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

Igotadose · 18-05-2018 12:28PM

Just saw an Ad on independent.ie from hateboth showing a kid with DS saying "don't repeal me". No gutter too low for No. Must be buying ads directly now. Will now use ghostery browser to avoid this garbage

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 18-05-2018 12:32PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Is there anywhere outside of Dublin City centre selling the togetherforyes stickers? I order a few bits from the website the other day but it'll probably be next week before I see them

Get on to your local together for yes group on Facebook, there are pro repeal businesses that stock them around the place, they'll hopefully be able to point you in the right direction.

SusieBlue · 18-05-2018 12:33PM

Just her wrote: »

Well they could have talked to her of abortion, termination, ending the pregnancy. All the terms people like to use to make it seem ok. I can definitely understand how she got the wrong end of the stick completely when people don't like/aren't allowed to call it for what it is.

It is okay.
It being a choice you wouldn't make doesn't mean its not ok.
Women don't need your approval on what is and isn't okay when making decisions on their on healthcare, for their own lives.

Billy86 · 18-05-2018 12:34PM

Water John wrote: »

Ireland is one of the safest places for a woman to be give birth. This is facilitated by obstetricians, 80% of whom say, the 8th should be repealed.

I'm sure it's been said to yo ua million times by now but your username is a bit of a mind fu** in this thread!

whisky_galore · 18-05-2018 12:34PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

Nope, I'm all about choice

He wants to vote Yes anyway, he is very passionate about repealing.

But if he was voting No, then yes, I would be reconsidering my relationship.

Which would also be my choice.

All about choice so long as it agrees with your choice?

neonsofa · 18-05-2018 12:36PM

Dressing gown wrote: »

No Savitas father supports the yes campaign and approved use of her image in the campaign. However the yes campaign chose not to.

https://evoke.ie/2018/04/11/news/irish-news/savitas-father-backs-yes-campaign

There has been some new yes posters put up around my area in just the last couple of days with picture of Savita on them. Hadn't seen any prior to now. Don't think it was together for Yes though.

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 18-05-2018 12:37PM

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

The problem is, that is likely to work. The reason their lies and scaremongering is their strategy is they realize something I only started to realize later in the campaign. They do not need to win this vote on public opinion. They need to win it on public TURNOUT.

So their posters are not aimed at changing minds or influencing decisions. They are primarily targeted at motivating "no" voters to actually get up and go vote.

And unfortunately my "on the ground" feeling directly and anecdotally from what is being reported back to me, is this is working. The "no" voters I am meeting or hearing about are motivated. They YES voters are more of the "Ah yes, change would be good, nice to see people like you working on that" mentality of "Oh good, someone somewhere is working on that" thinking.

We have won this vote on public opinion I think. My prediction/fear is we are going to lose it next week on public turnout.

People who genuinely care about this issue will do everything they can to get to the polling station. People who can't be bothered because it's raining/the polling station means getting off the bus a stop early/they're tired/ they'd have to drag the kids down with them etc really aren't that engaged or interested regardless of what they might tell canvassers or spout off in the pub.

djPSB · 18-05-2018 12:40PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

I completely disagree.
In my own personal situation, I'm having treatment to prevent cancer, and should I get pregnant unintentionally, that treatment would stop.
Logically, if my boyfriend was voting No, we can presume he wouldn't want me to seek a termination to continue treatment.
He would want me to continue the pregnancy and have the baby, despite the massive risk of developing cancer.
I couldn't be with someone who wouldn't even entertain the idea of going to the UK.
I'd want us to discuss it and reach a mutual choice, but I would absolutely want a termination to be considered.

So far, I don't know what I'd actually do if this was to happen.
I'd love a baby but I don't think I could go through a pregnancy with the heavy burden of cancer on it, and the worry of potentially leaving a baby without a mum.

My boyfriend on the other hand, has said he'd have me booked on the first flight to Liverpool, because even though he also really wants a baby, it wouldn't be worth me getting ill or dying.
He said we could get over the loss of a pregnancy, but not the loss of me.

So I do think its fundamentally important that partners agree on issues such as these. Especially when one partners opinion could limit the healthcare the other receives.

There are so many elements to it that it is possible that a couple may not agree on all aspects.

That's one scenario as outlined above.

What if a couple get pregnant with a perfectly healthy baby and both parents are perfectly healthy. But the mother wants to abort and the father does not agree?

SusieBlue · 18-05-2018 12:40PM

whisky_galore wrote: »

All about choice so long as it agrees with your choice?

No, so long as he is willing to have an open discussion with ALL choices on the table should I become pregnant while still receiving treatment to prevent cancer.
If he was voting No there would be no choice, he would want me to forego treatment in favour of carrying the pregnancy.

If he is open to CHOICE, we can weigh up the situation and come to a decision together. If he was voting No there would be no choice.

Duh.

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 18-05-2018 12:40PM

neonsofa wrote: »

There has been some new yes posters put up around my area in just the last couple of days with picture of Savita on them. Hadn't seen any prior to now. Don't think it was together for Yes though.

Savita's husband has asked that his late wife not be brought into debate about the amendment. Yes voters should respect that, but they don't.

SusieBlue · 18-05-2018 12:42PM

djPSB wrote: »

There are so many elements to it that it is possible that a couple may not agree on all aspects.

That's one scenario as outlined above.

What if a couple get pregnant with a perfectly healthy baby and both parents are perfectly healthy. But the mother wants to abort and the father does not agree?

I think that both parties should try to reach a decision they are happy with, but if not, without question, the woman should have the deciding vote.

She has to carry the pregnancy and give birth and statistically she'll be doing the lions share of childcare. She should get the deciding vote, absolutely.

....... · 18-05-2018 12:42PM

This post has been deleted.

....... · 18-05-2018 12:42PM

This post has been deleted.

SusieBlue · 18-05-2018 12:44PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

Savita's husband has asked that his late wife not be brought into debate about the amendment. Yes voters should respect that, but they don't.

Her father has urged people to vote Yes and has stated that he is happy for her picture to be used to encourage a Repeal vote.

See here.

Mr Yalagi said Yes campaigners should use his daughter’s image in their efforts to change the State’s abortion laws.

“Of course. It should be shown. The rules in Ireland about abortion should change . . .
“We are happy people in Ireland remember Savita, and remember her when they are talking about abortion. It is very good people in Ireland are remembering how she died.
“I want people to remember her. It is a long time. It is six years, and the law still has not been changed. I am surprised change has not been implemented. I request that all Irish people vote Yes for this law to change.”

I've googled Savita's husbands request and can't find anything, can you please provide a link to back that up?

seamus · 18-05-2018 12:45PM

whisky_galore wrote: »

All about choice so long as it agrees with your choice?

That's a disingenuous argument tbh.
For any relationship to work requires the couple to agree broadly on matters of importance. For example, a couple where one person wants children and another doesn't, is not going to work.

That people would be aghast that a Yes voter would discount a No voter as a potential partner illustrates a general undertone of much of the No campaign; John McGuirk in particular. For many of them this is something of a philosophical game. A game of "who can make the best argument". And the expectation that afterwards everyone can slap each other on the back and say, "Well played, we nearly had ye".

For Yes voters, it's not just a philosophical matter. It's as serious as the question of whether women should be allowed vote, or whether a wife should be subservient to a husband. It's an actual issue of human rights that has real impacts.

For a Yes voter, that a partner could vote "No" on this calls into question the very fabric of the relationship, and what the "No" voter considers to be each person's place in it.

neonsofa · 18-05-2018 12:45PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

Savita's husband has asked that his late wife not be brought into debate about the amendment. Yes voters should respect that, but they don't.

It is specific yes campaigners, not all yes voters.

nozzferrahhtoo · 18-05-2018 12:46PM

Just her wrote: »

It's not imagination that the baby/foetus will be sentient given a couple of weeks to develop.

Well yes it kinda is, because anything can happen. You do not know it will not miscarry or die or anything else. You ASSUME it will become sentient, and probability is on your side for sure, but an assumption it remains.

Meanwhile we have an ACTUAL sentient agent, the pregnant mother, here in the present. And not only do I see any reason to afford rights, or moral and ethical concern, to an entity that is not sentient and MIGHT be in the future.......... I certainly do not see any validation coming from you as to why we should do that at the expense of the only sentient agent we can coherently have concern for. The one that exists.

Just her wrote: »

You like to use sentience as a way to dismiss their right to life when you know they will be sentient in a short space of time.

Again I can not "dismiss" what is not even there. You are inventing a narrative for me I do not hold. Which is not exactly an honest move from you.

Neither do I use sentience because I "like" it. So please do not belittle an argument you do not understand. I do so because it is the only coherent mediation point anyone in any conversation so far has offered as workable when evaluating what we should value, why we should value it, what "rights" are, what they are for, and what it means to hold moral and ethical concern for another being other than oneself.

There is no philosophical argument being offered, other than your personal gut feeling, why there is any moral onus on us to think an entity that is not sentient has a right to become such. You seem to want to assume that move is true, without explaining why. Me, not so much.

seamus · 18-05-2018 12:47PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

Savita's husband has asked that his late wife not be brought into debate about the amendment. Yes voters should respect that, but they don't.

Source?

....... · 18-05-2018 12:50PM

This post has been deleted.

cherryghost · 18-05-2018 12:51PM

No words.

http://workersparty.ie/tallaght-firefighters-condemn-save-the-8th-firefighter-ad-as-offensive-and-misleading/#post/0

Sofiztikated · 18-05-2018 12:52PM

djPSB wrote: »

.

What if a couple get pregnant with a perfectly healthy baby and both parents are perfectly healthy. But the mother wants to abort and the father does not agree?

What if she doesn't, but he wants her too?

That's a conversation between them, not the wider society.

nozzferrahhtoo · 18-05-2018 12:53PM

wes · 18-05-2018 12:55PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

Savita's husband has asked that his late wife not be brought into debate about the amendment. Yes voters should respect that, but they don't.

Her father says otherwise:
Savita Halappanavar’s father urges Yes vote in abortion referendum

He is happy for them to use her image.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 18-05-2018 01:00PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

Savita's husband has asked that his late wife not be brought into debate about the amendment. Yes voters should respect that, but they don't.

Can't find anything about that, Mr Halapanavar doesn't seem to have any statement whatsoever on the campaigns, Savita's father has said he's happy for her image and story to be used, her friends are on record being highly critical of the comments made by representatives of the No campaign about her.

I think someone misled you.

I'm also struck that you're not drawing a distinction between yes campaigners and yes voters, or distinguishing yes voters from each other at all. Would you be happy to be lumped in with the ICBR, or what's being said by any and all no voters on Twitter?

gmisk · 18-05-2018 01:02PM

I am still getting blooming targeted no adverts on browser - only option seems to be turn of advert preferences?

RobertKK · 18-05-2018 01:03PM

Igotadose wrote: »

Just saw an Ad on independent.ie from hateboth showing a kid with DS saying "don't repeal me". No gutter too low for No. Must be buying ads directly now. Will now use ghostery browser to avoid this garbage

People with DS even asked to be part of the No campaign.
DS Ireland went about and acted as if they owned people with DS, but they don’t represent or help all families who have a member with DS.

Sofiztikated · 18-05-2018 01:06PM

RobertKK wrote: »

People with DS even asked to be part of the No campaign.
DS Ireland went about and acted as if they owned people with DS, but they don’t represent or help all families who have a member with DS.

Imagine that, getting indignant because someone went and spoke out about people should or shouldn't do.

charlietheminxx · 18-05-2018 01:08PM

Delighted to see Ben Bulben is no longer taking a stance on the 8th.... I have enjoyed the photoshopping efforts though!

One week left to go, I’m getting really worried about turnout but I’m hopeful the 8th will be repealed.

Like others, I’ve ordered a badge from T4Y but haven’t got it yet, hopefully Monday

This is my first time posting since the 3rd thread opened! Been struggling to keep up but I have finally managed to read each and every post.

Pedro K · 18-05-2018 01:09PM

djPSB wrote: »

There are so many elements to it that it is possible that a couple may not agree on all aspects.

That's one scenario as outlined above.

What if a couple get pregnant with a perfectly healthy baby and both parents are perfectly healthy. But the mother wants to abort and the father does not agree?

Well, as it stands the woman has a constitutional right to travel to another jurisdiction to get an abortion. No man, father, boyfriend, police force, or army can stop her.

So. Should the 8th be repealed, the father's rights remain exactly the same. Only difference is the woman won't have to go to another jurisdiction, should she choose an abortion.

neonsofa · 18-05-2018 01:10PM

RobertKK wrote: »

People with DS even asked to be part of the No campaign.
DS Ireland went about and acted as if they owned people with DS, but they don’t represent or help all families who have a member with DS.

I suppose it comes down to the individual's autonomy and choice. We should all respect each individuals choice because the person experiencing the situation knows what is best for them personally, not someone who thinks they know better.

Hence the need to repeal and allow women to chose what is best for themselves. Rather than acting as if we own women.

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

Comments