The 8th amendment(Mod warning in op)

Doctor Jimbob

Da Boss wrote: »

No I most definitely do not agree with your proposition that men shouldn’t have a say. Saying men shouldn’t have a say in an abortion referendum is like saying straight couples shouldn’t have a say in the marriage equality referendum and that batchelors or widows shouldn’t have a say in the divorce referendum. Ireland is a democracy so yes men do and should have a say , yee feminists won’t silence us. And yes abortion does effect men as it ends the life of others , the unborn, and only for the eighth amendment many men may not be enjoying the life they currently do.

I'd agree men should have a say, for the simple reason that only allowing one gender to vote on any issue is pretty undemocratic.

That said, myself and plenty of other men will be happy to vote to repeal it.

I'm sure the same Helen Lovejoy arguments that you're making were trotted out about contraception back in the day as well, but thankfully Ireland seems to be moving on from that attitude.

Spanish Eyes

Most of the anti choice are men.

kylith

average_runner wrote: »

You could be right but a man should have a choice if he wants to be in the kids life, if he decides not To, he shouldn't have to pay maintenance.

So you think that if a man doesn't want to have a baby he should be able to walk away, scot free, despite that fact that his behaviour is just as responsible for the existance of the pregnancy.

Do you think that a woman should be forced to continue with a pregnancy that she doesn't want, or do you think she should be able to access abortion services in her own country?

nice_guy80

first week of January and already the Catholic church are interfering and trying to influence the probable referendum

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/archbishop-urges-catholics-to-speak-out-against-abortion-1.3347360?mode=amp

average_runner

kylith wrote: »

So you think that if a man doesn't want to have a baby he should be able to walk away, scot free, despite that fact that his behaviour is just as responsible for the existance of the pregnancy.

Do you think that a woman should be forced to continue with a pregnancy that she doesn't want, or do you think she should be able to access abortion services in her own country?

I believe both should be allow to make a choice.

Da Boss

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Have you ever suffered pre eclampsia, bleeding, potential miscarriage, post natal depression, pelvic floor disintegration?

But I do acknowledge that you have a say but only for putting the seed in, after that the woman does everything to bring the child into the world.

You are hosting all the men who do not acknowledge that fact.

Yes that however doesn’t mean men shouldn’t have a say, this does affect men too as I previously highlighted!!! If took time to read what I typed I would not have to repeat the fact that the eighth does indeed affect men as even I myself was an “accident “ and I thank the eighth because without it I would not be here today!! That’s the importance of it in my life!

Spanish Eyes

average_runner wrote: »

Well I am a man. I think you have to take each decision for what it is and respect it. You got be in the scenario to understand it.

Yes of course. However there are some strident men out there in the msm telling women what to do regarding the potential repeal of the 8th.

Why so many men?

I am not talking about intimate relationships where such a decision is bound to be traumatic. I do have empathy.

average_runner

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Yes of course. However there are some strident men out there in the msm telling women what to do regarding the potential repeal of the 8th.

Why so many men?

I am not talking about intimate relationships where such a decision is bound to be traumatic. I do have empathy.

I think it's to do with what this system has done to men. Outside this debate. Men have no rights when it comes to children, judges will give the children to the mother no matter how bad she is and then expect men to pay through the nose, eventually pushing a lot of men to suicide and never talked about.

Da Boss

Da Boss wrote: »

the eighth does indeed affect men as even I myself was an “accident “ and I thank the eighth because without it I would not be here today!! That’s the importance of it in my life!

Did your mother tell you that?
Hey son, i only gave birth to you because I couldn't get an abortion?
That might explain somethings.............!

Spanish Eyes

Il Papa will be visiting here soon.

Italy has abortion. How the heck did they manage to get that introduced in such a Catholic country would someone tell me now.

Never heard a negative word about it anywhere, even though it is a cough, Catholic country.

And yes, I do know that the Vatican is not Italy.

Spanish Eyes

average_runner wrote: »

I think it's to do with what this system has done to men. Outside this debate. Men have no rights when it comes to children, judges will give the children to the mother no matter how bad she is and then expect men to pay through the nose, eventually pushing a lot of men to suicide and never talked about.

That is a very sad post, even if you didn't mean it to be.

I thought things had changed recently regarding this issue. But please inform me if I am wrong.

average_runner

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

That is a very sad post, even if you didn't mean it to be.

I thought things had changed recently regarding this issue. But please inform me if I am wrong.

Does anything change in this country. It's not my situation though. Thank god

Spanish Eyes

I'm getting a feeling that if the 8th is repealed and legislation framed, it will be a nine day wonder.

And no one will refer to it afterwards.

Any views on that?

end of the road

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Just an offside comment.

Would I be totally wrong to say that men should not have any input into the lives of pregnant women and their babies WRT abortion and their lives/health? Should be a medical decision with the ob/gyn only.

Men will never have to suffer life threathening pre eclampsia, sepsis, post natal depression, pelvic floor disintegration, giving birth and the aftermath of it all.

Well I think they should just back off.

I notice a lot of the pro life are men. Command and control.

I have a lot of time for the former master of Holles Street (he is a man yay!) Peter Boylan.

What do you think.

the baby is the man's as well. he is entitled to an opinion.
also, as men are going to be voting in this referendum, we are entitled to have an opinion on it. if you want men to back off, call for the referendum to be canceled. otherwise you will just have to accept that people both men and women will have opinions either for or against repeal.

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

I'd agree men should have a say, for the simple reason that only allowing one gender to vote on any issue is pretty undemocratic.

That said, myself and plenty of other men will be happy to vote to repeal it.

I'm sure the same Helen Lovejoy arguments that you're making were trotted out about contraception back in the day as well, but thankfully Ireland seems to be moving on from that attitude.

there is a huge difference between contraception and abortion. anyone arguing against contraception has something wrong with them. anyone arguing against abortion on demand has a legitimate argument.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Most of the anti choice are men.

there is actually no tangible evidence for that.

thee glitz wrote: »

I can't tell you you're wrong - are we, as a country getting richer or not?

to be fair, that part of my post was aimed at pilly. she wanted someone else to tell me that i'm wrong, so i'm suggesting she do it, seeing as she believes it to be the case yet refuses to do it herself.

Doctor Jimbob

end of the road wrote: »

there is a huge difference between contraception and abortion. anyone arguing against contraception has something wrong with them. anyone arguing against abortion on demand has a legitimate argument.

Funny that the same arguments are used against both then,isn't it? Arguments against contraception look silly now in hindsight, and it's probably going to be the same with abortion in future.

There might be a legitimate argument against abortion on demand, but "I don't like it so it shouldn't be allowed" certainly isn't one. Even if someone does present an argument against allowing abortion that I agree with, I'd still go out and vote to repeal the 8th, because it's a backwards amendment that does more harm than good.

Loafing Oaf

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I'm getting a feeling that if the 8th is repealed and legislation framed, it will be a nine day wonder.

And no one will refer to it afterwards.

Any views on that?

Not the first time that point has been made in this thread:

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

This could be the basis of a Waterford Whispers-style article.


Things The Catholic Right Said Were Going To Destroy Society And Morals But Nothing Happened And Now Nobody Gives A Damn


Marriage equality
POLDPA
Morning after pill
Divorce
Legalising homosexuality
Contraception
Equal pay
Married women in jobs

...etc...

Bannasidhe

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

This is just absolute bunkum and drivel. Of course the state can ban travel. The state injuncted Ms X from travelling. We had a referendum to guarantee the ability to travel. The reality is pro forced birthers dont want to reverse the 13th amendment. They are happy with a hypocrytical NIMBYIST not on my Island attitude.

In the aftermath of the 8th being passed the Irish State implemented a draconian censorship of any mention of abortion. It is my understanding that it was illegal to even tell a woman living in Ireland how and where she could get an abortion.

The result was a group of (mostly Irish) people living outside the State engaging in a clandestine information campaign - lots of phone calls to telephone boxes in Ireland at strange hours of the day and night- and a meet and accompany service for women travelling alone.

How do I know? Because I was often the one on the end of the phone in London calling some phone booth in Ireland or waiting for a bus coming from the ferry in Victoria Station so I could bring some terrified, alone, woman or girl for a procedure that she could never speak about to her family or friends but which gave her hope of a life worth living,

If the Irish authorities knew why these women and girls were travelling they would stop them. Like they did with Ms X. It was the public outcry over her case that (eventually) ended the travel ban and censorship.

For over a decade Ireland did prevent women travelling for abortions, it did censor information and access to information while at the same time continuing to support the enslavement of unmarried mothers and forced adoptions. The Magdalene Laundries were still in operation in the 1990s.

I don't doubt for a second that if they had their way many anti-repealers would bring back those days.

The great irony in all this is the ferry carried women - some of whom were married - to England to end an unwanted pregnancy and women who were unmarried but wanted to be able to keep their child.

Ireland has never been much interested in either protecting it's female citizens or allowing them to make their own choices.

Spanish Eyes

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Not the first time that point has been made in this thread:

Yep, the debate is all from one side now. We know what is required, everyone does, but there are some entities out there with foreign funding just the same trying to change it.

Malta AFAIS is the only EU country without abortion now, but like ourselves, they can send their females to Italy. What does the Pope think of this?

And the Pope will be visiting here soon. If he has anything negative to say about Ireland and its repeal of the 8th, he had better look to his own country of Italy, although I know the Vatican is independent but still.

It is just so hypocritical to me anyway.

mrkiscool2

Has the argument really gone to "But what about the menz?"

Seriously, in order to consider this we first have to remove the cage from women's uterus'. When we do that, then we can talk about men's parental rights. Ultimately, they don't have to carry a child to term so they really don't get THAT much of a say. Like, sure, there needs to be a frank conversation, but that's it.

When we get abortion legalised, then we can talk about men being able to pull any legal responsibilities from the potential life while giving away any and all rights to it.

Spanish Eyes

What about all those countries with legal abortion now? Where is all the vitriol regarding their abortion laws? None AFAIS. I will stand corrected though.

We should be looking at them. There doesn't seem to be any problem at all. Even in places that have a Pope living there. Like Italy. Think about it.

If he comes here and mentions abortion he will be so hypocrital I think.

end of the road

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Funny that the same arguments are used against both then,isn't it? Arguments against contraception look silly now in hindsight, and it's probably going to be the same with abortion in future.

There might be a legitimate argument against abortion on demand, but "I don't like it so it shouldn't be allowed" certainly isn't one. Even if someone does present an argument against allowing abortion that I agree with, I'd still go out and vote to repeal the 8th, because it's a backwards amendment that does more harm than good.

i agree the 8th as a whole needs to go and i have said plenty of times that if it wasn't for the likely hood of abortion on demand being legislated for i'd vote yes to repeal.

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Has the argument really gone to "But what about the menz?"

Seriously, in order to consider this we first have to remove the cage from women's uterus'. When we do that, then we can talk about men's parental rights. Ultimately, they don't have to carry a child to term so they really don't get THAT much of a say. Like, sure, there needs to be a frank conversation, but that's it.

When we get abortion legalised, then we can talk about men being able to pull any legal responsibilities from the potential life while giving away any and all rights to it.

we can talk about men's issues as well. half of that child is the man's DNA so he has quite a right to a say.

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

What about all those countries with legal abortion now? Where is all the vitriol regarding their abortion laws? None AFAIS. I will stand corrected though.

We should be looking at them. There doesn't seem to be any problem at all. Even in places that have a Pope living there. Like Italy. Think about it.

If he comes here and mentions abortion he will be so hypocrital I think.

quite a bit of vitrial in the uk i believe (if protesting outside clynics fits your description of vitrial)

One eyed Jack

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Just an offside comment.

Would I be totally wrong to say that men should not have any input into the lives of pregnant women and their babies WRT abortion and their lives/health? Should be a medical decision with the ob/gyn only.

You'd be very wrong, as any referendum is a Constitutional issue, where anyone who is eligible has a say in the kind of society they want to live in. Quite frankly, I don't care what you do on a personal level, but this is a social issue, bigger than you as an individual.

Men will never have to suffer life threathening pre eclampsia, sepsis, post natal depression, pelvic floor disintegration, giving birth and the aftermath of it all.

Well I think they should just back off.

I don't know why you included sepsis in that list. Men are far more likely to experience a sepsis infection than women for starters.

I notice a lot of the pro life are men. Command and control.

I have a lot of time for the former master of Holles Street (he is a man yay!) Peter Boylan.

What do you think.

It's nothing to do with command and control. A lot of the pro-life are men, a lot more of the pro-choice are also men. The reason you have a lot of time for Peter Boylan is because you agree with him!

average_runner wrote: »

You could be right but a man should have a choice if he wants to be in the kids life, if he decides not To, he shouldn't have to pay maintenance.

Nope, don't agree with that at all. Abortion has nothing to do with when the child or children are actually born, and the father should absolutely be held financially responsible for their children. If he decides not to be in his children's lives, that's his prerogative, but that doesn't absolve either parent of their responsibilities towards their children. Maintenance and guardianship and so on are completely separate issues to abortion.

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

It fascinates me how much men on both sides feel they must have a say.

It's an issue that affects everyone in society Joey, I'm happy to see the numbers of both men and women on both sides expressing their opinions.

average_runner wrote: »

I think it's to do with what this system has done to men. Outside this debate. Men have no rights when it comes to children, judges will give the children to the mother no matter how bad she is and then expect men to pay through the nose, eventually pushing a lot of men to suicide and never talked about.

That's simply not true. Men absolutely have rights when it comes to their children. They also have responsibilities, responsibilities that you imagine they should be able to abandon on a whim, and who do you think should step in to provide support for the child then? The State? So you'll end up supporting all those children who have been abandoned by their fathers anyway through taxation. I don't want to be forced to support anyone else's child but my own, but that's not the way our society functions.

I'm not the only father with primary custody of my child btw, there are plenty of men who do, so this idea that men are pushed to suicide or that it's never talked about (plenty of threads on this site about fathers rights, even though they have the same rights as mothers!), I'm not sorry to say it but what you're talking about there just isn't true.

Loafing Oaf

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

What about all those countries with legal abortion now? Where is all the vitriol regarding their abortion laws? None AFAIS. I will stand corrected though.

We should be looking at them. There doesn't seem to be any problem at all. Even in places that have a Pope living there. Like Italy. Think about it.

If he comes here and mentions abortion he will be so hypocrital I think.

Well the Pope technically has his own independent country and Italy is technically a secular republic. But re your central point, I suppose the general expectation is we will be like those countries as regards abortion if the referendum passes, just as we already are re divorce, gay marriage, etc...

Spanish Eyes

The day a man gets pregnant and gives birth and might suffer all the associated health issues is the day I will say OK man.

Men have no idea what is involved in being pregnant, but some of them try to tell women all about it.

And the biggest idiot in all this is Ronan Mullen. But he is a woman hater, sorry forgot that bit about him.

One eyed Jack

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

What about all those countries with legal abortion now? Where is all the vitriol regarding their abortion laws? None AFAIS. I will stand corrected though.

You're joking surely? Abortion is legal in the US, and there's plenty of vitriol on both sides there, not unlike the vitriol on both sides here.

Spanish Eyes

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

Well the Pope technically has his own independent country and Italy is technically a secular republic. But re your central point, I suppose the general expectation is we will be like those countries as regards abortion if the referendum passes, just as we already are re divorce, gay marriage, etc...

And the resulting problem is? I have never heard of any trouble WRT to Italy and its abortion laws, or any other country either. And that includes Britain where as you know, we export our abortions to. So blinkered

I guess people will move on and that's that. Like the same sex marriage ref.

Spanish Eyes

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You're joking surely? Abortion is legal in the US, and there's plenty of vitriol on both sides there, not unlike the vitriol on both sides here.

The Southern States are all god and stuff, Church is everything, but with rifles in their back pockets.

I doubt they are really Christian tbh.

One eyed Jack

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The Southern States are all god and stuff, Church is everything, but with rifles in their back pockets.

I doubt they are really Christian tbh.

I don't doubt that they're Christian at all tbh, they just have a different perspective on Christianity than you or I do, that very small few at least, because I wouldn't be one to tar everyone with the same brush. I've no doubt most of them are actually grand

January

It's very obvious that the majority (possibly even all except one) of anti choice voices on this thread are men.

Its quite telling.

Loafing Oaf

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You're joking surely? Abortion is legal in the US, and there's plenty of vitriol on both sides there, not unlike the vitriol on both sides here.

The exception that proves the rule. There is a consensus in favour of liberal abortion laws in most western democracies, and the issue attracts very little controversy.

January

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You're joking surely? Abortion is legal in the US, and there's plenty of vitriol on both sides there, not unlike the vitriol on both sides here.

The loudest voices in the Irish abortion debate seem to be being shipped in from America... There was a campaign during the summer last year for families to host' pro life' visitors so they could campaign door to door. It's no wonder the debate here mirrors the states if thats the tactics they're using.

One eyed Jack

January wrote: »

It's very obvious that the majority (possibly even all except one) of anti choice voices on this thread are men.

Its quite telling.

Quite telling in what way? It doesn't tell anything other than your own bias is showing. There are far more women who are pro-life/anti-choice/pro-birth, whatever label you want, than men, and there are far more men than women on this thread anyway.

Your post kinda reminds me of that woman in the video earlier who was telling men to know their place and claiming that Savita was a rich woman who could have gone to England but was killed by racism and sexism in this fùcking country. I suppose depending upon ones perspective, what she said was true too.

end of the road

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

And the biggest idiot in all this is Ronan Mullen. But he is a woman hater, sorry forgot that bit about him.

on what basis is he a woman hater?
lets say he is, then he is very very wrong, no question, and he needs to change his view quick.

One eyed Jack

January wrote: »

The loudest voices in the Irish abortion debate seem to be being shipped in from America... There was a campaign during the summer last year for families to host' pro life' visitors so they could campaign door to door. It's no wonder the debate here mirrors the states if thats the tactics they're using.

I'll agree with that alright, but I would also point out the tactics of Amnesty Ireland in refusing to hand back funding they received from George Soros. At least the ARC did hand back any funding they received. I wouldn't just look at one side and say "look what they're doing", both sides of the issue are playing politics in an attempt to influence Irish society.

Spanish Eyes

Men in general are good at controlling women and their bodies,

Sure that's their raison d'etre mostly if they haven't succeeded in other ways.

January

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Quite telling in what way? It doesn't tell anything other than your own bias is showing. There are far more women who are pro-life/anti-choice/pro-birth, whatever label you want, than men, and there are far more men than women on this thread anyway.

Your post kinda reminds me of that woman in the video earlier who was telling men to know their place and claiming that Savita was a rich woman who could have gone to England but was killed by racism and sexism in this fùcking country. I suppose depending upon ones perspective, what she said was true too.

No bias here. Men have a very important voice in the repeal the 8th debate. I'm not disputing that at all. Just that it's very telling that it's mostly men voicing their opinion on this thread. I don't believe there are more women than men who are pro life though. Not from what I've seen over the past couple of years in person and online.

Loafing Oaf

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

And the resulting problem is? I have never heard of any trouble WRT to Italy and its abortion laws, or any other country either. And that includes Britain where as you know, we export our abortions to. So blinkered

I guess people will move on and that's that. Like the same sex marriage ref.

This is why I suspect a lot of people in FF and FG who don't have strong convictions on the issue might be attracted by the idea of settling the issue in one feel swoop with a referendum to introduce 'abortion on demand', getting it off the political agenda for good...They might even vote against the legislation safe in the knowledge that it will pass...

end of the road

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Men in general are good at controlling women and their bodies,

Sure that's their raison d'etre mostly if they haven't succeeded in other ways.

that's rather unfair. some men maybe like that but we all aren't. anyway that argument was done on another thread, best we don't go back there IMO.

Tigger

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The day a man gets pregnant and gives birth and might suffer all the associated health issues is the day I will say OK man.

Men have no idea what is involved in being pregnant, but some of them try to tell women all about it.

And the biggest idiot in all this is Ronan Mullen. But he is a woman hater, sorry forgot that bit about him.

ive never been an internal combustion engine but i understand how they work and the processes involved
so to say i cant understand pregnency without being pregnant is; i donno justvwrong insuppose.

Tigger

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Men in general are good at controlling women and their bodies,

Sure that's their raison d'etre mostly if they haven't succeeded in other ways.

this post is very telling

Bannasidhe

Tigger wrote: »

ive never been an internal combustion engine but i understand how they work and the processes involved
so to say i cant understand pregnency without being pregnant is; i donno justvwrong insuppose.

I'm sorry but that is a ridiculous statement.

It's akin to me saying I don't have a penis but I have seen penii and therefore I know what an erection feels like.

NO. I Don't.
I can imagine but how the hell do I know if my imagining it correct?

Unless you have been pregnant one cannot possibly know what it feels like to be pregnant - and (this bit will blow your mind) not all pregnancies are the same.
In fact, the same woman can experience different pregnancies differently.

volchitsa

Tigger wrote: »

ive never been an internal combustion engine but i understand how they work and the processes involved
so to say i cant understand pregnency without being pregnant is; i donno justvwrong insuppose.

Actually, this post is very telling.

Knowing how a pregnancy occurs and develops is very different from knowing what being pregnant is like. Nobody discussing combustion engines expects the discussion to delve into how the combustion engine feels. For obvious reasons.

Well, I'd have thought it was obvious anyway.

eviltwin

Tigger wrote: »

ive never been an internal combustion engine but i understand how they work and the processes involved
so to say i cant understand pregnency without being pregnant is; i donno justvwrong insuppose.

Are you comparing women to objects now? Interesting you chose to compare a pregnant woman to a machine rather than pick another of the many human experiences.

One eyed Jack

January wrote: »

No bias here. Men have a very important voice in the repeal the 8th debate. I'm not disputing that at all. Just that it's very telling that it's mostly men voicing their opinion on this thread. I don't believe there are more women than men who are pro life though. Not from what I've seen over the past couple of years in person and online.

Why are women more opposed to abortion?

Gender doesn’t explain abortion views, and abortion policy doesn’t explain Republicans Gender Gap


Now to be fair to you, the latest Gallup poll done in 2015 does show a higher percentage of women are pro-choice than men in previous years -

Americans Choose "Pro-Choice" for First Time in Seven Years


Americans divide 50% "pro-choice," 44% "pro-life" on abortion
Majority of women, 54%, now pro-choice, vs. 46% of men
Pro-choice ID among Democrats has swelled since 2001


But I would.suggest that has more to do with their political affiliation than their gender tbh.

Having said that, if I were to go on my own personal experience, then I would say that of those men I knew who claimed to be pro-choice, it was more to do with the fact that they were thinking of themselves and the financial implications for themselves if they were ever to impregnate a woman, than any thoughts for the welfare of any woman in question.

I've also known women who were vehemently pro-choice online, but offline they would be pro-life, and then of course there are women who are pro-life all their lives, but when actually in that situation, they decided to have an abortion. I know there was an article earlier in the thread about medical professionals who were giving their opinions of women who were pro-life who wanted an abortion, but honestly my own personal point of view on that is I'm not going to point fingers at those women either, as I think that's just as wrong as those women pointing fingers at other women who have decided to have an abortion.

mzungu

January wrote: »

No bias here. Men have a very important voice in the repeal the 8th debate. I'm not disputing that at all. Just that it's very telling that it's mostly men voicing their opinion on this thread. I don't believe there are more women than men who are pro life though. Not from what I've seen over the past couple of years in person and online.

Red C poll from two years back shows things are pretty much even. Other polls from the US and UK show roughly similar, with slightly more women being in favour.

masculinist

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Men in general are good at controlling women and their bodies,

Sure that's their raison d'etre mostly if they haven't succeeded in other ways.

Some might respond that women are really good in general at controlling mens wallets - both personally and politically utilizing the force of the state

One eyed Jack

masculinist wrote: »

Some might respond that women are really good in general at controlling mens wallets - both personally and politically utilizing the force of the state

While I don't agree with Spanish Eyes comment, I find your response to it even more bizarre, as though you're suggesting that two wrongs make a right. Men who try to control women or their bodies, or try to control women in any way, are very much in a minority in Irish society, and I don't know how you can justify at all your comment about some men who would say that women are really good at all, never mind in general, at control men's wallets, either personally, or using the force of the State. The men who would say that though are also, thankfully, very much in a minority in Irish society.

rainbow kirby

end of the road wrote: »

quite a bit of vitrial in the uk i believe (if protesting outside clynics fits your description of vitrial

The average person here has a broadly pro-choice stance, after 50 years of the Abortion Act being in place it's generally accepted as an option and a matter of individual choice. There have been a few Tory attempts to bring the gestational limit down to 20 weeks but they have been shot down every time.

The clinic protesters are rightly seen as extremists, are affiliated with groups like SPUC, the Good Counsel Network or 40 Days for Life and there is generally broad support for measures taken against them.

One eyed Jack

rainbow kirby wrote: »

The clinic protesters are rightly seen as extremists, are affiliated with groups like SPUC, the Good Counsel Network or 40 Days for Life and there is generally broad support for measures taken against them.

Yeah I too would see protesters as extremists and I would support any action being taken against them, as I don't believe anyone should be intimidated and harassed no matter whether or not I agree or disagree with their decision that they've made for themselves.

I remember one council, I think it was Ealing, taking legal action to have protesters barred from protesting outside clinics -


Ban on protests outside abortion clinic gets backing from MPs


I could imagine the same would eventually have to happen here if the 8th were repealed.

January

Tigger wrote: »

ive never been an internal combustion engine but i understand how they work and the processes involved
so to say i cant understand pregnency without being pregnant is; i donno justvwrong insuppose.

Come back to me when you've felt a doctor rummaging around your uterus through your abdomen to pull your baby out of you. It's a very, unique, feeling.