You've been looking in the wrong direction, the dangers are coming from the right.

Oh another thing about Authoritarian leaders, their tight control of media allows them peddle whatever they want to peddle, they will often use fear as a tactic to control the masses...just something to look out for!!

@Danno

Never ceases to amaze me people coming out with absolute shite like this. If you had any clue what you were trying to talk about you'd know that actual Socialists and Communists (if such a thing even exists any more) would be firmly against a globalist corporate structure as a broker of power over the people of a given state. It's fundamentally against such the political views that Socialists would have because corporate globalism is in direct opposition to their beliefs. It's one of the reasons why those on the left view the EU with a lot of scepticism.

Globalism is a neo-liberal project born out of post war American political thinking. It has fuck all to do with the left wing of anywhere, despite what the modern right would have people believe.

You are some .....

Did I ever say we as a people and a nation should not be ashamed of the treatment meted out to what was seen as non conforming christians, nay catholics, in this state both by the church and the state itself.

You are now dragging in the abuse scandals, our treatment of mentally ill or different sexual leanings to conflate the argument with the notion about being ashamed of what Ireland and Irish people did to people in some far off land that were probably a different race.

You know damn well what I was driving at, but you decide to widen the scope.

Ehh who is this WE you speak of, don't you live in the US?

There you go again with links to US issues and then you project that Ireland has a huge issue with right wing.

When are you going to get it that the US is a toxic shyteshow and the polarisation is only getting worse, with some going back towards KKK and Nazis.

And to show how fooked up it is you have neo Nazis (the real ones with their Hitler salutes and not just someone against modern trans activists and un-managed immigration) using the comments of a black for their cause.

You highlight three absolute toxic motormouth clowns as examples of how bad things are.

BTW I have to thank you for including old Kanye there because it highlights one thing that a fair amount of the modern socially liberal refuse to countenance.

And that is that black people can be racist just like old whitey.

BTW you do seem to have an unhealthy fascination with that utter gutter scutter Carlson.

I bet you are like the ones that use to tune into Howard Stern, they detested him and his antics, but they tuned in to see how bad he was and then complain.

And here come the hives.

Did you even read the post you reacted to with Hives before you flipped out about people discussing America again

No **** ****, hence what I was saying. Thanks for the mansplaining, dismissed.

Nope don't want to discuss that anymore. absolutely shocking dog whistle post

Mature minors is a legal term in this context you do know that right. And it already exists in Canadian law because it was recognised by their supreme Court in 2009.

So it is correct for the joint committee to consider it in this context.

But something something the left are trying to kill kids. Right?

How do you imagine this playing out, in reality?

It wasn't a law in 2009 it was a decision of the Canadian supreme Court. The concept of mature minor also exists in the USA. (definetly not a left wing country).

Sometimes I do wonder why am I bothering when other posters don't even read or understand the links they post.

if you dont see a legitimate reason to oppose it, i will presume you support this. 12 years of age!

any doctor who supports this should be struck off.

i'm depressed and i want to kill myself.

are you in your right mind?

yes.

grand, you'll be dead tomorrow.

what ever happened to offering proper support to people struggling? just let us help them kill themselves and we save money in the long run.

You even linked to the thing and raised this guff entirely yourself.

Question,

How in the universe did you come to the conclusion the legislation would assist teenagers to suicide themselves for depression?

It’s not really “assisted suicide” though, according to your own links, so much as medically assisted death for an already terminal and suffering patient.

Clearly, you didn’t read the links you posted: the proposal is for mature minors age 16 and 17 to be able to seek the right without parental requirements, for 12 to 15 there’s a parent in the loop

DWDC’s position on safeguards for mature minors

They literally addressed your hyperbole per your own link but I guess reading your own link before you used it for a hyperbolic rant was less effort.

I think the better question is why are you against it - we've already seen the reasons you rambled at it for and it was insincere and baseless. What compelling argument do you have for Joe Nobody to be against MAID for 12 to 15 with a parent, 16 and 17 with a counselor, or 18 and up at your own volition?

That's not different to what's being proposed from what I can gather. These laws are also to protect peoples religious freedoms, this all stems from a 2009 landmark case in Candadada

AC v Manitoba (Director of Child and Family Services), 2009 SCC 30 (26 June 2009)

On 26 June 2009, the Canadian Supreme Court handed down a decision which discussed in detail the right of adolescents to make their own medical decisions. The Court held that the wishes of the child must be considered when determining what action was in the child’s best interests.

Facts

AC was 14 years old. She was admitted to hospital with intestinal bleeding, and needed a blood transfusion. AC was a Jehovah’s Witness and was prohibited from receiving blood or blood products. She, and her parents, refused to consent to the transfusion. AC’s doctor applied for a court order permitting the transfusion on the grounds that it was medically necessary to prevent death or serious injury to AC.

Under s 25(8) of the Child and Family Services Act the Court has power to order medical treatment that is in the ‘best interests’ of the child, despite the child and/or parents refusing to consent to the treatment. Where a child is 16 or older, s 25(9) provides that the child’s views should be determinative, and the Court shall not authorise the treatment without the child’s consent unless there is evidence that the child lacks the maturity to appreciate the consequences of their decision.

AC was deemed competent to make decisions about her medical treatment, but because she was under 16, her wishes were not determinative. The Court granted the treatment order as requested by the doctors, and the transfusion was given to AC. In making the treatment order, Kaufman J proceeded on the basis of deemed capacity, and did not investigate AC’s actual capacity to make medical decisions. This was done because, in Kaufman J’s view, there was no requirement under s 25 for the Court to give consideration to the wishes of a child under 16.

Honestly how are you expected to discuss anything civilly with posters who post as if they are in the middle of a manic depressive episode all the time.