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

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I don't understand how abortion is legalised just in cases of rape to be honest. I take it the woman just goes to the doctor and say they were raped and he'll send her to the relevant services. To me this is basically legalised abortion/abortion on demand/abortion by choice/what ever term you want to call it.

Presumably the woman would have to go through a horrendous trail if she finds her attacker, which would probably make the case for the aboration much more simpler to achieve. If the "father" in this instance cannot be located then it would get progressively harder to prove rape and thus the legitimately of having the abortion much more harder.

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I don't understand how abortion is legalised just in cases of rape to be honest. I take it the woman just goes to the doctor and say they were raped and he'll send her to the relevant services. To me this is basically legalised abortion/abortion on demand/abortion by choice/what ever term you want to call it.

Yes its THAT straight forward. Dont be soft.

RDM_83 again

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I must say the reported size of it certainly worries me a little - I never thought it would be a walk in the park for repeal but I did expect there to be an enthusiasm gap, which there doesn't seem to be if the reported attendance of this is anything to go by.

Having said that, I really don't think holding simultaneous and co-located counter rallies is ever a good idea. Let them have their moment and then try and have an even bigger repeal rally the following week would have been a better strategy IMO.

I'm not in Ireland at the minute but the impression I get is that the Repeal the 8th movement is allowing the strongly pro-choice voices to dominate the message and its being led by urban multinational younger people. I don't think this is a smart on their part at all.

Repealing the 8th should be an fairly easy win, repeal doesn't have to mean that a liberal pro-choice regime with late term limits like the UK, USA or Canada is brought in. We could repeal and still have a fairly strict needs based regime with measures like multiple consultations and mandatory counseling so that the system is focused on harm reduction. We should be looking to mainland Europe not the Anglo-sphere for guidance.

If I'm in the country for it I would vote for Repeal as the 8th realistically does cause harm however I have a lot of understanding for the "slippery slope" argument when you see how its the strongly pro-choice voices that are dominating the debate and we live right next door to a great example of how a law that sets out a fairly strict needs based regime UK 1967 abortion act is now very much misapplied - see Lord Steel, the architect of said bill comments on this.

TLDR: The Repeal movement is messing up by making this all about being pro-choice when it should be about Repealing the 8th.

freshpopcorn

Rebekah Strong Archivist wrote: »

How does abortion in the case of rape work on a practical level?

I don't understand how abortion is legalised just in cases of rape to be honest. I take it the woman just goes to the doctor and say they were raped and he'll send her to the relevant services. To me this is basically legalised abortion/abortion on demand/abortion by choice/what ever term you want to call it.

Rebekah Strong Archivist wrote: »

How does abortion in the case of rape work on a practical level?

Ehhh Huh? I would imagine if you get raped you have an abortion.

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Abortion is wrong and shouldnt be allowed, period. That would be my opinion. Unfortunately abortion is available and even those that break the law in Ireland by going abroad to have one, means that we must face the fact that abortion available and a fact of life that will not disappear.

I have every sympathy for women that dont want a child but have got themselves into that position, and in certain LIMITED instances, such as rape, abortion should be allowed, but for the most part I will defend the life of the unborn it doesnt have a voice.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Syphonax wrote: »

Im in favour or women aborting a child in the instance of rape, so your quick witted remark has nothing to do with abortion-on-demand, sorry.

How does abortion in the case of rape work on a practical level?

super_furry

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0701/887020-march-for-life/

"It was organised by groups who want to preserve the Eighth Amendment. They said around 70,000 people took part in the march today."

Seems that 70k figure came from the people organising the event. Who'd have thought they'd overestimate by 50,000?

....... wrote: »

The Garda figure was reported in the Irish Times, it was RTE who published the 70k figure.

Perhaps RTE simply didnt fact check?

Sure, I'm just saying it's quite unlike them and I'd have to wonder how they calculated it themselves. Most of the time their own estimations end up falling short of the Garda numbers.

There are phone apps which calculate crowd size based on drawing a line on a map of roughly how much of an area was filled with people - maybe they're now using a new one with a different algorithm?

This post has been deleted.

To chime in on the philosophical debate here, I enjoy life, I'm pretty sure for various reasons that I was an accident (I hesitate to use the word "mistake" here although I'm sure many who know me would happily do so), but the way I see it had I never existed at all there'd be more pints to go around for everyone else and the fine citizenry of Boards.ie would have been spared years of political pontifications, so really it's a win-win either way

This post has been deleted.

freshpopcorn

Ben Gadot wrote: »

Sometimes social media can trick one into thinking something is a foregone conclusion but I don't think there is one here now. I'd be concerned now, especially as how one poster pointed out earlier, that there doesn't to be one coherent voice or message in the choice lobby.

I really think this is one of their biggest downfalls that they need to get sorted. The pro-life side could really get under them if they don't when it comes to debates.

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Im in favour or women aborting a child in the instance of rape, so your quick witted remark has nothing to do with abortion-on-demand, sorry.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

[Dougal]
I'm no good at estimating the size of crowds but i reckon there is about 17 million of them.
[/Dougal]

Tell Eoin we think he's lovely!

ohnonotgmail

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

That's pretty bizarre if you compare it to water charge protests, anti war protests etc - the media are usually either in line with or actually more conservative than the Garda statistics. Wonder why the discrepancy?

you would also wonder why RTE barely mentioned the counter demonstration at all.

....... wrote: »

RTE reported 70,000 but Gardai estimated between 10,000 and 20,000.

The size wouldnt worry me at all tbh, the prolifers tend to be a vocal minority.

That's pretty bizarre if you compare it to water charge protests, anti war protests etc - the media are usually either in line with or actually more conservative than the Garda statistics. Wonder why the discrepancy?

Lollipops23 wrote: »

How come it's murder if I feel unable to feed and raise a child, but not murder if the child's father forces himself on me? What's the line for you?

Its murder either way, but without the consent of the woman and unless she is willing to have the baby or carry it to term and give it up for adoption, then I would be in favour of allowing her to abort it.

ohnonotgmail

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

[Dougal]
I'm no good at estimating the size of crowds but i reckon there is about 17 million of them.
[/Dougal]

zedhead

RobertKK wrote: »

But you brought happiness to your parents, so you did make the world a better place for others who love you.

I bought happiness to my parents because they wanted me. I was the product of a loving, committed marriage in which they knew they wanted more childred. They were in a position to support me financially and emotionally.

Had that not been the case then they may have chosen to go down the abortion route and I am fine knowing that.

This post has been deleted.

Whether or not it's murder should depend almost entirely on how early during pregnancy we're talking about. Any other argument makes zero sense in my view.

This post has been deleted.

ohnonotgmail

RobertKK wrote: »

Just look at your own reply, you have not even debated the point.

It is an uncomfortable truth that I posted.

there is nothing to debate. If i had been aborted the world would have continued just fine. I certainly wouldnt have cared.

zedhead wrote: »

It always comes down to punishing a women for daring to have sex and not be prepared for the consequences, regardless of the fact that there are always 2 people involved.

Unfortunately for women, they make the babies, so more than anyone they would have to deal with consequences. It is therefor incumbent on them to not get into situations where they will have to be "punished" as you call it, otherwise we are "punishing" an innocent child who will never get to tell his or her life story.

RobertKK

zedhead wrote: »

I don't think the world would be any better or worse had I been aborted. I am sure it would have been the right choice for my parents if they had chosen that path. To be honest I think my life is wholly irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. What I am grateful for is that I had parents who were in a position to raise me in a home filled with love and where all my requirements were met.

But you brought happiness to your parents, so you did make the world a better place for others who love you.

This post has been deleted.

Lollipops23

Syphonax wrote: »

Dont jump down my throat about rape cases when you clearly have no idea of my opinion on the matter. I am for abortion in very limited circumstances, such as rape.

How come it's murder if I feel unable to feed and raise a child, but not murder if the child's father forces himself on me? What's the line for you?

I must say the reported size of it certainly worries me a little - I never thought it would be a walk in the park for repeal but I did expect there to be an enthusiasm gap, which there doesn't seem to be if the reported attendance of this is anything to go by.

Having said that, I really don't think holding simultaneous and co-located counter rallies is ever a good idea. Let them have their moment and then try and have an even bigger repeal rally the following week would have been a better strategy IMO.