The 8th amendment referendum - part 4

gmisk · 24-05-2018 09:27PM

antiskeptic wrote: »

Saw a graphic on twitter which
Indicates No need 55-65% in the midlands to be on track for a win

Can I see link? cheers

Cupcake_Crisis · 24-05-2018 09:27PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Another deliberate misrepresentation. Hard case women should have their own choice yes. Outside of those cases I'd like to see protection for the unborn from some of the clowns in the Dail who have zero respect for the unborn.

The unborn don't vote after all so why would our TDs be bothered protecting them?

So basically, unless I’m raped or have the trauma of FFA or am on deaths door I can’t be trusted to make decisions about my lady parts?

Guy:Incognito · 24-05-2018 09:28PM

nullzero wrote: »

Well it's inherently linked to this situation, a woman under the proposed changes is judge jury and executioner (apologies if the last word is too on the nose) and the man has no say because trust women.

If a woman is giving you no say then your relationship has much deeper issues.

But sure, it's not about the hard cases...........

What If you don't want kids and go have a vasectomy against her will.

tigger123 · 24-05-2018 09:28PM

nullzero wrote: »

Well it's inherently linked to this situation, a woman under the proposed changes is judge jury and executioner (apologies if the last word is too on the nose) and the man has no say because trust women.

So, what is it you have an issue with? The abortion? Or the fact that the man doesn't have to sign off on it?

SusieBlue · 24-05-2018 09:28PM

nullzero wrote: »

Men have no reproductive rights, if a consenting couple get pregnant and the woman decides motherhood isn't for her is she free to terminate against her partners wishes? Of course because the man has no say at all.

You know, I can’t tell you how many posts I’ve seen on this thread alone of men calling female Repeal supporters feminazis and the like.

These same men seem to be predominately concerned about women aborting babies without their permission.
I agree this referendum affects men, these laws can effect their daughters and wives and sisters and so on.
And of course, a potential ex partner potentially aborting a baby without permission deserves concern too.
But it’s very telling that their only issue seems to be the latter.
I’ve seen post after post about this.
It sounds incredibly controlling.
Nothing about how these laws can impact the woman they love, nothing about what might happen a future daughter, but lots and lots of Vote No’s who seem to be doing so on the basis that they dont want women having abortions without their permission.

Just something I’ve noticed.

Shurimgreat · 24-05-2018 09:29PM

Proposing unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks really is a classic case of using a sledge hammer to open a nut.

The collatoral damage will be the thousands of unborn who had nothing whatsoever to do with the small number of hard cases.

It wasnt me123 · 24-05-2018 09:29PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

Incredible how many people there are who don't know what they are actually being asked to vote on tomorrow?

I'm not sure that they don't know - they seem to all start "undecided" and then start listing all the No reasons for voting No

I'm not convinced There is some great info on the thread or refcom.ie if you really wanted to do some research. You wouldn't leave it till less than 9 hours to vote.

antiskeptic · 24-05-2018 09:29PM

jos28 wrote: »

After all the months of campaigning and debating polling day is nearly here. 100 years ago this year Irish women were finally given the chance to vote. As an Irish woman I feel privileged and excited to be voting tomorrow.
I have been very lucky, I had 2 pregnancies resulting in 2 healthy babies. I have been lucky, I was in a solid relationship with a supportive family surrounding me.
In an ideal world every woman should be as fortunate. This is not an ideal world and people find themselves in traumatic situations with horrific decisions to make. None of us know how we would react in these circumstances. Tomorrow we vote to give women choices. Their body, their choice - simple as that.
A foetus inside any woman is the concern of her, her partner and her doctor, it is no-one else's concern,
I believe this is where the NO campaign has failed to show real compassion and empathy. They are not the guardians of the wombs of the nation. Each individual woman is the guardian of her own womb. Her body, her choice.
I will be voting YES tomorrow and hope that my young nieces/friends/future grand daughters will be secure knowing that this nation will support them.

I cant say Ive seen a whole lot of empathy for the life in the womb.

Its been necessarily relegated to non-person. And you cant really empathize with a non person. Not if killing it is your 'collateral damage'

I'm bewildered as to how you call the mother who aborts her child a guardian of it. She's terminating it.

one world order · 24-05-2018 09:30PM

For all those lives without a voice, I'll be voting no tomorrow. There are tens of thousands of Irish people alive today as a result of the 8th amendment and hopefully all those people that would be born in the future under it's protection will continue to be given an opportunity to live.

Guy:Incognito · 24-05-2018 09:30PM

nullzero wrote: »

No I make an exception for week populism peddled by the same person ad nauseum.

Would you not just say " I don't have an answer instead of bul****ting to deflect.

nullzero · 24-05-2018 09:31PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

If a woman is giving you no say then your relationship has much deeper issues.

What If you don't want kids and go have a vasectomy against her will.

A vasectomy and an abortion are hardly comparable.
It's not unheard of for women to surreptitiously have an abortion for any number of reasons I know at least one guy who had this happen to him and he was devastated, if she didn't want the child he could have been a father to the child but he didn't get a say.

astrofool · 24-05-2018 09:32PM

I see the next phase of the No side campaign has already begun, go after the legislators. At least, whatever the outcome, they can't say they haven't been given a fair go at it, and gone well beyond the boundaries of what's allowed in a campaign.

I wonder if they'll keep on wheeling out Maria Steen as their one, able to string a sentence together without frothing, public representative, or will she go to ground.

nullzero · 24-05-2018 09:33PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Would you not just say " I don't have an answer instead of bul****ting to deflect.

You don't have any answers, you have catchphrases and I'm not sure what I'm deflecting when I'm answering your questions in detail.

Guy:Incognito · 24-05-2018 09:33PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Proposing unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks really is a classic case of using a sledge hammer to open a nut.
s.

No. What it does is let each woman decide what's best for them in the situation they are in.

I'm willing to assume they know better about that than me. Not that I'd want them to justify it to me anyway.

namloc1980 · 24-05-2018 09:33PM

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Proposing unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks really is a classic case of using a sledge hammer to open a nut.

The collatoral damage will be the thousands of unborn who had nothing whatsoever to do with the small number of hard cases.

That's happening anyway with illegal abortion pills and trips to the UK. But as long as it can be swept under the carpet that's grand.

Digital_Guy · 24-05-2018 09:34PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

When prohibition was in place in America no one drank........

There are no gay people in some African countries..........

Do you think drinking was more acceptable and commonplace in Prohibition times or outside of them?

Rhetorical question of course, but you get the point I'm making.

namloc1980 · 24-05-2018 09:34PM

one world order wrote: »

For all those lives without a voice, I'll be voting no tomorrow. There are tens of thousands of Irish people alive today as a result of the 8th amendment and hopefully all those people that would be born in the future under it's protection will continue to be given an opportunity to live.

Do you support the repeal of the 13th & 14th amendments?

Guy:Incognito · 24-05-2018 09:35PM

nullzero wrote: »

You don't have any answers, you have catchphrases and I'm not sure what I'm deflecting when I'm answering your questions in detail.

I didn't use any catchphrase. Unlike yourself with "emotive bs".

Asking why you'd want a say in the health care of a woman that's nothing to do with you isn't a catchphrase.

nullzero · 24-05-2018 09:35PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

You know, I can’t tell you how many posts I’ve seen on this thread alone of men calling female Repeal supporters feminazis and the like.

These same men seem to be predominately concerned about women aborting babies without their permission.
I agree this referendum affects men, these laws can effect their daughters and wives and sisters and so on.
And of course, a potential ex partner potentially aborting a baby without permission deserves concern too.
But it’s very telling that their only issue seems to be the latter.
I’ve seen post after post about this.
It sounds incredibly controlling.
Nothing about how these laws can impact the woman they love, nothing about what might happen a future daughter, but lots and lots of Vote No’s who seem to be doing so on the basis that they dont want women having abortions without their permission.

Just something I’ve noticed.

I posted earlier outlining how I feel everything but abortion on demand is morally justifiable. I only take issue with the on demand notion.

Mam of 4 · 24-05-2018 09:35PM

Kh1993 wrote: »

Save the 8th out tonight in my area. Interestingly, they stuck to the main road (pricier houses) and skipped our cul de sac (considered more working class).

We have not had one knock at the door , from either side.

Obviously our opinions aren't worth asking about either .

Greysquirel09 · 24-05-2018 09:36PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

You know, I can’t tell you how many posts I’ve seen on this thread alone of men calling female Repeal supporters feminazis and the like.

These same men seem to be predominately concerned about women aborting babies without their permission.
I agree this referendum affects men, these laws can effect their daughters and wives and sisters and so on.
And of course, a potential ex partner potentially aborting a baby without permission deserves concern too.
But it’s very telling that their only issue seems to be the latter.
I’ve seen post after post about this.
It sounds incredibly controlling.
Nothing about how these laws can impact the woman they love, nothing about what might happen a future daughter, but lots and lots of Vote No’s who seem to be doing so on the basis that they dont want women having abortions without their permission.

Just something I’ve noticed.

Absolutely. It took 2 to tango. When 2 consenting adults have sex a baby is always likely to be conceived as no contraception is 100%. Not about men wanting to sign off on an abortion it's my son/daughter in there for god sake!!

Digital_Guy · 24-05-2018 09:36PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

That's happening anyway with illegal abortion pills and trips to the UK. But as long as it can be swept under the carpet that's grand.

What's actually happening I have no doubt is that more people are deciding to continue with their pregnancies because abortion is not part of our culture (yet).

jos28 · 24-05-2018 09:36PM

antiskeptic wrote: »

I cant say Ive seen a whole lot of empathy for the life in the womb.

Its been necessarily relegated to non-person. And you cant really empathize with a non person. Not if killing it is your 'collateral damage'

I'm bewildered as to how you call the mother who aborts her child a guardian of it. She's terminating it.

Her choice - none of your concern or mine.

Fart · 24-05-2018 09:36PM

antiskeptic wrote: »

jos28 wrote: »

After all the months of campaigning and debating polling day is nearly here. 100 years ago this year Irish women were finally given the chance to vote. As an Irish woman I feel privileged and excited to be voting tomorrow.
I have been very lucky, I had 2 pregnancies resulting in 2 healthy babies. I have been lucky, I was in a solid relationship with a supportive family surrounding me.
In an ideal world every woman should be as fortunate. This is not an ideal world and people find themselves in traumatic situations with horrific decisions to make. None of us know how we would react in these circumstances. Tomorrow we vote to give women choices. Their body, their choice - simple as that.
A foetus inside any woman is the concern of her, her partner and her doctor, it is no-one else's concern,
I believe this is where the NO campaign has failed to show real compassion and empathy. They are not the guardians of the wombs of the nation. Each individual woman is the guardian of her own womb. Her body, her choice.
I will be voting YES tomorrow and hope that my young nieces/friends/future grand daughters will be secure knowing that this nation will support them.

I cant say Ive seen a whole lot of empathy for the life in the womb.

Its been necessarily relegated to non-person. And you cant really empathize with a non person. Not if killing it is your 'collateral damage'

I'm bewildered as to how you call the mother who aborts her child a guardian of it. She's terminating it.

"It".

Spanish Eyes · 24-05-2018 09:36PM

Try_harder wrote: »

Who was safe? Women? No. Children? No. Babies??? Even babies were sold to America or disposed of if they weren't healthy enough to sell.

Great points there. When you think about what went on WRT to unwanted children and so called fallen women you'd have to want to give the NO side a kick.

Such fkn hypocrisy from them. But it was wise of the Yes side to just point out that it is a woman's choice, and she can do it now anyway whatever the result.

There is no argument to counterract that point really.

But put on the blinkers and carry on.

nullzero · 24-05-2018 09:37PM

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I didn't use any catchphrase. Unlike yourself with "emotive bs".

Asking why you'd want a say in the health care of a woman that's nothing to do with you isn't a catchphrase.

Look back through your posts, one line answers posted repeatedly by you and others all the way through this thread.

24-05-2018 09:37PM

nullzero wrote: »

Watch the thanks roll in.

You seem to be really bitter about women and your posts read like you've been ****ed over. In the words of another poster on here let it go.

namloc1980 · 24-05-2018 09:37PM

Digital_Guy wrote: »

What's actually happening I have no doubt is that more people are deciding to continue with their pregnancies because abortion is not part of our culture (yet).

This notion that women will use abortion as a contraceptive is just weird and insulting.

Shurimgreat · 24-05-2018 09:37PM

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

So basically, unless I’m raped or have the trauma of FFA or am on deaths door I can’t be trusted to make decisions about my lady parts?

I am fundamentally coming from the point of view that unborm children deserve rights the most basic of which is the right to life except in the case of hard cases.

I don't believe women should be allowed abort their foetus's in this country and often for very spurious and shallow reasons. You also forget and I posted articles earlier that women are often pressurised into aborting by their own parents or male partners.

So no I don't believe abortion should be freely available here except for the small number of unfortunate cases mentioned. Otherwise abortion will become common place and normalised which it shouldn't be.

nullzero · 24-05-2018 09:38PM

jos28 wrote: »

Her choice - none of your concern or mine.

Too simplistic a response to take in the moral complexity of the situation.

The 8th amendment referendum - part 4

Comments