The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

B0jangles · 30-03-2018 4:40pm

Stupify wrote: »

Excuse me B0jangles, but you are attributing things to me that I have not said.

Nowhere did I say that unless it benefits me personally I won't fight for it, I have already said a few times that I was in support of repealing the 8th, I will always want people in this country to have a choice with regards their own body.

Can men not also be discussed though? I want to have a choice too, will you fight for my right to that choice B0jangles?

If a law can be formulated in which the rights of the born child are fully protected, then I'd theoretically be happy for men either parent to be able to sign away all rights and responsibilities to that child.

The state would have to step in and provide full financial support though; so while you might not have to directly support the child, you'll be doing so indirectly through taxes anyway.

Stupify · 30-03-2018 4:47pm

Oldtree wrote: »

Ah I see what you are saying. But the difficulty is proving or disproving fatherhood rights before birth, in this case before 12 weeks, so I dont see how such a right could be implemented.

Yes that is a huge difficulty, but I'm sure there could be a way to implement it somehow.

Stupify · 30-03-2018 4:51pm

B0jangles wrote: »

If a law can be formulated in which the rights of the born child are fully protected, then I'd theoretically be happy for men either parent to be able to sign away all rights and responsibilities to that child.

The state would have to step in and provide full financial support though; so while you might not have to directly support the child, you'll be doing so indirectly through taxes anyway.

The state would need not provide anymore support than what is already in place I think, although I can foresee childcare costs being an issue where the single parent has no support network.

Anyway, I'm logging off now to enjoy the long weekend. I wish everyone here a happy Easter and safe travels over the break.

erica74 · 30-03-2018 5:47pm

I heard David Quinn from the Iona Institute (I think that's his name) on the radio earlier saying "no abortion will be refused if the 8th is removed from the constitution". He said that like it's a bad thing. I can't wait for no abortion to be refused!

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 30-03-2018 5:48pm

Stupify wrote: »

Not at all, I'm talking about before the child is born. Same as when a woman will be able to decide if she wants the child or not.

But there will be a born child. A child who has physical and financial needs. A child who will have paternal grandparents and extended family. A child who may be at risk of heritable disease. A child who may need an organ transplant. It's not workable.

It's funny that pro life posters are agreeing with you when they're so quick to accuse pro choice arguments of only talking about the woman's rights and not the "baby's" rights. In your scenario there's an actual, born, sentient baby. But oh yeah, they're born, and a woman's responsibility, so who cares :rolleyes:

January · 30-03-2018 5:54pm

BabysCoffee wrote: »

Anyone in this discussion planning on canvassing, fundraising or getting involved with the campaign generally?

I am busy this weekend but hopefully I will join up with a local canvas next weekend.

Yup. I'm one of the founding members of our local group. We've been out canvassing only once so far just to test the waters but have put together a plan for the next couple of weeks now that the date is set in stone. We had a stall today in the Blanchardstown Centre and had a brilliant response to it (not our first one have had a few before!), only one crazy person shouting that we were murderers and shame on us. We've a quiz night coming up next week in the area. We're one of the biggest constituencies in the country so it'll be a busy few weeks getting around to all the houses but hopefully, we'll get there!

Mr. CooL ICE · 30-03-2018 7:12pm

B0jangles wrote: »

Were you one of those kids who absolutely had to get a present on other people's birthdays just so you didn't feel left out?

Mod: Less of this, please. Comments like this are what give people the impression that repeal voters use bullying tactics.

kylith · 30-03-2018 7:22pm

Ok, so say a man can sign away his righrmys and not pay maintenance. Are you happy to see an increase in social welfare and a corresponding rise in taxes?

BabysCoffee · 30-03-2018 7:47pm

January wrote: »

Yup. I'm one of the founding members of our local group. We've been out canvassing only once so far just to test the waters but have put together a plan for the next couple of weeks now that the date is set in stone. We had a stall today in the Blanchardstown Centre and had a brilliant response to it (not our first one have had a few before!), only one crazy person shouting that we were murderers and shame on us. We've a quiz night coming up next week in the area. We're one of the biggest constituencies in the country so it'll be a busy few weeks getting around to all the houses but hopefully, we'll get there!

Good on you January!

Madscientist30 · 30-03-2018 7:49pm

I think Stupify's point is a fair one. If abortion should be a legal option for a woman who does not want to be a mother, then a man should also have the legal option to decide not to be a father at similar stages of the pregnancy.

At the same time though I dont see how it is relevant to repealing the 8th? If some men want to pursue getting that right to legally renounce parental responsibilities during the early stages of an unplanned pregnancy then they and their supporters (male and female) can surely campaign for it and if it gets enough support it can be legislated for. Why does it have to be tied into legislating for abortion? It is a seperate issue. And parents can already give up their rights in certain circumstances anyway.

Madscientist30 · 30-03-2018 7:54pm

kylith wrote: »

Ok, so say a man can sign away his righrmys and not pay maintenance. Are you happy to see an increase in social welfare and a corresponding rise in taxes?

But if a woman decides to continue with a pregnancy and needs state support we are happy to pay that? Both situations are the result of individual choices so why would the state support one (the woman wants to be a mother) and not the other (the man doesnt want to be a father). I mean, morally it would leave a bad taste in my mouth but legally, it seems fair.

kylith · 30-03-2018 7:56pm

Madscientist30 wrote: »

But if a woman decides to continue with a pregnancy and needs state support we are happy to pay that? Both situations are the result of individual choices so why would the state support one (the woman wants to be a mother) and not the other (the man doesnt want to be a father). I mean, morally it would leave a bad taste in my mouth but legally, it seems fair.

But if the father does not want to pay child support and contribute to the upkeep for his child the shortfall has to be made up from somewhere or the child will suffer.

Bannasidhe · 30-03-2018 8:47pm

Stupify wrote: »

But he can be forced to pay for that child. A man who has made clear before birth (same period as a woman is allowed decide) that he wants no part in the childs life should not be forced to pay for that child.

Any minute now the pro-Birthers will be along to say that men know the risks and must suffer the consequences. :pac:

You are not comparing like for like.
There is no physical impact on the man's body. He will not be at risk of possibly fatal complications.

The impact will be on his wallet.

You are comparing a woman's body to a man's wallet and saying they are equal.

_Dara_ · 30-03-2018 9:13pm

Stupify wrote: »

I see it as related, repealing the 8th will bring the choice of abortion into this country for women, it should also bring with it a choice for men too.

One thing at a time. There is merit in the idea of legal abortion but the world's not there yet. Ireland won't be a groundbreaker in that regard.

Parklife1988 · 30-03-2018 9:42pm

Someone able to help me out with this?

The pro life campaign launched today. And their main spokesman said John McGuirk said this. Am I reading this right??

‘Spokesman for the group John McGuirk said those in favour of the amendment’s retention have reduced their campaign to telling people they are “terrible” if they do not agree with terminations in certain circumstances.’

Is he not attacking his own side?
Main article here. It’s not long but it is nauseating. And yes they actually are campaigning for women pregnant through rape and infer to be forced to give birth.

Is this just bizarre double speak?? It’s a weird statement from their main spokesman

Victims of rape and incest should carry babies to full term, say campaigners
‘Save the 8th’ group predicts referendum will not be passed

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/victims-of-rape-and-incest-should-carry-babies-to-full-term-say-campaigners-1.3444429?mode=amp&__twitter_impression=true

Annasopra · 30-03-2018 9:53pm

kylith wrote: »

And you don’t think that the pressure to save the money and book the clinic and the hotel and the clinic puts pressure in the woman to rush into a decision, and that having done all that she then may feel pressured into going ahead with it even if she’s unsure? Whereas having a few weeks to think it over and the procedure being less expensive and available from a local gp would actually give her more time to consider her options and decide what is right for her?

Of course it does. I am aware of a case where a woman went through all that; booked everything - went to UK. Was mulling it over; thinking that an abortion might be the wrong decision then felt pressured into it because she just didnt have time or financial resources to go home, think it through more and then go back agsin to UK.

Annasopra · 30-03-2018 9:58pm

Stupify wrote: »

I appreciate the input, I would love to see a method for men to be able to rid themselves of responsibility for a child they don't want, I also don't think it will happen anytime soon though.

It could be regulated I think, but the support to get it something like this legalized in the first place just isn't there.

In ways this deserves a glib response given to women all the time. If he doesnt want the responsibility then he shouldnt have sex.

ForestFire · 30-03-2018 10:37pm

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

In ways this deserves a glib response given to women all the time. If he doesnt want the responsibility then he shouldnt have sex.

So then deserve the same answers as well and everyone is okay if we all agree and pass the referendum?

Are men not allowed go out and enjoy themselves?
Men like to have sex too you know?
Why should their life be dictated too, when they have taken all precautions?
Contraceptives is not 100% effective, even 2 forms, and 1 in 100 will still end up getting a woman pregnant through no fault of their own.

Annasopra · 30-03-2018 10:55pm

ForestFire wrote: »

So then deserve the same answers as well and everyone is okay if we all agree and pass the referendum?

Are men not allowed go out and enjoy themselves?
Men like to have sex too you know?
Why should their life be dictated too, when they have taken all precautions?
Contraceptives is not 100% effective, even 2 forms, and 1 in 100 will still end up getting a woman pregnant through no fault of their own.

I think Bannasidhe hit the nail on the head here this is just about some mens desire to put their wallet first. Its irrelevant really to anything to do with the 8th. Fair enough if some men want to campaign for financial abandonment of responsibility - leave them to it though. Pretty much nothing to do with the 8th or the 36th amendment.

ForestFire · 30-03-2018 11:12pm

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I think Bannasidhe hit the nail on the head here this is just about some mens desire to put their wallet first. Its irrelevant really to anything to do with the 8th. Fair enough if some men want to campaign for financial abandonment of responsibility - leave them to it though. Pretty much nothing to do with the 8th or the 36th amendment.

How is it abandomment for men but not women, if it is done before 12 weeks?

I don't understand this, we keep saying there is no child so there is nothing to abandon?

And just to be clear I do not think or expect this to be part of the immediate referendum needs, but something that needs to but discussed and expanded upon if/When the 8th is repealed.

As you and others have said there are more important decisions to be made initially and I have no problem with that.

But we can discuss the concepts and rights and wrongs openly now as part of the overall debate and where we might eventually go.

Pherekydes · 30-03-2018 11:42pm

This angle of men's rights issue is nothing to do with the 8th.

The 8th amendment states: "The states acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right."

Nowhere does it mention men or fathers.

Let's get back on track and drop the sideshow.

Madscientist30 · 31-03-2018 8:20am

I agree that it has nothing directly to do with the 8th so it's a seperate thread maybe, but I think there is a point there. Lots of fathers find themselves in very difficult situations too and I think it is a discussion that follows naturally in societies where abortion is now freely available. This was a good read mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-04/financial-abortion-men-opt-out-parenthood/8049576

Anyway, apologies, it was just nice to actually have a new point to debate in this thread instead of going around and around in the same circles!

amdublin · 31-03-2018 9:25am

I agree about the circles

I am seeing a lot of save the 8th posters gone up around Dublin city.

Specifically with the 1 in 5 pregnancies end in abortion in England, don't let this happen here. Am I right in thinking that this is Not factually correct. Because this stat includes miscarriages that end in abortion.
?

Also are these posters allowed?

ForestFire · 31-03-2018 9:27am

Pherekydes wrote: »

This angle of men's rights issue is nothing to do with the 8th.

The 8th amendment states: "The states acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right."

Nowhere does it mention men or fathers.

Let's get back on track and drop the sideshow.

But the 8th will be gone in this dicussion, so it doesn't matter what it says.

And legislation to replace it is what we are discussing, which is part of this overall referendum.

Every pregnancy has 2 people legally involved and therefore it is revelavant to what happens when the 8th is removed and how current and future legislation will be put in place.

AtomicHorror · 31-03-2018 10:10am

Parklife1988 wrote: »

Victims of rape and incest should carry babies to full term, say campaigners
‘Save the 8th’ group predicts referendum will not be passed

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/victims-of-rape-and-incest-should-carry-babies-to-full-term-say-campaigners-1.3444429?mode=amp&__twitter_impression=true

If they hold that line, they don't have a chance of retaining the 8th. That campaign line is referendum suicide.

Edward M · 31-03-2018 10:20am

amdublin wrote: »

I agree about the circles

I am seeing a lot of save the 8th posters gone up around Dublin city.

Specifically with the 1 in 5 pregnancies end in abortion in England, don't let this happen here. Am I right in thinking that this is Not factually correct. Because this stat includes miscarriages that end in abortion.
?

Also are these posters allowed?

It doesent include miscarriages, that was posted earlier.
One pro choice poster lost his rag when that was pointed out.
One in Five pregnancies excluding miscarriages end in abortion in England and Wales, less in Scotland.

PhoenixParker · 31-03-2018 10:20am

ForestFire wrote: »

But the 8th will be gone in this dicussion, so it doesn't matter what it says.

And legislation to replace it is what we are discussing, which is part of this overall referendum.

Every pregnancy has 2 people legally involved and therefore it is revelavant to what happens when the 8th is removed and how current and future legislation will be put in place.

The 8th might be gone in this discussion, what it says is the absolute core of the discussion.

Men's rights with respect to parenthood are a different discussion.
Threads are free and in unlimited supply.
Please get your own.

Whether intentional or not this whole men's rights angle is an excellent example of whataboutery and having seen what's happened with Brexit and in the US we really need to not engage in it by separating out discussions.

Bannasidhe · 31-03-2018 10:22am

ForestFire wrote: »

But the 8th will be gone in this dicussion, so it doesn't matter what it says.

And legislation to replace it is what we are discussing, which is part of this overall referendum.

Every pregnancy has 2 people legally involved and therefore it is revelavant to what happens when the 8th is removed and how current and future legislation will be put in place.

It really doesn't.
The 8th is not just about Abortion - it impacts on women's healthcare in an insidious and sometimes fatal way and overrides any rights to bodily autonomy until either a baby is born or it is proven the women isn't pregnant. As such it has zero impact on men apart from making them helpless bystanders.

The issue of father's rights - to be there or not - doesn't come into play until after birth and is therefore a separate issue and not relevant to a discussion on the 8th - it's a diversion.

I am not saying this is not a discussion that isn't important far from it. Unlike, I imagine, most posters here I have experience of the 'want nothing to do with this child' aspect as the 'father' of my son didn't. And that was grand with me. We agreed that before hand and he never contributed anything to 'his son' bar a lick of an ice cream. I supported my son myself and he was able to walk away. With my blessing.

I have also seen my son struggle to pay maintenance for his children during periods of unemployment (he never missed a payment). I stood by him in Court as he fought for Guardianship, Access etc. My partner and I drove him hundreds of miles on weekends after their mother moved to a different county so he could have his children for weekends.

I also saw my aunt struggle to raise 6 children on her own - 2 from her first marriage, 2 from her second marriage and 2 step-children when both her husbands turned out to be deadbeats. And yes, that is what they were. Employed deadbeats who decided once the divorce papers were signed their role ended. She worked to support her family.

I spent days in Court with a friend who was seeking a judicial separation (amicably) as she and her husband tried to explain to the judge that their child was going to live full-time with his father and that my friend didn't need or want any financial support from her husband and that she would be paying maintenance for her child.
The absolute sh*t she had to listen to from busybodies about how she wasn't a real woman for abandoning her son was unreal. She wasn't abandoning him, she recognised his father was the better full time parent and as he worked from home better placed to provide stable care. She has a wonderful relationship with her now adult son and her ex-husband.

So, I get that this is an important discussion but it has nothing to do with Repealing the 8th.

Edward M · 31-03-2018 10:26am

PhoenixParker wrote: »

The 8th might be gone in this discussion, what it says is the absolute core of the discussion.

Men's rights with respect to parenthood are a different discussion.
Threads are free and in unlimited supply.
Please get your own.

Whether intentional or not this whole men's rights angle is an excellent example of whataboutery and having seen what's happened with Brexit and in the US we really need to not engage in it by separating out discussions.

While I agree re the eighth being repealed is the real issue here, it does lead to other considerations as to what will replace it, and probably the rights of all citizens when its gone.
All these things when taken in to consideration may affect the way people vote re repeal.
Why limit the discussion?

PhoenixParker · 31-03-2018 10:26am

Edward M wrote: »

It doesent include miscarriages, that was posted earlier.
One pro choice poster lost his rag when that was pointed out.
One in Five pregnancies excluding miscarriages end in abortion in England and Wales, less in Scotland.

One question I had after that discussion was whether miscarriage treatment is included in abortion stats in the U.K.
Not every miscarriage requires treatment but for the significant portion that do, the treatment is the same as an abortion.

I can't find a definitive answer but if it is the case, it would massively increase the apparent abortion rate in the UK.