The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Parchment · 23-04-2017 07:40PM

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.

I am totally pro choice but i dont see the referendum going in favour of the pro choice vote.

Calhoun · 23-04-2017 07:42PM

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?

I would say the first one is the route the will take. They are going to press the life of the unborn button quite hard.

RobertKK · 23-04-2017 07:43PM

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.

Calhoun · 23-04-2017 07:47PM

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.

That is the middle ground i think they will come back to, no matter what they do both sides are going to be unhappy. As the article will be kept in the constitution there will be something put into it that will keep their core support happy.

The other thing to consider is the lawsuits, we saw the suits that came with the gay marriage referendum be interesting to see what they do this time.

tigger123 · 23-04-2017 07:48PM

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.

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).

Woodville56 · 23-04-2017 07:50PM

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.

volchitsa · 23-04-2017 07:50PM

:confused

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.

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.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 23-04-2017 07:50PM

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.

Yeah premature joy is pretty annoying...

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...

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.

tigger123 · 23-04-2017 07:52PM

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.

RobertKK · 23-04-2017 07:53PM

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).

They are non binding recommendations.

RobertKK · 23-04-2017 07:55PM

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.

You do know that everything proposed is non binding recommendations?

That is why it is premature joy.

Calhoun · 23-04-2017 07:55PM

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.

The problem with that and what i think Robert is calling out is that the other side will not be happy with anything.

What this really comes down to is how well general Ireland understands the subject, its not as clear cut as the marriage referendum, there are ranging opinions and view points on this.

I heard one political commentator saying that the pro-life are in with a chance as they can push the abortion on demand topic, saying that this is where it will end up. With the citizens assembly recommending it to them it feeds right into their hands.

Regardless if it comes to a referendum it will be a messy affair.

spakman · 23-04-2017 07:56PM

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.

I would be appalled if they did. How could anyone see it as "progressive" to allow abortion at any stage of gestation and for any or no reason!?

Calhoun · 23-04-2017 07:57PM

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.

Indeed, their core voted in my eyes would be very conservative. Does them no favors to bring it in.

professore · 23-04-2017 07:57PM

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?

Every time i drink I consent to ingesting alcohol but I don't consent to getting drunk. Your statement is equally logical.

eviltwin · 23-04-2017 07:57PM

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.

They can't ignore it, they went to the trouble of passing it to the CA, they have to address it somehow.

I think people have every right to be happy with today's developments. I doubt we'd have seen this result a few years ago, people are seeing a change in this country's attitude to social issues and see that as a good thing.

No one expects full, on demand abortion to pass but any woman who can be helped here, one less woman who has to make the journey to the UK is a great result.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 23-04-2017 07:58PM

RobertKK wrote: »

You do know that everything proposed is non binding recommendations?

That is why it is premature joy.

I am pleased that the citizens assembly came to those conclusions, that, in and of itself is pleasing to me.

Yes I do realise that the recommendations are non binding and that the CA was just a meaningless delay tactic that wouldn't actually cause anything to happen, I'm still happy at what they decided.

It's joy about something, taking place after the thing has happened. It's really not premature. For that I'd refer to your own post from the first page.

tigger123 · 23-04-2017 08:00PM

Interesting that a selection of citizens that listened to fair, balanced and non hysterical debate ended up with this result.

professore · 23-04-2017 08:03PM

I would have preferred a clearly defined definition of when abortion is allowed and when it's not and have that as the referendum vote, rather than this which is a choice between no change and referring it to the Dail, where I will have zero say on what gets legislated. Very unsatisfactory.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 23-04-2017 08:04PM

tigger123 wrote: »

Interesting that a selection of citizens that listened to fair, balanced and non hysterical debate ended up with this result.

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 · 23-04-2017 08:16PM

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 · 23-04-2017 08:20PM

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.

Yep think you're spot on there.

AtomicHorror · 23-04-2017 08:22PM

professore wrote: »

Every time i drink I consent to ingesting alcohol but I don't consent to getting drunk. Your statement is equally logical.

Oh bloody hell. Really?

I can't even

Calhoun · 23-04-2017 08:24PM

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.

The only thing i think this posts misses is the level people are at on this discussion.

Do we have the pro-life v pro-choice, or is there actually a third grouping which is middle of the ground and support abortion in the case of certain conditions and not the whole way.

If that is the case, i think they are to play for if a referendum comes up.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 23-04-2017 08:25PM

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.

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 · 23-04-2017 08:29PM

RobertKK wrote: »

The thing is nothing has been passed and are simply recommendations.

The government wants this whole affair to have been someone else's decision. I don't think you're going to enjoy where this leads.

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?

Did you come away from this with the impression that there'll be a referendum on abortion on demand?

The referendum, if the CA are followed, will ask if 40.3.3 should go unchanged or should allow Oireachteas to legislate without restriction.

RobertKK wrote: »

They can simply leave it at serious health risks, rape and FFA.

If I were betting, I'd say that's probably how they'll legislate at first (though if they're spinless enough, they'll fully implement what the CA recommends and just blame the will of the people!). But the door will be open for successive governments to go much further without future referenda.

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.

You were pretty quick to gloat when you though this was coming up good for you.

AtomicHorror · 23-04-2017 08:32PM

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.

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.

Academic · 23-04-2017 08:47PM

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.

Absolutely. For me the question is: how many people are likely to change their minds between now and whenever the referendum is held?

That's one reason, among other obviously good ones, why I'm interested in what people think the timetable will be.

Morgans · 23-04-2017 08:56PM

I think its the most beautiful irony Ive come across in some time. That the OP is accusing the pro-choice/repeal activists of premature joy with the non binding recommendations from the CA given that the opening post was outlining (with a tone of glee) of how twitter was in meltdown from the repeal activists disappointed with the results of the CA 24 hours ago.

The pro-life activists seemed to think that the CA was another hurdle that the establishment was placing in the way of the overwhelming wishes of the people. Turns out that the results can only help the pro-choice cause and politics of FF/FG will need to explain to those pro-choice voters why they abandoning the recommendations of their own process. Far less leeway than previous and may in fact provide the excuse for those TDs who didnt want to declare their position previously.

Frank O. Pinion · 23-04-2017 09:04PM

I think you should not get an abortion unless you need one. In which case you better get one. I mean, seriously, if you need an abortion, you better get one. Don't f*ck around. And hurry, not getting an abortion that you need is like not taking a sh*t, that's how bad that is. It's like not taking a sh*t.

The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Comments