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

Walter Bishop · 17-05-2018 04:31PM

Well at least the women were let make the tae and sandwiches.

Mrhuth · 17-05-2018 04:32PM

....... wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/john-waters-eamon-dunphy-4018829-May2018/

LOL - John Waters not able to hold it together.

Yeah and the idiot interviewing him said I'll vote no as well. Facepalm.

gmisk · 17-05-2018 04:42PM

wexie wrote: »

I really don't think any of us care too much about the abortion campaign in Argentina nor how their funding is of particular relevance to any of us here.

Having said that if they want some "help" on the No to choice side please take John Waters and John mc guirk!

wexie · 17-05-2018 04:44PM

gmisk wrote: »

Having said that if they want some "help" on the No to choice side please take John Waters and John mc guirk!

No no, we need them for a little while longer, they're far too valuable to the yes side

ohnonotgmail · 17-05-2018 04:45PM

antiskeptic wrote: »

Anyone know if any country in the world with where abortion has been legalized had a national vote on the introduction of it?

It's just this "let's catch up with our enlightened neighbours" line would ring a little hollow if folk in these enlightened countries didn't actually get a chance to vote on the subject

We need to have a vote because other countries were not stupid enough to put something like the 8th in a written constitution, assuming they even have such a thing. they were happy to let legislators legislate. We should do the same.

circadian · 17-05-2018 04:48PM

This is playing out exactly like an Info Wars surprise interview.

lobbylad · 17-05-2018 04:49PM

Apologies if this is the wrong forum.

My colleague here just found out she is listed (in error) on the electoral register as British since 2011 and thus cannot vote next week. She doesn't remember ever registering in 2011, and the council stated that perhaps they got her details from a door to door Council rep (do they Council have these?). They also claim to no longer have any copies of forms she would have completed back in 2011.

She had sent in the correct forms prior to the recent deadline, not being able to find her name on the checkthregister.ie site.

She also called the council multiple times before the deadline to verify that they had received her form and that she was now registered. The Council told her to call back after the 15th May to verify she was now registered. Oddly, this is 7 days after the deadline, so is too late to take any action.

Today, the council are now claiming that she is not listed to vote, and this cannot be amended so close to the referendum.

They also claim, that they sent out a letter asking her to confirm her citizenship some weeks ago (they claim everyone listed as "Dail Only" was sent such a letter). She never received it, and has always lived at the same address.

Why would the Council ask every British citizen if they had changed their citizenship before every referendum? It seems a bit odd to me.

They now tell her that as she didn't respond to the letter she will remain listed as a British citizen and will not be eligible to vote.

Is there anything she can do? (Just as a note, as most of the calls to the Council were made on a work phone, we have call recordings).

Is it too late?

NuMarvel · 17-05-2018 04:50PM

gmisk wrote: »

Do you even follow politics in Ireland

Have you seen the polls?
The repeal side has a clear lead currently, but they arent taking anything for granted, knocking on doors, leaflets etc are being widely distributed.

Walter Bishop wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/irish-times-poll-repeal-has-large-but-reduced-lead-1.3497830

Don't bother guys. That poster is clearly just trying to get a rise. Ignore and move on. With only a week left, there are better uses of our time.

PressRun · 17-05-2018 04:52PM

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Laughable. I love his bit about "I thought you were supporting us!" or whatever. He only wants to have discussions with people who fully support and agree with his position, otherwise he throws a tantrum. Very telling. These people don't want to be asked any hard questions because they offer no answers or solutions.

Also, the "we’re talking about wholesale slaughter, potentially up to the moment of birth and possibly even past it" bit. Absolute head banger stuff.

wexie · 17-05-2018 04:54PM

PressRun wrote: »

Also, the "we’re talking about wholesale slaughter, potentially up to the moment of birth and possibly even past it" bit. Absolute head banger stuff.

Oh...I hadn't realised we were voting on legalising infanticide?

May have to rethink my position.

What an assclown*

*Yes yes, terribly disrespectful word, I know and intended it as such

eric hoone · 17-05-2018 04:55PM

Kurtosis wrote: »

Pregnancies may be terminated after 12 weeks in certain circumstances. Once the point of viability is reached, a termination of pregnancy means an early delivery.

Hope miss Y's kid is healthy after 26 week delivery. Would be disappointing to see anything like that crop up again after referendum

gmisk · 17-05-2018 04:59PM

lobbylad wrote: »

Apologies if this is the wrong forum.

My colleague here just found out she is listed (in error) on the electoral register as British since 2011 and thus cannot vote next week. She doesn't remember ever registering in 2011, and the council stated that perhaps they got her details from a door to door Council rep (do they Council have these?). They also claim to no longer have any copies of forms she would have completed back in 2011.

She had sent in the correct forms prior to the recent deadline, not being able to find her name on the checkthregister.ie site.

She also called the council multiple times before the deadline to verify that they had received her form and that she was now registered. The Council told her to call back after the 15th May to verify she was now registered. Oddly, this is 7 days after the deadline, so is too late to take any action.

Today, the council are now claiming that she is not listed to vote, and this cannot be amended so close to the referendum.

They also claim, that they sent out a letter asking her to confirm her citizenship some weeks ago (they claim everyone listed as "Dail Only" was sent such a letter). She never received it, and has always lived at the same address.

Why would the Council ask every British citizen if they had changed their citizenship before every referendum? It seems a bit odd to me.

They now tell her that as she didn't respond to the letter she will remain listed as a British citizen and will not be eligible to vote.

Is there anything she can do? (Just as a note, as most of the calls to the Council were made on a work phone, we have call recordings).

Is it too late?

Yikes I dont know when it comes to a situation like that.
Maybe try citizens information?
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government_in_ireland/elections_and_referenda/voting/registering_to_vote.html

Pugzilla · 17-05-2018 05:00PM

One advantages for a yes win would be a big reduction in Trisomy 21 cases and other genetic disorders. Will take some strain off the health and education services down the line.

SusieBlue · 17-05-2018 05:03PM

Pugzilla wrote: »

One advantages for a yes win would be a big reduction in Trisomy 21 cases and other genetic disorders. Will take some strain off the health and education services down the line.

There are groups on the No side who view this to be a terrible thing and are promoting the idea that the Yes side are trying to make these conditions "extinct", as if these conditions are something we should all desire and want for our children.

*not saying there is anything wrong or bad about children and people with such conditions but it certainly isn't something we all wish for when thinking about having children

January · 17-05-2018 05:05PM

Pugzilla wrote: »

One advantages for a yes win would be a big reduction in Trisomy 21 cases and other genetic disorders. Will take some strain off the health and education services down the line.

Abortion won't be available for cases of disability.

17-05-2018 05:08PM

meeeeh wrote: »

You mean Clare Daly? Anyway she is right for early term miscarriages and a lot of women don't even realize they having a miscarriage, they think it's the period. Bleeding can be worse and it can go wrong but that's how it looks. To me it certainly did't feel like I was loosing a baby and it was very much a wanted pregnancy.

Neyite wrote: »

She's right. The vast majority are before 12 weeks and are just like a heavy clotty, more painful period and later weeks (8-12) it's possible to sometimes feel passing the embryo. Before that, you won't feel it expelling from your body as it's too small. It
usually slips out when you go to the toilet and is around the u-bend before you realise it's out.

I know because I've had a few of them. Maybe she also is speaking from experience like I am?

Where it is different from a period is that the emotional side is different. You are losing a pregnancy which if wanted, can be a very sad time. Your hopes and dreams that you had since the pregnancy test are literally dripping away.

But my losses are in no way comparable with women who have a second trimester loss, or full term loss. Miscarriage is unfortunately very common. It's thought that 20% at least of pregnancies end in natural miscarriage. So you'll be hard pressed to find a woman who hasn't experienced one if they intended to have children.

Interesting.
I've had two 1st trimester miscarriages. one like a heavy period, the other with agonising cramps, and much heavier blood loss.
My 2nd trimester miscarriage, strangely enough, was less painful than the severe 1st trimester one. Maybe because I was bleeding for 2 weeks, before I eventually lost my much wanted baby? I don't know.

I do know all three experiences were very different, though.

SusieBlue wrote: »

.

I was only watching an episode of One Born Every Minute last week where the mum had a baby with an FFA.
She was treated with compassion, understanding, and was given excellent care. She gave birth naturally and spent time with her baby before he passed away.
She and her son were treated with dignity and love.
I only wish we treated our own women the same here.

??
My sisters friend was diagnosed with a FFA. She also was treated with compassion and care, and gave birth naturally - in Donegal. Letterkenny General Hospital, to be precise.

Igotadose wrote: »

Savita Halappanavar died. The women on this thread that talk about delayed cancer treatment nearly died. The one on 'in her shoes' talking about having to move to Australia in order to continue her treatment for cystic fibrosis, would have been gravely ill at best if not dead. The one in the Irish Times article who also got sepsis like Savita H., nearly died.

I don't want anyone to die either. The eighth increases the probability that innocent women will die, because they might be pregnant. It *may* cause an uptick in abortions in Ireland. May. And, even if it stays, the number of abortions will stay the same, as women will go to England.

The story you gave of your friend whose partner aborted without his agreement, obviously wasn't prevented by the 8th amendment. All it did (assuming this was someone in Ireland - direct question, was it?) was force them to go abroad.

It took place in London, in 1980.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Given I believe in the right to life too, your statement here is false on it's very face. The only ACTUAL difference between someone like you, and someone like me is actually WHEN and WHY we think that right comes into play.

So yea, lets pocket the implications that Pro Choice people like myself do not believe in the right to life shall we?

We do not legislate for "wishes". We legislate for "rights". So let's leave wishes out of it. The problem here is you are not clear what "rights" you think the father does or should have, or indeed why you believe he does or should have them.

No the reality is that you are declaring the existence of "people" where there is, in fact, no people.

You are not "arguing" that at all, you are asserting it, which is the problem. You are not suggesting why he should have any such right. If you plant a seed on my land you do not have any rights over the tree that grows either. Nor should you. If you think a father should have such a right, I am all ears as to WHY you think so.

What makes you think nothing will change if I vote "No".
There is absolutely nothing to stop any Government from holding another referendum. Hint: Nice, and Lisbon.

My point exactly! Nor should it!

Then take that up with people who HAVE no sympathy for them. I am here discussing what peoples rights should and should not be. If they are disenfranchised by that then I certainly have sympathy for them. But I do not let mere sympathy get in the way of reason and law. Nor should I.

More often than you know, and probably more often than most people you know. But I still stand by my words. And you have not shown me any reason I should not stand by them. You are basically trying a very weak appeal to emotion here, on the crass and false assumption I have never felt those emotions or witnessed them.

You are not OBLIGED to offer any proof for anything really. But it should be noted and highlighted when you have not, can not, or will not do so. Because this is, after all, a debate and discussion. And if you can only assert and soap box your nonsense and then refuse to back up or substantiate it in ANY way..... then a flag should be planted firmly in that fact for all to see.

Why not? If the definition of X is Y and Z, then something without Y and Z is simply not X. This is basic linguistic logic. Sentience is the very core of what makes us a "person", the very core of what "humanity" means in every sense outside the realm of biological taxonomy. If something does not meet the very definitions of a word, then you can not label it with that word and come out looking sane.

What attributes do YOU think constitute the definition of "Humanity" then?

Great. Nor do I. I have had the good fortune to meet two adults in my life time who simply can not feel pain due to a relatively rare condition. I do not consider them less human because they feel no pain. In fact I am confused why you even bring Pain into it when I did not.

That is not a problem for me. A coma patient HAS the faculty of consciousness. Maybe it is not working, it is damaged, it is off line.... but it is THERE.

A 12/16 week old fetus however simply does not have it. So this is simply not comparable with a coma patient in terms of affording one rights and the other not.

STILL an entity with the faculty of sentience. Are you seeing a pattern in my answers yet? All the issues you listed having with aspects of IVF, Stem Cell research, termination of a fetus at 10 months are all the same thing........ and all similarly without substance.

And something "feeling like" does not make it so. You are basing too many arguments on what things FEEL like, and almost none based on any arguments, evidence, data or reasoning. We can not legislate for feelings or even imagination. Nor should we.

Fair enough. I'll rephrase that to "Believing in the right to life from conception."

I have to go, I've spent way too much time on this thread today.
It is clear that we have very different outlooks on what constitutes life.

To me, life begins at conception. It may be a simple argument, but the reality is, left alone, that life takes approx. 9 months before it is born. Left without intervention, it is born a functioning baby. In that context, abortion prevents that baby being born.

The point at which sentience can be proven, or the ability to feel pain, has no impact on the very simple fact that abortion prevents a baby being born.
From that viewpoint, it doesn't matter whether the abortion takes place at 8 weeks, or 12 weeks - the baby will be born without an abortion taking place, and will not, when an abortion does take place. From that viewpoint then - and I'm not trying to prove it scientifically, btw, abortion removes life. Full stop.

You are free to disagree with my argument, just as I am free to disagree with your definitions. Clearly you consider the point at which sentience can be proved is relevant. I do not. I don't believe sentience should be an issue at all. The fact that sentience will develop is enough for me.

It is very clear that we are both committed to voting differently in the referendum - and that is exactly as it should be.
One person, one vote. No need to prove to anyone what you believe - unless you are actively campaigning for a vote in either direction. Otherwise, the only obligation on any of us is to vote according to our conscience to the best of our ability. Discussion boards will never change that. Neither will you, or I.

On the issue of Fathers rights, I cannot understand the reasoning behind a father having rights and responsibilities for a child after birth, yet none beforehand.

Why should that be?
I think any parent - in the absence of a real threat to the life of the Mother - should have the same rights over a baby before birth as after it.
It took two people to create that baby - why does only one have rights?
It's not as if the father suddenly changes into someone else after the birth. It's not as if he isn't expected to care for his partner and child before birth, but he should have no legal rights? Sounds like discrimination to me, tbh.

eric hoone · 17-05-2018 05:09PM

Pugzilla wrote: »

One advantages for a yes win would be a big reduction in Trisomy 21 cases and other genetic disorders. Will take some strain off the health and education services down the line.

IF that happens with Downs it will be down to wider availability of non-invasive screening techniques, not whether abortion is available in Ireland

SusieBlue · 17-05-2018 05:13PM

Deleted User wrote: »

My sisters friend was diagnosed with a FFA. She also was treated with compassion and care, and gave birth naturally - in Donegal. Letterkenny General Hospital, to be precise.

What I said was in response to someone who claimed that in the UK they force couples with FFA to have abortions as soon as the FFA was diagnosed because they have no interest or time for people in that situation.

My point was that isn't correct, firstly because its a ridiculous statement, and secondly because I had seen a full term woman with an FFA baby treated with compassion and care on OBEM.

I have no doubt women here are treated to compassion and care when they give birth to their full term FFA babies.
Its just a shame that women who want to be induced early in the pregnancy aren't treated with the same dignity.

Mr. CooL ICE · 17-05-2018 05:28PM

Rereg troll banned and thread cleaned up, in case anybody is missing their posts

don corleone · 17-05-2018 05:41PM

Is there any voters in here from the yes side that have a problem with abortion up to 12 weeks when the mother and baby are perfectly healthy but the mother just doesnt want a baby at that particular time.
I have a problem with this. but I am voting yes as I believe all of the other positives of repealing far outweigh this issue. Still, its an issue for me nonetheless. Wondering if anyone feels the same.

freshpopcorn · 17-05-2018 05:41PM

Quick question guys, When does the media black out begin next Thursday?

Mrhuth · 17-05-2018 05:45PM

While I wish the yes would win, I don't think we have a chance. The insane number of no posters and ads everywhere you go. Going to shop 5 minutes from my house, I see no everywhere. Last week in my town there were yes posters along with the no posters. This week the yes posters have disappeared somewhere yet the no ones remain on lamp posts. It's **** knowing that Ireland is still so backwards thinking and literally the only country in Europe which bans abortions. Sad.

iamwhoiam · 17-05-2018 05:46PM

don corleone wrote: »

Is there any voters in here from the yes side that have a problem with abortion up to 12 weeks when the mother and baby are perfectly healthy but the mother just doesnt want a baby at that particular time.
I have a problem with this. but I am voting yes as I believe all of the other positives of repealing far outweigh this issue. Still, its an issue for me nonetheless. Wondering if anyone feels the same.

Yes . I have misgivings about the unrestricted 12 week abortion . But am voting Yes because I have to see the bigger picture . I could not vote No if it meant one woman health or well being was compromised . I could not vote No because women out there are depending on this repeal so they can be safe

And if I voted No it would not stop abortion happening anyway so I would be voting in vain anyway

wexie · 17-05-2018 05:46PM

don corleone wrote: »

Is there any voters in here from the yes side that have a problem with abortion up to 12 weeks when the mother and baby are perfectly healthy but the mother just doesnt want a baby at that particular time.
I have a problem with this. but I am voting yes as I believe all of the other positives of repealing far outweigh this issue. Still, its an issue for me nonetheless. Wondering if anyone feels the same.

Yes...no...maybe

It's a toughy, if she wants an abortion because the pregnancy interferes with her holiday plans (an example used before) then I don't think it's really a good enough reason. Although you could argue (as has been done before) she probably wouldn't make a great parent.

If she wants an abortion so she can finish college I'd find it a lot more palatable

PopePalpatine · 17-05-2018 05:46PM

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Quick question guys, When does the media black out begin next Thursday?

The BAI lists it as 2pm.

Mrhuth · 17-05-2018 05:47PM

What's alarming as well is that yes voters are dropping and no voters are increasing at the same time giving it a massive boost. I really, really wish that it's not going to be the case of American election and Brexit.

joe40 · 17-05-2018 05:48PM

If this referendum fails to pass I will despair at my fellow Irish people.
Not so much the people that have strong pro life views and possibly strong religious faith. I disagree with their opinion but can respect it is genuinely held.

It is the undecideds, the soft NO's that are more disappointing.
The people that didn't research the issue. Listened to the scaremongering soundbites.
This thread has been a wealth of information, with excellent, heartfelt contributions from people with real world experiences of this issue.
The only argument from NO side is that life begins at conception, therefore cannot be taken in any situation.
If that is your outlook, fine a NO vote is probably your thing.
If however you can see nuance, not this absolutist view, then there is no reason not to vote yes.
We have abortion, it is just been outsourced. This is primarily a health care issue.

Are there any other arguments from no side. Please not the slippery slope one, that makes no sense.

fxotoole · 17-05-2018 05:49PM

Mrhuth wrote: »

While I wish the yes would win, I don't think we have a chance. The insane number of no posters and ads everywhere you go. Going to shop 5 minutes from my house, I see no everywhere. Last week in my town there were yes posters along with the no posters. This week the yes posters have disappeared somewhere yet the no ones remain on lamp posts. It's **** knowing that Ireland is still so backwards thinking and literally the only country in Europe which bans abortions. Sad.

The number of posters up is not indicative of the mood of the country. The No side are obviously spamming every signpost they see with posters in a last ditch effort to try to get the message out. But that doesn't mean that the majority of voters are in the No camp. It just means the No camp have more posters up.

The latest polls show Yes leading by a slight margin.

Mrhuth · 17-05-2018 05:51PM

fxotoole wrote: »

The number of posters up is not indicative of the mood of the country. The No side are obviously spamming every signpost they see with multiple posts in a last ditch effort to try to get the message out. But that doesn't mean that the majority of voters are in the No camp. It just means the No camp have more posters up.

The latest polls show Yes leading by a slight margin.

People are very easily brainwashed unfortunately.

Mrhuth · 17-05-2018 05:52PM

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Yes . I have misgivings about the unrestricted 12 week abortion . But am voting Yes because I have to see the bigger picture . I could not vote No if it meant one woman health or well being was compromised . I could not vote No because women out there are depending on this repeal so they can be safe

And if I voted No it would not stop abortion happening anyway so I would be voting in vain anyway

So you would rather someone have a child who doesn't want it and the child ends up being abused and resorting to crime when growing up?

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

Comments