Eighth Amendment poll

[gallsman]

Is this the question in the referendum? I though it was to replace the 8th to text that allows the oireachtas to legislate on abortion. Just because there is a yes vote doesn't Change the current law.

Imagine that, omaghjoe paying away without the slightest understanding of the facts. Who'd have thunk it?

Ah here. That's disingenuous. It's pretty obvious what will happen if the referendum is passed. Just because there's a Yes vote doesn't change the current law, however a Yes vote clearly means that the proposed legislation will be brought through the Oireachteas quickly.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but at least be honest about what a Yes vote means in reality.

It's absolutely not disingenuous. Removing a constitutional barrier to "introducing abortions on request" is some leap.

But Gallsman, that's the proposed legislation. Up to 12 week, abortions to be available without any limits. Or do you think that won't come in? Effectively, this is the people voting on that piece of legislation, because if they vote yes, the Government know there's a popular mandate for the legislation as is. As Syf says, people are codding themselves if they think this referendum will not lead to elective abortions up to 12 weeks, within a matter of months.

Proposed legislation is just that - proposed.

12 weeks is half the time that abortion is generally available in the UK. It can take half that before people even realise they're pregnant. Use of the phrase "abortion on demand" is absolute bullshit and vines from the minds of people who think everyone just decides willy nilly that they'll pop down for an abortion. Next stop (it's been used here before) is "people will just use it as contraception"

[AZOffaly]

Seanie, it is disingenuous. To say 'The law won't change if the 8th Amendment is removed' implies that this is simply some sort of unconnected event. The referendum being removed ALLOWS the proposed law to be enacted. It's almost cause and effect.

Telling someone that repealing the 8th won't lead to 12 week elective abortions is either being deliberately disingenuous, or is avoiding the consequence of their vote. Most Yes voters, by far, want to see 12 week elective abortions in my view, otherwise they are in serious danger of watching the law of unintended consequences. Semantics about what the wording of the constitution will look like post referendum is just that. Semantics. The truth is that the proposed legislation will be enacted unless the referendum is defeated.

[AZOffaly]

Is this the question in the referendum? I though it was to replace the 8th to text that allows the oireachtas to legislate on abortion. Just because there is a yes vote doesn't Change the current law.

Imagine that, omaghjoe paying away without the slightest understanding of the facts. Who'd have thunk it?

Ah here. That's disingenuous. It's pretty obvious what will happen if the referendum is passed. Just because there's a Yes vote doesn't change the current law, however a Yes vote clearly means that the proposed legislation will be brought through the Oireachteas quickly.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but at least be honest about what a Yes vote means in reality.

It's absolutely not disingenuous. Removing a constitutional barrier to "introducing abortions on request" is some leap.

But Gallsman, that's the proposed legislation. Up to 12 week, abortions to be available without any limits. Or do you think that won't come in? Effectively, this is the people voting on that piece of legislation, because if they vote yes, the Government know there's a popular mandate for the legislation as is. As Syf says, people are codding themselves if they think this referendum will not lead to elective abortions up to 12 weeks, within a matter of months.

Proposed legislation is just that - proposed.

12 weeks is half the time that abortion is generally available in the UK. It can take half that before people even realise they're pregnant. Use of the phrase "abortion on demand" is absolute bullshit and vines from the minds of people who think everyone just decides willy nilly that they'll pop down for an abortion. Next stop (it's been used here before) is "people will just use it as contraception"

So you think the proposed legislation will not be enacted?

Edit, I meant to say I agree with you about 'abortion on demand' and 'use it as contraception'. Abortion is not a trivial matter, and I don't think anyone would ever do it lightly. However, I use the term elective abortions and I think it's accurate for the situation proposed re the 12 weeks. It's obviously still a terrible choice and decision to make, but it is still elective.

[Rossfan]

Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't the Government  called on to publish draft legislation before the referendum so people would have the full picture before voting on Article 40/3/3?
We now know what the proposed Legislation is if the Constitution is changed so we're not voting in a vacuum as it were.
While technically the voters are only voting on whether to change 40/3/3 there is a bigger picture associated with it.
If we vote to change will the Dáil pass the proposed legislation?

[AZOffaly]

Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't the Government  called on to publish draft legislation before the referendum so people would have the full picture before voting on Article 40/3/3?
We now know what the proposed Legislation is if the Constitution is changed so we're not voting in a vacuum as it were.
While technically the voters are only voting on whether to change 40/3/3 there is a bigger picture associated with it.
If we vote to change will the Dáil pass the proposed legislation?

Yes and yes. That's exactly my point. Whether you are a Yes or No voter is up to yourself obviously, but it's not a vote in a vacuum. There is cause and effect at play here.

[gallsman]

No I think it will be enacted but I would not be surprised to see the issue drawn out.

[Rossfan]

I suspect the 12 weeks legislation will indeed be enacted if the Referendum passes.
Most of SF plus lefties of all sorts = 35 votes at least plus the Cabinet and Junior members another 30.
So they only need 15 of the other 93 to back it then.

[Avondhu star]

I suspect the 12 weeks legislation will indeed be enacted if the Referendum passes.
Most of SF plus lefties of all sorts = 35 votes at least plus the Cabinet and Junior members another 30.
So they only need 15 of the other 93 to back it then.

Wait till the TDs analyse the no votes in their constituency?

[Hardy]

If when the proposed legislation is enacted it will de facto represent the majority wish of the electorate, since that's what we elect governments for. If the electorate wishes to change its mind on the legislation, there will be a general election in due course.

[sid waddell]

Why are the anti-choice nutters so congenitally incapable of teling the truth?

https://www.newstalk.com/Master-of-the-Rotunda-Maternity-Hospital-warns-prolife-posters-factually-inaccurate

Pro-life posters that say a foetus can kick and yawn at nine weeks are factually incorrect, according to the Master of the Rotunda Maternity Hospital.

Speaking to Newstalk's Lunchtime Live, Professor Fergal Malone noted that a "yawn is an inhalation of breath" and as such is impossible for a foetus - which is surrounded by fluid in the womb.

The Professor also noted that the notion of a foetus kicking or having "any such conscious movement" after nine weeks gestation is misleading.

He said the posters are causing "extreme distress" among pregnant women.

The Rotunda Hospital was forced to call the Gardaí after a group of campaigners picketed in front of the hospital with posters featuring graphic imagery.

Professor Malone said the protesters were "holding them up to the faces of people walking through the hospital."

[AZOffaly]

Why would anti abortion campaigners be outside a maternity hospital. Donkeys.

[Crete Boom]

Alot of people on here seem to be saying they don't trust who we elect to legislate for abortion?
Does everyone here who doesn't trust the governement we elect vote in general elections? If you do why do you vote if you don't trust elected governments?
If they only way we can or feel we can legislate for major social issues is to have it bound in rigid black and white text in our constituition what is the point in us having a democracy at all?
I am in the undecided camp but I don't feel very comfortable with this we can't trust our elected officials to legislate on a major social issues so we need to have rigid text in a constitution to police a major social issue!!!

Other observations I have is the campaign reminds me of Brexit and the American presidential election where the No side is taking a very simple targeted lets have a revoloution against the government/establishment that have made our lives a misery, take back our country, with striking stats that are complete lies etc.. etc.. , and the Yes side is kind of wishy washy rambling set of reasons, all logical and valid but seem limp in soundbite terms to the No side!!!

[Esmarelda]

Matt Cooper on asking a FF TD if FF lead the next government, with over half their TDs canvassing for a NO vote, won't they just change the legislation to reflect this position.

[sid waddell]

Other observations I have is the campaign reminds me of Brexit and the American presidential election where the No side is taking a very simple targeted lets have a revoloution against the government/establishment that have made our lives a misery, take back our country, with striking stats that are complete lies etc.. etc.. , and the Yes side is kind of wishy washy rambling set of reasons, all logical and valid but seem limp in soundbite terms to the No side!!!

Facts aren't sexy in comparison to lies.

Most people voting Yes will be doing so on the basis of facts.

Most people voting No will not be doing so on the basis of facts, but on feelings and emotion.

You can't persuade people who vote on the basis of feelings rather than facts that they are wrong by throwing facts at them.

This is as true of this referendum as it is with Brexit and Trump.

[magpie seanie]

Seanie, it is disingenuous. To say 'The law won't change if the 8th Amendment is removed' implies that this is simply some sort of unconnected event. The referendum being removed ALLOWS the proposed law to be enacted. It's almost cause and effect.

Telling someone that repealing the 8th won't lead to 12 week elective abortions is either being deliberately disingenuous, or is avoiding the consequence of their vote. Most Yes voters, by far, want to see 12 week elective abortions in my view, otherwise they are in serious danger of watching the law of unintended consequences. Semantics about what the wording of the constitution will look like post referendum is just that. Semantics. The truth is that the proposed legislation will be enacted unless the referendum is defeated.

But not exactly. Trying to pretend nothing will change of there's a yes vote is disingenuous but the referendum is simply about removing or retaining the 8th Amendment. As has been said before, if a majority in Dáil Éireann want more restrictive laws at a future time they will be in a position to do so.

While we're speaking about things being disingenuous - the "1 in 5" posters by the no campaign are an absolute disgrace. Statistically/factually incorrect and using the comparison of Britain which has vastly more liberal abortion laws that what is proposed for here if there's a yes vote. We have a referendum commission - surely they should have powers to prevent outright lies being peddled. There may be examples on the Yes side but I've not seen them (and I'm biased of course).

Again one other thing I want to be clear about. No one or very few people want to see abortions at any stage. The reality though is that they are happening and we need to face those facts rather than keeping our heads in the sand.