Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1…247248250252253…324

Comments

  • #7472
    Cantona's Collars
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,709 ✭✭✭✭Cantona's Collars


    If any undecided voters have been listening to the Last Word then the performance of the NO contributers on the debate would have pushed them to vote YES.
    Dodging simple questions or not knowing facts. One accused Matt Cooper of bullying yet refused to answer a question on whether the No campaign were happy to continue to export the "issue" to the UK.


  • #7473
    iamwhoiam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,248 ✭✭✭✭iamwhoiam


    Pugzilla wrote: »
    I don't care about the result either way, but it would be hilarious if the No side won. The Yes side are very smug and overconfident. Reminds me of the Hilary Clinton supporters prior to the 2016 US election.

    There is nothing at all hilarious about womens health and keeping them safe . Nothing


  • #7474
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »
    Cantona's Collars wrote: »
    What annoys me is their use of a counties heritage and history to push an agenda.
    Gardai moved them off the bridge in Enniscorthy after complaints about the graphic images on placards.

    Likewise the Project Arts Centre had to be ordered to remove a Repeal the 8th mural from their wall - an example of the Yes side defacing a publicly financed cultural space. It's happening on both sides.
    The Project gave permission for the mural to be painted. An anti-repeal group also asked if they could put up a mural there and were told yes, and invited to submit a design, which they did not do. The Project recognises the all art is inherently political in nature.

    Asking and receiving permission to paint on a wall is hardly the same thing as deciding to deface one of the most iconic parts of the Irish countryside.

    The mural was removed as Project were told that it could be seen as endorsing one side, which would contravene its charitable status. The Iona institute, which also has charitable status, insists on campaigning vociferously against repeal and refuses to stop. Your thoughts on this, please?


  • #7475
    lazygal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    I would like anyone who's a No voter to explain how the eighth amendment has helped me during this or my two previous pregnancies.


  • #7476
    Ulysses Gaze
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,570 ✭✭✭Ulysses Gaze


    This is going end to up like Brexit with a difference of between 3% to 4% between Yes and No.

    I think that Yes will sneak over the line but it is going to be very close.


  • Advertisement
  • #7477
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Pugzilla wrote: »
    I don't care about the result either way, but it would be hilarious if the No side won. The Yes side are very smug and overconfident. Reminds me of the Hilary Clinton supporters prior to the 2016 US election.
    So glad you find the fact that I get no say in my healthcare hilarious.


  • #7478
    Ulysses Gaze
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,570 ✭✭✭Ulysses Gaze


    kylith wrote: »
    So glad you find the fact that I get no say in my healthcare hilarious.

    Just one of those trolls who gets off on "Snowflake" Meltdown videos on Youtube.

    Pay no heed.


  • #7479
    c68zapdsm5i1ru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,709 ✭✭✭c68zapdsm5i1ru


    meeeeh wrote: »
    I think both sides can be as bad as each other hurlung insultd. But I am certain the no side developed a tactic for media debates where they try to talk over the yes side when they are making a point. Ridiculous laws that demand both sides get equal hearing and I think their answers are timed. If you can't make a coherent point when you were interrupted and spoken over it's a point for the other side. This was evident on the C. Byrne show and also next day on prime time when Claire Daly wasn't allowed to talk without interruptions. It seemed to me they managed to limit that to the minimum on The Hard Shoulder yesterday and suddenly Maria Steen was a lot less effective.

    :confused:


  • #7480
    erica74
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,618 ✭✭✭erica74


    Just her wrote: »
    What makes you worthy of deciding upon someone else's right to life?

    Oh the ironing. What makes you worthy of deciding upon someone else's actual life that are living and have built up around themselves in the actual world?

    On a separate note, I find all this discussion disputing Savita Halappanavar's death quite disrespectful.
    The experts gave their expert opinion on the matter and it is disrespectful for random people on the internet to now say well actually I know better.
    If you feel you know better than the experts, which I don't know how that would even be possible, then present your full findings based on all of the information about the matter to the medical council.
    Personally I'm inclined to trust the report made by the experts who actually have all of the facts.

    <snip>
    ....... wrote: »
    I agree with pregnancy termination up to birth. But by then the developing fetus will have developed far enough to be capable of survival outside of the womb so it would not be killed.

    As do I. I don't believe there should be any time limit on abortion. If a woman wants an abortion, she should be able to have one at any stage for any reason. However, as you say, there comes a point in the pregnancy when a baby is delivered rather than an abortion.

    As much as the No side like to say we're all stupid women who can't keep our legs closed and are too stupid to use contraception properly, there is an awful lot of stupidity in people who don't understand that an abortion can only happen up to a certain point in the pregnancy because after that point, a baby will be delivered.
    Nobody is talking about delivering babies at 7 months, 8 months, 9 months and then murdering them, because that would actually be murder. To deliver a viable baby after a certain point in the pregnancy is reached and murder it, is murder.


  • #7481
    c68zapdsm5i1ru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,709 ✭✭✭c68zapdsm5i1ru


    kylith wrote: »
    The Project gave permission for the mural to be painted. An anti-repeal group also asked if they could put up a mural there and were told yes, and invited to submit a design, which they did not do. The Project recognises the all art is inherently political in nature.

    Asking and receiving permission to paint on a wall is hardly the same thing as deciding to deface one of the most iconic parts of the Irish countryside.

    The mural was removed as Project were told that it could be seen as endorsing one side, which would contravene its charitable status. The Iona institute, which also has charitable status, insists on campaigning vociferously against repeal and refuses to stop. Your thoughts on this, please?

    The Iona Institute is funded to promote the place of religion and family in society, so they are doing what they are funded to do.

    The Project receives public funding to promote and develop contemporary Art.

    Two totally different scenarios.


  • Advertisement
  • #7482
    bruschi
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 4,149 Mod ✭✭✭✭bruschi


    lazygal wrote: »
    I would like anyone who's a No voter to explain how the eighth amendment has helped me during this or my two previous pregnancies.

    you didnt die.

    Seems to be the main thing the 8th helps with, even though it sometimes doesnt either.


  • #7483
    Dressing gown
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 212 ✭✭Dressing gown


    pearcider wrote: »
    People are coming up with all sorts of arguments but at the end it's all disengenuous. At the end of the day, the abortion rate in progressive countries like Sweden is 1 in 3 babies are killed. In Ireland it's 1 in 19. So by voting yes, you will be voting to murder thousands more Irish citizens per year. Grotesque.

    So the law defines murder and abortion isn’t murder.

    So medicine defines a foetus and an embryo and calling it a baby or a child does not make it a baby.

    Show an actual child a picture of a 12 week old foetus and ask them what it is. I’m fairly confident unless they’ve been told it is a baby they won’t say it is a baby or a child. They will say they don’t know what it is. Show them a picture of an actual baby or child and I’m fairly confident they will be able to tell you what it is. I tried this with my two year old, my four year old and my seven year old (n=3).


  • #7484
    AnneFrank
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,827 ✭✭✭AnneFrank


    DellyBelly wrote: »
    Still not sure what way I'll vote. I watched the debate on Claire Byrne on tv the other night and I have to say the lady from the IONA institute was very good on it and I was impressed with her.

    She's first class, i have so much admiration for her.
    She is bullied on every single show she go's on, simply because
    she values the traditional family structure, and now believes in defending the most vulnerable in our society, by which i mean babies.
    It's sad really, and people keep saying but no one can give a good argument for the no side, well it's about the right to life, this is where the two sides can never agree, the yes side think it's an idea of a baby or a cluster of cells.
    Where as people like me believe, it's life that needs protecting.
    I honestly believe no one can have their mind changed if they believe either one.


  • #7485
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    AnneFrank wrote: »
    She's first class, i have so much admiration for her.
    She is bullied on every single show she go's on, simply because
    she values the traditional family structure, and now believes in defending the most vulnerable in our society, by which i mean babies.
    It's sad really, and people keep saying but no one can give a good argument for the no side, well it's about the right to life, this is where the two sides can never agree, the yes side think it's an idea of a baby or a cluster of cells.
    Where as people like believe, it's life that needs protecting.
    I honestly believe no one can have their mind changed if they believe either one.

    :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:


  • #7486
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    I think the last poll in the IT is interesting. There is large cohort of yes vote that feel uncomfortable about the 12 week rule. Everyone is saying how vital it is to get undecided on their side, but I think more important is to persuade uneasy yes voters to vote and to vote yes. No campaign is targeting them with assertions that there are no actual limits and how with time the changes will be even more liberal.

    If yes side go ahead with more aggressive statements about denying women the right over their bodies and so on they could loose middle ground and middle ground is vital here. Brid Smith or Ruth Coppinger don't need to persuade those who agree with them and everyone else can't stand them (probably also half of those who agree with them). If they are kept away and more moderate politicians are wheeled out by yes side I think there is better chance of success. Thankfully the other side has Mattie McGrath and that will hopefully put off majority of voters with the iq above their shoe size. But this referendum is no way decided.


  • #7487
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »
    kylith wrote: »
    The Project gave permission for the mural to be painted. An anti-repeal group also asked if they could put up a mural there and were told yes, and invited to submit a design, which they did not do. The Project recognises the all art is inherently political in nature.

    Asking and receiving permission to paint on a wall is hardly the same thing as deciding to deface one of the most iconic parts of the Irish countryside.

    The mural was removed as Project were told that it could be seen as endorsing one side, which would contravene its charitable status. The Iona institute, which also has charitable status, insists on campaigning vociferously against repeal and refuses to stop. Your thoughts on this, please?

    The Iona Institute is funded to promote the place of religion and family in society, so they are doing what they are funded to do.

    The Project receives public funding to promote and develop contemporary Art.

    Two totally different scenarios.
    No it’s not. Both have charitable status. Charitable status precludes a group from political campaigning. The Iona institute refuses to abide by this.


  • #7488
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    This post has been deleted.


  • #7489
    lazygal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    AnneFrank wrote: »
    She's first class, i have so much admiration for her.
    She is bullied on every single show she go's on, simply because
    she values the traditional family structure, and now believes in defending the most vulnerable in our society, by which i mean babies.
    It's sad really, and people keep saying but no one can give a good argument for the no side, well it's about the right to life, this is where the two sides can never agree, the yes side think it's an idea of a baby or a cluster of cells.
    Where as people like believe, it's life that needs protecting.
    I honestly believe no one can have their mind changed if they believe either one.
    I like Maria am married with children and I'm also pregnant. Do I somehow not value 'traditional family structures' because I'm voting in favour of repeal? Should every woman be like Maria, homeschooling their children in a large detached home in Blackrock in Dublin while her husband has a lucrative career?


  • #7490
    tigger123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,593 ✭✭✭tigger123


    I see The Mountain People are supporting a No vote.


  • #7491
    wp_rathead
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,072 ✭✭✭✭wp_rathead


    Is Ben Bulben not a "protected site"?


  • Advertisement
  • #7492
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    antiskeptic wrote: »
    I for one, wouldn't want to be in the canteen of the Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists when Boylan and Monaghan meet.
    That seems unlikely given that Monaghan is no longer licenced to practice.


  • #7493
    Cantona's Collars
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,709 ✭✭✭✭Cantona's Collars


    wp_rathead wrote: »
    Is Ben Bulben not a "protected site"?

    Yes,they should be fined for littering and defacement.


  • #7494
    meeeeh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,624 ✭✭✭✭meeeeh


    kylith wrote: »
    No it’s not. Both have charitable status. Charitable status precludes a group from political campaigning. The Iona institute refuses to abide by this.

    I am not sure that is correct because that would mean Amnesty International could not campaign. Similarly different gay organizations couldn't campaign in marriage equality referendum.

    It is possible that Project Arts define themselves as non political organisation or something similar but I am pretty certain charities can be political.


  • #7495
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,811 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    AnneFrank wrote: »
    the yes side think it's an idea of a baby

    Mod: Perhaps you missed the bit about "No more subtle and petty sniping at other posters". Or perhaps you missed my direct warning here. Either way, you've been given more than enough leeway and the thread is better off without you.

    Don't post here again.

    Everybody else, stop replying to her.


  • #7496
    c68zapdsm5i1ru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,709 ✭✭✭c68zapdsm5i1ru


    kylith wrote: »
    No it’s not. Both have charitable status. Charitable status precludes a group from political campaigning. The Iona institute refuses to abide by this.

    But that's their remit.


  • #7497
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 1,159 ✭ [Deleted User]


    I think on a national level the Yes side needs to do more to counter the No lies. We're doing our best on the doors but there needs to be a concerted effort from above. There is an emphasis on compassion and on FFA, rape, etc, but people have genuine concerns about 12 weeks and they need to be answered properly. I have found in conversations with people that when they are given the reasoning behind the 12 weeks, the comparison to the rest of Europe, and the stats on abortion rates in other countries after legalisation, they tend to come round to Yes. We need to actively address this and not just talk about compassion.


  • #7498
    Triceratops Ballet
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,894 ✭✭✭Triceratops Ballet


    meeeeh wrote: »
    I think the last poll in the IT is interesting. There is large cohort of yes vote that feel uncomfortable about the 12 week rule. Everyone is saying how vital it is to get undecided on their side, but I think more important is to persuade uneasy yes voters to vote and to vote yes. No campaign is targeting them with assertions that there are no actual limits and how with time the changes will be even more liberal.

    If yes side go ahead with more aggressive statements about denying women the right over their bodies and so on they could loose middle ground and middle ground is vital here. Brid Smith or Ruth Coppinger don't need to persuade those who agree with them and everyone else can't stand them (probably also half of those who agree with them). If they are kept away and more moderate politicians are wheeled out by yes side I think there is better chance of success. Thankfully the other side has Mattie McGrath and that will hopefully put off majority of voters with the iq above their shoe size. But this referendum is no way decided.

    Slightly left of the point, but I think it's sad that women should have to be nicey nice when simply asking for the rights to bodily autonomy. It's something the men in our lives have by default but we have to to play nice to get it. Heaven forbid we should get angry about what we're being denied.

    I do agree though in terms of the campaign, flies honey etc


  • #7499
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »
    kylith wrote: »
    No it’s not. Both have charitable status. Charitable status precludes a group from political campaigning. The Iona institute refuses to abide by this.

    But that's their remit.
    Their remit is to promote religion. How are they promoting religion here?


  • #7500
    erica74
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,618 ✭✭✭erica74


    Flying Fox wrote: »
    I think on a national level the Yes side needs to do more to counter the No lies. We're doing our best on the doors but there needs to be a concerted effort from above. There is an emphasis on compassion and on FFA, rape, etc, but people have genuine concerns about 12 weeks and they need to be answered properly. I have found in conversations with people that when they are given the reasoning behind the 12 weeks, the comparison to the rest of Europe, and the stats on abortion rates in other countries after legalisation, they tend to come round to Yes. We need to actively address this and not just talk about compassion.

    I think the Together for Yes leaflets, delivered to houses this week, are very informative and educational.


  • Advertisement
  • #7501
    freshpopcorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,718 ✭✭✭✭freshpopcorn


    Regarding Maria Steen and Iona.
    I'll use my farther as an example. He's goes to mass and says prayer(to himself the odd time), shakes holy water on everyone, etc. The same man tough used birth control, he came around to homosexuality and even people changing their genders a bit once the person is old enough, he'd support euthanasia within reason.
    He's very unsure about this tough in some ways he'd support abortion but in other ways he wouldn't but Maria Steen has a way of picking up the a la carte Catholic especially in this from what I've seen.
    He's know idea who IONA are tough.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement