Re: Irish referendum on abortion May 25 2018
 

You need to ask them, not me

---------- Post added at 12:06 ---------- Previous post was at 12:02 ----------

Again you are painting a deliberately emotive and distorted picture of what was voted for, as Hugh pointed out.

Do you not think, as you believe for a far less decisive Brexit vote, that the "losers" should shut up and buy into the winning decision?

Re: Irish referendum on abortion May 25 2018
 

You could also say why should a man have a say on woman being forced to carry a child though the entire pregnancy?

Ultimately that's what is at the heart of the issue. The rights of a fetus/unborn child vs the rights of the woman. In the end I don't think society should compel women to carry children and all the medical consequences and risks that come with that.

Personally I question the point of a referendum on the rights of others.

Re: Irish referendum on abortion May 25 2018
 

You know when I saw your post yesterday I thought that it was so preposterous it was unworthy of response but now I realize how dangerous your line of thinking is.

I don't know whether you are biologically unaware of what it involves in regards to conception (guy inserting penis into the vagina of the woman) or you just think that prejudicial baring of people from voting is the way to go or perhaps you are so far gone that you are so okay with abortion that only the carrier's views are important but any and or all reasoning equates to your end view as disgusting.

Luckily though, you don't see the likes of me saying that no men should have no right to free speech even though I find your views repellent.

---------- Post added at 18:26 ---------- Previous post was at 18:19 ----------

If it is his baby why should only the mother have a right to determine whether the child is born or killed though?

It comes down to an issue of ownership, every single time. If she has a right to kill her child, why don't the rest of us have that right, too? Does she get special dispensation just purely because she is carrying the child?

I think that deep down it is to show that there is a decency among society to care enough about the value of others without a conflict of interest in their own outcome through it all that there is enough value above ones self. Sure if everything we voted about, was effecting what was in our own interest, we would continue to vote in favor of what benefited us, no? Unless we had a lot of selfless members of the electorate...which we clearly don't.

Re: Irish referendum on abortion May 25 2018
 

I am talking about the referendum itself although I am not fussed on the idea of men not voting in it, might as if well if there is going to be a vote. I am wondering if this is a wise question to put to referendum.

Re: Irish referendum on abortion May 25 2018
 

Ahh, sorry for the conflation, I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. :)

Re: Irish referendum on abortion May 25 2018
 

This is absolutely outstanding news for the DUP:

https://news.sky.com/story/some-sinn...laims-11392617

I am as Catholic as they get but wow I would stand with Arlene over the likes of SF any day...I would hope that more and more Catholics defect from the Republic's version of Christianity (which has a fetish for abortion and homosexuality) and accept that it is Ulster that has gotten this correct.

Go Arlene!

Re: Irish referendum on abortion May 25 2018
 

Not sure if I would regard as equal rights for gays as a ‘fetish for homosexuality’ myself - I have attended a number of friends’ weddings over the past few years (straight and gay) and I was just happy to see people in love being allowed to marry.

At no time did my wife and I feel we had a fetish for homosexuality during the ceremonies or the receptions - we just had a good time.

Re: Irish referendum on abortion May 25 2018
 

No, I did not mean fetish in a sexual sense. Just deviant, in general. They have a warped way of going about it in SF - though they are not the only ones.

For example through this latest referendum on abortion Mary Lou (new leader of the party) was pregnant. She would go ahead and rub her bump and then go ahead and say that it was a fundamental right of a woman "to chose". She didn't quite have a twinkle in her eye like a disturbing smile or something like Cuomo did but it was perverse.

I mean the publicity stunt of women in the north taking abortafative pills, when not even pregnant - what would you call that if not a fetish? (Not a sexual one, just an unhealthy obsession).

Same with gay marriage - any normal person would have their own views on the matter...for or against. Not them, no. SF think that it must be done with all the pomp and circumstance of explaining to clergy why gay marriage is the norm, say it in church - insist on it as a part of their Christian roots. I don't know what else to call it - intentional antagonism? Attention seeking? OCD?

Same with Ruth Davidson...she was warned time and again that it would cost her party seats in the next election if the Tories brought the gay marriage vote in. Did she listen?

Her basic response was "yes, I do agree that we need more outward aggression towards homosexuality". Then she went off to figure why the Tories got hammered by traditional voters:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/81...-Election-2017

I don't under any circumstances view your having a fetish on the issue - you are not hell bent on shoving it in the face of other people in an entirely antagonistic way what your views are on the matter. (When unsolicited).

SF though, along with the likes of Davidson / May etc all seem hell bent on trying their level best to get under the skin of those who do hold traditional views.

I honestly don't know what a better word than fetish is, to use. They have some depraved need to seek attention...what word best suits that? It is in no way any reference to someone who may support gay rights though - your average individual will leave it at that. Which is perfectly fine, whichever side you may take. :)

Re: Irish referendum on abortion May 25 2018
 

I'm not sure that it was bringing in the gay marriage vote that cost the Tories seats in the 2017 Election, as the Scottish Conservatives gained 12 seats in that election, when they were led by an openly gay woman.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-40246332

Re: Irish referendum on abortion May 25 2018
 

Yeah I mean I made that as part of my statement before and then after the election - the Tories are not only being propped up by the DUP but the failure of the SNP in Scotland. If Sturgeon had hung on to maybe 3 of those seats, May would not be PM today. Their failure allows her to cling onto her seat.

They were offset by huge losses in the UK though where traditional Tory voters all just did not get out to vote.

That gay marriage vote cost Cameron - he placated the Euro-skeptics in his party in 2015 and they went out and voted for him but after the gay marriage vote traditional voters just would not go near the man. They gave him a majority in 2015 to get what they could out of him but will never go near the Tory party again after this.

I do not know how much stock to put into articles like this but it was clear how much the older generation loathed Cameron for his vote on gay marriage:

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/...he-referendum/

Scotland doesn't seem to have as much of a traditional mindset so it didn't effect Scottish seats directly but the gay marriage vote did, as a whole.

Even then, though gay marriage is one thing but the way that Sinn Fein go about life is just outright filth. The same way with abortion / the Irish language / Orange day / the EU etc etc. It is like one big circus act.

Re: Irish referendum on abortion May 25 2018
 

Chloe, you state However, the Tory voting figures for the last three General Elections were -

2010 - 10,703,754 - 36.1%
2015 - 11,334,226 - 36.9%
2017 - 13,636,684 - 42.4%

So, the Tory vote has increased over the last two elections, and by over 2.3 million in the last election.

Also, according to Ipsos MORI’s analysis of the 2017 election, The Conservatives held on to 90% of their 2015 voters, whilst gaining 15% of LibDem and 60% of UKIP voters from the 2015 election.

In the 45+ age groups, the Tory % of the vote rose from 2015.

45-54 +7%
55-64 +14%
65+ . +14%

https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-...-2017-election

Re: Irish referendum on abortion May 25 2018
 

The 2017 vote increase in % of vote was mainly because of the collapse of parties like UKIP - they only ran in how many constituencies in 2017?

In 2015 (despite the gay marriage vote) a lot were sold on the idea of the EU referendum - all those then went and voted to leave. They had no loyalty to the Tory brand / Cameron's desire to remain...heck I think some of that vote was just to spite him.

They got what they wanted, then they stayed at home in 2017 - of the millions who voted for UKIP in the last election, how many went to the Tories? in 2015 UKIP won nearly 4 million votes.

In 2017 the Tories gained 2M+ on the last election...a lot of them were from UKIP. On their raw vote from 2015 (less the UKIP voters returning - who were likely the older voters) they lost votes - without the returning UKIP voters, they would have lost a net total of votes from 2015.

UKIP wipeout (even at 60 % of 3.8 million) is why their vote total increased...and yes that 15% of LD voters. Without that, the raw total is dropping and that will play out in the next few elections.

1. Because some of the elder generation still voting for them will pass away.

2. Because all those other votes (from other parties) are already factored into a base vote in the new 2017 totals - no way do the Tories match 13.6 million.