The Dilemma of the Undecideds in the abortion referendum

lawred2 · 22-05-2018 06:56PM

Overheal wrote: »

Seems to me you’ve established my point: you don’t really mind the act of abortion as long as it’s legal wherever it’s performed

Urm... yeah

Isn't that obvious?

Overheal · 22-05-2018 06:59PM

lawred2 wrote: »

Urm... yeah

Isn't that obvious?

Voting yes then? Sorry I misinterpreted your intent so.

DarkScar · 22-05-2018 07:42PM

Overheal wrote: »

Do you care about the laws in some other country? It’s not your jurisdiction.

Seems to me you’ve established my point: you don’t really mind the act of abortion as long as it’s legal wherever it’s performed

So when are the yes side invading the world as they seem to think the Irish laws need to be enforced across the globe?

Overheal · 22-05-2018 07:50PM

DarkScar wrote: »

So when are the yes side invading the world as they seem to think the Irish laws need to be enforced across the globe?

Not sure what you mean at all.

DarkScar · 22-05-2018 09:13PM

Overheal wrote: »

Not sure what you mean at all.

Translation: I know exactly what you said but I can't answer.
Every act an Irish person commits abroad that would be a crime here is not our responsibility. Are you saying we should have child marriage here because it's legal in Mauretania? If an Englishman murders somebody in Ireland, are they tried in England or extradited to where they committed the crime?
"they are allowed to have an abortion in the UK" is an utter red herring. No wonder you're making out you can't follow the logic.

Martina1991 · 22-05-2018 09:18PM

DarkScar wrote:

Every act an Irish person commits abroad that would be a crime here is not our responsibility.

When it is my sister, my friends or even my own life that is effected then it is my responsibility to help them and for them to help me.

You have just implied you don't care if Irish women have abortions abroad., as long as it's not on Irish soil.

I.e. Not in my back yard

brianhere · 22-05-2018 09:21PM

But anyway to get back to the OP is there any good text out there that summarises the Yes side position, that could therefore be balanced against the previous link? Here is a quote from that link to show the kind of points that are made there so presumably someone can find a comparable Yes text:

"Abortion already occurs in Ireland

It is a much talked about fact that some Irish mothers are using abortion pills already, hence we currently have abortion and if we vote No we will still have it? And also many people are availing of the right to travel to the UK to have an abortion there and that will not change either with a No vote.

But somewhat obviously a lot of laws are breached in Ireland some of the time, maybe all or nearly all of them, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be enacted or repealed if they are there? Clearly we have a fair number of murders committed in modern times in Ireland for example, but its rare to hear anybody extrapolate from that the necessity to repeal the laws against murder that are on the statute book? Of course its a pity people are breaking these laws on murder but clearly there would be a lot more of them if the law allowed it, both because the threat of incarceration would be lifted and also because if we did that it would signal societies acceptance of murder.

Much the same applies with respect to the UK, we obviously cannot change their laws, and it would be impractical to meaningfully restrict travel there, so yes some abortions occur this way but lifting our prohibition would clearly greatly increase the number of abortions, for the same two reasons listed above with respect to murder.

It therefore isn't much of a counter argument this one, it seems to be designed to appeal to a sense of hopelessness or despair in this country's ability to tackle any question."
( http://www.politics.ie/forum/elections/263893-manifesto-undecideds.html .)

DarkScar · 22-05-2018 09:23PM

Martina1991 wrote: »

When it is my sister, my friends or even my own life that is effected then it is my responsibility to help them and for them to help me.

You have just implied you don't care if Irish women have abortions abroad., as long as it's not on Irish soil.

I.e. Not in my back yard

So what other laws from around the world do you think we should be adding to our legislation could you tell me? Are Irishmen subject to Irish law wherever in the world they are?
Completely 100% true. I don't care what the laws are in other countries. We can only vote on our own ones.
Utter red herring, totally rumbled. Move on.

DarkScar · 22-05-2018 09:25PM

brianhere wrote: »

But anyway to get back to the OP is there any good text out there that summarises the Yes side position, that could therefore be balanced against the previous link? Here is a quote from that link to show the kind of points that are made there so presumably someone can find a comparable Yes text:

This logic is flawless.
And I say that as a supporter of 20ish week abortion, which I'd like to see in our constitution, not political football flavour of the month legislation.

Martina1991 · 22-05-2018 10:31PM

DarkScar wrote:

So what other laws from around the world do you think we should be adding to our legislation could you tell me?.

I'll settle for safe legal abortions and uncompromised maternity care for now thanks.

ArthurDayne · 23-05-2018 01:23AM

DarkScar wrote: »

So what other laws from around the world do you think we should be adding to our legislation could you tell me? Are Irishmen subject to Irish law wherever in the world they are?
Completely 100% true. I don't care what the laws are in other countries. We can only vote on our own ones.
Utter red herring, totally rumbled. Move on.

Pardon the coming deluge of the words 'constitutional' and 'Constitution' here but you are fundamentally misunderstanding the implications of constitutional law. To place a particular right in the Constitution is to give that right the highest priority and to preclude the Oireachtas / judiciary from making or interpreting law in a way which conflicts with the relevant constitutional provisions. The constitutional recognition of the right to life of the unborn therefore places this right in 'high priority'. The problem with this of course is that, about one centimetre below the line in the Constitution regarding the right to life of the unborn, is a line giving constitutional effect to a woman's right to travel abroad for an abortion.

So no, this is not a case of our Constitution helpfully reminding us that abortion is legal in other countries -- this is a case of the unborn having a constitutional right to life but that the State is constitutionally unable to stop women from going abroad to have an abortion. The effect of this therefore is that, in a country with a constitutional provision which claims to respect the right to life of the unborn, the Constitution also provides effectively that a woman marching into Dublin Airport with a banner saying 'I am off to Manchester to terminate my pregnancy' is constitutionally protected and cannot be apprehended -- nor can any law be passed or judgement passed down which would interfere with that right.

I have long said -- those who are truly 'pro-life' should not be supporting the constitutional status quo because it does not in fact protect the unborn in any meaningful way at all. Their blissful acquiescence to this point reinforces my view that the 'pro-life' viewpoint lacks logical and intellectual consistency. If you were truly pro-life, you would be against the Constitution for explicitly allowing the right to life of the unborn to be rendered meaningless by the mere act of openly boarding a plane. If you were truly pro-life, you would be advocating the arrest and detention of any woman known or reasonably suspected of trying to have an abortion performed abroad.

Overheal · 23-05-2018 02:01AM

DarkScar wrote: »

Translation: I know exactly what you said but I can't answer.

no as in translation you’re not communicating clearly: the Irish are invading where? What? Why? War with Canada again?

Every act an Irish person commits abroad that would be a crime here is not our responsibility.

so then there really is no mind if they go to the Philippines for sex tourism. Grand so.

Are you saying we should have child marriage here because it's legal in Mauretania? If an Englishman murders somebody in Ireland, are they tried in England or extradited to where they committed the crime?
"they are allowed to have an abortion in the UK" is an utter red herring. No wonder you're making out you can't follow the logic.

Dial down the melodrama. No, what I’m saying is that the No excuse for not repealing the 8th is “sure, they can just go to England.” Which is not a glaring condemnation of abortion. You certainly don’t hear people saying “sure be a pedo just don’t do it in my backyard,” the same way they are saying they don’t care what a woman does with her body as long as they don’t do it in your backyard. I’m highlighting the hypocrisy on the No side. If you can’t see that, I apologize, but don’t go throw your toys out of the pram because you’re making no sense and are not being understood for want of logic or rationale

blondeonblonde · 23-05-2018 07:47AM

DarkScar wrote: »

So what other laws from around the world do you think we should be adding to our legislation could you tell me? Are Irishmen subject to Irish law wherever in the world they are?
Completely 100% true. I don't care what the laws are in other countries. We can only vote on our own ones.
Utter red herring, totally rumbled. Move on.

Only one person has been rumbled mate. Look in the mirror. There are none so blind has those who will not see.

brianhere · 23-05-2018 09:55AM

Anyway the last quote seemed to be popular so maybe I will include another:

"Hard cases make bad law

You must have heard that phrase umpteen times during this referendum and before it, but what does it mean exactly? It means that normally one doesn't frame laws to take into account hard cases, rather you deal with the substance of the issue, the vast majority of the cases that will come under the law. The exceptional cases are dealt with in the discretion built into the administration of the law, that is you can make your case, if you feel you have broken the law for some exceptional reason, to a Garda who has stopped you, or a judge or indeed a jury.

You can see this with respect to nearly all laws if you think about it. We have serious laws against speeding for example, but we don't introduce into the law get out clauses for every available exception. Probably there are a fair few people caught speeding who were heading for a hospital or because of some other just cause but in that case you would explain the situation to a Garda etc. Unfortunately there are probably quite a few people who feel suicidal as a result of some letter from the tax authorities - the same exception that is often talked about in the case of abortion of course -, but exceptions like this we don't add into the tax code, we just hope that inspectors and judges will take them into account in the event of future court proceedings. An exception like this isn't added to this law because if it was there you can be sure a large number of people would suddenly classify themselves as suicidal, and would have all the documentation you want to prove it. It would be impossible to administer most laws if they had to chase up every possible exception and add it into the text. Also every evidence to date is that the law on abortion in Ireland is administered very humanely - some would say laxly -, for example no doctor or mother at all has been prosecuted under the 8th amendment, or under the relevant legislation, since its enactment in 1983.

In this referendum then we see a huge emphasis on the exceptional cases, the yes side hardly ever want to talk about the practical reality that the vast vast majority of abortions that will be performed in Ireland will be on healthy babies in healthy mothers, if it trends anything like the experiences of other countries. So the question arises are you focused on the bigger, more realistic, overall picture then or has the Yes side sidelined you into these elaborate - sometimes hypothetical - exceptional cases, and if so maybe you should realign your thoughts on the matter?"
( http://www.politics.ie/forum/elections/263893-manifesto-undecideds.html .)

Hotblack Desiato · 23-05-2018 12:40PM

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

antiskeptic wrote: »

If the current law would prevent a Michelle case then the 8th isn't to blame. The lack of the 2013 law, possible under the 8th is.

So did you support or oppose POLDPA?

Would be very interested in your answer. My view is that the No campaigners who are now claiming to back X Case / POLDPA / right to travel are not credible as they originally opposed these things, and might still reverse them if they could. If you differ from the majority of the No campaign in your opinion on this point, it would be significant.

Idjit · 23-05-2018 03:57PM

To get back to the OP:

With two days to go to the referendum, a few of friends and family members of mine are still genuinely undecided. Some of them appear to be panicking a bit as they run out of time and try to make up their mind. I was leaning slightly one way for a long time but would have been open to change my mind if I'd been presented with convincing facts, even at the last minute.

The campaigners on the streets are not helping at all, it's actually become rather irritating at this point for me and I know what I'm voting for. I can only imagine the effect its having on undecideds this late in the game.

Has anyone noticed the last few days both sides appear to have really ramped up the aggression on the streets? It has started to feel like an election rather than a referendum: people choosing the less evil of the two sets of campaigners rather than deciding on the issue itself.

I know this referendum is very important but I honestly will be relieved when it's over, no matter the outcome.

Hotblack Desiato · 23-05-2018 04:21PM

Both sides, really? Like what Trump said? I'm not buying it tbh.

Zubeneschamali · 23-05-2018 05:42PM

DarkScar wrote: »

Every act an Irish person commits abroad that would be a crime here is not our responsibility.

No worries then - since shortly it won't be a crime here, no laws will be broken anywhere, so the situation will be abortion available (same as today), no laws broken (same as today).

Only difference is location - abortions happen here instead of England, no moral change at all.

fergus1001 · 23-05-2018 06:42PM

anyone else notice Yes posters disappearing with no posters in their place I'm seeing this everywhere in the last couple of days

lawred2 · 23-05-2018 07:22PM

fergus1001 wrote: »

anyone else notice Yes posters disappearing with no posters in their place I'm seeing this everywhere in the last couple of days

Noticed the coast road into Malahide had nothing but no posters on each and every lamppost

antiskeptic · 23-05-2018 08:05PM

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

So did you support or oppose POLDPA?

Actually I opposed it.

To be honest, I wasn't all that well informed. I would have an intrinsic, if dormant pro-life view anyway, so when this popped up, I automatically went with it. Don't crucify me on this: my wife is out on the canvas and most folk she encounters haven't got a bog about the issues.

I went with it mostly on the basis that "grounds of suicide ideation" sounded very much like a back door into abortion on demand. As the psychiatrist on the YES side said in the debate last night I considered mental health a "soft option"

I wouldn't have had a clue about the possible role of the 8th in Savita's or anyone else's death. I wouldn't have had a clue what the amendment was going to do to the 8th - other than the notion for the potential for abortion on demand.

As it happens, I was wrong about suicide ideation. I gather there's only been 77 invocations of it since 2013. Hardly a floodgate.

-

I'm a bit better informed now. And now, of course, we are looking down the barrel of abortion on demand again. It may well be, as some have suggested, that the actual legislation will be toned back in practice. Perhaps. But now, as then, there are things I can't countenance.

A couple of last points.

1. I don't believe the 8th killed Savita. I don't believe the law change of 2013 has altered in any significant way, the possibility for a doctor to terminate well in time. I've looked at it from this and that angle and all I see is death-by-cockup/desire to self-protect. I'm too long in the tooth to ignore what I've learned of mankind when the finger is pointed at them. Heck, I worked in Corporate World!

2. I don't suppose that any watering down of legislation-to-come is going to change anything fundamentally. Women who are currently prepared to travel at whatever gestation, will, if denied here, still travel. The only thing that can happen down the line is that the same "bring them home' argument is wheeled out. And the law will be liberalized further in response. First the wedge, then the rest. Heck, I've worked in Corporate World! So now is the time to try to halt it

3. The aforementioned suicide ideation issue is an example of something that might appear "soft" but turns out not to open the floodgates. It strikes me as strange that rape cases can't similarly be catered for. The objection has been: how do you tell that someone has been raped / things will be tied up in court until her subsequent kid leaves primary school. It strikes me as strange that you can't insert an amendment to cater for other hard cases. But then again, this isn't really about hard cases. Hard cases are a Trojan Horse and always have been.

3.

Mr.Nice Guy · 23-05-2018 10:21PM

I am still undecided. A week ago I would have classed myself as an undecided leaning yes; this week I'd class myself as an undecided leaning no.

I've no issue with the so-called 'hard cases' of women needing abortions for rape or when they know their baby is likely to die soon after birth, but my moral compass has a hard time justifying ending the life of a baby on the basis that it is considered an inconvenience.

I listened to the commentator Peter Hitchens - not one I'd normally be influenced by as we have very different politics - and he flagged something up about how those who push for abortion often use deliberately dehumanising language. I have noticed this myself. Very little talk of 'babies' and a lot more on 'foetuses'. I was quite shocked to see someone on social media from the Yes side remark that "a parasite should not have more rights than the host". I find this really low and troubling discourse, which leaves me with a sour taste.

Another moment that gave me pause for thought this past week was that BBC NI Spotlight programme. They interviewed one woman who had originally been pro-abortion but then found herself with an unexpected pregnancy. She couldn't bring herself to have the abortion in the end and we saw her son there on the programme with her. She mentioned how she was soon graduating from university, and remarked that the extra time she had to mull over her options had enabled her to come to the decision to keep the child - something she was glad to do; she noted that had she had the option of an abortion in the same hospital she likely would have taken it and forever regretted doing so. They then went and interviewed another woman who did have an abortion when she became pregnant. Her reasoning was, "I was worried about what it would do to my career prospects." I have a real problem with that latter attitude as to me it is a license to avoid taking responsibility for one's actions. I respect freedom and people having choice but when it constitutes taking a life because it's deemed an inconvenience, I don't know if I can endorse that. And a Yes vote empowers the government to enable such a system.

What worries me about voting No is those hard cases, and the thought of women here having to rely on compassionate care across the water because they can't get it at home. And the fact that if it is a No vote, then it might take 15-20 years for the next referendum and that's a lot of pain for couples to go through. So then I think to myself maybe I should vote Yes for those cases, as it will mean something will at least be done for them.

I am not certain what my mindset is going to be on Friday morning. I want to make the right moral call and I've gone back-and-forth on this numerous times the past number of weeks. I wish I had more time to mull it over and listen to perspectives. It may come down for me to the moment I'm in the booth and staring at the paper.

oscarBravo · 23-05-2018 10:44PM

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I've no issue with the so-called 'hard cases' of women needing abortions for rape or when they know their baby is likely to die soon after birth, but my moral compass has a hard time justifying ending the life of a baby on the basis that it is considered an inconvenience.

I'm afraid I still can't get my head around how easily some people can convince themselves that what they consider a baby deserves to die because its mother was raped.

blanch152 · 23-05-2018 10:48PM

fergus1001 wrote: »

anyone else notice Yes posters disappearing with no posters in their place I'm seeing this everywhere in the last couple of days

The NO campaign have diverted funding from internet campaigns to posters because of the Facebook and Google bans.

listermint · 23-05-2018 11:07PM

blanch152 wrote: »

The NO campaign have diverted funding from internet campaigns to posters because of the Facebook and Google bans.

A ridiculous level of funding that's quite suspicious tbh. They're paying people to stand on bridges on the m50 with brand new highly visible and very expensive looking flags and banners. Nearly all day long. Coupled with paying for vans driving around the east coast with disgusting images all over them.

This is not home grown money.

blondeonblonde · 23-05-2018 11:08PM

Any undecided people out there would do well to watch Rónán Mullens comments on the Pat Kenny show tonight towards a young woman who told her story about her abortion in Birmingham.

"You deserve love and respect no matter what you've done"

What a pious, sanctimonious, judgemental excuse for a human being.

Overheal · 23-05-2018 11:10PM

listermint wrote: »

A ridiculous level of funding that's quite suspicious tbh. They're paying people to stand on bridges on the m50 with brand new highly visible and very expensive looking flags and banners. Nearly all day long. Coupled with paying for vans driving around the east coast with disgusting images all over them.

This is not home grown money.

Nope it sure isn’t. Interest groups in the US want Ireland to keep its referendum and use that fact to sway voters in the United States to support defunding of planned parenthood and the adoption of TRAP laws and other measures that neuter Roe vs Wade.

jimmycrackcorm · 23-05-2018 11:37PM

listermint wrote:

A ridiculous level of funding that's quite suspicious tbh. They're paying people to stand on bridges on the m50 with brand new highly visible and very expensive looking flags and banners. Nearly all day long. Coupled with paying for vans driving around the east coast with disgusting images all over them.

By disgusting images, do you mean images of what about fetuses look like?

Presumably if so is it not the case that the yes campaign objects to it because it highlights the reality, and as such the truth of what this vote is about?

listermint · 23-05-2018 11:42PM

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

By disgusting images, do you mean images of what about fetuses look like?

Presumably if so is it not the case that the yes campaign objects to it because it highlights the reality, and as such the truth of what this vote is about?

No I think I object to it because its not something I want my kids looking at out their car window on journey home from school.

Only a scumbag would think that's ok.

Oh yeah sorry they care for kids don't they.

....

fergus1001 · 23-05-2018 11:42PM

blanch152 wrote:

The NO campaign have diverted funding from internet campaigns to posters because of the Facebook and Google bans.

does that include taking down yes posters ? I have seen where yes posters once were are now occupied by no posters

The Dilemma of the Undecideds in the abortion referendum

Comments