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

patrickSTARR wrote: »

I do, but what can I do to stop them going abroad?

You can repeal the 13th and 14th amendment which gives the right to travel for abortion.

Fun fact: Those amendments came about after we detained a pregnant 14 year old who had been raped by a relative at the airport to stop her from travelling to end her pregnancy.
Such was the national outcry at how disgustingly we treated this girl, we added it to our constitution that women are legally allowed to travel for an abortion.

So we're just a bunch of hypocrites really. Abortion is illegal, yet we have the constitutional right to travel for one.

robarmstrong wrote: »

Not so fast Bob.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3729671/

The predominant themes identified as reasons for seeking abortion included financial reasons (40%), timing (36%), partner related reasons (31%), and the need to focus on other children (29%).

Financial reasons = it affects lifestyle
Timing = it affects lifestyle.
Partner related issues = relationships are a part of one's lifestyle.

None of the main reasons are health. It is general lifestyle being affected.

SusieBlue wrote: »

You can repeal the 13th and 14th amendment which gives the right to travel for abortion.

.

Ah but this vote is to repeal the 8th, its what we are voting on now.

However if such an referendum was for the 13th and 14th, Id vote to repeal them.

Killing an unborn child is wrong.

patrickSTARR wrote: »

I agree, however I don't trust the government to draft legislation that bans abortion on demand.

If I knew repealing the 8th would ban on demand abortion for unwanted pregnancies then id vote to repeal.

Legislation can be amended or removed much easier than a constitutional amendment which is making legislation impossible.

If the government enact legislation you don't like, vote for someone who supports legislation you do like.

There seems to be a common trend among the No side that they don't seem to trust anyone else to be able to make decisions or act for themselves...

Mrsmum wrote: »

I would urge against in the strongest possible terms. If they wouldn't listen I wouldn't turn against them either. To be perfectly truthful I would not leave them go alone but the whole way there I'd be saying please don't.

So if you can find it in yourself to support the women you love, why not other women?

robarmstrong wrote: »

They'd rather not go abroad. They'd rather you value them a bit more rather than the life inside of them.

Id value them both, unlike them not valuing whats inside them.

patrickSTARR wrote: »

Ah but this vote is to repeal the 8th, its what we are voting on now.

However if such an referendum was for the 13th and 14th, Id vote to repeal them.

Killing an unborn child is wrong.

To kill something is to stop it from being alive. An unborn thing is not yet alive. They don’t issue death certs for miscarriage.

Mrsmum wrote: »

I would urge against in the strongest possible terms. If they wouldn't listen I wouldn't turn against them either. To be perfectly truthful I would not leave them go alone but the whole way there I'd be saying please don't.

If my mother did that to me, I'd never forgive her. You'd be better off leaving them go with someone who's not going to try and emotionally blackmail them the whole way there.

uptherebels wrote: »

So you interpret any reason as "lifestyle". Here was me thinking financial might mean being unable to buy food for it

Does finances affect one's lifestyle, yes or no?

patrickSTARR wrote: »

In that case above, I agree the 8th needs to be repealed, Ive never said it shouldn't.

However, I do think more abortions will happen here for reasons not medical and I don't agree with that, hence my leaning towards no.

So you are willing to throw those women, and many more, under the bus because someone might have an abortion for a reason you may not like?

And you are LITERALLY saying it shouldn't, and are voting to keep it.

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.

Stall on there BobbyKK, 1 mural, which Save are keen as **** to get rid off.

What about the multi page booklets that Save put out, that are completely inaccurate, and were through the doors in no time? What about the numerous posters that appeared up, as soon as the Save campaign went live? Surely that's a bit old school?

There's various posts, from men and women, on this forum, and social media, there's podcasts, there's TV segments, there was a crowd funding platform that raised a stack of cash from people, there's loads, and you ****e on about Yes not using social media?

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.

I've told you before, disagreeing with an opinion does not make it a lie. It being a lie makes it a lie.

And it doesn't matter what evidence is provided to you, you claim "hard case."

Gintonious wrote: »

Getting the excuses ready it seems.

Jaysis, they look sour.

RobertKK wrote: »

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

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

Any link to what those reasons were for those abortions?

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.

A lot of reregs and bots getting blocked. It's apparent here, it's apparent there. Hardly a good metric of support.

No don't need anything like that, you just shout at people.

Triceratops Ballet wrote: »

If my mother did that to me, I'd never forgive her. You'd be better off leaving them go with someone who's not going to try and emotionally blackmail them the whole way there.

Equally if my daughter aborted a baby just because its unplanned and not a good time in their lives, Id never forgive them either.

RobertKK wrote: »

Does every No voter who posts here have to be interrogated if they believe that censorship of information works as in abortion information, or women be banned from travelling because most travelling women are not travelling for an abortion, but all women should supposedly be banned from travelling?

I am just reading the crap I had to reply to...and Patrick being asked the same crap.

Testing women at airports is unworkable. It will never happen so we can't stop Irish women travelling.

We can intercept those women having pills here. It shouldn't be that difficult to arrest them and charge them. Would you advocate that Bob?

Overheal wrote: »

That’s dandy but pop quiz: situation arises where your loved one lives, or the unborn thing does. The other will die. Times up. Who is worth more?

I don't know, its a Sophies choice.