Chat Forum
It is currently Wed Aug 15, 2018 12:39 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3891 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 ... 98  Next

How would/will you vote in a referendum?
Keep the law as it stands. 20%  20%  [ 32 ]
Repeal the 8th. 80%  80%  [ 125 ]
Total votes : 157
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51862
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong

I may have misunderstood your cost point above, you're just taking a moral stance on it? You seem to be speaking for 'the people' though. You don't think that the vote is what is going to ascertain the majority view of the people, no?


see above.

I'm pretty sure "the people" who pay tax, don't want their money pissed away on that cohort of abortion requests, that emanate from people that it simply doesn't suit to carry the baby to full term

I'm sure you'd have something to say if our health pending was being frittered away on things like tattoo removal, boob jobs and such like?


You see, now you've broken it down to a cost analysis rather than a moral viewpoint. The antenatal care alone would cost way more than an abortion so your comparisons are completely irrelevant.

I've no problem with you leaving it as a moral viewpoint and the referendum should decide whether you are correct that it's a majority opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12265
"Red Herring"

"Completely irrelevant"

Captain Spa on another charge


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7810
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong

Well, as far as I'm aware we will treat a woman who has had complications due to using an abortion pill. They just won't be initially monitored properly and could end up in a worse situation than if they were under the care of a doctor.

See above post on the cost issue.

On the final point, I'm not sure why no one can give a straight answer on this. In terms of your question, of course I can't guarantee an outcome I'm uncomfortable with. I'm ok with that as I don't believe we're going to see a drastic change in attitudes and I'd be much more interested in pushing proper sex education to avoid the need for abortion at all. I mentioned this when I name checked the Netherlands 'low' abortion rate. I also firmly believe that there are very few abortions over 12 weeks which fall under abortion as a contraceptive.

But either way, I'm not trying to be antagonistic with the question. I'm just wondering if you know of a realistic way where you get what you want without having to worry about unrestricted access coming in anyway?


my original post WAS realistic in my view .....

1/
Legislate for abortion in cases of FFA as well as rape/incest (albeit in a slightly differing way).
2/
Tell anyone else (pursuing an elective abortion for sake of convenience) to fook off to the UK with that shite
3/
Rely on the Irish people to vote out any party that tries to take things too far

the world is unpredictable ...... but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do the right thing .... anything else is defeatism


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7810
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong

I may have misunderstood your cost point above, you're just taking a moral stance on it? You seem to be speaking for 'the people' though. You don't think that the vote is what is going to ascertain the majority view of the people, no?


see above.

I'm pretty sure "the people" who pay tax, don't want their money pissed away on that cohort of abortion requests, that emanate from people that it simply doesn't suit to carry the baby to full term

I'm sure you'd have something to say if our health pending was being frittered away on things like tattoo removal, boob jobs and such like?


You see, now you've broken it down to a cost analysis rather than a moral viewpoint. The antenatal care alone would cost way more than an abortion so your comparisons are completely irrelevant.

I've no problem with you leaving it as a moral viewpoint and the referendum should decide whether you are correct that it's a majority opinion.


Sorry stats, but that bit in bold is utterly bonkers ...... its like saying we should legalise euthanasia because its cheaper than paying state pensions

I have no problem with my taxes going toward antenatal care, but I have a major problem with them going toward the cost of elective abortions. There is nothing contradictory in my position.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12265
Want an economic argument?

3,225 abortions last year of Irish babies.

Let's assume they all grow up to earn the average industrial wage and pay c. 6,140 annually in tax

19,801,500 annually forgone in tax
Not allowing for unemployment and those that will consume services of course

40 working years

792,060,000


Last edited by Mullet 2 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51862
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong

I may have misunderstood your cost point above, you're just taking a moral stance on it? You seem to be speaking for 'the people' though. You don't think that the vote is what is going to ascertain the majority view of the people, no?


see above.

I'm pretty sure "the people" who pay tax, don't want their money pissed away on that cohort of abortion requests, that emanate from people that it simply doesn't suit to carry the baby to full term

I'm sure you'd have something to say if our health pending was being frittered away on things like tattoo removal, boob jobs and such like?


You see, now you've broken it down to a cost analysis rather than a moral viewpoint. The antenatal care alone would cost way more than an abortion so your comparisons are completely irrelevant.

I've no problem with you leaving it as a moral viewpoint and the referendum should decide whether you are correct that it's a majority opinion.


Sorry stats, but that bit in bold is utterly bonkers ...... its like saying we should legalise euthanasia because its cheaper than paying state pensions

I have no problem with my taxes going toward antenatal care, but I have a major problem with them going toward the cost of elective abortions. There is nothing contradictory in my position.


Did you just completely ignore my second paragraph? You have outlined a moral position. Maybe you feel just as strongly about boob jobs but for me one (boob job) is a direct cost which sees the taxpayer out of pocket (which is why I'd agree with you on not wanting to pay for it) and the other one is not an extra cost on the taxpayer, quite the opposite. You brought up this line of argument by mentioning the health budget btw.

Again, no problem with you taking a moral stance on it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51862
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong

Well, as far as I'm aware we will treat a woman who has had complications due to using an abortion pill. They just won't be initially monitored properly and could end up in a worse situation than if they were under the care of a doctor.

See above post on the cost issue.

On the final point, I'm not sure why no one can give a straight answer on this. In terms of your question, of course I can't guarantee an outcome I'm uncomfortable with. I'm ok with that as I don't believe we're going to see a drastic change in attitudes and I'd be much more interested in pushing proper sex education to avoid the need for abortion at all. I mentioned this when I name checked the Netherlands 'low' abortion rate. I also firmly believe that there are very few abortions over 12 weeks which fall under abortion as a contraceptive.

But either way, I'm not trying to be antagonistic with the question. I'm just wondering if you know of a realistic way where you get what you want without having to worry about unrestricted access coming in anyway?


my original post WAS realistic in my view .....

1/
Legislate for abortion in cases of FFA as well as rape/incest (albeit in a slightly differing way).
2/
Tell anyone else (pursuing an elective abortion for sake of convenience) to fook off to the UK with that shite
3/
Rely on the Irish people to vote out any party that tries to take things too far

the world is unpredictable ...... but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do the right thing .... anything else is defeatism


Ok, so your position is to hold the referendum exactly as the government are planning to hold it?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20259
Mullet 2 wrote:
Want an economic argument?

3,225 abortions last year of Irish babies.

Let's assume they all grow up to earn the average industrial wage and pay c. 6,140 annually in tax

19,801,500 annually forgone in tax
Not allowing for unemployment and those that will consume services of course

40 working years

792,060,000


I think it's a little bit disingenuous to trot out stuff like this (purely numbers hide a lot of things).

Does it take into account the maternity leave of the mother? What was the productivity of the mother before? The effects of giving birth? Child benefit? Other costs to the state? Blah blah blah


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7810
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong

Well, as far as I'm aware we will treat a woman who has had complications due to using an abortion pill. They just won't be initially monitored properly and could end up in a worse situation than if they were under the care of a doctor.

See above post on the cost issue.

On the final point, I'm not sure why no one can give a straight answer on this. In terms of your question, of course I can't guarantee an outcome I'm uncomfortable with. I'm ok with that as I don't believe we're going to see a drastic change in attitudes and I'd be much more interested in pushing proper sex education to avoid the need for abortion at all. I mentioned this when I name checked the Netherlands 'low' abortion rate. I also firmly believe that there are very few abortions over 12 weeks which fall under abortion as a contraceptive.

But either way, I'm not trying to be antagonistic with the question. I'm just wondering if you know of a realistic way where you get what you want without having to worry about unrestricted access coming in anyway?


my original post WAS realistic in my view .....

1/
Legislate for abortion in cases of FFA as well as rape/incest (albeit in a slightly differing way).
2/
Tell anyone else (pursuing an elective abortion for sake of convenience) to fook off to the UK with that shite
3/
Rely on the Irish people to vote out any party that tries to take things too far

the world is unpredictable ...... but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do the right thing .... anything else is defeatism


Ok, so your position is to hold the referendum exactly as the government are planning to hold it?


I haven't seen the replacement legislation yet, have you?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51862
Replacement wording in the constitution?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7810
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong

I may have misunderstood your cost point above, you're just taking a moral stance on it? You seem to be speaking for 'the people' though. You don't think that the vote is what is going to ascertain the majority view of the people, no?


see above.

I'm pretty sure "the people" who pay tax, don't want their money pissed away on that cohort of abortion requests, that emanate from people that it simply doesn't suit to carry the baby to full term

I'm sure you'd have something to say if our health pending was being frittered away on things like tattoo removal, boob jobs and such like?


You see, now you've broken it down to a cost analysis rather than a moral viewpoint. The antenatal care alone would cost way more than an abortion so your comparisons are completely irrelevant.

I've no problem with you leaving it as a moral viewpoint and the referendum should decide whether you are correct that it's a majority opinion.


Sorry stats, but that bit in bold is utterly bonkers ...... its like saying we should legalise euthanasia because its cheaper than paying state pensions

I have no problem with my taxes going toward antenatal care, but I have a major problem with them going toward the cost of elective abortions. There is nothing contradictory in my position.


Did you just completely ignore my second paragraph? You have outlined a moral position. Maybe you feel just as strongly about boob jobs but for me one (boob job) is a direct cost which sees the taxpayer out of pocket (which is why I'd agree with you on not wanting to pay for it) and the other one is not an extra cost on the taxpayer, quite the opposite. You brought up this line of argument by mentioning the health budget btw.

Again, no problem with you taking a moral stance on it.


boob jobs and elective abortions are BOTH an extra and unnecessary cost to the taxpayer .... I dont want to pay for either.

Your economic argument that the abortion is cheaper than the antenatal care is complete bunkum .....

There is no economic or moral contradiction here and i've no idea why you are trying to imply one


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51862
Oh and Mullet, I've put you on ignore for the moment to give me a breather from the constant abuse. I certainly won't be engaging with you for the rest of today so save your breath.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51862
rfurlong

Well, I suppose if we assume that the abortion will happen anyway but either illegally or abroad then yes, it is an extra cost. Otherwise, I can't agree with you there. Overall cost to the state assuming a not insignificant percentage of those not aborted never work would be much higher.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12265
Bullettyme wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
Want an economic argument?

3,225 abortions last year of Irish babies.

Let's assume they all grow up to earn the average industrial wage and pay c. 6,140 annually in tax

19,801,500 annually forgone in tax
Not allowing for unemployment and those that will consume services of course

40 working years

792,060,000


I think it's a little bit disingenuous to trot out stuff like this (purely numbers hide a lot of things).

Does it take into account the maternity leave of the mother? What was the productivity of the mother before? The effects of giving birth? Child benefit? Other costs to the state? Blah blah blah



It's a back of the envelope calculation.

There would be hundreds of factors to take into account for the real number.

However it is obviously true that killing/aborting/terminating future taxpayers is a massive cost to the Irish state


Last edited by Mullet 2 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7810
CM11 wrote:
Replacement wording in the constitution?


no

I want to see what legislation the government are planning to bring to the Dail in the event that the 8th is simply removed from the consitution

if the legislation is seen to be too open ended/unrestrictive, this will have an effect on how people vote in the referendum


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12265
rfurlong wrote:

There is no economic or moral contradiction here and i've no idea why you are trying to imply one



It's because he's a disingenuous cúnt

Glad I could help


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51862
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
Replacement wording in the constitution?


no

I want to see what legislation the government are planning to bring to the Dail in the event that the 8th is simply removed from the consitution

if the legislation is seen to be too open ended/unrestrictive, this will have an effect on how people vote in the referendum


You've misunderstood the question then. I was only asking about the referendum. If you were in charge, you would repeal and replace with wording to the effect that the Oireachtas could legislate on abortion?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12265
CM11 wrote:
Oh and Mullet, I've put you on ignore for the moment to give me a breather from the constant abuse. I certainly won't be engaging with you for the rest of today so save your breath.



Aww diddums


If only you weren't reading every word


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20259
Mullet 2 wrote:

However it is obviously true that killing future taxpayers is a massive cost to the Irish state


I think it's a ridiculous argument with a silly amount of assumptions that doesn't really hold water tbf. I was going to start going on about johnnies and pulling out and whatever else but it's not something I'm willing to get into on a Friday afternoon at 4pm :((


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12265
Bullettyme wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:

However it is obviously true that killing future taxpayers is a massive cost to the Irish state


I think it's a ridiculous argument with a silly amount of assumptions that doesn't really hold water tbf. I was going to start going on about johnnies and pulling out and whatever else but it's not something I'm willing to get into on a Friday afternoon at 4pm :((



It is clearly not a silly argument at all.

Why do you think Germany and Russia are so panicked over their falling birthrate? Putin is talking about paying people to have children.

People = taxes


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7810
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong

Well, I suppose if we assume that the abortion will happen anyway but either illegally or abroad then yes, it is an extra cost. Otherwise, I can't agree with you there. Overall cost to the state assuming a not insignificant percentage of those not aborted never work would be much higher.


Sorry, what exactly is your point? Are you seriously arguing that while unrestricted abortion is disappointing, on the bright side, it saves the taxpayer money?

I don't want to pay for elective abortions for people who are too lazy to use contraception .... its a point of principle grounded in both economic and moral considerations. Saying that I'm wrong because (in your view) I'll end up paying more if the baby is born, totally ignores the point that I was making ...... i.e. let the woman buy the pills herself or abort the baby in England AT YOUR HER OWN COST, if the pregnancy is such an inconvenience.

why should taxpayers cover the cost of elective abortions?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12265
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong

Well, I suppose if we assume that the abortion will happen anyway but either illegally or abroad then yes, it is an extra cost. Otherwise, I can't agree with you there. Overall cost to the state assuming a not insignificant percentage of those not aborted never work would be much higher.


Sorry, what exactly is your point? Are you seriously arguing that while unrestricted abortion is disappointing, on the bright side, it saves the taxpayer money?

I don't want to pay for elective abortions for people who are too lazy to use contraception .... its a point of principle grounded in both economic and moral considerations. Saying that I'm wrong because (in your view) I'll end up paying more if the baby is born, totally ignores the point that I was making ...... i.e. let the woman buy the pills herself or abort the baby in England AT YOUR HER OWN COST, if the pregnancy is such an inconvenience.

why should taxpayers cover the cost of elective abortions?



:lol: :lol:

Welcome to my world


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51862
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong

Well, I suppose if we assume that the abortion will happen anyway but either illegally or abroad then yes, it is an extra cost. Otherwise, I can't agree with you there. Overall cost to the state assuming a not insignificant percentage of those not aborted never work would be much higher.


Sorry, what exactly is your point? Are you seriously arguing that while unrestricted abortion is disappointing, on the bright side, it saves the taxpayer money?

I don't want to pay for elective abortions for people who are too lazy to use contraception .... its a point of principle grounded in both economic and moral considerations. Saying that I'm wrong because (in your view) I'll end up paying more if the baby is born, totally ignores the point that I was making ...... i.e. let the woman buy the pills herself or abort the baby in England AT YOUR HER OWN COST, if the pregnancy is such an inconvenience.

why should taxpayers cover the cost of elective abortions?


Look, I disagree with you on the economic argument but I never said you were wrong on the ethical/moral part of your argument. It's your opinion to have and I said so several times.

I'm not using any economic argument, btw, to argue for abortion. If anyone did so, it was you but I've already said that I misunderstood where you were coming from originally.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 7810
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
Replacement wording in the constitution?


no

I want to see what legislation the government are planning to bring to the Dail in the event that the 8th is simply removed from the consitution

if the legislation is seen to be too open ended/unrestrictive, this will have an effect on how people vote in the referendum


You've misunderstood the question then. I was only asking about the referendum. If you were in charge, you would repeal and replace with wording to the effect that the Oireachtas could legislate on abortion?


yes ..... as per what I said in my opening post today.

I would repeal the 8th
I would legislate (in slightly different ways) for FFA and rape/incest
I would limit abortion to those categories
I would tell anyone outside those categories to fook off to England or buy some pills, as I wont be asking the Irish taxpayers to cover the costs of their elective abortions .... in the same way as I wouldn't be asking the Irish taxpayer to cover any other elective procedure, or self-diagnosed course of action.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51862
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
Replacement wording in the constitution?


no

I want to see what legislation the government are planning to bring to the Dail in the event that the 8th is simply removed from the consitution

if the legislation is seen to be too open ended/unrestrictive, this will have an effect on how people vote in the referendum


You've misunderstood the question then. I was only asking about the referendum. If you were in charge, you would repeal and replace with wording to the effect that the Oireachtas could legislate on abortion?


yes ..... as per what I said in my opening post today.

I would repeal the 8th
I would legislate (in slightly different ways) for FFA and rape/incest
I would limit abortion to those categories
I would tell anyone outside those categories to fook off to England or buy some pills, as I wont be asking the Irish taxpayers to cover the costs of their elective abortions .... in the same way as I wouldn't be asking the Irish taxpayer to cover any other elective procedure, or self-diagnosed course of action.


Ok, so we're on the same page in terms of the constitution.

I have said before that your stance is a minimum for me. It has to happen and if that's all that happens then we'll still have come a long way.

However, IMO, even if you got what you wanted this year, it wouldn't be that long before we had unrestricted up to 12 weeks. Any vote which allows for abortion in legislation will see less restrictive legislation come in, whether it be now or in 5-10 years.

And I don't think you'd be able to vote out a party for suggesting it because, again IMO, there is already a majority opinion towards less restrictive abortion and there definitely will be in 10 years (do I need another IMO here just to be sure?!).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2818
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong

Well, I suppose if we assume that the abortion will happen anyway but either illegally or abroad then yes, it is an extra cost. Otherwise, I can't agree with you there. Overall cost to the state assuming a not insignificant percentage of those not aborted never work would be much higher.


Sorry, what exactly is your point? Are you seriously arguing that while unrestricted abortion is disappointing, on the bright side, it saves the taxpayer money?

I don't want to pay for elective abortions for people who are too lazy to use contraception .... its a point of principle grounded in both economic and moral considerations. Saying that I'm wrong because (in your view) I'll end up paying more if the baby is born, totally ignores the point that I was making ...... i.e. let the woman buy the pills herself or abort the baby in England AT YOUR HER OWN COST, if the pregnancy is such an inconvenience.

why should taxpayers cover the cost of elective abortions?


"Too lazy to use contraception"?

You do know it's not a guarantee in preventing pregnancy, right?

You do realise that the unrestricted 12 weeks largely consists of taking a pill under medical supervision?

Why is the cost an issue? It's a rather strange gambit.

And your continual attempt to portray the issue as a mere "inconvenience" hardly does it justice, does it? It's "such an inconvenience" kind of belittles anyone who's actually gone through with an abortion or is contemplating doing so.


rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
rfurlong wrote:
CM11 wrote:
Replacement wording in the constitution?


no

I want to see what legislation the government are planning to bring to the Dail in the event that the 8th is simply removed from the consitution

if the legislation is seen to be too open ended/unrestrictive, this will have an effect on how people vote in the referendum


You've misunderstood the question then. I was only asking about the referendum. If you were in charge, you would repeal and replace with wording to the effect that the Oireachtas could legislate on abortion?


yes ..... as per what I said in my opening post today.

I would repeal the 8th
I would legislate (in slightly different ways) for FFA and rape/incest
I would limit abortion to those categories
I would tell anyone outside those categories to fook off to England or buy some pills, as I wont be asking the Irish taxpayers to cover the costs of their elective abortions .... in the same way as I wouldn't be asking the Irish taxpayer to cover any other elective procedure, or self-diagnosed course of action.


Fook off to England? Charming.

An "elective abortion", just like a boob-job then?

The sheer crassness and derision contained within your posts hardly gives the impression of someone who's taking the issue in any way seriously.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 6:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21247
Or we could let everybody make up their own minds.

That way there'd be abortions for some and no abortions for those who don't want them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 7:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6155
Location: LOL! WISDOM!
Seems to me that once you've crossed the boundary to dismiss the 'rights' of foetal cells (e.g. FFA and rapey incest), then the only thing you're clinging onto is control and punishment.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 8:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51862
message #2527204 wrote:
Seems to me that once you've crossed the boundary to dismiss the 'rights' of foetal cells (e.g. FFA and rapey incest), then the only thing you're clinging onto is control and punishment.


I've tried that angle before, although not in so many words, to no avail. I just get silence in reply.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 9:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8691
Mullet 2 wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
normilet wrote:
https://twitter.com/iAM_AM/status/961889432369590278

Didn't want to post the picture directly on the forum, supposedly taken outside the Department of Education yesterday.


I saw those scumbags down at Independent House during the week. Absolutely shameless, and shows the depths that they'll sink. Shows that their arguments aren't really working either and they're getting desperate. Friend of mine has been getting death threats and, in an ironic twist, being called a murdering c**t.

Can't wait until this thing is done with.


Let's not have a rush to the moral high ground here from the anybody pro-choice.

I've seen some of the stuff John McGuirk and others are getting. And look at that cúnt Conspicous's and his attack on here.


Eh , attack? What exactly did I say ?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 10:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 6155
Location: LOL! WISDOM!
CM11 wrote:
message #2527204 wrote:
Seems to me that once you've crossed the boundary to dismiss the 'rights' of foetal cells (e.g. FFA and rapey incest), then the only thing you're clinging onto is control and punishment.


I've tried that angle before, although not in so many words, to no avail. I just get silence in reply.


It deserves repeating and emphasising imo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 9:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12265
anonymous_joe wrote:
Or we could let everybody make up their own minds.

That way there'd be abortions for some and no abortions for those who don't want them.


Don't bring out the crayon argument.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Sat Feb 10, 2018 9:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12265
Statto got a reply but as is his won't if he disagrees he just dismisses it from his mind.

Because he's a liar.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21702
Mullet 2 wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
normilet wrote:
https://twitter.com/iAM_AM/status/961889432369590278

Didn't want to post the picture directly on the forum, supposedly taken outside the Department of Education yesterday.


I saw those scumbags down at Independent House during the week. Absolutely shameless, and shows the depths that they'll sink. Shows that their arguments aren't really working either and they're getting desperate. Friend of mine has been getting death threats and, in an ironic twist, being called a murdering c**t.

Can't wait until this thing is done with.


Let's not have a rush to the moral high ground here from the anybody pro-choice.

I've seen some of the stuff John McGuirk and others are getting. And look at that cúnt Conspicous's and his attack on here.

Forgot to get back to this post but you of all people should know what a sneaky lying toolbag McGuirk is.

He's after getting caught out claiming to have a mole on some Pro-choice WhatsApp group taking screenshots when he probably got his mum to send it to him.
https://twitter.com/john_mcguirk/status ... 0953929728

Take his stuff with a pinch of salt.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Wed Feb 21, 2018 1:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 775
Location: City Cow Titty, the kingdom
So who can vote in the referendum, is it the same as an election?

Have lived here In Ireland since Nov 2016, but not yet registered despite all the local TDs offering to 'sign me up' a few months after I got here during the election.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Wed Feb 21, 2018 9:54 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 22, 2016 9:43 am
Posts: 12265
Only Irish Citizens can vote in a referendum.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2018 4:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20259
So what's going on here then?

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-a ... -1.3417970

Does this make it more difficult for repeal to be passed as it will strip away all constitutional rights for the unborn, or else it will be spun that way by "pro lifers"? How does this impact on the referendum?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2018 4:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 4273
It will mean that the unborn will have zero rights, read that again, zero rights should the 8th be repealed.

So at 14.53 on a Thursday the unborn has zero rights, one minute later it enters the world with all the rights that the constitution affords any of us. Absolutely mental stuff.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20259
Liathroidigloine wrote:
It will mean that the unborn will have zero rights, read that again, zero rights should the 8th be repealed.

So at 14.53 on a Thursday the unborn has zero rights, one minute later it enters the world with all the rights that the constitution affords any of us. Absolutely mental stuff.


Well I don't know if that's correct or if it is dishonesty. It essentially means that constitutionally the unborn does not have a right to life, outside the 8th. It never did essentially.

Why do you consider it so mental? It seems to be the norm in a lot of countries.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Repealing the 8th
PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2018 5:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 51862
Liathroidigloine wrote:
It will mean that the unborn will have zero rights, read that again, zero rights should the 8th be repealed.

So at 14.53 on a Thursday the unborn has zero rights, one minute later it enters the world with all the rights that the constitution affords any of us. Absolutely mental stuff.


I'm trying to figure out what rights, other than the obvious relating to the 8th, that you'd like them to have. Their rights are pretty much intertwined with the mother until born. What can you do to an unborn child (again apart from the obvious) that they would need rights for? Once separated from their mother and alive, they immediately gain rights, as you point out.

Just to be clear, I'm not asking or attempting to enter a repeal argument, just wondering what other rights you think they should have?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3891 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 ... 98  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Boobs not Moobs, Brumby_in_Vic, DOB, Google Adsense [Bot], guy smiley, MungoMan, Olddantucker, Peaches, sonic_attack and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group