The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Bannasidhe

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Yes and the things I've mentioned will be a major stubling block in my opinion and it will cause a lot of hassle. I just feel some posters here are very niave about it.
I did a good bit of campaigning for the marriage one/talked to people about and got a different vibe.
People who are big into this also had the same issues with their parents.
We are never going to agree on this.

You have done rather more than 'mention' it, you have been actively banging on about it.

If you did so much campaigning in '15 you would know that one of the strengths of that campaign was the disciplined way people kept on message and actively counteracted attempts at 'but if we allow this then ...*insert floodgates scenario here* scaremongering.

I see no counteracting from you - I see dissemination.

pilly

Joeytheparrot wrote:

I find your assertions on this very strange. You claim to be in favour of repeal but you are always undermining it. I'm not sure I believe you are in favour of repeal at all.

I agree. Very odd.

freshpopcorn

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You have done rather more than 'mention' it, you have been actively banging on about it.

If you did so much campaigning in '15 you would know that one of the strengths of that campaign was the disciplined way people kept on message and actively counteracted attempts at 'but if we allow this then ...*insert floodgates scenario here* scaremongering.

I see no counteracting from you - I see dissemination.

Yes, I've banged on about. I am not ashamed of it. If you want me to stop them don't reply to me.
I feel this issue is important and there's going to be a lot of scare tactis used. I fear at this time they might work.

Loafing Oaf

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

It is exploiting the child. Down Syndrome Ireland have said it is disredpectful to people with down syndrome and their families and these images are causing a huge amount of unnecessary stress.

But they are being ignored. Is there anything more they can do I wonder.

The Legend Of Kira

Joeytheparrot 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 .

It is downright nasty. If the 12 week legislation comes in it is effectively lying. It is exploiting the child. Down Syndrome Ireland have said it is disredpectful to people with down syndrome and their families and these images are causing a huge amount of unnecessary stress.

One other poster pointed out something from an Irish times article- I wasn,t aware of till he/she mentioned it.

"" The Irish Times claims he is Joseph Cronin and his mam Catriona gave full permission to use his image.""

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106033987&postcount=6420


Given that the boys mother gave her permission for his image to be used in the billboard campaign, how is he being exploited once his parent/guardian consented to give permission to use his image ? if his image was used without any permission being given then yeah I would see issue with it- but once permission has being given Id see it as his mothers own personal business if she wants his image to be used, this new group the Irish times mentioned ( Disability voices for life ) if they want to campaign & give permission for images to be used in billboards I don,t see any issue with it .

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/child-with-down-syndrome-to-feature-in-anti-abortion-billboard-campaign-1.3372867

Annasopra

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You have done rather more than 'mention' it, you have been actively banging on about it.

If you did so much campaigning in '15 you would know that one of the strengths of that campaign was the disciplined way people kept on message and actively counteracted attempts at 'but if we allow this then ...*insert floodgates scenario here* scaremongering.

I see no counteracting from you - I see dissemination.

Yep. As I said earlier he is continuously spreading reasons to vote no.

Annasopra

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

One other poster pointed out something from an Irish times article- I wasn,t aware of till he/she mentioned it.

"" The Irish Times claims he is Joseph Cronin and his mam Catriona gave full permission to use his image.""

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106033987&postcount=6420


Given that the boys mother gave her permission for his image to be used in the billboard campaign, how is he being exploited once his parent/guardian consented to give permission to use his image ? if his image was used without any permission being given then yeah I would see issue with it- but once permission has being given Id see it as his mothers own personal business if she wants his image to be used, this new group the Irish times mentioned ( Disability voices for life ) if they want to campaign & give permission for images to be used in billboards I don,t see any issue with it .

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/child-with-down-syndrome-to-feature-in-anti-abortion-billboard-campaign-1.3372867

The child is being used because he has downs. That is how he is being exploited. Exploiting his condition.

Lots of disabled people and downs people are pro choice too by the way. This nonsense from so called pro life people about disability is sick.

freshpopcorn

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Yep. As I said earlier he is continuously spreading reasons to vote no.

Just making people aware of the issues that's coming up and I feel people aren't taking them seriously!
It's very easy to say reasons why to vote yes.

Sweetemotion

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You have done rather more than 'mention' it, you have been actively banging on about it.

If you did so much campaigning in '15 you would know that one of the strengths of that campaign was the disciplined way people kept on message and actively counteracted attempts at 'but if we allow this then ...*insert floodgates scenario here* scaremongering.

I see no counteracting from you - I see dissemination.

What has the SSM referendum got to do with this referendum?

I have no idea why the two are seen as the same.

NuMarvel

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

One other poster pointed out something from an Irish times article- I wasn,t aware of till he/she mentioned it.
....

Given that the boys mother gave her permission for his image to be used in the billboard campaign, how is he being exploited once his parent/guardian consented to give permission to use his image ? if his image was used without any permission being given then yeah I would see issue with it- but once permission has being given Id see it as his mothers own personal business if she wants his image to be used, this new group the Irish times mentioned ( Disability voices for life ) if they want to campaign & give permission for images to be used in billboards I don,t see any issue with it .

You're not saying much about how this material is misleading if not outright lying. Funny that.

Abortion on grounds of disability isn't in the committee's recommendations and the Institute of Obstetricians have said it's not realistic or feasible to get a diagnosis in within 12 weeks, meaning it won't be done under the on-request option.

The poster is telling us "don't let that happen here" yet no one on the anti-repeal side is telling us how it can happen here.

freshpopcorn

Sweetemotion wrote: »

What has the SSM referendum got to do with this referendum?

I have no idea why the two are seen as the same.

When the same sex marriage referendum passed. This referendum was called for basically because of how Ireland is changing with the result.
I also feel the No side can pick poles in this campaign this time that might stick. It's a total different referendum and I find some people are very complacent at the moment.

Annasopra

freshpopcorn wrote: »

Just making people aware of the issues that's coming up and I feel people aren't taking them seriously!
It's very easy to say reasons why to vote yes.

Tell us why you will vote yes then?

david75

Real children and adults from 10 years of age to over 40, who’s parents were same sex couples, spoke out in Marref and all were attacked by the no campaign. ‘Manipulating children/clearly brainwashed as a result of havin gay parents’ etc etc. Some horrible stuff was said to them and about them by those in the No camp.

Same people are now using kids with Down’s syndrome as a basis for their campaign.

Think about that.

Sweetemotion

freshpopcorn wrote: »

When the same sex marriage referendum passed. This referendum was called for basically because of how Ireland is changing with the result.
I also feel the No side can pick poles in this campaign this time that might stick. It's a total different referendum and I find some people are very complacent at the moment.

I can see your argument and why you said it.

I'm sure joey does too, but it's either you are fully with us or the enemy.

How can they not see this will push people away?

Annasopra

Sweetemotion wrote: »

I can see your argument and why you said it.

I'm sure joey does too, but it's either you are fully with us or the enemy.

How can they not see this will push people away?

I can see the argument too. There is some validity in what he is saying. It is the repetetiveness that made me question it. I think it is odd when someone claims to be one side but constantly subtly undermining that side. I have made my point and I will leave it now.

freshpopcorn

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Tell us why you will vote yes then?

To stop exporting the issue to the UK.
To make sure people have the support of their family/friends at home.
It's basic medical care that's available in most developed countries.
People's circumstances might be difficult be it financially or being in an abusive relationship and bring a baby into the world won't be the right thing to do.
Difficulty during previous pregnancies.
Having a large family to support already.
Being to young.
Just not the wright time in life.
Health reasons either for the mother or baby.
Off the top of my head.
Sorry it's not written better.

The Legend Of Kira

NuMarvel wrote: »

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

One other poster pointed out something from an Irish times article- I wasn,t aware of till he/she mentioned it.
....

Given that the boys mother gave her permission for his image to be used in the billboard campaign, how is he being exploited once his parent/guardian consented to give permission to use his image ? if his image was used without any permission being given then yeah I would see issue with it- but once permission has being given Id see it as his mothers own personal business if she wants his image to be used, this new group the Irish times mentioned ( Disability voices for life ) if they want to campaign & give permission for images to be used in billboards I don,t see any issue with it .

You're not saying much about how this material is misleading if not outright lying. Funny that.

Abortion on grounds of disability isn't in the committee's recommendations and the Institute of Obstetricians have said it's not realistic or feasible to get a diagnosis in within 12 weeks, meaning it won't be done under the on-request option.

The poster is telling us "don't let that happen here" yet no one on the anti-repeal side is telling us how it can happen here.

""  You're not saying much about how this material is misleading if not outright lying. Funny that. ""

I addressed the claim the billboard van is saying/quoting in an earlier post this evening .

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106033668&postcount=6402

nice_guy80

I see the fear and mongering have started in earnest. by one side.

where does it say anything in the oireachtas report about abnormal foetuses being aborted?

deflect. misconstrue the truth. play on people's emotions.
sick

Bannasidhe

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

""  You're not saying much about how this material is misleading if not outright lying. Funny that. ""

I addressed the claim the billboard van is saying/quoting in an earlier post this evening .

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106033668&postcount=6402

A cut and paste job is not 'addressing' - not even in a very large typeface.

The Legend Of Kira

Bannasidhe wrote: »

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

""  You're not saying much about how this material is misleading if not outright lying. Funny that. ""

I addressed the claim the billboard van is saying/quoting in an earlier post this evening .

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106033668&postcount=6402

A cut and paste job is not 'addressing' - not even in a very large typeface.

What is it you want addressed the figure of a 90% abortion rate the billboard truck is quoting or something else ?



If its the 90% abortion rate the truck is claiming, I googled their claim again to see what came in the google search- I found this article from the BBC who are also quoting a 90% abortion rate of unborn babies diagnosed with down syndrome .

Water John

Well those two statements cannot be mutually true, unless 90% of the people who don't ask whether the Foetus has DS are also aborted.

We don't in many things, follow the UK pattern. We don't have the same level of divorce, for example. Two quite different countries, socially in many ways.

NuMarvel

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I addressed the claim the billboard van is saying/quoting in an earlier post this evening

"the poster is telling us "don't let that happen here" yet no one on the anti-repeal side is telling us how it can happen here."

You haven't addressed that part of the claim, and considering we're talking about what will happen here, in Ireland, that's the most relevant part.

If you had an answer, you'd have provided it by now. Clearly you don't, hence your evasion and deflection.

Annasopra

The whole thing is a lie

1 How can 90% of babies be aborted? A baby is born human being
2 Its complete irrelevant nonsense given that the oireachtas is proposing legislation for 12 weeks.

pitifulgod

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

The whole thing is a lie

1 How can 90% of babies be aborted? A baby is born human being
2 Its complete irrelevant nonsense given that the oireachtas is proposing legislation for 12 weeks.

And it's going to incredibly hurtful for people with down syndrome or family members with it to have to deal with such billboards for the next 6 months. Kira doesn't seem to care about such things though.

captbarnacles

What are they worrying about? We'll still be exporting that issue to the UK. It will mean the people who cannot afford to travel and likely could in no way cope financially with a disabled child will have no choice but we know that is irrelevant to them.

Cabaal

pitifulgod wrote: »

And it's going to incredibly hurtful for people with down syndrome or family members with it to have to deal with such billboards for the next 6 months. Kira doesn't seem to care about such things though.

Just like it was very hurtful for single mothers and fathers when the started the crap of "Every child deserves a mother and father" back in 2015.

This made many single parents feel hurt

The Legend Of Kira

NuMarvel wrote: »

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I addressed the claim the billboard van is saying/quoting in an earlier post this evening

"the poster is telling us "don't let that happen here" yet no one on the anti-repeal side is telling us how it can happen here."

You haven't addressed that part of the claim, and considering we're talking about what will happen here, in Ireland, that's the most relevant part.

If you had an answer, you'd have provided it by now. Clearly you don't, hence your evasion and deflection.

" yet no one on the anti-repeal side is telling us how it can happen here."

If a future government ever decides to legalise for abortion access further then the current 12 week limit proposal, I know some might say " that,s scaremongering "  if its just about legalising for access for 12 weeks limit & 12 weeks limit only, then surely there would be proposals from some public figures/Tds for some sort of legal clause to be included that no future government can legalise for further abortion access beyond 12 weeks without consulting the people,  but at the present moment I don,t see anyone publicly calling for such a clause to be included funny that, a few months ago while giving an interview to Rte news the spokesperson for the abortion rights campaign went on record saying they want the recommendations of the citizens assembly at the minimum meaning they want more.

"" We want full abortion access, at the minimum we want the recommendations of the citizens assembly "" .

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/0930/908737-march-for-choice/

If the Tds on the repeal side want 12 weeks access & 12 weeks access only, they should be calling for a legal clause to ensure any future legalisation stays at 12 weeks only & goes no further-the fact that they aren,t calling a for a legal clause is telling .

Water John

There is every likelyhood, as I mentioned before, that the law would be stricter than 12 weeks. Irish Times today (behind a paywall) are saying one third of TDs for, one third against, and one third undecided.

Well just look at the USA, where they inserted the right of militia to bear arms into the original constitution. Specifics into the constitution is not a good idea.

Loafing Oaf

Water John wrote: »

There is every likelyhood, as I mentioned before, that the law would be stricter than 12 weeks.

No chance.

Water John

Oaf, well I told where I was getting my facts from. What have you got to back up what you are saying. Not being smart here. Just think the proposed legislation would not be a foregone conclusion, erring on the stricter side.

Loafing Oaf

Water John wrote: »

Oaf, well I told where I was getting my facts from. What have you got to back up what you are saying. Not being smart here. Just think the proposed legislation would not be a foregone conclusion, erring on the stricter side.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/spotlight-on-sinn-fin-as-clear-majority-of-tds-rejects-12week-proposal-36562750.html

Legislation to allow for abortion up to 12 weeks will not pass through the Dáil unless Sinn Féin changes its party policy.

And there is about as much chance of Man City not winning the league as of SF not doing that. Okay you're still not quite over the line then, but you only need a handful of the FG undecideds to support it and you're there.

Water John

Those figures look reasonable. Peader Tobin, I presume would be the only TD to break SF party ranks.

NuMarvel

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

If a future government ever decides to legalise for abortion access further then the current 12 week limit proposal...

In other words, it can't be done under the current proposals. I'm glad we finally got there.

This of course means that the pro life poster isn't a call to vote No in the referendum, but actually a call to legislate as per the Committee's recommendations. Have to say, I didn't see that one coming.

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

If the Tds on the repeal side want 12 weeks access & 12 weeks access only, they should be calling for a legal clause to ensure any future legalisation stays at 12 weeks only & goes no further-the fact that they aren,t calling a for a legal clause is telling .

There's already a constitutional provision to refer legislation to the people in a referendum in specified circumstances. It's called Article 27. If those circumstances aren't to your satisfaction, you're welcome to campaign to have them changed.

Cabaal

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

If a future government ever decides to legalise for abortion access further then the current 12 week limit proposal,

I'm tired of this being trotted out as its pretty baseless.

If a government did this without the backing of the people then the government wouldn't last long and the TD's would feel the full wraith of the people at the polls.

The fact that every-time the 8th has come up its been kicked down the road year upon years shows just how reluctant governments are to do anything in relation to abortion. Yet here we are with the pro life groups claiming it can be just changed and thats that, its utter nonsense.

At the end of the day if there's enough backing from the people for the government to change the legislation in years to come, then there's also enough backing for the 8th to be repealed in years to come.

FG did the citizen assembly likely thinking the outcome would be different to this, but instead it went the way they didn't expect....people looked at the facts and understood the current setup was simply far too restrictive and was untrusting to women.

This baseless fear mongering is just getting silly.

NuMarvel

Water John wrote: »

Those figures look reasonable. Peader Tobin, I presume would be the only TD to break SF party ranks.

Even if there wasn't a change, it's possible SF TDs would abstain on votes on the 12 week option. I think that's what the SF TDs on the Committee did and they haven't faced sanctions for that.

nozzferrahhtoo

Water John wrote: »

Oaf, well I told where I was getting my facts from.

I have no facts either way myself but I can only give my thinking on it.

Well there is a workability issue to look at. 12 weeks is already pretty restrictive. But not so much. We see worldwide on average that a country that has access to abortion by choice generally find over 90% of their abortions occurring in or before 12 weeks. Even if the country has a 24 week limit in a UK or US form, or n o theoretical limit like in Canada. With or without a limit the abortions GENERALLY happen by 12 weeks.

But most of those happen in the 10 to 12 week area. Why? Because most people at, say, 0-4 weeks do not even KNOW they are pregnant. If you restrict it TOO Much you are pushing it back to a point where most people will not realize they are pregnant in time to avail of it.

Further even those who DO realize it.... if the limit is too restrictive you pressure and rush them into a decision. And statistically NO ONE wants that I suspect.

So you are 100% right it is possible. But I think it is a bad enough idea that it is unlikely to happen. Humans have a fetish for round numbers though so I guess I would not be shocked by a 10 week limit. But 12 weeks is round number in terms of being 3 months. So....... meh. Wait and see I guess.

Water John

SF TDs abstained because they had not got approval from an Ard Fheis. They thus did not break party rules.

Loafing Oaf

Water John wrote: »

Those figures look reasonable. Peader Tobin, I presume would be the only TD to break SF party ranks.

As far as we know. An interesting straw in the wind on this issue was FF TD Thomas Byrne saying he would feel duty-bound as a legislator to vote for the 12-week legislation if the referendum passed, despite being strongly pro-life. Assuming a SF volte face, it would only take a handful of 'on-the-fence' FG TDs (perhaps looking for political cover) to take this line for the legislation to pass.

NuMarvel

Cabaal wrote: »

I'm tired of this being trotted out as its pretty baseless.

If a government did this without the backing of the people then the government wouldn't last long and the TD's would feel the full wraith of the people at the polls.

It's not as if there isn't precedent for governments falling or doing u-turns because of public backlash either. VAT on children's shoes, removing automatic medical cards for over 70s, and water charges spring to mind as examples.

Bannasidhe

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

" yet no one on the anti-repeal side is telling us how it can happen here."

If a future government ever decides to legalise for abortion access further then the current 12 week limit proposal, I know some might say " that,s scaremongering "  if its just about legalising for access for 12 weeks limit & 12 weeks limit only, then surely there would be proposals from some public figures/Tds for some sort of legal clause to be included that no future government can legalise for further abortion access beyond 12 weeks without consulting the people,  but at the present moment I don,t see anyone publicly calling for such a clause to be included funny that, a few months ago while giving an interview to Rte news the spokesperson for the abortion rights campaign went on record saying they want the recommendations of the citizens assembly at the minimum meaning they want more.

"" We want full abortion access, at the minimum we want the recommendations of the citizens assembly "" .

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/0930/908737-march-for-choice/

If the Tds on the repeal side want 12 weeks access & 12 weeks access only, they should be calling for a legal clause to ensure any future legalisation stays at 12 weeks only & goes no further-the fact that they aren,t calling a for a legal clause is telling .

The simple medical fact is that many conditions which may cause the fetus to be incompatible with life cannot be diagnosed by 12 weeks. [edited for clarification] Neither can Downs Syndrome which is compatible with life and therefore not a Fatal Fetal Abnormality. The CA recommended that after 12 weeks termination be permissible (not compulsory) when there is a diagnosis of FFA however the CA did not recommend termination be available if the fetus has been diagnosed with a non-fatal abnormality. Downs Syndrome is a non fatal abnormality.

The committee’s report will also recommend that a termination be legal in cases of fatal foetal abnormality but it will not recommend that a termination be legal in cases where a foetal abnormality is not deemed to be fatal.

On that latter point, the committee differs from the Citizens’ Assembly which recommended that a termination be legal in cases of a “significant abnormality” that are not fatal.

http://www.thejournal.ie/committee-citizens-assembly-3749589-Dec2017/

The key word is 'significant' - given that many many people with DS are perfectly capable of living independent, productive lives it cannot be deemed to be a 'significant' abnormality and such a classification would be open to legal challenge.

You are scaremongering.

Furthermore, firstly the Dáil cannot introduce legislation which ties the hands of future Dáils. But even if it could, should a future Dáil wish to change the legislation it could equally remove this 'legal clause'.
It would be nothing but meaningless window dressing.

Secondly, the current proposal is that the Ref question be 'repeal and allow the Dáil to legislate' - that's it.
Repeal the 8th and allow government to do it's job and legislate. What that legislation will be will be thrashed out in the Dáil and the Senate and will need a majority vote to pass.

If you think a time will come when the Irish electorate will accept legislation for terminations after 12 weeks for any fetal abnormality at all, significant or not, then I put it to you that you do not want to wait for that electorate to be voting on Repeal as it will be very very liberal and probably in favour of a Canadian style system.

Cabaal

NuMarvel wrote: »

It's not as if there isn't precedent for governments falling or doing u-turns because of public backlash either. VAT on children's shoes, removing automatic medical cards for over 70s, and water charges spring to mind as examples.

Exactly,

If one government tried to increase it to 24 weeks the next could easily change it back, if the will of the people supported them. The government aren't going to touch it with a barge pole otherwise.

Its still not a reason not to repeal the 8th, without repealing it we cannot properly deal with the issues at hand and the hard reality of what women go through and how this country fails them.

Either we must repeal the 8th or if we're going to claim a fetus is equal to a chilod then we must start charging women with murder if the use abortion pills and we must ban them from traveling for abortions.

People simply can't claim a fetus is equal to a child and abortion is murder and yet be fine with women traveling for abortion and not having the full weight of the law place upon women who use pills illegally.

One way or another we as a country must own up and start properly dealing with our own issues, either we trust women and provide support and care for them by repealing the 8th or we treat women who have illegal abortions as criminals and charge them with murder of the fetus.

Ave Sodalis

The Legend Of Kira wrote:

If its the 90% abortion rate the truck is claiming, I googled their claim again to see what came in the google search- I found this article from the BBC who are also quoting a 90% abortion rate of unborn babies diagnosed with down syndrome .

I have a question for you: do you work with families of Downs children? Do you actively help care for the children than need constant supervision? Do you go out of your way on at least a weekly basis to allow parents of severe Down's children some time off? Do you help care for any of them when their parents die? Do you provide any sort of educational or social support for the children themselves?


Or is this another case of "what about the Down's children! Won't someone think of them and their fight against the heartless abortionists" and then go back to not giving a sh*t about them when this referendum is all over?

January

Not to nitpick guys but can we stop using terms like 'Down's children' 'down's people' 'disabled people' etc

The proper terms that families and people want used is 'child with Down Syndrome' 'person with Down Syndrome' 'people with disabilities'. Don't let the condition define the person.

swampgas

If you think about it, the 90% figure might actually indicate that many Irish people would also prefer to have the option of a termination if DS is detected. I have had conversations with Irish people who were prepared to travel to the UK to terminate rather than continue a pregnancy with DS. I can't be the only one, surely?

Are Irish women and British women so different? I don't think so. Surely this just illustrates that the issue should be the ability of the person who will have to undergo the pregnancy, and then more than likely be the primary carer for the child afterwards, to decide whether they should go through with it or not?

And, perhaps without realising it, those posters have shown what they are really about - don't let it happen here. Are they really saying "just keep going to England, for appearances sake"?

January

I've a friend who talks about the fact that had she known about her son's DS diagnosis in utero that she doesn't 100% know whether she would have travelled or not.

Bannasidhe

January wrote: »

I've a friend who talks about the fact that had she known about her son's DS diagnosis in utero that she doesn't 100% know whether she would have travelled or not.

I refused the test back in the day - in the UK. I had chosen to have a child and if that child had a disability it wouldn't have made any difference.
However, if there had been a diagnosis of FFA I would have terminated the pregnancy. And that would have been the only reason I would ever have had an abortion.
My body. My Choice.

SusieBlue

Was just chatting to a few lovely girls campaigning to repeal the 8th by Penneys in cork city.
It made my heart happy to see the table surrounded by people looking to sign up and support the cause.

It was a far cry from the two elderly men roaring into megaphones slightly up the street about how repealing the 8th will cause newborns to be ripped from their mothers breast and is a threat to the nuclear family. The pro life side, keeping it classy as always.
Luckily they didn’t seem to have any support at all.

Tipperary animal lover

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Was just chatting to a few lovely girls campaigning to repeal the 8th by Penneys in cork city.
It made my heart happy to see the table surrounded by people looking to sign up and support the cause.

It was a far cry from the two elderly men roaring into megaphones slightly up the street about how repealing the 8th will cause newborns to be ripped from their mothers breast and is a threat to the nuclear family. The pro life side, keeping it classy as always.
Luckily they didn’t seem to have any support at all.

Whiteroses, had the exact same experience today in cork, complete opposites of the spectrum, there was a lot of names signed up, the girl I talked to said they are delighted with the way the public are interacting with them, they had a few from other side shouting into their faces but that's to be expected she said.

The Legend Of Kira

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

The Legend Of Kira wrote:

If its the 90% abortion rate the truck is claiming, I googled their claim again to see what came in the google search- I found this article from the BBC who are also quoting a 90% abortion rate of unborn babies diagnosed with down syndrome .

I have a question for you: do you work with families of Downs children? Do you  actively help care for the children than need constant supervision? Do you go out of your way on at least a weekly basis to allow parents of severe Down's children some time off? Do you help care for any of them when their parents die? Do you provide any sort of educational or social support for the children themselves?


Or is this another case of "what about the Down's children! Won't someone think of them and their fight against the heartless abortionists" and then go back to not giving a sh*t about them when this referendum is all over?

I have a friend who has down syndrome I met from an older job who I hang out with during the week as in going for a coffee or going for lunch .

freshpopcorn

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Was just chatting to a few lovely girls campaigning to repeal the 8th by Penneys in cork city.
It made my heart happy to see the table surrounded by people looking to sign up and support the cause.

It was a far cry from the two elderly men roaring into megaphones slightly up the street about how repealing the 8th will cause newborns to be ripped from their mothers breast and is a threat to the nuclear family. The pro life side, keeping it classy as always.
Luckily they didn’t seem to have any support at all.

What did want you to sign up?
E-mail/volunteering?