The 8th amendment referendum - part 4

jill_valentine

cournioni wrote: »

You’re still not grasping my point though, if you kill outside the womb it’s completely unacceptable right? Why is it acceptable inside the womb?

If I was found planning to get a plane to England and grab a random baby out of a pram and throw it down a well, I could be prosecuted.

If I was found planning to get a plane to England to get an abortion, I couldn't.

More to the point, would No campaigners try to physically stop me? Restrain me? If not, why not? Why weren't they lobbying against my right to travel as angrily as they're lobbying against repeal of the 8th?

What you're asserting is that the two acts are identical in the minds of No campaigners. But held up to the light, they clearly aren't. They understand quite well that there's a difference.

ArmaniJeanss

Hmmmmm, after seemingly 149 posts about the UK, can I just point out again that we share very little culturally with the sink estates of the UK. Thankfully no areas of Ireland have been left to rot quite like parts of Glasgow, Middlesboro, Burnley, Stoke etc.
We have a decent benefit system, not one where staff seem incentivised to get people down to zero from already low payments.
We are not the UK, there is nothing in how we run our country that suggests abortion figures would be anywhere close.

For any undecided lurkers looking for something other this curiously relentless barrage of posts about the UK, can I also remind them that we are voting such that your living wives and daughters won't be denied cancer treatment during their pregnancy because it would harm their equal rights foetus, that no woman will be told that 'this is a catholic country' as a virus attacks her system, that women will be treated with respect and dignity.

cournioni

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Because I don't view it as the same. That my choice.

It's your choice to see it the way you choose and act accordingly. But to force that choice on others is wrong.

Why don’t you view it as the same? They are still the same baby, just in a different location.

Alive inside the womb is an acceptable killing but outside it’s deemed murder?

circadian

Digital_Guy wrote: »

Nothing at all if you're ok with a culture of abortion and more and more babies not having the right you enjoyed to be born I guess. Or the prospect of a 7 or 8 month old baby being aborted.

You do realise that pregnancies of 7 or 8 months are regularly terminated in Ireland right? Or "aborted" as the no campaign would have you believe.

These terminations are usually delivery by C-section or induction. Completely misleading to suggest otherwise.

Zubeneschamali

cournioni wrote: »

Why don’t you view it as the same? They are still the same baby, just in a different location.

No-one is going to kill viable babies, in or out of the womb.

jill_valentine

nullzero wrote: »

The scissor sisters (or the Mulhall sisters) famously murdered and dismembered their mothers partner (himself an extremely nasty character) and distributed his body parts around Dublin, his head was never found. They gained the name scissor sisters because of the brutality of their crime and the then popularity of the band of the same name.

Which led to a very strange period of time when very serious mainstream journalists were using a crude slang term for a lesbian sex act in their reports every day to a blissfully unaware public.

namloc1980

Digital_Guy wrote: »

Nothing at all if you're ok with a culture of abortion and more and more babies not having the right you enjoyed to be born I guess. Or the prospect of a 7 or 8 month old baby being aborted.

Where are you coming up with this from?

Airyfairy12

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Yes i said that. I am opposed to men controlling women.

But this referendum is not about men controlling women. Many women are voting no.

Do you understand?

Of course some women are voting no, but the majority are voting Yes. The no canvassers in my town tend to be very old men and women spouting religious reasons and false information about the referendum, I got screamed at today by a no canvasser who was atleast 80, all for saying im voting Yes.. The no voters on my facebook newsfeed are mostly men and either well known misogynists or have genuine mental illness like schizophrenia, their reason for voting no is out of touch with reality.
I know 2 women who are voting No. One of them is extremely religious, goes to mass and confession every week, voted no in the marriage referendum and has tried to 'save' me with her religious dogma in the past. The second is a woman who ive been unfortunate enough to encounter once over a year ago. She was selling stuff and I went to buy from her, I left our 10 minute encounter feeling awful about myself as she was so judgmental and down right mean. I remember getting back into the car and my dad asking me what was wrong as I was so quiet. This had nothing to do with the referendum btw, she just has that way about her.
Ive had much older female relatives who ive not seen or spoken to in years contact me to ask me to vote Yes.

This silly argument that im constantly hearing from certain types of men about how 'women are voting no too' is a ridiculous comment. Women can, and often do have different opinions, being people and everything. I know thats a shock for you.

antiskeptic

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No-one is going to kill viable babies, in or out of the womb.

Viable. Has a 'survival of the fittest' ring to it

Digital_Guy

Paranoid Bob wrote: »

- "You were raped. Oh you poor dear. Who did this to you? We'll make sure they pay!"
- "uh" (I have to give a name or they'll know I'm lying and I won't get the abortion) "It was John."


.. cue the investigation that makes John's life a misery and adds more guilt and shame on the woman who just needed support.

That's quite the leap, I never suggested that any names be given. And who would lie if we trust women? Very, very few I'd imagine.

nullzero

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Where did I? You need to learn to read things properly.

The poster bolded a part of their story they posted. This was a lead on from the previous message of mine he replied to.

The bolded part was an accusation by anti abortion groups. And that's what was being replied to.

You didn't clarify that in your original post in reply to the issue, although it is reasonable to expect such groups to be allowed to have a say in the debate and the point made wasn't exactly on the extreme end of the scale.

Digital_Guy

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Where did I? You need to learn to read things properly.

The poster bolded a part of their story they posted. This was a lead on from the previous message of mine he replied to.

The bolded part was an accusation by anti abortion groups. And that's what was being replied to.

You still haven't read the article, have you?! :eek: Where the head of the Royal College of Midwives is fine with abortion at ANY STAGE??

cournioni

jill_valentine wrote: »

If I was found planning to get a plane to England and grab a random baby out of a pram and throw it down a well, I could be prosecuted.

If I was found planning to get a plane to England to get an abortion, I couldn't.

More to the point, would No campaigners try to physically stop me? Restrain me? If not, why not? Why weren't they lobbying against my right to travel as angrily as they're lobbying against repeal of the 8th?

What you're asserting is that the two acts are identical in the minds of No campaigners. But held up to the light, they clearly aren't. They understand quite well that there's a difference.

I disagree with abortion on demand no matter where it is.

Guy:Incognito

cournioni wrote: »

Why don’t you view it as the same? They are still the same baby, just in a different location.

Alive inside the womb is an acceptable killing but outside it’s deemed murder?

You can keep saying it but I don't

If a child is past the stage of viability and not suffering a ffa, it will be delivered.

Why do you count your age as the number of birthdays you've had and not the time since birth plus 9 months?

Overheal

nullzero wrote: »

The scissor sisters (or the Mulhall sisters) famously murdered and dismembered their mothers partner (himself an extremely nasty character) and distributed his body parts around Dublin, his head was never found. They gained the name scissor sisters because of the brutality of their crime and the then popularity of the band of the same name.

That is indeed horrific. But doesn’t seem related, respectfully, to the trust a woman ought to be shown to determine what she does with her own body, or with anything gestating in it.

Cupcake_Crisis

cournioni wrote: »

Why don’t you view it as the same? They are still the same baby, just in a different location.

Alive inside the womb is an acceptable killing but outside it’s deemed murder?

Why don’t medical professionals view it as the same? Why doesn’t the church or the state?

namloc1980

cournioni wrote: »

I disagree with abortion on demand no matter where it is.

Do you support the repeal of the 13th & 14th amendments??

Hotblack Desiato

angel eyes 2012 wrote: »

Does anyone know if it's 50 meters from the entrance used by voters to enter the building, any entrance to the building or the actual building itself? I still believe it was less than 50 meters from the main entrance anyway.

This is a criminal matter. There is a ban 100m in either direction from the entrance of the polling station. There should be a Garda present at every polling station, ask them to take action, otherwise dial 999.

antiskeptic

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Hmmmmm, after seemingly 149 posts about the UK, can I just point out again that we share very little culturally with the sink estates of the UK. Thankfully no areas of Ireland have been left to rot quite like parts of Glasgow, Middlesboro, Burnley, Stoke etc.
We have a decent benefit system, not one where staff seem incentivised to get people down to zero from already low payments.
We are not the UK, there is nothing in how we run our country that suggests abortion figures would be anywhere close.

For any undecided lurkers looking for something other this curiously relentless barrage of posts about the UK, can I also remind them that we are voting such that your living wives and daughters won't be denied cancer treatment during their pregnancy because it would harm their equal rights foetus, that no woman will be told that 'this is a catholic country' as a virus attacks her system, that women will be treated with respect and dignity.

If not 'anywhere close' how close.

The UK has a rate of 1 abortions to every 4 live births. On the debate the other night, the estimate for here was 1 in 12

???

gctest50

antiskeptic wrote: »

Viable. Has a 'survival of the fittest' ring to it

trying to control words people use by discouraging some of them ?


hmmm ....... Institute recommended New-Speek ?

jill_valentine

cournioni wrote: »

I disagree with abortion on demand no matter where it is.

But you are not opposing women openly travelling for what, you are telling me, you consider a murder.

Why not?

namloc1980

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

This is a criminal matter. There is a ban 100m in either direction from the entrance of the polling station. There should be a Garda present at every polling station, ask them to take action, otherwise dial 999.

It's 50m, just for clarity.

NIMAN

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

This is a criminal matter. There is a ban 100m in either direction from the entrance of the polling station. There should be a Garda present at every polling station, ask them to take action, otherwise dial 999.

I'd like to think we are mature enough not to dial 999 with such nonsense.

dudara

Digital_Guy wrote: »

That's quite the leap, I never suggested that any names be given. And who would lie if we trust women? Very, very few I'd imagine.

I disagree. There is a not unsubstantial cohort of women who choose not to continue a pregnancy every year. If abortion remains generally illegal, women will turn to any channel they can to access it. This could mean travelling to England or the Netherlands, ordering abortion pills or signing a declaration of rape (especially if there are no consequences). After all, doing the latter would allow you to access safe abortion in your own country.

I think you completely fail to grasp how much a pregnancy impacts women who do not want to remain pregnant. You need to listen to the voices of women, the people who carry the pregnancy, give birth and spend a life in motherhood. Thankfully most pregnancies are wanted and happy. But there are enough which are not wanted or which are not happy

nullzero

Overheal wrote: »

That is indeed horrific. But doesn’t seem related, respectfully, to the trust a woman ought to be shown to determine what she does with her own body, or with anything gestating in it.

I didn't make the comment.
It was made in relation to trusting women by another poster.
I do find it interesting that you've never heard of the case, you do live in Ireland I take it?

namloc1980

NIMAN wrote: »

I'd like to think we are mature enough not to dial 999 with such nonsense.

It's classified as potential voter intimidation and subject to up to 2 years imprisonment. Hardly nonsense.

antiskeptic

namloc1980 wrote: »

Do you support the repeal of the 13th & 14th amendments??

Do you support women continuing to be forced to travel to the UK by restrictions imposed by our proposed 'tighter than the UK' legislation

nullzero

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

This is a criminal matter. There is a ban 100m in either direction from the entrance of the polling station. There should be a Garda present at every polling station, ask them to take action, otherwise dial 999.

I don't think it is an issue that needs to be resolved by dialing 999 which is an emergency number, maybe call your local Garda station.

pitifulgod

So I'm not normally one to interact with people on trains. Was getting the Dublin Cork train which was filled with Yes voters. But I got the no canvassers next to me. They were so incredibly nasty, upset other passengers and described abortions to other passengers. So that was uncomfortable.

Then a guy asked me if I was voting yes. (had a badge on). He proceeded to shout at me about the cost on the tax payer. Conclusion is, the most adamant and vocal of no voters are incredibly nasty. Nobody on the train treated those people with disrespect, the same cannot be said of them.

NuMarvel

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

This is a criminal matter. There is a ban 100m in either direction from the entrance of the polling station. There should be a Garda present at every polling station, ask them to take action, otherwise dial 999.

Do NOT dial 999. This is not an emergency. If there are posters ask the clerks at the polling station who you can report it to.

Frankly, we need to be more focused on getting people to turn up to vote tomorrow than whether posters are within 50 metres or not. That is not going to be the deciding factor in someone's vote.

Hellrazer

Shurimgreat wrote: »

But this referendum is not about men controlling women. Many women are voting no.

Why any woman in their right mind is voting no is beyond me.

If not for themselves they need to vote YES for their daughters,future grand daughters etc.

And btw it is not necessarily about men controlling women it goes much deeper than that. Its actually about other women controlling women. Women who you`d expect to have a level of sympathy with women who choose to have a termination.

Ive said it before and Ill say it again.
This referendum is about choice. A womans choice to do what she wants with her own body.

And for those undecided regardless of your views on whether you agree with abortion or not get out there and vote YES tomorrow even if its just to give women a choice.

It is possible to be Pro choice and anti abortion.

Guy:Incognito

How many "Pro life" people smoke around their children?

Mrsmum

Deedsie wrote: »

Please any no voters reconsider your position... It is so cruel to force a mother to carry a child that is incompatible with life as long as the babies heart keeps beating. The baby can't and won't survive. You are forcing people to travel to Britain to have an abortion and then carry the baby home to bury it in Ireland.

I have stayed out of these debates but this is too important to stay out entirely. Please vote yes tomorrow for heartbroken mothers and fathers and their baby that has no hope of survival. Give them some bit of relief and let them choose what is the right thing for them to do in their own country.

Please vote yes.

And yet these are the parents who would give anything for their babies to be healthy and if they could wave a magic wand and make them so, these parents would be the last parents on earth to abort their precious children. It is strange then that to help them we must be ok with perfectly healthy babies being aborted. A step too far for me so I'm voting no.

namloc1980

antiskeptic wrote: »

Do you support women continuing to be forced to travel to the UK by restrictions imposed by our proposed 'tighter than the UK' legislation

What??

nullzero

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

How many "Pro life" people smoke around their children?

What has that got to do with anything?
What sort of parent willfully exposes their child carcinogens full stop?
Hardly a relevant point.

P_1

Lets make some history tomorrow. Let's remove a stain on our history. Lets cast off the remaining influence of an evil foreign empire. Lets just do the right thing and trust women.

Stonedpilot

pitifulgod wrote: »

So I'm not normally one to interact with people on trains. Was getting the Dublin Cork train which was filled with Yes voters. But I got the no canvassers next to me. They were so incredibly nasty, upset other passengers and described abortions to other passengers. So that was uncomfortable.

Then a guy asked me if I was voting yes. (had a badge on). He proceeded to shout at me about the cost on the tax payer. Conclusion is, the most adamant and vocal of no voters are incredibly nasty. Nobody on the train treated those people with disrespect, the same cannot be said of them.

Well there has been countless tales of yes voters being dicks as well. No biggie.

Story sounds iffy. Guy asks you what way you were voting despite wearing a yes badge?. Hmmmm.

Unless he was blind?.

nullzero

Hellrazer wrote: »

Why any woman in their right mind is voting no is beyond me.

If not for themselves they need to vote YES for their daughters,future grand daughters etc.

And btw it is not necessarily about men controlling women it goes much deeper than that. Its actually about other women controlling women. Women who you`d expect to have a level of sympathy with women who choose to have a termination.

Ive said it before and Ill say it again.
This referendum is about choice. A womans choice to do what she wants with her own body.

And for those undecided regardless of your views on whether you agree with abortion or not get out there and vote YES tomorrow even if its just to give women a choice.

It is possible to be Pro choice and anti abortion.

Women have the right to their opinions and shouldn't be lumped into groups based on gender.

Conservatory

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

This is a criminal matter. There is a ban 100m in either direction from the entrance of the polling station. There should be a Garda present at every polling station, ask them to take action, otherwise dial 999.

Just checked in here before bed and all I can say is woah.
Take a step back there buddy. Are you sure you are mature enough to influence how people vote on such a topic?
When you say trust women is this what’ll happen? 999 calls around the country for Garda to measure poster distances?

nullzero

P_1 wrote: »

Lets make some history tomorrow. Let's remove a stain on our history. Lets cast off the remaining influence of an evil foreign empire. Lets just do the right thing and trust women.

Evil foreign empire?

antiskeptic

dudara wrote: »

I disagree. There is a not unsubstantial cohort of women who choose not to continue a pregnancy every year. If abortion remains generally illegal, women will turn to any channel they can to access it.

Seemingly not. The rise in the UK went from a baseline of 25,000 legal abortions in year 1 after legalisation ... to 167,000 in year 5.

Are we to suppose it took 5 years to convince ca.122, 000 women p.a. to turn away from back street abortions they had long being having.

Or do you suppose something fundamentally changed in that society?

Guy:Incognito

nullzero wrote: »

What has that got to do with anything?
What sort of parent willfully exposes their child carcinogens full stop?
Hardly a relevant point.

Just an observation. Surely they should be doing everything to promote their child's health.

Anyway, it's still much more relevant that plenty of their ****e spouted and used as excuses.

Hellrazer

nullzero wrote: »

Women have the right to their opinions and shouldn't be lumped into groups based on gender.

Of course they have a right to their opinion. It just really baffles me why a law which openly discriminates against women has so many female supporters that want to keep it in place.

antiskeptic

Conservatory wrote: »

Just checked in here before bed and all I can say is woah.
Take a step back there buddy. Are you sure you are mature enough to influence how people vote on such a topic?
When you say trust women is this what’ll happen? 999 calls around the country for Garda to measure poster distances?

He's back!

Paranoid Bob

Digital_Guy wrote: »

That's quite the leap, I never suggested that any names be given. And who would lie if we trust women? Very, very few I'd imagine.

OK; so your position is that you can get an abortion if you sign a declaration that you were raped, but there is no need to look at evidence or start an investigation.


Floodgates! Abortion on demand!


I guess that does not work. Rape is a very serious crime, and if someone makes an allegation then as a society it is important we find the perpetrator.

nullzero

Hellrazer wrote: »

Of course they have a right to their opinion. It just really baffles me why a law which openly discriminates against women has so many female supporters that want to keep it in place.

Perhaps their opinions are more nuanced, maybe they don't agree with the unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks but agree with the rest?

gmisk

Hellrazer wrote: »

Why any woman in their right mind is voting no is beyond me.

If not for themselves they need to vote YES for their daughters,future grand daughters etc.

And btw it is not necessarily about men controlling women it goes much deeper than that. Its actually about other women controlling women. Women who you`d expect to have a level of sympathy with women who choose to have a termination.

Ive said it before and Ill say it again.
This referendum is about choice. A womans choice to do what she wants with her own body.

And for those undecided regardless of your views on whether you agree with abortion or not get out there and vote YES tomorrow even if its just to give women a choice.

It is possible to be Pro choice and anti abortion.

Absolutely Spot on, thank you.

I am a man, a gay man, this will never affect me directly, but I have friends who have been affected horribly by it.
I have also read enough real life stories on the in her shoes page to see the 8th has to be repealed.
Voting no offers no solutions to the problem it just continues to force woman and couples to travel to the UK or order pills illegally online.
The No side are now saying we can legislate for FFA rape etc (we can't), and even if it was ever attempted they would still vote against it.

Hope the yes crowd vote, we need everyone, you can be sure the No side will.

Bed time for me up early to vote Yes, night all.
Repeal the 8th.

nullzero

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Just an observation. Surely they should be doing everything to promote their child's health.

Anyway, it's still much more relevant that plenty of their ****e spouted and used as excuses.

I have no idea what relevance this has to the referendum.

nullzero

P_1 wrote: »

Lets make some history tomorrow. Let's remove a stain on our history. Lets cast off the remaining influence of an evil foreign empire. Lets just do the right thing and trust women.

Have to quote this again I'm afraid as it can get lost all too easily.
What foreign empire are we talking about here?

Hellrazer

nullzero wrote: »

Perhaps their opinions are more nuanced, maybe they don't agree with the unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks but agree with the rest?

That's quite possible. But as I said before you can still be pro womens choice but not necessarily agree with abortion.

What one woman chooses to do in the case of an unwanted pregnancy shouldn't really be anyones elses concern.