Random Thoughts

[astfgyl]

There's been bull from both sides but one might think it wouldn't come from the government.

What? Who exactly would be thinking bull wouldn't come from the government?? What an odd thing to say.

Like, it was this bad

https://twitter.com/MlMcNamaraTD/status/1766138182331191370?t=8MnlR4Ig2HFl6wyCf9zT-Q&s=19

[astfgyl]

Are ye ready for the words that will be potentially deleted from the constitution tomorrow?

Yeah ye are thinking it's "Woman", and yeah it is and all, but they could have replaced that with "Homemaker" and fixed it for equality across the board no problem but then they would have had a harder time deleting the "By Economic Necessity" part without it being noticed. As it doesn't seem to have been at all.

What is the significance of these words being trimmed out?

I've thought from the get go that these referenda wouldn't be happening at all unless the wording as it is will be a barrier to something specific that the government would like to do and thus it must be removed.

We will hear the punchline in time but it's not what it's purported to be at all.

I'm aware the die is cast now and what will be will be but the devil is always in the details

Imagine the wording had they just changed it to

"1° In particular, the State recognises that by their life within the home, a homemaker gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.
2° The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that homemakers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home"

Bang goes your sexist lingo there and it's all inclusive and it keeps the pressure on the state to endeavour rather than strive. Now you can have two fellas or two women or single fellas or women or women with men all being recognised as having the chance to take the responsibility of being the homemaker and the state endeavouring to make life go in such a way that people can stay at home bringing up their kids if they so wish but don't have to based on sex.

Oh but no, that wouldn't do, would it? No we had to have the ball of shit that we just did have because the point was never what you were told it was or else the wording would have reflected that. And it didn't and it doesn't if it passes. But you won't be asked again if they get what they want, will you?

The difference between strive and endeavour is that strive is an effort; a striving while endeavour is a sincere attempt; a determined or assiduous effort towards a specific goal. (not my own words, I was looking it up)

Can't be bothered typing out the other amendment and why it's a ball of shit but I'll get to it in time because it's there to be torn asunder easily as well

[son of the Morrigan]

It just occurred to me that there are people voting to change the constitution today who think if a man puts on a dress he magically becomes a woman.
It put a shiver down my spine.

Get out and enjoy life and stop getting triggered by shite that never really affects you.

Steady on there chief.
What's this "triggered" shite, who's triggered? (prick of a word by the way)
I had a random thought, I put it in the random thoughts tread, and I enjoy life just fine thanks.

[son of the Morrigan]

Are ye ready for the words that will be potentially deleted from the constitution tomorrow?

Yeah ye are thinking it's "Woman", and yeah it is and all, but they could have replaced that with "Homemaker" and fixed it for equality across the board no problem but then they would have had a harder time deleting the "By Economic Necessity" part without it being noticed. As it doesn't seem to have been at all.

What is the significance of these words being trimmed out?

I've thought from the get go that these referenda wouldn't be happening at all unless the wording as it is will be a barrier to something specific that the government would like to do and thus it must be removed.

We will hear the punchline in time but it's not what it's purported to be at all.

I'm aware the die is cast now and what will be will be but the devil is always in the details

Imagine the wording had they just changed it to

"1° In particular, the State recognises that by their life within the home, a homemaker gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.
2° The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that homemakers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home"

Bang goes your sexist lingo there and it's all inclusive and it keeps the pressure on the state to endeavour rather than strive. Now you can have two fellas or two women or single fellas or women or women with men all being recognised as having the chance to take the responsibility of being the homemaker and the state endeavouring to make life go in such a way that people can stay at home bringing up their kids if they so wish but don't have to based on sex.

Oh but no, that wouldn't do, would it? No we had to have the ball of shit that we just did have because the point was never what you were told it was or else the wording would have reflected that. And it didn't and it doesn't if it passes. But you won't be asked again if they get what they want, will you?

The difference between strive and endeavour is that strive is an effort; a striving while endeavour is a sincere attempt; a determined or assiduous effort towards a specific goal. (not my own words, I was looking it up)

Can't be bothered typing out the other amendment and why it's a ball of shit but I'll get to it in time because it's there to be torn asunder easily as well

Spot on.

[Black Shepherd Carnage]

I know some of yous like Jordan Peterson and some of yous don't. I think this 8 min speech about globalisation is worth watching, it doesn't really have anything to do with his past comments/behaviours:

This is supposed to be about January 6th? When does he stop talking about China? As paranoid a lead-with-fear, streaked-with-BS meandering ramble as I've ever seen him deliver. Paranoid and seeking victimhood right down to his "Do I have my five minutes or do I not?" after he'd been rambling for seven and a half minutes and is asked to please summarize. He's angry as hell and he's not going to take it anymore. Or doing anything useful about it. There, summarized.

[Giggles]

This is supposed to be about January 6th?

I'm not sure what it's supposed to be about, I just enjoyed the rant 

[The Butcher]

Both look well defeated, especially the carers ref.

[astfgyl]

Funny part of the whole thing for me is that had they changed the wording to do what it was that they were selling it was going to do, I'd have been the very fella would've said yes yes or at least not turned up.

[mickO)))]

Great to see the No votes winning. At least it gives some hope that more and more people are waking up to whats going on around them.

[Caomhaoin]

Great to see the No votes winning. At least it gives some hope that more and more people are waking up to whats going on around them.

Too right. The attempt to appear 'right on' with the language (in and of itself another room in the house of mirrors) was botched to the point that was bound to create either distaste or offence.

Of far more concern is this hate speech bullshit, sadly no referendum on thon.

[Ollkiller]

It just occurred to me that there are people voting to change the constitution today who think if a man puts on a dress he magically becomes a woman.
It put a shiver down my spine.

Get out and enjoy life and stop getting triggered by shite that never really affects you.

Steady on there chief.
What's this "triggered" shite, who's triggered? (prick of a word by the way)
I had a random thought, I put it in the random thoughts tread, and I enjoy life just fine thanks.

The wording was probably wrong. And I agree triggered is a stupid word. What I was getting at was why would you be thinking of a man putting on a dress like its a bad thing. So fucking what. Who cares like. Each to their own.

[astfgyl]

It just occurred to me that there are people voting to change the constitution today who think if a man puts on a dress he magically becomes a woman.
It put a shiver down my spine.

Get out and enjoy life and stop getting triggered by shite that never really affects you.

Steady on there chief.
What's this "triggered" shite, who's triggered? (prick of a word by the way)
I had a random thought, I put it in the random thoughts tread, and I enjoy life just fine thanks.

The wording was probably wrong. And I agree triggered is a stupid word. What I was getting at was why would you be thinking of a man putting on a dress like its a bad thing. So fucking what. Who cares like. Each to their own.

This is a thing that always comes up. I've no issue with any man putting on women's clothes if he likes, really none whatsoever and I'd sit in the pub with him as soon as a lad in men's clothes as long as he was sound.

What I won't do however, is believe he's a woman because he wants me to or some stupid government rule says I have to.

No no he can be in fantasy land all he likes but that's the line drawn for me if I have to play along. I'd even call him whatever woman's name he wants and respect his right to believe he's a woman, but like everything else these days it's after getting silly the last few years. Same for a woman that wants me to believe they're really a man, fire away but don't expect me to believe it.

No different in a way than meeting someone who believes in a different god like I don't mind if they do but I don't so they can either respect my beliefs as I do theirs, or alternatively, they can always fuck off with themselves.

I'd also stick up for a transvestite if other people were picking on them and they weren't bothering anyone.

[astfgyl]

Also this referendum is looking like a fuckin landslide. I didn't think myself it would go the way it's going

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ireland-referendum-paves-way-for-modern-families-and-womens-roles/ar-BB1jBinp

Do they know something we all don't?

[son of the Morrigan]

It just occurred to me that there are people voting to change the constitution today who think if a man puts on a dress he magically becomes a woman.
It put a shiver down my spine.

Get out and enjoy life and stop getting triggered by shite that never really affects you.

Steady on there chief.
What's this "triggered" shite, who's triggered? (prick of a word by the way)
I had a random thought, I put it in the random thoughts tread, and I enjoy life just fine thanks.

The wording was probably wrong. And I agree triggered is a stupid word. What I was getting at was why would you be thinking of a man putting on a dress like its a bad thing. So fucking what. Who cares like. Each to their own.

I agree with ya man, each to their own.
I was actually up to my elbow in a ewes vagina trying to separate a pair of lambs that were in a ball at the time and it crossed my mind as funny that people who couldn't define what a woman is were being given the opportunity to remove "mother" from the constitution, that's all.
I could have worded the post better myself in fairness.
I couldn't give a fuck if a lad wants to wear a dress, that's his business, and it certainly doesn't weigh on my mind.
Its the clowns that think by putting on a dress said lad should be considered a woman that annoy me.
And I deffo don't want to spark off this fucking stupid debate about "Gender" again.

[astfgyl]

https://twitter.com/francisjfoster/status/1768933619265831182?t=F--i4iiUDux3NvllinBe4Q&s=19

Random lol for Saturday morning