Mickey Harte: voters must chose between 'culture of death and culture of life'
A group of GAA figures launched the GAA Athletes for a No Vote campaign in Dublin on Saturday. Gaelic Athletes for Life said the Government's proposals on abortion are not inclusive and "seek to exclude one group of people - the unborn - from society".
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/mickey-harte-voters-must-chose-between-culture-of-death-and-culture-of-life-1.3469954 (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/mickey-harte-voters-must-chose-between-culture-of-death-and-culture-of-life-1.3469954)
Haven't seen any promotional material yet but they should not be using the association's name at all in my opinion.
Doesn't sit well with me, regardless of which way people swing on this issue.
I wouldn't be happy if there was a 'GAA players for yes' campaign either.
Same here.
They are individuals and don't speak for the GAA or players of its various sports.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 21, 2018, 08:17:08 PM
Mickey Harte: voters must chose between 'culture of death and culture of life'
A group of GAA figures launched the GAA Athletes for a No Vote campaign in Dublin on Saturday. Gaelic Athletes for Life said the Government's proposals on abortion are not inclusive and "seek to exclude one group of people - the unborn - from society".
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/mickey-harte-voters-must-chose-between-culture-of-death-and-culture-of-life-1.3469954 (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/mickey-harte-voters-must-chose-between-culture-of-death-and-culture-of-life-1.3469954)
Haven't seen any promotional material yet but they should not be using the association's name at all in my opinion.
Doesn't sit well with me, regardless of which way people swing on this issue.
I wouldn't be happy if there was a 'GAA players for yes' campaign either.
I don't have any issue with the idea of it. There's enough of the can't-dare-have-an-opinion-on-society stuff in American pro sports without it infecting amateur sports here too. You should be allowed to have an opinion in public on something as huge as abortion.
That said, the No side of this debate are frankly wrong and in general dehumanise women in how they campaign and use their talking points. I hope the Yes side of the GAA community mobilises itself even more forcefully and does not allow Micky Harte to have the platform to himself.
Given he's from Tyrone what does unsettle me is he doesn't even have a vote in the referendum, so it becomes blatant meddling in another country's legislative process.
I'm with the lads above , don't want gaa stars or managers campaigning either way, esp those who can't vote in it
One of the McGee's from Donegal has been vocal about repealing the 8th, and no one I know has taken issue with him voicing his opinion.
Quote from: Syferus on April 21, 2018, 08:28:47 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 21, 2018, 08:17:08 PM
Mickey Harte: voters must chose between 'culture of death and culture of life'
A group of GAA figures launched the GAA Athletes for a No Vote campaign in Dublin on Saturday. Gaelic Athletes for Life said the Government's proposals on abortion are not inclusive and "seek to exclude one group of people - the unborn - from society".
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/mickey-harte-voters-must-chose-between-culture-of-death-and-culture-of-life-1.3469954 (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/mickey-harte-voters-must-chose-between-culture-of-death-and-culture-of-life-1.3469954)
Haven't seen any promotional material yet but they should not be using the association's name at all in my opinion.
Doesn't sit well with me, regardless of which way people swing on this issue.
I wouldn't be happy if there was a 'GAA players for yes' campaign either.
I don't have any issue with the idea of it. There's enough of the can't-dare-have-an-opinion-on-society stuff in American pro sports without it infecting amateur sports here too. You should be allowed to have an opinion in public on something as huge as abortion.
That said, the No side of this debate are frankly wrong and in general dehumanise women in how they campaign and use their talking points. I hope the Yes side of the GAA community mobilises itself even more forcefully and does not allow Micky Harte to have the platform to himself.
Given he's from Tyrone what does unsettle me is he doesn't even have a vote in the referendum, so it becomes blatant meddling in another country's legislative process.
You are allowed.
Look at Eamon McGee's involvement with the 'Together4Yes' campaign in Donegal.
Do it in your capacity as a private individual and leave the GAA out of it.
I haven't heard of him do so and didnt hear any group of gaa affiliates organising themselves such a way to support repeal.
I would be equally critical if what I see as abuse of positions
McGee's is perfectly entitled to support which side he wants as us Micky H or any other GAA person.AS INDIVIDUALS.
Quote from: Rossfan on April 21, 2018, 09:08:19 PM
McGee's is perfectly entitled to support which side he wants as us Micky H or any other GAA person.AS INDIVIDUALS.
I agree with you alright. No need for the "gaa athletes" title.h
Not happy that they are referencing the GAA and half of the them don't even have the vote on this issue. As private individuals they are more than entitled to campaign for whatever they want apart from those 3 from the North who should, frankly, just stay out of it.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 21, 2018, 08:17:08 PM
Mickey Harte: voters must chose between 'culture of death and culture of life'
A group of GAA figures launched the GAA Athletes for a No Vote campaign in Dublin on Saturday. Gaelic Athletes for Life said the Government's proposals on abortion are not inclusive and "seek to exclude one group of people - the unborn - from society".
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/mickey-harte-voters-must-chose-between-culture-of-death-and-culture-of-life-1.3469954 (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/mickey-harte-voters-must-chose-between-culture-of-death-and-culture-of-life-1.3469954)
Haven't seen any promotional material yet but they should not be using the association's name at all in my opinion.
Doesn't sit well with me, regardless of which way people swing on this issue.
I wouldn't be happy if there was a 'GAA players for yes' campaign either.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Msmnb676RxI
too many gruseome deaths of innocent women
The one who was dead but kept in limbo with her unborn baby because of the abortion regime was more important than whatever Mickey has to say
Quote from: Jinxy on April 21, 2018, 08:17:08 PM
Mickey Harte: voters must chose between 'culture of death and culture of life'
A group of GAA figures launched the GAA Athletes for a No Vote campaign in Dublin on Saturday. Gaelic Athletes for Life said the Government's proposals on abortion are not inclusive and "seek to exclude one group of people - the unborn - from society".
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/mickey-harte-voters-must-chose-between-culture-of-death-and-culture-of-life-1.3469954 (https://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/mickey-harte-voters-must-chose-between-culture-of-death-and-culture-of-life-1.3469954)
Haven't seen any promotional material yet but they should not be using the association's name at all in my opinion.
Doesn't sit well with me, regardless of which way people swing on this issue.
I wouldn't be happy if there was a 'GAA players for yes' campaign either.
+1
Quote from: hardstation on April 21, 2018, 10:07:16 PM
Quote from: An Fhairche Abu on April 21, 2018, 09:33:17 PM
Not happy that they are referencing the GAA and half of the them don't even have the vote on this issue. As private individuals they are more than entitled to campaign for whatever they want apart from those 3 from the North who should, frankly, just stay out of it.
Lol. Freddie Free State speaks for the nation.
What on earth does having a vote have to do with it?
What on earth does an invisible border have to do with it?
You've lost the run of yourself in your attempts to distance yourself from the north.
Freddie Free State, at least try to be more creative with the insult if that's your tack. As for your statement that I'm losing the "run of yourself", physician, heal thyself.
Their "Pro life" preference is not up for change in the jurisdiction that they live, and have a vote in. It's a contentious enough debate without people who will be unaffected by the result campaigning either way.
A few fellas spouting contradictions including syferus. Not a week ago half the people in ROI were passing comment and opinion on the Ulster rugby rape trial including at least half of the TD's and senators in the Dail. The affair was broached in the Dail and very publicly covered on social media by the same public representatives. There were demonstrations in cork, Dublin, galway etc and 300 odd pages of comment on here by mostly ROI commentators. This is despite the trial being held under the laws of a different jurisdiction.
Next to no-one in the north attempted to deny the right of people south of the border to pass comment or publicly lobby for one side of the rape trial. I think it's a bit cheap to now state that harte, Cassidy or gallagher are "blatantly meddling in another country's legislative process". Where the Labour Party or solidarity blantantly meddling in another countries legal process when their representatives passed slanderous comment against the defendants in an NI rape trial?
The group shouldn't be using the GAA acronym in it's title I agree and it's not defendable but it's contradictory, cynical and myopic to think people north of the border don't have a right to support, or object, to repealing the 8th amendment.
Quote from: hardstation on April 21, 2018, 10:07:16 PM
Quote from: An Fhairche Abu on April 21, 2018, 09:33:17 PM
Not happy that they are referencing the GAA and half of the them don't even have the vote on this issue. As private individuals they are more than entitled to campaign for whatever they want apart from those 3 from the North who should, frankly, just stay out of it.
Lol. Freddie Free State speaks for the nation.
What on earth does having a vote have to do with it?
What on earth does an invisible border have to do with it?
You've lost the run of yourself in your attempts to distance yourself from the north.
I agree with an fairche on this. MH and others who neither are affected by the decision or can decide on it should stay out.
They do not represent my GAA
Quote from: trileacman on April 21, 2018, 10:46:24 PM
A few fellas spouting contradictions including syferus. Not a week ago half the people in ROI were passing comment and opinion on the Ulster rugby rape trial including at least half of the TD's and senators in the Dail. The affair was broached in the Dail and very publicly covered on social media by the same public representatives. There were demonstrations in cork, Dublin, galway etc and 300 odd pages of comment on here by mostly ROI commentators. This is despite the trial being held under the laws of a different jurisdiction.
Next to no-one in the north attempted to deny the right of people south of the border to pass comment or publicly lobby for one side of the rape trial. I think it's a bit cheap to now state that harte, Cassidy or gallagher are "blatantly meddling in another country's legislative process". Where the Labour Party or solidarity blantantly meddling in another countries legal process when their representatives passed slanderous comment against the defendants in an NI rape trial?
The group shouldn't be using the GAA acronym in it's title I agree and it's not defendable but it's contradictory, cynical and myopic to think people north of the border don't have a right to support, or object, to repealing the 8th amendment.
The last I checked no one gets a vote on a criminal case but the jury. Commenting on a court case is a whole different situation to publicly campaigning to impact a imminent vote in a country you are not a resident of. You are the master of the misguided take.
Quote from: An Fhairche Abu on April 21, 2018, 10:43:29 PM
It's a contentious enough debate without people who will be unaffected by the result campaigning either way.
By extension medical professionals from the UK should be barred from passing comment on the amendment as they will be unaffected by the result.
I think Mickey is losingb the run of himself and his intrusion into the debate abusing the GAA name....
We had one extremist northern religious extremist in Dana already and it turned neutrals off, Hartes opinion won't be rated by most, and won't be appreciated by most GAA people who see the GAA name being brought into disrepute ....
Quote from: hardstation on April 21, 2018, 10:53:18 PM
It's a moral issue. One of perceived right and wrong.
Voting Jurisdiction has nothing to do with it. Much like being from Ireland and campaigning about Israel's treatment of Palestine. Furthermore, we live on the same (small) island. Mickey Harte lives closer to Monaghan than he does Ballycastle. I don't see how the border has any impact on the moral views of anyone in Ireland, unless it suits them to.
If you have a vote you're perfectly entitled to campaign. If you don't, the difference is very clear. If this was something like Enda Kenny endorsing a Unionist candidate in the north I can only imagine the uproar here. Ireland is a different country to the north as it stands and only those resident in Ireland will be voting to decide this referendum.
Some people seem to want to have a say but not share in the responsibility of the result or its impact on the nation. That's frankly egotistical on the part of people like Micky Harte.
Quote from: trileacman on April 21, 2018, 10:52:46 PM
Quote from: An Fhairche Abu on April 21, 2018, 10:43:29 PM
It's a contentious enough debate without people who will be unaffected by the result campaigning either way.
By extension medical professionals from the UK should be barred from passing comment on the amendment as they will be unaffected by the result.
Have they all come together under a similar type of campaign trying to influence the vote either way? If so then they absolutely should be barred from doing that.
Quote from: hardstation on April 21, 2018, 10:53:18 PM
It's a moral issue. One of perceived right and wrong.
Voting Jurisdiction has nothing to do with it. Much like being from Ireland and campaigning about Israel's treatment of Palestine.Furthermore, we live on the same (small) island. Mickey Harte lives closer to Monaghan than he does Ballycastle. I don't see how the border has any impact on the moral views of anyone in Ireland, unless it suits them to.
Absolute nonsense comparison. It's nothing like that at all.
Quote from: hardstation on April 21, 2018, 11:04:41 PM
Just like the #ibelieveher campaigns in Dublin about a Belfast rape trial....
Yeah. Rape culture doesn't exsist in Ireland so they definitely weren't commenting on the larger issue that effects everyone. And I must have missed the public vote they had on the verdict because I really should have voted.
I hope you're being disingenuous because it's pretty hard not to see the huge difference between the two situations.
http://www.hoganstand.com/Article/Index/284050 (http://www.hoganstand.com/Article/Index/284050)
'The launch takes place at 2pm in the Ballyfermot Sports and Fitness Centre where the GAA stars will campaign for a 'No' vote in the upcoming referendum on the Eighth Amendment.
The GAA stars will conduct a skills training session for local children from 2-3pm, followed by a press availability and the reading out of an official statement thereafter.'
Who in their right mind is going to supply their kids for this photo op?
For fcuk sake..... why drag children into it as well as the GAA.
0 out of 10 folks and ye're doing ye're cause no favours.
Was there not similar backing of the gay marriage vote by GAA bodies/players? GPA were definitely involved
Quote from: hardstation on April 21, 2018, 11:10:37 PM
Quote from: An Fhairche Abu on April 21, 2018, 11:03:42 PM
Quote from: trileacman on April 21, 2018, 10:52:46 PM
Quote from: An Fhairche Abu on April 21, 2018, 10:43:29 PM
It's a contentious enough debate without people who will be unaffected by the result campaigning either way.
By extension medical professionals from the UK should be barred from passing comment on the amendment as they will be unaffected by the result.
Have they all come together under a similar type of campaign trying to influence the vote either way? If so then they absolutely should be barred from doing that.
Quote from: hardstation on April 21, 2018, 10:53:18 PM
It's a moral issue. One of perceived right and wrong.
Voting Jurisdiction has nothing to do with it. Much like being from Ireland and campaigning about Israel's treatment of Palestine.Furthermore, we live on the same (small) island. Mickey Harte lives closer to Monaghan than he does Ballycastle. I don't see how the border has any impact on the moral views of anyone in Ireland, unless it suits them to.
Absolute nonsense comparison. It's nothing like that at all.
Explain. You aren't from there. It has no impact on your life.
Ah here, really? There's nothing to be gained from further interaction on this subject by the looks of it.
Back in 2015, David Gough was going to wear a rainbow wristband with the GAA's blessing while reffing a game in Croke Park.
However, they then changed their mind and said he couldn't wear it.
My recollection of the incident was there was no issue with him wearing the wristband when it was considered an anti-homophobia gesture, however he then made comments about the same-sex marriage referendum, which then gave the impression it was a political gesture.
Once something becomes political, the association needs to keep well clear.
I think the GPA supported a 'Yes' vote, but they only represent inter-county players (who I presume were consulted in advance) and as such have nothing to do with you or I.
Big difference between a players representative body and the actual association.
https://twitter.com/BallyfermotDLS/status/987732535533867008 (https://twitter.com/BallyfermotDLS/status/987732535533867008)
Fair play to them.
Croke Park needs to get out in front of this, and fast.
There are plenty of people in this country with little or no interest in sport who will not understand the distinction between the position of this small group staging a photo op in a sports centre and position of the wider association.
Quote from: hardstation on April 21, 2018, 10:53:18 PM
It's a moral issue. One of perceived right and wrong.
Voting Jurisdiction has nothing to do with it. Much like being from Ireland and campaigning about Israel's treatment of Palestine. Furthermore, we live on the same (small) island. Mickey Harte lives closer to Monaghan than he does Ballycastle. I don't see how the border has any impact on the moral views of anyone in Ireland, unless it suits them to.
Agree 100%.
Also agree that these campaigners should keep the GAA out of the title of their campaign
Exactly Jinxy.
Let them tear away as individuals , albeit well known ones due to GAA involvement which might influence some.
And Micky H is as much entitled to promote one side as is E Magee the other.
Magee can vote though.
Quote from: hardstation on April 21, 2018, 11:46:55 PM
Quote from: An Fhairche Abu on April 21, 2018, 11:37:03 PM
Quote from: hardstation on April 21, 2018, 11:10:37 PM
Quote from: An Fhairche Abu on April 21, 2018, 11:03:42 PM
Quote from: trileacman on April 21, 2018, 10:52:46 PM
Quote from: An Fhairche Abu on April 21, 2018, 10:43:29 PM
It's a contentious enough debate without people who will be unaffected by the result campaigning either way.
By extension medical professionals from the UK should be barred from passing comment on the amendment as they will be unaffected by the result.
Have they all come together under a similar type of campaign trying to influence the vote either way? If so then they absolutely should be barred from doing that.
Quote from: hardstation on April 21, 2018, 10:53:18 PM
It's a moral issue. One of perceived right and wrong.
Voting Jurisdiction has nothing to do with it. Much like being from Ireland and campaigning about Israel's treatment of Palestine.Furthermore, we live on the same (small) island. Mickey Harte lives closer to Monaghan than he does Ballycastle. I don't see how the border has any impact on the moral views of anyone in Ireland, unless it suits them to.
Absolute nonsense comparison. It's nothing like that at all.
Explain. You aren't from there. It has no impact on your life.
Ah here, really? There's nothing to be gained from further interaction on this subject by the looks of it.
Because you can't.
No I don't have the interest to engage further, you're just flat out wrong in my opinion.
https://twitter.com/EDDIEBARRETT/status/987815661094277120 (https://twitter.com/EDDIEBARRETT/status/987815661094277120)
Probably going to see a lot of this type of thing over the next couple of days if the GAA don't act quickly to distance themselves from this specific incident and also to clarify their 'non-political' stance in general.
Social media is full of self-righteous clowns who expect those they disagree with to be punished simply for holding an opposing viewpoint.
My understanding is that they are not in breach of any of the association's rules, therefore to suggest they be 'suspended' is absurd.
The GAA should not be used as a vehicle for either side in this unavoidably divisive debate, and Mickey Harte et al. should be more self-aware than that, and just steer fecking clear, for once.
But for (rather pathetic) partitionists to indulge their petty political biases is equally reprehensible -- give it a rest too, things may catch you up before you know where you really are, and who or what has jurisdiction where might just be a trivial fading memory where this island is concerned, and sooner than you think.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 21, 2018, 11:22:56 PM
http://www.hoganstand.com/Article/Index/284050 (http://www.hoganstand.com/Article/Index/284050)
'The launch takes place at 2pm in the Ballyfermot Sports and Fitness Centre where the GAA stars will campaign for a 'No' vote in the upcoming referendum on the Eighth Amendment.
The GAA stars will conduct a skills training session for local children from 2-3pm, followed by a press availability and the reading out of an official statement thereafter.'
Who in their right mind is going to supply their kids for this photo op?
This definitely goes way too far.
Just checked there and the name of the group is "Gaelic Athletes for Life" rather than GAA athletes. A minor but significant difference tbf
Sure wasnt Enda and a gang over in Ruislip at the Mayo game campaigning against Brexit outside the stadium.
And the (hammered) Mayo fan was interviewed afterwards by RTE complaining about all the foreigners coming in taking the jobs.
Mickey Harte is entitled to his opinion. He is recognized and respected North and South, but why in Gods name (if he/she exists) would anyone cast their vote based on what the manager of a football team has to say on the matter.
Quote from: whitey on April 22, 2018, 03:14:33 AM
Sure wasnt Enda and a gang over in Ruislip at the Mayo game campaigning against Brexit outside the stadium.
And the (hammered) Mayo fan was interviewed afterwards by RTE complaining about all the foreigners coming in taking the jobs.
Mickey Harte is entitled to his opinion. He is recognized and respected North and South, but why in Gods name (if he/she exists) would anyone cast their vote based on what the manager of a football team has to say on the matter.
I'll correct myself. You're the real king of the bad take.
Quote from: Syferus on April 22, 2018, 04:30:04 AM
Quote from: whitey on April 22, 2018, 03:14:33 AM
Sure wasnt Enda and a gang over in Ruislip at the Mayo game campaigning against Brexit outside the stadium.
And the (hammered) Mayo fan was interviewed afterwards by RTE complaining about all the foreigners coming in taking the jobs.
Mickey Harte is entitled to his opinion. He is recognized and respected North and South, but why in Gods name (if he/she exists) would anyone cast their vote based on what the manager of a football team has to say on the matter.
I'll correct myself. You're the real king of the bad take.
Dont you have a sheep to be attending to, or a Brendan Shine concert to attend rather than criticizing very intelligent and meaningful posts like mine?
Is Mickey Harte catholic?
It's scary how quickly people point the "you aren't part of us" finger when it suits them. Of course the GAA name shouldn't be bought into this debate but neither should people from the north's right to have a view on it. It's our country too. Hardly any wonder partition was allowed to happen when you scrape the surface and see what the true colours of how partitionist some people from the south actually are. Regardless of the abortion debate it's depressing how some people from the south view the north of this country.
Quote from: BennyHarp on April 22, 2018, 06:42:13 AM
It's scary how quickly people point the "you aren't part of us" finger when it suits them. Of course the GAA name shouldn't be bought into this debate but neither should people from the north's right to have a view on it. It's our country too. Hardly any wonder partition was allowed to happen when you scrape the surface and see what the true colours of how partitionist some people from the south actually are. Regardless of the abortion debate it's depressing how some people from the south view the north of this country.
It is.
As if the border is stronger than history and culture.
Nationalism works by emphasising the group and differentiating it from outsiders. The Roi has unfinished business in the North so excluding part of the nation does not work.
Whatever brings debate and awareness to the fore in a national referendum is to be welcomed from whatever angle it comes. A referendum is not necessarily a political issue and that is borne out by swathes of different opinions across different political parties and people. It is in my eyes a societal, civil, moral potentially and ultimately legal issue that is being voted on. Anyone who thinks this is a political owned referendum needs to think a little deeper. Therefore anyone political, non political of any description is entitled to inform debate and lobby. Suppression of views at this timeis anti democratic.
Incidently,!and on an unrelated point without being critical or otherwise of the significant visit of the Queen to the Gaa headquarters where players officials and administrators including J S involved themselves was potentially a much more a political statement than this civi debate and poll. We probably do irony fairly well well on this board.
Quote from: macdanger2 on April 22, 2018, 02:49:48 AM
Just checked there and the name of the group is "Gaelic Athletes for Life" rather than GAA athletes. A minor but significant difference tbf
Where Mickey Harte comes from doesn't bother me s there are others involved who live south of the border.
But I do object to the use of a GAA club's premises to promote the cause of any party involved in a political issue of any sort. The forthcoming referendum is a political matter, albeit not a party political one, as the electorate are being asked to cast their votes one way or another..
I particularly object to the involvement of children to promote the cause of either side in the present campaign. This move has feck all to do with the kids' football skills and feck everything to do with persuading parents and friends to support their agenda in a very unsubtle way.
Quote from: macdanger2 on April 22, 2018, 02:49:48 AM
Just checked there and the name of the group is "Gaelic Athletes for Life" rather than GAA athletes. A minor but significant difference tbf
'GAA Athletes for a NO vote'
'GAA Athletes for a NO vote' has launched its campaign, in advance of the Referendum on the Eighth Amendment.
The Referendum will take place on Friday May 25, 2018.
'GAA Athletes for a NO vote' launched its campaign earlier today (Saturday, April 21), at Ballyfermot Sports Centre in Dublin.
The group said it also planned to issue a series of videos, featuring well-known GAA players over the coming month, in which the players will give their reasons for voting NO.
Today's launch of ''GAA Athletes for a NO vote' was attended by: Joe Sheridan (Meath), Patrick Gallagher (Antrim), Aoife Cassidy (Derry, All Ireland Camogie winning captain), Anne-Marie McDonagh (Galway Ladies Football) and Micky Harte (Tyrone Manager).
A statement issued at the event said: "The mission statement in the GAA's Strategic Plan assures us that, 'We actively seek to engage with and include all members of our society.'
"The GAA's vision is 'that everyone be welcome to participate fully in our games and culture, that they thrive and develop their potential, and be inspired to keep a lifelong engagement with our Association.'
"Many young men and women are wondering how to vote. The GAA insists that there is a place for everybody in our Association, regardless of ability, or disability, regardless of background, regardless of race.
"We are an inclusive organisation. There is a space for everybody at our table. Sport is a place where people come together to test themselves, to strive for greatness, to fulfil their potential, and to express their unique gifts as part of a team.https://www.donegalnow.com/news/gaa-athletes-no-vote/220650 (https://www.donegalnow.com/news/gaa-athletes-no-vote/220650)
Those are fairly muddy waters, at best.
'Gaelic athletes for life' does seem to be the official title alright.
https://twitter.com/Savethe8thInfo/status/987833880798466048 (https://twitter.com/Savethe8thInfo/status/987833880798466048)
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 11:34:49 AM
Quote from: macdanger2 on April 22, 2018, 02:49:48 AM
Just checked there and the name of the group is "Gaelic Athletes for Life" rather than GAA athletes. A minor but significant difference tbf
'GAA Athletes for a NO vote'
'GAA Athletes for a NO vote' has launched its campaign, in advance of the Referendum on the Eighth Amendment.
The Referendum will take place on Friday May 25, 2018.
'GAA Athletes for a NO vote' launched its campaign earlier today (Saturday, April 21), at Ballyfermot Sports Centre in Dublin.
The group said it also planned to issue a series of videos, featuring well-known GAA players over the coming month, in which the players will give their reasons for voting NO.
Today's launch of ''GAA Athletes for a NO vote' was attended by: Joe Sheridan (Meath), Patrick Gallagher (Antrim), Aoife Cassidy (Derry, All Ireland Camogie winning captain), Anne-Marie McDonagh (Galway Ladies Football) and Micky Harte (Tyrone Manager).
A statement issued at the event said: "The mission statement in the GAA's Strategic Plan assures us that, 'We actively seek to engage with and include all members of our society.'
"The GAA's vision is 'that everyone be welcome to participate fully in our games and culture, that they thrive and develop their potential, and be inspired to keep a lifelong engagement with our Association.'
"Many young men and women are wondering how to vote. The GAA insists that there is a place for everybody in our Association, regardless of ability, or disability, regardless of background, regardless of race.
"We are an inclusive organisation. There is a space for everybody at our table. Sport is a place where people come together to test themselves, to strive for greatness, to fulfil their potential, and to express their unique gifts as part of a team.
https://www.donegalnow.com/news/gaa-athletes-no-vote/220650 (https://www.donegalnow.com/news/gaa-athletes-no-vote/220650)
Those are fairly muddy waters, at best.
Especially given Ireland outsources abortion to England
Big Joe and Co are defending an Ireland that does not exist
Quote from: whitey on April 22, 2018, 03:14:33 AM
Sure wasnt Enda and a gang over in Ruislip at the Mayo game campaigning against Brexit outside the stadium.
And the (hammered) Mayo fan was interviewed afterwards by RTE complaining about all the foreigners coming in taking the jobs.
Mickey Harte is entitled to his opinion. He is recognized and respected North and South, but why in Gods name (if he/she exists) would anyone cast their vote based on what the manager of a football team has to say on the matter.
Well, they rolled out all the sports stars, musicians, actors for the Lisbon Treaty. It clearly worked. People really are that easily manipulated.
I wouldn't underestimate the effect that the support of a public, well-liked 'non-political' figure, can have on voters who are on the fence or simply indifferent to the issue at hand.
As I said before, everyone is entitled to have their say and publicly support whichever side they want, but I don't want the GAA dragged into it.
For all the careful wording this group are using, it is fairly evident that they are using the GAA as a platform by proxy.
Quote from: BennyHarp on April 22, 2018, 06:42:13 AM
It's scary how quickly people point the "you aren't part of us" finger when it suits them. Of course the GAA name shouldn't be bought into this debate but neither should people from the north's right to have a view on it. It's our country too. Hardly any wonder partition was allowed to happen when you scrape the surface and see what the true colours of how partitionist some people from the south actually are. Regardless of the abortion debate it's depressing how some people from the south view the north of this country.
That's not an issue for me at least.
I just have a problem with the association being appropriated as a vehicle for promoting this group's agenda.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 01:07:57 PM
Quote from: BennyHarp on April 22, 2018, 06:42:13 AM
It's scary how quickly people point the "you aren't part of us" finger when it suits them. Of course the GAA name shouldn't be bought into this debate but neither should people from the north's right to have a view on it. It's our country too. Hardly any wonder partition was allowed to happen when you scrape the surface and see what the true colours of how partitionist some people from the south actually are. Regardless of the abortion debate it's depressing how some people from the south view the north of this country.
That's not an issue for me at least.
I just have a problem with the association being appropriated as a vehicle for promoting this group's agenda.
Were you as concerned when the GPA declared in favour of marriage equality?
No, because I'm not a member of the GPA.
Quote from: trileacman on April 22, 2018, 01:16:14 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 01:07:57 PM
Quote from: BennyHarp on April 22, 2018, 06:42:13 AM
It's scary how quickly people point the "you aren't part of us" finger when it suits them. Of course the GAA name shouldn't be bought into this debate but neither should people from the north's right to have a view on it. It's our country too. Hardly any wonder partition was allowed to happen when you scrape the surface and see what the true colours of how partitionist some people from the south actually are. Regardless of the abortion debate it's depressing how some people from the south view the north of this country.
That's not an issue for me at least.
I just have a problem with the association being appropriated as a vehicle for promoting this group's agenda.
Were you as concerned when the GPA declared in favour of marriage equality?
Apples and oranges trillick.
Let mickey stick to the coaching and stop preaching to others ....
Quote from: whitey on April 22, 2018, 04:43:52 AM
Quote from: Syferus on April 22, 2018, 04:30:04 AM
Quote from: whitey on April 22, 2018, 03:14:33 AM
Sure wasnt Enda and a gang over in Ruislip at the Mayo game campaigning against Brexit outside the stadium.
And the (hammered) Mayo fan was interviewed afterwards by RTE complaining about all the foreigners coming in taking the jobs.
Mickey Harte is entitled to his opinion. He is recognized and respected North and South, but why in Gods name (if he/she exists) would anyone cast their vote based on what the manager of a football team has to say on the matter.
I'll correct myself. You're the real king of the bad take.
Dont you have a sheep to be attending to, or a Brendan Shine concert to attend rather than criticizing very intelligent and meaningful posts like mine?
It always comes back to the sheep
The people whining about Mickey Harte etc getting involved in a political issue are the same ones who wanted the GAA to come out in support of hunger strikers etc
Quote from: Avondhu star on April 22, 2018, 01:48:46 PM
The people whining about Mickey Harte etc getting involved in a political issue are the same ones who wanted the GAA to come out in support of hunger strikers etc
I'd say most of them weren't born 37 years ago and the ones who were would have been at least 16... do the maths thats a daft statement.
The thing is I can't really see any point in the whole thing.
Are there really all that many people whose vote is going to be affected by this one way or the other?
Quote from: twohands!!! on April 22, 2018, 02:26:01 PM
The thing is I can't really see any point in the whole thing.
Are there really all that many people whose vote is going to be affected by this one way or the other?
Using the GAA IP haphazzardly can seriously damage the sport.
People can have an opinion and they are allowed to share that - i dont see what the issue is here;
Calling themselves Gaelic Athletes possibly is of concern for the GAA but i will leave that with them.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 01:26:32 PM
No, because I'm not a member of the GPA.
The dissociation between the GPA and the GAA is tenuous at the very least given that the GPA is now a fully endorsed and funded wing of the GAA.
The groups name and location of their event may cross a line in the rule book but there's a hugely disproportionate reaction to it. Had Harte not been involved I doubt if this would have reached a full page of comment. Had the group been supporting repeal I doubt if comment would have been passed at all on this board.
There has been a succession of reasons as to its impropriety, each more desperate than the last, first was the name (since debunked), second was the "nationality" of those passing comment (also challenged), then there was the venue and lastly has been the programme for the day. To me it seems people are much more willing to challenge the group than they are challenge the argument they are supporting.
It's become a rather typical response in discourse nowadays, playing the man and not the ball etc. If you believe strongly in repealing the 8th it should be easy to rebuke this group views and arguments rather than having to deny their right to lobby due to rather minor infringements of the GAA's rule book.
I've no dog in this fight, do as you wish with the 8th amendment. However I'm tired of opinion or comment being stifled instead of being countered.
If you believe in aborting people then you are hardly likely to refrain from playing the man if he is in your way.
Quote from: trileacman on April 22, 2018, 03:16:34 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 01:26:32 PM
No, because I'm not a member of the GPA.
The dissociation between the GPA and the GAA is tenuous at the very least given that the GPA is now a fully endorsed and funded wing of the GAA.
The groups name and location of their event may cross a line in the rule book but there's a hugely disproportionate reaction to it. Had Harte not been involved I doubt if this would have reached a full page of comment. Had the group been supporting repeal I doubt if comment would have been passed at all on this board.
There has been a succession of reasons as to its impropriety, each more desperate than the last, first was the name (since debunked), second was the "nationality" of those passing comment (also challenged), then there was the venue and lastly has been the programme for the day. To me it seems people are much more willing to challenge the group than they are challenge the argument they are supporting.
It's become a rather typical response in discourse nowadays, playing the man and not the ball etc. If you believe strongly in repealing the 8th it should be easy to rebuke this group views and arguments rather than having to deny their right to lobby due to rather minor infringements of the GAA's rule book.
I've no dog in this fight, do as you wish with the 8th amendment. However I'm tired of opinion or comment being stifled instead of being countered.
Eh, that's exactly the point.
Thought that was pretty obvious.
The argument isn't the problem.
Abortion meeting cancelled because GAA 'has to stay neutral' - club boss
'The club informed the People Before Profit (PBP) party it could not use the space on Thursday, less than five hours before the meeting was due to begin.
Chairman of the club ,Brendan O Connalain, said the decision was made because the GAA could not be seen to promote either side in a possible abortion referendum.'
https://www.herald.ie/news/abortion-meeting-cancelled-because-gaa-has-to-stay-neutral-club-boss-34999655.html (https://www.herald.ie/news/abortion-meeting-cancelled-because-gaa-has-to-stay-neutral-club-boss-34999655.html)
Can't remember if we discussed it here at the time but I remember arguing with several pro-choice people on social media about this incident.
They didn't think it was a political issue, I argued it was.
This isn't me having a go at Mickey Harte or trying to deny him a voice, I just believe the association needs to steer well clear (and be KEPT well clear) of this stuff.
Quote from: armaghniac on April 22, 2018, 03:35:04 PM
If you believe in aborting people then you are hardly likely to refrain from playing the man if he is in your way.
What a pathetic description of the pro-choice side.
Joe Sheridan had no problem illegally and unjustly repealing the ninth* in 2010.
What a hypocrite.
*Leinster title for Louth
This group are being referred to as 'GAA athletes for a No vote' in multiple media reports now.
I doubt some reporter just decided to make up a name for them so I'd be curious to know who told them it was called that.
Tyrone manager Mickey Harte fronts GAA anti-abortion group
'The group, GAA Athletes for a No Vote, was launched in Dublin on Saturday.'
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43856580 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43856580)
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 05:55:46 PM
This group are being referred to as 'GAA athletes for a No vote' in multiple media reports now.
I doubt some reporter just decided to make up a name for them so I'd be curious to know who told them it was called that.
Tyrone manager Mickey Harte fronts GAA anti-abortion group
'The group, GAA Athletes for a No Vote, was launched in Dublin on Saturday.'
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43856580 (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43856580)
They could have called it Angelus fans or Dunnes shoppers for No but GAA has more cachet.
The GAA should come down heavy on this misuse of the Association's brand
Mickey Harte, and the others involved, are entitled to their opinions. However, I don't believe they should have called they're wee group GAA athletes
No harm to Mickey Harte, he's manager of the Tyrone Senior Football team. He should stick to that instead of getting involved in a debate which he can't even vote in.
Creating a sideshow, obviously as a Tyrone fellow I'd like to be able to vote in Irish affairs, but we can't. What's he at. Someone be safer having a word with him to be honest.
Quote from: GetOverTheBar on April 22, 2018, 06:22:26 PM
No harm to Mickey Harte, he's manager of the Tyrone Senior Football team. He should stick to that instead of getting involved in a debate which he can't even vote in.
Creating a sideshow, obviously as a Tyrone fellow I'd like to be able to vote in Irish affairs, but we can't. What's he at. Someone be safer having a word with him to be honest.
At last a Tyrone man with no chips on shoulders calling it as it is
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 03:42:27 PM
Abortion meeting cancelled because GAA 'has to stay neutral' - club boss
'The club informed the People Before Profit (PBP) party it could not use the space on Thursday, less than five hours before the meeting was due to begin.
Chairman of the club ,Brendan O Connalain, said the decision was made because the GAA could not be seen to promote either side in a possible abortion referendum.'
https://www.herald.ie/news/abortion-meeting-cancelled-because-gaa-has-to-stay-neutral-club-boss-34999655.html (https://www.herald.ie/news/abortion-meeting-cancelled-because-gaa-has-to-stay-neutral-club-boss-34999655.html)
Can't remember if we discussed it here at the time but I remember arguing with several pro-choice people on social media about this incident.
They didn't think it was a political issue, I argued it was.
This isn't me having a go at Mickey Harte or trying to deny him a voice, I just believe the association needs to steer well clear (and be KEPT well clear) of this stuff.
Totally agree. Harte should get a suspension for this but probably won't.
No vote is going to win this election. They look much better organised on the ground. Every where I go I see no posters, nothing from the yes side or the major parties.
Quote from: Itchy on April 22, 2018, 06:40:45 PM
No vote is going to win this election. They look much better organised on the ground. Every where I go I see no posters, nothing from the yes side or the major parties.
Pretty sure the opinion polls say different. 63% .
Quote from: Itchy on April 22, 2018, 06:40:45 PM
No vote is going to win this election. They look much better organised on the ground. Every where I go I see no posters, nothing from the yes side or the major parties.
The people who will vote Yes don't get their news from papers or direction from political parties. The Yes side is by and large younger and far more tech savvy so trying to judge it on posters is ludicrous. There's a massive campaign to crowdfund tickets for exiles to return to vote Yes. The Yes side have been mobilised for this moment for at least a decade at this stage. It will not be a contest.
Quote from: Itchy on April 22, 2018, 06:40:45 PM
No vote is going to win this election. They look much better organised on the ground. Every where I go I see no posters, nothing from the yes side or the major parties.
Unfortunately, only a matter of time before the NO posters are pulled down unfortunately, that's if you live in an urban environment.
I think it was 5000 abortions a year in England for the last 25 years.
125000 women with 125000 men is 250K or maybe 10% of the electorate
Quote from: Syferus on April 22, 2018, 08:05:55 PM
Quote from: Itchy on April 22, 2018, 06:40:45 PM
No vote is going to win this election. They look much better organised on the ground. Every where I go I see no posters, nothing from the yes side or the major parties.
The people who will vote Yes don't get their news from papers or direction from political parties. The Yes side is by and large younger and far more tech savvy so trying to judge it on posters is ludicrous. There's a massive campaign to crowdfund tickets for exiles to return to vote Yes. The Yes side have been mobilised for this moment for at least a decade at this stage. It will not be a contest.
And when you make a stupid prediction you can be sure it will be wrong as usual
Quote from: Itchy on April 22, 2018, 08:29:20 PM
Quote from: Syferus on April 22, 2018, 08:05:55 PM
Quote from: Itchy on April 22, 2018, 06:40:45 PM
No vote is going to win this election. They look much better organised on the ground. Every where I go I see no posters, nothing from the yes side or the major parties.
The people who will vote Yes don't get their news from papers or direction from political parties. The Yes side is by and large younger and far more tech savvy so trying to judge it on posters is ludicrous. There's a massive campaign to crowdfund tickets for exiles to return to vote Yes. The Yes side have been mobilised for this moment for at least a decade at this stage. It will not be a contest.
And when you make a stupid prediction you can be sure it will be wrong as usual
Aren't you the fella who thought the evil Brits were setting up the Russians on the nerve agent assassination?
:-[
will be interesting to see if the tyrone county board will issue a statement distancing themselves from hartes disgraceful pr stunt in dublin. he should be banned for bringing the gaa into disrespute.
Quote from: hardstation on April 22, 2018, 09:12:53 PM
How have they brought the association into disrepute?
well i thought the gaa wasnt supposed to get involved in politics and such so for harte and co to try and use the name of the gaa to influence the outcome of a referendum is disgraceful.
well if the gaa has a rule that the organisation cannot be used for political purposed then they obviously have broken that rule.
The name of the group plus the fact that they ran a coaching session for the kids at the launch are both pretty cynical stunts as far as I'm concerned, but I don't think they have breached any rules.
If sufficient people think the GAA are officially behind this, then you could probably make the 'disrepute' case but thus far it seems to me that most people know this is a solo run by Mickey & Co.
Quote from: Syferus on April 22, 2018, 08:05:55 PM
Quote from: Itchy on April 22, 2018, 06:40:45 PM
No vote is going to win this election. They look much better organised on the ground. Every where I go I see no posters, nothing from the yes side or the major parties.
The people who will vote Yes don't get their news from papers or direction from political parties. The Yes side is by and large younger and far more tech savvy so trying to judge it on posters is ludicrous. There's a massive campaign to crowdfund tickets for exiles to return to vote Yes. The Yes side have been mobilised for this moment for at least a decade at this stage. It will not be a contest.
I dont think yes Is as engaged as the gay marriage campaign was by a long shot
I have a feeling there is a huge silent No vote waiting to go to the booths on election day
Quote from: Orchard park on April 22, 2018, 10:08:12 PM
Quote from: Syferus on April 22, 2018, 08:05:55 PM
Quote from: Itchy on April 22, 2018, 06:40:45 PM
No vote is going to win this election. They look much better organised on the ground. Every where I go I see no posters, nothing from the yes side or the major parties.
The people who will vote Yes don't get their news from papers or direction from political parties. The Yes side is by and large younger and far more tech savvy so trying to judge it on posters is ludicrous. There's a massive campaign to crowdfund tickets for exiles to return to vote Yes. The Yes side have been mobilised for this moment for at least a decade at this stage. It will not be a contest.
I dont think yes Is as engaged as the gay marriage campaign was by a long shot
They are waaaay more engaged. There have been regular big rallies to repeal the 8th for years now. They have been mobilised for this moment for a very long time.
This is a much more heated debate than gay marriage - this one directly effects 50% of the population and indirectly effects the other half, so you can expect overall turnout to be up and that's very bad news for the No side.
I think it should be remembered that when the votes are cast and the controversy dies down, there will be little if any change to the current state of affairs.
Women who want abortions can still travel openly to Britain or any other country where abortion is legal or else abortion pills may be ordered by post.
We will still have an Irish solution to an Irish problem as Charlie Haughey might put it.
Quote from: Syferus on April 22, 2018, 09:01:42 PM
Quote from: Itchy on April 22, 2018, 08:29:20 PM
Quote from: Syferus on April 22, 2018, 08:05:55 PM
Quote from: Itchy on April 22, 2018, 06:40:45 PM
No vote is going to win this election. They look much better organised on the ground. Every where I go I see no posters, nothing from the yes side or the major parties.
The people who will vote Yes don't get their news from papers or direction from political parties. The Yes side is by and large younger and far more tech savvy so trying to judge it on posters is ludicrous. There's a massive campaign to crowdfund tickets for exiles to return to vote Yes. The Yes side have been mobilised for this moment for at least a decade at this stage. It will not be a contest.
And when you make a stupid prediction you can be sure it will be wrong as usual
Aren't you the fella who thought the evil Brits were setting up the Russians on the nerve agent assassination?
:-[
No clown. I said just cos the Brita say something doesn't make it true. Check out Robert fisks article on chemical attack on Syria as another example. Some people are too stupid or have memory of a gold fish to think straight
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 22, 2018, 10:32:19 PM
I think it should be remembered that when the votes are cast and the controversy dies down, there will be little if any change to the current state of affairs.
Women who want abortions can still travel openly to Britain or any other country where abortion is legal or else abortion pills may be ordered by post.
We will still have an Irish solution to an Irish problem as Charlie Haughey might put it.
This is not a solution, women taking dodgy pills without medical supervision, women getting procedures with no aftercare. Women not being in a position to travel and essentially being forced to continue with an unwanted pregnancy.
This is not an Irish solution to an Irish problem. That's a damaging phrase that suggests that the current status quo is any sort of 'solution'.
Mickey Harte seems to have more compassion for lads accused of sexual assault and murder than he does for vulnerable young women.
He's a dinosaur, needs to take his hard line catholic shite and get it away from anything related to the GAA.
harte out!
Quote from: Westside on April 22, 2018, 11:15:48 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 22, 2018, 10:32:19 PM
I think it should be remembered that when the votes are cast and the controversy dies down, there will be little if any change to the current state of affairs.
Women who want abortions can still travel openly to Britain or any other country where abortion is legal or else abortion pills may be ordered by post.
We will still have an Irish solution to an Irish problem as Charlie Haughey might put it.
This is not a solution, women taking dodgy pills without medical supervision, women getting procedures with no aftercare. Women not being in a position to travel and essentially being forced to continue with an unwanted pregnancy.
This is not an Irish solution to an Irish problem. That's a damaging phrase that suggests that the current status quo is any sort of 'solution'.
Mickey Harte seems to have more compassion for lads accused of sexual assault and murder than he does for vulnerable young women.
He's a dinosaur, needs to take his hard line catholic shite and get it away from anything related to the GAA.
+10000
Lar, you've shown yourself up big time again.
Quote from: Westside on April 22, 2018, 11:15:48 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 22, 2018, 10:32:19 PM
I think it should be remembered that when the votes are cast and the controversy dies down, there will be little if any change to the current state of affairs.
Women who want abortions can still travel openly to Britain or any other country where abortion is legal or else abortion pills may be ordered by post.
We will still have an Irish solution to an Irish problem as Charlie Haughey might put it.
This is not a solution, women taking dodgy pills without medical supervision, women getting procedures with no aftercare. Women not being in a position to travel and essentially being forced to continue with an unwanted pregnancy.
This is not an Irish solution to an Irish problem. That's a damaging phrase that suggests that the current status quo is any sort of 'solution'.
Mickey Harte seems to have more compassion for lads accused of sexual assault and murder than he does for vulnerable young women.
He's a dinosaur, needs to take his hard line catholic shite and get it away from anything related to the GAA.
I think you may have taken Lar up the wrong way.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 11:28:18 PM
Quote from: Westside on April 22, 2018, 11:15:48 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 22, 2018, 10:32:19 PM
I think it should be remembered that when the votes are cast and the controversy dies down, there will be little if any change to the current state of affairs.
Women who want abortions can still travel openly to Britain or any other country where abortion is legal or else abortion pills may be ordered by post.
We will still have an Irish solution to an Irish problem as Charlie Haughey might put it.
This is not a solution, women taking dodgy pills without medical supervision, women getting procedures with no aftercare. Women not being in a position to travel and essentially being forced to continue with an unwanted pregnancy.
This is not an Irish solution to an Irish problem. That's a damaging phrase that suggests that the current status quo is any sort of 'solution'.
Mickey Harte seems to have more compassion for lads accused of sexual assault and murder than he does for vulnerable young women.
He's a dinosaur, needs to take his hard line catholic shite and get it away from anything related to the GAA.
I think you may have taken Lar up the wrong way.
And I think you may have taken up the implications of what he said the wrong way to say that, Jinxy.
Quote from: Rich Ricci on April 22, 2018, 11:45:50 PM
A bit uneducated here on this matter. Will removing the 8th lead to abortion on demand or just in cases for the likes of rape, abnormalities etc.?
'Abortion on demand' is a very loaded No side term, so I'd be careful phrasing it as such if you don't want to give the wrong impression.
Repealing the 8th will mean a new law that allows abortions up to 12 weeks will be ratified by the Dail. This is entirely to be the woman's choice, as it should be. Anything else would just lead to women and doctors fudging the law to use the loopholes to get an abortion so if we are going to repeal the 8th we have to install something that legislates for the actual reality and not some idealised version where situational limits on abortion actually work.
Quote from: Syferus on April 22, 2018, 11:29:54 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 11:28:18 PM
Quote from: Westside on April 22, 2018, 11:15:48 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 22, 2018, 10:32:19 PM
I think it should be remembered that when the votes are cast and the controversy dies down, there will be little if any change to the current state of affairs.
Women who want abortions can still travel openly to Britain or any other country where abortion is legal or else abortion pills may be ordered by post.
We will still have an Irish solution to an Irish problem as Charlie Haughey might put it.
This is not a solution, women taking dodgy pills without medical supervision, women getting procedures with no aftercare. Women not being in a position to travel and essentially being forced to continue with an unwanted pregnancy.
This is not an Irish solution to an Irish problem. That's a damaging phrase that suggests that the current status quo is any sort of 'solution'.
Mickey Harte seems to have more compassion for lads accused of sexual assault and murder than he does for vulnerable young women.
He's a dinosaur, needs to take his hard line catholic shite and get it away from anything related to the GAA.
I think you may have taken Lar up the wrong way.
And I think you may have taken up the implications of what he said the wrong way to say that, Jinxy.
That is also a possibility.
I think there will be a big no vote from rural Ireland. It's just a hunch I have. The no campaign to me seem to be out of blocks fast and the FF and FG parties are afraid to look actively for a yes at local level. I also think both sides are descending into auld shite of shouting down the other instead of making their case. Harte I don't like his uber religious talk but he is an Irish citizen and entitled to an opinion (he should have GAA out of it) yet today Twitter full of trendy lefties saying he's from north so should mind his business. The yes side need to get their act together quick as those no posters are very simple & effective and should not be under estimated.
Quote from: Itchy on April 23, 2018, 12:14:57 AM
I think there will be a big no vote from rural Ireland. It's just a hunch I have. The no campaign to me seem to be out of blocks fast and the FF and FG parties are afraid to look actively for a yes at local level. I also think both sides are descending into auld shite of shouting down the other instead of making their case. Harte I don't like his uber religious talk but he is an Irish citizen and entitled to an opinion (he should have GAA out of it) yet today Twitter full of trendy lefties saying he's from north so should mind his business. The yes side need to get their act together quick as those no posters are very simple & effective and should not be under estimated.
I would describe them as partitionists not 'trendy lefties'
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 11:28:18 PM
Quote from: Westside on April 22, 2018, 11:15:48 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 22, 2018, 10:32:19 PM
I think it should be remembered that when the votes are cast and the controversy dies down, there will be little if any change to the current state of affairs.
Women who want abortions can still travel openly to Britain or any other country where abortion is legal or else abortion pills may be ordered by post.
We will still have an Irish solution to an Irish problem as Charlie Haughey might put it.
This is not a solution, women taking dodgy pills without medical supervision, women getting procedures with no aftercare. Women not being in a position to travel and essentially being forced to continue with an unwanted pregnancy.
This is not an Irish solution to an Irish problem. That's a damaging phrase that suggests that the current status quo is any sort of 'solution'.
Mickey Harte seems to have more compassion for lads accused of sexual assault and murder than he does for vulnerable young women.
He's a dinosaur, needs to take his hard line catholic shite and get it away from anything related to the GAA.
I think you may have taken Lar up the wrong way.
I'm afraid he has. I guess SYF is too young to remember what Charlie said and the context in which he said it.
I was being sarcastic when I paraphrased him.
But at least he is back on speaking terms again so we must be grateful for small mercies. :D :D
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 23, 2018, 12:35:56 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 11:28:18 PM
Quote from: Westside on April 22, 2018, 11:15:48 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 22, 2018, 10:32:19 PM
I think it should be remembered that when the votes are cast and the controversy dies down, there will be little if any change to the current state of affairs.
Women who want abortions can still travel openly to Britain or any other country where abortion is legal or else abortion pills may be ordered by post.
We will still have an Irish solution to an Irish problem as Charlie Haughey might put it.
This is not a solution, women taking dodgy pills without medical supervision, women getting procedures with no aftercare. Women not being in a position to travel and essentially being forced to continue with an unwanted pregnancy.
This is not an Irish solution to an Irish problem. That's a damaging phrase that suggests that the current status quo is any sort of 'solution'.
Mickey Harte seems to have more compassion for lads accused of sexual assault and murder than he does for vulnerable young women.
He's a dinosaur, needs to take his hard line catholic shite and get it away from anything related to the GAA.
I think you may have taken Lar up the wrong way.
I'm afraid he has. I guess SYF is too young to remember what Charlie said and the context in which he said it.
I was being sarcastic when I paraphrased him.
But at least he is back on speaking terms again so we must be grateful for small mercies. :D :D
I think the Repeal campaign might be lulled into a false sense of security by the size of the victory in the Marriage Equality vote. There seems to be assumption that those who voted for marriage equality will automatically vote to Repeal. Based on my Facebook feed nothing could be further from the truth
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 23, 2018, 12:35:56 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 11:28:18 PM
Quote from: Westside on April 22, 2018, 11:15:48 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 22, 2018, 10:32:19 PM
I think it should be remembered that when the votes are cast and the controversy dies down, there will be little if any change to the current state of affairs.
Women who want abortions can still travel openly to Britain or any other country where abortion is legal or else abortion pills may be ordered by post.
We will still have an Irish solution to an Irish problem as Charlie Haughey might put it.
This is not a solution, women taking dodgy pills without medical supervision, women getting procedures with no aftercare. Women not being in a position to travel and essentially being forced to continue with an unwanted pregnancy.
This is not an Irish solution to an Irish problem. That's a damaging phrase that suggests that the current status quo is any sort of 'solution'.
Mickey Harte seems to have more compassion for lads accused of sexual assault and murder than he does for vulnerable young women.
He's a dinosaur, needs to take his hard line catholic shite and get it away from anything related to the GAA.
I think you may have taken Lar up the wrong way.
I'm afraid he has. I guess SYF is too young to remember what Charlie said and the context in which he said it.
I was being sarcastic when I paraphrased him.
But at least he is back on speaking terms again so we must be grateful for small mercies. :D :D
Christ. Don't pretend like your first two lines were sarcasm just because you got savaged for not thinking about the implications of aftercare or the other problems caused by palming off our societal blind spots on other countries. Own up to your mistake and move on.
There's no way the NO side will win.
Posters up on poles doesn't equal votes
There's a huge undecided vote and most of them will stay away from the polls.
And Mickey should keep his opinions to himself considering he doesn't have a vote in this contest
Around 64% of the population is urban.
This is not going to help the no side
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on April 23, 2018, 07:58:12 AM
There's no way the NO side will win.
Posters up on poles doesn't equal votes
There's a huge undecided vote and most of them will stay away from the polls.
And Mickey should keep his opinions to himself considering he doesn't have a vote in this contest
So as an Irish citizen you aren't allowed an opinion on something so important that will effect your neighbours 10 minutes away? I don't know why people who are on the yes side are so scared of people on the no sides opinions. All sides should be heard, it's an important debate.
By your logic I'm assuming Mary McAleese shouldn't have been the president of Ireland?
Quote from: trileacman on April 21, 2018, 10:46:24 PM
A few fellas spouting contradictions including syferus. Not a week ago half the people in ROI were passing comment and opinion on the Ulster rugby rape trial including at least half of the TD's and senators in the Dail. The affair was broached in the Dail and very publicly covered on social media by the same public representatives. There were demonstrations in cork, Dublin, galway etc and 300 odd pages of comment on here by mostly ROI commentators. This is despite the trial being held under the laws of a different jurisdiction.
Next to no-one in the north attempted to deny the right of people south of the border to pass comment or publicly lobby for one side of the rape trial. I think it's a bit cheap to now state that harte, Cassidy or gallagher are "blatantly meddling in another country's legislative process". Where the Labour Party or solidarity blantantly meddling in another countries legal process when their representatives passed slanderous comment against the defendants in an NI rape trial?
The group shouldn't be using the GAA acronym in it's title I agree and it's not defendable but it's contradictory, cynical and myopic to think people north of the border don't have a right to support, or object, to repealing the 8th amendment.
Well said.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 12:20:19 AM
https://twitter.com/EDDIEBARRETT/status/987815661094277120 (https://twitter.com/EDDIEBARRETT/status/987815661094277120)
Probably going to see a lot of this type of thing over the next couple of days if the GAA don't act quickly to distance themselves from this specific incident and also to clarify their 'non-political' stance in general.
Social media is full of self-righteous clowns who expect those they disagree with to be punished simply for holding an opposing viewpoint.
My understanding is that they are not in breach of any of the association's rules, therefore to suggest they be 'suspended' is absurd.
Most of the things that SF hack has to say for himself on social media are absurd.
Quote from: Owenmoresider on April 23, 2018, 09:02:56 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 12:20:19 AM
https://twitter.com/EDDIEBARRETT/status/987815661094277120 (https://twitter.com/EDDIEBARRETT/status/987815661094277120)
Probably going to see a lot of this type of thing over the next couple of days if the GAA don't act quickly to distance themselves from this specific incident and also to clarify their 'non-political' stance in general.
Social media is full of self-righteous clowns who expect those they disagree with to be punished simply for holding an opposing viewpoint.
My understanding is that they are not in breach of any of the association's rules, therefore to suggest they be 'suspended' is absurd.
Most of the things that SF hack has to say for himself on social media are absurd.
Don't talk to me. He's a raving eejit.
Harte entitled to his views but not entitled to speak for the GAA
'In an association the size of the GAA, there will be Yes people and there will be No people. Nobody with even a passing knowledge of Irish sport will have been surprised at Harte's position on the repeal question. Similarly, if you've followed his career at any level over the past 15 years since he took charge of Tyrone, you know he's not likely to duck any issue about which he has strong feelings. In many respects, there is no news here.
That is, until you get to the statement put out behalf of Harte and co.
"The GAA's vision," it begins, "is that everyone be welcome to participate fully in our games and culture, that they thrive and develop their potential, and be inspired to keep a lifelong engagement with our association." It goes on to includes lines such as: "We are an inclusive organisation. There is space for everybody at our table."
All the way through, the statement is littered with 'we' and 'our' – in reference to the GAA as a whole. When it gets to the meat of the statement, it reads: "In keeping with those principles, we are coming together today to ask the Irish people to vote No on May 25th."
There is no gear change, no line separating their own personal views from that of the association, nothing like that. To anyone reading the statement, it looks like a declaration of the position of the GAA on the matter.
Which, of course, it is not.'
https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/harte-entitled-to-his-views-but-not-entitled-to-speak-for-the-gaa-1.3470268?mode=amp (https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/harte-entitled-to-his-views-but-not-entitled-to-speak-for-the-gaa-1.3470268?mode=amp)
Malachy Clerkin nails the point I'm trying to make.
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on April 23, 2018, 07:58:12 AM
There's no way the NO side will win.
Posters up on poles doesn't equal votes
There's a huge undecided vote and most of them will stay away from the polls.
And Mickey should keep his opinions to himself considering he doesn't have a vote in this contest
What do you base that on? I will probably be voting yes but there is part of me uneasy about it to be honest and I not in anyway a religious person. I live in a rural part of Ireland but i imagine it is not dissimilar to many parts of Ireland outside the big cities. If I were to make a guess I think there are currently more people voting No than voting yes in my area and these are people who do turn up at poll stations. I am not in the cities to often these days so maybe it is totally the opposite there. However, as someone said above this is a totally different vote than the Gay Marriage one. It boils down to this for me and I think the same for a lot of people. Is a baby in the womb to be considered a person or not in the time period abortion is permitted. If it is to considered a person then you should not be allowed to kill it. I think a lot of people are debating this and while you can scoff at the No side posters, they show a child in the womb (I have no idea of what the time is) and imply "look this is a child and you are going to kill it" - This is a powerful message. Quite frankly I have seen no one from the Yes side out arguing the opposite - no posters, no leaflets, no canvas and no information. I can only guess the main parties, like they always have, are running a mile from this issue and the No side will continue to make hay. That's how I see it at the moment.
The older demographic generally holds the balance of power in local/general elections but that gets turned on its head for referendums on perceived social justice/human rights issues.
I feel the 'Yes' side will win, but not by as much as people think.
It will be a comfortable margin, not a landslide.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 09:47:30 AM
The older demographic generally holds the balance of power in local/general elections but that gets turned on its head for referendums on perceived social justice/human rights issues.
I feel the 'Yes' side will win, but not by as much as people think.
It will be a comfortable margin, not a landslide.
I'm not so sure its all older people, but sure we are only guessing both of us.
You don't have to be older and/or religious to vote 'No', but I'd imagine the bulk of that vote will be drawn from one or both of those categories.
It's a numbers game and if there is a relatively high turn-out, I can only see it going one way.
There seems to be alot more no posters down this way so far, even the ads on YouTube and Facebook are mostly no ones. I hope the yes side aren't taking things for granted. You'd always expected the no side to be much more in you're face and stronger in their campaign though
I'm from Tyrone and a Mickey Harte fan however I cringed when I see this. I wish he would stay out of stuff like this. A man in his 50's from outside the jurisdiction getting involved in this is absurd.
Whatever your views he should not be forcing his religious views on anyone.
I also think its very sneaky to use the GAA name. I bet he'll have noo problem speaking to RTE if it means ramming his religious views down someones throat!
Quote from: tippabu on April 23, 2018, 10:16:18 AM
There seems to be alot more no posters down this way so far, even the ads on YouTube and Facebook are mostly no ones. I hope the yes side aren't taking things for granted. You'd always expected the no side to be much more in you're face and stronger in their campaign though
Really? I'm in the north but all I've seen on social media etc are 'yes' advocates. Wouldn't like to see what would happen anyone who made a 'no' post, on my feed anyway!
Mickey Harte is completely out of order here.
I don't care how many all Irelands he was won, he has no right to present his merry band as in any way representative of the GAA.
Quote from: thewobbler on April 23, 2018, 10:46:20 AM
Mickey Harte is completely out of order here.
I don't care how many all Irelands he was won, he has no right to present his merry band as in any way representative of the GAA.
I'd say it is a sign of how well the No side are going.
At least part of Ulster says no .
I would think that a lot of people have thought a lot about this particular issue and might be less amenable to celebrity intervention.
He definitely doesn't. I see GAA to write to secretaries to tell them shouldn't have any involvement - they should have done this long before now.
Nobody was trying to hijack the GAA to their side before Saturday.
Quote from: Syferus on April 23, 2018, 01:31:07 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 23, 2018, 12:35:56 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 22, 2018, 11:28:18 PM
Quote from: Westside on April 22, 2018, 11:15:48 PM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 22, 2018, 10:32:19 PM
I think it should be remembered that when the votes are cast and the controversy dies down, there will be little if any change to the current state of affairs.
Women who want abortions can still travel openly to Britain or any other country where abortion is legal or else abortion pills may be ordered by post.
We will still have an Irish solution to an Irish problem as Charlie Haughey might put it.
This is not a solution, women taking dodgy pills without medical supervision, women getting procedures with no aftercare. Women not being in a position to travel and essentially being forced to continue with an unwanted pregnancy.
This is not an Irish solution to an Irish problem. That's a damaging phrase that suggests that the current status quo is any sort of 'solution'.
Mickey Harte seems to have more compassion for lads accused of sexual assault and murder than he does for vulnerable young women.
He's a dinosaur, needs to take his hard line catholic shite and get it away from anything related to the GAA.
I think you may have taken Lar up the wrong way.
I'm afraid he has. I guess SYF is too young to remember what Charlie said and the context in which he said it.
I was being sarcastic when I paraphrased him.
But at least he is back on speaking terms again so we must be grateful for small mercies. :D :D
Christ. Don't pretend like your first two lines were sarcasm just because you got savaged for not thinking about the implications of aftercare or the other problems caused by palming off our societal blind spots on other countries. Own up to your mistake and move on.
????? :D :D :D :D
WTF is this all about?
Writing to the county secretaries is largely a PR exercise.
The GAA have to be seen to do something about this and yet it is not clear if any rules have been broken.
I'd imagine most people at county board level would be well aware of their responsibilities re the associations non-political stance.
Croke Park has had to engage in a certain amount of 'both sides-ism' in response to this issue, but in terms of GAA personalities advocating for a 'Yes' vote, the most high-profile of those is Eamon McGee but I have not seen or heard him even reference the GAA thus far.
He's involved in the campaign as a private citizen of this country and he is fully entitled to be.
Quote from: Owenmoresider on April 23, 2018, 08:58:36 AM
Quote from: trileacman on April 21, 2018, 10:46:24 PM
A few fellas spouting contradictions including syferus. Not a week ago half the people in ROI were passing comment and opinion on the Ulster rugby rape trial including at least half of the TD's and senators in the Dail. The affair was broached in the Dail and very publicly covered on social media by the same public representatives. There were demonstrations in cork, Dublin, galway etc and 300 odd pages of comment on here by mostly ROI commentators. This is despite the trial being held under the laws of a different jurisdiction.
Next to no-one in the north attempted to deny the right of people south of the border to pass comment or publicly lobby for one side of the rape trial. I think it's a bit cheap to now state that harte, Cassidy or gallagher are "blatantly meddling in another country's legislative process". Where the Labour Party or solidarity blantantly meddling in another countries legal process when their representatives passed slanderous comment against the defendants in an NI rape trial?
The group shouldn't be using the GAA acronym in it's title I agree and it's not defendable but it's contradictory, cynical and myopic to think people north of the border don't have a right to support, or object, to repealing the 8th amendment.
Well said.
100%
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:00:34 AM
Writing to the county secretaries is largely a PR exercise.
The GAA have to be seen to do something about this and yet it is not clear if any rules have been broken.
I'd imagine most people at county board level would be well aware of their responsibilities re the associations non-political stance.
Croke Park has had to engage in a certain amount of 'both sides-ism' in response to this issue, but in terms of GAA personalities advocating for a 'Yes' vote, the most high-profile of those is Eamon McGee but I have not seen or heard him even reference the GAA thus far.
He's involved in the campaign as a private citizen of this country and he is fully entitled to be.
Completely, the issue here, for me anyway, is those who are referencing the GAA. I'd have exactly the same issue with 'yes' side doing it
Quote from: thewobbler on April 23, 2018, 10:46:20 AM
Mickey Harte is completely out of order here.
I don't care how many all Irelands he was won, he has no right to present his merry band as in any way representative of the GAA.
And why all the GAA gear on?
Surely if you're projecting your own personal views then there's no need for the GAA gear on.
I'm sure they've other attire in their wardrobe.
He's certainly entitled to his opinion as people have said,him having a vote or not is irrelevant. I agree he shouldn't be doing it under the name of the GAA though.
I'm not sure how much of an influence he would have anyway on people who are undecided.
I'll be voting No but it won't be because Mickey Harte told me too.
It also won't be because I'm some sort of religious freak which is something anyone voting no seems to be labelled as. I'm anything but religious.
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
Quote from: Rittal on April 23, 2018, 11:21:55 AM
He's certainly entitled to his opinion as people have said,him having a vote or not is irrelevant. I agree he shouldn't be doing it under the name of the GAA though.
I'm not sure how much of an influence he would have anyway on people who are undecided.
I'll be voting No but it won't be because Mickey Harte told me too.
It also won't be because I'm some sort of religious freak which is something anyone voting no seems to be labelled as. I'm anything but religious.
Agree with all of that.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
This is what i have the issue with. It was cynical exploitation of a club , of kids attending a training gig etc. Its totally underhand and cynical and in case anyone thinks this is just mickey harte bashing I'm equally vexed with Joe sheridan and the others who I never heard of before
Quote from: Rittal on April 23, 2018, 11:21:55 AM
He's certainly entitled to his opinion as people have said,him having a vote or not is irrelevant. I agree he shouldn't be doing it under the name of the GAA though.
I'm not sure how much of an influence he would have anyway on people who are undecided.
I'll be voting No but it won't be because Mickey Harte told me too.
It also won't be because I'm some sort of religious freak which is something anyone voting no seems to be labelled as. I'm anything but religious.
Absolutely, I've been in Croke Park more often this year than in a church but there's no way I could support abortion on demand, which Varadkar and co. have somehow capitulated to supporting. Everyone will sympathise with the difficult stories and complications that we hear of, but what's on the table goes well beyond that and hopefully the No camp will hammer that message home before polling day.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Quote from: Orchard park on April 23, 2018, 11:36:05 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
This is what i have the issue with. It was cynical exploitation of a club , of kids attending a training gig etc. Its totally underhand and cynical and in case anyone thinks this is just mickey harte bashing I'm equally vexed with Joe sheridan and the others who I never heard of before
New polls out today show the Yes side @ 98% in Louth
;D
Mickey brought in Big Joe to get the 'No' vote over the line.
98% is literally unbelievable.
As noted before, polls count for a lot less now too as with social media people are more aware what the populist view is, and happier to lie in polls to go along with it.
If I had a vote I don't think I would vote, but the position of the No side is much clearer and much easier to justify imo. A lot of what the Yes side say, and how they say it, is bollocks. I suppose at the end of the day all our morals are subjective, and it seems to be the way it is going...
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 23, 2018, 12:07:23 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Harte coming from outside the 26 counties has nothing to do with anything, so let's put that one to bed. We've had a president from Belfast, and Martin McGuinness and Dana ran last time.
There's a glaring inconsistency that the No side never answer. If they believe that abortion truly does constitute "murder", why can't any of them answer whether they think women who have abortions are committing murder, and should be locked up in prison for such?
Presuming the No campaigners think all murders should be punishable by imprisonment, like.
Between 1980 and 2016, 170,000 Irish women travelled abroad to have abortions.
Are these 170,000 women therefore "murderers"?
Quote from: haranguerer on April 23, 2018, 12:18:48 PM
98% is literally unbelievable.
I think you're missing the joke....
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
Louth folk are notoriously liberal.
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 12:19:57 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 23, 2018, 12:07:23 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Harte coming from outside the 26 counties has nothing to do with anything, so let's put that one to bed. We've had a president from Belfast, and Martin McGuinness and Dana ran last time.
There's a glaring inconsistency that the No side never answer. If they believe that abortion truly does constitute "murder", why can't any of them answer whether they think women who have abortions are committing murder, and should be locked up in prison for such?
Presuming the No campaigners think all murders should be punishable by imprisonment, like.
Between 1980 and 2016, 170,000 Irish women travelled abroad to have abortions.
Are these 170,000 women therefore "murderers"?
the doctor or nurse who performs it is a murderer. The woman in many cases doesn't think it's a baby. Or does but is being coerced into terminating it. But a child loses its life. I don't think all the blame falls on the woman. There's a man involved in this whole equation too. We're all to blame on some level because we let it happen. But the act of murder in my eyes is solely on the abortionist.
Your line of argument doesn't take anything away from what is happening - you're focusing on the aftermath, we're focusing on the act and preventing it. We're not calling for these women to be locked up
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:28:26 PM
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
I've seen that smugly posted before - the fact is these sorts of issues have been stumping everyone forever. It does raise interesting points, no doubt, but there are similar questions repealers may find it similarly stumping to answer, like, when does life start, or why they bother to congratulate someone who announces a pregnancy, or indeed commiserate with someone who has a miscarriage?
It seems to me the difference in whether it is a life or not comes down largely to whether it is wanted or not, and that to me seems a very inconsistent position indeed.
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 12:19:57 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 23, 2018, 12:07:23 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Harte coming from outside the 26 counties has nothing to do with anything, so let's put that one to bed. We've had a president from Belfast, and Martin McGuinness and Dana ran last time.
There's a glaring inconsistency that the No side never answer. If they believe that abortion truly does constitute "murder", why can't any of them answer whether they think women who have abortions are committing murder, and should be locked up in prison for such?
Presuming the No campaigners think all murders should be punishable by imprisonment, like.
Between 1980 and 2016, 170,000 Irish women travelled abroad to have abortions.
Are these 170,000 women therefore "murderers"?
I think that's an assumption on your behalf.
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:28:26 PM
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 strangers or your own child in a burning building?
Quote from: haranguerer on April 23, 2018, 12:40:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:28:26 PM
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
I've seen that smugly posted before - the fact is these sorts of issues have been stumping everyone forever. It does raise interesting points, no doubt, but there are similar questions repealers may find it similarly stumping to answer, like, when does life start, or why they bother to congratulate someone who announces a pregnancy, or indeed commiserate with someone who has a miscarriage?
It seems to me the difference in whether it is a life or not comes down largely to whether it is wanted or not, and that to me seems a very inconsistent position indeed.
What makes us human is our ability to feel pain, and that starts at the 12-14 week milestone in pregnancy from what I have read.. I think before 12 weeks as the Irish government have set out is A reasonable cut off point as compared to the U.K. were t is 24 weeks Babies have been born premature and lived from that length of pregnancy
Quote from: The Iceman on April 23, 2018, 12:39:14 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 12:19:57 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 23, 2018, 12:07:23 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Harte coming from outside the 26 counties has nothing to do with anything, so let's put that one to bed. We've had a president from Belfast, and Martin McGuinness and Dana ran last time.
There's a glaring inconsistency that the No side never answer. If they believe that abortion truly does constitute "murder", why can't any of them answer whether they think women who have abortions are committing murder, and should be locked up in prison for such?
Presuming the No campaigners think all murders should be punishable by imprisonment, like.
Between 1980 and 2016, 170,000 Irish women travelled abroad to have abortions.
Are these 170,000 women therefore "murderers"?
the doctor or nurse who performs it is a murderer. The woman in many cases doesn't think it's a baby. Or does but is being coerced into terminating it. But a child loses its life. I don't think all the blame falls on the woman. There's a man involved in this whole equation too. We're all to blame on some level because we let it happen. But the act of murder in my eyes is solely on the abortionist.
Your line of argument doesn't take anything away from what is happening - you're focusing on the aftermath, we're focusing on the act and preventing it. We're not calling for these women to be locked up
Ordering a murder is equivalent to murder. If there was any consistency in your position and the position of "No" campaigners, you'd be calling for both the doctor and the woman to be locked up.
If you and "No" campaigners believe abortion really
is murder, then it follows automatically that you would want to see those responsible abortions be imprisoned.
But you know this would play very badly with public opinion, so you carry on without addressing the contradiction.
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 01:16:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 23, 2018, 12:39:14 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 12:19:57 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 23, 2018, 12:07:23 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Harte coming from outside the 26 counties has nothing to do with anything, so let's put that one to bed. We've had a president from Belfast, and Martin McGuinness and Dana ran last time.
There's a glaring inconsistency that the No side never answer. If they believe that abortion truly does constitute "murder", why can't any of them answer whether they think women who have abortions are committing murder, and should be locked up in prison for such?
Presuming the No campaigners think all murders should be punishable by imprisonment, like.
Between 1980 and 2016, 170,000 Irish women travelled abroad to have abortions.
Are these 170,000 women therefore "murderers"?
the doctor or nurse who performs it is a murderer. The woman in many cases doesn't think it's a baby. Or does but is being coerced into terminating it. But a child loses its life. I don't think all the blame falls on the woman. There's a man involved in this whole equation too. We're all to blame on some level because we let it happen. But the act of murder in my eyes is solely on the abortionist.
Your line of argument doesn't take anything away from what is happening - you're focusing on the aftermath, we're focusing on the act and preventing it. We're not calling for these women to be locked up
Ordering a murder is equivalent to murder. If there was any consistency in your position and the position of "No" campaigners, you'd be calling for both the doctor and the woman to be locked up.
If you and "No" campaigners believe abortion really is murder, then it follows automatically that you would want to see those responsible abortions be imprisoned.
But you know this would play very badly with public opinion, so you carry on without addressing the contradiction.
and that means we should go ahead and let abortions happen how?
public opinion isn't a requirement for laws. Internet theft and illegal downloading of content is still theft but public opinion on it wouldn't agree... I don't see what your point is. "A ha I've got you pro lifers in a contradiction therefore all your thinking is wrong I win....."
Quote from: The Iceman on April 23, 2018, 01:23:24 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 01:16:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 23, 2018, 12:39:14 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 12:19:57 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 23, 2018, 12:07:23 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Harte coming from outside the 26 counties has nothing to do with anything, so let's put that one to bed. We've had a president from Belfast, and Martin McGuinness and Dana ran last time.
There's a glaring inconsistency that the No side never answer. If they believe that abortion truly does constitute "murder", why can't any of them answer whether they think women who have abortions are committing murder, and should be locked up in prison for such?
Presuming the No campaigners think all murders should be punishable by imprisonment, like.
Between 1980 and 2016, 170,000 Irish women travelled abroad to have abortions.
Are these 170,000 women therefore "murderers"?
the doctor or nurse who performs it is a murderer. The woman in many cases doesn't think it's a baby. Or does but is being coerced into terminating it. But a child loses its life. I don't think all the blame falls on the woman. There's a man involved in this whole equation too. We're all to blame on some level because we let it happen. But the act of murder in my eyes is solely on the abortionist.
Your line of argument doesn't take anything away from what is happening - you're focusing on the aftermath, we're focusing on the act and preventing it. We're not calling for these women to be locked up
Ordering a murder is equivalent to murder. If there was any consistency in your position and the position of "No" campaigners, you'd be calling for both the doctor and the woman to be locked up.
If you and "No" campaigners believe abortion really is murder, then it follows automatically that you would want to see those responsible abortions be imprisoned.
But you know this would play very badly with public opinion, so you carry on without addressing the contradiction.
and that means we should go ahead and let abortions happen how?
public opinion isn't a requirement for laws. Internet theft and illegal downloading of content is still theft but public opinion on it wouldn't agree... I don't see what your point is. "A ha I've got you pro lifers in a contradiction therefore all your thinking is wrong I win....."
The point is that the No campaign refuses to address a glaring and massive contradiction in its reasoning and rhetoric.
If they can't do that, nothing they say deserves to be taken seriously.
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 01:16:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 23, 2018, 12:39:14 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 12:19:57 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 23, 2018, 12:07:23 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Harte coming from outside the 26 counties has nothing to do with anything, so let's put that one to bed. We've had a president from Belfast, and Martin McGuinness and Dana ran last time.
There's a glaring inconsistency that the No side never answer. If they believe that abortion truly does constitute "murder", why can't any of them answer whether they think women who have abortions are committing murder, and should be locked up in prison for such?
Presuming the No campaigners think all murders should be punishable by imprisonment, like.
Between 1980 and 2016, 170,000 Irish women travelled abroad to have abortions.
Are these 170,000 women therefore "murderers"?
the doctor or nurse who performs it is a murderer. The woman in many cases doesn't think it's a baby. Or does but is being coerced into terminating it. But a child loses its life. I don't think all the blame falls on the woman. There's a man involved in this whole equation too. We're all to blame on some level because we let it happen. But the act of murder in my eyes is solely on the abortionist.
Your line of argument doesn't take anything away from what is happening - you're focusing on the aftermath, we're focusing on the act and preventing it. We're not calling for these women to be locked up
Ordering a murder is equivalent to murder. If there was any consistency in your position and the position of "No" campaigners, you'd be calling for both the doctor and the woman to be locked up.
If you and "No" campaigners believe abortion really is murder, then it follows automatically that you would want to see those responsible abortions be imprisoned.
But you know this would play very badly with public opinion, so you carry on without addressing the contradiction.
Been trying to make that point, sort of earlier in this thread and I'm afraid nobody got my point, except Syferus and he got it it arseways.
I'm not saying abortion is right or wrong, merely that women in the republic who wish to have a pregnancy terminated can do so with relatively little bother. Nothing short of armed guards at every airport and ferryport along with hefty sentencing for all concerned will prevent that.
That ain't going to happen and, as well as that, any individual has the right to travel abroad without having to state their reasons for doing so.
If the Yes vote carries the day and abortion on demand is allowed by law, I can't see having much of an impact on society for many years to come.Women will, in many cases, prefer to travel outside of their locality to have pregnancies terminated rather than being the subject of ridicule or worse at home.
They will continue to use discretion and travel abroad, at least until public attitudes change and that won't happen overnight.
Here, I'm not stating my personal views only. I have spoken to any women of various ages and none of those I spoke to seems too fussed by the results of the referendum.
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on April 23, 2018, 12:40:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:28:26 PM
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
I've seen that smugly posted before - the fact is these sorts of issues have been stumping everyone forever. It does raise interesting points, no doubt, but there are similar questions repealers may find it similarly stumping to answer, like, when does life start, or why they bother to congratulate someone who announces a pregnancy, or indeed commiserate with someone who has a miscarriage?
It seems to me the difference in whether it is a life or not comes down largely to whether it is wanted or not, and that to me seems a very inconsistent position indeed.
What makes us human is our ability to feel pain, and that starts at the 12-14 week milestone in pregnancy from what I have read......
The theories about what 'makes us human' have been postulated on for thousands of years. You've just picked out one characteristic among many for your argument.
Lads, I'm not sure if this is the right place to discuss the actual referendum itself.
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 01:44:49 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 23, 2018, 01:23:24 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 01:16:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 23, 2018, 12:39:14 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 12:19:57 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 23, 2018, 12:07:23 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Harte coming from outside the 26 counties has nothing to do with anything, so let's put that one to bed. We've had a president from Belfast, and Martin McGuinness and Dana ran last time.
There's a glaring inconsistency that the No side never answer. If they believe that abortion truly does constitute "murder", why can't any of them answer whether they think women who have abortions are committing murder, and should be locked up in prison for such?
Presuming the No campaigners think all murders should be punishable by imprisonment, like.
Between 1980 and 2016, 170,000 Irish women travelled abroad to have abortions.
Are these 170,000 women therefore "murderers"?
the doctor or nurse who performs it is a murderer. The woman in many cases doesn't think it's a baby. Or does but is being coerced into terminating it. But a child loses its life. I don't think all the blame falls on the woman. There's a man involved in this whole equation too. We're all to blame on some level because we let it happen. But the act of murder in my eyes is solely on the abortionist.
Your line of argument doesn't take anything away from what is happening - you're focusing on the aftermath, we're focusing on the act and preventing it. We're not calling for these women to be locked up
Ordering a murder is equivalent to murder. If there was any consistency in your position and the position of "No" campaigners, you'd be calling for both the doctor and the woman to be locked up.
If you and "No" campaigners believe abortion really is murder, then it follows automatically that you would want to see those responsible abortions be imprisoned.
But you know this would play very badly with public opinion, so you carry on without addressing the contradiction.
and that means we should go ahead and let abortions happen how?
public opinion isn't a requirement for laws. Internet theft and illegal downloading of content is still theft but public opinion on it wouldn't agree... I don't see what your point is. "A ha I've got you pro lifers in a contradiction therefore all your thinking is wrong I win....."
The point is that the No campaign refuses to address a glaring and massive contradiction in its reasoning and rhetoric.
If they can't do that, nothing they say deserves to be taken seriously.
That's ridiculously simplistic.
You believe there's a contradiction in what you believe all who intend to vote No believe and so you believe nothing they believe deserves to be listened to?
Hang on, maybe it's no so simple after all....
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on April 23, 2018, 12:40:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:28:26 PM
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
I've seen that smugly posted before - the fact is these sorts of issues have been stumping everyone forever. It does raise interesting points, no doubt, but there are similar questions repealers may find it similarly stumping to answer, like, when does life start, or why they bother to congratulate someone who announces a pregnancy, or indeed commiserate with someone who has a miscarriage?
It seems to me the difference in whether it is a life or not comes down largely to whether it is wanted or not, and that to me seems a very inconsistent position indeed.
What makes us human is our ability to feel pain, and that starts at the 12-14 week milestone in pregnancy from what I have read.. I think before 12 weeks as the Irish government have set out is A reasonable cut off point as compared to the U.K. were t is 24 weeks Babies have been born premature and lived from that length of pregnancy
It's much later than 12-14 weeks. Into the 20s anyway.
Quote from: Tubberman on April 23, 2018, 02:00:47 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 01:44:49 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 23, 2018, 01:23:24 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 01:16:55 PM
Quote from: The Iceman on April 23, 2018, 12:39:14 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 12:19:57 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 23, 2018, 12:07:23 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Harte coming from outside the 26 counties has nothing to do with anything, so let's put that one to bed. We've had a president from Belfast, and Martin McGuinness and Dana ran last time.
There's a glaring inconsistency that the No side never answer. If they believe that abortion truly does constitute "murder", why can't any of them answer whether they think women who have abortions are committing murder, and should be locked up in prison for such?
Presuming the No campaigners think all murders should be punishable by imprisonment, like.
Between 1980 and 2016, 170,000 Irish women travelled abroad to have abortions.
Are these 170,000 women therefore "murderers"?
the doctor or nurse who performs it is a murderer. The woman in many cases doesn't think it's a baby. Or does but is being coerced into terminating it. But a child loses its life. I don't think all the blame falls on the woman. There's a man involved in this whole equation too. We're all to blame on some level because we let it happen. But the act of murder in my eyes is solely on the abortionist.
Your line of argument doesn't take anything away from what is happening - you're focusing on the aftermath, we're focusing on the act and preventing it. We're not calling for these women to be locked up
Ordering a murder is equivalent to murder. If there was any consistency in your position and the position of "No" campaigners, you'd be calling for both the doctor and the woman to be locked up.
If you and "No" campaigners believe abortion really is murder, then it follows automatically that you would want to see those responsible abortions be imprisoned.
But you know this would play very badly with public opinion, so you carry on without addressing the contradiction.
and that means we should go ahead and let abortions happen how?
public opinion isn't a requirement for laws. Internet theft and illegal downloading of content is still theft but public opinion on it wouldn't agree... I don't see what your point is. "A ha I've got you pro lifers in a contradiction therefore all your thinking is wrong I win....."
The point is that the No campaign refuses to address a glaring and massive contradiction in its reasoning and rhetoric.
If they can't do that, nothing they say deserves to be taken seriously.
That's ridiculously simplistic.
You believe there's a contradiction in what you believe all who intend to vote No believe and so you believe nothing they believe deserves to be listened to?
Hang on, maybe it's no so simple after all....
The massive contradictions at the heart of the No campaign are what is simplistic.
As long as they continue to ignore those contradictions, why should anything they say be taken seriously by reasonable people?
Especially given that their campaign amounts to little more than a shameless tissue of lies.
If you believe abortion is murder, you should at least admit you believe that mothers who have abortions and the doctors who carry them out are murderers.
If you believe abortion is murder, that means you also believe the morning after pill and any abortion pill is murder.
If you believe that the 8th Amendment should be retained, you should be up front about your belief that rape victims shuld be forced to carry a pregnanacy to term.
We have got no acknowledgement, never mind answers, from any prominent people in the No campaign as regards any of these contradictions.
There is no honesty from the No side here.
I'm no Fine Gael supporter, but this is a genuine attempt from a Government to address a serious and very difficult issue in a reasonable, grown up manner.
There is no desire to do so from the other side.
Quote from: Tubberman on April 23, 2018, 12:41:02 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 12:19:57 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 23, 2018, 12:07:23 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Harte coming from outside the 26 counties has nothing to do with anything, so let's put that one to bed. We've had a president from Belfast, and Martin McGuinness and Dana ran last time.
There's a glaring inconsistency that the No side never answer. If they believe that abortion truly does constitute "murder", why can't any of them answer whether they think women who have abortions are committing murder, and should be locked up in prison for such?
Presuming the No campaigners think all murders should be punishable by imprisonment, like.
Between 1980 and 2016, 170,000 Irish women travelled abroad to have abortions.
Are these 170,000 women therefore "murderers"?
I think that's an assumption on your behalf.
It's a talking point regularly used by the No side Tubberman. Whether they've spent enough time thinking about what it means and taken the idea to its logical conclusion is another matter.
Quote from: grounded on April 23, 2018, 01:51:23 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on April 23, 2018, 12:40:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:28:26 PM
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
I've seen that smugly posted before - the fact is these sorts of issues have been stumping everyone forever. It does raise interesting points, no doubt, but there are similar questions repealers may find it similarly stumping to answer, like, when does life start, or why they bother to congratulate someone who announces a pregnancy, or indeed commiserate with someone who has a miscarriage?
It seems to me the difference in whether it is a life or not comes down largely to whether it is wanted or not, and that to me seems a very inconsistent position indeed.
What makes us human is our ability to feel pain, and that starts at the 12-14 week milestone in pregnancy from what I have read......
The theories about what 'makes us human' have been postulated on for thousands of years. You've just picked out one characteristic among many for your argument.
Yes just like the pro-lifers pick out there own characteristics?? Its not going to affect a pro-lifers life if the abortions get passed is it? No.. if they are pro-life they won't have one, if a pro-choicer wants the law passed for them to have an abortion then why shouldn't they have it? It's about deciding what you want yourself.
To re work a quote from the Simpsons "Abortions for some and miniature Tri-colours for the rest"
Quote from: Syferus on April 23, 2018, 02:19:58 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on April 23, 2018, 12:41:02 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 12:19:57 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 23, 2018, 12:07:23 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Harte coming from outside the 26 counties has nothing to do with anything, so let's put that one to bed. We've had a president from Belfast, and Martin McGuinness and Dana ran last time.
There's a glaring inconsistency that the No side never answer. If they believe that abortion truly does constitute "murder", why can't any of them answer whether they think women who have abortions are committing murder, and should be locked up in prison for such?
Presuming the No campaigners think all murders should be punishable by imprisonment, like.
Between 1980 and 2016, 170,000 Irish women travelled abroad to have abortions.
Are these 170,000 women therefore "murderers"?
I think that's an assumption on your behalf.
It's a talking point regularly used by the No side Tubberman. Whether they've spent enough time thinking about what it means and taken the idea to its logical conclusion is another matter.
Is it? I haven't heard the word 'murder' used in any debate so far, although I try to avoid a lot of them as it feels like it's the same thing being rehashed over and over again.
I will more than likely vote No, but it's not because I consider abortion to be murder.
For the record, I support the option of abortion for fatal foetal abnormalities, rape, incest.
My main problem is that if the 8th amendment is repealed, then any govt could allow abortion up to any gestational period without any public say in the matter. That's a principle I'd be very uncomfortable with.
Quote from: Tubberman on April 23, 2018, 02:28:08 PM
Quote from: Syferus on April 23, 2018, 02:19:58 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on April 23, 2018, 12:41:02 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 23, 2018, 12:19:57 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 23, 2018, 12:07:23 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:24:56 AM
One of the most vexing things for me re Mickey Harte's group is that they obviously put a lot of thought into how they could maximise the perception that this was a 'GAA' group, without actually being in technical breach of any rules (that I can see at least).
The name, the location for the launch, the deliberate blurring of the lines between their position and the strategic vision of the association etc.
It's incredibly cynical stuff.
I think you have to try and put yourself in Mickey Harte's shoes here to try and understand his thought processes. My sense would be that Mickey, as a devout Catholic, will regard the legalization of abortion as tantamount to allowing the murder of the innocents. In such circumstances, he will use whatever influence he has to try and affect that decision. In that context, his concern for the issue around the blurring of the lines regarding the use of the GAA's name will carry zero weight.
By the way, I wonder will those 'Gaels' on here, who decry Mickey's intervention, on the basis of him coming from a different jurisdiction, consider their membership of the GAA on the basis that it has as its basic aim "the strengthening of the National Identity in a 32 County Ireland through the preservation and promotion of Gaelic Games and pastimes"?
Their position flies in the face of the spirit of that aim.
Harte coming from outside the 26 counties has nothing to do with anything, so let's put that one to bed. We've had a president from Belfast, and Martin McGuinness and Dana ran last time.
There's a glaring inconsistency that the No side never answer. If they believe that abortion truly does constitute "murder", why can't any of them answer whether they think women who have abortions are committing murder, and should be locked up in prison for such?
Presuming the No campaigners think all murders should be punishable by imprisonment, like.
Between 1980 and 2016, 170,000 Irish women travelled abroad to have abortions.
Are these 170,000 women therefore "murderers"?
I think that's an assumption on your behalf.
It's a talking point regularly used by the No side Tubberman. Whether they've spent enough time thinking about what it means and taken the idea to its logical conclusion is another matter.
Is it? I haven't heard the word 'murder' used in any debate so far, although I try to avoid a lot of them as it feels like it's the same thing being rehashed over and over again.
I will more than likely vote No, but it's not because I consider abortion to be murder.
For the record, I support the option of abortion for fatal foetal abnormalities, rape, incest.
My main problem is that if the 8th amendment is repealed, then any govt could allow abortion up to any gestational period without any public say in the matter. That's a principle I'd be very uncomfortable with.
Unless you're exclusively talking about PG-rated TV debates you'll hear it very very regularly. There's plenty of off-colour stuff on both sides. The implication of treating an embryonic fetus as a full human means by its definition abortion becomes murder so it's an ever present part of the No side argument.
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 02:21:43 PM
Quote from: grounded on April 23, 2018, 01:51:23 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on April 23, 2018, 12:40:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:28:26 PM
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
I've seen that smugly posted before - the fact is these sorts of issues have been stumping everyone forever. It does raise interesting points, no doubt, but there are similar questions repealers may find it similarly stumping to answer, like, when does life start, or why they bother to congratulate someone who announces a pregnancy, or indeed commiserate with someone who has a miscarriage?
It seems to me the difference in whether it is a life or not comes down largely to whether it is wanted or not, and that to me seems a very inconsistent position indeed.
What makes us human is our ability to feel pain, and that starts at the 12-14 week milestone in pregnancy from what I have read......
The theories about what 'makes us human' have been postulated on for thousands of years. You've just picked out one characteristic among many for your argument.
Yes just like the pro-lifers pick out there own characteristics?? Its not going to affect a pro-lifers life if the abortions get passed is it? No.. if they are pro-life they won't have one, if a pro-choicer wants the law passed for them to have an abortion then why shouldn't they have it? It's about deciding what you want yourself.
To re work a quote from the Simpsons "Abortions for some and miniature Tri-colours for the rest"
According to Evolutionary genetics what makes us human is our DNA which is formed at conception
That unborn human is unable to communicate their choice but let every other form of life the likelihood is that want to survive
Lads, where do university GAA clubs fit in here?
https://twitter.com/ul_gaa/status/715165663078252544 (https://twitter.com/ul_gaa/status/715165663078252544)
Breaking the rules or not?
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 23, 2018, 03:11:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 02:21:43 PM
Quote from: grounded on April 23, 2018, 01:51:23 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on April 23, 2018, 12:40:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:28:26 PM
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
I've seen that smugly posted before - the fact is these sorts of issues have been stumping everyone forever. It does raise interesting points, no doubt, but there are similar questions repealers may find it similarly stumping to answer, like, when does life start, or why they bother to congratulate someone who announces a pregnancy, or indeed commiserate with someone who has a miscarriage?
It seems to me the difference in whether it is a life or not comes down largely to whether it is wanted or not, and that to me seems a very inconsistent position indeed.
What makes us human is our ability to feel pain, and that starts at the 12-14 week milestone in pregnancy from what I have read......
The theories about what 'makes us human' have been postulated on for thousands of years. You've just picked out one characteristic among many for your argument.
Yes just like the pro-lifers pick out there own characteristics?? Its not going to affect a pro-lifers life if the abortions get passed is it? No.. if they are pro-life they won't have one, if a pro-choicer wants the law passed for them to have an abortion then why shouldn't they have it? It's about deciding what you want yourself.
To re work a quote from the Simpsons "Abortions for some and miniature Tri-colours for the rest"
According to Evolutionary genetics what makes us human is our DNA which is formed at conception
That unborn human is unable to communicate their choice but let every other form of life the likelihood is that want to survive
But Mickey is a devote holy joe?! he doesn't believe in evolution, he believes God created the earth and everything that inhabits it.....
Rule 1.11 of the Official Guide states: 'The Association shall be non-party political. Party political questions shall not be discussed at its meetings, and no Committee, Club, Council or representative thereof shall take part, as such, in any party political movement. A penalty of up to twenty four weeks suspension may be imposed for infringement'.
Now, we're into interesting territory here, what constitutes party politics?
Is this rule fit for purpose or should it be re-worded to provide greater clarity?
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 03:18:51 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 23, 2018, 03:11:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 02:21:43 PM
Quote from: grounded on April 23, 2018, 01:51:23 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on April 23, 2018, 12:40:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:28:26 PM
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
I've seen that smugly posted before - the fact is these sorts of issues have been stumping everyone forever. It does raise interesting points, no doubt, but there are similar questions repealers may find it similarly stumping to answer, like, when does life start, or why they bother to congratulate someone who announces a pregnancy, or indeed commiserate with someone who has a miscarriage?
It seems to me the difference in whether it is a life or not comes down largely to whether it is wanted or not, and that to me seems a very inconsistent position indeed.
What makes us human is our ability to feel pain, and that starts at the 12-14 week milestone in pregnancy from what I have read......
The theories about what 'makes us human' have been postulated on for thousands of years. You've just picked out one characteristic among many for your argument.
Yes just like the pro-lifers pick out there own characteristics?? Its not going to affect a pro-lifers life if the abortions get passed is it? No.. if they are pro-life they won't have one, if a pro-choicer wants the law passed for them to have an abortion then why shouldn't they have it? It's about deciding what you want yourself.
To re work a quote from the Simpsons "Abortions for some and miniature Tri-colours for the rest"
According to Evolutionary genetics what makes us human is our DNA which is formed at conception
That unborn human is unable to communicate their choice but let every other form of life the likelihood is that want to survive
But Mickey is a devote holy joe?! he doesn't believe in evolution, he believes God created the earth and everything that inhabits it.....
I hadn't realised this was purely about you forming an opinion about the issue based on what you believe Mickey Harte believes. But for the record Id guess he does believe in evolution like the Catholic church.
Anyway you can reply to my point anytime ;)
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 23, 2018, 03:25:57 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 03:18:51 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 23, 2018, 03:11:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 02:21:43 PM
Quote from: grounded on April 23, 2018, 01:51:23 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on April 23, 2018, 12:40:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:28:26 PM
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
I've seen that smugly posted before - the fact is these sorts of issues have been stumping everyone forever. It does raise interesting points, no doubt, but there are similar questions repealers may find it similarly stumping to answer, like, when does life start, or why they bother to congratulate someone who announces a pregnancy, or indeed commiserate with someone who has a miscarriage?
It seems to me the difference in whether it is a life or not comes down largely to whether it is wanted or not, and that to me seems a very inconsistent position indeed.
What makes us human is our ability to feel pain, and that starts at the 12-14 week milestone in pregnancy from what I have read......
The theories about what 'makes us human' have been postulated on for thousands of years. You've just picked out one characteristic among many for your argument.
Yes just like the pro-lifers pick out there own characteristics?? Its not going to affect a pro-lifers life if the abortions get passed is it? No.. if they are pro-life they won't have one, if a pro-choicer wants the law passed for them to have an abortion then why shouldn't they have it? It's about deciding what you want yourself.
To re work a quote from the Simpsons "Abortions for some and miniature Tri-colours for the rest"
According to Evolutionary genetics what makes us human is our DNA which is formed at conception
That unborn human is unable to communicate their choice but let every other form of life the likelihood is that want to survive
But Mickey is a devote holy joe?! he doesn't believe in evolution, he believes God created the earth and everything that inhabits it.....
I hadn't realised this was purely about you forming an opinion about the issue based on what you believe Mickey Harte believes. But for the record Id guess he does believe in evolution like the Catholic church.
Anyway you can reply to my point anytime ;)
Just like you can reply to the question I originally posted? Good lad ;)
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 03:29:31 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 23, 2018, 03:25:57 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 03:18:51 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 23, 2018, 03:11:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 02:21:43 PM
Quote from: grounded on April 23, 2018, 01:51:23 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on April 23, 2018, 12:40:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:28:26 PM
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
I've seen that smugly posted before - the fact is these sorts of issues have been stumping everyone forever. It does raise interesting points, no doubt, but there are similar questions repealers may find it similarly stumping to answer, like, when does life start, or why they bother to congratulate someone who announces a pregnancy, or indeed commiserate with someone who has a miscarriage?
It seems to me the difference in whether it is a life or not comes down largely to whether it is wanted or not, and that to me seems a very inconsistent position indeed.
What makes us human is our ability to feel pain, and that starts at the 12-14 week milestone in pregnancy from what I have read......
The theories about what 'makes us human' have been postulated on for thousands of years. You've just picked out one characteristic among many for your argument.
Yes just like the pro-lifers pick out there own characteristics?? Its not going to affect a pro-lifers life if the abortions get passed is it? No.. if they are pro-life they won't have one, if a pro-choicer wants the law passed for them to have an abortion then why shouldn't they have it? It's about deciding what you want yourself.
To re work a quote from the Simpsons "Abortions for some and miniature Tri-colours for the rest"
According to Evolutionary genetics what makes us human is our DNA which is formed at conception
That unborn human is unable to communicate their choice but let every other form of life the likelihood is that want to survive
But Mickey is a devote holy joe?! he doesn't believe in evolution, he believes God created the earth and everything that inhabits it.....
I hadn't realised this was purely about you forming an opinion about the issue based on what you believe Mickey Harte believes. But for the record Id guess he does believe in evolution like the Catholic church.
Anyway you can reply to my point anytime ;)
Just like you can reply to the question I originally posted? Good lad ;)
I wasn't replying to your original question I was merely correcting a subsequent point you made.... but Ok then....
The child, as you can tell for sure if its alive, and the embryos are not in an environment that will allow them to grow. And the latter reason is where if you are using it as an analogy to the abortion debate is where it becomes a false one as a child in utero is in such an environment.
Now over to you...
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 23, 2018, 03:44:37 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 03:29:31 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 23, 2018, 03:25:57 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 03:18:51 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 23, 2018, 03:11:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 02:21:43 PM
Quote from: grounded on April 23, 2018, 01:51:23 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:58:34 PM
Quote from: haranguerer on April 23, 2018, 12:40:52 PM
Quote from: Mourne Red on April 23, 2018, 12:28:26 PM
How to stump a save the 8ther - Hypothetical Question
If you could choose only one, would you save 1,000 viable human embryos or one child in a burning building?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem
I've seen that smugly posted before - the fact is these sorts of issues have been stumping everyone forever. It does raise interesting points, no doubt, but there are similar questions repealers may find it similarly stumping to answer, like, when does life start, or why they bother to congratulate someone who announces a pregnancy, or indeed commiserate with someone who has a miscarriage?
It seems to me the difference in whether it is a life or not comes down largely to whether it is wanted or not, and that to me seems a very inconsistent position indeed.
What makes us human is our ability to feel pain, and that starts at the 12-14 week milestone in pregnancy from what I have read......
The theories about what 'makes us human' have been postulated on for thousands of years. You've just picked out one characteristic among many for your argument.
Yes just like the pro-lifers pick out there own characteristics?? Its not going to affect a pro-lifers life if the abortions get passed is it? No.. if they are pro-life they won't have one, if a pro-choicer wants the law passed for them to have an abortion then why shouldn't they have it? It's about deciding what you want yourself.
To re work a quote from the Simpsons "Abortions for some and miniature Tri-colours for the rest"
According to Evolutionary genetics what makes us human is our DNA which is formed at conception
That unborn human is unable to communicate their choice but let every other form of life the likelihood is that want to survive
But Mickey is a devote holy joe?! he doesn't believe in evolution, he believes God created the earth and everything that inhabits it.....
I hadn't realised this was purely about you forming an opinion about the issue based on what you believe Mickey Harte believes. But for the record Id guess he does believe in evolution like the Catholic church.
Anyway you can reply to my point anytime ;)
Just like you can reply to the question I originally posted? Good lad ;)
I wasn't replying to your original question I was merely correcting a subsequent point you made.... but Ok then....
The child, as you can tell for sure if its alive, and the embryos are not in an environment that will allow them to grow. And the latter reason is where if you are using it as an analogy to the abortion debate is where it becomes a false one as a child in utero is in such an environment.
Now over to you...
You wouldn't because a child is life and embryos are not? Also viable environment - some mothers have inhospitable wombs which the baby won't survive but are being made to go to full term? This is what an abortion is for as it isnt a viable environment. As you have said in your reply they wont survive.
Also the Genes thing, I am looking at it from a moral perspective that if something feels pain then it is alive, in case of 12 weeks cut off the fetus won't feel pain. Some may argue that it should be before the heart forms which I believe is around the 6 weeks milestone(unsure) but in terms of birth complications I don't know if they are visible at that point.
Maybe it's time to move this away from the GAA thread!
Quote from: haranguerer on April 23, 2018, 10:32:21 AM
Quote from: tippabu on April 23, 2018, 10:16:18 AM
There seems to be alot more no posters down this way so far, even the ads on YouTube and Facebook are mostly no ones. I hope the yes side aren't taking things for granted. You'd always expected the no side to be much more in you're face and stronger in their campaign though
Really? I'm in the north but all I've seen on social media etc are 'yes' advocates. Wouldn't like to see what would happen anyone who made a 'no' post, on my feed anyway!
It's all the paid ads and stuff on social media that's no voting. Hasn't been a whole lot from people on my Facebook but what there is is people sharing yes posts, don't think I've seen someone share a no vote one.
Quote from: westbound on April 23, 2018, 04:11:18 PM
Maybe it's time to move this away from the GAA thread!
+1000
It's giving me a headache.
Yeah, move it out.
By the way, Twitter and Facebook would have had you convinced that Brexit was for slaughtering.
Problem is social media is full of young people who are quick to click "like", but are unable to make their way to a voting booth.
Quote from: thewobbler on April 23, 2018, 04:18:06 PM
Yeah, move it out.
By the way, Twitter and Facebook would have had you convinced that Brexit was for slaughtering.
Problem is social media is full of young people who are quick to click "like", but are unable to make their way to a voting booth.
Abortion is not the same as choosing between generic middle-aged men in suits in elections and a closer analogy is the marriage referendum when it comes to youth engagement. Aka historically high. You're detached from the reality of this one and your dismissal of the platforms that drove a lot of the social change in recent years tells me that by itself.
Quote from: longballin on April 23, 2018, 04:41:47 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 04:15:59 PM
Quote from: westbound on April 23, 2018, 04:11:18 PM
Maybe it's time to move this away from the GAA thread!
+1000
It's giving me a headache.
Was Harte and co dragged it into the GAA arena.
Yeah, and while we were actually discussing that, it was an interesting thread.
Now, it just seems to be people making arguments for/against abortion.
Not the place for it.
Quote from: longballin on April 23, 2018, 04:41:47 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 04:15:59 PM
Quote from: westbound on April 23, 2018, 04:11:18 PM
Maybe it's time to move this away from the GAA thread!
+1000
It's giving me a headache.
Was Harte and co dragged it into the GAA arena.
Really? Jinxy's twitter link above (UL GAA Club account posting photo of a 'Yes' Campaign meeting) was posted on 30th March. Harte's intervention was on 21st April.
Quote from: Snapchap on April 23, 2018, 04:52:24 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 23, 2018, 04:41:47 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 04:15:59 PM
Quote from: westbound on April 23, 2018, 04:11:18 PM
Maybe it's time to move this away from the GAA thread!
+1000
It's giving me a headache.
Was Harte and co dragged it into the GAA arena.
Really? Jinxy's twitter link above (UL GAA Club account posting photo of a 'Yes' Campaign meeting) was posted on 30th March. Harte's intervention was on 21st April.
That UL tweet was for 2016 though, presumably some SU referendum that was on in the college at the time.
Quote from: Syferus on April 23, 2018, 04:50:49 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on April 23, 2018, 04:18:06 PM
Yeah, move it out.
By the way, Twitter and Facebook would have had you convinced that Brexit was for slaughtering.
Problem is social media is full of young people who are quick to click "like", but are unable to make their way to a voting booth.
Abortion is not the same as choosing between generic middle-aged men in suits in elections and a closer analogy is the marriage referendum when it comes to youth engagement. Aka historically high. You're detached from the reality of this one and your dismissal of the platforms that drove a lot of the social change in recent years tells me that by itself.
Could you try and have a discussion without being patronising, dismissive and personally insulting?
You're well capable of making an argument without resorting to that.
Quote from: Tubberman on April 23, 2018, 05:01:37 PM
Quote from: Syferus on April 23, 2018, 04:50:49 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on April 23, 2018, 04:18:06 PM
Yeah, move it out.
By the way, Twitter and Facebook would have had you convinced that Brexit was for slaughtering.
Problem is social media is full of young people who are quick to click "like", but are unable to make their way to a voting booth.
Abortion is not the same as choosing between generic middle-aged men in suits in elections and a closer analogy is the marriage referendum when it comes to youth engagement. Aka historically high. You're detached from the reality of this one and your dismissal of the platforms that drove a lot of the social change in recent years tells me that by itself.
Could you try and have a discussion without being patronising, dismissive and personally insulting?
You're well capable of making an argument without resorting to that.
He fundamentally believes in technology, and can't entertain the thought that people who've spent 50+ years in Catholic Ireland might not have their opinion swayed by social media.
FWIW, I expect it to be repealed. But I also expect a rubbish turnout, especially from people aged 18-35, which will make it a closer contest than i should be.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 04:52:00 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 23, 2018, 04:41:47 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 04:15:59 PM
Quote from: westbound on April 23, 2018, 04:11:18 PM
Maybe it's time to move this away from the GAA thread!
+1000
It's giving me a headache.
Was Harte and co dragged it into the GAA arena.
Yeah, and while we were actually discussing that, it was an interesting thread.
Now, it just seems to be people making arguments for/against abortion.
Not the place for it.
Time to lock it Jinxy.
Most people disagree with thone folks' attempt to hijack the GAA.
Let the Referendum have its own thread.
Quote from: Tubberman on April 23, 2018, 05:01:37 PM
Quote from: Syferus on April 23, 2018, 04:50:49 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on April 23, 2018, 04:18:06 PM
Yeah, move it out.
By the way, Twitter and Facebook would have had you convinced that Brexit was for slaughtering.
Problem is social media is full of young people who are quick to click "like", but are unable to make their way to a voting booth.
Abortion is not the same as choosing between generic middle-aged men in suits in elections and a closer analogy is the marriage referendum when it comes to youth engagement. Aka historically high. You're detached from the reality of this one and your dismissal of the platforms that drove a lot of the social change in recent years tells me that by itself.
Could you try and have a discussion without being patronising, dismissive and personally insulting?
You're well capable of making an argument without resorting to that.
Interesting that you focused on my post being apparently patronising and not the post that precipitated that reply.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 04:52:00 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 23, 2018, 04:41:47 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 04:15:59 PM
Quote from: westbound on April 23, 2018, 04:11:18 PM
Maybe it's time to move this away from the GAA thread!
+1000
It's giving me a headache.
Was Harte and co dragged it into the GAA arena.
Yeah, and while we were actually discussing that, it was an interesting thread.
Now, it just seems to be people making arguments for/against abortion.
Not the place for it.
You're right Jinxy. Lock this thread because it has degenerated into the usual dogfight between the usual suspects and Mickey & Co. and their motives are being ignored by all sides.
Did they change their name from GAA athletes.... to Gaelic athletes....?
Either way I think using Gaelic in their titles gives the impression that the GAA are backing them and is very mischievous
The Official Guide should be updated. It's no longer enough that it should be "non-party political," it should be "non-political." We should be able to discipline anyone using the GAA's name in a political campaign whether it's an election or a referendum.
Heard Alan Milton on the radio when I was driving home.
Pretty much said that the GAA can't stop people using the word 'GAA' for things like this, which I was a bit surprised at.
Got the impression they were going to get in touch with Mickey & Co. about it anyway.
Will probably ask them to publicly state that they are not representing the GAA.
Quote from: Syferus on April 23, 2018, 05:37:02 PM
Quote from: Tubberman on April 23, 2018, 05:01:37 PM
Quote from: Syferus on April 23, 2018, 04:50:49 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on April 23, 2018, 04:18:06 PM
Yeah, move it out.
By the way, Twitter and Facebook would have had you convinced that Brexit was for slaughtering.
Problem is social media is full of young people who are quick to click "like", but are unable to make their way to a voting booth.
Abortion is not the same as choosing between generic middle-aged men in suits in elections and a closer analogy is the marriage referendum when it comes to youth engagement. Aka historically high. You're detached from the reality of this one and your dismissal of the platforms that drove a lot of the social change in recent years tells me that by itself.
Could you try and have a discussion without being patronising, dismissive and personally insulting?
You're well capable of making an argument without resorting to that.
Interesting that you focused on my post being apparently patronising and not the post that precipitated that reply.
Your idol Paddy Joe Burke was interviewed one time and stated that he always had very good manners when he went to a match because his behavior (good or bad) was a reflection on his beloved Roscommon
You should think about taking a leaf out of his book
https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/harte-entitled-to-his-views-but-not-entitled-to-speak-for-the-gaa-1.3470268?mode=amp (https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/harte-entitled-to-his-views-but-not-entitled-to-speak-for-the-gaa-1.3470268?mode=amp)
Quote from: blewuporstuffed on April 23, 2018, 11:29:30 PM
https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/harte-entitled-to-his-views-but-not-entitled-to-speak-for-the-gaa-1.3470268?mode=amp (https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/harte-entitled-to-his-views-but-not-entitled-to-speak-for-the-gaa-1.3470268?mode=amp)
Clerkin seriously loses the plot describing the healthy and 'triving' nature of the GAA in 2018 but his points on Harte are mostly correct.
harte went into another clubs football gound without permission to shoot the anti abortion video! arrogance of the highest order but not surprising as we in tyrone have been subjected to it for too long. time for either the tyrone county board or gaa hierarchy to take this chancer down a peg or two.
So the GAA is failing and unhealthy according to the expert!!!
I know it's well after 11 weeks but is there any possibility of doing an abortion of syphilis.
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on April 23, 2018, 11:22:11 PM
Posted without comment. From Cootehill Celtic's (Cavan) Facebook Page, dated 9th April...
QuoteA video potraying the views of Tyrone GAA Manager Mickey Harte was recently shot at our pitch WITHOUT Club knowledge or consent. Our Club is non-political and non-sectarian - as such we would never tell citizens how to vote - that is a matter for individuals to decide at the ballot-box, none of a GAA Club's business. We have requested that the video, falsely associating our Club with Mr. Harte's views, be taken down forthwith.
PS - Tyrone Co.Board has expressed regret at any annoyance caused to CC Club/members by Mr.Harte's unauthorised use of our premises - but also regrets it is unable to take down the video.
https://www.facebook.com/cootehill.celtic/posts/2124563204443175
That's fairly black and white for me.
If right is right, a suspension will follow.
Gives Croke Park some leverage anyway.
If Harte was suspended as a matter of interest, how would Tyrone fans react?
He should keep his religion out of the sport full stop.
jinksy, most tyrone people would be delighted to see the back of harte but he does have a hardcore/cult following who could start a waco type seige up in garvaghy.
Quote from: Itchy on April 23, 2018, 11:53:42 PM
I know it's well after 11 weeks but is there any possibility of doing an abortion of syphilis.
Plumbing new depths I see. Wow.
Quote from: longballin on April 24, 2018, 12:01:39 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:56:49 PM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on April 23, 2018, 11:22:11 PM
Posted without comment. From Cootehill Celtic's (Cavan) Facebook Page, dated 9th April...
QuoteA video potraying the views of Tyrone GAA Manager Mickey Harte was recently shot at our pitch WITHOUT Club knowledge or consent. Our Club is non-political and non-sectarian - as such we would never tell citizens how to vote - that is a matter for individuals to decide at the ballot-box, none of a GAA Club's business. We have requested that the video, falsely associating our Club with Mr. Harte's views, be taken down forthwith.
PS - Tyrone Co.Board has expressed regret at any annoyance caused to CC Club/members by Mr.Harte's unauthorised use of our premises - but also regrets it is unable to take down the video.
https://www.facebook.com/cootehill.celtic/posts/2124563204443175
That's fairly black and white for me.
If right is right, a suspension will follow.
Gives Croke Park some leverage anyway.
If Harte was suspended as a matter of interest, how would Tyrone fans react?
would be very divided opinion. Some think he can do no wrong, others have had enough of him
Wonder what the county board think.
To be honest, I don't think Croke Park will go after him on this as it will stir up a hornets nest.
They should though.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 24, 2018, 12:17:23 AM
Quote from: longballin on April 24, 2018, 12:01:39 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:56:49 PM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on April 23, 2018, 11:22:11 PM
Posted without comment. From Cootehill Celtic's (Cavan) Facebook Page, dated 9th April...
QuoteA video potraying the views of Tyrone GAA Manager Mickey Harte was recently shot at our pitch WITHOUT Club knowledge or consent. Our Club is non-political and non-sectarian - as such we would never tell citizens how to vote - that is a matter for individuals to decide at the ballot-box, none of a GAA Club's business. We have requested that the video, falsely associating our Club with Mr. Harte's views, be taken down forthwith.
PS - Tyrone Co.Board has expressed regret at any annoyance caused to CC Club/members by Mr.Harte's unauthorised use of our premises - but also regrets it is unable to take down the video.
https://www.facebook.com/cootehill.celtic/posts/2124563204443175
That's fairly black and white for me.
If right is right, a suspension will follow.
Gives Croke Park some leverage anyway.
If Harte was suspended as a matter of interest, how would Tyrone fans react?
would be very divided opinion. Some think he can do no wrong, others have had enough of him
Wonder what the county board think.
To be honest, I don't think Croke Park will go after him on this as it will stir up a hornets nest.
They should though.
They'd have to reciprocate the action with those groups who used the GAA as a vechile to further the repeal movement. I don't think they'll want to wade into this mess and I'd say a strongly worded cease and desist sort of letter is what they'll go with and I'd say that's also the correct line of action.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 24, 2018, 12:17:23 AM
Quote from: longballin on April 24, 2018, 12:01:39 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:56:49 PM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on April 23, 2018, 11:22:11 PM
Posted without comment. From Cootehill Celtic's (Cavan) Facebook Page, dated 9th April...
QuoteA video potraying the views of Tyrone GAA Manager Mickey Harte was recently shot at our pitch WITHOUT Club knowledge or consent. Our Club is non-political and non-sectarian - as such we would never tell citizens how to vote - that is a matter for individuals to decide at the ballot-box, none of a GAA Club's business. We have requested that the video, falsely associating our Club with Mr. Harte's views, be taken down forthwith.
PS - Tyrone Co.Board has expressed regret at any annoyance caused to CC Club/members by Mr.Harte's unauthorised use of our premises - but also regrets it is unable to take down the video.
https://www.facebook.com/cootehill.celtic/posts/2124563204443175
That's fairly black and white for me.
If right is right, a suspension will follow.
Gives Croke Park some leverage anyway.
If Harte was suspended as a matter of interest, how would Tyrone fans react?
would be very divided opinion. Some think he can do no wrong, others have had enough of him
Wonder what the county board think.
To be honest, I don't think Croke Park will go after him on this as it will stir up a hornets nest.
They should though.
What about the women who used gaa grounds to promote the no vote? Should the GAA "go after them too"?
For all the talk of this being about the principle of it there's very little talk of any other of the GAA athletes involved in this bar Harte. Sheridan has been mentioned once but Gallagher and the rest have been mentioned in the midst of hardly any posts. Now I'm not aiming this at you jinxy but some people are barely concealing their dislike of Harte behind the thin veil of concern for the GAA's non political stance.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:56:49 PM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on April 23, 2018, 11:22:11 PM
Posted without comment. From Cootehill Celtic's (Cavan) Facebook Page, dated 9th April...
QuoteA video potraying the views of Tyrone GAA Manager Mickey Harte was recently shot at our pitch WITHOUT Club knowledge or consent. Our Club is non-political and non-sectarian - as such we would never tell citizens how to vote - that is a matter for individuals to decide at the ballot-box, none of a GAA Club's business. We have requested that the video, falsely associating our Club with Mr. Harte's views, be taken down forthwith.
PS - Tyrone Co.Board has expressed regret at any annoyance caused to CC Club/members by Mr.Harte's unauthorised use of our premises - but also regrets it is unable to take down the video.
https://www.facebook.com/cootehill.celtic/posts/2124563204443175
That's fairly black and white for me.
If right is right, a suspension will follow.
Gives Croke Park some leverage anyway.
If Harte was suspended as a matter of interest, how would Tyrone fans react?
Totally agree here and I said it a few days ago. Harte must get a suspension for this. Most tyrone supporters I know would be delighted.
I doubt Mickey would be suspended. It wouldn't be GAA style. More likely that someone would take him aside and have a word.
Quote from: seafoid on April 24, 2018, 08:20:14 AM
I doubt Mickey would be suspended. It wouldn't be GAA style. More likely that someone would take him aside and have a word.
I'd love to see who gonna be brave enough to do that.lol
Has Harte been interviewed on RTE or RTE Radio regarding his views? Is he still boycotting them completely?
Quote from: lenny on April 24, 2018, 07:30:01 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:56:49 PM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on April 23, 2018, 11:22:11 PM
Posted without comment. From Cootehill Celtic's (Cavan) Facebook Page, dated 9th April...
QuoteA video potraying the views of Tyrone GAA Manager Mickey Harte was recently shot at our pitch WITHOUT Club knowledge or consent. Our Club is non-political and non-sectarian - as such we would never tell citizens how to vote - that is a matter for individuals to decide at the ballot-box, none of a GAA Club's business. We have requested that the video, falsely associating our Club with Mr. Harte's views, be taken down forthwith.
PS - Tyrone Co.Board has expressed regret at any annoyance caused to CC Club/members by Mr.Harte's unauthorised use of our premises - but also regrets it is unable to take down the video.
https://www.facebook.com/cootehill.celtic/posts/2124563204443175
That's fairly black and white for me.
If right is right, a suspension will follow.
Gives Croke Park some leverage anyway.
If Harte was suspended as a matter of interest, how would Tyrone fans react?
Totally agree here and I said it a few days ago. Harte must get a suspension for this. Most tyrone supporters I know would be delighted.
Most tyrone supporters you know would think harte should be suspended? Wise up you clown. It makes me cringe what he done and I am against his views but you talking out of the preverbial
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 24, 2018, 08:38:38 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 24, 2018, 08:20:14 AM
I doubt Mickey would be suspended. It wouldn't be GAA style. More likely that someone would take him aside and have a word.
I'd love to see who gonna be brave enough to do that.lol
THIS EJIT IS FROM FERMANAGH, HAS NO CLUB AND HAS AN OBSESSION WITH HARTE! COMPLETELY QUIET WHEN TYRONE ARE DOING WELL THEN COMES OUT OF THE WOODWORK ANY CHANCE HE GETS!
Quote from: trileacman on April 24, 2018, 12:38:13 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 24, 2018, 12:17:23 AM
Quote from: longballin on April 24, 2018, 12:01:39 AM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:56:49 PM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on April 23, 2018, 11:22:11 PM
Posted without comment. From Cootehill Celtic's (Cavan) Facebook Page, dated 9th April...
QuoteA video potraying the views of Tyrone GAA Manager Mickey Harte was recently shot at our pitch WITHOUT Club knowledge or consent. Our Club is non-political and non-sectarian - as such we would never tell citizens how to vote - that is a matter for individuals to decide at the ballot-box, none of a GAA Club's business. We have requested that the video, falsely associating our Club with Mr. Harte's views, be taken down forthwith.
PS - Tyrone Co.Board has expressed regret at any annoyance caused to CC Club/members by Mr.Harte's unauthorised use of our premises - but also regrets it is unable to take down the video.
https://www.facebook.com/cootehill.celtic/posts/2124563204443175
That's fairly black and white for me.
If right is right, a suspension will follow.
Gives Croke Park some leverage anyway.
If Harte was suspended as a matter of interest, how would Tyrone fans react?
would be very divided opinion. Some think he can do no wrong, others have had enough of him
Wonder what the county board think.
To be honest, I don't think Croke Park will go after him on this as it will stir up a hornets nest.
They should though.
What about the women who used gaa grounds to promote the no vote? Should the GAA "go after them too"?
For all the talk of this being about the principle of it there's very little talk of any other of the GAA athletes involved in this bar Harte. Sheridan has been mentioned once but Gallagher and the rest have been mentioned in the midst of hardly any posts. Now I'm not aiming this at you jinxy but some people are barely concealing their dislike of Harte behind the thin veil of concern for the GAA's non political stance.
To be fair, he's the most high-profile person in the group and he is still actively involved at the elite level of gaelic games.
Not sure how this group came together but my assumption (perhaps an incorrect assumption) would be that Mickey was the first person they went looking for.
I'd never heard of Gallagher before and Big Joe is retired.
I don't actually dislike Mickey Harte at all and I feel that he is an easy target for scorn because he is religious.
All of the things he has said in done in recent years in terms of being a character witness, opposing same-sex marriage etc. are consistent with his faith.
Quote from: Syferus on April 24, 2018, 12:09:00 AM
Quote from: Itchy on April 23, 2018, 11:53:42 PM
I know it's well after 11 weeks but is there any possibility of doing an abortion of syphilis.
Plumbing new depths I see. Wow.
Come on it would be painless. We can put it up on social media. You'd be a star.
Quote from: Itchy on April 24, 2018, 10:01:59 AM
Quote from: Syferus on April 24, 2018, 12:09:00 AM
Quote from: Itchy on April 23, 2018, 11:53:42 PM
I know it's well after 11 weeks but is there any possibility of doing an abortion of syphilis.
Plumbing new depths I see. Wow.
Come on it would be painless. We can put it up on social media. You'd be a star.
FFS, get a life would you. He might be a pain in the ass, but that's disgusting.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 23, 2018, 11:56:49 PM
Quote from: Fionntamhnach on April 23, 2018, 11:22:11 PM
Posted without comment. From Cootehill Celtic's (Cavan) Facebook Page, dated 9th April...
QuoteA video potraying the views of Tyrone GAA Manager Mickey Harte was recently shot at our pitch WITHOUT Club knowledge or consent. Our Club is non-political and non-sectarian - as such we would never tell citizens how to vote - that is a matter for individuals to decide at the ballot-box, none of a GAA Club's business. We have requested that the video, falsely associating our Club with Mr. Harte's views, be taken down forthwith.
PS - Tyrone Co.Board has expressed regret at any annoyance caused to CC Club/members by Mr.Harte's unauthorised use of our premises - but also regrets it is unable to take down the video.
https://www.facebook.com/cootehill.celtic/posts/2124563204443175
That's fairly black and white for me.
If right is right, a suspension will follow.
Gives Croke Park some leverage anyway.
If Harte was suspended as a matter of interest, how would Tyrone fans react?
Not a problem with a suspension, and I've no opinion on the vote yet.
MH will always beheld in high esteem in my mind and I have defended him on many occasions while not always agreeing with his standpoint.
However I find his actions on this occasions wholly inappropriate and downright wrong.
There is no way he should be holding his standing in our association to try to influence people to vote.
Simply not good enough and whatever sanctions follow are deserved
Quote from: Taylor on April 24, 2018, 02:22:07 PM
MH will always beheld in high esteem in my mind and I have defended him on many occasions while not always agreeing with his standpoint. However I find his actions on this occasions wholly inappropriate and downright wrong. There is no way he should be holding his standing in our association to try to influence people to vote. Simply not good enough and whatever sanctions follow are deserved
For Mickey, this is a life and death matter. That is the context to his actions.
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 24, 2018, 03:32:21 PM
Quote from: Taylor on April 24, 2018, 02:22:07 PM
MH will always beheld in high esteem in my mind and I have defended him on many occasions while not always agreeing with his standpoint. However I find his actions on this occasions wholly inappropriate and downright wrong. There is no way he should be holding his standing in our association to try to influence people to vote. Simply not good enough and whatever sanctions follow are deserved
For Mickey, this is a life and death matter. That is the context to his actions.
I get that and he is well entitled to give his opinion as he has done on many other occasions.
But he still should not be using our organisation
Quote from: Taylor on April 24, 2018, 03:35:50 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 24, 2018, 03:32:21 PM
Quote from: Taylor on April 24, 2018, 02:22:07 PM
MH will always beheld in high esteem in my mind and I have defended him on many occasions while not always agreeing with his standpoint. However I find his actions on this occasions wholly inappropriate and downright wrong. There is no way he should be holding his standing in our association to try to influence people to vote. Simply not good enough and whatever sanctions follow are deserved
For Mickey, this is a life and death matter. That is the context to his actions.
I get that and he is well entitled to give his opinion as he has done on many other occasions.
But he still should not be using our organisation
Well said. He was also out of order to use Cootehill GFC grounds if, as is reported, he didn't have the permission of the club. This is an emotive issue and people are entitled to voice an opinion but they should do so as individuals.
Quote from: longballin on April 24, 2018, 04:11:02 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 24, 2018, 03:32:21 PM
Quote from: Taylor on April 24, 2018, 02:22:07 PM
MH will always beheld in high esteem in my mind and I have defended him on many occasions while not always agreeing with his standpoint. However I find his actions on this occasions wholly inappropriate and downright wrong. There is no way he should be holding his standing in our association to try to influence people to vote. Simply not good enough and whatever sanctions follow are deserved
For Mickey, this is a life and death matter. That is the context to his actions.
life and death or not he has a history of wading into issues be it court references, marching for the Quinn dynasty or lecturing us about contraceptives https://www.thefreelibrary.com/GAA%27S+HARTE+BACKS+CONDOM+BAN%3B+Hero+supports+controversial+book.-a0196914275
Yes but the issue I have is that he has done this under the GAA banner in a GAA ground
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on April 24, 2018, 03:32:21 PM
Quote from: Taylor on April 24, 2018, 02:22:07 PM
MH will always beheld in high esteem in my mind and I have defended him on many occasions while not always agreeing with his standpoint. However I find his actions on this occasions wholly inappropriate and downright wrong. There is no way he should be holding his standing in our association to try to influence people to vote. Simply not good enough and whatever sanctions follow are deserved
For Mickey, this is a life and death matter. That is the context to his actions.
But Rufus is that acceptable and correct.
harte and his cohorts are so out of order yet all I'm seeing is well that's the way mickey is and thats what he believes in.......
I wonder was it "gaa athletes for a no vote " that were around Carrickmore chapel last night?
If those folks had their event/launch in a hotel nobody would have any issues.
They're perfectly entitled to advocate for a no vote whether they can vote or not.
But what they did was simply out of order.
Quote from: lenny on April 24, 2018, 07:30:01 AM
Totally agree here and I said it a few days ago. Harte must get a suspension for this. Most tyrone supporters I know would be delighted.
Under what rule?
did the gaa not try to ban tiarnan mc cann for 8 weeks for bringing the game into disrepute? what harte has done is much more serious in my opinion.
Ah, it's not.
Is the GAA meddling in our democracy? They're worse than the Ruskies!
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 24, 2018, 09:52:59 PM
did the gaa not try to ban tiarnan mc cann for 8 weeks for bringing the game into disrepute? what harte has done is much more serious in my opinion.
Yes, he got 8 weeks for looking like a ladyboy .
Quote from: Jinxy on April 24, 2018, 09:56:09 PM
Ah, it's not.
Yes it is
It's breaking the association rules
4 days on from harte and companys stunt in dublin and the tyrone county board have yet to even release a statement. prob just say silent and hope the whole thing blows over then sweep it under the carpet. even croke park staying very silent on the issure.
Tiernan McCann's hair is involved in the 'Yes' campaign.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 24, 2018, 11:32:50 PM
Tiernan McCann's hair is involved in the 'Yes' campaign.
Hopefully the Yes campaign gets a bounce rather than takes a dive after this revelation.
I love the selective outrage.
No one had their hair on fire when Enda and co staged an anti Brexit event in Ruislip a couple of years ago when Mayo were over playing.
Mickey shouldn't have done what he did, but talk about sanctioning him or suspending him is pure rubbish.
Mickey Harte is entitled to his views, which are basically right wing fundamentalist Catholic in origin. I don't like his views and I don't like that he uses his GAA profile to try go influence how women should live their lives in Ireland, but he's entitled to do what he wants. Same way women should be entitled to live as they choose and not be told what to do by an outdated law.
Quote from: ck on April 25, 2018, 04:52:26 AM
Mickey Harte is entitled to his views, which are basically right wing fundamentalist Catholic in origin. I don't like his views and I don't like that he uses his GAA profile to try go influence how women should live their lives in Ireland, but he's entitled to do what he wants. Same way women should be entitled to live as they choose and not be told what to do by an outdated law.
My wife is fond of quoting Dr Phil of US TV fame who says "never miss an opportunity to shut up".
Mickey should take that on board imo. He is entitled to his opinion but only between consenting adults.
Quote from: whitey on April 25, 2018, 01:10:33 AM
I love the selective outrage.
No one had their hair on fire when Enda and co staged an anti Brexit event in Ruislip a couple of years ago when Mayo were over playing.
Mickey shouldn't have done what he did, but talk about sanctioning him or suspending him is pure rubbish.
Ah sure of course he shouldn't have done it but look at the number of posts the likes of southtyronegael and longballin have added to this thread - they are confirmed hissy fitters whenever any Harte issue arises. Whether we agree with Mickey or not, it's clearly an issue he feels very passionate about and is prepared to use any advantage he can to get his point across, including bending the rules of the GAA if required. A risk he was prepared to take for his beliefs. It was an ill advised thing to do and doesn't sit well with me but the over reaction from the hand wringers is as usual a little bit extreme and no doubt Mickey is delighted with the publicity these guys are giving his cause.
Yeah while i don't agree with him here are one or two, tyrone people at that, with ridiculous vendettas against him on here. It has ruined some of those tyrone threads.
Mickey Harte: Co Cavan GAA club complains about pro-life video filmed at its ground
'A GAA club in Co Cavan has complained to the Tyrone board after it claimed the county's manager Mickey Harte filmed a pro-life video at its ground without permission.
Mr Harte is a prominent member of Gaelic Athletes for Life - a group which is campaigning for a 'No' vote in next month's abortion referendum in the Republic.
Cootehill Celtic said the pro-life video, part of a separate LoveBoth campaign, was filmed at its ground without its knowledge or consent.'
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/04/25/news/mickey-harte-co-cavan-gaa-club-complains-about-pro-life-video-filmed-at-its-ground-1313296/ (http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/04/25/news/mickey-harte-co-cavan-gaa-club-complains-about-pro-life-video-filmed-at-its-ground-1313296/)
Did Mickey just wander in off the road?
Surely somebody from the club knew he was there.
Quote from: imtommygunn on April 25, 2018, 07:34:30 AM
Yeah while i don't agree with him here are one or two, tyrone people at that, with ridiculous vendettas against him on here. It has ruined some of those tyrone threads.
for too long mickey Harte has been able to do and say as he pleases without ever been challenged, and the same people defend him and back him to the hilt even when they know he is wrong. Myself and a few other posters are try to offer some critical analysis to balance things. Only fair.
And also I think mickeys stunts have been a huge own goal for the no campaign. It has really revved up the yes side and alot of undecided voters will prob want disassociate themselves from religious fundamentalism and vote yes.
Quote from: seafoid on April 25, 2018, 05:39:03 AM
Quote from: ck on April 25, 2018, 04:52:26 AM
Mickey Harte is entitled to his views, which are basically right wing fundamentalist Catholic in origin. I don't like his views and I don't like that he uses his GAA profile to try go influence how women should live their lives in Ireland, but he's entitled to do what he wants. Same way women should be entitled to live as they choose and not be told what to do by an outdated law.
My wife is fond of quoting Dr Phil of US TV fame who says "never miss an opportunity to shut up".
Mickey should take that on board imo. He is entitled to his opinion but only between consenting adults.
I bet she is.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 25, 2018, 10:58:03 AM
Quote from: seafoid on April 25, 2018, 05:39:03 AM
Quote from: ck on April 25, 2018, 04:52:26 AM
Mickey Harte is entitled to his views, which are basically right wing fundamentalist Catholic in origin. I don't like his views and I don't like that he uses his GAA profile to try go influence how women should live their lives in Ireland, but he's entitled to do what he wants. Same way women should be entitled to live as they choose and not be told what to do by an outdated law.
My wife is fond of quoting Dr Phil of US TV fame who says "never miss an opportunity to shut up".
Mickey should take that on board imo. He is entitled to his opinion but only between consenting adults.
I bet she is.
:)
Quote from: imtommygunn on April 25, 2018, 07:34:30 AM
Yeah while i don't agree with him here are one or two, tyrone people at that, with ridiculous vendettas against him on here. It has ruined some of those tyrone threads.
Two in particular who add nothing and just clog up the threads with the same topic. The local board used to be good to read for information. Now it's like a child's playground and the same circular arguments. Would wreck your head.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 25, 2018, 10:08:27 AM
Mickey Harte: Co Cavan GAA club complains about pro-life video filmed at its ground
'A GAA club in Co Cavan has complained to the Tyrone board after it claimed the county's manager Mickey Harte filmed a pro-life video at its ground without permission.
Mr Harte is a prominent member of Gaelic Athletes for Life - a group which is campaigning for a 'No' vote in next month's abortion referendum in the Republic.
Cootehill Celtic said the pro-life video, part of a separate LoveBoth campaign, was filmed at its ground without its knowledge or consent.'
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/04/25/news/mickey-harte-co-cavan-gaa-club-complains-about-pro-life-video-filmed-at-its-ground-1313296/ (http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/04/25/news/mickey-harte-co-cavan-gaa-club-complains-about-pro-life-video-filmed-at-its-ground-1313296/)
Did Mickey just wander in off the road?
Surely somebody from the club knew he was there.
Maybe a renegade from within the club agreed it without sanction from the club committee?
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 25, 2018, 10:44:44 AM
And also I think mickeys stunts have been a huge own goal for the no campaign. It has really revved up the yes side and alot of undecided voters will prob want disassociate themselves from religious fundamentalism and vote yes.
I disagree - the Brexit debate changed the playing field for referendum campaigning. The problem with a referendum is that neither of the two sides of the debate are necessarily responsible for the fall out of the results therefore can use any means necessary to get their information out into the public domain, regardless of the legality or legitimacy of the methods or the information. The higher the profile of the information - the better. Look at the Leave campaign's bus slogan - it was ridiculed by all in sundry but got a message across even if the detail was incorrect. People who may be inclined to vote no will be galvanised by Harte's stunt. It has grabbed the narrative in the media and outrage / hatred shown by the likes of yourself against Harte and his message will encourage people to mobilise and support the NO campaign. One could argue that Harte has played you guys like a fiddle - 17 pages in a few days on the Gaa Section of the gaaboard (his target market don't forget) is impressive for a non GAA issue. The YES campaign will have to go some over the coming days to regain control of the debate in my view.
Most if the chat here is saying Harte and his crew were out of order.
Little chat about the subject of the Referendum itself.
Yes benny, 17 pages and almost all comments negative towards Harte and his crew. So how can that help the no side?
(https://memegenerator.net/img/images/600x600/17314631/ponte-verga-negro.jpg)
Quote from: Itchy on April 25, 2018, 12:07:52 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 25, 2018, 10:08:27 AM
Mickey Harte: Co Cavan GAA club complains about pro-life video filmed at its ground
'A GAA club in Co Cavan has complained to the Tyrone board after it claimed the county's manager Mickey Harte filmed a pro-life video at its ground without permission.
Mr Harte is a prominent member of Gaelic Athletes for Life - a group which is campaigning for a 'No' vote in next month's abortion referendum in the Republic.
Cootehill Celtic said the pro-life video, part of a separate LoveBoth campaign, was filmed at its ground without its knowledge or consent.'
http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/04/25/news/mickey-harte-co-cavan-gaa-club-complains-about-pro-life-video-filmed-at-its-ground-1313296/ (http://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/04/25/news/mickey-harte-co-cavan-gaa-club-complains-about-pro-life-video-filmed-at-its-ground-1313296/)
Did Mickey just wander in off the road?
Surely somebody from the club knew he was there.
Maybe a renegade from within the club agreed it without sanction from the club committee?
Plenty of renegades up in that neck of the woods.
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 25, 2018, 12:58:58 PM
Yes benny, 17 pages and almost all comments negative towards Harte and his crew. So how can that help the no side?
We tend to shout louder and be heard more when we are giving out.
For example, if i agree with a post you made i wouldn't bother replying to it. However, if I disagree we could go on for pages disagreeing about it.
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 25, 2018, 12:58:58 PM
Yes benny, 17 pages and almost all comments negative towards Harte and his crew. So how can that help the no side?
I don't think Mickey's stunt will particularly sway peoples view - its so deeply personal that I think the vast majority will have made or make up their own mind on the issue. The key thing is to get people out to vote and the outpouring of, in some cases, downright venom towards Mickey et al and their views, will galvanise and maybe mobilise those no voters. I don't imagine anyone who was thinking of voting no because they believe they are saving the life of an unborn child are going to sway their vote to yes because Mickey Harte held an unsanctioned skills session and pro-life media event in a GAA club.
Quote from: BennyHarp on April 25, 2018, 02:39:48 PM
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 25, 2018, 12:58:58 PM
Yes benny, 17 pages and almost all comments negative towards Harte and his crew. So how can that help the no side?
I don't think Mickey's stunt will particularly sway peoples view - its so deeply personal that I think the vast majority will have made or make up their own mind on the issue. The key thing is to get people out to vote and the outpouring of, in some cases, downright venom towards Mickey et al and their views, will galvanise and maybe mobilise those no voters. I don't imagine anyone who was thinking of voting no because they believe they are saving the life of an unborn child are going to sway their vote to yes because Mickey Harte held an unsanctioned skills session and pro-life media event in a GAA club.
so does Mickey deserve a proverbial toe up the arse for trying to generate a GAA vote or do you think he is ok because of his "beliefs"
Quote from: Orchard park on April 25, 2018, 02:45:32 PM
Quote from: BennyHarp on April 25, 2018, 02:39:48 PM
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 25, 2018, 12:58:58 PM
Yes benny, 17 pages and almost all comments negative towards Harte and his crew. So how can that help the no side?
I don't think Mickey's stunt will particularly sway peoples view - its so deeply personal that I think the vast majority will have made or make up their own mind on the issue. The key thing is to get people out to vote and the outpouring of, in some cases, downright venom towards Mickey et al and their views, will galvanise and maybe mobilise those no voters. I don't imagine anyone who was thinking of voting no because they believe they are saving the life of an unborn child are going to sway their vote to yes because Mickey Harte held an unsanctioned skills session and pro-life media event in a GAA club.
so does Mickey deserve a proverbial toe up the arse for trying to generate a GAA vote or do you think he is ok because of his "beliefs"
Of course he does, it was cynical and wrong. But I'd say he'd think it was well worth it if the NO vote wins.
I do agree with Harte on his abortion stance, but disagree with how he went about it.
He has influence, but there is more societal issues that he could be addressing: benefit cuts, zero hour contracts, mental health funding, and I don't recall hearing from him when the banks screwed the people over. Ok there's only so much one man can do, but these kind of issues affect more people than the abortion referendum. Join up with Brolly and address such issues.
Quote from: BennyCake on April 25, 2018, 07:09:30 PM
I do agree with Harte on his abortion stance, but disagree with how he went about it.
He has influence, but there is more societal issues that he could be addressing: benefit cuts, zero hour contracts, mental health funding, and I don't recall hearing from him when the banks screwed the people over. Ok there's only so much one man can do, but these kind of issues affect more people than the abortion referendum. Join up with Brolly and address such issues.
What the fúck?
Quote from: Syferus on April 25, 2018, 07:21:06 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on April 25, 2018, 07:09:30 PM
I do agree with Harte on his abortion stance, but disagree with how he went about it.
He has influence, but there is more societal issues that he could be addressing: benefit cuts, zero hour contracts, mental health funding, and I don't recall hearing from him when the banks screwed the people over. Ok there's only so much one man can do, but these kind of issues affect more people than the abortion referendum. Join up with Brolly and address such issues.
What the fúck?
With you there Syferus.....
Just heard that Mickey has recorded a short video condemning the vulture funds on the grass bank at the Hospital End in Pairc Tailteann.
A county board official grabbed the video camera and tried to run off with it but he was quickly surrounded and dispossessed by Mickey's entourage.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 25, 2018, 10:38:14 PM
Just heard that Mickey has recorded a short video condemning the vulture funds on the grass bank at the Hospital End in Pairc Tailteann.
A county board official grabbed the video camera and tried to run off with it but he was quickly surrounded and dispossessed by Mickey's entourage.
There should be 24 hour rolling news coverage of this. He's been from Cootehill to Ballyfermot to Navan breaking into GAA grounds. No ground is safe. Locks your gates guys.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 25, 2018, 10:38:14 PM
Just heard that Mickey has recorded a short video condemning the vulture funds on the grass bank at the Hospital End in Pairc Tailteann.
A county board official grabbed the video camera and tried to run off with it but he was quickly surrounded and dispossessed by Mickey's entourage.
First he blighted the GAA with the scourge of handpassing.
Now he's moved on to trespassing.
No pitch in Ireland is safe from Mickey "The Trespasser" Harte.
Mickey Harte and the Tyrone Roses proudly present their new single "Breaking Into Tailteann", from their new album "Second Coming".
I've been casing your joint
For the past my best years of life
Like the look of your pitch
To tell everyone I'm right
When I'm angry and out in the cold
When I'm having it rough
Or just getting old
Listen up sweet child o' mine
Have I got news for you
If the 8th is repealed
No baby leaves this place alive
They'll die and join the queue
Better man the stadium gates
I'm coming in tonight
Have a red hand and a video camera
Outta sight
When I preach and when I roam
I'll find a soul I can trust
I'm coming home
Listen up sweet child o' mine
Have I got news for you
If the 8th is repealed
No baby leaves this place alive
They'll die and join the queue, sing it
I'm gonna break right into Tailteann
I can't wait anymore
Tailteann's gates won't hold me
I'll Cavanagh-tackle those suckers down
Laughing loud at your locks
When they hit the ground
Every Yes voter in every town
Hear this, your number's up
I'm coming 'round
Listen up sweet child o' mine
Have I got news for you
If the 8th is repealed
No baby leaves this place alive
They'll die and join the queue, sing it
I'm gonna break right into Tailteann
I can't wait anymore
How many times will I have to tell you
If the 8th goes you won't have to wait to die
You can have it all, any time you want it
Yeah, I gotta protect what's inside
Anti-abortion group defends Mickey Harte
However, a spokesman for Save the 8th last night defended Mr Harte and players involved in campaigning.
"In 2015, the Gaelic Players Association came out, en masse, for a 'Yes' vote in the marriage referendum. The GAA said nothing.
"Last week, a number of players came out for a 'No' vote in the abortion referendum, and the GAA is suddenly concerned.
"It is unclear what has changed from 2015 to now."
https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/04/26/news/anti-abortion-group-defends-mickey-harte-1314257/ (https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/04/26/news/anti-abortion-group-defends-mickey-harte-1314257/)
It is a fair point although I could argue about the technicalities.
I haven't heard anything from the GPA regarding the upcoming referendum, but for argument's sake, if they came out and said, "We've polled our membership and 70% are in favour of us advocating for a 'YES' vote", what would/could the GAA do or say about it?
If their statement started with a load of stuff about the GAA's vision and mission statement and then ran into advocating......
Also if it was launched in a GAA club's pitch with training/coaching involved.
If the GPA are in receipt of funding from the GAA, are they not just another 'unit'?
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 09:52:42 AM
Anti-abortion group defends Mickey Harte
However, a spokesman for Save the 8th last night defended Mr Harte and players involved in campaigning.
"In 2015, the Gaelic Players Association came out, en masse, for a 'Yes' vote in the marriage referendum. The GAA said nothing.
"Last week, a number of players came out for a 'No' vote in the abortion referendum, and the GAA is suddenly concerned.
"It is unclear what has changed from 2015 to now."
https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/04/26/news/anti-abortion-group-defends-mickey-harte-1314257/ (https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/04/26/news/anti-abortion-group-defends-mickey-harte-1314257/)
It is a fair point although I could argue about the technicalities.
I haven't heard anything from the GPA regarding the upcoming referendum, but for argument's sake, if they came out and said, "We've polled our membership and 70% are in favour of us advocating for a 'YES' vote", what would/could the GAA do or say about it?
Any connection between what he GPA did in the run in to the last referendum and what Mickey & Co are doing at present is fairly tenuous, to say the least.
As far as I can recall, both the GPA and the LGPA (WGPA?) announced that both bodies were officially endorsing the referendum and, apart from publishing the results of a poll conduced by each association, neither got actively involved.
On the other hand, Mickey & Co. represent, well, Mickey & Co and have used GAA grounds, apparently without permission to broadcast their message and have manipulated children to try to influence their parents voting intentions.
What if the GPA endorsed a 'NO' vote in the same-sex marriage referendum though?
Could you imagine the negative backlash there would have been against the GAA as a whole?
I'm curious to know if the GPA will be getting involved in the upcoming referendum, since they've already established the precedent.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 12:25:10 PM
What if the GPA endorsed a 'NO' vote in the same-sex marriage referendum though?
Could you imagine the negative backlash there would have been against the GAA as a whole?
I'm curious to know if the GPA will be getting involved in the upcoming referendum, since they've already established the precedent.
But they didn't and, apart from announcing the results of the poll they conducted, they didn't get actively involved one way or the other.
Not endorsing a vote either way = not getting actively involved.
Endorsing a vote = getting actively involved.
Just to be clear, I voted yes in the same-sex marriage referendum, and will be voting yes in the upcoming referendum so it's not about which side they came down on.
It's the principle and the precedent that I'm primarily interested in.
Lets say the GPA put the issue of endorsing the upcoming referendum to a vote and it came back 50:50 or even 60:40 against.
Would they report that?
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 12:25:10 PM
What if the GPA endorsed a 'NO' vote in the same-sex marriage referendum though?
Could you imagine the negative backlash there would have been against the GAA as a whole?
I'm curious to know if the GPA will be getting involved in the upcoming referendum, since they've already established the precedent.
If GPA endorsed a No vote for SS marriage, youwouldnt have heard about it, because people were afraid to speak out against it (except the DUP) for fear of being attacked and ridiculed.
That would be my gut feeling on it as well, Benny.
It was essentially a PR move, but it sets a tricky precedent, particularly as the issue to be decided upon in the upcoming referendum is even more divisive.
I'd be surprised if some journo hasn't been in touch with the GPA to ask them if they will be polling their membership on this issue and when the results of that poll will be made available.
Also, I may be wrong, but I don't recall the representative bodies for soccer & rugby players getting involved in the previous referendum.
Why would any organisation be polling its members at all about something it has no role in?
Because they are confident that the overall response will be positive and it will make the organisation seem progressive and enlightened.
Are they as confident on this issue?
It's a total hostage to fortune, which is why they should steer clear of this stuff altogether.
If you don't get the response you want, do you then bury the poll?
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 01:58:58 PM
Because they are confident that the overall response will be positive and it will make the organisation seem progressive and enlightened.
Are they as confident on this issue?
It's a total hostage to fortune, which is why they should steer clear of this stuff altogether.
If you don't get the response you want, do you then bury the poll?
That is 100% correct Jinxy.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 01:26:22 PM
Not endorsing a vote either way = not getting actively involved.
Endorsing a vote = getting actively involved.
Just to be clear, I voted yes in the same-sex marriage referendum, and will be voting yes in the upcoming referendum so it's not about which side they came down on.
It's the principle and the precedent that I'm primarily interested in.
Lets say the GPA put the issue of endorsing the upcoming referendum to a vote and it came back 50:50 or even 60:40 against.
Would they report that?
Why not? I see no reason why they shouldn't or wouldn't. There's a line between publishing the results of a poll that overwhelmingly back one side in the upcoming election and taking using a GAA pitch without the owners's permission to declare support for any side in this referendum. I'll probably vote like you when he time comes but that's not the reason I object to Mickey's antics. The cynical use of children to push any agenda in any election of any sort is beyond the pale for me.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 01:58:58 PM
Because they are confident that the overall response will be positive and it will make the organisation seem progressive and enlightened.
Are they as confident on this issue?
It's a total hostage to fortune, which is why they should steer clear of this stuff altogether.
If you don't get the response you want, do you then bury the poll?
Nah, just go again until you get the "right" answer, a la the Lisbon Treaty.
Quote from: BennyCake on April 26, 2018, 06:34:12 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 01:58:58 PM
Because they are confident that the overall response will be positive and it will make the organisation seem progressive and enlightened.
Are they as confident on this issue?
It's a total hostage to fortune, which is why they should steer clear of this stuff altogether.
If you don't get the response you want, do you then bury the poll?
Nah, just go again until you get the "right" answer, a la the Lisbon Treaty.
There's a reason progress is usually the right answer.
Quote from: Syferus on April 26, 2018, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on April 26, 2018, 06:34:12 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 01:58:58 PM
Because they are confident that the overall response will be positive and it will make the organisation seem progressive and enlightened.
Are they as confident on this issue?
It's a total hostage to fortune, which is why they should steer clear of this stuff altogether.
If you don't get the response you want, do you then bury the poll?
Nah, just go again until you get the "right" answer, a la the Lisbon Treaty.
There's a reason progress is usually the right answer.
And there's a reason why a country/group votes 'No' too.
Anyway, it's a matter of opinion re: progress.
Quote from: Syferus on April 26, 2018, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on April 26, 2018, 06:34:12 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 01:58:58 PM
Because they are confident that the overall response will be positive and it will make the organisation seem progressive and enlightened.
Are they as confident on this issue?
It's a total hostage to fortune, which is why they should steer clear of this stuff altogether.
If you don't get the response you want, do you then bury the poll?
Nah, just go again until you get the "right" answer, a la the Lisbon Treaty.
There's a reason progress is usually the right answer.
I knew Syferus was around for a reason....To define the appeal to novelty
Quote from: Syferus on April 26, 2018, 06:40:04 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on April 26, 2018, 06:34:12 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 01:58:58 PM
Because they are confident that the overall response will be positive and it will make the organisation seem progressive and enlightened.
Are they as confident on this issue?
It's a total hostage to fortune, which is why they should steer clear of this stuff altogether.
If you don't get the response you want, do you then bury the poll?
Nah, just go again until you get the "right" answer, a la the Lisbon Treaty.
There's a reason progress is usually the right answer.
Vote Yes for jobs.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 26, 2018, 04:26:10 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 01:26:22 PM
Not endorsing a vote either way = not getting actively involved.
Endorsing a vote = getting actively involved.
Just to be clear, I voted yes in the same-sex marriage referendum, and will be voting yes in the upcoming referendum so it's not about which side they came down on.
It's the principle and the precedent that I'm primarily interested in.
Lets say the GPA put the issue of endorsing the upcoming referendum to a vote and it came back 50:50 or even 60:40 against.
Would they report that?
Why not? I see no reason why they shouldn't or wouldn't. There's a line between publishing the results of a poll that overwhelmingly back one side in the upcoming election and taking using a GAA pitch without the owners's permission to declare support for any side in this referendum. I'll probably vote like you when he time comes but that's not the reason I object to Mickey's antics. The cynical use of children to push any agenda in any election of any sort is beyond the pale for me.
It would make them look bad, that's why.
This is all hypothetical, but it's a bit like people being hugely in favour of free speech unless the person speaking disagrees with them.
Look at the abuse Ger Brennan got for endorsing a 'No' vote in the same sex marriage referendum.
Now imagine instead of one individual, it was a players association drawing the ire of every self-righteous clown on social media.
The GPA's 'commercial partners' would have to take on extra staff to handle all the phone calls demanding they disassociate themselves.
My argument is, why set the precedent?
If you were advising them Lar, knowing that they took a position on the last referendum, would you say it was a good move to take a position on this referendum?
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 26, 2018, 04:26:10 PM
The cynical use of children to push any agenda in any election of any sort is beyond the pale for me.
Sneak preview of this weekend's publicity stunt by Mickey Harte:
(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/03/27/article-1165186-00F09D9200000191-975_468x374.jpg)
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
If I had to put money on it, I would say the GPA will do the same as last time and endorse a 'Yes' vote.
They may wait to see how favourable the wind behind them is first.
Or, will the GAA lean on them to sit this one out perhaps?
The GPA have said nothing to date.
Jinxy seems obsessed over that.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 27, 2018, 09:31:38 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 26, 2018, 04:26:10 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 01:26:22 PM
Not endorsing a vote either way = not getting actively involved.
Endorsing a vote = getting actively involved.
Just to be clear, I voted yes in the same-sex marriage referendum, and will be voting yes in the upcoming referendum so it's not about which side they came down on.
It's the principle and the precedent that I'm primarily interested in.
Lets say the GPA put the issue of endorsing the upcoming referendum to a vote and it came back 50:50 or even 60:40 against.
Would they report that?
Why not? I see no reason why they shouldn't or wouldn't. There's a line between publishing the results of a poll that overwhelmingly back one side in the upcoming election and taking using a GAA pitch without the owners's permission to declare support for any side in this referendum. I'll probably vote like you when he time comes but that's not the reason I object to Mickey's antics. The cynical use of children to push any agenda in any election of any sort is beyond the pale for me.
It would make them look bad, that's why.
This is all hypothetical, but it's a bit like people being hugely in favour of free speech unless the person speaking disagrees with them.
Look at the abuse Ger Brennan got for endorsing a 'No' vote in the same sex marriage referendum.
Now imagine instead of one individual, it was a players association drawing the ire of every self-righteous clown on social media.
The GPA's 'commercial partners' would have to take on extra staff to handle all the phone calls demanding they disassociate themselves.
My argument is, why set the precedent?
If you were advising them Lar, knowing that they took a position on the last referendum, would you say it was a good move to take a position on this referendum?
NO, I'd tell them to shut the f**k up and stay outa it!
I never meant to imply that the GPA was right in publicly endorsing one side or the other.
I thought we were comparing the lengths both parties went to get their respective messages across to the public and here I feel Mickey & Co. went away beyond the bonds of acceptable behaviour.
(http://mayogodhelpus.com/gaaboard/mickey.png)
It's bad enough that this shower should use a GAA ground, without the club's permission, to promote their message but to use children in a cynical way to do this is wholly unacceptable by any standard.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 27, 2018, 01:28:41 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 27, 2018, 09:31:38 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 26, 2018, 04:26:10 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 01:26:22 PM
Not endorsing a vote either way = not getting actively involved.
Endorsing a vote = getting actively involved.
Just to be clear, I voted yes in the same-sex marriage referendum, and will be voting yes in the upcoming referendum so it's not about which side they came down on.
It's the principle and the precedent that I'm primarily interested in.
Lets say the GPA put the issue of endorsing the upcoming referendum to a vote and it came back 50:50 or even 60:40 against.
Would they report that?
Why not? I see no reason why they shouldn't or wouldn't. There's a line between publishing the results of a poll that overwhelmingly back one side in the upcoming election and taking using a GAA pitch without the owners's permission to declare support for any side in this referendum. I'll probably vote like you when he time comes but that's not the reason I object to Mickey's antics. The cynical use of children to push any agenda in any election of any sort is beyond the pale for me.
It would make them look bad, that's why.
This is all hypothetical, but it's a bit like people being hugely in favour of free speech unless the person speaking disagrees with them.
Look at the abuse Ger Brennan got for endorsing a 'No' vote in the same sex marriage referendum.
Now imagine instead of one individual, it was a players association drawing the ire of every self-righteous clown on social media.
The GPA's 'commercial partners' would have to take on extra staff to handle all the phone calls demanding they disassociate themselves.
My argument is, why set the precedent?
If you were advising them Lar, knowing that they took a position on the last referendum, would you say it was a good move to take a position on this referendum?
NO, I'd tell them to shut the f**k up and stay outa it!
I never meant to imply that the GPA was right in publicly endorsing one side or the other.
I thought we were comparing the lengths both parties went to get their respective messages across to the public and here I feel Mickey & Co. went away beyond the bonds of acceptable behaviour.
(http://mayogodhelpus.com/gaaboard/mickey.png)
It's bad enough that this shower should use a GAA ground, without the club's permission, to promote their message but to use children in a cynical way to do this is wholly unacceptable by any standard.
just look at the NO posters and the use of images of children on them
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 27, 2018, 01:28:41 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 27, 2018, 09:31:38 AM
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 26, 2018, 04:26:10 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 26, 2018, 01:26:22 PM
Not endorsing a vote either way = not getting actively involved.
Endorsing a vote = getting actively involved.
Just to be clear, I voted yes in the same-sex marriage referendum, and will be voting yes in the upcoming referendum so it's not about which side they came down on.
It's the principle and the precedent that I'm primarily interested in.
Lets say the GPA put the issue of endorsing the upcoming referendum to a vote and it came back 50:50 or even 60:40 against.
Would they report that?
Why not? I see no reason why they shouldn't or wouldn't. There's a line between publishing the results of a poll that overwhelmingly back one side in the upcoming election and taking using a GAA pitch without the owners's permission to declare support for any side in this referendum. I'll probably vote like you when he time comes but that's not the reason I object to Mickey's antics. The cynical use of children to push any agenda in any election of any sort is beyond the pale for me.
It would make them look bad, that's why.
This is all hypothetical, but it's a bit like people being hugely in favour of free speech unless the person speaking disagrees with them.
Look at the abuse Ger Brennan got for endorsing a 'No' vote in the same sex marriage referendum.
Now imagine instead of one individual, it was a players association drawing the ire of every self-righteous clown on social media.
The GPA's 'commercial partners' would have to take on extra staff to handle all the phone calls demanding they disassociate themselves.
My argument is, why set the precedent?
If you were advising them Lar, knowing that they took a position on the last referendum, would you say it was a good move to take a position on this referendum?
NO, I'd tell them to shut the f**k up and stay outa it!
I never meant to imply that the GPA was right in publicly endorsing one side or the other.
I thought we were comparing the lengths both parties went to get their respective messages across to the public and here I feel Mickey & Co. went away beyond the bonds of acceptable behaviour.
(http://mayogodhelpus.com/gaaboard/mickey.png)
It's bad enough that this shower should use a GAA ground, without the club's permission, to promote their message but to use children in a cynical way to do this is wholly unacceptable by any standard.
I think we agree on all of this, Lar but it raises the broader question of direct/indirect GAA involvement in issues like this, and 'social' vs. 'political' positions.
Whether individuals or groups are in breach of the rules is one issue.
Then you have individuals or groups who are not in breach of the rules but may inadvertently drag the wider association into the debate.
I think the wisest option is to stay out of these things altogether or make it abundantly clear that you are representing yourself and not the whole lot of us.
We're GAA people so we know where the dividing line is, but for the average man/woman on the street it's not that simple.
They might see 'GAA', 'GPA' or even the word 'Gaelic' and assume the associated position of that specific group is the 'official' position.
The reason I focus on the GPA, is that they are well within their rights (seemingly) to support a 'Yes' or 'No' vote, but should they?
For me, there is limited potential upside and significant potential downside to endorsing either position.
Harte used the GAA name to promote their stance. Had he done it as an individual, there wouldn't have been half the coverage. He knows that. He ain't stupid.
He also knows he severely bent the rules, but if his campaign helps win the vote, he won't care. If there's a fine/suspension later, he won't care. His job will have been a success.
It won't have been the first time he chucked the rulebook out the window.
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Quote from: AQMP on April 27, 2018, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Wonder who'll be on it?
Quote from: BennyCake on April 27, 2018, 03:36:40 PM
Harte used the GAA name to promote their stance. Had he done it as an individual, there wouldn't have been half the coverage. He knows that. He ain't stupid.
He also knows he severely bent the rules, but if his campaign helps win the vote, he won't care. If there's a fine/suspension later, he won't care. His job will have been a success.
It won't have been the first time he chucked the rulebook out the window.
That's more or less my view also.
I do accept what Jinxy is saying and the GPA, as a body, should not get involved but on a scale of 1 to 10, where degrees of culpability are concerned, I'd put the GPA about 5 but I'd give Mickey & Co the full 10.
Quote from: Farrandeelin on April 27, 2018, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: AQMP on April 27, 2018, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Wonder who'll be on it?
Terry Prone, Eamon Dunphy, Bibi Baskin & Brush Shiels.
Quote from: Lar Naparka on April 27, 2018, 04:31:42 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on April 27, 2018, 03:36:40 PM
Harte used the GAA name to promote their stance. Had he done it as an individual, there wouldn't have been half the coverage. He knows that. He ain't stupid.
He also knows he severely bent the rules, but if his campaign helps win the vote, he won't care. If there's a fine/suspension later, he won't care. His job will have been a success.
It won't have been the first time he chucked the rulebook out the window.
That's more or less my view also.
I do accept what Jinxy is saying and the GPA, as a body, should not get involved but on a scale of 1 to 10, where degrees of culpability are concerned, I'd put the GPA about 5 but I'd give Mickey & Co the full 10.
I find that strange. Both made political statements and used their grouping within the GAA as a position to highlight their stance. Ignoring the right or wrong of the statements each are making, they both are equally culpable in using the GAA name in a political position.
Quote from: Jinxy on April 27, 2018, 05:27:47 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on April 27, 2018, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: AQMP on April 27, 2018, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Wonder who'll be on it?
Terry Prone, Eamon Dunphy, Bibi Baskin & Brush Shiels.
Dana will not be happy
Quote from: macdanger2 on April 27, 2018, 05:44:34 PM
Quote from: Jinxy on April 27, 2018, 05:27:47 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on April 27, 2018, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: AQMP on April 27, 2018, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Wonder who'll be on it?
Terry Prone, Eamon Dunphy, Bibi Baskin & Brush Shiels.
Dana will not be happy
She is doing a song.
She's doing a duet with Peter Ustinov.
Quote from: Farrandeelin on April 27, 2018, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: AQMP on April 27, 2018, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Wonder who'll be on it?
Probably Sinead O'Connor - on the Yes side obviously.
Quote from: Farrandeelin on April 27, 2018, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: AQMP on April 27, 2018, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Wonder who'll be on it?
I'd imagine there will be a couple of reasonable people to whom facts are important and who have thought through the issues in a calm and considered manner on the Yes side, and a couple of backward, shouting, lying ignoramuses to whom facts are irrelevant on the No side.
Quote from: sid waddell on April 27, 2018, 09:30:18 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on April 27, 2018, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: AQMP on April 27, 2018, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Wonder who'll be on it?
I'd imagine there will be a couple of reasonable people to whom facts are important and who have thought through the issues in a calm and considered manner on the Yes side, and a couple of backward, shouting, lying ignoramuses to whom facts are irrelevant on the No side.
A Various selection of facts are important on the Yes side, like they are on the No side,
I suspect tho that for many on both sides appearing to be associated or disassociated with a certain ideology and castigating those with a different opinion is more important than looking at the subject and forming your own opinion based on logically applying your own principles.
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 27, 2018, 09:43:28 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 27, 2018, 09:30:18 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on April 27, 2018, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: AQMP on April 27, 2018, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Wonder who'll be on it?
I'd imagine there will be a couple of reasonable people to whom facts are important and who have thought through the issues in a calm and considered manner on the Yes side, and a couple of backward, shouting, lying ignoramuses to whom facts are irrelevant on the No side.
A Various selection of facts are important on the Yes side, like they are on the No side,
I suspect tho that for many on both sides appearing to be associated or disassociated with a certain ideology and castigating those with a different opinion is more important than looking at the subject and forming your own opinion based on logically applying your own principles.
Err, yet more attempted false equivalences on GAABoard. I can assure you the Yes side are far more worried about women having control over their own bodies than they are what the other side thinks. To suggest otherwise is frankly insulting.
Quote from: Syferus on April 27, 2018, 10:56:59 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 27, 2018, 09:43:28 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 27, 2018, 09:30:18 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on April 27, 2018, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: AQMP on April 27, 2018, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Wonder who'll be on it?
I'd imagine there will be a couple of reasonable people to whom facts are important and who have thought through the issues in a calm and considered manner on the Yes side, and a couple of backward, shouting, lying ignoramuses to whom facts are irrelevant on the No side.
A Various selection of facts are important on the Yes side, like they are on the No side,
I suspect tho that for many on both sides appearing to be associated or disassociated with a certain ideology and castigating those with a different opinion is more important than looking at the subject and forming your own opinion based on logically applying your own principles.
Err, yet more attempted false equivalences on GAABoard. I can assure you the Yes side are far more worried about women having control over their own bodies than they are what the other side thinks. To suggest otherwise is franklyin insulting.
Im sure you would never resort to ad hominen Syerfus ...oh hang on.... you don't but .... you just did?
It also seems that what your saying is the right to choose for a woman supersedes the right to life for a child, is that right?
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 27, 2018, 11:09:10 PM
Quote from: Syferus on April 27, 2018, 10:56:59 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 27, 2018, 09:43:28 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 27, 2018, 09:30:18 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on April 27, 2018, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: AQMP on April 27, 2018, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Wonder who'll be on it?
I'd imagine there will be a couple of reasonable people to whom facts are important and who have thought through the issues in a calm and considered manner on the Yes side, and a couple of backward, shouting, lying ignoramuses to whom facts are irrelevant on the No side.
A Various selection of facts are important on the Yes side, like they are on the No side,
I suspect tho that for many on both sides appearing to be associated or disassociated with a certain ideology and castigating those with a different opinion is more important than looking at the subject and forming your own opinion based on logically applying your own principles.
Err, yet more attempted false equivalences on GAABoard. I can assure you the Yes side are far more worried about women having control over their own bodies than they are what the other side thinks. To suggest otherwise is franklyin insulting.
Im sure you would never resort to ad hominen Syerfus ...oh hang on.... you don't but .... you just did?
It also seems that what your saying is the right to choose for a woman supersedes the right to life for a child, is that right?
Zzzzzzzzz.
Quote from: Syferus on April 27, 2018, 11:21:46 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 27, 2018, 11:09:10 PM
Quote from: Syferus on April 27, 2018, 10:56:59 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 27, 2018, 09:43:28 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 27, 2018, 09:30:18 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on April 27, 2018, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: AQMP on April 27, 2018, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Wonder who'll be on it?
I'd imagine there will be a couple of reasonable people to whom facts are important and who have thought through the issues in a calm and considered manner on the Yes side, and a couple of backward, shouting, lying ignoramuses to whom facts are irrelevant on the No side.
A Various selection of facts are important on the Yes side, like they are on the No side,
I suspect tho that for many on both sides appearing to be associated or disassociated with a certain ideology and castigating those with a different opinion is more important than looking at the subject and forming your own opinion based on logically applying your own principles.
Err, yet more attempted false equivalences on GAABoard. I can assure you the Yes side are far more worried about women having control over their own bodies than they are what the other side thinks. To suggest otherwise is franklyin insulting.
Im sure you would never resort to ad hominen Syerfus ...oh hang on.... you don't but .... you just did?
It also seems that what your saying is the right to choose for a woman supersedes the right to life for a child, is that right?
Zzzzzzzzz.
Ignore it if you want Sy but thats what the vast majority of on demand abortion cases boil down to.
Quote from: Syferus on April 27, 2018, 11:21:46 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 27, 2018, 11:09:10 PM
Quote from: Syferus on April 27, 2018, 10:56:59 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on April 27, 2018, 09:43:28 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on April 27, 2018, 09:30:18 PM
Quote from: Farrandeelin on April 27, 2018, 04:29:29 PM
Quote from: AQMP on April 27, 2018, 04:02:47 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 27, 2018, 10:27:01 AM
There is a Referendum debate on Late late Show tonight shud be interesting
Oh f**k, please...no
Wonder who'll be on it?
I'd imagine there will be a couple of reasonable people to whom facts are important and who have thought through the issues in a calm and considered manner on the Yes side, and a couple of backward, shouting, lying ignoramuses to whom facts are irrelevant on the No side.
A Various selection of facts are important on the Yes side, like they are on the No side,
I suspect tho that for many on both sides appearing to be associated or disassociated with a certain ideology and castigating those with a different opinion is more important than looking at the subject and forming your own opinion based on logically applying your own principles.
Err, yet more attempted false equivalences on GAABoard. I can assure you the Yes side are far more worried about women having control over their own bodies than they are what the other side thinks. To suggest otherwise is franklyin insulting.
Im sure you would never resort to ad hominen Syerfus ...oh hang on.... you don't but .... you just did?
It also seems that what your saying is the right to choose for a woman supersedes the right to life for a child, is that right?
Zzzzzzzzz.
Easy on the medication. Its meant for the sheep only
Another example of the potential for association with either side.
People standing outside GAA grounds.
https://twitter.com/SaveEighth/status/990148021416493057 (https://twitter.com/SaveEighth/status/990148021416493057)
Quote from: Jinxy on April 28, 2018, 12:05:27 PM
Another example of the potential for association with either side.
People standing outside GAA grounds.
https://twitter.com/SaveEighth/status/990148021416493057 (https://twitter.com/SaveEighth/status/990148021416493057)
Its natural that canvassers will go where the crowds are. It happens at every election.
What annoys me is when having a few pints in the clubhouse the local gombeen is brought in by the Chairman to press the flesh and we are told how he was great help getting the Lottery grant for the all weather pitch.
I see a video of Petie Harte in a Tyrone jersey and other 'GAA athletes' in their team jerseys supporting NO vote. Cynical use of their GAA status. Is also issue of sponsor's name on the jersey. Did they ask their counties-clubs or sponsors for endorsement to wear their kits? Tyrone jersey or not, Harte doesn't represent me as a member of the GAA in Tyrone.
Quote from: hardstation on April 30, 2018, 06:46:26 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 30, 2018, 12:12:40 PM
I see a video of Petie Harte in a Tyrone jersey and other 'GAA athletes' in their team jerseys supporting NO vote. Cynical use of their GAA status. Is also issue of sponsor's name on the jersey. Did they ask their counties-clubs or sponsors for endorsement to wear their kits? Tyrone jersey or not, Harte doesn't represent me as a member of the GAA in Tyrone.
You don't need permission to wear a jersey. I'd say you'd see loads of Tyrone tops on show at Sinn Fein or dissident rallies. It doesn't mean Tyrone GAA endorses these organisations or their views.
When it's a group called GAA athletes is exploiting position on county team to peddle his agenda. Sponsor name seems pixulated out so he knows the craic...
where did you see this longballin? and why would he even be wearing a tyrone jersey if its nothing to do with football?
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 30, 2018, 09:04:26 PM
where did you see this longballin? and why would he even be wearing a tyrone jersey if its nothing to do with football?
Is on a Facebook vote NO site. Yer man Forker and a few others on it too.
Quote from: longballin on April 30, 2018, 09:11:30 PM
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 30, 2018, 09:04:26 PM
where did you see this longballin? and why would he even be wearing a tyrone jersey if its nothing to do with football?
Is on a Facebook vote NO site. Yer man Forker and a few others on it too.
cheers.
just watched this 'gaelic athletes for life' video. they may have dropped the 'gaa' name but still very cynical use of the gaa. no suprise to see mickeys nephew having his say, but why did he have to wear a tyrone jersey to do it?
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 30, 2018, 10:25:18 PM
just watched this 'gaelic athletes for life' video. they may have dropped the 'gaa' name but still very cynical use of the gaa. no suprise to see mickeys nephew having his say, but why did he have to wear a tyrone jersey to do it?
Very thing I ask. When he plays he represents me but doesn't give him licence to assume he represents our political views
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 30, 2018, 10:25:18 PM
just watched this 'gaelic athletes for life' video. they may have dropped the 'gaa' name but still very cynical use of the gaa. no suprise to see mickeys nephew having his say, but why did he have to wear a tyrone jersey to do it?
So is it any relation you have it in for now too?
Quote from: imtommygunn on May 01, 2018, 07:33:45 AM
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 30, 2018, 10:25:18 PM
just watched this 'gaelic athletes for life' video. they may have dropped the 'gaa' name but still very cynical use of the gaa. no suprise to see mickeys nephew having his say, but why did he have to wear a tyrone jersey to do it?
So is it any relation you have it in for now too?
i have absolutely nothing against peter harte. i just dont like to see the tyrone jersey being used as political tool, especially in such a divisive referendum. same goes for any tyrone player.
The main reason I think the GPA will stay out of this (unlike the last referendum), and not seek the views of their members, is that it could reveal a significant North/South divide.
It is noticeable no big names have got involved from Dublin, Kerry, Mayo... very much a Nordie initiative though looks like only a few got involved
Quote from: longballin on May 01, 2018, 12:10:23 PM
It is noticeable no big names have got involved from Dublin, Kerry, Mayo... very much a Nordie initiative though looks like only a few got involved
Not surprising given that the GAA in a the North is inextricably connected to Catholicism and Nationalism
Quote from: whitey on May 01, 2018, 12:32:10 PM
Quote from: longballin on May 01, 2018, 12:10:23 PM
It is noticeable no big names have got involved from Dublin, Kerry, Mayo... very much a Nordie initiative though looks like only a few got involved
Not surprising given that the GAA in a the North is inextricably connected to Catholicism and Nationalism
GAA is a nationalist organisation... can be a nationalist without being a Catholic.
I think the players from Dublin, Kerry and mayo are to busy preparing for an assault on the all Ireland rather than getting side tracked by this stuff.
Quote from: southtyronegael on May 01, 2018, 12:45:58 PM
I think the players from Dublin, Kerry and mayo are to busy preparing for an assault on the all Ireland rather than getting side tracked by this stuff.
Totally
As far as I can see, we have current players from Tyrone, Armagh, Donegal and Antrim actively campaigning for a No vote.
Am I missing anyone?
Quote from: Jinxy on May 01, 2018, 01:10:52 PM
As far as I can see, we have current players from Tyrone, Armagh, Donegal and Antrim actively campaigning for a No vote.
Am I missing anyone?
Don't think so... is also a few camogs and your man Joe
Actually, speaking of Joe, do you remain a member of the GPA after you've retired from intercounty football?
Did Jayo get his MBA scholarship while he was still playing?
Quote from: longballin on May 01, 2018, 12:38:54 PM
Quote from: whitey on May 01, 2018, 12:32:10 PM
Quote from: longballin on May 01, 2018, 12:10:23 PM
It is noticeable no big names have got involved from Dublin, Kerry, Mayo... very much a Nordie initiative though looks like only a few got involved
Not surprising given that the GAA in a the North is inextricably connected to Catholicism and Nationalism
GAA is a nationalist organisation... can be a nationalist without being a Catholic.
And what percentage of Nationalists in the North are Protestants........0.00001?
Learn how to read while youre at it
Quote from: whitey on May 01, 2018, 01:25:21 PM
Quote from: longballin on May 01, 2018, 12:38:54 PM
Quote from: whitey on May 01, 2018, 12:32:10 PM
Quote from: longballin on May 01, 2018, 12:10:23 PM
It is noticeable no big names have got involved from Dublin, Kerry, Mayo... very much a Nordie initiative though looks like only a few got involved
Not surprising given that the GAA in a the North is inextricably connected to Catholicism and Nationalism
GAA is a nationalist organisation... can be a nationalist without being a Catholic.
And what percentage of Nationalists in the North are Protestants........0.00001?
Learn how to read while youre at it
Ooh get you Mr Angry : )
I've been disappointed that no GAA players bar Eamon McGee have put their heads above the parapet to come out on the Yes side.
The #men4yes campaign, with Richard Sadlier, Gordon D'Arcy and Andy Lee involved, would have been, and still is, a good opportunity.
I sense a lot of men who may privately back a Yes are reluctant to say much as they may sort of feel this issue can be filed away neatly into that easily forgettable box called "women's issues", and a lot of men tend not to like publicly voicing their thoughts in favour of women's rights.
As someone said most leading GAA players are busily preparing for the Hurling and Football Championships.
Many also presumably feel that how they'll vote in a secret ballot is nobody's business but their own.
Quote from: Rossfan on May 01, 2018, 01:52:02 PM
As someone said most leading GAA players are busily preparing for the Hurling and Football Championships.
Many also presumably feel that how they'll vote in a secret ballot is nobody's business but their own.
Yeah, just because so many media personalities are lining up behind the approved side of the debate in order to maintain their credibility within the D4 set doesn't mean that any GAA players have an obligation to do so.
Quote from: sid waddell on May 01, 2018, 01:28:58 PM
I've been disappointed that no GAA players bar Eamon McGee have put their heads above the parapet to come out on the Yes side.
The #men4yes campaign, with Richard Sadlier, Gordon D'Arcy and Andy Lee involved, would have been, and still is, a good opportunity.
I sense a lot of men who may privately back a Yes are reluctant to say much as they may sort of feel this issue can be filed away neatly into that easily forgettable box called "women's issues", and a lot of men tend not to like publicly voicing their thoughts in favour of women's rights.
I'm struggling to think of any 'current' sports people that have come out and advocated for a 'Yes' vote.
All of those #men4yes lads are retired, as is McGee obviously.
Quote from: longballin on May 01, 2018, 01:27:59 PM
Quote from: whitey on May 01, 2018, 01:25:21 PM
Quote from: longballin on May 01, 2018, 12:38:54 PM
Quote from: whitey on May 01, 2018, 12:32:10 PM
Quote from: longballin on May 01, 2018, 12:10:23 PM
It is noticeable no big names have got involved from Dublin, Kerry, Mayo... very much a Nordie initiative though looks like only a few got involved
Not surprising given that the GAA in a the North is inextricably connected to Catholicism and Nationalism
GAA is a nationalist organisation... can be a nationalist without being a Catholic.
And what percentage of Nationalists in the North are Protestants........0.00001?
Learn how to read while youre at it
Ooh get you Mr Angry : )
Your initial response just epitomizes the stupid, Johnny One Up, snarky, know it all attitude, that exists on this board.
(BTW .....I never said that Nationalism was the exclusive preserve of Catholics, I said it was inextricably connected .....big difference)
Quote from: whitey on May 01, 2018, 03:28:18 PM
Quote from: longballin on May 01, 2018, 01:27:59 PM
Quote from: whitey on May 01, 2018, 01:25:21 PM
Quote from: longballin on May 01, 2018, 12:38:54 PM
Quote from: whitey on May 01, 2018, 12:32:10 PM
Quote from: longballin on May 01, 2018, 12:10:23 PM
It is noticeable no big names have got involved from Dublin, Kerry, Mayo... very much a Nordie initiative though looks like only a few got involved
Not surprising given that the GAA in a the North is inextricably connected to Catholicism and Nationalism
GAA is a nationalist organisation... can be a nationalist without being a Catholic.
And what percentage of Nationalists in the North are Protestants........0.00001?
Learn how to read while youre at it
Ooh get you Mr Angry : )
Your initial response just epitomizes the stupid, Johnny One Up, snarky, know it all attitude, that exists on this board.
(BTW .....I never said that Nationalism was the exclusive preserve of Catholics, I said it was inextricably connected .....big difference)
And you could have said that without throwing the toys out of the pram
Quote from: longballin on April 30, 2018, 09:11:30 PM
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 30, 2018, 09:04:26 PM
where did you see this longballin? and why would he even be wearing a tyrone jersey if its nothing to do with football?
Is on a Facebook vote NO site. Yer man Forker and a few others on it too.
Person 1: Lads, does anyone know where I can actively seek out something to outrage me?
Person 2: Yeah, over there.
Person 1: Cheers
Person 2: No bother
Person 3: Well lads? Soft day.
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
Free Country entitled to air their views.
Quote from: BennyHarp on May 01, 2018, 07:52:36 PM
Quote from: longballin on April 30, 2018, 09:11:30 PM
Quote from: southtyronegael on April 30, 2018, 09:04:26 PM
where did you see this longballin? and why would he even be wearing a tyrone jersey if its nothing to do with football?
Is on a Facebook vote NO site. Yer man Forker and a few others on it too.
Person 1: Lads, does anyone know where I can actively seek out something to outrage me?
Person 2: Yeah, over there.
Person 1: Cheers
Person 2: No bother
Person Benny: Stop challenging what these GAA players are doing, it's makes me uncomfortable :o
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
I know this doesn't relate to you as you can't vote anyway, but that's a few times now people have said 'let the women vote and decide what to do', meaning they're not going to vote.
That would only make sense if no men voted, but the Mickey Harte types and the Eamon McGee types are all going to vote, so that makes that strategy a load of balls.
Now of course, rightly or wrongly, we have the right not to vote and people can choose not to exercise it. But if your view is that women should decide this, then you should ask the women closest to you how they are going to vote, and then vote accordingly.
Quote from: Hound on May 02, 2018, 07:30:37 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
I know this doesn't relate to you as you can't vote anyway, but that's a few times now people have said 'let the women vote and decide what to do', meaning they're not going to vote.
That would only make sense if no men voted, but the Mickey Harte types and the Eamon McGee types are all going to vote, so that makes that strategy a load of balls.
Now of course, rightly or wrongly, we have the right not to vote and people can choose not to exercise it. But if your view is that women should decide this, then you should ask the women closest to you how they are going to vote, and then vote accordingly.
I think it's ridiculous to say that men shouldn't vote. It takes two to make a pregnancy, and in the majority of cases there are will be two people involved in raising the child. If it goes to term, the baby will be some man's son or daughter. If the decision is made to terminate the pregnancy, in a lot of cases a man's input will also be a factor.
Women don't just "get" pregnant........
Quote from: Rossfan on May 02, 2018, 09:04:05 AM
Women don't just "get" pregnant........
I can think of one that did
The Holy Spirit was involved though.
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
Yup, totally agree.
Quote from: AZOffaly on May 02, 2018, 08:45:49 AM
Quote from: Hound on May 02, 2018, 07:30:37 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
I know this doesn't relate to you as you can't vote anyway, but that's a few times now people have said 'let the women vote and decide what to do', meaning they're not going to vote.
That would only make sense if no men voted, but the Mickey Harte types and the Eamon McGee types are all going to vote, so that makes that strategy a load of balls.
Now of course, rightly or wrongly, we have the right not to vote and people can choose not to exercise it. But if your view is that women should decide this, then you should ask the women closest to you how they are going to vote, and then vote accordingly.
I think it's ridiculous to say that men shouldn't vote. It takes two to make a pregnancy, and in the majority of cases there are will be two people involved in raising the child. If it goes to term, the baby will be some man's son or daughter. If the decision is made to terminate the pregnancy, in a lot of cases a man's input will also be a factor.
If a woman and a man come to a conultative, agreed decision about what to do with a pregnancy, great.
But if they don't, why should a man be able to tell a woman that she must carry his foetus to full term?
He isn't carrying it, she is.
So ultimately, it should always be the woman's decision.
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 10:11:32 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on May 02, 2018, 08:45:49 AM
Quote from: Hound on May 02, 2018, 07:30:37 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
I know this doesn't relate to you as you can't vote anyway, but that's a few times now people have said 'let the women vote and decide what to do', meaning they're not going to vote.
That would only make sense if no men voted, but the Mickey Harte types and the Eamon McGee types are all going to vote, so that makes that strategy a load of balls.
Now of course, rightly or wrongly, we have the right not to vote and people can choose not to exercise it. But if your view is that women should decide this, then you should ask the women closest to you how they are going to vote, and then vote accordingly.
I think it's ridiculous to say that men shouldn't vote. It takes two to make a pregnancy, and in the majority of cases there are will be two people involved in raising the child. If it goes to term, the baby will be some man's son or daughter. If the decision is made to terminate the pregnancy, in a lot of cases a man's input will also be a factor.
If a woman and a man come to a conultative, agreed decision about what to do with a pregnancy, great.
But if they don't, why should a man be able to tell a woman that she must carry his foetus to full term?
He isn't carrying it, she is.
So ultimately, it should always be the woman's decision.
My point is the man is involved. So to say they shouldn't be involved in a major societal referendum like this is crazy in my view, regardless of what way an individual man might vote.
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
+1
Quote from: Owenmoresider on May 02, 2018, 10:31:24 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
+1
Ultimately, yes, it is a woman's body issue.
What you're saying is that if a woman does not want a foetus in her womb, she should have no say over the matter and be forced to carry the pregnancy to term.
GAA players call for 'No' vote in abortion referendum
The latest video blurs logos of sponsors on the GAA sports clothing worn by those who appear in the video. A spokesman for the group said the logos were blurred "to avoid potential opposition leading to a sidetracked debate".
https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/05/02/news/gaa-players-call-for-no-vote-in-abortion-referendum-1318772/ (https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2018/05/02/news/gaa-players-call-for-no-vote-in-abortion-referendum-1318772/)
Quick question, Paddy Burns and Aidan Forker are wearing their GPS vests in the video.
Did they record this at an Armagh training session?
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 10:11:32 AM
Quote from: AZOffaly on May 02, 2018, 08:45:49 AM
Quote from: Hound on May 02, 2018, 07:30:37 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
I know this doesn't relate to you as you can't vote anyway, but that's a few times now people have said 'let the women vote and decide what to do', meaning they're not going to vote.
That would only make sense if no men voted, but the Mickey Harte types and the Eamon McGee types are all going to vote, so that makes that strategy a load of balls.
Now of course, rightly or wrongly, we have the right not to vote and people can choose not to exercise it. But if your view is that women should decide this, then you should ask the women closest to you how they are going to vote, and then vote accordingly.
I think it's ridiculous to say that men shouldn't vote. It takes two to make a pregnancy, and in the majority of cases there are will be two people involved in raising the child. If it goes to term, the baby will be some man's son or daughter. If the decision is made to terminate the pregnancy, in a lot of cases a man's input will also be a factor.
If a woman and a man come to a conultative, agreed decision about what to do with a pregnancy, great.
But if they don't, why should a man be able to tell a woman that she must carry his foetus to full term?
He isn't carrying it, she is.
So ultimately, it should always be the woman's decision.
Why should a woman be able to tell a man that she's not going to carry his baby to full term? There's two people involved in a pregnancy.
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 11:19:00 AM
Why should a woman be able to tell a man that she's not going to carry his baby to full term?
Have you read this sentence back to yourself?
Have you checked what century it is?
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:28:00 AM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 11:19:00 AM
Why should a woman be able to tell a man that she's not going to carry his baby to full term?
Have you read this sentence back to yourself?
Have you checked what century it is?
It's the 21st century. And in the 16th century, there were still two people involved in a pregnancy. Nothing has changed and it won't change.
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 12:13:19 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:28:00 AM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 11:19:00 AM
Why should a woman be able to tell a man that she's not going to carry his baby to full term?
Have you read this sentence back to yourself?
Have you checked what century it is?
It's the 21st century. And in the 16th century, there were still two people involved in a pregnancy. Nothing has changed and it won't change.
It is indeed the 21st century.
But clearly not for you, given that you believe that women should have to answer to men about whether they want to carry a pregnancy to full term or not.
By all means continue to live in your 16th century fantasy world if that's what you really want.
But there's a real world going on around you. It would be much better for you to try to live in it.
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:03:39 AM
Quote from: Owenmoresider on May 02, 2018, 10:31:24 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
+1
Ultimately, yes, it is a woman's body issue.
What you're saying is that if a woman does not want a foetus in her womb, she should have no say over the matter and be forced to carry the pregnancy to term.
Where did I say that?
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 12:30:47 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 12:13:19 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:28:00 AM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 11:19:00 AM
Why should a woman be able to tell a man that she's not going to carry his baby to full term?
Have you read this sentence back to yourself?
Have you checked what century it is?
It's the 21st century. And in the 16th century, there were still two people involved in a pregnancy. Nothing has changed and it won't change.
It is indeed the 21st century.
But clearly not for you, given that you believe that women should have to answer to men about whether they want to carry a pregnancy to full term or not.
By all means continue to live in your 16th century fantasy world if that's what you really want.
But there's a real world going on around you. It would be much better for you to try to live in it.
You make it sound like "what the man says, goes". That's not what I was implying.
Regardless, if a woman aborts a child off her own bat, she's a murderer. If the man and woman agree to abort, they're both murderers. That's how I see it.
Can we please stay on topic and not start this again?
Take it to facebook/twitter.
Wow, I watched that video, and it really stuck in my craw.
Why should I take advice on a grave social issue from lads whose only claim to fame is having fairly decent hand to eye coordination and athletic builds?
The GAA is a sporting association and these lads are good at playing games - I wouldn't be asking them to perform brain surgery the next time I need it.
The entitlement of it. I want my GAA players to take scores and burst opponents. After that I can take them or leave them. Whether they were advocating a Yes or a No, they are doing it by leveraging the very organisation that gave them the profile they are abusing. I don't care what they do or say as private citizens.
They can rev up and f$%k off as far as I am concerned.
I think the people pulling the strings of the 'No' campaign realise that their biggest difficulty is engaging with young people on this issue.
You're not going to get musicians or sports stars to back you, and young people have relatively little or no truck with the Church, so the only people that would 'speak' to that younger demographic are sports people.
If you were a young lad who was largely indifferent to the issue and as a result unlikely to vote, maybe someone like Peter Harte might sway you.
If there was an equivalent group advocating for a 'Yes' vote, they would probably be equally likely to sway you.
This isn't about changing anyone's mind, it's about getting people to vote who aren't that pushed either way.
Quote from: easytiger95 on May 02, 2018, 04:21:27 PM
Wow, I watched that video, and it really stuck in my craw.
Why should I take advice on a grave social issue from lads whose only claim to fame is having fairly decent hand to eye coordination and athletic builds?
The GAA is a sporting association and these lads are good at playing games - I wouldn't be asking them to perform brain surgery the next time I need it.
The entitlement of it. I want my GAA players to take scores and burst opponents. After that I can take them or leave them. Whether they were advocating a Yes or a No, they are doing it by leveraging the very organisation that gave them the profile they are abusing. I don't care what they do or say as private citizens.
They can rev up and f$%k off as far as I am concerned.
Agreed. Shameful carry-on.
Quote from: longballin on May 02, 2018, 04:54:02 PM
Quote from: easytiger95 on May 02, 2018, 04:21:27 PM
Wow, I watched that video, and it really stuck in my craw.
Why should I take advice on a grave social issue from lads whose only claim to fame is having fairly decent hand to eye coordination and athletic builds?
The GAA is a sporting association and these lads are good at playing games - I wouldn't be asking them to perform brain surgery the next time I need it.
The entitlement of it. I want my GAA players to take scores and burst opponents. After that I can take them or leave them. Whether they were advocating a Yes or a No, they are doing it by leveraging the very organisation that gave them the profile they are abusing. I don't care what they do or say as private citizens.
They can rev up and f$%k off as far as I am concerned.
Agreed. Shameful carry-on.
Agreed. And I feel the same way about actors, musicians and journalists. Why should I give a f**k what some lad in ER says about politics?
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 12:30:47 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 12:13:19 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:28:00 AM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 11:19:00 AM
Why should a woman be able to tell a man that she's not going to carry his baby to full term?
Have you read this sentence back to yourself?
Have you checked what century it is?
It's the 21st century. And in the 16th century, there were still two people involved in a pregnancy. Nothing has changed and it won't change.
It is indeed the 21st century.
But clearly not for you, given that you believe that women should have to answer to men about whether they want to carry a pregnancy to full term or not.
By all means continue to live in your 16th century fantasy world if that's what you really want.
But there's a real world going on around you. It would be much better for you to try to live in it.
You make it sound like "what the man says, goes". That's not what I was implying.
Regardless, if a woman aborts a child off her own bat, she's a murderer. If the man and woman agree to abort, they're both murderers. That's how I see it.
That's exactly what you were implying.
Given that you say women who have abortions are murderers, would you like to see the bans on travel and access to information about abortion to be re-implemented?
Do you believe women who take the morning after pill should be imprisoned for 14 years?
Quote from: AZOffaly on May 02, 2018, 04:59:07 PM
Quote from: longballin on May 02, 2018, 04:54:02 PM
Quote from: easytiger95 on May 02, 2018, 04:21:27 PM
Wow, I watched that video, and it really stuck in my craw.
Why should I take advice on a grave social issue from lads whose only claim to fame is having fairly decent hand to eye coordination and athletic builds?
The GAA is a sporting association and these lads are good at playing games - I wouldn't be asking them to perform brain surgery the next time I need it.
The entitlement of it. I want my GAA players to take scores and burst opponents. After that I can take them or leave them. Whether they were advocating a Yes or a No, they are doing it by leveraging the very organisation that gave them the profile they are abusing. I don't care what they do or say as private citizens.
They can rev up and f$%k off as far as I am concerned.
Agreed. Shameful carry-on.
Agreed. And I feel the same way about actors, musicians and journalists. Why should I give a f**k what some lad in ER says about politics?
The medical people who spoke so well on the Late Late Show is who I listen to. YES.
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 05:25:56 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 12:30:47 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 12:13:19 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:28:00 AM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 11:19:00 AM
Why should a woman be able to tell a man that she's not going to carry his baby to full term?
Have you read this sentence back to yourself?
Have you checked what century it is?
It's the 21st century. And in the 16th century, there were still two people involved in a pregnancy. Nothing has changed and it won't change.
It is indeed the 21st century.
But clearly not for you, given that you believe that women should have to answer to men about whether they want to carry a pregnancy to full term or not.
By all means continue to live in your 16th century fantasy world if that's what you really want.
But there's a real world going on around you. It would be much better for you to try to live in it.
You make it sound like "what the man says, goes". That's not what I was implying.
Regardless, if a woman aborts a child off her own bat, she's a murderer. If the man and woman agree to abort, they're both murderers. That's how I see it.
That's exactly what you were implying.
Given that you say women who have abortions are murderers, would you like to see the bans on travel and access to information about abortion to be re-implemented?
Do you believe women who take the morning after pill should be imprisoned for 14 years?
It wasn't.
At the end of the day, abortion is murder. Someone going to England for one might not be breaking UK law, but it's still murder. You can't deny that.
And if abortion becomes legal in Ireland, people won't bat an eyelid about it. Because it'll be legal, in people's heads, it will then become "acceptable". It's far from acceptable.
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 05:48:46 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 05:25:56 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 12:30:47 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 12:13:19 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:28:00 AM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 11:19:00 AM
Why should a woman be able to tell a man that she's not going to carry his baby to full term?
Have you read this sentence back to yourself?
Have you checked what century it is?
It's the 21st century. And in the 16th century, there were still two people involved in a pregnancy. Nothing has changed and it won't change.
It is indeed the 21st century.
But clearly not for you, given that you believe that women should have to answer to men about whether they want to carry a pregnancy to full term or not.
By all means continue to live in your 16th century fantasy world if that's what you really want.
But there's a real world going on around you. It would be much better for you to try to live in it.
You make it sound like "what the man says, goes". That's not what I was implying.
Regardless, if a woman aborts a child off her own bat, she's a murderer. If the man and woman agree to abort, they're both murderers. That's how I see it.
That's exactly what you were implying.
Given that you say women who have abortions are murderers, would you like to see the bans on travel and access to information about abortion to be re-implemented?
Do you believe women who take the morning after pill should be imprisoned for 14 years?
It wasn't.
At the end of the day, abortion is murder. Someone going to England for one might not be breaking UK law, but it's still murder. You can't deny that.
And if abortion becomes legal in Ireland, people won't bat an eyelid about it. Because it'll be legal, in people's heads, it will then become "acceptable". It's far from acceptable.
Given that you say women who have abortions are murderers, would you like to see the bans on travel and access to information about abortion to be re-implemented?
Do you believe women who take the morning after pill should be imprisoned for 14 years?
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 05:48:46 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 05:25:56 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 12:30:47 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 12:13:19 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:28:00 AM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 11:19:00 AM
Why should a woman be able to tell a man that she's not going to carry his baby to full term?
Have you read this sentence back to yourself?
Have you checked what century it is?
It's the 21st century. And in the 16th century, there were still two people involved in a pregnancy. Nothing has changed and it won't change.
It is indeed the 21st century.
But clearly not for you, given that you believe that women should have to answer to men about whether they want to carry a pregnancy to full term or not.
By all means continue to live in your 16th century fantasy world if that's what you really want.
But there's a real world going on around you. It would be much better for you to try to live in it.
You make it sound like "what the man says, goes". That's not what I was implying.
Regardless, if a woman aborts a child off her own bat, she's a murderer. If the man and woman agree to abort, they're both murderers. That's how I see it.
That's exactly what you were implying.
Given that you say women who have abortions are murderers, would you like to see the bans on travel and access to information about abortion to be re-implemented?
Do you believe women who take the morning after pill should be imprisoned for 14 years?
It wasn't.
At the end of the day, abortion is murder. Someone going to England for one might not be breaking UK law, but it's still murder. You can't deny that.
And if abortion becomes legal in Ireland, people won't bat an eyelid about it. Because it'll be legal, in people's heads, it will then become "acceptable". It's far from acceptable.
It's incredibly weak and incredibly condescending arguments like this that have helped drive so many potential No voters towards Yes over the last two decades.
Quote from: easytiger95 on May 02, 2018, 04:21:27 PM
Wow, I watched that video, and it really stuck in my craw.
Why should I take advice on a grave social issue from lads whose only claim to fame is having fairly decent hand to eye coordination and athletic builds?
The GAA is a sporting association and these lads are good at playing games - I wouldn't be asking them to perform brain surgery the next time I need it.
The entitlement of it. I want my GAA players to take scores and burst opponents. After that I can take them or leave them. Whether they were advocating a Yes or a No, they are doing it by leveraging the very organisation that gave them the profile they are abusing. I don't care what they do or say as private citizens.
They can rev up and f$%k off as far as I am concerned.
And this is the sort of vitriol and venom I referred to in a previous post on the matter. Respect to those that participated, knowing almost certainly that this could be the sort of reaction they would receive on social media for voicing their opinion.
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 05:49:58 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 05:48:46 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 05:25:56 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 12:42:32 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 12:30:47 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 12:13:19 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:28:00 AM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 02, 2018, 11:19:00 AM
Why should a woman be able to tell a man that she's not going to carry his baby to full term?
Have you read this sentence back to yourself?
Have you checked what century it is?
It's the 21st century. And in the 16th century, there were still two people involved in a pregnancy. Nothing has changed and it won't change.
It is indeed the 21st century.
But clearly not for you, given that you believe that women should have to answer to men about whether they want to carry a pregnancy to full term or not.
By all means continue to live in your 16th century fantasy world if that's what you really want.
But there's a real world going on around you. It would be much better for you to try to live in it.
You make it sound like "what the man says, goes". That's not what I was implying.
Regardless, if a woman aborts a child off her own bat, she's a murderer. If the man and woman agree to abort, they're both murderers. That's how I see it.
That's exactly what you were implying.
Given that you say women who have abortions are murderers, would you like to see the bans on travel and access to information about abortion to be re-implemented?
Do you believe women who take the morning after pill should be imprisoned for 14 years?
It wasn't.
At the end of the day, abortion is murder. Someone going to England for one might not be breaking UK law, but it's still murder. You can't deny that.
And if abortion becomes legal in Ireland, people won't bat an eyelid about it. Because it'll be legal, in people's heads, it will then become "acceptable". It's far from acceptable.
Given that you say women who have abortions are murderers, would you like to see the bans on travel and access to information about abortion to be re-implemented?
Do you believe women who take the morning after pill should be imprisoned for 14 years?
How can you stop that?
How would you know who took what?
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on May 02, 2018, 06:40:54 PM
Quote from: easytiger95 on May 02, 2018, 04:21:27 PM
Wow, I watched that video, and it really stuck in my craw.
Why should I take advice on a grave social issue from lads whose only claim to fame is having fairly decent hand to eye coordination and athletic builds?
The GAA is a sporting association and these lads are good at playing games - I wouldn't be asking them to perform brain surgery the next time I need it.
The entitlement of it. I want my GAA players to take scores and burst opponents. After that I can take them or leave them. Whether they were advocating a Yes or a No, they are doing it by leveraging the very organisation that gave them the profile they are abusing. I don't care what they do or say as private citizens.
They can rev up and f$%k off as far as I am concerned.
And this is the sort of vitriol and venom I referred to in a previous post on the matter. Respect to those that participated, knowing almost certainly that this could be the sort of reaction they would receive on social media for voicing their opinion.
You've missed the point. I have no problem with them expressing their views as private citizens, whatever their opinion. I have a huge problem with them hijacking a sporting organisation, conflating their views with the aims of the organisation- under the guise of "inclusivity", no less. The mind boggles at the cynicism.
So if they decide to insert themselves into a debate in such a dishonest way, they can have all the vitriol and venom i can give them.
They are big boys, aren't they, not snowflakes?
Quote from: easytiger95 on May 02, 2018, 09:27:31 PM
You've missed the point. I have no problem with them expressing their views as private citizens, whatever their opinion. I have a huge problem with them hijacking a sporting organisation, conflating their views with the aims of the organisation- under the guise of "inclusivity", no less. The mind boggles at the cynicism.
So if they decide to insert themselves into a debate in such a dishonest way, they can have all the vitriol and venom i can give them.
They are big boys, aren't they, not snowflakes?
I raised the issue of the venom and vitriol being directed against these people. They didn't. They will almost certainly have known the vitriol and venom the likes of yourself would direct their way, but yet they were still prepared to stand up for their beliefs by putting their heads above the parapet. Respect to them for that.
Snowflakes? I don't think so.
It is my belief that they genuinely believe the words they are speaking and are doing so on what they - and I - believe is a life and death issue, and genuinely believe that that is consistent with the ethos of our organisation. You can put YOUR interpretation of their actions in whatever way you want for whatever cause you want. The manner in which you do though will give as much insight into yourself as those it's directed against.
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on May 02, 2018, 10:54:52 PM
Quote from: easytiger95 on May 02, 2018, 09:27:31 PM
You've missed the point. I have no problem with them expressing their views as private citizens, whatever their opinion. I have a huge problem with them hijacking a sporting organisation, conflating their views with the aims of the organisation- under the guise of "inclusivity", no less. The mind boggles at the cynicism.
So if they decide to insert themselves into a debate in such a dishonest way, they can have all the vitriol and venom i can give them.
They are big boys, aren't they, not snowflakes?
I raised the issue of the venom and vitriol being directed against these people. They didn't. They will almost certainly have known the vitriol and venom the likes of yourself would direct their way, but yet they were still prepared to stand up for their beliefs by putting their heads above the parapet. Respect to them for that.
Snowflakes? I don't think so.
It is my belief that they genuinely believe the words they are speaking and are doing so on what they - and I - believe is a life and death issue, and genuinely believe that that is consistent with the ethos of our organisation. You can put YOUR interpretation of their actions in whatever way you want for whatever cause you want. The manner in which you do though will give as much insight into yourself as those it's directed against.
Which is?
Quote from: Jinxy on May 02, 2018, 11:26:01 PM
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on May 02, 2018, 10:54:52 PM
Quote from: easytiger95 on May 02, 2018, 09:27:31 PM
You've missed the point. I have no problem with them expressing their views as private citizens, whatever their opinion. I have a huge problem with them hijacking a sporting organisation, conflating their views with the aims of the organisation- under the guise of "inclusivity", no less. The mind boggles at the cynicism.
So if they decide to insert themselves into a debate in such a dishonest way, they can have all the vitriol and venom i can give them.
They are big boys, aren't they, not snowflakes?
I raised the issue of the venom and vitriol being directed against these people. They didn't. They will almost certainly have known the vitriol and venom the likes of yourself would direct their way, but yet they were still prepared to stand up for their beliefs by putting their heads above the parapet. Respect to them for that.
Snowflakes? I don't think so.
It is my belief that they genuinely believe the words they are speaking and are doing so on what they - and I - believe is a life and death issue, and genuinely believe that that is consistent with the ethos of our organisation. You can put YOUR interpretation of their actions in whatever way you want for whatever cause you want. The manner in which you do though will give as much insight into yourself as those it's directed against.
Which is?
Begrudgery.
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on May 02, 2018, 10:54:52 PM
Quote from: easytiger95 on May 02, 2018, 09:27:31 PM
You've missed the point. I have no problem with them expressing their views as private citizens, whatever their opinion. I have a huge problem with them hijacking a sporting organisation, conflating their views with the aims of the organisation- under the guise of "inclusivity", no less. The mind boggles at the cynicism.
So if they decide to insert themselves into a debate in such a dishonest way, they can have all the vitriol and venom i can give them.
They are big boys, aren't they, not snowflakes?
I raised the issue of the venom and vitriol being directed against these people. They didn't. They will almost certainly have known the vitriol and venom the likes of yourself would direct their way, but yet they were still prepared to stand up for their beliefs by putting their heads above the parapet. Respect to them for that.
Snowflakes? I don't think so.
It is my belief that they genuinely believe the words they are speaking and are doing so on what they - and I - believe is a life and death issue, and genuinely believe that that is consistent with the ethos of our organisation. You can put YOUR interpretation of their actions in whatever way you want for whatever cause you want. The manner in which you do though will give as much insight into yourself as those it's directed against.
Is absolutely nothing to do with the GAA which doesn't belong to the Hartes or No campaigners
Exactly.
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on May 02, 2018, 10:54:52 PM
Quote from: easytiger95 on May 02, 2018, 09:27:31 PM
You've missed the point. I have no problem with them expressing their views as private citizens, whatever their opinion. I have a huge problem with them hijacking a sporting organisation, conflating their views with the aims of the organisation- under the guise of "inclusivity", no less. The mind boggles at the cynicism.
So if they decide to insert themselves into a debate in such a dishonest way, they can have all the vitriol and venom i can give them.
They are big boys, aren't they, not snowflakes?
I raised the issue of the venom and vitriol being directed against these people. They didn't. They will almost certainly have known the vitriol and venom the likes of yourself would direct their way, but yet they were still prepared to stand up for their beliefs by putting their heads above the parapet. Respect to them for that.
Rufus, any 'venom and vitriol' (if you could even call it that) directed at Mickey & Co. isn't because they are supporting the 'No' side.
It's how they have gone about it.
The 'Gaelic Athletes for a No Vote' campaign (or was it 'GAA athletes'?) has been a cynical attempt to piggy-back on the good name of the association we are all part of from day one.
Can you tell me why the campaign was launched with a coaching session for children?
Do you think that's appropriate?
Can you tell me why the press release made several references to the GAA's official strategic vision in an attempt to tie it in with the objectives of this group?
Do you think that's appropriate?
Can you tell me why Mickey Harte used an empty GAA pitch, without the club's permission, to record a video for the 'No' campaign?
Do you think that's appropriate?
Can you tell me why almost all of the individuals in this group are wearing official county gear (albeit with the sponsors blurred) in the promotional videos produced for the campaign?
Do you think that's appropriate?
Actually, rather than answering all of those questions, just answer one.
WHAT HAS THIS REFERENDUM GOT TO DO WITH THE GAA?If you think it has nothing to do with the GAA, then surely you can understand why the actions of the 'Gaelic Athletes for a No Vote' group has rubbed so many ordinary GAA people up the wrong way.
Knowing Mickey Harte is a man of very strong faith, I would 100% expect him to be against repealing the 8th amendment.
I would also fully expect him to publicly campaign against repealing the 8th amendment.
It was possible for him to do this without hijacking the good name of the GAA.
Quote from: Rufus T Firefly on May 02, 2018, 10:54:52 PM
Quote from: easytiger95 on May 02, 2018, 09:27:31 PM
You've missed the point. I have no problem with them expressing their views as private citizens, whatever their opinion. I have a huge problem with them hijacking a sporting organisation, conflating their views with the aims of the organisation- under the guise of "inclusivity", no less. The mind boggles at the cynicism.
So if they decide to insert themselves into a debate in such a dishonest way, they can have all the vitriol and venom i can give them.
They are big boys, aren't they, not snowflakes?
I raised the issue of the venom and vitriol being directed against these people. They didn't. They will almost certainly have known the vitriol and venom the likes of yourself would direct their way, but yet they were still prepared to stand up for their beliefs by putting their heads above the parapet. Respect to them for that.
Snowflakes? I don't think so.
It is my belief that they genuinely believe the words they are speaking and are doing so on what they - and I - believe is a life and death issue, and genuinely believe that that is consistent with the ethos of our organisation. You can put YOUR interpretation of their actions in whatever way you want for whatever cause you want. The manner in which you do though will give as much insight into yourself as those it's directed against.
Ah, so you're the snowflake.
It is an insult to the GAA what they did. And of course they are entitled to their opinion but trying to hijack the GAA to peddle their agenda was cynical.
Also, 'Gaelic Athletes for a No Vote' are a group within a group.
They are part of the 'Savethe8th' campaign, which John McGuirk is the communications director for.
https://twitter.com/john_mcguirk/status/987697838669942785 (https://twitter.com/john_mcguirk/status/987697838669942785)
They could simply campaign under the 'Savethe8th' banner, just as Eamon McGee campaigns under the 'Donegal Together For Yes' banner, and nobody would have an issue with that.
Quote from: longballin on May 03, 2018, 12:07:20 PM
It is an insult to the GAA what they did. And of course they are entitled to their opinion but trying to hijack the GAA to peddle their agenda was cynical.
Would you have a problem if it was "GAA athletes for a Yes vote"?
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:03:39 AM
Quote from: Owenmoresider on May 02, 2018, 10:31:24 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
+1
Ultimately, yes, it is a woman's body issue.
What you're saying is that if a woman does not want a foetus in her womb, she should have no say over the matter and be forced to carry the pregnancy to term.
No, it isn't. The woman's appendix is her body, her ear is her body, the baby is the baby's body.
Quote from: RedHand88 on May 07, 2018, 09:34:52 AM
Quote from: longballin on May 03, 2018, 12:07:20 PM
It is an insult to the GAA what they did. And of course they are entitled to their opinion but trying to hijack the GAA to peddle their agenda was cynical.
Would you have a problem if it was "GAA athletes for a Yes vote"?
I certainly would, the GAA is about football and hurling and everyone involved with them, leave religion and politics at the door please!!!
Exactly.
Plenty of Yes and No groupings about for anyone wishing to campaign in either direction
Quote from: RedHand88 on May 07, 2018, 09:36:51 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:03:39 AM
Quote from: Owenmoresider on May 02, 2018, 10:31:24 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
+1
Ultimately, yes, it is a woman's body issue.
What you're saying is that if a woman does not want a foetus in her womb, she should have no say over the matter and be forced to carry the pregnancy to term.
No, it isn't. The woman's appendix is her body, her ear is her body, the baby is the baby's body.
A 12 week old foetus is not a baby.
A baby is a baby.
Does the Roman Catholic Church offer funerals for zygotes? Do zygotes which are aborted by a pill go to heaven?
Or do they go to "limbo", as the Roman Catholic Church used to tell us?
Or is it only zygotes and foetuses aborted after April 20th, 2007, when the Roman Catholic Church abandoned the concept of "limbo", which go to heaven rather than limbo?
Do you celebrate your birthday or your conception day?
If you celebrate the former, shouldn't you really be celebrating the latter if you're being consistent?
Quote from: sid waddell on May 07, 2018, 02:39:55 PM
Quote from: RedHand88 on May 07, 2018, 09:36:51 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:03:39 AM
Quote from: Owenmoresider on May 02, 2018, 10:31:24 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
+1
Ultimately, yes, it is a woman's body issue.
What you're saying is that if a woman does not want a foetus in her womb, she should have no say over the matter and be forced to carry the pregnancy to term.
No, it isn't. The woman's appendix is her body, her ear is her body, the baby is the baby's body.
A 12 week old foetus is not a baby.
A baby is a baby.
Does the Roman Catholic Church offer funerals for zygotes? Do zygotes which are aborted by a pill go to heaven?
Or do they go to "limbo", as the Roman Catholic Church used to tell us?
Or is it only zygotes and foetuses aborted after April 20th, 2007, when the Roman Catholic Church abandoned the concept of "limbo", which go to heaven rather than limbo?
Do you celebrate your birthday or your conception day?
If you celebrate the former, shouldn't you really be celebrating the latter if you're being consistent?
A 12 week old foetus, same as a 1 hour old embryo is.... a human being.
It will become a baby, enfant, toddler, child, adolescent, adult.
Not sure what theology has to do with this, looks like some sort of feebly attempt at a strawman.
Quote from: sid waddell on May 07, 2018, 02:39:55 PM
Quote from: RedHand88 on May 07, 2018, 09:36:51 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:03:39 AM
Quote from: Owenmoresider on May 02, 2018, 10:31:24 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
+1
Ultimately, yes, it is a woman's body issue.
What you're saying is that if a woman does not want a foetus in her womb, she should have no say over the matter and be forced to carry the pregnancy to term.
No, it isn't. The woman's appendix is her body, her ear is her body, the baby is the baby's body.
A 12 week old foetus is not a baby.
A baby is a baby.
Does the Roman Catholic Church offer funerals for zygotes? Do zygotes which are aborted by a pill go to heaven?
Or do they go to "limbo", as the Roman Catholic Church used to tell us?
Or is it only zygotes and foetuses aborted after April 20th, 2007, when the Roman Catholic Church abandoned the concept of "limbo", which go to heaven rather than limbo?
Do you celebrate your birthday or your conception day?
If you celebrate the former, shouldn't you really be celebrating the latter if you're being consistent?
If your partner/spouse was 12 weeks pregnant and was killed by a drink driver would you have the same opinion?
Also that is an interesting point about the birthdays Sid
Now obviously birthdays are cultural so basically we celebrate them because we always have, and the conception day isn't known anyway so it would sort of impossible.
Anyway my point about it is that children born premature will medically have their age adjusted to calculate baby development.
So in the medical world they are already doing this as the age of conception gives true age.
Quote from: omaghjoe on May 07, 2018, 03:52:59 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 07, 2018, 02:39:55 PM
Quote from: RedHand88 on May 07, 2018, 09:36:51 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:03:39 AM
Quote from: Owenmoresider on May 02, 2018, 10:31:24 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
+1
Ultimately, yes, it is a woman's body issue.
What you're saying is that if a woman does not want a foetus in her womb, she should have no say over the matter and be forced to carry the pregnancy to term.
No, it isn't. The woman's appendix is her body, her ear is her body, the baby is the baby's body.
A 12 week old foetus is not a baby.
A baby is a baby.
Does the Roman Catholic Church offer funerals for zygotes? Do zygotes which are aborted by a pill go to heaven?
Or do they go to "limbo", as the Roman Catholic Church used to tell us?
Or is it only zygotes and foetuses aborted after April 20th, 2007, when the Roman Catholic Church abandoned the concept of "limbo", which go to heaven rather than limbo?
Do you celebrate your birthday or your conception day?
If you celebrate the former, shouldn't you really be celebrating the latter if you're being consistent?
A 12 week old foetus, same as a 1 hour old embryo is.... a human being.
It will become a baby, enfant, toddler, child, adolescent, adult.
Not sure what theology has to do with this, looks like some sort of feebly attempt at a strawman.
Yes I agree.
This "a 12 week embryo isn't a baby" thing is the line the eugenisists spin to the population to justify abortion. And people end up believing it themselves, and it suits them because it removes the guilt. They can nip out for an abortion on their lunch hour, and don't think twice about it. "Ah sure it's not even a baby."
Quote from: omaghjoe on May 07, 2018, 03:52:59 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 07, 2018, 02:39:55 PM
Quote from: RedHand88 on May 07, 2018, 09:36:51 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:03:39 AM
Quote from: Owenmoresider on May 02, 2018, 10:31:24 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
+1
Ultimately, yes, it is a woman's body issue.
What you're saying is that if a woman does not want a foetus in her womb, she should have no say over the matter and be forced to carry the pregnancy to term.
No, it isn't. The woman's appendix is her body, her ear is her body, the baby is the baby's body.
A 12 week old foetus is not a baby.
A baby is a baby.
Does the Roman Catholic Church offer funerals for zygotes? Do zygotes which are aborted by a pill go to heaven?
Or do they go to "limbo", as the Roman Catholic Church used to tell us?
Or is it only zygotes and foetuses aborted after April 20th, 2007, when the Roman Catholic Church abandoned the concept of "limbo", which go to heaven rather than limbo?
Do you celebrate your birthday or your conception day?
If you celebrate the former, shouldn't you really be celebrating the latter if you're being consistent?
A 12 week old foetus, same as a 1 hour old embryo is.... a human being.
It will become a baby, enfant, toddler, child, adolescent, adult.
Not sure what theology has to do with this, looks like some sort of feebly attempt at a strawman.
"A 1 hour old embryo is a human being."
This just gets better. ;D
I mention theology because it clearly has everything to do with your worldview, mate.
But even the Roman Catholic Church has a serious case of cognitive dissonance on this, given that it does not offer baptism for embryos or foetuses.
So the reality is that not even the Roman Catholic Church considers foetuses to be human beings.
A human being is somebody who has been born.
As an aside, here's an interesting little thought experiment.
When do you think children's allowance payments should start?
From birth or conception?
And why do you think women should be denied essential healthcare under the 8th Amendment, even if they are
not pregnant?
Because I can tell you right now, that actually happens in this country.
Quote from: BennyCake on May 07, 2018, 04:24:26 PM
They can nip out for an abortion on their lunch hour, and don't think twice about it. "Ah sure it's not even a baby."
You have a truly abhorrent, neanderthal view of women.
Quote from: sid waddell on May 07, 2018, 07:00:50 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on May 07, 2018, 03:52:59 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 07, 2018, 02:39:55 PM
Quote from: RedHand88 on May 07, 2018, 09:36:51 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:03:39 AM
Quote from: Owenmoresider on May 02, 2018, 10:31:24 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
+1
Ultimately, yes, it is a woman's body issue.
What you're saying is that if a woman does not want a foetus in her womb, she should have no say over the matter and be forced to carry the pregnancy to term.
No, it isn't. The woman's appendix is her body, her ear is her body, the baby is the baby's body.
A 12 week old foetus is not a baby.
A baby is a baby.
Does the Roman Catholic Church offer funerals for zygotes? Do zygotes which are aborted by a pill go to heaven?
Or do they go to "limbo", as the Roman Catholic Church used to tell us?
Or is it only zygotes and foetuses aborted after April 20th, 2007, when the Roman Catholic Church abandoned the concept of "limbo", which go to heaven rather than limbo?
Do you celebrate your birthday or your conception day?
If you celebrate the former, shouldn't you really be celebrating the latter if you're being consistent?
A 12 week old foetus, same as a 1 hour old embryo is.... a human being.
It will become a baby, enfant, toddler, child, adolescent, adult.
Not sure what theology has to do with this, looks like some sort of feebly attempt at a strawman.
"A 1 hour old embryo is a human being."
This just gets better. ;D
I mention theology because it clearly has everything to do with your worldview, mate.
But even the Roman Catholic Church has a serious case of cognitive dissonance on this, given that it does not offer baptism for embryos or foetuses.
So the reality is that not even the Roman Catholic Church considers foetuses to be human beings.
A human being is somebody who has been born.
As an aside, here's an interesting little thought experiment.
When do you think children's allowance payments should start?
From birth or conception?
And why do you think women should be denied essential healthcare under the 8th Amendment, even if they are not pregnant?
Because I can tell you right now, that actually happens in this country.
You werent even replying to me but its nice to know that you were thinking of me specifically.
Anyway I have clearly set out my viewpoint without ever mentioning religion so your wrong. and to bring that into it is irrelevant a strawman.
A human being's lifecycle starts at conception, anything after that is just different stages in the lifecycle.... its fairly basic biology
Chidren's allowance should be started when they start doing chores :P
Nah seriously pregant mothers should be given additional support to support the baby and the birth...time off work, additional food payments, birthing/pregnancy education/support etc, especially from mid 2 trimester onwards. Its fundamentally different support required for raising a child but yes it should be there from the state.
I don't think any person should be denied basic healthcare and I would be in favour of ammending the wording of the 8th.... if right of life was still afforded to the unborn, that is difficult I agree but no one seems to be even having that conversation and with the current proposal then my opinion is that right of a unique human life supersedes the mother's right to choose
Quote from: sid waddell on May 07, 2018, 07:03:25 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 07, 2018, 04:24:26 PM
They can nip out for an abortion on their lunch hour, and don't think twice about it. "Ah sure it's not even a baby."
You have a truly abhorrent, neanderthal view of women.
185,000 abortions per year in England and Wales. You can't tell me they were all abnormal foetus/rape etc. No, abortion has become a method of contraception. It's becomes normalised, any level of thought, guilt or morality removed. And the lunch hour quote while exaggerated, wouldn't be too far off the mark. Making abortion legal doesn't make it acceptable.
Quote from: BennyCake on May 07, 2018, 07:53:49 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 07, 2018, 07:03:25 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 07, 2018, 04:24:26 PM
They can nip out for an abortion on their lunch hour, and don't think twice about it. "Ah sure it's not even a baby."
You have a truly abhorrent, neanderthal view of women.
185,000 abortions per year in England and Wales. You can't tell me they were all abnormal foetus/rape etc. No, abortion has become a method of contraception. It's becomes normalised, any level of thought, guilt or morality removed. And the lunch hour quote while exaggerated, wouldn't be too far off the mark. Making abortion legal doesn't make it acceptable.
Abortion
is normal. That is a fact. It's happening in Ireland and will continue to happen whether you like or not. Women can order pills online and they work up to 12 weeks.
The point is that is unregulated and because it is against the law, women can suffer serious adverse health effects and even death from such because they tend not to seek medical treatment if there adverse effects. This would not be the case were it to be regulated, as it should be. If it is legal, it would be safe.
What is your plan for women who order abortion pills online? Throw them in jail?
Our constitution already allows abortion in Ireland under the Protection Of Life During Pregnancy Act. That was an act the No campaign railed against.
Our constitution specifically states that Irish women have a right to an abortion. It's contained in the 13th Amendment and was passed in a referendum in 1992. The Irish people voted to specifically give Irish women the right to an abortion - outside the state, of course. ;D
Why are the anti-women's rights mob not campaigning to get the 13th Amendment abolished too? Because they know they'd be laughed out it, that's why.
You and the other shrieking woman haters on this forum have no right to tell a woman what is a crisis pregnancy and what is not.
Why should neanderthals like you have the right to deny women essential healthcare?
Failure to repeal the 8th Amendment would be a shameful act of cowardice on the part of this state.
Quote from: omaghjoe on May 07, 2018, 07:46:20 PM
I don't think any person should be denied basic healthcare and I would be in favour of ammending the wording of the 8th.... if right of life was still afforded to the unborn, that is difficult I agree but no one seems to be even having that conversation and with the current proposal then my opinion is that right of a unique human life supersedes the mother's right to choose
I don't think you get it.
Women's right to essential healthcare can only be guaranteed by the abolition of the 8th Amendment.
If it stays, women don't have that right and will continue to be denied it.
Why are many Yes people so insulting and abusive to No individuals.
Can "Sid" not make his points without the extremist language?
Quote from: Rossfan on May 08, 2018, 06:35:12 PM
Why are many Yes people so insulting and abusive to No individuals.
Can "Sid" not make his points without the extremist language?
Can a No supporter like yourself make a post without lying or mendaciously attempting to play the victim?
There's only one set of extremists here.
They're the people that are attempting to try and keep Ireland's status as the only major country in Europe which denies essential healthcare to women.
They're the ones that are attempting to lump us in with the likes of Somalia.
Afghanistan has more liberal abortion laws than Ireland currently does.
Have a think about that.
Some good points on both sides. Does the referendum as currently constituted go too far? Does it come in level with the UK or go further?
Quote from: sid waddell on May 08, 2018, 06:47:33 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on May 08, 2018, 06:35:12 PM
Why are many Yes people so insulting and abusive to No individuals.
Can "Sid" not make his points without the extremist language?
Can a No supporter like yourself make a post without lying or mendaciously attempting to play the victim?
There's only one set of extremists here.
They're the people that are attempting to try and keep Ireland's status as the only major country in Europe which denies essential healthcare to women.
They're the ones that are attempting to lump us in with the likes of Somalia.
Afghanistan has more liberal abortion laws than Ireland currently does.
Have a think about that.
Calm down, Tom Daley.
Quote from: Rossfan on May 08, 2018, 06:35:12 PM
Why are many Yes people so insulting and abusive to No individuals.
Can "Sid" not make his points without the extremist language?
Good question, and no he can't.
Quote from: BennyCake on May 08, 2018, 07:38:32 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on May 08, 2018, 06:35:12 PM
Why are many Yes people so insulting and abusive to No individuals.
Can "Sid" not make his points without the extremist language?
Good question, and no he can't.
What do you expect from a pig, but a grunt
Quote from: sid waddell on May 08, 2018, 06:33:27 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on May 07, 2018, 07:46:20 PM
I don't think any person should be denied basic healthcare and I would be in favour of ammending the wording of the 8th.... if right of life was still afforded to the unborn, that is difficult I agree but no one seems to be even having that conversation and with the current proposal then my opinion is that right of a unique human life supersedes the mother's right to choose
I don't think you get it.
Women's right to essential healthcare can only be guaranteed by the abolition of the 8th Amendment.
If it stays, women don't have that right and will continue to be denied it.
No I don't think you get it sid
All people includes all unique human life who would have no legal right to life under the proposed legislation
Ill assume that you agree with the rest of my points tho?
I agree wholeheartedly omaghjoe. Basic healthcare is too often denied to the most vulnerable in our society (unborn, very young, handicapped, older people). It's an awful shame that the term "basic healthcare" is used by ceetain people to promote what some would describe as abortion on demand.
Quote from: whitey on May 08, 2018, 08:18:17 PM
Quote from: BennyCake on May 08, 2018, 07:38:32 PM
Quote from: Rossfan on May 08, 2018, 06:35:12 PM
Why are many Yes people so insulting and abusive to No individuals.
Can "Sid" not make his points without the extremist language?
Good question, and no he can't.
What do you expect from a pig, but a grunt
Neatly sums up your entire output on this forum.
Quote from: omaghjoe on May 08, 2018, 11:59:52 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 08, 2018, 06:33:27 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on May 07, 2018, 07:46:20 PM
I don't think any person should be denied basic healthcare and I would be in favour of ammending the wording of the 8th.... if right of life was still afforded to the unborn, that is difficult I agree but no one seems to be even having that conversation and with the current proposal then my opinion is that right of a unique human life supersedes the mother's right to choose
I don't think you get it.
Women's right to essential healthcare can only be guaranteed by the abolition of the 8th Amendment.
If it stays, women don't have that right and will continue to be denied it.
No I don't think you get it sid
All people includes all unique human life who would have no legal right to life under the proposed legislation
Ill assume that you agree with the rest of my points tho?
You're against essential healthcare for women.
You are in favour of making a rape victim carry a pregnancy to term against her will.
You are in favour of dismissing the best medical evidence and opinions.
These are extremist, misogynist positions.
Im sorry you feel you can't be honest in this debate.
Quote from: Rossfan on May 08, 2018, 06:35:12 PM
Why are many Yes people so insulting and abusive to No individuals.
Can "Sid" not make his points without the extremist language?
For one of the rudest posters on the board you regularly fall back on the crutch of propriety when it suits whatever fancy you have at that given moment. Usually because you don't have the ability to debate or discuss the topic in anything beyond skin-deep detail. It's entirely self-serving and shows you up more than whoever you happen to be trying to dress down. Don't think people haven't noticed.
Once more you give a fair oul description of yourself ;D
Quote from: sid waddell on May 09, 2018, 01:06:13 AM
Quote from: omaghjoe on May 08, 2018, 11:59:52 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 08, 2018, 06:33:27 PM
Quote from: omaghjoe on May 07, 2018, 07:46:20 PM
I don't think any person should be denied basic healthcare and I would be in favour of ammending the wording of the 8th.... if right of life was still afforded to the unborn, that is difficult I agree but no one seems to be even having that conversation and with the current proposal then my opinion is that right of a unique human life supersedes the mother's right to choose
I don't think you get it.
Women's right to essential healthcare can only be guaranteed by the abolition of the 8th Amendment.
If it stays, women don't have that right and will continue to be denied it.
No I don't think you get it sid
All people includes all unique human life who would have no legal right to life under the proposed legislation
Ill assume that you agree with the rest of my points tho?
You're against essential healthcare for women.
You are in favour of making a rape victim carry a pregnancy to term against her will.
You are in favour of dismissing the best medical evidence and opinions.
These are extremist, misogynist positions.
Im sorry you feel you can't be honest in this debate.
This is all plain old ad hominen and what's better every line is a fabrication.
So much for your saintly depiction o yourself as a guardian of the truth ::)
Dealing with nonsense in what is supposed to be a debating forum is beyond frustrating
Quote from: omaghjoe on May 07, 2018, 04:19:31 PM
Also that is an interesting point about the birthdays Sid
Now obviously birthdays are cultural so basically we celebrate them because we always have, and the conception day isn't known anyway so it would sort of impossible.
Anyway my point about it is that children born premature will medically have their age adjusted to calculate baby development.
So in the medical world they are already doing this as the age of conception gives true age.
Conception date gives you the date that development starts and therefore what the expected stage of development should be at a point.
But it's development. At what stage in this development are you saying a human baby is formed with a right to life?
Quote from: omaghjoe on May 07, 2018, 03:52:59 PM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 07, 2018, 02:39:55 PM
Quote from: RedHand88 on May 07, 2018, 09:36:51 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on May 02, 2018, 11:03:39 AM
Quote from: Owenmoresider on May 02, 2018, 10:31:24 AM
Quote from: Tubberman on May 02, 2018, 09:52:05 AM
Quote from: Therealdonald on May 01, 2018, 08:52:48 PM
I'd imagine most men are off the same opinion as myself...it's a woman's body, let the women vote and decide what to do. What i don't understand is why players from the occupied six are putting in their tuppence when we can't vote in it.
But it's not just the woman's body. It's also some man's unborn child - some men mightn't know about it, some mightn't care, some might want it aborted, and some might be very happy at the prospect of having the child.
It's not just a woman's body issue as if it was a boob job ffs.
+1
Ultimately, yes, it is a woman's body issue.
What you're saying is that if a woman does not want a foetus in her womb, she should have no say over the matter and be forced to carry the pregnancy to term.
No, it isn't. The woman's appendix is her body, her ear is her body, the baby is the baby's body.
A 12 week old foetus is not a baby.
A baby is a baby.
Does the Roman Catholic Church offer funerals for zygotes? Do zygotes which are aborted by a pill go to heaven?
Or do they go to "limbo", as the Roman Catholic Church used to tell us?
Or is it only zygotes and foetuses aborted after April 20th, 2007, when the Roman Catholic Church abandoned the concept of "limbo", which go to heaven rather than limbo?
Do you celebrate your birthday or your conception day?
If you celebrate the former, shouldn't you really be celebrating the latter if you're being consistent?
A 12 week old foetus, same as a 1 hour old embryo is.... a human being.
It will become a baby, enfant, toddler, child, adolescent, adult.
Not sure what theology has to do with this, looks like some sort of feebly attempt at a strawman.
When does become a human baby?
See contribution to Citizens' Assembly by Dr Helen Watt, Senior Research Fellow, Anscombe Bioethics Centre, Oxford
https://www.citizensassembly.ie/en/Meetings/Dr-Helen-Watt-Paper.pdf (https://www.citizensassembly.ie/en/Meetings/Dr-Helen-Watt-Paper.pdf)
Quote from: The Boy Wonder on May 13, 2018, 10:22:31 AM
See contribution to Citizens' Assembly by Dr Helen Watt, Senior Research Fellow, Anscombe Bioethics Centre, Oxford
https://www.citizensassembly.ie/en/Meetings/Dr-Helen-Watt-Paper.pdf (https://www.citizensassembly.ie/en/Meetings/Dr-Helen-Watt-Paper.pdf)
Everything hinges on the word "broadly" and therefore hinges on 2 questions
1) Does her evidence actually reflect the broad agreement?
2) does broad agreement equate to proof?
Me thinks a more nuanced contribution might me required than that of Dr Watt.
Without doubt there will be differing opinions on this subject - I just posted the above link as one particular viewpoint.
Only a Divine Being (or Sid) could give a conclusive answer as to exactly when human life begins.
Quote from: The Boy Wonder on May 13, 2018, 01:57:46 PM
Without doubt there will be differing opinions on this subject - I just posted the above link as one particular viewpoint.
Only a Divine Being (or Sid) could give a conclusive answer as to exactly when human life begins.
Completely understand that you were just posting the link. And it was worth posting.
If we are to run with Dr Watts contention that every fertilised egg is a human life then the failure to implant any fertilised egg in an IVF clinic is murder. That could be a couple who engage in IVF to have a child and end up with a crop of 8 or 18 fertilised egg if varying viability who decide to implant say 2 eggs. Are the No campaign protesting outside fertility clinics, campaigning against state support of IVF and denouncing the users of IVF from the pulpit and GAA grounds? Presumably they are if all human life is equal and human life commences at fertilisation?
Another outstanding late intervention from Kevin McManamon. Always one of Dublin's most articulate and thoughtful representatives.
https://twitter.com/kevmc15/status/996403415172505600
He had as many votes as anyone else.
I'm undecided on which way to vote and having watched the debate the other night on Clare Byrne it appears that the legislation proposed is unclear?
http://www.thejournal.ie/eight-repeal-legislation-3925410-Mar2018/ (http://www.thejournal.ie/eight-repeal-legislation-3925410-Mar2018/)
The government has already signalled that, if repealed, legislation would be introduced to allow for abortion up to 12 weeks of pregnancy.
The general scheme that Harris is bringing to Cabinet is understood to be in line with the policy paper brought to Cabinet earlier this month.
It is set to propose to make terminations lawful where an appropriate medical practitioner has certified that the pregnancy has not exceeded 12 weeks.
A period of 72 hours must elapse between certification and the termination being carried out.
Beyond that period of pregnancy, termination will only be available in exceptional circumstances, such as the risk of serious harm to the health or life of the woman, in emergency situations, or in cases of fatal foetal abnormality.
In all other circumstances, abortion will remain unlawful after 12 weeks.
In cases were there is a risk to the life, or of serious harm to the health, of a woman termination would not be lawful beyond viability.
The viability of a foetus would be assessed and agreed by two doctors, one of whom would be an obstetrician or gynaecologist.
If viability is established and the pregnancy is ended on health grounds then it will be done through early delivery, with a full medical team on hand.
Will there/or can there be any sanctions against these individuals for their wanton attempt to use the GAA as a vehicle to influence the outcome of this decision?
Quote from: stephenite on May 26, 2018, 10:21:15 AM
Will there/or can there be any sanctions against these individuals for their wanton attempt to use the GAA as a vehicle to influence the outcome of this decision?
Dismal failure as far as that goes. They are not as important as they think they are.
Quote from: stephenite on May 26, 2018, 10:21:15 AM
Will there/or can there be any sanctions against these individuals for their wanton attempt to use the GAA as a vehicle to influence the outcome of this decision?
Being in Round 1 and drawing Mayo would be sanction enough for the man who walks on water.
I, for one, am ashamed with Harte et al in pushing their ill-informed, simplistic, agenda on this issue. And another thing, The Irish News should really consider what extremist advertising they allow after seeing a corner of a page devoted to a rosary schedule to keep the 8th(no sh1t!) ...with links to Harte etc's videos on the issue. As a Tyrone fan, the sooner we get a manager who stays away from this stuff, the better, so I wouldn't be broken hearted to see Tyrone knocked out before the super 8's, with the stench of the 8th ammendment stlll lingering.
Quote from: Whishtup on May 26, 2018, 10:15:24 PM
I, for one, am ashamed with Harte et al in pushing their ill-informed, simplistic, agenda on this issue. And another thing, The Irish News should really consider what extremist advertising they allow after seeing a corner of a page devoted to a rosary schedule to keep the 8th(no sh1t!) ...with links to Harte etc's videos on the issue. As a Tyrone fan, the sooner we get a manager who stays away from this stuff, the better, so I wouldn't be broken hearted to see Tyrone knocked out before the super 8's, with the stench of the 8th ammendment stlll lingering.
A victory for Irish women; this is the last generation that will have to "take the boat." Mickey Harte's opinion is not as important as he thinks it is
There was nothing wrong with Mickey Harte's views on the referendum. It was using the GAA name that was the issue.
While Harte shouldn't have used the GAA in that way, I also think Varadkar shouldn't have used his position to advocate for a Yes vote. He would have had more sway with voters than Harte would. I find that worse than what Harte did.
Error (as Syfīn might say) Vara dear is head of the Government that proposed the Referendum and the new Article so he was hardly going to leave it to self appointed non Governmental organisations. ....