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

fxotoole wrote: »

I couldn’t disagree more. Their poster campaign has been full of scaremongering, mistruths, and whataboutterry.

The Yes poster campaign was on point.

Regardless of truth, there's no law on flat out lying.
And that's what the no side have done. There was only 1 true poster in their whole campaign, the "Unrestricted up to 12 weeks" one. But that wasn't having the desired impact.


We should have lied. A yes vote gives everyone 10k cash bonus.

Currently there's no law against it.

sightband wrote: »

agreed...although if yes wins, we're apparently moving on to assisted suicide, which by the way I'm all for but I'm getting pretty f*ckin sick of all these in your face 24/7 movements. lots of people here have little to be worrying about or doing in their daily lives. i was off sick yesterday and had two sets of campaigners from either side at my door during the afternoon, tons of them walking the streets.

Assisted suicide (or euthanasia, as it's correctly named) is a cause worthy of discussion..
But it is in no way related to this vote.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

dont have cards!

You don't have to have a polling card just ID

Deleted User wrote:

dont have cards!

If you are on the register you don't need cards.
Bring identification with you. Passport or Drivers licence

sightband wrote: »

lots of people here have little to be worrying about or doing in their daily lives.

God yeah, they should get back to sitting in front of their Playstations, Soap Operas, reality TV shows, pints, and discussing which football team is the best in the world. The really important stuff, rather than petty concerns like improving the rights and well being of their fellow humans and society as a whole.

Priorities people! Who cares about our constitution and what anyone does to it really. Just a piece of paper innit?

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I remember about a week before the marriage referendum The Journal did a poll asking all the TD's/Senators about how they were voting. Has this being done yer?
I know in my area one is No and two are Yes with one who probably won't answer.

Irish Times has an referendum tracker. It might be a bit outdated.


https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/referendum-tracker

Nettle Soup wrote: »

I wont get any canvassers where I live especially since I am the village atheist.

But I am curious - what do the knowledgeable Yes voters say to the No campaigners and how does it get received?

I'm voting yes, thanks bye

[Deleted User] wrote: »

thanks for reassurance, im in dcc area and simply impossible to get them on the phone so im fretting

That's where I am too I got them on the phone quite easily would you believe. I wouldn't worry at all

Did anyone get that green book, looking like it was government published?

Or have a picture of it?

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

If the no side wins, is it possible to expand on the law concerning abortion? For example, to allow medical professional treat a woman who has taken abortion pills without fear of jail time for anyone. I appreciate that invites a higher amount of people taking unknown drugs alone, but at least if they do and they go wrong they can get help.

Or can we soften the 'serious threat to life of the woman', to threat to the woman's life?

It's not ideal, but if Yes lose, at about hands completely tied for another 40 or so years until another referendum? Can we campaign to soften the laws?

I don't think any changes are possible while the 8th is in place. In terms of the threat to the woman's life, that's based on the X Case judgement, which said the threat must be real and substantial, and that it's a threat to life not health. Any changes to this would almost certainly be challenged and I can't see how the Government could argue they have scope on this issue.

And I don't think there's scope to change the prison terms either. The 8th says the unborn has an equal right to life as the rest of us, and also says the state is obliged to protect and vindicate that right. If my right to life is breached it's treated as a serious offence, and attracts a prison sentence. So it follows that the unborn's right to life is breached there should be a prison sentence too, and a substantial one to act as a deterrent. Last year, Brid Smith tried to replace the prison sentence with a €1 fine, and the Dáil voted against it, with the Attorney General saying "If the State is to fulfil its obligations under article 40.3.3, this prohibition must be backed up by an effective sanction that reflects the seriousness of the offence".

I agree the no side have had better propaganda and convincing speakers that have no problem lying - justified with the mindset to win at all costs.

I myself as a yes voter do not find the ‘my body my choice’ argument compelling enough when the other side tell you if you vote no babies are being slaughtered.

An argument I think the yes side is missing on capitalising on is that voting no is voting to perpetuate the shame culture in Ireland. The shame culture that enables Magdalene laundries and the shame culture that is destroying lives and families in Ireland every day. Once that seed is planted in a person it is very difficult to eradicate.

I’ve a true story for you. In the 90’s a Dublin college girl gets pregnant. Her parents are devout Catholics. She knows her parents love her, but owing to the shame culture Ireland she is terrified of telling them. Some of their best friends are staunch prolife campaigners and she fears she may be ostracised if they find out. So she decided to take care of it. She tells only her best friend. She gets a flight to England and has an abortion. She comes home and tells no one. But the shame eats her up. Years later she decides she has to tell her mother. Her mother is devastated, but not because she had an abortion, but because her daughter was so alone in dealing with it. She tells her she would have helped her with the baby. She is still prolife but she is pro her daughter first. Her daughter swears her to secrecy.

Now the problem in this scenario is not the abailability of an abortion, but the shame of having a baby outside wedlock, and of having an abortion.

The days of frowning on babies out of wedlock are over for the most part. But the shame associated in having an abortion lives on. That is why the no voters are happy for abortion to continue in England and they aren’t bothered about prosecuting girls and women. Because the women prosecute themselves by feeling shame. The state shames you by saying you are not allowed to do it here-we are superior to you and you can go over to the murderers and come back to saintly Ireland, our hands are clean.

Put an end to the shame culture in Ireland. Vote yes.

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

For example, to allow medical professional treat a woman who has taken abortion pills without fear of jail time for anyone.

This is one of the uncertain ones. Medical professional are obliged to treat anyone who presents as ill. It's not the case right now that a woman who presents at a hospital having taken abortion pills will be turned away. Any doctor who treats her cannot be charged with a crime.

The question to whether she may be charged is "probably". This is where the uncertainty aspect comes in.

Consider the nature of the 8th amendment. It doesn't just confer a right to life on the unborn. In fact, that's not really the bit that makes the 8th difficult. It's the bit after it that places an obligation on the state:

"guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right."

It's not just that we have to recognise a right to life of the unborn. The state must actively defend that right as fully as it possibly can. It cannot turn a blind eye, nor allow any situation to exist where a blind eye is turned.

This would include the requirement to prosecute any woman who has taken abortion pills, potentially obliging doctors to report any case where they suspect an abortion has been carried out.

This is the crux of the issue. It's not really that a right to life exists, it's the fact that the state must defend it, with all its might.

_Dara_ wrote: »

Out of curiosity, how are your families voting?

There are 7 adults in our house (8 if you include my daughter who's just about to move into her own place) and the score is 8-0 in favour of repeal.

seamus wrote: »

In reality, it was pure turnout: the first referendum had a 30% turnout, the second was 45%.

Yes, the 8th passed in 1983 with a poor 54% turnout. After the X case, we got 68% turnout to amend it.

If turnout is low this time, especially in Dublin, Cork and other urban areas, No will win by a small margin.