The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

average_runner wrote: »

I think it's to do with what this system has done to men. Outside this debate. Men have no rights when it comes to children, judges will give the children to the mother no matter how bad she is and then expect men to pay through the nose, eventually pushing a lot of men to suicide and never talked about.

That is a very sad post, even if you didn't mean it to be.

I thought things had changed recently regarding this issue. But please inform me if I am wrong.

average_runner

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

That is a very sad post, even if you didn't mean it to be.

I thought things had changed recently regarding this issue. But please inform me if I am wrong.

Does anything change in this country. It's not my situation though. Thank god

I'm getting a feeling that if the 8th is repealed and legislation framed, it will be a nine day wonder.

And no one will refer to it afterwards.

Any views on that?

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Just an offside comment.

Would I be totally wrong to say that men should not have any input into the lives of pregnant women and their babies WRT abortion and their lives/health? Should be a medical decision with the ob/gyn only.

Men will never have to suffer life threathening pre eclampsia, sepsis, post natal depression, pelvic floor disintegration, giving birth and the aftermath of it all.

Well I think they should just back off.

I notice a lot of the pro life are men. Command and control.

I have a lot of time for the former master of Holles Street (he is a man yay!) Peter Boylan.

What do you think.

the baby is the man's as well. he is entitled to an opinion.
also, as men are going to be voting in this referendum, we are entitled to have an opinion on it. if you want men to back off, call for the referendum to be canceled. otherwise you will just have to accept that people both men and women will have opinions either for or against repeal.

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

I'd agree men should have a say, for the simple reason that only allowing one gender to vote on any issue is pretty undemocratic.

That said, myself and plenty of other men will be happy to vote to repeal it.

I'm sure the same Helen Lovejoy arguments that you're making were trotted out about contraception back in the day as well, but thankfully Ireland seems to be moving on from that attitude.

there is a huge difference between contraception and abortion. anyone arguing against contraception has something wrong with them. anyone arguing against abortion on demand has a legitimate argument.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Most of the anti choice are men.

there is actually no tangible evidence for that.

thee glitz wrote: »

I can't tell you you're wrong - are we, as a country getting richer or not?

to be fair, that part of my post was aimed at pilly. she wanted someone else to tell me that i'm wrong, so i'm suggesting she do it, seeing as she believes it to be the case yet refuses to do it herself.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I'm getting a feeling that if the 8th is repealed and legislation framed, it will be a nine day wonder.

And no one will refer to it afterwards.

Any views on that?

Not the first time that point has been made in this thread:

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

This could be the basis of a Waterford Whispers-style article.

Things The Catholic Right Said Were Going To Destroy Society And Morals But Nothing Happened And Now Nobody Gives A Damn

Marriage equality
POLDPA
Morning after pill
Divorce
Legalising homosexuality
Contraception
Equal pay
Married women in jobs

...etc...

Bannasidhe

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

This is just absolute bunkum and drivel. Of course the state can ban travel. The state injuncted Ms X from travelling. We had a referendum to guarantee the ability to travel. The reality is pro forced birthers dont want to reverse the 13th amendment. They are happy with a hypocrytical NIMBYIST not on my Island attitude.

In the aftermath of the 8th being passed the Irish State implemented a draconian censorship of any mention of abortion. It is my understanding that it was illegal to even tell a woman living in Ireland how and where she could get an abortion.

The result was a group of (mostly Irish) people living outside the State engaging in a clandestine information campaign - lots of phone calls to telephone boxes in Ireland at strange hours of the day and night- and a meet and accompany service for women travelling alone.

How do I know? Because I was often the one on the end of the phone in London calling some phone booth in Ireland or waiting for a bus coming from the ferry in Victoria Station so I could bring some terrified, alone, woman or girl for a procedure that she could never speak about to her family or friends but which gave her hope of a life worth living,

If the Irish authorities knew why these women and girls were travelling they would stop them. Like they did with Ms X. It was the public outcry over her case that (eventually) ended the travel ban and censorship.

For over a decade Ireland did prevent women travelling for abortions, it did censor information and access to information while at the same time continuing to support the enslavement of unmarried mothers and forced adoptions. The Magdalene Laundries were still in operation in the 1990s.

I don't doubt for a second that if they had their way many anti-repealers would bring back those days.

The great irony in all this is the ferry carried women - some of whom were married - to England to end an unwanted pregnancy and women who were unmarried but wanted to be able to keep their child.

Ireland has never been much interested in either protecting it's female citizens or allowing them to make their own choices.

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Not the first time that point has been made in this thread:

Yep, the debate is all from one side now. We know what is required, everyone does, but there are some entities out there with foreign funding just the same trying to change it.

Malta AFAIS is the only EU country without abortion now, but like ourselves, they can send their females to Italy. What does the Pope think of this?

And the Pope will be visiting here soon. If he has anything negative to say about Ireland and its repeal of the 8th, he had better look to his own country of Italy, although I know the Vatican is independent but still.

It is just so hypocritical to me anyway.

mrkiscool2

Has the argument really gone to "But what about the menz?"

Seriously, in order to consider this we first have to remove the cage from women's uterus'. When we do that, then we can talk about men's parental rights. Ultimately, they don't have to carry a child to term so they really don't get THAT much of a say. Like, sure, there needs to be a frank conversation, but that's it.

When we get abortion legalised, then we can talk about men being able to pull any legal responsibilities from the potential life while giving away any and all rights to it.

What about all those countries with legal abortion now? Where is all the vitriol regarding their abortion laws? None AFAIS. I will stand corrected though.

We should be looking at them. There doesn't seem to be any problem at all. Even in places that have a Pope living there. Like Italy. Think about it.

If he comes here and mentions abortion he will be so hypocrital I think.

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Funny that the same arguments are used against both then,isn't it? Arguments against contraception look silly now in hindsight, and it's probably going to be the same with abortion in future.

There might be a legitimate argument against abortion on demand, but "I don't like it so it shouldn't be allowed" certainly isn't one. Even if someone does present an argument against allowing abortion that I agree with, I'd still go out and vote to repeal the 8th, because it's a backwards amendment that does more harm than good.

i agree the 8th as a whole needs to go and i have said plenty of times that if it wasn't for the likely hood of abortion on demand being legislated for i'd vote yes to repeal.

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Has the argument really gone to "But what about the menz?"

Seriously, in order to consider this we first have to remove the cage from women's uterus'. When we do that, then we can talk about men's parental rights. Ultimately, they don't have to carry a child to term so they really don't get THAT much of a say. Like, sure, there needs to be a frank conversation, but that's it.

When we get abortion legalised, then we can talk about men being able to pull any legal responsibilities from the potential life while giving away any and all rights to it.

we can talk about men's issues as well. half of that child is the man's DNA so he has quite a right to a say.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

What about all those countries with legal abortion now? Where is all the vitriol regarding their abortion laws? None AFAIS. I will stand corrected though.

We should be looking at them. There doesn't seem to be any problem at all. Even in places that have a Pope living there. Like Italy. Think about it.

If he comes here and mentions abortion he will be so hypocrital I think.

quite a bit of vitrial in the uk i believe (if protesting outside clynics fits your description of vitrial)

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Just an offside comment.

Would I be totally wrong to say that men should not have any input into the lives of pregnant women and their babies WRT abortion and their lives/health? Should be a medical decision with the ob/gyn only.

You'd be very wrong, as any referendum is a Constitutional issue, where anyone who is eligible has a say in the kind of society they want to live in. Quite frankly, I don't care what you do on a personal level, but this is a social issue, bigger than you as an individual.

Men will never have to suffer life threathening pre eclampsia, sepsis, post natal depression, pelvic floor disintegration, giving birth and the aftermath of it all.

Well I think they should just back off.

I don't know why you included sepsis in that list. Men are far more likely to experience a sepsis infection than women for starters.

I notice a lot of the pro life are men. Command and control.

I have a lot of time for the former master of Holles Street (he is a man yay!) Peter Boylan.

What do you think.

It's nothing to do with command and control. A lot of the pro-life are men, a lot more of the pro-choice are also men. The reason you have a lot of time for Peter Boylan is because you agree with him!

average_runner wrote: »

You could be right but a man should have a choice if he wants to be in the kids life, if he decides not To, he shouldn't have to pay maintenance.

Nope, don't agree with that at all. Abortion has nothing to do with when the child or children are actually born, and the father should absolutely be held financially responsible for their children. If he decides not to be in his children's lives, that's his prerogative, but that doesn't absolve either parent of their responsibilities towards their children. Maintenance and guardianship and so on are completely separate issues to abortion.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

It fascinates me how much men on both sides feel they must have a say.

It's an issue that affects everyone in society Joey, I'm happy to see the numbers of both men and women on both sides expressing their opinions.

average_runner wrote: »

I think it's to do with what this system has done to men. Outside this debate. Men have no rights when it comes to children, judges will give the children to the mother no matter how bad she is and then expect men to pay through the nose, eventually pushing a lot of men to suicide and never talked about.

That's simply not true. Men absolutely have rights when it comes to their children. They also have responsibilities, responsibilities that you imagine they should be able to abandon on a whim, and who do you think should step in to provide support for the child then? The State? So you'll end up supporting all those children who have been abandoned by their fathers anyway through taxation. I don't want to be forced to support anyone else's child but my own, but that's not the way our society functions.

I'm not the only father with primary custody of my child btw, there are plenty of men who do, so this idea that men are pushed to suicide or that it's never talked about (plenty of threads on this site about fathers rights, even though they have the same rights as mothers!), I'm not sorry to say it but what you're talking about there just isn't true.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

What about all those countries with legal abortion now? Where is all the vitriol regarding their abortion laws? None AFAIS. I will stand corrected though.

We should be looking at them. There doesn't seem to be any problem at all. Even in places that have a Pope living there. Like Italy. Think about it.

If he comes here and mentions abortion he will be so hypocrital I think.

Well the Pope technically has his own independent country and Italy is technically a secular republic. But re your central point, I suppose the general expectation is we will be like those countries as regards abortion if the referendum passes, just as we already are re divorce, gay marriage, etc...

The day a man gets pregnant and gives birth and might suffer all the associated health issues is the day I will say OK man.

Men have no idea what is involved in being pregnant, but some of them try to tell women all about it.

And the biggest idiot in all this is Ronan Mullen. But he is a woman hater, sorry forgot that bit about him.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

What about all those countries with legal abortion now? Where is all the vitriol regarding their abortion laws? None AFAIS. I will stand corrected though.

You're joking surely? Abortion is legal in the US, and there's plenty of vitriol on both sides there, not unlike the vitriol on both sides here.

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Well the Pope technically has his own independent country and Italy is technically a secular republic. But re your central point, I suppose the general expectation is we will be like those countries as regards abortion if the referendum passes, just as we already are re divorce, gay marriage, etc...

And the resulting problem is? I have never heard of any trouble WRT to Italy and its abortion laws, or any other country either. And that includes Britain where as you know, we export our abortions to. So blinkered

I guess people will move on and that's that. Like the same sex marriage ref.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You're joking surely? Abortion is legal in the US, and there's plenty of vitriol on both sides there, not unlike the vitriol on both sides here.

The Southern States are all god and stuff, Church is everything, but with rifles in their back pockets.

I doubt they are really Christian tbh.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The Southern States are all god and stuff, Church is everything, but with rifles in their back pockets.

I doubt they are really Christian tbh.

I don't doubt that they're Christian at all tbh, they just have a different perspective on Christianity than you or I do, that very small few at least, because I wouldn't be one to tar everyone with the same brush. I've no doubt most of them are actually grand

January

It's very obvious that the majority (possibly even all except one) of anti choice voices on this thread are men.

Its quite telling.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You're joking surely? Abortion is legal in the US, and there's plenty of vitriol on both sides there, not unlike the vitriol on both sides here.

The exception that proves the rule. There is a consensus in favour of liberal abortion laws in most western democracies, and the issue attracts very little controversy.

January

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You're joking surely? Abortion is legal in the US, and there's plenty of vitriol on both sides there, not unlike the vitriol on both sides here.

The loudest voices in the Irish abortion debate seem to be being shipped in from America... There was a campaign during the summer last year for families to host' pro life' visitors so they could campaign door to door. It's no wonder the debate here mirrors the states if thats the tactics they're using.

January wrote: »

It's very obvious that the majority (possibly even all except one) of anti choice voices on this thread are men.

Its quite telling.

Quite telling in what way? It doesn't tell anything other than your own bias is showing. There are far more women who are pro-life/anti-choice/pro-birth, whatever label you want, than men, and there are far more men than women on this thread anyway.

Your post kinda reminds me of that woman in the video earlier who was telling men to know their place and claiming that Savita was a rich woman who could have gone to England but was killed by racism and sexism in this fùcking country. I suppose depending upon ones perspective, what she said was true too.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

And the biggest idiot in all this is Ronan Mullen. But he is a woman hater, sorry forgot that bit about him.

on what basis is he a woman hater?
lets say he is, then he is very very wrong, no question, and he needs to change his view quick.

January wrote: »

The loudest voices in the Irish abortion debate seem to be being shipped in from America... There was a campaign during the summer last year for families to host' pro life' visitors so they could campaign door to door. It's no wonder the debate here mirrors the states if thats the tactics they're using.

I'll agree with that alright, but I would also point out the tactics of Amnesty Ireland in refusing to hand back funding they received from George Soros. At least the ARC did hand back any funding they received. I wouldn't just look at one side and say "look what they're doing", both sides of the issue are playing politics in an attempt to influence Irish society.

Men in general are good at controlling women and their bodies,

Sure that's their raison d'etre mostly if they haven't succeeded in other ways.

January

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Quite telling in what way? It doesn't tell anything other than your own bias is showing. There are far more women who are pro-life/anti-choice/pro-birth, whatever label you want, than men, and there are far more men than women on this thread anyway.

Your post kinda reminds me of that woman in the video earlier who was telling men to know their place and claiming that Savita was a rich woman who could have gone to England but was killed by racism and sexism in this fùcking country. I suppose depending upon ones perspective, what she said was true too.

No bias here. Men have a very important voice in the repeal the 8th debate. I'm not disputing that at all. Just that it's very telling that it's mostly men voicing their opinion on this thread. I don't believe there are more women than men who are pro life though. Not from what I've seen over the past couple of years in person and online.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

And the resulting problem is? I have never heard of any trouble WRT to Italy and its abortion laws, or any other country either. And that includes Britain where as you know, we export our abortions to. So blinkered

I guess people will move on and that's that. Like the same sex marriage ref.

This is why I suspect a lot of people in FF and FG who don't have strong convictions on the issue might be attracted by the idea of settling the issue in one feel swoop with a referendum to introduce 'abortion on demand', getting it off the political agenda for good...They might even vote against the legislation safe in the knowledge that it will pass...