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

jameorahiely

20Cent wrote: »

The eigth has to be repealed for any type of abortion.

That's simply not true. Abortions are carried out as necessary in Ireland under the current leglislation at present and the 8th in place.

__Alex__

Deleted User wrote: »

What's with the lightening strike? Are they trying to be Harry Potter or something?

That's a symbol for the separation of church and state. It even says something to that effect on the banner.

The Legend Of Kira

snowflaker wrote: »

Any pictures from the anti abortion demonstration at the Central Bank?

Some pictures + video of the counter protesters .

https://twitter.com/ICBRabortionno/status/839535194017316870

https://twitter.com/ICBRabortionno/status/839534750578720774

https://twitter.com/thejournal_ie/status/839514927685648389

https://twitter.com/Cormfitz/status/839511243828391936

https://twitter.com/Cormfitz/status/839505977435123712

https://twitter.com/JadeHayden/status/839506387059294213

freshpopcorn

I occasionally look at posts on social media regarding articles about the repeal and in general it's the same amount of peoples commenting and liking the articles. The demand for the repeal isn't as big as people make it out to be.

[Deleted User]

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I occasionally look at posts on social media regarding articles about the repeal and in general it's the same amount of peoples commenting and liking the articles. The demand for the repeal isn't as big as people make it out to be.

Aye, mentioned it to a couple of people over 40 today and the first reaction was to ask what it was about followed by "What's the 8th?".

Careful what ya wish for etc.

freshpopcorn

Deleted User wrote: »

Aye, mentioned it to a couple of people over 40 today and the first reaction was to ask what it was about followed by "What's the 8th?". Careful what ya wish for etc.

Lots of people simply don't really care!

snowflaker

Deleted User wrote: »

Aye, mentioned it to a couple of people over 40 today and the first reaction was to ask what it was about followed by "What's the 8th?". Careful what ya wish for etc.

People over 40 don't know what the 8th amendment is? Try those over 50!

1983 is 34 years ago so 52 is the youngest person that voted

[Deleted User]

snowflaker wrote: »

People over 40 don't know what the 8th amendment is? Try those over 50!

1983 is 34 years ago so 52 is the youngest person that voted

How so? A lot of people don't keep count of amendments. There were 2 people around 60 included

Prime Irish Beef

Burka Twerker wrote: »

Whether you are pro-life or pro-choice I think we can all laugh at students and unemployable graduates having the nerve to tell others to take a day off work.

You seem awful familiar.

ThisRegard

I don't know why people are taking dumb swipes at students attending the protest. Yes the timing is poor for everyone else but they have a bigger dog in this race than most of us.

snowflaker

Deleted User wrote: »

How so? A lot of people don't keep count of amendments. There were 2 people around 60 included

Was this a random sample or just work colleagues? People may not want to answer as it very political. All of my friends and most of my work colleagues know what the 8th amendment is.

The Legend Of Kira

A quick question for anyone involved in the Repeal campaign,, the phrase " Free safe & legal " is often used by Repeal advocates " free " obviously means someone else pays for the abortion meaning the taxpayer - please note as I ask this question Im not trying to compare anything or trying to compare like with like- Im just asking your opinion if you think it should also be " free " ,, if a guy wants to get or have the snip procedure do you think it should also be equally " free " paid for by the taxpayer ?

[Deleted User]

snowflaker wrote: »

Was this a random sample or just work colleagues? People may not want to answer as it very political. All of my friends and most of my work colleagues know what the 8th amendment is.

Family mostly. All would probably vote to get rid, but it shows how strong online echo chamber are when I'm sure many of us under a certain age have been bombarded for the last month or two but plenty haven't. "The 8th" is meaningless to a lot of people. As with the divorce and European referenda they're remembered by topic, not number.

retro:electro

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

A quick question for anyone involved in the Repeal campaign,, the phrase " Free safe & legal " is often used by Repeal advocates " free " obviously means someone else pays for the abortion meaning the taxpayer - please note as I ask this question Im not trying to compare anything or trying to compare like with like- Im just asking your opinion if you think it should also be " free " ,, if a guy wants to get or have the snip procedure do you think it should also be equally " free " paid for by the taxpayer ?

Wouldn't that procedure be seen on the same grounds as say a hysterectomy? A (predominately) elective surgery that you pay for yourself?

Delirium

RobertKK wrote: »

https://twitter.com/NicoleOConor/status/839515950688964608
https://twitter.com/nora__claire/status/839516265345609728
https://twitter.com/ZaraKing/status/839435333859176449

Quite crude.

Woop-woop! That's the sound of da (tone) police!

jackofalltrades

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

Some pictures + video of the counter protesters .

https://twitter.com/ICBRabortionno/status/839535194017316870

https://twitter.com/ICBRabortionno/status/839534750578720774

https://twitter.com/thejournal_ie/status/839514927685648389

https://twitter.com/Cormfitz/status/839511243828391936

https://twitter.com/Cormfitz/status/839505977435123712

https://twitter.com/JadeHayden/status/839506387059294213

So the Repeal protesters blocked the road at multiple locations, directly confronted the counter protest, defaced their banner and then tried to stop the pro-life banners being seen.

They really don't look like they're out to make friends or influence people.

meeeeh

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

A quick question for anyone involved in the Repeal campaign,, the phrase " Free safe & legal " is often used by Repeal advocates " free " obviously means someone else pays for the abortion meaning the taxpayer - please note as I ask this question Im not trying to compare anything or trying to compare like with like- Im just asking your opinion if you think it should also be " free " ,, if a guy wants to get or have the snip procedure do you think it should also be equally " free " paid for by the taxpayer ?

Well you can also not be father by using contraception. The alternative to safe abortion is clothes hanger. Women who have money already have autonomy to do whatever they want, they just need to travel, it's poor and vulnerable that will be affected by paying for abortion.

Personally I think vasectomy should be covered by some sort insurance too but you need to change health system for that. It's in no way comparative situation though. And it's not about men vs women so don't turn it into that.

neonsofa

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

A quick question for anyone involved in the Repeal campaign,, the phrase " Free safe & legal " is often used by Repeal advocates " free " obviously means someone else pays for the abortion meaning the taxpayer - please note as I ask this question Im not trying to compare anything or trying to compare like with like- Im just asking your opinion if you think it should also be " free " ,, if a guy wants to get or have the snip procedure do you think it should also be equally " free " paid for by the taxpayer ?

I dunno tbh. But if abortion is not available to those experiencing an unplanned pregnancy and the woman goes on to have a child and claim child benefit (among other social welfare payments/childcare subsidies/rent payments or council housing etc, if she is unable to financially support the child that she didn't plan for) the taxpayers will be paying an awful lot more than the cost of the procedure.

Sweetemotion

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

A quick question for anyone involved in the Repeal campaign,, the phrase " Free safe & legal " is often used by Repeal advocates " free " obviously means someone else pays for the abortion meaning the taxpayer - please note as I ask this question Im not trying to compare anything or trying to compare like with like- Im just asking your opinion if you think it should also be " free " ,, if a guy wants to get or have the snip procedure do you think it should also be equally " free " paid for by the taxpayer ?

Maybe a better question would be. If the man wanted the woman to have an abortion and willing to give up all rights of the child and the woman went ahead and had the child anyway.

Should, he still have to pay maintenance?

fatknacker

NegativeCreep wrote: »

Had to get a taxi home because of these idiots. Students that couldn't care less about abortion or women's issues but instead are just falling over each other to be seen as more progressive and liberal as all their friends is all I saw there today. If they had jobs they wouldn't have the time to be posing on O'Connell street.

I'm sure the women who have to take a day or two off work, travel to the airport, fly to the UK and travel to a clinic and back will empathise and share your pain.

One eyed Jack

neonsofa wrote: »

I dunno tbh. But if abortion is not available to those experiencing an unplanned pregnancy and the woman goes on to have a child and claim child benefit (among other social welfare payments/childcare subsidies/rent payments or council housing etc, if she is unable to financially support the child that she didn't plan for) the taxpayers will be paying an awful lot more than the cost of the procedure.

I'd be ok with the State providing for the welfare and education of it's citizens, it does that anyway. I wouldn't support demands being put on the State to provide for abortion though.

One eyed Jack

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Maybe a better question would be. If the man wanted the woman to have an abortion and willing to give up all rights of the child and the woman went ahead and had the child anyway.

Should, he still have to pay maintenance?

That's not a better question. A child is not a possession that a man can simply "give up all rights to", he would still be obliged to pay to maintain the child, regardless of whether he wants to or not. Who else do you think should be supposed to pay for the child?

Here we go

My first post hope I don't ruin the follow of debate but I don't get debate in relation to abortion your either for it cos you belive a woman should have full control and choice of her body and the unborn isn't a life but a collection of cells or against cos you belive the unborn is a person as real as you or me and deserves all right one would expect for themselfs at least I hope that's people's view on it I can't take people who bring religion sexism ect into it and if it is one of those two how can there be middle ground

jameorahiely

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That's not a better question. A child is not a possession that a man can simply "give up all rights to", he would still be obliged to pay to maintain the child, regardless of whether he wants to or not. Who else do you think should be supposed to pay for the child?

I was reading about a case in England in the papers yesterday where a woman was up for raping a man. If she is pregnant, should the man have to pay?

Richard Hillman

fatknacker wrote: »

I'm sure the women who have to take a day or two off work, travel to the airport, fly to the UK and travel to a clinic and back will empathise and share your pain.

If they legalised it, it will pretty much be the exact same thing bar the airport security.

neonsofa

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I'd be ok with the State providing for the welfare and education of it's citizens, it does that anyway. I wouldn't support demands being put on the State to provide for abortion though.

I wasn't supporting or opposing either way, just pointing it out to the poster discussing taxpayers paying for these procedures- they pay anyway, and moreso for a child than a procedure. Like you say, many don't mind that being paid for citizens of the state, many have a lot of issues with it- take your pick of any AH thread on the dole/social housing etc- and you're bound to find a comment saying "if you can't afford them don't have them" or something similar. Swings and roundabouts!

retro:electro

Here we go wrote: »

My first post hope I don't ruin the follow of debate but I don't get debate in relation to abortion your either for it cos you belive a woman should have full control and choice of her body and the unborn isn't a life but a collection of cells or against cos you belive the unborn is a person as real as you or me and deserves all right one would expect for themselfs at least I hope that's people's view on it I can't take people who bring religion sexism ect into it and if it is one of those two how can there be middle ground

But there very much is a middle ground. Some people are pro-choice, but once it gets past a certain amount of weeks (i.e. when the foetus could survive outside the womb) some people can't be on board with that, so how do those people vote? It's a middle ground which the Repeal crowd do not want to address. It's crucial and it's integral to the referendum, yet nobody wants to have a conversation about it.

fatknacker

Richard Hillman wrote: »

If they legalised it, it will pretty much be the exact same thing bar the airport security.

Let's say the average Irish person lives around 1.5 hours from the airport and that's being generous. An hour before check in and an hour for flight including taking off and landing and disembarking. Then maybe an hour to the clinic, thats 4.5 hours travelling just to get to the clinic. Not accounting for traffic, delays, rural dwellers etc. And then the same all the way back or perhaps forking out for a crappy hotel too. All without raising an eyebrow from anyone close to them.

I wouldn't say it's the exact same thing, really.

One eyed Jack

jameorahiely wrote: »

I was reading about a case in England in the papers yesterday where a woman was up for raping a man. If she is pregnant, should the man have to pay?

I read the same case, no mention that she is pregnant, only that she has been charged with allegedly raping a man, and as far as I'm aware in the UK, the charge of rape means the alleged victim was penetrated, not the alleged rapist.

volchitsa

anna080 wrote: »

But there very much is a middle ground. Some people are pro-choice, but once it gets past a certain amount of weeks some people can't be on board with that, so how do those people vote? It's a middle ground which the Repeal crowd do not want to address. It's crucial and it's integral to the referendum, yet nobody wants to have a conversation about it.

That isnt true though - there are lots of posts here discussing 12 weeks or 16 weeks or the UK system. The thing is though, that many of us think that level of detail can only be decided by legislation, same as it is in other countries.

People who want to keep some level of ban in the constitution want to get the discussion onto what that would be. I think it would be a disaster to do it at all, so I don't want to get into their suggestions for modifying the constitution, Iwant it repealed first.

I don't think that's an extreme view, given what's happened to several women in Ireland because of the 8th. And I don't only mean those who actually wanted abortions.