Howard Tasteless Bank wrote: » No, I mean what would the process be, not the 'women should be punished if they have sex on purpose' bit. Walk me through how it would happen, what would the guidelines and rules be so that the dirty hoor who let her knickers down stays pregnant and serves her right, and the poor fallen woman who was raped is allowed an abortion because sure she'd probably never have one normally the poor thing.
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Ah here we go with the martyrdom.. Haven't seen one user refer to women (who have become pregnant through consensual sex) in that manner, or anything close to it.
Riskymove wrote: » The difficulty, as ever, is how these work in pracice and what is required to be proven etc.
B_Wayne wrote: » One user referred to them as 'hussies' and another came along to back them up on the use of the term... So it's pretty spot on.
ricero wrote: » Liberals are trying to ruin this countries morality. I for one will not vote in abortion to be used as a easy fix for hussies who forget to use contraception
Howard Tasteless Bank wrote: » Well yeah, and I mean apparently this is news to some people but the abortion debate does also take place outside the confines of boards on sites where people let their true colours show a bit more.
AtomicHorror wrote: » Actually, two other users came along to thank ricero for his judgment. So there's at least three of them in it, and although ricero hasn't shown his face since then, the other two are still posting here:
JupiterKid wrote: » Forcing a woman who has been raped to carry her fetus to full term is utterly barbaric, and anyone on this thread advocating this should be ashamed of themselves.
dav3 wrote: » Well we had Mattie Mcgrath on the radio the morning after the Citizens’ Assembly once again stating he is opposed to abortion in all circumstances. He is quite happy forcing a women to have a baby against her will, even if she was raped. I’m sure he’s not the only TD who thinks in this way. Unfortunately he wasn’t pushed on this by the interviewer, he never is. I believe people with this mindset should be encouraged to come forward and give a full explanation as to why they think forcing a woman to have a baby against her will is a reasonable belief to have. It’s the only way to show these people that their belief is no longer held by the majority of people in Ireland.
AtomicHorror wrote: » I think at a certain point media outlets have to ask themselves if they're really obliged to offer a platform to everyone with a brain-fart about an important topic. And ask themselves if they're offering it for the sake of good journalism or good sales. A lunatic is free to stand on a box on Grafton Street and speak as he wishes, we don't have to make the decision to hand him a megaphone.
dav3 wrote: » Well we had Mattie Mcgrath on the radio the morning after the Citizens’ Assembly once again stating he is opposed to abortion in all circumstances. He is quite happy forcing a women to have a baby against her will, even if she was raped.
AtomicHorror wrote: » I think at a certain point media outlets have to ask themselves if they're really obliged to offer a platform to everyone with a brain-fart about an important topic. And ask themselves if they're offering it for the sake of good journalism or good sales..
dav3 wrote: » This applies to the same half dozen names, that we all know, constantly on the airwaves attempting to misinform and muddy the waters when it comes to the abortion debate.
kunst nugget wrote: » There's pretty strict rules in place in terms of balanced reporting in relation to referenda (or even potential referenda like repeal the 8th) where both sides have to get equal airing - organisations on both sides seem to monitor the airwaves obsessively and make complaints if they think the other side is getting preferential treatment.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » Folks in RTE believe that they have to have a "balanced" debate with views on both sides given equal and respectful treatment. The gay marriage referendum was strange that way, since they were unable to dig out anyone half-way normal to oppose it with "balance", although they tried. So was their failure to round up opposition due to the fact it was so popular, or did it end up so popular because the anti side were so pathetic?
dav3 wrote: » As an aside, there are disgraceful attempts to undermine the Citizens’ Assembly by certain people in the media. One point being that the outcome does not tally with previous polls. This is a false equivalence. The only way you can compare a poll and the outcome of the Citizen’s Assembly would be to expose the people taking to poll to the same facts, logic and evidence by leading experts and then poll them and compare it to the Citizens’ Assembly outcome. I imagine we would get the same results as the Assembly. When you expose people to misinformation and fearmongering, having a skewed poll on abortion is inevitable. The attempts to discredit the Citizen’s Assembly should be challenged at every opportunity.
Zubeneschamali wrote: » Folks in RTE believe that they have to have a "balanced" debate with views on both sides given equal and respectful treatment.
dav3 wrote: » It was similar to the Citizen’s Assembly where one side of the debate was unable to put their points across in a meaningful manner. They, like the same-sex marriage referendum relied on misinformation and false facts. As an aside, there are disgraceful attempts to undermine the Citizens’ Assembly by certain people in the media. One point being that the outcome does not tally with previous polls. This is a false equivalence. The only way you can compare a poll and the outcome of the Citizen’s Assembly would be to expose the people taking to poll to the same facts, logic and evidence by leading experts and then poll them and compare it to the Citizens’ Assembly outcome. I imagine we would get the same results as the Assembly. When you expose people to misinformation and fearmongering, having a skewed poll on abortion is inevitable. The attempts to discredit the Citizen’s Assembly should be challenged at every opportunity.
kunst nugget wrote: » It's not that the folks in RTÉ believe they have to have a balanced debate - all radio stations are required by the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland to have balanced coverage with both sides being given equal treatment.
AtomicHorror wrote: » This was something that came to my mind last week as well. Although I'm happy with the outcome of the CA, I still do think that a sample so small cannot be considered statistically representative of the population. What I think would be really interesting would be any data on the participants attitudes on entry into the CA. And then of course equivalent polling on exit. Was the wording of the ballots known at the start of the CA meetings on Article 40.3.3? Was any entry polling done? It would be very interesting to see if the CA were similar to the general populace in attitudes and whether access to experts moved people's position on various matters.
AtomicHorror wrote: » This I know, but I don't have to like how "balanced" is interpreted by a spineless organisation that fears complaints more than it respects expertise or good journalism. There will be plenty of voices on the No side with a coherent argument to make. We won't want for balance.
kunst nugget wrote: » In referenda like the one for the Marriage Equality one, it did end giving a lot of power to fringe groups like the Iona Institute as they were one of the few groups opposing it but thems the breaks.
kunst nugget wrote: » I still think the fair and balanced approach is the only way to go - it stops dissent about unfair treatment in the media if the vote goes against them.
AtomicHorror wrote: » Sure, but if, for the sake of argument, a TD wished to opine that we should vote no because it is the will of the faeries, does BAI require that his opinion get an airing, or is it sufficient that equal time and exposure be granted to the no side, but with discretion as to the bonkersness of the actual voices given a platform?
NuMarvel wrote: » The 50/50 balance rule only applies during referendum campaigns. Outside of that, the rules are that broadcasters must be fair and objective. But as the BAI said, there's no automatic requirement for balance or equal airtime to be fair.
AtomicHorror wrote: » But was that the BAI or RTE's fear of the BAI erring on the side of caution?
kunst nugget wrote: » RTÉ would be following the BAI guidelines to avoid complaints being upheld against them.
kunst nugget wrote: » No, it wouldn't mean that his opinion would have to be aired, it just means that if it is aired, equal coverage has to be given to an opposing argument. Like I said, I think the problem has been with the previous couple of a referendum (Marriage Equality, Children's Rights) only fringe groups were in the opposition camp which lead to them being given a lot of media power - it didn't do much damage to the outcome of the votes.
