On ‘Misery Hill’, above the Waterford railway station, in Waterford City.
Youth Defence writes:
Pro-aborts painted a huge Repeal onto this rockface in Waterford. Someone has changed it to read REVEAL.
Previously: Meanwhile, In Waterford
Sponsored Link
pro-aborts. lol. get over yourselves, YD.
that’ll show us.
It’s hilarious when that shower try and be all rebellious. “Reveal”, er yeah guys, keep up those radical anarchic actions of yours….
‘Someone.’
As in, why doesn’t Youth Defence reveal their funding and subscribe to the rules of SIPO and prove they are not some foreign money funded interest group funded largely by Christian fundamentalists from the USA?
Yeah, good question…. I’d leave a message but I appear to be blocked from commenting…
I’m so upset now… I need a cat video…
“Pro aborts”, you guys are adorable.
Are they pro-adorbs?
Reveal what? We all know what repeal means. They’re going to have to do a little bit better than this. It’s the equivalent of changing the Y on a yield sign to F so that it now says field – for no reason.
It’s almost like they’re only realizing now that different letters make different words but sometimes words have similar letters in them.
“If a Christian group changed it THATS BAD, If an Islamic group changed it THATS GOOD” – Karl Marx 1988
Chortle Chortle. Those Yank Defense wags!!
Women have been “reveal”ing the reality of having to come up with hundreds of euros to travel to the UK for an abortion and the anguish of being forced abroad to be treated with compassion and care in the many cases of fatal foetal diagnoses. Women have also been revealing the lies and scaremongering told by so called prolife organisations in bogus clinics.
Reveal the truth. Repeal the 8th. Repel the liars.
….nice
Reveal
Reveal the source of your yankee donors…
I need lunch…
It just sums up the incoherence and pearl-clutching of the campaign. Broadsheet ran a piece on the rainbow that was painted there last year, and on the morning of the referendum ‘someone’ painted a big black NO on top of it. Reveal? Come on like.
Maybe the pro-life movement could come up with their own ideas instead of censoring or changing murals done by the Repeal side. Probably not though as they seem to have no imagination or creativity of any kind.
Nobody could rival “Keep your rosaries off my ovaries.”
Nobody.
Get your crucifix outta my cervix?
I’m aiming for crude here.
Get your Gethsemane out of my garden?
Get your Pope out of my pipe!
I have a bit of a grá for “Keep your nose out of my vagina”.
Here’s another one – “A defibrillator stops a beating heart.”
What? WHAT?
It’s true. A defibrillator can’t restart a heart that has stopped beathing. It stops a heart that has developed an irregular rhythm to enable it to get back to a normal sinus rhythm.
The things you learn on a “how to use a defibrillator” course!!
Keep your pontiffs away from our poonanny?
Keep your vestments away from their vaginas?
Keep your chalices off Irish women’s valises?
Keep your words and Yankee cash away from what my GF does with her gash?
we have a winner with that last one.
I am absolutely chanting that last one at the march!
Why would they do such a thing?! Think of the children and assorted small/cute animals.
Both sides guilty of shameless propaganda and getting more and more militant with their respective stances. The argument is just being lost in noise. The over-reaction to anything said on either side is tiresome at this stage and it’s become ‘you’re either with us or against us’ on both sides as the name-calling continues.
I can’t imagine how bad it’s going to get in the run up to any actual referendum on the subject.
The handwringing about the tone of the arguments is way more off-putting than the tone of the arguments. Nobody likes people who go about loudly looking for an excuse to go sit on the fence.
While the moral case is overwhelming for Side X, some people were being mean to some other people and now I’m too chicken sh1t to have an opinion and will thus be burying my head in this small pile of sand I’ve procured. Good DAY!
Are your fingers dry now after that heartfelt hand-wrangling?
Careful, this crowd are like George W. Bush – you’re either with them or your against them. They won’t tolerate nuance or any suggestions that the issue is a bit more complicated than “Repeal”.
Whereas the side who are adamant a raped child carry her fathers baby to term on penalty of 14 years prison sentence (more than he’d ever get) are the reasonable ones. Gotcha.
Spot on Jimmy.
It’s only going to get worse, as predicted last year.
“Stunning equalizer from a corner in the opening minutes of the second half…”
“…given as an own goal due to it going in off the head of one of the (youth) defence.”
Youth Defence are scum but this is what happens when Pro-Choice start doing tacky publicity stunts. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If we really believe in free speech then anti-abortion propaganda is just as legitimate even if we disagree with it. I’d rather have a grown up conversation myself. Trivializing a complicated topic like abortion (How many weeks? Under what circumstances? Will the medical profession cooperate?) into a one-word slogan isn’t terrible helpful. Repealing the 8th amendment to the constitution wouldn’t make everything okay.
Here is a thought – how about given women the choice and trust them to make the right one? That way no-one has to worry about nothing that is not of their business *sorted*
‘trust women to make the right choice’ is the biggest load of nonsense this campaign has thrown up.
While I am absolutely pro-appeal and pro-choice, Women aren’t magical Always-Right-Fairies.
We have laws for a reason and that reason is so that we don’t have to trust human beings to make the right choice.
I think your choice of a massive tribal tattoo on your face was silly in the extreme. But I also recognise that the best person to make that decision is you. Not really a contradiction.
Makes for cracking Star Trek Voyager cosplay though
In situations where a woman is pregnant the decision she makes for herself is ALWAYS right for her. No amount of lies by bogus prolie “prolife” agencies will change that.
So you believe a person should be legally allowed to abort a 39 or 40 week pregnancy once the baby has not emerged? That is what always right means.
An abortion at 39 or 40 weeks is called “giving birth”.
No it’s not Daisy.
The conversation here isn’t simply about ‘repeal the 8th’. That’s a no brainer.
I was adressing Joe Small’s original point that the implementation of the following legislation will have to take into account his (and many others concerns)
While you keep dragging things down to a black/white level and ignoring the grey, the YD militants will prey on those grey areas and further muddy the waters.
It is a no brainer.
The argument we’re having is whether it’s a good idea to have the constitution dictate the terms of medical engagement, about whether that’s a good plan from a medical and safety perspective, let alone a moral one. If it is, let’s start proscribing constitutional principles around prostrate exams, breast check, vasectomies, sti screenings.
People arguing for repeal don’t need to sketch out the entire legal framework that will follow – that’s why we have a parliament. By following your logic we’re playing into their game. The same tactics came out during the marriage referendum – if we’d followed them down the rabbit hole of surrogacy rights and adoption principles the water truly would have been muddied.
You are being wilfully disingenius if you think that the framework that will follow repeal of the 8th won’t be an issue in any referendum.
It’s FAR more relevant than the surrogacy arguments in the marraige referendum.
No, but women deserve the right to make their own reproductive choices. They do. It matters not at all whether they are always right or never right, or whether an abortion is the right choice or not. Everyone deserves the right to choose what happens to their own body.
Of course they do.
What if some women decides to perform her own abortion with a knitting needle at 40 weeks?
That is not the right choice for anybody.
I’m not saying that situation is likely, just possible. That is why we have laws.
Not entirely on topic: assisted voluntary euthanasia is now available for mentally ill people in some of the Benelux countries. I feel there might be some limits to body autonomy.
“reason is so that we don’t have to trust human beings to make the right choice” – provided the law itself is reasonable, unbiased and not gender-specific. Which the 8th isn’t. Kinda shows the caliber of law profession back then.
If you can’t trust women with a pregnancy, why do you trust them with a child?
I don’t.
Again, I’ll point you to those little things we have called ‘laws’
You’re so distrustful of women that you believe without “laws” we’d be sticking knitting needles up our foo foos at 40 weeks of pregnancy?
Why do you think we’d do that without the anti “needles up foo foos” legislation to stop us?
You’re right. But it will pave the way for a more nuanced discussion, where it belongs, in the Doctor’s surgery.
….and then that becomes an issue of applying best medical practice – like every other medical procedure.
Control over one’s own body shouldnt be down to how uncomfortable other folk are. I, for one, am tired of hearing how hard this is for other people. I don’t give a toss about your hand wringing – i want the women (and men) involved to decide for themselves and my nose (and yours) to be kept in its place.
I sincerely hope the step after getting rid of the 8th amendment for people to grow some objectivity and empathy and mind their own business.
http://m.independent.ie/opinion/comment/why-my-fellow-repealers-cant-face-the-facts-around-abortion-35039115.html This article makes some good points. Rabble posted it yesterday (with a disparaging comment) and predictably there was a negative, shrill and outraged opinion from their subscribers – a number of them are hardened SJWs who dismiss anybody who doesn’t think exactly the way they do. To be fair, the author of the Indo piece was trying to make suggestions on how the pro-choice side could improve their strategy. No point in preaching to the circle jerk.
Yeah, anyone who calls the people affected by this (that’s women, fact fans) shrill for speaking out really deserves all the comments which made his feelings all hurt.
He didn’t call all people affected by it shrill. He called shrill people shrill.
He’s correct.
Donal Lynch is as “pro choice” as Breda O’Brien. Mansplaining to “shrill” women and insulting them for daring to call him on his inconsistencies as someone who’s supposed to be pro choice! He’s been deleting tweets where he says “Abortion is murder” in a vain attempt to be down with the wimmins. He uses prolie phrases such as “unborn children” and actually calls on pro choice people to “join the likes of Youth Defence in grieving for the dead”
Here’s more anti-choice witterings from Lynch http://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/prochoicers-should-see-abortion-as-a-necessary-social-evil-34222919.html
Surely if he votes YES to repeal then all is forgiven?
Prolie supporters aren’t in favour of allowing a vote.
I am pro life and think a referendum is long overdue. It’s about time that people of childbearing age can have a say