Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

1212213215217218246

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    spookwoman wrote: »
    At least it was signed in before the change over in president.

    Isn’t the president bit just a formality?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,059 ✭✭✭✭spookwoman


    Isn’t the president bit just a formality?
    They could ar*e around a bit drag it out etc if they wanted. At least least now its signed out of the constitution which is a major start


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,278 ✭✭✭mordeith


    Isn’t the president bit just a formality?

    There's precedent with a former president stalling legislation. Can't remember his name. Might have been he lad before Hillery


  • Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,564 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    mordeith wrote: »
    There's precedent with a former president stalling legislation. Can't remember his name. Might have been he lad before Hillery

    If Gemma was president she might have stalled it "for the good of the people"
    :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,059 ✭✭✭✭spookwoman


    Cabaal wrote: »
    If Gemma was president she might have stalled it "for the good of the people"
    :rolleyes:
    And if that other space cadet got in......


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,278 ✭✭✭mordeith


    This is the lad. Jump to the section on his presidency.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cearbhall_Ó_Dálaigh


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,142 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    I remember his name giving me a lot of grief back in history class. :pac:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    I’m glad Miggeldy got that shit done, so.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,921 ✭✭✭✭Frank Bullitt


    https://twitter.com/ellenmcoyne/status/1042376885051813888

    Next thing we need to repeal, Ronan Mullens career.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,653 ✭✭✭✭amdublin


    With each step comes relief. But we're not there yet


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,662 ✭✭✭✭Dial Hard


    Gintonious wrote:
    Next thing we need to repeal, Ronan Mullens career.

    They'd be transvaginal ultrasounds too if that prick had his way.

    I absolutely loathe that man.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 700 ✭✭✭LorelaiG




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    Dial Hard wrote: »
    They'd be transvaginal ultrasounds too if that prick had his way.

    I absolutely loathe that man.

    His puss on RTÉ the day of the vote still fills me with delight.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Gintonious wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/ellenmcoyne/status/1042376885051813888

    Next thing we need to repeal, Ronan Mullens career.

    Before that happens, he'll probably try to force mothers to attend funerals for fetuses.

    On the bright side, his ideas are most likely to be ones that everyone has already heard of.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 219 ✭✭FingerDeKat


    His puss on RTÉ the day of the vote still fills me with delight.
    you can also add that goat fukker Mattie McGrath ...small pleasures in life :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,811 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    Gintonious wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/ellenmcoyne/status/1042376885051813888

    Next thing we need to repeal, Ronan Mullens career.

    Leaving aside the invasive and demeaning nature of the proposal, has he thought about the practicalities of it for a split second? Or is it just something he vaguely heard about pro-life people in America advocating?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    An ultrasound that looks like a baked bean isn't going to change anyone's mind, Ronan.

    I'm partial to your abracadabra,

    I'm raptured by the joy of it all.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 661 ✭✭✭Annabella1


    I see minister Harris is proposing free access to termination for the whole female population
    I find it ironic that couples unable to conceive needing ivf face hugh bills and zero state support !


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Sofiztikated


    Annabella1 wrote: »
    I see minister Harris is proposing free access to termination for the whole female population
    I find it ironic that couples unable to conceive needing ivf face hugh bills and zero state support !

    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-to-pay-for-couples-to-have-ivf-treatment-1.3242402


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,637 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,637 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    An ultrasound that looks like a baked bean isn't going to change anyone's mind, Ronan.

    Anything to put the woman under pressure is o.k. for the hate both crowd. This, and the 3 day waiting period, and whatever the fcuk the anti-woman types come up with.

    Besides, arguing with a hatebother trying to appeal to their intelligence is pointless.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 661 ✭✭✭Annabella1




    A vague maybe promise for 2019
    Why isn’t the state equally supportive for those who want a pregnancy


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,811 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    Annabella1 wrote: »
    A vague maybe promise for 2019

    Whereas the state is already subsidising abortions?:confused:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,637 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Annabella1 wrote: »
    A vague maybe promise for 2019
    Why isn’t the state equally supportive for those who want a pregnancy

    Because IVF is an expensive luxury when you don't have enough hospital beds? Better the State reforms the horrible adoption rules in this country, solves the problem and improves real lives.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,917 ✭✭✭✭iguana


    As someone who has experienced difficulty conceiving and has never experienced an unwanted pregnancy I genuinely don't understand your point. Infertility is absolute hell but it's not the same as unwanted pregnancy. Having something growing inside you, making you ill and causing pain, changing your body for good and ending with a person in the world who is your child whether you have to raise them or give them up is a completely and totally different experience to infertility. Just because they both concern reproductive function doesn't make them the same thing or even two sides of the same coin. They aren't. Please don't conflate women's reproductive issues as one thing. It's reductive and frankly stupid. Constipation and diarrhea are both illnesses of the digestive system but we don't conflate them for no good reason.

    Infertility is also not just something that means jumping straight to IVF and the state does cover the cost of treating many conditions associated with infertility. My endometriosis was treated by the HSE. Women with miscarriage history can be prescribed free progesterone to help maintain the pregnancy, etc. IVF is expensive and with an average of a 20% success rate and often used by couples who have other issues that should have been treated first. My ovarian endometriosis would have meant IVF would never have worked for me as my body treated embryos as invaders. It will be great if IVF becomes available through the HSE, but lets not pretend that the state's free/subsidised healthcare system isn't actually helping couples conceive already.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,917 ✭✭✭✭iguana


    As someone who has experienced difficulty conceiving and has never experienced an unwanted pregnancy I genuinely don't understand your point. Infertility is absolute hell but it's not the same as unwanted pregnancy. Having something growing inside you, making you ill and causing pain, changing your body for good and ending with a person in the world who is your child whether you have to raise them or give them up is a completely and totally different experience to infertility. Just because they both concern reproductive function doesn't make them the same thing or even two sides of the same coin. They aren't. Please don't conflate women's reproductive issues as one thing. It's reductive and frankly stupid. Constipation and diarrhea are both illnesses of the digestive system but we don't conflate them for no good reason.

    Infertility is also not just something that means jumping straight to IVF and the state does cover the cost of treating many conditions associated with infertility. My endometriosis was treated by the HSE. Women with miscarriage history can be prescribed free progesterone to help maintain the pregnancy, etc. IVF is expensive and with an average of a 20% success rate and often used by couples who have other issues that should have been treated first. My ovarian endometriosis would have meant IVF would never have worked for me as my body treated embryos as invaders. It will be great if IVF becomes available through the HSE, but lets not pretend that the state's free/subsidised healthcare system isn't actually helping couples conceive already.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Igotadose wrote: »
    Shame that. State needs to spend less on entitlements.
    I was going to sarcastically reply "yeah yeah, but besides that"... I see the person you were replying to had already beaten me to it, just without the sarcasm.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Sofiztikated


    Billy86 wrote: »
    I was going to sarcastically reply "yeah yeah, but besides that"... I see the person you were replying to had already beaten me to it, just without the sarcasm.

    You'll find I didn't reply with anything, with or without sarcasm, as this is my first post on this topic since.

    I was just pointing out that Harris had already said about the State helping possibly with IVF treatments, the poster I replied to asked why State didn't.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,312 ✭✭✭paw patrol


    Annabella1 wrote: »
    I see minister Harris is proposing free access to termination for the whole female population
    I find it ironic that couples unable to conceive needing ivf face hugh bills and zero state support !

    the state is broke or acts like it.
    Plenty of hospitals in heap and operations cancelled etc....obligatory mention of the homeless...

    but the state find the pennies and cough up for young Mary's mistake during rag week....

    priorities?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,417 ✭✭✭WinnyThePoo


    jesus


Advertisement