Nobody needs to get married to start a family, it's not 1950.
Try reading your quote again. Let me give you an analogy:
"Working is primarily about money, main purpose being the need to earn enough to live"
Does that mean that I am saying that if you have enough money to survive without working that you should not be allowed to work?
Many people would agree with her that marriage is primarily (not wholly... she never said that) about children. Others can disagree if it doesn't apply to them, but I think that primarily it is about children. Stating that fact is not making it illegal to marry for other reasons. Would you not be aware that the reason many people get married is to start a family? Again, I'm not saying all. I'm saying many. This is common sense
The bit in the quotes is what she said. That's how quotes work.
Anyway I'm done commenting on a washed up former TD on a thread about 2 other clowns.
Do you have a source for her saying that "infertile people have no right to get married" or is it just some non-sequitur you made up yourself?
Thanks
Well considering Renua got about 2% of the vote and she disappeared soon after but yet you think she is "badly missed" would make me think your own grasp on politics is weak.
Not defending Wallace or Daly by the way. I think they are all nobs.
If you think she is in the same bracket as Wallace and Daly you really know nothing about politics.
She believed than infertile people had no right to get married.
"marriage is primarily about children, main purpose being to propagate and create"
Have they resigned in order to stand up for their "principles"? I wasn't aware that they had
You don't have to agree with Creighton's beliefs but they would be legitimate beliefs held by some people.
Wallace and Daly's guff is incoherent and inconsistent.
You still haven't explained why you would associate her with the label "shame"
You could say that about anyone including Wallace and Daly surely.
The important word you have said is if
The availability of well paying jobs is down to many factors. An important one being the political set-up there.
If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle
If there were well paying jobs a-plenty in Russia, and none here, they probably would.
Emigration doesn't have much to do with 'values' imo.
What did she do though that caused shame? Genuine question.
My understanding is that she held views which were not really in line with the majority of the public and then resigned because she was being pressured not to uphold her own principles by her party
I'm not even getting into whether she is missed or not. Just asking about the "shame" aspect
There are a lot of Brazilians in Dublin, never mind Europe. Plenty in the US also. I'm not sure whether their population has the same appetite for emigrating to Russia. Anyone got any stats to prove me wrong?
A South American political view on the war in Ukraine doesn't really hold much water for its relative geopolitical distance in the matter. Especially when his rationale is as painfully naive as he's quoted:
What was the reason for the Ukraine invasion? NATO? Then the U.S. and Europe should have said: “Ukraine won’t join NATO.” That would have solved the problem.
I guess Lula didn't read the literal essay by Putin arguing Ukraine was part of the Russian motherland.
She wasn't missed when I said it in April and she isn't missed now.
I was going to let this slide but...................Lucinda Creighton was one of the most able and articulate TDs out there. She is badly missed.
With the election of President Lula in Brazil, Wallace and Daly are now less isolated politically.
Many Brazilians in Ireland support Lula.
Lula said Zelensky was "as responsible as Putin for the war".
He also said "it’s not just Putin who is guilty. The US and the EU are also guilty."
Rubbish. Any state can leave NATO at any time. France ordered US bases out of its country but remained a US ally. You're just waffling trying (and failing) to fit history into some anti-US narrative.
An ally in the sense that "it was on the US team". Where it had to be, as it was a US vassal state. It has greater freedom to carry out an independent foreign policy today, owing to several factors, including the existence of the EU as a bloc of which a united Germany is the powerhouse, the disappearance of the USSR, and of course the relative decline in the strength of the USeconomy and the rise of China and the other BRICS.
Wait a minute, you said Germany wasn't a US ally - you seem to be confusing even yourself with your spin.
Yet Austria ended up neutral and unified, neither zone of occupation was forced to join an alliance.
West Germany saw it in its interest to join and stay in NATO, the example of France proved that they could have left at any time.
Anyway none of your whataboutery is at all relevant to the topic of this thread, Daly and Wallace's unwavering support for mass murderers provided they're anti-Western.
West Germany was a US ally, and East Germany was a USSR ally.
Neither of them had any choice in the matter though.
Total nonsense.
West Germany was a US ally before it joined NATO in 1955, the unified Germany is also.
Treaties between nations being an outcome of wars - who knew! 🙄
Whether a treaty is 'unequal' or not is a matter of opinion - but in the end it's military and economic power which determines whether treaties are renegotiated or not.
Vincent Browne's chickens coming home to roost. Hope he's embarrassed at the behaviour of his fledglings.
France was an ally of the US, Germany wasn't. I clearly remember British jets screaming past about 50 feet above my head back in the day when I worked in Germany.
As for Gibraltar and Guantanamo, they both came about as a result of wars, and the victors took what they wanted. Cuba was not a belligerent, but officially a part of Spain, along with the Philipines and Puerto Rico, IIRC. The Americans in that case were the warmongers, they used an accident as their excuse to go to war.
So whatever about Gibraltar and the Wars of the Spanish Succession - isn't it just a little disingenuous to call the outcome of the Spanish American War an "international treaty"? I think the Chinese have a term for this sort of thing: unequal treaties. The Brits on the other hand called it Gunboat Diplomacy.
I've seen a few people tweeting about those comments basically saying that we, as an electorate, need to take European elections more seriously. I hope that if Wallace runs again in 2024 that these comments, in particular, are brought up in any debates. There are a minority of voters out there with a soft spot for Russia but I doubt that there is hardly anyone out there who support the Iranian regime.
It'd be funny if it wasn't for the people dying. 🙄
Or with the very ‘best’ of his takes. Life is difficult enough so don’t make it any way more difficult. I need a bit of ‘light’ entertainment now and again and Wallace and Co are up there with Joe Duffy
Germany could ask the US to vacate their bases in the morning - France did exactly that in the late 1960s and didn't become a pariah state or anything.
Gibraltar and Guantanamo are the result of international treaties from long ago, if countries should be able to just do what they like regardless of agreements or laws we're left with.... the attempted destruction of Ukraine among many other things we'd rather not happen.
Closer to home, the UK has installations in part of our country.
Where in our country?
