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

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 16-05-2018 01:51PM

Gintonious wrote: »

Cora Sherlock was just on the radio there for the NO side (what media bias?)

She is not against travel, accessing information by post or the net, or the importation of abortion pills.

What kind of position is this? She also wouldn't directly answer the question about if she would allow a woman to have access to abortion in the cases of rape, where she said she "knew people" who had given birth after a rape and were glad they did...

She is just another moron with no morals to just flat out say she is happy for Irish women to remain in danger in Ireland.

She did seem to have a peculiarly high amount of "friends" who'd been raped and got pregnant...

Frank Bullitt · 16-05-2018 01:53PM

Esmeralda Inexpensive Balloonist wrote: »

She did seem to have a peculiarly high amount of "friends" who'd been raped and got pregnant...

Very easy to say things like that, works like a conspiracy theory, you don't need any evidence or common sense for it.

ohnonotgmail · 16-05-2018 01:58PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes but a realistic fine. Not a symbolic fine which was defeated. Don't ask me how much as I am not an expert in fines and what level is a deterrent.

btw speeding can kill so it is serious when a person is breaking speed limits.

If you kill somebody while speeding you can go to prison. Why should the same not apply to those who have an abortion? Is it not the deliberate killing of another in your eyes?

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 16-05-2018 02:01PM

Gintonious wrote: »

Very easy to say things like that, works like a conspiracy theory, you don't need any evidence or common sense for it.

It's natural that she'd have contact with women who've regretted an abortion or been happy they went through with a pregnancy after rape, given the organisations she's involved with. It was the way she framed it as "friends of mine" "people I know" that was fcuking weird.

RobertKK · 16-05-2018 02:02PM

Dressing gown wrote: »

Robert thanks for being honest and engaging in this discussion. The whole thing is horrible to be honest. Despite being a yes voter the concept of abortion makes me squeamish too. But being a mum and having had a hard time of it at that I just can’t endorse a law that forces women to become mothers. I think you are half way there too as it’s clear you don’t want women punished for becoming pregnant. There are women that are at breaking point. Loving mothers that just cannot cope with another baby and child to care for. She has other children to think of. She is not selfish, she just knows her limits. She is desperate. I know you are grappling with this and I know you will probably stay a no, but if there is a niggling voice in you asking you to reconsider please listen to it.

Wouldn't it be great if the Yes politicians put as much effort into supporting pregnant women, women with babies and children as they have been in their push for the legalisation of unrestricted abortion?
I don't see these politicians as being really that concerned about women, they are talk for the sake of it, it is is easier for them to have a quick fix with abortion as it takes away responsibility the state should be doing for women which is making pregnancy something positive whatever situation a woman in is. But I don't see this, I don't see Yes people putting forward an alternative to abortion.
These politicians don't care about women, no accountability and they support people responsible for a cover up that has cost women their lives. They keep their jobs because that is more important to them.
I won't be changing my vote, there is no niggling voice in my head to change my vote. I do support better supports for women who are pregnant and who have children, rather than the alternative which I don't support.

Frank Bullitt · 16-05-2018 02:03PM

Esmeralda Inexpensive Balloonist wrote: »

It's natural that she'd have contact with women who've regretted an abortion or been happy they went through with a pregnancy after rape, given the organisations she's involved with. It was the way she framed it as "friends of mine" "people I know" that was fcuking weird.

Stands to reason as well, that she also doesn't know women who would be the opposite to those circumstances.

Mr. CooL ICE · 16-05-2018 02:07PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Wouldn't it be great if the Yes politicians put as much effort into supporting pregnant women, women with babies and children as they have been in their push for the legalisation of unrestricted abortion?
I don't see these politicians as being really that concerned about women, they are talk for the sake of it, it is is easier for them to have a quick fix with abortion as it takes away responsibility the state should be doing for women which is making pregnancy something positive whatever situation a woman in is. But I don't see this, I don't see Yes people putting forward an alternative to abortion.
These politicians don't care about women, no accountability and they support people responsible for a cover up that has cost women their lives. They keep their jobs because that is more important to them.

You see, you could replace references to 'Yes politicians/people' in your post with 'No politicians/people' and depending on your perspective, could be equally, if not more, valid.

nozzferrahhtoo · 16-05-2018 02:08PM

RobertKK wrote: »

I don't see Yes people putting forward an alternative to abortion.

That is because you contrive, quite willfully and demonstably, to only see what you want to see.

Especially given I, and many other users, have made MANY posts on this very thread doing exactly what you claim not to have seen. You not wanting to see it does not mean those posts never happened you know.

An interesting question I have in my head, but it has been ducked every time I ask it, is why it is that groups (lets example the Catholic church here) who have historically been against abortion are also often against the things that serve to reduce it. Like contraception and sex education.

Why is it, for example, than in all the decades I have been calling for better, more comprehensive, and significantly EARLIER sexual education in our schools..... the only people who push back at me are people against abortion? I have yet (yet) to have a pro-choice person suggest to me that such sex education is a bad idea.

I have yet to meet any pro-choice person at all who is against contraception either. Yet who were the biggest opponents to it's legalization in our past?

RobertKK wrote: »

I won't be changing my vote

I doubt strongly there is even one person interacting with you on this thread that is under ANY illusion that you might. The purpose of rebutting the false and unsubstantiated claims you have made on the thread is to benefit OTHER people who might be reading. I doubt a single person is doing it because they think they can reach you.

That is generally what the purpose of public discourse is. It is for the benefit of that public, not the person you happen to be having that discourse with. And in that regard I think you have being done more of a fine job for the "yes" side in this thread than you even suspect.

seamus · 16-05-2018 02:10PM

RobertKK wrote: »

The 8th amendment can be kept and the law could be changed to a fine rather than a jail term.

No, it can't. This is 100%, unarguably, incorrect.

A fine would be unconstitutional.

But you already know that.

ArmaniJeanss · 16-05-2018 02:11PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Wouldn't it be great if the Yes politicians put as much effort into supporting pregnant women, women with babies and children as they have been in their push for the legalisation of unrestricted abortion?
I don't see these politicians as being really that concerned about women, they are talk for the sake of it, it is is easier for them to have a quick fix with abortion as it takes away responsibility the state should be doing for women which is making pregnancy something positive whatever situation a woman in is. But I don't see this, I don't see Yes people putting forward an alternative to abortion.

Eh, the various socialist parties (Brid Smith, Claire Daly, Coppinger etc) who are loudest re a Yes vote would also be amongst the most vocal when it comes to wanting increased social welfare, childrens benefit, social housing etc.

Being broadly right wing myself I don't support them on this, but you really really can't accuse them of having no interest in 'born' children.

Dressing gown · 16-05-2018 02:13PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Wouldn't it be great if the Yes politicians put as much effort into supporting pregnant women, women with babies and children as they have been in their push for the legalisation of unrestricted abortion?
I don't see these politicians as being really that concerned about women, they are talk for the sake of it, it is is easier for them to have a quick fix with abortion as it takes away responsibility the state should be doing for women which is making pregnancy something positive whatever situation a woman in is. But I don't see this, I don't see Yes people putting forward an alternative to abortion.
These politicians don't care about women, no accountability and they support people responsible for a cover up that has cost women their lives. They keep their jobs because that is more important to them.
I won't be changing my vote, there is no niggling voice in my head to change my vote. I do support better supports for women who are pregnant and who have children, rather than the alternative which I don't support.

That’s fine. The three alternatives options to abortion are forcing the mother to keep the baby, forcing the father to, or putting the child up for adoption.

I know three people that were adopted. One is absolutely fine. One was told by his parents that he was adopted in his early 20s. He didn’t take t well and turned to substance abuse. He overdosed in his early thirties. The other knew he had been adopted from an early age and had a wonderful childhood. After having his own family he sought to find his birth mother. His birth mothers told him he was the product of rape and slammed the door in his face. He suffered a break down. It subsequently turned out she had not been raped but did not want the shame of a child outside wedlock known to her family.

Take from that what you will but my point is adoption is not a happy solution for everyone. Yes there are plenty of couples desperate for a child that would adopt in a heartbeat but do not forget there are psychological consequences for the adopted child that can be devastating.

mc25 · 16-05-2018 02:13PM

RobertKK wrote: »

it takes away responsibility the state should be doing for women which is making pregnancy something positive whatever situation a woman in is.

This really makes my blood boil!
Pregnancy is NOT always something positive (regardless of which side of the vote a person is on)

It wasnt me123 · 16-05-2018 02:24PM

Discussion on obtaining abortion pills soon to be on Moncrief on Newstalk

erica74 · 16-05-2018 02:26PM

FrancieBrady wrote: »

This is quite sickening really, considering what we have had to uncover in this country.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/no-campaign-defends-booklet-resembling-a-government-publication-1.3496559

Elements of the No side seem to favour getting this over the line any which way they can in an effort to pretend we are a morally upstanding haven. The truth doesn't matter.
Despicable behaviour.

Surely that's illegal? It's masquerading as something it's not to try to sway voters.

https://mobile.twitter.com/JOEdotie/status/995996232739934208/video/1

My sister sent me this, I'm not on Twitter so I hope the link posts okay for everyone to watch it. Please watch it.

It wasnt me123 · 16-05-2018 02:27PM

Copied from another thread on Boards

"On a post about the 8th:

Why kill them please let them live have I Mary full of grease the he lord is with d blessed art down among womon an blessed is the fruit of thy womd Jesus holy Mary mother of god pray for us sinners now an the hours of our death Amen

I laughed for 20 minutes about the grease bit"

Sofiztikated · 16-05-2018 02:32PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Wouldn't it be great if the Yes politicians put as much effort into supporting pregnant women, women with babies and children as they have been in their push for the legalisation of unrestricted abortion?
I don't see these politicians as being really that concerned about women, they are talk for the sake of it, it is is easier for them to have a quick fix with abortion as it takes away responsibility the state should be doing for women which is making pregnancy something positive whatever situation a woman in is. But I don't see this, I don't see Yes people putting forward an alternative to abortion.
These politicians don't care about women, no accountability and they support people responsible for a cover up that has cost women their lives. They keep their jobs because that is more important to them.
I won't be changing my vote, there is no niggling voice in my head to change my vote. I do support better supports for women who are pregnant and who have children, rather than the alternative which I don't support.

Would these be the politicians that worked on widening adoption policies? The ones that get slated for upping children's allowance, the ones that get a go over for any changes to loan parents allowance?

You out forward that no Yes side is putting forward an alternative to abortion? There is no alternative, that isn't already there. This is just ANOTHER option, not the only option.

I think you see how awkward the 8th is, but don't want to admit it.

Frank Bullitt · 16-05-2018 02:32PM

It wasnt me123 wrote: »

Copied from another thread on Boards

"On a post about the 8th:

Why kill them please let them live have I Mary full of grease the he lord is with d blessed art down among womon an blessed is the fruit of thy womd Jesus holy Mary mother of god pray for us sinners now an the hours of our death Amen

I laughed for 20 minutes about the grease bit"

Did Mattie McGrath type that?

nozzferrahhtoo · 16-05-2018 02:33PM

It wasnt me123 wrote: »

I laughed for 20 minutes about the grease bit"

Reminds me of a wonderful sketch by Dave Allen who spoke of how he first learned to bless himself at a funeral, and he did it the way the priest did it. And he did it for many years.

Problem is when the priest did it at the funeral, Dave Allen misheard him as saying "In the name of the father, and of the son, and into the hole he goes".

tigger123 · 16-05-2018 02:34PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes but a realistic fine. Not a symbolic fine which was defeated. Don't ask me how much as I am not an expert in fines and what level is a deterrent.

btw speeding can kill so it is serious when a person is breaking speed limits.

Weren't you saying the other day that it's pointless to bring up the issue of a prosecution for a woman as part of this debate as it's never been pursued by the State before?

But now you're saying that it should be a realistic fine instead of a jail term?

Which is it?

greenpilot · 16-05-2018 02:36PM

Hi,

I have been a No voter up until 3 days ago. I was voting no, purely because I felt that the government cast the net to wide with the 12 weeks. I am non-religious, male in my mid 40's.

However, on more than a few occasions, I have witnessed males in their 50's and 60's spouting absolute nonsense relating to their reasons for voting No and it has turned my stomach. It has been like listening to a parish debate from the 1950's and I, quite frankly, do not wish to be associated with this rubbish. The constant association with religion or religious teachings is also a red line for me. never should be a reason to deny women a choice.

Finally, as a man, and regardless of my feelings about children in a relationship, who am I to decide the welfare of women or to decide whether or not a woman should have a choice or not?

People are saying that the RTE debate was a win for the NO side. I beg to differ. It has, In a lot of cases turned No votes into Yes votes. The braying mob is the last gasp of 1950's Ireland.

It wasnt me123 · 16-05-2018 02:38PM

No I don't think Mattie typed it. I know his speech is a bit dodgy but he is actually a very efficient TD for local people (I have used his office on more than one occasion). He has a very efficient electrion crowd behind him, including his 8 children. I just don't agree with him on this occasion (and a few other occasions as well).

It sounded like Dublinese to me, Moore Street, or maybe that was just the accent I used when I said it!

Dave Allen was hilarious, very un PC, ahead of his time.

eviltwin · 16-05-2018 02:38PM

greenpilot wrote: »

Hi,

I have been a No voter up until 3 days ago. I was voting no, purely because I felt that the government cast the net to wide with the 12 weeks. I am non-religious, male in my mid 40's.

However, on more than a few occasions, I have witnessed males in their 50's and 60's spouting absolute nonsense relating to their reasons for voting No and it has turned my stomach. It has been like listening to a parish debate from the 1950's and I, quite frankly, do not wish to be associated with this rubbish. The constant association with religion or religious teachings is also a red line for me. never should be a reason to deny women a choice.

Finally, as a man, and regardless of my feelings about children in a relationship, who am I to decide the welfare of women or to decide whether or not a woman should have a choice or not?

People are saying that the RTE debate was a win for the NO side. I beg to differ. It has, In a lot of cases turned No votes into Yes votes. The braying mob is the last gasp of 1950's Ireland.

From the bottom of my heart, thank you.

DEFTLEFTHAND · 16-05-2018 02:38PM

Gintonious wrote: »

Did Mattie McGrath type that?

Someone trolling.

SusieBlue · 16-05-2018 02:40PM

greenpilot wrote: »

Hi,

I have been a No voter up until 3 days ago. I was voting no, purely because I felt that the government cast the net to wide with the 12 weeks. I am non-religious, male in my mid 40's.

However, on more than a few occasions, I have witnessed males in their 50's and 60's spouting absolute nonsense relating to their reasons for voting No and it has turned my stomach. It has been like listening to a parish debate from the 1950's and I, quite frankly, do not wish to be associated with this rubbish. The constant association with religion or religious teachings is also a red line for me. never should be a reason to deny women a choice.

Finally, as a man, and regardless of my feelings about children in a relationship, who am I to decide the welfare of women or to decide whether or not a woman should have a choice or not?

People are saying that the RTE debate was a win for the NO side. I beg to differ. It has, In a lot of cases turned No votes into Yes votes. The braying mob is the last gasp of 1950's Ireland.

I think many, many of this country's Yes voters will be doing so for exactly the same reasons as you. Thank you.

It wasnt me123 · 16-05-2018 02:41PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Someone trolling.

Quite possibly but I found it amusing for a Wednesday afternoon waiting for my next patient.

What that says about me is a psychololgists nightmare.

erica74 · 16-05-2018 02:41PM

greenpilot wrote: »

Hi,

I have been a No voter up until 3 days ago. I was voting no, purely because I felt that the government cast the net to wide with the 12 weeks. I am non-religious, male in my mid 40's.

However, on more than a few occasions, I have witnessed males in their 50's and 60's spouting absolute nonsense relating to their reasons for voting No and it has turned my stomach. It has been like listening to a parish debate from the 1950's and I, quite frankly, do not wish to be associated with this rubbish. The constant association with religion or religious teachings is also a red line for me. never should be a reason to deny women a choice.

Finally, as a man, and regardless of my feelings about children in a relationship, who am I to decide the welfare of women or to decide whether or not a woman should have a choice or not?

People are saying that the RTE debate was a win for the NO side. I beg to differ. It has, In a lot of cases turned No votes into Yes votes. The braying mob is the last gasp of 1950's Ireland.

Thank you for being so open minded on the matter.

spookwoman · 16-05-2018 02:44PM

Just saw this which is stooping to even lower levels by the no side. The No side have brought out their own booklet that resembles a government publication :mad:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/no-campaign-defends-booklet-resembling-a-government-publication-1.3496559

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 16-05-2018 02:44PM

dudara wrote: »

Yes, it could lead to that. But perhaps for very valid reasons. The woman does not want to be a mother, is studying, is persuing her career, does not have enough money, is not in a stable relationship. There are many reasons why women might persue an abortion.

What you are saying is that you believe in making women mothers against their will. You are taking away her choice and self-determination. You may be irrevocably changing her life. Are you OK with that, genuinely?

That's my point really. There will be women who will choose to end their baby's life because it is inconvenient to have a baby. That certainly doesn't sit easy with me. Lots of things irrevocably change a person's life, and I don't think that is a reason to end another human's life. And yes, I know a lot of posters will come on here and say 'it's not a baby/human' etc. But to me it is, so there is no way I would ever see an abortion so that a girl could continue her studies, does not want to be a mother as okay.

I don't think anybody should be forced to bring up a child, and I do think it's a shame that so few babies are available for adoption any more. On that subject, a few people have posted that the realities of adoption are not fully understood. I'm genuinely interested in clarification on that. Obviously there will be stories of some adoptions which haven't worked out, just as there will be non adopted adults who will have stories of difficult childhoods. But I would have grown up at a time when many of the girls I went to school with, kids on the road etc would have been adopted and they all seemed to have happy childhoods and grow up to be normal adults.

I do agree that situations where vulnerable children are passed from foster home to foster home because a parent refuses to consent to adoption are wrong. That is definitely an area that needs reform.

Frank Bullitt · 16-05-2018 02:45PM

spookwoman wrote: »

Just saw this which is stooping to even lower levels by the no side. The No side have brought out their own booklet that resembles a government publication :mad:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/no-campaign-defends-booklet-resembling-a-government-publication-1.3496559

John McGuirks handy work, utter pig.

trixi001 · 16-05-2018 02:47PM

Not sure if this has been posted before, but there is an article in the Irish times by a doctor supporting keeping the 8th amendment
irishtimes.com/opinion/medical-myths-about-eighth-amendment-must-be-challenged-1.3451748
I believe for the issues surrounding maternal car, a lot of these issues are not about the constitution, they are about the law.
Savita Halappanavar didn't die due to the 8th amendment, she died due to uncertainty around the 8th amendment in the medical profession.
Abortion is and always has been allowed if the life of the mother is at risk.
The government were able to amend the abortion law and brought in Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013, which has made it much clearer for the medical profession what they can and cannot do. The law can be further amended without the need to remove the 8th amendment.
I firmly believe the unborn have a right to life, and firmly disagree with abortion on demand.
If the referendum was to repel the 8th amendment and replace it with a different amendment for exceptional cases such as FFA etc, then I may not vote no, but it is being replaced with wording that means any government can fully change the rules on abortion - and the current government want to introduce abortion on demand for any reason up to 12 weeks - my conscience could not allow me to support this.

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

Comments