The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Water John

Well, I'll wait to see what those Ministers opposed to the 12 weeks come up with, to deal with rape and incest. That conundrum needs to be satisfactorily dealt with by anyone, proposing Repeal and saying the 12 weeks is too liberal. I understand their reluctance at 12 weeks no restriction.
They need to point out how they would see the law that follows Repeal.
In fact, anyone here who supports the Repeal but want a more restricted law than the 12 weeks, please post.

Billy86

RobertKK wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/05/make-access-to-abortion-easier-uks-top-obstetrician-demands

Kind of funny that the link is about the UK's chief gynecologist calling for easier access to abortions. Beyond that, as I said, in the UK are more accurately struggling from a shortage of doctors and professionals full stop.

More than 86,000 NHS posts vacant, says report

NHS faces shortage of 2,000 surgeons

NHS faces shortage of more than 40,000 nurses after Brexit, says leaked government prediction

According to the report, compiled by London’s Southbank University, across London there are more than 252 unfilled occupational therapist posts within NHS and social care services. Nearly one third of these vacancies sit within the Mental Health sector.

1,000 more psychiatrists needed to tackle 'unacceptable failings' in care

CANCER CARE SHORTAGE Cancer patients are being denied prompt chemotherapy due to a lack of specialist nurses

UK experiencing ‘desperate’ shortage of radiologists

Children's hospital units forced to close to new patients due to staff shortages
Lack of paediatric doctors and nurses across the UK also means care children receive is at risk, says the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health

'Thousands' at risk due to shortage of specialist physiotherapists, charity warns

Almost one in three paramedic jobs are vacant across England.

And no surprise, that shortage includes midwives...

NHS midwife shortages: Bill for temporary staff costing service £100m a year
NHS contending with shortage of 3,500 midwives as Government pay restraint policies see experienced staff leave in droves

Riskymove

Water John wrote: »

I understand their reluctance at 12 weeks no restriction.
They need to point out how they would see the law that follows Repeal.

from the comments so far I think they would live with a tighter time frame - i.e. 8 - 10 weeks

munchkin_utd

Water John wrote: »

Well, I'll wait to see what those Ministers opposed to the 12 weeks come up with, to deal with rape and incest. That conundrum needs to be satisfactorily dealt with by anyone, proposing Repeal and saying the 12 weeks is too liberal. I understand their reluctance at 12 weeks no restriction.
They need to point out how they would see the law that follows Repeal.
In fact, anyone here who supports the Repeal but want a more restricted law than the 12 weeks, please post.

As to a possible viable fudge, maybe it'd simply be that the form for getting the abortion pills would have a few boxes for incest or rape, and you choose from the pallete of valid reasons which one applies. If the form simply stays with the advising doctor then whatever box is ticked becomes only an administrative formality to access the pills
With something like that, its technically only for rape, incest etc keeping politicans happy, but its essentially abortion on demand keeping the repeal side happy.

I dont know why it'd be the job of someone against a change to come up with a proposal to make a change? Surely it'd be someone looking for a change (from the status quo that nothing in the slightest is allowed) who would need to use their imagination to at least get something voted through.

Maybe the politicans who see 12 weeks as being too liberal are in reality happy to see no change but for political reasons want to say they are in the middle. Or, maybe they have more pressing issues like driving around attending funerals in order to shore up the support in advance of any potential election. That after all is the main purpose of a career politician, to get re-elected

Zubeneschamali

munchkin_utd wrote: »

As to a possible viable fudge, maybe it'd simply be that the form for getting the abortion pills would have a few boxes for incest or rape, and you choose from the pallete of valid reasons which one applies. If the form simply stays with the advising doctor then whatever box is ticked becomes only an administrative formality to access the pills

Yes, lets do away with one kind of hypocrisy and add a new one instead. You can have access to abortion pills, just lie on this form, thanks.

Loafing Oaf

munchkin_utd wrote: »

A

I dont know why it'd be the job of someone against a change to come up with a proposal to make a change?

Because they say that they are not opposed to any change but that the change proposed by the government goes too far. I'll just link to an article making the case because I'm too lazy to:

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/legislating-for-abortion-in-rape-cases-is-very-difficult-1.3376777

Those TDs and Senators who accept that the current position is no longer appropriate but who have said they don’t want to go with the 12 weeks proposal from the Oireachtas committee need to tell the electorate what if any alternative they are proposing to address the circumstances of women pregnant as a result of rape.

Water John

The case of those who are opposed to Repeal is clear. I am talking of, the many who, support the Repeal, but who have problems with the proposed 12 weeks, no questions, which Minister Harris has indicated would be the proposed law.

joe_cork

What if, after 10 weeks, the scan results for your pregnancy revealed that the foetus has a chromosomal abnormality resulting in serious sight & hearing problems, would have severe brain abormalities and serious mental disabilities, and even if it survived the pregnancy would never walk. What if, assuming it managed to reach full term, it would have only a 10% chance of reaching the age of one. What if, even if you knew that the baby was to reach its first birthday, that you would know for certain that you would be burying the child at some stage, and almost certainly at a young age?

If this was the scenario put in front of you after 10 weeks into a pregnancy, would you choose to take a pill that would induce a miscarriage?

We didn't do an amniocentesis during pregnancy, so a few days after the birth of our child we suddenly found that these were the conditions that our baby had been born with. So, for us, the decision around termination was never an option.

We are both in favour of repealing the 8th amendment. Personally, if I had done the amniocentesis (or preferably the newer non-invasive Harmony cfDNA tests), I know for a fact that I would have chosen to terminate. Even today, this is the option I would have chosen were it up to me.

However, we would not have terminated as my wife has said she would never have been able to do this, but would respect the decision of other mothers to do otherwise. In other words, she is very much pro-choice, but would personally choose not to terminate.

Why am I writing this? Firstly, I personally find every day an emotional struggle, I find it a battle to get over the condition of our baby. We both love our child, but know our time with her is limited, and we both know that at some stage she will be gone. So even the act of writing these thoughts down feels like an escape valve, something heavy off my chest. Secondly, the ongoing abortion debate will definitely focus on conditions such as this. The anti-abortion side will say they are speaking for parents such as us. They don't speak for us. They don't know what we've experienced, or what parents in similar situations have experienced. Remember that the Harmony cfDNA tests are non-invasive, which I believe will mean that more parents will choose to scan for fetal chromosomal conditions. So this is a scenario that more parents will find themselves in. I believe parents should have a choice.

January

Riskymove wrote: »

from the comments so far I think they would live with a tighter time frame - i.e. 8 - 10 weeks

Which is actually what is happening with the 12 week limit anyway.

A pregnancy is calculated from the first day of the person's last period. Conception happens at least two weeks after that (could be longer, up to three weeks depending on when a person ovulates), so a 12 week pregnancy is actually a ten week old fetus.

If they were to reduce it to 10 weeks, we'd be looking at an 8 week old fetus, 8 weeks is actually 6 weeks and some people don't even know they're pregnant before 6 weeks. So trying to organise an abortion within two weeks doesn't give a person much time to contemplate their options and come to a decision on whether they want to abort or carry on with the pregnancy.

Riskymove

January wrote: »

two weeks doesn't give a person much time to contemplate their options and come to a decision on whether they want to abort or carry on with the pregnancy.

agreed

Hannibal_Smith

I don't understand why people are okay with abortion in cases of rape, but are against it in other circumstances.

If you do not agree with abortion because a baby is being killed and you believe it is likely to suffer then why is it okay to allow that suffering in cases of rape? If you believe in the right to life of the unborn and that it deserves it's own rights and protections, why would you agree to killing it in cases of rape?

Does your opinion of the foetus change? Is it less deserving of rights than any other foetus?

Why would you stand up for the rights of one set of unborn, but not others?

How would the woman prove to a medical professional that she was raped? Particularly before the 12 week cut off?

_Roz_

January wrote: »

So trying to organise an abortion within two weeks doesn't give a person much time to contemplate their options and come to a decision on whether they want to abort or carry on with the pregnancy.

I'm fine with the 12 week limit but.... would people really take that long to figure out what to do? Do you want it, and can you support it. Yes/no answers to both. If you want it but can't support it, the decision might take a bit longer I suppose to try find a workable arrangement, but for the most part, surely anyone who is having sex should already have considered what they would do if they got accidentally pregnant, and review this at any point circumstances change, no?

RobertKK

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I see no evidence that your imaginary future will come to pass. But let us imagine for the purposes of argument that it does.

So what?

If abortion is happening who cares WHO is providing it?

As with any business we will have to ensure they conform to certain regulations of course. But nothing new there.

So what's the problem in your imaginary world there? I am not seeing it.

How can you say something is an imaginary world when it was reported as fact in the UK?
Why would Ireland be different?

Do you think abortions should be viewed as a business which you said it would be?
We are told the pro choice side want abortions to be legal, safe and rare. But a business is there to make money and that would go against rare.

Speaking of businesses, I do feel sympathy for Marie Stopes, when she was alive she was all for birth control being used to reduce unwanted pregnancies, but she was against abortion. Now her name is associated with being for something she was against.
A bit like Amnesty International whose founder was against abortion. But who died and now the organisation is a campaigner for abortion. Giving who funds them it is a business more than a charity when change of policy can be bought.
It is like they pissed on the graves of the Marie Stopes by using her name and on the founder of Amnesty by turning the organisation he founded into an advocate for abortion.

This is why it matters, Marie Stopes was for eugenics. She was very anti-abortion and I wonder do women know who use the clinics that bear her name that Marie Stopes accused a friend of murder because she had an abortion?
She was a very strange choice of name for a business that provides abortion.

eviltwin

_Roz_ wrote: »

I'm fine with the 12 week limit but.... would people really take that long to figure out what to do? Do you want it, and can you support it. Yes/no answers to both. If you want it but can't support it, the decision might take a bit longer I suppose to try find a workable arrangement, but for the most part, surely anyone who is having sex should already have considered what they would do if they got accidentally pregnant, and review this at any point circumstances change, no?

It's not an easy decision to make, it can take weeks to decide. Not for everyone but for some. And you might have an idea what you would do before it happens, actually faced with making that choice can be very different.

chalkitdown1

Some horrible Pro-Life posters & billboards up around Cork City already including one giant one on the side of a building about a block away from a rape-crisis centre. Disgusting. And of course the info on them is either misleading or straight up false. It's gonna be a long 4 months of this crap.

georgina toadbum

eviltwin wrote: »

It's not an easy decision to make, it can take weeks to decide. Not for everyone but for some. And you might have an idea what you would do before it happens, actually faced with making that choice can be very different.

I was just going to say this. A friend of mine always said she didn't want kids and that if she got pregnant she would have an abortion.

She got pregnant and couldn't go through with it. It really is not a decision you can make before you know you are pregnant and are in that situation.

Myself I don't agree with abortion. I am however pro-choice and will be voting to repeal. I would never have one myself but I wouldn't judge anyone or wish them to be denied an abortion for whatever reason they want one.

_Roz_

eviltwin wrote: »

It's not an easy decision to make, it can take weeks to decide. Not for everyone but for some. And you might have an idea what you would do before it happens, actually faced with making that choice can be very different.

georgina toadbum wrote: »

I was just going to say this. A friend of mine always said she didn't want kids and that if she got pregnant she would have an abortion.

She got pregnant and couldn't go through with it. It really is not a decision you can make before you know you are pregnant and are in that situation.

Myself I don't agree with abortion. I am however pro-choice and will be voting to repeal. I would never have one myself but I wouldn't judge anyone or wish them to be denied an abortion for whatever reason they want one.

I've heard that, and I guess it must be true, I just dunno. I know my stance on kids. I know my financial and emotional capabilities, and I know they don't support children. Ergo, abortion. But yeah I suppose it's a case of, once you do it there's no going back, so think long and hard.

nozzferrahhtoo

RobertKK wrote: »

How can you say something is an imaginary world when it was reported as fact in the UK? Why would Ireland be different?

Different countries. Different population size. Different medical system. Different issues WITH their medical system. And much much more. We are not 1:1 the same country where you can simply assume one will predict the outcome in another.

And that's BEFORE you factor in the difference in abortion laws. They have, what, 24 weeks? So a significant proportion of surgical abortion? We have a proposed 12 week limit. So almost entirely PILL based. So what kind of external business model do you IMAGINE will come in to meet that demand exactly? And Why?

RobertKK wrote: »

Do you think abortions should be viewed as a business which you said it would be?

I simply do not care. Once an ELECTIVE procedure is afforded to the public in a safe, regulated, and ethical manner, I simply could not care WHO is providing it. Nor, I notice despite you are replying to a post with me asking you, have you presented a reason why I might.

RobertKK wrote: »

We are told the pro choice side want abortions to be legal, safe and rare. But a business is there to make money and that would go against rare.

Now you are asking a different question. Would I like to see abortions reach a level of quantity where an external business is even required in the first place. That is ENTIRELY different and the answer is no, I would not. I want ideally NO ONE to have to have abortions, or to feel they need to seek them.

But that is a TOTALLY different angle to be looking at than whether a business providing them in and of itself is problematic. I honestly do not think THAT is an issue. If abortions are happening, I ask you again (since yuo did not deign to answer) what does it matter WHO is providing them?

But AGAIN you seem to forget that at 12 weeks, which is the proposal, we are not talking about surgical abortions. But pills. So from this angle ALSO I am failing to see what your issue is.

The rest of your post is nothing to do with a reply to me, so I am sure you will forgive me if I ignore it. Especially given the sheer quantity of posts from me, to you, which you have ignored so far on the thread.

Bannasidhe

I had a conversation the other day with a friend I don't get to see often where she told me of her horrible day canvassing for Marriage Equality in a Cork suburb (Simon Coveney's base as it happens) and her absolute horror when my notoriously homophobic elderly father opened the door to her knock. Having known her since she was a small child he recognised her so she couldn't run away. Instead she bit the bullet and asked him to vote Yes. He replied 'what other way would I ****ing vote?' Friend said she knew at the moment it was in the bag. Then she asked me 'What about Repeal? How will he vote on that?. I said I honestly don't know but suspect it would be a No. We made the sad commiseration faces at each other.

This morning I decided to ask him. He said that while he, personally, is anti-abortion all this amendment is is nothing more than a way for the same bunch of godbotherers who put girls in the laundries to control and torture women and girls. That as far as he is concerned there is no way a fetus is equal to a living breathing woman and it's ridiculous to say it is. It's high time the women of Ireland were shown the respect they deserve and that respect includes them having the same control over what happens their own bodies as men have. Why on Earth would anyone want to force anyone to have a child they don't want? Sure he grew up seeing the effect that had. Women trapped in abusive marriages. Unloved and unwanted children with the rags of their arses flogging them. Men drinking to escape the responsibilities they couldn't cope with or fecking off on the boat.

No more Holy Joes and Josephines punishing women and girls, he declared. Them day are gone and good riddance!

My will be 86 years old when the Referendum happens father is voting Yes to Repeal.

No one is more surprised than me.

_Roz_

My parents will both vote no, unfortunately. My mother has always said if I ever had an unwanted pregnancy, give the baby to her. This the woman having to declare personal insolvency because of the insane debt racked up on the house by my father. She hasn't the means to provide for herself, let alone a human being. But somehow the child existing is more important than quality of life.

drkpower

Water John wrote: »

Well, I'll wait to see what those Ministers opposed to the 12 weeks come up with, to deal with rape and incest. That conundrum needs to be satisfactorily dealt with by anyone, proposing Repeal and saying the 12 weeks is too liberal. I understand their reluctance at 12 weeks no restriction.
They need to point out how they would see the law that follows Repeal.
In fact, anyone here who supports the Repeal but want a more restricted law than the 12 weeks, please post.

Indeed.

Lost an awful lot of respect for Simon Coveney listening to his interview with Sean O'Rourke. I have respect for anyone with a genuinely held 'pro-life' view, but he was completely disingenuous on rape being a workable standalone ground for termination. And he also lobbed Downs in there too. He knows better that that.

Incredibly dishonest and self-serving; as a potential 'leader', he showed himself up.

Cabaal

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I had a conversation the other day with a friend I don't get to see often where she told me of her horrible day canvassing for Marriage Equality in a Cork suburb (Simon Coveney's base as it happens) and her absolute horror when my notoriously homophobic elderly father opened the door to her knock. Having known her since she was a small child he recognised her so she couldn't run away. Instead she bit the bullet and asked him to vote Yes. He replied 'what other way would I ****ing vote?' Friend said she knew at the moment it was in the bag. Then she asked me 'What about Repeal? How will he vote on that?. I said I honestly don't know but suspect it would be a No. We made the sad commiseration faces at each other.

This morning I decided to ask him. He said that while he, personally, is anti-abortion all this amendment is is nothing more than a way for the same bunch of godbotherers who put girls in the laundries to control and torture women and girls. That as far as he is concerned there is no way a fetus is equal to a living breathing woman and it's ridiculous to say it is. It's high time the women of Ireland were shown the respect they deserve and that respect includes them having the same control over what happens their own bodies as men have. Why on Earth would anyone want to force anyone to have a child they don't want? Sure he grew up seeing the effect that had. Women trapped in abusive marriages. Unloved and unwanted children with the rags of their arses flogging them. Men drinking to escape the responsibilities they couldn't cope with or fecking off on the boat.

No more Holy Joes and Josephines punishing women and girls, he declared. Them day are gone and good riddance!

My will be 86 years old when the Referendum happens father is voting Yes to Repeal.

No one is more surprised than me.

This,
This is the catholic church forgets about in Ireland when they spout about whats is not moral or right.

They have caused so much upset and suffering that people actually don't respect them anymore. Sure they have faith in a god but they don't trust a word the catholic church says anymore.

A large amount of Catholics in this country feel betrayed,
While the church claimed the moral high-ground it betrayed its followers and the countless pregnant women in this country for decades. Nobody wants a repeat of Ann Lovett and nobody wants to force a rape victim to carry the rapists off spring to term.

A large amount of the people that feel betrayed now think of the bigger picture and even if they don't personally think abortion is right for them they think that its unfair to force their views on others like the church did for decades, after all look how much suffering that caused on women.

It is this that resulted formed a large part in the passing of the marriage ref I believe,

The likes of Lolek Limited (Iona) and their many sub-organisations forget this,

SusieBlue

_Roz_ wrote: »

My parents will both vote no, unfortunately. My mother has always said if I ever had an unwanted pregnancy, give the baby to her. This the woman having to declare personal insolvency because of the insane debt racked up on the house by my father. She hasn't the means to provide for herself, let alone a human being. But somehow the child existing is more important than quality of life.

I'm in a similar situation with my parents, they are both going to be pretty firm no votes and they despair at the passion I have for repeal.
I hope they change their minds but I can't see it happening.
They were opening up to the idea of changing views when all those disgraceful abortion pro-life pictures of fetuses were put up around where they live and they now won't even entertain the idea of a yes vote.
Its an extremely manipulative campaign that they're running.
I think a lot of people will vote no after seeing those pictures. It stops people seeing the wood from the trees.
Its just shock/guilt tactics.

seenitall

Cabaal wrote: »

nobody wants to force a rape victim to carry the rapists off spring to term.

Well, That's not quite true though, is it? Plenty of people even just on this thread denouncing abortion as murder, so I am sure some of the more rabid ones could not be happier if they could somehow enact a law whereby A Handmaid's Tale becomes a reality.

I haven't started seeing tiny little hands and feet on huge placards in my locality yet, but when I do, I just have to make sure to remember one thing: The last sting of a cruel, vicious, dying wasp.

freshpopcorn

Just out of interest _Roz_ and whiteroses how did ye're parents vote in the marriage referendum?
People were able to seem to talk their parents around in the marriage referendum but this one seems more difficult.

Cabaal

seenitall wrote: »

Well, That's not quite true though, is it? Plenty of people even just on this thread denouncing abortion as murder, so I am sure some of the more rabid ones could not be happier if they could somehow enact a law whereby A Handmaid's Tale becomes a reality.

The same sort of people that brought us Mother & Baby homes as a "solution" to women.

I haven't started seeing tiny little hands and feet on huge placards in my locality yet, but when I do, I just have to make sure to remember one thing: The last sting of a cruel, vicious, dying wasp.

Thats all it is,
They know conservative Ireland is dying, they'll do anything to try and stop it. Including faking photos and everything (they did this previously at a pro choice march where a well known pro life supporter had her picture taken with a repeal jumper and a sign).

Shadowthrone

_Roz_ wrote: »

I'm fine with the 12 week limit but.... would people really take that long to figure out what to do? Do you want it, and can you support it. Yes/no answers to both. If you want it but can't support it, the decision might take a bit longer I suppose to try find a workable arrangement, but for the most part, surely anyone who is having sex should already have considered what they would do if they got accidentally pregnant, and review this at any point circumstances change, no?

Honestly I would say 12 weeks is not enough time. 16 is a better figure really.

1). this is a major decision, not something you just decide on easily (contrary to what pro life seems to believe, abortion will not be the new contraception).
2). it is entirely possible that people do not even realise they are pregnant by the 12 week point, or close to it. That happens all to often to be very realistic and not unreasonable.

While it may seem like a simple decision from the outside, once it happens to you it is very different. It is a decision you must live with for the rest of your life and no woman will ever, i repeat, ever take it lightly.

Which is why i laugh at some pro life people who seem to think that if this passes, all of a sudden every woman will be getting abortions because they can and it will be the new fad!

SusieBlue

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Just out in interest _Roz_ and whiteroses how did ye're parents vote in the marriage referendum?
People were able to seem to talk their parents around in the marriage referendum but this one seems more difficult.

They voted yes in the marriage referendum with no convincing needed, they were both very very supportive and active in the campaign.

They actually aren't conservative at all in any other aspects of their lives - neither are religious, and they encouraged/allowed me to start taking the contraceptive pill with their full support when I was 16. They support legalising cannabis/cbd oil.
They are very open minded people.

I think their opposition to repealing is a hangover from their strict religious upbringings. They realise all the implications it has on women but they just can't get past the fact that it "murders all the babies".
I'm still hoping they change their mind but if the pro-life side continue with their scare tactics it isn't likely to happen.

January

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I had a conversation the other day with a friend I don't get to see often where she told me of her horrible day canvassing for Marriage Equality in a Cork suburb (Simon Coveney's base as it happens) and her absolute horror when my notoriously homophobic elderly father opened the door to her knock. Having known her since she was a small child he recognised her so she couldn't run away. Instead she bit the bullet and asked him to vote Yes. He replied 'what other way would I ****ing vote?' Friend said she knew at the moment it was in the bag. Then she asked me 'What about Repeal? How will he vote on that?. I said I honestly don't know but suspect it would be a No. We made the sad commiseration faces at each other.

This morning I decided to ask him. He said that while he, personally, is anti-abortion all this amendment is is nothing more than a way for the same bunch of godbotherers who put girls in the laundries to control and torture women and girls. That as far as he is concerned there is no way a fetus is equal to a living breathing woman and it's ridiculous to say it is. It's high time the women of Ireland were shown the respect they deserve and that respect includes them having the same control over what happens their own bodies as men have. Why on Earth would anyone want to force anyone to have a child they don't want? Sure he grew up seeing the effect that had. Women trapped in abusive marriages. Unloved and unwanted children with the rags of their arses flogging them. Men drinking to escape the responsibilities they couldn't cope with or fecking off on the boat.

No more Holy Joes and Josephines punishing women and girls, he declared. Them day are gone and good riddance!

My will be 86 years old when the Referendum happens father is voting Yes to Repeal.

No one is more surprised than me.

Next time you see your father give him a big fat hug and a thank you from me.

freshpopcorn

WhiteRoses wrote: »

They voted yes in the marriage referendum with no convincing needed, they were both very very supportive and active in the campaign.

They actually aren't conservative at all in any other aspects of their lives - neither are religious, and they encouraged/allowed me to start taking the contraceptive pill with their full support when I was 16. They support legalising cannabis/cbd oil.
They are very open minded people.

I think their opposition to repealing is a hangover from their strict religious upbringings. They realise all the implications it has on women but they just can't get past the fact that it "murders all the babies".
I'm still hoping they change their mind but if the pro-life side continue with their scare tactics it isn't likely to happen.

Thanks,
My parents would be similar but a bit more religious, condoms, sex, homosexuality(Took my father a bit longer to be honest once he saw gay people outside overly gay people on TV), even euthanasia(within reason) wouldn't really bother them.
Abortion is another issue tough fatal fetal abnormalities, kids who'd be severely disabled would probably be okay but anything else they'd be very dodgy of to be honest. Especially when financial issues are mentioned or putting careers on hold. They'd have being of the generation when you'd make things work even tough things would be a bit tight and you'd get help from home and make things work out.(I do understand not everybody would have help/etc)

Loafing Oaf

I wonder is Robert happy his thread title has been changed. Likely spare his blushes in four months time...

SusieBlue

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Thanks,
My parents would be similar but a bit more religious, condoms, sex, homosexuality(Took my father a bit longer to be honest once he saw gay people outside overly gay people on TV), even euthanasia(within reason) wouldn't really bother them.
Abortion is another issue tough fatal fetal abnormalities, kids who'd be severely disabled would probably be okay but anything else they'd be very dodgy of to be honest. Especially when financial issues are mentioned or putting careers on hold. They'd have being of the generation when you'd make things work even tough things would be a bit tight and you'd get help from home and make things work out.(I do understand not everybody would have help/etc)

That sounds like where my parents are at as well.
I have a brother with special needs and life was extremely tough for them both financially while myself and my siblings were young.
We lived with our grandparents for years before my parents were able to have their own home.
They are very defensive about it all and very much of a "get up and get on with it" type attitude.
They won't entertain any points about people struggling emotionally/financially because of an unplanned pregnancy and I really think its down to their own situations, they had more children than they planned to, because they literally had no choice but to struggle on. And I'm only in my mid 20's, and they aren't particularly old either (early 50's)

Its interesting how our experiences shape us.
As their child, I adore the ground they walk on. I had a great childhood all things considered and appreciate every opportunity they gave me. I know I am luckier than most.
But I would NOT choose to have as many kids as they did. I don't know if I could cope if I had a child with special needs. My now almost adult brother still needs round the clock care and I don't know if I could make those kinds of sacrifices.
Their experience makes them pro life. Mine makes me pro choice. My siblings are also pro-choice. I think a lot of people similar to my parents will vote no, as much as I wish it wasn't the case.

_Roz_

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Just out of interest _Roz_ and whiteroses how did ye're parents vote in the marriage referendum?

Parents voted yes. They have no problem with anyone wanting to be together, but preventing lives is a whole other matter. It's nothing religious on their part, they're both atheists. My mum says it's because she's an atheist that she's pro-life - she believes you only ever get the one chance at life and once the process has begun, we've no right to interrupt it.

Shadowthrone wrote: »

Honestly I would say 12 weeks is not enough time. 16 is a better figure really.

1). this is a major decision, not something you just decide on easily (contrary to what pro life seems to believe, abortion will not be the new contraception).
2). it is entirely possible that people do not even realise they are pregnant by the 12 week point, or close to it. That happens all to often to be very realistic and not unreasonable.

While it may seem like a simple decision from the outside, once it happens to you it is very different. It is a decision you must live with for the rest of your life and no woman will ever, i repeat, ever take it lightly.

Which is why i laugh at some pro life people who seem to think that if this passes, all of a sudden every woman will be getting abortions because they can and it will be the new fad!

It's not something I would *do* lightly, but I already know I can't provide for a child. If my implant failed and I found out I was pregnant, I'd have to have an abortion. The facts of my situation decide it. I would have thought a lot of people would work this out in advance, in case, so they have a good starting point to make their ultimate decision from. I really don't think I'd change my mind.

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Thanks,
Abortion is another issue tough fatal fetal abnormalities, kids who'd be severely disabled would probably be okay but anything else they'd be very dodgy of to be honest. Especially when financial issues are mentioned or putting careers on hold. They'd have being of the generation when you'd make things work even tough things would be a bit tight and you'd get help from home and make things work out.(I do understand not everybody would have help/etc)

I suspect my parents would be very similar to this. When the baby is buggered anyway, or the mother would die, then abort. Otherwise, nope. If you end up on the streets due to the cost, you've to have the baby anyway. It's possible I disagree because I grew up in a house with an alcoholic who f**ked us over financially and left me with anxiety and depression due to the eggshells I spent 18 years tiptoeing on. Was it worth it? Eh, I'm doing the best I can with what I've got. Would it be worth another life experiencing that for my mother to raise my unwanted child? Not a hope. I wouldn't let her. I wouldn't let another life experience my childhood.

R.e. things like Downs Syndrome, my mother thinks aborting them is abhorrent. One of my best friends growing up was a Downs girl. She's lovely, she's the daughter of my mum's best friend. And my mum always says, 'with that attitude, she never would have existed'. No, she wouldn't. Some people don't have the capacity to give up their lives to dedicate to the constant care or provision of another life. There's nothing wrong with wanting to avoid it, either.

whatdoicare

WhiteRoses wrote: »

That sounds like where my parents are at as well.
I have a brother with special needs and life was extremely tough for them both financially while myself and my siblings were young.
We lived with our grandparents for years before my parents were able to have their own home.
They are very defensive about it all and very much of a "get up and get on with it" type attitude.
They won't entertain any points about people struggling emotionally/financially because of an unplanned pregnancy and I really think its down to their own situations, they had more children than they planned to, because they literally had no choice but to struggle on. And I'm only in my mid 20's, and they aren't particularly old either (early 50's)

Its interesting how our experiences shape us.
As their child, I adore the ground they walk on. I had a great childhood all things considered and appreciate every opportunity they gave me. I know I am luckier than most.
But I would NOT choose to have as many kids as they did. I don't know if I could cope if I had a child with special needs. My now almost adult brother still needs round the clock care and I don't know if I could make those kinds of sacrifices.
Their experience makes them pro life. Mine makes me pro choice. My siblings are also pro-choice. I think a lot of people similar to my parents will vote no, as much as I wish it wasn't the case.

My mam is the ultimate god fearing woman and also mother to an adult child with special needs - she told me the other day, much to my shock, that she would very much vote yes to repeal.

You may be surprised, I'd have never said she would be anything but pro life.

My dad is a definite pro choicer, he had a sister nearly carted off to the laundries only for last minute intervention from his own grandad. He said he'll never forget that as long as he lives!

The Legend Of Kira

chalkitdown1 wrote: »

Some horrible Pro-Life posters & billboards up around Cork City already including one giant one on the side of a building about a block away from a rape-crisis centre. Disgusting.  And of course the info on them is either misleading or straight up false.  It's gonna be a long 4 months of this crap.

What exactly is horrible about the billboards & what if any type of pro life billboards would you find acceptable ? when they used some graphic posters in the past some people say its " horrible " & when they use non graphic images some people still take offence, for example this is a new billboard van being driven around town at the moment & some people are still taking offence over it even though there is no graphic images on display .

ohnonotgmail

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

What exactly is horrible about the billboards & what if any type of pro life billboards would you find acceptable ? when they used some graphic posters in the past people say its " horrible " & when they use non graphic images some people still take offence, for example this is a new billboard van being driven around town at the moment & some people are still taking offence over it even though there is no graphic images on display .

What is proposed is abortion up to 12 weeks. you cannot test for downs before 12 weeks. Its a complete red herring from the No side.

SusieBlue

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

What exactly is horrible about the billboards & what if any type of pro life billboards would you find acceptable ? when they used some graphic posters in the past some people say its " horrible " & when they use non graphic images some people still take offence, for example this is a new billboard van being driven around town at the moment & some people are still taking offence over it even though there is no graphic images on display .

Its emotional manipulation at its finest. Downs can't even be detected or tested for at 12 weeks so its a moot point in our referendum.

pitifulgod

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

What exactly is horrible about the billboards & what if any type of pro life billboards would you find acceptable ? when they used some graphic posters in the past some people say its " horrible " & when they use non graphic images some people still take offence, for example this is a new billboard van being driven around town at the moment & some people are still taking offence over it even though there is no graphic images on display .

Down syndrome Ireland requested that down syndrome should not be exploited for the referendum. It's pretty nasty and isn't even identifiable before 12 weeks. Actively ignoring a group that campaigns for those with down syndrome is pretty low.

kylith

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

What exactly is horrible about the billboards & what if any type of pro life billboards would you find acceptable ? when they used some graphic posters in the past some people say its " horrible " & when they use non graphic images some people still take offence, for example this is a new billboard van being driven around town at the moment & some people are still taking offence over it even though there is no graphic images on display .

DSI have requested that on-one uses people with DS as pawns in their referendum campaign.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

What exactly is horrible about the billboards & what if any type of pro life billboards would you find acceptable ? when they used some graphic posters in the past people say its " horrible " & when they use non graphic images some people still take offence, for example this is a new billboard van being driven around town at the moment & some people are still taking offence over it even though there is no graphic images on display .

It's offensively inaccurate for one thing.

I'd imagine it's also potentially deeply distressing for people with Down Syndrome and their families.

And seeing as what's being proposed is abortion available up to a point in pregnancy where Down syndrome can't be screened for, it's got nothing to do with the matter at hand, and is a blatantly cynical, manipulative move.

The pro-choice campaign seems to be sticking to the high road and using text, graphics etc in their campaign.

freshpopcorn

Just in my opinion and I know people will jump down my throat over this but the reason that the pro-life campaign are using these poster is they'd claim that future governments could easily extended the twelve week rule which could result us ending up like the UK!

The Legend Of Kira

kylith wrote: »

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

What exactly is horrible about the billboards & what if any type of pro life billboards would you find acceptable ? when they used some graphic posters in the past some people say its " horrible " & when they use non graphic images some people still take offence, for example this is a new billboard van being driven around town at the moment & some people are still taking offence over it even though there is no graphic images on display .

DSI have requested that on-one uses people with DS as pawns in their referendum campaign.

In reply to pitigulgod & Kylith, this week a young man who is a member of Down syndrome Ireland expressed a different point of view.

"" [font=Georgia, serif]A young man with Down syndrome has lent his voice to the Save the Eighth campaign.[/font]
[font=Georgia, serif]Conor O'Dowd, from Drogheda, Co Louth, and his father Michael yesterday appealed to voters not to repeal the Eighth Amendment.[/font]
[font=Georgia, serif]
"I took today off college to be here. This is a very important day. I am against abortion," Conor told a press conference in Dublin yesterday. Michael took issue with a statement released by Down Syndrome Ireland last week saying the use of the image of a girl with Down syndrome on pro-life campaign pamphlets was "disrespectful to both children and adults with Down syndrome ". The group said people with Down syndrome "should not be used as an argument for either side of this debate".[/font]
[font=Georgia, serif]"I'm a member of Down Syndrome Ireland. I've sat on the board in the past. There are very different views in Down Syndrome Ireland ... but I won't be silenced," said Michael.
He said the organisation's CEO, Gary Owens, was "relatively new" and was doing a "good job", but added, "I think he's made a mistake".[/font]

[font=Georgia, serif]"We would not have felt obliged to speak out were it not for the relentless campaign from some quarters telling us to remain silent. This past week, it has felt like our existence is inconvenient for some supporters of the abortion referendum, and that they would rather we went away and were quiet.[/font]
[font=Georgia, serif]
"We will not. It is a cold, hard, undeniable fact that when abortion is introduced, a disproportionate impact is suffered by those children diagnosed with some form of disability."

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/we-wont-be-silenced-on-the-eighth-insists-student-with-down-syndrome-36549791.html[/font]

ohnonotgmail

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

In reply to pitigulgod & Kylith, this week a young man who is a member of Down syndrome Ireland expressed a different point of view.

"" [font=Georgia, serif]A young man with Down syndrome has lent his voice to the Save the Eighth campaign.[/font]
[font=Georgia, serif]Conor O'Dowd, from Drogheda, Co Louth, and his father Michael yesterday appealed to voters not to repeal the Eighth Amendment.[/font]
[font=Georgia, serif]
"I took today off college to be here. This is a very important day. I am against abortion," Conor told a press conference in Dublin yesterday. Michael took issue with a statement released by Down Syndrome Ireland last week saying the use of the image of a girl with Down syndrome on pro-life campaign pamphlets was "disrespectful to both children and adults with Down syndrome ". The group said people with Down syndrome "should not be used as an argument for either side of this debate".[/font]
[font=Georgia, serif]"I'm a member of Down Syndrome Ireland. I've sat on the board in the past. There are very different views in Down Syndrome Ireland ... but I won't be silenced," said Michael.
He said the organisation's CEO, Gary Owens, was "relatively new" and was doing a "good job", but added, "I think he's made a mistake".[/font]

[font=Georgia, serif]"We would not have felt obliged to speak out were it not for the relentless campaign from some quarters telling us to remain silent. This past week, it has felt like our existence is inconvenient for some supporters of the abortion referendum, and that they would rather we went away and were quiet.[/font]
[font=Georgia, serif]
"We will not. It is a cold, hard, undeniable fact that when abortion is introduced, a disproportionate impact is suffered by those children diagnosed with some form of disability."

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/abortion-referendum/we-wont-be-silenced-on-the-eighth-insists-student-with-down-syndrome-36549791.html[/font]

And all completely irrelevant to ireland because of the 12 week limit proposed.

The Legend Of Kira

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

What exactly is horrible about the billboards & what if any type of pro life billboards would you find acceptable ? when they used some graphic posters in the past people say its " horrible " & when they use non graphic images some people still take offence, for example this is a new billboard van being driven around town at the moment & some people are still taking offence over it even though there is no graphic images on display .

What is proposed is abortion up to 12 weeks.  you cannot test for downs before 12 weeks.  Its a complete red herring from the No side.

At the moment that,s the proposal, what I haven,t heard anyone say is what,s to stop a future government legalising for abortion access further then 12 weeks ?

ohnonotgmail

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Just in my opinion and I know people will jump down my throat over this but the reason that the pro-life campaign are using these poster is they'd claim that future governments could easily extended the twelve week rule which could result us ending up like the UK!

Easily?? I really dont think so. That is just scaremongering.

ohnonotgmail

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

At the moment that,s the proposal, what I haven,t heard anyone say is what,s to stop a future government legalising for abortion access further then 12 weeks ?

if at some point in the future there is a proposal to extend it beyond 12 weeks then they can show as many pictures of cute kids as they like. But for now it just shows the complete dishonesty of the No side. It is just a slippery slope argument.

Shadowthrone

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

At the moment that,s the proposal, what I haven,t heard anyone say is what,s to stop a future government legalising for abortion access further then 12 weeks ?

That argument can go both ways, what's to stop them making it illegal again in future too?

Simple fact is, it doesn't belong in the constitution, let the government legislate and let the people respond to their legislation. we are the voters and we have the power to influence their decisions. But as a country we forget that all to often and simply bow down every time they throw out a petty excuse or threat.
Some day the population may grow a back bone... but that conversation doesn't belong in this thread

freshpopcorn

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Easily?? I really dont think so. That is just scaremongering.

I can see the pro life campaign bring it up in debates. They'll make it sound easier than it will actually be but it will create doubt and scaremongering might work for them whether you like it or not.

SusieBlue

Scaremongering over something the government may or may not do in the future is ridiculous.

We need to vote on the wording we have in front of us. The current recommendation is 12 weeks. Downs cannot be detected at that gestation. Voting "no" to repeal in fear of a future government increasing the limit is a cop out.

If you aren't ok with abortion, then just admit it. Its dishonest to make excuses.

It reminds me of the marriage referendum, actually.

"I have no problem with gay marriage and would vote yes, but what's to stop a future government legalising marriage to dogs/trees/the sofa? Can't take the risk".......... Its just a cop out.

NuMarvel

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

At the moment that,s the proposal, what I haven,t heard anyone say is what,s to stop a future government legalising for abortion access further then 12 weeks ?

What's to stop a government closing all public hospitals and telling people to take care of themselves?