The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Because he would rather just throw out personal insults.

Best to just report the idiotic posts then put it on ignore.

Agree with the reporting, but I haven't yet put anyone on ignore and don't think I ever will, at least not yet.

For one thing at least with this thread, you'd miss out on some pro lifers making their side of the argument look so bad in terms of outright lies, double standards and bullsh1t that if you weren't already voting repeal you'd probably be convinced to do so.

rainbow kirby

pleas advice wrote: »

Do you trust women from England and Wales? Where there is more than one abortion for every four live births.

I've had two babies in England - I have a 2 year old and 11 week old. The system here trusts women far more than the Irish system does in my experience. Scans were at the right time - 12 and 20 weeks as standard, with growth scans at 35 and 37 weeks with my second when I had some complications. No postcode lottery regarding getting an anatomy scan either. My choices were respected and everything was presented as an offer - I could have declined the antenatal screening, could have refused induction etc, I had my older son in the midwife led unit using the active birth equipment etc. The screening booklet lists TFMR as an option in serious and fatal anomaly cases, no obligation to make any particular choice.

Annasopra

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The problem is information does not equal truth

Kermit.de.frog

I have been weighing up the arguments for myself and I was open to "yes" but i'm falling on the "no" side here principally because I don't know what the term limit would be on abortion. Think this is a fatal flaw in the "yes" campaign. Still time for the "yes" side to convince me.

SusieBlue

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I have been weighing up the arguments for myself and I was open to "yes" but i'm falling on the "no" side here principally because I don't know what the term limit would be on abortion. Think this is a fatal flaw in the "yes" campaign. Still time for the "yes" side to convince me.

It will most likely be a limit of 12 weeks, with an option of requesting one later at a later gestation in cases of FFA or threat to the life of the mother. This was the recommendation of the citizens assembly.

Kermit.de.frog

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I have been weighing up the arguments for myself and I was open to "yes" but i'm falling on the "no" side here principally because I don't know what the term limit would be on abortion. Think this is a fatal flaw in the "yes" campaign. Still time for the "yes" side to convince me.

Here's some info on limits and terms reported, been posted numerous times in the thread but not expecting you to read the whole thread to find it.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/government-will-seek-to-ban-late-term-abortions-1.3440056

Joeytheparrot

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

The problem is information does not equal truth

As the baird said even the devil can quote scripture for his own use.

Can I ask how your finding things on the canvassing front given the latest opinion poll?

Do you find it matches up? I still think it will be close personally.

RobertKK

https://twitter.com/johnburnsst/status/987809157997842432?s=21

Significant fall in support for yes in Dublin with a fall of 8%, yes down to 55% in Dublin.

Overall the Sunday Times has the following with their behaviour and attitudes poll.

Yes 47% (-2%)
No 29% (+2%)
Undecided 21% (+1%)
Won’t vote 3% (-1%)

iguana

rainbow kirby wrote: »

I've had two babies in England - I have a 2 year old and 11 week old. The system here trusts women far more than the Irish system does in my experience. Scans were at the right time - 12 and 20 weeks as standard, with growth scans at 35 and 37 weeks with my second when I had some complications. No postcode lottery regarding getting an anatomy scan either. My choices were respected and everything was presented as an offer - I could have declined the antenatal screening, could have refused induction etc, I had my older son in the midwife led unit using the active birth equipment etc. The screening booklet lists TFMR as an option in serious and fatal anomaly cases, no obligation to make any particular choice.

I spent the first 6 months of my pregnancy in Ireland and the last 3 in the UK and the difference was phenomenal. In Ireland my 'anomaly scan' at 22 weeks (which was the only scan I was offered as routine care) tested for very limited anomalies. The difference in the literature from the HSE and the NHS was phenomenal. There are so many tests routinely performed in the UK that I never even knew existed when I was under HSE care. It caused me so much anxiety because the realisation that I was being deliberately kept in the dark about possible complications was horrific.

But even beyond anomaly testing, the whole system of maternity care is incomparable because of the 8th amendment. The first thing my UK midwife did was give me her mobile number and tell me call her whenever I needed her, if she couldn't answer I'd be transferred to a call team. My midwife spent hours in my home talking about the myriad options the NHS provides. Making sure that we aimed to have the birth I felt most comfortable with. At ante-natal classes there was so much focus on women making the best, most informed decision for them, in terms of where to birth, how to birth, the selection of pain relief, the pros and cons. When my son's birth turned out to be difficult and dangerous, I was kept informed, consulted with, offered more information, only given opinions on the choices I should make when I asked for them. Nobody did anything to me without my informed consent and I was treated at all times like the central person in the room.

And afterwards, almost every single medical professional I dealt with came back to me and asked me how I felt about the treatment they'd provided and if I had any suggestions about anything they should change. I even had a senior doctor come and ask if I'd like for her to arrange a counsellor to come and talk to me. (Which scared the crap out of me for a minute as I thought something awful must have happened if she was so concerned about my mental state.)

The mid-pregnancy switch from one health service where the system does not treat you like a full autonomous person to one that actively fuçking cherishes you was intense. I needed an emergency c-section, my heart rate dropped badly due to the spinal block and I needed adrenaline to keep it going. This made my heart beat faster so I lost a lot of blood and stitching me back up after my son was born took a long time due to excessive bleeding and required a platelet transfer. And I still think of it all as a really positive experience due to just how well I was treated. How informed I was kept, how every question I had was answered to my satisfaction. I have friends who had textbook deliveries here and have horrific memories of it because of how dismissive the medical staff was of them, of how procedures were carried out without their consent. Because they were treated like irrelevant children. Our maternity system is just awful and it's hard to see that when you haven't experienced both sides of it. But it is and that's because of the 8th amendment.

Rjd2

Water John wrote: »

See some GAA players group in support of Voting No. The involvement and use of a lot of children in their launch, totally inappropriate.
Also Mikey Harte of Tyrone, highest profile person I see. But he has no vote himself and lives in a different jurisdiction.

Never ever forget that no matter how good of a manager he is, Mickey Harte is a incredibly unpleasant man.:mad:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/tyrone-boss-harte-gives-reference-for-sex-attacker-29078997.html

gctest50

Rjd2 wrote: »

Never ever forget that no matter how good of a manager he is, Mickey Harte is a incredibly unpleasant man.:mad:.......]

with bad eyesight it seems :

Runbane House has a notorious reputation for clerical sex abuse; Fr. Brendan Smyth was sentenced to ten years for his crimes in the 1990s, while charges against Brother Florence (real name Joseph Scally) were eventually dropped.

Harte has previously claimed that he was oblivious to abuse that went on in Runbane House


https://www.joe.ie/uncategorized/police-questioned-tyrone-manager-over-assault-claims-13592

horseburger

You said

DubInMeath wrote: »

She speaks for people who support and have committed the sexual abuse of children in my opinion

You are citing an article in the Iona Institute website, discussing the seal of confession, as a basis for you saying that Maria Steen supports sexual abuse of children.

DubInMeath wrote: »

They supported him until the end including his stance that having priests should not report knowledge of sexual abuse gained through confession.

https://www.ionainstitute.ie/cardinal-brady-attacked-for-defending-seal-of-confession/

I know your going to try a thread derailment on this, because your about as much on the fence as I am in relation to the 8th, so its going to be my final answer to you on this here, but if you want to discuss by pm fire away, I'll reply when I can.

horseburger

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I have been weighing up the arguments for myself and I was open to "yes" but i'm falling on the "no" side here principally because I don't know what the term limit would be on abortion. Think this is a fatal flaw in the "yes" campaign. Still time for the "yes" side to convince me.

That is the issue that struck me about the Late Late Show item broadcast on RTE One on Friday 16th November 2012.

Caroline Simons stated in the discussion, to Clare Daly, that Clare Daly wants abortion to be available throughout pregnancy.

In response, Clare Daly didn't dispute what Caroline Simons said, but straight way tried to change the subject of discussion away from her views on abortion limits, by answering by stating that the bill she had recently been working on at that time, was only for certain circumstances.

If Clare Daly's stance, is not as wide ranging as outlined by Caroline Simons, why didn't Clare Daly state if she had a view about what limits should be in place, or if she thinks that abortion shouldn't be available beyond a certain point in the pregnancy?

It ended up sounding like Caroline Simons was correct about Clare Daly's views on availability of abortion, that it should be available throughout the whole duration of the pregnancy, but that when Clare Daly responded, she was trying to change the subject, so as to not get into discussing what limits, if any, she would recommend, or if she would have any limits.

Clare Daly often responds to the questions about her views on abortion and on what limits she would recommend, by saying that the decision to have an abortion and at what stage, should be made between a woman and her doctor.

This doesn't detail, if Clare Daly would want any limits at all during pregnancy, on an abortion.

In this item below, Clare Daly made reference to the issue of the decision of abortion, being made between the pregnant woman and her doctor:

https://www.headstuff.org/topical/this-isnt-equality-this-is-control-clare-daly-td-on-repealing-the-8th-amendment/

The article includes the line:

"Decisions for and about our health and our bodies have no place in the
Constitution. We do not live in an equal society where women are trusted to have
a choice regarding their own bodies. When the threat of prison hangs over a
woman and her doctor if she has an abortion here, this is far from equality – it
is control".

Here is an item in The Journal, about the bill that was proposed by Clare Daly in 2012.

http://www.thejournal.ie/clare-daly-abortion-bill-vote-693646-Nov2012/

http://www.thejournal.ie/daly-abortion-bill-how-each-td-voted-694118-Nov2012/

Someone, the other day, asked about Clare Daly's stance on limits on abortion.

Clare Daly addresses this question in this 2012 Late Late Show discussion:

Caroline Simons stated:

"If you look at the bill that Clare introduced earlier this year, She's not
talking about cases where mother's lives are at risk, and I think, we have to
appreciate, you know, Clare you and I have had this debate before. You said that
you think that as a reproductive choice, and as a matter of personal autonomy, a
woman should be entitled to choose to have an abortion, for whatever reasons she
wants, throughout pregnancy. And I think we have to be very clear that,
that being the case, I think we need to reflect very carefully. I'm very glad
that the Minister and Taoiseach, have decided not to rush into anything, in view
of where we are this week".

Clare Daly responded:

"Obviously, that is, I do support a pro choice position, but the
legislation I introduced, and I was quite open about it, could only deal with
the very narrow specifics of providing for abortion in Ireland where the life of
a woman was in danger, so, you know, that was the restrictive nature, and I
was actually apologetic that it was so restrictive. But to say that it opened
the floodgates, and would allow unlimited abortion, is absolutely
ludicrous. And it is reflective of the sort of hype and hysteria that
surrounds this issue, which really we should be discussing quite calmly and
rationally, because it affects so many families".

I presume, if Clare Daly wanted to question what Caroline Simons stated, about Clare Daly's stance - where Caroline Simons said about Clare Daly:

"You said that you think that as a reproductive choice, and as a matter of personal autonomy, a woman should be entitled to choose to have an abortion, for whatever reasons she wants, throughout pregnancy

- she had time to reply.

If Caroline Simons had inaccurately described Clare Daly's stance, Clare Daly had time to correct it.

P_1

TBH the Yes campaign should really be highlighting the other issues that the 8th causes for women (aside from choice). I'd imagine a lot of undecided voters would be swayed towards yes if the fact that a woman can be denied cancer treatment if they are pregnant was given more prominence for example, or that women are routinely tested for pregnancy before any surgery and the treatment plan offered to them can drastically change as a result of this.

NuMarvel

RobertKK wrote: »

https://twitter.com/johnburnsst/status/987809157997842432?s=21

Significant fall in support for yes in Dublin with a fall of 8%, yes down to 55% in Dublin.

Overall the Sunday Times has the following with their behaviour and attitudes poll.

Yes 47% (-2%)
No 29% (+2%)
Undecided 21% (+1%)
Won’t vote 3% (-1%)

So the results are relatively unchanged from their last poll, with Yes at 62% when you exclude don't knows. I'd still prefer to see a larger lead myself, to have more reassurance, but it shows that a strong Yes campaign will see this over the line.

But the key message this polls sends is that the No campaign, despite starting much earlier, isn't having an impact. That's what the Irish Times poll shows as well. Their core support has been previously estimated to be at the 25/30% mark, and they're clearly not reaching beyond that with their "Licence to Kill?" and "1 in 5" messages. I'm sure the rest of their campaign was planned to be equally over the top, so they'll have to jettison that and rethink their strategy if they want to be sure of a win.

Sofiztikated

Ah, horseburger, I see you're back.

So I guess I was right in my judgement of you?

Sofiztikated wrote: »

@horseburger

You haven't lied. You haven't given your own opinion on anything, nor posted anything of substance for us to determine if YOU have lied.

We've asked you countless times, even myself a few days ago had to ask you three times what you though,long before this latest 3 page back and forth between you and rob, to which you replied, but edited out the question.

We, on the other hand, have laid out in various levels of minute detail, how the 8th affects us, our loved ones, colleagues, people we meet every day but don't know their names, and people we have never met.

Noone is saying pregnancy and procreation aren't important. The human race depends on it, and to be honest, riding is great craic. I can't wait to have a child with my wife, we've only had one pregnancy, which ended in a missed miscarriage, and are possibly looking into IVF, but man that's hella expensive. But even if, after all that time, and considerable expense, if she requires a termination, I'd really rather she had it here safely, than somewhere else. Do we want children, absolutely, but is that potential baby, the carrier of my name, and one which is looking to be slipping day by day, worth the risk to her health and well being? I know I'd rather have my wife healthy and happy (given a level of happiness, seeing as she'll have just lost a chance at being a mother) than my wife is poor health or worse, and a child to look after, and IVF bills to pay.

I have 2 questions, I would appreciate a genuine answer, if you we be so kind.

1. In your opinion, if we vote to keep the 8th, how does our situation improve? Give me a reason to vote no. Sell it to me.

2. What do you (not someone else, you horseburger) think benefits of repealing the 8th might be? Do you see see why our situation gives us reason to vote yes?

I've been polite, but if you respond with your usual "someone said" and "I heard" bluff and hours of video (seriously, have you actually watched them all, or do you just have it written down because someone told you?), I'm just going to write you off as that belligerent, old fool, that shouts and rants at people, and any genuine things he might have to say, gets lost in a cloud of spittle and bile.

Please and thank you.

horseburger

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So no evidence whatsoever that BPAS or Marie Stopes are planning on setting up in Ireland? Yet we have people like you quoting them as if they have bought properties here already to open.

Between That and your ridiculous "this happens in Germany " and "oh look at the statistics in Canada and Australia " arguments you have managed to successfully derail this thread more times than I care to count.

Your latest "show me where I said that" tirade over 3 pages was probably one of the most blatant attempts yet to get the thread closed. Hopefully more people have seen through you as I have and have reported your posts for derailing the thread.

We get it, you're pro-life to the bone. How about actually debating the issue now instead of trying to shut down the debate?

Wouldn't setting up two .ie websites be needless, if BPAS does not intend establishing itself in Ireland?

Do the New York Times or Washington Post newspapers have .ie websites?

www.newyorktimes.ie

www.washingtonpost.ie

Do the BBC or Channel 4 have .ie websites?

It would seem not.

http://www.channel4.ie/

https://www.theguardian.ie/ does not divert to www.guardian.com

www.bbc.ie diverts to a page that does not work, http://bogons.bbc.co.uk/public.shtml

www.abortion.ie and www.bpas.ie each work, as does www.bpas.co.uk

www.metalhammer.co.uk diverts to https://www.loudersound.com/metal-hammer.

www.metalhammer.ie diverts to nothing.

www.https://www.qthemusic.ie/ does not divert to https://www.qthemusic.com.

I don't recall, in my posts, mentioning, in any great detail, the issue of abortion services and statistics in Australia or Canada, but thanks for bringing it to my attention.

horseburger

horseburger wrote: »

Caroline Simons stated in the discussion, to Clare Daly, that Clare Daly wants abortion to be available throughout pregnancy.

In response, Clare Daly didn't dispute what Caroline Simons said, but straight way tried to change the subject of discussion away from her views on abortion limits, by answering by stating that the bill she had recently been working on at that time, was only for certain circumstances.

If Clare Daly's stance, is not as wide ranging as outlined by Caroline Simons, why didn't Clare Daly state if she had a view about what limits should be in place, or if she thinks that abortion shouldn't be available beyond a certain point in the pregnancy?

I'm sure this has already been clarified in the thread, but at present, there is no gestational limit to terminations under the Protection of Life in Pregnancy Act.

But that doesn't mean a foetus can be destroyed at any stage during the pregnancy. It means that the pregnancy can be terminated at any stage, i.e. a medical team will assess the pregnancy and determine how to end it, depending on viability and the gestational age of the foetus.

i'm surprised that anyone thinks there is any significant support for destruction of foetuses up until birth, and I doubt that Clare Daly supports this.

In any case, it probably is something that should be clarified and codified in whatever legislation replaces the 2013 Act. I assume the reason it hasn't previously been codified was so as not to interfere with medical decision-making, since the IMC guidelines and the 8th Amendment already describe the right to life of the unborn quite adequately.

volchitsa

horseburger wrote: »

Wouldn't setting up two .ie websites be needless, if BPAS does not intend establishing itself in Ireland?

Do the New York Times or Washington Post newspapers have .ie websites?

www.newyorktimes.ie

www.washingtonpost.ie

Do the BBC or Channel 4 have .ie websites?

It would seem not.

However if RTE didn't exist, and the BBC and other British broadcasters had been providing an Irish service from the UK for thirty odd years, replying to specifically Irish questions etc, it would be strange for them to take no part in discussions around and preparation for setting up an Irish broadcasting service.

NuMarvel

horseburger wrote: »

Wouldn't setting up two .ie websites be needless, if BPAS does not intend establishing itself in Ireland?

It's probably more to do with the fact that Irish people make up the majority of people who travel to Britain for abortion services (68% in 2016). But I'm sure you won't let that stop you putting two and two together and getting 52.

horseburger

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I'm sure this has already been clarified in the thread, but at present, there is no gestational limit to terminations under the Protection of Life in Pregnancy Act.

But that doesn't mean a foetus can be destroyed at any stage during the pregnancy. It means that the pregnancy can be terminated at any stage, i.e. a medical team will assess the pregnancy and determine how to end it, depending on viability and the gestational age of the foetus.

i'm surprised that anyone thinks there is any significant support for destruction of foetuses up until birth, and I doubt that Clare Daly supports this.

In any case, it probably is something that should be clarified and codified in whatever legislation replaces the 2013 Act. I assume the reason it hasn't previously been codified was so as not to interfere with medical decision-making, since the IMC guidelines and the 8th Amendment already describe the right to life of the unborn quite adequately.

hi,
thanks for your reply.

I think it is striking, though, that in that particular discussion on the 16th November 2012 episode of the Late Late Show, that Clare Daly had an opportunity, to clearly state her position, but didn't.

She could have interrupted Caroline Simons, before Caroline Simons stated, what she believes is the stance held, by Clare Daly.

But then Clare Daly changed the discussion to the bill that she proposed, with regard to abortion in certain cases.

It seems to me that Clare Daly is being vague, when she is asked about it, in clarifying if she thinks there should be limits at all, on abortion.

I think one of the most concerning issues about abortion is the issue highlighted by Peter Fitzpatrick, of cases of abortions being done on grounds, suggested by the abortion clinic staff, to the pregnant woman, in cases where the original ground requested, is not permitted under the legislation, in the jurisdiction, in which the abortion clinic is located.

I say that because if it occurs that different grounds like mental health are applicable, then it can't be stated - for example by Ivana Bacik on RTE Prime Time on 18th January 2018, two months after the Dail Committee dialogue between Peter Fitzpatrick on 22nd November 2017 - that abortion will not occur in cases of Down's Syndrome, as outlined by Maria Steen.

I think its disappointing that, in her case for abortion provision, that Bríd Smith TD, made that ridiculous comment on the Vincent Browne show that until the baby is born it is a "potential human being".

I was disappointed by her style of rationale n this issue, since she was really good in challenging Regina Doherty in the Dáil, regarding her comments, and the comments by Leo Varadkar on issues relating to exaggerations made by Fine Gael in relation to social welfare fraud.

Ruth Coppinger was really good in challenging Regina Doherty on this issue, but I find their arguments for endorsing abortion, unsettling.

Three is coverage of their Dáil presentations, on oireachtas.ie on the issue of exaggerated claims regarding Social Welfare fraud, but I can't remember what date the particular discussion was held, so I will have a look.

Did neither Ruth Coppinger or Bríd Smith find that BPAS Medical Director Patricia Lohr's response to Peter Fitzpatrick - about carrying out abortions on requested, but not permitted grounds of "foetal sex", being carried out under another ground - to be disturbing?

Why are they not as inquisitive on the issues relating to abortion, as they are on other issues?

They use conflicting language in their arguments for wider provision of abortion.

I mean, Ruth Coppinger interjected when Eamon O'Cuiv was speaking on 7th March 2017 in Dáil Éireann, to say that a pregnant woman is not a mother until the baby is born, and on the Thursday 6th July 2017 episode of Tonight with Vincent Browne, Brid Smith said that she doesn't regard that the foetus is a human being until its born, but at the same time describes the pregnant woman as a mother.

If Fine Gael TDs used euphemistic and contradictory language like this, in relation to any other issue, Ruth Coppinger and Brid Smith, would verbally tear them asunder.

Here is the Vincent Browne show from 6th July 2017

https://www.tv3.ie/3player/show/41/128607/0/Tonight-with-Vincent-Browne

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHtpWBsH378

Here is Eamon O'Cuiv's address in the Dáil on 7th March 2017, where he was interrupted by Ruth Coppinger, and the page of the transcript of the dialogue between Ruth Coppinger and Eamon O'Cuiv:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SwEoFXGHeNs

http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=34782&&CatID=130&StartDate=01 January 2017&OrderAscending=0

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2017030700050?opendocument

horseburger

NuMarvel wrote: »

It's probably more to do with the fact that Irish people make up the majority of people who travel to Britain for abortion services (68% in 2016). But I'm sure you won't let that stop you putting two and two together and getting 52.

.co.uk websites can be accessed online, in Ireland.

I've given examples of websites, of companies located outside Ireland, that don't also have a .ie website.

NuMarvel

horseburger wrote: »

.co.uk websites can be accessed online, in Ireland.

I know how the internet works, thanks.

horseburger wrote: »

I've given examples of websites, of companies located outside Ireland that don't also have a .ie website.

I saw. My point still stands because they don't have people traveling to their base of operations to use their services. BPAS having a .ie website is no different in practice from dental services in eastern Europe doing the same, eg http://www.cheapdentist.ie.

Plus, it also stops anti-choice activists from using the domain names for their own purposes, which they have form in: http://www.thejournal.ie/eighth-website-conflict-3818537-Jan2018/.

I'm don't expect any of this will change your mind. You're convinced there's some conspiracy going on, and people who didn't reason themselves into a position can't be reasoned out of them. But the fact remains, that there isn't a sliver of evidence to support your claims, and there's plenty of evidence to contradict you.

amdublin

An interesting analogy from a writer (Taryn De Vere) on Facebook. Worth a read



"In April 2018 a man arrived at the A&E. He was bleeding and the triage nurse said because of the wound type there was the possibility of an infection.
"So now we'd like you to go home and wait." The nurse said, ushering him out the door.
"Wait for what?" said the man, still bleeding and in pain.
"For it to get worse." The nurse said.
"What? No." Said the man, now getting quite irritated. "I want to be treated now. I want you to stitch me up and give me something so I don't get an infection!"
"I'm sorry Sir, you just have to wait." Said the nurse, growing impatient.
"Wait for what?" The man asked.
"For it to get worse. We cannot treat you until your life is at risk." The nurse said.

"My LIFE!" yelled the man, really angry now. "You're saying you can't help me now, before I even get infected, you have to wait until the infection is so bad that I'm at death's door??"
"That's the law Sir." Said the nurse. "We are legally obliged to wait until your life is at risk. Now please go home and wait. Come back as SOON as you feel close to death and we'll treat you immediately, ok?"

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Nowhere else in medicine are we forced to withhold a safe procedure until someone is dying."
- Obstetric Doctor and Professor Louise Kenny

Right now, in Ireland a woman's life must be at risk before she can access an abortion. A blood infection can spread very quickly, it can and has killed women who were denied abortions when they needed one. We wouldn't accept this for any other person in need of medical attention, so why do we care so little for the lives of pregnant people?

Every person in Ireland who has the capacity to become pregnant is at risk from the 8th amendment. It is a dangerous law that has killed before and will kill again.

Please #VoteYes in the upcoming referendum."

Ken.

Mod-Horseburger, you've had more than enough chances in this thread. DO NOT POST HERE AGAIN. Reason- ignoring mod warnings

Samuel T. Cogley Don't post again-Reason-trolling

Blahblah2012 Don't post again- Reason-trolling

Annasopra

eeepaulo wrote: »

Has there been much online advertising?

I dont do facebook and use an ad blocker so i basically dont see adverts.

Facebook has a lot see tref.ie

Pro life also targeting games like candy crush and angry birds

Annasopra

BarleySweets wrote: »

Like the previous reply said, bite your lip, there’s no point in falling out with each other over an issue that’ll be resolved one way or the other in 5 weeks time.

In the meantime, if you really want to have a discussion about it with your family, maybe print out some of the In Her Shoes stories and ask their opinion on them in a non-confrontational way?

They have a little book from in her shoes. Maybe see if you can get a copy.

Annasopra

Kk333 wrote: »

Haha best of look if he does that. Dont mess with grannies.

Many grandparents are open to discussion on this issue. My experience is actually a lot of older people are voting yes because they have their own experiences with the 8th and with family with the 8th.

baylah17

Kk333 wrote: »

Haha best of look if he does that. Dont mess with grannies.

My Mum is 84 Catholic and a mass goer
She votes Yes in 1983
She voted Yes for Divorce in 1995
She voted Yes to Marraige Equality
She is voting Yes to repeal the 8th
Dont presume that because a woman is old or religious they will just vote like sheep!

seenitall

So, she changed her mind on the 8th from 1983 to 2018?

Hopefully there are plenty more like her.