hungoverbunny wrote: » Yes from me and a yes from my 93 year old grandmother who voted no in the marriage referendum (had to tick the box for her at that time as she couldn't hold the pen which was painful to do). Delighted with her decision this time around however, and she did in the face of an elderly neighbour and her middle aged daughter who we bumped into while walking into the polling station. We went over to say hello and then upon hearing she was voting yes both of them started to shout at us, as if we'd change our vote at this stage. The granny just said lovely day ignoring them and walked (rolled) past. Proud of her today.
ted1 wrote: » You give out about lies. Yet you then say repealing the 8th will only allow abortions for 12 weeks. That in itself is a lie. The vote is about removing the right of the baby / foetus whatever you want to call it. The 2 weeks will be set by legislation which could easily be changed to between 0 to 23/24 weeks.
fxotoole wrote: » ted1 wrote: » You give out about lies. Yet you then say repealing the 8th will only allow abortions for 12 weeks. That in itself is a lie. The vote is about removing the right of the baby / foetus whatever you want to call it. The 2 weeks will be set by legislation which could easily be changed to between 0 to 23/24 weeks. Could be, but politically extremely unlikely to be. You're scaremongering now.
ted1 wrote: » I’m stating facts the poster I quoted was telling lies as if they are facts. I didn’t vote no.
Deleted User wrote: » I'm in Asia. It's 1.37. Will I wake up to a predicted or actual result?
Blazer wrote: » ted1 wrote: » I’m stating facts the poster I quoted was telling lies as if they are facts. I didn’t vote no. No you’re scaremongering. Yes voter me hole.
niallo27 wrote: » Sounds to me like you forced him into voting yes really.
Overheal wrote: » ted1 wrote: » You give out about lies. Yet you then say repealing the 8th will only allow abortions for 12 weeks. That in itself is a lie. The vote is about removing the right of the baby / foetus whatever you want to call it. The 2 weeks will be set by legislation which could easily be changed to between 0 to 23/24 weeks. It’s about removing a constitutional line that gives the unborn equal right to life against the mother in all circumstances. After that the expected law will be 12 weeks. And sure they could take it to 24 weeks but thats extremely unlikely, they’re still answerable to voters who have been given a handshake deal at this point for 12 week legislation. Any future govt wanting to expand the time frame will need to face the wrath of the voting public, just as this govt will to get in the 12 week law.
ted1 wrote: » So we are in agreement that the poster lied to her father.
ted1 wrote: » So you are ok with people telling lies , but when I pull them up on it I’m scaremongering. I’m into facts not make believe fiction. I based my vote on facts, not what I want to be facts. Should a rape victim be forced to carry a baby. No they should not Should a women be forced to carry a FFA. No they should not Should a pregnant lady have her care dictated during labour . No they should not That’s what my vote was based on. The rest was background noise and I can tell from someone who had their mind made up and didn’t care what other people said I found the yes side to be bully’s , whingers snd really annoying. As you have demonstrated by calling new scaremonger for stating facts and highlighting lies