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

spookwoman · 09-05-2018 09:46PM

RobertKK wrote: »

They are not the same.

Both are moaning about the google ban which was discussed hours ago. Why bring it up again.

RobertKK · 09-05-2018 09:47PM

Overheal wrote: »

You sound like Trump. Don’t sound like Trump. “Election interference is good if it helps me! Spasiba, comrade!”

Where did I mention election interference?

Irish campaigners had money paid to Google. Not foreign money. It is late in the day to be changing policy.

PhoenixParker · 09-05-2018 09:47PM

jluv wrote: »

Thank you for your reply..
Structure for debate..great..
But for me, I find it a major dilemma..
I am 100% for repeal. But not for the proposed abortion proposal. I'd like that to be a seperate debate and think it should be. Thats why I wanted to know if the legislation needed to be in place for repeal. As it seems not to be a requirement,and possibly a debating point, it may be adding a consious defining question for others (myself included)
Now I am quite happy to fight with my concsious and repeal but I'm also strong enough to let my feelings be felt on legislation. But I feel others are of the opinion that abortion on demand HAS to be the option. The government should take that off the table IMO to allow for a fair referendum.

If you want to understand why the legislation proposed is the legislation proposed read the report of the committee on the 8th amendment.
How they got to 12 weeks is clearly laid out and the reasoning is strong.

Overheal · 09-05-2018 09:47PM

NuMarvel wrote: »

That's what you're thinking about right now? Really? That seems.... petty. But you do you, buddy.

It’s professional outrage, only because one side of the debate banked heavily on outside vectors for their political strategy.

spookwoman · 09-05-2018 09:47PM

Martina1991 wrote: »

Can be diagnosed.
Routine pregnancies are not screened for DS.

Trying to get scans and screenings in this country is a nightmare and from ehat I gather doesn't really happen

The Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists has said that while it is technically possible to diagnose chromosomal abnormality indicating that a foetus has Down syndrome before 12 weeks' gestation, the diagnosis can rarely or realistically be achieved within that timeframe.

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2018/0129/936853-down-syndrome/

Overheal · 09-05-2018 09:48PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Where did I mention election interference?

Irish campaigners had money paid to Google. Not foreign money. It is late in the day to be changing policy.

Not really. The vote is a whole two weeks out. Surely google will refund them the moneys if they don’t deliver said spam?

Overheal · 09-05-2018 09:49PM

And sorry, *referendum* interference.

RobertKK · 09-05-2018 09:49PM

spookwoman wrote: »

Both are moaning about the google ban which was discussed hours ago. Why bring it up again.

Said on the news that the Yes side welcomed it, and then had Micheal Martin on agreeing with it.
It is like someone is trying to control the message to the people. Meanwhile the whole country end up with rubbish from Yes in our letterboxes.

Water John · 09-05-2018 09:50PM

So the medical experts decide what an ill pregnant woman should do. Should this not be her and her family's decision?

Overheal · 09-05-2018 09:50PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Said on the news that the Yes side welcomed it, and then had Micheal Martin on agreeing with it.
It is like someone is trying to control the message to the people. Meanwhile the whole country end up with rubbish from Yes in our letterboxes.

Are you this professionally outraged about phonebooks or credit card offers?

Overheal · 09-05-2018 09:51PM

Don’t mean to be snarky, Robert, but you’re being might facetious.

Ave Sodalis · 09-05-2018 09:51PM

RobertKK wrote:

Said on the news that the Yes side welcomed it, and then had Micheal Martin on agreeing with it. It is like someone is trying to control the message to the people. Meanwhile the whole country end up with rubbish from Yes in our letterboxes.

I've not gotten anything from either side in my letterbox?

spookwoman · 09-05-2018 09:52PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Said on the news that the Yes side welcomed it, and then had Micheal Martin on agreeing with it.
It is like someone is trying to control the message to the people. Meanwhile the whole country end up with rubbish from Yes in our letterboxes.

ooOOO (don't feed it, don't go there, you are a young woman with your life ahead of you.)

Martina1991 · 09-05-2018 09:52PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Said on the news that the Yes side welcomed it, and then had Micheal Martin on agreeing with it.
It is like someone is trying to control the message to the people. Meanwhile the whole country end up with rubbish from Yes in our letterboxes.

Paper can be recycled.

RobertKK · 09-05-2018 09:52PM

Overheal wrote: »

It’s professional outrage, only because one side of the debate banked heavily on outside vectors for their political strategy.

What outside vectors?
Google went and banned Irish people using Google to advertise/campaign which is very convenient for Yes.
Facebook allows Irish campaigners continue to use their platform. Google is an anomaly which helps Yes.

RobertKK · 09-05-2018 09:53PM

Martina1991 wrote: »

Paper can be recycled.

Most wont be.

RobertKK · 09-05-2018 09:54PM

Overheal wrote: »

Well it’s helping the local economy, supporting the local postal system rather than lining the profit margins in California.

Google employs 7,000 people in Ireland.

Overheal · 09-05-2018 09:54PM

RobertKK wrote: »

What outside vectors?
Google went and banned Irish people using Google to advertise/campaign which is very convenient for Yes.
Facebook allows Irish campaigners continue to use their platform. Google is an anomaly which helps Yes.

How is it any more convenient from one side over the other, going forth? Neither side has the outlet now. Or are you alleging that the No side doesn’t have the numbers to orchestrate a field campaign? What’s your beef, really?

Overheal · 09-05-2018 09:55PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Google employs 7,000 people in Ireland.

And while Ireland might be Google’s tax haven that’s not where the good scotch goes.

NuMarvel · 09-05-2018 09:57PM

Mrsmum wrote: »

But in that act, regarding cancer:
Two physicians, one an obstetrician and the other a specialist in the field of the relevant condition, must concur.[17] For example, if the woman has cancer, the two physicians would be an obstetrician and an oncologist. Where relevant, the specialists must also consult the woman's general practitioner (GP). The termination would be an elective procedure performed at an appropriate institution.
How is this not allowing for abortion if the doctors say it is necessary ?

In order for it to be necessary, the doctors also have to be sure that there is a real and substantial risk to the woman's life AND that a termination is the only way to avert that risk.

Simply being diagnosed with cancer isn't sufficient reason. They not only have to be satisfied there's a real and substantial risk, but that a termination is the only way to avert it. It is not at all outside the realms of possibility that doctors could deny cancer treatment until the foetus has reached viability and then start treatment after early delivery.

It is nowhere near as clear cut as you're making it out to be. There's a reason that the master of Holles Street compared the current laws to medical roulette.

SusieBlue · 09-05-2018 09:57PM

Mrsmum wrote: »

Regarding cancer, I really could pull loads of articles to say a woman can be treated during pregnancy but I accept there will always be exceptions. Cancer to my mind directly puts your life at risk and I can't see where the 8th in its actual wording prevents treatment. Doctors need to be given a directive as to what 'as far as practicable' means because if people are dying of cancer from non treatment then their interpretation is crap. It's a get out clause and rightly so for such situations if ever I heard one.

I’m currently going through treatment for high grade genotyping cell changes in my cervix picked up at an abnormal smear test.
Before I do each test and procedure, I have to do a pregnancy test, If that test were to come back positive, I would be denied any further treatment.

Cervical cancer is the second biggest killer in Irish women aged 25-39 in this country.
If I want to take a risk and hope those cells haven’t developed into cancer in 9 months time, that should be on me.
Not for society to decide.
I shouldn’t have to wait for cancer to develop and to be actually dying to receive treatment or be able to request a termination.
I’m only 27.

I genuinely don’t know what I’d do if I found out I was pregnant tomorrow but the fact that I wouldn’t be given any treatment until I am no longer pregnant is unacceptable.

That’s why the 8th needs to go - too many grey areas that ties medical professionals hands.

RobertKK · 09-05-2018 09:58PM

Overheal wrote: »

And while Ireland might be Google’s tax haven that’s not where the good scotch goes.

These are high paying jobs which brings in a lot of tax revenue.

tigger123 · 09-05-2018 09:59PM

The No side are pissed off because they have to argue out in the open now.

No more targeting lies directly into people's devices and news feeds.

crustybla · 09-05-2018 10:00PM

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

I've not gotten anything from either side in my letterbox?

Wonder what's gonna happen with the couple of No posters dotted here and there around the country???:rolleyes:

indy_man · 09-05-2018 10:01PM

tigger123 wrote: »

The No side are pissed off because they have to argue out in the open now.

No more targeting lies directly into people's devices and news feeds.

Wait, its the likes of Simon Harris and Lisa Chambers who will not come out in the open and debate\argue with the no side.

indy_man · 09-05-2018 10:01PM

Another thing, the problem is not that Ireland needs abortion, a bigger problem is that England needs to stop its extremely liberal abortion policy. Why do we have to follow their example blindly thinking that we need it also, what has it achieved for them? Eventually the UKs abortion policy will be a disaster for that nation, the amount of UK and Irish unborn children terminated will be worse than the great holocaust and eventually they will need to end it. You know that certain Imans in Europe and the UK have declared the fall of the native western population and the rise of their population a great miracle from Alla. Those guys have sharia law in mind for the UK and Europe, its already well underway in Belgium, Holland and other places. There won’t be much choice then. If we say NO now maybe we can be a light for our neighbours in the UK and help them see sense and stop their unrestricted abortion policy before its too late.

Overheal · 09-05-2018 10:01PM

Basically it sounds like Alphabet just decided to disallow adverts on its platforms from any vectors to save them the trouble of having to find out that advertisers supposedly from Ireland are funded from outside sources. Seems fair and dispassionate to me.

tigger123 · 09-05-2018 10:02PM

indy_man wrote: »

Wait, its the likes of Simon Harris and Lisa Chambers who will not come out in the open and debate\argue with the no side.

There's a whole host of Yes campaigners willing to debate then I'm sure.

BabysCoffee · 09-05-2018 10:04PM

Mrsmum wrote: »

Regarding cancer, I really could pull loads of articles to say a woman can be treated during pregnancy but I accept there will always be exceptions. Cancer to my mind directly puts your life at risk and I can't see where the 8th in its actual wording prevents treatment. Doctors need to be given a directive as to what 'as far as practicable' means because if people are dying of cancer from non treatment then their interpretation is crap. It's a get out clause and rightly so for such situations if ever I heard one.

Or women should be allowed to have an abortion in their home country when diagnosed with cancer, if this is what they want.

Ave Sodalis · 09-05-2018 10:04PM

indy_man wrote: »

Another thing, the problem is not that Ireland needs abortion, a bigger problem is that England needs to stop its extremely liberal abortion policy. Why do we have to follow their example blindly thinking that we need it also, what has it achieved for them? Eventually the UKs abortion policy will be a disaster for that nation, the amount of UK and Irish unborn children terminated will be worse than the great holocaust and eventually they will need to end it. You know that certain Imans in Europe and the UK have declared the fall of the native western population and the rise of their population a great miracle from Alla. Those guys have sharia law in mind for the UK and Europe, its already well underway in Belgium, Holland and other places. There won’t be much choice then. If we say NO now maybe we can be a light for our neighbours in the UK and help them see sense and stop their unrestricted abortion policy before its too late.

You're joking...?

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

Comments