The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Sofiztikated

pleas advice wrote: »

would be classed a lie or an opinion? because its definitely not the truth

it'd be opinion, and in my opinion an incorrect one, but that'd go down to how far you want to go with the definition of "Life".

ForestFire

I am voting yes but....

I have been accused of being on some sort of shift worker, as have many others.

I have had my clarifications ignored repeatedly.

I have had statements attributed to me falsely that I never said.

I have been repeat asked to answer questions on Indian stats or something, which I never raised or spoke about.

One poster stated something like "a fetus has a heart beat at 12 weeks? Really?" as a rebuttal.

But I guess the ? mark, means it's not a lie I suppose? A 2 second Google search would have confirmed, and you constantly get into to uninformed.

Pro choice are afraid of an emotional side of the debate when taking about the life of the fetus but it's okay to post the In her shoe stories repeatedly (which it should be okay for both) . But this is what we are voting on and we are adults and should not hide away from the full topics, because it might be emotional.

Pro choice complain that people keep repeat themselves and post links to Irish debates, yet you keep discussing trees and toenails.

Pro choice shout and scream when someone posts a representative photo, although they are in every pregnancy book, and the only reasonable think that can be posted to show/discuss fetal development.

Pro choice attribute past atrocities, like Tuam, somehow to ordinary people, simple because they are pro life.

For some reason if you are pro life you don't care about any other issues for children in the world, I don't know how you know this?

Pro choice raised 500k on crowd funding for posters, i presume they have done similar before also, to support women in need?

I don't think you realise how daunting it is to try and have an open debate or ask a question in here. A small part maybe due to the difference in numbers. And don't worry I am not claiming victim status, as I'm sure you will say, just pointing out how difficult it is.

Oh... I have also had posts and questions ignored.... but I have not gone around demanding answers from posters and trying to raise them somehow for this..... If they don't want to answer fine......

_Dara_

^^^^

Another “I’m voting yes but...”er.

It’s not remotely believable. It’s a tactic I don’t fully understand but knock yourself out.

RobertKK

_Dara_ wrote: »

^^^^

Another “I’m voting yes but...”er.

It’s not remotely believable. It’s a tactic I don’t fully understand but knock yourself out.

Your post sums up the problem in this thread.

FingerDeKat

RobertKK wrote: »

Your post sums up the problem in this thread.

not providing proof when asked ??

_Dara_

RobertKK wrote: »

Your post sums up the problem in this thread.

I’m really, massively okay with that.

At least I’ve not been one-note on this thread. All you seem able for is surly posts where you play the victim and deflect.

Larbre34

I'm just going to interject here. Each and every person will be making a personal rationalisation and a moral judgement on this matter. That doesn't make what they feel a lie, so long as they dont lord it over everyone else with something that is a matter of degrees or subject to interpretation.

Im basing my own view on a couple of indisputable facts. Independent viability outside of the womb at less than 20 weeks gestation, is impossible. Thus, a 12 week limit for non medical or surgical reasons is acceptable to me and entirely a matter of bodily autonomy of the mother in that regard. If abortion was a procedure under consideration for a loved one of mine, i would genuinely try and guide them through alternatives first, but at the end of the day, its not for me to deny this option to them or any woman.

Another fact is the disgusting situation that pertains in the State, where women requiring treatment for serious illnesses arising who happen to be pregnant or fall pregnant around the time of their diagnosis are forced to travel to the UK for a termination before their treatment can commence. This national shame and dereliction of responsibility to the people is the main reason ill be voting to repeal and in bad news for Robert's side I feel many more voters will come down on those sort of issues and the 8th will be gone.

RobertKK

_Dara_ wrote: »

I’m really, massively okay with that.

At least I’ve not been one-note on this thread. All you seem able for is surly posts where you play the victim and deflect.

I am not a victim, but people could treat others more nicely in this thread.

_Dara_

RobertKK wrote: »

I am not a victim, but people could treat others more nicely in this thread.

You are absolutely acting the victim in some of your posts. Don’t want people saying that you’re acting the victim? Then don’t... act the victim. It’s quite simple.

How about posting something of substance? Every second post of yours contains a sullen accusation (with little to back them up).

I’ll also ask: what concrete lies have the Yes side told? I’m genuinely interested. If they have told some lies, I want to know that information.

RobertKK

_Dara_ wrote: »

You are absolutely acting the victim in some of your posts. Don’t want people saying that you’re acting the victim? Then don’t... act the victim. It’s quite simple.

How about posting something of substance? Every second post of yours contains a sullen accusation (with little to back them up).

I’ll also ask: what concrete lies have the Yes side told? I’m genuinely interested. If they have told some lies, I want to know that information.

I saw no one condemn me being called a ku klux klan luvvie. Too busy trying to score points against me to care, then the yes side talks about compassion...I am not a victim but I am also not a doormat.

iguana

ForestFire wrote: »

Pro choice are afraid of an emotional side of the debate when taking about the life of the fetus but it's okay to post the In her shoe stories repeatedly (which it should be okay for both) .

What is the emotional side about the life of a foetus? A foetus at 12 weeks (which is 10 weeks gestation) has no capability of feeling emotions. So what's to be discussed there? Do you mean the emotions of happy expectant parents? They have nothing to do with this debate. The grief when a wanted pregnancy ends in miscarriage or stillbirth. That's devastating but it doesn't really have anything to do with the 8th unless the miscarriage occurs in a way that is made worse by the 8th. What emotions do you mean?

Annasopra

RobertKK wrote: »

I saw no one condemn me being called a ku klux klan luvvie. Too busy trying to score points against me to care, then the yes side talks about compassion...I am not a victim but I am also not a doormat.

I reported it. Hppy for mods to confirm I reported it. As we are encouraged to do rather than to drag the thread off topic. You are right. The KKK stuff is unacceptable. Thankfully it was deleted. By the poster or by the mods?

But lets not make this thread about you Robert please. It isnt about you.

_Dara_

RobertKK wrote: »

I saw no one condemn me being called a ku klux klan luvvie. Too busy trying to score points against me to care, then the yes side talks about compassion...I am not a victim but I am also not a doormat.

That was a post here on boards?

Let’s try this again - what lies have the Yes campaign told?

Oh and “The Yes campaign has told lies too!!!” ISN’T point-scoring?

RobertKK

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I reported it. Hppy for mods to confirm I reported it. As we are encouraged to do rather than to drag the thread off topic. You are right. The KKK stuff is unacceptable. Thankfully it was deleted. By the poster or by the mods?

But lets not make this thread about you Robert please. It isnt about you.

Thank you.
I know it isn’t that is why I shouldn’t be expected to answer so many questions, or people post something on Facebook and then tag my name to answer it as if it had something to do with me, and I must explain stuff I had nothing to do with, or tell me i lied about what is proposed and then use the same thing because it then suits an argument.
I just think some of the stuff that has gone on has been crap.
It isn’t about me so I don’t think others should make it about me either.

Neddyusa

RobertKK wrote: »

Thank you.
I know it isn’t that is why I shouldn’t be expected to answer so many questions, or people post something on Facebook and then tag my name to answer it as if it had something to do with me, and I must explain stuff I had nothing to do with, or tell me i lied about what is proposed and then use the same thing because it then suits an argument.
I just think some of the stuff that has gone on has been crap.
It isn’t about me so I don’t think others should make it about me either.

You come across as a nice guy on boards Robert.
The level of muck thrown at you on this thread is revealing.
I really think things would be much better for you to leave the hectoring bitter Repealers here in their own Repeal-Shield echo-chamber.
A minority of them attempt respectful debate but most just talk about "Choice" yet have no interest in alternatives to abortion, nor tolerance of others views.
Maybe you are already, but it might be good to go out and talk to friends or colleagues or get talking to real people on the canvass about this referendum.

Krispie

Question on my mind after listening to the sound bites on radio from both sides and quickly flicking through this thread.....

Will both sides respect the democratic result of the voting public, whichever way it falls, and not seek a review or the "Irish solution" i.e. another referendum to make sure we get the result anted by some????

Zubeneschamali

Neddyusa wrote: »

most just talk about "Choice" yet have no interest in alternatives to abortion, nor tolerance of others views.

I have no issue with other people's views. You can view a fertilized cell as a grown up human being, you can view a miscarriage as the untimely death of a young child and put up a little tombstone if you want, really, nobody cares about your views enough to be intolerant of them.

We just don't want your views imposed by law on us, with a 14 year jail sentence for not following them. We don't want your views blocking our doctors from giving us the health care they should, and telling us to go to England instead to get around your views.

Zubeneschamali

Krispie wrote: »

Will both sides respect the democratic result of the voting public, whichever way it falls, and not seek a review or the "Irish solution" i.e. another referendum to make sure we get the result anted by some????

The only point of a court case to challenge the result would be if there was some egregious problem with the count, and the Irish system is very robust, so no reviews of that sort. OK, I'm sure the No side will be in the High Court when they lose, but from my Yes perspective, no point.

There would also be no point in having another referendum in a years time, like the Lisbon or Nice ones. We'll have to wait maybe 5 years until some more pre-Vatican II Catholics shuffle off their mortal coils.

erica74

Neddyusa wrote: »

A minority of them attempt respectful debate but most just talk about "Choice" yet have no interest in alternatives to abortion, nor tolerance of others views.

If a woman wants an abortion, there is no alternative to an abortion.

Repeal the 8th.

Krispie

Krispie wrote: »

Question on my mind after listening to the sound bites on radio from both sides and quickly flicking through this thread.....

Will both sides respect the democratic result of the voting public, whichever way it falls, and not seek a review or the "Irish solution" i.e. another referendum to make sure we get the result anted by some????

If it is repealed there maybe appeals brought against it same as there was for the SSM referendum. Quite possibly that if the vote goes to retain that someone or a group may try the same.
I hope it wont be a no vote as I don't think it will be like voting on EU treaties. It took a lot of suffering since 83 to get a vote on it, it will probably more to get another one, but I hope it doesn't take another 35 years.

dudara

Neddyusa wrote: »

A minority of them attempt respectful debate but most just talk about "Choice" yet have no interest in alternatives to abortion, nor tolerance of others views.

I think it’s more the case that we have extensively discussed all the options in this thread.

We all wish contraception would work perfectly, but it doesn’t.

Wouldn’t it be great if every unwanted baby could be adopted, but that’s not feasible. In fact an adoption advocacy group has come out in favour of Repeal as they themselves do not see adoption as an alternative.

The very simple fact is that sometimes an abortion is the only solution, unpalatable as it may be.

Annasopra

RobertKK wrote: »

Thank you.
I know it isn’t that is why I shouldn’t be expected to answer so many questions, or people post something on Facebook and then tag my name to answer it as if it had something to do with me, and I must explain stuff I had nothing to do with, or tell me i lied about what is proposed and then use the same thing because it then suits an argument.
I just think some of the stuff that has gone on has been crap.
It isn’t about me so I don’t think others should make it about me either.

Hmmm

Yeah ok but lets step back for a second. You are mostly loooking at this from a stance of it not personally affecting you. A lot of the posters here are very personally affected. Whether that is because of what their wives/partners/girlfriends have gone through or because of they themselves have gone through because of the 8th. Can you not see that the 8th has genuinely caused many people to suffer on a personal individual basis? Because it has put the lives of the unborn before women?

Hannibal_Smith

RobertKK wrote: »

No one is above lies.

Sometimes people intentionally lie, other times unintentionally lie. People who intentionally lie are stupid. I give opinion which some believe are lies but I don't believe they are.
Then it becomes a matter of how someone else interprets my opinion.

But why would Some One lie in relation to the 8th? Which is actually what I asked. If you believe people are lying in saying talk to your sister, your daughter and it's about medical care, why do you think they are lying? If those reasons are not in fact why people want repeal, what do you believe is their true reason for repeal?

ELM327

Krispie wrote: »

Question on my mind after listening to the sound bites on radio from both sides and quickly flicking through this thread.....

Will both sides respect the democratic result of the voting public, whichever way it falls, and not seek a review or the "Irish solution" i.e. another referendum to make sure we get the result anted by some????

If there's a no vote there should be a referendum every day until there's a yes vote. 10 times a day actually, to mark the 10 Irish women that will travel to the uk, each day, until the 8th is repealed. And come back on ferries and planes risking blood clots, hemorrhaging, and all sorts. Take your "morals" and get the boat. Pun intended.

Stop imposing your rules on everyone. Luckily this sort is dying off. In 5 years there will be less old catholics left, 5 more years the same again.

#togetherforyes
#trustourwomen
#repealthe8th

Edward M

erica74 wrote: »

If a woman wants an abortion, there is no alternative to an abortion.

Repeal the 8th.

I'd like to believe there is always an alternative. What women want wouldn't be my reasoning for voting for repeal, it wouldn't make me change my mind if I was considering voting no.
What women need is what swayed me to the yes side.
What someone needs is more important than what someone wants, there is always an alternative to a want, not often for a need!

nozzferrahhtoo

professore wrote: »

Neither is an unborn baby.

There is a difference there however. The user you are replying to is referring to entities that are not of an age to give consent. In abortion of a fetus at 12-16 weeks we are talking about an entity to which the concept of consent does not even apply. There is nothing there TO give consent. It is an entity entirely devoid of the pre-requisites of consent, like sentience and consciousness.

So conflating a conversation about consent to genital mutilation in babies, and the fetus, is an error. With abortion we are terminating an entity the consent of which is irrelevant. With FGM we are mutilating the body of a sentient agent before they are capable of giving or withholding consent.

professore wrote: »

What surprises me is how anyone can have black and white views on abortion. It isn't a black and white issue for me, it's a very murky grey one.

I think once you make it explicit and clear to yourself exactly what it is you value in your moral system and more importantly WHY you value it, the greyness renders itself more amenable to a useful form of black and white thinking.

Unfortunately I think many people operate under a moral system that they have not thought too deeply about. In the vast majority of cases that their own moral system comes into actual contact with, this is fine. They can have a general moral rule like "protect the young and vulnerable" which 99.999999% of the time will be generally a good algorithm to work with. But then it comes to things like abortion and that algorithm is triggered in a well meant but ultimately erroneous fashion.

We see time and time again when we try moral thought experiments designed to test peoples day to day moral intuitions, things like the trolley car problem to name one of many many, things break down a bit.

For me the process of introspection required that I sit down and actually go back to basics. What ARE rights and morality and ethics. Where do they come from. What are they for. What do they do. And what is it we value, or should value, or think we value, when we apply them.

And for me it comes down to the idea that rights, morality and ethics are in the business of mediating the actions and well being of conscious creatures. If they are not then I am agog to hear what they ARE doing.

The fetus at 12-16 weeks is not only NOT such an entity, but it even lacks many of the pre-requisites to be one. It is not one. It never has been one. It is a distinct period of time away from becoming one.

Therefore I have ZERO moral or ethical qualms about the termination of such an entity, and am generally seeing no reason why I might or should. So the issue becomes a lot more black and white for me for this reason, and while you might not agree with it, perhaps this description of it stops it being "surprising" to you.

The MAIN agenda in my moral system is to maximize where possible the freedoms, choices, and well being of conscious creatures in any given context. The pregnant woman is such an entity. The fetus inside her (at 12/16 weeks when the near totality of termination of viable fetuses occurs) is simply not. As such it takes an actual reason why we should curtail her choices, her freedoms and her well being in deference to it. Reasons that the anti-choice speakers on this thread simply have yet to offer us. They just shout words like "Human" and "alive" at the problem in the hope no one notices this begs the question rather than answers it.

seamus

Krispie wrote: »

Will both sides respect the democratic result of the voting public, whichever way it falls, and not seek a review or the "Irish solution" i.e. another referendum to make sure we get the result anted by some????

Respecting a democratic result simply means accepting that the result is valid and was achieved democratically.

There is no obligation on any individual or group to pipe down and be quiet if a vote goes the way they didn't like. Democracy only requires that we uphold the outcome of a vote, not that we all have to get behind it and support it.

There is nothing whatsoever undemocratic or disrespectful about calling for a second vote on a topic.

.......

This post has been deleted.

amcalester

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I think the reason these No type campaigners don't continue after a Yes result is that their campaigns are based on the worst possible outcome, "the sky is falling" type scenarios but obviously this never happens and people just continue to go about their lives as they did before.

Hopefully this will be no different, anyone passionately opposed to repealing the 8th will be able to refuse the improved medical treatment on offer if they are pregnant while others will be able to avail of it.

And nobody will be forced to do anything that they do not want to do.

rayjdav

amcalester wrote: »

Hopefully this will be no different, anyone passionately opposed to repealing the 8th will be able to refuse the improved medical treatment on offer if they are pregnant while others will be able to avail of it.

And nobody will be forced to do anything that they do not want to do.

This is the important aspect of the debate imo. No one is being forced against their will to uptake the facilities available, assuming a yes vote. At least the choice will be there.
Whats good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander.....