volchitsa wrote: » I'm so happy and relieved this evening. I just really hope now that the rest of the country shows the same willingness to think about the issues and not follow the bloody bishops! But I have a lot more hope that they will than I did even a couple of years ago. I was in despair after the Ms Y fiasco. Today I'm relieved and hopeful that my country won't continue to shame itself over its unforgivable treatment of women.
Howard Tasteless Bank wrote: » The one where the gay neoliberal feminists will be having abortion parties 3 days before their due date if we give an inch or the one where people aren't agreeing with them so the whole thing is obviously unfair and imbalanced?
RobertKK wrote: » The thing is nothing has been passed and are simply recommendations. Do people think FG will be being alienating their voters if they are the ones responsible for a referendum? Do they think FF will do the same? They can simply leave it at serious health risks, rape and FFA. If they wanted it to fail they could go extreme and have no limits on the reasons. Just think all this joy is a bit premature for those who support abortion as an option for whatever reason.
RobertKK wrote: » The thing is nothing has been passed and are simply recommendations. Do people think FG will be being alienating their voters if they are the ones responsible for a referendum with abortion on request? Do they think FF will do the same? They can simply leave it at serious health risks, rape and FFA. If they wanted it to fail they could go extreme and have no limits on the reasons. Just think all this joy is a bit premature for those who support abortion as an option for whatever reason.
RobertKK wrote: » There will be a referendum, and it is going to be war from all sides.
RobertKK wrote: » But all the repeal gear, Unal Mullally's repeal the 8th book, the t-shirts, etc will have to be replaced or amended too...
tigger123 wrote: » Fine Gael would never have put this to the Citizen's Assembly without having a plan ready to go, whatever the result is. They know they have to act on it (and put it to a referendum).
Howard Tasteless Bank wrote: » Yeah premature joy is pretty annoying... Assuming that the CA is representative of the country, this is good news, I wouldn't be confident of unrestricted access being passed in a referendum but really the whole debate the last year or so has just been a string of pleasant surprises so who knows. Getting access for women with FFA pregnancies and serious health problems would still be good news. (Making an exception for rape is a stupid unworkable idea). Any progress is good as far as I'm concerned.
volchitsa wrote: » :confused You seem to think that most pro choice people will only be happy with an unlimited abortion regime practically up to birth - but you're completely wrong. Most people I know would be perfectly satisfied with abortion for personal reasons being available for the first trimester only, because that is when the vast majority of such abortions take place anyway. After that date, serious health reasons and FFA may be necessary, but that can be legislated for separately.
Woodville56 wrote: » RobertKK wrote: » There will be a referendum, and it is going to be war from all sides. I can't see a referendum of the people approving an amendment proposing the broad liberalisation in abortion law as proposed by the Citizens Assembly - abortion in cases of rape of incest probably would succeed but abortion on demand with no gestation time limits, abortion for social economic reasons ? I don't think so. I really don't expect the Irish voting public will go down that road if that's what's proposed in a referendum.
tigger123 wrote: » I doubt FG will tackle it in the lifetime of this Govt tbh. They'll push it out till after the election, knowing full well they might not be in Govt and FF/SF/whoever will have to pick it up.
LexieOnRale wrote: » Every time I have sex, I consent to sex only, not with the condition this may produce a child. To say "well she had consensual sex, now let her live with it", is kind of punishing a woman, no?
RobertKK wrote: » You do know that everything proposed is non binding recommendations? That is why it is premature joy.
tigger123 wrote: » Interesting that a selection of citizens that listened to fair, balanced and non hysterical debate ended up with this result.
Howard Tasteless Bank wrote: » Thing is though, that's not what the general population will get in the run up to a vote, unfortunately. It's not going to be pleasant at all.
hatrickpatrick wrote: » Howard Tasteless Bank wrote: » Thing is though, that's not what the general population will get in the run up to a vote, unfortunately. It's not going to be pleasant at all. Unfortunately you're right. However, in all honesty, how much is that going to matter in this case? The issue is so contentious and such a sacred cow for people regardless of who's side they're on that I just can't imagine anybody being swayed by campaigning. Can you? Do you see a poster, a radio or TV ad, a debate etc changing anyone's pre-existing views on this? Do you see current undecideds, who IMO are the only ones who will potentially be convinced in such a manner, numbering anywhere near enough to swing the result in one direction or another? In my view, this very simply will come down to whether the majority of the population is pro choice or not. The campaign, despite being inevitably massive, pervasive and ugly as you have predicted, will matter very little in terms of actually influencing the outcome. I could be wrong in my assertion that on-the-fencers will be an extreme rarity in this, but I certainly can't think of a single person I know or have heard of in the media or elsewhere who hasn't had their mind made up on this for years and years, and in such a manner that nothing, not even God himself appearing in the clouds and making a declaration on the subject, would convince them to change it.
professore wrote: » Every time i drink I consent to ingesting alcohol but I don't consent to getting drunk. Your statement is equally logical.
hatrickpatrick wrote: » Unfortunately you're right. However, in all honesty, how much is that going to matter in this case? The issue is so contentious and such a sacred cow for people regardless of who's side they're on that I just can't imagine anybody being swayed by campaigning. Can you? Do you see a poster, a radio or TV ad, a debate etc changing anyone's pre-existing views on this? Do you see current undecideds, who IMO are the only ones who will potentially be convinced in such a manner, numbering anywhere near enough to swing the result in one direction or another? In my view, this very simply will come down to whether the majority of the population is pro choice or not. The campaign, despite being inevitably massive, pervasive and ugly as you have predicted, will matter very little in terms of actually influencing the outcome. I could be wrong in my assertion that on-the-fencers will be an extreme rarity in this, but I certainly can't think of a single person I know or have heard of in the media or elsewhere who hasn't had their mind made up on this for years and years, and in such a manner that nothing, not even God himself appearing in the clouds and making a declaration on the subject, would convince them to change it.
RobertKK wrote: » The thing is nothing has been passed and are simply recommendations.
RobertKK wrote: » Do people think FG will be being alienating their voters if they are the ones responsible for a referendum with abortion on request? Do they think FF will do the same?
RobertKK wrote: » They can simply leave it at serious health risks, rape and FFA.
RobertKK wrote: » If they wanted it to fail they could go extreme and have no limits on the reasons. Just think all this joy is a bit premature for those who support abortion as an option for whatever reason.
Howard Tasteless Bank wrote: » I was pro-life when I was younger. People do change their minds. People who have previously been pro-life may be edging towards not being pro-the-eighth in light of the cases which have been in the news the last few years. And I'd say there are plenty of people who are in principle supportive of abortion in certain cases, but who would be susceptible to scaremongering, the 'open the flood gates' notion.
AtomicHorror wrote: » As was I, to my shame. My education and research in biology made me moderately pro-choice, my conversations with pro-choice advocates and women friends made me strongly pro-choice. People change, with the right arguments.
