Non Registered Member
Their duty is to advocate for and protect DS people. By sitting on the fence, they failed in their duty and endorsed aborting humans afflicted with DS. Hell isn't hot enough, nor eternity long enough.DSI, is another quango reliant on government monies however you are wrong to say they 'campaigned for the elimination' of DS, they sat on the fence, below is their position, which I disagreed with, they could have been a true voice for people with DS instead they chose to play the game.
This morning (January 23rd), an article appeared in the Irish Times highlighting the fact that a pro-life lobby group called Love Both is using an image of a little girl with Down syndrome on campaign pamphlets which are being distributed to households. This has come on top of a number of references appearing in the media over the past few days where campaigners on both sides of the debate are using people with Down syndrome to present their views.
This is very disrespectful to both children and adults with Down syndrome and their families. It is also causing a lot of stress to parents. People with Down syndrome should not be used as an argument for either side of this debate.
Down Syndrome Ireland believes that it is up to each individual to make their own decision about which way to vote in the upcoming referendum.
We are respectfully asking both sides of the campaign debate, all political parties and any other interested groups to stop exploiting children and adults with Down syndrome to promote their campaign views.
We would also like to remind campaigners on both sides of the debate that people with Down syndrome listen to the news and read media articles, including social media content. We ask that the tone of the debate is respectful towards all people with disabilities
How on earth did she qualify as a solicitor? She's a gurrier.Right, so she says that was in 2011 then and she wasn't involved in politics then, sure, she was only a young wan of 30 then and was green, sure
Now what I would like to know is when she qualified as a solicitor and therefore became an officer of the court.
An officer of the court has a code of conduct which they are to abide by and i am sure these comments would be deemed to contravene that code.
Will the law,society now take action against her.
Anyway my point is she was probably a qualified solicitor at the time of her tweets, is she saying she was a solicitir but didnt see anything in what She tweeted.
If she'd stood by her "tweets" and declared her right to free speech or whatever, she may have been seen as a breath of fresh air. Instead she predictably kow-towed before the PC brigade and offered some cringeworthy, grovelling apologies.If only it'll make her more popular
She's FF.In what world do you think this would be likely?
She is a Fine Gaeler, a Regime politician.
Oh is she FF, OK, same difference.She's FF.
You'd be surprised how the electorate react to honesty. Didn't that geezer who ran for president get a good share of the vote in spite of his controversial comments about the travelling community?
Personally, I'm not offended by her comments. I welcome her right to tweet whatever the fupp she wants.
But by God is she thick. If she's indicative of the standard of politician in this country, then we are well and truly forked.