Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Theresa Heaney on Vincent Browne

1…34689…21

Comments

  • #152
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,442 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    RobertKK wrote: »
    You say conspiracies but I wonder how much research you did on her views?

    Should we all have to accept gay marriage because you want it?

    Should we ignore what happened in Japan with the vaccine in question?

    Should we ignore that there is actual oestrogen pollution and some of it is man made?

    She is credible as anyone else on the ballot, some who say they are Catholic and vote for abortion as a treatment for suicide.
    Others on the ballot who belong to a party that supports/supported the IRA.
    FF who are still not very credible.
    Labour whose leader in the past supported regimes such as those in North Korea.
    Theresa Heaney and the the man from Ballyhea are the two who seemed to tell it as they believed it to be, better to have people who are honest with their views than those who lie about what they supported or pretend their past or that of their party is not relevant.

    I actually went and looked up details about the HPV vaccine. It's pretty much harmless. No worse than any other vaccine.

    as for the rest... The woman is deluded. If your only criteria that someone is honest, not that they actually make sense or are sane, then you have really, really low standards.

    As for gay marriage, yes you do have to accept it because everyone else does. It's called equality and democracy. If people were forcing you to marry a man or suck cock, it'd be different, but seriously, let people do what they want so long as it doesn't hurt others.

    In an atheist dominated country you would be allowed practice your beliefs, although if you said they out loud people would challange them and engage you in debate.
    In a catholic run country gay people would be imprisoned. Teenage girls would be sent to laundries and priests would be beyond question.


  • #153
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Nodin wrote: »
    Ahhh. So one genuine error means that a well is forever tainted?

    Applying that logic to the RCC, and bearing in mind that what went on was no error, nor a singular (or even rare) occurrence....................


    You post as if peer review of vaccines in the Lancet is flawless, I never said the RCC is flawless, it is a church of sinners so was never flawless.

    It was more than a genuine error in the Lancet, the investigation into it described it as fraud, and it was not a scientist who uncovered the fraud.

    From the British Medical Journal: few people could deny that it was fatally flawed both scientifically and ethically. But it has taken the diligent scepticism of one man, standing outside medicine and science, to show that the paper was in fact an elaborate fraud.

    http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c7452 Fraud is not a genuine error.


  • #154
    Muise...
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,512 ✭✭✭Muise...


    RobertKK wrote: »
    You post as if peer review of vaccines in the Lancet is flawless, I never said the RCC is flawless, it is a church of sinners so was never flawless.

    It was more than a genuine error in the Lancet, the investigation into it described it as fraud, and it was not a scientist who uncovered the fraud.

    From the British Medical Journal: few people could deny that it was fatally flawed both scientifically and ethically. But it has taken the diligent scepticism of one man, standing outside medicine and science, to show that the paper was in fact an elaborate fraud.

    http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c7452 Fraud is not a genuine error.

    The only thing your reference to the Lancet's publishing of Wakefield's fraudulent paper has to do with the thread is that both are based on idiots believing woo with an extremely dodgy agenda. The main difference is the Lancet had the balls to eventually see the error and amend it.


  • #155
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    RobertKK wrote: »
    You post as if peer review of vaccines in the Lancet is flawless, I never said the RCC is flawless, it is a church of sinners so was never flawless.

    It was more than a genuine error in the Lancet, the investigation into it described it as fraud, and it was not a scientist who uncovered the fraud.

    From the British Medical Journal: few people could deny that it was fatally flawed both scientifically and ethically. But it has taken the diligent scepticism of one man, standing outside medicine and science, to show that the paper was in fact an elaborate fraud.

    http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c7452 Fraud is not a genuine error.

    So they were wrong about something else. Let's ignore what they say now. Can you link to a study showing there is something wrong with the vaccine? Why is it only Japan having an issue with it? You and the catholic democrats are making serious claims but you have nothing to show you are right. If there was something wrong with it it needs to be stopped but there is nothing to suggest there is.

    Also are you trying to say the RCC made a genuine error?


  • #156
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Grayson wrote: »
    I actually went and looked up details about the HPV vaccine. It's pretty much harmless. No worse than any other vaccine.

    as for the rest... The woman is deluded. If your only criteria that someone is honest, not that they actually make sense or are sane, then you have really, really low standards.

    As for gay marriage, yes you do have to accept it because everyone else does. It's called equality and democracy. If people were forcing you to marry a man or suck cock, it'd be different, but seriously, let people do what they want so long as it doesn't hurt others.

    In an atheist dominated country you would be allowed practice your beliefs, although if you said they out loud people would challange them and engage you in debate.
    In a catholic run country gay people would be imprisoned. Teenage girls would be sent to laundries and priests would be beyond question.

    I will only have to accept gay marriage if my vote is taken away from me and I am not allowed vote, interestingly on a radio debate on national radio it was said to me that I should not vote if against it while being called a bigot.
    To me that was scary, like why have a referendum if one side is saying you should not vote and also call you names if you are against something, to me that is not freedom and that is not democracy, it is fascist in nature.
    Presuming I am alive when the vote comes around, I will be using my right to vote - I believe in the right to say no if one doesn't agree with something and I believe people shouldn't be bullied by name calling for whatever they believe or for what they are.
    There is an irony with people being for SSM and calling people names who are against it.

    I think she was honest in her opinions, people will choose to dismiss others that they don't want to believe if they choose to either ignore, play down or just totally dismiss an opinion that doesn't agree with them.

    In Japan they stopped the HPV vaccine from being compulsory after hundreds of cases where there was issues. We can pretend it has been pretty much harmless.

    The CDC report regarding the vaccine:
    the most commonly reported generalized symptoms are:
    • syncope (fainting)
    • dizziness
    • nausea
    • headache
    • fever
    • urticaria (hives)
    and the most commonly reported local symptoms are:
    • injection-site pain
    • redness
    • swelling
    Among the VAERS reports coded as "serious,” headache, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, dizziness, syncope, and generalized weakness are the most frequently reported symptoms.



    The complaints received due to adverse effects to the CDC are in the tens of thousands, despite low take up - 27% of those available for vaccination.


    There have been conventions held this year to discuss the safety of this vaccine, in Tokyo by their government, in London and elsewhere.


    It is not like governments agree to vaccinate people and cause other health problems for people, is it?...like narcolepsy from swine flu vaccine....


    The low standards are people who choose to dismiss things or people out of hand.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Muise... wrote: »
    The only thing your reference to the Lancet's publishing of Wakefield's fraudulent paper has to do with the thread is that both are based on idiots believing woo with an extremely dodgy agenda. The main difference is the Lancet had the balls to eventually see the error and amend it.

    It is easy to see the error of your way when you have nowhere else to run with the fake peer reviewed paper.

    The Lancet was found to have published fake stuff, not by its own investigations but by a journalist who had nothing to do with science.

    The Lancet did not see the error of its way until it was put into a position where they had no other option but to accept they could no longer continue this lie.


  • #158
    SaveOurLyric
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭SaveOurLyric


    Is this thread a general discussion on peer reviewed papers, or one specifically on The Lancet ?


  • #159
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    Nobody is preventing you from voting however I will happily admit that out saddens me that the rights of an individual have to be voted upon. Voting to restrict the rights of an individual is in itself morally reprehensible. Why do you feel your religious beliefs should dictate the lives of others? What negative impact would gay marriage have? There's tons of countries that have had it for years,it should be easy. So yep,it's bigoted to vote to restrict the rights of gay people but nobody is stopping you from doing so. Enjoy your martyr complex!

    Now,do you have any papers to backup your claims on cervical cancer vaccines killing people? Because it's fairly obvious why Theresa said it.

    Vaccines having side effects is pretty normal. The overall benefit of having the vaccine outweighs the tiny chance of negative effects. There's literally statistical analyses to take this into consideration. You haven't backed up death by hpv vaccine though .....

    There are 390000 vaers reports on it to date however it has been distributed to 57 million people. Serious side effects are not proven to be as a result of it. 92% are minor issues which sort of destroys your claims tbh.

    Are the cdc lying too? http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Vaccines/HPV/gardasil.html

    You quote them but reject their conclusions.


  • #160
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    RobertKK wrote: »
    I will only have to accept gay marriage if my vote is taken away from me and I am not allowed vote, interestingly on a radio debate on national radio it was said to me that I should not vote if against it while being called a bigot.
    To me that was scary, like why have a referendum if one side is saying you should not vote and also call you names if you are against something, to me that is not freedom and that is not democracy, it is fascist in nature.

    Its sure is fascism, if only you werent being a fascist yourself by your logic taking away others people right to choose because you feel like it.
    RobertKK wrote: »
    Presuming I am alive when the vote comes around, I will be using my right to vote - I believe in the right to say no if one doesn't agree with something and I believe people shouldn't be bullied by name calling for whatever they believe or for what they are.
    There is an irony with people being for SSM and calling people names who are against it.

    Because if you dont like something nobody can do it because...........
    RobertKK wrote: »
    I think she was honest in her opinions, people will choose to dismiss others that they don't want to believe if they choose to either ignore, play down or just totally dismiss an opinion that doesn't agree with them.

    And yet everyone else is a sheep. Your psychic powers are amazing.
    RobertKK wrote: »
    In Japan they stopped the HPV vaccine from being compulsory after hundreds of cases where there was issues. We can pretend it has been pretty much harmless.

    The CDC report regarding the vaccine:
    the most commonly reported generalized symptoms are:
    • syncope (fainting)
    • dizziness
    • nausea
    • headache
    • fever
    • urticaria (hives)
    and the most commonly reported local symptoms are:
    • injection-site pain
    • redness
    • swelling
    Among the VAERS reports coded as "serious,” headache, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, dizziness, syncope, and generalized weakness are the most frequently reported symptoms.



    The complaints received due to adverse effects to the CDC are in the tens of thousands, despite low take up - 27% of those available for vaccination.


    There have been conventions held this year to discuss the safety of this vaccine, in Tokyo by their government, in London and elsewhere.


    It is not like governments agree to vaccinate people and cause other health problems for people, is it?...like narcolepsy from swine flu vaccine....


    The low standards are people who choose to dismiss things or people out of hand.

    Oh wow, a vaccine has side effects. Thats completely new. Im sure you have that scientific study to back it up.
    RobertKK wrote: »
    It is easy to see the error of your way when you have nowhere else to run with the fake peer reviewed paper.

    The Lancet was found to have published fake stuff, not by its own investigations but by a journalist who had nothing to do with science.

    The Lancet did not see the error of its way until it was put into a position where they had no other option but to accept they could no longer continue this lie.
    Your sources are far better. As soon as you can make them up let us know what they are.


  • #161
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,442 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    RobertKK wrote: »
    I will only have to accept gay marriage if my vote is taken away from me and I am not allowed vote, interestingly on a radio debate on national radio it was said to me that I should not vote if against it while being called a bigot.
    To me that was scary, like why have a referendum if one side is saying you should not vote and also call you names if you are against something, to me that is not freedom and that is not democracy, it is fascist in nature.
    Presuming I am alive when the vote comes around, I will be using my right to vote - I believe in the right to say no if one doesn't agree with something and I believe people shouldn't be bullied by name calling for whatever they believe or for what they are.
    There is an irony with people being for SSM and calling people names who are against it.

    I think she was honest in her opinions, people will choose to dismiss others that they don't want to believe if they choose to either ignore, play down or just totally dismiss an opinion that doesn't agree with them.

    In Japan they stopped the HPV vaccine from being compulsory after hundreds of cases where there was issues. We can pretend it has been pretty much harmless.

    The CDC report regarding the vaccine:
    the most commonly reported generalized symptoms are:
    • syncope (fainting)
    • dizziness
    • nausea
    • headache
    • fever
    • urticaria (hives)
    and the most commonly reported local symptoms are:
    • injection-site pain
    • redness
    • swelling
    Among the VAERS reports coded as "serious,” headache, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, dizziness, syncope, and generalized weakness are the most frequently reported symptoms.



    The complaints received due to adverse effects to the CDC are in the tens of thousands, despite low take up - 27% of those available for vaccination.


    There have been conventions held this year to discuss the safety of this vaccine, in Tokyo by their government, in London and elsewhere.


    It is not like governments agree to vaccinate people and cause other health problems for people, is it?...like narcolepsy from swine flu vaccine....


    The low standards are people who choose to dismiss things or people out of hand.

    I took a pill to give up smoking. All was fine for 4 weeks. Then one morning I woke up so bloated I thought I was pregnant. I farted non stop for two days. there on the leaflet was "Side effect:- Bloating and wind"

    There's side effects for every single drug. The prevalence of it is what is important. is it within statistical norms. 5 out of 10 is bad. 5 out of 100,000 isn't. And you didn't provide any of that info. As a matter of interest do you think every drug/vaccine with side effects should be banned?

    Regarding gay marriage, I have absolutely no idea how someone can be against it. It doesn't harm anyone. All it is, is someone telling another person they're not allowed so something because it makes them uncomfortable.

    I think it's one of those beliefs like making women wear burkas. Just because someone is offended by a woman's face is no reason to make every woman cover up their face.

    I've never seen anyone provide any links to any studies, or facts which show that gay marriage is bad for society in any way at all. There is no rational reason to be against gay marriage, just emotive ones. And if the only argument against it is that it makes someone uncomfortable, that's no reason to remove rights from someone. Catholicism makes me uncomfortable. I don't think we should close churches.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    I'm just wondering why Robert didn't choose to link to the cdc page which he cites,it appears he doesn't agree with their actual conclusions so just selectively quotes to backup his views.


  • #163
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    I'm just wondering why Robert didn't choose to link to the cdc page which he cites,it appears he doesn't agree with their actual conclusions so just selectively quotes to backup his views.

    I think at this stage if we saw a link half the thread will need to be treated for shock


  • #164
    Zaph
    Registered Users, Subscribers, Registered Users 2 Posts: 47,418 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    DazMarz wrote: »
    I took great pleasure today when I was filling in my ballot paper. Before I had filled in my #1, I went straight to Theresa Heaney and put a nice big "15" next to her name...

    So you voted for her then? Now obviously she'll be long gone before it would ever get to 15th preference transfers, but it always amazes me how many people think they're supposed to give a preference to every candidate on the ballot paper.


  • #165
    Muise...
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,512 ✭✭✭Muise...


    RobertKK wrote: »
    It is easy to see the error of your way when you have nowhere else to run with the fake peer reviewed paper.

    The Lancet was found to have published fake stuff, not by its own investigations but by a journalist who had nothing to do with science.

    The Lancet did not see the error of its way until it was put into a position where they had no other option but to accept they could no longer continue this lie.

    And if you see the error of your stance against gay marriage and the safety of cervical cancer vaccines, will you accept it? Or will you stick to your guns and find an example where something completely unrelated was incorrect?


  • #166
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,222 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Zaph wrote: »
    So you voted for her then? Now obviously she'll be long gone before it would ever get to 15th preference transfers, but it always amazes me how many people think they're supposed to give a preference to every candidate on the ballot paper.

    I wouldn't even give her (or Mullen) an 8,000,000,000th preference on the ballot paper.


  • #167
    kowloon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,187 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    A single dose of the pill dropped in any waterway in Ireland could render the entire population infertile due to the 'homoeopathy effect' (it has 'homo' in the name, so you know it's bad). Either way, it's going to be like Children of Men in a few short years.


  • #168
    Turtwig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    If you have a strain of the influenza virus you've a chance of developing nacrolepsy. Unfortunately, that also means that some vaccines, especially 'live' ones, have a chance of giving you nacrolepsy. the odds from the vaccination are much lower.

    Everything from the common banana to the potato has side effects. It's when the literature and manufacturer leaflet carries statements like:
    "Serious and fatal side effects have occurred"
    That you know this shizz not's to be taken lightly.

    Note: by the way, that doesn't necessarily mean the drug is unsafe for you. It just means there's a high categories of risks associated with it. And, usually, more thorough pre-screening of your body is required. Or the medicine is to be used in serious cases whereby your health would be severely compromised otherwise.


  • #169
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 16,339 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    RobertKK wrote: »
    The CDC report regarding the vaccine:
    the most commonly reported generalized symptoms are:
    • syncope (fainting)
    • dizziness
    • nausea
    • headache
    • fever
    • urticaria (hives)
    and the most commonly reported local symptoms are:
    • injection-site pain
    • redness
    • swelling

    I'm on blood pressure medication. Many of the above side effects are noted on the information sheet.

    Regarding the injection site symptoms, how many people have ever reported having an injection without those symptoms?


  • #170
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    RobertKK wrote: »
    I will only have to accept gay marriage if my vote is taken away from me and I am not allowed vote, interestingly on a radio debate on national radio it was said to me that I should not vote if against it while being called a bigot.
    To me that was scary, like why have a referendum if one side is saying you should not vote and also call you names if you are against something, to me that is not freedom and that is not democracy, it is fascist in nature.
    .

    ...sex the man forcing his morals on others.


    RobertKK wrote: »
    In Japan they stopped the HPV vaccine from being compulsory after hundreds of cases where there was issues. We can pretend it has been pretty much harmless.
    .


    Yet over a year after, no-one else has, nor has it been entirely stopped in Japan.


  • #171
    Anita Blow
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,935 ✭✭✭Anita Blow


    Everyone can take solace in the fact that she's garnered <1% of the vote in RTE's exit poll. Nice to see the electorate overwhelmingly agrees she belongs in the middle ages.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    I'm just wondering why Robert didn't choose to link to the cdc page which he cites,it appears he doesn't agree with their actual conclusions so just selectively quotes to backup his views.


    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/HPV/index.html

    I could have posted more, but the CDC is easily accessed.


  • #173
    Bubbaclaus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,460 ✭✭✭Bubbaclaus


    Anita Blow wrote: »
    Everyone can take solace in the fact that she's garnered <1% of the vote in RTE's exit poll. Nice to see the electorate overwhelmingly agrees she belongs in the middle ages.

    Hilarious. How many votes does she need to get her deposit back?


  • #174
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    RobertKK wrote: »
    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/HPV/index.html

    I could have posted more, but the CDC is easily accessed.

    I already posted it and dealt with your claims. You're simply wrong and don't appear to have read all the CDC report.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=90529291&postcount=159


  • #175
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Nodin wrote: »
    ...sex the man forcing his morals on others.






    Yet over a year after, no-one else has, nor has it been entirely stopped in Japan.

    It is not me forcing my morals on anyone, a referendum is to ask the people for their views on a certain subject.
    Otherwise we should do away with democracy and just allow the government to change the constitution without asking what the people want.
    A majority may want same sex marriage, a majority may not want it. It will be the people who decide, to say one is imposing their morals is a nonsensical argument as voting yes is also someone voting for what they believe is moral.

    Sometimes it seems only liberal morals are excepted, if not liberal one is likely to be branded something like morally reprehensible.

    I grew up and marriage was always between opposite sexes, It was nothing to do with religion per se.
    I don't support same sex marriage as I don't believe it is necessary, and it has been a very convenient thing for politicians who have used it in a time of economic uncertainty as something to take attention away from the real issues.
    A swathe of the nation have been akin to brainwashed into accepting it as this new right, promoted on TV, radio and other media.
    Oh you are a bigot, a homophobe or someother form of hateful person if you don't accept it.
    I hate no one as I feel hate is the most wasteful of emotions as it is negative and does one no good. Yet to not support it, one is told they are hateful.
    I believe in freedom, freedom means I don't have to agree with SSM if I don't believe in it as a concept.
    Trying to make conform only makes the issue something that is contentious. It is like telling someone they must believe in Catholicism, Islam, Judaism or whatever and yet you can't make yourself believe in any of them. It is not because you hate them, it is just you don't believe in it.
    I don't believe in marriage between two people of the same sex.
    When someone calls someone a name for that, it doesn't change opinion, it shows a lack of understanding why.
    I can accept some people strongly believe in it, some people believe in a God, other don't. You can't make someone believe in something that they aren't in a position to believe in.
    We would be better off accepting that. Saying one is bigoted for not supporting SSM is like saying one is somehow less moral if they are atheist.
    It lacks reasoning.


  • #176
    Bubbaclaus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,460 ✭✭✭Bubbaclaus


    RobertKK wrote: »
    I don't support same sex marriage as I don't believe it is necessary

    What the hell? Do you realise how idiotic that argument is?

    Of course you don't think its necessary. For the thousands of gay men and women in the country that want to get married to the person they love it is a very necessary thing.

    What you are sprouting is the exact same as:

    Man in 1800s "I don't support women voting as I don't believe it is necessary"

    White person in 1900s "I don't support black rights as I don't believe it is necessary"


  • #177
    hotmail.com
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,746 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    RobertKK wrote: »
    It is not me forcing my morals on anyone, a referendum is to ask the people for their views on a certain subject.
    Otherwise we should do away with democracy and just allow the government to change the constitution without asking what the people want.
    A majority may want same sex marriage, a majority may not want it. It will be the people who decide, to say one is imposing their morals is a nonsensical argument as voting yes is also someone voting for what they believe is moral.

    Sometimes it seems only liberal morals are excepted, if not liberal one is likely to be branded something like morally reprehensible.

    I grew up and marriage was always between opposite sexes, It was nothing to do with religion per se.
    I don't support same sex marriage as I don't believe it is necessary, and it has been a very convenient thing for politicians who have used it in a time of economic uncertainty as something to take attention away from the real issues.
    A swathe of the nation have been akin to brainwashed into accepting it as this new right, promoted on TV, radio and other media.
    Oh you are a bigot, a homophobe or someother form of hateful person if you don't accept it.
    I hate no one as I feel hate is the most wasteful of emotions as it is negative and does one no good. Yet to not support it, one is told they are hateful.
    I believe in freedom, freedom means I don't have to agree with SSM if I don't believe in it as a concept.
    Trying to make conform only makes the issue something that is contentious. It is like telling someone they must believe in Catholicism, Islam, Judaism or whatever and yet you can't make yourself believe in any of them. It is not because you hate them, it is just you don't believe in it.
    I don't believe in marriage between two people of the same sex.
    When someone calls someone a name for that, it doesn't change opinion, it shows a lack of understanding why.
    I can accept some people strongly believe in it, some people believe in a God, other don't. You can't make someone believe in something that they aren't in a position to believe in.
    We would be better off accepting that. Saying one is bigoted for not supporting SSM is like saying one is somehow less moral if they are atheist.
    It lacks reasoning.

    Ridiculous post.


  • #178
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Bubbaclaus wrote: »
    What the hell? Do you realise how idiotic that argument is?

    Of course you don't think its necessary. For the thousands of gay men and women in the country that want to get married to the person they love it is a very necessary thing.

    What you are sprouting is the exact same as:

    Man in 1800s "I don't support women voting as I don't believe it is necessary"

    White person in 1900s "I don't support black rights as I don't believe it is necessary"

    I don't think you posting like that is necessary, who said anything about women voting, racial rights?

    You took one line out of my post and didn't deal with the rest of it. That lacks you putting yourself into a position to understand why someone might not support it.

    Love doesn't mean marriage is necessary. You don't marry your close blood relations because you love them.
    If I loved another man, it doesn't mean marriage is needed because other men might also love another man and they might want marriage.


  • #179
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    hotmail.com wrote: »
    Ridiculous post.

    It is easy to knock people without debating the points.


  • #180
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    It would appear that Robert did not read the cdc report in its entirety or is ignoring the majority for the sake of making false claims.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,782 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    It would appear that Robert did not read the cdc report in its entirety or is ignoring the majority for the sake of making false claims.

    I did, and in other news Japan removed the compulsory nature of receiving the vaccine.


Advertisement
Advertisement