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

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Christ on a bike this parasite thing, lads ye don't need to justify yerselves. Neyite said "Ever watch Aliens 3 where Ripley is infected with the alien parasite inside?" explicitly in relation to how it might feel being pregnant as a result of rape. An apt analogy for a specific situation.

A three page discussion on whether foetuses are aliens, or sequels in a franchise where the second installment is arguably the strongest, would be as sensible as what's just happened.

I mean pregnancy's basically just The Godfather III, right? Am I right??

gctest50

bit of reading here if you havn't seen it already :

http://www.clare.fm/featured-2/live-clare-count-underway-eighth-amendment-referendum/

09:35 - So far, Furglan (near Lahinch) is the only box tallied that has said no

Labasheeda – the third No vote in the county – had a margin of only three votes.

It wasnt me123

gctest50 wrote: »

Soon as i can - flat out here @ Abortion Central - paintin' n tilin' in this weather is murder

When you have time, can I have the Tipperary ones as well please. I tried to get them on google but not having much luck. thanks

The Legend Of Kira

I watched the latest video from the social media vlogger Ciara Sherlock, she mentions that some people are apparently planning some sort of legal challenges to the outcome, when a vote is carried by people in a referendum or election, what grounds would someone have to issue a legal challenge once the issue has being voted on by people ?

https://www.facebook.com/ciara.sherlock.50/videos/10156405909918554/

gctest50

Limerick :

Fighting Tao

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I watched the latest video from the social media vlogger Ciara Sherlock, she mentions that some people are apparently planning some sort of legal challenges to the outcome, when a vote is carried by people in a referendum or election, what grounds would someone have to issue a legal challenge once the issue has being voted on by people ?

https://www.facebook.com/ciara.sherlock.50/videos/10156405909918554/

If it's like the nut job that took offence to the SSM referendum, then they won't have a case. As far as I know, anyone can go to court to contest a referendum. Let them waste their money. It will fail. I reckon it will be along the lines of home2vote, even though there was a homeToVoteNo campaign abroad.

[Deleted User]

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I watched the latest video from the social media vlogger Ciara Sherlock, she mentions that some people are apparently planning some sort of legal challenges to the outcome, when a vote is carried by people in a referendum or election, what grounds would someone have to issue a legal challenge once the issue has being voted on by people ?

https://www.facebook.com/ciara.sherlock.50/videos/10156405909918554/

Perhaps similar to the two cases taken against the SSM ref

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/marriage-referendum-appeals-rejected-by-supreme-court-1.2354322

Simi

I worked out some of the percentages for the Sligo-Leitrim constituency. I was was primarily looking for the highest yes vote (which was Strandhill with a whooping 74.6% - with a few other areas breaking 70%). I didn't bother calculating Leitrim or west Cavan as they were much more evenly divided between yes & no.

gctest50

It wasnt me123 wrote: »

When you have time, can I have the Tipperary ones as well please. I tried to get them on google but not having much luck. thanks

Same - not much luck at all - bar this :

It wasnt me123

gctest50 wrote: »

Same - not much luck at all - bar this :

Ah bless poor Mattie, he looks very sad heh heh.

Not to worry, its just I was working at one of the booths and curious as to how they voted. Thanks for trying

iguana

nullzero wrote: »

This seems to have gone under the radar a little, as stated earlier a parasite is an organism of a different species to its host.
It appears that following posters agree(seeing that they thanked the above post) that a human fetus developing inside a human woman is a parasite; bootpaws, Cupcake_Crisis, doomshine, fxotoole, iguana, LorelaiG, SusieBlue, wench.

Can we reach a consensus on this? Is a human fetus a parasite? Or is it as science would stipulate not a parasite?

It's not a parasite but it can certainly feel like a parasite unless conditions are positive. And I mean that on both a mental level and a biological one. Growing a foetus is gruelling under positive conditions, if you never want it, you would absolutely feel like it was a parasite. And biologically, as I have stated many, many, many time on this and other threads in the last 6 weeks or so, my own immune system attacked and killed the embryos in all but one of my pregnancies. My own body certainly treated all those embryos as parasites, but I guess nobody told my anti-bodies about the dictionary definition.

standardg60

As this thread looks like its quickly coming to a close due to ridiculous bickering and way off topic discussion i'd like to return to its original purpose and pay tribute to the dead. The 8th amendment.

The vast majority of yes and no voters don't seem to realise the referendum was about the removal of the eight..not about the rights and wrongs of abortion.

The simple indisputable fact is the 8th amendment directly led to the establishment of legal abortion for Irish women. Before the 8th no woman could legally travel for an abortion (she was still subject to prosecution on her return) or could claim to be suicidal in order to procure one. These suddenly became ocean going fur lined constitutional rights, anyone who thinks that the 8th saved lives is deluded. The only lives the 8th could subsequently affect were mothers who actually wanted children, not to save but to kill, and it did that ruthlessly.

The fact remains that the 8th, and its supporters, sought to separate that which couldn't be separated, the mother and the unborn, and give separate rights to each somehow not affecting the other. This is impossible. You cannot 'love both'. You either believe that forcing a woman to become pregnant and forcing her to remain pregnant are as wrong as each other, or you don't. That is the essence of the argument.

Wrongway1985

Tipp FM tweeted percentage by areas but only on one polling station breakdown , Matties own :pac:

https://twitter.com/TippFM/status/1000350172960952320
https://twitter.com/TippFM/status/1000327474310467584

Didn't see anything else meself.

iguana

standardg60 wrote: »

These suddenly became ocean going fur lined constitutional rights, anyone who thinks that the 8th saved lives is deluded.

That was the 13th amendment which passed in 1992. Up until them women could possibly have been arrested for travelling abroad for an abortion and the could certainly be stopped as happened with Ms X.

standardg60

iguana wrote: »

That was the 13th amendment which passed in 1992. Up until them women could possibly have been arrested for travelling abroad for an abortion and the could certainly be stopped as happened with Ms X.

This was just the first case where it was actually challenged. Miss x was in state care. Any previous challenges would have led to the same result.

gormdubhgorm

iguana wrote: »

What 20% on boards? Do you mean the less than 15% difference between the boards poll and the referendum result? Then you are misunderstanding why it exists. It's not because boards is 15% more liberal, it's because there is a very, very small elderly population on the forum. I don't know exactly what the age demographics are here but I think that it's fair to assume that we skew significantly under 50. And 81.66% of 18-49 year olds voted Yes. Boards.ie is actually a very, very, very fair reflection of Irish society based on age bracket.

And as for the tone you are picking up. That's what people are feeling on and offline. It's just that with the relative anonymity of a forum people can be more forward about it. Just as I'm guessing you are, because there is no way you'd hold forth in the pub with the views you've been pontificating about here because at best you'd end up friendless and at worst they could provoke violence from someone who has really suffered under the 8th.

What I meant is the percentage of no voters are treated as piranhas on boards and the rest just end up back slapping and see how great they are.
(it is the way internet forums /social media in general works the majority rule and it becomes an echoe chamber bubble with people agreeing with each other.

As for comments in the pub.
I wouldn't normally discuss politics in a pub.
But if I was asked directly I would.
I actually tried to converse as gaelige to a repeal canvasser who happened to be at Irish thing at a pub (not the one in my original post).
(my Irish is patchy at best - difficult discussing abortion in english never mind Iirsh)

She was very fair-minded as at that stage I explained how I found the decision difficult (before the ref - I had not assessed all the issues in my mind yet).
She was one of the ones who had the "woman's. place is the revolution on her back.
It is one thing I noticed even yesterday I saw a woman wearing a repeal t-shirt, the yes side are very visual and overt the no side less so in general it seems.
It seems socially acceptable to be overt with a yes vote and the opposite for no.
I am the type of person if I was asked my opinion directly on anything I would tell the other person.
Online or offline.

pitifulgod

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I watched the latest video from the social media vlogger Ciara Sherlock, she mentions that some people are apparently planning some sort of legal challenges to the outcome, when a vote is carried by people in a referendum or election, what grounds would someone have to issue a legal challenge once the issue has being voted on by people ?

https://www.facebook.com/ciara.sherlock.50/videos/10156405909918554/

None, Sherlock is far from credible.

standardg60

Gormdubhgorm would you like to deal directly with any of my points?

Otherwise this thread is going nowhere. Mods please note.

Cupcake_Crisis

The whole ‘we’re not allowed to get our point across’ from the no side bothers me somewhat. The referendum passed 2:1, it stands to reason that any thread like this is going to be populated with more yes than no voters. You’re basically complaining that you’re not being heard because there’s more people that disagree with you than agree with you.

That’s not directed at anyone btw, just an observation.

gormdubhgorm

standardg60 wrote: »

As this thread looks like its quickly coming to a close due to ridiculous bickering and way off topic discussion i'd like to return to its original purpose and pay tribute to the dead. The 8th amendment.

The vast majority of yes and no voters don't seem to realise the referendum was about the removal of the eight..not about the rights and wrongs of abortion.

The simple indisputable fact is the 8th amendment directly led to the establishment of legal abortion for Irish women. Before the 8th no woman could legally travel for an abortion (she was still subject to prosecution on her return) or could claim to be suicidal in order to procure one. These suddenly became ocean going fur lined constitutional rights, anyone who thinks that the 8th saved lives is deluded. The only lives the 8th could subsequently affect were mothers who actually wanted children, not to save but to kill, and it did that ruthlessly.

The fact remains that the 8th, and its supporters, sought to separate that which couldn't be separated, the mother and the unborn, and give separate rights to each somehow not affecting the other. This is impossible. You cannot 'love both'. You either believe that forcing a woman to become pregnant and forcing her to remain pregnant are as wrong as each other, or you don't. That is the essence of the argument.

I still disagree it is not impossible to love both that is just a silly.
There is all this talk about those who suffered because of the 8th amendment.
On the other side of the coin there are those who have been born because of the 8th amendment?

That are now living happy lives?
There are bound to be mothers that say I am glad I didn't have that abortion when she looks into her child's eyes etc etc.

robarmstrong

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I still disagree it is not impossible to love both that is just a silly.
There is all this talk about those who suffered because of the 8th amendment.
On the other side of the coin there are those who have been born because of the 8th amendment?

That are now living happy lives?
There are bound to be mothers that say I am glad I didn't have that abortion when she looks into her child's eyes etc etc.

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Mod note: gormdubhgorm, no electioneering as per the OP. Don't post in this thread again.

Buford T. Justice

Has your threadban been lifted? If so, ask the mod to clarify, otherwise you will be reported left right and centre and face further infractions.

Grayditch

I'm starting a metal band called Foetus Parasite and I just need to know who I'm paying naming rights to.

gormdubhgorm

Cupcake_Crisis wrote: »

The whole ‘we’re not allowed to get our point across’ from the no side bothers me somewhat. The referendum passed 2:1, it stands to reason that any thread like this is going to be populated with more yes than no voters. You’re basically complaining that you’re not being heard because there’s more people that disagree with you than agree with you.

That’s not directed at anyone btw, just an observation.

I am not saying I don't expect to be t numbered it is just a cohort of the 'hard yes' seem to run the show.

There seems to be damn all no voters posting because they would not brave these waters.

My opinion anyway.
It is not really proportional it is done now anyway can't be undone.
Where do they start now is the question it will be a mess for good while before things settle down.

gormdubhgorm

Grayditch wrote: »

I'm starting a metal band called Foetus Parasite and I just need to know who I'm paying naming rights to.

Cough... it's your band your choice now apparently

robarmstrong

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Cough... it's your band your choice now apparently

Has your threadban been lifted?

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Mod note: gormdubhgorm, no electioneering as per the OP. Don't post in this thread again.

Buford T. Justice

gormdubhgorm

standardg60 wrote: »

Gormdubhgorm would you like to deal directly with any of my points?

Otherwise this thread is going nowhere. Mods please note.

Hang on still I check can't be reading everything.

I hope the mods are noting!

gormdubhgorm

robarmstrong wrote: »

Has your threadban been lifted?

Attack the post not the poster rob .. please read the charter

robarmstrong

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Attack the post not the poster rob .. please read the charter

Have you read this?

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Mod note: gormdubhgorm, no electioneering as per the OP. Don't post in this thread again.

Buford T. Justice

Myself and another user are trying to do you a favour, if you continue to post you're ignoring mod instructions that dictate you are not to post here anymore, you really should wait for the mod to clarify this on-thread if it has been reversed because you'll honestly end up worse than a threadban.

Take the advice, stop posting until it's sorted.

gormdubhgorm

gctest50 wrote: »

.

How is that is electioneering that is comment on perception and so and so forth.
That is point I was making.

pleas advice

standardg60 wrote: »

The simple indisputable fact is the 8th amendment directly led to the establishment of legal abortion for Irish women. Before the 8th no woman could legally travel for an abortion (she was still subject to prosecution on her return) or could claim to be suicidal in order to procure one. These suddenly became ocean going fur lined constitutional rights, anyone who thinks that the 8th saved lives is deluded. The only lives the 8th could subsequently affect were mothers who actually wanted children, not to save but to kill, and it did that ruthlessly.

are there any cases where a death was unavoidable, because of the 8th, but wouldn't have been otherwise? Any that I have seen linked, those deaths were not unavoidably caused by the 8th.