Calhoun wrote: » I havent really read the comments but while i condemn them i don't really care about them. Crap is on the internet folk from abroad are going to comment on it. My main concern is the crap she is spouting about Irish citizens. So get off your white night high horse trying to turn this whole discussion into a race argument. Its crap like this video that will sink this referendum, especially if we have a doubling down on the whole conversation and crap like this video is not allowed be challenged because its "racist".
RobertKK wrote: » But when there is an abortion, is the woman terminating her life, or that of a human life within her body? Her body is not just one life, but two lives. So while the argument is my body, my choice, the body that is being terminated is not her body per se.
B_Wayne wrote: » You literally just mentioned the comments you had seen in response to me commenting on the comments. :rolleyes: She said absolutely nothing wrong in my opinion, I think it's utterly wrong that we ever enshrined control over a woman's body into our constitution. She spouted no crap and said women should be at the forefront of this campaign. In terms of why this video resurfaced at all today is because a racist scumbag tweeted it. So yep, I think there is very much so an element of racism in terms of finding a problem with what she said. She said what a lot of women do feel about the position the state presently puts them in. In terms of her being from or not from Ireland, I don't think it remotely matters. We're currently going through Ms Y, a refugee who couldn't travel because she was not an EU citizen. She was raped, suicidal and wanted an abortion. Is her opinion less valid because she's not from Ireland? She might not have a vote but she is affected by our archaic policies. Take offence all you want but I could send that video onto my seventy year old mum and I doubt she'd be disagreeing. She's pretty conservative too but her views on abortion have largely changed as of late. The reason being is that women have been open about how they feel. They have told their stories and have every reason to be outraged.
volchitsa wrote: » If I came at you now with a knife, a bystander would presumably be entitled to hold me down, tie me down if necessary, to stop me, right? Should we do the same to a pregnant woman who is determined to abort her pregnancy? And since we don't, isn't that evidence that the majority of our society doesn't actually see the unborn as being the equivalent to a born person in the way you have tried to present it?
Calhoun wrote: » I think it matters where she is from, maybe not to you or I but to general population it might. The Mrs Y case is horrible but it is an outlier case and we don't really want to bring up the rabbit warren of refugees applying to Ireland even though we share no land border with Europe.
B_Wayne wrote: » The most favourited response simply reads: Some neckbeard on Twitter wrote: What is this negro doing in Ireland?! So stop bs'ing and claiming that it's not a racist pile on.
Some neckbeard on Twitter wrote: What is this negro doing in Ireland?!
Consonata wrote: » It isn't an outlier case for a few reasons, mainly the fact that the only difference between Mrs. Y and other Irish people seeking an abortion is means of travel. For her it was a legal barrier, for if she left the country she may not have been able to return. For others it is an economic barrier where they may not be able to afford the travel costs/accommodation/procedure that would be required when having the procedure in the UK Now if your response to that is "well abortion is a privilege so costs are to be expected" then that is a whole other can of worms, but if you accept that Mrs. Y's case is terrible and should not have happened, then you should at least accept that she is not an outlier.
PopePalpatine wrote: » Isn't it funny that pro-lifers aren't being asked by self-described "fence-sitters" to disown the assholes on their side?
Calhoun wrote: » her country of choice for refugee status
Calhoun wrote: » Not nearly as funny as the self righteous know it all pro-choice folk who look down on the little people in scorn. If they would only come down off their high horses and lose the condescending attitudes we might have an actual discussion.
Consonata wrote: » This implies that shes like a customer in a shop and is picking out her favourite from the EU 27 which is faintly ridiculous. You think after coming all that way she is going to jeopardize her status?
Consonata wrote: » The Irony here is pretty strong.
Calhoun wrote: » If your telling me her only reason for not going abroad was that she wasnt sure she would be allowed back into her country of choice for refugee status, its ridiculous. If she wanted the abortion so badly that she was suicidal surely she would have done anything possible to get rid of it.
Calhoun wrote: » No i am saying its not wise to build an argument on abortion based upon a refugee. Its a mess of a topic and allot of hard questions not related to the abortion will come out of it.
Calhoun wrote: » Why so because you disagree with what i am saying?
Consonata wrote: » So on the one hand and on the other hand we have I can't keep track of these goalposts. Is her situation bad or is it not? You are simultaneously dismissing her plight out of hand (on what basis I don't even want to know) and then saying that "The Mrs Y case is horrible". You are changing your point to fit your argument, plainly arguing in bad faith. Oh don't give me the poor discriminated right wing rubbish. Either argue with class or don't bother.
Calhoun wrote: » Let me break it down for you, what happened to her in terms of the rape ect was terrible, if the reason she couldnt have an abortion abroad was because our authorities wouldnt allow her to leave the country that should not have happened. However her being allowed to leave the country but not doing so because she might not get back in changes the dynamic. I wasn't aware if this was the case i was going on what you said. I am not giving you the poor discriminated right wing rubbish, i have been arguing that identity politics shouldnt play a part in this conversation at all. This then became a case of holding the pro-choice to more account than we are pro-lifers. There are crazy folk on both sides as far as i am concerned but for the purposes of today we are only talking about the one that came up. So again ill ask how is it Ironic? or is it just that you don't agree with what i am saying? Ok thought police tell the good folk of after-hours what they should think.
So again ill ask how is it Ironic?
freshpopcorn wrote: » Can somebody answer this for me. Should we see a referendum on this in the next few years?
Consonata wrote: » How does it remotely relate to identity politics though? You have the case of the refugee, who can't leave due to her status in the country, and you have the lady who can't afford to leave due to socio-economic reasons. Both women have an impediment to leaving the country which they cannot control, unless you are going to defer to some "bootstrap" logic. You have accepted that the case in terms of Mrs. Y was a terrible situation, yet do not accept that this situation is not unique. You are not being consistent with your outrage. Due to the fact you referred to pro-choice supporters as "self righteous know it all pro-choice folk who look down on the little people in scorn." and then went on to comment that people should "lose the condescending attitudes we might have an actual discussion."
Due to the fact you referred to pro-choice supporters as "self righteous know it all pro-choice folk who look down on the little people in scorn." and then went on to comment that people should "lose the condescending attitudes we might have an actual discussion.
RobertKK wrote: » Society is split, things being law doesn't mean it is right, in the past many things that were wrong were legal.
Consonata wrote: » The point is that it isn't law though. People aren't after keeping the status quo in this situation, in fact as far as I'm aware, retain in its entirety is only at like 15% polling wise. That suggests less a split, and more a consensus that something needs to change somewhere.
Calhoun wrote: » The case of socio-economic problem is something that i would say happens on a regular occurence there for it is common. Ms Y's case as i said is an outlier, meaning it is unique and the chances of it happening again are slim when we compare it to the former problem.
Calhoun wrote: » It would be folly to believe however that their is consensus for everything the citizens assembly has advised on. What will win the day is what ever side is more rational and speak to the Irish people. If we go down the identity politic route again like we did with the marriage referendum, it might not go the right way.
RobertKK wrote: » A referendum based on the CA recommendations would be hard to pass.
Consonata wrote: » But her case is not an outlier, you are only framing it so. Both women couldn't leave the country to have an abortion. There reasons are separate, the important point is that they couldn't have the abortion here. It isn't some other-worldly scenario, as frequently women can't just go away to the UK for a weekend to have an abortion. There's waiting lists, time off, familial circumstances, etc.
Calhoun wrote: » I am not treating it as an outlier, the folk who are pushing this as a sign that Ireland needs to change are doing that.
Consonata wrote: » I take it from that that your opinion is that the Pro-Gay Marriage side was not rational.
Consonata wrote: » Loving these goalpost moves. Great target practice.
