Emotional campaigns ‘do little to help us decide’

In our increasingly polarised society, attitudes to the fast-approaching referendum amongst students are mixed and tense. Some fear the decision to be made whilst others have been campaigning for years for their voices to be heard on this issue. As we are all well aware, the importance and difficulties surrounding this referendum lie in the fact that the decision to be made concerns one of the most complex things known to mankind, life itself.

Debates, discussions and campaigns have been heated and emotional often leading to students being unable to develop informed opinions. From a neutral standpoint, there are tragic stories and strong arguments on both sides. Yet these arguments are too often consumed by emotion.

Nasty encounters between Yes and No campaigners on our city streets are unnecessary and do little to enable voters to reach a decision. Trendy ‘Repeal’ jumpers endorsed by celebrities, posters on campuses and Repeal parties in pubs run the risk of encouraging students to accept a viewpoint without being fully informed.

Having real babies at ‘Vote No’ stands and erecting posters with thought-provoking images also risk capturing the voter’s hearts without informing their heads.

The run-up to this referendum has consisted of endless attempts to swing voters by appealing to their emotions.

Quite apart from politics, religion and the media, students are aware that this referendum ultimately falls to their own personal opinions, experiences and morality. Therefore, it is inevitable that opinions will differ greatly.

Given the extremely personal nature of viewpoints on this difficult issue is it acceptable to simply ask us to vote Yes or No?

The Government is asking too much. They have attempted to over-simplify a complex issue without providing us with all the information. Instead of legislating for our concerns and legislating for the issues, they have offered us an all or nothing option.

The result of this is that with only a few days to go many of us have not and cannot decide how to vote.

A draft sample of future legislation could have helped, instead of leaving us to guess what the legislature may or may not do. Both sides have sought desperately to enforce their broad viewpoints whilst ignoring the subtler questions.

Whilst it has been proven that the current legislation is flawed the question on our minds is whether it is flawed enough to warrant a total repeal or whether it should simply be amended and improved?

Asking us to sweepingly vote Yes is also unfair without answering questions such as whether Irish doctors will be willing to perform abortions, whether there will be waiting lists as in most aspects of our healthcare system or whether aftercare mental health support will be provided?

Without providing answers to our subtle questions, emotional campaigns do little to help us reach our decision.

The complexity of this issue warranted this referendum to be handled differently and in a more practical, more informed, more thought-out and less emotional manner. The failure to do so has made a difficult decision even harder.