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

Cabaal

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

If a future government ever decides to legalise for abortion access further then the current 12 week limit proposal,

I'm tired of this being trotted out as its pretty baseless.

If a government did this without the backing of the people then the government wouldn't last long and the TD's would feel the full wraith of the people at the polls.

The fact that every-time the 8th has come up its been kicked down the road year upon years shows just how reluctant governments are to do anything in relation to abortion. Yet here we are with the pro life groups claiming it can be just changed and thats that, its utter nonsense.

At the end of the day if there's enough backing from the people for the government to change the legislation in years to come, then there's also enough backing for the 8th to be repealed in years to come.

FG did the citizen assembly likely thinking the outcome would be different to this, but instead it went the way they didn't expect....people looked at the facts and understood the current setup was simply far too restrictive and was untrusting to women.

This baseless fear mongering is just getting silly.

NuMarvel

Water John wrote: »

Those figures look reasonable. Peader Tobin, I presume would be the only TD to break SF party ranks.

Even if there wasn't a change, it's possible SF TDs would abstain on votes on the 12 week option. I think that's what the SF TDs on the Committee did and they haven't faced sanctions for that.

nozzferrahhtoo

Water John wrote: »

Oaf, well I told where I was getting my facts from.

I have no facts either way myself but I can only give my thinking on it.

Well there is a workability issue to look at. 12 weeks is already pretty restrictive. But not so much. We see worldwide on average that a country that has access to abortion by choice generally find over 90% of their abortions occurring in or before 12 weeks. Even if the country has a 24 week limit in a UK or US form, or n o theoretical limit like in Canada. With or without a limit the abortions GENERALLY happen by 12 weeks.

But most of those happen in the 10 to 12 week area. Why? Because most people at, say, 0-4 weeks do not even KNOW they are pregnant. If you restrict it TOO Much you are pushing it back to a point where most people will not realize they are pregnant in time to avail of it.

Further even those who DO realize it.... if the limit is too restrictive you pressure and rush them into a decision. And statistically NO ONE wants that I suspect.

So you are 100% right it is possible. But I think it is a bad enough idea that it is unlikely to happen. Humans have a fetish for round numbers though so I guess I would not be shocked by a 10 week limit. But 12 weeks is round number in terms of being 3 months. So....... meh. Wait and see I guess.

Water John

SF TDs abstained because they had not got approval from an Ard Fheis. They thus did not break party rules.

Loafing Oaf

Water John wrote: »

Those figures look reasonable. Peader Tobin, I presume would be the only TD to break SF party ranks.

As far as we know. An interesting straw in the wind on this issue was FF TD Thomas Byrne saying he would feel duty-bound as a legislator to vote for the 12-week legislation if the referendum passed, despite being strongly pro-life. Assuming a SF volte face, it would only take a handful of 'on-the-fence' FG TDs (perhaps looking for political cover) to take this line for the legislation to pass.

NuMarvel

Cabaal wrote: »

I'm tired of this being trotted out as its pretty baseless.

If a government did this without the backing of the people then the government wouldn't last long and the TD's would feel the full wraith of the people at the polls.

It's not as if there isn't precedent for governments falling or doing u-turns because of public backlash either. VAT on children's shoes, removing automatic medical cards for over 70s, and water charges spring to mind as examples.

Bannasidhe

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

" yet no one on the anti-repeal side is telling us how it can happen here."

If a future government ever decides to legalise for abortion access further then the current 12 week limit proposal, I know some might say " that,s scaremongering " if its just about legalising for access for 12 weeks limit & 12 weeks limit only, then surely there would be proposals from some public figures/Tds for some sort of legal clause to be included that no future government can legalise for further abortion access beyond 12 weeks without consulting the people, but at the present moment I don,t see anyone publicly calling for such a clause to be included funny that, a few months ago while giving an interview to Rte news the spokesperson for the abortion rights campaign went on record saying they want the recommendations of the citizens assembly at the minimum meaning they want more.

"" We want full abortion access, at the minimum we want the recommendations of the citizens assembly "" .

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/0930/908737-march-for-choice/

If the Tds on the repeal side want 12 weeks access & 12 weeks access only, they should be calling for a legal clause to ensure any future legalisation stays at 12 weeks only & goes no further-the fact that they aren,t calling a for a legal clause is telling .

The simple medical fact is that many conditions which may cause the fetus to be incompatible with life cannot be diagnosed by 12 weeks. [edited for clarification] Neither can Downs Syndrome which is compatible with life and therefore not a Fatal Fetal Abnormality. The CA recommended that after 12 weeks termination be permissible (not compulsory) when there is a diagnosis of FFA however the CA did not recommend termination be available if the fetus has been diagnosed with a non-fatal abnormality. Downs Syndrome is a non fatal abnormality.

The committee’s report will also recommend that a termination be legal in cases of fatal foetal abnormality but it will not recommend that a termination be legal in cases where a foetal abnormality is not deemed to be fatal.

On that latter point, the committee differs from the Citizens’ Assembly which recommended that a termination be legal in cases of a “significant abnormality” that are not fatal.

http://www.thejournal.ie/committee-citizens-assembly-3749589-Dec2017/

The key word is 'significant' - given that many many people with DS are perfectly capable of living independent, productive lives it cannot be deemed to be a 'significant' abnormality and such a classification would be open to legal challenge.

You are scaremongering.

Furthermore, firstly the Dáil cannot introduce legislation which ties the hands of future Dáils. But even if it could, should a future Dáil wish to change the legislation it could equally remove this 'legal clause'.
It would be nothing but meaningless window dressing.

Secondly, the current proposal is that the Ref question be 'repeal and allow the Dáil to legislate' - that's it.
Repeal the 8th and allow government to do it's job and legislate. What that legislation will be will be thrashed out in the Dáil and the Senate and will need a majority vote to pass.

If you think a time will come when the Irish electorate will accept legislation for terminations after 12 weeks for any fetal abnormality at all, significant or not, then I put it to you that you do not want to wait for that electorate to be voting on Repeal as it will be very very liberal and probably in favour of a Canadian style system.

Cabaal

NuMarvel wrote: »

It's not as if there isn't precedent for governments falling or doing u-turns because of public backlash either. VAT on children's shoes, removing automatic medical cards for over 70s, and water charges spring to mind as examples.

Exactly,

If one government tried to increase it to 24 weeks the next could easily change it back, if the will of the people supported them. The government aren't going to touch it with a barge pole otherwise.

Its still not a reason not to repeal the 8th, without repealing it we cannot properly deal with the issues at hand and the hard reality of what women go through and how this country fails them.

Either we must repeal the 8th or if we're going to claim a fetus is equal to a chilod then we must start charging women with murder if the use abortion pills and we must ban them from traveling for abortions.

People simply can't claim a fetus is equal to a child and abortion is murder and yet be fine with women traveling for abortion and not having the full weight of the law place upon women who use pills illegally.

One way or another we as a country must own up and start properly dealing with our own issues, either we trust women and provide support and care for them by repealing the 8th or we treat women who have illegal abortions as criminals and charge them with murder of the fetus.

Ave Sodalis

The Legend Of Kira wrote:

If its the 90% abortion rate the truck is claiming, I googled their claim again to see what came in the google search- I found this article from the BBC who are also quoting a 90% abortion rate of unborn babies diagnosed with down syndrome .

I have a question for you: do you work with families of Downs children? Do you actively help care for the children than need constant supervision? Do you go out of your way on at least a weekly basis to allow parents of severe Down's children some time off? Do you help care for any of them when their parents die? Do you provide any sort of educational or social support for the children themselves?

Or is this another case of "what about the Down's children! Won't someone think of them and their fight against the heartless abortionists" and then go back to not giving a sh*t about them when this referendum is all over?

January

Not to nitpick guys but can we stop using terms like 'Down's children' 'down's people' 'disabled people' etc

The proper terms that families and people want used is 'child with Down Syndrome' 'person with Down Syndrome' 'people with disabilities'. Don't let the condition define the person.

swampgas

If you think about it, the 90% figure might actually indicate that many Irish people would also prefer to have the option of a termination if DS is detected. I have had conversations with Irish people who were prepared to travel to the UK to terminate rather than continue a pregnancy with DS. I can't be the only one, surely?

Are Irish women and British women so different? I don't think so. Surely this just illustrates that the issue should be the ability of the person who will have to undergo the pregnancy, and then more than likely be the primary carer for the child afterwards, to decide whether they should go through with it or not?

And, perhaps without realising it, those posters have shown what they are really about - don't let it happen here. Are they really saying "just keep going to England, for appearances sake"?

January

I've a friend who talks about the fact that had she known about her son's DS diagnosis in utero that she doesn't 100% know whether she would have travelled or not.

Bannasidhe

January wrote: »

I've a friend who talks about the fact that had she known about her son's DS diagnosis in utero that she doesn't 100% know whether she would have travelled or not.

I refused the test back in the day - in the UK. I had chosen to have a child and if that child had a disability it wouldn't have made any difference.
However, if there had been a diagnosis of FFA I would have terminated the pregnancy. And that would have been the only reason I would ever have had an abortion.
My body. My Choice.

SusieBlue

Was just chatting to a few lovely girls campaigning to repeal the 8th by Penneys in cork city.
It made my heart happy to see the table surrounded by people looking to sign up and support the cause.

It was a far cry from the two elderly men roaring into megaphones slightly up the street about how repealing the 8th will cause newborns to be ripped from their mothers breast and is a threat to the nuclear family. The pro life side, keeping it classy as always.
Luckily they didn’t seem to have any support at all.

Tipperary animal lover

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Was just chatting to a few lovely girls campaigning to repeal the 8th by Penneys in cork city.
It made my heart happy to see the table surrounded by people looking to sign up and support the cause.

It was a far cry from the two elderly men roaring into megaphones slightly up the street about how repealing the 8th will cause newborns to be ripped from their mothers breast and is a threat to the nuclear family. The pro life side, keeping it classy as always.
Luckily they didn’t seem to have any support at all.

Whiteroses, had the exact same experience today in cork, complete opposites of the spectrum, there was a lot of names signed up, the girl I talked to said they are delighted with the way the public are interacting with them, they had a few from other side shouting into their faces but that's to be expected she said.

The Legend Of Kira

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

The Legend Of Kira wrote:

If its the 90% abortion rate the truck is claiming, I googled their claim again to see what came in the google search- I found this article from the BBC who are also quoting a 90% abortion rate of unborn babies diagnosed with down syndrome .

I have a question for you: do you work with families of Downs children? Do you actively help care for the children than need constant supervision? Do you go out of your way on at least a weekly basis to allow parents of severe Down's children some time off? Do you help care for any of them when their parents die? Do you provide any sort of educational or social support for the children themselves?

Or is this another case of "what about the Down's children! Won't someone think of them and their fight against the heartless abortionists" and then go back to not giving a sh*t about them when this referendum is all over?

I have a friend who has down syndrome I met from an older job who I hang out with during the week as in going for a coffee or going for lunch .

freshpopcorn

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Was just chatting to a few lovely girls campaigning to repeal the 8th by Penneys in cork city.
It made my heart happy to see the table surrounded by people looking to sign up and support the cause.

It was a far cry from the two elderly men roaring into megaphones slightly up the street about how repealing the 8th will cause newborns to be ripped from their mothers breast and is a threat to the nuclear family. The pro life side, keeping it classy as always.
Luckily they didn’t seem to have any support at all.

What did want you to sign up?
E-mail/volunteering?

Bannasidhe

freshpopcorn wrote: »

What did want you to sign up?
E-mail/volunteering?

Looking for donations to buy more megaphones for roaring elderly men.

Bannasidhe

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I have a friend who is down syndrome I met from an older job who I hang out with during the week as in going for a coffee or going for lunch .

But not enough of a friend for you to refer to her as a person who has Downs Syndrome - by saying she is down syndrome is looks like that is all she is to you.

January

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I have a friend who is down syndrome I met from an older job who I hang out with during the week as in going for a coffee or going for lunch .

If she's your friend then be respectful enough to refer to her as a person with down syndrome not someone who is down syndrome. Nobody is down syndrome they HAVE down syndrome.

January

freshpopcorn wrote: »

What did want you to sign up?
E-mail/volunteering?

My local repeal group will be having a stall in two weeks time, various locations around our constituency. Our aim is to provide information to people about our group see if they'd be interested in helping out with canvassing or behind the scenes and seeing how many people on the streets actually support the repeal of the 8th amendment.

We were out just before the March for Choice and only had two people argue with us about repealing the 8th. It was very heartening.

Ave Sodalis

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I have a friend who is down syndrome I met from an older job who I hang out with during the week as in going for a coffee or going for lunch .

Then I'm sorry, but I have absolutely no respect for what you're trying to achieve here. If you were actually worried about people with DS, you'd be out there trying to make things easier on the parents who have to give up their entire lives to care for their children. Even those that want to do it need breaks. This is the risk that parents face with DS, you may have an almost near functional child like some people I know, or you might have a child who is completely dependent on you for the rest of their life. The latter is why some parents choose abortion, so surely if you were genuinely worried about them, you'd be helping to make that risk easier?

The same for any of the anti-abortion arguments. I understand that people are pro-life, it's a complex subject and not as clear cut as the SSM referendum. However, I cannot respect the opinion of people who are pro-life but aren't out there helping the homeless, campaigning for better welfare payments, campaigning for better child care initiative, or better work to home ratios etc. Basically, if you're pro-life but not trying to make society a somewhat easier place to have children, or ease some of the reasons people have abortions and therefore possibly reduce the number of abortions... then I personally don't care for your opinion. Respect your right to have an opinion, but don't respect the opinion itself.

Annasopra

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I have a friend who has down syndrome I met from an older job who I hang out with during the week as in going for a coffee or going for lunch .

What does your friend think of the 90% posters?

david75

‘I’m not against gay marriage, one of my friends is gay...but...’

freshpopcorn

david75 wrote: »

‘I’m not against gay marriage, one of my friends is gay...but...’

Last time their was Paddy Manning and Keith Mills the gay men against gay marriage.
This time they'll have women who regretted having abortions.

david75

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Last time their was Paddy Manning and Keith Mills the gay men against gay marriage.
This time they'll have women who regretted having abortions.

And look how that worked out.

Employing people like manning and Mills as representing the no campaign was campaign suicide.

The PLC have even worse represtening them.

Irish people will not buy what the loons and extremists are selling At all.

Spanish Eyes

The irony is that when (if) the referendum is passed, and legislation is enacted, it will all be forgotten about within weeks.

That is not to say that people are not engaged or interested on one one side or the other, but that is the reality.

The Legend Of Kira

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I have a friend who has down syndrome I met from an older job who I hang out with during the week as in going for a coffee or going for lunch .

What does your friend think of the 90% posters?

It hasn,t come up in conversation as of yet, friend is what I call " apathetic " when it comes to anything to do with politics never voted yet .

Annasopra

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

It hasn,t come up in conversation as of yet, friend is what I call " apathetic " when it comes to anything to do with politics never voted yet .

I'd be curious about that. I know children of single parents were disgusted at being used against marriage equality. I know a friend of mine with a child who has downs is disgusted by these posters.

freshpopcorn

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

What does your friend think of the 90% posters?

To be honest with you it all depends on the families and their beliefs!