I have no beef with you, and thank you for the response, but am not going to get into any wrangle on this issue. No appetite for it. I find so much of current carry on acutely dispiriting.
As mentioned, I did not agree with Flatty’s take on the EB case – if only because any prior wrong, legally, does not make any subsequent wrong any less wrong. But so it went and so it goes. EB is a narcissistic gobshite who is getting his comeuppance. I say two cheers (and am sorry it is not his mother who is doing time in The 'Joy, because she is the anvil on which they were all buckled, a point where I agree with Flatty).
Beir bua. And fuck the likes of John McGuirk and his bootboys.
Sitting at home with a bottle of whiskey to yourself? Come at me if you want, but i find your vile, snide little barbs and tagging of flatty quite distasteful.
As if a banker could ever be in a position to sneer at anyone over morals
Burton defended Union salaries and the Christmas bonus whilst Murphy got a mob to attack her. Murphy is a complete waster and purveyor of negative politics. I despise SF but will take great relish when they take that wankers seat.
The experimental basket case of all cases that is Canada have said enough. Let kids be, and let them grow up. How are we fighting for stuff that was normal life 5 years ago.
Is your essential point to me as follows? ‘EB should be allowed to do whatever he wants, in fullest excess of legal considerations, because (individual/religious) conscience trumps any such considerations.’
Seems that way to me on all that you have said, tonight and before.
I would like you to answer this query with care and thought, because I think I have a pretty devastating rejoinder that will ruin your perspective forever.