darkpagandeath wrote: » I just hate the emotive language used.
meeeeh wrote: » In fairness non gay people did stick up for gay rights and it was great. I must say I dislike that kind of protests. I think it is moronic to draw attention to prolifers and give a group of people who value religious dogma more than empathy to fellow humans any more air time than strictly necessary.
Clandestine wrote: » it looked no different this year
Buzz Meeks wrote: » Could it not all be settled with paper, rock, scissors?
Not a NSA agent wrote: » After the whole gay people molesting children thing I cant wait to see what the religious nuts come up with for this one. Probably something like if we remove the 8th amendment it will be possible to kill children of any age. Most people are somewhere on a scale but as people tend to pick some random point on it then nobody will budge.
newmug wrote: » You can stop there. The age of the child doesnt matter. Your words, repealing the 8th will make it possible to kill children. People, I wouldnt be surprised if a second civil war was brewing, over a number of things. The Troubles were sparked over far less.
newmug wrote: » You can stop there. The age of the child doesnt matter. Your words, repealing the 8th will make it possible to kill children.
RayM wrote: » Repealing the 8th will make it possible for the government to implement legislation giving women the right to have some level of control over their own bodies.
newmug wrote: » Would this apply to all Irish females? What about the ones alive and well in their mothers wombs? What control will it give them?
RayM wrote: » What other rights would you extend to foetuses?
newmug wrote: » The right not to be murdered.
newmug wrote: » The right not to be murdered - like every other human being.