A bit of sense at last.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32129006
Good news, France rejects new law!!
Printable View
-
31-03-15, 13:34doodlebugGood news, France rejects new law!!
-
31-03-15, 13:56willie wackerHopefully it might become European law and then these fools here will have to go the same way :DQuote:
Originally Posted by doodlebug
-
31-03-15, 18:09Peugeot404
Yeah but those guys have some sense we tend to be lacking in this basic quality in our parliament
-
01-04-15, 04:11Alex.xx
Good news:)
But. After reading this article, I think it is a joke, Prima Aprilis??? I am a foreigner, English is my second language, please do enligthen me, what in the context of the article means: ''Social affairs minister Marisol Touraine said that Monday night's vote was "absolutely unbelievable and contemptuous towards women". Or the actual decision is not 'to scrap the fine' only????
Also this one. I think the guy is brilliant (Joelle Garriaud-Maylam) '(...)soliciting was a useful resource for the authorities. "To help these women, you first of all have to identify them.(...)"
WOW!
@facepalm
+@facepalm over the unstoppable need to help 'these woman'.
Then later, Maud has spoken: "There is no choice; violence is ever present,". Whaaaaaa???
If that all is true indeed, only the journalist skipped his French in school, or skipped the school altogether???, then I shall congratulate the best clients of 'these women'. They really keeping tabs on what's happening.
Stormont didn't do school, they were busy with... eh, shit, what do you call it?...
And one more on the very piece of finest journalism: Please, do tell me, it is me, not BBC. -
01-04-15, 05:3610inchesandcountingWell, I hate to rain on your parade , but there is nothing good about that news.Quote:
Originally Posted by doodlebug
It is not France that rejected that law, it the French senate who has only a consultative role.
Now that it was rejected (twice), it will go back in front of the parliament one last time ( who drafted and voted the law in the first place) to be redrafted or not, and put to vote again by the parliament(in final instance).
Make no mistake, this law will happen.
The fact that the majority of the population is against it has nothing to do with the democratic process the politicians keep telling us about. -
01-04-15, 08:14Alex.xx
[QUOTE=irishdeltaforce;1529334]I beleave this was one ministers response to the to the Swedish law not going ahead and was included in the article for balance.
'to scrap the fine' this was the fine the French government would have imposed on clients if the Swedish law went ahead.
yeah I get it allrite, it just doesn't make any sense in the context with the coming next martyrology of women in question.
If initially women were fined, then state has moved the penalty over onto (onto??? to???)buyer, and now: if they've voted to scrap it ONLY, then women aren't affected anyhow, and actually nobody woould be. But, if they voted sucessfully on criminalisation of independant prostitution, then indeed, tears were running and [sic!] on both sides. The buyer would still pay the toll in the price. Escorts' rates will include something like 'criminalisation charge' or in that tune-like. Condon-(m) charge? Wet wipes add-on?.... Soprano's Duty Tax. I can go on like that...
This is why I think, the article is either poorly translated (sorry, I don't speak French), or 's been read and written by someone who has poor understanding of the language, topic, bla bla, nothing, sorry Google Translate on payroll. I bet it was Andy. Or at least someone from the same team. I am not sure if that's not better idea in general. Indoctrinating next generations by Andys of BBC A.D.2015 sounds scary.
BTW The harvesting of the charge/penalty -> Would that make the state a pimp? yeeeeee....
Would state benefit from immoral earrings? aye, day like everyday....
-------------------------------------------------------
So, you say it's BBC not me? thanks.
...
But you are Irish, you will always be on my side versus BBC. Not sure, if that counts:(