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

gctest50 wrote: »

No, they don't speculate - unless they say they are just speculating

They don't tend yo lie by leaving out stuff either it seems

Yes so they know they aren't all mental health even though that is the provision used.

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

I'm not even going to try any more. He gets it, the reality doesn't fit his agenda though so easier to ignore and obfuscate.

You're better off. These are lost causes anyway, they will never see the big picture because they don't like it.

If anyone who isn't sure how to vote possesses true compassion, and not just theatrical overwrought concern for the undeveloped contents of women's wombs (be the contents real or phantom), then they will hear your story, and the stories of all women who have been irreparably damaged and wronged by this amendment, and extend that compassion to those of us alive and breathing.

robarmstrong wrote: »

Yes, does it state otherwise?

Are there further dissections of the 97% figure in the form of official reports?

I don't want to speculate you see.

Ok people can come to their own conclusion if they believe that the 97% were purely based on mental health being the issue.
Even the architect of the abortion law in question doesn't believe that.

The_Brood wrote: »

Literally all your posts so far have been insisting it doesn't matter what it is "developing" into. You don't care what an unborn baby is developing into, you judge's its worth of life based on what it is in a freeze frame moment - so use the same freeze frame logic for a 1-month old baby.

There is an absurdly long list of animals that display a much, much, much greater sentience than a 1-month old human baby - yet are afforded not even 0.01 percent of the protections and rights that baby gets. How in the world does that make sense? It does not - all of human logic rejects abortion-justifying freeze-frame, instead it thinks of a child as a developing being.

But logic is thrown out when it becomes "offensive" to the status quo.

All my posts to you so far have been clarifying the difference between a 12 week foetus and a 1 month old baby because you are pretending not to know the difference.

If you want to talk about the status quo, talk about women receiving their dead baby's ashes in the post because they had to travel to make the hardest decision of their lives.

Talk about the women who are told they aren't dying yet, to please lay there another few hours, days, or weeks until you're close enough to death that we can intervene.

Talk about the woman undergoing treatment for cancer who accidentally becomes pregnant and has that treatment halted.

Talk about the 12 year old girl who has been raped, whose childhood has not only been taken by her attacker, but will be further destroyed by our laws which will do irreparable damage to her undeveloped body by forcing her to carry a foetus to term.

Because that's the real status quo in this country, and if you truly possessed a shred of the compassion you claim to feel so FIERCELY for that which has no brain, nervous system, or sentience, then you would not be here spewing the absolute sh!te you are.

RobertKK wrote: »

In your own imagination they are.

In your imagination you are for the lives of women and then their unborn.

The reality is with the eighth in place that is not possible, the unborn has the same rights as the living unit who is carrying it. You are happy to keep the eighth so therefore you in fact do not want the woman to have a say over the governance of her own body. You assert rights of the woman to be the same level as a recently fused sperm and egg at the detriment of her.

Wrongway1985 wrote: »

In your imagination you are for the lives of women and then their unborn.

The reality is with the eighth in place that is not possible, the unborn has the same rights as the living unit who is carrying it. You are happy to keep the eighth so therefore you in fact do not want the woman to have a say over the governance of her own body. You assert rights of the woman to be the same level as a recently fused sperm and egg at the detriment of her.

So why did Dr Eamon McGuinness a no voter say on Prime Time - the former chairman of the institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists say he carried out 4 abortions under the 8th amendment to save life, because people make out this is impossible with the 8th.

The_Brood wrote: »

And you have assumed that I support those things or that I am against abortion in every case why? Simple - because much like this entire debate from beginning to end, it's all based on hysteria and not on logic, reason, and common sense. Anyone who disagrees with you must hate you and have no compassion, right?

I certainly don't have all the answers, and it is a complicated issue. My specific problem is with the dominant pro-abortion argument that seeks to pretend that what you are not killing is human life. All kinds of logic loops are made to get away from that fact.

As evidence you cannot explain to my why a 1 month baby deserves every protection under the law, while a more intelligent mouse (and many other more intelligent creatures) are treated as less than trash?

I am telling you that women are literally being left to die and all you keep talking about is the intelligence of mice.

RobertKK wrote: »

All my close friends including female and relations are no voters which included difficult pregnancies.
I'm not voting yes to remove the 8th amendment to give politicians a blank cheque.

Are you from Kilkenny? If you are I'm disappointed with you. I've had an ectopic pregnancy and early miscarriage in the same year. I went through that but still can't vote no. I'm not going to go down the road of saying you're a man you don't understand but understand this. We need to move forward and give women the choice to have control over what happens to their wombs. I won't tell a neighbour what to do with their garden so why should they say what happens with mine. Think of that analogy. I may not like what others do but I won't tell them it's wrong because it's not my life but theirs.

The_Brood wrote: »

And you have provided absolutely no reasoning as to why that is horrible, but butchering women to be - unborn children developing into women is fine? Why should they not have the right to grow up, to become someone, to live their life instead of being snuffed out before politicians can grant them rights?

Why should potential people be given any rights at all at the expense of the living born citizen in which it resides?
You have provided no reasoning at all as to why a pre 12 week fetus should have an EQUAL right to life to that of a born living breathing woman.

KKkitty wrote: »

Are you from Kilkenny? If you are I'm disappointed with you. I've had an ectopic pregnancy and early miscarriage in the same year. I went through that but still can't vote no. I'm not going to go down the road of saying you're a man you don't understand but understand this. We need to move forward and give women the choice to have control over what happens to their wombs. I won't tell a neighbour what to do with their garden so why should they say what happens with mine. Think of that analogy. I may not like what others do but I won't tell them it's wrong because it's not my life but theirs.

I have told no one I know how to vote. People are entitled to vote what they believe, if the unborn should keep their protection under the constitution or have none. Women will continue to have protections under the constitution and in law, only the unborn can lose rights in this referendum.

RobertKK wrote: »

I have told no one I know how to vote. People are entitled to vote what they believe, if the unborn should keep their protection under the constitution or have none. Women will continue to have protections under the constitution and in law, only the unborn can lose rights in this referendum.

RobertKK wrote: »

.,.......,...

if the unborn should keep their protection under the constitution .......

If a woman has the means and can travel, what you are implying there in that post only exists in the form of NIMBYism


It is make believe bullsh!t that is endangering women in Ireland






"Abortion is a reality in Ireland today. Unregulated abortion is a reality in Ireland. Abortion is unregulated in Ireland.
The Eighth Amendment has not changed that fact.

"Far from providing certainty, it has left women and doctors in impossible situations alone in the care of other countries."

RobertKK wrote: »

I have told no one I know how to vote. People are entitled to vote what they believe, if the unborn should keep their protection under the constitution or have none. Women will continue to have protections under the constitution and in law, only the unborn can lose rights in this referendum.

Your mindset is flawed though. I'm sorry but you can't see the bigger picture. Women will be in control of their bodies. They will be able to make the choice of months of being forced to have a baby that may not live for very long to making a baby that will. Please don't vote against women, vote with them.

RobertKK wrote: »

I have told no one I know how to vote. People are entitled to vote what they believe, if the unborn should keep their protection under the constitution or have none. Women will continue to have protections under the constitution and in law, only the unborn can lose rights in this referendum.

You've told no one how to vote but you still want to control how everyone else has to live their lives.

How about you look after your own health without any of us interfering and let everyone else do the same.

I'm willing to bet if you'd to run any operations you need past a committee of people you don't know to decide whether you could have it or if it was just outlawed altogether you'd be fighting for your right to decide for yourself.........