017 02:43PM

RayM wrote: »

It's not disrespectful to say that the majority of people who oppose abortion, contraception, divorce, marriage equality, etc have been heavily influenced by the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Or by a monotheistic ideology in general which just happens to be majoritively Catholic here?

I agree with you absolutely that our culture has been defined by the Catholic Church and that is a huge influencer on these issues.

That's not to say that people cannot critically examine issues for themselves, more so nowadays than before.

08-03-2017 02:43PM

anna080 wrote: »

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.

Yeah its gotten too main stream

SafeSurfer · 08-03-2017 02:45PM

rainbow kirby wrote: »

keano_afc wrote: »

I shared that on twitter under the Citizens Assembly hashtag. The reason it was dismissed by Repealers that replied to me? Why, he's a man (and a foreign man!) of course and therefore has absolutely nothing to add. By that I presume they mean he's a man not in favour of abortion, as whenever the likes of James Corden or Liam Neeson show support for the Repeal cause they get the back slapped off them.

It was dismissed because the anti-choicers saw the opportunity to parachute in some American paid shill. :rolleyes:

Using the "anti choice" label is as childish as using the "anti life" label. For all the rhetoric about pro choice, it seems many would have choice limited to agreeing with their particular view.

Jawgap · 08-03-2017 02:48PM

January wrote: »

Women have taken the day off work for this, so yes some of them have jobs, some will be stay at home parents, some will be students, some will be unemployed.

The turn out on O'Connell Bridge is fantastic.

Yes, they did a brilliantly selfish job at knackering up the the traffic :rolleyes:

tigger123 · 08-03-2017 02:51PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Yes, they did a brilliantly selfish job at knackering up the the traffic :rolleyes:

Clearly, the big take away issue for today.

RayM · 08-03-2017 02:52PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Yes, they did a brilliantly selfish job at knackering up the the traffic :rolleyes:

Oh no, not the traffic!

kylith · 08-03-2017 02:55PM

Ronan|Raven wrote: »

And of course block the bridge and cause those trying to do their days work a load of hassle.

Why not? It works for the French. If they have a point to make they protest and shut down the country until they're listened to. That's a book we should take a leaf out of rather than the milquetoast Irish attitude of shutting up, putting up, and not causing a fuss.

MightyMandarin · 08-03-2017 02:56PM

RayM wrote: »

It's not disrespectful to say that the majority of people who oppose abortion, contraception, divorce, marriage equality, etc have been heavily influenced by the teachings of the Catholic Church.

It most certainly is.

If I told you that support for Repealing the 8th Amendment was purely down to the trendiness of the social media campaign and that one's decision to support it was made because of a couple of black jumpers and hastags, how would you react?

It might seem crazy, but people can be opposed to all of those things, and not be catholic. Just be mindful of that.

orathaic · 08-03-2017 02:57PM

Ronan|Raven wrote: »

And of course block the bridge and cause those trying to do their days work a load of hassle.

Yes, because protesting isn't effective unless it is disruptive.

Peaceful protest doesn't mean sitting at home quietly waiting for others to listen to your position.

It is our duty in a democracy to make our voices heard, voting is a minimum requirement. Disruption of the functionin of the state until the access to our demands is the only way.

And if your views differ, advocate for a referendum and campaign for your side.

RobertKK · 08-03-2017 02:59PM

We have less and less workers supporting an aging population in western society, abortion of healthy unborn lives makes this situation worse.
It contributed to the poor policy of letting refugees into Europe who were unknown, seen as a solution that stemmed from a replacement rate that is too low in Europe.

SafeSurfer · 08-03-2017 03:01PM

orathaic wrote: »

Ronan|Raven wrote: »

And of course block the bridge and cause those trying to do their days work a load of hassle.

Yes, because protesting isn't effective unless it is disruptive.

Peaceful protest doesn't mean sitting at home quietly waiting for others to listen to your position.

It is our duty in a democracy to make our voices heard, voting is a minimum requirement. Disruption of the functionin of the state until the access to our demands is the only way.

And if your views differ, advocate for a referendum and campaign for your side.

Disrupt the functioning of the state until they give in to your demands? What if you are in the minority? What then? Blow up a few bridges? Shoot a few guards?

Jawgap · 08-03-2017 03:01PM

RayM wrote: »

Oh no, not the traffic!

tigger123 wrote: »

Clearly, the big take away issue for today.

Well, you see traffic is made up of many vehicles - including the fire appliance and emergency ambulance that were stalled in the traffic (presumably returning to Tara Street?) so yes well done to the protestors for taking at least 2 of the city's emergency vehicles out of commission.

Then there was all the Guards trying to sort the traffic mess out and stop pedestrians from getting squished by HGVs and buses trying to mooch through.....of course the Guards work for free and sure what else would there be for them to do around that part of the city, it being such a genteel neighbourhood.....

......then there was the Garda helimachopter - sure that thing runs on air so it costs the taxpayer nothing......

......and all to do what? Protest something that just about everyone agrees needs to change and will be voted through as soon as its voted on?

As I said, selfish.

Widdershins · 08-03-2017 03:01PM

kylith wrote: »

Why not? It works for the French. If they have a point to make they protest and shut down the country until they're listened to. That's a book we should take a leaf out of rather than the milquetoast Irish attitude of shutting up, putting up, and not causing a fuss.

Nothing wrong with civil disobedience, but there's a lot wrong with hurling heavy projectiles, whether or not they are aimed at the police. I resent any form of protest that uses violence or severe disruption to ordinary peoples lives. You don't know how seriously some peoples lives can be affected by what might be mere inconvenience in your eyes, and that's not to mention the danger of having your home burned down. I would strongly disagree with the government giving in and giving anyone who does that what they want.

Richard Hillman · 08-03-2017 03:03PM

What exactly are they protesting for? A referendum?

It has pretty much been guaranteed that we will have a referendum as soon as Enda focks off.

One eyed Jack · 08-03-2017 03:03PM

RayM wrote: »

It's not disrespectful to say that the majority of people who oppose abortion, contraception, divorce, marriage equality, etc have been heavily influenced by the teachings of the Catholic Church.

That's not what MightyMandarin said was disrespectful. What's disrespectful is to assume that the main reason people would object to the issues you mention above is because the RCC told them to.

By using your rationale, then the point stands that people who are in favour of legislating for abortion, contraception, divorce and marriage equality are just as heavily influenced by the teachings of the Catholic Church in that anything the Church promotes in society, they're against it, because they have issues with the Church.

They use every opportunity to take a pop at people who are religious, rather than take their heads out of their asses for five minutes and do some proper research. This causes them to assume that anyone who opposes their position must be religious, which makes sense to them in their mind, given they had issues with the Church in the first place.

If that's how you want to argue it, you risk doing the same as the marriage equality crowd who ignored the number of people who are gay and lesbian who are also religious. You're ignoring the number of women who have had abortions who are also religious, many of whom tend to take their faith seriously, and having someone take a dump on their faith only makes them feel even more alienated and isolated.

Glenster · 08-03-2017 03:04PM

MightyMandarin wrote: »

It most certainly is.

If I told you that support for Repealing the 8th Amendment was purely down to the trendiness of the social media campaign and that one's decision to support it was made because of a couple of black jumpers and hastags, how would you react?

It might seem crazy, but people can be opposed to all of those things, and not be catholic. Just be mindful of that.

I don't think its offensive to state something that tallys with your personal experience.

There does seem to be a massive correlation between the religious and those who speak out in favour of the 8th amendment.

Whether that's a causal relationship can never be proved because its impossible to know what's in someone's heart. And those in favour of the 8th amendment seem very keen to distance themselves from the idea.

Arcade_Tryer · 08-03-2017 03:04PM

RayM wrote: »

Oh no, not the traffic!

Won't somebody PLEASE think of the traffic!!!

Little CuChulainn · 08-03-2017 03:04PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

What exactly are they protesting for? A referendum?

It has pretty much been guaranteed that we will have a referendum as soon as Enda focks off.

They either want an earlier referendum or for the government to pass unconstitutional legislation. Either option would be bad for them in my opinion.

RayM · 08-03-2017 03:05PM

MightyMandarin wrote: »

If I told you that support for Repealing the 8th Amendment was purely down to the trendiness of the social media campaign and that one's decision to support it was made because of a couple of black jumpers and hastags, how would you react?

I'd say that the movement for repealing the 8th existed long before social media, but I'd agree that social media has definitely been a vehicle for generating publicity for the cause. I wouldn't reduce it to "trendiness" or "black jumpers and hashtags". Similarly, I wouldn't reduce the influence wielded by the Catholic Church to "people blindly doing what their church tells them to".

orathaic · 08-03-2017 03:05PM

Jawgap wrote: »

Yes, they did a brilliantly selfish job at knackering up the the traffic :rolleyes:

You know that was the ****ing point, peaceful protests do very little unless they disrupt the state.

It worked for the water charges!

Democracy doesn't just mean we sit at hone and wait for the government to tell us we can have a referendum, and then if we vote wrong tell us to try again...

kylith · 08-03-2017 03:05PM

Widdershins wrote: »

Nothing wrong with civil disobedience, but there's a lot wrong with hurling heavy projectiles, whether or not they are aimed at the police. I resent any form of protest that uses violence or severe disruption to ordinary peoples lives. You don't know how seriously some peoples lives can be affected by what might be mere inconvenience in your eyes, and that's not to mention the danger of having your home burned down. I would strongly disagree with the government giving in and giving anyone who does that what they want.

I'm sorry, are you claiming that the Repeal protesters are hurling projectiles cos last I heard there was just a bit of a traffic jam on O'Connell St. Though, frankly, how that's any different from how O'Connell St usually is I don't know.

RobertKK · 08-03-2017 03:07PM

Black is the colour for a funeral, mourning, a death, strange choice given abortion is involved which involves terminating a life.

andekwarhola · 08-03-2017 03:07PM

If I share Sisters Are Doing It For Themselves on my Facebook, will I get attractive women messaging me?

padd b1975 · 08-03-2017 03:09PM

Imnotthehulk wrote: »

Certainly looks like there's a good crowd congregating on O'Connell Bridge

Rough guess I would say about 500 at most.

In a capital city of around 1.5 million its a pathetic turnout.

Edit. Actually make that guess 300, at that time of the day there's probably about 200 people going about their business that have nothing to do with the protests.

Jawgap · 08-03-2017 03:12PM

orathaic wrote: »

You know that was the ****ing point, peaceful protests do very little unless they disrupt the state.

It worked for the water charges!

Democracy doesn't just mean we sit at hone and wait for the government to tell us we can have a referendum, and then if we vote wrong tell us to try again...

Yeah, because that's going to engender support :rolleyes:

.....and we don't live in a democracy, we live in a republic - it would be helpful if the first years out protesting understood the significant differences.

Btw, if you want to 'disrupt the state' why not take it up to Kildare Street, or block Hawkins House......oh wait, that's right the light is not as good there for the TV crews

MightyMandarin · 08-03-2017 03:14PM

Glenster wrote: »

I don't think its offensive to state something that tallys with your personal experience.

There does seem to be a massive correlation between the religious and those who speak out in favour of the 8th amendment.

Whether that's a causal relationship can never be proved because its impossible to know what's in someone's heart. And those in favour of the 8th amendment seem very keen to distance themselves from the idea.

No, but it's an incredibly dumb thing to do imo. It's the same with people meeting a person from Germany, for example, who was an arsehole, and assuming all Germans are like them; or saying that all Muslims are terrorists, just because a small minority use their faith as justification for causing terror.

It's a very cheap way of looking at the world.

I'm not denying that there is a correlation between support for pro-life campaigns and religious groups, but on this particular issue of abortion, I think there's a lot of people who couldn't give a **** about the Church but will not vote to repeal the 8th because it is not the right thing to do.

I think the proportion of those people, far outweighs the 'Iona Institute crowd', who just happen to share the same opinion on the matter.

keano_afc · 08-03-2017 03:15PM

rainbow kirby wrote: »

It was dismissed because the anti-choicers saw the opportunity to parachute in some American paid shill. :rolleyes:

How do you know he was paid for his contribution?

Strike For Repeal?

Comments