Second coming of the Pope to coincide with General Election issue of 8th amendment?

Shrap

I reckon we'll be seeing the gears grinding on this very soon for sure. Heard somewhere that 2018 is the timeline of his projected visit, some suggesting that it would/could undermine and coincide with any promise of a referendum on the 8th amendment. Am I being a bit "conspiracy theorist" to now be thinking that this projected visit is already putting the cat among the pigeons in the lead up to our GE announcement and the parties taking their positions on this election issue?

That's what I'm seeing here anyway.....

Archbishop Eamon Martin seems "inspired" by pope to take a hard line on families being only for reproduction (although rather fluffs his cue by hitting out at a family inclusiveness poster by the INTO):

Addressing the National Eucharistic Congress in Knock, the Primate of All Ireland called for "a renewed mission to the family in Ireland over the next five years".
This mission, he explained, would implement the recommendations of the forthcoming synod on the family in Rome.
He also pledged to proclaim "courageously to Irish society the Good News about marriage between a man and a woman, always open to life"

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/it-is-not-schools-job-alone-to-teach-sex-education-bishop-31563479.html

Pope, in Manila a few months ago:

“The family is threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life”

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/30/pope-francis-meeting-kim-davis-no-surprise?CMP=share_btn_tw

I genuinely think they've (the pope that is) been smart enough to take an early derailing mission on our electoral issues and each and every party knows that #repealthe8th is already dead in the water, or am I just being pessimistic about the power of the Vatican over our State?

Mods - maybe it's not worth a thread - no offence if you move it elsewhere!

Cabaal

They tried to blackmail TD's using belief against them during the last abortion related discussion so I'd put nothing past them

Shrap

Cabaal wrote: »

They tried to blackmail TD's using belief against them during the last abortion related discussion so I'd put nothing past them

And I'd put nothing past the TD's to call this GE in November (each and every significant party having already hurriedly called a "No" or an "Unlikely" on the ref) to get in there before a Papal visit is officially announced.

I think we've been trumped.

Cabaal

Shrap wrote: »

And I'd put nothing past the TD's to call this GE in November (each and every significant party having already hurriedly called a "No" or an "Unlikely" on the ref) to get in there before a Papal visit is officially announced.

I think we've been trumped.

At the end of the day a lot TD's want to keep the mass goers happy, they don't want to upset the Vatican/Pope. FF is particular guilty of this esp during the ref in May in my view.

Shrap

Cabaal wrote: »

At the end of the day a lot TD's want to keep the mass goers happy, they don't want to upset the Vatican/Pope. FF is particular guilty of this esp during the ref in May in my view.

For sure. Not much coincidence that YD were lobbying away in Limerick in the week coming up to Limerick CoCo voting on a motion to call for a referendum on the 8th. All FF gave a flat-out NO. There is unseemly haste on display here, with a GE undoubtedly going to be called for Nov.

Cabaal

Perhaps FF should adopt this as there next election poster

mahoganygas

Two interesting points I took from this.

1) The Pope decided to come Ireland after a majority of Irish people voted in favor of same-sex marriage.

2) On his recent visit to the US the Pope met with Kim Davis (Kentucky County clerk who refused to issue a marriage licence to a gay couple) in secret. He gave her rosaries and told her to "stay strong".

A lot of people rightly point out that this Pope is the most liberal we have seen. I admire how he has turned many church traditions on their head.

But in light of the timing of the visit, and his anti-gay policies I am now opposed to his proposed visit to Ireland.
And I will consider voting for a TD who takes a secular view to gay issues and women's reproductive rights.

Shrap

mahoganygas wrote: »

And I will consider voting for a TD who takes a secular view to gay issues and women's reproductive rights.

Great! But good luck finding one, still less a party with half a chance of actually bringing us a referendum on it!

Shrap

And yes, the timing is everything. The mere threat/promise of his visit is already affecting our affairs of state, to my mind.

Notable last lines of this article: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/parents-to-get-involved-in-religious-education-as-pope-visit-approaches-31566498.html

But Archbishop of Dublin Diarmuid Martin told RTÉ that Pope Francis "has a great liking for Ireland and he has a concern for Ireland".
He added: "I think he just sees this as coming to Ireland but with a good build-up to it rather than just arriving with a few weeks' notice."

I'll be hopping this off every candidate in my area.

Hotblack Desiato

No chance of an election until the spring.

Will be surprised if the pope does visit, hundreds of millions of catholics live in third world countries which have never had a papal visit and would actually be glad to have him. In any case it's a couple of years away at least, might be a new pope by then

Repeal the 8th is NOT dead in the water :mad:

martinjudge73

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

No chance of an election until the spring.

Will be surprised if the pope does visit, hundreds of millions of catholics live in third world countries which have never had a papal visit and would actually be glad to have him. In any case it's a couple of years away at least, might be a new pope by then

Repeal the 8th is NOT dead in the water :mad:

Hmm. The last Pope pretty much visited every country in the world. There is not going to be a referendum on removing the 8th amendment because it would not pass. "The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn.. and equal right to life of the mother".. So how would they present a question that would not remove the rights of the child? It would not fly. We would end up with abortion on demand like britain.. which the majority here don't want.

lazygal

martinjudge73 wrote: »

Hmm. The last Pope pretty much visited every country in the world. There is not going to be a referendum on removing the 8th amendment because it would not pass. "The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn.. and equal right to life of the mother".. So how would they present a question that would not remove the rights of the child? It would not fly. We would end up with abortion on demand like britain.. which the majority here don't want.

Maybe we could have all healthcare on demand. Do you have stats to back up your claims about what the majority of Irish people want?

martinjudge73

lazygal wrote: »

Maybe we could have all healthcare on demand. Do you have stats to back up your claims about what the majority of Irish people want?

Every politician knows that a referendum would fail. How can you say that the unborn does not have the right to life. Its a political nightmare trying to find the wording. At the end of the day Women are not dying because children have a right to life.

There is some support to abortion in the case of rape.. However most people are uncomfortable about abortion on demand. We have one of the highest birthrates in europe.

The reality is we already carry out dozens of abortions a year when a mothers life is at risk. A mother has the right to life.

lazygal

The unborn loses its right to life if a woman's life is at risk or a woman has the means and ability to deny it the right to life elsewhere. Why is the right to life of the unborn subject to such provisions? And which stats indicate that the majority of voters in Ireland wouldn't vote to repeal the eighth amendment?

martinjudge73

lazygal wrote: »

The unborn loses its right to life if a woman's life is at risk or a woman has the means and ability to deny it the right to life elsewhere. Why is the right to life of the unborn subject to such provisions? And which stats indicate that the majority of voters in Ireland wouldn't vote to repeal the eighth amendment?

What do you replace the eight amendment with? If the current clause is not causing the deaths of Mothers or children in the republic then why waste millions on a vote? We already have abortions when a mothers life is at risk.

lazygal

martinjudge73 wrote: »

What do you replace the eight amendment with? If the current clause is not causing the deaths of Mothers or children in the republic then why waste millions on a vote? We already have abortions when a mothers life is at risk.

So once women aren't dying that's the main thing. Regardless of our feelings or health, compulsory gestation needs to remain in place. Any stats on the numbers who wouldn't repeal the amendment? Why is the unborn without a right to life when a woman needs an abortion to save her life? Why is there a clause allowing women to take the unborn elsewhere to kill them after the eighth amendment protecting their right to life?

martinjudge73

lazygal wrote: »

So once women aren't dying that's the main thing. Regardless of our feelings or health, compulsory gestation needs to remain in place. Any stats on the numbers who wouldn't repeal the amendment? Why is the unborn without a right to life when a woman needs an abortion to save her life? Why is there a clause allowing women to take the unborn elsewhere to kill them after the eighth amendment protecting their right to life?

If the pregnancy is not the result of rape then how can it be compulsory? She should use the Pill/condom or morning after pill.

As I said we already have abortion in Ireland to save a mothers life.. So getting rid of the 8th would get us what? What would you replace it with?

Or better still what would you put on the ballot paper? It really is a no brainer to spend millions on this vote now. Maybe in 10 years when things a different.

I am justing be realistic here. The 8th is not killing women and children today.

eviltwin

martinjudge73 wrote: »

What do you replace the eight amendment with? If the current clause is not causing the deaths of Mothers or children in the republic then why waste millions on a vote? We already have abortions when a mothers life is at risk.

So you see allowing women of child bearing age to have a say on an issue that directly affects them as a waste do you?

lazygal

martinjudge73 wrote: »

If the pregnancy is not the result of rape then how can it be compulsory? She should use the Pill/condom or morning after pill.

As I said we already have abortion in Ireland to save a mothers life.. So getting rid of the 8th would get us what? What would you replace it with?

Or better still what would you put on the ballot paper? It really is a no brainer to spend millions on this vote now. Maybe in 10 years when things a different.

I am justing be realistic here. The 8th is not killing women and children today.

So regardless of how a girl or woman feels about being pregnant she must be compelled to remain pregnant. Unless she can travel, that is, or is at risk of dying. What do you think would happen if women weren't allowed to travel to kill the unborn?
I note you've provided no stats on voting outcomes.

martinjudge73

lazygal wrote: »

So regardless of how a girl or woman feels about being pregnant she must be compelled to remain pregnant. Unless she can travel, that is, or is at risk of dying. What do you think would happen if women weren't allowed to travel to kill the unborn?

Hold on.. I'm not debating right/wrongs of all this. Just look around ireland, there simply is not the support for removing this sentence from our constitution.

You would be surprised but people don't want dead children. I know a women personally who was about to have an abortion, her friend told her mother and her mother raced to Dublin, told her unconditionally she would support her with the child. I think most families are like that, once they know everyone rallys around. So to present to people a vote that would mean killing their grandchildren on Irish soil might be a step too far. That is my pragmatic view.

We might be pretty liberal when it comes to accepting gay marriage, however abortion is another kettle of fish.

stinkle

Abortion is already a thing in Ireland, we just have a typical Irish solution to an Irish problem which means they actually occur elsewhere. Women shouldnt have to travel to access this, and not every woman is able to travel anyway due to myriad reasons such as finances, visa issues, other family responsibilities and so on. It happens anyway, get over it and allow women to access basic healthcare in their own country.

No contraception is 100% effective. No woman should be forced to go full term on a non-viable pregnancy, and rape victims should not have to go through with a pregnancy either.

lazygal

martinjudge73 wrote: »

Hold on.. I'm not debating right/wrongs of all this. Just look around ireland, there simply is not the support for removing this sentence from our constitution.

You would be surprised but people don't want dead children. I know a women personally who was about to have an abortion, her friend told her mother and her mother raced to Dublin, told her unconditionally she would support her with the child. I think most families are like that, once they know everyone rallys around. So to present to people a vote that would mean killing their grandchildren on Irish soil might be a step too far. That is my pragmatic view.

We might be pretty liberal when it comes to accepting gay marriage, however abortion is another kettle of fish.

Anecdotes aren't data. You keep saying the Irish people want to keep compulsory gestation in the constitution but you haven't produced any stats to back up this claim. So one woman's changed her mind. What about those who want to access abortion? What should they do?

Icepick

mahoganygas wrote: »

I admire how he has turned many church traditions on their head.

He hasn't changed anything.

He said a few liberal things but the Vatican has made no changes to the doctrine and heavily supported anti gay rights referendums in Europe.

martinjudge73

lazygal wrote: »

Anecdotes aren't data. You keep saying the Irish people want to keep compulsory gestation in the constitution but you haven't produced any stats to back up this claim. So one woman's changed her mind. What about those who want to access abortion? What should they do?

As my grandmother said.. if you don't want to get pregnant, then keep your knickers on. compulsory gestation is only compulsory if the women is raped, otherwise it was a choice she made. Live with the choice.

As for the stats.. well you will see in the next election. Fine Gael/Fianna won't have it in their manifest because they would not get elected.

Maybe when there is a left wing government you might have a chance, since we haven't had one do you think a right wing party will touch abortion?

If Enda thought that abortion would help FG.. he would push it. The political reality is that abortion is too hot and divisive to touch, any referendum would be defeated.

Would I like to see my daughters having an abortion if her life was not at risk.. Certainly not. And there are a lot of parents like me.

The dogs on he street know it.

lazygal

I wouldn't want my daughter to be compelled to remain pregnant if she didn't want to be and I'd like more say over my uterus. I wouldn't dream of racing to stop my daughter having an abortion if it was the right decision for her. I'd hate for her to have to travel to access the medical services that should be available here. Hopefully by the time she's older the eighth amendment will be long gone.
As for comments like "keep your knickers on", what do you mean? If you have sex and use contraception and don't want to remain pregnant tough? Unless you head off under the right to travel to kill the unborn amendment?

martinjudge73

lazygal wrote: »

I wouldn't want my daughter to be compelled to remain pregnant if she didn't want to be and I'd like more say over my uterus. I wouldn't dream of racing to stop my daughter having an abortion if it was the right decision for her. I'd hate for her to have to travel to access the medical services that should be available here. Hopefully by the time she's older the eighth amendment will be long gone.
As for comments like "keep your knickers on", what do you mean? If you have sex and use contraception and don't want to remain pregnant tough? Unless you head off under the right to travel to kill the unborn amendment?

Well.. Ask and see how many TD's will support a referendum. That will get you your statistics.

I would never ever support my daughters having an abortion.(if their lives are not at risk) A dead child is not the solution to a problem, it just creates another problem.

lazygal

martinjudge73 wrote: »

Well.. Ask and see how many TD's will support a referendum. That will get you your statistics.

I would never ever support my daughters having an abortion.(if their lives are not at risk) A dead child is not the solution to a problem, it just creates another problem.

I would never ever support telling my daughter what to do with her reproductive choices. Compulsory gestation is not the solution to a problem, it just creates another problem.
One of my local tds does support doing away with compulsory gestation. They'll be getting my vote. Do you have any statistics on how people would vote in a referendum on repealing the eighth amendment yet?

eviltwin

martinjudge73 wrote: »

Well.. Ask and see how many TD's will support a referendum. That will get you your statistics.

I would never ever support my daughters having an abortion.(if their lives are not at risk) A dead child is not the solution to a problem, it just creates another problem.

What problem does it create

lazygal

eviltwin wrote: »

What problem does it create

WomenHurt might roll out it's traveling road show of regret to tell you all women regret killing their unborn babies and the biased media won't tell you this. Or something about abortion stealing our future I'd say.

martinjudge73

lazygal wrote: »

I would never ever support telling my daughter what to do with her reproductive choices. Compulsory gestation is not the solution to a problem, it just creates another problem.
One of my local tds does support doing away with compulsory gestation. They'll be getting my vote. Do you have any statistics on how people would vote in a referendum on repealing the eighth amendment yet?

Well as I say to my daughters.. Guys that just want to have sex. but no kids are not men at all. When it comes to having kids.. You either want them or you don't. If you get pregnant I will unconditionally support my grandchildren. A dead child solves nothing.

You have to teach your children to be responsible for their acts. There are a lot of strings attached to having sex. So find the right person. I always tell them to find a guy who wants kids if you want to have sex.. If he does not want kids, then he won't respect them in the long run..

lazygal

martinjudge73 wrote: »

Well as I say to my daughters.. Guys that just want to have sex. but no kids are not men at all. When it comes to having kids.. You either want them or you don't. If you get pregnant I will unconditionally support my grandchildren. A dead child solves nothing.

You have to teach your children to be responsible for their acts. There are a lot of strings attached to having sex. So find the right person. I always tell them to find a guy who wants kids if you want to have sex.. If he does not want kids, then he won't respect them in the long run..

Is having an abortion not taking responsibility for your actions? Should the right to travel to avail of abortion services be repealed? Do you think anyone ever changes their mind about wanting to have children?

eviltwin

martinjudge73 wrote: »

Well as I say to my daughters.. Guys that just want to have sex. but no kids are not men at all. When it comes to having kids.. You either want them or you don't. If you get pregnant I will unconditionally support my grandchildren. A dead child solves nothing.

You have to teach your children to be responsible for their acts. There are a lot of strings attached to having sex. So find the right person. I always tell them to find a guy who wants kids if you want to have sex.. If he does not want kids, then he won't respect them in the long run..

If your daughter wants an abortion she's going to have an abortion. She just might not tell you given your attitude.

martinjudge73

eviltwin wrote: »

If your daughter wants an abortion she's going to have an abortion. She just might not tell you given your attitude.

They are pretty practical girls. I somehow don't think abortion would ever enter their minds.. it would be the opposite,, they are mad about babies. That is what scares me a little. They said themselves they would never abort anyway. And I have always said I would never abandon them or judge them if they became pregnant, they would be supported 100%.

We can't run away from the consequences of choices you make in life. So its better to think before acting.. and thats what I tell my girls.

Since I have 3 first cousins who had crisis pregnancies in the 80's and who have adult kids now.. they also tell my girls to think first before jumping into bed with a guy.

I'm glad that Ireland is more open today.

stinkle

Also, it isn't just 'girls' having abortions, many women who have already had children don't want any more. Do you suggest wives and husbands never having sex again until shes through menopause once they've had enough kids? This attitude of slutty girls having to keep their knickers on is insulting.

martinjudge73

stinkle wrote: »

Also, it isn't just 'girls' having abortions, many women who have already had children don't want any more. Do you suggest wives and husbands never having sex again until shes through menopause once they've had enough kids? This attitude of slutty girls having to keep their knickers on is insulting.

So if you don't want kids.. you kill them?

eviltwin

martinjudge73 wrote: »

They are pretty practical girls. I somehow don't think abortion would ever enter their minds.. it would be the opposite,, they are mad about babies. That is what scares me a little. They said themselves they would never abort anyway. And I have always said I would never abandon them or judge them if they became pregnant, they would be supported 100%.

We can't run away from the consequences of choices you make in life. So its better to think before acting.. and thats what I tell my girls.

Since I have 3 first cousins who had crisis pregnancies in the 80's and who have adult kids now.. they also tell my girls to think first before jumping into bed with a guy.

I'm glad that Ireland is more open today.

I bet my mother says the same about me. I had a crisis pregnancy in my teens, had the baby, married the father, it all turned out grand. I still found myself having an abortion in my 30's though. You never can tell what will happen and doing one thing at a certain stage in your life doesn't mean you'll choose the same path at another stage. Your daughters will make their own choices regardless of what you want for them cause they are able to make up their own minds.

lazygal

martinjudge73 wrote: »

So if you don't want kids.. you kill them?

Well it's constitutionally protected that girls and women can travel to kill their kids once they're unborn. Do you think that should be repealed? Lots of us are into babies but that does not mean we should be forced to gestate a foetus against our wishes. Married women with born children have abortions too. And maybe go on to have more children after an abortion.

Cabaal

martinjudge73 wrote: »

Well.. Ask and see how many TD's will support a referendum. That will get you your statistics.

Err, that's not stats, that's TDs being careful so they don't loose votes so they won't say anything to upset 60+s

If you look at what most FF TDs actually voted on the marriage ref you'd likely find they were against marriage equality.

For example, take Kilkenny. No FF went door to door, no posters up supporting it and it was well known that Bobby Elyward would be voting no.

By your logic the Irish public had no interest in marriage equality.

Either provide creditable stats or stop spouting nonsense.

frostyjacks

How do you explain the Limerick vote last week? 2/3 majority was a pretty comprehensive rejection of the repeal movement. Would the result be any different at councils up and down the land? I doubt it. It's a dead duck.

lazygal

Nothing to be feared by those who foresee abortion mills up and down the land then, if we have a referendum on who has more of a say over my uterus, is there? Do we only have referendums where the outcome is a sure thing?

Pherekydes

Funny. In the Marriage equality referendum, Limerick county had a 54.75% Yes vote, compared with a 64.15% Yes in Limerick city.

There will be huge variations across the country when the issue is voted on.

Peregrinus

Pherekydes wrote: »

Funny. In the Marriage equality referendum, Limerick county had a 54.75% Yes vote, compared with a 64.15% Yes in Limerick city.

Why would that be funny? These are two easily-distinguished issues. There's no reason to think that people's views on marriage equality will be a reliable predictor of their views on abortion.

Pherekydes wrote: »

There will be huge variations across the country when the issue is voted on.

Indeed there will. But when you net them all out, there'll either be a majority in favour of repealing the eighth or there won't. And if the proposal is to repeal the eighth and say nothing about abortion in the Constitution, I don't see that there will be a majority in favour of repeal. (And I say this as someone who would favour simple repeal myself.)

Peregrinus

lazygal wrote: »

Nothing to be feared by those who foresee abortion mills up and down the land then, if we have a referendum on who has more of a say over my uterus, is there? Do we only have referendums where the outcome is a sure thing?

Ideally, we only have referendums where we think some good might come out of it. And previous abortion referendums have been appalling, polarising, divisive, corrosive exercises which have done nothing to contribute to a climate in which progressive development might be possible. Another one now would be no different.

Pherekydes

Peregrinus wrote: »

Indeed there will.

That was my point and only my point. Variation.

Why would Limerick be a bellwether for the entire country?

Peregrinus

Oh, I don't think it would be. But the contrast between the support for marriage equality and the (apparent) opposition to repeal of the eighth, both in Limerick, does point to the fact that they are distinct issues, and support for the former does not translate into support for the latter. And I think that's probably as true for the country as a whole as it is for Limerick.

Shrap

Hmm. May have been stupid in thinking this wouldn't turn into a rights/wrongs of abortion discussion.

I think it's nearly a given that Irish politicians in the main won't touch this issue unless they think there's a good chance of it passing (which it very well might do), but my original question (although a bit garbled) was do people think that the Pope making such an early threat or promise to come here is a nefarious move to help prevent a referendum being mooted by any party?

In other words, as the Pope is so "concerned" about Ireland and the way our society is progressing, does it strike anyone else here that an early announcement of a visit is actually in order to put "the fear of god" into our politics?

Peregrinus

Shrap wrote: »

Hmm. May have been stupid in thinking this wouldn't turn into a rights/wrongs of abortion discussion.

I think it's nearly a given that Irish politicians in the main won't touch this issue unless they think there's a good chance of it passing (which it very well might do), but my original question (although a bit garbled) was do people think that the Pope making such an early threat or promise to come here is a nefarious move to help prevent a referendum being mooted by any party?

My instinctive reaction is to say "no", because I don't think a "nefarious move" is necessary. Both instinct and experience will cause politicians of all stripes to run screaming from yet another abortion referendum. They have nothing to gain and much to lose from a referendum. Hence I don't think they need to be scared away from one.

Shrap wrote: »

In other words, as the Pope is so "concerned" about Ireland and the way our society is progressing, does it strike anyone else here that an early announcement of a visit is actually in order to put "the fear of god" into our politics?

Plus, I see no reason to think that this pope is particularly concerned about (or even aware of) Ireland. And holding the (legal) line against abortion is not really one of his central concerns.

Not that, if asked, he wouldn't say (a) abortion is a bad thing, and (b) it should be illegal. It's just that his interests, in terms of what he wants to achieve as pope, appear to lie elsewhere. He has a limited time as pope - he's already 78 - and he'll want to focus on what he wants to focus on; abortion laws have never been one of his central preoccupations; even if the eighth were to be repealed I don't see Ireland adopting anything other than a pretty restrictive abortion law and I expect if he did interest himself in the question at all that's what he'd be told; and at best a papal visit could only temporarily hold up a move to more liberal abortion laws, if they really were coming.

Bottom line; we/the western world/the western media may be preocuppied with the Catholic church's theology of sexuality. Francis, while he doesn't reject that theology, doesn't share the same preoccupation with it. If he has concerns about Ireland they will be his concerns, not ours, and if he visits Ireland it will be because of the state of the Irish church, not because of the state of Irish abortion law.

Mark Hamill

martinjudge73 wrote: »

What do you replace the eight amendment with?

Why would we need to replace it with anything?

Peregrinus

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Why would we need to replace it with anything?

Because whether you would replace it, and with what, is a factor which would inluence the prospects of the referendum being passed.

Cabaal

Peregrinus wrote: »

Because whether you would replace it, and with what, is a factor which would inluence the prospects of the referendum being passed.

We remove it and legislation in law like most country's, its utter nonsense its in our constitution

Peregrinus

Oh, I agree. But we are where we are, and this might be one of those areas in life where the best is the enemy of the good.

Which is more desirable - a refernedum to remove the eighth and not replace it which fails, or a referendum to remove the eighth and replace it with some text giving a wider (but not unrestricted) right to abortion which succeeds?

Even if you refuse to contemplate the possibility that a remove-and-not-replace referendum would fail, you must accept the fact that that others do contemplate that possiblity. And that fact is the answer to Mark Hamill's question.