8th amendment referendum part 3 - Mod note and FAQ in post #1

Wrongway1985 · 06-05-2018 09:07AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

The argument that “abortion is happening in the UK anyway; make it safer by allowing it to happen here” is utterly ridiculous.

"Safer" only refers to under medical supervision prior/after; in + out from X country at the min.

Abortion is happening here be it back alley abortion or pills online it's here anyway.

What effect on you does unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks have on you and what is your recommendation if you say you are for repeal but that's a sticking point,What's your ideal alternative?

Andrew Beef · 06-05-2018 09:10AM

That is a ridiculous argument!

Just because some women are choosing to commit an illegal and immoral act either via the internet by ordering pills or via a trip to the UK, it is not justification for changing our country into one which readily accepts the unnecessary termination of a viable baby’s life.

The 8th needs to go but we do not need unrestricted access to abortion up to 12 weeks.

Triceratops Ballet · 06-05-2018 09:16AM

BoJack Horseman wrote:

If you claim to be on the wrong end of a hierarchy, who is on the top exactly?

I would say that men who have an unconditional right to bodily autonomy are at the top. My right to life/bodily autonomy/access to healthcare/consent to medical intervention should not be contingent on the contents of my uterus.

PhoenixParker · 06-05-2018 09:17AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

That is a ridiculous argument!

Just because some women are choosing to commit an illegal and immoral act either via the internet by ordering pills or via a trip to the UK, it is not justification for changing our country into one which readily accepts the unnecessary termination of a viable baby’s life.

The 8th needs to go but we do not need unrestricted access to abortion up to 12 weeks.

I think you're more persuaded then you'd like to admit.

Why don't we need access to abortions, on request in Ireland, restricted by a three day waiting period, subject to the approval of a doctor and up to 12 weeks?

Triceratops Ballet · 06-05-2018 09:21AM

Andrew Beef wrote:

Just because some women are choosing to commit an illegal and immoral act either via the internet by ordering pills or via a trip to the UK, it is not justification for changing our country into one which readily accepts the unnecessary termination of a viable babyâ€™s life.

Would you like to see these women prosecuted?

Immoral is a subjective term, and should not inform law, we live in a democracy not a theocracy

06-05-2018 09:22AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

That is a ridiculous argument!

Just because some women are choosing to commit an illegal and immoral act either via the internet by ordering pills or via a trip to the UK, it is not justification for changing our country into one which readily accepts the unnecessary termination of a viable baby’s life.

The 8th needs to go but we do not need unrestricted access to abortion up to 12 weeks.

Why do you consider a <12 week foetus to be the same as a baby? Genuine question. This opinion is at odds with the medical profession and the vast majority of the developed world. But it is prevalent in Ireland due to the influence of the RCC.

bootpaws · 06-05-2018 09:22AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

I want to see the 8th repealed but will be voting No

Do you understand how words work?

Andrew Beef · 06-05-2018 09:24AM

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

Andrew Beef wrote:

Just because some women are choosing to commit an illegal and immoral act either via the internet by ordering pills or via a trip to the UK, it is not justification for changing our country into one which readily accepts the unnecessary termination of a viable babyâ€™s life.

Would you like to see these women prosecuted?

Immoral is a subjective term, and should not inform law, we live in a democracy not a theocracy

Yes, I would. I would prefer if discretionary abortions were illegal and gave rise to prosecutions because I believe that they are utterly wrong.

joe40 · 06-05-2018 09:29AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

The argument that “abortion is happening in the UK anyway; make it safer by allowing it to happen here” is utterly ridiculous.

I want to see the 8th repealed but will be voting No because I don’t want to see unrestricted access to abortion up to 12 weeks. Why? Because it is morally wrong. If perfectly healthy people want to end the lives of perfectly healthy unborn children, let them travel to a jurisdiction that allows it. Making things convenient for them is not our concern; discretionary abortion shouldn’t be easy and we are right to keep it from happening on our doorstep.

So could you give some suggestions on what to replace it with, and more importantly how this would be administered.

Plenty of adamant no voters here want to keep the 8th I get that but disagree. I don't understand your stance. Did you read any of the expert testimony.

PhoenixParker · 06-05-2018 09:33AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

Yes, I would. I would prefer if discretionary abortions were illegal and gave rise to prosecutions because I believe that they are utterly wrong.

This is interesting to me.

You've changed your wording to discretionary abortions.

What do you think constitutes a discretionary abortion?

Where do you draw the line between discretionary and need?

06-05-2018 09:36AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

Yes, I would. I would prefer if discretionary abortions were illegal and gave rise to prosecutions because I believe that they are utterly wrong.

I am shocked by the bit in bold. Discretionary??

No woman takes the decision lightly and to suggest otherwise is deeply misogynistic and insulting.

Andrew Beef · 06-05-2018 09:38AM

I would look to allow abortion in cases of Fatal Foetal Abnormality, and cases such as the tragic Savita case.

Cases of abortion and incest are harder to deal with because, by the time any case has worked itself through the system, the baby has been born. I would therefore set up “Rape Committees” which would consist of a clinical psychologist, a Garda of no less than Chief Superintendent rank, and an obstetrician or appropriate medical professional; the Rape Committee could permit an abortion if they agree unanimously that, beyond a reasonable doubt, a rape has taken place. The findings of the Rape Committee could not be used in any criminal trial.

Beyond that, I would not allow discretionary abortion.

Andrew Beef · 06-05-2018 09:41AM

Flying Fox wrote: »

Andrew Beef wrote: »

Yes, I would. I would prefer if discretionary abortions were illegal and gave rise to prosecutions because I believe that they are utterly wrong.

I am shocked by the bit in bold. Discretionary??

No woman takes the decision lightly and to suggest otherwise is deeply misogynistic and insulting.

You should probably google “discretionary+meaning” so.

Timberrrrrrrr · 06-05-2018 09:43AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

I would look to allow abortion in cases of Fatal Foetal Abnormality, and cases such as the tragic Savita case.

Cases of abortion and incest are harder to deal with because, by the time any case has worked itself through the system, the baby has been born. I would therefore set up “Rape Committees” which would consist of a clinical psychologist, a Garda of no less than Chief Superintendent rank, and an obstetrician or appropriate medical professional; the Rape Committee could permit an abortion if they agree unanimously that, beyond a reasonable doubt, a rape has taken place. The findings of the Rape Committee could not be used in any criminal trial.

Beyond that, I would not allow discretionary abortion.

A RAPE committee? Seriously? You want a woman who has been raped to be interviewed and cross examined?

Also re the bolded part, they cannot do that! To make that decision their would have to be a criminal trial.

Timberrrrrrrr · 06-05-2018 09:44AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

I would look to allow abortion in cases of Fatal Foetal Abnormality, and cases such as the tragic Savita case.

Cases of abortion and incest are harder to deal with because, by the time any case has worked itself through the system, the baby has been born. I would therefore set up “Rape Committees” which would consist of a clinical psychologist, a Garda of no less than Chief Superintendent rank, and an obstetrician or appropriate medical professional; the Rape Committee could permit an abortion if they agree unanimously that, beyond a reasonable doubt, a rape has taken place. The findings of the Rape Committee could not be used in any criminal trial.

Beyond that, I would not allow discretionary abortion.

A RAPE committee? Seriously? You want a woman who has been raped to be interviewed and cross examined?

Also re the bolded part, they cannot do that! To make that decision their would have to be a criminal trial.

06-05-2018 09:45AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

That is a ridiculous argument!

Just because some women are choosing to commit an illegal and immoral act either via the internet by ordering pills or via a trip to the UK, it is not justification for changing our country into one which readily accepts the unnecessary termination of a viable baby’s life.

The 8th needs to go but we do not need unrestricted access to abortion up to 12 weeks.

Our constitution gives women the right to information on abortion & the right to travel & have an abortion.
Basically the state, constitutionally allow women to have abortions.
Just not in this country.
So are you looking to repeal the amendments allowing this to happen?

bootpaws · 06-05-2018 09:45AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

I would therefore set up “Rape Committees” which would consist of a clinical psychologist, a Garda of no less than Chief Superintendent rank, and an obstetrician or appropriate medical professional; the Rape Committee could permit an abortion if they agree unanimously that, beyond a reasonable doubt, a rape has taken place. The findings of the Rape Committee could not be used in any criminal trial.

Beyond that, I would not allow discretionary abortion.

A little derivative but a solid outline for an eerie dystopian sci-fi thriller in the vein of- wait you're serious.

Andrew Beef · 06-05-2018 09:46AM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Andrew Beef wrote: »

I would look to allow abortion in cases of Fatal Foetal Abnormality, and cases such as the tragic Savita case.

Cases of abortion and incest are harder to deal with because, by the time any case has worked itself through the system, the baby has been born. I would therefore set up “Rape Committees” which would consist of a clinical psychologist, a Garda of no less than Chief Superintendent rank, and an obstetrician or appropriate medical professional; the Rape Committee could permit an abortion if they agree unanimously that, beyond a reasonable doubt, a rape has taken place. The findings of the Rape Committee could not be used in any criminal trial.

Beyond that, I would not allow discretionary abortion.

A RAPE committee? Seriously? You want a woman who has been raped to be interviewed and cross examined?

Also re the bolded part, they cannot do that! To make that decision their would have to be a criminal trial.

We should even consider ending the life of that unborn child unless it can be proven, within the timescale, that a rape has taken place. Ideally, an actual trial would take place but that is not feasible.

pitifulgod · 06-05-2018 09:47AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

I would look to allow abortion in cases of Fatal Foetal Abnormality, and cases such as the tragic Savita case.

Cases of abortion and incest are harder to deal with because, by the time any case has worked itself through the system, the baby has been born. I would therefore set up “Rape Committees” which would consist of a clinical psychologist, a Garda of no less than Chief Superintendent rank, and an obstetrician or appropriate medical professional; the Rape Committee could permit an abortion if they agree unanimously that, beyond a reasonable doubt, a rape has taken place. The findings of the Rape Committee could not be used in any criminal trial.

Beyond that, I would not allow discretionary abortion.

Your proposal sounds psychologically damaging in its own right. Also, do you want to remove the right to yes travel? Seems like you should given the extremity of your position.

06-05-2018 09:48AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

I would look to allow abortion in cases of Fatal Foetal Abnormality, and cases such as the tragic Savita case.

Cases of abortion and incest are harder to deal with because, by the time any case has worked itself through the system, the baby has been born. I would therefore set up “Rape Committees” which would consist of a clinical psychologist, a Garda of no less than Chief Superintendent rank, and an obstetrician or appropriate medical professional; the Rape Committee could permit an abortion if they agree unanimously that, beyond a reasonable doubt, a rape has taken place. The findings of the Rape Committee could not be used in any criminal trial.

Beyond that, I would not allow discretionary abortion.

Oh, it's rape committee guy again!!
The most horrific thing to happen to a woman & you think they should be interrogated by a PANEL of strangers, to see if they are telling the truth.........

I honestly don't think anyone could believe this......

AnneFrank · 06-05-2018 09:49AM

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

It's a different thread sure but how is it taken out of context it would be better for national resources apparently if people in homeless situations were dead according to you it doesn't sound very remorseful, you'll condone women in troubling scenarios on abortion though.

What's pathetic is how you couldn't explain why?It's fine to throw that out elsewhere but it doesn't fit your stance here?

There was a mod warning on quoting from different threads, as it was a 'dickish' thing to do.

eviltwin · 06-05-2018 09:49AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

Yes, I would. I would prefer if discretionary abortions were illegal and gave rise to prosecutions because I believe that they are utterly wrong.

What would be an appropriate punishment in your opinion and would this apply to all involved ie the woman, her partner, those who may have helped or known her intentions and didn't stop it etc?

Would you punish all women including those who travel or just those who procure abortions here?

Andrew Beef · 06-05-2018 09:50AM

A pal of mine who is also opposed to discretionary abortion came up with an interesting idea recently.

Many people fear that liberalising Ireland’s abortion regime will result in abortion being used as some form of retrospective contraception.

His idea? For discretionary abortions pre-12 weeks, the patient’s womb must also be removed. It’s extreme to say the least, but it would certainly rule out abortions taking place willy nilly.

Re abortions/incest, all I see and hear is people ranting and raving but not coming up with proposals to deal with it.

The Rape Committee concept is novel and extreme some might say, but what’s people’s alternative?

Hannibal_Smith · 06-05-2018 09:51AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

I would look to allow abortion in cases of Fatal Foetal Abnormality, and cases such as the tragic Savita case.

Cases of abortion and incest are harder to deal with because, by the time any case has worked itself through the system, the baby has been born. I would therefore set up “Rape Committees” which would consist of a clinical psychologist, a Garda of no less than Chief Superintendent rank, and an obstetrician or appropriate medical professional; the Rape Committee could permit an abortion if they agree unanimously that, beyond a reasonable doubt, a rape has taken place. The findings of the Rape Committee could not be used in any criminal trial.

Beyond that, I would not allow discretionary abortion.

I would like a Rape Committee to not be implemented. You would have a mock trial for a woman who is pregnant yhrough rape and wants an abortion where time is of the absolute essence? And if those 3 people say, sorry I don't believe you....she stays pregnant? Is it not enough that a woman says she was raped? Are women such devious untrustworthy being a that we have to put them under scrutiny like That?

Repeal the 8th and let the woman decide.

Timberrrrrrrr · 06-05-2018 09:51AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

We should even consider ending the life of that unborn child unless it can be proven, within the timescale, that a rape has taken place. Ideally, an actual trial would take place but that is not feasible.

So the rapist gets to live his life as innocent until proven guilty until such time a trial has taken place.

Meanwhile his victim has to live her life as guilty until proven innocentuntil such time a trial has taken place.

06-05-2018 09:51AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

You should probably google “discretionary+meaning” so.

I know the meaning of the word and I know well what your intention is in using it.

06-05-2018 09:52AM

Ahh here, this has to be bulls hit!!
Take away the womb......

PhoenixParker · 06-05-2018 09:52AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

I would look to allow abortion in cases of Fatal Foetal Abnormality, and cases such as the tragic Savita case.

Cases of abortion and incest are harder to deal with because, by the time any case has worked itself through the system, the baby has been born. I would therefore set up “Rape Committees” which would consist of a clinical psychologist, a Garda of no less than Chief Superintendent rank, and an obstetrician or appropriate medical professional; the Rape Committee could permit an abortion if they agree unanimously that, beyond a reasonable doubt, a rape has taken place. The findings of the Rape Committee could not be used in any criminal trial.

Beyond that, I would not allow discretionary abortion.

How do you consider health issues for the mother?

dudara · 06-05-2018 09:52AM

Andrew Beef wrote: »

A pal of mine who is also opposed to discretionary abortion came up with an interesting idea recently.

Many people fear that liberalising Ireland’s abortion regime will result in abortion being used as some form of retrospective contraception.

His idea? For discretionary abortions pre-12 weeks, the patient’s womb must also be removed. It’s extreme to say the least, but it would certainly rule out abortions taking place willy nilly.

I’m honestly gobsmacked. Sometimes you forget just how much other people want to tell you how to live your life and exactly how much you should be punished for failing to meet their moral standards.

AnneFrank · 06-05-2018 09:52AM

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

I would say that men who have an unconditional right to bodily autonomy are at the top. My right to life/bodily autonomy/access to healthcare/consent to medical intervention should not be contingent on the contents of my uterus.

Ah those evil men again,

8th amendment referendum part 3 - Mod note and FAQ in post #1

Comments