It Wrote Itself



Last night’s Tonight with Vincent Browne featuring pro-life Fine Gael TD, Peter Mathews (left), Sinead Kennedy, a pro-choice campaigner from NUI Maynooth, (centre) and Sara McInerney of The Sunday Times.

The transcript.

Go on.

Get yourself some tay.

(begins at 20:22 ends at 31.35)

Vincent Browne: “The reality is, simply Peter, deal with this simple point.”

Peter Mathews: “I’ll deal with the point. Do you know what the simple point is?”

Browne: “No, no wait a minute. The simple point, this is the law as it now is. So what’s the problem?”

Mathews: “And what’s the Constitution?”

Browne: “This is the law and the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court. This is the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court.”

Mathews: “Well let’s go back to the plain English.”

Browne: “No, no, just a minute just a minute now. That is the reality. Now what is the problem with simply codifying this legal reality. Not changing any laws, no difference, nothing else, what is the problem with changing that reality?”

Mathews: “Vincent, legislation nearly always in every area that it’s carried out gets amended. Constitutions only get amended when the people actually vote on the amendment, or change it.”

Sinead Kennedy: “And twice, and twice they have refused to exclude suicide as grounds, as grounds for a termination. I mean you can’t get around that, you can’t get around the fact that the vast majority of people in this country support X case legislation as a bare minimum.”

Sarah McInerney: “It’s interesting actually there are some in Fine Gael who think that you can get round it, again for people that I was speaking to last week, one of the alternatives, sort of, some people have come up with and which they would like to see is for the legislation to say where there is a real and substantial risk to the life of the mother that the medical profession can act or it can intervene and just not include suicide but not preclude suicide.”

Mathews: “Don’t specify it. Yeah.”

McInerney: “And they believe that that would possibly be a workable solution and that if it was challenged in the courts that the government should take up that challenge in the courts and use the new evidence that Peter is talking about to challenge anyone who wanted to challenge that in the courts and that is one of the, one of the schools of thinking as such, absolutely.”

Mathews: “But that’s, that was what I said Vincent.”

Kennedy: “But that’s not good enough, I do not think, but that’s not good enough.”

Mathews: “You were saying leave it there and it won’t be applied anyway, because it’s, you know, the experience is, you know, that it is not going to be a contentious area.”

Browne: “No, I didn’t say that it wouldn’t be. I was saying that if your premise is correct, that if there is no medical basis to terminate a pregnancy because of a threat to suicide, of suicide, if if that is correct then it will never happen under the legislation, therefore there is no issue of principle here.”

Mathews: “Therefore leave out the reference to it, therefore leave out the specific preference to it. And as you’ve said Sarah if there is a substantive risk to the life of the mother, then let the medical profession…”

McInerney: “Well I’m not saying that, I’m saying that is what some people would like to see happen, yeah,”

Mathews: “Well, this is the area of professional judgment, when the professional judgment is carried out on the solemn duty to implement the Constitution which says equal rights of life to everybody who comes into existence, whether it be a baby in the earliest stages after conception, the mother or the father, there’s three people involved in the family.”

Kennedy: “I accept that when those rights come into conflict, when the right to life of the foetus conflicts with the right to life of the mother including the risk of suicide. That is the law and that law, there has been a delay for over 21 years in introducing a legal framework in which to make that a reality and to be quite frank I think the people in this country have had enough and they want at a bare minimum, I don’t think X case legislation, X case legislation, goes far enough.”

Mathews: “Sinead, would you mind, when are the rights of life to those three people in conflict. They’re never in conflict.”

Kennedy: “The two people.”

Mathews: “There’s three. people a father mother and baby.”

Kennedy: “The right to life of the father is not at issue here We’re talking about right to life of pregnant woman and right to life of the foetus. That’s what we’re talking about. In a life-threatening situation.”

Mathews: “Of a baby, don’t say the word foetus.”

Kennedy: “In a life threatening situation.”

Mathews: “Do you believe that life begins at conception?”

Kennedy: “No I don’t.”

Mathews: “There you go, there now, we know where you stand.”

Kennedy: “There is no legal or ethical consensus on where life begins. Now you may believe that life begins at conception but that is not an issue, again it’s not what is at issue here..”

Mathews: “Sinead, our Constitution, before you even start wondering do you understand plain english, takes the precept that every life begins at conception.”

Kennedy: “I have no difficulty understanding plain English. Our Constitution conflates the life of a foetus with that of a pregnant woman and I disagree with this as do I believe the vast majority of people in this country, because when it comes down to it people do not think that its the same thing. They really don’t think it is the same thing. They do not think that woman with all her life in front of her, her hopes and dreams are the exact same thing as a fertilised egg. Nobody really believes that. Maybe a small number of people do but when those issues come into conflict the vast majority of people think what is the, the more valuable life in that context when you have to make a judgment and the vast majority of people will side with the pregnant woman.”

Browne: “A lot of people do believe that its, there is a human life there prior to birth and I don’t think that’s necessarily contentious. Peter can I just ask you one further point.”

Mathews: “Well, Sinead says it is.”

Kennedy: “I said there’s no consensus on the issue and there is no consensus philosophical and ethical.”

Browne: “Peter, suppose your daughter were to get married and she were to become pregnant. I’m sure you’d be delighted at the prospect of a child being born to her and you becoming a grandfather and I am certain you’d be a wonderful grandfather.”

Mathews: “Like you Vincent, as I understand.”

Browne: “I’m not a grandfather.”

Mathews: “But maybe soon.”

Browne: “But if in the course of the pregnancy your daughter became seriously ill and if it became obvious that if the pregnancy were to continue her health would be seriously impaired for the rest of her life, and would you think that anybody other than she should take the decision with regard to what should happen?”

Mathews: “But of course the mother, the expectant mother, will have a responsibility to the unborn child and she will make that decision.”

Browne: “And it should be up to her and her alone. Ultimately. Obviously her husband…”

Mathews: “But that’s a matter of fact Vincent. Yeah, and her husband too yeah…”

Browne: “But wouldn’t it be terrible, wouldn’t it be a terrible intrusion on her autonomy and her integrity to say that somebody else should decide what should happen to her and should…”

Mathews: “But you’re talking about a theoretical situation that probably wouldn’t arise.”

Browne: “But these things do arise Peter, but I’m just putting it to you. Isn’t there something terribly…”

Mathews: “Do they? Do they Vincent Can you name a case?”

Browne: “Okay, isn’t there something terribly arrogant about us men particularly deciding in the case of women that they have to carry to full termination a baby within their womb irrespective of the consequences to them throughout the rest of their lives of doing so. Isn’t there terrible arrogance in that, involved in that?”

Mathews: “Well, you’re suggesting that arrogance arises in the case of all men. It doesn’t in my case. I have huge respect for my mother who looked after me, you know, through, before my birth ,after my birth, I have huge respect for wife who has borne our children, and I have huge respect for my daughter. And also for all my nieces.”

Browne: “You’re not dealing with the point I’m making, Peter.”

Mathews: “I am, Vincent. Not the way you want me to.”

Browne: “Yes of course you’re not the way I want you to because, you’re not answering the question.”

Mathews: “Truthfully, Vincent.”

Browne: “I think that maybe you haven’t listened. If in the case I have postulated to you somebody else was to say that oh no under no circumstances can your daughter take decisions for herself in circumstances such as that, wouldn’t you be appalled.”

Mathews: “I’m saying Vincent, that the reality is that expectant mothers and fathers, their partners or husbands do make those decisions for themselves, the same way for instance, hold on, men, men, well, men….”

Browne: “But they don’t. Sure the law has intervened they make criminals over them.”

Mathews: “Look, Vincent, men went down the mines and ways, men went into the mines and ways to provide for their family and their health was impaired and they died young. Look, for goodness, life is tough…. Vincent you know that, the ‘The Road Less Travelled’. ‘Life is tough’ that’s the first sentence of it And it was written by a psychiatrist in 1957.”

Browne: “Ah well, it must be true then.”

Mathews: “It’s an interesting insight.”

McInerney: “I’d be interested to hear your explanation on that point, if you say the couple involved will take the decision for themselves, everything we know about the case now of Savita and her husband they wanted to take the decision for themselves and weren’t given that opportunity. So, what do you think could or should have happened in that case, where they wanted to take the decision for themselves and were told they weren’t allowed?”

Mathews: “Yeah. There was, the question of judgment about when the risk to life of the mother arose seemed to have got mistimed.”

Browne: “No It wasn’t.”

Mathews: “It was.”

Browne: “No it wasn’t. No it wasn’t.”

Mathews: “Oh I know, your interview with Peter Boylan.”

Kennedy: “Who was very explicit, about this.”

Browne: “Now, wasn’t it terrible, wasn’t there something wrong that this woman knew that the, her baby was going to die, she was, a baby she desperately wanted and was not going to survive without the womb, and she intuitively wanted to end the pregnancy there and then and had it happened her life would have been saved, isn’t there something terribly wrong, that our law wouldn’t…”

Mathews: “It was a extraordinarily sad occasion. Extraordinarily sad.”

Browne: “And isn’t it terrible, awful that our law doesn’t permit that to happen.”

Mathews: “I don’t believe it was our law, no, Vincent. I think it was a misjudgment, a medical misjudgment.”

Browne: “You’re wrong Peter, you’re just wrong, you’re actually wrong.”

Mathews: “All right I’m wrong.”

McInerney: “Just on that point, you think that the couple involved are allowed take the decision for themselves They weren’t allowed and if you think it was okay for the couple not to to be allowed the decision for themselves, that’s obviously a valid point of view. But I don’t think you can say that the couple is allowed to take a decision for themselves when we know…”

Mathews: “Vincent was talking about health.”

McInerney: “When they asked for an intervention they were talking about health.

Mathews: “When you’ve a man and a woman and you provide for the family, your health for different people at different times, is going to take a toll. That’s human life.”

Kennedy: “So you think it’s an acceptable risk for woman to be allowed to continue with a pregnancy even if that pregnancy would damage her health. You think that’s acceptable?”

Browne: “For the rest of her life. Seriously imperil her health for the rest of her life.”

Mathews: “But sure we’re all going to end up dead anyway.”

Kennedy: “Do you think that’s an acceptable risk? And do you think you get to make that decision for a woman? It’s not your decision to make. It’s the decision of the individual woman.”

Mathews: “Sinead, I have a responsibility to uphold the Constitution which is in plain English, elucidated by the Supreme Court in 1992, with a reference to include suicide for that specific case which is now not relevant given the evidence.”


99 thoughts on “It Wrote Itself

    1. Sophie

      I think I popped a blood vessel I was so angry when I read that. The absolute arrogance of that f**ker

    2. Jonathon Fibonatchi

      What a ridiculous statement. Shocked at the caliber of people we elect to our government when they make such bafoon like comments

    3. Jandals

      If thats his attitude, then why do we need any laws? Shoot someone? Well thats fine, the victim has to die of something, amirite??

    4. Keith

      How does he resolve the fact that he can be so flippant about life for people with families and lives ahead of them yet be so righteous and morally arrogant when it comes to the unborn and the woman/couple/families involved? At what point, from conception to the end of a life, does he consider a life frivolous, when it is no longer worth imposing on the decisions a couple make for their own lives because we’re all going to die anyway?

      1. realPolithicks

        That’s a simple one, at birth. These wa*kers don’t give a rat’s ass about you after your born. For them the importance of the sanctity of life ends at birth, after that you’re on you’re own!

  1. blueboymario

    Should be Vincent Browne and Sara McInerney of the Pro-Choice campaign also.

    I saw it last night and it was completely one sided. I don’t agree with Peter Mathews but the rest of them including Vincent just ganged up on him.

    3 on 1, where is the balance? It’s just rhetoric from all sides.

    1. General Waste

      I take it you’ve never seen the loathsome Caroline Simons shout over Vincent and all the other guests? You haven’t seen the tiny and unrepresentative Iona Institute hog the media in recent times?

      Bollox to balance, especially when 82% of us want legislation on X and we’ve twice voted for suicide as a threat to the life of the mother. How about some fairness for change?

      1. Phil

        How does having people on a TV show to talk about how they are uncomfortable about an issue because their imaginary friend tells them to be, providing balance ?

        This whole issue is so embarrassing

    2. Bangalore

      When someone comes out with their reason for ignoring the states courts, europes courts and the democratic will of its people on two occasions and not legislating to save women’s lives and good health as “But sure we’re all going to end up dead anyway.” then the time for balance is over.

  2. missred

    Sinéad Kennedy is from Action on X there Broadsheet, not the Pro-Life Campaign! Do your research!

  3. J

    Below sounds like a veiled threat!

    Browne: Okay one more thing. Peter, suppose your daughter were to get married and she were to become pregnant. I’m sure you’d be delighted at the prospect of a child being born to her and you becoming a grandfather and I am certain you’d be a wonderful grandfather.

    Matthews: “Like you Vincent, as I understand.”

    Browne: “I’m not a grandfather.”

    Matthews: “Could be soon.”

  4. mark

    Mathews keeps saying “the constitution is written in plain english” – er… no it isn’t. Its written in Irish. The english version is a translation.

    1. Adrian

      The Irish constitution was written in English first, then translated into Irish, supervised by Mícheál Ó Gríobtha, even though the Irish version is privileged and Irish is stated to be the country’s first language.

  5. Roger

    He’s a Fine Gaeler and chartered accountant. Of course’s he’s arrogant. He doesn’t need to be nice to get by. He doesn’t care what people think of him. Now that can be a good thing but not if you’re arrogant and self regarding.

    1. Stephen Whitty

      I am a chartered accountant. I marched in 1992 on the pro-choice side. I still am pro-choice. Who are you to pigeonhole?

  6. Fred

    Well if we are all going to die anyway why is he so worried about the foetus??? And if life is so tough etc etc. What a dufus!

    1. Niamh

      Oh no no no. It’s not a foetus! It’s a baby, or a ‘preborn child’.
      See Mathews, who (as a politician and an account) is of course an expert on these issues, states you can’t call it a foetus.

  7. droid

    Mathews needs to get his hands on some of that pro-life media training that so many of his ilk avail of. He’s completely off message.

    Worst gaffe since Caroline Simmons said that Savita’s baby had ‘a passport to heaven’.

    1. YellowElk

      Good grief, did she really say that? Doesn’t she know the unbaptised go straight to hell.

      1. Caroline

        No, it’s limbo they used to go to.

        But then the Catholic Church did away with the concept of limbo, leaving those deceased children who they had so cruelly consigned there in something of a, a, uh… um.

  8. Intact

    Yerra, why would you be bothered with hospitals and doctors at all, shur you’re going to die anyway.

    Might as well give up trying to stop wars and pull people out of poverty – shur that’s life, getting yer family killed by a bomb while you slave away in the diamond mines. No point trying to stop it. Put up and shut up.

  9. Sgt. Bilko

    “Sinead, I have a responsibility to uphold the Constitution which is in plain English, elucidated by the Supreme Court in 1992, with a reference to include suicide for that specific case which is now not relevant given the evidence.”

    So what he’s saying is that he shall discharge that responsibility by ignoring the clear and explicit judgment of the Supreme Court in the X case in 1992 and the express wishes of the people of Ireland. In other words, he is saying that he will actually decline to discharge that responsibility.

  10. Starina

    I find it interesting (and totally infuriating) that even as Mathews is arguing against letting women have choice, he says:

    Mathews: “But of course the mother, the expectant mother, will have a responsibility to the unborn child and she will make that decision.”

    DECISION. SHE WILL MAKE THAT DECISION. It’s not a decision if there’s only one option to choose from.

    Mathews: “But you’re talking about a theoretical situation that probably wouldn’t arise.”

    So basically he’s saying that it’s unlikely to happen specifically to his daughter so therefore it won’t happen to anyone.


  11. nellyb

    LOL! “Mathews: “Do they? Do they Vincent Can you name a case?”” Mathews, as an obstetrician and a woman would have definitely known or heard :-)
    Ah… Ireland, the land of the fudge masters :-)

  12. C Sharp

    The biggest feckin eejit in the Dáil, and that’s saying something.

    At least he’s consistent I suppose. Consistently a feckin eejit.

    Based on the above he can also add callous and possibly sociopathic to his CV.

  13. Frilly Keane

    Ah herw, these transcripts are hard work.

    Any chance Ye record them with Muppet voices and uTube ’em.

  14. Ms Piggy

    “Look, Vincent, men went down the mines and ways, men went into the mines and ways to provide for their family and their health was impaired and they died young. Look, for goodness, life is tough…. Vincent you know that, the ‘The Road Less Travelled’. ‘Life is tough’ that’s the first sentence of it And it was written by a psychiatrist in 1957.”


    1. Jandals

      I think it means because the women have to die young too, from easily manageable conditions to do with dead foetuses?

      1. Jane

        I think he means men do their jobs (macho stuff down mines) and women do theirs’ (carry the preborn, unborn, foetus or whatever you have, no matter what).

        It is primitive orthodoxy. Of course it can’t reflect real life – hence all this tension about what is essentially a bit of legislation for a rare occurance that is stuck up the cul de sac of that wretched Constitutional Amendment.

        Meanwhile nothing is being done for women with non-viable pregnancies, women with life-threatening conditions, victims of rape or incest etc. They can just save their pennies and get their bodies over to the UK for care. The damndest thing is that most Irish people do care and do want a change. The politicians are chicken and the small crowd of vociferous ‘pro-life’ people are shouting loudest, twisting facts and trying to determine what everybody else should do.

        It is pathetic.

    2. YellowElk

      I’m guessing he’s referring to The Road Less Traveled by Scott Peck. It was published in 1978 and begins with the paragraph: “Life is difficult. This is a great truth, one of the greatest truths. It is a great truth because once we truly see this truth, we transcend it. Once we truly know that life is difficult – once we truly understand and accept it – then life is no longer difficult. Because once it is accepted, the fact that life is difficult no longer matters.”

      I haven’t read it, but from a skim, it seems like awful shite.

      1. Scared Vagina

        Oh thank god, I thought he was on about The Road Less Travelled, which starts with the line ‘Two roads diverged in a yellow wood’ and was written by Robert Frost who by all accounts was no psychiatrist.

      2. Lyndabynda

        I’ve read it and his other one, The People of the Lie, which helpfully explains that people who commit suicide are actually evil. It’s tripe.

        Good stuff YellowElk for pointing out that Matthews was talking through his hole… misquote and the wrong year ffs…

    3. justanotherstatistic

      Life is tough Peter. You’d be better off heading down the mines and ways and speeding up the inevitable. Seriously – off you go.

  15. Atticus

    “Watch here (begins at 20.26 ends at 31.27)” should always be at the top of the post. Does away with any unnecessary reading

  16. Susan

    Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! It actually looks worse when written down. There’s no coming back from that last line!

  17. YellowElk

    Aside from Matthews’ appallingly callous attitude to women’s lives, which is just sickening, I find this whole conversation utterly baffling. He genuinely doesn’t seem to understand his own position.

    He keeps agreeing that decisions around pregnancy are a woman’s choice, and saying that women should make decisions about pregnancy for themselves and those decisions shouldn’t be forced on them by anyone.. …while arguing for laws that would prevent exactly this.

    Bloody eejit should stick to talking about the banks.

  18. sinabhfuil

    He’s right in a way; for the Constitution to be made absolutely clear, a referendum on the Eighth Amendment is necessary. This amendment states:

    “The State acknowledges the right to life of the unborn and, with due regard to the equal right to life of the mother, guarantees in its laws to respect, and, as far as practicable, by its laws to defend and vindicate that right.”

    If a referendum were held and decided that this amendment should be taken out of the Constitution, then pregnant women’s lives would no longer be less important than their pregnancies.

    1. Scared Vagina

      I would probably cry with joy if anyone in any kind of position of power were to realise this is the real crux of the issue and that dicking about with all this ‘threat to life’ bollocks is a waste of everyone’s time.

      1. PaddyIrishMan

        Yes, yes, yes, a hundred times yes. We will NEVER have a proper solution to this issue without the repeal of the Offences against the Person Act (1861) and the removal of the 8th Amendment. Research has shown the majority of people of Ireland are in favour of abortion being offered to women in a number of different scenarios that are in direct conflict with that amendment. It was a mistake in 1983 and it is time for it to go.

  19. Sgt. Bilko

    The “as far as practicable” bit already does that. There is no need to go mucking about with the Constitution on this particular issue. All that needs to be done is give meaningful legislative force to the decision in the X case. The electorate were asked twice to set the Supreme Court’s decision aside, and they declined both times. Bruton and Matthews are just plain flat out wrong when they say that the X case decision can somehow be disregarded because they happen to be uncomfortable with it. There’s nothing more to talk about on this, the Dail just needs to get off its hole and do its job, however many years late.

  20. Dee

    Wimmin = baby machine fodder. EXCEPT my daughter, cause that wouldn’t happen.
    Men! now men go down the mines, make the money, feed the economy. men men men men men…
    focus there Peter.

  21. Bejayziz

    Even if legislation changes it will be a half arse change as usual….We need abortion “on demand” (dont like the phrase but how and ever) in the country, not this rubbish about a threat to the life, it just makes things hard for women that are already under enough stress if they in that position, it will still be less stressful to just go to England

  22. Hm?

    Kind of shite that this hasn’t gotten more mainstream recognition…

    Anyway, if “But sure we’re all going to end up dead anyway” is his genuine attitude, he needs to answer why he should be allowed to represent anyone – as pointed out in an earlier comment, you can consider any mistake you make as unimportant if that’s your perspective.
    If it was just something the threw out cause he was under pressure, then he needs to apologize for it, cause that is a disgusting statement to make in the context of (as the originator of this most recent abortion debate) Savita Halappanavar.

  23. Mark Dowling

    “There’s three people a father mother and baby” pretty friggin’ ballsy thing for PM to say considering the discussion touched on the X Case, not to mention how he glossed over Savita’s husband’s backing her wishes 100%, instead towing the Breda O’Brien line which Boylan demolished on Marian. A damn sight more ballsy at any rate than hiding in UCD on #promnight – when his supposed expertise in banking should have been front and centre.

  24. Mark Dowling

    Also: these transcripts are very useful for those of us in the diaspora who TV3 want to force to buy some cockamamie Roku box in order to watch #vinb the odd time.

    1. Lyndabynda

      She did indeed. I don’t know how those two women kept their cool when he was saying some of those awful things. Aside from the pure stupidity, he was actually extremely rude to both of them, blatantly ignoring them and talking over them, wouldn’t even look at Sarah McInerney when she was trying to speak to him. And then says he’s not arrogant.

  25. johnmcork

    Sure between govt. and opposition support it’ll easily be carried so we should all just calm down and carry on.

  26. De

    I made the suggested tay before reading, but when it got to ‘those lives are never in conflict’ I wished to hell I’d put scotch in it.

  27. Angelily

    Members of Fine Gael are really starting to look like complete and utter plonkers these days. Foot stamping and having tantrums and threatening to resign if things don’t go their way on this abortion legislation issue.

    Scary to listen to such moronic rantings from those who hold such power.

    1. johnmcork

      I’m pro-choice – part of which means being tolerant of other people’s opinions.
      Dismissing people as backward just because they oppose any point of law is in itself backward. Reasoned argument is the way to go here – otherwise you are no better than the crowd with the nasty pictures and the rosary beads.

      1. YellowElk

        What is this obsession with always being tolerant of everyone else’s opinion, regardless of its content? Everyone has a right to hold their own opinion and I respect that. But it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t call people out on their bullshit.

        Reasoned argument is indeed the way to go. But Peter Matthews does not present a reasoned argument. He gets asked about whether it’s important for women to have control over their own healthcare and, in response, he says “sure we’re all going to end up dead anyway.”

        I don’t see why I should tolerate or respect that opinion.

  28. Gav D

    Genuine question: Are pro-life comments being removed / moderated on this post, are they not bothering to try defend what appears to be indefensible?

    1. well

      they’re not bothering i imagine, they are here all the time.

      it’s a common PR tactic, pretend it didn’t happen and it will go away.

  29. hyper nova

    Guys… what the f*ck is going on with our country?

    A member of government went on national television and said he doesn’t care what happens to half of the population…

    1. Trish

      Exactly and, as far as I can see, neither the Irish Times nor the Independent has picked it up. In other countries this gobshite would be under fire to resign.

      1. hyper nova


        I’m appalled too that neither Vincent nor the other guests lost their shit entirely when he said that. No one even voiced their disgust. What an utter coward. He wouldn’t even honestly engage in the Socratic method…

  30. Michael

    The fact that present politicians in Ireland believe that they should have the authority to undermine somebody’s autonomy and personal liberty is both upsetting and delirious. They need to listen to the change that the people, they continually fail to represent, desire. We live in a state so embedded with catholic beliefs that it prevents any sort of development. While they’re at it, why don’t they just consider legalizing murder “sure we’re all going to end up dead anyway”.

  31. Jane

    “Of a baby, don’t say the word foetus.”

    Hate being told what to do with my body by a man who sees women as breeders with nothing more to offer society than the creation of more tax-payers!

  32. Hesch

    I find it interesting, how blantant Matthews uses well trained communication power-tools and how easy it is to see the problem he seems to be having with women. He tries to depreciate Kennedy with statements like “plain English”, for example, and constantly tries to avoid the debate with the women by trying to only be talking to the only other male. He is not even subtle in his hate, fear and insecurity. Not to mention what comes out when he opens his mouth – or what does not come out and is still apparent.

Comments are closed.