end of the road wrote: » i would disagree, it's not a clump of cells.
Shurimgreat wrote: » Not inconsistent at all. I and most other No siders have been consistent all along. They oppose freely available abortion in this country in all but the most extenuating of circumstances. Extenuating includes lack of consent in the pregnancy, FFA, serious risk to mothers life, and extreme mental distress.
Graces7 wrote: » It is not, ever OK to abort a healthy foetus ( and all are innocent so stop with the emotionally overloaded terminology please).
_Dara_ wrote: » I voted in a very rural polling station in the west of Ireland. I found out from my father today that the results from that station were 52% No, 48% Yes. At the same station for the SSM ref, it was 70% No, 30% Yes. For a conservative, rural outpost to only slightly go against the grain is very surprising.
....... wrote: » This post has been deleted.
It was a bit of a shocker alright. But it affected many many more people directly.
alaimacerc wrote: » Immediately after the exit polls, I was seeing comments on social media to the effect of, "how can this be more popular than SSM?!" Not from No's, mind, but from Yes people completely consternated at what they were seeing. And maybe pinching themselves, and hoping RTE and the IT weren't just pranking us all.
ArmaniJeanss wrote: » SSM was 3 years ago so the register had increased by everyone who was aged 15->18 back then, probably 80% Yes Voters.
Loafing Oaf wrote: » I'm convinced most pro-lifers know this deep down and the defiant statements about carrying on the fight are just going through the motions.https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/breda-o-brien-anti-abortion-movement-has-not-given-up-and-will-not-disappear-1.3510365 I've cited this Breda O'Brien article before to illustrate this. If she genuinely believed the "Anti-abortion movement has not given up and will not disappear," would the article not have included even one sentence along the lines of "The first thing pro-life people need to do now is x or y."?
the great challenge now confronting the pro-life movement in Ireland is to build up an infrastructure of cultural influence and formation that does not depend on the support, patronage or goodwill of politicians and mainstream media. Such an infrastructure could include alternative online media, support groups for families and single parents, counselling services for pregnant women, support networks and legal assistance for conscientious objectors, and a revitalisation of parish communities.
operating at the margins of the establishment may seem rather unglamorous and may even appear defeatist.
Loafing Oaf wrote: » Loafing Oaf wrote: » I'm convinced most pro-lifers know this deep down and the defiant statements about carrying on the fight are just going through the motions.https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/breda-o-brien-anti-abortion-movement-has-not-given-up-and-will-not-disappear-1.3510365 I've cited this Breda O'Brien article before to illustrate this. If she genuinely believed the "Anti-abortion movement has not given up and will not disappear," would the article not have included even one sentence along the lines of "The first thing pro-life people need to do now is x or y."? https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/pro-lifers-must-regroup-in-the-shadow-of-the-mainstream-1.3521418 Her's a guy with at least some sort of concrete suggestions on a way forward for the pro-life movement the great challenge now confronting the pro-life movement in Ireland is to build up an infrastructure of cultural influence and formation that does not depend on the support, patronage or goodwill of politicians and mainstream media. Such an infrastructure could include alternative online media, support groups for families and single parents, counselling services for pregnant women, support networks and legal assistance for conscientious objectors, and a revitalisation of parish communities. Although as he says himself operating at the margins of the establishment may seem rather unglamorous and may even appear defeatist.
Taytoland wrote: » Losing the vote for the pro life side was the end. No coming back from this. They need to just move on now or move out of the country.
Wrongway1985 wrote: » Taytoland wrote: » Losing the vote for the pro life side was the end. No coming back from this. They need to just move on now or move out of the country. Malta prob their best bet doesn't look like they'll be many years left of an abortion free Northern Ireland :pac:
iguana wrote: » My parents had an interesting conversation with a No voter during the week. A friends of theirs in her late 60s - 70s. She said she felt voting Yes was the right thing to do but in the polling booth was overcome by a fear of God watching and just couldn't go against a lifetime of teaching. Hearing the exit polls on Friday night was a massive relief as she really, really wanted the 8th to be repealed and were glad her fear hadn't prevented it from happening. My grandmother in her late 80s didn't vote, as she didn't in 2015. I met a lot of older people while canvassing who said they wouldn't be voting this time. I think that comes from a similar instinct of not being able to vote Yes after a lifetime of church membership but not wanting to vote No.
Taytoland wrote: » Will take some amount of work before legislation is passed via the assembly in NI. Everyone thinks it's just the DUP who are skeptical of abortion. The SDLP MLAs I'd argue are more against it than the UUP MLAs.
Taytoland wrote: » How are the SDLP irrelevant when you will probably need all SDLP MLAs to back reform on abortion in a vote?
FrancieBrady wrote: » Taytoland wrote: » How are the SDLP irrelevant when you will probably need all SDLP MLAs to back reform on abortion in a vote? They were discussing disbanding a short while ago or merging with FF. They will go with the majority on this imo, it would be the death knell for them if they align themselves with the DUP. Arlene knows how toxic association with her own party is among nationalists/republicans, when she proudly trolled that some SF MLA's would vote with the DUP.
[font=Helmet, Freesans, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]The proposal to allow abortion in such cases was defeated by 59 votes to 40. [/font] The amendment relating to pregnancies which are the result of rape or incest was put forward by Anna Lo, also of the Alliance Party, and was defeated by by 64 votes to 30.
The amendment relating to pregnancies which are the result of rape or incest was put forward by Anna Lo, also of the Alliance Party, and was defeated by by 64 votes to 30.
Taytoland wrote: » Losing the vote for the pro life side was the end. No coming back from this. They need to just move on now or move out of the country. The legislation once enacted will never be removed, the flood gates will have opened. Over 60% of the people don't want the old abortion laws, this can not be disputed or argued with. What's done is done.
Loafing Oaf wrote: » I'm sure pro-lifers with any cop-on know this, and yet they're coming out with the "We haven't gone away, you know" routine. I'm just wondering is this just bluster or do they have a way forward in mind that doesn't involve (for the forseeable future) seeking to repeal the legislation or reverse the referendum result.
Achasanai wrote: » I think it's quite clear that that reversing the referendum result is the first step, as it's already happening with the three court cases. Preventing the legislation will be the next step, with arguments ranging from (the at least honest) straight-up don't agree with it, to the more disingenuous (a lot of which we have here) based around the result 'not being a landslide' (:rolleyes:) as well as arguing over the exit poll, and the legitimacy of the citizens' Assembly. Repealing the legislation will be the next route down the line, but I imagine there won't be a huge amount of appetite for it at that stage.
iguana wrote: » My impression of Iona, the Life "Institute," etc is that they are not very good at adapting quickly to changed situations. From as soon as the Citizens Assembly vote made it clear that a referendum would be on the horizon they formed a plan to fight against any changes and a plan to fight back if they lost the referendum. Once it was decided that the referendum was for full repeal they thought they had a chance at winning and that any loss would be by a tiny margin. So their plan B was to get a dupe to take a court case and buy time while they used their mandate of nearly half the electorate to pressure politicians into delaying and diluting any legislation. A few days before the referendum I drove past a huge Save the 8th stall collecting signatures for 'a petition against abortion.' At the time I thought it was weird as what was the purpose of that petition a few days before we voted. A few months before it would have been a way to gather names of potential volunteers for the campaign but that that point it could only be preparation to come out swinging after a Yes victory. They have been preparing to fight legislation for abortion since before Repeal was voted for. They thought they'd be able to claim huge support from an enormous minority. They can't now, but they haven't adapted. They won't be able to delay or dilute legislation with a 2:1 loss because few politicians will go up against the majority of their constituency on this matter. But they are still going to continue on as they had planned despite the utterly changed landscape. It's very, very stupid of them because they can't win and it means that Ireland is no longer this bastion of conservative values in the Western world. We may in fact be the opposite as abortion is likely to be heavily subsidised if not free and harassing women availing of the services will not be tolerated. Which may very likely mean that the fundamentalist Americans who have been pumping money into maintaining the status quo here will be less invested in fighting an unwinnable fight. Iona have still got a lot of money but they are probably going to see many of their income streams dry up. Wasting money now will only hasten their irrelevancy but they don't seem to be people blessed with a lot of cop on. They couldn't have run a more tone deaf campaign if they had deliberately tried. They are still claiming Maria Steen was the winner of the Claire Byrne debate when it's obvious now that she utterly failed in her actual objective of winning over undecided voters. They are continuing to spend money now as if their best income streams aren't at risk of being discontinued. They might be made up of well educated people but they really aren't very smart and will continue tilting at windmills until they fall over.
_Dara_ wrote: » I’ve been looking at Save the 8th Twitter profiles with interest since the result. Not interacting with them, just looking at them. One commonality among many of them is an almost prurient tendancy for describing - whether accurately or not - the process of abortion. Really gory posts, almost luxuriating in the details. It’s very odd.
_Dara_ wrote: » Did anyone ever see this video Save The 8th released in response to the Together For Yes video featuring celebrities? Embarrassing stuff.https://twitter.com/Savethe8thInfo/status/997560476614709248?s=20
gctest50 wrote: » lol - yet again ? really ? lol
