The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

gmisk

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

You are right in your analysis,, the yes posters are very kinda soft compared to the no posters- & just incase anyone asks me no Im not referring to any graphic imagery or anything, for example take this new no poster, its hard hitting blunt & getting right to the point a lot better compared with the soft approach of the yes posters.

I am honestly not that sure poster's will make a huge difference, I think and hope people will do their own research into claims being made before deciding how to vote.

Also the bookies, polls and analysis point to a repeal... So we will see... There have been lots of upsets recently like trump and brexit so every vote important

applehunter

Who are the YES going to put forward for debates?

They may unite under "Together for Yes" but that is a very large umbrella ranging from those that would favour restrictive abortion to those that believe there should be no restrictions.

horseburger

robarmstrong wrote: »

Hi horseburger,

Do you feel a woman should be forced to contend with an unwanted pregnancy to satisfy your personal beliefs/morals?
If your answer is yes:

Do you feel that a woman who has fallen pregnant due to rape should be forced to continue that pregnancy to satisfy the personal beliefs/opinions/morals of those against abortion?
If your answer is yes:

Women travel abroad for abortion every year in Ireland, because of the 8th, these women will not receive proper aftercare and support after the abortion is performed and will have to travel back home and pretty much carry on with their lives. Would you not prefer that if they absolutely HAD to have an abortion, it would be a lot safer in their own country, so they may receive the appropriate aftercare and support that would be required?

I never stated anything about stopping people from having abortions. I never said that people shouldn't have abortions.

I has asked questions relating to how people advocate for abortion and the language that they use to describe abortion in ways that avoid dealing with what abortion involves.

For example describing abortion as a termination of a pregnancy is not accurate, Every birth coincides with a termination of a pregnancy.

Describing abortion as the ending of a pregnancy isn't accurate considering every birth coincides with the ending of a pregnancy.

I find that it defies logic to argue that a foetus is less of a human than humans who develop later.

Why is a foetus considered less of a human just because it happens to be at an earlier stage of human life cycle growth and development?

A five year old child isn't considered any less of a human than a 60 year old adult.

How is something that is created by two separate humans, not human at every stage of its existence?

In this video, around the 14 minute mark, a repeal campaigner has difficulty trying to avoid conceding that the life being ended in an abortion, is a human life. She describes that what is being called for is healthcare, but doesn't seem to want to concede, to the interviewer, that the healthcare sought is a procedure that intentionally ends a human life. The interviewer asks her about use of euphemisms:

Recently on Tonight with Matt Cooper and in this case Gavan Reilly, the reporter Donal Lynch, who is supporting a repeal of the Eight Amendment, addresses the issue, of abortion being described in a way, that he stated is denying the human status of the foetus being aborted.

He mentioned this in an episode of The Claire Byrne Show on RTE One in 2016, by saying that language used by advocates for repeal meant that "the humanity of the foetus is denied even by people who want abortion on demand".

robarmstrong

That's all well and good but try extra hard to answer the questions I've actually asked, rather than share YouTube links.

NuMarvel

lazygal wrote: »

My experience of having tests done in Ireland which were processed in the UK was that the results were sent to my consultant who advised me that further testing ie amniocentesis was required. No mention of termination at that stage. Just the % odds of a possible FFA. I never heard from the lab directly.

I've never heard of a lab contacting a patient directly, and I definitely have never heard of them recommending a particular course of action. I can't see how it would be appropriate either, considering they wouldn't have the patient's medical history. That's why results will usually go back to the patient's doctor, so they can be the ones to discuss the results and the patient's options.

lazygal wrote: »

I don't understand why a doctor in Crumlim got involved. All Dublin maternity hospitals have experts in foetal medicine who are involved in cases where possible or probable abnormalities are identified.

The only reason I can think of is that perhaps the doctor also works out of Crumlin. In general, it's not uncommon for doctors to work out of multiple hospitals, though I'm not sure what type of fetal medicine would be on offer in both a maternity hospital and a children's hospital

applehunter wrote: »

Who are the YES going to put forward for debates?

John McGuirk. He's really a double agent. I can't believe the No side fell for it.

horseburger

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

What?! I didn't even say that!


Okay, well, I'm going to stop replying to you now. You haven't answered a single question given to you, you jump around the topic like a madman to try and avoid anything you don't want to answer, a mod had to tell you to cut out the other crap you were at, and now your tactic is to completely and utterly (and it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if it was purposely) misread posts.

If another poster wants to answer you, good luck to them.

You said that BPAS could speak at the Citizens' Assembly and the Oireachtas Committee on the Eight Amendment, as long as it didn't take a position with regard to the laws on abortion in another country.

BPAS made criticisms of the Irish government in 2013, with regard to abortion laws in Ireland.

Considering it has made criticisms of abortion laws in Ireland, one can well assume that BPAS would be taking a definite position on the upcoming referendum.

https://www.abortionrightscampaign.ie/2013/11/15/bpas-serves-notice-to-the-irish-government/

If BPAS isn't taking an interest in the upcoming referendum, why has it registered the website www.abortion.ie that diverts to the official BPAS website?

The Abortion Rights Campaign item above includes the following text:

"For many of our followers the BPAS notice was an act of solidarity with women in Ireland who have travelled, or who will be obliged to travel to one of their clinics to access abortion services. For other supporters BPAS were directly calling our Government to action, questioning it’s ability to care for women in Ireland by saying – ‘We’ll care for your women until your government does’".

"Those who hold opposing anti-choice views were naturally outraged by the BPAS Notice. They questioned its legality, given Ireland’s strict abortion laws, and in particular – those laws governing access to information on Abortion services. They demanded to know what gave BPAS the right to comment on Irish abortion laws? They declared that the only possible motive for BPAS’ involvement in the Irish abortion debate was financial gain".

"With regards the legality – the BPAS notice was perfectly legal. As the notice did not contain a phone number, an invitation to donate money or details about the services it provides – it is not what the Advertising Standards Authority for Ireland (ASAI) would class as an advertisement nor does it break any laws by providing information on abortion services.
As to BPAS’ right to comment – many of the 4,000 women a year who travel to the UK to have an abortion do so in a BPAS clinic. BPAS are a registered charity in the UK which provides reproductive health services".

"These services include – contraception advice and vasectomy, pregnancy testing and counselling and abortion treatments. The staff in BPAS clinics meet women who have travelled from Ireland every day, and are thus uniquely positioned to comment on situation. They have an insight into the extra burden of stress travelling places on those coming from Ireland compared to the ‘normal’ stresses faced by those who access abortion services from within the UK".

"BPAS have stated publicly that they would prefer it if people in Ireland who want to access abortion services could do so in Ireland. They see the hardship travelling to the UK inflicts on those in their care and they hear first hand the extraordinary logistical difficulties people are required to navigate in order to travel. Be it accessing money; time off work or organising child-care – the stresses heaped on people in an already stressful situation are exacerbated by having to travel from Ireland . BPAS are also acutely aware that many will face difficulty accessing the follow up medical care they need".

You stated:

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

I said the complete opposite. I said nobody outside of the country should be meddling in the referendum of that country, unless they can bring something to the table that nobody in the country can. They are perfectly allowed to have and state their opinions but I don't believe those opinions should have anything to do with a referendum at an official level.

How on earth did you come to the conclusion you did?

You stated:

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

What point did I ignore?



Yes exactly


They can have whatever opinions they want. Just not as a side on the referendum



Good for you? I didn't say they couldn't have opinions. In fact, I specifically said they had a freedom of speech. Just not on an official level on a referendum that has nothing to do with their country.

The organization BPAS has commented on Irish laws on abortion:



Yes actually, I do.



Actually, no. I don't believe she should.


Now, can you please answer the rest of my questions? Nice pulling it off topic in order not to answer by the way

RobertKK

The Gardai are investigating after lots of No posters were illegally taken down.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

RobertKK

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Are they involved in illegal behaviour?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

RobertKK

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I didn't given an opinion. The Gardai are investigating the illegal removal of No posters. You said by the ESB, which means you made a claim they are involved in illegal activity.

gctest50

RobertKK wrote: »

I didn't given an opinion. The Gardai are investigating the illegal removal of No posters. You said by the ESB, which means you made a claim they are involved in illegal activity.

That is some warped logic

Posters that appear on electricity poles will be removed by ESB staff when possible and it is safe to do so.

RobertKK

RobertKK wrote: »

I didn't given an opinion. The Gardai are investigating the illegal removal of No posters. You said by the ESB, which means you made a claim they are involved in illegal activity.

No it's dangerous to place posters on ESB poles and they remove them regularly everytime there's a campaign or election.

So any side that do so are endangering life, ironic when the save the 8th do so.

Ave Sodalis

RobertKK wrote: »

The Gardai are investigating after lots of No posters were illegally taken down.

Link?

pitifulgod

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

You are right in your analysis,, the yes posters are very kinda soft compared to the no posters- & just incase anyone asks me no Im not referring to any graphic imagery or anything, for example take this new no poster, its hard hitting blunt & getting right to the point a lot better compared with the soft approach of the yes posters.

You'll find that plenty of on the fence voters find the no campaign's posters to be outright offensive rather than persuasive.

Can find this

https://kclr96fm.com/pro-life-posters-seized-gardai-kilkenny-following-complaints/

The only link compaints of no campaign posters being reported to the gardai is from the SSM campaign

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/same-sex-marriage-referendum-removal-5573116

Ave Sodalis

DubInMeath wrote: »

Can find this

https://kclr96fm.com/pro-life-posters-seized-gardai-kilkenny-following-complaints/

The only link compaints of no campaign posters being reported to the gardai is from the SSM campaign

https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/same-sex-marriage-referendum-removal-5573116

The second one was the only one I could find too

Ave Sodalis

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

The second one was the only one I could find too

I'm sure Robertkk can provide the link to back up what he said, it might be just the search terms we're using.

Cantona's Collars

Someone has been busy down my way, I've yet to see a single "Vote yes" poster in County Wexford yet the place is plastered with "Vote No" billboards and posters.
Come to think of it,the only repeal posters I did see were 2 on the Longmile Road in Dublin.
The "Vote No" campaign seems to have stolen a march in the visibility stakes.
Personally,I don't like the tone of their posters,there seems to be a huge emphasis on guilt tripping people with images of foetuses etc and messages along the lines of "why would you kill me?".

bertieinexile

John DoeReMi wrote: »

If the poster campaign in Dublin so far is anything to go by then the Repeal campaign have already lost the referendum. The anti - Repeal campaign have had their posters up for about a month now and of course they’re what you’d expect – simple, graphic no nonsense, fear-based messages claiming that repeal is a licence for wholesale baby murder. So far, so predictable. Only in the last fortnight have the pro - Repeal posters begun to appear. It’s bad enough that the pro-Repeal side were behind the ball in launching their campaign but the quality of the messages so far have been dreadful. The Labour party’s two posters – “For Compassion in a Crisis” and “For Women’s Health” are typical of the kind of bland, wishy washy, “let’s not offend anyone” approach common now in all establishment election and referendum campaigns. The worst I’ve seen so far though is the Together For Yes campaign poster – an awful yoke proclaiming “Sometimes a private matter needs public support”.

I thought the first "1 in 5" poster was very good but I was in two minds about the second "License to kill" one until I came face to face with it looking out the upstairs window on a bus. It really packs a punch.

The repeal side posters read like they were written by a committee. Which they were.

“For Compassion in a Crisis” could equally well apply to the unborn child. It's like the people who decided to use it couldn't make that leap of imagination.
I don't understand the "For Women's Health" one. It seems like they missed an opportunity to explain themselves further.
Also it'd be great if they could make the Labour Party logo even bigger. Anyone able to put a word in?

There's a picture on one of the other threads which I can't link to but it's a fairly ironic. It's a save the 8th poster above directions to the ferry to Wales.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

DubInMeath wrote: »

There's a picture on one of the other threads which I can't link to but it's a fairly ironic. It's a save the 8th poster above directions to the ferry to Wales.

Speaking of irony I almost got hit by a car the other day, they were pulling into a carpark across a footpath without looking...had a big love both bumper sticker.

I bet if I was a foetus instead of just a woman they would've seen me

Cantona's Collars

Cantona's Collars wrote: »

Someone has been busy down my way, I've yet to see a single "Vote yes" poster in County Wexford yet the place is plastered with "Vote No" billboards and posters.
Come to think of it,the only repeal posters I did see were 2 on the Longmile Road in Dublin.
The "Vote No" campaign seems to have stolen a march in the visibility stakes.
Personally,I don't like the tone of their posters,there seems to be a huge emphasis on guilt tripping people with images of foetuses etc and messages along the lines of "why would you kill me?".

Pretty much the same during the SSM campaign, No posters greatly out numbered Yes posters, just a matter of funding.

Ave Sodalis

Misael Echoing Horse wrote: »

Speaking of irony I almost got hit by a car the other day, they were pulling into a carpark across a footpath without looking...had a big love both bumper sticker.

I bet if I was a foetus instead of just a woman they would've seen me

I laughed. I shouldn't have laughed but I laughed :pac:

Misael Echoing Horse

Misael Echoing Horse wrote: »

Speaking of irony I almost got hit by a car the other day, they were pulling into a carpark across a footpath without looking...had a big love both bumper sticker.

I bet if I was a foetus instead of just a woman they would've seen me

You didn't happen to be wearing a repeal top at the time were you

Find people leaving the shops are dangerous their mind is on "did I remember the milk, sh1t why is someone walking under my car"

BabyCheeses

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

Link?

DubInMeath wrote: »

I'm sure Robertkk can provide the link to back up what he said, it might be just the search terms we're using.

I found a link after a bit of searching. I think I know why Robert wasn't keen on sharing it.

http://theliberal.ie/garda-investigation-underway-after-numerous-pro-life-posters-have-been-illegally-pulled-down/

bertieinexile

bertieinexile wrote: »

I thought the first "1 in 5" poster was very good but I was in two minds about the second "License to kill" one until I came face to face with it looking out the upstairs window on a bus. It really packs a punch.

The repeal side posters read like they were written by a committee. Which they were.

“For Compassion in a Crisis” could equally well apply to the unborn child. It's like the people who decided to use it couldn't make that leap of imagination.
I don't understand the "For Women's Health" one. It seems like they missed an opportunity to explain themselves further.
Also it'd be great if they could make the Labour Party logo even bigger. Anyone able to put a word in?

1 in 5 has been shown to be inaccurate but that's already been pointed out to you so not sure why you still think its a good one.

robarmstrong

Maybe if buffoons stopped spreading false info across their posters individuals might be inclined to not tear them down, I saw two women tearing one down on Glasnevin the other day while I was out on a stroll with herself, when I asked were they pro-choice they said no, they just don't feel the posters are appropriately representing their pro-life views - the poster in question was of an aborted 20 something week fetus and how the 8th will allow abortions to this stage to happen (even though it's been unanimously agreed that it's 12 weeks).

amdublin

BabyCheeses wrote: »

I found a link after a bit of searching. I think I know why Robert wasn't keen on sharing it.

http://theliberal.ie/garda-investigation-underway-after-numerous-pro-life-posters-have-been-illegally-pulled-down/

Why?

Because of the source? The journal is not exactly reputable. Plus it's also totally pro choice, being ran by Cora Sherlocks brother Leo.

Could that be the reason I wonder??

*sarcasm alert*


Plus that article is pure drivel, reads like it was written by a sixth class student

BabyCheeses

BabyCheeses wrote: »

I found a link after a bit of searching. I think I know why Robert wasn't keen on sharing it.

http://theliberal.ie/garda-investigation-underway-after-numerous-pro-life-posters-have-been-illegally-pulled-down/

Ah a fine example of truth and investigative journalism on every page, why would anyone be afraid of sharing that as evidence.