Proposed abortion Referendum

I think banning ads is futile in the age of the internet and social media, also a retrograde step more suited to Catholic Ireland in the 1950’s or North Korea today.

We have always had outside interference in our political affairs even before the internet. Newspapers, typically owned and run by foreign corporations, have been on sale here for decades and have never been shy in pushing their own political agendas in their publications.

It may be more useful to require carriers of advertising to publish the source of the advertisements. It might have saved the US a lot of bother pointing the finger at Russia for interference in the Presidential campaign when all along it was a British company.
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
When I see a poster of a 9 week old foetus talking about yawning and kicking, I say "that's it, I'm voting Yes, there is no way that foetus has rights equal to a 9 week old baby"
Click to expand...

I agree with you that a 9 week old foetus should not have the same rights as an adult woman or a 9 week old baby. That is why I think some change to the present constitutional arrangement is required.

However I do not think that a foetus should have no rights, which it seems would be the outcome if the referendum is passed. That is why I expect that I will vote against this current proposal.
 
cremeegg said:
However I do not think that a foetus should have no rights, which it seems would be the outcome if the referendum is passed. That is why I expect that I will vote against this current proposal.
Click to expand...
It was all too familiar watching Claire Byrne last night where almost all of those on the Yes side dodged this point or point blank refused to accept it. Only Aodhan O'Riordan seemed to accept it. By all means argue for Repealing the 8th based on the many reasons raised, but please don't try and make it seem as if, up to 12 weeks at least, a Yes vote will not mean the unborn has no rights. Mary Lou in particular continued to dodge this point last night and whilst I don't doubt the sincerity and strength of her convictions in why she is voting Yes, it was disingenuous of her not to admit that this was true and to state that she was prepared to accept this as part of repealing the 8th (I heartily agreed with her on her clapometer comment, Claire Byrne really should moderate the crowd better than she does imho).
 
Black Sheep said:
I just wonder do we have the doctors who will carry out abortions if the legislation is passed. Doctors duties are to save lives.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't he hugely surprised if some prominent consultants open an abortion clinic in double-quick time. It could prove more lucrative than hospital parking.
 
michaelm said:
I wouldn't he hugely surprised if some prominent consultants open an abortion clinic in double-quick time. It could prove more lucrative than hospital parking.
Click to expand...
They'll probably wait for the State to build one for them and then run their private business out of it.
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
I watched the RTE Player. MLMcD came across really well. This worries me. Sinn Fein/IRA look like serious government partners. Come back Gerry, all is forgiven.
Click to expand...

Funny that, I was thinking much the same thing. I think an election is coming sooner rather than later. It is looking increasingly poor on FF to be at once in a confidence/supply agreement and supposedly the leading opposition party. I thought it was going to happen late last year but I was wrong on that, but I understand the clock is ticking on M Martins leadership - he has one last chance to be back in power, time is against him.
If an election returns seats in accordance with recent polls than a coalition between FF/FG, FG/SF or SF/FF looks on the cards. My money is on FG/SF, which notably has moved in recent months from 25/1 to 10/1.
 
TheBigShort said:
My money is on FG/SF, which notably has moved in recent months from 25/1 to 10/1.
Click to expand...
It's a fair bet. FG has been commandeered by show-ponies and upstarts who don't really stand for anything but election. They'd dance with the devil to stay in power. SF has been doing contortions to be ready for government by moving Gerry off stage and by scrapping their 'must be biggest party in coalition' rule. FG/SF is still a tempting 20/1 with [broken link removed].
 
Been avoiding contributing to the debate as nothing I find more depressing. After weighing it all up though over the last few months I've decided to vote Yes. Basically on the basis that alleviating the hard cases (fatal foetal, rape etc) trumps any wish to keep Irish abortions out of Ireland. The lives hanging in the balance are not so much those of the unborn (the mother is going to determine that one way or the other regardless), but the risks of abortion XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, and delayed medical care (I'm not comfortable that the Savita amendment is sufficient or the way to go).

For those who "dont trust the government" - if your fears are borne out then form the No Abortion party, get into the Dail, repeal the legislation, run another referendum if you want - I think it's a total cop out argument. I respect the No's, I can see why "doing God's work" means they feel carte blanche to say and do whatever they want - but the reality of the sit-ye-ation, the borrow from another political arena, means I can't row in behind a No much as I'd prefer if no healthy woman ever aborted a healthy foetus/baby.
 
Betsy Og said:
I respect the No's, I can see why "doing God's work" means they feel carte blanche to say and do whatever they want
Click to expand...
I don't see a link between opposing abortion and religion.
It is a moral issue and morality was around before religion.
That said I'm in general agreement with your reasons for voting yes.
 
That's fair enough, I'm totally on the morality is not the possession of religion point, but I'm guessing there's a distinct religious flavour to most of the No campaign....maybe I'm wrong.
 
Purple said:
It is a moral issue and morality was around before religion.
Click to expand...
The State should have no role whatsoever in imposing moral values. It's only legitimate role is to protect citizens from each other. No smoking in public places, no drunk and disorderly, no recreational drugs, no indecent exposure, no prostitution etc. may seem to have a tinge of morality attaching to them but they can only be justified as protecting citizens from each other.

Unfortunately our Catholic DNA still makes us think that the State should act as moral custodians, it's just that our moral values have changed.

So when is the unborn a "citizen" deserving the protection from other citizens in particular its mother? To be pro Yes does not mean you support the morality of abortion just that you don't think it is any of the State's business.
 
Betsy Og said:
. After weighing it all up though over the last few months I've decided to vote Yes. Basically on the basis that alleviating the hard cases (fatal foetal, rape etc) trumps any wish to keep Irish abortions out of Ireland.
Click to expand...
A sledgehammer to crack a nut...hard cases are as it says, hard cases. They probably make up less than 10% of total pregnancies.

As per the stat put out by the No side, based on info from the NHS, 97% of abortions are on healthy, normal babies.
 
Where do moral values stop and protecting citizens from each other start?

Duke of Marmalade said:
Unfortunately our Catholic DNA still makes us think that the State should act as moral custodians, it's just that our moral values have changed.
Click to expand...
Maybe but speaking for myself religion has nothing to do with it.

Duke of Marmalade said:
So when is the unborn a "citizen" deserving the protection from other citizens in particular its mother? To be pro Yes does not mean you support the morality of abortion just that you don't think it is any of the State's business.
Click to expand...
That's a reasonable position to take but I also think that legislating to protect the unborn is a reasonable position to make.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register