The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

RobertKK wrote: »

Young women most in favour of repeal. Older women most in favour of retain.
I trust older women who have life experience.

Odd how you left out that the majority of older women support repeal and legislating for 12 weeks:

39% in favour
36% against
15% don't know or won't say.

In fact, there's no gender or age group where the No vote has majority support.

PhoenixParker wrote: »

If your only measure of good maternal outcome is "the mother didn't die" then Ireland performs pretty well. How well, I'm admittedly a little suspicious of because there are differences in how different countries count their statistics.

Personally "mother didn't die" is not a satisfactory measure. I happen to think things like long term health impacts on the mother are also very important. Congrats you survived, sorry about the blindness, isn't exactly a great result.

Further our maternal mortality rate is achieved in the context of most women whose health or life is in danger being able to access abortion albeit by travelling to the UK. Lauding excellent maternal mortality statistics in the context of that safety valve is suspect at best.

Imagine if that was the standard for successful brain surgery.
Doctor- the surgery was a success.
Parents- our son is in a permanent vegetative state!
Doctor- but he's alive. Success!!

Sofiztikated wrote: »

Spoke with a Yes campaigner on the street about an hour ago in Cavan.

Smart, articulate woman, who calmly explained to a gent her position, while I was there.

Said they get fierce abuse yesterday when setting up their stall, so much so that the head of the local No campaign came over and apologised. Both agreed that no matter the outcome, everyone still has to live here afterwards.

Who gave them the abuse did she say? What kinds of people? Old? Young? Male? Female?

threescompany wrote: »

I believe her point was that she believes the very act of abortion is wrong...... she was going to have an abortion but after discussion and thinking about it, she didn’t and now she is so glad she didn’t...... she was trying to convey there are other CHOICES

Yes, she chose not to. A choice she is advocating not allowing other women have.
Great that it all worked out for her and she has a happy life. Others aren’t so lucky.
Other people’s choices shouldn’t be limited by her opinions.

threescompany wrote: »

Of course it “dawns” on women to use contraception but many many women CHOOSE not to, for whatever reason. That’s a fact. They take risks & hope for the best. Anyone I know that’s been to the UK has had unprotected sex and taken a risk and ended up with an unplanned pregnancy .... why should I vote to repeal the 8th to enable their abortions ? Not a hope

Well the three women I know who travelled to the UK we’re doing so as a result of failed contraceptive. See what I did there?

Do you think forcing someone who doesn’t want a baby into motherhood is in the best interests of the child? Do you not see how you were weaponizing these babies into punishments for their careless mothers?
And please don’t mention contraception, because advice about how they should have used a rubber is of no use to someone who is already pregnant.

Why should you not vote to repeal? Cos someone might have an abortion you don’t approve of?
What’s it to you, seriously? Are you going to assist in the bringing up of this child you are forcing into the world?

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

In a time when contraception wasn't available! Ultimately she didn't use unsavory methods to not have you either, while I appreciate your existence isn't it fair to say your reasoning is largely based on assumption especially when the 60s was prior to the 8th amendment so played no part in you personally being born anyway.

We have contraception today and the morning after pill .... now you want 12 weeks too as another form !!

Killester1 wrote: »

We have contraception today and the morning after pill .... now you want 12 weeks too as another form !!

Contraception isn’t 100% reliable.
The MAP only works if you haven’t already ovulated that month. If you’ve already ovulated, it does nothing.
Which you won’t find out till you pee on a stick and get a positive test result.
And regardless, those options are of no help or use to someone who is already pregnant and having a crisis. The horse has bolted.

Can anyone on the No side please explain to me where the compassion is here?

https://www.facebook.com/RepealTheEighth/posts/160910714583354:0

I feel abortion should be allowed in certain criteria such as cases of rape , certain fetal abnormalities etc but the government haven't made this referendum about these types of cases.
They have made it to mean we would be welcoming abortion on demand,for any reason before 12 weeks. I don't agree with that, Total game changer.

Too many people will continue to have sex irresponsibly and use abortion then to avoid having a baby- which is a human life.
I would vote yes if it was for specific cases but seen as this referendum is just going to open up the flood gates to abortion for any reason at all, I will be voting no.
I would vote yes if the criteria was different.

lillycakes2 wrote: »

I feel abortion should be allowed in certain criteria such as cases of rape , certain fetal abnormalities etc but the government haven't made this referendum about these types of cases.
They have made it to mean we would be welcoming abortion on demand,for any reason before 12 weeks. I don't agree with that, Total game changer.

Too many people will continue to have sex irresponsibly and use abortion then to avoid having a baby- which is a human life.
I would vote yes if it was for specific cases but seen as this referendum is just going to open up the flood gates to abortion for any reason at all, I will be voting no.
I would vote yes if the criteria was different.

The problem here is that as long as we choose to have every single change to our abortion laws come down to a simple Yes/No question (which is inevitable when doing it via referendum) then people who want to decide over these scenarios, distinctions or term limits are going to be boxed out of the debate. If repeal occurs, you will still be able to lobby your representatives to make the exact changes you want rather than continuing this destructive game (which only favours people with more absolutist positions) of having unrepresentative referendums every 5/10 years.

The original sin here was believing that the beliefs of millions of Irish people on any issue as complex as abortion could possibly be accurately reflected in one (or more) sections of text basically a long as a tweet. The 8th is bad constitutional law and the last 35 years of awful cases, additional clarification referendums and discussion on this issue being dominated by a small set of extreme talking heads has shown that.

kylith wrote: »

Can anyone on the No side please explain to me where the compassion is here?

https://www.facebook.com/RepealTheEighth/posts/160910714583354:0

well according to the no campaign last night we need to stop focussing on these cases and worry about the "healthy" babies being aborted. Tragic Presumably the No campaign believe that these women are suffering for a noble cause and are collateral damage in the fight to keep abortion out of Ireland.

Dole Scrounging Vegan Crossfitter wrote: »

Had my first canvassers call to the door (Dublin west). They were from Together For Yes. Pretty much told them straight off that it was a Yes household. They gave me a leaflet and I just told them to keep up the good work.

If anyone wants to look back, I took a few photos of the Save the 8th, 20 page, heavier paper stock, booklet that came through my door a while ago.

Compare that to the Together for Yes leaflet, which is an single (double sided) A5, lighter paperstock. It's still screamingly obvious who has the better funding.