Irish election candidate wants gay people jailed, adultery made illegal and rock bands outlawed - Polidicks

and ban dancing those kids with their iTunes and their flipidy flops and their cumberbaches! Oh it makes me feel anxious that young girls are doing something that will get them pregnant! [editline]28th April 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=itisjuly;47617615]But divorce due to adultery still results in asset split. I think if you cheat you should not get 50% cut after a divorce.[/QUOTE] Which is what divorce laws pretty much do unless theres clear evidence one party is substantially responsible for assets, like clarksons upcoming divorce, he probably will loose half his fortune because while he wrote and stared, his wife invested, managed, and budgeted his money as well as earn her own so she is entitled to half his fortune. [editline]28th April 2015[/editline] Also if anybody says their a friend of the gay community and advocates for their incarceration, they're not a fucking friend of the gay community they're homophobic and want to plaster over that. Saying you're a friend of gays doesn't give you a free pass for being homophobic, it means you're even worse because you understand what you're saying is wrong.

[QUOTE=itisjuly;47617749]Yeah I agree, criminalisation is overboard. But marriage laws need to be modified to take cheating into account when dealing with divorce. Right now it's a free pass.[/QUOTE] What about swingers? Some married couples like having a third.

[QUOTE=Penultimate;47617839]What about swingers? Some married couples like having a third.[/QUOTE] These won't get divorced due to cheating then. No problem there.

[QUOTE=Zang-Pog;47617868]Don't marry a person who'd cheat on you, dummy[/QUOTE] Nice one mate. Yeah because we all can see into the future and predict cheating 100% of the time. Like damn. [editline]28th April 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Sableye;47617751] Which is what divorce laws pretty much do unless theres clear evidence one party is substantially responsible for assets, like clarksons upcoming divorce, he probably will loose half his fortune because while he wrote and stared, his wife invested, managed, and budgeted his money as well as earn her own so she is entitled to half his fortune. [/QUOTE]No idea what's going with Clarkson's divorce, did he or she cheat?

[QUOTE=itisjuly;47617876]Nice one mate. Yeah because we all can see into the future and predict cheating 100% of the time. Like damn. [editline]28th April 2015[/editline] No idea what's going with Clarkson's divorce, did he or she cheat?[/QUOTE] Divorces and couples private lives should never be policed by the state. If someone has an affair OK maybe that couple splits or maybe they don't who gives a shit, marriage has stopped being the end all to life many decades ago with no fault divorces

[QUOTE=itisjuly;47617864]These won't get divorced due to cheating then. No problem there.[/QUOTE] But that's still technically adultery. What if a cop or something found out a married couple just slept with a third person? Wouldn't they be legally obligated to arrest each party? Basically my point is that there's a point where the law shouldn't have to intervene. Non-consensual cheating sucks. I get that. But there's no way having legal repercussions for adultery would work out. You say the splitting of assets is unfair. I get that. So let's fix THAT instead of creating laws that are going to be abused as hell.

[QUOTE=Sableye;47617897]Divorces and couples private lives should never be policed by the state. If someone has an affair OK maybe that couple splits or maybe they don't who gives a shit, marriage has stopped being the end all to life many decades ago with no fault divorces[/QUOTE] I believe marriage overall should not be a thing legally but it is and we have to deal with that. [editline]28th April 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Penultimate;47617907]But that's still technically adultery. What if a cop or something found out a married couple just slept with a third person? Wouldn't they be legally obligated to arrest each party? Basically my point is that there's a point where the law shouldn't have to intervene. Non-consensual cheating sucks. I get that. But there's no way having legal repercussions for adultery would work out. You say the splitting of assets is unfair. I get that. So let's fix THAT instead of creating laws that are going to be abused as hell.[/QUOTE] If no charges are pressed then there is no issue though.

[QUOTE=itisjuly;47617910]I believe marriage overall should not be a thing legally but it is and we have to deal with that. [editline]28th April 2015[/editline] If no charges are pressed then there is no issue though.[/QUOTE] But charges would be brought. There's a whole ton of cops. Not all of them would be tolerant.

Is she running for the no fun party or something because rock and gays are awesome

We must never discover a fountain of youth, otherwise crazy old people like her will be around forever. Imagine that shit.

[QUOTE=Coffee;47617563]Isn't northern Ireland protestant?[/QUOTE] the fuck are you talking about? [editline]28th April 2015[/editline] [img]http://imgkk.com/i/y72p.png[/img]

i don't get how people can think society isn't supposed to change as time goes on. i mean, if she really wants to stick to her guns she should go hunt and gather and sleep on the ground outside

[QUOTE=.Lain;47618103]the fuck are you talking about? [editline]28th April 2015[/editline] [img]http://imgkk.com/i/y72p.png[/img][/QUOTE] alright calm down guy, he was asking a question

I bet she beats couples who hold hands with her purse

10/10 Would vote

[QUOTE=itisjuly;47617749]Yeah I agree, criminalisation is overboard. But marriage laws need to be modified to take cheating into account when dealing with divorce. Right now it's a free pass.[/QUOTE] This is a lot less extreme than what we initially understood from you. Be careful with what you agree with, you might be completely misunderstood. Just to be sure: Besides the problem of dividing assets in a divorce, should people who cheat during marriage by punished by law?

Can we outlaw old shits that think and live like it's the 50s instead?

[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;47618590]Can we outlaw old shits that think and live like it's the 50s instead?[/QUOTE] With that opinion you'd have to be outlawed along with her, haha!

Damn Sweden could use one of those nutters, maybe it would balance itself out a bit

imagine her being the president of the united states

[QUOTE=itisjuly;47617588]Why not? If you enter a lawful monogamous marriage then I don't see why cheating on someone you marry shouldn't have consequences with the law.[/QUOTE] Because this isn't fucking Saudi Arabia.

She's a little late to the "rock music is bad" bandwagon isn't she? By like almost 50 years?

[QUOTE=itisjuly;47617570]I can agree with adultery. The rest is nuts.[/QUOTE] Adultery is ALL sex outside of marriage. It is not just cheating. Religious people have soft-pedaled the definition, so society thinks it's only cheating in marriage ("I'm not sinning!"). Nutters still apply the true meaning of the word.

[QUOTE=Deathtrooper2;47618997]Because this isn't fucking Saudi Arabia.[/QUOTE] Are you saying in the west it's okay to cheat and we should encourage such behavior? [editline]28th April 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=BlueChihuahua;47619052]Adultery is ALL sex outside of marriage. It is not just cheating. Religious people have soft-pedaled the definition, so society thinks it's only cheating in marriage ("I'm not sinning!"). Nutters still apply the the true meaning of the word.[/QUOTE] All definitions I can find is "sex between a married person and not spouse"

As I said, there's now two definitions to the word. The Biblical definition of adultery is sex outside of marriage. Religious zealots, such as this woman, use that definition.

[QUOTE=BlueChihuahua;47619092]As I said, there's now two definitions to the word. The Biblical definition of adultery is sex outside of marriage. Religious zealots, such as this woman, use that definition.[/QUOTE] That's not how law works. The proper definition is sex with not your spouse. If law is worded as adultery it will use dictionary definition, not biblical one.

[QUOTE=itisjuly;47619098]That's not how law works. The proper definition is sex with not your spouse. If law is worded as adultery it will use dictionary definition, not biblical one.[/QUOTE] But as you've been discussing, adultery isn't a part of the law. And the definitions change by which dictionary you use. This woman wants to incarcerate homosexuals. Do you really think she's a reasonable person?

a fossil from another age, one could say

[QUOTE=BlueChihuahua;47619141]But as you've been discussing, adultery isn't a part of the law. And the definitions change by which dictionary you use. This woman wants to incarcerate homosexuals. Do you really think she's a reasonable person?[/QUOTE]Not talking about the woman specifically, just the idea of adultery-like laws being added as companion marriage laws.

I'm going to go with no. :v: