I thought the turnout would be a bit higher than 64.1% though.
Turnout for the SSM referendum was 60.52%, which is lower than I thought it was. (All these 60+ percentages can mess with your memory)
Printable View
I thought the turnout would be a bit higher than 64.1% though.
Turnout for the SSM referendum was 60.52%, which is lower than I thought it was. (All these 60+ percentages can mess with your memory)
FG committing to legislating this fairly soon. I don't think the other parties will stand in their way either, after the size of the majority.
Interesting to see if it will be an issue come election time, and if so, how the different parties play it.
I suspect the legislation will go through without to much difficulty. Even though 1 in 3 people was against repeal, I very much doubt that the only party in favour of retention, ReNua, will gain many of those votes. That was their best chance ever to put their name in front of the people but I never heard a peep out of them or if they did sound off, I must have had a bad dose of wax in my ear at the time. The economy by and large determines votes (but not as much as Enda thought) and the HSE crisis has damaged the Government so if there was an election in the morning I wouldn't expect much of a change. Once the abortion legislation goes through it was be old hat until the request for the period to be extended to 21 weeks is promoted and pushed and it will all kick off again but not to the same extent.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
If Declan Ganly and a few cronies (or a better version of him) together with a few indos (Mattie etc) were to form a new party specifically to "represent" the people who feel disenfranchised by all the other parties there could be a market for them.
There has to be room for a party when a third of the voters have literally no one who represents their view.
Fianna Fail would be the big loser if that party was formed I reckon
For the last five or so years I hear this constant "Room for a centre-right/full-on right wing conservative party" stuff, but the only people who ever bothered their hole to form one got rejected by voters wholesale. Besides, there isn't a constituency in the country that doesn't have some Independent or micro-party candidate (Christian Solidarity anyone?) of that persuasion, but they always go nowhere. That 1 in 3 will hold their nose and vote for their FF or FG or Independent TD candidate, just like they did after SSM.
Good to have the campaign over. It wasn't a quiet revolution- Leo just took a while to listen.
The Yes campaign were good, focussed on the stories of affected women which was hugely effective. Where to even start with the No campaign- they were absolutely dreadful both tactically and morally. Got desperate from a few weeks out and just crumbled completely into nastiness, looking like the loons most of us always suspected them to be.
Martin may have saved FFs bacon as they would have looked a very 'No' party without him. Renua were active in some parts of the country but no one cares.
Must get my Seanad vote sorted at new address so I can help get rid of that reptile Mullen.
Its a celebrity world , the likes of Christian Solidarity have no hope ,
But if someone credible came out swinging it would be interesting,
Its now or never.
The Abortion thing is dead forever even if a new party put it on the agenda the % in favour of repeal means FG or whomever else couldn't backtrack
Why would there be a demand for 21 weeks?Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
It's set at 12 in the prpposed legislation and there has been no indication from anywhere that women are unhappy with having that choice? In fact I would sincerely doubt this is ever going to be an issue again in my lifetime.
Well they have nobody who represents that particular one of their views. I presume if Declan Ganley had to choose between pro-choice Fine Gael and a pro-life party who propose massive tax hikes and wealth distribution he'd support FG, etc. If people are that vexed about abortion they will find representation.Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
Call it Libertas.Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
Where is your proof for this?Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
PBP have already stated they will only support the 12 week period legislation for 5 years then push for longer.Quote:
Originally Posted by jinxy lilywhite
others will readily jump aboard that cause quite easily especially given the large mandate received last week.
I don't think "proof" is possible here but I'd tend to agree that Ireland will follow the same trajectory as USA UK that once it is introduced in a "limited" fashion it is constantly chipped away at to increase the reasons by using every hard case from then on.
Leaving completely aside whether you are a yes or a no I think that's just accepting reality
and that's 5 TDs out of 80 required. yeah the rest will all jump on board because there is a national blood lust now baby killing women of IrelandQuote:
Originally Posted by jbyrne
wow, where did that come from?!Quote:
Originally Posted by jinxy lilywhite
I think the same - that the limit will be left alone for a number of years, then get moved. But I think that will happen very slowly, and will also be affected (and limited) by any medical improvements that result in earlier fetal viability.Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
I would imagine that FG will want to legislate for it along the lines of what they outlined pre-referendum, as they have a now mandate to do so, then not go near it again for a long time, and I'd guess the other big parties would feel much the same.
In the future, the debate might see the current Save the 8th advocates arguing that the result of the referendum meant 12 weeks and no more.
I don't think, though, that it would be the 'hard cases' that would shape the future changes. If they are properly legislated for now, it wouldn't need to be such an issue in the future.
Nobody has an abortion lightly. No one.Quote:
Originally Posted by jinxy lilywhite
It's revealing how you never hear of anyone making the difficult or gut-wrenching decision to have the baby.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr A
I don't really understand your point - the No campaign had plenty of stories from women who thought about seeking an abortion, but after a lot of thought or soul-searching, in the end decided to have their child instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Fly
Be that a 'crisis' pregnancy because of their age and lack of money and maturity, or because there was an indication that the foetus would not survive, or would have a disability, and so on.
It was a fairly common theme I thought, - in response to the Repeal side's stories of women who did have an abortion in such circumstances, the No side (one of its various strands anyway) had stories of woman who went through similar experiences but decided to have their baby anyway.
I thought it was one of their smarter bits of campaigning - take the opposition's argument and provide your own personal stories to show that it doesn't have to end in abortion.
I wouldn't be surprised if there's actually a reduction in the number of abortions procured by Irish women when the legislation takes effect. The stress of knowing the option wasn't available locally must have been a huge additional burden, and once flights were booked etc. changing of mind would have been unlikely. At least now there's going to be consultation locally, advice, support etc. and with the proposals to increase access to birth control and improve sex education in schools it should be a much healthier environment for women in general.
I am aware of several such stories. I'd say most people are.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Fly
Whatever legislation is passed will continue to be changed/chipped away at in the Courts establishing new "Case Law" and widening the times and criteria.
The argument is dead at this point and there is zero chance of any protections for the unborn being voted back in by Referendum.
Trying to mount a rear guard action to delay the changes that will come in terms of times Criteria etc to whatever legislation is introduced is what the people on the No side will probably do now but I honestly think they should just give up and accept the inevitable , . the world has changed.
No basis for that, nothing has changed anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
There was abortion last year and there will be this year - all we have done is face up to it.
There was abortion last year where there was a real and substantive danger to the life of the Mother etc etc.
There is now a different criteria i'e any reason up to 12 wks then etc etc, my point is this criteria will change and I don't see the point in people fighting a losing battle like in other countries , just accept it and move on.
I think the point was that abortion was available last year - in the U.K. all the proposed change does is provides the same function without the boat/plane trip.
with access to termination still a long way off in Northern Ireland, could we see Donegal 9the only county to vote no) become a centre for women travelling from the North ?
No doubt you are right, Government will try and stick to the published heads of Bill because any deviation will see a free for all with pro lifers trying to water it down and pro choice trying to make it more liberal. best option is stick to what was advertised 9and received a huge mandate) and let both sides rekindle battle down the line (preferably on someone else's watch).pro choice will have been lifted by high 'Yes@ vote and will try and push further but down the road a bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
I get the UK thing but that was kind of my point, its unrestricted on demand in the UK and that the way its inevitably heading here.
This subject will continue to be a thorny subject every time the needle moves going forward.
Its time to just give up and accept it , fighting every inch of the way will achieve nothing other than an on-going argument where neither side wants to listen to the other.
Agree with you but unfortunately that seems to be the way we do things here. I think there is still too strong a pro life element here to simply roll over, ironic it was the insertion of article 8 that provided the impetus for the push to where e are now. sometimes silence speaks the loudest (but lessons are never learnt)Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
ah yes, take your beating, forget about the principles you held so dearly for so long and be on your way like a good person! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
I didn't explain myself very well ...I didn't mean that the NO voters should toddle off and forget their principles in a HA HA sore loser kind of way.
What I was trying to say is that the battle is over.
We have voted in Abortion on demand up to 12 weeks and effectively up to 24 weeks if the person says they are mentally not able to go through with the pregnancy (and I am not saying that there are not real genuine cases where that is actual reality).
Given that is now the state of affairs I don't think the Pro lifers achieve anything meaningful by fighting against any gradual erosions of the "theoretical" 12 week limit. All they achieve is making themselves look like hardline uncaring people and increasing the resentment and anti church sentiment of the Media and sections of Society when they will achieve nothing.
If the Church (and there are good people there) want to remain relevant they need to stop letting hardliners fight losing/pointless battles and start doing good in society and promoting positives that they are involved in.
A lot of No voters weren't hardline people and a lot of Yes voters were swayed by the hard cases but troubled by unlimited Abortion.
The trouble in the "debate" was that you tended to only here from the nutters on either side.
"every sperm is sacred" versus "Abortion up to Birth"
I'm just glad its over and didn't mean to appear to be telling people to sod off
I still don't get this part.Quote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
And the constant - there are lunatics on both sides arguments - which is nonsense.
The No side had:
Giant NO signs adorning landmarks.
17,000 Crosses placed on the side of the road.
Lies on campaign posters.
Information booklets made to look like official Referendum commission information.
Graphic posters held up outside maternity hospitals.
Graphic imagery on posters erected outside schools.
The constant use of disabled children as a tool for voting NO when expressly asked not to do so.
The use of music ( Ed Sheeran & Snow Patrol ) without permission - Another populist stunt.
The utter belittling of people with genuine mental health problems.
Not to mind what went on during some of the TV debates.
Now we have :
the Catholic church telling us we are all going to hell in the aftermath.
Declan Ganley doesn't want to pay his taxes to fund abortion
The Iona institute thinks your Granny is next on "The Death Train"
John McGurk is calling everyone angry.
John Waters is writing : Ireland - An Obituary.
on the Yes ledger:
Well apart from a few zealots out canvassing I'm not altogether sure. No lies, no graphic imagery, no posturing - just let the facts speak for themselves.
I think on some of the TV debates - a lot of YES people held thier counsel in face of some pretty objectionable behavior - to the detriment of the YES campaign at the time I thought.
Brid Smyth maybe is a bit of a nutter and some of the celebratory tweets were in poor taste - but most of the objectionable stuff was on the NO side for me.
The result I thought was a spectacular rejection of the Ireland of Old.
uncaring people? the No side would argue otherwise. quite the opposite actuallyQuote:
Originally Posted by sbgawa
They would, absolutely oblivious to the narrowness of their "caring".Quote:
Originally Posted by jbyrne
Anyhoo, the referendum is OVER the people have spoken and whether we like it or not the decision is made. I expect the Government to quickly move to formalize the 'heads of Bill' published prior to the referendum into real legislation. while I think the provision of services by 1st January 2019 is probably hopelessly optimistic, I expect the HSE to move quickly (well, quicker than they usually do) to roll out the service.
hopefully the failure of some of the scaremongering tactics deployed by the 'No' side (as they failed in the SSM referendum) will lead to more proper rational debate on these issues in the future. some of the post referendum antics of the catholic church (banning V de P etc.) simply marginalize them further from the mainstream of Irish people (thankfully)
So why was their slogan "love both" while the yes campaign was about the one person? One looks a bit narrower to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahamsta
I'd expect the busiest clinics outside Dublin to be in Dundalk and Letterkenny. And I'd expect there to be a lot of yellow number plates in the car park.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
It will be interesting to see what the legislation ends up looking like. Despite my own reservations the heads of the bill produced by Simon Harris were clearly put to the people before the referendum, and obviously received very strong backing. Anything other than very modest shifts away from those proposals will be controversial, but who knows what could happen if there is an election between then and now.
My point is simply that you only ever hear of people speaking in terms of the 'gut-wrenching', or the 'difficult', or the 'harrowing' decision when it comes to their eventual decision to have an abortion. Which tells me that deep down those people know that said decision carries a great deal of moral weight. Your use of the phrase 'soul-searching' just reinforces it.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
It's possible, but highly improbable. The liberalisation of abortion law has led to more abortion in every country (or at least every country I'm aware of) where such liberalisation has taken place. It's statistically demonstrable.Quote:
Originally Posted by passinginterest
Contraception is widely and virtually freely available already, and if...(from Wiki) "the purpose of sexuality education curriculum in Europe is to facilitate adolescents to gain knowledge, attitudes, skills and values to make appropriate and healthy choices in their sexual behaviour, thus preventing them from sexually transmitted infections, including HIV and HPV, teenage or unwanted pregnancies, and from domestic and sexual violence, contributing to a greater society", then it has failed in its purpose.Quote:
Originally Posted by passinginterest
I always thought that was one of, if not thee strongest argument that those advocating for repeal had; namely that abortion is a reality whether it be through export to Britain or importation online. It's important to remember though that in facing up to it, we have also 'okayed' it, and that will bring consequences.Quote:
Originally Posted by Real ale Madrid
One takeaway I got from the whole debate is that there's a significant number of people who think that the referendum (heralding Ireland's belated membership of true Western 'modernity') represents some kind of "End of History" moment...a la Francis Fukuyama. They're as wrong as he was.
The 8th Amendment. Remember that. If you don't, who could blame you?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Fly
It was designed for you not to be appalled by its language (just like "The Right To Choose" or "Pro Choice" in America).
Why is this relevant now?
Well in case it went unnoticed in Ireland this week, the New York State Legislature just passed a bill which allows a baby to be aborted at any time during the pregnancy and even after it has been born (killed in other words).
Some are calling it the "Fourth Trimester". Others are calling it "Infantacide"
And those who perform these abortions/killings cannot be prosecuted (and from what I understand they don't even have to be medical professionals - lay people who do it also).
And the wonderful folks in the New York State Legislature rose in unison to cheer and applaud the passing of the bill.
Meanwhile down in Virginia, a bill was introduced which the Governor of that state backed. In his description of what would happen in such situations, Governor Northam said that a baby could potentially be born and "made comfortable" while the mother and physician were allowed to have a discussion as to its (the baby's) fate. Meaning that any time after the birth of the baby, the mother could decide whether she wanted the child or not. There was no word as to how long the mother could take to decide (a half hour, an hour, a week a month?) Who knows? One wonders, what would happen if the mother decided after a few months that she really didn't want her newborn? Fortunately that bill was defeated in the Viriniga State Legislature. But it looks like we have reached new lows in our 'handling' of the unborn.
Why is this important to Ireland? Well you can be guaranteed it is coming to a hospital near you soon.