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

Overheal

Calina wrote: »

Didn't stop them trying with the six month's element of the no campaign.

But remember the No side didn’t lie and was very factual!

[Deleted User]

robarmstrong wrote: »

It was an absolute disgrace that across what, 40,000+ posts how the majority of No voters on Boards viewed women as untrustworthy abortion-seeking sluts essentially.

Yet their posting on here that no one voted no due to having issues or in some cases hatred for women, might want to add selective reading to the list of selected sight and hearing, though it could be covered under selective sight also I suppose.

DrumSteve

Overheal wrote: »

But remember the No side didn’t lie and was very factual!

My missus was called a murderer in our own garden by one of their lot after she told them she was voting yes.

To paraphrase Roy, they can shove it up their bollix. All their lies and attempts at bullying and intimidation didn't work.

AtomicHorror

c montgomery wrote: »

Thanks but my question was about healthy pregnancy not one considered necessary.

Healthy pregnancy is not the same thing as healthy woman, and the state is not solely concerned with health and mental health but also things like poverty, social mobility, child welfare, access to education and the countless other social issues that are directly impacted when a woman is prevented from choosing.

So the state pays, as we have now agreed that it is in our collective best interests.

You disagree, but that's fine. You pay taxes on plenty of things you don't need or agree with.

Overheal

DrumSteve wrote: »

My missus was called a murderer in our own garden by one of their lot after she told them she was voting yes.

To paraphrase Roy, they can shove it up their bollix. All their lies and attempts at bullying and intimidation didn't work.

It’s like those aliens from Dreamcatcher: they’re all “help us we come in peace” and nice looking until Morgan Freeman’s like ‘nope ya dont’ and opens fire on them and they transform into crazy snarling slithering monsters.

https://youtu.be/jNlPCjYn4-k

AtomicHorror

DrumSteve wrote: »

My missus was called a murderer in our own garden by one of their lot after she told them she was voting yes.

To paraphrase Roy, they can shove it up their bollix. All their lies and attempts at bullying and intimidation didn't work.

My wife was called a murderer for refusing to take leaflets. Her friend was thumped on the chest where she was wearing her yes badge. A gentleman wearing a sandwich board wished death on every one of us.

The calls for a conciliatory approach now are nothing more than an attempt to expose a weakness for further attack. They had their say and 35 years to do better. Too late, now it's our turn.

No compromise, no dialogue. Shut them out.

Loafing Oaf

DubInMeath wrote: »

It could be that when the lies of McGrath says they will not obstruct the will of the majority, that they will simply not try to question the outcome of Fridays vote given the large majority for yes.

Apart from this as far as I know. The legislation will be drawn up by the goverment and then will have to be voted on by the dail to be passed into law. By voting against the legislation put forward by the government would be a way to obstruct it, however as with any bote the number of votes against the legislation must be greater than those in favour to actually obstruct.

Well I think we can safely say Mattie will be voting against whatever legislation is proposed. When he says he won't 'obstruct', I'm assuming he won't fillibuster or engage in similar tactics. However, this article says many TDS who had previously said they were opposed to the draft legislation are explicitly declaring they will support it. Note

Minister of State Ciarán Cannon, who voted No, said he would support “every single aspect” of the legislation.

I think we can stick a fork in this one...

ohnonotgmail

AtomicHorror wrote: »

My wife was called a murderer for refusing to take leaflets. Her friend was thumped on the chest where she was wearing her yes badge. A gentleman wearing a sandwich board wished death on every one of us.

The calls for a conciliatory approach now are nothing more than an attempt to expose a weakness for further attack. They had their say and 35 years to do better. Too late, now it's our turn.

No compromise, no dialogue. Shut them out.

Absolutely agree. An overwhelming majority have spoken. The No side dont get to water down the proposals now.

monkeybutter

free abortions for all on the NHS Dole

Zubeneschamali

monkeybutter wrote: »

free abortions for all on the NHS Dole

Free abortions for some, tiny flags for others!

Penn

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Well I think we can safely say Mattie will be voting against whatever legislation is proposed. When he says he won't 'obstruct', I'm assuming he won't fillibuster or engage in similar tactics. However, this article says many TDS who had previously said they were opposed to the draft legislation are explicitly declaring they will support it. Note

I think we can stick a fork in this one...

All McGrath kept saying on Saturday was that he trusted that the Taoiseach would take the concerns of the No side seriously and that their concerns should be discussed and incorporated into the legislation.

But given that the concerns of the No side boil down to "No abortion up to 12 weeks unless it's in the event of rape/FFA" at best, and given that people voted Yes knowing the proposed legislation, that's just not going to happen. So McGrath et al will refuse to support the bill because the concerns of the No side aren't being addressed.

So all he said on Saturday was just to try and look unobstructive while knowing he's going to ask for stuff which won't be given and he can be obstructive.

Zubeneschamali

Penn wrote: »

So all he said on Saturday was just to try and look unobstructive while knowing he's going to ask for stuff which won't be given and he can be obstructive.

McGrath voting voting no will not be obstructive. He will vote No and lose, we move on.

Obstructive would be calling for repeated amendments and multiple votes to delay passage of legislation. This would be extremely unpopular, so it sounds more like Mullen then McGrath.

Mullen has to know he's on borrowed time in the Seanad - he needs to keep his Pro-Life profile in the news so he can bag some right-wing think tank cash when the NUI graduates fire him.

erica74

It wasnt me123 wrote: »

It will also have to go to the Seanad and the likes of Ronan Mullen will oppose it but there will be enough yes voters to pass it. It was a great choice by FG/Simon Harris to put the legislation out there so that the No side can't say we didn't know what we were voting for. We all new exactly what we were voting for, including the 12 weeks, so they can't pretend they didn't know.

He disgraced himself throughout the campaign, particularly in the final stages. How on earth is he still in a position of power?

ohnonotgmail

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

McGrath voting voting no will not be obstructive. He will vote No and lose, we move on.

Obstructive would be calling for repeated amendments and multiple votes to delay passage of legislation. This would be extremely unpopular, so it sounds more like Mullen then McGrath.

Mullen has to know he's on borrowed time in the Seanad - he needs to keep his Pro-Life profile in the news so he can bag some right-wing think tank cash when the NUI graduates fire him.

i cant understand why they ever voted for him in the first place

[Deleted User]

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Absolutely agree. An overwhelming majority have spoken. The No side dont get to water down the proposals now.

Given some are posting the same crap on here as they did in the previous threads, yeah I'd go with that, but it's up to their TDs to tell them that really.

CruelCoin

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Absolutely agree. An overwhelming majority have spoken. The No side dont get to water down the proposals now.

Unfortunately they do.

No-voting independents propping up the government are still propping up the government.

While i hope for all-access to 12 weeks, in reality it's going to be a halfway house between that and the current situation, once all the appeasing is finished.

fxotoole

AtomicHorror wrote: »

My wife was called a murderer for refusing to take leaflets. Her friend was thumped on the chest where she was wearing her yes badge. A gentleman wearing a sandwich board wished death on every one of us.

The calls for a conciliatory approach now are nothing more than an attempt to expose a weakness for further attack. They had their say and 35 years to do better. Too late, now it's our turn.

No compromise, no dialogue. Shut them out.

These people you've described are obsessed with death despite being allegedly "pro life"

[Deleted User]

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i cant understand why they ever voted for him in the first place

Local politics why else.

Zubeneschamali

CruelCoin wrote: »

No-voting independents propping up the government are still propping up the government.

Not on this one - SF and half of FF will back the government, the independents can go and sh!te.

CruelCoin

fxotoole wrote: »

These people you've described are obsessed with death despite being allegedly "pro life"

The same heavily religious types who scan the obituary every day.

Loafing Oaf

DubInMeath wrote: »

I don't think this will be the case

https://www.facebook.com/savethe8th/posts/1376655072478676

The leadership of the various groups wont go away.

I'd say we could potentially see the likes of youth defence attacking medics and being abusive to patients around hospitals and GPs similar to how they acted around family planning clinics and hospitals in the 90s.

They should be allowed protest, but on the balance of this if they start acting like they have in the past they will have no grounds for complaint if physically removed or arrested by the Gardai.

Well the leadership of the anti-divorce movement didn't 'go away' after the 1995 referendum, and they presumably retained their beliefs, but AFAIK any real-world activism in that cause ceased entirely. I remember Dr. Gerard Casey saying they would regroup and agitate for another referendum but he didn't sound like he believed a word of it...

It is notable that very few of the pro-lifers declaring the fight will continue are giving any indication what form this 'fightback' will take. This Breda O'Brien article literally contains no more information about it than what is in the headline. Breda O’Brien: Anti-abortion movement has not given up and will not disappear
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/breda-o-brien-anti-abortion-movement-has-not-given-up-and-will-not-disappear-1.3510365

CruelCoin

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Not on this one - SF and half of FF will back the government, the independents can go and sh!te.

I hope so!

ArmaniJeanss

CruelCoin wrote: »

Unfortunately they do.

No-voting independents propping up the government are still propping up the government.

While i hope for all-access to 12 weeks, in reality it's going to be a halfway house between that and the current situation, once all the appeasing is finished.

Nah, government comfortably gets it through with the support of SF,AAAPBP, Labour, and the (at worst) abstaining of FF members.
It won't be a halfway house, it'll be a 98% build. We may have to miss out on some nice decking.

ohnonotgmail

CruelCoin wrote: »

Unfortunately they do.

No-voting independents propping up the government are still propping up the government.

While i hope for all-access to 12 weeks, in reality it's going to be a halfway house between that and the current situation, once all the appeasing is finished.

they wont need the independents to get this passed if Sinn Fein support the proposed bill. And bar one or two they do support the proposed bill.

[Deleted User]

fxotoole wrote: »

These people you've described are obsessed with death despite being allegedly "pro life"

At least until birth as well founded, after that feck ya.

Fighting Tao

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

This Breda O'Brien article literally contains no more information about it than what is in the headline. Breda O’Brien: Anti-abortion movement has not given up and will not disappear
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/breda-o-brien-anti-abortion-movement-has-not-given-up-and-will-not-disappear-1.3510365

No way, I am not clicking that! Each click gives her validation within the Irish Times.

martingriff

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Absolutely agree. An overwhelming majority have spoken. The No side dont get to water down the proposals now.

While agree that the Yes was overwhelming behaviour polls by RTE and other have shown people voted yes as it was a yes or no question however if was between repeal just for FAA rape incest metal health or repeal on all and the 12 weeks the majority of the yes and some of the no votes would have overwhelming gone for no 12 weeks. So I can see the 12 might be reduced to 10 or 9 as a possibility not likely but a pissibility

AtomicHorror

CruelCoin wrote: »

Unfortunately they do.

No-voting independents propping up the government are still propping up the government.

While i hope for all-access to 12 weeks, in reality it's going to be a halfway house between that and the current situation, once all the appeasing is finished.

I hope not.

FG need votes from the independents for many things, but do they need them for this? Sinn Fein, Labour and the Social Democrats will back FG 100%, and a good portion of FF will back them too.

The major parties are already maneuvering for a GE, so their incentive to pander to the independents is dwindling.

[Deleted User]

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Well the leadership of the anti-divorce movement didn't 'go away' after the 1995 referendum, and they presumably retained their beliefs, but AFAIK any real-world activism in that cause ceased entirely. I remember Dr. Gerard Casey saying they would regroup and agitate for another referendum but he didn't sound like he believed a word of it...

It is notable that very few of the pro-lifers declaring the fight will continue are giving any indication what form this 'fightback' will take. This Breda O'Brien article literally contains no more information about it than what is in the headline. Breda O’Brien: Anti-abortion movement has not given up and will not disappear
https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/breda-o-brien-anti-abortion-movement-has-not-given-up-and-will-not-disappear-1.3510365

I'd say part of it will be the likes of youth defence etc protesting at GP or hospitals as they did in the past or physically attacking medics and verbally abusing patients, similar stuff again from their past.

It was telling I'd say that from a few stunts by some members, that they were kept out of the way by the retain campaign.

Shurimgreat

spookwoman wrote: »

Jesus is Shurimgreat still at it. Can someone please donate a womb to them so they have one to control hoping it will shut them up.

Spook, if you don't like what I'm saying put me on ignore.
Its a public forum where free speech is allowed.
Tell you what so we don't have to listen to each other's views any more, let me go first and add you to ignore