Joeytheparrot wrote: » Completely agree. I wasnt old enough to vote in 95 or 97 but would have voted no to divorce and for Dana. Peoples views change over time.
Dan_Solo wrote: » Just wondering if there's a transcript of this on government websites anywhere would you know?
Joeytheparrot wrote: » would have voted for Dana.
Stark wrote: » 10 years ago I would have held pro-life views, these days I'd be almost militantly pro-choice. People's views change over time as they become better educated on issues, exposed to various debates etc. Don't think that makes one a hypocrite. And don't think any more explanation is needed than "I wasn't aware of the issues then, I am now".
lazygal wrote: » Very similar here. I was of the 'have the baby and give it up for adoption' view and 'if people decide they are gay, then they can't expect to have the same rights to adopt' mindset when I left school 15 years ago. College, travel and working with all sorts of people have made me reassess many things. Having children cemented my prochoice views.
macyard wrote: » What was it like being out and gay in 95-97 as a young person
Joeytheparrot wrote: » I wasnt even out to myself
macyard wrote: » 15 years ago the world was way less liberal and you where young. He said this in 2009 and was a grown middle age adult. I am very pro choice women gets to chose to keep baby or kill it, man get 3 months after he is told to be allowed to disown the baby and have also no legal obligations to it. Choice for both parents
macyard wrote: » You didn't know you where gay? I though you where born gay I understand you might not tell others but you should have know unless if was choice later in life
volchitsa wrote: » That's not abortion you're advocating there, it's infanticide. I don't think it comes under the usual definition of "pro-choice".
macyard wrote: » Only the mom have the right to chose to kill it and only at the early stage of pregnancy, there has to be a way for the dad to get an out too and since he cannot force the mon to kill it a removal of all responsibility in the same timeframe the mon has the choice to abort is a very fair option
volchitsa wrote: » So it's not a child. And why does there "have" to be a way to "get an out"? The roles aren't symmetrical - unless and until the father can have the pregnancy and then give birth, that is. You might as well say it's unfair that women get maternity leave from work to give birth. Or maybe you do say that? (Just to be clear, I'm talking about the time it takes for the woman to give birth and to recover physically from that. Not about the time to look after the child after that, which could and should IMO, be shared between the parents.)
macyard wrote: » I do think men and women should get the same paternity leave before and after the birth father should be allowed to look after the wife just before birth, also if the takes an out the mom can still have the baby just can claim for him to be on the hook for it
efb wrote: » This has nothing to do with Varadkar's coming out
efb wrote: » The closet can suffocate you with homophobia
seamus wrote: » It's the oldest cover in the book - people seem to think that if you can be as homophobic and vicious as possible about gay people, then you can convince other people and yourself that you're not actually gay. The number of viciously anti-gay people who've been subsequently found in compromising positions with people of the same sex is quite incredible. I'd put even money on the vast majority of anti-gay campaigners being at least bisexual. If you're brought up to believe that one of the fundamental pieces of your identity is evil and wrong, then you're going to be a very unhappy person indeed.
macyard wrote: » Is the same true about so many gays using the attack on paedophiles
seamus wrote: » English please.
seamus wrote: » I'd put even money on the vast majority of anti-gay campaigners being at least bisexual.
macyard wrote: » You seem to think if some doesn't like something they are secretly it, gays get very defensive about the links to gay paedophiles are they secretly in that closet and into boys
At least?!?! Are some of them trisexual?
macyard wrote: » Is the same true about so many gays using the attack on paedophiles, would you bet the vast majority are at least into teenage boys?
seamus wrote: » That's a straw man argument, I never said that this applies across all arguments. That's like saying that people who hate blacks must be secretly black. Homosexuals and paedophiles are two different data sets.
macyard wrote: » Seems like gays use you don't like gay stuff you are really gay strawman too much, if they want to use that strawman I will apply it with other stuff to them
