Morgans wrote: » 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.
Academic wrote: » May I be frank? I think triumphalism from either side of the debate is not only distasteful but also wildly premature. Moreover it contributes nothing to the quality of the discussion. But hey, that’s just me.
RobertKK wrote: » Meltdown on twitter by Repealthe8th people.
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...
RobertKK wrote: » They are non binding recommendations.
RobertKK wrote: » That is why it is premature joy.
AtomicHorror wrote: » 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
professore wrote: » Every time i drink I consent to ingesting alcohol but I don't consent to getting drunk. Your statement is equally logical.
AtomicHorror wrote: » 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.
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.
professore wrote: » Can't even what? If you have sex there is a chance you will get pregnant. You can't consent to getting pregnant. It either happens or it doesn't. You consent to have sex, which can cause you to get pregnant if you're female. If you make nonsensical statements expect to be called out on them.
Delirium wrote: So everyone who has sex, man or woman, is consenting to having a child?????
professore wrote: » How do you define the difference between moderately pro choice and strongly pro choice in scientific terms?
AtomicHorror wrote: » My stat was from the CA itself. Of course abstainers are not counted. Please stop patronising me.
thee glitz wrote: » A reasonable interpretation of your stat presentation is that 64% of people voted for abortion on demand. The actual result was 52% for, 29% against and 19% not giving an opinion.
[Deleted User] wrote: » I am very much pro choice but the "repeal the 8th crowd" sicken me hole even more than Iona do :mad:
Deleted User wrote: » I am very much pro choice but the "repeal the 8th crowd" sicken me hole even more than Iona do :mad:
anna080 wrote: » I'm pro choice within reason. I feel that most of the Repeal the 8th camp are too militant and seem to want AOD up until due day- that makes me feel sick to be honest.
AtomicHorror wrote: » Take it up with the CA. Maybe they need a lesson in stats. I don't. Or I don't care. Whichever.
anna080 wrote: I'm pro choice within reason. I feel that most of the Repeal the 8th camp are too militant and seem to want AOD up until due day- that makes me feel sick to be honest.
pilly wrote: » I have literally NEVER heard this view uttered.
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.
anna080 wrote: I realise I've made this point before, but this is a different thread, with different posters. Some of the same points are being made over and over by many of the usual suspects. Cool of you to choose mine though.
thee glitz wrote: Have you heard of abortionrightscampaign.ie?
Delirium wrote: » professore wrote: » Can't even what? If you have sex there is a chance you will get pregnant. You can't consent to getting pregnant. It either happens or it doesn't. You consent to have sex, which can cause you to get pregnant if you're female. If you make nonsensical statements expect to be called out on them. So everyone who has sex, man or woman, is consenting to having a child?????
Frank O. Pinion wrote: » 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.
Cosmicfox wrote: » 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 definitely think there's people who'll change their minds. I was pro-life myself all my life until a few years ago whereas now I'd support abortion on demand until 20 weeks (and probably extreme situations after that, need more research on that area) When all this really started kicking off I remember discussing it with a friend who was utterly disgusted with abortion for any reason. I've since seen her photos on FB campaigning to repeal the 8th. Something changed her stance I also had a conversation with my mum and she was pro-life too, the usual the 'poor babies' thing. Then she saw a debate on TV and was so disgusted by how the pro life side acted that she did more research herself on the topic and is now pro-choice until 12 weeks. Another girl in my family who wasn't bothered either way recently had a pregnancy scare and shocked that she found herself looking up information on abortion methods and clinics in the UK. She wasn't pregnant after all but it made her think about the subject far more seriously than ever before. I think some people will probably be swayed on their stance in the future, but it's going to be ugly seeing what's happened so far
Aseth wrote: » For me it is quite clear that woman's body is her own to do what she wants with - and I do not know how anyone wants to explain (except with their own concept of morality or god or whatever) how does a woman's decision to have an abortion affects anyone else except maybe her own family? I don't see why she should even justify herself - it's not like there's a country that allows abortion till 6 month or later and we would be hard pressed to find many people even supporting it. Most countries go with 20 weeks and it's a good solution. Anyway having a referendum would already be a big win giving each and every person a right to vote and express their opinion whatever it is.
professore wrote: » Your first sentence is factually incorrect. It's a distinct body with 50% of someone else's DNA not your body. By your logic you should be free to kill your adult children as "it's your body". It's as ridiculous and unscientific as the ancient Jewish belief that each sperm contained a fetish which simply grew inside the womb.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/a6734f9e45541efceb67bf368d9bc1c2.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/892f365931e5cb4ba5c9d4ce2c7da299.svg)
