Because it can't be
==============

No one is suggesting it can

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

No the point was that people take responsibility for their own chit.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

As i said we need to educate kids better

Then maybe we wouldnt have to pay for them.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Absolutely

Imagine thinking having kids without the resources is a good move.

Vastly more important to society than lbgt lessons.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/chelsea-fans-racism-anti-semitic-songs-bbc-film-tottenham-a4356761.html

And on and on it goes.

comment by Cal Neva - Lisa For Leader (U11544)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Cal Neva - Lisa For Leader (U11544)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by R9 (U22327)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Cal Neva - Lisa For Leader (U11544)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by R9 (U22327)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Cal Neva - Lisa For Leader (U11544)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by R9 (U22327)
posted 5 seconds ago
Do you think morally poor people should have children?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What would be the alternative ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Not having them if you cant afford to raise them, just a thought.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And how would that be enforced?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Its not something to be enforced its about people making better decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Difference between the left and right beautiful demonstrated there. Enforcement vs responsibility.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who was suggesting enforcement ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The first question was 'how would that be enforced?'...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because it can't be
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I get that... I think you're trying to have two debates at once...

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by Irishred (U2539)
posted 11 hours, 42 minutes ago
comment by Take Mahomes, Country Roads (U3979)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by R9 (U22327)
posted 3 minutes ago
Well yes it is isnt it sizzle. thats exactly what youre saying.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It really isn't, he's not even expecting you to contribute more in tax than you already do, you're missing the key point here, it's about introducing policies that actually use tax money to help those who need it most in better ways than it currently is.

How is this simple fact so hard for conservatives to grasp? And why is the immediate response always "why should I give them money"...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
90% of conversations entirely agree with this point, "it's about introducing policies that actually use tax money to help those who need it most in better ways than it currently is".

The ones I know anyway.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes but who pays for the politicians big pensions then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SF will rob a bank😳

Looking like shinner winner😢

Coalition with FF......times change all over and if the dup and me accept SF in govt, how can you say no in Dublin???

Will you be backing SF, kneerash.... as a left wing alternative?

In any future united ireland, dup and SF coalition will melt heads lol👍😀