seamus wrote: » It will be something along the lines of saying the Oireachtas will have the power to legislate in relation to abortion. My understanding is that the legal experts determined that a straightforward repeal wouldn't give the government power to legislate. There would be other provisions in the Constitution on which abortion laws could be declared unconstitutional. But by explicitly stating that the Government are permitted to legislate, you remove all question of whether abortion legislation would be unconstitutional. This isn't actually a call to repeal, it's even better than that.
notjustsweet wrote: » I'm presuming youre a virgin then. Anyone who says things like "make better choices" really has no place in this conversation.
conorhal wrote: » Saying things like "make better choices" excludes you from debate? You are a very enlightened example of why the pro-abortion side frequently looks shrill and foolish.
Calhoun wrote: » This is why if it had of gone to a repeal referendum it might well have failed, the identify politic simplification of the argument and bringing it into an us versus them perspective is ignorant of the complex and nuanced problem that we have in Ireland. We move on then to the collective blaming of anyone that doesnt agree with the SJW narrative, if you don't agree with me you want to see babies dead in a septic tank. Designed to shut down reasonable discourse, nice little tactic imported from the Americans. If you want a reasonable debate on this i would suggest you change the tune. Otherwise you might not be happy with the result.
notjustsweet wrote: » Yet your abuse telling me to make better choices was OK?? At no point have I said what my personal choice would be but you feel it's OK to make nasty personal comments and complain when they are returned? No, I'm pro choice. Let people make up their own minds. We are adults here. I won't be responding to you so save the drama.
conorhal wrote: » If there are better choices that a person can make in life to ensure the don't end up making tragic ones, they should probably examine the choices they make and try to make better ones, way controversial statement that. As for you're whining attempt at to suggest I'm being abusive towards you, Sorry snowflake, but disagreeing isn't abuse, and as you are to person wittily quipping "I'm presuming youre a virgin then.", you'll have to forgive me if I think that attempt at climbing up on a high horse is a wee bit laughable.
gizmo81 wrote: » This debate is going on for longer than i have been alive. Get over it. Some women will want/need abortions. Allow them to make that choice. We tried as a society to block abortion and the result of it was laundries, septic tanks etc That is not shutting down debate that is highlighting the results of a failed policy on abortion.
gizmo81 wrote: » This 'debate' is going on for longer than i have been alive. It's not a debate it's one part of society trying to control another part. I have not heard any reasonable debate. Get over it. The world moves. Women have abortions. Some women will want/need abortions. Allow them to make that choice. We tried as a society to block abortion and the result of it was laundries, septic tanks etc That is not shutting down debate that is highlighting the results of a failed policy on abortion.
pjohnson wrote: » I dont believe you adressed what you meant by being against abortion "in most cases" care to elaborate? Or just evade?
Calhoun wrote: » No no when you accuse people who dont agree with you of being advocates for the crap that happened in the mother and baby homes you are shutting down debate. The laundries were the result of another time altogether, abortion was one of the issues that created them but not the only one. To compare society today with back then is a huge stretch. Yes it has been going on for longer than we both have been alive but the playground name calling is not going to make it finish any quicker. You need to get over yourself and accept the nuanced approach that exists here because otherwise you are going to be very unhappy in the future.
conorhal wrote: » I'm not being evasive, I have things to do today other then argue on the internet and parse every comment on a thread believe it or not. I fundamentally disagree with abortion but we live in the real world, if a woman need chemo to save her life or a hystorectomy to save her life then the sad and inevitable consequence will be aborting the child. As much as I dislike abortion I could also live with it in the case of fatal fetal abnormalities that would see that child suffer and die shortly after birth, there are alternatives like neo-natal hospice care that have many psychological benefits for grieving parents too, but I could understand ending a pregnancy in which the child never stood a chance anyway and foregoing the trauma of that birth for both the parents and the child.
Deleted User wrote: » Get over it????? You have not heard any reasonable debate, so your answer is "get over it"? Society in Ireland has also moved forward since the times you have mentioned There is no next to no stigma now with an unmarried woman having a child There is also a lot more help and assistance for anyone having a child You are right though, the world has moved on, thankfully
gizmo81 wrote: » Because the neighbours are happy enough with the knocked up young wan next door we should force her to carry a baby for 9 months?
pjohnson wrote: » So you do want the 8th amended after all? Thats what I thought glad I cleared that up.
Deleted User wrote: » What?
gizmo81 wrote: » I haven't used a playground name please point to it. The laundries were a result of hiding the problem! The ferries are a result of hiding the problem. How many more decades do you want to keep passing on the problem?
conorhal wrote: » I don't think it's necessary from my point of view, it would be acceptable to me however if it was amended to permit for fatal fetal abnormalities.
gizmo81 wrote: » I read it that you said because there is no stigma for single mothers we should ban abortion? "There is no next to no stigma now with an unmarried woman having a child There is also a lot more help and assistance for anyone having a child"
pjohnson wrote: » Yes so despite you histrionics regarding "pro abortionists" you are actually in favour of the amendment. Was an odd duopoly that you tried to sneak in unnoticed. Perhaps your admittance may show you that those who want choice dont actually want all babies mounted on pikes or have an insatiable abortion lust. People just dont want another Savita or to force women to endure giving birth to a baby destined to die.
WHIP IT! wrote: » With every post you make, you push many undecided people further and further away from supporting your ideals... I'm not sure if you're aware of that - but you should be.
gizmo81 wrote: » If they need to use me as an excuse that's fine. The weak have been using the strong to justify their weakness forever.
conorhal wrote: » I'm sure in your mind you've caught a demagogue in some wonderful 'gottcha!' moment, but I've never said anything I consider inconsistent. What I said was, I'm not in favor of a change in the constitution. If an amendment was passed by the electorate that allowed for abortion in the case of fatal fetal abnormality I would accept that. As somebody with a distaste for the commodification of life as yet another disposible product, I see no conflict in the ending of a life that would never survive, and my own personal morality, that objects to ending a life for the sake of convenience. I don't characterize people who are pro abortion as slavering individuals who "want all babies mounted on pikes or have an insatiable abortion lust", that's just your sad projection of your own prejudices onto my mindset, and what would have saved your favorite strawman Savita Halapinaver's life was an ounce of logic and a competent doctor who bothered to read a chart or answer a page.
pjohnson wrote: » And now your rhetoric is back lol.
WHIP IT! wrote: » An excuse for what?
gizmo81 wrote: » To vote against abortion
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/v2/539351850a16f5f9c21e3ead71d5e342.svg)
