The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

ohnonotgmail

Bannasidhe wrote: »

They favoured day-glo colouration back then. Garish and appalling was the order of the day.

looking back on some of the clothes i wore back then i have to agree.

Shadowstrife

_Dara_ wrote: »

You know you can volunteer, right?

Nothing to say that I haven't. Their canvassing hasn't started yet, but I will be there among 'em

It wasnt me123

Ush1 wrote: »

This is the gender politics angle I find odd.

As I said, I'll likely be voting yes.

I don't know what a gender politics angle is - but please don't enlighten me. I've survived this long without knowing, I'll survive a few more years.

Anyway, I digress, its about my body - no politics, no man, no nobody.

Its my body and I want body autonomy - its mine, I can do with it what I like.

gmisk

Ush1 wrote: »

I don't think there will be any, as I said I'm likely going to vote yes.

But things like abortion, same sex marriage etc... do alter the "moral zeitgeist" or whatever you want to call it, of a society. Often for the better, but it's changes none the less.

That's why I don't like when people try to solely frame this with gender politics in this strange adversarial way.

I can kind of see the point you are trying to make here.
Especially the last sentence. I am a man myself and I think this decision will have an impact on mens live as well.

I think you should read some of the stories from the in her shoes facebook page, there is a story on there from a male perspective which I found hugely heartfelt, about a man supporting his partner and it is told from his point of view.

Shadowstrife

'Abortions for some, miniature campaign posters for others.'

- Vote Kang 2018

Ush1

JDD wrote: »

Put it this way. We are at a crossroads. The majority view in this country - up until I would say 10 or 15 years ago - was that the right to life started at conception. This was mostly a cultural view that stemmed from the vast majority of the country being raised with the catholic faith.

A more questioning view has arisen since then, and I think the majority view now is that there is no automatic right to life from conception. Debate remains, and rages, over what time limit should be placed on terminations. That is for another debate.

The question we are being asked now is, as a society (and clearly that includes men), do we agree that the full right to life no longer begins at conception, but begins at some later point (to be determined by widespread debate and ultimately legislation)? And following on that, before that later point occurs, we agree that a termination of a pregnancy is a choice that remains solely with the pregnant person, who happens biologically femaie? The majority of our society, including the men, have to agree that this change has occurred. So you have a very central place in this debate.

Don't be surprised though if a pro-choice poster tells you that you should not have a say in whether a termination does or does not occur before the time limit placed on terminations. That is the pro-choice position. That's not to say that you don't have a place in the debate, to change a constitution which reflects the will of the people, male and female.

As an aside, I have read the policy paper on the draft legislation. It's not like draft legislation at all, it's just bullet points. It so vague, but I don't think they could have made it much more detailed. The detail is for Dail debate, and they can't do that while the 8th is in place.

I think the 12 week time limit will stay but I think there will be huge debate over the 12-24 week period whereby a termination can be availed of if two doctors agree there is a threat to the health of a woman. I wouldn't be in the least surprised if that 24 week limit got dropped to 20. And I wouldn't be surprised either if terminations between 20 and 30 weeks will only be performed if a committee agrees that there is a significant threat to the life or health of the mother. There's huge room to maneuver on that draft legislation.

Agree with everything there. To what you are saying, I think some pro-choice frame it as a debate that men have no place in whatsoever despite in my belief, a huge number of men will vote yes.

Ush1

seamus wrote: »

Pro-life people are worked up about it, because it's about God.

That's it, at the core. God gives you filthy harlots babies, how dare you take them away.

And I don't give a **** if you're not religious. All of those who will reply to this post claiming they're atheists but pro-life, can just **** off.

If there was no religion, there would be no campaign to keep the 8th. That is a fact. There is no irreligious pro-life campaign.

You could be right.

I just think certain elements of the pro choice side are wilfully ignorant of why the issue is contentious, to both men and women. That's all.

gmisk

Ush1 wrote: »

Agree with everything there. To what you are saying, I think some pro-choice frame it as a debate that men have no place in whatsoever despite in my belief, a huge number of men will vote yes.

This is story I was referring to.
https://www.facebook.com/RepealTheEighth/photos/a.142348133106279.1073741828.142243109783448/158030514871374/?type=3
My advice dont read too many of them though they would bring tears to a glass eye!

Also this facebook site
https://www.facebook.com/LadsForChoice/

ohnonotgmail

Ush1 wrote: »

Agree with everything there. To what you are saying, I think some pro-choice frame it as a debate that men have no place in whatsoever despite in my belief, a huge number of men will vote yes.

there are plenty of men involved in the discussion here. I dont see anybody on the pro-choice saying they should be excluded.

Ush1

Bannasidhe wrote: »

It's more a biological angle.

Only one gender gets pregnant therefore it is primarily a issue for/about that gender however, it is also an issue which affects the other gender albeit to a lesser, not physically intrusive, extent.

Can you explain how we can discuss an issue which primarily -and sometimes fatally - is focused on the bodies of one gender without it having a hint of gender politics about it?

As a wee thought experiment replace 'abortion' with 'vasectomy'* - it is illegal to have the snip. It is in the Constitution. Discuss without making it a gendered issue. Off ya go...


*not nearly an equivalent I know but I honestly couldn't think of something that would have as deep an impact on men's health care as the 8th has on women's.

It can have more than a hint.

As Nietzsche said, "if you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares back at you".

Yer Da sells Avon

applehunter wrote: »

John McGuirk has played a stormer.

In what way has the perennial loser impressed you?

Bannasidhe

Ush1 wrote: »

You could be right.

I just think certain elements of the pro choice side are wilfully ignorant of why the issue is contentious, to both men and women. That's all.

True... to an extent.

However, some people are wilfully ignorant of the impact this Amendment has had on the lives of women and just how much f*ucking ANGER has been building for the last 35 years.
Yes, women are venting.
Women are angry.
It might make people uncomfortable but ya know what... so what.
The anger is real. It is justified.

The 8th has never personally affected me or my bodily autonomy but I'm fairly furious it exists.

NyOmnishambles

Ush1 wrote: »

I don't think there will be any, as I said I'm likely going to vote yes.

I am not having a go in any way here but I am just curious

You have stated you are likely to vote yes many times at this stage

What is it that has you as likely as opposed to having decided one way or another?

I would have thought most of the relevant information to make a decision is out there already?

Bannasidhe

Ush1 wrote: »

It can have more than a hint.

As Nietzsche said, "if you stare into the abyss, the abyss stares back at you".

Kant or wont do the thought experiment?

Ush1

NyOmnishambles wrote: »

I am not having a go in any way here but I am just curious

You have stated you are likely to vote yes many times at this stage

What is it that has you as likely as opposed to having decided one way or another?

I would have thought most of the relevant information to make a decision is out there already?

I have a broad understanding of the proposal from what is reported in media but will sit down and read the full nuts and bolts of it before actually casting my vote.

Shadowstrife

I don't think it's true to say that there are no irreligious No voters.

There are plenty of people who object on moral grounds, completely separated from any religion.

Sofiztikated

Ush1 wrote: »

I don't think there will be any, as I said I'm likely going to vote yes.

But things like abortion, same sex marriage etc... do alter the "moral zeitgeist" or whatever you want to call it, of a society. Often for the better, but it's changes none the less.

That's why I don't like when people try to solely frame this with gender politics in this strange adversarial way.

I'm not a big fan of the hate for men some campaigners seem to have, but to be fair, some women have been telling everyone, not just men for a long time that its a step that needs to be taken. So its not a bit of wonder some people get frustrated.

1 in 4 women have a miscarriage at some point, but its still kept quiet, and not talked about. And that's been happening since day dot. So its unlikely that, even with abortion being accessible, people will be singing and dancing about having to have an abortion.

Abortions have been happening for a long time as well, be it a couple of pills, a bottle of gin and a bath, "falling" down stairs, or a concoction of herbs. Do you not think its about time we had a proper think, and try and help these women, rather sticking our fingers in our ears, and pretending it doesn't happen here, in good "Old Catholic Ireland".

Ush1

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Kant or wont do the thought experiment?

I would think about it the exact same way, if there was a proposal to change the constitution with regards to making the snip legal I would welcome womens input greatly.

Funnily enough my wife is currently putting a lot of pressure on me to get the snip! Where's my autonomy?:pac:

captbarnacles

If this was about mens bodily autonomy I would ignore any female input.

Ush1

Sofiztikated wrote: »

I'm not a big fan of the hate for men some campaigners seem to have, but to be fair, some women have been telling everyone, not just men for a long time that its a step that needs to be taken. So its not a bit of wonder some people get frustrated.

1 in 4 women have a miscarriage at some point, but its still kept quiet, and not talked about. And that's been happening since day dot. So its unlikely that, even with abortion being accessible, people will be singing and dancing about having to have an abortion.

Abortions have been happening for a long time as well, be it a couple of pills, a bottle of gin and a bath, "falling" down stairs, or a concoction of herbs. Do you not think its about time we had a proper think, and try and help these women, rather sticking our fingers in our ears, and pretending it doesn't happen here, in good "Old Catholic Ireland".

Yep that's all fine and I'm not petty enough that misplaced anger would sway my vote, but I wonder is that the same for people who might be on the fence?

nozzferrahhtoo

Thing is it is not really about anyone's autonomy at the core of the issue. It is about changing the constitution. A document we ALL "own". And as such regardless of what the topic is, we all have a fully equal say. Regardless of where we draw the lines of autonomy or who the issue ultimately actually affects.

Sofiztikated

Ush1 wrote: »

I would think about it the exact same way, if there was a proposal to change the constitution with regards to making the snip legal I would welcome womens input greatly.

Funnily enough my wife is currently putting a lot of pressure on me to get the snip! Where's my autonomy?:pac:

If you are under 35, and don't already have kids, getting an elective vasectomy can be quite difficult.

Ush1

Sofiztikated wrote: »

If you are under 35, and don't already have kids, getting an elective vasectomy can be quite difficult.

I'm 33 and have two boys(second is a month old) so I'm being coerced, the night feeds and constant crying aren't helping my case much.:D

Zubeneschamali

Shadowstrife wrote: »

There are plenty of people who object on moral grounds, completely separated from any religion.

Are there? Can you name 3?

Hannibal_Smith

Ush1 wrote: »

I would think about it the exact same way, if there was a proposal to change the constitution with regards to making the snip legal I would welcome womens input greatly.

Funnily enough my wife is currently putting a lot of pressure on me to get the snip! Where's my autonomy?:pac:

You have bodily autonomy. You can say no. No one can force you to do it.

Zubeneschamali

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

You have bodily autonomy. You can say no. No one can force you to do it.

Well, as a matter of fact, rapists force women by definition, and at the other end courts force them with court orders, so women get people interfering in their bodily autonomy both legally and illegally.

But you can help with the legal cases by repealing the 8th.

Ush1

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

You have bodily autonomy. You can say no. No one can force you to do it.

Erm, it was just a joke.

Ave Sodalis

Sofiztikated wrote: »

1 in 4 women have a miscarriage at some point, but its still kept quiet, and not talked about. And that's been happening since day dot. So its unlikely that, even with abortion being accessible, people will be singing and dancing about having to have an abortion.

I think it should also be pointed out that up to 50% of all pregnancies are miscarried before 4 weeks, often without the woman realising. There is a 75% chance of miscarriage if you're 45 (up from 35% at age 40) after 4 weeks.

Hannibal_Smith

Ush1 wrote: »

Erm, it was just a joke.

Then I don't get your response to the previous poster. If you wanted to have a vasectomy and the law was to change to make them illegal, how would you discuss it without focusing on one gender?

Hannibal_Smith

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Well, as a matter of fact, rapists force women by definition, and at the other end courts force them with court orders, so women get people interfering in their bodily autonomy both legally and illegally.

But you can help with the legal cases by repealing the 8th.

There are plenty of examples where people are forced to do things by others. My comment was specific to the point the other poster was making regarding vasectomy.