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

blanch152

Edward M wrote: »

Ok, some are missing my point.
My point is that repeal of the eighth is the most important issue here now IMO.
There are, like it or not, a big percentage of voters against abortion on demand but in favour of repeal.
You have to be careful how the case for abortion is handled or you may cause some of those in favour of repeal back over the line by saying that abortion should be available like the flu jab or antibiotic.
I presume the pro choice campaign itself will be careful in how they handle it.
The pro life side are going to use every trick and heart tugging photo available to them to try to dissuade these pro repeal but anti abortion on demand voter back over that line.

Given that there is an abortion pill available, which can be viewed merely as an extension of contraception or the morning after pill, what restrictions should be placed on the use of the abortion pill? Like any medical treatment, should it require the approval of a GP following a consultation with the person affected?

amdublin

Would it be so bad if abortion was available like the flu jab or antibiotic?

Actually let me rephrase that. Why can't we have abortion available like the flu jab or antibi9tic?
If someone needs an abortion why do we insist on making it so fekking hard for them?? Do we not trust that they have thought about it long and hard?

.......

This post has been deleted.

PopePalpatine

amdublin wrote: »

I don't get this whole abortion on demand thing. Isn't abortion on request more of an accurate description?

Yes, but "abortion-on-request" doesn't paint the pregnant woman as a spoilt brat.

amdublin

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Yes, but "abortion-on-request" doesn't paint the pregnant woman as a spoilt brat.

Yes I guess that. Abortion on demand paints the crazy picture of someone using abortion as a contraceptive?

Anyone who has ever suffered a miscarriage or underwent an abortion (also suffered) will tell you it's not an easy experience - aside from the emotional stuff, physically it is pain - think horrendous stomach cramps I.e. labour contractions.

There is no sane wOman out there who would choose to use abortion as an abortion method. If there is one woman im.a million zillion out there doing that she needs help and support in another way altogether.

amdublin

Another opinion of mine is that having abortion here in Ireland would actually reduce the number of abortions.

At the moment there is in some way "no going back". The appointment is made, the flights are paid for.

If you have an appointment here with less expense you can take the time to think about it more. You don't HAVE to take that flight on that one day because you can only get that time off etc.
Not having to travel takes some pressure away from you and you can take a little more time to think it all through. When you have to travel it's more like it's a done deal, the flights are booked, the dye is cast.

pleas advice

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Yes, but "abortion-on-request" doesn't paint the pregnant woman as a spoilt brat.

Is there a need for that? Really?

amdublin

pleas advice wrote: »

Is there a need for that? Really?

What are your thoughts on it?

Do you agree or disagree with the statement? And why or why not?

pleas advice

Well, if you're saying 'abortion on demand' is only used to portray women as spoiled brats... Yes I disagree with that.
Abortion on demand is what it is, theres no judgement in that statement.

eviltwin

pleas advice wrote: »

Well, if you're saying 'abortion on demand' is only used to portray women as spoiled brats... Yes I disagree with that.
Abortion on demand is what it is, theres no judgement in that statement.

There is plenty of judgement from the pro life groups, just take a look at Facebook

sunshine and showers

amdublin wrote: »

Another opinion of mine is that having abortion here in Ireland would actually reduce the number of abortions.

At the moment there is in some way "no going back". The appointment is made, the flights are paid for.

If you have an appointment here with less expense you can take the time to think about it more. You don't HAVE to take that flight on that one day because you can only get that time off etc.
Not having to travel takes some pressure away from you and you can take a little more time to think it all through. When you have to travel it's more like it's a done deal, the flights are booked, the dye is cast.

I've heard the head of BPAS say this exact thing about Irish women who go to the UK for abortions. They feel they have to go through with it after all the effort and expense.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

pleas advice wrote: »

Well, if you're saying 'abortion on demand' is only used to portray women as spoiled brats... Yes I disagree with that.
Abortion on demand is what it is, theres no judgement in that statement.

So why not use the term abortion on request, that would be the most neutral and accurate phrasing. It's loaded language, which the pro-life movement have been excellent at ever since they named themselves that.

PopePalpatine

Just out of curiosity, I did a DuckDuckGo (because this isn't something I want on my Google search history, or influenced by it) search for "abortion on demand" and "abortion on request".

For "abortion on demand", I got two Breitbart sharticles in the top 12, along with 6 other pro-life opinion pieces and blogs. "Abortion on request" only returned 1 pro-life opinion piece in the top 12, and also included reports/papers from The Lancet and the UN's Department of Economic & Social Affairs.

Zubeneschamali

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, I did a DuckDuckGo (because this isn't something I want on my Google search history, or influenced by it) search for "abortion on demand" and "abortion on request".

Per Google Ngram, Abortion on demand is used about 8 times as often.

pleas advice

Why are pro life people pro life, in your view? Are they all women-hating slut-shamers, or... What?

Water John

They coopted the term to themselves. Your simply wanting us all to run down, rabbit holes, with this line of discussion.
It's called baiting.

pleas advice

No, not at all. I would like you to ask yourself, "why are these people 'pro-life' ? Can I maybe try to see their point of view, see where they're coming from?"

amdublin

pleas advice wrote: »

Why are pro life people pro life, in your view? Are they all women-hating slut-shamers, or... What?

You know what. I really couldn't care less what prolifers are, or what they think, as long as they stay out of my life and bedroom.

Abortion, contraception and healthcare choices are a decision for each and every individual on their own

NuMarvel

pleas advice wrote: »

No, not at all. I would like you to ask yourself, "why are these people 'pro-life' ? Can I maybe try to see their point of view, see where they're coming from?"

I think a better question is does a person's argument have a rational and coherent basis that stands up to scrutiny. And when I look at the argument of anti-repealers (because not every pro life person is necessarily anti-repeal), my conclusion is; No.

amdublin

pleas advice wrote: »

No, not at all. I would like you to ask yourself, "why are these people 'pro-life' ? Can I maybe try to see their point of view, see where they're coming from?"

At the end of the day aren't we all Pro Life? But we also realise that practically sometimes it just isn't the right thing for the woman involved. Or the couple involved etc.

Everyone needs to make their own decision of what to do.

JuliusCaesar

We are all pro-life; the anti-abortion crowd chose this name for themselves to tug the heartstrings.

I'm just more pro-existing life; pro-born, you might call it. Rather than pro-potential-life.

I had an abortion myself as a teenager, way back in the late 70s. I was lucky in that I had the information at my fingertips. My then boyfriend came with me to England and paid for it as he was working and I wasn't.

I became a single mother at the age of 32, deciding against abortion on this occasion. I was older, had a job etc. I'd split up with the father before I knew I was pregnant. Although he was initially delighted, he fecked off PDQ. It was MUCH more difficult being a single mother than I had envisaged.

pilly

pleas advice wrote: »

No, not at all. I would like you to ask yourself, "why are these people 'pro-life' ? Can I maybe try to see their point of view, see where they're coming from?"

I understand exactly why people are pro-life and have no problem whatsoever with that.

If you don't want to have an abortion don't have one.

Can you please ask yourself "why you think you should have control over other people's decisions".

pleas advice

Well I mean, for me pro life means anti-(medically unnecessary) abortion.

I mean, it's the ending of a human life they have a problem with, I guess.
That shouldn't be anyone's decision *to* make

amdublin

pleas advice wrote: »

Well I mean, for me pro life means anti-(medically unnecessary) abortion.

I mean, it's the ending of a human life they have a problem with, I guess.
That shouldn't be anyone's decision *to* make

Well that's where we disagree and my personal opinion is you need to mind your own business.

Who are you or I, to dictate to any woman in the middle (for example) of a ffa that she must carry the baby full term or until it dies inside her. Go and sh1te it'll be a cold day in hell before I advise a woman of that. Or that there is to be no medical intervention until she tips into danger /sepsis. No way hosay. Go away and have your own pregnancy and stay out of someone else's pregnancy.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

There are obviously a multiplicity of reasons why people are pro life. Religious belief or background, personal or family history, a sincerely held belief that an embryo is a tiny human and therefore entitled to the same rights as a baby or adult, force of habit or lack of interest in the issue, and yes, in many cases, rank, raving misogyny.

But the thing is, while those beliefs generally deserve respect when an individual holds them, the upshot of ALL of those beliefs, when they're imposed on a society at large by law, is the oppression and suffering of women, and the punishment of women.

I might have a lovely nice kindhearted belief that paramedics should have 180 days annual leave. The result of that, if I lobbied and made it law, would be pain and death. I don't get to distance myself from those easily observable, dire consequences, just because I didn't set out with those consequences as my goal.

I'd like to turn the question back to the pro-life posters, why do you think other people are pro-choice and can you identify with their reasoning at all?

pleas advice

I can indeed. But that doesn't change the fact that somewhere between a third and a half of the population have, as you say, 'a sincerely held belief that an embryo is a tiny human and therefore entitled to the same rights as a baby or adult' and some on the pro-choice side couldn't care less what prolifers are, or what they think.

Zubeneschamali

pleas advice wrote: »

I mean, it's the ending of a human life they have a problem with, I guess. That shouldn't be anyone's decision *to* make

Better start work to repeal the 13th then, because today women have a Constitutional right to make that decision (but with an unnecessary trip to England thrown in).

Edward M

amdublin wrote: »

Well that's where we disagree and my personal opinion is you need to mind your own business.

Who are you or I, to dictate to any woman in the middle (for example) of a ffa that she must carry the baby full term or until it dies inside her. Go and sh1te it'll be a cold day in hell before I advise a woman of that. Or that there is to be no medical intervention until she tips into danger /sepsis. No way hosay. Go away and have your own pregnancy and stay out of someone else's pregnancy.

But you listed reasons for abortion?
Why not be so blunt as to say why should any woman have to have any reason for abortion?

amdublin

Edward M wrote: »

But you listed reasons for abortion?
Why not be so blunt as to say why should any woman have to have any reason for abortion?

pleas advice

Howard Tasteless Bank wrote: »

, and yes, in many cases, rank, raving misogyny.

Do you actually really think that?