Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Options
1…278279281283284…325

Comments

  • Options
    #8402
    gmisk
    Registered Users Posts: 33,081 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    I suppose from my POV I think the voters and constituents will make sure politicians wont go too far as you put it in either direction.

    No problem at all :)

    I think in fairness a lot of people here have personal very real experience with regards this area, where as I really don't, so i can see why they would be so very passionate about it.


  • Options
    #8403
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    professore wrote: »
    Ideally I'd like to see it replaced with some kind of statement in the constitution around the 12 weeks, FFA, mother's health and then allow legislation around that. What the citizens assembly recommended.

    The Assembly specifically voted against that type of amendment and favoured an amendment that would allow the Oireachtas to decide the law. These are the two options they voted on:

    Option A - Article 40.3.3° should be replaced with a constitutional provision that explicitly authorises the Oireachtas to legislate to address termination of pregnancy, any rights of the unborn and any rights of the pregnant woman.

    Option B - Article 40.3.3° should be replaced or amended with a constitutional provision that directly addresses termination of pregnancy, any rights of the unborn and any rights of the pregnant woman.

    57% went for Option A, and that's what's on the ballot paper. This was all covered recently in the thread by the way. Maybe you should take the time out to review the thread, so we're not all rehashing old ground


  • Options
    #8404
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    gmisk wrote: »
    I think in fairness a lot of people here have personal very real experience with regards this area, where as I really don't, so i can see why they would be so very passionate about it.

    That's a good point. I know some women who have gone through this, one in particular who is a very close friend. And as others have pointed out from trawling through my post history, I have two daughters. So it's not some academic exercise for me either.


  • Options
    #8405
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    The Assembly specifically voted against that type of amendment and favoured an amendment that would allow the Oireachtas to decide the law. These are the two options they voted on:

    Option A - Article 40.3.3° should be replaced with a constitutional provision that explicitly authorises the Oireachtas to legislate to address termination of pregnancy, any rights of the unborn and any rights of the pregnant woman.

    Option B - Article 40.3.3° should be replaced or amended with a constitutional provision that directly addresses termination of pregnancy, any rights of the unborn and any rights of the pregnant woman.

    57% went for Option A, and that's what's on the ballot paper. This was all covered recently in the thread by the way. Maybe you should take the time out to review the thread, so we're not all rehashing old ground

    Thanks for clarifying. There are a huge amount of posts already, and I came late to the party.


  • Options
    #8406
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    professore wrote: »
    Thanks for clarifying. There are a huge amount of posts already, and I came late to the party.

    I appreciate that, but my last post was copied and pasted from one I made this day last week, so this has been recently discussed. It's definitely worthwhile even going back a week or so to catch up on the discussion; you'd be surprised how often the same issues come up in one way or another.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8407
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,072 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    iguana wrote: »
    What do we think voter turn-out is actually going to be like? Most of the campaigning is obviously aimed at the undecideds but even referendums touted as having hugely high turnouts still see roughly one third of the electorate not voting. In 1983 less than 54% of the electorate turned out. The 1992 referenda had the third highest ever voter turnout with just over 68% on all three amendments. The abortion referendum in 2002 had a pathetic turnout of less than 43%, which was probably because it was a confusing clusterfuof a proposed amendment. The "fantastic" voter turnout of the marriage equality referendum 3 years ago was 60.52%. I don't like to assume but the odds are that most of the undecideds will stay undecided and not vote. Some of the Yes/No voters will also not vote but it will be mostly undecideds who don't.

    I heard unoficially that requests from new voters (18) in Wicklow to go onto the supplementary are much higher than marriage referendum.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #8408
    Wombatman
    Registered Users Posts: 3,337 ✭✭✭Wombatman


    professore wrote: »
    My point on that was if you have a law, then it should make sense. The whole "freedom to travel" thing was a bit of a joke. Basically we have this strong moral stance on abortion in Ireland but sure if you go abroad it's all grand. Of course in practice, it would be impossible to police.

    No more difficult than the Brexit Irish border problem. I believe the Brits are making great strides with a 'technical solution'.

    Maybe women of a certain age could report for testing and tagging before travelling abroad?


  • Options
    #8409
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    professore wrote: »
    That's a good point. I know some women who have gone through this, one in particular who is a very close friend. And as others have pointed out from trawling through my post history, I have two daughters. So it's not some academic exercise for me either.

    I appreciate your change in position on the matter and applaud you actually doing some research on the matter, if only more people who were on the fence or pro-life like yourself.

    I'm not sure if you read my situation as I can't remember seeing you pop up in the thread, but here it is - https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106806749&postcount=8130, bear in mind now, I have already had pro-lifers completely disregard the miscarriages my partner suffered and focused on me suggesting I have a vasectomy rather than have legislation put in place to allow my partner the dignity of a safe and legal abortion here.. Kind of felt like I was being blamed for the whole thing.

    So I can only apologize if you are feeling attacked by some posters, as since this thread has been opened we have had an influx of individuals who have had some truly horrific things to say and attempt to pass them off as opinions, or "facts".

    A couple of my friends were going to vote no until they realised voting no would be essentially booting women with uterine abnormalities like my partner to the kerb and denying them the dignity of having a safe and legal abortion performed on them. On another thread, someone recognized my partner's ordeal but is still voting no frankly because it doesn't suit them/appease them.

    This is the kind of mindset that we have been put up against so many times, so apologies for people jumping on you over questions/statements you made and I appreciate your change of stance with the intention to repeal.


  • Options
    #8410
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,072 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    professore wrote: »
    No it is not. We are voting for REPEAL. Not to REPLACE or AMEND. Very very different.

    Actually technically we are voting replace.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #8411
    baylah17
    Closed Accounts Posts: 790 ✭✭✭baylah17


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    iguana wrote: »
    What do we think voter turn-out is actually going to be like? Most of the campaigning is obviously aimed at the undecideds but even referendums touted as having hugely high turnouts still see roughly one third of the electorate not voting. In 1983 less than 54% of the electorate turned out. The 1992 referenda had the third highest ever voter turnout with just over 68% on all three amendments. The abortion referendum in 2002 had a pathetic turnout of less than 43%, which was probably because it was a confusing clusterfuof a proposed amendment. The "fantastic" voter turnout of the marriage equality referendum 3 years ago was 60.52%. I don't like to assume but the odds are that most of the undecideds will stay undecided and not vote. Some of the Yes/No voters will also not vote but it will be mostly undecideds who don't.

    I heard unoficially that requests from new voters (18) in Wicklow to go onto the supplementary are much higher than marriage referendum.
    A friend of mine is a Gardai and he says that there are a huge number of people mainly young people attending the station every day to have forms for the supplementaryregister stamped


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8412
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,458 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Wombatman wrote: »
    No more difficult than the Brexit Irish border problem. I believe the Brits are making great strides with a 'technical solution'.

    Maybe women of a certain age could report for testing and tagging before travelling abroad?

    i think the person who thanked that thought you were being serious.


  • Options
    #8413
    _Dara_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,971 ✭✭✭_Dara_


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    i think the person who thanked that thought you were being serious.

    The person that thanked him openly thinks that women should be blocked from travelling abroad to have an abortion. :(


  • Options
    #8414
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    I appreciate your change in position on the matter and applaud you actually doing some research on the matter, if only more people who were on the fence or pro-life like yourself.

    I'm not sure if you read my situation as I can't remember seeing you pop up in the thread, but here it is - https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=106806749&postcount=8130, bear in mind now, I have already had pro-lifers completely disregard the miscarriages my partner suffered and focused on me suggesting I have a vasectomy rather than have legislation put in place to allow my partner the dignity of a safe and legal abortion here.. Kind of felt like I was being blamed for the whole thing.

    So I can only apologize if you are feeling attacked by some posters, as since this thread has been opened we have had an influx of individuals who have had some truly horrific things to say and attempt to pass them off as opinions, or "facts".

    A couple of my friends were going to vote no until they realised voting no would be essentially booting women with uterine abnormalities like my partner to the kerb and denying them the dignity of having a safe and legal abortion performed on them. On another thread, someone recognized my partner's ordeal but is still voting no frankly because it doesn't suit them/appease them.

    This is the kind of mindset that we have been put up against so many times, so apologies for people jumping on you over questions/statements you made and I appreciate your change of stance with the intention to repeal.

    I have no issues whatsoever with abortion being available to your wife. To me that's an open and shut case.


  • Options
    #8415
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    I find the argument of being against abortion yourself but voting yes so as to not restrict others from doing it is intellectually dishonest.

    Let's say it was a referendum on legalising FGM. Would people who are against it be fine with voting Yes to allow it, as they would never allow it themselves but respect the rights of others to do it?

    And just saying "they are different" is not an answer - for genuine No voters they feel at least as strongly about abortion as others would about FGM.

    And as I said before, I am going to vote Yes and take responsibility for it - this is not some kind of back handed No argument.


  • Options
    #8416
    OrlaFS2017
    Registered Users Posts: 64 ✭✭OrlaFS2017


    But there isn’t a constitutional right to travel for FGM like there is for abortion so you cannot equate them


  • Options
    #8417
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    OrlaFS2017 wrote: »
    But there isn’t a constitutional right to travel for FGM like there is for abortion so you cannot equate them

    That makes no difference to the point. Let's assume there is. De facto there is anyway.

    Why is it that you are all so afraid to directly answer a question like this?

    It's actually a good parallel, as cultures that practice FGM see it as an essential right and an integral part of their culture.

    The only difference I can see is that abortion can get a woman out of a very difficult situation. Not a trivial difference but a difference nonetheless.

    In cultures with FGM not having one will negatively affect the girl's marriage prospects and future prosperity.


  • Options
    #8418
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    professore wrote: »
    I find the argument of being against abortion yourself but voting yes so as to not restrict others from doing it is intellectually dishonest.

    Let's say it was a referendum on legalising FGM. Would people who are against it be fine with voting Yes to allow it, as they would never allow it themselves but respect the rights of others to do it?

    And just saying "they are different" is not an answer - for genuine No voters they feel at least as strongly about abortion as others would about FGM.

    And as I said before, I am going to vote Yes and take responsibility for it - this is not some kind of back handed No argument.


    FGM has no medical benefits (that I am aware of) while abortions do so it's a silly question.

    Not only that but where FGM is performed it is not usually at the choice of the girl/woman so it's a ridiculous comparison.


  • Options
    #8419
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,458 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    professore wrote: »
    That makes no difference to the point. Let's assume there is. De facto there is anyway.

    Why is it that you are all so afraid to directly answer a question like this?


    because it is a stupid false equivalence.


  • Options
    #8420
    Triceratops Ballet
    Registered Users Posts: 4,894 ✭✭✭Triceratops Ballet


    professore wrote: »
    I find the argument of being against abortion yourself but voting yes so as to not restrict others from doing it is intellectually dishonest.

    How is it intellectually dishonest? I would hope not to be in a situation where abortion was on the table, if I was i'm not sure if I would do it, but I have no problem with others doing it if it's the right choice for them.

    I don't take mdma either but if that's what some people are in to I have no objection to them doing it


  • Options
    #8421
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    Triceratops Ballet wrote: »
    How is it intellectually dishonest? I would hope not to be in a situation where abortion was on the table, if I was i'm not sure if I would do it, but I have no problem with others doing it if it's the right choice for them.

    I don't take mdma either but if that's what some people are in to I have no objection to them doing it

    If you believe it's wrong to do something yourself - wrong, not just you are not into it - but have no problems enabling others to do that, then that's intellectually dishonest IMO. It's passing the buck. Looking at the youths taking the wheels off the car and not calling the Gardai because "it's not my business what others do"


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8422
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #8423
    Mr. CooL ICE
    Registered Users Posts: 17,587 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    There are some silly comparisons, but I'll bite
    professore wrote: »
    I find the argument of being against abortion yourself but voting yes so as to not restrict others from doing it is intellectually dishonest.
    Using a recent example, SSM. I am against marrying another man because I am not attracted to other men. But I don't want to stop two other men marrying each other if that is what they want. It is their choice to do so should they want it so I think it is wrong to stop them.
    professore wrote: »
    Let's say it was a referendum on legalising FGM. Would people who are against it be fine with voting Yes to allow it, as they would never allow it themselves but respect the rights of others to do it?
    As said above, FGM has no proven health benefit. It is also mostly done without the consent of the woman involved. And morally, I find it barbaric. And outlawing it would be protecting vulerable women in these situations. Therefore, I would vote against it, even though it won't affect me.



    When it comes to voting in a referendum, you shouldn't really vote based solely on how it affects you.


  • Options
    #8424
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    amcalester wrote: »
    FGM has no medical benefits (that I am aware of) while abortions do so it's a silly question.

    Not only that but where FGM is performed it is not usually at the choice of the girl/woman so it's a ridiculous comparison.

    The point is about supporting a law in a country that you claim to be against yourself to allow others freedom of choice. Yet everyone is attacking whether or not they are EXACTLY equivalent. That's not the point I'm making.


  • Options
    #8425
    robarmstrong
    Registered Users Posts: 1,598 ✭✭✭robarmstrong


    professore wrote: »
    I have no issues whatsoever with abortion being available to your wife. To me that's an open and shut case.

    To you yes, but to others no unfortunately.

    Not sure who you're addressing in the follow-up post about voting yes against your personal beliefs is being intellectually dishonest.

    I am fully against abortion but I don't want my personal beliefs regarding it to stand in the way of allowing women like my partner the dignity of a safe and legal abortion, if anything I would consider it to be intellectually mature to do so.


  • Options
    #8426
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #8427
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    Dole Scrounging Vegan Crossfitter wrote: »
    There are some silly comparisons, but I'll bite

    Using a recent example, SSM. I am against marrying another man because I am not attracted to other men. But I don't want to stop two other men marrying each other if that is what they want. It is their choice to do so should they want it so I think it is wrong to stop them.
    .

    That's not the same thing.

    In your analogy, if you believed gay marriage was evil and anyone who associated with gay men would burn in hell for all eternity, and you voted for gay marriage so as not to interfere with the rights of others, that would be a better equivalence.

    No one is forcing people to have abortions if the referendum is carried.


  • Options
    #8428
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    ....... wrote: »
    This post has been deleted.

    Are you sure about that? Where it is a rite of passage to womanhood, marriage etc, you think every girl is totally against it? I sincerely doubt it.


  • Options
    #8429
    Triceratops Ballet
    Registered Users Posts: 4,894 ✭✭✭Triceratops Ballet


    professore wrote: »
    If you believe it's wrong to do something yourself - wrong, not just you are not into it - but have no problems enabling others to do that, then that's intellectually dishonest IMO. It's passing the buck. Looking at the youths taking the wheels off the car and not calling the Gardai because "it's not my business what others do"

    But just because I believe something is wrong, doesn't mean it is wrong though it's just my opinion, and why should my opinion on how others live their lives be a deciding factor.

    (I don't think abortion is wrong btw)


  • Options
    #8430
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    robarmstrong wrote: »
    To you yes, but to others no unfortunately.

    Not sure who you're addressing in the follow-up post about voting yes against your personal beliefs is being intellectually dishonest.

    I am fully against abortion but I don't want my personal beliefs regarding it to stand in the way of allowing women like my partner the dignity of a safe and legal abortion, if anything I would consider it to be intellectually mature to do so.

    I see your point - a rock and a hard place, right?

    If the choice was between allowing abortions in medical cases for women like your partner, FFA and a more liberal regime how would you vote in that case?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8431
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,458 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    professore wrote: »
    Are you sure about that? Where it is a rite of passage to womanhood, marriage etc, you think every girl is totally against it? I sincerely doubt it.

    they are not of an age where they can give consent.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement