The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

swampgas

Poyndexter wrote: »

True but it terminates a baby with a heartbeat and Unfortunately in some cases such ffa and risk of life to mother abortion is the only viable option however in the case of a woman who doesn’t feel she’s ready for a baby there are many more options than abortion.

You can't use the constitution to change reality, and to change the way people think.

Making homosexuality illegal didn't make it disappear. Making divorce illegal didn't stop many marriages being complete trainwrecks.

Living in denial of reality, and passing laws that ignore reality, because of ideology, gives bad results and puts some people into desperate situations.

You can't make a woman with a crisis pregnancy want to be pregnant if she really doesn't want to be. It's as simple as that - she has her own mind and that must be respected.

If you believe that a woman should have as much control over her life as you do yourself, you need to put aside your personal distaste for abortion and accept that a woman should get to decide for herself when and how she brings children into the world.

On top of that, when women are happy to be pregnant, the 8th amendment should not be there interfering with their right to medical consent.

RobertKK

pitifulgod wrote: »

I would view their position on sex education which relates directly to reproductive health to be entirely relevant to the debate. Pure in Heart oppose contraceptives and have a pretty controversial record in terms of the sex education course they ran. So nope, it was relevant, why is she so uncomfortable with it being highlighted? There's no actual lying involved.

It is the actions of someone who feels they lost the debate on Friday night to retweet such crap about Wendy, and then her husband was brought into it, whom was not involved in the debate on Friday night.
Guess it is Peter Boylan conceding he lost on Friday since he felt he needed to go into the gutter.

dudara

Poyndexter wrote: »

Also I am fully aware that many people aren’t in the position to support and raise a child but there are other options such as adoption where people who can’t have children for whatever reason would be delighted to adopt a child.

Are you aware that an Irish adoption advocate group has publically stated that they are in favour of repealing the 8th? They don’t believe that adoption is the solution to every unwanted pregnancy. Look what happened in Ireland in the past when we made women carry their pregnancies to term. We ended up with the horrific Magdalene laundries and Tuam babies.

What is your proposed solution to the case where a women just does want to be pregnant? Does not want the physical and mental stress of being pregnant, does not want the medical trauma of birth. You seem to be of the opinion that she should go through stress and trauma that she does not want to go through. In any other case than pregnancy, we would call the imposition of physical pain torture.

ELM327

Poyndexter wrote: »

True but it terminates a baby with a heartbeat and Unfortunately in some cases such ffa and risk of life to mother abortion is the only viable option

It terminates an embryo or a foetus, depending on the stage of pregnancy.
The stage "baby" does not commence until viability which is ~22-24 weeks.

Poyndexter wrote: »

however in the case of a woman who doesn’t feel she’s ready for a baby there are many more options than abortion.

No. No there isnt.
Not without forcing her to be an incubator

Poyndexter wrote: »

So youre saying I shouldn’t have a vote?

Unfortunately you do, but I'd prefer for the health and rights of our women I'd prefer if you didn't

Poyndexter

bubblypop wrote: »

What is your solution for a woman who doesn't wish to be pregnant?

Use protection? Birth control?

ELM327

RobertKK wrote: »

It is the actions of someone who feels they lost the debate on Friday night to retweet such crap about Wendy, and then her husband was brought into it, whom was not involved in the debate on Friday night.
Guess it is Peter Boylan conceding he lost on Friday since he felt he needed to go into the gutter.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

Lost the debate?
Did you even watch it?

ELM327

Poyndexter wrote: »

Use protection? Birth control?

Any of them are able to either?

• end a pre-existing pregnancy?
• Offer 100% effectiveness?

No?
Didnt think so.


Try again.

swampgas

Poyndexter wrote: »

Use protection? Birth control?

And we're back ... it's Groundhog Day.

ELM327

dudara wrote: »

Are you aware that an Irish adoption advocate group has publically stated that they are in favour of repealing the 8th? They don’t believe that adoption is the solution to every unwanted pregnancy. Look what happened in Ireland in the past when we made women carry their pregnancies to term. We ended up with the horrific Magdalene laundries and Tuam babies.

What is your proposed solution to the case where a women just does want to be pregnant? Does not want the physical and mental stress of being pregnant, does not want the medical trauma of birth. You seem to be of the opinion that she should go through stress and trauma that she does not want to go through. In any other case than pregnancy, we would call the imposition of physical pain torture.

They don't have one.
Enforced incubation.

Poyndexter

[quote="ELM327;106860410"



Unfortunately you do, but I'd prefer for the health and rights of our women I'd prefer if you didn't[/quote]

And unfortunately for the unborn you have a vote. But its a democracy we live in. Not the dictatorship you wish?

RobertKK

ELM327 wrote: »

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

Lost the debate?
Did you even watch it?

Yes, he certainly didn't win it, which his retweet confirms as he felt he needed to discredit the person who had debated him.
Winners don't need to lie to try and discredit.

ELM327

Poyndexter wrote: »

And unfortunately for the unborn you have a vote. But its a democracy we live in. Not the dictatorship you wish?

Thankfully for the rights and health of our women, you lot enumerate 27% of the electorate.

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes, he certainly didn't win it, which his retweet confirms as he felt he needed to discredit the person who had debated him.
Winners don't need to discredit.

Lmao.

Poyndexter

swampgas wrote: »

And we're back ... it's Groundhog Day.

Sorry you left yourself wide open on that one. Couldn’t resist

dudara

I must add that I really changed my opinion of Micheal Martin when he announced his position on the 8th. Both him and Leo Varadkar would have a lot of traditional TDs and party members, and being politicians, they well understand the risk of a backlash from traditional voters. They obviously feel that this is more important. I’m impressed hugely by their stance

swampgas

Poyndexter wrote: »

Sorry you left yourself wide open on that one. Couldn’t resist

Not getting it, I'm afraid.

I'd be curious to know how much of this thread you've read back over? Have you just jumped in now?

Because the whole "use contraception/keep your legs closed if you don't want to be pregnant" nonsense has been done to death. And the reality is there are lots of reasons why sensible people taking sensible precautions get pregnant, and all you have to offer is ... what? Adoption?

Poyndexter

ELM327 wrote: »

Thankfully for the rights and health of our women, you lot enumerate 27% of the electorate.


Lmao.

Didn’t know you conducted a poll of the entire electorate of the country? We’ll see what that figure is on May 26th when the counting is done. Although I feel yes will win, the no side will be a lot higher than 27 percent

Poyndexter

swampgas wrote: »

Not getting it, I'm afraid.

I'd be curious to know how much of this thread you've read back over? Have you just jumped in now?

Because the whole "use contraception/keep you legs closed if you don't want to be pregnant" nonsense has been done to death. And the reality is there are lots of reasons why sensible people taking sensible precautions get pregnant, and all you have to offer is ... what? Adoption?

It was a joke will you calm down. You got a stipod answer to a stupid question get over it.

pitifulgod

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes, he certainly didn't win it, which his retweet confirms as he felt he needed to discredit the person who had debated him.
Winners don't need to lie to try and discredit.

There's no lying in what was stated.... It is relevant, she didn't respond by saying she doesn't with agree with that position on sex education. The reality is that, Pure in Heart is something she supports. She didn't win on Friday btw. :rolleyes: It's pretty telling when you're outraged by facts being stated.

ELM327

Poyndexter wrote: »

Didn’t know you conducted a poll of the entire electorate of the country? We’ll see what that figure is on May 26th when the counting is done. Although I feel yes will win, the no side will be a lot higher than 27 percent

Many polls have been done with relatively consistent data. Acceptable poll size is generally 1000.
All of which has NO at below 30%. And not only that, even allowing for 100% conversion from "dont know" to "NO", the NO side still doesnt get 50%.

ELM327

Poyndexter wrote: »

It was a joke will you calm down. You got a stipod answer to a stupid question get over it.

A Stipod (sic) answer?
Is that the same kind of stipod (sic) that suggests adoption as a viable option to terminate a pregnancy?

Wrongway1985

Martina1991 wrote: »

The anti choice people here (mostly men it seems) will never have their lives put in danger because of it. For many anti choice people a yes vote won't impact their lives at all.

That does seem to be the case (I'm a guy btw), I really hope you and many other women get what ye want, outside the confines of boards however I know a few women mostly swayed by religious opinion who are strongly against repealing (more so than men).

swampgas

Poyndexter wrote: »

It was a joke will you calm down. You got a stipod answer to a stupid question get over it.

I'm perfectly calm, thanks.

So, any chance of you explaining why you think a No vote is the right thing to do?

You obviously seem to think that healthy women who have a crisis pregnancy should just go ahead with it, with the constitution forcing them to if need be. Have you ever asked any of the women in your life what their take on it is?

Do you have a sister or niece or aunt who you would be happy to see forced into an unwanted pregnancy against her will?

baylah17

Poyndexter wrote: »

bubblypop wrote: »

What is your solution for a woman who doesn't wish to be pregnant?

Use protection? Birth control?

So all women should take the pill to protect against pregnancy due to rape?

You really have a low opinion of women and women's rights

RobertKK

ELM327 wrote: »

Many polls have been done with relatively consistent data. Acceptable poll size is generally 1000.
All of which has NO at below 30%. And not only that, even allowing for 100% conversion from "dont know" to "NO", the NO side still doesnt get 50%.

The Ireland thinks poll for the Daily Mail had No at 31% (+4%) and Yes at 46%(-7%)

Poyndexter

swampgas wrote: »

I'm perfectly calm, thanks.

So, any chance of you explaining why you think a No vote is the right thing to do ?

Already explained in my original post.

robarmstrong

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes, he certainly didn't win it, which his retweet confirms as he felt he needed to discredit the person who had debated him.
Winners don't need to lie to try and discredit.

Like the way the pro-life campaign lied about the "nurse" and tried to discredit the people who exposed him?

ELM327

Poyndexter wrote: »

Already explained in my original post.

Ah. Another dodge.
Poor diddums. Run out of rationale already have we? Naaawh.

RobertKK wrote: »

The Ireland thinks poll for the Daily Mail had No at 31% (+4%) and Yes at 46%(-7%)

Ah yes that trusted and respected paper of record.
That poll shows that just over 2 out of every 3 Irish people are not on the NO side. I don't know why you quote that as a backup for your side.

RobertKK

pitifulgod wrote: »

There's no lying in what was stated.... It is relevant, she didn't respond by saying she doesn't with agree with that position on sex education. The reality is that, Pure in Heart is something she supports. She didn't win on Friday btw. :rolleyes: It's pretty telling when you're outraged by facts being stated.

It is as he debated Wendy, not her husband, and most of the attack was on her husband. Then an openly gay man came out and said Wendy is a good friend - given the retweet by Boylan did contain overtures that Wendy and her husband are homophobic.

Poyndexter

baylah17 wrote: »

So all women should take the pill to protect against pregnancy due to rape?

You really have a low opinion of women and women's rights

Already explained my opinion in circumstances of rape and anyway i was joking but the yes side have obviously lost their sense of humour and the level of anger and hate in the yes side posts is something else i must say.

This is turning into a debate on womens rights rather than about abortion and the eight amendment ie if you vote no youre a monster who hates women despite the fact ive encountered more women who will be voting no than men

ELM327

RobertKK wrote: »

It is as he debated Wendy, not her husband, and most of the attack was on her husband. Then an openly gay man came out and said Wendy is a good friend - given the retweet by Boylan did contain overtures that Wendy and her husband are homophobic.

The same openly gay man who is pro gay rights (same sex marriage referendum) but anti-women's rights (judging by the "no" in his profile).

Yeah he's a well rounded citizen who judges all equally alright. Good thing for him as a gay man he won't face the crisis pregnancy situations at all.