The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Trasna1

bear1 wrote: »

They are free to vote in our elections but they are not resident within the state, hence why I can't vote and I've spent most of life living in Galway.
I see no reason for a referendum such as this to be tossed around into a jurisdiction which belongs to the UK.
It would be like Ireland having the right to vote on Brexit.
Referendum should and just be contained to those citizens which spend the majority of their time in the south.
I don't seem to recall much noise from the north when we had the Lisbon referendum or the gay marriage referendum.
I'd be terrified that including those in the north would lead to the pro life campaign winning.

I think it would be perverse if NI resident citizens were given a vote similar to the yes campaign shipping in sympathetic former residents of questionable eligibility.

At least my position is consistent, a lot of people here seem to have no problem with non-resident voters participating illegally as long as they are going to vote the "right" way.

Zubeneschamali

thee glitz wrote: »

If all pregnancies can be deemed to be risking the life of the woman, this suggests that there would be practically no restrictions.

I this were true, the 8th would have made no-restriction abortion available after the judgement in the X case in 1992.

But this is not true, as you well know.

Trasna1

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I this were true, the 8th would have made no-restriction abortion available after the judgement in the X case in 1992.

But this is not true, as you well know.

But was that not because the 8th amendment gave the unborn a right to life which had to be balanced with the rights of the mother? Without the 8th no balancing of rights would have to occur, and therefore term limits would be set by legislation rather than constitutional restriction.

Correct me if my understanding is incorrect, genuinely.

Zubeneschamali

Trasna1 wrote: »

But was that not because the 8th amendment gave the unborn a right to life which had to be balanced with the rights of the mother?

If a pregnancy was a threat to the life of the mother, abortion is already legal. We have heard endlessly from the prolifers about how the 8th did not kill Savita Hallapanavar for this reason, and that the team just screwed up.

We did not see mass abortion across the Irish medical system as ghoulish doctors jumped at the chance to abort 30 week pregnancies by claiming a threat to the mothers life.

Yet this is what Thee Glitz is "just askin" about with the new law - the idea that the medical profession will lie and say women's lives or health are at risk in order to break the law. Eh, no.

kylith

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If a pregnancy was a threat to the life of the mother, abortion is already legal. We have heard endlessly from the prolifers about how the 8th did not kill Savita Hallapanavar for this reason, and that the team just screwed up.

As we know the 8th killed her because by the time her life was deemed at risk, rather than ‘just’ her health, the infection was already too far gone to save her. If the pregnancy had been terminated when she presented with a prolonged miscarriage she would almost certainly still be alive, but the medical team’s hand were tied by the 8th because there was still a foetal heartbeat.

I would recommend that people who donmt think that the 8th impacts many, many women should have a read of the In Her Shoes Facebook page; there are plenty of stories from women who are having miscarriages where the foetal heartbeat is down to 2/3 bpm (normal is around 130bpm) and are told there’s nothing can be done even though the foetus is doomed, and they have to keep going back for scam to check if it’s totally dead yet.

Trasna1

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I do think it is fascinating that you have people hopping up and down about pro choice people coming home to vote but not the fact that Family and Life has a full time employee in the UK organising people in the UK to come home to vote. Slight double standards.

Whoever you are aiming that remark at, quote them. Fwiw, I made no distinction between the campaigns. Pro life or pro choice, neither should be encouraging illegal activity undermining the process. I voted for SSM but I was very critical of home to vote at the time.

The vote is likely to be tight so I imagine, if a couple of thousand pro lifers flying in swung it, you'd be fairly upset and rightly so. The process has to be fair.

Sofiztikated

To be honest, I'm not a big fan of people, who have no intention of returning to Ireland, voting in any way to influence policy in Ireland.

I get why people do it, but I still think it's wrong. I think it should be representative of the people present within the country on that day.

It sucks for those that have no vote in the country they reside in, but that's an issue between them and their resident country.

But as it's so vague, the left or returning within 18 months, it's hard to police.

JDD

That constitutional case taken by the NI crowd doesn't have a leg to stand on. It's not enough to be a citizen to get a right to vote. The constitution clearly states that you must be a citizen AND be resident in one of the constituencies as set out under legislation. So unless the NI citizens are going to take a case saying that the legislation that sets out the voting districts is unconstitutional then I think they're on a hiding to nowhere. The only people that come out as winners from that case is the instructing law firm.

I agree with the posters from both sides that say those coming home to vote, who do not fit the eligibility requirements, should not vote. I'm sure Timberrrs heart is in the right place, but in my view it's exactly the same as attempting to vote twice. It's voter fraud, plain and simple. Having said that, anyone and everyone who is eligible to vote and is living abroad I would welcome home to vote.

And this whole "abortion will be allowed right up to full term if a doctor says there's a threat to the health of the mother" is nonsense. After 24 weeks it won't be an abortion, it will be an early induction with a live birth. TWO doctors will have to agree on the early induction. The policy paper is admittedly fairly sparse on what constitutes a threat to the health of the mother, but I assume the actual legislation will have more detail on that. It won't be any threat to the health, because there is a threat to the health of any pregnant woman in continuing to be pregnant. That being said, I don't think they'll say that it has to be a serious threat to the health of the mother, because that introduces that ambiguity again. What constitutes a serious threat? One doctors definition will be different to another's. This is when we do get down to the nitty gritty of trusting a pregnant woman and her doctor to make the right decision.

amdublin

Can you help? (Aka...want to see more posters for prochoice?)

Crowd funding has gone live. Wow, achieved goal of €100k in just 4 hours. Are going to keep going to try get to €150k

Can you support?
https://togetherforyes.causevox.com/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=cf1

_Dara_

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

People who are not legally eligible to vote should not vote. I can certainly agree with you on that much. If a result got over turned because of voter fraud then that would be blood on the hands of anyone who committed that fraud.

Anyone who is eligible should absolutely return to vote however, so you have simply phrased this badly here. The mediation point should be their eligibility, not their physical location. Irish citizens can and should of course return to vote.

Eligibility is bound up in both citizenship and residency requirements. I think many people abroad would not know if they are still ordinarily residence in Ireland. If they live elsewhere, probably not. Ordinary residence is quickly lost.

But those people living abroad who are not ordinarily resident could still be on the register of whatever polling station they last voted in. I'll be voting in the polling station in my old primary school as I was living at home the last time I voted in 2011 as I'm still on the register there. (Was seriously ill during the MarRef) I've been living in Ireland the whole time so that's fine. But someone could similarly find themselves on a register but have lived out of the country for five years. They could still come home to vote but it would be fraud as they won't have ordinary residence which has a very strict definition. That's a problem.

JDD wrote: »

That constitutional case taken by the NI crowd doesn't have a leg to stand on. It's not enough to be a citizen to get a right to vote. The constitution clearly states that you must be a citizen AND be resident in one of the constituencies as set out under legislation. So unless the NI citizens are going to take a case saying that the legislation that sets out the voting districts is unconstitutional then I think they're on a hiding to nowhere. The only people that come out as winners from that case is the instructing law firm.

My thoughts too. Of course she's being encouraged. Ching ching!

NuMarvel

amdublin wrote: »

Can you help? (Aka...want to see more posters for prochoice?)

Crowd funding has gone live. Wow, achieved goal of €100k in just 4 hours. Are going to keep going to try get to €150k

Can you support?
https://togetherforyes.causevox.com/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=cf1

At this rate they'll have money for more posters than poles!

Also, saw my first TogetherForYes poster on the way to work today. It looks good.

nozzferrahhtoo

_Dara_ wrote: »

Eligibility is bound up in both citizenship and residency requirements. I think many people abroad would not know if they are still ordinarily residence in Ireland.

Indeed. A user earlier asked me how did we know who was eligible or not during the SSM project we ran for the Irish Voters in the UK

And one of the many answers to that question is: They asked us. And we worked out with them if they were or not. Showed them how to check the register and so forth. It was not that they claimed to be eligible to vote and we took their word for it. It is they came to us to ask us to help them find out if they were.

bertieinexile

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

This new fact based website by Fiona De Londras and Mairead Enright addresses a number of points in this thread raised by many such as Bertie in Exile

https://aboutthe8th.com/

If you look at fiona and mairead's website you will see that their answer to thee glitz's question of whether abortion would be available on "spurious mental health grounds" up to 24 weeks - the answer that impressed Joeytheparrot so much - is simply to say that the wording of Harris's proposed legislation concerning mental health grounds is different than in england.

This is exactly the same point made here by PhoenixParker but PhoenixParker made some effort to tease out the implications of that difference in wording.
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106662540&postcount=3490

My reply to that, does it really need to be repeated, was
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106666305&postcount=3541

Any discussion we might have about the legal distinction between between "injury" and ""serious harm" is completely irrelevant from a practical point of view.
Why?
Because it will be left up to Marie Stopes clinics to worry about that difference.
And based on how they operate in england it is safe to say they don't care.

I don't remember any attempt to directly counter that, just a claim that Marie Stopes mightn't want to come here and finally

Joeytheparrot wrote:

Yeah ok they might set up here...

Now when thee glitz asks

The Government’s proposal is that abortion will be available up to viability of the foetus where two doctors certify that there is a risk to the life of the pregnant woman. If all pregnancies can be deemed to be risking the life of the woman, this suggests that there would be practically no restrictions.

numarvels answer is that what in practice would amount to abortion on demand/request up to viability is OK by him/her

If a woman believes her pregnancy is a risk to her life, and two appropriately qualified doctors agree and say an abortion will mitigate or eliminate that risk, then I am happy to trust that woman and her doctors.

.

In a nutshell

PhoenixParker wrote:

But there’s one very important point that you’re missing:
Irish Law is not U.K. Law.
That is all.

me wrote:

It will be left up to Marie Stopes clinics to worry about that difference.
And based on how they operate in england it is safe to say they don't care.

Which of those two is going to matter?

You can only vote yes if you are comfortable with abortion on demand/request up to 24 weeks.

dudara

amdublin wrote: »

Can you help? (Aka...want to see more posters for prochoice?)

Crowd funding has gone live. Wow, achieved goal of €100k in just 4 hours. Are going to keep going to try get to €150k

Can you support?
https://togetherforyes.causevox.com/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=cf1

Just put €50 in the pot. This is a very important campaign.

amdublin

dudara wrote: »

Just put €50 in the pot. This is a very important campaign.

I just put €20. I am donating separately 8 for 8 for the 8th (8 euro per month for 8 months)

I swear it's just jumped up €10k on my lunch break alone. We can do this!

Trust women!
Repeal the 8th

ELM327

dudara wrote: »

Just put €50 in the pot. This is a very important campaign.

Just donated aswell.
Have to try to defeat the dirty dollars in the no camp from the US!

One of the most important issues of our time, a no vote will push us back to the dark days of baby killing catholic Ireland (oh the irony). When Amnesty International are telling you your constitution is barbaric you know they are right and it needs to change.

baylah17

bertieinexile wrote: »

You can only vote yes if you are comfortable with abortion on demand/request up to 24 weeks.

You can only vote NO is you believe that women cannot be trusted to know whats best for themselves and/or you believe that women lack the mental or emotional capacity to make value judgements!

ohnonotgmail

bertieinexile wrote: »

If you look at fiona and mairead's website you will see that their answer to thee glitz's question of whether abortion would be available on "spurious mental health grounds" up to 24 weeks - the answer that impressed Joeytheparrot so much - is simply to say that the wording of Harris's proposed legislation concerning mental health grounds is different than in england.

This is exactly the same point made here by PhoenixParker but PhoenixParker made some effort to tease out the implications of that difference in wording.
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106662540&postcount=3490

My reply to that, does it really need to be repeated, was
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106666305&postcount=3541
I don't remember any attempt to directly counter that, just a claim that Marie Stopes mightn't want to come here and finally



Now when thee glitz asks
numarvels answer is that what in practice would amount to abortion on demand/request up to viability is OK by him/her
.

In a nutshell


Which of those two is going to matter?

You can only vote yes if you are comfortable with abortion on demand/request up to 24 weeks.

you're just repeating yourself and convincing nobody.

bertieinexile

Zubeneschamali has made the following point

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

... we are dealing here with the Irish Medical establishment, who could, ever since the X case judgement in 1992, have performed abortions here by falsely claiming the mothers life was at risk.

For some reason, they never did that, yet Bertie thinks they will falsely claim there is a threat of serious harm to flighty-headed young wans who feel like an abortion during their lunchbreak at 24 weeks for no reason at all.

It is nonsense.

I wasn't sure if it was a serious question but (s)he has repeated it twice more so I take it it must be.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106666753&postcount=3551

they should have set up shop in Ireland in 1992, since the 8th made abortion legal here when the woman's life is in danger. According to yourself, these people have no problem lying about reasons for abortion, so why didn't they do as you suggest then?

Because you are talking out of your pants, that's why.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106681151&postcount=3697

We have heard endlessly from the prolifers about how the 8th did not kill Savita Hallapanavar [because if there is a threat to the life of the mother, abortion is already legal], and that the team just screwed up.

We did not see mass abortion across the Irish medical system as ghoulish doctors jumped at the chance to abort 30 week pregnancies by claiming a threat to the mothers life.

The difference, since it apparently needs to be said, is that a doctor signing medical certificates saying a woman is suffering from septicemia or has an ectopic pregnancy - when she clearly isn't or doesn't - is going to be struck off.
That really needed to be said?

But who is ever going to get struck off for signing a medical cert saying that in their opinion there would have been a threat of serious harm to a woman's mental health if her pregnancy had been allowed to continue?
Would it cost them a thought? Especially since they are convinced they are doing the right thing.
All the abortion clinics need is an opening.

You can only vote Yes if you are comfortable with abortion on demand/request up to 24 weeks.
(As it's becoming increasingly clear a number of people on this thread are.)

rainbow kirby

Just donated. Best I can do right now to help while living in London with two tiny kids!

BabysCoffee

€127,000 raised for Yes posters already!!!

What a phenomenal response :-)

ELM327

BabysCoffee wrote: »

€127,000 raised for Yes posters already!!!

What a phenomenal response :-)

It's gone up €10k since I made my donation a few minutes ago!

#trustourwomen
#trustourdoctors
#repealthe8th

BabysCoffee

It seems to be going up by 500 euro every minute or two!!

And once everyone comes home from work I'm sure the donations will pour in.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

hatrickpatrick

NuMarvel wrote: »

At this rate they'll have money for more posters than poles!

Also, saw my first TogetherForYes poster on the way to work today. It looks good.

They need more than posters, they need to start putting out some video ads to counter that omnipresent "as a doctor" BS. But as I said a few pages back, IMO they should do that in moderation. Nothing pisses people off more than ads which come up too often, which is already happening with that pro-life ad.

NuMarvel

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

They need more than posters, they need to start putting out some video ads to counter that omnipresent "as a doctor" BS. But as I said a few pages back, IMO they should do that in moderation. Nothing pisses people off more than ads which come up too often, which is already happening with that pro-life ad.

I think it's a given they'll do more than posters, and online ads will probably be just one of the avenues they use. But posters are a good way to generate coverage and to get attention. And I'd imagine they're going to have at least one more wave of posters before the campaign ends.

But they can't do anything if they don't have money, and realistically, they need that money sooner than later.

Yeah_Right

I'm not eligible to vote even though I've lived here for over a decade. Purely because I couldn't be arsed going through the process and paperwork of becoming a citizen. I can understand why citizens who aren't residents are coming back to vote because it is something that effects their families and their friends. I realise that it's illegal but I understand why they would do it.

The NI people going to court to get the right to vote in this referendum are as moronic as the people in the Republic protesting the verdict of a trial in Belfast.

Mr. CooL ICE

Just paid for 5 posters there myself

captbarnacles

BabysCoffee wrote: »

€127,000 raised for Yes posters already!!!

What a phenomenal response :-)

Incredible considering Bertie repeated his nonsense argument again! I thought that last repeat would be the clincher for most people.

Triceratops Ballet

150k raised!!