The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

splinter65

splinter65 wrote: »

All the footage I’ve seen is of the speakers so far. It’s certainly very noisy. I’ll just see it on the 6 news.
I’m pressing Dav because hes insisting 7000 but has shown no evidence of that.

if youve nothing yourself it probably looks less like reflex quibbling just to say nothing

just imo

pitifulgod

Pretty amusing spot that highlights some of the dodgy tactics the save the eighth gang have engaged in. Assume Splinter will be similarly outraged as he was with the jumpers photos.
https://twitter.com/SPE32/status/972512845232508930

splinter65

david75 wrote: »

There’s one from the stage.
So apparently you can fit 100k from there to the dáil which you can see in the background.

https://twitter.com/lifeinstitute/status/972516798355722245?s=21

It’s a few more then 7000 though Dav. Your man from the communist party is not good at counting, but accuracy is not nor never was, their strong point.

david75

HERes a pic of a world record attempt in exactly the same spot. 3567 people.

neonsofa

garbo speaks wrote: »

In the marriage referendum, no one wanted to murder innocent unborn children.

No they just wanted to keep gay and lesbian couples from adopting the innocent babies. Adopting babies that resulted from unwanted pregnancies. Babies that were brought to term and put up for adoption just like people are now suggesting women should do instead of terminating.

B0jangles

pitifulgod wrote: »

Pretty amusing spot that highlights some of the dodgy tactics the save the eighth gang have engaged in. Assume Splinter will be similarly outraged as he was with the jumpers photos.
https://twitter.com/SPE32/status/972512845232508930

https://twitter.com/saoleoin/status/972514919806636033

Either they are idiots or they think their supporters are idiots.

gmisk

pitifulgod wrote: »

Pretty amusing spot that highlights some of the dodgy tactics the save the eighth gang have engaged in. Assume Splinter will be similarly outraged as he was with the jumpers photos.
https://twitter.com/SPE32/status/972512845232508930

That is shocking!

splinter65

pitifulgod wrote: »

Pretty amusing spot that highlights some of the dodgy tactics the save the eighth gang have engaged in. Assume Splinter will be similarly outraged as he was with the jumpers photos.
https://twitter.com/SPE32/status/972512845232508930

I’m not getting it.
A girls shown up for repeal calling for abortions for terminally ill babies.
Is she looking for the option to abort the baby or to make abortions mandatory ?
Poor signage, not clear.

B0jangles

splinter65 wrote: »

I’m not getting it.
A girls shown up for repeal calling for abortions for terminally ill babies.
Is she looking for the option to abort the baby or to make abortions mandatory ?
Poor signage, not clear.

She's now acting as steward at today's Anti-Abortion march, as can be clearly seen in the tweet I just posted.

Maybe she just really really enjoys marches about abortion?

eviltwin

splinter65 wrote: »

I’m not getting it.
A girls shown up for repeal calling for abortions for terminally ill babies.
Is she looking for the option to abort the baby or to make abortions mandatory ?
Poor signage, not clear.

She's a troll

splinter65

B0jangles wrote: »

She's now acting as steward at today's Anti-Abortion march, as can be clearly seen in the tweet I just posted.

Maybe she just really really enjoys marches about abortion?

Did she see the light?

pitifulgod

splinter65 wrote: »

I’m not getting it.
A girls shown up for repeal calling for abortions for terminally ill babies.
Is she looking for the option to abort the baby or to make abortions mandatory ?
Poor signage, not clear.

https://twitter.com/saoleoin/status/972514919806636033

Well, the photo was from the pro choice march last year but there she is at the march for life..... She was literally a plant for pro lifers to complain about last year.

gmisk

splinter65 wrote: »

I’m not getting it.
A girls shown up for repeal calling for abortions for terminally ill babies.
Is she looking for the option to abort the baby or to make abortions mandatory ?
Poor signage, not clear.

Ah come on...if I knew how to do an eye roll emoji I would...

B0jangles

splinter65 wrote: »

Did she see the light?

No, she's just another liar. Like the guy who was passing out posters with an old British Fascist Party logo on them at the Women's Day march yesterday:

https://www.facebook.com/SolidarityTimes/photos/a.341910489331727.1073741828.341899462666163/780496845473087/?type=3&theater

RobertKK

pitifulgod wrote: »

https://twitter.com/saoleoin/status/972514919806636033

Well, the photo was from the pro choice march last year but there she is at the march for life..... She was literally a plant for pro lifers to complain about last year.

Maybe she went on a journey like Simon Harris,Micheal Martin, Leo Varadkar but in the opposite direction.
Or is it ok for them to change their mind?

david75

She’s a pro lifer up to no good. Here she is holding the orange sign outside the dail this week

https://twitter.com/savethe8thinfo/status/971847724298534914?s=21

pitifulgod

RobertKK wrote: »

Maybe she went on a journey like Simon Harris,Micheal Martin, Leo Varadkar but in the opposite direction.
Or is it ok for them to change their mind?

splinter65 wrote: »

Did she see the light?

See, none of this is actually true as she was confirmed as a plant at the time. She didn't have a damascus moment. She was identified at the time as a member of pro life groups. Disgraceful isn't it?
https://twitter.com/daithigor/status/779726277032968192?lang=en

B0jangles

RobertKK wrote: »

Maybe she went on a journey like Simon Harris,Micheal Martin, Leo Varadkar but in the opposite direction.
Or is it ok for them to change their mind?

So it's purely a coincidence that she chose such deliberately inflammatory language for her 'pro-choice' poster?

"Abortion for terminally ill babies"

Yeah, that's a completely normal, non-crazy slogan, along with

'I hate babies - Legalize Abortion NOW!
and
'I LOVE ABORTIONS!!! - why should I have to travel to have one?!"

Edit: Just saw above, so she's a known, long-term Youth Defencer - seems like lying and mud-slinging are perfectly moral and ethical when you think you have the moral high ground.

jesus

thats pretty damning stuff

ive a general maxim that people active in campaigning to tell voters what to think are weirdos who presume far too much about their own opinion

but behaviour like uncovered in the last few posts should be of interest to the gardai. profoundly subversive and antidemocratic

shame on any prolifer in this thread who wouldnt disavow it

pleas advice

old news, I thought this was from the other day

Oldtree

Rte, The Journal and Independent all reporting tens of thousands marched today.

Times reporting thousands. Times have posted a video of the thousands.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/thousands-taking-part-in-anti-abortion-rally-for-life-1.3422543

Independent video here

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/thousands-march-in-dublin-calling-for-the-eighth-amendment-to-be-retained-36690818.html

January

RobertKK wrote: »

Maybe she went on a journey like Simon Harris,Micheal Martin, Leo Varadkar but in the opposite direction.
Or is it ok for them to change their mind?

Well here she is back in 2015 on RTE speaking for the 'pro-life' movement. So she was pro-life in 2015... then pro-choice (with very extreme views if her sign is anything to go by) in 2016 and then back to pro-life in 2018 and a steward at the march? I doubt it very very much. She's there from 1.06

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QFiAx0nElY

Oldtree

Rte now down to "in excess of 15,000 with no official figures", changed their article in the last 4 minutes.

Edit: but not the heading of the article.
"Tens of thousands"

Loafing Oaf

pitifulgod wrote: »

She was literally a plant for pro lifers to complain about last year.

Incredibly stupid stunt though. If her sign got the media attention it was designed to, someone would surely recognize her...

Oldtree

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Incredibly stupid stunt though. If her sign got the media attention it was designed to, someone would surely recognize her...

Whatever her real agenda, one can only suppose that personal attention seeking is at the base of it.

Oldtree

Oldtree wrote: »

Whatever her real agenda, one can only suppose that personal attention seeking is at the base of it.

one presumes something far more sinister and ugly than that

do you lean a particular way yourself

dav3

That's a very low turn out for such a well publicised event so close to the referendum. The organisers certainly aren't happy.

January

dav3 wrote: »

That's a very low turn out for such a well publicised event so close to the referendum. The organisers certainly aren't happy.

They'll just keep lying that there was 100,000 there and start to believe themselves.

Bannasidhe

Oldtree wrote: »

Rte now down to "in excess of 15,000 with no official figures", changed their article in the last 4 minutes.

Edit: but not the heading of the article.
"Tens of thousands"

Perhaps they are all pregnant and counting the unborn as being there campaigning against Repeal because everyone knows a Yes vote will make abortion compulsory :pac:

pitifulgod

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Incredibly stupid stunt though. If her sign got the media attention it was designed to, someone would surely recognize her...

Amusing part is that those who are really vocal about pro choice tactics which are open and transparent will probably go absolutely silent when it comes to stuff like this..

eviltwin

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Perhaps they are all pregnant and counting the unborn as being there campaigning against Repeal because everyone knows a Yes vote will make abortion compulsory :pac:

Maybe the length of time it took the aul ones to shuffle down O'Connell St confused them. It was like an active retirement day out.

Oldtree

[Deleted User] wrote: »

do you lean a particular way yourself

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by leaning?

ohnonotgmail

pleas advice wrote: »

old news, I thought this was from the other day

It is from today. This supposedly pro-chocie woman was a steward at the pro-life march today.

splinter65

pitifulgod wrote: »

https://twitter.com/saoleoin/status/972514919806636033

Well, the photo was from the pro choice march last year but there she is at the march for life..... She was literally a plant for pro lifers to complain about last year.

That’s shocking duplicity and I’m glad to see she was caught out.

splinter65

Oldtree wrote: »

Whatever her real agenda, one can only suppose that personal attention seeking is at the base of it.

I agree with you oldtree. It’s hard to believe she thought she could get away with that.

splinter65

Oldtree wrote: »

Rte, The Journal and Independent all reporting tens of thousands marched today.

Times reporting thousands. Times have posted a video of the thousands.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/thousands-taking-part-in-anti-abortion-rally-for-life-1.3422543

Independent video here

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/thousands-march-in-dublin-calling-for-the-eighth-amendment-to-be-retained-36690818.html

I wonder who are the fundamentalist Christian family in the times video. In the long skirts? Americans ?

splinter65

dav3 wrote: »

That's a very low turn out for such a well publicised event so close to the referendum. The organisers certainly aren't happy.

What makes you think that they’re not happy with the turn out?

pitifulgod

splinter65 wrote: »

What makes you think that they’re not happy with the turn out?

Because they're obsessed with bigging up the numbers, clearly have far less activist support than the repeal movement. Repeal has considerable support is the reality that they're facing.

mzungu

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Incredibly stupid stunt though. If her sign got the media attention it was designed to, someone would surely recognize her...

Aye, but most people won't be on forums/social media hence it goes mostly unchecked. People will see the sign on the street and assume she is part of the Repeal movement. Very underhand tactic.

suicide_circus

pitifulgod wrote: »

Because they're obsessed with bigging up the numbers, clearly have far less activist support than the repeal movement. Repeal has considerable support is the reality that they're facing.

Yeah, no march in the history of the world have inflated the numbers

Loafing Oaf

mzungu wrote: »

Aye, but most people won't be on forums/social media hence it goes mostly unchecked. People will see the sign on the street and assume she is part of the Repeal movement. Very underhand tactic.

You reckon it was only aimed at passers-by and wasn't intended to attract media attention? Well that makes some sense I suppose. Still only a very ill-informed person would think that was a genuine pro-choice slogan...

Rezident

Rubberchikken wrote: »

Im irish. I love my country. Not a big fan of some of my country men/ women but that's another thread.
But i do not want to see any more women having to leave this country to avail of a service that in 2018 should be here, be legal, be safe and be capabke of being availed if without shame.

Why should a baby termination "service" be available in Ireland because it's 2018? How can you justify killing the only people on the planet that are innocent? If abortion without shame was possible then the pro-abortion lobby would at least be able to call themselves 'pro-abortion' but even they can't use the word, they have to go with the misleading title of 'pro-choice', that's a sign that they are hiding something.

Abortion is obviously wrong, no reasonable person would want someone they loved to go through an abortion. You know that some babies survive the abortion, and must be left to die of neglect, it's called 'comfort care'.

And as for the dead babies that you de-humanise as if they are some pest to be removed by a "service", what about them? Do you just not think about them? Pretend that they are not human? How do you do it?

mzungu

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

You reckon it was only aimed at passers-by and wasn't intended to attract media attention? Well that makes some sense I suppose. Still only a very ill-informed person would think that was a genuine pro-choice slogan...

I'd be quite certain. It would make no sense to aim for national media, because it would be easily exposed and end up making their organisation look both foolish and dishonest. By going for street exposure it lessens the risk of being exposed and it even if caught out (as happened) it makes little difference because it's confined to forums like this and social media etc.

On the other hand, it could just be an extreme case of switching allegiances that would put any good film noir to shame!

Ajsoprano

I don’t think the numbers matter at the marches. Both extreme sides are very militant. I will vote but you won’t see me at any marches. I couldn’t care if anybody wears a repeal jumper or a Jesus cross. I think a lot of people think they have far more influence than they do. It’s just the Internet. If people follow you on the Internet it’s because they agree with you. You haven’t changed any bodies mind.

To be honest when I’m approached by either side it pisses me off. I’ll vote how I feel and if I don’t care about the issue I won’t vote. Feck off with your leaflets.

Oldtree

Oldtree wrote: »

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by leaning?

sorry, came out abrupt

if your conclusion to a pro-life plant posing as a deliberately inflammatory pro-choice slogan wielding ringer in order that the image be circulated across right wing blogosphere to stoke outrage is that she must be an individual out seeking personal attn

then

you are being outrageously...i mean outrageously...generous to the pro-life crew

because to most ppl that looks like pretty offensive, subversive and at a very mild use of language dishonest behaviour that disgraces anyone who wouldnt condemn it

sorry if ive picked your comments up wrong but....

david75

mzungu wrote: »

I'd be quite certain. It would make no sense to aim for national media, because it would be easily exposed and end up making their organisation look both foolish and dishonest. By going for street exposure it lessens the risk of being exposed and it even if caught out (as happened) it makes little difference because it's confined to forums like this and social media etc.

On the other hand, it could just be an extreme case of switching allegiances that would put any good film noir to shame!

As with the fascist placards being handed out by the guy at the Repeal march the other night, it’s simply to make Repeal look bad any way at all possible.

So if they’re resorting to such pathetic and transparent tactics you know they’re on the ropes and desperate.

The public aren’t stupid. It’s treating them like they are that’ll lose it as it lost it for them in marref

swampgas

Rezident wrote: »

Why should a baby termination "service" be available in Ireland because it's 2018? How can you justify killing the only people on the planet that are innocent? If abortion without shame was possible then the pro-abortion lobby would at least be able to call themselves 'pro-abortion' but even they can't use the word, they have to go with the misleading title of 'pro-choice', that's a sign that they are hiding something.

Abortion is obviously wrong, no reasonable person would want someone they loved to go through an abortion. You know that some babies survive the abortion, and must be left to die of neglect, it's called 'comfort care'.

And as for the dead babies that you de-humanise as if they are some pest to be removed by a "service", what about them? Do you just not think about them? Pretend that they are not human? How do you do it?

Very few people actually see it the way you are describing it.

The Irish constitution GUARANTEES that Irish women can travel abroad for abortions. And how often do I hear anyone campaign to change that? Never, that's how often. And that's very telling.

We can conclude that Irish people haven't had a problem for years with Irish women having abortions. What's happening now is that Irish people are starting to understand that it would be better if we just admitted to ourselves that if abortion is okay for Irish women abroad then it should be made available at home where Irish women actually live.

And that's a very good thing.

Oldtree

[Deleted User] wrote: »

sorry, came out abrupt

if your conclusion to a pro-life plant posing as a deliberately inflammatory pro-choice slogan wielding ringer in order that the image be circulated across right wing blogosphere to stoke outrage is that she must be an individual out seeking personal attn

then

you are being outrageously...i mean outrageously...generous to the pro-life crew

because to most ppl that looks like pretty offensive, subversive and at a very mild use of language dishonest behaviour that disgraces anyone who wouldnt condemn it

sorry if ive picked your comments up wrong but....

Oldtree wrote: »

Whatever her real agenda, one can only suppose that personal attention seeking is at the base of it.

No worries, clarity is key. I'm not sure how you took that out of my post.

I don't know the lady in question, but it appears to me that she is out playing a very public role on both sides of the fence. I don't think we can take either of her public self portrayals as genuine. And that being the case, she is doing damage to both opinions.

I don't understand her agenda, other than she is seeking self publicity for some very wierd reason. I condone neither of her roles, nor do I find her two faced inflammatory behaviour acceptable.

Oldtree

Oldtree wrote: »

No worries, clarity is key. I'm not sure how you took that out of my post.

I don't know the lady in question, but it appears to me that she is out playing a very public role on both sides of the fence. I don't think we can take either of her public self portrayals as genuine. And that being the case, she is doing damage to both opinions.

I don't understand her agenda, other than she is seeking self publicity for some very wierd reason. I condone neither of her roles, nor do I find her two faced inflammatory behaviour acceptable.

i dont see how steward for one side equates to parody-level inflammatory signwaver at an event for the other

January

[Deleted User] wrote: »

i dont see how steward for one side equates to parody-level inflammatory signwaver at an event for the other

This. If she was marching with an inflammatory sign at the March today then I'd take it that she was just a **** stirrer but the fact she's actively volunteering for the anti choice side and not matching with signs tells a lot.