Yes/Yes campaign and misinformation

[Fugue]

Bucky's hot take is to ask jmayo if they have the lotto numbers for this weekend. As they clearly seem possessed of an extraordinary clairvoyance that has Bucky is awe.

Good point Buckster.
Hey, isn't it quite similar to when some people use the phrase "faux outrage" as if they can read minds and conclude lack of genuine intent?

[Arthur Cocks]

I will be voting yes in both. When you have people like Conor McGregor, John Waters and every sort of looper on twitter advocating for a no then you know yes is the only logical option.

[marhay70]

I will be voting yes in both. When you have people like Conor McGregor, John Waters and every sort of looper on twitter advocating for a no then you know yes is the only logical option.

If these individuals said eating was a good idea, would you stop? Why not assess the subject and have the courage of your own convictions?

[PogMoThoin22]

I found this interpretation on Reddit

1. ⁠Family Amendment

Before: The Constitution says a family is based on a marriage between two people. After: The Constitution would say a family can also be other groups of people who care for each other, like a single parent and their child, grandparents taking care of grandchildren, or people living together for a long time.

2. Care Amendment

Before: The Constitution has a special mention that women should not have to work outside the home if it stops them from taking care of their family. After: This part would be removed, and instead, there would be a new part saying that the government should support anyone who takes care of others, no matter if they are a man or a woman, and whether they take care of someone inside or outside the home.

Basically the removing of Catholicism's from the constitution which is a good thing. However, I was voting yes to both, now I'm unsure. Been reading and there's an interpretation of the referendum care amendment that absolves the government of aiding care for others if there's someone around to do the caring/paying of said care. Care groups are not happy with it.

[Fugue]

If these individuals said eating was a good idea, would you stop? Why not assess the subject and have the courage of your own convictions?

Another of their ilk, Andrew Tate, says he takes issue with eating.

[marhay70]

Another of their ilk, Andrew Tate, says he takes issue with eating.

Well if he follows up on that, he shouldn't bother anyone for too long.

[jmayo]

Agreed. Can't understand such vitriol towards Holohan at all.

All one has to do is see his comments on the cervical smear cockup to know the measure of the man.

For instance see this response to his attempts at rewriting history in order to make himself less culpable.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/y ... 49818.html

He hasn't had the balls to apologise only to offer regret and sympathy.

Vicky Phelans solicitor Cian O'Carrol had to challenge RTE not to show some segments of the Meaning of Life interview with the toad Tony Holohan when he stated there were “no delayed diagnoses” involving CervicalCheck.

He is lying prick he tried to hide the facts to protect the inept system.

People can laud the fooker all they want for his actions during covid, but the true mark of the man has been there since the cervical controversy.

And for all the stuff about him working hard and leaving his dying wife, he was damn quick to find a replacement.

[jmayo]

I found this interpretation on Reddit

1. ⁠Family Amendment

Before: The Constitution says a family is based on a marriage between two people. After: The Constitution would say a family can also be other groups of people who care for each other, like a single parent and their child, grandparents taking care of grandchildren, or people living together for a long time.

Or like a muslim bloke and his 3 wives which would mean the 3 wives and all associated kids could then avail of family reunification to this country ?

2. Care Amendment

Before: The Constitution has a special mention that women should not have to work outside the home if it stops them from taking care of their family. After: This part would be removed, and instead, there would be a new part saying that the government should support anyone who takes care of others, no matter if they are a man or a woman, and whether they take care of someone inside or outside the home.

Basically the removing of Catholicism's from the constitution which is a good thing. However, I was voting yes to both, now I'm unsure. Been reading and there's an interpretation of the referendum care amendment that absolves the government of aiding care for others if there's someone around to do the caring/paying of said care. Care groups are not happy with it.

Is mentioning woman or women now a Catholicism?

[marhay70]

I found this interpretation on Reddit

1. ⁠Family Amendment

Before: The Constitution says a family is based on a marriage between two people. After: The Constitution would say a family can also be other groups of people who care for each other, like a single parent and their child, grandparents taking care of grandchildren, or people living together for a long time.

2. Care Amendment

Before: The Constitution has a special mention that women should not have to work outside the home if it stops them from taking care of their family. After: This part would be removed, and instead, there would be a new part saying that the government should support anyone who takes care of others, no matter if they are a man or a woman, and whether they take care of someone inside or outside the home.

Basically the removing of Catholicism's from the constitution which is a good thing. However, I was voting yes to both, now I'm unsure. Been reading and there's an interpretation of the referendum care amendment that absolves the government of aiding care for others if there's someone around to do the caring/paying of said care. Care groups are not happy with it.

That's just it. The Government, supposedly our representatives, want to absolve the State from any responsibility in the care of the sick and infirm.
They dress it up in the pretty stuff but as the saying goes, "The Devil is in the detail". It's like the Budget telling you all the goodies and then hitting you with the increases in excise tax, income tax, USC etc. An economic bottom line argument.

[PogMoThoin22]

Is mentioning woman or women now a Catholicism?

Nope, but if you read the first paragraph of our constitution you would see it's basically a prayer book. Every bit of this needs to be re-written from scratch in proper language removing all religious references

CONSTITUTION OF IRELAND

In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred,

We, the people of Éire,

Humbly acknowledging all our obligations to our Divine Lord, Jesus Christ, Who sustained our fathers through centuries of trial,

Gratefully remembering their heroic and unremitting struggle to regain the rightful independence of our Nation,

And seeking to promote the common good, with due observance of Prudence, Justice and Charity, so that the dignity and freedom of the individual may be assured, true social order attained, the unity of our country restored, and concord established with other nations,

Do hereby adopt, enact, and give to ourselves this Constitution.

[mrmercedes]

Eh , don't really see why our constitution needs to be rewritten .
Yera whey did we even bother gaining independence if all we want to do is merge into nothingness.

Think it's quite insulting to those who died freeing the country and developing out constitution to say we should just re write it.

[PogMoThoin22]

Eh , don't really see why our constitution needs to be rewritten .
Yera whey did we even bother gaining independence if all we want to do is merge into nothingness.

Think it's quite insulting to those who died freeing the country and developing out constitution to say we should just re write it.

It was written in 1937 by Bishop McQuaid and Dev another devout Catholic. Ireland is a different place now we've nearly rid ourselves of the bastards we turned to after we got rid of the Brits!

[knownunknown]

That press conference where the three boyos walked out; Varadkar has since said on highland radio that Ben Scanlan of gript media wasn’t called upon and the press conference was over.

Here Ben responds proving many reporters ask questions just by shouting them out and nobody ended the press conference, they just walked out. More misinformation or disinformation from the government.

[6234567]

Well, I will be voting No and No.
This government has shown again and again that they are untrustworthy and incompetent, willfully so in most cases.
Therefore I, in good conscience, will not do anything to enable this untrustworthy and incompetent entity to change anything.
At best they will mess it up, at worst it's another nail in the coffin of the autonomous nation-state (remember those?)

[marhay70]

It was written in 1937 by Bishop McQuaid and Dev another devout Catholic. Ireland is a different place now we've nearly rid ourselves of the bastards we turned to after we got rid of the Brits!

Not judging by RTE we haven't. Any time there's an incident in any rural town, who is the first person RTE trot out to mouth platitudes? Not the leader of the local council, or the local school principal, but the Parish Priest. And we still willingly hand over our four-year-olds to be indoctrinated in nonsensical ritual both in schools and in the RCC's bedfellow, the GAA.

[PogMoThoin22]

Not judging by RTE we haven't. Any time there's an incident in any rural town, who is the first person RTE trot out to mouth platitudes? Not the leader of the local council, or the local school principal, but the Parish Priest. And we still willingly hand over our four-year-olds to be indoctrinated in nonsensical ritual both in schools and in the RCC's bedfellow, the GAA.

Yeah we have a long way to go but at least they're no longer interfering in politics keeping us years behind other countries. How many referenda have we had now to become more modern?

Here's a of things the Catholic Church has opposed in Ireland


1944 – Tampons (may arouse women)

1950 – Mother & Child Scheme

1970 – Studying at Trinity College

1973 – Married women in the Civil Service

1985 – Contraception

1986 – Divorce

1993 – Decriminalisation of homosexuality

1996 – Divorce

2005 – Ferns report into child abuse

2010 – Civil Partnerships

2013 – Abortions if mother’s life was at risk

2015 – Equal Marriage

2018 – Abortion

[marhay70]

Yeah we have a long way to go but at least they're no longer interfering in politics keeping us years behind other countries. How many referenda have we had now to become more modern?

Here's a of things the Catholic Church has opposed in Ireland


1944 – Tampons (may arouse women)

1950 – Mother & Child Scheme

1970 – Studying at Trinity College

1973 – Married women in the Civil Service

1985 – Contraception

1986 – Divorce

1993 – Decriminalisation of homosexuality

1996 – Divorce

2005 – Ferns report into child abuse

2010 – Civil Partnerships

2013 – Abortions if mother’s life was at risk

2015 – Equal Marriage

2018 – Abortion

You're preaching to the converted here. I've spent most of my adult life in one battle or another, with the RCC

[BrianD3]

I've lost any respect I had for Family Carers Ireland (NGO supposedly representing carers) over this. Yesterday on six one news, a representative made several false statements. Said that a Yes vote would place an "onus" on the state to support carers. She then used the example of the carer's support grant being cut a few years ago during the financial crisis and said this couldn't happen after a Yes vote. This is absolutely false.

I can't work out what is going on with these NGOs. Are they naive, useful idiots? Or more cynically, are they adopting a certain position because they receive state funding? Or even more cynically, do they want non committal language (strive) in the constitution so they have a bigger role arguing and lobbying over the striving that the state is or isn't doing. Like a legal advisor who wants the law to be vague = more arguments and challenges = more money for the legal profession?

[PogMoThoin22]

Leo Thatcher, what a classist elitist wanker!!

[PogMoThoin22]

Can't see a yes vote now

[6234567]

Well I'm not overly confident for a No and No result.
I'll have to be prepared for that.
The reason for this is simply that I'll never underestimate the servility of the Irish electorate.

[PogMoThoin22]

The ditch are publishing this letter this evening, some politicians are already tweeting about it, it must be good!

[PogMoThoin22]

https://www.ontheditch.com/attorney-gen ... e-in-full/

[jmayo]

And the journal beloved of all woke and hip have confirmed it.

I suppose if Gript had run with it they would claim it was misinformation.

If it does pass then I could forsee a judicial challenge based on the the government

Wasn't the electoral commission meant to ensure we had all the facts?

In order to protect the fairness and integrity of elections and referendums the Electoral Commission will:

monitor, investigate and combat the dissemination of disinformation and misinformation;
monitor, investigate, identify and combat manipulative or inauthentic behaviour;
monitor, investigate and identify trends in respect of disinformation, misinformation and manipulative or inauthentic behaviour.

I see they only mentioned disinformation and misinformation.
Nothing about lack of information.
how convenient.
Maybe we could consider it manipulate behaviour ?

Then again minister Martin can be done for misinformation.

[Del.Monte]

I fully intended to vote today and to vote No/No instead of spoiling my vote but circumstances, and eventually fatigue, mean that walking into town for a third time is not going to happen. Guess they will manage without me.