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

The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

RobertKK

The citizens assembly voted to replace or amend the 8th amendment.

50% voted to replace or amend
44% voted to repeal
Rest preferred to not state an opinion

Now deciding how it will be replaced or amended
: Let the Dail legislate on the rights of the unborn
: Amend the provision in the constitution.

Meltdown on twitter by Repealthe8th people.

Mod- This thread has descended in to petty name calling. We've tried to let this thread run without too much mod interference but now it's on our radar we will be watching. From here on the name calling stops. If you can't debate civilly we will remove your right to post.

__________________

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Odhinn

Kurtosis wrote: »

Yes they were. And also scaremongering by spouting nonsense like this:

That would be the yokel who helped block a cancer trial because it required women to take the pill - and then got promoted to bishop.
https://www.herald.ie/news/abortion-row-priest-blocked-cancer-trials-29484085.html
I'd say hes not a medical doctor either.

Night Falls wrote:

It's also ironic for someone to be decrying the erosion of morals and the value of human life when in the very same thread someone is pining for a dictator infamous for the murder of thousands of his citizens and for the repression of the democratic process.

Are you saying a friend of thatcher that ran a regime where women were raped with various rodents is a bad man?

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote:

This referendum is purely to facilitate Tara Flynn types to bang strange men without a condom and without consequences, and greedy doctors get rich on the back of it.

Referendum night I'd rather watch Bullseye reruns than get off my ar $e to facilitate selfish hipsters.

I take it this is "humour".

Wanderer78

erica74 wrote: »

Apologies! I bristled as I think I'm all hot headed after reading through this thread.

its understandable, the debate hasnt been particularly good, not just on boards. even though im on the repeal side, i feel it has been a very divisive campaign filled with a lot of ****e from both sides, and im a little angry now that it has been more or less decided by our leading parties what the outcome will be, thats not democracy!

erica74

Wanderer78 wrote: »

oh you did, and im in agreement, but theres actually no ultimate 'right' answer, it should be up to the individual to decide what that actually means to them, and up to them to decide on voting day

Apologies! I bristled as I think I'm all hot headed after reading through this thread.

Wanderer78

erica74 wrote: »

I would have thought I was clear about what I think the right decision is

oh you did, and im in agreement, but theres actually no ultimate 'right' answer, it should be up to the individual to decide what that actually means to them, and up to them to decide on voting day

erica74

Wanderer78 wrote: »

What's the 'right' decision and has this actually been decided democratically? The outcome is clear in my mind

I would have thought I was clear about what I think the right decision is

Anyone who wants an abortion should have safe legal access to one in Ireland and anyone who doesn't want an abortion can continue with their pregnancy.

Wanderer78

erica74 wrote:

I hope that Ireland can make the right decision. Anyone who wants an abortion should have safe legal access to one in Ireland and anyone who doesn't want an abortion can continue with their pregnancy. Seems fair to us all.

What's the 'right' decision and has this actually been decided democratically? The outcome is clear in my mind

erica74

I'm so very happy about the decision to go ahead with the Referendum. I'm not as confident as some people that it will pass. I think there's still too much misinformation out there, and too many people too close minded to seek out the actual facts in spite of their beliefs.
I would like abortion legalised in Ireland, no restrictions, however, I would be happy to accept abortions without restrictions up to 12 weeks.

I wonder if the plan for abortion services in Ireland will be made public before the Referendum? What I mean by this is, what will the actual set-up be? In hospitals, the cost, will there be any sort of screening, what will the process be - from finding out you're pregnant to deciding you can't/don't want to continue with the pregnancy to the abortion itself?

I hope that Ireland can make the right decision. Anyone who wants an abortion should have safe legal access to one in Ireland and anyone who doesn't want an abortion can continue with their pregnancy. Seems fair to us all.

[Deleted User]

I don't particularly like my tax money spent on gangs of unwanted gasúrs, this seems likely to generate savings tbh

[Deleted User]

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

Don't forget, my tax money will be funding this.

What the Repeal crowd are asking normal, responsible people to do is akin to drivers without insurance asking law abiding drivers to vote for a proposal whereby their insurance premiums would be increased to fund increased claims against the MIBI so the law breakers can crash into other people for the pleasure of it.

That my friend, to directly quote your Alice Glenn, is like a turkey voting for Christmas.

Wait what is your tax money and mine funding?

Mrs Shuttleworth

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Is that type of language helpful in any way ? I feel like I'm watching a clip from the late late with Alice Glenn. I'd have hoped we as a country would be past this view in 2018.

Don't forget, my tax money will be funding this.

What the Repeal crowd are asking normal, responsible people to do is akin to drivers without insurance asking law abiding drivers to vote for a proposal whereby their insurance premiums would be increased to fund increased claims against the MIBI so the law breakers can crash into other people for the pleasure of it.

That my friend, to directly quote your Alice Glenn, is like a turkey voting for Christmas.

pleas advice

Itssoeasy wrote: »

If the poster is registered to vote in this country then no it's not illegal.

he's being illegal

(if he has left more than 18 months ago and/or is not planning on returning for good within 18 months)

Itssoeasy

pleas advice wrote: »

TomSweeney wrote: »

I think I'll come home to vote to repeal this.
I hope other ex pats do too.

you're being illegal

If the poster is registered to vote in this country then no it's not illegal.

Itssoeasy

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

eviltwin wrote: »

Yes that's exactly why nearly 170,000 Irish women have had abortions

They banged when they didn't want a baby and now they expect us to massage and assuage their egos post the event. They can p*$ off, no sympathy.

Is that type of language helpful in any way ? I feel like I'm watching a clip from the late late with Alice Glenn. I'd have hoped we as a country would be past this view in 2018.

pleas advice

TomSweeney wrote: »

I think I'll come home to vote to repeal this.
I hope other ex pats do too.

you're being illegal

TomSweeney

JupiterKid wrote: »

The result will be a lot closer than the SSM referendum, that’s for sure. It may be as wafer thin close as the divorce referendum of 1995. There will be a marked urban-rural divide, with Dublin being yes and probably the regional cities.

Constituencies like Roscommon-South Leitrim and Donegal will be strongly no.

One key issue is how many young people eligible to vote will register and actually use their vote. This could swing the result.

I think I'll come home to vote to repeal this.
I hope other ex pats do too.

eviltwin

JupiterKid wrote: »

How are things in the 1950s? Sure those brazen hussies deserve to be thrown into the laundries, yes?

Ah she's watching Bullseye, definitely stuck circa 1985

david75

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

They banged when they didn't want a baby and now they expect us to massage and assuage their egos post the event. They can p*$$ off, no sympathy.

Amazing. With any luck this kind of comment gets blared loud and all the women who have had miscarriages or been raped or have had FFA experiences don’t hear it.

This thinking and attitude is exactly why this ref will pass.

JupiterKid

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

"Unwanted crisis pregnancy", oh get to f**k.

This referendum is purely to facilitate Tara Flynn types to bang strange men without a condom and without consequences, and greedy doctors get rich on the back of it.

Referendum night I'd rather watch Bullseye reruns than get off my ar $e to facilitate selfish hipsters.

At least be honest about your motives.

How are things in the 1950s? Sure those brazen hussies deserve to be thrown into the laundries, yes?

drkpower

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I disagree. No-one who thinks a fertilized cell is a human baby with an equal right to life will vote to repeal the 8th no matter what anyone says in the campaign.

But even though it is popular among pro-lifers to say things like that, nobody much believes it. I see no reason to let the pro-life campaign lie about this.

Right to travel passed 62:38, and that was 25 years ago. Suicide, 65:35. Information, 60:40. We all knew we were voting for abortion on demand, just in England.

I think on the day, 60:40 is quite possible. (Of course I'll be quite happy with 50.1)

The pro life campaign campaign are going to lie whether you let them or not. But you have to choose your battles wisely. Whether anyone likes or agrees with it, a lot of the middle ground - the people who will decide this - have a very conflicted view on what the early foetus represents. Characterising the early foetus as 'value-less' may be what you believe, it may even be intellectually rigorous (for some), but it will likely alienate those voters. That may represent a short term victory for you, but won't achieve the end you want. Better to respect that position, while advocating for repeal due to the myriad of other good reasons that exist for it.

Zubeneschamali

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Just no sense of momentum for the repeal side but that is just my sense of it at moment.

The campaign hasn't started yet, we haven't even seen the text.

It's a bit early to be thinking about momentum.

Mrs Shuttleworth

eviltwin wrote: »

Yes that's exactly why nearly 170,000 Irish women have had abortions

They banged when they didn't want a baby and now they expect us to massage and assuage their egos post the event. They can p*$$ off, no sympathy.

JupiterKid

The result will be a lot closer than the SSM referendum, that’s for sure. It may be as wafer thin close as the divorce referendum of 1995. There will be a marked urban-rural divide, with Dublin being yes and probably the regional cities.

Constituencies like Roscommon-South Leitrim and Donegal will be strongly no.

One key issue is how many young people eligible to vote will register and actually use their vote. This could swing the result.

[Deleted User]

I'm still stunned that people feel this is worth debating voluntarily.

Nobody is changing anybody's mind folks.

Get out and vote on the day. Ignore the ugliness the media will stir up. That's all anyone can do.

It will pass comfortably.

eviltwin

Mrs Shuttleworth wrote: »

"Unwanted crisis pregnancy", oh get to f**k.

This referendum is purely to facilitate Tara Flynn types to bang strange men without a condom and without consequences, and greedy doctors get rich on the back of it.

Referendum night I'd rather watch Bullseye reruns than get off my ar $e to facilitate selfish hipsters.

Yes that's exactly why nearly 170,000 Irish women have had abortions

Mrs Shuttleworth

murpho999 wrote: »

It will be to repeal the 8th.

Simple as that.

Legislation will then decide the terms afterwards.

I don't get why a rape victim's child is ok to be aborted but not that of an unwanted crisis pregnancy. I don't see the difference.

"Unwanted crisis pregnancy", oh get to f**k.

This referendum is purely to facilitate Tara Flynn types to bang strange men without a condom and without consequences, and greedy doctors get rich on the back of it.

Referendum night I'd rather watch Bullseye reruns than get off my ar $e to facilitate selfish hipsters.

At least be honest about your motives.

Zubeneschamali

drkpower wrote: »

and needs to avoid the inevitable temptation to enter argumentative debates on the value or otherwise of the pre 12 week foetus. However one feels on the latter, those debates will win no votes amongst the target demographic.

I disagree. No-one who thinks a fertilized cell is a human baby with an equal right to life will vote to repeal the 8th no matter what anyone says in the campaign.

But even though it is popular among pro-lifers to say things like that, nobody much believes it. I see no reason to let the pro-life campaign lie about this.

Right to travel passed 62:38, and that was 25 years ago. Suicide, 65:35. Information, 60:40. We all knew we were voting for abortion on demand, just in England.

I think on the day, 60:40 is quite possible. (Of course I'll be quite happy with 50.1)

david75

drkpower wrote: »

I would be very concerned at this stage re this referendum being passed. I sincerely hope I am wrong.

The main reasons:
1. SSM was only 2 years ago and 38pc voted No. it is hard to believe that many of that 38pc who felt SSM was a step too far, will be comfortable with repeal (plus abortion to 12 weeks).

2. A chunk of that 12pc can safely be considered to be in the antirepeal camp on the 8th. That leaves a very small amounts of votes to play for. And those swing voters are likely going to be people who until recently would have been very uncomfortable with a 12 week regime.

3. The anti repeal campaign has barely started yet, while the pro repeal campaign have been out early and have led the narrative for the last few months.

4. There may be an aura of overconfidence beginning to slip into the pro repeal side that won't play well amongst the few percentage of middle ground voters who will decide this.

The last point is the easiest to counter. The pro repeal campaign needs to be all about 'safe, legal and rare'. It needs to folllow the example of the SSM campaign by being utterly respectful of differences, emphasising how each decision is a deeply personal one, and needs to avoid the inevitable temptation to enter argumentative debates on the value or otherwise of the pre 12 week foetus. However one feels on the latter, those debates will win no votes amongst the target demographic.

We live in an age where fear lies and pure bullsh!t will stick in people’s minds regardless of how strong the opposing actual facts and evidence presented are or how well they’re presented. So you may well be right.

It might not pass.

What kind of victory is that?

Women will still go to Britain for abortions.

So what will the pro life campaign actually achieve if they’re victorious?

It’s completely self defeating of themselves and their motives

Beechwoodspark

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I can see a good few constituencies voting No in this referendum unlike the marriage one. Any place that was under about 55% could easily go No this time around and it will take Dublin/Urban areas to pull it over.

Just anecdotally in my role I travel around rural Ireland (midlands and south east mainly) and to me it seems the pro life side will win easily at this stage. Just no sense of momentum for the repeal side but that is just my sense of it at moment.

pleas advice

Kurtosis wrote: »

The proposals are clearly not more liberal than Britain's laws.

oh right, i thought you were disputing the numbers.

although I don't think theres an equivalent restriction proposed for our laws as the one below, however ineffectual it is

Subject to the provisions of this section, a person shall not be guilty of an offence under the law relating to abortion when a pregnancy is terminated by a registered medical practitioner if two registered medical practitioners are of the opinion, formed in good faith -

(a) that the pregnancy has not exceeded its twenty-fourth week and that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve risk, greater than if the pregnancy were terminated, of injury to the physical or mental health of the pregnant woman or any existing children of her family; or

drkpower

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

So, some of the prolifers are beginning to believe the polls - realizing they will lose, they want to prevent a vote.

I would be very concerned at this stage re this referendum being passed. I sincerely hope I am wrong.

The main reasons:
1. SSM was only 2 years ago and 38pc voted No. it is hard to believe that many of that 38pc who felt SSM was a step too far, will be comfortable with repeal (plus abortion to 12 weeks).

2. A chunk of that 12pc can safely be considered to be in the antirepeal camp on the 8th. That leaves a very small amounts of votes to play for. And those swing voters are likely going to be people who until recently would have been very uncomfortable with a 12 week regime.

3. The anti repeal campaign has barely started yet, while the pro repeal campaign have been out early and have led the narrative for the last few months.

4. There may be an aura of overconfidence beginning to slip into the pro repeal side that won't play well amongst the few percentage of middle ground voters who will decide this.

The last point is the easiest to counter. The pro repeal campaign needs to be all about 'safe, legal and rare'. It needs to folllow the example of the SSM campaign by being utterly respectful of differences, emphasising how each decision is a deeply personal one, and needs to avoid the inevitable temptation to enter argumentative debates on the value or otherwise of the pre 12 week foetus. However one feels on the latter, those debates will win no votes amongst the target demographic.