Mulherin's 'fornication' statements described as primitive

gizmo555

Graciefacey wrote: »

To be frank, how can her words be taken out of context when the entire dail proceedings and debate are freely available online thus the comments leading up to her absurd outburst are there for all to see?

Since, as you say, it's all freely available, would you care to explain why her "outburst" is "absurd", or are you just using those words as a lazy shorthand for "stuff I disagree with"?

Graciefacey

gizmo555 wrote: »

Graciefacey wrote: »

To be frank, how can her words be taken out of context when the entire dail proceedings and debate are freely available online thus the comments leading up to her absurd outburst are there for all to see?

Since, as you say, it's all freely available, would you care to explain why her "outburst" is "absurd", or are you just using those words as a lazy shorthand for "stuff I disagree with"?

No I don't care to explain my opinion to strangers I couldn't give a hoot about! I actually like Mulherin as I know her personally but her comments were misplaced, amateur and left her personal life open to unnecessary intrusion from the media. This thread is turning into an arrogant competition 'who can use the biggest word' *rolleyes*

finisklin

The aim of any politician is to regain their seat at the next election and all the work that they do is geared towards achieving this aim. This includes how they position themselves in relation to hot topics and debates and their opinions on same.

MM has a track record of doing solo runs and putting her mouth in gear before she has thought through the implications of her profound insights.

1. Her view on the Libyan uprising which she deemed an internal matter, despite being against party policy. More here.
2. Her attempt to grab the headlines by making Liam & Noel Gallagher first citizens of Mayo was completely off the wall and portrayed her as a headline grabbing soloist.
3. The use of archaic language that people on the street don't use. Why not call fornication what it is - sex between unmarried people?

Her Dail comments were poorly judged, not thought through and only alienated her from the majority of her constituents. A portion will give her credit for her courage to stand up and express them, and be counted. It's disappointing that she has left it till now to express them.


Will these opinions help build her electoral base and consolidate her position as a TD for North Mayo? Undoubtedly no and the next local Cumainn meeting will be interesting for her as all the local party members come from Ballina and its surrounding hinterland.

Father Tuffy did give her a good plug during his sermon at 11 o clock mass on Sunday. However, his argument of standing up for what is right is right and what is wrong is wrong was lost on the congregation. It was a little akward at that juncture to listen to this from a priest given the sins of the church in the recent past.

At least if some communication specialists were on board she could have spelt out her position more clearly and simply and this might have taken all the fuss out of the episode. Alas, she didn't clearly express her opinion on abortion, religion (is she a catholic or have a broader christian faith), fornication and why women can't make what ever choices they want for themselves.

This latter point is what galls me, how can she say what is best for somebody? This judgemental conservatism is out of place in Irish society and certainly out of place in her constituency. To call it straight talking is like closing the stable door after the horse has bolted.

Inda may have to do a John Deacy with her and banish her to beyond the back benches if she persists. It ain't helping the rest of her FG constituency colleagues.

BTW, it may be no harm for posters to declare their politcal affiliations and their relationship with the party and MM in particular. Me - no affiliations, just to my bank manager!

I'm looking forward to her next Dail slip of the tongue.......;)

WaltKowalski

finisklin wrote: »

[*]The use of archaic language that people on the street don't use. Why not call fornication what it is - sex between unmarried people?
[/LIST]

Isn't she a solicitor? Aren't they always unnecessarily verbose?
I didn't know the proper meaning of the word fornication before her rant.
I'm happy I do now!

Oldtree

finisklin wrote: »

BTW, it may be no harm for posters to declare their politcal affiliations and their relationship with the party and MM in particular. Me - no affiliations, just to my bank manager!

I'm looking forward to her next Dail slip of the tongue.......;)

No affiliations and no relationship to THE party, but I really like Michael Ring

I've heard that when decisions don't go her way in the town council that she would routinely break down in tears and make a holy show of herself.

Her appearance on the SNS was a disgrace. You got the impression that Brendan felt sorry for her so rather than challenge anything she said and make her cry he just let her waffle off on her wild tangents. She said absolutely nothing of note in the 5 or so minutes she rambled.

Ilovelucy

A transcript of her interview with Brendan O Connor.

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/04/22/michelle-mulherin-the-saturday-night-show-transcript/

HarryPotter41

thysich wrote: »

Well she is doing more for Ballina now that D. Calleary, Since he got promoted to be FF national voice he has forgotten about Ballina.

Yes a lot of FG candidates got elected because they were not FF. Lets wait until the next election to see if she remains.. I would not write her off just yet, You would be surprised of the Christian base in Mayo that will vote for her. Fine if we don't want Christian values in our society.. But its 2012 not 1712 and we are allowed to opening voice our opinions instead of having to hide our faith like 300 years ago.

What exactly is she doing for Ballina?? I am sure Dara Calleary is as effective as she is being and she is in the party of the major coalition partner. Your lack of a list of things she has done for Ballina as a councillor speaks volumes.I am a mass going Catholic, I find her views abhorrent to me on the issue and were ill judged. As to my political affiliation I am FF, but that does not colour my view of MM because I would give her credit if I thought it was due but have watched her career in politics thinking it to be one of the luckiest around. I know many FG supporters who think shes terrible. Locally last Christmas she contacted her supporters in Sports Clubs to distibute her Christmas Cards door to door and there were children from non FG households asked to deliver cards. That kind of behaviour is ridiculous as childrens sports and politics should not mix. Time and time again her judgement is questionable.

finisklin

Oldtree wrote: »

No affiliations and no relationship to THE party, but I really like Michael Ring

Not sure if you're speaking figuratively or literally here, but each to their own.

ash23

Medicine333 wrote: »

Thanks. Some people around here are lacking basic general knowledge, it seems.

I suggest you read up on a few items here


http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/cohabiting_couples/


It might not be "basic general knowledge" but times are a-changing and co-habiting couples are recognised legally by the state after a certain number of years. That number is even less if there are children involved.

Just FYI.

gizmo555

ash23 wrote: »

I suggest you read up on a few items here.

I just did. From the above page, and the information it links to:

Cohabitants in Ireland do not possess the same rights and obligations as married couples or civil partnerships.

Unmarried couples in Ireland cannot jointly adopt children.

Cohabiting couples in Ireland have no automatic right of inheritance on the death of either partner.

These provisions [of the Family Home Protection Act] do not apply to cohabiting couples.

By law, an unmarried mother is the sole guardian of a child born outside of marriage.

Where a [life or pension] policy specifies that only a spouse may benefit, your cohabiting partner will not have any entitlements.

etc, etc, etc . .

Just FYI.

ash23

But they do have legal rights in terms of property, inheritance etc. To say that a co-habiting couple haven't got the same rights as married couples isn't totally correct. In some cases they don't but in many other ways they do.
And those rights are ever changing.


I just think the argument that Irish women fall into 2 categories - those who have pregnancies that cannot survive or those who have no partner is quite frankly ignorant of the multitude of reasons a woman/couple may feel compelled to travel for an abortion.

A co-habitation is not necessarily a weaker relationship than a marriage. God knows we all know of marriages that are a disaster.

Medicine333

ash23 wrote: »

But they do have legal rights in terms of property, inheritance etc. To say that a co-habiting couple haven't got the same rights as married couples isn't totally correct. In some cases they don't but in many other ways they do.
And those rights are ever changing.


I just think the argument that Irish women fall into 2 categories - those who have pregnancies that cannot survive or those who have no partner is quite frankly ignorant of the multitude of reasons a woman/couple may feel compelled to travel for an abortion.

A co-habitation is not necessarily a weaker relationship than a marriage. God knows we all know of marriages that are a disaster.

Quite a hole you've dug yourself there:) Get your facts straight before you try to correct someone who is 100% correct.

It doesn't matter whether times are changing, co-habiting couple are not the same as married couples.

ash23

Medicine333 wrote: »

Quite a hole you've dug yourself there:) Get your facts straight before you try to correct someone who is 100% correct.

It doesn't matter whether times are changing, co-habiting couple are not the same as married couples.

Actually my post was in relation to your agreement with someone saying

"No they don't" to the following quote from another poster

In the eyes of THE LAW cohabiting couples have the same rights as married couples.

Co habiting couples have many of the same rights as married couples so you are not 100% correct in saying in the eyes of the law that cohabiting couples do NOT have the same rights as married couples.

They have many of the same rights, not all, and I acknowledged that in my last post.

You are not 100% correct much as you would like to think that you are.
if you were 100% correct then property laws, inheritance laws etc would not apply to both co-habiting and married couples. The law overlaps on both in a number of ways. State benefits being an obvious one.

So you really should make sure you are 100% correct before declaring that you are.

Graciefacey

ash23 wrote: »

Medicine333 wrote: »

Quite a hole you've dug yourself there:) Get your facts straight before you try to correct someone who is 100% correct.

It doesn't matter whether times are changing, co-habiting couple are not the same as married couples.

Actually my post was in relation to your agreement with someone saying

"No they don't" to the following quote from another poster

In the eyes of THE LAW cohabiting couples have the same rights as married couples.

Co habiting couples have many of the same rights as married couples so you are not 100% correct in saying in the eyes of the law that cohabiting couples do NOT have the same rights as married couples.

They have many of the same rights, not all, and I acknowledged that in my last post.

You are not 100% correct much as you would like to think that you are.
if you were 100% correct then property laws, inheritance laws etc would not apply to both co-habiting and married couples. The law overlaps on both in a number of ways. State benefits being an obvious one.

So you really should make sure you are 100% correct before declaring that you are.

Also as regards social welfare cohabiting couples are treated exactly the same as married couples.

oscarBravo

Graciefacey wrote: »

Also as regards social welfare cohabiting couples are treated exactly the same as married couples.

But where tax is concerned, they most certainly are not.

Defiler Of The Coffin

finisklin wrote: »

Her Dail comments were poorly judged, not thought through and only alienated her from the majority of her constituents. A portion will give her credit for her courage to stand up and express them, and be counted. It's disappointing that she has left it till now to express them.

A lot of people are probably in agreement with the gist of what she was saying but the archaic language and rambling tone did not help her one bit. It doesn't reflect well on the county at all and the electorate will remember this come ballot time. I'm surprised she was allowed onto the SNS by the party brass, the best thing she could have done was just keep a low profile and let it all blow over. Still, at least she has stimulated some debate but at the cost of negative headlines.

finisklin wrote: »

Will these opinions help build her electoral base and consolidate her position as a TD for North Mayo? Undoubtedly no and the next local Cumainn meeting will be interesting for her as all the local party members come from Ballina and its surrounding hinterland.

Father Tuffy did give her a good plug during his sermon at 11 o clock mass on Sunday. However, his argument of standing up for what is right is right and what is wrong is wrong was lost on the congregation. It was a little akward at that juncture to listen to this from a priest given the sins of the church in the recent past.

The church haven't got much public defenders left at this stage so they have to make use of every single one!

Seriously though, is it possible that we can ever have a mature debate about abortion in this country? It's no wonder that the X-Case still hasn't been legislated for after 20 years. If I was a politician I wouldn't want to touch it with a bargepole. You're damned whatever your position is.

Graciefacey

oscarBravo wrote: »

Graciefacey wrote: »

Also as regards social welfare cohabiting couples are treated exactly the same as married couples.

But where tax is concerned, they most certainly are not.

I never mentioned tax

Medicine333

Graciefacey wrote: »

I never mentioned tax

SO, basically what you're saying is that co-habiting couples have the same rights as married couples?

However, married couple have more rights than co-habiting couples and they're the points some of us are making.

Married people are different to co-habiting couples. In the government's eyes, married people are entitled to more rights, and rightly so.

Graciefacey

Medicine333 wrote: »

Graciefacey wrote: »

I never mentioned tax

SO, basically what you're saying is that co-habiting couples have the same rights as married couples?

However, married couple have more rights than co-habiting couples and they're the points some of us are making.

Married people are different to co-habiting couples. In the government's eyes, married people are entitled to more rights, and rightly so.

And I totally agree that married couples have more rights I am aware of this I'm not living in a cave. I'm simply agreeing with ash23 by pointing out that you were not 100% correct as you thought. The amount of nit picking in here is insane!

Medicine333

Graciefacey wrote: »

And I totally agree that married couples have more rights I am aware of this I'm not living in a cave. I'm simply agreeing with ash23 by pointing out that you were not 100% correct as you thought. The amount of nit picking in here is insane!

I never said co-habiting couples had no rights compared to married.

Perhaps it's not nit-picking that is the scourge here, rather inaccurate inferences like you made above.

Graciefacey

Medicine333 wrote: »

Graciefacey wrote: »

And I totally agree that married couples have more rights I am aware of this I'm not living in a cave. I'm simply agreeing with ash23 by pointing out that you were not 100% correct as you thought. The amount of nit picking in here is insane!

I never said co-habiting couples had no rights compared to married.

Perhaps it's not nit-picking that is the scourge here, rather inaccurate inferences like you made above.

Get a hobby!

Medicine333

Graciefacey wrote: »

Get a hobby!

I have plenty. Maybe you should improve your maturity and stop jumping to unfounded conclusions:)

yop

People are sailing very close to bans here now. Any more personal abuse will get long bans. Be civil and don't attack the poster.

No more warnings

Oldtree

Slightly to one side of this thread but of a similar nature:

Senator Mullen's insensitive (and unforgivable imo) comment to people that had to travel for an abortion for medical reasons - "You've got a bigger agenda here James, don't you?"

and Senator Mullen's defence of his comment here:

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/mullen-insists-abortion-conversation-entirely-courteous-on-my-side-548672.html

finisklin

I just had a look at the youtube clip below and have just realised that she is working off a script. WTF, she actually preplanned her comments and had a script cobbled together, what was she thinking? :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

For some reason I thought that her comments were off the cuff......

I wonder has she undertaken the prerequisite media training with the Communications Clinic for politicians, if so it didn't hit home.

finisklin

I came across this on youtube by the Strawberry Alarm Clock.....priceless.

nuac

Excellent

Jim2007

finisklin wrote: »

I just had a look at the youtube clip below and have just realised that she is working off a script. WTF, she actually preplanned her comments and had a script cobbled together, what was she thinking? :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

The more I listen to it the more I wonder what her point was.... I also pulled up a few more dail comments by her and found them no better - at one point it looked like the ECB was going investing in wind farms

It's hard to imagine she earned her living as an advocate - I certainly would be worried if she was representing me in court!

TopTec

Medicine333 wrote: »

Perhaps it's not nit-picking that is the scourge here, rather inaccurate inferences like you made above.

Pot, kettle, kettle pot

TT