nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Did anybody here attend the Rally For Life/repeal the 8th marches in Dublin?

freshpopcorn

I heard a good bit about these online at the weekend. Did anybody on Boards attend either of these?
I think it was official the Rally for Life and the counter march was organised by the repeal side. I know in my local town their was a bus organised by the Rally for Life group. According to the net their was meant to have be a good turn out for the Rally for Life protest. This was discredited by repeal the 8th side but either side always tend to think they've a massive group and the other side is smaller.
From social media it appears to the same people commenting from both sides all the time in my experience with the typical comments getting all the likes. Outside of the internet/news articles I have never really heard many people on about it to be honest.
It will be a very interesting to see how a vote on this will go in my opinion it will all depend on what people are voting for. One thing I have noticed is repeal votes seem to be alienating the on the fence voters more so than the pro-life campaign.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Ann_Landers

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Well probably yes but you could say the same about younger people attending the repeal march back in September.(Not to generalise about age) However the grew vote can be very loyal.

I thought I read that one of the main groups involved in organising the pro-life march was from Northern Ireland which I thought a bit odd.

freshpopcorn

Ann_Landers wrote: »

I thought I read that one of the main groups involved in organising the pro-life march was from Northern Ireland which I thought a bit odd.

I honestly don't know. Sometimes with campaigns money/resources come from overseas. No matter what side of the fence your on.

Donal55

Ann_Landers wrote: »

I thought I read that one of the main groups involved in organising the pro-life march was from Northern Ireland which I thought a bit odd.

Can't see any problem with it. I'm sure many of our LGBT pals will go north to protest about the marriage/equality issue up there.

Uriel.

wordofwarning wrote: »

No true. Around 50-66% of abortions are due to contraceptive failures eg the pills not working for some reason or condom failure. No all contraceptives are effective. In fact condoms are quite ineffective at preventing pregnancy versus IUD

AFAIK I don't think we were once told in sex ed in school that IUDs had pretty much a zero failure rate versus condoms which have a high failure rate

Condoms are near 100% effective when used correctly and when they fail you know they fail and can get MAP.

Will I Am Not

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

People's reasons for abortions are their own and just like any decision in life , it's theirs to decide and to deal with consequences. Regardless of the changes, none of them will allow for abortions at 6 months anyway, and I don't see anyone advocating that it should, outside of certain circumstances.

But either way, giving carte Blanche to have abortions up till the day of delivery on the grounds that the person doesn't want a black haired baby wouldnt have any effect on your life anyway so why get involved ?

Again , do you not think all this energy could be better spent helping people that actually want help from people who clearly have time on their hands to give it?

That's not even a reasonable point. Apart from the fact it would have an effect if it's their wife, sister, mother... You could say that about anything really.

whisky_galore

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Why are they still going around with the "Repeal" jumpers? It has pretty much been confirmed that it won't be repealed and we will instead have the option to amend the amendment.

"Amending the amendment" won't fit on a jumper.

keano_afc

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

And the mask slips.

Was it ever up in the first place?

keano_afc

gctest50 wrote: »

And how many of them had a uterus and were aged between say 18 and 40 ?

Quite a few of them actually, including my wife who was standing beside me.

If social media has taught me anything over the last couple of days, its that "pro-choice" supporters have as much respect for the validity of the elderly as they do for the pre-born.

Yourself isit

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

How about the simple solution of you stay out of my life and I stay out of yours. If you don't want an abortion youre free to not have one. The availability of abortion will have no impact on your life unless you go out of your way to involve yourself. Just like all the things I don't involve myself with don't impact my life.

This argument is why I dispair of the pro choice movement. Clearly the other side - which isn't my side - believes there is a child there at all times.

And surely everybody believes that in late term.

gctest50

Ann_Landers wrote: »

I thought I read that one of the main groups involved in organising the pro-life march was from Northern Ireland which I thought a bit odd.

There could be a lot of money involved in it all - bit like Noraid etc

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/sinn-f%C3%A9in-raised-12-million-in-the-united-states-1.2126033?mode=amp

Easy enough go " passing the hat around" in America etc for poor little Oirland

keano_afc

Ann_Landers wrote: »

I thought I read that one of the main groups involved in organising the pro-life march was from Northern Ireland which I thought a bit odd.

Not really. The event was called the All Ireland Rally for Life.

Grayson

Donal55 wrote: »

Can't see any problem with it. I'm sure many of our LGBT pals will go north to protest about the marriage/equality issue up there.

Precious life are a bit odd.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/prolifer-bernadette-smyth-breaches-court-order-in-just-48-hours-30851134.html

Plus, if I remember correctly, she's the one that said yoga was evil and christians shouldn't have anything to do with it.

CaoimheSquee

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Do you think a woman should be able to abort pregnancies at seven months? No, you don't, like most normal people and so therefore even YOU think a woman should not always be able to do what she wants to with "her body". People parrot that slogan because that's all they have but it has never been able to stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

ALL opinions on abortion come down to fetal development. There is no adult on Planet Earth that has an opinion on abortion that is not based solely on fetal development (excluding fta, risk to life etc etc... of course). All the other bull**** is just background noise as even the staunchest of prochoice don't believe women should be able to abort any stage of a pregnancy. Which is why women in the UK (for example) have been imprisoned for killing their unborn babies after 24 weeks gestation.

Now, you ask why should you (a man) have a say in any abortion referendum?

Well, 50% of a baby's DNA comes from it's father. In fact, human beings use use more DNA from their fathers than we do our mothers and so why shouldn't men have a say in what happens babies as they develop in the womb given that?

Besides, even if that wasn't true. All citizens of a country should have a say in something as important the rights of our offspring at gestational stage. How we treat our most vulnerable says so much about us and there are no more vulnerable human beings on this Planet than those in the womb.

So much wrong with this.
Do you really think women will turn around at 7 months and decide nah, I don't really want this baby now?
Late abortions only happen in very sad circumstances for all, and 7 months would be HIGHLY irregular and horrifying. It would be a c-section also. Not an abortion and probably a miscarriage.
It is only the later scans that show abnormalities (generally the 20 week one) so by the time a woman decides what to do and arranges to go to ANOTHER COUNTRY to have an abortion it will be late. Nobody wants that.
Any reasonable person (doctors for choice TFMR, ARC etc.) is campaigning for early as possible, late as necessary.
Allowing women to choose with their doctors, privately, is the compassionate and logical outcome here.

And it is her body. And it is her choice. Ultimately. Even my parents in their 70's know that!

If men went through pregnancy, went through labour and put their lives and livelihoods at risk then I would fully support them if the tables were turned on this.

The sky will not fall in if and when this passes. Women will not start murdering children on the streets. Remember the divorce referendum? Husbands and wives did not start leaving each other and walking out of their homes.

Grayson

Uriel. wrote: »

Condoms are near 100% effective when used correctly and when they fail you know they fail and can get MAP.

I think you need to learn a bit more about condoms.

CaoimheSquee

Uriel. wrote: »

Condoms are near 100% effective when used correctly and when they fail you know they fail and can get MAP.

:eek::eek::eek::eek:

hytrogen

martingriff wrote:

So if you partner was pregnant you be happy if she just went and had a termination. After all it's her body why should a man (you) have a say

I'd perhaps raise an eyebrow if it was my wife and our child and everything was going hunky dory until then, but until the day those bells ring why should I decide about her lifestyle choices? Especially if we committed to a sexual encounter that was mutually enjoyable and all the safeguards were used. Raising a child is a massive undertaking emotionally, physically and financially, especially for a parent. Equally why should she get involved in my affairs when we have no legal recognition of unity together?
Difference being the supportiveness of husband and wife Vs partner(s) really. I'm not saying kids raised by a lone parent are bad, far from it, but from personal observations they mostly do end up with a chip on their shoulder and psychological issues later on in life due to society's pressures portrayed upon them of "normality".

nozzferrahhtoo

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Looked like a decent sized crowd but sure if people want to dismiss views... let them.

It is hard to "dismiss" views that are not coherently offered. I have not sat down and talked to The Anti Abortion campaigners in a long time but I can only hope that over the years they have improved their approach.

I have told the story before but I took an afternoon out, during the time I wanted to form and inform my final opinions on abortion, to go sit and talk with the Anti Abortion people at those old information tables they used to have outside Central Bank Dublin (do they still do that?)

I could not get a SINGLE coherent argument out of them. They just kept telling me in a stoner like drawl "Look at the pictures maaaaan", referring to the misleading photographs they had blown up and erected for their shock value.

And when I come on to forums like this one it is not much better. I get utter nonsense pedaled at me like playing music to the fetus to make it's tongue move. Followed by silent fish impressions when you ask what the point actually is.

In the end my pro-choice position was informed not just by the arguments I heard and learned, and the biology and science I studied and learned, but by the complete and utter lack of arguments and points being made to me by the wavers of cherry picked photographs.

I can not dismiss, what simply is not there.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Do you think a woman should be able to abort pregnancies at seven months? No, you don't, like most normal people and so therefore even YOU think a woman should not always be able to do what she wants to with "her body".

Is it safe to ask that question and answer it for them though? They MIGHT believe that. There have been three or four people on this forum who seem to genuinely believe that abortion should be allowed at ANY stage for ANY reason at all.

Though the coherence of their reasoning on that is pretty poor. One user, for example, when I queried him on the basis of that position merely claimed that Hillary Clinton agrees with him. Not only do I doubt that is entirely true or representative of her position......... an enormous "so what?" jumped into my mind at the time.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

People parrot that slogan because that's all they have but it has never been able to stand up to even the slightest scrutiny.

Like many slogans, if you take it at face value and entirely literally it is not going to make much sense. You have, however, had it explained to you MULTIPLE times what lies behind the slogan, and what people generally mean by it. Like most slogans you need to engage with it, and the people using it, to unpack the meaning and intention of it. But if you contrive to refuse to do that, then I do not think conversation will ever move past the slogans.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

There is no adult on Planet Earth that has an opinion on abortion that is not based solely on fetal development

I have met some people who's ENTIRE argument against abortion is that they believe some god inserts a "soul" into the zygote at the moment of conception and that abortion is wrong because it is against their god's plan and intentions.

So I would be careful of declaring what "ALL" people believe until you have taken the time to actually talk to "ALL" people. Or even ANY of them.

Eyes Down Field wrote: »

I think the referendum on the 8th should be decided by women only. As a man, Why should I have a say in what a woman choses to do with her, body, her life.

Because it involves a change to our constitution and the constitution belongs to ALL the people, not just one gender or sex.

Uriel.

Grayson wrote: »

I think you need to learn a bit more about condoms.

Go on educate me

Guy:Incognito

At the end of the day the only people being prevented from having abortions are those too poor or vulnerable to travel to the UK. I'm not sure how forcing those women to have children they don't want is some sort of victory.........

And I notice that while people are selectively answering the posts that suit, the issue of why not spend your time helping people that are currently struggling with life and actually want your help seems to be ignored. Its not like there's a shortage of good deeds that need doing.

RayM

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I do get why you would focus on the male participants because of the message you hope to send, but is there any evidence for the male thing? Any of the pro-life marches I've seen (never participated in any though) have more women than men so I would be surprised if this one is any different.

Any pro-life marches I've seen in the last few years, middle-aged/elderly men were definitely the most vocal and most noticeable group. I've noticed a tendency to push younger people towards the front, particularly carrying banners, but those marches definitely seem to attract a disproportionate amount of old people.

Don't get me wrong - old men are every bit as entitled to have an opinion on women's bodily autonomy as I am.

Guy:Incognito

Well older virginal bachelors are aparently the best people to give advice to young couple's starting out married life so maybe they have all the answers........

Mutant z

I fully support womens right to be in control of their reproductive organs, why be forced to bring a child into the world you clearly don't want.

ash23

I saw a local woman on the news at the rally.
She was the same woman who showed me a rental property a few years back. She was mad keen on me when I scheduled the viewing. I was working and had great references.
When I was viewing the house she asked me who would be living there. Partner? Room mates?
I said just me and the little one.

"Oh, no partner? Just you?"
"Yes and my child"
"But how will you pay the rent? I don't take rent allowance"
"That's ok, I'm not on rent allowance. I work full time and have been renting a more expensive place for the last three years so the rent won't be a problem"
"Oh I'm not sure about renting to a single mother. The neighbours are very quiet and wouldn't want any trouble"

Anyway, conversation went on like that for a bit until I told her to stick it.

So she's all for the women keeping the tiny babies but then her and her ilk will look down their noses at the women and the babies if they're not in the perceived ideal situation.

Pro-life until the child is born in my opinion and my experience.

Or the chap I was seeing who ended it because his pro-life parents didn't approve of him seeing a single mother. So if I'd had an abortion I'd have been welcome because they'd have known no different. But the evidence of me not having an abortion meant I wasn't good enough for their son. I was well rid of him, the big girls blouse, but that stuck in my craw.

Uriel.

ash23 wrote: »

I saw a local woman on the news at the rally.
She was the same woman who showed me a rental property a few years back. She was mad keen on me when I scheduled the viewing. I was working and had great references.
When I was viewing the house she asked me who would be living there. Partner? Room mates?
I said just me and the little one.

"Oh, no partner? Just you?"
"Yes and my child"
"But how will you pay the rent? I don't take rent allowance"
"That's ok, I'm not on rent allowance. I work full time and have been renting a more expensive place for the last three years so the rent won't be a problem"
"Oh I'm not sure about renting to a single mother. The neighbours are very quiet and wouldn't want any trouble"

Anyway, conversation went on like that for a bit until I told her to stick it.

So she's all for the women keeping the tiny babies but then her and her ilk will look down their noses at the women and the babies if they're not in the perceived ideal situation.

Pro-life until the child is born in my opinion and my experience.

Or the chap I was seeing who ended it because his pro-life parents didn't approve of him seeing a single mother. So if I'd had an abortion I'd have been welcome because they'd have known no different. But the evidence of me not having an abortion meant I wasn't good enough for their son. I was well rid of him, the big girls blouse, but that stuck in my craw.

You should have performed an adult abortion on the lot of them

Will I Am Not

Everyone has an anecdote and everyone was at every meeting on both sides :rolleyes:

super_furry

For me, the whole thing can be summed up in one image.

SN%20Rally%20%20%203.jpg

Hector Savage

ash23 wrote: »

I saw a local woman on the news at the rally.
She was the same woman who showed me a rental property a few years back. She was mad keen on me when I scheduled the viewing. I was working and had great references.
When I was viewing the house she asked me who would be living there. Partner? Room mates?
I said just me and the little one.

"Oh, no partner? Just you?"
"Yes and my child"
"But how will you pay the rent? I don't take rent allowance"
"That's ok, I'm not on rent allowance. I work full time and have been renting a more expensive place for the last three years so the rent won't be a problem"
"Oh I'm not sure about renting to a single mother. The neighbours are very quiet and wouldn't want any trouble"

Anyway, conversation went on like that for a bit until I told her to stick it.

So she's all for the women keeping the tiny babies but then her and her ilk will look down their noses at the women and the babies if they're not in the perceived ideal situation.

Pro-life until the child is born in my opinion and my experience.

Or the chap I was seeing who ended it because his pro-life parents didn't approve of him seeing a single mother. So if I'd had an abortion I'd have been welcome because they'd have known no different. But the evidence of me not having an abortion meant I wasn't good enough for their son. I was well rid of him, the big girls blouse, but that stuck in my craw.

Spot on, once they are born they don't give a sh*t about them.

Shady shady group these anti choicers.

What were the numbers like in both rallies ?

_Kaiser_

I think it's very simple... the option should be there for those who want/need an abortion to have one legally and safely, without the additional trauma and expense of having to travel to the UK for it.

That's the most sensible option given that latter alternative isn't going away, no matter what is decided here. It's also not going to lead to a flood of abortions. Such a decision is something that I doubt anyone in that position makes lightly or doesn't agonize over afterwards (maybe for the rest of their lives).

Anything else is agenda-driven emotional blackmail by those who have no business interfering in that individual's choice and who certainly won't be living with the consequences (either way).

The_Valeyard

After reading the comments from most of the pro abortion side, I'll probably be voting to keep the 8th. Decision made.

_Kaiser_

The_Valeyard wrote: »

After reading the comments from most of the pro abortion side, I'll probably be voting to keep the 8th. Decision made.

Yea, because social media ranting (from both sides) is always the way to decide important issues.

Ask yourself this... what's the better outcome for a woman who finds herself in the position? Because THAT is what matters here, not the agenda of those (again on both sides) who won't have to live with the decision either way.