Do you think a referendum on abortion would be passed?(not how you'd vote)

MightyMandarin · 03-03-2016 10:38pm

AlexisM wrote: »

I didn't add anything - you omitted a pretty important part of the question...That wasn't your point though - you said the poll showed a majority don't want abortion under any circumstances. Whereas it's actually a majority don't want abortion under any circumstance deemed necessary by the mother (i.e. completely unrestricted demand right up to 9 months). That is a massive distinction.

It's not an important part, unless you want to claim that women should have abortions against their will. The poll made no mention of time, so the question doesn't change when you omit the last part (which I did accidentally) as it only includes the consent of the mother, and it's pretty certain that consent would be accounted for if a woman were to have an abortion.
I apologise for omitting it, but you're really clutching at straws here.

There are very few supporters of unrestricted abortion on demand even amongst strongly pro-choice people.

Again, the poll made no mention of time period, but most people who answered the poll presumably would've only considered the restrictions asked in the other questions. All I can go by is the most recent poll which is this one, and a majority of people don't want it on demand.

Ice Maiden · 03-03-2016 10:40pm

Loath as I am to use the auld "Militant atheists are as bad as militant religious people" style tactic, I am compelled to do so in relation to this argument. The fanatics on either side of the debate are just impossible to reason with.

And also, as a liberal, I find it extremely frustrating that if you're also a liberal, but admit you have some views on abortion that might chime more with a pro-life/anti-choice stance, you may as well admit you're a paedophile.

I most certainly support choice but I am largely against abortion after a certain point in the pregnancy and I do not consider the life of an unborn baby (baby now, not collection of cells) to be worthless. Although I know it cannot always be as straightforward as that.

I'm sure it seems hypocritical, but it is such a complex topic that it is not always easy to be consistent. That goes for various stances in the debate.

deseil · 03-03-2016 10:45pm

beach_walker wrote: »

Do you really not see why? I mean it's fair enough people disagreeing over issues but it's worrying when people can't even understand the other side, even while disagreeing with it.

[I don't want counters/what-ifs to the following, I'm not drawing explicit parallels. I'm just trying to show you were some might be coming from.] Many see it as a moral issue i.e. that it's just wrong. Think of the abolitionists to slavery (particularly in the US). They weren't happy to let states decide on the issue and merely stand by their beliefs by not engaging in the practice. They saw it as a societal wrong.

Like I wouldn't be happy with a referendum tomorrow on introducing the death penalty. I think it's just plain wrong and completely unacceptable no matter the limited circumstances.

I'm sure you have some issues like that. If this referendum has to happen, then it's better for everybody if you at least see where the other side is coming from.

Slavery, death penalty are state wise issues its not comparable.

Children are brought up by one or 2 people who are solely responsible in every way for the rearing of a child, if one does not feel ready to take on this responsibility it should be a personal decision not a state decision.

CaraMay · 03-03-2016 10:48pm

The Young Wan wrote: »

My friend is early 20s, and probably the most liberal person I know in many ways. But will not enter into a discussion about abortion at all - she is dead against it. We have not come as far as we think we have.

You're not much of a friend if you think she's backward for not believing in abortion. I think it's a very primal response. You either agree with it in your gut or you don't.

Little CuChulainn · 03-03-2016 10:52pm

sm213 wrote: »

So would it not be easier to amend the 8th amendment to make abortion illegal unless you are up to and including 12 weeks gestation and after that only for cases of rape/incest (as it could take longer than that to prove) or fatal abnormalities (which may only get detected by 20 week anomaly scan).
I'm sure you'd have to include a counselling session to ensure you're of sound mind and fully educated on what will happen and possible consequences too.

I think people would go for that.

Although I see above someone mentioned only up to 8 weeks.
There's just no pleasing people.

Can we not just trust that women are not going to go on an abortion rampage?
I don't think it's the easiest choice for anyone whether the pregnancy is wanted or not.

I get some people don't agree with it but can those people just not get abortions? And let the people who do want/require them Do as they see fit?

Sure why not introduce the death penalty and trust the state to only execute guilty people?

I can only speak for myself but I think that once a foetus reaches a certain level of development it should be afforded the same rights as any other person. I'm not a religious person, I just see a role in the state for protecting the vulnerable. I think that most people believe this to a certain extent. What's different for most people is the stage at which these rights should attach. If you want to put a specific limit on what stage an abortion can be obtained then there will need to be some sort of national consensus on what this will be, preferably before people go to the ballot box.

Niemoj · 03-03-2016 10:53pm

I really hope it would but I just don't think it would.

beach_walker · 03-03-2016 10:55pm

deseil wrote: »

Slavery, death penalty are state wise issues its not comparable.

*swish*

sm213 · 03-03-2016 10:56pm

beach_walker wrote: »

Do you really not see why? I mean it's fair enough people disagreeing over issues but it's worrying when people can't even understand the other side, even while disagreeing with it.

[I don't want counters/what-ifs to the following, I'm not drawing explicit parallels. I'm just trying to show you were some might be coming from.] Many see it as a moral issue i.e. that it's just wrong. Think of the abolitionists to slavery (particularly in the US). They weren't happy to let states decide on the issue and merely stand by their beliefs by not engaging in the practice. They saw it as a societal wrong.

Like I wouldn't be happy with a referendum tomorrow on introducing the death penalty. I think it's just plain wrong and completely unacceptable no matter the limited circumstances.

I'm sure you have some issues like that. If this referendum has to happen, then it's better for everybody if you at least see where the other side is coming from.

I do see where the other side comes from.
I get that it's a life. I understand there's people who desperately would love a child and can't that would possibly hate the idea at all.

I have kids. I personally wouldn't get an abortion. I don't like the idea of it.
My point is I'm not other women.

Also as I've posted above I believe it would be repealed if there were restrictions. I don't think people would begrudge a woman, who has been told her baby will die outside the womb immediately or soon after birth, an abortion.
That's just dragging out someone's grief otherwise.
And who knows if I was ever in that unimaginable position what I would want to do.

There does need to be restrictions in place. Ones like I've outlined above.

Maybe I'm being naive but I don't think hoards of women are going to go aborting babies because they can.

I doubt it's a walk in the park for anyone making that choice.

lazygal · 03-03-2016 11:00pm

The eighth amendment doesn't protect the unborn. All it does is make it difficult for girls and women who can't travel to access abortion. It also affects maternity care and options during pregnancy and birth. Abortion should be completely out of the constitution and legislated for like any other medical procedures. It's a medical procedure that will always be necessary.
I know I would have abortion in certain circumstances. The eighth amendment just means I have to travel. It doesn't make me want to protect a foetus if I don't want to continue being pregnant.

AlexisM · 03-03-2016 11:02pm

MightyMandarin wrote: »

It's not an important part, unless you want to claim that women should have abortions against their will. The poll made no mention of time, so the question doesn't change when you omit the last part (which I did accidentally) as it only includes the consent of the mother, and it's pretty certain that consent would be accounted for if a woman were to have an abortion.
I apologise for omitting it, but you're really clutching at straws here.

Again, the poll made no mention of time period, but most people who answered the poll presumably would've only considered the restrictions asked in the other questions. All I can go by is the most recent poll which is this one, and a majority of people don't want it on demand.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Your post said:

MightyMandarin wrote: »

It must also be noted that a majority (56%) of people don't want abortion in any circumstances.

That's at one end of the 'how acceptable do you find abortion' spectrum - no abortion under ANY circumstance. At the very far end of the spectrum of abortion views is 'abortion on demand'. In between there are varying levels of acceptability - fatal foetal abnormality, rape/incest. demand with time limits etc. You have taken the polls findings of the most extreme pro-choice views and said that it applies to the most extreme anti-choice level. Bizarre...

Anyway, you've recognised your omission so you should probably go back and edit your original post - I'm sure you wouldn't want to mislead anyone.

lazygal · 03-03-2016 11:05pm

CaraMay wrote: »

You're not much of a friend if you think she's backward for not believing in abortion. I think it's a very primal response. You either agree with it in your gut or you don't.

I was terribly backward when, to my shame, I once argued against abortion. It was a backwards view that I've since come to realize mainly came from the religious schools I attended. I'm staunchly pro-choice now.

Toots · 03-03-2016 11:07pm

For Forks Sake wrote: »

The SSM referendum campaign will seems like a sunny stroll in the park compared to the sort of sh1te and vitriol that'd be flung around on an abortion referendum.

Yeah, I think I'd have to leave the country for the run up and then just return on the day of the vote. Couldn't handle all that being blasted at all angles for months on end.

Baggy Trousers · 03-03-2016 11:12pm

In another 10 years, Yes.

I think the demographic is still not there yet.

Arbiter of Good Taste · 03-03-2016 11:12pm

lazygal wrote: »

I was terribly backward when, to my shame, I once argued against abortion. It was a backwards view that I've since come to realize mainly came from the religious schools I attended. I'm staunchly pro-choice now.

See, here's the problem with too many people. Instead of trying to understand where the other side is coming from, you just dismiss their opinions as "backwards". That's an unbelievably small minded and arrogant attitude. Sadly it works that way on the other side as well. There's no such thing as reasoned and intelligent debate in this country any more

Ice Maiden · 03-03-2016 11:12pm

lazygal wrote: »

I was terribly backward when, to my shame, I once argued against abortion. It was a backwards view that I've since come to realize mainly came from the religious schools I attended. I'm staunchly pro-choice now.

What use is there in insulting people by calling them backwards?

I'm pro-choice too but people who are pro-life and reasonable with it (and they exist) don't deserve to be insulted.

Ice Maiden · 03-03-2016 11:13pm

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

There's no such thing as reasoned and intelligent debate in this country any more

There is, but it gets drowned out.

lazygal · 03-03-2016 11:14pm

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

See, here's the problem with too many people. Instead of trying to understand where the other side is coming from, you just dismiss their opinions as "backwards". That's an unbelievably small minded and arrogant attitude. Sadly it works that way on the other side as well. There's no such thing as reasoned and intelligent debate in this country any more

It was my opinion I called backwards. I held backwards views. Am I not allowed to call previously held views backwards?

Berserker · 03-03-2016 11:21pm

lazygal wrote: »

All it does is make it difficult for girls and women who can't travel to access abortion.

You can travel to the UK for buttons these days.

lazygal · 03-03-2016 11:24pm

Berserker wrote: »

That line doesn't really fly any more. You can travel to the UK for buttons these days.

If you have the money. An abortion can cost two grand. And there's non financial reasons women can't travel.
How is the unborn protected anyway, when women have the right to travel for abortions?

smash · 03-03-2016 11:26pm

Ice Maiden wrote: »

What use is there in insulting people by calling them backwards?
I'm pro-choice too but people who are pro-life and reasonable with it (and they exist) don't deserve to be insulted.

Can we stop calling them "pro-life" and call them by the name which is more suitable... "Anti-choice"

The Young Wan · 03-03-2016 11:27pm

CaraMay wrote: »

You're not much of a friend if you think she's backward for not believing in abortion. I think it's a very primal response. You either agree with it in your gut or you don't.

To be honest, for many reasons she isn't much of a friend either, but that's not what is being discussed here. I was merely agreeing with the point that it is not just the elder generation than mine that does not agree with abortion.

Berserker · 03-03-2016 11:28pm

Toots wrote: »

Yeah, I think I'd have to leave the country for the run up and then just return on the day of the vote. Couldn't handle all that being blasted at all angles for months on end.

The abortion referenda which have taken place in the past have been incredibly passionate affairs. I believe (hope) that a referendum on the matter in 2016 would be more mature affair.

Toots · 03-03-2016 11:30pm

Berserker wrote: »

The abortion referenda which have taken place in the past have been incredibly passionate affairs. I believe (hope) that a referendum on the matter in 2016 would be more mature affair.

We could hope, but if the carry on in the marriage equality referendum was anything to go by, the odds are on it won't be.

Ice Maiden · 03-03-2016 11:31pm

Berserker wrote: »

You can travel to the UK for buttons these days.

That's not the point - they shouldn't have to travel anyway. There is more to it than the money.

03-03-2016 11:31pm

Definitely voting no myself if the referendum happens and hopefully it's doesn't. If it does it will be close but I'd be hopeful there are still enough decent people in the country that it wouldn't pass. i can see a big bandwagon coming back again like the vote last year, you didn't see them for the immeasurably more important general election last week.

smash · 03-03-2016 11:34pm

Selene Dry Apartment wrote: »

I'd be hopeful there are still enough decent people in the county that it wouldn't pass.

What a sad sad comment.

Berserker · 03-03-2016 11:34pm

Selene Dry Apartment wrote: »

Definitely voting no myself if the referendum happens and hopefully it's doesn't. If it does it will be close but I'd be hopeful there are still enough decent people in the county that it wouldn't pass. i can see a big bandwagon coming back again like the vote last year, you didn't see them for the immeasurably more important general election last week.

I'd be a 'No' myself too but I can't see it not passing. What political party would run a 'No' campaign out of the current lot? FG are socially conservative apparently but Enda & Co. took the lefty stance on the marriage referendum.

Huntergonzo · 03-03-2016 11:36pm

It's hard to know how such a referendum would pan out, I'd imagine any referendum in the next 5-10 years would simply be to remove tge 8th amendment. Abortion on demand would not be on a ballot paper, hell would freeze over before either FG or FF granted us that sort of responsibility.

Anyway even if we are lucky enough to get an opportunity to remove the 8th ammendment I wouldn't be overly confident of that passing. I would however be confident that we'd have one of the most nasty, embittered campaigns ever witnessed in this country, that's a guarantee.

Look at all the silly shíte we had to put up with over something as mild as same sex marriage (which 734,300 people voted No to), now imagine the avalanche that would come with removing the 8th ammendment!

lazygal · 03-03-2016 11:38pm

Selene Dry Apartment wrote: »

Definitely voting no myself if the referendum happens and hopefully it's doesn't. If it does it will be close but I'd be hopeful there are still enough decent people in the county that it wouldn't pass. i can see a big bandwagon coming back again like the vote last year, you didn't see them for the immeasurably more important general election last week.

How does the eighth amendment make Ireland decent?

Baggy Trousers · 03-03-2016 11:40pm

Selene Dry Apartment wrote: »

Definitely voting no myself if the referendum happens and hopefully it's doesn't. If it does it will be close but I'd be hopeful there are still enough decent people in the county that it wouldn't pass. i can see a big bandwagon coming back again like the vote last year, you didn't see them for the immeasurably more important general election last week.

Let me guess....

Devout Catholic. Male. Over 50.

lazygal · 03-03-2016 11:41pm

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

Let me guess....

Catholic. Male. Over 50.

Never going to be pregnant.
Probably not too concerned about the born.

03-03-2016 11:41pm

lazygal wrote: »

How does the eighth amendment make Ireland decent?

We don't allow people to kill unborn children except in the very extreme circumstance of the mothers life being in exceptional danger.

I'd consider not killing babies as something that would but you very high on the "decent" list

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

Let me guess....

Catholic. Male. Over 50.

I'm only 31 and have the same opinion since I knew what abortion was. Being male and catholic are irrelevant to my opinion on it.

Huntergonzo · 03-03-2016 11:43pm

Berserker wrote: »

I'd be a 'No' myself too but I can't see it not passing. What political party would run a 'No' campaign out of the current lot? FG are socially conservative apparently but Enda & Co. took the lefty stance on the marriage referendum.

I know it was terrible after same sex marriage passed, I was forced to marry a man even though I'm not homosexual and thousands of children nationwide were left parentless!

deseil · 03-03-2016 11:43pm

smash wrote: »

What a sad sad comment.

Agreed!
Its amazing considering the number of childrens allowance, lone parent bashers on this forum.

smash · 03-03-2016 11:43pm

Selene Dry Apartment wrote: »

We don't allow people to kill unborn children except in the very extreme circumstance of the mothers life being in exceptional danger.

I'd consider not killing babies as something that would but you very high on the "decent" list

They're not babies. They're either a zygotes or a foetus.

lazygal · 03-03-2016 11:44pm

Selene Dry Apartment wrote: »

We don't allow people to kill unborn children except in the very extreme circumstance of the mothers life being in exceptional danger.

I'd consider not killing babies as something that would but you very high on the "decent" list

I'm only 31 and have the same opinion since I knew what abortion was.

But the eighth amendment was followed by the right to travel, even if you're planning to kill babies. Was that a decent thing to vote in favour of? Should it be repealed? If my life is in unexceptional danger should doctors be able to kill my baby to save my life?

Huntergonzo · 03-03-2016 11:45pm

lazygal wrote: »

How does the eighth amendment make Ireland decent?

It doesn't, it's actually the opposite, he just hasn't an iota what he's talking about and more importantly doesn't care about the rights of pregant women, so don't try and convince him, it's a waste of time.

lazygal · 03-03-2016 11:45pm

deseil wrote: »

Agreed!
Its amazing considering the number of childrens allowance, lone parent bashers on this forum.

You're confusing pro life with pro children and pro parents.

wokingvoter · 03-03-2016 11:46pm

I genuinely think boards should restrict abortion discussions to the train wreck, sorry, thread, in A&A. The mudslinging on both sides by all the usual suspects is atrocious. Some people seem to be totally obsessed with this subject and will go around and around in satanically angry circles repeating themselves over and over
Has anyone on either side ever had their mind changed on abortion by anything they read on here?
My 2 cents is no it won't be passed. The tide is currently turning against abortion world wide, SSM was a different atmosphere, positive joyful love and romance
I think the pro choice people are possibly very disappointed in the destruction of Labour in the GE and the general "tenor" of the candidates that people voted for.
Of the 5 TDs elected in my constituency only 2 voted for abortion in 2013 and the other 3 (1 in particular) are vociferously pro life

lazygal · 03-03-2016 11:47pm

Huntergonzo wrote: »

I know it was terrible after same sex marriage passed, I was forced to marry a man even though I'm not homosexual and thousands of children nationwide were left parentless!

I'm barely holding onto my two born kids. My gay friends are making worrying noises about exercising their right to be parents.

CrabRevolution · 03-03-2016 11:47pm

I'm honestly not sure if it would. While its easy to compare to the marriage referendum, I don't think they're that similar really. In the marriage referendum the sides were clear enough. On one side you had a marginalised group (LGB people), just about every single one of them probably voted yes. Then you had those that supported them, plus those who mightn't have cared much but who at the very least respected their right to marry. Combined with total media and political support, as well as just about any and every possible "celebrity" endorsement at home and abroad.

On the other side you had a small few Catholic groups and "protect the family" types. They didn't gain much traction or have much popular support. They were fighting a losing battle from the start and I think everyone knew that. There was also a definite stigma attached to No votes, so you wouldn't really see big rallies or public events. If someone seemed to be really really passionate and emotional about gays not marrying, you'd think there's something wrong with them. Looking at it with a cold eye, there were no logical or even emotional reasons to prevent gay marriage passing.

While the No vote definitely got more votes than their media presence suggested, it was still a bad enough defeat.

An abortion referendum wouldn't be anywhere as clear cut. The waters are a lot muddier and it will be messy. While women may be the marginalised group in this case, there are definitely many women out there who'd oppose abortion. You couldn't count on them to vote one way as a whole. Combined with that, the pro-life groups have much more to work with than the anti gay marriage types. Emotional pleas about babies and murder will gain a lot more traction than emotional pleas about gays corrupting children did.

There's a lot less stigma associated with pro-life rallies and protests. They can play the angle that they're giving a voice to the voiceless and innocent etc. Combined with that, politicians seem ambivalent at best about it. Where many threw their whole weight behind gay marriage, so far there aren't many saying much on abortion (aside from Clare Daly trying to walk over the constitution and introduce a bill last year providing for abortion).

Personally I'm uneasy with the idea of abortions, but still reckon at the end of day the it should be the woman's choice. Like I've said, any referendum on this could get very close and messy.

Baggy Trousers · 03-03-2016 11:48pm

Selene Dry Apartment wrote: »

I'm only 31 and have the same opinion since I knew what abortion was. Being male and catholic are irrelevant to my opinion on it.

My bad, thought you were older. Still 2 out of 3 aint bad.

One last guess....Single?

L.Jenkins · 03-03-2016 11:49pm

Late to the thread. I would most definitely hope it passes. It's not our decision to make regarding a woman's body and it's the height of cruelty to legislate. I am male, but if this were a male issue, it wouldn't be a contentious issue. Such legislation wouldn't even exist.

DEFTLEFTHAND · 03-03-2016 11:50pm

I'm very conflicted, 5 years ago I would have probably went along with the yes side but now I'm not so certain anymore. Deep deep, down I think there's something very wrong about it. I can't help that, it's a natural feeling that I have.

But then what do you tell a girl who has been raped and is carrying her rapists child? It's a very emotive topic and sadly I think the debate on this matter will be extremely ugly.

RayM · 03-03-2016 11:50pm

Selene Dry Apartment wrote: »

We don't allow people to kill unborn children except in the very extreme circumstance of the mothers life being in exceptional danger.

I'd consider not killing babies as something that would but you very high on the "decent" list

Are you in favour of 'killing babies' in the very extreme circumstance of the mother's life being in exceptional danger? Would you advocate killing a baby to save the life of the baby's mother?

When you strip them down, the attitudes of anti-choice people are really weird and inconsistent.

wokingvoter · 03-03-2016 11:51pm

I see I'm much too late regarding the usual suspects
Page 8 anyone?
Ugh, imagine being stuck in a lift with some of these people
(Shudders)
I'm out .....(runs for her life....)

Baggy Trousers · 03-03-2016 11:51pm

Itzy wrote: »

Late to the thread. I would most definitely hope it passes. It's not our decision to make regarding a woman's body and it's the height of cruelty to legislate. I am male, but if this were a male issue, it wouldn't be a contentious issue. Such legislation wouldn't even exist.

I am male too and I actually think only women should vote in an abortion referendum. Not going to happen but I think it would be correct.

smash · 03-03-2016 11:52pm

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

I'm very conflicted, 5 years ago I would have probably went along with the yes side but now I'm not so certain anymore. Deep deep, down I think there's something very wrong about it. I can't help that, it's a natural feeling that I have.

But then what do you tell a girl who has been raped and is carrying her rapists child? It's a very emotive topic and sadly I think the debate on this matter will be extremely ugly.

What do you tell someone who's contraception has failed and just doesn't wants kids?

deseil · 03-03-2016 11:53pm

lazygal wrote: »

You're confusing pro life with pro children and pro parents.

Is it all not the same?

Spudman_20000 · 03-03-2016 11:55pm

smash wrote: »

What do you tell someone who's contraception has failed and just doesn't wants kids?

Personally, I'd tell them to act like an adult and deal with the.consequences of their actions. You know, like an adult.

Do you think a referendum on abortion would be passed?(not how you'd vote)

Comments