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

Abortion/ *Note* Thread Closing Shortly! ! !

Options
1…170171173175176…330

Comments

  • Options
    #5162
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Silvio.Dante wrote: »
    Why the need to type 'baybees'. Does it make you feel all superior or something?

    I'd be happy to see American Life dollars funding pro life organisations in the UK...

    It's a compromise - you insist we are discussing babies. I insist we are discussing fetus'.

    Would you prefer Fetbies? Babus?

    Would you? Do you think Americans would be happy to see foreigners pour money into their country in a blatant attempt to lobby the government?

    Not saying that doesn't happen, but it is usually made more palatable by calling it things like 'trade deals'. Americans don't tend to like it when Johnny Foreigner buts their nose into domestic policy - they don't like it at all.


  • Options
    #5163
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    Sarky wrote: »
    I already did, in my post that explained how this country's legislation works. Bannasidhe also went into it in great detail. Your memory appears to be worse than Caroline Simons'.

    Laws are made to match the rights granted people in the constitution. The constitution can only be changed by a public referendum. If the constitution guarantees a right, laws must be made to protect that right.

    The X case found via the Supreme Court that X had a constitutional right to an abortion as her life was in danger, via suicide. That means a law MUST be passed to protect that right, unless the constitution is changed. Now, the country has had two referenda on this very issue, to change the constitution so that X doesn't actually have that right.

    In both referenda, the Irish people overwhelmingly voted that the constitution not be changed. The Irish people were consulted directly, by a government cowed by whining arseholes like youth Defence, and the Irish people said "No. Get up off your arses and make a law to protect this constitutional right."

    The government don't get to vote on it. That's not how the country works. The people get to vote on it, and they have always said that the X case should be legislated for. Despicable people holding the poisonous views you support have managed to delay this process for twenty years, for some reason. Perhaps they hate how this democratic republic works? Maybe they just hate Ireland? considering how many of your ilk don't actually come from Ireland, the latter mightn't be all that far-fetched.

    So you see, Silvio, fighting the X case legislation is pointless. The battle was lost 20 years ago. The recent business with Savita Happalannavar, whether an abortion would have saved her life or not, has shown just how furious the majority of Irish people are that the process has been delayed, and this government cannot stall any longer.

    It's a done deal. The constitutional rights guaranteed by the Supreme Court decision, two referendums, and the ruling of the European Court for Human rights, have declared that the constitution stay as it is regarding the X Case. The government isn't there to vote on whether the constitution be legislated for. They're there to legislate for the rights guaranteed by it.

    They have no choice, and neither do you. The right to an abortion when the mother's right is in danger including the risk of suicide is constitutionally guaranteed and upheld by the Irish people. It's getting legislated for. Deal. With. It.

    So they are voting.

    Thought so :)

    It is vtal from a Life perspective to oppose legislation for X and thats where out focus will be over the coming months. Legislation that will be democratically accepted or rejected...


  • Options
    #5164
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    Sarky wrote: »
    There will be no vote, it was settled a long time ago. How is this not getting through to you?

    Vote in the Dail..!!! :)


  • Options
    #5165
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Sarky wrote: »
    There will be no vote, it was settled a long time ago. How is this not getting through to you?

    I don't think, judging by some of Silvio's earlier posts, that he understands how our political system works - at least when it comes to what the Constitution means and exactly what a Referendum does...


  • Options
    #5166
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    They are not voting. All they get to decide is the precise wording. They are still legally required to make and pass a law guaranteeing the right to an abortion if the woman's life is in danger, including suicide. The law must be made. That's how the country works.

    Honestly, a child could have grasped this by now, do we have to make you a sodding puppet show to make the point stick?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5167
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    It's a compromise - you insist we are discussing babies. I insist we are discussing fetus'.

    Would you prefer Fetbies? Babus?

    Would you? Do you think Americans would be happy to see foreigners pour money into their country in a blatant attempt to lobby the government?

    Not saying that doesn't happen, but it is usually made more palatable by calling it things like 'trade deals'. Americans don't tend to like it when Johnny Foreigner buts their nose into domestic policy - they don't like it at all.


    Capitol Hill would grind to a halt if Chinese dosh was stoped...


  • Options
    #5168
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I don't think, judging by some of Silvio's earlier posts, that he understands how our political system works - at least when it comes to what the Constitution means and exactly what a Referendum does...

    I don't think, judging by all of his posts, that he understands much of anything tbh.


  • Options
    #5169
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    Sarky wrote: »
    They are not voting.

    Yes, they are. Sadly for us but at least we can do our best to have it voted down...


  • Options
    #5170
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    Sarky wrote: »
    I don't think, judging by all of his posts, that he understands much of anything tbh.

    Didn't take long for the insults to come streaming back...


  • Options
    #5171
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    When you stop insulting our intelligence with your abysmally ignorant posts, I'll stop insulting your lack of understanding.

    Now, you still have some questions to answer, and an apology to make regarding how wrong you got the Irish legislative process.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5172
    _rebelkid
    Registered Users Posts: 1,886 ✭✭✭_rebelkid


    Silvio.Dante wrote: »
    Didn't take long for the insults to come streaming back...

    Well then answer the question and "it'll" stop. Though I don't see it worse than anything you've said and done...

    Now answer the questions that have been put to you. If it helps, ask me one first...


  • Options
    #5173
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Silvio.Dante wrote: »
    Vote in the Dail..!!! :)

    Sigh- Silvio.

    We have this very important document called The Constitution.
    It is number one law of the land.
    No legislation can be enacted if it goes against the Constitution - technical term is 'Unconstitutional.'
    In order for what is written in the Constitution to be changed a majority of the electorate must vote for that change.
    In 1983 a majority of the electorate voted for the 8th Amendment= No abortions under any circumstances (win for you guys).
    This meant the Constitution had to be changed and the appropriate legislation introduced.

    In 1992 a majority of the electorate voted to change the 8th Amendment in light of the X-Case = abortion if the life of the mother is in immediate danger - including by suicide. (Partial win for us guys).

    This means the Constitution has to be changed and the appropriate legislation introduced.

    2 subsequent referendums upheld the 'suicide clause'.
    This means the Constitution has to be changed and the appropriate legislation introduced.

    The government has to legislate for X - the argument is about the wording. There will be legislation and it will allow for abortion in certain circumstances. The fight is over which circumstances - how little can FG concede/how much can Labour demand.

    But have no doubt - they will legislate to allow abortion.

    It is illegal for the government to simply refuse to legislate following a referendum - all they can do is delay.

    Which they have.

    For 20 years.

    But there is this place called The European Court of Human Rights and the government got in big trouble with them because of all the delaying...


  • Options
    #5174
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    Sarky wrote: »
    When you stop insulting our intelligence with your abysmally ignorant posts, I'll stop insulting your lack of understanding.

    Now, you still have some questions to answer, and an apology to make regarding how wrong you got the Irish legislative process.


    Some people can post without deliberately insulting others while others can't. You clearly fall inot the latter category...


  • Options
    #5175
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    _rebelkid wrote: »
    ask me one first...

    Do you retract the claim I called you a baby killer..?


  • Options
    #5176
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Sigh- Silvio.

    We have this very important document called The Constitution.
    It is number one law of the land.
    No legislation can be enacted if it goes against the Constitution - technical term is 'Unconstitutional.'
    In order for what is written in the Constitution to be changed a majority of the electorate must vote for that change.
    In 1983 a majority of the electorate voted for the 8th Amendment= No abortions under any circumstances (win for you guys).
    This meant the Constitution had to be changed and the appropriate legislation introduced.

    In 1992 a majority of the electorate voted to change the 8th Amendment in light of the X-Case = abortion if the life of the mother is in immediate danger - including by suicide. (Partial win for us guys).

    This means the Constitution has to be changed and the appropriate legislation introduced.

    2 subsequent referendums upheld the 'suicide clause'.
    This means the Constitution has to be changed and the appropriate legislation introduced.

    The government has to legislate for X - the argument is about the wording. There will be legislation and it will allow for abortion in certain circumstances. The fight is over which circumstances - how little can FG concede/how much can Labour demand.

    But have no doubt - they will legislate to allow abortion.

    It is illegal for the government to simply refuse to legislate following a referendum - all they can do is delay.

    Which they have.

    For 20 years.

    But there is this place called The European Court of Human Rights and the government got in big trouble with them because of all the delaying...


    If X is rejected in the Dail, what happens then...? :)


  • Options
    #5177
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    Silvio.Dante wrote: »
    If X is rejected in the Dail, what happens then...? :)
    It can't be. Seriously.

    MrP


  • Options
    #5178
    _rebelkid
    Registered Users Posts: 1,886 ✭✭✭_rebelkid


    Silvio.Dante wrote: »
    Do you retract the claim I called you a baby killer..?

    Well seeing as you actually did, No.
    As I pointed out 3 days ago, you inferred from my responses that I "Support intentional killing of unborn babies", which is contextually synonomical with Murder.

    Now, answer the questions which have been put to you by varoius users. I'm not going through 'em for you.


  • Options
    #5179
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Silvio.Dante wrote: »
    If X is rejected in the Dail, what happens then...? :)

    It can't be.

    The very minimum which has to be introduced is legislation which permits abortion when there is an immediate and significant risk to the life of the mother if the pregnancy continues - including the risk of suicide.

    If the government refuses to introduce that minimum they will have overthrown the Constitution as the basis of our laws and from which the State derives its legitimacy.

    In short - the will have staged a Coup d'état


  • Options
    #5180
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    MrPudding wrote: »
    It can't be. Seriously.

    MrP


    Oh it can if enough TDs vote against it...:)

    Would that be treason..?


  • Options
    #5181
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    _rebelkid wrote: »
    Well seeing as you actually did, No.
    As I pointed out 3 days ago, you inferred from my responses that I "Support intentional killing of unborn babies", which is contextually synonomical with Murder.

    where did I say that..?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5182
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Silvio.Dante wrote: »
    Oh it can if enough TDs vote against it...:)

    Would that be treason..?

    YES!

    Coup d'état


  • Options
    #5183
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    It can't be.

    The very minimum which has to be introduced is legislation which permits abortion when there is an immediate and significant risk to the life of the mother if the pregnancy continues - including the risk of suicide.

    If the government refuses to introduce that minimum they will have overthrown the Constitution as the basis of our laws and from which the State derives its legitimacy.

    In short - the will have staged a Coup d'état
    Well in that case Viva la Revolucion...:D

    Fact is this legislation could be rejected if enough TDs vote against it, hence our campaign...


  • Options
    #5184
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Silvio.Dante wrote: »
    Well in that case Viva la Revolucion...:D

    Fact is this legislation could be rejected if enough TDs vote against it, hence our campaign...

    No it can't unless you want the Republic to cease to exist.

    TDs can reject a particular wording - they cannot fail to legislate.

    You really really need to educate yourself on our political system, I don't know where you are getting your information but they are telling you porkies and inciting you to commit treason by getting you to lobby political parties to overthrow the State. :eek:

    Seriously Silvio - go look it up.


  • Options
    #5185
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    Silvio.Dante wrote: »
    Oh it can if enough TDs vote against it...:)

    Would that be treason..?
    OK, once more for the cheap seats. THERE IS NO VOTE.

    MrP


  • Options
    #5186
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Silvio.Dante wrote: »
    Some people can post without deliberately insulting others while others can't. You clearly fall inot the latter category...

    If I do, then so do you. You aren't exactly covering yourself in glory with your snotty, passive-aggressive, judgmental flippancy.

    You aren't willing to up your game, so for the sake of balance, I'm lowering mine. I don't claim to be nice. Only correct.


  • Options
    #5187
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    MrPudding wrote: »
    OK, once more for the cheap seats. THERE IS NO VOTE.

    MrP

    Of course there is and each TD will either accept or reject the proposed legislation...


  • Options
    #5188
    Silvio.Dante
    Site Banned Posts: 4,066 ✭✭✭Silvio.Dante


    Sarky wrote: »
    If I do, then so do you. You aren't exactly covering yourself in glory with your snotty, passive-aggressive, judgmental flippancy.

    You aren't willing to up your game, so for the sake of balance, I'm lowering mine. I don't claimed to be nice. Only correct.

    Very weak justification...


  • Options
    #5189
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    You know what's weaker? Focusing on your poor little hurt feelings in the hopes people will forget the shameless way you dodge questions and ignore points. How about you nut up and tackle those instead? Y'know, like we keep doing?


  • Options
    #5190
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Silvio.Dante wrote: »
    Of course there is and each TD will either accept or reject the proposed legislation...

    each TD will either accept or reject the party whip and the proposed wording of the legislation.

    There will be legislation.
    It will permit abortion.

    or the republic will cease to exist.

    Funny how getting the 8th Amendment passed has bitten ye in the ass.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5191
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Or it would be funny if it hadn't killed the occasional pregnant woman. And destroyed her foetus too. Ironic, certainly. Funny, not so much.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement