Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

SusieBlue · 04-01-2019 03:11PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Women have plenty of options. Take a pill or use some other form of contraceptive. Take a pill afterwards.
Abortion of a fetus shouldn't be an option just because you were irresponsible.
I think I've made it quite clear, I'm not against a woman having an abortion if the contraceptive doesn't work so long as they were responsible enough to use one in the first place.

How would that be legally proven? How would the woman prove a condom was used?
Statements from her partner, maybe a reference of good character from her employer? Bank statements to prove she's a "responsible" person?

I've asked you several times now and you haven't answered, why are you so determined to weaponise innocent children into punishments to be bestowed onto their "careless" and "irresponsible" mothers?

Why do you think irresponsible, careless people who do not want a child would make a good parent?
Do you think its in the best interests of a child to be born to such a parent?

Why do you think its an acceptable fate to force a woman to gestate a pregnancy she does not want, just to dump the baby into foster care in the hope it may be "adopted" at best, or at worst, go through life stuck in the system?

None of these scenarios have the best interests of the child, woman, or society at heart, none.
Those scenarios satisfy your own personal morals on the issue and very little else.
Why should women you don't know have their choices restricted because you, a stranger they will never meet, don't agree with it?

dudara · 04-01-2019 03:27PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Women have plenty of options. Take a pill or use some other form of contraceptive. Take a pill afterwards.

Yes, we do have lots of options. And I’m going to let you in on a little secret. They don’t always work, no matter how diligent or careful you are.

Now, how do you propose to define someone being “negligent”? How you do propose that is defined in law so that it is clear and straightforward to understand?

And even if someone was negligent, or careless, are you comfortable with making them live with the results of that “mistake” for the next 18 years? Because that is what you are suggesting, an 18 year sentence.

eagle eye · 04-01-2019 03:54PM

amcalester wrote:

What if the women was "irresponsible" but now has a life threatening condition, or a FFA, can she get an abortion or does her being "irresponsible" mean no abortion under any circumstances?

These are all reasons why I voted to repeal the law.
I'm talking about a healthy woman with a healthy fetus who has been irresponsible.
And the policing is the medical practitioner. She has to fill out a form and that form decides if she is allowed to proceed. If somebody is willing to put lies on the form they can live with it.

Wrongway1985 · 04-01-2019 03:59PM

Eagle Eye c'mon now reading your posts is prior election speak it's all been through before and the thoughts or arguments you've laid down are very suspect to come from someone who apparently voted Yes.

SusieBlue · 04-01-2019 04:03PM

eagle eye wrote: »

These are all reasons why I voted to repeal the law.
I'm talking about a healthy woman with a healthy fetus who has been irresponsible.
And the policing is the medical practitioner. She has to fill out a form and that form decides if she is allowed to proceed. If somebody is willing to put lies on the form they can live with it.

Then it is essentially a pointless exercise.
Over the course of history women have been known to throw themselves down the stairs, drink bleach, stick coat hangers up themselves, commit suicide and in more recent times, order tablets on the internet and travel to other jurisdictions to terminate their pregnancies.

You think having to fill in and potentially lie on a form will phase them if they're in that desperate a situation they need to end their pregnancy?

Your whole idea just adds more humiliation and stress to what is already a difficult situation.
Contraception or no contraception makes absolutely no difference, the end result is the same.

Also interesting and disappointing to note your repeated blame of the woman, she didn't get pregnant by herself, what's the punishment for the equally "irresponsible" man in this scenario? Does he have to fill in any forms to prove he wasn't careless?

Mr. CooL ICE · 04-01-2019 04:04PM

eagle eye wrote: »

These are all reasons why I voted to repeal the law.
I'm talking about a healthy woman with a healthy fetus who has been irresponsible.
And the policing is the medical practitioner. She has to fill out a form and that form decides if she is allowed to proceed. If somebody is willing to put lies on the form they can live with it.

I've asked you multiple questions and you haven't answered. I understand that there are a lot of people posting questions to you. When so many people are talking to you, it's very hard to respond to everybody.

However, I'm after re-reading the last few pages and I noticed something. You haven't responded to anybody asking you a difficult question. You have been spouting the same rhetoric about "irresponsibility" and "morning after pill" and whatnot with zero substance. Seems to me that you're skipping these because you don't have the answers and not because there are too many posters replying to you.

So here is my opinion. I don't think you voted yes on May 25th. I think you are a No voter using debating tactics to make it look like you were deceived and lied to about the referendum. I think you are lying and I don't think you are worth responding to any more.

amcalester · 04-01-2019 04:06PM

eagle eye wrote: »

These are all reasons why I voted to repeal the law.
I'm talking about a healthy woman with a healthy fetus who has been irresponsible.
And the policing is the medical practitioner. She has to fill out a form and that form decides if she is allowed to proceed. If somebody is willing to put lies on the form they can live with it.

You'll still need guidelines for the doctor to follow, and you haven't given any indication on what these would be.

It all comes across as very curtain twitchy for no real purpose other than to make it more difficult for women to access medical treatment.

If I needed treatment, but could only access it if I met some made up moral criteria, I'd lie every single time. Wouldn't even think twice about it, because it makes no difference.

Lying doesn't result in someone else being denied the treatment I received, doesnt change the cost, the duration anything.

Asking the question is pointless and serves no purpose other than to appease people like you. And sure, who are you?

Calina · 04-01-2019 04:18PM

eagle eye wrote: »

These are all reasons why I voted to repeal the law.
I'm talking about a healthy woman with a healthy fetus who has been irresponsible.
And the policing is the medical practitioner. She has to fill out a form and that form decides if she is allowed to proceed. If somebody is willing to put lies on the form they can live with it.

In other words, pregnancy as punishment. You must really, really hate women.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 04-01-2019 04:27PM

Mark Rippetoe wrote: »

I've asked you multiple questions and you haven't answered. I understand that there are a lot of people posting questions to you. When so many people are talking to you, it's very hard to respond to everybody.

However, I'm after re-reading the last few pages and I noticed something. You haven't responded to anybody asking you a difficult question. You have been spouting the same rhetoric about "irresponsibility" and "morning after pill" and whatnot with zero substance. Seems to me that you're skipping these because you don't have the answers and not because there are too many posters replying to you.

So here is my opinion. I don't think you voted yes on May 25th. I think you are a No voter using debating tactics to make it look like you were deceived and lied to about the referendum. I think you are lying and I don't think you are worth responding to any more.

To be fair, I was out canvassing and there were plenty people who were voting Yes but weren't exactly delighted about it, for variations on the same reasoning eagle eye has. They didn't like the idea of abortion full stop, or didn't like the idea of "irresponsible" or "lifestyle" abortions. But they recognised the harm the 8th was causing and that it had to go. Most of them were considerably better informed though I have to say.

Like it or not without voters Like that the majority wouldn't have been close to as big as it was, and there are still LOTS of people in this country for whom the nitty gritty of abortion essentially boils down to judging women's sex lives.

Trust me I'm normally one who sees pro-life lies and scheming everywhere, but this honestly just seems like a bad debater with unsustainable positions on the issue. Pick any thread on boards and you'll find people avoiding direct questions and repeating themselves :pac:

ELM327 · 04-01-2019 04:30PM

Elisabeth Wrong Stork wrote: »

To be fair, I was out canvassing and there were plenty people who were voting Yes but weren't exactly delighted about it, for variations on the same reasoning eagle eye has. They didn't like the idea of abortion full stop, or didn't like the idea of "irresponsible" or "lifestyle" abortions. But they recognised the harm the 8th was causing and that it had to go. Most of them were considerably better informed though I have to say.

Like it or not without voters Like that the majority wouldn't have been close to as big as it was, and there are still LOTS of people in this country for whom the nitty gritty of abortion essentially boils down to judging women's sex lives.

Trust me I'm normally one who sees pro-life lies and scheming everywhere, but this honestly just seems like a bad debater with unsustainable positions on the issue. Pick any thread on boards and you'll find people avoiding direct questions and repeating themselves :pac:

A lot of yes voters I know (eg my father's generation) would be yes voters because even though they don't like, want, or even want to discuss, abortion available in Ireland, the previous alternative was worse. Women dying, women not getting cancer treatment, x rays declined, women sent bleeding onto ships/planes to the UK.

I do accept that the huge YES majority included many who for whom abortion is still unpalatable but they recognised they did not have jurisdiction over those women's bodies.

volchitsa · 04-01-2019 05:17PM

eagle eye wrote: »

These are all reasons why I voted to repeal the law.
I'm talking about a healthy woman with a healthy fetus who has been irresponsible.
And the policing is the medical practitioner. She has to fill out a form and that form decides if she is allowed to proceed. If somebody is willing to put lies on the form they can live with it.

What's the point of doing it then? A law that is based on forcing people to lie to get what they feel they need, but with no sanctions for having lied just discredits the whole legal system.

Even the rather crazy US immigration forms where you're asked if you're a terrorist are (I suppose) based on the idea that if the person is caught out in a lie it makes it easier to deport them or whatever, rather than having to go through a court case for what may be some minor link to terrorism.

eagle eye · 04-01-2019 05:55PM

SusieBlue wrote:

Your whole idea just adds more humiliation and stress to what is already a difficult situation.

We are, or at least I am, talking about a specific group of people here. I'm talking about somebody who is irresponsible, negligent.
I don't accept that as a good enough reason to abort.
I am fully for abortion for responsible people who just don't want a baby, for people who need it for medical reasons, for people who find out that their baby will not he a normal baby, for anybody who has got pregnant due to a sexual assault. I'm for abortion in almost all circumstances.
If you are irresponsible enough to get pregnant accidentally then I'm sorry but I've no sympathy for you.

volchitsa · 04-01-2019 06:01PM

eagle eye wrote: »

We are, or at least I am, talking about a specific group of people here. I'm talking about somebody who is irresponsible, negligent.
I don't accept that as a good enough reason to abort.
I am fully for abortion for responsible people who just don't want a baby, for people who need it for medical reasons, for people who find out that their baby will not he a normal baby, for anybody who has got pregnant due to a sexual assault. I'm for abortion in almost all circumstances.
If you are irresponsible enough to get pregnant accidentally then I'm sorry but I've no sympathy for you.

Ok, so if you stupidly make a drunken mistake and feel so bad about it that you tell the truth on this form,
then you're going to have a baby to teach you a lesson.

Whereas if you're irresponsible, and a blatant liar to boot, then it's all good. Right?

I wonder what lesson you think the form is there to teach people.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 04-01-2019 06:03PM

eagle eye wrote: »

We are, or at least I am, talking about a specific group of people here. I'm talking about somebody who is irresponsible, negligent.
I don't accept that as a good enough reason to abort.
I am fully for abortion for responsible people who just don't want a baby, for people who need it for medical reasons, for people who find out that their baby will not he a normal baby, for anybody who has got pregnant due to a sexual assault. I'm for abortion in almost all circumstances.
If you are irresponsible enough to get pregnant accidentally then I'm sorry but I've no sympathy for you.

Man, nobody is unclear on the fact that those are your opinions, instead of repeating them again and again answer any one of the dozen or follow up questions, even to yourself.

This is, I have to admit, very very similar to the dishonest posting from no voters before the referendum.

This is just

You: Guys I think we should cross the road, I don't like this side of the road, I wish I wasn't on it.

Other people: well I disagree with your opinion, also there's a lot of fast moving traffic on that road, it's really really wide and if we cross it we're on a basically identical roadside, how do you think we can proceed with this crossing the road thing?

You: oh it's easy, I don't like this side of the road, we should definitely cross it! Sure wish I wasn't on this side of the road!

It's a waste of kilobytes to go round that circle again.

SusieBlue · 04-01-2019 06:04PM

eagle eye wrote: »

We are, or at least I am, talking about a specific group of people here. I'm talking about somebody who is irresponsible, negligent.
I don't accept that as a good enough reason to abort.
I am fully for abortion for responsible people who just don't want a baby, for people who need it for medical reasons, for people who find out that their baby will not he a normal baby, for anybody who has got pregnant due to a sexual assault. I'm for abortion in almost all circumstances.
If you are irresponsible enough to get pregnant accidentally then I'm sorry but I've no sympathy for you.

Your sympathy is neither required nor necessary, just mind your own business and stop attempting to impose your morals and judgement on people whose circumstances you do not know.

And maybe next time there's a referendum, be a bit more responsible and do more thorough research before casting your vote.

LorelaiG · 04-01-2019 06:21PM

Soooo, force an irresponsible person to give birth to, and raise, a baby....

Hmmm.

Zubeneschamali · 04-01-2019 06:25PM

eagle eye wrote: »

If you are irresponsible, like you didn't try and make sure it didn't happen the I don't think you should be allowed abort.

The votes were already counted - it's over. Why do you think anyone cares what you think now?

uptherebels · 04-01-2019 06:29PM

orourkeda1977 wrote: »

People who didnt like the brexit result want a second referendum.

Why wouldnt people who dont like the abortion result seek a second referendum.

Its equally absurd. I voted no.

Because the side that told the lies lost the 8th referendum but won the Brexit vote

gandalf · 04-01-2019 07:16PM

eagle eye wrote: »

These are all reasons why I voted to repeal the law.
I'm talking about a healthy woman with a healthy fetus who has been irresponsible.
And the policing is the medical practitioner. She has to fill out a form and that form decides if she is allowed to proceed. If somebody is willing to put lies on the form they can live with it.

You cannot formulate a law that is policed by the opinion of a doctor???

I agree with the sentiment of others you appear to hate women.

So if a doctor decides the women is irresponsible is the man pursued as well. Do they get a forced vasectomy as their punishment for being irresponsible?

Hotblack Desiato · 04-01-2019 07:25PM

eagle eye wrote: »

I don't accept that as a good enough reason to abort.

You keep telling us the WHAT. You can't come up with one good reason WHY though, can you? Because it's a bloody stupid idea.

Call me Al · 04-01-2019 07:34PM

eagle eye wrote: »

We are, or at least I am, talking about a specific group of people here. I'm talking about somebody who is irresponsible, negligent.
I don't accept that as a good enough reason to abort.
I am fully for abortion for responsible people who just don't want a baby, for people who need it for medical reasons, for people who find out that their baby will not he a normal baby, for anybody who has got pregnant due to a sexual assault. I'm for abortion in almost all circumstances.
If you are irresponsible enough to get pregnant accidentally then I'm sorry but I've no sympathy for you.

So I'm wondering would you regard the rhythm method of contraception as being irresponsible?

paw patrol · 04-01-2019 07:36PM

LorelaiG wrote: »

Soooo, force an irresponsible person to give birth to, and raise, a baby....

Hmmm.

irresponsible parent or don't be born ?

we all have differing opinions but I'd bet the vast majority would prefer the being alive bit.

LorelaiG · 04-01-2019 07:45PM

paw patrol wrote: »

irresponsible parent or don't be born ?

we all have differing opinions but I'd bet the vast majority would prefer the being alive bit.

But you wouldn't know and actually I think I'd prefer not to be born than to be born to someone who never wanted me but was forced to carry me

Billy86 · 04-01-2019 08:02PM

paw patrol wrote: »

irresponsible parent or don't be born ?

we all have differing opinions but I'd bet the vast majority would prefer the being alive bit.

I worked in admin in tusla for about 2 years... I can tell you of many kids who would have preferred to have not been born, and attempt suicide with extreme regularity at ages as young as 8. Many of them fail due to being so physically disabled from their parents negligence during pregnancy, infancy and through their childhoods that they literally are not even capable of taking their own lives. It is one of the saddest, most genuinely pathetic (and in no way do I use that word insultingly here) existences I could imagine.

Still, I guess they have the silver lining though that there's a strong chance for many of them that these same health issues will do the job for them before they hit 30. So there's that...

batgoat · 04-01-2019 08:22PM

eagle eye wrote: »

We are, or at least I am, talking about a specific group of people here. I'm talking about somebody who is irresponsible, negligent.
I don't accept that as a good enough reason to abort.
I am fully for abortion for responsible people who just don't want a baby, for people who need it for medical reasons, for people who find out that their baby will not he a normal baby, for anybody who has got pregnant due to a sexual assault. I'm for abortion in almost all circumstances.
If you are irresponsible enough to get pregnant accidentally then I'm sorry but I've no sympathy for you.

You're entire idea is stupid, I think it's perfectly responsible to end a pregnancy when a person doesn't consider themselves prepared for it. If contraceptives fail for a married couple with children, would you classify them as irresponsible and they should not be allowed to get an abortion? Even if they're not fiscally capable of having another child?

People's situations don't always put a person in a position to have a child at that point in their life. To recognise that is in itself responsible. Contraceptives do fail and none is 100%, the morning after pill is unsafe to use regularly.

paw patrol wrote: »

irresponsible parent or don't be born ?

we all have differing opinions but I'd bet the vast majority would prefer the being alive bit.

If my mother felt she wasn't in the position to carry me to term at the time, it wouldn't phase me since I wouldn't be born. Secondly, I think it's incredibly responsible and sensible for a person to consider an abortion if they don't feel like they're in a position to have a child.

eagle eye · 04-01-2019 09:24PM

Elisabeth Wrong Stork wrote:

This is, I have to admit, very very similar to the dishonest posting from no voters before the referendum.

You have some cheek to try and put me down as a no voter.
Clearly you live in a bubble where anybody who disagrees even slightly with your views is a liar.
I won't be responding to you again

eagle eye · 04-01-2019 09:29PM

gandalf wrote:

I agree with the sentiment of others you appear to hate women.

I like the way you use others to back your point.
I don't hate women, I have a dislike for irresponsible, careless, negligent people regardless of their gender.

Amirani · 04-01-2019 09:39PM

eagle eye wrote: »

I have a dislike for irresponsible, careless, negligent people regardless of their gender.

You think it's going to make the country a better place by having a plethora of kids born to what you describe as "irresponsible, careless, negligent people"? These are exactly the sort of traits that wouldn't make good parents and would most likely cause problematic childhoods.

eagle eye · 04-01-2019 09:41PM

Amirani wrote:

You think it's going to make the country a better place by having a plethora of kids born to what you describe as "irresponsible, careless, negligent people"? These are exactly the sort of traits that wouldn't make good parents and would most likely cause problematic childhoods.

Well it might make them responsible!

batgoat · 04-01-2019 09:46PM

eagle eye wrote: »

Well it might make them responsible!

I'm glad to say that the referendum has passed, in general the electorate acted responsibly and understood what they were voting for. You are in the minority in terms of your judgmental views and clearly don't even want to even acknowledge the reasonable points that show up the silliness of your position.

Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

Comments