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

Triceratops Ballet · 09-05-2018 04:46PM

RobertKK wrote: »

It happened elsewhere, it is absolute sense what he is posting.

link please

RobertKK · 09-05-2018 04:47PM

robarmstrong wrote: »

Hi Bob,

See below -

Also - I'd much rather paint on walls than post up a constant stream of lies, wouldn't you? Others are not in this century I will agree with you on that, when are you joining us so?

Yes for compassion, removing the right to life of the unborn is compassion...you talk about lies, they are are many posters for Yes.
Killing the lives of healthy unborn lives by healthy mothers is healthcare, another lie up on posters.
Evidence is the hard cases are a tiny percentage.

patrickSTARR · 09-05-2018 04:47PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

Its a sad loser too afraid to join in on the discussion here, should be pitied more than anything really.

Just forget about them and let the mods sort them out.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 09-05-2018 04:47PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

Its a sad loser too afraid to join in on the discussion here, should be pitied more than anything really.

As far as I remember they were banned last time round.

If this wasn't boards I'd assume it was a young teenager, the posts really do read like somebody badly trolling a forum in the early 2000s. I mean there's bad arguments and there's gibberish.

....... · 09-05-2018 04:47PM

This post has been deleted.

robarmstrong · 09-05-2018 04:47PM

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

link please

I wouldn't get your hopes up, although I'd like to be surprised as RobertKK has a great habit of making wild, absurd speculative claims that he insists are facts but are really just speculative claims with no evidence to support it other than his opinion.

He will then dart from the thread, return with a quote from someone from twitter or a nonsensical article when he believes it is safe to return.

patrickSTARR · 09-05-2018 04:48PM

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

Have you any statistical basis to back that assertion up? anything?

Of course I don't, it hasn't happened. Its my prediction.

Frank Bullitt · 09-05-2018 04:48PM

Getting the excuses ready it seems.

robarmstrong · 09-05-2018 04:48PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes for compassion, removing the right to life of the unborn is compassion...you talk about lies, they are are many posters for Yes.
Killing the lives of healthy unborn lives by healthy mothers is healthcare, another lie up on posters.
Evidence is the hard cases are a tiny percentage.

Where's the evidence of your claim that most women who seek abortion on mental health grounds do so out of a lifestyle choice or due to career related reasons?

....... · 09-05-2018 04:48PM

This post has been deleted.

Triceratops Ballet · 09-05-2018 04:48PM

patrickSTARR wrote: »

Maybe it should be extended beyond 12 weeks in the case of medical complications

So now you want access to abortion for longer than 12 weeks so people can find out if their baby is healthy and abort later if it's not?

....... · 09-05-2018 04:49PM

This post has been deleted.

Bridge93 · 09-05-2018 04:49PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes it is telling that Yes side has been doing an awful job and needed the help from US firms to ban advertising that comes from Ireland.
It doesn't affect Yes as they are too busy painting murals on walls...some are in the 21st century with online advertising and others are not in this century yet and are still painting walls as the modern form of campaigning.

You think firms as big as Facebook and Google aren't able to make up their own minds and we're pushed to do this by one side of the debate? That it has nothing to do with both companies deciding for themselves what they want displayed on their sites.
Your posts today have been nothing short of an embarrassment and give off the impression of panic. Toys out of the pram comes to mind

RobertKK · 09-05-2018 04:49PM

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

link please

https://twitter.com/marymurphy266/status/993615061867466752

We are told we need unrestricted 12 weeks for the hard cases...

Overheal · 09-05-2018 04:49PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes for compassion, removing the right to life of the unborn is compassion...you talk about lies, they are are many posters for Yes.
Killing the lives of healthy unborn lives by healthy mothers is healthcare, another lie up on posters.
Evidence is the hard cases are a tiny percentage.

As opposed to dying from miscarriage inspired sepsis... “compassion!”

Triceratops Ballet · 09-05-2018 04:50PM

patrickSTARR wrote: »

Of course I don't, it hasn't happened. Its my prediction.

oh well in that case a fortune teller just told me you've no need to worry that won't happen!!

patrickSTARR · 09-05-2018 04:50PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

Can you not see how arrogant that is?

You are essentially offering up these people in difficult, heartbreaking situations as collateral damage in order to keep the "bad" abortions you don't agree with out.

Its not arrogant.

Its the lesser of two evils in my eyes. Who ever I vote for, someone will be hard done by.

Votes Yes : the unborn babies

Votes No : those in need of medical care.

Its the reality of the situation from my view.

bootpaws · 09-05-2018 04:50PM

Gintonious wrote: »

Getting the excuses ready it seems.

:pac:

....... · 09-05-2018 04:51PM

This post has been deleted.

Overheal · 09-05-2018 04:51PM

RobertKK wrote: »

https://twitter.com/marymurphy266/status/993615061867466752

We are told we need unrestricted 12 weeks for the hard cases...

That’s a secondary argument. The 12 weeks is the proposed legislation after the floor is opened to that debate by the repeal of the 8th. You can repeal the 8th and then campaign your butt off to restrict it to rape, incest and life endangerment.

robarmstrong · 09-05-2018 04:52PM

RobertKK wrote: »

https://twitter.com/marymurphy266/status/993615061867466752

We are told we need unrestricted 12 weeks for the hard cases...

I see your twitter graph that I can't seem to find a linked source other than a biased pro-life individual and raise you a medical report.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11420809

Particularly -

CONCLUSIONS:
During the study period a significant proportion of reproductive-aged Spanish women had abortions in England and Wales and The Netherlands. Decriminalisation has had no observed effect on the trends in abortion, but rather it has benefited Spanish women by making abortion available locally and, therefore, reducing the inequalities implied by lack of access to proper health care services. These data demonstrate the impact of the liberalisation of abortion on the trends of procedures performed in other countries.

....... · 09-05-2018 04:53PM

This post has been deleted.

Triceratops Ballet · 09-05-2018 04:53PM

Bridge93 wrote: »

You think firms as big as Facebook and Google aren't able to make up their own minds and we're pushed to do this by one side of the debate? That it has nothing to do with both companies deciding for themselves what they want displayed on their sites.
Your posts today have been nothing short of an embarrassment and give off the impression of panic. Toys out of the pram comes to mind

Actually this is in line with the way these companies have been moving recently in terms of their stance on advertising in general, and it totally in line with their reactions to the proliferation of fake news etc during the US election and Brexit vote

RobertKK · 09-05-2018 04:53PM

The repeal shield is very encouraging, now up to 11.5k twitter accounts and it's growing fast. So many No people to this referendum.
It went up around 2,000 in a week, the more it grows the more encouragement it is for No as it shows a lot of support.

The No side have nothing similar, so we can't compare.

uptherebels · 09-05-2018 04:54PM

RobertKK wrote: »

https://twitter.com/marymurphy266/status/993615061867466752

We are told we need unrestricted 12 weeks for the hard cases...

Problem is according to that graph the number of abortions was on an upward trend already so legalising abortion may not have had any effect on the numbers.
You would need an example when the numbers are static or declining then increasing after changing laws

seamus · 09-05-2018 04:54PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes it is telling that Yes side has been doing an awful job and needed the help from US firms to ban advertising that comes from Ireland.
It doesn't affect Yes as they are too busy painting murals on walls...some are in the 21st century with online advertising and others are not in this century yet and are still painting walls as the modern form of campaigning.

Wow, you're actually really sore about this.

Even though the ban affects both sides equally.

Surely if the "No" side has a cohesive message, then a ban on online advertising wouldn't be a problem? Why do you think "Yes" aren't fussed?

Yet here we are with David Quinn sitting under a presentation asking if the election is being rigged - because he can't buy ads on Google.

That's basically an admission that Quinn knows his message is awful, that it has no substance, and he was relying on being REALLY REALLY LOUD through advertising to win this referendum.

robarmstrong · 09-05-2018 04:54PM

RobertKK wrote: »

The repeal shield is very encouraging, now up to 11.5k twitter accounts and it's growing fast. So many No people to this referendum.
It went up around 2,000 in a week, the more it grows the more encouragement it is for No as it shows a lot of support.

The No side have nothing similar, so we can't compare.

Not so fast Bob.

robarmstrong wrote: »

Where's the evidence of your claim that most women who seek abortion on mental health grounds do so out of a lifestyle choice or due to career related reasons?

patrickSTARR · 09-05-2018 04:54PM

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

Actually this is in line with the way these companies have been moving recently in terms of their stance on advertising in general, and it totally in line with their reactions to the proliferation of fake news etc during the US election and Brexit vote

This is true.

RobertKK · 09-05-2018 04:55PM

robarmstrong wrote: »

I see your twitter graph that I can't seem to find a linked source other than a biased pro-life individual and raise you a medical report.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11420809

Particularly -

They call it healthcare, when most abortions have nothing to do with health, the Yes side peddle this lie so much.

Mrsmum · 09-05-2018 04:55PM

patrickSTARR wrote: »

Because its a life, just like you.

The contents of your womb is a life.

And also nature decided it was the safest place to put that life.

Something else that occurs to me. My mother was only in my life for five years and I am now more than 15 years older than she was when she died and I hope I will live a lot longer. It makes me think how life laughs in the face of how important we think we are in so far as she, by most people's standards here, should be entitled to get rid of a life that would live far longer than her own. I accept there are reasons where on balance there are difficulties with the 8th for hard cases but on demand abortions I can't accept.

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

Comments