The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

January

There's also a great article published in The Irish Times today setting out the facts and comparing what other EU countries have access to in the form of abortions.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/abortion-referendum/abortion-facts#

splinter65

Fred Swanson wrote: »

It is not smugness. We are organising the troops well and will be joined by thousands home to vote.

You couldn’t be any smugger if you were a Professor of Smugness lecturing in Avanced Cockyness at Smug University, to paraphrase darling Blackadder.
More please!

gandalf

Bonniedog wrote: »

I wonder what Gandalf's view is on their theocratic buddy Dr. Selim proposing that Irish hospitals legally carry out the torture and mutilation of little girls?

Left was curiously silent on that.

Simple we shouldn't facilitate it. We shouldn't allow religious zealots to have any input into our health services and how they operate no matter what their hue. The same for education and any of the organs of the state.

As for my politics I am neither right wing or left wing. Unlike some I don't have the simple black and white view of life that allows for that simplistic ability to label myself as either.

(BTW none of my friends are called Selim....you must be imaging things)

Oldtree

Damien360 wrote: »

I stand corrected. Delighted. Will that go to the wording in referendum ?

Link didn't work from phone, so I attached the actual published paper to post above

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106405725&postcount=8948

It is the proposed government scheme as it stands at the moment.

Zubeneschamali

Fred Swanson wrote: »

What are the keep lot going to do when they lose?

Nothing at all. Like the anti-divorce and anti-SSM folks, they will just forget the whole issue forever.

applehunter

Very well organised rally yesterday.

Nice atmosphere & some great speeches.

I found it inspirational.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

baylah17

Bonniedog wrote: »

Ismisejack wrote: »

Wow never came across such a snob in my relatively short life, well I’m 22 so I’ll be able vote against repeal for a long time yet! How u like that?! There’s is nothing backwards about being anti abortion it’s indeed progressive as there is much more progressive ways of dealing with crisis pregnancies than child murdering. When referendum day comes and the eighth is retained I can’t wait to see the face on snobs like you

I wonder what Gandalf's view is on their theocratic buddy Dr. Selim proposing that Irish hospitals legally carry out the torture and mutilation of little girls?

Left was curiously silent on that.

Because that dibnt happen
More hate posts by queen of hate posting

RobertKK

Given the extremist abortion laws planned by the politicians, 12 week abortion allowed for any reason, and no time limit on abortion for life limiting conditions or on mental health grounds, I don't believe the repeal the 8th will win.
I don't believe people will trust letting the politicians in having the power to change law without asking the people in the future. It gives them free reign.
Simon Harris campaigned and said he was pro-life, lies.
Micheal Martin showed his previous words were lies.
The repeal side have so many politicians supporting repeal who showed they lied to voters about their stance on abortion.
Then they want voters to trust politicians over what the constitution at present guarantees.
People aren't fools, repeal say trust women, I trust women and most I know are for the 8th amendment, I don't trust politicians who have proven they lied about this issue. They can say they went on a journey but it has been a journey of betrayal to their voters. What good is a person as a politician who says 'you can vote for me, I am prolife and will defend that position' but then does the exact opposite? Who would vote or put trust in giving people like this more power, when their word means zero?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

RobertKK

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

What about that small rally that repeal had on international women's day?
Organised well in advance, and less than a thousand attended.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

RobertKK

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

So this is about the Catholic Church?
Did someone forget to tell Atheists for life?

eviltwin

RobertKK wrote: »

What about that small rally that repeal had on international women's day?
Organised well in advance, and less than a thousand attended.

Bad day for it but we don't need it, we got what we wanted. We got a referendum.

swampgas

RobertKK wrote: »

Given the extremist abortion laws planned by the politicians, 12 week abortion allowed for any reason, and no time limit on abortion for life limiting conditions or on mental health grounds, I don't believe the repeal the 8th will win.
I don't believe people will trust letting the politicians in having the power to change law without asking the people in the future. It gives them free reign.
Simon Harris campaigned and said he was pro-life, lies.
Micheal Martin showed his previous words were lies.
The repeal side have so many politicians supporting repeal who showed they lied to voters about their stance on abortion.
Then they want voters to trust politicians over what the constitution at present guarantees.
People aren't fools, repeal say trust women, I trust women and most I know are for the 8th amendment, I don't trust politicians who have proven they lied about this issue. They can say they went on a journey but it has been a journey of betrayal to their voters. What good is a person as a politician who says 'you can vote for me, I am prolife and will defend that position' but then does the exact opposite? Who would vote or put trust in giving people like this more power, when their word means zero?

You're very passionate in your beliefs. So are many, many people who want the 8th repealed.

Abortion is one of those emotive topics that people often need to make a journey to understand. It's not simple. Ireland has been stuck in a time warp for decades, and it's not because Ireland is somehow better than anywhere else. Ireland has learned, Ireland has grown up, and Ireland will have legal abortion, with or without you.

You are screaming about betrayal? That's makes my blood boil, to be honest. The women and girls of Ireland, and the men and women who love them, have been betrayed for decades by a people and government too cowardly and immature to face the reality of the need for abortion in Ireland. The 8th amendment was and is a betrayal, a shameful betrayal, of the women of Ireland. I for one will feel like a stain has been lifted from the country when it is finally repealed.

Discodog

The photo on the front page of the Sunday Times is so wrong. A nine year old child carrying a big red heart. On it is written "I'm Prolife because there's always a better answer than abortion".

This is child abuse. It's using a child in the way that a beggar would. The child has no concept about the subject. The hypocrisy of protecting life & abusing a child.

January

Discodog wrote: »

The photo on the front page of the Sunday Times is so wrong. A nine year old child carrying a big red heart. On it is written "I'm Prolife because there's always a better answer than abortion".

This is child abuse. It's using a child in the way that a beggar would. The child has no concept about the subject. The hypocrisy of protecting life & abusing a child.

I'm not sure how you think a nine year old has no concept about the subject? Why do you say that.

_Dara_

Discodog wrote: »

The photo on the front page of the Sunday Times is so wrong. A nine year old child carrying a big red heart. On it is written "I'm Prolife because there's always a better answer than abortion".

This is child abuse. It's using a child in the way that a beggar would. The child has no concept about the subject. The hypocrisy of protecting life & abusing a child.

In fairness, some Repeal campaigners aren’t much better in that regard. I certainly saw some putting words in their very young children’s mouths whilst posting photos of them on social media. I just think children should be left out of it on both sides. It’s manipulative nonsense.

January wrote: »

I'm not sure how you think a nine year old has no concept about the subject? Why do you say that.

It’s so so young. Let children be innocent and give them space and time to form their own opinions on the matter. Critical thinking faculties need to be developed first.

January

_Dara_ wrote: »

In fairness, some Repeal campaigners aren’t much better in that regard. I certainly saw some putting words in their very young children’s mouths whilst posting photos of them on social media. I just think children should be left out of it on both sides. It’s manipulative nonsense.


It’s so so young. Let children be innocent and give them space and time to form their own opinions on the matter. Critical thinking faculties need to be developed first.

I don't think it's so young. Especially if it's explained in an age appropriate way, and it can be. Mine have asked about it because I wear my repeal jumper a lot and help run the local pro-choice group so go to meetings often.

Discodog

January wrote: »

I'm not sure how you think a nine year old has no concept about the subject? Why do you say that.

Are you really suggesting that a 9 year old understands fatal fetal abnormality, rape, incest etc ? The child "understands" what it's parents have indoctrinated it with.

up for anything

Ismisejack wrote: »

Wow never came across such a snob in my relatively short life, well I’m 22 so I’ll be able vote against repeal for a long time yet! How u like that?! There’s is nothing backwards about being anti abortion it’s indeed progressive as there is much more progressive ways of dealing with crisis pregnancies than child murdering. When referendum day comes and the eighth is retained I can’t wait to see the face on snobs like you

So come on then, Jack. Detail the more progressive ways of dealing with crisis pregnancies other than child murdering as you see it, please? I'd be really interested in hearing about these.

_Dara_

January wrote: »

I don't think it's so young. Especially if it's explained in an age appropriate way, and it can be. Mine have asked about it because I wear my repeal jumper a lot and help run the local pro-choice group so go to meetings often.

There’s no harm in answering questions, of course. But I just would be wary of people indoctrinating kids either way. And putting words in their months like people on both sides sometimes do is really tasteless. That’s not giving them the breathing room to parse the issue for themselves. Children are developing mentally. Give them unbiased information and let them form their own worldview.

Discodog

January wrote: »

I don't think it's so young. Especially if it's explained in an age appropriate way, and it can be. Mine have asked about it because I wear my repeal jumper a lot and help run the local pro-choice group so go to meetings often.

Do you think that this mother of this child explained both sides of the argument ?

January

Are you really serious? A child can definitely understand things when it's explained to them simply.

Fatal fetal abnormality = the baby is very sick in the mother's belly and will not survive outside of it.

Rape = when someone forces someone to have sex with them against their will (and yes, I have spoken to my child about rape, I may not have called it rape but she knows about it, I have younger kids too and will discuss it with them when I feel they're ready too)

We haven't discussed incest yet but I'm sure it will come.

She knows that some women do not want to remain pregnant and that there are a myriad of reasons for that such as the above cases and also because of possibly financial implications or that they just don't want to have children and that currently women who don't want to, or can't remain pregnant, are forced to go to England so they can have either pills or an operation to remove the fetus from the womb and she knows that there is a referendum coming up about it.

I'm not saying my child is a genius but she understands the process of abortion and what may cause a woman to have one. It's not that hard to understand.

RobertKK

swampgas wrote: »

You're very passionate in your beliefs. So are many, many people who want the 8th repealed.

Abortion is one of those emotive topics that people often need to make a journey to understand. It's not simple. Ireland has been stuck in a time warp for decades, and it's not because Ireland is somehow better than anywhere else. Ireland has learned, Ireland has grown up, and Ireland will have legal abortion, with or without you.

You are screaming about betrayal? That's makes my blood boil, to be honest. The women and girls of Ireland, and the men and women who love them, have been betrayed for decades by a people and government too cowardly and immature to face the reality of the need for abortion in Ireland. The 8th amendment was and is a betrayal, a shameful betrayal, of the women of Ireland. I for one will feel like a stain has been lifted from the country when it is finally repealed.

Maybe you like voting for people who openly lied?
It is a betrayal whether it makes your blood boil or not.

_Dara_

January wrote: »

I'm not saying my child is a genius but she understands the process of abortion and what may cause a woman to have one. It's not that hard to understand.

But the point is, it's not about the child understanding what the issues are. It's whether they agree with it or not.

And people putting up on pictures of their kids on social media and saying stuff like "Little Aoibhinn is pro-life/pro-choice!" are just nauseating and emotive and, forgive me, but I don't believe those people have given their child the option of deciding how they feel about the issue. They've probably either been nudged into believing what their parent does or they were never asked at all and are just being as a cheap photo op.

Discodog

January wrote: »

Are you really serious? A child can definitely understand things when it's explained to them simply.

Fatal fetal abnormality = the baby is very sick in the mother's belly and will not survive outside of it.

Rape = when someone forces someone to have sex with them against their will (and yes, I have spoken to my child about rape, I may not have called it rape but she knows about it, I have younger kids too and will discuss it with them when I feel they're ready too)

We haven't discussed incest yet but I'm sure it will come.

She knows that some women do not want to remain pregnant and that there are a myriad of reasons for that such as the above cases and also because of possibly financial implications or that they just don't want to have children and that currently women who don't want to, or can't remain pregnant, are forced to go to England so they can have either pills or an operation to remove the fetus from the womb and she knows that there is a referendum coming up about it.

I'm not saying my child is a genius but she understands the process of abortion and what may cause a woman to have one. It's not that hard to understand.

We aren't talking about your child. We are talking about a child that is carrying a Prolife banner. I do not believe for one minute that it's parents have discussed the alternative view.

January

It's possible they have, their version of the alternatives view though, not the actual alternative view.

Discodog

_Dara_ wrote: »

But the point is, it's not about the child understanding what the issues are. It's whether they agree with it or not.

And people putting up on pictures of their kids on social media and saying stuff like "Little Aoibhinn is pro-life/pro-choice!" are just nauseating and emotive and, forgive me, but I don't believe those people have given their child the option of deciding how they feel about the issue. They've probably either been nudged into believing what their parent does or they were never asked at all and are just being as a cheap photo op.

Absolutely. It's an action designed to make people think about a child. To engender sympathy just like a beggar with a child.

But it's the double standard of saying that you want to protect children but then use them to further your cause.

eviltwin

_Dara_ wrote: »

But the point is, it's not about the child understanding what the issues are. It's whether they agree with it or not.

And people putting up on pictures of their kids on social media and saying stuff like "Little Aoibhinn is pro-life/pro-choice!" are just nauseating and emotive and, forgive me, but I don't believe those people have given their child the option of deciding how they feel about the issue. They've probably either been nudged into believing what their parent does or they were never asked at all and are just being as a cheap photo op.

I brought my son to the pro choice march last year, he's 8. He doesn't understand abortion but he knew we were marching so women could have agency over their own body, he understands that concept well. It's up to each parent to decide what their child needs to know and every child is different. I don't think taking a child to any march regardless of your "side" is wrong, I just know I'd rather my kids marched with those who are now judgemental, open minded and supportive.

Discodog

January wrote: »

It's possible they have, their version of the alternatives view though, not the actual alternative view.

Someone who is carrying a pro life banner has the no alternative view.

Discodog

eviltwin wrote: »

I brought my son to the pro choice march last year, he's 8. He doesn't understand abortion but he knew we were marching so women could have agency over their own body, he understands that concept well. It's up to each parent to decide what their child needs to know and every child is different. I don't think taking a child to any march regardless of your "side" is wrong, I just know I'd rather my kids marched with those who are now judgemental, open minded and supportive.

Really ? Try running that past a child psychologist. I disagree with it regardless of the side & I am pro choice.

_Dara_

Discodog wrote: »

Absolutely. It's an action designed to make people think about a child. To engender sympathy just like a beggar with a child.

But it's the double standard of saying that you want to protect children but then use them to further your cause.

Yeah, but to be honest and I say this as a pro-choicer, I look just as dimly on Repeal supporters using their children in this way. I honestly think there is no need to employ tactics like that and I'm not comfortable with children being manipulated like that.

_Dara_

eviltwin wrote: »

I brought my son to the pro choice march last year, he's 8. He doesn't understand abortion but he knew we were marching so women could have agency over their own body, he understands that concept well. It's up to each parent to decide what their child needs to know and every child is different. I don't think taking a child to any march regardless of your "side" is wrong, I just know I'd rather my kids marched with those who are now judgemental, open minded and supportive.

There's no harm bringing them to marches. They can soak up the atmosphere and will take in some information there. But putting them front and centre of photos and saying what the child believes in - that really doesn't sit well with me at all. They are so young to be boxed in like that. And a strong campaign shouldn't need to resort to such emotive codswallop.

eviltwin

Discodog wrote: »

Really ? Try running that past a child psychologist. I disagree with it regardless of the side & I am pro choice.

I'm quite confident bringing a kid to a march isn't going to mess them up regardless what side you support.

swampgas

RobertKK wrote: »

Maybe you like voting for people who openly lied?
It is a betrayal whether it makes your blood boil or not.

Meh. Abortion being available is far more important than the fact that spineless politicians were too afraid to speak up about it for years. Now that the voters are in favour of legalising abortion the politicians are finally coming out of cover to support it.

If you feel betrayed because politicians are a little less hypocritical than they used to be, so be it.

Discodog

eviltwin wrote: »

I'm quite confident bringing a kid to a march isn't going to mess them up regardless what side you support.

So it's ok to use them as long as it doesn't permanently mess with them.

Edward M

eviltwin wrote: »

I brought my son to the pro choice march last year, he's 8. He doesn't understand abortion but he knew we were marching so women could have agency over their own body, he understands that concept well. It's up to each parent to decide what their child needs to know and every child is different. I don't think taking a child to any march regardless of your "side" is wrong, I just know I'd rather my kids marched with those who are now judgemental, open minded and supportive.

I'd see no harm in that personally, parents are a child's first teacher and including them in something you strongly believe in is your right as a parent, no harm in that at all.
My own parents never brought me to a protest march, they would have been and indeed my mother still is fiercely anti abortion.
I got my values mainly from them, they were (and my mother still is) very loving and giving and supportive parents to me and my siblings.
Of course as I'm now pro life because of it, I'm judgemental, close minded and unsupportive.

eviltwin

Discodog wrote: »

So it's ok to use them as long as it doesn't permanently mess with them.

how is bringing a child to a march messing with them?

splinter65

Discodog wrote: »

Absolutely. It's an action designed to make people think about a child. To engender sympathy just like a beggar with a child.

But it's the double standard of saying that you want to protect children but then use them to further your cause.

Both sides use children in the campaign.

splinter65

Discodog wrote: »

Someone who is carrying a pro life banner has the no alternative view.

What alternative view do you have yourself?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

_Dara_

splinter65 wrote: »

Both sides use children in the campaign.

That was already pointed out.

professore

January wrote: »

I don't think it's so young. Especially if it's explained in an age appropriate way, and it can be. Mine have asked about it because I wear my repeal jumper a lot and help run the local pro-choice group so go to meetings often.

I would love to hear your explanation.

professore

RobertKK wrote: »

Given the extremist abortion laws planned by the politicians, 12 week abortion allowed for any reason, and no time limit on abortion for life limiting conditions or on mental health grounds, I don't believe the repeal the 8th will win.
I don't believe people will trust letting the politicians in having the power to change law without asking the people in the future. It gives them free reign.
Simon Harris campaigned and said he was pro-life, lies.
Micheal Martin showed his previous words were lies.
The repeal side have so many politicians supporting repeal who showed they lied to voters about their stance on abortion.
Then they want voters to trust politicians over what the constitution at present guarantees.
People aren't fools, repeal say trust women, I trust women and most I know are for the 8th amendment, I don't trust politicians who have proven they lied about this issue. They can say they went on a journey but it has been a journey of betrayal to their voters. What good is a person as a politician who says 'you can vote for me, I am prolife and will defend that position' but then does the exact opposite? Who would vote or put trust in giving people like this more power, when their word means zero?

This is a huge issue, and I think the repeal campaign has made a huge mistake in calling for repeal. If there was a clear statement to vote on to REPLACE or AMEND the 8th, it would have a better chance of passing. As it stands we don't know what we are voting for, except to allow the whims of the politicians to decide. It will be a political football rather than a human rights issue, which IMO should be in the constitution. Its too important not to be. I say this regardless of your stance on the issue.

Edward M

professore wrote: »

This is a huge issue, and I think the repeal campaign has made a huge mistake in calling for repeal. If there was a clear statement to vote on to REPLACE or AMEND the 8th, it would have a better chance of passing. As it stands we don't know what we are voting for, except to allow the whims of the politicians to decide. It will be a political football rather than a human rights issue, which IMO should be in the constitution. Its too important not to be. I say this regardless of your stance on the issue.

Given the way the present govt and some past ones were formed it would be easy to see how an independent TD could easily have the time allowed either shortened or lengthened.
It could easily become a bargaining chip, imagine the Healy Rae's being in a position to bargain for instance.
Others in favours of abortion too might well want the time extended.

Loafing Oaf

professore wrote: »

If there was a clear statement to vote on to REPLACE or AMEND the 8th, it would have a better chance of passing. .

Living up to your name there professore...

Discodog

splinter65 wrote: »

What alternative view do you have yourself?

Leave the kids at home & I am firmly Pro Choice. I also agree that Pro Choice demonstrators should leave their kids at home.

Water John

Would agree with you on this, Discodog, Be adult enough to, leave the kids at home.

Galwayguy35

Thread needs a poll attached to it to get an idea what way people will vote.