The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

NuMarvel

RobertKK wrote: »

I looked it up, an extraordinary general meeting was held, 25 people turned up, 24 voted for repeal and one abstained.

See people do vote on these things

You might want to look it up again, because their position on the 8th was decided at a meeting of the Institute's 25-member executive team, not an extraordinary general meeting.

They held an EGM a few weeks back to discuss clinical principles about the proposed legislation, and that had 50 to 60 members in attendance.

ForestFire

_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.

Well Thanks, That has made things much more open.

Are you accusing me of lying?
What do you think my tactics are?
Do you have any proof to your accusations about me?

Do you think I am also lying to my wife?
Maybe I am also lying to my 4 year old daughter?

You have proved the whole point of my post perfectly, attack the poster at the first opportunity, without reason, regardless, well done.

It wasnt me123

..

amcalester

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes, and she thankfully isn't always right.

But how many women have to suffer like Rob’s partner for the one miracle like your niece(nephew?).

RobertKK

kylith wrote: »

The referendum is about repealing the 8th amendment. It is a lie to say that it is about anything else.
Yes, we know

Untrue.

Your presumption. What is a 'lie' about recommending people talk to women about a topic. So what if they are all anti-repeal, why not talk to them anyway?

Citation needed.

Some of your Yes guys are in the High Court after refusing to return foreign money.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0212/940173-amnesty-sipo/

Amnesty International has brought a High Court challenge against the Standards in Public Office Commission's order that it return a Swiss based foundation's donation of €137,000 for a campaign to increase support for a referendum to repeal the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution.

The donation was made in August 2015 by the Open Society Foundations (OSF), a body founded by businessman George Soros, for the Irish based strand of Amnesty's, "My Body, My Rights" campaign.

Interestingly that donation happened a month before our yes supporting president met George Soros at the request Soros in 2015....
http://www.president.ie/en/news/article/official-visit-to-the-the-united-states

Friday 25th September
On Friday morning the President has a private meeting with Mr George Soros and Mr Chris Stone, President of Mr. Soros’s Open Society Foundation - at their invitation

The following May the President's wife was getting involved in the abortion debate...
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/sabina-higgins-making-women-carry-fatal-foetal-pregnancies-an-outrage-1.2640814

Mrs Higgins had said it was an “outrage” against women that in the case of “foetal abnormality” a person should be “made carry” the baby.

It has been a concerted effort to get it from there in 2015/2016 to unrestricted abortion being proposed...
Lets see if the High Court wants Open Society Foundation's money returned, a foundation that involves secret talks with our political class and funding groups who support the position of Repeal.
It is amazing how all our political leaders evolved..

robarmstrong

Sorry I just want to put it out there and this is directed at both campaigns.

Who the f*ck cares about foreign money being pumped into either campaign? I don't care if the pro-life/pro-choice campaign are backed and funded by multi-million billion trillionaires, funding should be the absolute last thing on a voters mind from both sides of the debate.

This referendum is about allowing women the right to access safe and legal abortions along with receiving the appropriate aftercare and support. It is about retaining the 8th or repealing the 8th.

If either side are arguing about money, then they're arguing about the wrong thing.

RobertKK

robarmstrong wrote: »

Sorry I just want to put it out there and this is directed at both campaigns.

Who the f*ck cares about foreign money being pumped into either campaign? I don't care if the pro-life campaign are backed and funded by multi-million billion trillionaires, funding should be the absolute last thing on a voters mind from both sides of the debate.

It is illegal for starters and therefore a crime. If any side is doing it they are breaking the law.

Otherwise foreign money can be used to influence referendums and elections, which is anti-democratic.

pitifulgod

RobertKK wrote: »

Some of your Yes guys are in the High Court after refusing to return foreign money.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0212/940173-amnesty-sipo/



Interestingly that donation happened a month before our yes supporting president met George Soros at the request Soros in 2015....
http://www.president.ie/en/news/article/official-visit-to-the-the-united-states


The following May the President's wife was getting involved in the abortion debate...
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/sabina-higgins-making-women-carry-fatal-foetal-pregnancies-an-outrage-1.2640814



It has been a concerted effort to get it from there in 2015/2016 to unrestricted abortion being proposed...
Lets see if the High Court wants Open Society Foundation's money returned, a foundation that involves secret talks with our political class and funding groups who support the position of Repeal.
It is amazing how all our political leaders evolved..

This time round, it's the president and amnesty being in an evil conspiracy with George Soros. Michael D and wife expressing opinions that very much so reflects their Labour background. They also have commented on things such as homelessness, they're not known for remaining silent on political issues. Let's just remember that during the marriage referendum, it was a Chuck Feeney conspiracy. :pac:

kylith

Is Amnesty running a Repeal campaign? I don’t think i’ve seen their logo on posters.

Where does the anti-repeal side get their funding again?

It wasnt me123

Stab*City wrote: »

But the mother gets a vote and the chance to lobby and change opinion the unborn does not.

I'm just really on the fence about this. I want someone to convince me but both sides are doing a bad job.

Another "I'm on the fence but really no" poster.

You would have to be living under a rock not to have some inkling of what the 8th amendment is about - stop the codology.

you have to be 18 to vote, of course an unborn baby can't vote - what sort of nonsence is that.

You are not on the fence, go look through the thread and read the InHerShoes posts on FB and then tell me you are still on the fence.

When all these "on the fence" posters post, End of the Road and Graces7 like them - go figure.

All this on the fence sh*te just derails the thread. Be honest, say yes or no and then debate it.

RobertKK

kylith wrote: »

Is Amnesty running a Repeal campaign? I don’t think i’ve seen their logo on posters.

Where does the anti-repeal side get their funding again?

Yes they were funding raising online yesterday.

At that time I looked the average donation was €77.

Apparently we don't have enough posters.

robarmstrong

It wasnt me123 wrote: »

When all these "on the fence" posters post, End of the Road and Graces7 like them - go figure.

To be fair, I think those posters just thank anything that doesn't mention anything positive about the repeal side of things, I've agreed with end of the road on a couple of points, he's open to abortion and does agree it should be made available to my partner, which I understand, appreciate and respect despite his vote for No.

RobertKK

kylith wrote: »

Is Amnesty running a Repeal campaign? I don’t think i’ve seen their logo on posters.

Where does the anti-repeal side get their funding again?

Ordinary people, took months for retain the 8th to get to €400k.

Took the repeal side less than a week to get €500k, then you ask that...

Plus on Prime Time, it was the repeal side that was not very co-operative about funding.

circular flexing

I just don't understand how anyone can read the stories of Michelle Harte or Savita Halappanavar or any of the women from TFMR or any of the women in the #InHerShoes and go "yep that's exactly the outcome I want for women in this country".

It's also worth repeating (maybe?) that the vote is just to repeal the 8th. The government has proposed abortions up to 12 weeks be allowed but that's not guaranteed to pass (particularly if SF don't alter their stance).

_Dara_

ForestFire wrote: »

Well Thanks, That has made things much more open.

Are you accusing me of lying?
What do you think my tactics are?
Do you have any proof to your accusations about me?

Do you think I am also lying to my wife?
Maybe I am also lying to my 4 year old daughter?

You have proved the whole point of my post perfectly, attack the poster at the first opportunity, without reason, regardless, well done.

Your posts protest too much. A hallmark of the fake yes-voter posts. I don’t have any evidence, natch. I just don’t believe you, as I’m entitled. Your apparent ‘yes voter’ stance is unconvincing and guess what? It’s also unoriginal.

RobertKK

circular flexing wrote: »

I just don't understand how anyone can read the stories of Michelle Harte or Savita Halappanavar or any of the women from TFMR or any of the women in the #InHerShoes and go "yep that's exactly the outcome I want for women in this country".

It's also worth repeating (maybe?) that the vote is just to repeal the 8th. The government has proposed abortions up to 12 weeks be allowed but that's not guaranteed to pass (particularly if SF don't alter their stance).

SF will alter their stance, maybe they kick out Peadar Toibin and any other dissenters.

Savita was not due to the 8th amendment, no one here has been able to produce an official report which blames the 8th, given it was hospital mismanagement of sepsis that caused her death and the reason the hospital had to compensate her family.

pitifulgod

RobertKK wrote: »

Ordinary people, took months for retain the 8th to get to €400k.

Took the repeal side less than a week to get €500k, then you ask that...

Plus on Prime Time, it was the repeal side that was not very co-operative about funding.

There's literally no reason to assume there was anything dodgy about the repeal campaign raising 500k with the crowd funding a few weeks back... I've contributed about 200 this year. The campaign raised 582k in a week,this was spread across 15000 people. That's about 39 euro a person, you think the people at the repeal marches aren't willing to donate 50 quid?

RobertKK wrote: »

SF will alter their stance, maybe they kick out Peadar Toibin and any other dissenters.

Savita was not due to the 8th amendment, no one here has been able to produce an official report which blames the 8th, given it was hospital mismanagement of sepsis that caused her death and the reason the hospital had to compensate her family.

What about Michelle Harte? She's not the only pregnant woman who hasn't been allowed to participate in drug trials.

RobertKK

pitifulgod wrote: »

There's literally no reason to assume there was anything dodgy about the repeal campaign raising 500k with the crowd funding a few weeks back... I've contributed about 200 this year. The campaign raised 582k in a week,this was spread across 15000 people. That's about 39 euro a person, you think the people at the repeal marches aren't willing to donate 50 quid?




What about Michelle Harte?

I don't know of her case. But hard cases make bad law.

I guess people have more money than whatever...

kylith

RobertKK wrote: »

Ordinary people, took months for retain the 8th to get to €400k.

Took the repeal side less than a week to get €500k, then you ask that...

Here’s a mad idea Robert: lots of people agree with Repeal and donated. That’s only 10,000 people donating €50 each.

Amazing that the anti-repeal side managed to get the country plastered with posters at the drop of a hat, what with them not having any cash.

Plus on Prime Time, it was the repeal side that was not very co-operative about funding.

Really? Got a link there? As far as I’m aware most of the anti-repeal haven’t even registered with SIPO.

While we’re here: what are the Yes campaign lies? How many parents should have to watch their child die of a FFA?

Ave Sodalis

RobertKK wrote: »

SF will alter their stance, maybe they kick out Peadar Toibin and any other dissenters.

Savita was not due to the 8th amendment, no one here has been able to produce an official report which blames the 8th, given it was hospital mismanagement of sepsis that caused her death and the reason the hospital had to compensate her family.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/eighth-amendment-played-major-role-in-savita-s-death-1.3261037

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/savita-died-because-of-eighth-amendment-claims-leading-doctor-36241339.html

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/author-of-savita-halappanavar-report-says-8th-amendment-contributed-to-her-death-810432.html

Saying she died from sepsis and not because of the 8th is like saying I have arthritis because of the hard work I was doing, not because of the person who gave me the hard work. It's like saying someone with cancer died of an infection, not of cancer. It's like saying someone with osteoporosis who broke their arm when they tripped was because they fell, not because the osteoporosis.

pitifulgod

RobertKK wrote: »

I don't know of her case. But hard cases make bad law.

I guess people have more money than whatever...

Pregnant women with cancer cannot participate in drug trials even if they're willing to have the necessary abortion. These are not niche cases, they're pretty normal cases.


https://m.independent.ie/regionals/goreyguardian/news/abortion-nightmare-for-cancer-sufferer-michelle-27340507.html

Since the amount people donated varied, it's not unbelievable that they raised that sum.

RobertKK

kylith wrote: »

Here’s a mad idea Robert: lots of people agree with Repeal and donated. That’s only 10,000 people donating €50 each.

Amazing that the anti-repeal side managed to get the country plastered with posters at the drop of a hat, what with them not having any cash.


Really? Got a link there? As far as I’m aware most of the anti-repeal haven’t even registered with SIPO.

While we’re here: what are the Yes campaign lies? How many parents should have to watch their child die of a FFA?

The retain side had been fundraising for months, not just a week like together for Yes.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0315/947793-eighth-amendment-primetime/

Pro-retain groups expect to spend more than €1.5m in the forthcoming referendum on the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution.

A number of prominent pro-repeal organisations refused to take part in an RTÉ Prime Time survey on referendum funding, but those that did, say they will spend around €500,000 during the campaign.

The Coalition to Repeal the Eighth Amendment declined to provide any details of the source of its funding or its spending plans.

It also refused interview requests.

The Abortion Rights Campaign, which returned a €23,450 donation from George Soros' Open Societies Foundation following a request from the Standards in Public Office Commission (SIPO), declined to take part in the survey.

Foreign donations to third-party organisations are prohibited in referendum campaigns.

SIPO regulates political funding in Ireland.

Most large organisations involved in the campaign said they have, or will register with SIPO.

pitifulgod

RobertKK wrote: »

The retain side had been fundraising for months, not just a week like together for Yes.

Polls strongly indicate far less support for retain so pretty reasonable they wouldn't raise as quickly. They also didn't attempt a crowd funding initiative. In fact, their fundraising is not the most transparent. From what I gather they've mailed around to people asking for money but no real public drives. So that would explain why it would take them months to raise it.

circular flexing

pitifulgod wrote: »

Pregnant women with cancer cannot participate in drug trials even if they're willing to have the necessary abortion. These are not niche cases, they're pretty normal cases.


https://m.independent.ie/regionals/goreyguardian/news/abortion-nightmare-for-cancer-sufferer-michelle-27340507.html

Since the amount people donated varied, it's not unbelievable that they raised that sum.

I donated 50 euro and I've never donated a cause like this in my life

circular flexing

RobertKK wrote: »

SF will alter their stance, maybe they kick out Peadar Toibin and any other dissenters.

They need to have an Ard Fheis to change their stance and there's no sign of that happening and even with an Ard Fheis there's no guarantee.

Savita was not due to the 8th amendment, no one here has been able to produce an official report which blames the 8th, given it was hospital mismanagement of sepsis that caused her death and the reason the hospital had to compensate her family.

The sepsis was caused in the first place by her not having access to an abortion.

Hammer Archer

Saying that the 8th amendment didn't cause Savita's death is like saying that AIDS doesn't kill anyone, it's the infections.

Frank Bullitt

I see Save the 8th are now calling for Dr Peter Boylans resignation...I wonder why?

groovyg

Gintonious wrote: »

I see Save the 8th are now calling for Dr Peter Boylans resignation...I wonder why?

Resign from what? Isn't he retired?

Ave Sodalis

groovyg wrote: »

Resign from what? Isn't he retired?

From chair of the Institute of O&G. Why? Because of his lies about women dying from the 8th....

https://twitter.com/john_mcguirk/status/989197537436463104

I mean the hypocrisy would leave you speechless

Sofiztikated

RobertKK wrote: »

1. Yes posters and no mention of abortion - it is a lie to say people are voting for compassion when it involves allowing the unborn to be terminated and dumped as medical waste, but the latter bit isn't mentioned.

2. It is not unrestricted abortion.

3. A majority of GPs are willing to become abortionists.

4. The yes campaign telling men to talk to the women in one's life pesuming they are all yes voters. None of them are in my life.

5. There is no illegal activity involving money on the Yes side.

1. How is that a lie? Its asking for compassion for women in **** circumstances.

2. Asking for unrestricted access, and it looks like restricting it to 12 weeks, and a 3 day waiting period, which could push someone outside those 12 weeks. Not a lie.

3. You said they weren't willing, which was pointed out it was a training or scheduling issue, not an unwillingness, and a contrary poll was posted. Again, not a lie.

4. How is asking men who happen to be pro repeal to speak to people a lie? Seriously?

5. You'd have proof of this illegal activity? As far as I'm aware, money was returned. And SIPO are currently happy.

Just because you don't agree with something doesn't make it a lie.

Do we have time to run through the ACTUAL lies from the enforced birth side? The ones that have been demonstrated time and time again, with actual facts showing you how and why they are lies?