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; } } }

Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

Ozymandius2011

This is for people who have already voted in the referendum. How did you vote? I voted yes.

Mod: This thread is little more than a survey about how you voted. Please don't the ins and outs of abortion.

Mod: This is not a reiteration of the previous 8th threads. If you were threadbanned from those, you are not threadbanned here.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

namloc1980

Dookie Monster wrote: »

8th Amendment covered it already

Nope. You were misled by no campaign lies.

Billy86

Trasna1 wrote: »

You couldn't run a constitutional referendum like that, as far as I know it has to be yes or no.

Your proposal would require two ballots Yes/No for the required constitutional referendum and a PR-STV list for an advisory plebiscite, in the event that the first returned Yes.

Oh I completely agree that it has to be YES/NO, I was just trying to point out the wild flaws in such a suggestion of running one 'NO' options vs a split of various different 'YES' options.

I think it's best to just get it off the constitution and let legislators deal with it from there, in accordance with the wishes of the Irish public. If that means something big changes in the next 20-30 years that means it becomes illegal again even in cases where lives are at risk, that's how it goes. If it means that all abortions including late term are allowed in 20-30 years, so be it. Most likely is somewhere in the middle of course, but it gives us the flexibility to move with the times accordingly.

wexie

Billy86 wrote: »

Most likely is somewhere in the middle of course, but it gives us the flexibility to move with the times accordingly.

I think moving with the times is a pretty tough concept for some people to digest though.

Dookie Monster

At least there are the Brexit rows still to look forward to

martingriff

Shurimgreat wrote: »

No your "question" was completely invalid.

But to answer its unrestricted abortion. In other words no reason has to be given, disability or otherwise for the abortion up to 12 weeks. You knew that already though.

First I voted yes but I need to ask what you mean by the 12 weeks was needed for disability was the FAA not what that was for

retro:electro

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

rather than just have a Yes vote which also makes it legal for a healthy woman, pregnant through consensual sex, to end the life of her healthy baby at 12 weeks gestation.

You can still do whatever the hell you want Pete. But you just no longer have a say in what women do with their bodies should they become pregnant. The control is now in their hands. Only a complete control freak would have a problem with that.
Diddums.

PressRun

Powerful result. Kind of felt it would go this way. The hysteria from the No side in public suggested to me that they weren't getting a good response on the ground and I felt that my own family and circle of friends who were all yes voters couldn't be outliers. An amazing grassroots movement from Together for Yes. Don't think I've ever seen anything quite like it in my time. They did all the hard work door to door and did a great job of mobilising voters. A terrific result for them.

The Irish media would want to take a look at themselves after this as well. Their misguided attempts to provide "balance" all the time and giving platforms to religious fundamentalists has completely misrepresented the views of the electorate and led to a situation where people are actually shocked by this result. Hardly anyone agrees with the views of the Iona Institute, so why are we being led to believe that they legitimately represent a significant section of Irish society? Present the views of the people as they are and stop pandering to extremists.

Dookie Monster

retro:electro wrote: »

You can still do whatever the hell you want Pete. But you just no longer have a say in what women do with their bodies should they become pregnant. The control is now in their hands. Only a complete control freak would have a problem with that.
Diddums.

Disgusting comment. What about the unborn baby? What about the father?

Movementarian

Dookie Monster wrote: »

8th Amendment covered it already

It most certainly does not. One of the many reasons we were even having this referendum was because it expressely does not. How can you be this badly informed after all these months.

suicide_circus

Dookie Monster wrote: »

Disgusting comment. What about the unborn baby? What about the father?

Tough sh*t

haskellgeek

Dookie Monster wrote: »

Disgusting comment. What about the unborn baby? What about the father?

Why should I, as a man, have a say in another persons health?

kneemos

For the love of God RTE can you not make your strap line move a bit faster.

Dookie Monster

haskellgeek wrote: »

Why should I, as a man, have a say in another persons health?

The father of the child should have a say in the welfare of the baby

Trasna1

Its interesting that apparently 75% of voters had made their minds up over 5 years ago. It makes the entire two campaigns irrelevant really and all that was needed was to get the turnout.

That said I do not trust that statistic that only 25% of voters were in play.

Fighting Tao

Dookie Monster wrote: »

The father of the child should have a say in the welfare of the baby

It is not a baby at that stage. You are using emotive language and it impairs your belief system.

Billy86

Dookie Monster wrote: »

The father of the child should have a say in the welfare of the baby

So a woman should have the father's written permission before seeking an abortion?

Fighting Tao

Billy86 wrote: »

So a woman should have the father's written permission before seeking an abortion?

Of course...including in rape and incest cases. /s

Dookie Monster

Fighting Tao wrote: »

It is not a baby at that stage. You are using emotive language and it impairs your belief system.

At 12 weeks it has arms and legsl and a heartbeat. Remember what a 12 week scan is like?

Dookie Monster

Billy86 wrote: »

So a woman should have the father's written permission before seeking an abortion?

Yea. The man should be able to have the woman arrested for manslaughter

spookwoman

Dookie Monster wrote: »

Yea. The man should be able to have the woman arrested for manslaughter

WTF

enda1

Dookie Monster wrote: »

The father of the child should have a say in the welfare of the baby

It's not a baby. If the foetus reaches a viable age and is given birth to, then it is a baby.
And then the father does have a say.

Billy86

Dookie Monster wrote: »

Yea. The man should be able to have the woman arrested for manslaughter

Man rapes woman. Woman cannot definitively prove rape quickly, as is often the case. Woman gets abortion. Rapist gets to send his own victim to prison.

Welcome to Dookie Monster's Ireland! Thank fuck you are in a decided minority made up primarily of an ageing generation that has been definitively replaced.

Fighting Tao

Dookie Monster wrote: »

Yea. The man should be able to have the woman arrested for manslaughter

Ah jaysis. You are a lost cause.

eviltwin

Dookie Monster wrote: »

Yea. The man should be able to have the woman arrested for manslaughter

Sorry mate, the days of enforced pregnancy are gone. I for one will be working to make sure any woman who needs an abortion can get one especially those in abusive relationships.

retro:electro

Dookie Monster wrote: »

Disgusting comment. What about the unborn baby? What about the father?

Disgusting comment? God forbid the woman be prioritised when it comes to HER pregnancy. Thank fcuk 70% of Ireland have voted to move past this regressive, oppressive, insulting bolloxology

wexie

Billy86 wrote: »

Man rapes woman. Woman cannot definitively prove rape quickly, as is often the case. Woman gets abortion. Rapist gets to send his own victim to prison.

Welcome to Dookie Monster's Ireland!

totally not trolling :rolleyes:

Pa8301

Dookie Monster wrote: »

Yea. The man should be able to have the woman arrested for manslaughter

Most disturbing post of the thread that I have read so far.

ArmaniJeanss

PressRun wrote: »

The Irish media would want to take a look at themselves after this as well. Their misguided attempts to provide "balance" all the time and giving platforms to religious fundamentalists has completely misrepresented the views of the electorate and led to a situation where people are actually shocked by this result. Hardly anyone agrees with the views of the Iona Institute, so why are we being led to believe that they legitimately represent a significant section of Irish society? Present the views of the people as they are and stop pandering to extremists.

I thinks it's broadcasting rules - no matter how low an option in a referendum is polling you have to give them 50% of the coverage. You can see how it kinda makes sense.

Meanwhile the print media, though they don't have such rules, are kinda incentivised by economics to keep the idea that it's a 50/50 thing. Keep the ad money coming in, and the sales and website clicks.

Fighting Tao

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I thinks it's broadcasting rules - no matter how low an option in a referendum is polling you have to give them 50% of the coverage. You can see how it kinda makes sense.

It only makes sense if both sides deal in facts. I don't think there should be live debates or comments. Everything should be fact checked before broadcasting.

martingriff

Dookie Monster wrote: »

Yea. The man should be able to have the woman arrested for manslaughter

If I was in a stable relationship I would hope she would at least come and talk with me if she wanted an abortion. End of day it's her decision but I be pretty pissed if she just went and did it