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

markodaly

Edward M wrote: »

But why, I mean where did they come from?
I had a child with my first partner in the 80s, in rural Cavan, we lived together for 4 years after the child was born, we had no problems or our daughter either.
I really would like to know where in Ireland this wasn't possible at that time?

I have family who had children outside of marriage in the 80'. They never married but lived together in a normal life.

I think perhaps some people maybe over egging the situation of the 80's in relation to unmarried mothers at the time.

It was entirely possible for an un married mother to keep their kids and life a normal life at the time without the some nun jumping out of a manhole to kidnap them.

markodaly

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I reckon I know who I worked with and hung out with in London in the 80s. We were the Irish Queers and the Lefties - the same people who 'manned' the Abortion Info lines - and yes - we left for social reasons and there was a lot of us because if you were gay or socially liberal Ireland was no place for you. Edit to add : or if you wanted a divorce, or to raise your 'illegitimate' child, or were a survivor of one of Ireland's many institutions designed to make life hell for the socially unacceptable.

And again - given I was there and these were my peers - I remember how Robinson's election caused us to decide it was time to bring the fight back home.

I didn't say it was all the Irish. I said it was the Irish I worked, lived among, and played with, and we were both politically and socially very aware.

It's not always about economics.

You are falling into your own trap of conformation bias. Just because you had an experience does not mean that it as true for all Irish emigrants of the 1980's.

According to CSO figures 206,000 people left Ireland during the 80's. The vast vast majority of these for economic reasons.

Again, I said social reasons may have contributed but to argue that the majority of emigration was caused by social issues flies in the face of established facts.

kylith

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Amend the 8 tomorrow for rape, incest, fatal fetal abnormality and if the mothers life in danger and it would pass by 99%.

But then you have the issue of how to bring it on for rape without opening the door for abortion on request as taking women’s word for it that they were raped IS abortion on request, but forcing women to go through a tribunal to prove they were raped is barbaric, and will ultimately wind up meaning that some women who just weren’t believable enough will have to carry their rapist’s baby.

It’s also rather upsetting that some people think a foetus is more important than a woman's physical or mental health, as allowing abortion in cases of threat to life only means that women can be denied treatment until their illness is so far progressed that it can kill them.

captbarnacles

amdublin wrote: »

Edward M wrote: »

But I can't get the baby out of my head in the middle of all that.

I can't get it out of my head that you have said you will vote yes to repeal.

Yet you throw out things like this every now again (a complete and utter probirther line, let's call a spade a spade)

Edward will be voting no and it's obvious at this stage he is not seriously debating it. If he were a fully paid up subscriber to Iona it would not be a shock.

captbarnacles

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Or in the cases of rape... or any of the other reasons that have been acknowledged over and over and over on this thread

Rape is always brought up in this discussion because it's the most extreme case.

Amend the 8 tomorrow for rape, incest, fatal fetal abnormality and if the mothers life in danger and it would pass by 99%.

But what we have now is an either you are with us or against attitude and that is damaging both sides but I think it will damage the pro choice more.

And back to rape committees then I guess? That will go well.

Ave Sodalis

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Rape is always brought up in this discussion because it's the most extreme case.

Amend the 8 tomorrow for rape, incest, fatal fetal abnormality and if the mothers life in danger and would pass by 99%.

But what we have now is an either you are with us or against attitude and that is damaging both sides but I think it will damage the pro choice more.

Except, as said over and over as well, specific cases of rape cannot be legislated for. I brought up rape because it is not as simple as closing your legs. The amendment will not be on specifically rape, incest or fatal fetal. The amendment will be so that the government can legislate for these cases, amongst others. We are not/will not be voting to amend for rape, incest or fatal fetal alone, so telling people it's as simple as closing their legs is a load of rubbish. This is something I think you know already.

amdublin

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Close your legs.

So you're never ever ever to have sex unless you want to be pregnant?

Sex is a good thing and an enjoyable thing to do for ones mind and soul.

[Deleted User]

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Close your legs.

youll be looking for the abstinence thread.

unfortunately for you its not busy. the country isnt voting on that anytime soon.

amdublin

Why is it ok to abort a foetus in some circumstances? Eg. Rape
But not in other circumstances? E.g. failed contraception and don't want to have a 3rd child

What's different about one foetus over another?

retro:electro

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Close your legs.

Never heard this one before :rolleyes:

Sweetemotion

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Or in the cases of rape... or any of the other reasons that have been acknowledged over and over and over on this thread

Rape is always brought up in this discussion because it's the most extreme case.

Amend the 8 tomorrow for rape, incest, fatal fetal abnormality and if the mothers life in danger and it would pass by 99%.

But what we have now is an either you are with us or against attitude and that is damaging both sides but I think it will damage the pro choice more.

Water John

Yes, the Govn't will publish legislation. We know that will be, the most liberal the law that we will up get, looks like. There is a distinct possibility that, with the free vote in both FF and FG that, the law that the Oireachtais passes will be more restrictive.
So Edward, the answer to you dilemna, is to vote for Repeal and canvass your TDs for the law that you prefer.

nice_guy80

splinter65 wrote: »

If you don’t want a baby you give it up for adoption and walk away.

Magdalene laundries is it?

Ave Sodalis

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Not a realistic option in a healthy, happy marriage or other long term relationship. :rolleyes:

Or in the cases of rape... or any of the other reasons that have been acknowledged over and over and over on this thread

Sweetemotion

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Not a realistic option in a healthy, happy marriage or other long term relationship. :rolleyes:

But it is that simple.

rainbow kirby

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Close your legs.

Not a realistic option in a healthy, happy marriage or other long term relationship. :rolleyes:

Sweetemotion

bubblypop wrote: »

what if you dont want to be pregnant?

Close your legs.

Martina1991

splinter65 wrote:

If you donâ€™t want a baby you give it up for adoption and walk away.

Like a puppy that you buy for Christmas or something.

Your complete lack of thought, consideration or empathy for any woman that is forces to carry a pregnancy is astounding and horrifying.

[Deleted User]

splinter65 wrote: »

If you don’t want a baby you give it up for adoption and walk away.

what if you dont want to be pregnant?

nozzferrahhtoo

Edward M wrote: »

What did the citizens assembly recommend?

So you are going to dodge questions with a question. Nice. I will add that to the list.

splinter65 wrote: »

If you don’t want a baby you give it up for adoption and walk away.

That is a choice some pregnant women get to make. Which is good. But not all of them get to make that choice. And sometimes the choice is not about not wanting a baby. It is about not wanting to be pregnant at all.

Edward M

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

When women CHOOSE to abort, as opposed to doing so for medical or other reasons that compel them..... they almost entirely do so before the fetus reaches week 12. Consistently over 90% in country after country. By week 16 the % has risen to 98% or higher.

Upon what basis do you argue that any such fetus should have a "right to life" in the first place?

What is it that the government, citizens assembly, 1000s after 1000s of our citizens, and many countries around the world.... and me..... are missing here?

I have asked, and asked, and asked this question of person after person and I get nearly nothing in reply. Except some vague appeals to Taxonomy that generally turn out to be a precursor to the speaker running away from the conversation.

What did the citizens assembly recommend?

splinter65

pilly wrote: »

Of course it will Edward, because women won't be left alone with a child they don't want.

Don't act all naive now because we know you're not.

If you don’t want a baby you give it up for adoption and walk away.

Edward M

anna080 wrote: »

The “baby” is out of your control regardless of a successful repeal or not, as many women would likely be going across the water anyway.
You can make their lives a little bit easier though by ensuring they don’t have to leave their country to seek medical help.

I'm voting repeal anna, but I'm hoping for a scenario to develop, like the independent suggested today, that legislation might only pass on certain conditions, not free choice.
I had originally considered not voting at all, but the eighth is dangerous in its own way too.
I don't want any woman denied necessary medical treatment because she is pregnant.
If abortion on demand is then legislated for then I feel I can live with that, even though I don't agree with it, but as you say if a woman really wants it it will happen regardless of whether its here or not.
I'm only expressing my views, but I wouldn't be honest if I said I believed in free choice in all situations.
I regard myself as pro life despite voting for repeal.

amdublin

Edward M wrote: »

I know, that's the way I see it though.
I don't place the baby's right to life above or even equal to the mothers, the mothers health should always be primary, if she's raped or incestuously abused
But I do place the baby's right to life above the woman's choice if her health isn't compromised.

If the woman got pregnant through rape your ok with it.
If she got pregnant through just having a good old time having sex you're not?

A. It feels like you're shaming a woman for having sex
B. This feels like we're heading back to that awful rape committee monstrosity that was mooted a few pages back on this thread

Will you ever mind your own business about how a woman got pregnant and let her make own mind up what she does with her own body.

Ave Sodalis

Edward M wrote: »

I know plenty single mothers, I don't know one I've ever heard of being ostracised, punished or made leave where she is from because of it.

Just on this, my mother in the early 90s had people knocking on her door trying to take me from her because she was a single, teenage mother. And I say her door because she was not living my grandparents house.

Being a single parent is tough. They may not try and take the child off the parent anymore, but that doesn't mean it's easy. Just a quick glance through this very forum will show you that the crappy attitudes towards single mothers have not disappeared, they just can't do as much about it. Being a single parent is doable, but I completely understand why someone would not want to go ahead with a pregnancy if it meant being a single mother at the end of it.

nozzferrahhtoo

Edward M wrote: »

But I do place the baby's right to life above the woman's choice if her health isn't compromised.

When women CHOOSE to abort, as opposed to doing so for medical or other reasons that compel them..... they almost entirely do so before the fetus reaches week 12. Consistently over 90% in country after country. By week 16 the % has risen to 98% or higher.

Upon what basis do you argue that any such fetus should have a "right to life" in the first place?

What is it that the government, citizens assembly, 1000s after 1000s of our citizens, and many countries around the world.... and me..... are missing here?

I have asked, and asked, and asked this question of person after person and I get nearly nothing in reply. Except some vague appeals to Taxonomy that generally turn out to be a precursor to the speaker running away from the conversation.

PhoenixParker

Edward M wrote: »

But I can't get the baby out of my head in the middle of all that.

Would you go through an 8 month procedure to donate an organ to a real live human being who won't survive without it?

For the first three months you take a pill that makes you vomit daily, feel exhausted. Your performance at work will be affected but convention is you don't tell anyone.

Then you move to a second set of medication. This results in weight gain of 10-15kg on average, causes frequent urination, difficulty sleeping, difficulty walking. You may get symptoms like not being able to walk for more than ten minutes due to hip pain, high blood pressure, diabetes which could well persist after the operation. You may end up hospitalised for days or weeks but either way you'll have frequent appointments resulting in missing work.

Then you'll go in for the operation. If you're lucky it'll go smoothly and they'll manage it by sticking a thick tube up your penis. It'll probably rip it a little but anaesthetic is discouraged. If that's not suitable you'll have major abdominal surgery and a six week driving ban. The government will pay you €270/week to cover all your expenses while you recover.

Would you do all that (and more) to save the life of a real life, living human being with a family and friends?

More importantly do you believe the government has the right to compel everybody in the country from 13 year olds to single parents struggling with young kids to go through that?

If not, why would you force someone to do it for a foetus?

Edward M

amdublin wrote: »

I can't get it out of my head that you have said you will vote yes to repeal.

Yet you throw out things like this every now again (a complete and utter probirther line, let's call a spade a spade)

I know, that's the way I see it though.
I don't place the baby's right to life above or even equal to the mothers, the mothers health should always be primary, if she's raped or incestuously abused
But I do place the baby's right to life above the woman's choice if her health isn't compromised.

retro:electro

Edward M wrote: »

But I can't get the baby out of my head in the middle of all that.

The “baby” is out of your control regardless of a successful repeal or not, as many women would likely be going across the water anyway.
You can make their lives a little bit easier though by ensuring they don’t have to leave their country to seek medical help.

amdublin

Edward M wrote: »

But I can't get the baby out of my head in the middle of all that.

I can't get it out of my head that you have said you will vote yes to repeal.

Yet you throw out things like this every now again (a complete and utter probirther line, let's call a spade a spade)