Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

ELM327 wrote: »

or aborted?


Seriously though... these men need to move on and realise that Ireland and its people have voted in their numbers against him and his ilk.

Realization's beyond them. They benefit too much from the status quo.

By censure, I meant, excluded from the debate if all he does is abuse his privilege. Seems almost like this is a gobsh!te's attempt at filibuster

Igotadose wrote: »

Realization's beyond them. They benefit too much from the status quo.

By censure, I meant, excluded from the debate if all he does is abuse his privilege. Seems almost like this is a gobsh!te's attempt at filibuster

Peadar said he had someone do a word-count to show they aren't filibusting :pac:
apparently it was 45k words to 50k, his side on 50k (i think)
doesn't seem to realise that its not just the speaking for 7 minutes
no mention of not withdrawing the unworkable amendment or submitting terrible amendments that aren't even close to having any support.

It's live now on Oireachtas TV.

That appears to have been the final Dail vote. 90-15 and the Bill goes to the Seanad.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/d%C3%A1il-passes-landmark-bill-providing-for-access-to-abortion-1.3721628

Sandor Clegane wrote: »

Mattie Mcgrath symbolizes all the hateful, repressive and downright evil attitudes of the Ireland of old, he wont be happy until Church and State are reinstated and the Magdalene laundries are reopened.

Deplorable man.

But sure didn't he fix the roads?

Abortion law may be held up by the Seanad
Legislation’s passage could be delayed due to the number of Amendments tabled

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/abortion-law-may-be-held-up-by-the-seanad-1.3725474

I wonder if such a delay might work out for the best at the end of the day, given the apparent practical difficulties associated with introducing the service on January 1...

Igotadose wrote: »

That article must set a record for the number of uses of the word "However" to begin a sentence.

I disagree with L.O. about delaying - no delay is acceptable. Senatorial scum like Mullen are introducing the same garbage amendments the Dail rejected, just to ensure his Iona backers keep the funds flowing his way.

Unfortunately as much as I like the Senate amendment about removing the 3 day mental abuse, waiting period, I'd rather not open the floodgates of accepting any amendments at all now, even the good ones. Get it passed, then get after the blocking GP's who want to block the services depolyment.

According to that article, the only amendments that might conceivably be passed by the Senate are liberalising ones. But then I'd imagine they'd almost certainly be defeated in the Dail anyway...

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I just get the popcorn out when reading the comments. They’re only making themselves look bad. In real life, I know a good few moderate No voters. They are not the people flooding comments sections. The comment sections are filled with the No loolaas. In the days following the referendum, Twitter was also awash with comments from them and some of them sounded seriously unhinged.

I think people are so used to it now, given the commentary on the crazy stuff American states try to pull, that a lot of people see through it. But, man, the fact that a person has it in their mind to try it anyway, and then deny why they are doing it, that person is the lowest of the low and deserves no respect from anyone.

How the NUI can stand over someone like "Rónán" Mullen representing them, I'll never know.

What's worse, is we had the chance to get rid of the Seanad where the his likes makes hay, and we didn't because FF thought it would be popular to go against it.

Igotadose wrote: »

That article must set a record for the number of uses of the word "However" to begin a sentence.

I disagree with L.O. about delaying - no delay is acceptable. Senatorial scum like Mullen are introducing the same garbage amendments the Dail rejected, just to ensure his Iona backers keep the funds flowing his way.

Unfortunately as much as I like the Senate amendment about removing the 3 day mental abuse, waiting period, I'd rather not open the floodgates of accepting any amendments at all now, even the good ones. Get it passed, then get after the blocking GP's who want to block the services depolyment.

Most women I know would happily concede to the 3 day wait if this could be just done and dusted.

The disgusting crap we're hearing now is just simply a last ditch attempt to make it so horrific to have an abortion that women will just travel to the UK instead.

In practice this 3 day wait thing could be dealt with through a telephone consultation followed by an appointment as they do in the UK currently.

It's nothing compared to the wait you'll have to go through whilst you get the money together for flights, accommodation etc and then try to get cheap flights as well.

Gintonious wrote: »

Seanad sitting well into the night it seems.

Ronan Mullen should be made pay for all the taxis home. He is a disease.

I agree, things would go much faster if everyone agreed on everything, it would be a sign of a healthy democracy apparently...

volchitsa wrote: »

You really think that's what that post said or are you being as disingenuous (or dishonest) as Mullan?

A 66% vote at referendum vs a senator who is elected by a special constituency that doesn't in any way correspond to the population in general - which one should get priority when it comes to respecting democracy? Hmm, it's so hard to know... :rolleyes:

ok, so in a democracy you are arguing 34% of people should not have their views heard in the political chambers of power in this country.

volchitsa wrote: »

Complete rubbish, that's not what I'm arguing at all. I'm saying that the referendum was a simple Yes/No choice, and the answer was Yes, so any attempt by a senator to block it further is antidemocratic.

Tell us, if instead the 8th had been tightened up by 66/34, say to remove the suicide clause, should the 34% of pro-choicers been allowed to block any subsequent legislation to enact that legislation?

How was he going to block it?
He had every right to have his voice heard in the Seanad, as did every other senator.
Debating a bill in the houses of Oireachtas should have varied opinion, otherwise we have a serious problem in this country.

You talk about people blocking. I would be seriously concerned with our parliament if people who were elected in either chamber and were not allowed to oppose a bill. What is happening with this bill. Politicians oppose all the time in our parliament.
All I see is people getting their knickers in knots because it is Ronan Mullen, who has every right to oppose if he as a legislator believes so.
Afterall the vote was to leave abortion in the hands of politicians.

We were told by some Yes campaigners, it is simply to remove the 8th amendment from the constitution, and allow the politicians have control.
But now it is all politicians must agree to abortion.
I'm sorry but we live in a democracy, and you wanted the politicians to have the power over this issue. Now that is a problem too...

RobertKK wrote: »

How was he going to block it?
He had every right to have his voice heard in the Seanad, as did every other senator.
Debating a bill in the houses of Oireachtas should have varied opinion, otherwise we have a serious problem in this country.

You talk about people blocking. I would be seriously concerned with our parliament if people who were elected in either chamber and were not allowed to oppose a bill. What is happening with this bill. Politicians oppose all the time in our parliament.
All I see is people getting their knickers in knots because it is Ronan Mullen, who has every right to oppose if he as a legislator believes so.
Afterall the vote was to leave abortion in the hands of politicians.

We were told by some Yes campaigners, it is simply to remove the 8th amendment from the constitution, and allow the politicians have control.
But now it is all politicians must agree to abortion.
I'm sorry but we live in a democracy, and you wanted the politicians to have the power over this issue. Now that is a problem too...

The people are sovereign though and the people voted to allow women to terminate their pregnancies. Ronan Mullem is not trying to improve the law, he is trying to block it or even make it unworkable.

You can pretend to think that is democracy if you want, but we can all see that you're lying. It's that simple. You are against the law, so you would be happy to see the will of the people being obstructed if you could.