The 8th Amendment Part 2 - Mod Warning in OP

Mr.H

david75 wrote:

I thought that was in the UK?

It is but they started debating it here. It's probably not related to be honest. Just stating where I was coming from.

Mr.H

david75 wrote:

How do you know anyone’s reported you to get you banned? You’re only posting here a day or two.

There were previous posters banned that sound remarkably like you but that’s par for the course language, derailing, hysteria and sideshow fron the pro life posters we’ve seen come and go throughout the past few weeks.

Because when the thread was locked for an hour the other evening, it was the excuse given by the mod. I was the only one on one side of the argument and everyone else disagreed. No issue with that. I just don't like the reporting to get someone banned just because you think they have different views.

I get that. But I haven't said anything offensive so how can anyone think I am being offensive.

In fact I haven't tried to influence anyone's views or change anyone's mind. I am pro choice, said it multiple times. But I smiled to the ideas that I don't know if I'm on the right side. But right now my gut is telling me this is the right choice.

I just wish i could read something that tells me its the right choice. But so far it's been provocative stories (yes from both sides) trying to get a cheap point across.

robarmstrong

Mr.H wrote: »

I wouldn't really worry about rob. They come across as very naive. Everything they said to you they said to me also. Even down to the mask off rubbish.

In fact they tried to get me banned by reporting all my posts. Didn't say anything offensive but claimed I was baiting.

I come across as naive?

Have you read half the absolute ridiculous sh!te you post? half of it doesn't make sense and the other half is flamebait.

There's one particular user that likes all those kind of posts you's put out and he's been either chased out of every thread related to this discussion for soapboxing or been threadbanned.

I could count the amount of braincells put into the posts yourself and your buddies like on one hand.

robarmstrong

Mr.H wrote: »

I baited nobody. You or your friends tried to get me banned and we're told to cop on. The thread was even locked because of are being ridiculous.

How is me saying I'm pro choice baiting you?

Maybe of you grew up and acted like an adult you would be able to have an intelligent conversation

Don't talk to me about intelligent conversations you don't post intelligent enough things to be even held in that standard.

Skylinehead

Back on topic

erica74

Anyway...

Just found this
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/referendum-tracker
Interesting for anyone watching politicians or particular parties.

https://www.wtva.com/content/national/477569043.html?ref=043
Limiting access to abortion doesn't lower the amount of abortions but does make them unsafe.

Laws that seek to limit abortions around the world may not lower the rate of abortions but could make them less safe, according to a new report that illustrates the trend.

In countries with the fewest restrictions, only 1% of abortions were the "least safe" kind from 2010 to 2014. That number jumps to 31% in the most restrictive countries, according to the report, released Tuesday by the Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive rights think tank.

During the same period, abortions happened roughly as frequently in the most restrictive countries as they did in the least restrictive: 37 versus 34 abortions each year for every 1,000 women aged 15 to 44.

https://www.wtva.com/content/national/477713323.html?ref=323
Women in Poland have to go to Germany.

Poland has some of the most restrictive laws in Europe when it comes to abortion. An estimated 80,000 Polish women a year go abroad or seek illegal abortions at home, according to Polish women's rights groups. The procedure is legal in only three cases: if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest, or if it endangers the life of the mother.

Now, the government is pushing through a new bill targeting the third and -- most commonly cited -- reason for abortion: damage to the fetus.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/women-feel-need-for-abortion-cover-stories-for-work-survey-author-says-1.3437162?mode=amp
Another factor women have to deal with, the cover story for their employer.

Fiona Bloomer of the University of Ulster said the research, carried out on behalf of the Alliance for Choice, found that women in Ireland feel they have to come up with an excuse for their absence from work when they are taking time off to have an abortion.

“There is pressure in that. When you are telling lies upon lies upon lies. The burden of that on top of everything else,” she said. “I think the general stigma of silencing over abortion means that women are reluctant to speak support. They are not sure of who to turn to.”

Doctor Jimbob

Mr.H wrote: »

Fair point.

My comment is because in here it seems to be mostly pro choice and anyone who appears to be opposed is teamed up on. On fact I said I am pro choice and just because I didn't just agree with everyone, people here reported my posts to get me banned.

Do you think that is mature behaviour?

I didn't say anything offensive yet got loads of reports.......

I don't think that's mature behaviour either, no. I just find it strange that you're focusing on the faults of the side you claim to be on, when the other side are being at least as bad (worse, IMO, but I can see people's views on that would different based on their stance on the debate).

I'd agree it's a bit daft reporting you when you haven't said anything offensive, but I can also see why people might assume you're trolling given the sheer ount of posters claiming to be pro-choice when they're clearly anything but. It would make anyone a bit sceptical.

Yes it was debated. By a select few. Do you think the debate is over? Nothing has been passed yet and it looks like it will be very close.

To pretend there is nothing to debate is that set yourself for a no vote.

I'm not sure there is anything left to debate though. People are of course free to disagree with the debates so far, but at this stage I think every argument has been covered and it's just a case of people picking which side they agree with.

erica74

And for anyone wondering about the timeline

So why do we still not know the
date of the referendum?

The Government cannot confirm the date of the referendum until the Referendum Bill passes through the Houses of the Oireachtas. It will be introduced to the Dáil this week and is expected it will be completed by the end of March. At that juncture, the date can be confirmed.

When is the referendum expected to be?

The rules state a referendum must be held no earlier than 30 days, and no later than 90 days after the Bill has been passed. The Government is examining only two options - May 25th and June 8th. Those in favour of change say it is vital to have the referendum on May 25th as most students will leave the country for the summer.

What happens in the meantime?

Well, now the heads of the Referendum Bill have been published, the Referendum Commission can be established. It cannot begin its information campaign until the date is known but it can recruit staff and prepare literature in this regard.

What about the legislation that could replace the Eighth Amendment?

The Government will publish a policy paper outlining how it intends to legislate, in the event of repeal. However, the Heads of a Bill will not be complete until the end of March. It is expected it will be very prescriptive and detailed.

Will the Oireachtas consider the legislation
before the Referendum?

No. It will not have the opportunity to scrutinise the Bill before the referendum takes place. It is expected to face significant opposition in the Oireachtas, in the event of a vote to repeal.

Yeah_Right

I'm originally from a country that has legal abortion. And its no big deal. The clinics are discreet. I think it's free. Not sure what limits there as far as how many weeks. Strangely enough there isn't a huge demand as far as I know. There aren't queues of girls/women lining up for abortions. I don't believe there is a frequent flyer card or anything like that. If you need/want an abortion you get one. Of the hundreds of females I know from back home only few have said they had an abortion.

Maybe its because there was compulsory, thorough sex ed and free/subsidised contraception. That probably helps.

I was involved in 2 abortions. I think. A girl at university that I had a ONS with later claimed she had to have an abortion because of it. We used condoms but maybe she was telling the truth. I say maybe because she was stalker crazy! The other was a girl who I was a FB with. Once again we used condoms but as we all know they aren't 100%. Neither of us wanted kids and we certainly didn't want to have a relationship so I took her to the clinic. She had made the appointment. We were interviewed together. They did some tests on her and interviewed her again (to make sure I wasn't forcing her to do it) then she went through for the procedure. It took a few hours from start to finish (interviews, tests, procedure, recovery) then I drove her home. One of her friends came round to look after her that evening and she was back in work the next day (I think).

The amazing thing is with all this going on the country hasn't collapsed, no zombie apocalypse. There's a decent standard of living, good education, robust economy and life goes on.

Guy:Incognito

I think I'll definitely vote to save the 8th now that I got to sit in a line of traffic behind a mobile advertising board going down the M50 at 60kmph with the pro life ad on 3 sides. ****ing numpties.

Maybe they were hoping to kill off a few fully grown adults by causing a pile up to make way for all the babies they want to "save"

statesaver

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I think I'll definitely vote to save the 8th now that I got to sit in a line of traffic behind a mobile advertising board going down the M50 at 60kmph with the pro life ad on 3 sides. ****ing numpties.

Maybe they were hoping to kill off a few fully grown adults by causing a pile up to make way for all the babies they want to "save"

Wha ???? That is fùcking silly ****.
Grow up

Zubeneschamali

italodisco wrote: »

I've never been one to have a conscience until now

OK, I believe you there.

January

statesaver wrote: »

Wha ???? That is fùcking silly ****.
Grow up

He was being sarcastic

Zubeneschamali

thee glitz wrote: »

I take it you won't pretend to have any specific interest in 'special circumstances' situations.

Correct.

I am not and never have been pretending to care about victims of rape and incest.

statesaver

January wrote: »

He was being sarcastic

And you speak for him/her ? Why ?

Annasopra

thee glitz wrote: »

That's exactly why it matters. Are we all gathered here to discuss repealing so women getting the treatment they need, or just pretending and using special cases as a justification for abortion for any reason?

Who am I to judge any person about the decisions they make for abortion on request? This thing about "special cases" is ridiculous. There are a huge myriad of reasons why abortion on request may be the right decision for pregnant people.

Achasanai

Mr.H wrote: »

In fact I haven't tried to influence anyone's views or change anyone's mind. I am pro choice, said it multiple times. But I smiled to the ideas that I don't know if I'm on the right side. But right now my gut is telling me this is the right choice.

I just wish i could read something that tells me its the right choice. But so far it's been provocative stories (yes from both sides) trying to get a cheap point across.

Where does your pro-choice come from, though? Surely that would tell you whether what you'll be voting on is the right choice or not?

But if it's not based on whether a woman has bodily autonomy over her body, would some of Erica74's links not be fairly persuasive?

erica74 wrote: »

https://www.wtva.com/content/national/477569043.html?ref=043
Limiting access to abortion doesn't lower the amount of abortions but does make them unsafe.

freshpopcorn

Do people here notice much going on social media about this?
I've approx eight friends on faceboook who are into liking and sharing posts and they'd be about 50/50 regarding the side their on. We're all pushing into the second half of our twenties now.
Locally there's a few campaigning on both sides as well but nothing much. Going on. A few extra did get involved in the marriage referendum in early May but they never called to us.

Ave Sodalis

freshpopcorn wrote:

Do people here notice much going on social media about this? I've approx eight friends on faceboook who are into liking and sharing posts and they'd be about 50/50 regarding the side their on. We're all pushing into the second half of our twenties now. Locally there's a few campaigning on both sides as well but nothing much. Going on. A few extra did get involved in the marriage referendum in early May but they never called to us.

I think it's been very quiet. Other than the odd paid advert from pro-life that shows up on my Facebook feed, and those silly adverts on van, I'm only really hearing about it from Boards. I'm going to guess once a date is set, there will be more of a push? The marriage referendum had lots of time, and as a result it turned quite nasty.

freshpopcorn

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

I think it's been very quiet. Other than the odd paid advert from pro-life that shows up on my Facebook feed, and those silly adverts on van, I'm only really hearing about it from Boards. I'm going to guess once a date is set, there will be more of a push? The marriage referendum had lots of time, and as a result it turned quite nasty.

If you thought that was nasty I'd say avoid this one. There was lots of jokes/messing with the marriage one and I can't see it happening with this one.

david75

freshpopcorn wrote: »

If you thought that was nasty I'd say avoid this one. There was lots of jokes/messing with the marriage one and I can't see it happening with this one.

It’s already been revealed that pages taking as pro marriage equality that actually were set ups by the no side, have changed their names to pro repeal. In order to keep the followers of the pages.
So they’re pretendin to be for repeal but posting horrible sh!t.
Theliberal exposed on twitter is a good account to follow as is repeal shield to keep track of this stuff in case you want to make friends or family aware of these accounts

Mr.H

robarmstrong wrote:

I could count the amount of braincells put into the posts yourself and your buddies like on one hand.

robarmstrong wrote:

Don't talk to me about intelligent conversations you don't post intelligent enough things to be even held in that standard.

See this is the kinda stuff I'm talking about. You prefer the abuse angle to the talking one.

The only thing I can be accused of calling you is naive. I feel from your lack of depth in reply's that you come across as naive.

Why can't we just draw a line under this now and just start fresh? If you think my posts are baiting just ignore them. I mean isn't it better than being off topic?

freshpopcorn

freshpopcorn wrote: »

If you thought that was nasty I'd say avoid this one. There was lots of jokes/messing with the marriage one and I can't see it happening with this one.

The prolife side will keep their powder dry until closer to the actual date. If the really ramp up to early their is more chance of the mask slipping and potentially swaying undecided voters against them in my opinion.

Martina1991

freshpopcorn wrote:

Do people here notice much going on social media about this?.

I have an aunt in her 60s sharing pro life stuff. Today it was from a page called courage to love.

It's full of anecdotal stories of women who followed through with unplanned pregnancies, pictures of newborns and unfounded statistics of women becoming suicidal after an abortion.

It really annoys me when people blindly believe these pages without researching facts.

robarmstrong

Mr.H wrote: »

See this is the kinda stuff I'm talking about. You prefer the abuse angle to the talking one.

The only thing I can be accused of calling you is naive. I feel from your lack of depth in reply's that you come across as naive.

Why can't we just draw a line under this now and just start fresh? If you think my posts are baiting just ignore them. I mean isn't it better than being off topic?

This is my last response to you, then you're on the ignore list.

You can be accused of more than just "calling me naive".

You came in here and started spouting nonsense and being completely ignorant as to how contraception works, an ignorant view of how abortion actually works (there is no such thing as abortion on demand, as a pro-choicer apparently, you should know this, it's unrestricted abortion), you constantly referred to abortion as another form of contraception, you made claims with nothing to back you up.

You can be (and are) accused of much more than a simple slight against me, the fact you'd suggest otherwise is sheer ignorance to some of the things you've posted regarding your knowledge, understanding and interpretation of some of the things I've mentioned previously.

As I said, I'm not responding to you any more after this, you're on the ignore list, I'm not getting sucked into a debate with someone who can't see the ignorance in what they've previously posted.

I'll stick with the mods instructions, thanks.

NuMarvel

Mr.H wrote: »

Everyone has the right to vote or no. It is the demographic process.

If nobody makes an argument strong enough to change someone's views, then that someone has a right to vote whatever way they want.

I'm not sure what this has to do with my post, because I didn't say Glitz shouldn't have the right to vote; I pointed out that his reasons for voting No doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

As for making arguments to change someone's views, that only works if someone has considered the matter rationally and is open to considering other viewpoints in the first place. Or to put it another way, you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into the first place.

Mr.H

Achasanai wrote:

But if it's not based on whether a woman has bodily autonomy over her body, would some of Erica74's links not be fairly persuasive?

It is very persuasive. I read every single one of her links and found them very informative.

My pro choice comes from the fact people genuinely need it for medical reasons. Now listen that's my own personal view.

Will I be annoyed if it ends up with the flood gates being opened to abortions? No of course not. I'm OK with that if that's what we decide.

I guess I am being more harsh on the side I stand with because I feel like we are losing the moral high ground with some of the attitudes out there. Mainly on campuses. I feel like sometimes the extreme liberals let down their own side. I think that's why I can come across as on the other side. I do question the pro choice not because I want you or anyone to change your mind. But because I want you to reinforce my mind.

Listen none of this talking might matter but I know a scary amount of people who I thought would be voting yes and will be voting no. I don't think this is straight forward.

david75

Mr.H wrote: »

It is very persuasive. I read every single one of her links and found them very informative.

My pro choice comes from the fact people genuinely need it for medical reasons. Now listen that's my own personal view.

Will I be annoyed if it ends up with the flood gates being opened to abortions? No of course not. I'm OK with that if that's what we decide.

I guess I am being more harsh on the side I stand with because I feel like we are losing the moral high ground with some of the attitudes out there. Mainly on campuses. I feel like sometimes the extreme liberals let down their own side. I think that's why I can come across as on the other side. I do question the pro choice not because I want you or anyone to change your mind. But because I want you to reinforce my mind.

Listen none of this talking might matter but I know a scary amount of people who I thought would be voting yes and will be voting no. I don't think this is straight forward.

But you have no problem with sleeper agents from pro life taking up positions on campuses under false pretences *and then getting caught AND then denying it?* hello Kate ascough and presumably others.

Nobody’s buying what you’re selling mr H. You may as well give up.

Neyite

Ave Sodalis wrote: »

I think it's been very quiet. Other than the odd paid advert from pro-life that shows up on my Facebook feed, and those silly adverts on van, I'm only really hearing about it from Boards. I'm going to guess once a date is set, there will be more of a push? The marriage referendum had lots of time, and as a result it turned quite nasty.

There's a lot of people who will vote yes but not mention it on social media- I'm one of those.

A couple in my family are staunchly pro-life. The kind of Iona pro-lifers that would maintain that unwavering view in even the cases of rape, FFA etc. There's actually no point in debating with someone who thinks that a woman dying in childbirth is basically a holy martyr and removal at any stage after conception of a foetus is murder.

Guy:Incognito

statesaver wrote: »

And you speak for him/her ? Why ?

If it's very obvious what's going on, then people can answer all they like.


If I have an issue with anyone speaking for me I'll let them know, thanks.