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

ELM327 · 17-05-2018 09:13AM

Just her wrote: »

Why so these type of comparisons only ever come up in abortion debates? I've yet to hear anyone congratulate a pregnant woman and add ' it's no more a baby than my pubic hair'. Is it because you need to dehumanise the baby to get abortion to sit right with you?

I discussed this with my partner who had a miscarriage (of a wanted pregnancy) before we met.

She explained that while there is a loss, it's the loss of the potential life that could have been, instead of an actual loss.

I agree with her (and not just because I have to

)

joe40 · 17-05-2018 09:17AM

In many ways this debate is like the contraception vote, divorce vote, SSM vote. The people opposing it are very vocal, very passionate in their opposition but ultimately it doesn't affect them.
It is almost comical to look back at the SSM debates only 3 years ago, the NO side got so worked up about an issue that has had zero impact on their lives since it was passed.
It had massive impact on the gay community in Ireland, that is where the disparity in these things lie.
The same for contraception and divorce, if you don't agree with these things, fine they don't have to impact your life.

This debate is the same, there is only one group of people with "skin in the game" that is women and their families that are concerned about their options should a crisis pregnancy occur (Whatever the crisis)

For me this is an important point, over the years hundreds of thousands of Irish people have chosen to live in UK, America and elsewhere. Many of these people would call themselves pro life, and that is absolutely their right, but did any of them let the fact that abortion was available in their chosen country even enter their decision.

It was understood and accepted that even where abortion laws exist, you can still live by your own pro-life stance. It will not become compulsory.

17-05-2018 09:17AM

There's a new poll out by the Irish Times/IPSOS MRBI:

44% Yes
32% No
17% Undecided
7% Not voting

Of the undecideds, 31% leaning Yes and 24% No.

Still a reasonable lead for Yes but it could tighten up again. Will be a close one.

neonsofa · 17-05-2018 09:17AM

Overheal wrote: »

Because if you’re congratulating someone like that, they’ve made the decision to keep it surely?

You can refer to it as a baby sure but it still medically progresses through prenatal phases described as embryo, zygote, and fetus, before becoming an infant.

Yeah I mean my friend "announced" to me when she was trying for a baby because she got the all clear from her medical team to do so. We marked the occasion with some wine for me and an orange juice for her over dinner. There was no baby,we were basically drinking to a more active sex life (which is as good a reason as any I suppose!) but it's the hopes and plans and dreams that she holds for her future child (she is still TTC) that we were celebrating.

It's the same when a woman sees two lines on a stick very early on in her pregnancy, it's a test of hormone levels, it is the future that comes with that which is being celebrated.

antiskeptic · 17-05-2018 09:20AM

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

So you can try and tell people that that isn't what the report says, that what you say is what the report says (even though it's written in plain english).

When asked to show where the investigative report implicated the 8th you quoted two sections.

Both sections you quoted - I stress you- involved the law.

Both sections queried whether the confusion during Savita stemmed from the law. Query isnt conclusion.

Neither section you quoted mentioned the constitution, either directly or indirectly.

Plain English would mention the 8th directly. Less plain English would mention the 8th indirectly.

Neither occurred.

If you disagree, post both sections here, and see can anyone spot any mention or reference to the 8th

What was the last one? That the law and the 8th have nothing to do with each other (or was it very little to do with each other?) and therefore the report doesn't mention the 8th (even though it does).

Its not that they have nothing at all to do with each other. Its that the law isn't the 8th.

If the law is bad it can be that the 8th forces it to be so. It can also be simply that the law is bad in its own right - without the 8th forcing it to be so.

The report doesnt say one way or the other. It merely says to look.

If you disagree, show where the report says bad law. Then show where its that bad law came from bad 8th?

Or was it that the professor wasn't a lawyer therefore his "opinion" doesn't count? Do you plan on stretching what it says even more?

Its not that his opinion doesnt count. Its that he is qualified to comment on medical matters, and medical procedures.

He is not qualified to say whether the law is bad or whether the law, if bad, stems from a bad 8th.

And so the report doesnt comment on whether the law or 8th is bad. It merely urges that it be looked at.

If you disagree and suppose it does say bad law/bad 8th, the quote the section.

It doesnt even have to be in plain English.

ELM327 · 17-05-2018 09:20AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Theoretically the 8th could be used to make it illegal for pregnant women to smoke or drink - neither of which I think they should be doing by the way - but how far should be go to 'protect' the unborn?

Do you agree that another human should have control over a woman's body?

Personally I think in the event of a NO vote the 8th should be applied correctly as per the description, and pregnant women cannot do anything to endanger the foetus. This includes walking, leaving the house, drinking tea/coffee, taking paracetamol, having sex, anything to raise the heartbeat, and so on.

Then have another referendum in 6 months.

ELM327 · 17-05-2018 09:21AM

Flying Fox wrote: »

There's a new poll out by the Irish Times/IPSOS MRBI:

44% Yes
32% No
17% Undecided
7% Not voting

Of the undecideds, 31% leaning Yes and 24% No.

Still a reasonable lead for Yes but it could tighten up again. Will be a close one.

As I said weeks ago, this could be like the divorce referendum.
We just have to hope that repeal wins, even if it's by one vote. That's all that matters.

iamwhoiam · 17-05-2018 09:26AM

joe40 wrote: »

In many ways this debate is like the contraception vote, divorce vote, SSM vote. The people opposing it are very vocal, very passionate in their opposition but ultimately it doesn't affect them.

It was understood and accepted that even where abortion laws exist, you can still live by your own pro-life stance. It will not become compulsory.

This is what I don't understand .People who try to force their beliefs on others and vote NO . No one is forcing anyone to have an abortion so these people can carry on just as they were and feel safe that no one will make them have an abortion .Yet they somehow feel it is up to them to push their beliefs and their opinions on other people .If it does not affect them why are they ranting at others to think as they do ? It baffles me . I will vote Yes but I sure am not forcing anyone to do anything by voting Yes .I am only opening up a choice fore them .

Just her · 17-05-2018 09:27AM

kylith wrote: »

Key word there is DEVELOPING. It is developing into a baby, it is not a baby.

No, it is a developing baby

ELM327 · 17-05-2018 09:28AM

Just her wrote: »

No, it is a developing baby

It's also a developing corpse, by that logic.

....... · 17-05-2018 09:30AM

This post has been deleted.

....... · 17-05-2018 09:30AM

This post has been deleted.

....... · 17-05-2018 09:32AM

This post has been deleted.

pleas advice · 17-05-2018 09:34AM

Grayson wrote: »

Now I would agree that possessing human DNA is a criteria but it's not the only one. It's a starting point.

Not just human DNA. It is a genetically separate human entity.

Just her · 17-05-2018 09:35AM

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Pedantically and linguistically one could start to argue they are the same. But if they were exactly the same we would not see the trend that "yes" campaigners use one almost exclusively and "No" campaigners use the other almost exclusively.

The fact this happens tells you there IS a difference. And I believe the basis of that difference is very clear indeed. It is that the word "baby" imports..... no I would say "smuggles in"..... implications, attributes, ideas, narratives, emotions and more that the fetus simply does not have, and does not warrant the pretense that it has.

The use of the word "baby" is contrived to trigger emotions and lines of thought that are simply fallacious and misleading. And I think they, and you, know that well even if you feign ignorance.

I learn things when I post on threads. Almost invariably. I have to say I have learned more knowledge and bits of trivia from this thread than any other I have ever posted on though. I really did not know that.

I don't think anyone is trying to be misleading. I think no campaigners say it as they see it. That the foetus and baby are the same. What is the argument, that a baby isn't a baby until it takes its first breath? Every single part of it is identical before and after birth but they just haven't been given the chance to take a breath so they aren't human, aren't a baby?

....... · 17-05-2018 09:35AM

This post has been deleted.

wexie · 17-05-2018 09:39AM

Just her wrote: »

Every single part of it is identical before and after birth but they just haven't been given the chance to take a breath so they aren't human, aren't a baby?

You don't think that largely depends on at what stage 'before' you look?

7 months I'd absolutely agree with you (I was born at 7 months)

12 weeks....not so much

....... · 17-05-2018 09:39AM

This post has been deleted.

Nettle Soup · 17-05-2018 09:40AM

The Roman church seem to have gone quiet after a few recent gaffes. Or maybe they are keeping the head down in media and hammering the No order home locally?

Just her · 17-05-2018 09:41AM

kylith wrote: »

So? ‘Cat’ comes from the Latin for ‘puppy’. Doesn’t mean it is one.

Well I would argue a foetus is a the same baby at an earlier stage of development. A cat is not a puppy at an earlier stage of development. People use foetus as if the word means it's not a baby, I'm just pointing out the origin as it doesn't seem to me, in my opinion, that was every what the word was meant to mean. People have attached dehumanising meanings to foetus in an attempt to make it seem ok to end their lives, perhaps to themselves as much as to anyone else.

SusieBlue · 17-05-2018 09:42AM

Just her wrote: »

I don't think anyone is trying to be misleading. I think no campaigners say it as they see it. That the foetus and baby are the same. What is the argument, that a baby isn't a baby until it takes its first breath? Every single part of it is identical before and after birth but they just haven't been given the chance to take a breath so they aren't human, aren't a baby?

Do you believe it should have an equal right to life as its mother?

Do you accept that the wording in the constitution has and will continue to cause confusion during medical emergencies because the line isn't clear for doctors?

And do you accept that if a woman is unwell or has a threat to her health (not her life, her health) that the only person who should have a say in whether she continues with her pregnancy is herself?

And if you don't agree with that, can you see that you are categorically putting the rights of the fetus over the rights/health of the mother? So they aren't actually equal at all?

This is what it all boils down to. Its a badly worded dangerous piece of text. It needs to go.

freshpopcorn · 17-05-2018 09:42AM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

This is what I don't understand .People who try to force their beliefs on others and vote NO . No one is forcing anyone to have an abortion so these people can carry on just as they were and feel safe that no one will make them have an abortion .Yet they somehow feel it is up to them to push their beliefs and their opinions on other people .If it does not affect them why are they ranting at others to think as they do ? It baffles me . I will vote Yes but I sure am not forcing anyone to do anything by voting Yes .I am only opening up a choice fore them .

This is from understanding about No voters. They are voting No because they don't want a society were abortion is seen as acceptable as England for example. They don't want to raise there sons/daughters/family/etc in this type of society.(If that makes sense).

pleas advice · 17-05-2018 09:45AM

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

A genetically separate human entity, in situ (or, in utero, if you prefer that term)

Just her · 17-05-2018 09:45AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

That does not seem to be what I am reading. I am reading you claiming that an Irish government could extend the limit, despite there being no evidence to support this either domestically or internationally. That, in fact, the UK - with whom comparisons are being made even though the proposed Irish legislation is completely different - reduced the limit.

It strikes me as odd using the UK as a bogeyman given that if NO wins that will continue to be where the majority of Irish women seeking abortions will go.
A No vote is essentially a vote to use the UK system.

I didn't understand that, I don't think, are you saying if abortion is legal here, that everyone will continue going to the UK? Why would that be? Where else where abortion is legal do people go overseas for abortion? Perhaps I misread your post genuinely?

wexie · 17-05-2018 09:45AM

Just her wrote: »

People have attached dehumanising meanings to foetus in an attempt to make it seem ok to end their lives, perhaps to themselves as much as to anyone else.

Or perhaps people just think that a foetus isn't a baby.

I also don't think that an egg is a chicken yet I fully accept that an egg might turn into a chicken.

....... · 17-05-2018 09:46AM

This post has been deleted.

Just her · 17-05-2018 09:47AM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

This is what I don't understand .People who try to force their beliefs on others and vote NO . No one is forcing anyone to have an abortion so these people can carry on just as they were and feel safe that no one will make them have an abortion .Yet they somehow feel it is up to them to push their beliefs and their opinions on other people .If it does not affect them why are they ranting at others to think as they do ? It baffles me . I will vote Yes but I sure am not forcing anyone to do anything by voting Yes .I am only opening up a choice fore them .

It is because they don't want people's babies being aborted, they want them given a chance to live their lives

Sofiztikated · 17-05-2018 09:47AM

Just her wrote: »

Well I would argue a foetus is a the same baby at an earlier stage of development. A cat is not a puppy at an earlier stage of development. People use foetus as if the word means it's not a baby, I'm just pointing out the origin as it doesn't seem to me, in my opinion, that was every what the word was meant to mean. People have attached dehumanising meanings to foetus in an attempt to make it seem ok to end their lives, perhaps to themselves as much as to anyone else.

I'll generally call it a baby when referring to what's inside a woman.

The distinction is, when you are trying to be accurate, wording helps.

Why are you an adult at 18, but at 17 years, 354 days you are still a child? They're virtually the same thing.

If someone brought you to an empty site, and said there's my house, you'd be right to think he was wrong. You know what he means, but he's still wrong.

....... · 17-05-2018 09:48AM

This post has been deleted.

....... · 17-05-2018 09:49AM

This post has been deleted.

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

Comments