Page 30 of 96

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:40 pm
by CM11
Mullet 2 wrote:If it quacks like a duck


Well in your case you'll just lie and say it's a cow but you get the drift.
Sigh.

Any more stuff you'd like to make up so you can continue to abuse me?

You might think it's all fun and games but even having been told that it's not on my end, you continue. And yet think my comment on the previous page was out of order.

Go figure.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:40 pm
by feckwanker
It's like watching two heavyweight punch-drunk boxers slug it out.

Captivating stuff :thumbup:

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:42 pm
by Mullet 2
Abuse you? Look who threw out the term twat first today horse.

Be a big boy and own your little tantrum.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:45 pm
by CM11
Mullet 2 wrote:Abuse you? Look who threw out the term twat first today horse.

Be a big boy and own your little tantrum.
You think it's all about today? You have worse self awareness than earl.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:48 pm
by Mullet 2
Earl is grand.

Doesn't become a whiney spa when people disagree with him.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:06 pm
by rfurlong
not been posting much in this thread ...... and its obviously getting heated, but here goes anyway.

I'm in favour of repealing the 8th and legislating for abortion in Ireland, on the following grounds:

In the case of medically diagnosed FFA, we should be providing a state funded abortion, on demand, at any stage, (plus all necessary subsequent care required) if thats what the parents want.

In the case of rape/incest, we should be providing all possible (non-advisory) counselling to the woman, and in the event that she feels simply cannot go through with the pregnancy, we should be providing a state funded abortion, up until 12 weeks.

In the case of ALL other requests for abortion (which I would deem to be 'elective'), we should be telling these people to buy a packet of abortion pills (pre 12 weeks) or fudge off over to England (post 12 weeks) if they REALLY want to go through with an abortion ...... because our laws are clear and unambiguous, and as a people we are not in the business of using taxpayers money to fund abortions, simply because pregnancy doesn't suit someone at a particular moment in time.

No doubt I'll get slated for this by some, but thats my best effort in terms of how I'm personally looking at this.

If the proposed replacement legislation doesn't restrict abortion outside of FFA, rape and incest cases, along the above lines, then the referendum will be defeated IMO .... and proper order too.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:13 pm
by Mullet 2
rfurlong wrote:not been posting much in this thread ...... and its obviously getting heated, but here goes anyway.

I'm in favour of repealing the 8th and legislating for abortion in Ireland, on the following grounds:

In the case of medically diagnosed FFA, we should be providing a state funded abortion, on demand, at any stage, (plus all necessary subsequent care required) if thats what the parents want. :thumbup:

In the case of rape/incest, we should be providing all possible (non-advisory) counselling to the woman, and in the event that she feels simply cannot go through with the pregnancy, we should be providing a state funded abortion, up until 12 weeks. :thumbup:

In the case of ALL other requests for abortion (which I would deem to be 'elective'), we should be telling these people to buy a packet of abortion pills (pre 12 weeks) or fudge off over to England (post 12 weeks) if they REALLY want to go through with an abortion ...... because our laws are clear and unambiguous, and as a people we are not in the business of using taxpayers money to fund abortions, simply because pregnancy doesn't suit someone at a particular moment in time. :thumbdown:

No doubt I'll get slated for this by some, but thats my best effort in terms of how I'm personally looking at this.

If the proposed replacement legislation doesn't restrict abortion outside of FFA, rape and incest cases, along the above lines, then the referendum will be defeated IMO .... and proper order too.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:48 pm
by CM11
rfurlong

Who is going to do the telling when it comes to abortion pills? Or do you mean stay with the current situation where it's illegal to buy one?

The state funding issue is a real red herring there. Try not to dress what is a complex situation up as a cost analysis. Disagree with unrestricted access, that's fine, but the cost is not even a distant cousin of being relevant. And if it was, it'd be in the other direction.

You might be able to answer a question I've asked Mullet several times to no avail. How do you see us repealing but managing to secure what you want without there being an opportunity down the line to expand to a situation you disagree with?

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:52 pm
by Uncle Fester
rfurlong wrote:not been posting much in this thread ...... and its obviously getting heated, but here goes anyway.

I'm in favour of repealing the 8th and legislating for abortion in Ireland, on the following grounds:

In the case of medically diagnosed FFA, we should be providing a state funded abortion, on demand, at any stage, (plus all necessary subsequent care required) if thats what the parents want.

In the case of rape/incest, we should be providing all possible (non-advisory) counselling to the woman, and in the event that she feels simply cannot go through with the pregnancy, we should be providing a state funded abortion, up until 12 weeks.

In the case of ALL other requests for abortion (which I would deem to be 'elective'), we should be telling these people to buy a packet of abortion pills (pre 12 weeks) or fudge off over to England (post 12 weeks) if they REALLY want to go through with an abortion ...... because our laws are clear and unambiguous, and as a people we are not in the business of using taxpayers money to fund abortions, simply because pregnancy doesn't suit someone at a particular moment in time.

No doubt I'll get slated for this by some, but thats my best effort in terms of how I'm personally looking at this.

If the proposed replacement legislation doesn't restrict abortion outside of FFA, rape and incest cases, along the above lines, then the referendum will be defeated IMO .... and proper order too.
Part of the reason I'd like the FFA/rape cases segregated from the 12 week cases is because the latter will muddy the waters for the former.

Allowances for FFA/rape is non-negotiable in my view and if they fück that up, there'll be a lot of people rightly pissed off.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:53 pm
by Mullet 2
Red herring? it's actually a fundamental principle in many jurisdictions that allow abortion or euthanasia.

I.e that the tax of people like me doesn't go to fund something we consider morally reprehensible.

You twat

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:55 pm
by Mullet 2
Uncle Fester wrote:
rfurlong wrote:not been posting much in this thread ...... and its obviously getting heated, but here goes anyway.

I'm in favour of repealing the 8th and legislating for abortion in Ireland, on the following grounds:

In the case of medically diagnosed FFA, we should be providing a state funded abortion, on demand, at any stage, (plus all necessary subsequent care required) if thats what the parents want.

In the case of rape/incest, we should be providing all possible (non-advisory) counselling to the woman, and in the event that she feels simply cannot go through with the pregnancy, we should be providing a state funded abortion, up until 12 weeks.

In the case of ALL other requests for abortion (which I would deem to be 'elective'), we should be telling these people to buy a packet of abortion pills (pre 12 weeks) or fudge off over to England (post 12 weeks) if they REALLY want to go through with an abortion ...... because our laws are clear and unambiguous, and as a people we are not in the business of using taxpayers money to fund abortions, simply because pregnancy doesn't suit someone at a particular moment in time.

No doubt I'll get slated for this by some, but thats my best effort in terms of how I'm personally looking at this.

If the proposed replacement legislation doesn't restrict abortion outside of FFA, rape and incest cases, along the above lines, then the referendum will be defeated IMO .... and proper order too.
Part of the reason I'd like the FFA/rape cases segregated from the 12 week cases is because the latter will muddy the waters for the former.

Allowances for FFA/rape is non-negotiable in my view and if they fück that up, there'll be a lot of people rightly pissed off.

I'll never know why they didn't simply for for this and not choose to wrap it in this shitfest.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:55 pm
by Bullettyme
How do you legislate for the rape cases?

EDIT: As I stand on it, FFA, Rape, no brainers and available. 12 weeks should be available on demand. I think the hysteria over industrial amounts of abortions and abortions being used as birth control is just that, hysteria.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:57 pm
by Mullet 2
Bullettyme wrote:How do you legislate for the rape cases?

As I said previously I am more than happy for this to be done on the word of women.

I don't believe the tiny amount of women who might abuse that is outweighed by the need for compassion.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:00 pm
by Bullettyme
Mullet 2 wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:How do you legislate for the rape cases?

As I said previously I am more than happy for this to be done on the word of women.

I don't believe the tiny amount of women who might abuse that is outweighed by the need for compassion.
That's a decent enough stance.

Your second line reflects my thinking on abortion up to 12 weeks.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:00 pm
by Mullet 2
Bullettyme wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:How do you legislate for the rape cases?

As I said previously I am more than happy for this to be done on the word of women.

I don't believe the tiny amount of women who might abuse that is outweighed by the need for compassion.
That's a decent enough stance.

Your second line reflects my thinking on abortion up to 12 weeks.

One would think so yes

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:09 pm
by CM11
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?

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:11 pm
by rfurlong
CM11 wrote:rfurlong

Who is going to do the telling when it comes to abortion pills? Or do you mean stay with the current situation where it's illegal to buy one?

Stick with current situation where they are illegal. If anyone genuinely needs an abortion, the Irish state can provide one, rather than anyone in the scenarios I've outlined having to rely on internet pills. If someone wants to take an illegal abortion pill out of convenience, and they subsequently have medical complications as a result, well thats their problem

The state funding issue is a real red herring there. Try not to dress what is a complex situation up as a cost analysis. Disagree with unrestricted access, that's fine, but the cost is not even a distant cousin of being relevant. And if it was, it'd be in the other direction.

Cost is germaine .... especially to the vote. Taxpayers have every right to object to their money being used for elective abortions .... same goes for any other elective surgery btw. Why should I pay for someones hair transplant, liposuction or botox injections, if their health is not at risk?

You might be able to answer a question I've asked Mullet several times to no avail. How do you see us repealing but managing to secure what you want without there being an opportunity down the line to expand to a situation you disagree with?

I cant see around corners any better than the full on pro choice brigade. If I put the question back to you along the below lines, you'll probably accuse me of constructing a strawman....

"Stats, how do you see us repealing along the lines you want, without there being an opportunity down the line to expand to a situation you (presumably) disagree with, such as abortion as a form of contraceptive?"


Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:12 pm
by anonymous_joe
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.
Tell them to go to the cops. Nobody deserves that sort of shít.

It's a real shame the bills of Rabbitte and Higgins never got over the line, making almost of all that stuff legal.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:15 pm
by rfurlong
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?

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:19 pm
by CM11
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?

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:20 pm
by Bullettyme
Mullet 2 wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:
Mullet 2 wrote:
Bullettyme wrote:How do you legislate for the rape cases?

As I said previously I am more than happy for this to be done on the word of women.

I don't believe the tiny amount of women who might abuse that is outweighed by the need for compassion.
That's a decent enough stance.

Your second line reflects my thinking on abortion up to 12 weeks.

One would think so yes
*clinks glass*

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:22 pm
by CM11
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.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:24 pm
by Mullet 2
"Red Herring"

"Completely irrelevant"

Captain Spa on another charge

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:30 pm
by rfurlong
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

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:35 pm
by rfurlong
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.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:39 pm
by Mullet 2
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

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:40 pm
by CM11
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.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:41 pm
by CM11
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?

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:44 pm
by Bullettyme
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

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:48 pm
by rfurlong
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?

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:50 pm
by CM11
Replacement wording in the constitution?

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:51 pm
by rfurlong
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

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:52 pm
by CM11
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.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:56 pm
by CM11
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.

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:56 pm
by Mullet 2
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

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:57 pm
by rfurlong
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

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:58 pm
by Mullet 2
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

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:00 pm
by CM11
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?

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:00 pm
by Mullet 2
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

Re: Repealing the 8th

Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2018 5:01 pm
by Bullettyme
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 :((