Why voting no?

K-9

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6W1cP_tW_U

just thought I'd put this up since it just happened the weekend that passed.


you have to laugh.

but I guess it makes sense

if you cannot read this the first time around



what is article 40.3.3

well its




This is not the assurances that we have just got from the EU, this is a protocol attached to lisbon, has been since 9/05/2008 at least [thats when the version of the treaty I am pasting it from was written up (consolidated version)]

And I just love that he throws in those urban legends in at the end with the whole straight banana etc.

Its pathetic.

There really is no debating with people like that. It doesn't matter how many protocols and assurances you get, they are convinced them foreigners will force Abortion on us.

RandomName2

Scofflaw wrote: »

The real world is a complicated place, and the simplistic battle-lines our No posters seek to draw don't follow any real-world divisions.

It just so happens that every one of the 27 member state governments oppose the idea of referenda? Unaminity is not all that complicated :cool:.

Scofflaw

K-9 wrote: »

There really is no debating with people like that. It doesn't matter how many protocols and assurances you get, they are convinced them foreigners will force Abortion on us.

Can we quote him on the "more than two-thirds of those who voted No had abortion concerns in mind"? I keep being told - by No proponents - that abortion wasn't an issue in the referendum.

cordially,
Scofflaw

BlitzKrieg

as I was thinking that myself.

RandomName2

skearon wrote: »

No Irish person should, as a No vote will only damage Ireland's future.

The two main figures of the No side, Ganley and Mary Lou, have been defeated by the people, their lies have been found out and they have no mandate what so ever.

If you are Irish and wish to support your Country, then the only logical way to vote is Yes.

Neither Ganley nor Marly Lou speak for me. I am free to make my own vote. Equally, just because my politician is a yes-man does not mean I am.

Ireland's future is not the full measure of the treaty - it is the future of the EU which is in question in the treaty. To say Ireland specifically will be damamaged if the constitution of the eu is not changed is to imply retribution from other eu members.

*

Abortion is and is not an issue. Individually it has no importance, just like any theoretical motion, particularly now with the promised guarantees. The issue in reality is the manner in which the EU can override national law - which it already has the ability to do. The streamlining of the legislative process in the eu gives it greater breadth in the practical application of its capacity to override national law - which personally I do not see any justtification for.

Hitman Actual

I think Coir and people like Richard Greene just push more marginal voters towards the Yes side. They're no real threat. Complete whack-jobs, though.

RandomName2

Hitman Actual wrote: »

I think Coir and people like Richard Greene just push more marginal voters towards the Yes side. They're no real threat. Complete whack-jobs, though.

Two words.
Dick Roche.

K-9

Hitman Actual wrote: »

I think Coir and people like Richard Greene just push more marginal voters towards the Yes side. They're no real threat. Complete whack-jobs, though.

I wouldn't discount them. Abortion is the "untouchable" issue in Irish politics and even the fear of the EU bringing it in touches a substantial conservative base. Despite everything, there is still a hard core religious conservative base here.

It's hard to quantify, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was 10% of the electorate.

Hitman Actual

RandomName2 wrote: »

Two words.
Dick Roche.

Believe it or not, I actually agree with you. He needs to be kept off the airwaves. At the same time, Richard Greene really seems a bit mentally unbalanced, and I don't think Roche deserves to be placed in the same league as him.

Scofflaw

RandomName2 wrote: »

Equally, just because my politician is a yes-man does not mean I am.

That's true for all of us, I think.

RandomName2 wrote: »

Abortion is and is not an issue. Individually it has no importance, just like any theoretical motion, particularly now with the promised guarantees. The issue in reality is the manner in which the EU can override national law - which it already has the ability to do. The streamlining of the legislative process in the eu gives it greater breadth in the practical application of its capacity to override national law - which personally I do not see any justtification for.

It's a necessity. The EU is a joint decision-making system, and it's necessary for the joint decisions to take precedence over the individual decisions. If Ireland agrees something jointly with the other 26, what is the point of then allowing Irish law to override that decision?

If you agree with all your neighbours that you'll paint your houses green, how can that not then take precedence over your choice of house colour?

cordially,
Scofflaw

RandomName2

K-9 wrote: »

I wouldn't discount them. Abortion is the "untouchable" issue in Irish politics and even the fear of the EU bringing it in touches a substantial conservative base. Despite everything, there is still a hard core religious conservative base here.

It's hard to quantify, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was 10% of the electorate.

Comparable perhaps to the electorate who voted yes because they were afraid of Ireland being forced out of the eu - another "untouchable" issue.

K-9

RandomName2 wrote: »

Comparable perhaps to the electorate who voted yes because they were afraid of Ireland being forced out of the eu - another "untouchable" issue.

Hard to know. Don't see to many marches about the issue though.

Then you have the element who would gladly leave the EU but "who dare not speak the truth".

PS. Love the EU Matters.ie ad campaign.

Hitman Actual

K-9 wrote: »

I wouldn't discount them. Abortion is the "untouchable" issue in Irish politics and even the fear of the EU bringing it in touches a substantial conservative base. Despite everything, there is still a hard core religious conservative base here.

It's hard to quantify, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was 10% of the electorate.

I don't know, I was worried about Coir the last time, as they had brain-washed teenagers all over the place handing out leaflets. But in the end, it seems abortion and euthanasia accounted for <2% of the No vote, and I can't see it being any different this time.

anonymous_joe

Hitman Actual wrote: »

I don't know, I was worried about Coir the last time, as they had brain-washed teenagers all over the place handing out leaflets. But in the end, it seems abortion and euthanasia accounted for <2% of the No vote, and I can't see it being any different this time.

When the margins in a referendum are so tight, <2% could still be crucial.

I'm firmly of the belief that people should have to pass an exam before being allowed to vote.

I know that sounds a bit silly, but if prior to voting in this treaty anyone who wanted to vote had to display some familiarity with it, (in this case indicated by passing an imaginary exam) a lot of the bullshít would be kept out of people's heads.

BlitzKrieg

*completely off topic*

Why is a man the spokesperson for an anti abortion group?

It just something that boggles my mind, why would someone who would never genuinely face the dileama in his entire life feel he is suitable to be the spokesperson for an anti abortion group?

Anyway back to our regular programming.

But in the end, it seems abortion and euthanasia accounted for <2% of the No vote,

depends on who you ask ...

PopeBuckfastXVI

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

*completely off topic*

Why is a man the spokesperson for an anti abortion group?

It just something that boggles my mind, why would someone who would never genuinely face the dileama in his entire life feel he is suitable to be the spokesperson for an anti abortion group?

Because as long as we've had judeo-christian religion we've had men telling women what to do with their bodies? Virgins telling other people how to have and not have sex and who with.

Don't try to insert logic into religion, you'll only end up getting your brain kicked in the balls.

K-9

Hitman Actual wrote: »

I don't know, I was worried about Coir the last time, as they had brain-washed teenagers all over the place handing out leaflets. But in the end, it seems abortion and euthanasia accounted for <2% of the No vote, and I can't see it being any different this time.

There's nearly an embarassment factor in mentioning it. It was similar to Ganley and opinion polls. People will not publicly say it's an issue but it will influence their vote.

bill_ashmount

K-9 wrote: »

There's nearly an embarassment factor in mentioning it. It was similar to Ganley and opinion polls. People will not publicly say it's an issue but it will influence their vote.

It wasn't an issue for me and I don't know anyone who voted NO who said it was an issue.

It's just a tactic used by YES campaigners to make NO voters look like religious fanatics stuck in the 18th century. Luckily the YES campaigns lies aren't working.

K-9

bill_ashmount wrote: »

It wasn't an issue for me and I don't know anyone who voted NO who said it was an issue.

It's just a tactic used by YES campaigners to make NO voters look like religious fanatics stuck in the 18th century. Luckily the YES campaigns lies aren't working.

Never said it was an issue for you. Touchy.

If you don't think abortion is a huge issue for many, fair enough, the rally pictures alone would suggest you are incorrect.

PopeBuckfastXVI

K-9 wrote: »

Never said it was an issue for you. Touchy.

If you don't think abortion is a huge issue for many, fair enough, the rally pictures alone would suggest you are incorrect.

They're just 'yes' voters in disguise, don't you know, there to distract from the reasoned and logical 'no' voters who are voting 'no' for entirely rational things like the EU being a 'dictatorship'...

:rolleyes:

bill_ashmount

K-9 wrote: »

Never said it was an issue for you. Touchy.

If you don't think abortion is a huge issue for many, fair enough, the rally pictures alone would suggest you are incorrect.

What rally pictures? I have no idea what you are talking about.

How many people were at this rally that you mention? Was there 200,000 or was there a million, perhaps more?

Can you give me a percentage figure for the number of people at the rally made up in comparison to the size of the NO vote? I assume we are talking aboout hundreds of thousands if this rally affected the size of the NO vote.

I'm stunned I didn't bump into this rally when it was taking place seen as it seems to be so big.

bill_ashmount

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

They're just 'yes' voters in disguise, don't you know, there to distract from the reasoned and logical 'no' voters who are voting 'no' for entirely rational things like the EU being a 'dictatorship'...

:rolleyes:

Rather than using rolleyes why don't you point me to your figures that show abortion won the NO vote?

PopeBuckfastXVI

bill_ashmount wrote: »

Rather than using rolleyes why don't you point me to your figures that show abortion won the NO vote?

In a video of a rally on this very thread, there is a claim made by an Anti Abortion spokesman that more than 66% of the 'No' vote was due to Abortion.

I don't believe him, personally. It seems your problem is with his claim.

bill_ashmount

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

In a video of a rally on this very thread, there is a claim made by an Anti Abortion spokesman that more than 66% of the 'No' vote was due to Abortion.

I don't believe him, personally. It seems your problem is with his claim.

My problem is with YES voters saying the NO vote won because of abortion. I am saying they are lying and they cannot provide proof.

1 person at a rally is not proof.

PopeBuckfastXVI

bill_ashmount wrote: »

My problem is with YES voters saying the NO vote won because of abortion. I am saying they are lying and they cannot provide proof.

1 person at a rally is not proof.

Did you even read my post?

K-9

bill_ashmount wrote: »

What rally pictures? I have no idea what you are talking about.

How many people were at this rally that you mention? Was there 200,000 or was there a million, perhaps more?

Can you give me a percentage figure for the number of people at the rally made up in comparison to the size of the NO vote? I assume we are talking aboout hundreds of thousands if this rally affected the size of the NO vote.

I'm stunned I didn't bump into this rally when it was taking place seen as it seems to be so big.

If you just want to take offence, fair enough.

PS. I'd recommend reading the posts before posting!

There is a video already posted.

There is research to show 2% voted on Abortion as an issue. I wouldn't say it swung the vote as these people aren't swing voters and will vote No regardless. Even if a tree stump in Limerick told them it's ok to vote Yes, they'd still vote No.!

panda100

K-9 wrote: »

Never said it was an issue for you. Touchy.

If you don't think abortion is a huge issue for many, fair enough, the rally pictures alone would suggest you are incorrect.

Was this the 'Rally for Life' march last weekend?
Many people came down from the North and wider Europe for that rally. It was no way represntative of Irish views towards abortion,especially considering there was only around 2000 people at it.

Opinion polls suggest that the majority of Irish people are in favour of abortion. Asked in 2007: “Do you think the Government should legislate to allow abortion to take place in Ireland?,” 54 percent said Yes, 31 percent said No, 15 percent gave no opinion.
This suggests that the threat of abortion legislation wouldn't have had a negative impact on Lisbon anyway.
You can see even from threads on boards that the general consensus of younger Irish people is that of a pro choice view : http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055346434

K-9

panda100 wrote: »

Was this the 'Rally for Life' march last weekend?
Many people came down from the North and wider Europe for that rally. It was no way represntative of Irish views towards abortion,especially considering there was only around 2000 people at it.

Opinion polls suggest that the majority of Irish people are in favour of abortion. Asked in 2007: “Do you think the Government should legislate to allow abortion to take place in Ireland?,” 54 percent said Yes, 31 percent said No, 15 percent gave no opinion.
This suggests that the threat of abortion legislation wouldn't have had a negative impact on Lisbon anyway.
You can see even from threads on boards that the general consensus of younger Irish people is that of a pro choice view : http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055346434

Don't think anybody is saying otherwise. Move along now, nothing to see here. Sorry for the Limerick reference!

BlitzKrieg

bill_ashmount wrote: »

My problem is with YES voters saying the NO vote won because of abortion. I am saying they are lying and they cannot provide proof.

1 person at a rally is not proof.

how about one of the main anti-lisbon mep's who campaigned across south ireland for a no vote

http://www.euractiv.com/en/future-eu/abortion-euthanasia-lisbon-treaty-ireland/article-173257


wonderful kathy Sinnott, thank the gods she is gone.

AuRevoir

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

how about one of the main anti-lisbon mep's who campaigned across south ireland for a no vote

http://www.euractiv.com/en/future-eu/abortion-euthanasia-lisbon-treaty-ireland/article-173257


wonderful kathy Sinnott, thank the gods she is gone.

I'd trust Kathy Sinnott alot quicker than I'd trust Brian Cowen & the government.