homerjay2005 wrote: » Wow. Go to the family court on any given day and you will see dozens of men fighting to get even 2 hours access petlr week for their child yet stilll expected to pay 3 or even 4 figures maintainance every month
Stonedpilot wrote: » Men should have a say of course; no man no pregnancy.In fact I would have thought feminists would want men involved in the lifes of their children from conception, be involved from the start rather than a silent bystander who doesnt get a mentio I just find it bizarre in this debate women arent encouraged to speak to their partners if a crisis pregnancy arises. Surely logic would dictate thats the first person to speak to. Im talking of couples in relationships which many crisis pregnancies occur in. Why not speak to your partner and come to a decision together?. In any abortion debate when is the father mentioned?. Never. Dont expect men to be mentioned in this 8th referendum however. The Yes side dont mention a baby and have yet to see a Yes campaign poster even mention abortion just Vote yes.To what exactly?. Most dont know the specifics at all and Yes want it that way. Fathers and babies being ignored totally in all this. If people dont even mention a baby involved good luck the maligned ignored father getting a word in edgeways.
bilbot79 wrote: » Wasn't there some court case where a woman impregnated herself with a man's sperm (released externally...) he took her to court saying 'she did this without my permission etc' and the judge ruled that he had 'gifted' her the sperm this had no rights over what she did with it next.... Same as here
Triceratops Ballet wrote: » of course women in crisis pregnancies should talk to their partners if they have one, who is advocating not doing this? The 8th amendment is about more than abortion and having posters that only address the issue of abortion is ignoring that. The 8th amendment could be repealed without ever introducing abortion to Ireland.
Stonedpilot wrote: » You think the 8th could be repealed without abortion?. Have yet to here anyone in the yes camp mention a father, or the woman discussing keeping a child, the woman asking for support to raise a child, the responsibility of both parents and mans right to his child.
Stonedpilot wrote: You think the 8th could be repealed without abortion?.
Stonedpilot wrote: Many on the yes side have said a woman in a crisis pregnancy should contact her gp first not her partner. Have yet to here anyone in the yes camp mention a father, or the woman discussing keeping a child, the woman asking for support to raise a child, the responsibility of both parents and mans right to his child. Not surprising from yes camp given its run by zealous unhinged feminist types who have made misandry a personal hobby.
Stonedpilot wrote: » You think the 8th could be repealed without abortion?.
Many on the yes side have said a woman in a crisis pregnancy should contact her gp first not her partner.
Have yet to here anyone in the yes camp mention a father, or the woman discussing keeping a child, the woman asking for support to raise a child, the responsibility of both parents and mans right to his child.
Stonedpilot wrote: » You think the 8th could be repealed without abortion?. Many on the yes side have said a woman in a crisis pregnancy should contact her gp first not her partner. Have yet to here anyone in the yes camp mention a father, or the woman discussing keeping a child, the woman asking for support to raise a child, the responsibility of both parents and mans right to his child.Not surprising from yes camp given its run by zealous unhinged feminist types who have made misandry a personal hobby.
Stonedpilot wrote: » You think the 8th could be repealed without abortion?. Many on the yes side have said a woman in a crisis pregnancy should contact her gp first not her partner. Have yet to here anyone in the yes camp mention a father, or the woman discussing keeping a child, the woman asking for support to raise a child, the responsibility of both parents and mans right to his child. Not surprising from yes camp given its run by zealous unhinged feminist types who have made misandry a personal hobby.
OldNotWIse wrote: » But if she decides to keep it, she will force you to pay maintenance.
optogirl wrote: » Yes, Mothers & Fathers, women & men, girls & boys are affected by the 8th. That's why there are groups such as lads for choice, grandfathers for yes, grandparents for yes, parents for choice etc etc etc. That's why many fathers in the TFMR group have shared their stories. It is you who is ignoring all of these men.
Triceratops Ballet wrote: » Of course it could, the 8th does not actually refer to abortion at all. It's a statement of rights. Why would you think it couldn't be? Can you point me to where you've see ppl on the yes side saying contact your gp ahead of your partner? As for the obligatory dig at feminists, you do know plenty of men support a repeal right, are they misandrists too?
Stonedpilot wrote: » Claire Daly poster girl of the unhinged feminist fruitcakes numerous times has said 'It's a woman's choice to make on her own with her Dr'. Few have said it. Not gonna crawl through youtube clips to prove a point. As for the men, they possibly don't like men. I'm not sure ,you'd have to ask them personally. I speak for no one but myself SP on this.If they support unrestricted abortion they don't like babies I know that much.
SusieBlue wrote: » I love babies so much that I believe they should only be brought into the world if they will be cherished and adored and loved and looked after. I don't understand the logic of forcing the birth of a child into awful circumstances, just to punish the mother. I don't see how anyone can be pro-life or LoveBoth if they don't give any consideration to the circumstances the child will be born into. Having a child to resign it to a life of instability, to be dragged up by someone who doesn't care about him/her isn't good enough.
SusieBlue wrote: » I'm getting treatment for abnormal cell changes in my cervix to stop them from developing into cervical cancer. Before each appointment I have to do a pregnancy test, and if it comes back positive, they won't help me. They won't treat me. They will make me gamble my life and hope that the cells haven't progressed to cancer by the time I give birth in 9 months. I'm only 27. This is unacceptable. I shouldn't have to be dying to avail of medical treatment. Can you imagine going into hospital, as a man, with a minor infection, and them sitting you on a chair and telling you they'll start treating you when the situation becomes critical and you're dying? Would you think thats ok?
Stonedpilot wrote: » Ah so you can predict the future now eh. How does anyone know someone else's circumstances are instable, and not good enough? certainly someone else's FUTURE circumstance. No one does don't be silly. Hardly cherishing to a baby to crush him/her in the womb and rip it out limb by limb in a second trimester abortion. Being poor is better than being ripped limb from limb in my view!. Weak argument.
AlmightyCushion wrote: » I was already in favour of repealing the 8th but never knew about situations like. I can understand how someone could be against abortions is situations where the woman and foetus are fine but the woman doesn't want the baby. But I can't wrap my head around being in favour of keeping the 8th amendment when it means situations like this will continue to happen. It's just horrible.
SusieBlue wrote: » Situations like mine don't get any air time and both campaigns are at fault here - the No side focus on the "social abortions" and the Yes side tend to discuss the hard cases of FFA and rape. There's a whole host of women just like me stuck in the middle forgotten about. I honestly don't know what I'd do if I found out I was pregnant right now, I'm desperate to have a baby, it was in the pipeline before I became unwell but I don't know how I could risk leaving my baby without a mother and my boyfriend without a partner. Its a huge risk but one only I and my boyfriend can take.
Calhoun wrote: » As for the feminist angle, this is the little gem that keeps on giving. I think it points exactly to how feminists feel about men's rights to vote on this one. Men need to know their place and take that into account when voting. Feminists would rather you not have a vote or an opinion.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BUNC0pp87c
KrustyUCC wrote: » This little beauty is doing the rounds on Facebook and was shared by a friend of mine A comment I just seen written by a man about repeal absolutely love he's way of thinking so have to share..... they are not my words people..... If the referendum fails , I propose that all the women in Ireland petition for a referendum on men’s reproduction rights . I propose all males should have vasectomys once they’ve reached puberty and that it would be illegal for a man to have live sperm without a woman’s consent . The vasectomy could only be reversed when their wife/partner decides she wants children. This would remove the need for abortions plus it would save women from the side effects of the pill ,coil and other chemical based reproduction suppressants. It might give the government some balls ! and I’d certainly slap mine on the table for the first snip. Let’s put the proverbial ball in the hands of women and see how us men folk like it when we don’t get to decide what to do with our bodies. Can I get an “Amen!” from the Bible bashers and big “Whopp!” from the pro-lifers I’ve solved your problem ��. I think it’s about time we realized no women ever got pregnant on her own . So if we’re not going to let women decide want they can do with their bodies then I think men should get a taste of that too it’s only fair .
Calhoun wrote: » I love it as it's been posted from the perspective that man said it so as not to seem as condescending as it is. Then all the back slapping in the comments is excellent. Really brings it home that the male vote is seen with contempt, and men need to be womansplained into it as we can't be trusted ourselves. Lines up nicely with the man hating feminist theme.
It might give the government some balls ! and I’d certainly slap mine on the table for the first snip.
iptba wrote: » I find it difficult to believe that a man wrote this, though I suppose anything is possible: If that's their position, no one is stopping them doing it now. That's one of the reasons why I find it difficult to believe. Though perhaps they said it simply to score brownie points with women.
SusieBlue wrote: » I never made any assumptions about predicting the future. If a woman already has 3 kids and is living hand to mouth in a state of poverty, she can't afford another one. Its not a good situation to bring another child in. Especially if the woman doesn't want to. Of course there are those who would be delighted to find themselves pregnant in such circumstances & that's fine - those people should have all the support and help in the world. But it doesn't justify taking the choice away from someone else. You are being disingenuous, we are looking at a 12 week limit. Two pills and a heavy period, no need for any ripping. Mid term and late term abortions are done in tragic circumstances for wanted babies, due to FFA and other such reasons. These are usually inductions, a baby is born as if it were full term. No dismembering. The parents will want to bury their child. It isn't a weak argument. I care more about born people (women, men and their children) than potential ones.
end of the road wrote: » the no voters also care about babies. not only do we wish for them to be born into the best, but we want to uphold their right to life also. nobody is forcing the birth of a child into awful circumstances, just to punish the mother or for any reason. proposals have been put forward to deal with babies born into aweful circumstances. the yes side have simply proposed abortion on demand. that is not good enough. i agree that having a child to resign it to a life of instability and to be dragged up by someone who doesn't care about him or her isn't good enough, but neither is abortion on demand. we can do better, ireland deserves better. #loveboth. because it's the only option to stop abortion on demand because of the government's proposals. i'm not voting to keep the 8th because i think it's a fantastic act, it's not. i'm voting to keep it because it's the only way of upholding the unborn's right to life now. had the government put forward legislation for genuine cases and had they copperfascened it and the unborn's right to life in some way that it could not be changed without referendum, then i'd be voting yes to repeal the 8th. but that's not what has been proposed, and regretibly i will not be in a position to vote yes. being poor is most certainly not a reason to end a life in the womb. the right to life does justify the removal of the choice to want to end it. none of us would want to have our lives ended by others exercising their "choice" we can do better then allowing the ending of a life as a choice. we are better then this.
SusieBlue wrote: » What support do you propose for these women in poor, underprivileged circumstances? You previously gave the advice of ‘work more hours’ and ‘contact a charity.’ We both know these are not suitable long term or appropriate options for a single woman with a 2 kids, so please, how can we do better? What can we do for her? What’s your advice to her?
end of the road wrote: » being poor is most certainly not a reason to end a life in the womb. the right to life does justify the removal of the choice to want to end it. none of us would want to have our lives ended by others exercising their "choice" we can do better then allowing the ending of a life as a choice. we are better then this.
