Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

Itssoeasy

I just listened back to Bishop Kevin Doran and his remarks on RTE radio this morning. I don't get why the Catholic Church Hierarchy don't get that while they are entitled to their positions of issues and to block them wouldn't be correct. My issue is that the RCC seem to believe that their moral capital is still like it was decades ago. It's due to some very serious scandals which shouldn't be forgotten in any way that their moral authority is eroded. Also the catholic church provided health care and education(not that it was perfect by any means).

But saying that voters who voted yes and are catholics should go to confession just doesn't help the image that the catholic church aren't hearing what is happening.

doomshine

DubInMeath wrote: »

2007 I believe, only since then will they allow an unbaptised baby including of course stillbirth be buried in a catholic cemetery. I think they still believe in the concept of limbo however.

Aww, how nice of them. How considerate, how humane to cling to this kind of silly bollocks well into the 21st century.

Pugzilla

Itssoeasy wrote: »

My issue is that the RCC seem to believe that their moral capital is still like it was decades ago. It isn't due to some very serious scandals which shouldn't be forgotten in any way.

It never had any moral capital since the entire insitution is based on a jewish zombie fairytale written by primitive savages.

TheValeyard

Pugzilla wrote: »

It never had any moral capital since the entire insitution is based on a jewish zombie fairytale written by savages.

Edgy.

Itssoeasy

Pugzilla wrote: »

It never had any moral capital since the entire insitution is based on a jewish zombie fairytale written by primitive savages.

Well considering the power they had in this country to dictate policy and moral positions of the Irish people, I'll have to disagree.

captbarnacles

captbarnacles wrote: »

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1549439/The-Pope-ends-state-of-limbo-after-800-years.html

It's abolished I think much like heaven might be for Irish people if we don't behave

Sorry a possible theological opinion, as in Catholics are free to believe or not in limbo, I believe

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html

41. Therefore, besides the theory of Limbo (which remains a possible theological opinion), there can be other ways to integrate and safeguard the principles of the faith grounded in Scripture: the creation of the human being in Christ and his vocation to communion with God; the universal salvific will of God

Pugzilla

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

Edgy.

Go pray some more to your imaginary friend.

wexie

Pugzilla wrote: »

It never had any moral capital since the entire insitution is based on a jewish zombie fairytale written by primitive savages.

hmmmyeah....but a jewish zombie fairytale written by primitive savages and believed by hundreds of millions of people worldwide.

So dismissing it as a jewish zombie fairytale written by primitive savages is highly disrespectful, incredibly narrowminded and dangerously simplistic

Fighting Tao

SusieBlue wrote: »

I’m sick to my back teeth of seeing people dismiss the 8th having a hand in Savita’s death.
It’s infuriating, and the height of disrespect to the woman’s memory.

It's easier for some people to dismiss the truth when it conflicts with the pretty picture they have painted in their heads.

Fighting Tao

doomshine wrote: »

Aww, how nice of them. How considerate, how humane to cling to this kind of silly bollocks well into the 21st century.

Imagine the queues at the heaven check in desk and the confusion due to all the baggage.

Pugzilla

wexie wrote: »

hmmmyeah....but a jewish zombie fairytale written by primitive savages and believed by hundreds of millions of people worldwide.

So dismissing it as a jewish zombie fairytale written by primitive savages is highly disrespectful, incredibly narrowminded and dangerously simplistic

If I'm wrong, may their god strike everyone else who has posted in this thread dead.

spookwoman

Nettle Soup wrote: »

Some great posts Spookwoman!

Thanks. I see none of them have come on to argue the points. Can't say I'm lying cause it is a direct quote from the bible and the popes etc for and against that's written into history..

Pugzilla

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

Edgy.

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/edgy

SusieBlue

SusieBlue wrote: »

I’m sick to my back teeth of seeing people dismiss the 8th having a hand in Savita’s death.
It’s infuriating, and the height of disrespect to the woman’s memory.

Despite the disquiet the Miss P case caused, Savita's case and the public reaction to it was a catalyst for actually getting the referendum.
The no side of course aren't to happy that we got the referendum and that it didn't go their way, so of course their going to be still be saying the 8th had nothing to do with her death.

Their use of her image as part of their campaign backfired and pissed a lot of people off and just help sink them even more, so unfortunately your going to hear it said a lot.

Pugzilla

Murray TheDemonic TalkingSkull wrote: »

Edgy.

Be careful not to cut yourself with that edge.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

But she was told “this was a Catholic country” etc.

And whether you believed the 8th played a part, or the laws, or the medical code of ethics, or the hospital policies, it’s indisputable that had she been granted an abortion she would have lived. Voting for the repeal means that less constricting laws can be had which prevent ambiguous situations where the doctors are left citing Catholicism to deny a termination.

There’s also the people who were on those investigations who have come out and said the 8th played a role in her death. I can only assume that the reason this wasn’t in their report if because it was out of their scope to say so at the time.

Alright I must have read some lies

wexie

Deleted User wrote: »

Alright I must have read some lies

well there have been plenty of em around. You'll hardly have been the only one.

pleas advice

Fighting Tao wrote: »

It's easier for some people to dismiss the truth when it conflicts with the .. picture they have painted in their heads.

Indeed

SusieBlue

SusieBlue wrote: »

I’m sick to my back teeth of seeing people dismiss the 8th having a hand in Savita’s death.
It’s infuriating, and the height of disrespect to the woman’s memory.

Not sure I want to get into this.... I find it disrespectful that her death is used as a political tool. I was glad to see most of the Yes campaign avoided using her in their posters.

Fighting Tao

pleas advice wrote: »

Indeed

No need to edit my post. I specified 'pretty picture' deliberately because the status quo seemed perfect to the No side. I think the subtleness was wasted on you.

Fighting Tao

Deleted User wrote: »

Not sure I want to get into this.... I find it disrespectful that her death is used as a political tool. I was glad to see most of the Yes campaign avoided using her in their posters.

Yet using the idea that billions of babies were dying wasn't distasteful?

pleas advice

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Yet using the idea that billions of babies were dying wasn't distasteful?

Well, it is true...

What was that about pretty pictures?

Fighting Tao

pleas advice wrote: »

Well, it is true...

What was that about pretty pictures?

Not billions but certainly thousands or tens of thousands and buried in unmarked graves or dumped in septic tanks. However, the no side didn’t care about babies because babies were born.

Aidric

At the risk of repeating myself the Irish electorate have proved themselves to be informed, considerate and above all compassionate. They don't want to be preached at, rather they want the arguments to be presented to them in a balanced and honest way.

The no side seemed to think that they could ride on the coattails of the Trump and Brexit result by fudging and obfuscating as much as they could. At its heart was dishonesty. Fortunately the Irish electorate are capable of cutting through the nonsense. The headbangers leading the no campaign didn't have the self awareness to realise this.

That said, the absolute brass neck of some members of the catholic church coming out with the 'sinner' statements today. They were quiet during the lead up to the vote for good reason and they have no moral authority to chip in post debate with their pontificating.

Overheal

pleas advice wrote: »

Well, it is true...

No it's not. Not even when you distort the definition of a baby to include the fetus. Hell, since Roe vs. Wade the United States has only been able to "chop up" not even a mere 50 million "babies" - billions is a baseless lie. Stop hitting yourself.

pleas advice

Ok, I haven't seen these 'billions' mentioned before, but millions is true

Overheal

pleas advice wrote: »

Ok, I haven't seen these 'billions' mentioned before, but millions is true

Only when you pretend a fetus is the same thing as a baby - kind of like how the 8th pretended a zygote was the same thing as an adult woman.

pleas advice

Well, it's more true than denying the fetus is alive, or is human...

Overheal

pleas advice wrote: »

Well, it's more true than denying the fetus is alive, or is human...

Now you're confusing gestation with living.

CruelCoin

Aidric wrote: »

That said, the absolute brass neck of some members of the catholic church coming out with the 'sinner' statements today. They were quiet during the lead up to the vote for good reason and they have no moral authority to chip in post debate with their pontificating.

If you belong to a church that not 40 years ago advocated what was essentially slavery and tossing babies into septic tanks, then no, they have absolutely no right to try assume th moral high horse.

Some opinions can be quite rightly ridiculed.

gctest50

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Not sure I want to get into this.... I find it disrespectful that her death is used as a political tool. I was glad to see most of the Yes campaign avoided using her in their posters.

Her father said/asked it her image to be used by thr Yes side :

In April Mr Yalagi said he wanted Savita’s image used by those campaigning for a Yes vote.

“Of course. It should be shown. The rules in Ireland about abortion should change” he said.

From what I've read, the doctors failed to realise that she was in danger of dying from sepsis. Once they realised this, they performed an abortion but it was too little too late. The symptoms of sepsis are identical to that of pregnancy so its difficult to diagnose. It cannot be said with certainty that an earlier abortion would have saved her life. Women who have abortions die from it, women who give birth die from it, anyone who undergoes surgery can die from it. Sepsis is a common enough killer. I'm 100% pro repeal and pro choice but I do think her death has been used as a political tool.

This is the conclusion I came to not too long ago when I did a bit of research. If I have this wrong, I'll gladly change my position.

SusieBlue

[Deleted User] wrote: »

From what I've read, the doctors failed to realise that she was in danger of dying from sepsis. Once they realised this, they performed an abortion but it was too little too late. The symptoms of sepsis are identical to that of pregnancy so its difficult to diagnose. It cannot be said with certainty that an earlier abortion would have saved her life. Women who have abortions die from it, women who give birth die from it, anyone who undergoes surgery can die from it. Sepsis is a common enough killer. I'm 100% pro repeal and pro choice but I do think her death has been used as a political tool.

This is the conclusion I came to not too long ago when I did a bit of research. If I have this wrong, I'll gladly change my position.

The symptoms of pregnancy are in no way similar to sepsis. I stopped reading at that point.

SusieBlue

SusieBlue wrote: »

The symptoms of pregnancy are in no way similar to sepsis. I stopped reading at that point.

Read the last paragraph in this: https://www.sepsis.org/sepsis-and/pregnancy-and-childbirth/

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Fred Swanson

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Fair enough. I'll look into it

SusieBlue

She was having a miscarriage. There was no hope for the baby.
She was left in hospital for a week, at the start of which she requested an abortion to speed up the inevitable.
She was refused and made sit there waiting for her baby to die, a few extra requests for an abortion were also denied.
She was left to suffer, developed sepsis, and died.

If she had been granted an abortion when she first requested one she wouldn’t have developed sepsis and woulda have died.
It’s that simple.

Overheal

Deleted User wrote: »

From what I've read, the doctors failed to realise that she was in danger of dying from sepsis. Once they realised this, they performed an abortion but it was too little too late. The symptoms of sepsis are identical to that of pregnancy so its difficult to diagnose. It cannot be said with certainty that an earlier abortion would have saved her life. Women who have abortions die from it, women who give birth die from it, anyone who undergoes surgery can die from it. Sepsis is a common enough killer. I'm 100% pro repeal and pro choice but I do think her death has been used as a political tool.

This is the conclusion I came to not too long ago when I did a bit of research. If I have this wrong, I'll gladly change my position.

They knew she was at risk for sepsis, she was on antibiotics. "Inevitable Miscarriage" was recorded on her records. The next day,

"Aware that her baby will not survive, Mrs Halappanavar asks her consultant Dr Astbury for a termination.

The consultant tells her that "in this country it is not legal to terminate a pregnancy on the grounds of poor prognosis for a foetus". A foetal heartbeat is present and her life is not at risk so it is not legally possible to carry out the termination.

Midwife manager Ann Maria Burke tries to calm an upset Savita and explains that the termination cannot be carried out because Ireland is "a Catholic country"."

The next morning,

"Dr Uzockwu notes a foul-smelling discharge and diagnoses an infection of the foetal membranes. He puts Savita on stronger antibiotics and orders tests."

Same day, the Attending Consultant who told her this was a Catholic country,

"8.25am Another two hours pass and consultant Dr Astbury visits Savita.

She does not read the notes herself and is not told about the discharge by the register looking after Savita, Dr Anne Helps.

She is told about the infection diagnosis and expresses concern.

She says she may have to carry out a termination despite the heartbeat. More tests are ordered and more antibiotics prescribed. Sepsis is diagnosed, rather than severe sepsis, because her blood pressure is not low.

She told the inquest she would have carried out a termination sooner had she been told about the discharge."

By Astburys own admissions she would've terminated sooner if she felt it was *severe* sepsis, not just plain old sepsis(?!?) having previously denied the ability to perform a termination because "this is a catholic country," believing " "in this country it is not legal to terminate a pregnancy on the grounds of poor prognosis for a foetus." That poor prognosis being an "inevitable miscarriage."

The 8th amendment quite demonstrably played a heavy influence on the poor judgement of the attending consultant, which resulted in Savita's death. I fail to see how anything less is in dispute.

CruelCoin

Deleted User wrote: »

From what I've read, the doctors failed to realise that she was in danger of dying from sepsis. Once they realised this, they performed an abortion but it was too little too late. The symptoms of sepsis are identical to that of pregnancy so its difficult to diagnose. It cannot be said with certainty that an earlier abortion would have saved her life. Women who have abortions die from it, women who give birth die from it, anyone who undergoes surgery can die from it. Sepsis is a common enough killer. I'm 100% pro repeal and pro choice but I do think her death has been used as a political tool.

This is the conclusion I came to not too long ago when I did a bit of research. If I have this wrong, I'll gladly change my position.

Septic miscarriage that the doctors allowed to continue because her life was not in danger, or so they thought. By the time they did think her life was in danger, things had progressed too far.
That's the 8th in action right there, and directly contributed to her death.

CruelCoin

Overheal wrote: »

Midwife manager Ann Maria Burke tries to calm an upset Savita and explains that the termination cannot be carried out because Ireland is "a Catholic country"."[/I]

Same day, the Attending Consultant who told her this was a Catholic country,

By Astburys own admissions she would've terminated sooner if she felt it was *severe* sepsis, not just plain old sepsis(?!?) having previously denied the ability to perform a termination because "this is a catholic country,"

"We 'gon let u die 'cuz Jebus"

That's horrific reading.

Overheal

CruelCoin wrote: »

"We 'gon let u die 'cuz Jebus"

That's horrific reading.

It's like a bad episode of Star Trek Voyager and Savita was the poor soul on the away mission that got hospitalized planetside.

spookwoman

Deleted User wrote: »

From what I've read, the doctors failed to realise that she was in danger of dying from sepsis. Once they realised this, they performed an abortion but it was too little too late. The symptoms of sepsis are identical to that of pregnancy so its difficult to diagnose. It cannot be said with certainty that an earlier abortion would have saved her life. Women who have abortions die from it, women who give birth die from it, anyone who undergoes surgery can die from it. Sepsis is a common enough killer. I'm 100% pro repeal and pro choice but I do think her death has been used as a political tool.

This is the conclusion I came to not too long ago when I did a bit of research. If I have this wrong, I'll gladly change my position.

eh?? From page 25 on http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2013/06/savita-halappanavar-hse-report.pdf

Sunday 21st of October 2012: Pain and bulging membrane
Note Pain, particularly severe pain may be a symptom of intrauterine sepsis or the process of miscarriage and should alert a clinician to look for uterine tenderness and if necessary, additional investigations.
O&G SpR 1 recalled at interview: O&G SpR 1 recalled at interview that the patient was actively having pain and that “it was probably a matter of hours before miscarriage”. The management option considered by O&G SpR 1 and discussed with the patient was “conservative management, wait and see
what would happen naturally” and that “no other forms of management were discussed”.
O&G SpR (Specialist Registrar) 1 documented that these findings were discussed with the patient and her partner.
O&G SpR 1 recalled at interview discussing with the patient and her husband that the pregnancy was not viable.
O&G SpR 1 did not recall a discussion including options to speed
up the process of inevitable miscarriage. O&G SpR 1 recalled leaving review room as “the couple wanted time alone

Monday 22nd of October 2012: 00.30HRS (Approx) Membranes rupture

Wednesday the 24th of October 2012: 04.15HRS
19 Rigors (i.e. shaking or shivering) is a sign of sepsis.
20 Rigors indicated by teeth chattering suggests sepsis.
21 Spontaneous Rupture of Membranes (SROM)

2 days her cervix was dilated and prime for sepsis. Saying doctors didnt realise she was in danger of dying from sepsis is like saying if I leave a rusty nail in my foot I'm not in danger of getting gangrene. They knew she was miscarrying and nothing was done to remove the chances of sepsis. She may have even had sepsis beginning when she was taken in on the 21st.

standardg60

Kumejima wrote: »

Yeah I let my sarcasm get the better of me there.

Look, it is what it is now and we'll all have to live with the result.
I don't think there's any point in people on the NO side branding the YES side as baby muderers or the YES side painting all of us as religious mysoginistic bigots.

It basically comes down to whether you believe an unborn child is a human being or not. If you think its a clump of cells, with no human qualities or "life" then taking the YES position is entirely reasonable. There's no "baby", hence no father whose rights you have to consider, so its only what the woman wants to do as a medical option that counts.


Just to explain it from a No voters perspective. Most of us believe the unborn child is a human being. A living child. No lesser worth than a 1 year old toddler. Now, going from that supposition, that we're talking about a living child as opposed to a foetus, isn't it entirely reasonable that there are now three people in the equation. Isn't it entirely reasonable that one of those people shouldn't get to end the life of a child, especially as there is another parent involved. If it were a 1 year old child whose life was in the balance, isn't it entirely reasonable that a decent society would put the child's life at a higher priority that the womans right to choose? Why would you castigate someone for not wanting to see that child killed?

This where people are talking past each other. One side thinks the others are happy to see toddlers murdered and the other thinks we want to use a clump of cells to control women's bodies for religious or misogynistic reasons. Both sides are outraged and bitterness can spill over understandably.

We have to realise that the vast majority voted with good intentions. Maybe a few didn't but what can you do. Irish people are a caring and decent people. We might not agree with each other's stances, but lets try to see the good rather than the bad motives on the opposing side.

Firstly, fair play to you.

As a yes voter I have no problem in describing abortion as the intentional killing of an unborn child, it is what it is. It is simply the unique ability of humans to feel compassion and empathy for our fellow humans which prevents us from having hard and fast rules. The 8th amendment was a hard and fast rule..to follow it to the letter meant women had to be kept prisoners and alive until the child was born. Clearly this was an infringement on basic human rights so subsequent amendments reduced the 8th to tumbleweed except for cases such as Savita.

The 8th was, is and always will be the biggest pile of nonsense ever constructed through the English language. It sought to divide one thing into two that everyone knew could not be done. It is so nonsensical that the phrase 'equal priority' would have actually brought more clarity. It is a vile, loaded, misogynistic, discriminatory statement that has no place in decent society. The phrase 'due regard', or basically the doffing of ones cap, is frankly (to borrow a phrase) , disgusting. It succeeded in one thing only, guaranteeing that a pregnant woman had as equal a right to die as her unborn child.

As an example of it's nonsense, when the right to travel came in, under the 8th the state should have argued that while the woman had the right to travel for a termination, it was obliged to protect the unborn, so therefore it should introduce a law to have it removed from the woman before she left.

You voted to retain this.

This is still a democracy, so you and others are fully entitled to elect enough td's who share your views who will re-enact a ban on abortion.

To elaborate on compassion and empathy, ask yourself this.

Is a woman who kills her unborn child in a fit of heartbroken pique upon learning that the father and man she loves is leaving her for someone else as guilty of murder as a stranger who walks up and stabs her?

Pac1Man

A lot of teary men in the celebration parades. 🤔

Scratching my head here. I've been clearly mislead. Cheers for the clarifications.

nice_guy80

The Iona crowd getting more air time on RTE

Why? Why?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

swampgas

nice_guy80 wrote: »

The Iona crowd getting more air time on RTE

Why? Why?

Wild guess: they're very very litigious and RTE prefer to pander to them than risk a court case.

fxotoole

Pac1Man wrote: »

A lot of teary men in the celebration parades. 🀔

Soyboys, obvs

fxotoole

swampgas wrote: »

Wild guess: they're very very litigious and RTE prefer to pander to them than risk a court case.

Or RTE are giving them just enough rope to hang themselves