The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

seamus · 16-04-2018 10:01AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Just to note that although I don't have a religious bone in my body, I do know religious people and I don't think they are all mad, some of them are very nice, and I'm sure their pro-life views are sincere, if not very consistent.

I would not like the thread to devolve into allegations that religious people are all mad.

Indeed I'd like to clarify that my intention was very much to define religious extremists and insane people as two distinct groups.
The latter are a very distinct subgroup of the pro-life side who are more driven to fight repeal on the basis that it's some grand George Soros conspiracy to commit genocide and usher in the rise of the lizard people, rather than being in possession of at least some form of cogent reasoning.

I don't judge the rest of the pro-life side on what that group particularly says, because you don't get to choose which groups align themselves on your side, and you can't silence the embarrassing ones.

Back on-topic, "No" posters have started appearing with a Dr Siobhan Crowley on them, claiming that the foetal heartbeat starts at 22 days.

Considering that no heart exists at 22 days, this is a failure in very basic biology. Which is being put up and published on posters all over the country, with said doctor's name and face attached. I wonder if she approved that quote and if she's happy to have such a medically ignorant quote attached to her, considering that medicine is her livelihood.

Shadowstrife · 16-04-2018 10:02AM

seamus wrote: »

Had exactly the same conversation with my wife last night

She was worried that she was living in a bubble because it seemed to her that all of the pro-life campaign were "batsh1t crazy". And she wouldn't be a campigner at all or someone to get involved in online conversations. So it's not like she's picking some sources and blocking others.

I assured her that her assessment is in fact correct and the only people who care enough to campaign on the pro-life side are in fact the religious extremists and the insane.

Most Dubs and city moderates/ liberals will wake up on May 26th like David Cameron and Hillary Clinton before them.

The Pro-Life side is nothing to be sneered at. This vote will either be very close, or a win for the No side.

erica74 · 16-04-2018 10:03AM

LOTS of Vote Yes "Vote for Care" posters gone up over night around Waterford and Kilkenny. Put up by togetherforyes.ie. Delighted to see prochoice posters going up around the place at last!

gmisk · 16-04-2018 10:03AM

dudara wrote: »

I was looking at a lot of new Ant-Choice posters that have gone up around work. I can’t see any names and addresses on the posters, either of the publisher or printer. Does his mean they’re technically illegal? Surely they can’t be making a mistake as simple as that?

According to DCCAE YES

Does the name and address of the printer and publisher have to be printed on the poster?
Yes. Legislation requires that every notice, bill, poster or similar document having reference to a referendum or Dáil, local or European parliament election or distributed for the purpose of furthering the candidature of any candidate at an election must have printed on its face the name and address of the printer and of the publisher thereof. The omission of the name and address of the printer and publisher is an offence.

What is the penalty if the name and address of the printer and publisher is not printed on the poster?
Where a person is guilty of an offence, such person shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €634.87 or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for a period not exceeding three months or to both such fine and such imprisonment.

Looks like I am going to be reporting a LOT of posters on my way home

baylah17 · 16-04-2018 10:13AM

Shadowstrife wrote: »

Most Dubs and city moderates/ liberals will wake up on May 26th like David Cameron and Hillary Clinton before them.

The Pro-Life side is nothing to be sneered at. This vote will either be very close, or a win for the No side.

I dont care how close the vote is so long as it passes, 50%+1 vote is all we need.

pjohnson · 16-04-2018 10:16AM

seamus wrote: »

Indeed I'd like to clarify that my intention was very much to define religious extremists and insane people as two distinct groups.
The latter are a very distinct subgroup of the pro-life side who are more driven to fight repeal on the basis that it's some grand George Soros conspiracy to commit genocide and usher in the rise of the lizard people, rather than being in possession of at least some form of cogent reasoning.

I don't judge the rest of the pro-life side on what that group particularly says, because you don't get to choose which groups align themselves on your side, and you can't silence the embarrassing ones.

Back on-topic, "No" posters have started appearing with a Dr Siobhan Crowley on them, claiming that the foetal heartbeat starts at 22 days.

Considering that no heart exists at 22 days, this is a failure in very basic biology. Which is being put up and published on posters all over the country, with said doctor's name and face attached. I wonder if she approved that quote and if she's happy to have such a medically ignorant quote attached to her, considering that medicine is her livelihood.

I would hope a lot a patients are leaving that practice.

Sofiztikated · 16-04-2018 10:19AM

seamus wrote: »

Indeed I'd like to clarify that my intention was very much to define religious extremists and insane people as two distinct groups.
The latter are a very distinct subgroup of the pro-life side who are more driven to fight repeal on the basis that it's some grand George Soros conspiracy to commit genocide and usher in the rise of the lizard people, rather than being in possession of at least some form of cogent reasoning.

I don't judge the rest of the pro-life side on what that group particularly says, because you don't get to choose which groups align themselves on your side, and you can't silence the embarrassing ones.

Back on-topic, "No" posters have started appearing with a Dr Siobhan Crowley on them, claiming that the foetal heartbeat starts at 22 days.

Considering that no heart exists at 22 days, this is a failure in very basic biology. Which is being put up and published on posters all over the country, with said doctor's name and face attached. I wonder if she approved that quote and if she's happy to have such a medically ignorant quote attached to her, considering that medicine is her livelihood.

She's off by about 20 days or so.

But as she's part of the Medical Alliance for the eighth, and is on record as saying "Abortion is life-ending. It is never life-saving. This proposal is about opening the door to wide-ranging abortion and nothing more,” Dr Siobhán Crowley, a GP, told a press conference in Dublin yesterday" I'd say she's fine with her face and spiel to be on the posters.

Zubeneschamali · 16-04-2018 10:28AM

baylah17 wrote: »

I dont care how close the vote is so long as it passes, 50%+1 vote is all we need.

The 8th was passed 67-33% back in 1983. I think that even if the referendum is defeated this time, it will be at most a 50-50 squeaker. While this would be a disappointment, it would also be progress, and a signal to folks that the 8th is beatable.

If not this year, soon.

Triceratops Ballet · 16-04-2018 10:30AM

Yeah I really feel we're talking 40 something to 50 something either way.
I'm nervous but optimistic

Shadowstrife · 16-04-2018 10:33AM

^ Sorry, but 'soon' isn't good enough. Too much time has passed with this stupid law in place. We have to canvass as much as possible.

pleas advice · 16-04-2018 10:36AM

seamus wrote: »

Back on-topic, "No" posters have started appearing with a Dr Siobhan Crowley on them, claiming that the foetal heartbeat starts at 22 days.

Considering that no heart exists at 22 days, this is a failure in very basic biology..

22 days from conception, possibly?

Zubeneschamali · 16-04-2018 10:36AM

Shadowstrife wrote: »

^ Sorry, but 'soon' isn't good enough.

I think it is better to aim high but prepare yourself for the worst. Defeat this time is possible, and not a cause for despair. Change is inevitable in the longer term.

Shadowstrife · 16-04-2018 10:38AM

pleas advice wrote: »

22 days from conception, possibly?

I find it amusing how they never bring up Identical Twins.

Triceratops Ballet · 16-04-2018 10:39AM

Zubeneschamali wrote:

I think it is better to aim high but prepare yourself for the worst. Defeat this time is possible, and not a cause for despair. Change is inevitable in the longer term.

I agree, push as hard as possible but if it doesn't pass the campaign resumes the next day.

Annasopra · 16-04-2018 10:45AM

dudara wrote: »

I was looking at a lot of new Ant-Choice posters that have gone up around work. I can’t see any names and addresses on the posters, either of the publisher or printer. Does his mean they’re technically illegal? Surely they can’t be making a mistake as simple as that?

Yes. It is illegal under the electoral act 1992 and the referendum act 1994

AtomicHorror · 16-04-2018 10:46AM

Sofiztikated wrote: »

She's off by about 20 days or so.

But as she's part of the Medical Alliance for the eighth, and is on record as saying "Abortion is life-ending. It is never life-saving. This proposal is about opening the door to wide-ranging abortion and nothing more,” Dr Siobhán Crowley, a GP, told a press conference in Dublin yesterday" I'd say she's fine with her face and spiel to be on the posters.

A GP that stands over a medical non-fact should be stuck off.

bertieinexile · 16-04-2018 10:46AM

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

I agree, push as hard as possible but if it doesn't pass the campaign resumes the next day.

Regina? Is that you?

kylith · 16-04-2018 10:49AM

pleas advice wrote: »

22 days from conception, possibly?

I think there's blood flow, but calling it a heartbeat is a bit of a stretch.

Triceratops Ballet · 16-04-2018 10:55AM

bertieinexile wrote:

Regina? Is that you?

Why yes, I have a public profile and have decided to post her disguised as a dinosaur to post anonymously! Good spot Cora!

*rolls eyes

AtomicHorror · 16-04-2018 10:55AM

kylith wrote: »

I think there's blood flow, but calling it a heartbeat is a bit of a stretch.

Actually I think there can be a beat from as early as 21 days, though why that matters, I don't know. You won't pick up anything on an ultrasound until about 6 or 7 weeks though.

gmisk · 16-04-2018 10:58AM

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

Yeah I really feel we're talking 40 something to 50 something either way.
I'm nervous but optimistic

I think you are right I think 55/45 is possible....but we will see.....every vote will be important!
I think it will be a lot closer than the marriage referendum 62/38.

seamus · 16-04-2018 11:02AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The 8th was passed 67-33% back in 1983. I think that even if the referendum is defeated this time, it will be at most a 50-50 squeaker. While this would be a disappointment, it would also be progress, and a signal to folks that the 8th is beatable.

If not this year, soon.

While it won't be 67-33 in favour of repeal, I'd be really surprised if it's a squeaker.

Everyone under the age of 53 - that's 70% of the voting population - have never voted on the 8th amendment.

Even if we assume that the remaining 30% of the population over 53 vote 67/33 against (which they won't), the rest of the population would have to vote 57/43 in order for the referendum to fail.
This would be a big downwards swing - the last polls puts it at 68/32. Even the most pessimistic recent poll was 61/39.

Definitely not a reason for complacency - turnout will make all the difference on the day, and any referendum can be defeated by apathy.

55/45 seems like a reasonable margin.

However, I do think the over-53s will surprise us. This is the generation who suffered some of the worst of the treatment from the church/medical cabal that oppressed and butchered pregnant women in the name of forced procreation.
We shouldn't underestimate the anger and experience in this group and their desire to not allow the same pain be inflicted on their children and grandchildren.

NuMarvel · 16-04-2018 11:46AM

gmisk wrote: »

I think you are right I think 55/45 is possible....but we will see.....every vote will be important!
I think it will be a lot closer than the marriage referendum 62/38.

The last referendum we had about abortion, in 2002 where it was proposed to remove suicide as a ground, was rejected by an incredibly narrow margin. It was 50.4% against and 49.6% in favour, with a difference of 10,500 votes out 1.2 million. And that had some pro life groups campaigning for a No vote because of aspects of the proposed post-referendum law.

Whichever way the vote goes, I think it will be very tight. Not quite as tight as the 2002 referendum, but I can't see it going over 55/45 for either side.

gmisk · 16-04-2018 11:46AM

https://twitter.com/louiseckenny/status/983069528967008256
Just for the poster earlier who said John McGuirk was playing a blinder.....
absolutely owned by someone who actually knows what she is talking about!

Zubeneschamali · 16-04-2018 11:49AM

kylith wrote: »

I think there's blood flow, but calling it a heartbeat is a bit of a stretch.

There is a heartbeat from 4 weeks when there is barely anything to call a heart. By 12 weeks the heart has chambers. See wikipedia

I am not sure why this is some sort of important issue though.

bertieinexile · 16-04-2018 11:56AM

seamus wrote: »

However, I do think the over-53s will surprise us. This is the generation who suffered some of the worst of the treatment from the church/medical cabal that oppressed and butchered pregnant women in the name of forced procreation.
We shouldn't underestimate the anger and experience in this group and their desire to not allow the same pain be inflicted on their children and grandchildren.

Would that church/medical cabal that oppressed and butchered pregnant women in the name of forced procreation be the same one responsible for the maternity care that has made the World Health Organisation, for the last 30 years, rank Ireland around the sixth safest place in the world to give birth.

Between 1985 and 2015 Ireland has had between the 5th and 7th lowest Maternal Mortality Rate of 183 countries measured by the WHO.

Or is that another cabal you were thinking of.

dudara · 16-04-2018 11:59AM

gmisk wrote: »

According to DCCAE YES

Does the name and address of the printer and publisher have to be printed on the poster?
Yes. Legislation requires that every notice, bill, poster or similar document having reference to a referendum or Dáil, local or European parliament election or distributed for the purpose of furthering the candidature of any candidate at an election must have printed on its face the name and address of the printer and of the publisher thereof. The omission of the name and address of the printer and publisher is an offence.

What is the penalty if the name and address of the printer and publisher is not printed on the poster?
Where a person is guilty of an offence, such person shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €634.87 or, at the discretion of the court, to imprisonment for a period not exceeding three months or to both such fine and such imprisonment.

Looks like I am going to be reporting a LOT of posters on my way home

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Yes. It is illegal under the electoral act 1992 and the referendum act 1994

Who do you report to? I’m assuming it’s the local council or via fixmystreet.ie

baylah17 · 16-04-2018 12:02PM

bertieinexile wrote: »

Would that church/medical cabal that oppressed and butchered pregnant women in the name of forced procreation be the same one responsible for the maternity care that has made the World Health Organisation, for the last 30 years, rank Ireland around the sixth safest place in the world to give birth.

Between 1985 and 2015 Ireland has had between the 5th and 7th lowest Maternal Mortality Rate of 183 countries measured by the WHO.

Or is that another cabal you were thinking of.

Go tell that to Savitas family or the families of all the other victims of the 8th .

Repeal the 8th

gmisk · 16-04-2018 12:03PM

dudara wrote: »

Who do you report to? I’m assuming it’s the local council or via fixmystreet.ie

That I dont know, I have emailed Dublin City Council, will post back if I get a response.

optogirl · 16-04-2018 12:04PM

bertieinexile wrote: »

Would that church/medical cabal that oppressed and butchered pregnant women in the name of forced procreation be the same one responsible for the maternity care that has made the World Health Organisation, for the last 30 years, rank Ireland around the sixth safest place in the world to give birth.

Between 1985 and 2015 Ireland has had between the 5th and 7th lowest Maternal Mortality Rate of 183 countries measured by the WHO.

Or is that another cabal you were thinking of.

Women with FFA diagnoses have to TRAVEL TO THE UK to get adequate care. Or are we just going to go on ignoring that?

The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Comments