The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

_Dara_ wrote: »

You are absolutely acting the victim in some of your posts. Don’t want people saying that you’re acting the victim? Then don’t... act the victim. It’s quite simple.

How about posting something of substance? Every second post of yours contains a sullen accusation (with little to back them up).

I’ll also ask: what concrete lies have the Yes side told? I’m genuinely interested. If they have told some lies, I want to know that information.

I saw no one condemn me being called a ku klux klan luvvie. Too busy trying to score points against me to care, then the yes side talks about compassion...I am not a victim but I am also not a doormat.

RobertKK wrote: »

I saw no one condemn me being called a ku klux klan luvvie. Too busy trying to score points against me to care, then the yes side talks about compassion...I am not a victim but I am also not a doormat.

I reported it. Hppy for mods to confirm I reported it. As we are encouraged to do rather than to drag the thread off topic. You are right. The KKK stuff is unacceptable. Thankfully it was deleted. By the poster or by the mods?

But lets not make this thread about you Robert please. It isnt about you.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I reported it. Hppy for mods to confirm I reported it. As we are encouraged to do rather than to drag the thread off topic. You are right. The KKK stuff is unacceptable. Thankfully it was deleted. By the poster or by the mods?

But lets not make this thread about you Robert please. It isnt about you.

Thank you.
I know it isn’t that is why I shouldn’t be expected to answer so many questions, or people post something on Facebook and then tag my name to answer it as if it had something to do with me, and I must explain stuff I had nothing to do with, or tell me i lied about what is proposed and then use the same thing because it then suits an argument.
I just think some of the stuff that has gone on has been crap.
It isn’t about me so I don’t think others should make it about me either.

Question on my mind after listening to the sound bites on radio from both sides and quickly flicking through this thread.....

Will both sides respect the democratic result of the voting public, whichever way it falls, and not seek a review or the "Irish solution" i.e. another referendum to make sure we get the result anted by some????

Krispie wrote: »

Will both sides respect the democratic result of the voting public, whichever way it falls, and not seek a review or the "Irish solution" i.e. another referendum to make sure we get the result anted by some????

The only point of a court case to challenge the result would be if there was some egregious problem with the count, and the Irish system is very robust, so no reviews of that sort. OK, I'm sure the No side will be in the High Court when they lose, but from my Yes perspective, no point.

There would also be no point in having another referendum in a years time, like the Lisbon or Nice ones. We'll have to wait maybe 5 years until some more pre-Vatican II Catholics shuffle off their mortal coils.

RobertKK wrote: »

Thank you.
I know it isn’t that is why I shouldn’t be expected to answer so many questions, or people post something on Facebook and then tag my name to answer it as if it had something to do with me, and I must explain stuff I had nothing to do with, or tell me i lied about what is proposed and then use the same thing because it then suits an argument.
I just think some of the stuff that has gone on has been crap.
It isn’t about me so I don’t think others should make it about me either.

Hmmm

Yeah ok but lets step back for a second. You are mostly loooking at this from a stance of it not personally affecting you. A lot of the posters here are very personally affected. Whether that is because of what their wives/partners/girlfriends have gone through or because of they themselves have gone through because of the 8th. Can you not see that the 8th has genuinely caused many people to suffer on a personal individual basis? Because it has put the lives of the unborn before women?

Krispie wrote: »

Question on my mind after listening to the sound bites on radio from both sides and quickly flicking through this thread.....

Will both sides respect the democratic result of the voting public, whichever way it falls, and not seek a review or the "Irish solution" i.e. another referendum to make sure we get the result anted by some????

If there's a no vote there should be a referendum every day until there's a yes vote. 10 times a day actually, to mark the 10 Irish women that will travel to the uk, each day, until the 8th is repealed. And come back on ferries and planes risking blood clots, hemorrhaging, and all sorts. Take your "morals" and get the boat. Pun intended.

Stop imposing your rules on everyone. Luckily this sort is dying off. In 5 years there will be less old catholics left, 5 more years the same again.

#togetherforyes
#trustourwomen
#repealthe8th

professore wrote: »

Neither is an unborn baby.

There is a difference there however. The user you are replying to is referring to entities that are not of an age to give consent. In abortion of a fetus at 12-16 weeks we are talking about an entity to which the concept of consent does not even apply. There is nothing there TO give consent. It is an entity entirely devoid of the pre-requisites of consent, like sentience and consciousness.

So conflating a conversation about consent to genital mutilation in babies, and the fetus, is an error. With abortion we are terminating an entity the consent of which is irrelevant. With FGM we are mutilating the body of a sentient agent before they are capable of giving or withholding consent.

professore wrote: »

What surprises me is how anyone can have black and white views on abortion. It isn't a black and white issue for me, it's a very murky grey one.

I think once you make it explicit and clear to yourself exactly what it is you value in your moral system and more importantly WHY you value it, the greyness renders itself more amenable to a useful form of black and white thinking.

Unfortunately I think many people operate under a moral system that they have not thought too deeply about. In the vast majority of cases that their own moral system comes into actual contact with, this is fine. They can have a general moral rule like "protect the young and vulnerable" which 99.999999% of the time will be generally a good algorithm to work with. But then it comes to things like abortion and that algorithm is triggered in a well meant but ultimately erroneous fashion.

We see time and time again when we try moral thought experiments designed to test peoples day to day moral intuitions, things like the trolley car problem to name one of many many, things break down a bit.

For me the process of introspection required that I sit down and actually go back to basics. What ARE rights and morality and ethics. Where do they come from. What are they for. What do they do. And what is it we value, or should value, or think we value, when we apply them.

And for me it comes down to the idea that rights, morality and ethics are in the business of mediating the actions and well being of conscious creatures. If they are not then I am agog to hear what they ARE doing.

The fetus at 12-16 weeks is not only NOT such an entity, but it even lacks many of the pre-requisites to be one. It is not one. It never has been one. It is a distinct period of time away from becoming one.

Therefore I have ZERO moral or ethical qualms about the termination of such an entity, and am generally seeing no reason why I might or should. So the issue becomes a lot more black and white for me for this reason, and while you might not agree with it, perhaps this description of it stops it being "surprising" to you.

The MAIN agenda in my moral system is to maximize where possible the freedoms, choices, and well being of conscious creatures in any given context. The pregnant woman is such an entity. The fetus inside her (at 12/16 weeks when the near totality of termination of viable fetuses occurs) is simply not. As such it takes an actual reason why we should curtail her choices, her freedoms and her well being in deference to it. Reasons that the anti-choice speakers on this thread simply have yet to offer us. They just shout words like "Human" and "alive" at the problem in the hope no one notices this begs the question rather than answers it.

amcalester wrote: »

Hopefully this will be no different, anyone passionately opposed to repealing the 8th will be able to refuse the improved medical treatment on offer if they are pregnant while others will be able to avail of it.

And nobody will be forced to do anything that they do not want to do.

This is the important aspect of the debate imo. No one is being forced against their will to uptake the facilities available, assuming a yes vote. At least the choice will be there.
Whats good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander.....

Unlike those other cases, I think the prolife crew will not vanish completely - they will hold the odd vigil, march, novena or protest, but we won't see them on the political stage again.

kylith wrote: »

Still waiting for a reply, Robert. Lies from the Yes campaign, please, not opinions from individual posters on this thread. The, far from comprehensive, list up thread is lies from official No canvassers and on posters. I could edit it to include the anti-choice ‘counselling’ services for crisis pregnancies if you like.

On a side note, I have been hearing of street harassment from people on anti-repeal stalls and leafleting campaigns, as well as doorstwpping children with graphic stories of abortion. Has anyone one witnessed this themselves?

I thought that was gas, you confront them with the lies told and they go on to say well it's their opinion that it's truth.

Some pro-lifers were door-to-door in my parents area yesterday and I just happened to answer the door, listened to their spiel and told them about my partner and her medical issues. I asked what should she do, continually miscarry because the 8th does not allow her access to legal abortion or fly to England to have the procedure done there.

They responded by asking if we had considered ceasing attempts to get pregnant. Just very slowly closed the door in the face after that, couldn't comprehend that amount of stupidity all of a sudden.

amcalester wrote: »

I said earlier in this thread that the lack of empathy being shown by some on the No side is astounding, here is another example.

With 28% approval ratings they have to resort to "Sky is falling in" drastic tactics.:D

SusieBlue wrote: »

Having read some of the replies to your story here on Boards on various threads, the impression I get from the No side is that they're sorry for your troubles, but they see your struggles and trauma as "worth it" to "keep abortion out of Ireland".

People like you are collateral damage, I'm sure they aren't monsters in that they do think what your situation is unfortunate, but it wouldn't be a good enough reason for them to vote Yes.

A necessary sacrifice, is the impression I get. Worth it.
I don't know if that's better or worse than those who have told you to just not have kids.
Both attitudes are alien to me but I don't know which is worse.

IMO a lot of the "that's just too bad" attitude from those supporting the 8th comes from a religious mindset.

Traditional Catholicism, in my experience, is fatalistic, "God's will be done", along with the idea of "offering it up" when faced with hardship.

To me, it's a coping mechanism from a bygone age that should be consigned to the bin. However there are still plenty of people who have grown up with the concept of making it to heaven by putting up with the hardship that religious belief imposes. Unfortunately while that's fine for their own choices, they do seem to want to impose the same fatalistic crap on everybody else.