T

There’s a lot of negativity floating about at the minute. The upcoming referendum on repealing the Eighth Amendment has been hugely contentious so far and we’re still a full month out from the vote. A whole bunch of people feel very strongly about it on both sides and, as a result, debates get very heated very quickly. I would never discourage someone from being passionate about something, especially when it comes to an issue as important as abortion, but if we really want to have a conversation, a bit of understanding could go a long way.

Personally, I’m pro-choice. I think the current legislation is dangerous and equating the life of a foetus to the life of a woman is, to my mind, unreasonable. I also believe that women should have the freedom to decide what’s right for their own bodies, and it’s sad that they have to ask for our permission in the first place. A lot of you might feel as though abortion should remain illegal but, as entitled as you are to your opinion, I fundamentally disagree. I suppose that’s why we’re having a referendum.

When people differ on a subject this emotive, tensions often flare and friendly chats turn argumentative in the blink of an eye. But what does that actually achieve? Maybe it might make you feel a bit better about yourself. You might leave the interaction thinking, “Jeez, I made a right fool out of that fella on Facebook,” or, “I wasn’t long quietening her,” but is your goal to convince or to ridicule? Taking the piss out of someone on the other side or denigrating their beliefs isn’t going to change their mind. If anything, slating the other campaign is more likely to fortify it than break it down.

The only way of reaching someone is by having an actual conversation with them, and to do that you have to make a genuine effort to understand where they’re coming from.

Why does something that seems so inherently right to me, seem inherently wrong to someone, say, 25 years older than me? (I don’t want to generalise but the rift in this particular instance does appear to be largely generational.) I think about this quite a bit. In 25 years’ time, will a new law be proposed that we whole-heartedly oppose, but our future children insist must be passed in the name of progress?

It’s a scary enough thought – especially as we’re part of a generation who consider ourselves to be very liberal and open-minded - but it’s entirely possible. And it opens your eyes to the fact that we think the way we do for a reason. We are, to a large extent, products of our environment. When it comes down to it, I feel the way I do about abortion because of factors like my upbringing, the people around me and the cultural influences I’ve been exposed to. The same is true for those on the other side of this debate. We’re basically the same. For whatever reason, we just ended up on different sides of this specific divide.

When you look at it from that perspective, you can talk to someone and say, “Right, I completely understand where you’re coming from but this is where I’m coming from…” With this kind of approach, maybe you’ll be able to change a mind or two before May 25 - regardless of whether you’re voting ‘yes’ or ‘no’.

And even if it doesn’t work, it’s a lot better than slagging each other off on Twitter for the next four weeks.