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

.......

This post has been deleted.

frag420

Edward M wrote: »

And with my mouth full of dinner too.:)

Cabbage, shpuds and some chewy mutton no doubt...keep it country eh!!

Edward M

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Complacency can beat anything if there's enough if it.

Its not just complacency perhaps.
I think there is a big difference between marriage equality and abortion tbf.
There is the fact that a human formation is to be destroyed if its passed.
The two totally different tbf.

Water John

When talking of public representatives, esp Cabinet Ministers, it should be noted that none to date, have said they oppose the repeal of the 8th. Simon Coveney and Michael Creed have agreed with the repeal, but express disquiet with the legislation proposed to follow. Richard Bruton I see, has been said not to have yet expressed an opinion. That is incorrect, as I heard him say yesterday, he supports the repeal and the Bill being proposed by Simon Harris.
It is important to differentiate between Repealing the 8th of the Constitution and the subsequent decisions by the Oirecahtas, as to the law it will put in place.
Minister Harris and the Govt, may not have the majority in the Houses of Oireachtais to carry the 12 week window. They may have to negotiate and settle for less. That will be decided, after the Referendum, if Repeal is carried.
It certainly, won't be more.

Timberrrrrrrr

Water John wrote: »

When talking of public representatives, esp Cabinet Ministers, it should be noted that none to date, have said they oppose the repeal of the 8th. Simon Coveney and Michael Creed have agreed with the repeal, but express disquiet with the legislation proposed to follow. Richard Bruton I see, has been said not to have yet expressed an opinion. That is incorrect, as I heard him say yesterday, he supports the repeal and the Bill being proposed by Simon Harris.
It is important to differentiate between Repealing the 8th of the Constitution and the subsequent decisions by the Oirecahtas, as to the law it will put in place.
Minister Harris and the Govt, may not have the majority in the Houses of Oireachtais to carry the 12 week window. They may have to negotiate and settle for less. That will be decided, after the Referendum, if Repeal is carried.
It certainly, won't be more.

Well that can't be Right! Sure haven't we had several posters over multiple threads state as a fact that if the 8th is repealed we will have abortion on demand right up to 9 months :pac:

Guy:Incognito

....... wrote: »

What complacency?

People have been upset about the 8th for 35 years now. I was out with a bunch of pensioners recently and they were all furious about it. Support is going to come from unexpected places.

No one knows how big the number of people that will look at loads of reports of a landslide win and not make the effort to go vote because it's a done deal and one vote won't make a difference

Water John

Certainly, any politician saying, they oppose the Repeal of the 8th, should state clearly what do they suggest doing with, the interaction of this Consitutional provision and medical ethics. It's clear the present situation is not sustainable. Secondly, where do they stand on women, importing abortion pills?
Do they believe in the right to travel?
They have to square the circle, as every body else has to do also, with a rational position.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Billy86

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Complacency can beat anything if there's enough if it.

It can, which might also explain the efforts by the anti-abortion side (and the anti-gay marriage side before them, both of which likely receive the majority of their funding from the same sources) to try and constantly give out about pro-SSM/pro-choice people being too active and not complacent enough, trying to claim it will "put people off their [pro choice/SSM] message".

Complacency certainly isn't an issue here, just as it wasn't for SSM.

david75

I’m scratching my head at that draft. What am I missing?

A.let us handle it

B. Let’s repeal it altogether

Can anyone clarify please?

Jimbob1977

david75 wrote: »

I’m scratching my head at that draft. What am I missing?

A.let us handle it

B. Let’s repeal it altogether

Can anyone clarify please?

Repealing it altogether (from the Constitution) will allow the Dail to legislate (through an Act or similar)

Larbre34

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Well that can't be Right! Sure haven't we had several posters over multiple threads state as a fact that if the 8th is repealed we will have abortion on demand right up to 9 months :pac:

Given some of the characters coming out of the woodwork on this one, its a pity there isn't abortion on demand up to 70 years.

Jimbob1977

So far I've heard that Willie O'Dea and Patrick O'Donovan state that they want to keep the 8th.

Willie O'Dea said 'Keep' when pushed on TV3 last night. It was unequivocal after initial contradiction.

ELM327

So.. two old men. Neither likely to be caught up in a crisis pregnancy.
Anyone with a relevant opinion?

Riskymove

ELM327 wrote: »

So.. two old men. Neither likely to be caught up in a crisis pregnancy.
Anyone with a relevant opinion?

well, one of them is 40!

anyways pushing the idea that only someone who could be directly Affected has a right to express a view is not agreeable to me. People have children and grandchildren and other loved ones who could be or indeed have been affected.

not to mention the fact that the idea of an irellevant opinion only seems to arise when one doesn't agree with it!

Rezident

I think it will be as most people seem to be pro-abortion nowadays but I can't agree with it personally, I mean, it's not exactly a million miles away from killing a baby is it? Just because the baby doesn't have a birth cert yet doesn't make it ok to sentence him or her to death!

Some babies survive the abortion, so there's 'comfort care', I don't understand how any human being with any empathy can turn a blind eye to this. It's all gone wrong hasn't it?

Night Falls

For **** sake. It's not pro-abortion, it's pro-choice.

.......

This post has been deleted.

ELM327

Riskymove wrote: »

well, one of them is 40!

anyways pushing the idea that only someone who could be directly Affected has a right to express a view is not agreeable to me. People have children and grandchildren and other loved ones who could be or indeed have been affected.

not to mention the fact that the idea of an irellevant opinion only seems to arise when one doesn't agree with it!

As a male... it will never directly impact me.
It should not be up to me however to tell someone else what to do.

Rezident wrote: »

I think it will be as most people seem to be pro-abortion nowadays but I can't agree with it personally, I mean, it's not exactly a million miles away from killing a baby is it? Just because the baby doesn't have a birth cert yet doesn't make it ok to sentence him or her to death!

Some babies survive the abortion, so there's 'comfort care', I don't understand how any human being with any empathy can turn a blind eye to this. It's all gone wrong hasn't it?

Nobody is pro abortion. I most certainly am not.
But I do not believe that I should be able to dictate what others do with their bodies. I am pro choice.

Like... I don't see where people derive this entitlement to "govern" others.

kylith

Rezident wrote: »

I think it will be as most people seem to be pro-abortion nowadays but I can't agree with it personally, I mean, it's not exactly a million miles away from killing a baby is it? Just because the baby doesn't have a birth cert yet doesn't make it ok to sentence him or her to death!

Well, yes, at the gestation period we're looking at it's a couple of centimetres long, has only recently lost its tail, and doesn't have a functioning brain. It's pretty far from killing a newborn baby.

Rezident wrote: »

Some babies survive the abortion, so there's 'comfort care', I don't understand how any human being with any empathy can turn a blind eye to this. It's all gone wrong hasn't it?

Not at 12 weeks, they don't. What you may be thinking of is babies that are delivered early due to a FFA and won't survive long. Some babies 'survive abortion' in that the pregnancy is far enough along that the fetus can be delivered early and put into care.

Jimbob1977

ELM327 wrote: »

So.. two old men. Neither likely to be caught up in a crisis pregnancy.
Anyone with a relevant opinion?

Should women that are infertile or going through the menopause have an opinion?

nozzferrahhtoo

Rezident wrote: »

I think it will be as most people seem to be pro-abortion

I have debated the issue of abortion in formal and informal settings, public and private, on and off line for nearly 20 years now. I have not yet met a SINGLE person who identifies with the term "pro abortion".

Rezident wrote: »

I mean, it's not exactly a million miles away from killing a baby is it?

Ripping up a blue print is not the same as knocking down a house. There is a lot of "narrative" in the word "baby" that simply does not apply to a fetus. There are many differences of note between killing one, and the other.

Rezident wrote: »

Some babies survive the abortion

It depends what you mean by "survived the abortion". Medical abortions for example can simply just fail to do their job. That is not really a baby "surviving the abortion" so much as the abortion failed to take place at all and it is not a case of "Comfort care".

Rarely but in late term abortions yes there is a small survival rate. And usually these abortions are performed for some level of medical necessity and not just because someone felt like performing it.

This has NOTHING AT ALL to do with providing abortion to women at 12, 16, or 20 weeks of gestation. Go count for me the fetal survival rate of surgical abortion at 12 weeks and let me know what figure you come back with. For reference: ZERO is the figure I have come up with so far. A figure I hope lays your concerns to rest as you genuinely do seem upset and worried by these things, in part for no good reason at all. And the only thing I hate to see more than someone suffering.... is someone suffering needlessly.

chalkitdown1

I hate the term "unborn child". Do the people who use it also refer to children as 'ungrown adults'?

Kurtosis

chalkitdown1 wrote: »

I hate the term "unborn child". Do the people who use it also refer to children as 'ungrown adults'?

A new one that I've noticed cropping up over the last few weeks is "preborn child".

ELM327

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

Should women that are infertile or going through the menopause have an opinion?

Should straw men have an opinion?

Riskymove

ELM327 wrote: »

As a male... it will never directly impact me.
It should not be up to me however to tell someone else what to do.

the two positions here don't really make sense to me to be honest

is it that only people that could be directly impacted by preganancy should be allowed a say in the regime here

or is it that there should just be completely unrestricted access and no one should be in a position to restrict anyone else from doing what they want?

Cabaal

So, given so many people like to claim we are a "catholic country" and the majority religion on the census is catholic.

What does the avg (most likely) catholic on the street think about the ref?

here's a video

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/im-not-in-favour-of-abortion-but-im-not-going-to-tell-anyone-else-what-to-do-irish-people-have-their-say-on-referendum-36547635.html

Overall, people understand the hard reality's of life even if they don't personally agree with abortion or they wouldn't have one themselves, they still think they can't tell other people what to do with their body's.

ELM327

Riskymove wrote: »

the two positions here don't really make sense to me to be honest

is it that only people that could be directly impacted by preganancy should be allowed a say in the regime here

or is it that there should just be completely unrestricted access and no one should be in a position to restrict anyone else from doing what they want?

I don't know what a preganancy is. Is that your new word? Bored with "Pro-Abortion" already are we?

Riskymove

ELM327 wrote: »

I don't know what a preganancy is. Is that your new word? Bored with "Pro-Abortion" already are we?

I think you have me confused with someone else?

I apologise if a typo caused you much trouble

freshpopcorn

Billy86 wrote: »

I really don't understand this one... in the marriage referendum we had people telling us it would be closer than expected and that no would have a big chance of winning without much to back it up beyond "people in favour being too aggressive and putting neutrals off" and other assorted bogeymen arguments about the laws of nature, the history or marriage and adoptions - nearly all of which were false arguments.

We're hearing the same here, yet the fact is the marriage referendum was a landslide vote beyond even what many on the 'yes' side expected, and won in every single area bar one - where it only lost by something like 1-2%.

How does that lead you to believe that the repeal side are less likely to win in this referendum?

The poll that was released was released at the weekend discussed here and people showed polls of the marriage referendum. Most polls in the marriage referendum were well into the 60% or even 70%. So seeing a poll just in the mid 50% would have me worried.
People I know who voted No in the marriage referendum will vote vote No in this one and I knew of a good few Yes voters(who basically did it for there son/nephew/etc) who won't be voting this time around.
I just can see a good few areas going No in the referendum and it will take Dublin to pull it over the line.