nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Dilemma of the Undecideds in the abortion referendum

brianhere

One noticeable thing about the opinion polls leading into the last few weeks of this referendum is the remaining large number of don't knows. Without getting too technical, it appears to this observer that the swing that occurred towards the No side in the last few weeks came from straight Yes's to Nos, rather than shrinking the undecideds.

So why are there so many undecideds? I think maybe there are two answers here:

1) Possibly there are some who have secretly made up their mind but don't wish to talk about it. Maybe some poor guy in a house full of aggressive feminists who wants to vote No would prefer not to say so, and of course in some parts of the country it could work the other way too.

2) Its obvious that there is a massive media bias towards Yes and this has been played out over the months leading to the vote, if not years. But in the last few weeks we have had some debates where both sides had equal time, and its clear too that some newspapers, like The Irish Times, have felt the need to be more balanced in their coverage over the last few weeks than they normally are.

This has possibly led to a pattern that some were sure they were Yes, based on the earlier biased information they had received, and are now not so sure when they now can hear from the other side.

So that also might be swelling the undecideds. Anyway I am sure there are strong opinions on the subject on this site but in any case it might be interesting to see what information both sides are putting out to influence the undecideds. This for example is an appeal to them from the No side: http://www.politics.ie/forum/elections/263893-manifesto-undecideds.html and if anybody knows of a comparable text from the Yes side maybe they could note it below.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

antiskeptic

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's not a rebuttal. That's just you disagreeing with doctors about what is and isn't a healthcare issue.

I notice you didn't deal with questions on what constitutes a life.

Beware, if you quote "science says", you're really only pointing to your philosophical decision to be guided, to large degree, by science.

.......

This post has been deleted.

ArthurDayne

AnneFrank wrote: »

yawn, hardcase argument.

Perhaps you can clarify some simple questions then:

Should a 15 year old who has been impregnated by rape perpetrated by her uncle be forced to undergo pregnancy? Yes or No.

If not, do you think there is a contradiction between your views that we should 'cherish the unborn child' in an adult pregnancy induced by consensual sex, but not 'cherish the unborn child' when the pregnancy is one of a child who has been raped?

I presume that, as someone who is clearly confident of your view, you can answer these questions with consummate ease.

.......

This post has been deleted.

AnneFrank

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I wish.

AnneFrank

ArthurDayne wrote: »

To be honest Anne -- I've been reading a lot of your posts and, while I don't expect people to write theses, they always seem to be undeveloped posts . . . a couple of lines where you seem to just repeat mantras rather than develop an actual point.

It's easy to say things like "all life, all children should be cherished" and that sounds great. But how far does your cherishing of children go when, say, you are dealing with a 15 year old girl who has been raped and impregnated by her uncle? How much do you cherish that child when you're forcing them to undergo the severe physical and mental trauma of pregnancy induced via incestuous rape?

You can repeat mantra and dogma all you want. But for too long this slavish devotion to dogma has overcome our ability as a society to fully appreciate and deal with the complexities of matters like this.

I hope today we finally overcome the dogma on abortion -- and if not today then the fight shall go on.

yawn, hardcase argument.

AnneFrank

blanch152 wrote: »

I was being nice.

A quick search using the search function for "age" in your posts, throws up a post where you claim to be the same age as an OP, check the thread, the OP was 32, the post was 8 years ago, around 40. Took less than 10 seconds, no snooping required.

A second glance (1 second) at the other forums you have posted in, and the conclusion you were likely male was also formed. Could check the tone and tenor of a handful of those posts and be definitive about it in less than 20 seconds if I wanted.

So around 40 and male was the conclusion of less than 12 seconds of a search, but based on real evidence, and probably took me longer to write this post. The caveat of whether you routinely tell the truth was to cover me if you don't, as there are some posters who have different ages depending on what they say.

Getting back on topic, what would you do if your niece was faced with a Savita situation?

jeez stalker alert, i'm not into whataboutery or the one hardcase everyone mentions, that was actually the fault of the nurses and Dr's looking after her, not the 8th

Amirani

antiskeptic wrote: »

I'm not sure what special contribution an cardiologist has to make.

Doctors receive very generalised training prior to specialising and would still have quite strong knowledge of various branches of medicine.

I actually know of a cardiologist SHO that wrote their thesis on the diagnosis of foetal illnesses, so they sometimes would know quite a lot.

ArthurDayne

AnneFrank wrote: »

I am, all you have mentioned above start in the womb in case you didn't know.
All life, all children should be cherished.

To be honest Anne -- I've been reading a lot of your posts and, while I don't expect people to write theses, they always seem to be undeveloped posts . . . a couple of lines where you seem to just repeat mantras rather than develop an actual point.

It's easy to say things like "all life, all children should be cherished" and that sounds great. But how far does your cherishing of children go when, say, you are dealing with a 15 year old girl who has been raped and impregnated by her uncle? How much do you cherish that child when you're forcing them to undergo the severe physical and mental trauma of pregnancy induced via incestuous rape?

You can repeat mantra and dogma all you want. But for too long this slavish devotion to dogma has overcome our ability as a society to fully appreciate and deal with the complexities of matters like this.

I hope today we finally overcome the dogma on abortion -- and if not today then the fight shall go on.

SusieBlue

blanch152 wrote: »

I was being nice.

A quick search using the search function for "age" in your posts, throws up a post where you claim to be the same age as an OP, check the thread, the OP was 32, the post was 8 years ago, around 40. Took less than 10 seconds, no snooping required.

A second glance (1 second) at the other forums you have posted in, and the conclusion you were likely male was also formed. Could check the tone and tenor of a handful of those posts and be definitive about it in less than 20 seconds if I wanted.

So around 40 and male was the conclusion of less than 12 seconds of a search, but based on real evidence, and probably took me longer to write this post. The caveat of whether you routinely tell the truth was to cover me if you don't, as there are some posters who have different ages depending on what they say.

Getting back on topic, what would you do if your niece was faced with a Savita situation?

I noticed this too. Most people presume him to be a woman and he doesn't correct them. I suppose its his basis for "plenty of women are voting no!!".

.......

This post has been deleted.

.......

This post has been deleted.

blanch152

AnneFrank wrote: »

Routinely and around, pretty broad strokes

I was being nice.

A quick search using the search function for "age" in your posts, throws up a post where you claim to be the same age as an OP, check the thread, the OP was 32, the post was 8 years ago, around 40. Took less than 10 seconds, no snooping required.

A second glance (1 second) at the other forums you have posted in, and the conclusion you were likely male was also formed. Could check the tone and tenor of a handful of those posts and be definitive about it in less than 20 seconds if I wanted.

So around 40 and male was the conclusion of less than 12 seconds of a search, but based on real evidence, and probably took me longer to write this post. The caveat of whether you routinely tell the truth was to cover me if you don't, as there are some posters who have different ages depending on what they say.

Getting back on topic, what would you do if your niece was faced with a Savita situation?

SusieBlue

AnneFrank wrote: »

way to miss the point, you must be seriously older than me if you had trouble understanding my post.

Before I reply, are you genuinely concerned about that you are being misunderstood, or is this another passive aggressive ageist remark?

I feel the need to clarify, seeing as you usually deny deny deny when confronted about these kind of snippy posts.

AnneFrank

listermint wrote: »

Too many women voting for that to happen.

Need i remind you thousands of women are voting no, just like thousands of men are voting yes.
I agree the yes side is a strong fav, but it's not over till it's over

fergus1001

AnneFrank wrote:

Exactly like i did before, how will you if no wins ?

I'll have a California cheese burger for the Craic

(Simpsons refference)

AnneFrank

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Really

AnneFrank

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

divert divert divert.
Nice try.

.......

This post has been deleted.

listermint

AnneFrank wrote: »

Exactly like i did before, how will you if no wins ?

Too many women voting for that to happen.

AnneFrank

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

way to miss the point, you must be seriously older than me if you had trouble understanding my post.

.......

This post has been deleted.

.......

This post has been deleted.

AnneFrank

blanch152 wrote: »

Depends on whether you routinely tell the truth in posts. If you do, then you are around 40.

Routinely and around, pretty broad strokes

AnneFrank

blanch152 wrote: »

Sentient, conscious, aware women who are your daughters, your sisters, your nieces, your cousins, your partners, your friends, their friends and all the women you know and love. That poster isn't thinking about that.

I am, all you have mentioned above start in the womb in case you didn't know.
All life, all children should be cherished.

blanch152

AnneFrank wrote: »

Still waiting on my age, but to reply to the above post,
were you born a fully grown "Sentient, conscious, aware women" ?

Depends on whether you routinely tell the truth in posts. If you do, then you are around 40.

AnneFrank

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Exactly like i did before, how will you if no wins ?

blanch152

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Sentient, conscious, aware women who are your daughters, your sisters, your nieces, your cousins, your partners, your friends, their friends and all the women you know and love. That poster isn't thinking about that.

AnneFrank

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Still waiting on my age, but to reply to the above post,
were you born a fully grown "Sentient, conscious, aware women" ?

blanch152

antiskeptic wrote: »

I was dealing with the average state of affairs. Apols for the offence

You were dealing with your average view of the world, which is how you have approached this thread from the start (and it is a distinctly average view).

You like to classify problems and put them into rigid constructs. That is why you favour constitutional provisions on the unborn. Unfortunately, that simply isn't the way the world works.

No constitutional provision, other than the one proposed by the government, can deal with the hard cases. It is only legislation, passed after the referendum, that can deal with the hard cases.