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

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)

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.

[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?

[Deleted User]

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

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.

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

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 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: »

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: »

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!

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".

Annasopra

david75 wrote: »

We should all take a moment to thank DeBild and similar people.

They’re doing an amazing job of completely shooting themselves in the foot with their loudmouth shouting and patronising and insulting and utterly factually vapid points of view.

These people did the same thing in marriage equality and it backfired horribly on them.

Keep up the great work DeBild. You’re doing great work altogether.
Do you even realise I wonder.

No. I don't agree.

Pro repeal need to calmly stick to the discussion itself. Let these prople show themselves for what they are but don't let them try and set up some narrative they are being bullied.

Annasopra

ForestFire wrote: »

There is a very important thing called the constitution.
Do you not think we need it?

The alternative was clear so not sure why you brought the Pope into it?

I dont think abortion law should be in the constution. Yes let the oireachtas decide.

Peatys

But late to the party here, this has probably been answered, but hard to trawl through all the "debating"..

where did the 12week figure come from?

Annasopra

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I have to say I can't see the eighth being repealed if the government can go changing the 12 week rule without putting it to another referendum!

We really shouldnt be having referenda after refeenda on this. Let the legislature legislate.

Annasopra

Peatys wrote: »

But late to the party here, this has probably been answered, but hard to trawl through all the "debating"..

where did the 12week figure come from?

Upto the 12 week period an abortion can take place with a pill and care be given by a GP. After that it is a procedure in hospital.

frag420

pleas advice wrote: »

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)

Where there is a will there is a way, esp when doing what’s right for my Irish sisters!

My employer here has offers myself and several other Irish employees to be somewhat employed by the Dublin office on a part time basis (one day a month) and use a company residential property in Ireland as an address to register to vote in the referendum!

However I have already sorted things out back home to stay on the register and will be returning on the day to vote and flying back here the next day!

Annasopra

freshpopcorn wrote: »

And if repeal campaign gets to complacent because of the marriage referendum it might continue for years to come.

I think after 35 years of fighting there wont be complacency

raspberrypi67

Forgive me not reading all of the ( boring ) but what exactly does repealing the 8th imply for the unborn and for the woman? Can it be explained in 2 sentences. ?
I'm thinking here we go again, I'm not going to vote if I dont fully understand what they are at here....

frag420

raspberrypi67 wrote: »

Forgive me not reading all of the ( boring ) but what exactly does repealing the 8th imply for the unborn and for the woman? Can it be explained in 2 sentences. ?
I'm thinking here we go again, I'm not going to vote if I dont fully understand what they are at here....

It means we get to kill and eat the unborn for any reason we like...up to and including the day of birth!

Annasopra

Doltanian wrote: »

And has no support from his party, Fianna Fail need to pull the plug on this charade excuse of a Government immediately to prevent a referendum taking place.

No support? Eh thats completely untrue. It was FF members who proposed the 12 week legislation.

Cabaal

ForestFire wrote: »

There is a very important thing called the constitution.

You claim that the constitution is only important when it suits you.

So tell me then, why are you not looking for the 13th amendment to be revoked when a women try's to travel for an abortion?

After all, if you consider a fetus as equal to a child then article 42 comes into effect and the important constitution states:

42.2:
"In exceptional cases, where the parents for physical or moral reasons fail in their duty towards their children, the State as guardian of the common good, by appropriate means shall endeavour to supply the place of the parents, but always with due regard for the natural and imprescriptible rights of the child".

So if you want the constitution to be followed then you agree that women must be detained when they attempt to travel for abortion because they are failing in their duty of care inline with 42.2 in the constitution.

Of course no pro life group ever looks for women to be banned from traveling, so this shows they are selective in relation to the constitution.

Why don't they look for women to be banned from traveling?
Because they are happy to export women to the UK and they know the public backlash would be massive against them with such a idiotic suggestion.

At the end of the day the constitution is conflicting and it needs to be changed, it ignores women's

Annasopra

Laois_Man wrote: »

My main gripe with the governments chosen method is when you take it out of the constitution and into the hands of the legislatures, every General Election forever more could effectively become another abortion referendum with every party proposing new changes as part of their manifesto. Whatever the new text is, if any, it needs to continue to live in the constitution

It shouldnt be in the constitution. That completely complicates things. Look at the unintended consequences of it being in the constution and Ms X

Cabaal

Doltanian wrote: »

And has no support from his party, Fianna Fail need to pull the plug on this charade excuse of a Government immediately to prevent a referendum taking place.

So despite a majority of our country demanding change you want to deny our citizens their democratic right to vote in a referendum ?

Sorry, we're not a dictatorship

Cabaal

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

It shouldnt be in the constitution. That completely complicates things. Look at the unintended consequences of it being in the constution and Ms X

Worse still, Miss P,
Having a brain dead women on life support because of a fetus has a heartbeat but the mothers brain is decomposing is just what every partner and family wants.

Disgraceful that the family and partner had to go to court to have the life support switched off,

pitifulgod

Cabaal wrote: »

So despite a majority of our country demanding change you want to deny our citizens their democratic right to vote in a referendum ?

Sorry, we're not a dictatorship

They're also concerned about "white genocide" so they have a pretty warped viewpoint.

Cabaal

pitifulgod wrote: »

They're also concerned about "white genocide" so they have a pretty warped viewpoint.

and funny how the religious pro-life people are not ok with religious freedom in our schools, despite the constitution stating parents have this right to opt children out

They love being selective

ForestFire

Cabaal wrote: »

You claim that the constitution is only important when it suits you.

So tell me then, why are you not looking for the 13th amendment to be revoked when a women try's to travel for an abortion?

After all, if you consider a fetus as equal to a child then article 42 comes into effect and the important constitution states:

So if you want the constitution to be followed then you agree that women must be detained when they attempt to travel for abortion because they are failing in their duty of care inline with 42.2 in the constitution.

At the end of the day the constitution is conflicting and it needs to be changed, it ignores women's

You have made a lot of assumptions here about me that it's really astounding. Can you point me to any if these claims you said i made or believe.

The constitution can be changed in other ways than what is proposed.

Just to be clear, I asked do you think it might shift the middle ground peoples views and affect the overall result?

sjb25

I was on the yes side the more I think about it I’m now swaying into mayb I genuinely haven’t a clue what way I’m going to vote on this.
And I’m normally pretty certain on this kind of stuff and would normally be on the yes side for the likes of this but I just don’t no

Iv a few months of thinking to do

one thing I do no is my family as an example is split down the middle was almost civil war the other night over it in our house. Had a gathering of about 10 people was almost 50/50 I’d say it’s oretty the same in work it’s going to be a close one this it’s people like myself who are undecided are going to sway this

Cabaal

ForestFire wrote: »

The constitution can be changed in other ways than what is proposed.

Just to be clear, I asked do you think it might shift the middle ground peoples views and affect the overall result?

But at the end of the day the 8th must be repealed,

You cannot consider a fetus equal to a child as this conflicts with article 42, so are you suggesting changes to 42 so it specifically states the state has not duty to intervene in cases of harm to a fetus?

The common sense approach to the 8th is for it to be changed as has been proposed, the government must be allowed to legislate in relation to this issue. The constitution is not the place for dictating medical care to women