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

PlaneSpeeking · 07-05-2018 11:27AM

Mrsmum wrote: »

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Forgive me ignorance but a genuine query here - let's say you are a pre op trans man. You're a man obviously but you have a womb

Would the 8th deny you healthcare as it does to cis women??

ELM327 wrote: »

Biologically you are still a woman at that stage (and any stage where you have a womb) so yes it would.

Ah here now, as an argument for abortion, I have to say I find this a scraping the bottom of the barrel one. At the very least you should change the "would" above to could. And this notion that's being put out here that non pregnant women are not getting treatment in their droves is bizarre to me. Blimey so prevalent is it, apparently trans men are even in danger ! The truth is all over Ireland right now, non pregnant women are getting all sorts of treatment and not being denied it at all unlike what the narrative on here suggests. One of my friends, a woman in her mid forties is being treated for cancer and that's as serious as it gets. Who doesn't know a woman who is on anti depression medication and any number of women with all manner of other medical issues getting treatment. Yet if someone landed from Mars and read this thread, he could be forgiven for thinking refusing treatment to non pregnant women of child bearing age was the norm. Well he'd be very wrong.
However of course medical personnel have to check if women of child bearing age might be pregnant before certain procedures are done and certain medicines are given. They would be medically negligent if they didn't. And same applies in UK or every other country also. And the reason they check before ploughing ahead is that most people would not thank them at all for damaging their foetus/baby in the womb by radiation or whatever. The exact same will still happen even if the 8th is repealed unless you expect them to say instead "listen Mary, we can skip the pregnancy questions on this form so long as I know you are happy enough to abort if this treatment damages the contents of your womb should it turn out you are pregnant" !

I'm writing this reply as a take a seat because the pain from my hip will not allow ne to walk more than 5 or so minutes without pain that makes me cry.

I should be going for an x-ray tomorrow as the start of hopefully sone treatment. It was cancelled as my last period was on 19th. I have to wait until Monday 21st May for the scan.

I am not pregnant. I have never been pregnant. I will never be pregnant.

The 8th is denying me healthcare NOW.

Please do not diminish what you may not want to accept, namely it's not all about abortion but denying me medical care and leaving me in unremitting pain.

AnneFrank · 07-05-2018 11:28AM

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

A pre op trans man. People born as women will generally have a womb.

Yes I get that, my point is they will always be a woman no matter what op you get, you can't change nature or chromosome, just a bizarre angle for this debate,not that's it a debate at all here as one side seems to get preferential treatment

Zubeneschamali · 07-05-2018 11:28AM

I appreciate No voters explaining their general views on how trans people are just dressing up, gay marriage is a catastrophe, women should just keep their legs together, there are no paedophile priests, rape victims should face a trial to get an abortion.

Show the real fence sitters who the No side are.

PlaneSpeeking · 07-05-2018 11:29AM

Mrsmum wrote: »

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Forgive me ignorance but a genuine query here - let's say you are a pre op trans man. You're a man obviously but you have a womb

Would the 8th deny you healthcare as it does to cis women??

ELM327 wrote: »

Biologically you are still a woman at that stage (and any stage where you have a womb) so yes it would.

Ah here now, as an argument for abortion, I have to say I find this a scraping the bottom of the barrel one. At the very least you should change the "would" above to could. And this notion that's being put out here that non pregnant women are not getting treatment in their droves is bizarre to me. Blimey so prevalent is it, apparently trans men are even in danger ! The truth is all over Ireland right now, non pregnant women are getting all sorts of treatment and not being denied it at all unlike what the narrative on here suggests. One of my friends, a woman in her mid forties is being treated for cancer and that's as serious as it gets. Who doesn't know a woman who is on anti depression medication and any number of women with all manner of other medical issues getting treatment. Yet if someone landed from Mars and read this thread, he could be forgiven for thinking refusing treatment to non pregnant women of child bearing age was the norm. Well he'd be very wrong.
However of course medical personnel have to check if women of child bearing age might be pregnant before certain procedures are done and certain medicines are given. They would be medically negligent if they didn't. And same applies in UK or every other country also. And the reason they check before ploughing ahead is that most people would not thank them at all for damaging their foetus/baby in the womb by radiation or whatever. The exact same will still happen even if the 8th is repealed unless you expect them to say instead "listen Mary, we can skip the pregnancy questions on this form so long as I know you are happy enough to abort if this treatment damages the contents of your womb should it turn out you are pregnant" !

Oh and it's not as simple as "check you're not pregnant". My word is immediately disbelieved.

kylith · 07-05-2018 11:37AM

AnneFrank wrote: »

Yes I get that, my point is they will always be a woman no matter what op you get, you can't change nature or chromosome, just a bizarre angle for this debate,not that's it a debate at all here as one side seems to get preferential treatment

FFS. People who were born female but who want to be male can have issues with their wombs. Your opinion on whether they should be called Male or female is not appropriate for this thread.

Mrsmum · 07-05-2018 11:46AM

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

I'm writing this reply as a take a seat because the pain from my hip will not allow ne to walk more than 5 or so minutes without pain that makes me cry.

I should be going for an x-ray tomorrow as the start of hopefully sone treatment. It was cancelled as my last period was on 19th. I have to wait until Monday 21st May for the scan.

I am not pregnant. I have never been pregnant. I will never be pregnant.

The 8th is denying me healthcare NOW.

Please do not diminish what you may not want to accept, namely it's not all about abortion but denying me medical care and leaving me in unremitting pain.

Planespeaking. I am sorry that you are in such pain. Truly. However your situation as an argument for repealing the 8th I am not convinced about. I still contend that even if the 8th was repealed, situations like yours would continue because doctors etc have to be sure there isn't a pregnancy and that is because the general population of women and indeed men out there would not thank them for harming an unknown pregnancy. As long as a woman is having periods there is a possibility of being pregnant in their eyes. The reason they have to be sure is not imo because of the 8th but because of the legal repercussions for themselves. This is the same all over the world.

kylith · 07-05-2018 11:50AM

Mrsmum wrote: »

Planespeaking. I am sorry that you are in such pain. Truly. However your situation as an argument for repealing the 8th I am not convinced about. I still contend that even if the 8th was repealed, situations like yours would continue because doctors etc have to be sure there isn't a pregnancy and that is because the general population of women and indeed men out there would not thank them for harming an unknown pregnancy. As long as a woman is having periods there is a possibility of being pregnant in their eyes.

What about me? I’m pregnant. If I get sick I can be denied treatment until I’m dying. If I miscarry I can be denied treatment: the idea of winding up like Savita is horrifying. I get no say over the management of my labour.

That’s the 8th amendment.

ELM327 · 07-05-2018 11:59AM

Mrsmum wrote: »

Planespeaking. I am sorry that you are in such pain. Truly. However your situation as an argument for repealing the 8th I am not convinced about. I still contend that even if the 8th was repealed, situations like yours would continue because doctors etc have to be sure there isn't a pregnancy and that is because the general population of women and indeed men out there would not thank them for harming an unknown pregnancy. As long as a woman is having periods there is a possibility of being pregnant in their eyes. The reason they have to be sure is not imo because of the 8th but because of the legal repercussions for themselves. This is the same all over the world.

No, no it isn't
It's a particular ridiculous piece of legislation, restricted only to this last bastion of child abuse, baby killing and church interference of state law. Sounds like a middle east country? No, that's Ireland. 2018.

The absolute bullheaded BOLLOXOSITY of your position telling a woman something completely opposite to what her doctors are telling her is equal parts delusional and ridiculous.

Richard Hillman · 07-05-2018 12:01PM

I'm glad this whole "Trust Women" marketing buzz is dieing off. It was more of a case of "Trust Politicians". IMO it is a case of Trust Doctors. I don't trust Doctor's to assess things like Mental Health on the grounds of abortion +12 Weeks. I believe they will always make a safe call to ensure they don't get sued.

We see this constantly with things like Sick Notes. Have you ever heard of a doctor refusing a Sick Note? Unlikely, because they are worried about being held liable. The same will apply for abortion.

This is not about 12 Weeks, this is abortion on demand with a little bit of red tape. For that reason, I will be voting no. 12 Weeks should have been proposed to enter the Constitution. There should also have been a proviso of holding a referendum in a few years time to reverse a potential Repeal. Give it a Trial run of 5-10 years, see if it's being abused and then vote again.

My predictions over he next few weeks will be that more Yes'ers will turn to undecideds, and undecideds will turn to No's. There will be a malaise from Yes voters and a lazy vote turn out due to impression the media are giving that everybody bar a handful of religious fundamentalists is for a Repeal.

The proposed Repeal will fail 52-48. The Repeal extremists will blame the government and definitely not themselves. The media will blame the government, the government will fall. The media will continue on with blaming foreign influence over the referendum. Labour/Sinn Fein/Extreme Left will run an Election campaign with a 2nd referendum as part of their manifesto. Fianna Fail will win the election.

splinter65 · 07-05-2018 12:06PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I'm glad this whole "Trust Women" marketing buzz is dieing off. It was more of a case of "Trust Politicians". IMO it is a case of Trust Doctors. I don't trust Doctor's to assess things like Mental Health on the grounds of abortion +12 Weeks. I believe they will always make a safe call to ensure they don't get sued.

We see this constantly with things like Sick Notes. Have you ever heard of a doctor refusing a Sick Note? Unlikely, because they are worried about being held liable. The same will apply for abortion.

This is not about 12 Weeks, this is abortion on demand with a little bit of red tape. For that reason, I will be voting no. 12 Weeks should have been proposed to enter the Constitution. There should also have been a proviso of holding a referendum in a few years time to reverse a potential Repeal. Give it a Trial run of 5-10 years, see if it's being abused and then vote again.

My predictions over he next few weeks will be that more Yes'ers will turn to undecideds, and undecideds will turn to No's. There will be a malaise from Yes voters and a lazy vote turn out due to impression the media are giving that everybody bar a handful of religious fundamentalists is for a Repeal.

The proposed Repeal will fail 52-48. The Repeal extremists will blame the government and definitely not themselves. The media will blame the government, the government will fall. The media will continue on with blaming foreign influence over the referendum. Labour/Sinn Fein/Extreme Left will run an Election campaign with a 2nd referendum as part of their manifesto. Fianna Fail will win the election.

Here’s hoping.

07-05-2018 12:11PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I'm glad this whole "Trust Women" marketing buzz is dieing off. It was more of a case of "Trust Politicians". IMO it is a case of Trust Doctors. I don't trust Doctor's to assess things like Mental Health on the grounds of abortion +12 Weeks. I believe they will always make a safe call to ensure they don't get sued.

We see this constantly with things like Sick Notes. Have you ever heard of a doctor refusing a Sick Note? Unlikely, because they are worried about being held liable. The same will apply for abortion.

This is not about 12 Weeks, this is abortion on demand with a little bit of red tape. For that reason, I will be voting no. 12 Weeks should have been proposed to enter the Constitution. There should also have been a proviso of holding a referendum in a few years time to reverse a potential Repeal. Give it a Trial run of 5-10 years, see if it's being abused and then vote again.

My predictions over he next few weeks will be that more Yes'ers will turn to undecideds, and undecideds will turn to No's. There will be a malaise from Yes voters and a lazy vote turn out due to impression the media are giving that everybody bar a handful of religious fundamentalists is for a Repeal.

The proposed Repeal will fail 52-48. The Repeal extremists will blame the government and definitely not themselves. The media will blame the government, the government will fall. The media will continue on with blaming foreign influence over the referendum. Labour/Sinn Fein/Extreme Left will run an Election campaign with a 2nd referendum as part of their manifesto. Fianna Fail will win the election.

Pretty far fetched considering Fine Gael have been consistently ahead of Fianna Fail in the polls for years, and the majority of that party is pro repeal. The government will make it to the next budget and we'll get an election in early 2019, but it will have nothing to do with this referendum.

Touchee · 07-05-2018 12:14PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I'm glad this whole "Trust Women" marketing buzz is dieing off. It was more of a case of "Trust Politicians". IMO it is a case of Trust Doctors. I don't trust Doctor's to assess things like Mental Health on the grounds of abortion +12 Weeks. I believe they will always make a safe call to ensure they don't get sued.

We see this constantly with things like Sick Notes. Have you ever heard of a doctor refusing a Sick Note? Unlikely, because they are worried about being held liable. The same will apply for abortion.

This is not about 12 Weeks, this is abortion on demand with a little bit of red tape. For that reason, I will be voting no. 12 Weeks should have been proposed to enter the Constitution. There should also have been a proviso of holding a referendum in a few years time to reverse a potential Repeal. Give it a Trial run of 5-10 years, see if it's being abused and then vote again.

My predictions over he next few weeks will be that more Yes'ers will turn to undecideds, and undecideds will turn to No's. There will be a malaise from Yes voters and a lazy vote turn out due to impression the media are giving that everybody bar a handful of religious fundamentalists is for a Repeal.

The proposed Repeal will fail 52-48. The Repeal extremists will blame the government and definitely not themselves. The media will blame the government, the government will fall. The media will continue on with blaming foreign influence over the referendum. Labour/Sinn Fein/Extreme Left will run an Election campaign with a 2nd referendum as part of their manifesto. Fianna Fail will win the election.

But what gives you the right to decide on what I should do with my body? Fine if you have an opinion, but you should have never been given the right to dictate on what I can do with my body. This is a basic human right that is denied to half of the population of Ireland.

Women must be so stupid that they can't be trusted with their own bodies. We need the constitution to tell what a woman can or cannot do.

Abortion on demand is such an insulting phrase. As if all the women in Ireland are waiting for this to become legal so they can have the joy of demanding an abortion every few months. Abortions are so much craic that we won't be able to help ourselves from having more and more.

Regardless of the reason why a woman needs an abortion, no one should have the right to decide on this matter. It's for the woman and only that woman to decide on a course of action.

amcalester · 07-05-2018 12:14PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I'm glad this whole "Trust Women" marketing buzz is dieing off. It was more of a case of "Trust Politicians". IMO it is a case of Trust Doctors. I don't trust Doctor's to assess things like Mental Health on the grounds of abortion +12 Weeks. I believe they will always make a safe call to ensure they don't get sued.

We see this constantly with things like Sick Notes. Have you ever heard of a doctor refusing a Sick Note? Unlikely, because they are worried about being held liable. The same will apply for abortion.

This is not about 12 Weeks, this is abortion on demand with a little bit of red tape. For that reason, I will be voting no. 12 Weeks should have been proposed to enter the Constitution. There should also have been a proviso of holding a referendum in a few years time to reverse a potential Repeal. Give it a Trial run of 5-10 years, see if it's being abused and then vote again.

My predictions over he next few weeks will be that more Yes'ers will turn to undecideds, and undecideds will turn to No's. There will be a malaise from Yes voters and a lazy vote turn out due to impression the media are giving that everybody bar a handful of religious fundamentalists is for a Repeal.

The proposed Repeal will fail 52-48. The Repeal extremists will blame the government and definitely not themselves. The media will blame the government, the government will fall. The media will continue on with blaming foreign influence over the referendum. Labour/Sinn Fein/Extreme Left will run an Election campaign with a 2nd referendum as part of their manifesto. Fianna Fail will win the election.

Abused?

This whole premise is based on women being granted abortions only if you approve.

Thinking you should have a say in someone else’s healthcare is a mindset I just can’t understand.

Should we extend that to other areas of healthcare?

Who are you to say what reasons are good enough?

erica74 · 07-05-2018 12:15PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I'm glad this whole "Trust Women" marketing buzz is dieing off. It was more of a case of "Trust Politicians". IMO it is a case of Trust Doctors. I don't trust Doctor's to assess things like Mental Health on the grounds of abortion +12 Weeks. I believe they will always make a safe call to ensure they don't get sued.

We see this constantly with things like Sick Notes. Have you ever heard of a doctor refusing a Sick Note? Unlikely, because they are worried about being held liable. The same will apply for abortion.

This is not about 12 Weeks, this is abortion on demand with a little bit of red tape. For that reason, I will be voting no. 12 Weeks should have been proposed to enter the Constitution. There should also have been a proviso of holding a referendum in a few years time to reverse a potential Repeal. Give it a Trial run of 5-10 years, see if it's being abused and then vote again.

My predictions over he next few weeks will be that more Yes'ers will turn to undecideds, and undecideds will turn to No's. There will be a malaise from Yes voters and a lazy vote turn out due to impression the media are giving that everybody bar a handful of religious fundamentalists is for a Repeal.

The proposed Repeal will fail 52-48. The Repeal extremists will blame the government and definitely not themselves. The media will blame the government, the government will fall. The media will continue on with blaming foreign influence over the referendum. Labour/Sinn Fein/Extreme Left will run an Election campaign with a 2nd referendum as part of their manifesto. Fianna Fail will win the election.

So you don't think doctors are qualified to assess a patient's mental health? That's bizarre.

Could you please explain how you think it will be "abused"?

Why would the Repeal extremists blame either the government or themselves?

Why do you think that you know better than the government, the healthcare professionals, women and girls everywhere?

Mrsmum · 07-05-2018 12:16PM

kylith wrote: »

What about me? I’m pregnant. If I get sick I can be denied treatment until I’m dying. If I miscarry I can be denied treatment: the idea of winding up like Savita is horrifying. I get no say over the management of my labour.

That’s the 8th amendment.

For me it depends on the seriousness of your sickness. It's a balancing act whereby the woman's life should never ever be at risk so if the pregnancy is downright dangerous to the woman, the doctor treating her should operate on the "as far as practicable" rule for the baby's life. The ideal is for yourself and your baby to be fine. All pregnant women suffer to a greater or lesser degree in order to produce offspring, it's part of the price we pay and it's usually worth it. I don't think it's right to end the baby's life because a woman is having a very tough pregnancy but as above if that tips over into real concern that's the point the doctor puts the woman first.

ArmaniJeanss · 07-05-2018 12:19PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

This is not about 12 Weeks, this is abortion on demand with a little bit of red tape. For that reason, I will be voting no. 12 Weeks should have been proposed to enter the Constitution. There should also have been a proviso of holding a referendum in a few years time to reverse a potential Repeal. Give it a Trial run of 5-10 years, see if it's being abused and then vote again.

You're effectively saying that because the referendum terms aren't framed exactly as you want then you'll vote no. But honestly that always going to be the case - if you got your exact referendum then it wouldn't be the perfect fit for lots of other people.
This attitude is pretty much making it impossible to ever get this repealed. It's almost as if people (not necessarily you) are striving to find excuses to vote No with this 'oh, I'd love to vote yes and I agree with so much that yes is saying/aiming for but because of this one area of concern that doesn't quite suit me then I must reject everything and vote no'.

I really think you are a Yes voter at heart by the way - getting this bloody amendment out of the constitution is so important and then move forward.

Mrsmum · 07-05-2018 12:19PM

ELM327 wrote: »

No, no it isn't
It's a particular ridiculous piece of legislation, restricted only to this last bastion of child abuse, baby killing and church interference of state law. Sounds like a middle east country? No, that's Ireland. 2018.

The absolute bullheaded BOLLOXOSITY of your position telling a woman something completely opposite to what her doctors are telling her is equal parts delusional and ridiculous.

Calm down there love.

BabysCoffee · 07-05-2018 12:19PM

Mrsmum wrote: »

For me it depends on the seriousness of your sickness. It's a balancing act whereby the woman's life should never ever be at risk so if the pregnancy is downright dangerous to the woman, the doctor treating her should operate on the "as far as practicable" rule for the baby's life. The ideal is for yourself and your baby to be fine. All pregnant women suffer to a greater or lesser degree in order to produce offspring, it's part of the price we pay and it's usually worth it. I don't think it's right to end the baby's life because a woman is having a very tough pregnancy but as above if that tips over into real concern that's the point the doctor puts the woman first.

Would you agree with a woman having an abortion if due to epileptic seizures she might end up brain damaged due to having to come off her medication? Oh and she also has 3 children who need her well & healthy and a husband who wants her around in full health for the next maybe 40 years or so.

Touchee · 07-05-2018 12:19PM

Mrsmum wrote: »

For me it depends on the seriousness of your sickness. It's a balancing act whereby the woman's life should never ever be at risk so if the pregnancy is downright dangerous to the woman, the doctor treating her should operate on the "as far as practicable" rule for the baby's life. The ideal is for yourself and your baby to be fine. All pregnant women suffer to a greater or lesser degree in order to produce offspring, it's part of the price we pay and it's usually worth it. I don't think it's right to end the baby's life because a woman is having a very tough pregnancy but as above if that tips over into real concern that's the point the doctor puts the woman first.

But that is fine for you! You can make that choice of suffering all you want.
However, I should also have a choice of not suffering, if that is what I want.

justshane · 07-05-2018 12:21PM

Climbed up Croagh Patrick on Saturday. Just at the 'shoulder' part with the small pond/lake it's not unusual to see rocks in the formation of someones name. This time there was a rock formation that read 'repeal 8th'. As I proceeded to the summit I met a group of people with pink hi vis vests that had vote no to repeal signage.

On my way down the rock formation was destroyed. I won't be in the country for the vote and if I was I'd still be unsure what way to go, however I thought that act was pretty pathetic.

AnneFrank · 07-05-2018 12:24PM

justshane wrote: »

Climbed up Croagh Patrick on Saturday. Just at the 'shoulder' part with the small pond/lake it's not unusual to see rocks in the formation of someones name. This time there was a rock formation that read 'repeal 8th'. As I proceeded to the summit I met a group of people with pink hi vis vests that had vote no to repeal signage.

On my way down the rock formation was destroyed. I won't be in the country for the vote and if I was I'd still be unsure what way to go, however I thought that act was pretty pathetic.

I agree with you, people are allowed have different views.good on you for doing the climb it's on my bucket list

ELM327 · 07-05-2018 12:25PM

Mrsmum wrote: »

Calm down there love.

No worries there, 27%.
You're diverting again.

At least you or your child wasn't killed by the church and buried in a sewer in tuam.
Or abused for their whole life in the magdelene laundries.

Love , care, compassion and human rights will win.
Your doctored photos, lies, and trolling will lose.
We have love on our side.

#trustourwomen
#repealthe8th

wexie · 07-05-2018 12:25PM

justshane wrote: »

On my way down the rock formation was destroyed. I won't be in the country for the vote and if I was I'd still be unsure what way to go, however I thought that act was pretty pathetic.

Which one? The putting the rocks down in 'repeal' or the removing of said rocks?

Or both?

Richard Hillman · 07-05-2018 12:26PM

erica74 wrote: »

So you don't think doctors are qualified to assess a patient's mental health? That's bizarre.

Could you please explain how you think it will be "abused"?

Why would the Repeal extremists blame either the government or themselves?

Why do you think that you know better than the government, the healthcare professionals, women and girls everywhere?

1. I have explained why I wouldn't be trusting of a doctor's decision.

2. People will show up 12+ weeks pregnant to a doctor and say they are depressed, may I please have an abortion.

3. If they lose the referendum. Please read previous post.

4. The female, political and healthcare vote is divided. I am being asked to vote on what I think should happen to an amendment in the Constitution and that is what I will do.

ELM327 · 07-05-2018 12:26PM

erica74 wrote: »

Why do you think that you know better than the government, the healthcare professionals, women and girls everywhere?

The NO side (all 27% of them and the american imports) think they know better than everyone.
After all, their rosaries are more important than decent healthcare.

Touchee wrote: »

But that is fine for you! You can make that choice of suffering all you want.
However, I should also have a choice of not suffering, if that is what I want.

+1

justshane wrote: »

Climbed up Croagh Patrick on Saturday. Just at the 'shoulder' part with the small pond/lake it's not unusual to see rocks in the formation of someones name. This time there was a rock formation that read 'repeal 8th'. As I proceeded to the summit I met a group of people with pink hi vis vests that had vote no to repeal signage.

On my way down the rock formation was destroyed. I won't be in the country for the vote and if I was I'd still be unsure what way to go, however I thought that act was pretty pathetic.

Pretty petty of course but I'd expect nothing less from "love both" and their ilk.

Nettle Soup · 07-05-2018 12:27PM

Oh my, we are going to need a Boards group hug after all of this referendum.

AnneFrank · 07-05-2018 12:29PM

Nettle Soup wrote: »

Oh my, we are going to need a Boards group hug after all of this referendum.

Still a divided country,always have been,always will be.

Mrsmum · 07-05-2018 12:29PM

Touchee wrote: »

But that is fine for you! You can make that choice of suffering all you want.
However, I should also have a choice of not suffering, if that is what I want.

By 'suffering' I mean no pregnancy is a walk in the park but that alone imo (and we all have our own opinions which we will take into the ballot booth with us) is a pretty poor reason to stop the baby in it's tracks.

PlaneSpeeking · 07-05-2018 12:29PM

ELM327 wrote: »

Mrsmum wrote: »

Planespeaking. I am sorry that you are in such pain. Truly. However your situation as an argument for repealing the 8th I am not convinced about. I still contend that even if the 8th was repealed, situations like yours would continue because doctors etc have to be sure there isn't a pregnancy and that is because the general population of women and indeed men out there would not thank them for harming an unknown pregnancy. As long as a woman is having periods there is a possibility of being pregnant in their eyes. The reason they have to be sure is not imo because of the 8th but because of the legal repercussions for themselves. This is the same all over the world.

No, no it isn't
It's a particular ridiculous piece of legislation, restricted only to this last bastion of child abuse, baby killing and church interference of state law. Sounds like a middle east country? No, that's Ireland. 2018.

The absolute bullheaded BOLLOXOSITY of your position telling a woman something completely opposite to what her doctors are telling her is equal parts delusional and ridiculous.

Plus I grew up in the UK, been treated there many times.

I also once required a scan for gallstones. Was asked "any chance you can be pregnant ?" Said no*, scan done. Its just us who distrust women.

* actually used Victoria Wood's Dinnerladies' joke about "not unless sperm can get through a sash window" but you get my drift.

ELM327 · 07-05-2018 12:29PM

Nettle Soup wrote: »

Oh my, we are going to need a Boards group hug after all of this referendum.

No, there will be nothing further heard, like after the divorce and SSM referenda.
Unless there's a no vote, in which case the campaign for another referendum in 3-5 years when more godbotherers will have died off will begin in earnest.

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

Comments