Counter-evidence. Proof, innit.nick_md wrote:Okay that's a fair point, will anything change your mind?
Vela wrote:I know why everyone can vote since its in the constitution, but there is no reason men should be voting in this.
RedDave2 wrote:Go on so. enlighten me why a major aspect of society should only be voted on by half? (Voting yes by the way)Vela wrote:I know why everyone can vote since its in the constitution, but there is no reason men should be voting in this.
Kow wrote:Also, while the physical process of an apron may be entirely the woman's.
Diluted Dante wrote:It shouldn't be subject to a vote at all, it should just happen, but that's the stupidity of the constitution.
Kow wrote:There shouldn't be a referendum on this any more than there should be one on letting women vote. It's already permitted by European law, which should be automatically adopted, without all this bullshit.
Vela wrote:
If you are a man inclined to vote no: Your vote is intended to limit the rights of a woman to choose, by removing the option of abortion or maintaining the current ban.
Liveinadive wrote:I'm not sure that is the angle "No" voters are coming from. Their intentions are saving babies from being murdered, gender doesn't come into their argument. Just to clarify I would very much vote Yes if I was Irish and don't agree with No arguments.Vela wrote:If you are a man inclined to vote no: Your vote is intended to limit the rights of a woman to choose, by removing the option of abortion or maintaining the current ban.
RedDave2 wrote:The idea that it is about limiting choice ignores the view on the no side that they feel it isnt a choice to be made at all.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!