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

neonsofa · 18-05-2018 01:11PM

Sofiztikated wrote: »

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

Ah dammit you said it way more concisely than Me!

RobertKK · 18-05-2018 01:17PM

Sofiztikated wrote: »

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

It all depends on what people are doing or not doing. You want to compare abortion to people with DS ignoring what DS Ireland, people on the Yes side like the Taoiseach and other called for, which was for people with DS to not be part of campaign, yet there are active campaigners on the no side who have DS.

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 18-05-2018 01:23PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

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.

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

I can't do the link but this is the original request made before official announcement of a referendum, a request he has apparently repeated several times to Together for Yes

Keep Savita's name out of abortion row – husband

PRAVEEN Halappanavar was left "hurt" and "distressed" by the use of his wife Savita's image during an attack on a pro-life office, writes Caroline Crawford.
Excrement was smeared on the door, locks and shutters of the Youth Defence office on Capel St in Dublin in an attack by abortion rights campaigners. Photos and news clippings about Mrs Halappanavar (31) were stuck to the building.
"Praveen was deeply distressed by the events. He doesn't want Savita's name or memory tarnished in this manner," said his solicitor Gerard O'Donnell. "He doesn't want to be embroiled in the dispute that is going on around this issue, he is simply looking for answers on his wife's death."

The Galway solicitor also said that Mr Halappanavar has still not been furnished with a copy of the report into the death of Savita more than two weeks after a draft report was leaked.
The report suggested Galway hospital staff underestimated her condition for too long and told she would miscarry.

She was diagnosed with sepsis days after her admission and this progressed to septic shock. She suffered a cardiac arrest and died as a result.

seamus · 18-05-2018 01:29PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

I can't do the link but this is the original request made before official announcement of a referendum, a request he has apparently repeated several times to Together for Yes

That's misleading. Deliberately so, I would posit;

https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/keep-savitas-name-out-of-abortion-row-husband-29096789.html?__twitter_impression=true

Years before the referendum was called, there was vandalism on Youth Defence's front door as a response to Savita's death.

Her husband condemned the vandalism in her name. He did not request that her name not be used in referendum campaigning.

If you have a source for this, please provide it.

18-05-2018 01:30PM

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.

My friends sister has Downs, she is for repeal. She is a woman too, with the same worries regarding her health...

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 18-05-2018 01:30PM

neonsofa wrote: »

It is specific yes campaigners, not all yes voters.

Exactly. It is also specific NO voters who defaced Ben Bulben, etc. But many posters use these incidents to generalise and assume that all No voters approve and nod along.

neonsofa · 18-05-2018 01:31PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

Keep Savita's name out of abortion row – husband

Abortion row which included vandalism prior to any referendum announcement is very different to a political campaign in the run up to a scheduled referendum.

Dressing gown · 18-05-2018 01:34PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

I can't do the link but this is the original request made before official announcement of a referendum, a request he has apparently repeated several times to Together for Yes

Keep Savita's name out of abortion row – husband

PRAVEEN Halappanavar was left "hurt" and "distressed" by the use of his wife Savita's image during an attack on a pro-life office, writes Caroline Crawford.
Excrement was smeared on the door, locks and shutters of the Youth Defence office on Capel St in Dublin in an attack by abortion rights campaigners. Photos and news clippings about Mrs Halappanavar (31) were stuck to the building.
"Praveen was deeply distressed by the events. He doesn't want Savita's name or memory tarnished in this manner," said his solicitor Gerard O'Donnell. "He doesn't want to be embroiled in the dispute that is going on around this issue, he is simply looking for answers on his wife's death."

The Galway solicitor also said that Mr Halappanavar has still not been furnished with a copy of the report into the death of Savita more than two weeks after a draft report was leaked.
The report suggested Galway hospital staff underestimated her condition for too long and told she would miscarry.

She was diagnosed with sepsis days after her admission and this progressed to septic shock. She suffered a cardiac arrest and died as a result.

So here’s the link:

http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.ie/2013/02/keep-savitas-name-out-of-abortion-row.html?m=1

Not surprising it was hard to find-it’s from 2013 and from clerical whispers. It’s a bit disingenuous to suggest a statement made by her husband in response to his late wife’s image being plastered next to excrement in 2013 can be applied to the debate on the referendum in 2018.

Eggs For Dinner · 18-05-2018 01:34PM

Really disheartened by the whole debate. Constant references to Yes/No "crowd", "Yer lot" or Yes/No "side" . It's shaping up that people on either side of the debate just want to be on the winning team, regardless of whether or not the effects of the result will impact on their lives. We really are becoming a nasty bunch of people to eachother.

neonsofa · 18-05-2018 01:35PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

Exactly. It is also specific NO voters who defaced Ben Bulben, etc. But many posters use these incidents to generalise and assume that all No voters approve and nod along.

Many posters, not all.
If it annoys you so much then surely you should ensure you don't make the same generalisations yourself.

RobertKK · 18-05-2018 01:35PM

bubblypop wrote: »

My friends sister has Downs, she is for repeal. She is a woman too, with the same worries regarding her health...

I grew up with a family relation with DS. I have nothing against the No side having people with DS in their campaign.

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 18-05-2018 01:35PM

seamus wrote: »

That's misleading. Deliberately so, I would posit;

https://amp.independent.ie/irish-news/keep-savitas-name-out-of-abortion-row-husband-29096789.html?__twitter_impression=true

Years before the referendum was called, there was vandalism on Youth Defence's front door as a response to Savita's death.

Her husband condemned the vandalism in her name. He did not request that her name not be used in referendum campaigning.

If you have a source for this, please provide it.

No it's not. He made it very clear that he did not want her used as a tool in this referendum. He has not made any statement since saying that anything has changed. People should respect that. Obviously it's hard to discuss the issue without mentioning her, but putting her image on posters is a different matter.

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 18-05-2018 01:36PM

neonsofa wrote: »

Many posters, not all.
If it annoys you so much then surely you should ensure you don't make the same generalisations yourself.

I did it deliberately to demonstrate how ridiculous it is to take the bad behaviour of a handful of campaigners and try to apply it to the entire side of the campaign.

neonsofa · 18-05-2018 01:37PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

No it's not. He made it very clear that he did not want her used as a tool in this referendum. He has not made any statement since saying that anything has changed. People should respect that. Obviously it's hard to discuss the issue without mentioning her, but putting her image on posters is a different matter.

There was no referendum when he made that statement so it couldn't have been in reference to the referendum.

Just her · 18-05-2018 01:37PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

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.

Why all the flowery language? People don't mind talking about death row, executions etc. Why shy away from talking about the death in an abortion? To the extent that the girl mentioned above didn't even know what was going to happen to her baby

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 18-05-2018 01:38PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

No it's not. He made it very clear that he did not want her used as a tool in this referendum. He has not made any statement since saying that anything has changed. People should respect that. Obviously it's hard to discuss the issue without mentioning her, but putting her image on posters is a different matter.

He made no statement at all on THIS referendum. Her father has, her friends have.

Dressing gown · 18-05-2018 01:39PM

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

Really disheartened by the whole debate. Constant references to Yes/No "crowd", "Yer lot" or Yes/No "side" . It's shaping up that people on either side of the debate just want to be on the winning team, regardless of whether or not the effects of the result will impact on their lives. We really are becoming a nasty bunch of people to eachother.

It’s not been pretty I give you that. I think emotions are running high which is why the hysteria. I think it’s because it impacts people’s lives that they feel so passionately. Try to find the good in the hysteria-overall it’s because people care one way or another.

irishguitarlad · 18-05-2018 01:39PM

Even if the no side doesn't win, it will be passed in the next few years.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 18-05-2018 01:39PM

Just her wrote: »

Why all the flowery language? People don't mind talking about death row, executions etc. Why shy away from talking about the death in an abortion? To the extent that the girl mentioned above didn't even know what was going to happen to her baby

What language would you be happy with? What exact words?

Sofiztikated · 18-05-2018 01:39PM

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

. We really are becoming a nasty bunch of people to eachother.

Becoming?

People have always been arseholes to each other.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 18-05-2018 01:40PM

Dressing gown wrote: »

It’s not been pretty I give you that. I think emotions are running high which is why the hysteria. I think it’s because it impacts people’s lives that they feel so passionately. Try to find the good in the hysteria-overall it’s because people care one way or another.

By all accounts it's a cake walk compared to 83 anyway

seamus · 18-05-2018 01:43PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

No it's not. He made it very clear that he did not want her used as a tool in this referendum.

He didn't.
That's an actual lie. You can't write it off as anything less than wilful misrepresentation of the article.

Grayson · 18-05-2018 01:43PM

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

Really disheartened by the whole debate. Constant references to Yes/No "crowd", "Yer lot" or Yes/No "side" . It's shaping up that people on either side of the debate just want to be on the winning team, regardless of whether or not the effects of the result will impact on their lives. We really are becoming a nasty bunch of people to eachother.

I think that has a lot to do with the environment that you're in when you see it.

On TV shows they tend to go for "zingers" that score points. I didn't watch the debate last week but by all accounts it seems like it was an effort to score points. What we really needed was a proper debate where the audience are educated.

The same goes for the internet. It's easy to see how a debate can slide into people sniping at each other.

neonsofa · 18-05-2018 01:43PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

I did it deliberately to demonstrate how ridiculous it is to take the bad behaviour of a handful of campaigners and try to apply it to the entire side of the campaign.

Kinda undermines your argument, yknow practice what you preach and all that, but whatever floats your boat!

18-05-2018 01:43PM

RobertKK wrote: »

I grew up with a family relation with DS. I have nothing against the No side having people with DS in their campaign.

there is no problem with any person, with or without DS being part of either side.
they are people too, with their own opinions.

the problem is when one, or the other side, use the Down Syndrome itself as a reason for or against.

meeeeh · 18-05-2018 01:44PM

It really doesn't matter. Halapanavar's case is relevant for discussion. They have right for privacy but the case itself is relevant, as is discussion about terminations in case of disabilities etc. It is not right to request not to talk about something because it upsets people.

kylith · 18-05-2018 01:49PM

Grayson wrote: »

On TV shows they tend to go for "zingers" that score points. I didn't watch the debate last week but by all accounts it seems like it was an effort to score points. What we really needed was a proper debate where the audience are educated.

I think that political debates should be without audience, with each side given a period of time to present their case, then a recess, and another set period to address their opponents’ remarks, then that’s it.

No hollaring from the audience, no shouting over someone.

swampgas · 18-05-2018 01:51PM

kylith wrote: »

I think that political debates should be without audience, with each side given a period of time to present their case, then a recess, and another set period to address their opponents’ remarks, then that’s it.

No hollaring from the audience, no shouting over someone.

Having a fact check at the end would seem to be very useful too, given the deliberate misinformation being pushed by some people.

Banjaxed82 · 18-05-2018 01:52PM

Anyone got stats on referendums backed by the government (of the day) that have failed to pass?

ELM327 · 18-05-2018 01:52PM

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?

Same as it is now.
Tough SH1T for the father (I'm a man).

If you have a problem with that you need to campaign to repeal the 13th and 14th amendments.

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

Comments