The 8th amendment referendum - part 4

Shurimgreat · 24-05-2018 12:59PM

murpho999 wrote: »

First one is a link from an anti abortion US group whilst the other is an Australian opinion piece

Can you post anything that is unbiased and is based on verifiable facts not just some people's opinions?

I had a few minutes before lunch and posted only two. If you gave me more time I am sure I could come up with more. Do you accept the second one as independent.

And because something is posted on an anti abortion site doesn't mean its false.

The No side routinely say 97% of abortions in the UK are on healthy foetues. Is this something the Yes side are prepared to deny.

I think its time the Yes side started prodividing evidence and stats of their own and also answering questions.

Here are the first questions to them:
How many abortions were carried out in the UK on victims or rape of incest in any given year recently?
And what proportion was that of the overall number of abortions?

gmisk · 24-05-2018 12:59PM

Malaya Red Sandlot wrote: »

Could you explain?

Or better still, could a mod intervene here? This is getting bizaare.

If issues report my post.
Did you read what was posted on that site?
It was basically encouraging voter intimidation imo

juanjo · 24-05-2018 12:59PM

Malaya Red Sandlot wrote: »

Personally I think it's important for No voters to go out and vote tomorrow, as the more that vote that way, even if on the losing side, the clearer the indication to our legislators that the twelve week for everyone is just going too far for many people.

How many weeks you propose, out of curiosity?

Grayditch · 24-05-2018 01:00PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's great to hear your situation worked out for the best. But for this last bit, I really think people are talking about the ultimate decision being with the woman. Believe me, I strongly believe both parties should be involved in the discussion and should try find the best solution for both and I empathise hugely with men who aren't considered in the decision (bar abusers).

Remember that there would be a three-day waiting period in Ireland. Trust women.

Mrsmum · 24-05-2018 01:00PM

seamus wrote: »

Well at least we can all agree on that.

Not all choices are between "nice" and "not nice". Many choices are about choosing the least terrible option.

I'm not the one that said it's nice to have a choice within the context of abortion. Take it up with poster that said it.

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 24-05-2018 01:01PM

spookwoman wrote: »

You agreed the 8th was an issue in the post so if the 8th is an issue then it must be removed. They cannot legislate around it, that has been said and that is why there is a referendum.
There is no logic to saying there is a problem with the 8th and then vote no

No, I asserted that the 8th was what was standing between protection for the unborn and legislators being able to try and go as far as they wanted.

Please stop putting words in my mouth and 'telling' me what I said. It's annoying and arrogant.

Noo · 24-05-2018 01:03PM

juanjo wrote: »

How many weeks you propose, out of curiosity?

Its irrelevant, if they vote no then there will be no grounds to discuss the exact legislation. They cant vote no and then demand change. The amendment doesnt allow for that. Only repealing the 8thh will open up the floor for this discussion.

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 24-05-2018 01:03PM

gmisk wrote: »

If issues report my post.
Did you read what was posted on that site?
It was basically encouraging voter intimidation imo

You posted your comment below a quote of one of my posts.

Did you perhaps mean to post it below the post showing the guy with the 'all yes voters should be aborted' board. Because if so you need to go back and edit your post.

Shurimgreat · 24-05-2018 01:03PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

Its very simple. Unrestricted abortion up till 12 weeks allows women who have been assaulted the opportunity to have terminations without the added stress of having to disclose what happened to them.

It also allows unrestricted abortion for the most spurious reasons such as not shaming the wider family or parents/grandparents.

Do you accept that most abortions have nothing to do with rape or incest? Or even fatal foetal abnormalities.

Time for the Yes side to start answering questions rather than deflecting.

You have my answers, you might not like them, but at least I answered. So now your turn.

ohnonotgmail · 24-05-2018 01:05PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

It also allows unrestricted abortion for the most spurious reasons such as not shaming the wider family or parents/grandparents.

Do you accept that most abortions have nothing to do with rape or incest? Or even fatal foetal abnormalities.

Time for the Yes side to start answering questions rather than deflecting.

You have my answers, you might not like them, but at least I answered. So now your turn.

Given you have no idea what those reasons are can i ask if you are normally this judgemental in real life?

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 24-05-2018 01:05PM

juanjo wrote: »

How many weeks you propose, out of curiosity?

I don't propose any number of weeks for healthy babies being carried by healthy women where there are no 'hard' circumstances. Therefore, the twelve weeks or an number of weeks with no reason is not something I would vote for.

Noo · 24-05-2018 01:06PM

Malaya Red Sandlot wrote: »

I don't propose any number of weeks for healthy babies being carried by healthy women where there are no 'hard' circumstances. Therefore, the twelve weeks or an number of weeks with no reason is not something I would vote for.

Well its a good thing youre not being asked to vote for that

Zubeneschamali · 24-05-2018 01:06PM

Flying Fox wrote: »

I would love to see it, but weren't the 13th and 14th held on the same day as a general election?

Yes, middle of Albert Reynolds reign. I'm not sure what the record for a standalone referendum is (the first one enacting the COnstitution was 75% - but a bit of an outlier...).

....... · 24-05-2018 01:06PM

This post has been deleted.

....... · 24-05-2018 01:07PM

This post has been deleted.

spookwoman · 24-05-2018 01:07PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I understand where you are coming from but there is a difference between emotionally invested to physically invested. It's hard to explain, I know your ex left you with you child after you broke up, what I am saying is you had a choice to take that kid after. what if you had decided you didn't want to raise them. Someone else posted her similar thing daddy said i'll be there fore you etc and then after the birth fecked off. In the end you have more of a choice then she has. As I said it's hard t explain

eviltwin · 24-05-2018 01:08PM

Malaya Red Sandlot wrote: »

I don't propose any number of weeks for healthy babies being carried by healthy women where there are no 'hard' circumstances. Therefore, the twelve weeks or an number of weeks with no reason is not something I would vote for.

Domestic violence, underage pregnancy, homelessness, poverty ARE hard cases.

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 24-05-2018 01:08PM

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It is what the Government have said will be their next proposal should there be a Yes vote.

AtomicHorror · 24-05-2018 01:08PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

It also allows unrestricted abortion for the most spurious reasons such as not shaming the wider family or parents/grandparents.

What evidence is there that "shaming" will be a significant contributor here?

Zubeneschamali · 24-05-2018 01:08PM

Billy86 wrote: »

I have a bad feeling this is related to trying to angle a right wing movement in Ireland in the longer term.

That would be Supreme Leader Ganley and his pals, but they are gaining zero traction thanks to our mole McGuirk in their ranks.

gmisk · 24-05-2018 01:09PM

Malaya Red Sandlot wrote: »

https://twitter.com/LoveBothDrog/status/999014874939297793?s=19
Maybe look at the twitter, do you think this is acceptable?

Cantona's Collars · 24-05-2018 01:10PM

Has anyone with all the scare talk of abortion on demand even mentioned the 72 hour consultation period with medical and psychological professionals from the moment a woman presents herself as wanting a termination.
The way the No campaign carry on you'd swear there's going to be a conveyor belt system of abortion.

jimgoose · 24-05-2018 01:10PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

It also allows unrestricted abortion for the most spurious reasons such as not shaming the wider family or parents/grandparents.

Do you accept that most abortions have nothing to do with rape or incest? Or even fatal foetal abnormalities.

Time for the Yes side to start answering questions rather than deflecting.

You have my answers, you might not like them, but at least I answered. So now your turn.

Let us suppose for the moment that most abortions are, in fact, for what you at any rate would consider "spurious" reasons. What of it?

eviltwin · 24-05-2018 01:10PM

Malaya Red Sandlot wrote: »

It is what the Government have said will be there next proposal should there be a Yes vote.

It's going to be debated and will have to pass through the Oireachtas first, it's not going to pass without challenges.

NuMarvel · 24-05-2018 01:10PM

Malaya Red Sandlot wrote: »

Personally I think it's important for No voters to go out and vote tomorrow, as the more that vote that way, even if on the losing side, the clearer the indication to our legislators that the twelve week for everyone is just going too far for many people.

A No vote will be interpreted as a preference for the status quo. There certainly won't be anything to suggest it's the 12 weeks provision that voters have issue with, especially in the absence of any meaningful alternative proposals from groups or politicians on the No side.

PhoenixParker · 24-05-2018 01:11PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

It also allows unrestricted abortion for the most spurious reasons such as not shaming the wider family or parents/grandparents.

Do you accept that most abortions have nothing to do with rape or incest? Or even fatal foetal abnormalities.

Time for the Yes side to start answering questions rather than deflecting.

You have my answers, you might not like them, but at least I answered. So now your turn.

Pregnancy by itself is tough.
Exhaustion, vomiting, reflux, joint pains, insomnia never mind the more severe issues that regularly crop up.
Not wanting to be pregnant is a non-spurious reason for abortion.

Childbirth by itself is tough.
Labour pain or a major operation.
Not wanting to give birth is a non-spurious reason for abortion.

Raising children is tough.
Sleepless nights, endless nappies, creche costs, time off work, huge responsibility.
Not wanting to raise a child is a non-spurious reason for an abortion.

Hard cases like rape and FFA are not the reason for most abortions but to state that therefore abortions take place for spurious reasons is nonsensical and belittles the difficulty inherent in pregnancy and parenting.

c68zapdsm5i1ru · 24-05-2018 01:12PM

gmisk wrote: »

https://twitter.com/LoveBothDrog/status/999014874939297793?s=19
Maybe look at the twitter, do you think this is acceptable?

What exactly is that in response to? You seem to be quoting me against totally unrelated posts. Genuinely confused here.

uptherebels · 24-05-2018 01:12PM

Mrsmum wrote: »

I'm not the one that said it's nice to have a choice within the context of abortion. Take it up with poster that said it.

Why is it not good to have options during a crisis pregnancy?

Shurimgreat · 24-05-2018 01:12PM

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Look at this from them about an hour ago

Fcuk sake like. Are they trying to sabotage the No campaign or what? Not a shred of logic or human decency to be seen.

Yes side call for abortion on demand up to 12 weeks yet are outraged when someone calls for others to be aborted. Anyone else see the irony here?

jaykay74 · 24-05-2018 01:13PM

gmisk wrote: »

https://twitter.com/LoveBothDrog/status/999014874939297793?s=19
Maybe look at the twitter, do you think this is acceptable?

Thats mental

The 8th amendment referendum - part 4

Comments