Jump to content

A Red

Season Ticket Holder
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    7,978

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Everything posted by A Red

  1. A Red
    Well, you used it directly to me referring to Unionism. It wasn't a reaction to anyone saying you should wear one or glorifying the actions of the britsh army. In case you hadn't noticed its April, no one is talking about poppies let alone "insisting" anyone should wear them. You know exactly what you are saying and the meaning taken when you refer to "poppy shaggers in the unionist corner" Pensioners blown up for celebrating the meaning of the poppy. So you can fuck right off with your apology. Now, if you can find any example of me using a derogatory sectarian term or language or bigotry for that matter, I'll gladly apologise and promise never to do it again. In the meantime I repeat, fuck right off.
  2. A Red
    Poppy shagger is, look back a few pages. Do you not get the link as to why its sectarian?
  3. A Red
    Well on the last few pages you will see glorification of a murdering terrorist organisation and defence of the use of the word hun and poppy shaggers
  4. A Red
    Possibly, if its singling out a group of people because of their beliefs, not thought about it. Poppy shagger is an easy one, particularly when poppy wearing unionists are blown up for being at a Remembrance parade. Do you see that? There are plenty of sectarian terms aimed at Republican/Roman Catholics, which you wont see used here.
  5. A Red
    You're in an irritating mood aren't you? Fair play
  6. A Red
    Theres a search engine, type a few choice words and there you go
  7. A Red
    Yes or referring to a unionist as a poppy shagger. Get it now? Smear fake tan over yourself and get called an orange bastard, not sectarian. Call an Ulster unionist......etc
  8. A Red
    What else did I say in that sentence?
  9. A Red
    *sigh* read what I said
  10. A Red
    And there it is, another day in sectarian land where hatred is the solution and what about is the excuse.
  11. A Red
    You both need to understand the definition of sectarian language. Poppy shaggers when used in conjunction with unionists most certainly is.
  12. A Red
    Search hun or poppy shaggers
  13. A Red
    You have to accept there is more republican sympathy than Unionist on this thread/site. You're not going to win it over, fair enough, but call out the sectarian bigotry when you see it.
  14. A Red
    The only way most of the severe cases can be helped is compulsory care, as you say criminalising is a complete waste of time and money.
  15. A Red
    Like I said, put the severe in to compulsory care. Proper funded care. Give them a chance
  16. A Red
    I wish I could fear for them
  17. A Red
    I'm not talking about temporary measures to suit headlines but a proper thought out plan that takes people with severe issues in to compulsory care until they are able to use something like housing first. It looks like there is no evidence that my idea doesn't work. We're in the unsual position whereby we can't dig up Google reports to chuck at each other, just our opinions.
  18. A Red
    Housing First, I agree, if you can get people to engage is the best way of doing things, cheaper and more humane, as you say. Well, there are social services, courts and prisons that can decide who needs compulsory help. I have no evidence it will work, just what I see. I thought that you had stacks of evidence that my solution for severe cases doesn't work?
  19. A Red
    I like that, it seems great. However, where is the evidence that it is better than compulsory care for the severe cases that you will see in any city centre today? Housing First should most definitely be available throughout the country but there are many it cannot help back in to society.
  20. A Red
    Proof that voluntary assistance works better than compulsory for severe cases? If that's true, fair enough I'm wrong. I'd like to see it.
  21. A Red
    You seem to just be talking about prison, I'm talking about all severe addicts and mentally ill. In these severe cases, often, any voluntary actions they are required to do don't happen and the cycle continues.
  22. A Red
    Yes, unless they are mentally ill or severe addicts, as I have said, in which case you have no choice but to impose stuff on them if you want them to have any chance of ever living a decent life.
  23. A Red
    People can be sectioned now, its done for their own good. Taking the vulnerable addicts and mentally ill off the streets in to secure rehabilitation centres is just an extension of that. The alternative is to try to support them but relying on them to also support themselves, it usually doesn't work. The mentally ill wont self medicate, the addicts wont go anywhere where they cant feed their addiction and the cycle continues. You think its dehumanising them, I really don't see any alternative. Please bear in mind I'm only talking about severe cases involving addicts and mentally ill.
  24. A Red
    Well, the judgement of homeless addicts and mentally health people doesn't tend to do them any long term good. There are plenty of people that choose to live on such parks year round, a good example would be the fitties at Cleethorpes. Clearly I'm not talking about shit caravans.
  25. A Red
    Thats my point, reverse it.
×
×
  • Create New...