No
I have him on ignore
Good idea
Starve him of attention, like, which is what he craves
Thatâs the entire point glas. Any of the tweets taken in isolation could be seen as typical of the lame lazy thoughtless drivel that a few lads here spout endlessly while thinking it makes them sound clever. Well, a couple of lads maybeâŚ
1 Like
No, itâs just a shit, failed attempt at satire by a talentless right-wing shill who thinks kicking the vulnerable and marginalised is comedy
Therefore itâs hardly surprising youâd like it
Youâre right. He should lay off you
Iâm not vulnerable and marginalised, pal
I think those who find such attempts at âhumourâ to be funny carry a deep vulnerability within themselves, however
A sort of self-hatred and low self worth where the only way they can validate their miserable existence is to find even easier targets to vilify
I think reactionary right-wing politics in general usually comes back to this central pathology
Yer man titiana is a laugh though. And he only satirises mad eejits who spout mad pc mantra. I canât imagine why youâre so annoyed.
Iâm not a bit annoyed
I just think that sort of attempt at humour is unfunny and basically shit on every level, which it is
Itâs pretty pathetic really
Good satire always kicks up, challenges established authority and is progressive - this seeks to maintain establishment authority and is regressive
Behind every attempt at political comedy or satire is a point and this guyâs real point is that is that patriarchal âthinkingâ and white supremacy and Christian religious supremacy, ie. hardcore right-wing ideas, are good things
They arenât - theyâre really really shit things which only cause misery for people - not just the victims of these ideas but ultimately those who hold them
Youâre right. We should stone him/burn him at the stake
Youâre feigning vicarious victimhood on behalf of this cliched, unfunny hack
Itâs interesting the way people who like attempts at comedy or satire which try to victimise people are the first to claim victimhood for themselves
Always the victims, at least in their own minds
Totally proving my point
Tragic case, but why are you assuming it was a âmedical mistakeâ and the family should be compensated?
There are screening tests for Edwards syndrome (and Downs syndrome), as the name âscreeningâ implies they give a lower chance/higher chance indication of the condition. Screening tests can give false positives (even if rare), which is why the normal practice (in the US and UK) is to wait for confirmation from a diagnostic test which is essentially 100%. From whatâs been reported, it sounds like the decision to abort was made based on the results of the screening test and before the diagnostic test.
The decision to abort is with the parents, not the medical practitioners. Itâs a little early to be assuming that medical practitioners made a mistake, as the parents may have been fully informed regarding the accuracy of the screening test and made their decision based on the information available. They would only have a case of medical malpractice if they were misled regarding the tests.
Why do you not find radical left politics just as dangerous? This obnoxious individual you referenced, Claire Fox, was a leading organizer for the Revolutionary Communist Party for two decades. Did she suddenly become a bad person when she abandoned left wing extremism for right wing extremism?
According to reports the decision to abort was made on the basis of a false positive - the parents would not have made the decision to abort otherwise
There was a mistake, whether that mistake was made by machine or by humans will come out in the investigation hopefully
Itâs a tragic case and hopefully those involved especially the parents receive counselling to help them deal with the situation
False positives in screening tests are unfortunately a feature of the tests, not a mistake. No test, whether screening or even diagnostic, is 100%. This should have been explained to the parents and also that they could wait for the diagnostic test results, although thatâs their decision. If it wasnât explained then they have a case of medical malpractice.
I certainly donât find radical left politics in any way as dangerous as far right politics
There are no radical leftists who believe in racist genocide, that would obviously be an oxymoron, whereas racist genocide and its glorification is integral to far right politics
As regards what Claire Fox thought when she was a communist, youâll have to take that up with a communist who might know more
I donât think there are any on the forum though
Maybe try boards.ie, itâs a much more populated forum
What we can say based on her public comment is that Claire Fox is currently a hardcore âlibertarianâ and believes that child porn should be legal
This is the logical outcome of âlibertarianâ thought
Except for the rather inconvenient truth that radical left wing politics always leads to totalitarianism and destruction of democracy, whether historical like the USSR or China, or in the modern day such as Cuba or Venezuela.
Radical leftists have been responsible for some of the worst genocides, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot. Surprised you havenât heard of them.
You mean Australia? Abortion is illegal in Queensland and New South Wales, unless the life or health of the mother is in danger, exactly the same law passed in Alabama. There is also no exception for rape or incest, and under the law in Australia women can be imprisoned for up to seven years, unlike the Alabama law where the woman cannot be prosecuted.
Abortion has been legal in the US since 1973, and any pre-viability ban on abortion is unconstitutional. The laws passed in bible belt states will be struck down by federal courts.
Nice job of self clamping though, you backward fuckwit.