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

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 20-05-2018 02:46PM

There is an article in today's Sunday Times by David Quinn. Anyone who seriously wants to be fully informed before voting next Friday should read it.

Sofiztikated · 20-05-2018 02:48PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

There is an article in today's Sunday Times by David Quinn. Anyone who seriously wants to be fully informed before voting next Friday should read it.

Chance of a link or synopsis?

wexie · 20-05-2018 02:49PM

Aniya Moldy Trowel wrote: »

There is an article in today's Sunday Times by David Quinn. Anyone who seriously wants to be fully informed before voting next Friday should read it.

Just to save anybody bothering to even go looking for it I've outlined all the relevant bits of information about the writer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Quinn_(columnist)

David Quinn is an Irish social and religious commentator who freelances and contributes weekly columns to The Irish Catholic and Irish Independent. He often appears on Irish current affairs broadcasts. Known for supporting anti-abortion, anti-euthanasia, and anti-homosexual views in his writings and media contributions.

Buford T. Justice XIX · 20-05-2018 02:51PM

Logo wrote: »

I'm not religious. However it's difficult for even me to see how being allowed to abort a fetus after 3 months and murdering a child after six months is right

Mod Note: Logo, don't post in this thread again

Buford T. Justice

Water John · 20-05-2018 02:54PM

David Quinn wouldn't be giving a full account on which to base your vote on Friday. Similar to suggesting Panti Bliss would have been a complete source on which to base your vote on SSM.

Martina1991 · 20-05-2018 02:59PM

Sofiztikated wrote: »

Chance of a link or synopsis?

The jist: don't trust politicians

Water John · 20-05-2018 03:02PM

A don't trust politicians, is a dangerous message for, any democracy. It legitimises populism. the type of thing that gives us the, Trumps of this world.

circadian · 20-05-2018 03:02PM

Alan_P wrote: »

If you really want to protect Irish babies, those 9 babies a day being aborted in the UK are an abomination
We need to think creatively
mandatory pregnancy tests every month for every fertile women.
Urine tests in the ports and airports.
Mandatory reporting of positive pregnancy tests.
Some simple obvious measures and we truly sanctify life. Why don't those babies matter ?

Is this for real or a tongue in cheek post?

Buford T. Justice XIX · 20-05-2018 03:05PM

dark crystal wrote: »

Did your congregation applaud when your priest gave his sermon about all the babies found in sewage chambers in Tuam?

Mod Note: dark crystal, don't post in this thread again,

Buford T. Justice.

robp · 20-05-2018 03:11PM

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

The Groningen Protocol is a thing. It provide euthanasia for children under the age of 1 who are born with hopeless and unbearable suffering (such as Hydrocephalus or Spina Bifida). It goes through extensive review before it's granted, and it's very rare.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the referendum, or abortion and is in no way relevant.

Well there you have it, I am proven right despite some of the shrill denials from prochoicers here. Voting yes removes fundamental rights of vulnerable citizens and takes us down a road with a horrific destination. The Groningen Protocol has everything to do with the prochoice movement. it has everything to do with the hypocrisy in the choice movement and how it will stop at nothing to undermine the rights of the most vunerable.
I don't know how you can defend something as ok on the basis that it is rare.

Buford T. Justice XIX · 20-05-2018 03:12PM

Call me Al wrote: »

So, just to clarify, what levels of septicemia or cancer in pregnancy do you think is ok for a woman to tolerate before they become so unhealthy they're dead?
Or is death that sweet spot for you.

Mod Note: Call me Al, don't post in this thread again,

Buford T. Justice

robp · 20-05-2018 03:13PM

January wrote: »

Oh, I knew it was a thing. I wanted the OP to provide a source for his outlandish claims that you can abort infants, knowing full well that they couldn't.

Nutters.

It is involuntary euthanasia post birth abortion. Sorry to have embarrassed you but there you go

robp · 20-05-2018 03:15PM

wexie wrote: »

Just to save anybody bothering to even go looking for it I've outlined all the relevant bits of information about the writer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Quinn_(columnist)

Funny that he engages in the arguments of secular prochoice folk but it doesnt work the other way round.

dudara · 20-05-2018 03:15PM

DOS wrote: »

Your health care is secure and safe in Ireland Susie. Tragedies like Savita occur. That's life. In all aspects of health care things go wrong. We have to think beyond the individual to the overall welfare of the community.

Yes, we do need to think beyond our individual cases and we need to look towards a better future. Onceis a tragedy but we have multiple numerous cases where the 8th has caused us to fail women. We need to legislate for the greater good. Which is why I will be voting YES.

dudara · 20-05-2018 03:18PM

Logo wrote: »

Is there any chance that posters might extract themselves from religious and other ideologies. Next Friday you will be asked if you agree to allow abortion of a fetus without question from a girls body, and also to the murder of a six month old baby

No, I will be voting to repeal the 8th and give the government permission to legislate. That is what I will be voting on.

And your persistent use of incorrect language is emotional blackmail. Can you at least be accurate in your language?

January · 20-05-2018 03:20PM

robp wrote: »

It is involuntary euthanasia post birth abortion. Sorry to have embarrassed you but there you go

I'm not embarrassed but you should be for that word salad that just went on there.

robp · 20-05-2018 03:20PM

kylith wrote: »

Love the way that he phrased it to make it sound like it was something a woman could just decide because she didn’t like the hair colour, or something, rather than to avoid prolonging the suffering of seriously ill babies with no hope of recovery.

Nope, you characterising me. I clearly said that in some specific circumferences by the way hat you write makes it sound like the Groningen protocol can only be used for terminally ill kids, that is not true. The utilitarian world view promoted here seems to be ok with the 'avoiding prolonging the suffering' being used to by pass pretty much any fundamental rights.

Ave Sodalis · 20-05-2018 03:22PM

robp wrote:

Well there you have it, I am proven right despite some of the shrill denials from prochoicers here. Voting yes removes fundamental rights of vulnerable citizens and takes us down a road with a horrific destination. The Groningen Protocol has everything to do with the prochoice movement. it has everything to do with the hypocrisy in the choice movement and how it will stop at nothing to undermine the rights of the most vunerable. I don't know how you can defend something as ok on the basis that it is rare.

It existing doesn't make you right.

This extreme strawman-ing.

wexie · 20-05-2018 03:23PM

robp wrote: »

Funny that he engages in the arguments of secular prochoice folk but it doesnt work the other way round.

.....I'd quite happily engage in a discussion with religious folk if I thought that could be a reasonable and logical discussion.

That doesn't seem to be possible though if you're debating with someone who's opinion is based on (or strongly influenced by) completely irrational beliefs.

It's akin to building a house on quicksand, no matter how well you build and finish it the foundation is inherently flawed.

Just her · 20-05-2018 03:23PM

Sofiztikated wrote: »

As I said before, I don't believe just being a fetus gives it a divine right to life when it negatively affects the person giving it that life. Just because it might achieve sentience, I see no reason for it to impact on those that already HAVE sentience.

Ok, well I see 2 possibilities from just before the foetus baby becomes sentient, whatever that point is. In your words it might achieve sentience but in reality in the vast majority of cases it actually will achieve sentience given the chance. The second possiblity a miscarriage occurs.

There may be a third where there is something wrong with the foetus but I don't feel qualified to judge what conditions a foetus might have which would give it sentience or prevent it from achieving sentience.

So to concentrate on the vast majority of cases, if you wouldn't mind please, where it will achieve sentience in a short space of time, is there no value at all that you would put on its life , considering the value you put on sentient beings, which all had to develop sentience in the same way?

robp · 20-05-2018 03:24PM

dudara wrote: »

No, I will be voting to repeal the 8th and give the government permission to legislate. That is what I will be voting on.

And your persistent use of incorrect language is emotional blackmail. Can you at least be accurate in your language?

Do mean to say using the word baby in this context is emotional black mail? Do you use scientific terminology for describing 1YOs or 2 YOs? Because you know baby is not a scientific word and the correct term in neonate. 'Baby' is correct English for ordinary parlance.

robp · 20-05-2018 03:26PM

wexie wrote: »

.....I'd quite happily engage in a discussion with religious folk if I thought that could be a reasonable and logical discussion.

That doesn't seem to be possible though if you're debating with someone who's opinion is based on (or strongly influenced by) completely irrational beliefs.

It's akin to building a house on quicksand, no matter how well you build and finish it the foundation is inherently flawed.

With the greatest respect that is extremely prejudiced. Its far too subjective. some people found Stalin or Mussolini to an expression of pure reason. We all have bouts of irrationality.

wexie · 20-05-2018 03:35PM

robp wrote: »

With the greatest respect that is extremely prejudiced. Its far too subjective. some people found Stalin or Mussolini to an expression of pure reason. We all have bouts of irrationality.

Well yes and no I guess. You're right insofar I could probably have expanded on that a bit and for that I apologize.

I know several quite religious people who are yes voters. They have looked at the facts and come to the conclusion that abortion (while regretful) sometimes is the lesser of two evils and as such should be legislated for.

I respect their opinion, the way they have come to that opinion as well as their religion and right to practice it.

There are even religious no voters who have explained their opinions here on the thread and at least have given it some rational thought. While I don't agree with their opinions I can at least respect them in a way.

What I have little time or patience for though is the nonsense along the lines of 'abortion is murder', 'it's wrong because my beliefs say so' etc. etc.

there really is no debating with a mindset like that and I have neither the patience nor time to attempt to do so. Open mouths and closed minds and all that.

If that makes me prejudiced then so be it.

Sofiztikated · 20-05-2018 03:44PM

Just her wrote: »

Ok, well I see 2 possibilities from just before the foetus baby becomes sentient, whatever that point is. In your words it might achieve sentience but in reality in the vast majority of cases it actually will achieve sentience given the chance. The second possiblity a miscarriage occurs.

There may be a third where there is something wrong with the foetus but I don't feel qualified to judge what conditions a foetus might have which would give it sentience or prevent it from achieving sentience.

So to concentrate on the vast majority of cases, if you wouldn't mind please, where it will achieve sentience in a short space of time, is there no value at all that you would put on its life , considering the value you put on sentient beings, which all had to develop sentience in the same way?

There is value, absolutely. But does that value trump the value of the woman?

And honestly, I'd let people set their own worth. The vast majority of women will continue with pregnancies, those that don't, won't.

Hotblack Desiato · 20-05-2018 03:53PM

robp wrote: »

The Groningen Protocol has everything to do with the prochoice movement.

The Groningen Protocol has got absolutely NOTHING to do with the prochoice movement, and is completely irrelevant to this thread.

lookyhere · 20-05-2018 03:54PM

I thought there had been a decision some weeks by Catholic priests to put an end to referendum campaigning at Mass.

I attended Mass in Knock this morning where Fidelma Healy-Eames took to the alter. So instead of a sermon, she spoke for about 15 minutes. I had arrived late so missed the beginning. Not sure how she was introduced. A small number of people left after she started speaking.

I suppose she was speaking to "the converted". Her takeaway was that everyone there should go and try to change the minds of 10 people to a No vote.

I think it's disgraceful that a politician should be allowed onto the altar like this. And this was not an optional add-on at the end of Mass, but instead was a substitute for the sermon.

Hotblack Desiato · 20-05-2018 03:58PM

Ex-politician...

In fairness if one is attending a catholic church on the last Sunday before the vote, what would one expect to hear? In Knock of all places.

lookyhere · 20-05-2018 04:05PM

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Ex-politician...

In fairness if one is attending a catholic church on the last Sunday before the vote, what would one expect to hear? In Knock of all places.

You're right of course. The woman sitting beside me became upset and started crying. She didn't join in the round of applause, nor did the man sitting next to her. I'm not sure what caused her to cry, but I felt sorry for her as she probably didn't expect it. Of course, maybe her crying was triggered by something else.

freshpopcorn · 20-05-2018 04:06PM

Mod Note Just to remind people don't reply to banned posters!

freshpopcorn · 20-05-2018 04:09PM

eeepaulo wrote: »

Does anyone have any thoughts on how fast legislation will be passed?

I just think about the way the healy Rae's and very few others filibustered the recent transport bill, will that be possible?

I really do not want to see it used in election time and I'm certain mcguirk, ganley and the iona lot will seamlessly slime their position to undermining and foreign backed lobbying, maybe candidate running?

Regarding this I know a few of the Fianna Fáil have said they are voting know but will accept the public's dicession!

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

Comments