What’s your most controversial opinion? **Read OP** **Mod Warning in Post #8023**

Drugs which even in small amounts really impact a person's ability to act rationally. Meth for example. I'd be in favor of legalized weed but then be very harsh on coke, heroin etc.

His children would be Irish of course.

The same way Rashidat Adeleke is Irish but her parents are not.

What if those drugs were sold in standardised small doses? So you could get a small bump of coke or amphetamine? Similar to how you can buy a measure of whiskey or a can of 5% lager? You wouldn't behave rationally having drunk a bottle of whiskey or s slab of lager, so they are sold infairly standard units.

Someone who has been born and raised here or grew up here or spent a large part of their formative years here.

Someone who emigrates here as an adult and has no connection to the country other than they moved here is not Irish.

Same way if I emigrated to France in my 20's and ended up living there for the rest of my life I would never be French and I think most people would agree with this.

The internet has the potential to give everyone the Library of Alexandria in their pocket, instead we opt for The Daily Star.

Poetic !

Actually the ancient Greeks had it all sussed a long long time ago. We've just been given the keys to heaven and instead choose annilation.

(Edit yes the Library of Alexandria was Ancient Egypt ... Anyway)

They are Irish as they have been born and raised here.

It's not that difficult a concept to understand in fairness.

”Green” is essentially the way to go into the future - the current Green political parties don’t have a clue - but the other parties like FF, FG and SF have their heads berried in the sand on this topic - we need our main parties to take on the Green agenda

People living long term under the rule of autocrats are fundamentally a weak people. I see no strength in the likes of the Russians, Chinese, North Korean or other such people for accepting a dictator as their lot.

Ultimately, people are the power, and accepting living under a dictator is a sign of a weak-willed people. Of course there are various reasons why this happens, but ultimately they are the ones that allow it to happen.

Whatever the faults of the West, Western democracy is by far and away the greatest form of governance the world has ever seen, offers the greatest freedoms, and despite some situations, puts the power of the country in the hands of the people.

And the West flirting with this type of autocracy is a potential disaster for humanity, and I believe the Western flirtation with autocracy is a sign of our decline into weak-willed societies like Russia and China.

I believe certain cultures: in middle eastern and certain African countries due to inherent tribalism baked in, cannot ever manage a democracy.

Best case scenario: a strongman of a dominant group is better than equally matched but perpetually warring small groups.

While no one is justifying it, at least i don't think anyone is anyway, the recent Natasha O’Brien case. It's yet another excuse for the same groups and people to push their agenda. She herself being one by claiming it only happened because she's female. These random attacks can happen to anyone both male and female, yet we're being led to believe it only happens to female. Would there be the same outrage if it had been a male? Orf course not an if anyone is to say otherwise the greatest cop out of ''whataboutism'' would be used.

It's also worrying to see ex female members slate the DF when they know full well they couldn't do anything until the trial was over before they could act.

I also see Limerick Pride getting in on it now by telling the DF they're not welcome to join them in their events.

"She herself being one by claiming it only happened because she's female."

Fair play to her for coming out against the judges decision but if it was a male or a woman from a lower class knocked into unconsciousness I very much doubt the media would have latched onto it as much.