The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Hooks Golf Handicap

Bearing in mind that nobody will change anyone's mind on an internet forum I put it to you that we've arrived at the perfect Irish solution.

If you want an abortion just order the 2 tablets from Holland, don't need to tell anyone, donation is voluntary.

The pro lifers can then bask in the afterglow of living in an abortion free country and safe in the knowledge that those travelling have dropped by a 1,000.

Now if neither side ever talk to each other this could work

captbarnacles

Somewhat off-topic but will this all be moot in the future? if pregnancy could be detected within 48 hours and (freely available) medication could end the pregnancy right there would it satisfy everyone?

mahamageehad

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

Bearing in mind that nobody will change anyone's mind on an internet forum I put it to you that we've arrived at the perfect Irish solution.

If you want an abortion just order the 2 tablets from Holland, don't need to tell anyone, donation is voluntary.

The pro lifers can then bask in the afterglow of living in an abortion free country and safe in the knowledge that those travelling have dropped by a 1,000.

Now if neither side ever talk to each other this could work

While that actually could be a perfect scenario, it doesn't actually solve the major problem of our human rights violations on FFA grounds. Then it's much too late for pills. And well, as for the on demand first trimester stuff with pills, that already happens (3 - 5 times a day) and the pro-lifers already ignore it so you're golden there!

January

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

Bearing in mind that nobody will change anyone's mind on an internet forum I put it to you that we've arrived at the perfect Irish solution.

If you want an abortion just order the 2 tablets from Holland, don't need to tell anyone, donation is voluntary.

The pro lifers can then bask in the afterglow of living in an abortion free country and safe in the knowledge that those travelling have dropped by a 1,000.

Now if neither side ever talk to each other this could work

The donation is not voluntary you have to pay minimum donation of 70 euro. Some people can't even afford that. There's also the fact that if you do need medical attention after you take the pills you still run the risk of jail time.

nozzferrahhtoo

Two users above have already addressed the main issues with your thinking on the topic, so I will address two other aspects of your post that they did not.....

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

Bearing in mind that nobody will change anyone's mind on an internet forum

I have never believed that, and in fact I have had many people say privately and publicly on forums that my posts have heavily influenced..... even sometimes completely changed....... their opinions on many issues.

Sure the amount of people who have their minds changed in real time is pretty small, but I operate under the assumption we are all moving through "idea space" together and through ongoing and iterative and repetitive discourse we influence each others paths in that space daily.

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

Now if neither side ever talk to each other this could work

Which would be a horrible thing to happen. Which is one of the reasons I rail strongly against the term "pro-abortionists" or derivatives of same.

There is a LOT of common ground between people who are pro-choice on abortion and those who are anti-choice on it. Including, most importantly, that both camps generally want less (ideally none) abortions to ever actually happen.

If we lose sight of our common ground and, worse, close off discourse with each other..... that would be a terrible result for everyone.

PopePalpatine

gctest50 wrote: »

How bizzare - Arguing with your own fantasy responses

Arguing against a blue-haired strawwoman is the only way they win.

Pherekydes

captbarnacles wrote: »

Somewhat off-topic but will this all be moot in the future? if pregnancy could be detected within 48 hours and (freely available) medication could end the pregnancy right there would it satisfy everyone?

It wouldn't solve problems like Savita's. i.e. wanted pregnancies gone wrong late on.

.......

This post has been deleted.

seamus

captbarnacles wrote: »

Somewhat off-topic but will this all be moot in the future? if pregnancy could be detected within 48 hours and (freely available) medication could end the pregnancy right there would it satisfy everyone?

That's a bit of sci-fi tbh. You'd need to be able to detect at the cellular level that the woman's body contains a fertilised egg; which is just one cell in billions. There are no chemical or hormonal tests that could detect a fertilised egg en route.

Even if for the sake of argument you could detect a pregnancy that early, that would need all women to scan/check/test themselves on a daily basis.

Ignoring the issue where a wanted pregnancy goes wrong, ultimately as long as human beings exist, they will have sex and they will get unintentionally pregnant. So there will always be a demand for abortion in these cases at the least because humans are not and will never be infallible.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

captbarnacles wrote: »

Somewhat off-topic but will this all be moot in the future? if pregnancy could be detected within 48 hours and (freely available) medication could end the pregnancy right there would it satisfy everyone?

Fantastic for unwanted pregnancies, pointless for all other cases.

People arguing against abortion, seem to think that abortion = contraceptive, when most people for abortion are debating completely different issues.

captbarnacles

I'm only talking about unwanted pregnancies because the other cases don't even seem debatable to me.

Hooks Golf Handicap

The abortion debate seems to have migrated to the DS thread but anyway I'll leave this here.

Some have said it's illegal under Irish law to have an abortion in this country (except in select circumstances).
What the Pro-Choice Campaign needs is martyr willing to document their Irish self-abortion, put it up all over Twitter & FB with a dated scan to show they were pregnant before the tablets.
Make it so ubiquitous that the authorities have to arrest them for murder & not loose the case down the back of the radiator.
. . . . . . Then comes the outcry that would dwarf Nelson Mandela or Deirdre Barlow's freedom campaign.
The World Press will descend to laugh at the murder trial & there would be a huge knee jerk swing to the pro-choice side.

Only caveat would be that the martyr would have to be whiter than white, no skeletons.

nozzferrahhtoo

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

The abortion debate seems to have migrated to the DS thread but anyway I'll leave this here.

Or, put another way, you will not be taking the time to reply to the people who took the time to reply to you.

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

What the Pro-Choice Campaign needs is martyr willing to document their Irish self-abortion, put it up all over Twitter & FB with a dated scan to show they were pregnant before the tablets.

Someone will have to help me here, but was this not already done? I have some vague bell ringing in the back of my head that someone openly named themselves as importing a LOT of those pills (I think it was into, or via, northern Ireland I can not remember details).... and then distributing them to people who required them.

And, again if memory is not entirely failing me, some of the people who received and used them were open about that too.

The authorities did nothing however?

Sorry to be really vague there, my memory is normally better than that, but perhaps someone can fill in the HUGE blanks in my memory there. I am sure it was only this year or last too.

.......

This post has been deleted.

mahamageehad

What are you raving on about? Yes, it's illegal to have a termination in Ireland and it could potentially have a 14 year sentence, but that sentence will not be for murder. It has also never been enforced yet, there is no political will to criminalise these women.

Hooks Golf Handicap

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Or, put another way, you will not be taking the time to reply to the people who took the time to reply to you.

I started talking about DS & how it was being eradicated through testing & abortion.
Somewhere along the way it turned into Repeal the 8th 2.0
Couldn't be dealing with it, there's no debate to be had, only sniping.

Should call the referendum for next Monday cause everyone I know has made up their own mind & we don't need 6 months of tearing the country apart.

We, the Irish, are not mature enough as a society to have a civilised debate, it's all shouting on both sides.

The real doomsday scenario for the Pro-Choice side is it runs into September & Francis' visit.
One wag of his finger will swing 10 to 15% of the occasional Catholics.

NuMarvel

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

The abortion debate seems to have migrated to the DS thread but anyway I'll leave this here.

Some have said it's illegal under Irish law to have an abortion in this country (except in select circumstances).
What the Pro-Choice Campaign needs is martyr willing to document their Irish self-abortion, put it up all over Twitter & FB with a dated scan to show they were pregnant before the tablets.
Make it so ubiquitous that the authorities have to arrest them for murder & not loose the case down the back of the radiator.
. . . . . . Then comes the outcry that would dwarf Nelson Mandela or Deirdre Barlow's freedom campaign.
The World Press will descend to laugh at the murder trial & there would be a huge knee jerk swing to the pro-choice side.

Only caveat would be that the martyr would have to be whiter than white, no skeletons.

Firstly, some say that because it's true. A 5 second google search would confirm that for you.

Secondly, as mahamageehad points out, the trial wouldn't be for murder because our laws don't regard illegal abortions as murder. The 5 second google search I mentioned above would probably have told you that too.

Thirdly, the Irish official attitude to abortion is look the other way. Has been since at least the X Case. Even when customs official seize hundreds of abortion pills, no one is charged. The only thing that would change that is if doctors and hospitals started carrying out abortions, and I don't think that's going to happen.

And finally, what you described above would be absolutely pointless at this stage. The most it would do is get the government to consider changing the constitution; WHICH IS WHAT THEY ARE DOING RIGHT NOW. That's what the Citizens Assembly was set up for, that's what the Committee on the 8th is doing right now. Nor would it lead to a "knee jerk swing", because polls constantly show that the vast majority want change. And last week's poll seems to show that the majority want change as recommended by the Assembly. You're basically saying that we should throw all that out and start again. Thanks, but no thanks.

nozzferrahhtoo

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

Couldn't be dealing with it, there's no debate to be had, only sniping.

You do not have to explain yourself to me! I was just pointing out that your retreating from one thread to another, means you will not be replying to the people who took the time to reply to you.

That is all. I am not demanding justification or explanation from you. I am just calling a spade a spade. But I reject your claim that it is "just sniping". Go read my reply to you that you ignored. Not a bit of sniping in it. Quite the opposite in fact, as I think I offered a post full of hope, potential, and good will.

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

Should call the referendum for next Monday cause everyone I know has made up their own mind & we don't need 6 months of tearing the country apart.

Not a good idea at all. Just because you and yours have made up their mind, does not mean everyone has. There are many fence sitters and MANY people who do not even understand what it is we are / will be voting on.

In fact since such details are not even known yet, as to what exact change or wording etc we will be voting on..... how is it you have already made up your mind? That sounds like a serious level of bias and pre-conception is going on on your part.

Further there are those of us, myself included, who NEVER consider our "mind made up" on any matter. Rather we are ALWAYS open to further evidence, further arguments, and most importantly further discourse. Just because YOU are not, does not mean the rest of us should be denied the coming months in which to engage with it.

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

We, the Irish, are not mature enough as a society to have a civilised debate, it's all shouting on both sides.

Then we the Irish who CAN do so, should do as much of it as we can. Which is what I try to do (and sometimes achieve) often by entering into emotive threads and arguments on the subject and giving a cool discourse that is not screeching labels and insults at anyone.

In the face of shouting a person has two main choices.... throw their hands up and walk away..... or stroll into the middle of it and try to be a less emotive voice of reasons. My choice is to attempt the latter. Different people have different opinions on how well I achieve that.

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

The real doomsday scenario for the Pro-Choice side is it runs into September & Francis' visit. One wag of his finger will swing 10 to 15% of the occasional Catholics.

It certainly is a piece on the game board for sure. But I remain agnostic as to how effective he will be. It also depends HOW he goes about it.

The Irish, in my experience, maintain a very fine line between their feelings of being influenced by such authority figures.... and being Nanny State dictated to by them.

He could potentially be a piece badly used on the game board. So I am going to maintain a "wait and see" on that one.

Zubeneschamali

Hooks Golf Handicap wrote: »

The real doomsday scenario for the Pro-Choice side is it runs into September & Francis' visit. One wag of his finger will swing 10 to 15% of the occasional Catholics.

I don't think so. Anyone who is of a mind to listen to the Pope on this subject will already be voting No.

As a Yes voter, I would welcome the Pope getting involved. it would be another opportunity to point out that every Christian church in Ireland was against passing the 8th in the first place.

Except the Catholic church. It is a sectarian piece of .. law.

seamus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't think so. Anyone who is of a mind to listen to the Pope on this subject will already be voting No.

As a Yes voter, I would welcome the Pope getting involved. it would be another opportunity to point out that every Christian church in Ireland was against passing the 8th in the first place.

Except the Catholic church. It is a sectarian piece of .. law.

Agreed. The Pope piping up on it would also be an unavoidable reminder to all of the casual Catholics about just how disconnected they actually are from the Church.

It's one thing being able to pretend that you're a Catholic because you go to Mass at Xmas, but when the Pope lands in your country and starts wittering on about premarital sex, contraception, homsexuality, sin and the devil, you might come to realise that you actually have very little in common with the Vatican.

frag420

seamus wrote: »

Agreed. The Pope piping up on it would also be an unavoidable reminder to all of the casual Catholics about just how disconnected they actually are from the Church.

It's one thing being able to pretend that you're a Catholic because you go to Mass at Xmas, but when the Pope lands in your country and starts wittering on about premarital sex, contraception, homsexuality, sin and the devil, you might come to realise that you actually have very little in common with the Vatican.

All rather common within the walls of the Vatican...

.......

This post has been deleted.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Had pro-life canvassers around my neck of the woods last night. Passed them on the way to the shop, which is about 200 metres from my house, gathered at the top of the road in their very snazzy hi vis Love Both gear. They'd already been and gone from my door by the time I got back, no sign of them along the rest of the road, guess nobody was very keen to talk to them Apparently their opening line was "Good evening, are you pro-abortion?"

.......

This post has been deleted.

The_Valeyard

....... wrote: »

Id just treat them the same as I do the religious "Go peddle crazy elsewhere, we're all stocked up here!!".

Everyines a little bit crazy

January

Just bumping this as the other thread is for experiences only and the other is discussing abortion in relation to fetal abnormality.

baylah17

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1213/927010-eighth_amendment/

So the Dail committee are going to recommend that abortion up to 12 weeks be available to women.
I never thought I would live long enough to see Ireland progress so far, I voted No in 1983 and am so glad we will soon have the opportunity to remove this abhorrent amendment from the Constitution.

Zubeneschamali

baylah17 wrote: »

So the Dail committee are going to recommend that abortion up to 12 weeks be available to women.

Heard that on the RTE news this morning - not clear what that actually means regarding the wording to be put to referendum.

munchkin_utd

baylah17 wrote: »

So the Dail committee are going to recommend that abortion up to 12 weeks be available to women.
<snip>

an amazing turn of events, from removing a pesky clause in the constitution that stops doctors making a medical decision in the interest of a mother, to straight abortion on demand

Will it pass? Polls say it wont.

baylah17

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Heard that on the RTE news this morning - not clear what that actually means regarding the wording to be put to referendum.

i think it just a case of repealing the amendment and the Dail will legislate.

Zubeneschamali

baylah17 wrote: »

i think it just a case of repealing the amendment and the Dail will legislate.

The Citizen's Assembly said that may not work, that having established a Right to Life in the constitution, simply removing references to it does not necessarily erase it. The Courts might rule that it is still there but unenumerated.

pilly

munchkin_utd wrote:

Will it pass?

Quite deceptive in your posting there. That poll was up to 22 weeks, not 12.

baylah17

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The Citizen's Assembly said that may not work, that having established a Right to Life in the constitution, simply removing references to it does not necessarily erase it. The Courts might rule that it is still there but unenumerated.

One can never second guess the Supreme Court but based upon previous cases (The X Case and the C case) the Court would I think be unlikely to block the will of the people, certainly the current Court based on its composition would be highly unlikely to, especially since women already have the unenumerated right to bodily integrity as espoused in Ryan V The Attorney General.

Zubeneschamali

baylah17 wrote: »

One can never second guess the Supreme Court

The Citizens Assembly said why take the chance? Replace the 8th with an explicit statement that the Oireachteas may legislate.

Chips Lovell

Most recent poll suggests it will pass. But the campaign isn't really in full swing.

Asked about the prospect of the referendum on the Eighth Amendment next year, 62 per cent said they would vote in favour of changing the Constitution to allow the Oireachtas to legislate for greater access to abortion, the poll finds

.

Zubeneschamali

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

But the campaign isn't really in full swing.

I don't think a campaign will change many minds on this one.

The proceedings of the Citizens Assembly and the Oireachteas Committee do seem to have changed minds, but they were sat down with an opportunity to listen and ask questions of experts. This is rather different from the screaming and yelling we can expect in a campaign.

jackofalltrades

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Most recent poll suggests it will pass. But the campaign isn't really in full swing.

.

That wording is quite vague though, previous polls that I've seen have showed support for similar levels of liberalisation to be in a minority.
IMO they're being too ambitious.

professore

baylah17 wrote: »

i think it just a case of repealing the amendment and the Dail will legislate.

Whatever my views on the amendment itself I find it quite shocking that an amendment to the Constitution that was voted for by the people at the time can be rescinded by an act of the Dail. Surely this is not the case? It would open the door to a future leader *cough* Mary Lou *cough* to throw out chunks of the Constitution wholesale and set herself as Supreme Leader.

PopePalpatine

professore wrote: »

Whatever my views on the amendment itself I find it quite shocking that an amendment to the Constitution that was voted for by the people at the time can be rescinded by an act of the Dail. Surely this is not the case?

Nope, the Dail doesn't have the power to overwrite the Constitution.

Zubeneschamali

professore wrote: »

Whatever my views on the amendment itself I find it quite shocking that an amendment to the Constitution that was voted for by the people at the time can be rescinded by an act of the Dail. Surely this is not the case? It would open the door to a future leader *cough* Mary Lou *cough* to throw out chunks of the Constitution wholesale and set herself as Supreme Leader.

No, baylah17 means the referendum would simply delete the 8th, and then the Dail would be free to legislate.

professore

Howard Tasteless Bank wrote: »

Had pro-life canvassers around my neck of the woods last night. Passed them on the way to the shop, which is about 200 metres from my house, gathered at the top of the road in their very snazzy hi vis Love Both gear. They'd already been and gone from my door by the time I got back, no sign of them along the rest of the road, guess nobody was very keen to talk to them Apparently their opening line was "Good evening, are you pro-abortion?"

Being somewhat strict on the criteria I think are valid for abortion myself, and not religious whatsoever, I think the Pro Life crowd are the best campaigners for the Pro Choice side as they are all a bunch of loonies I wouldn't want to be seen dead with. I can see the arguments from both sides. Having said that some of the more extreme Pro Choice people don't cover themselves in glory either.

NuMarvel

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't think a campaign will change many minds on this one.

The proceedings of the Citizens Assembly and the Oireachteas Committee do seem to have changed minds, but they were sat down with an opportunity to listen and ask questions of experts. This is rather different from the screaming and yelling we can expect in a campaign.

The screaming and yelling is a feature of TV debates, but there's more to a referendum campaign that TV debates. It's be door to door canvassing and people talking to friends and family that will prompt the general public to ask questions and to inform themselves.

Grayson

NuMarvel wrote: »

The screaming and yelling is a feature of TV debates, but there's more to a referendum campaign that TV debates. It's be door to door canvassing and people talking to friends and family that will prompt the general public to ask questions and to inform themselves.

And a ridiculous amount of posters. Not that the posters will do anything more than irritate people but there will be feck loads.

NuMarvel

Grayson wrote: »

And a ridiculous amount of posters. Not that the posters will do anything more than irritate people but there will be feck loads.

And now all I'm wondering is how bad the No side posters are going to be. They'll probably make the anti-marriage equality posters look positively delightful!

Larbre34

munchkin_utd wrote: »

an amazing turn of events, from removing a pesky clause in the constitution that stops doctors making a medical decision in the interest of a mother, to straight abortion on demand

Will it pass? Polls say it wont.

I too am very surprised at the likely outcome from the committee, i.e. a pretty liberal regime in totality. But then its easy for the Committee to make strong recommendations to appear ballsy, but the cabinet will have to take account of what would actually pass in the Oireachtas.

To quote Dr Michael Harty TD, he said he believed there would be a repeal of the Eighth Amendment, however, he cautioned that if the legislation underpinning what the parameters of the termination will be - either too radical or too conservative - there will be a possibility that a referendum might fail.

Hotblack Desiato

That's a pretty stupid line to take as he must be aware any Bill published along with the referendum proposal is only that, a bill, with no guarantee the Oireachtas will pass it or that a future Oireachtas won't significantly amend it.

People should vote purely on the constitutional question being put to them, not a non-binding political promise.

Irish Times poll last weekend is 62:26 for:against unconditional repeal.That's well over two to one.

Billy86

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I don't think a campaign will change many minds on this one.

The proceedings of the Citizens Assembly and the Oireachteas Committee do seem to have changed minds, but they were sat down with an opportunity to listen and ask questions of experts. This is rather different from the screaming and yelling we can expect in a campaign.

A strong campaign is going to be very helpful here - it made a huge difference in the SSM referendum, and while people are very entrenched on abortion the feeling was somewhat similar for that one back in 2015. More over though, a good campaign is going to be hugely important in swatting aside the constant barrage of lies coming from the United States pro-lifers, which was an understated but vital part of what they did during the SSM lead up.

Chips Lovell

Billy86 wrote: »

More over though, a good campaign is going to be hugely important in swatting aside the constant barrage of lies coming from the United States pro-lifers, which was an understated but vital part of what they did during the SSM lead up.

You mean SSM doesn't open the way to polygamy and marrying blood relatives? Damn, that's the only reason I voted for it.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Billy86 wrote: »

A strong campaign is going to be very helpful here - it made a huge difference in the SSM referendum, and while people are very entrenched on abortion the feeling was somewhat similar for that one back in 2015. More over though, a good campaign is going to be hugely important in swatting aside the constant barrage of lies coming from the United States pro-lifers, which was an understated but vital part of what they did during the SSM lead up.

They're already getting going on social media with sponsored ads and pages, nice fake news stylee. Staying away from the words pro-life though, it's things like Get The Truth Out, Students For Balance etc. Plenty of people seeing straight through them and commenting, but I'd wager that the clued in and digital media savvy aren't the target audience.

Zubeneschamali

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

You mean SSM doesn't open the way to polygamy and marrying blood relatives?

Well, I'm married to my little dog now, so there's that.