Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Gay people should 'seek help'. Northern MP compares homosexuality to bestiality.

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Patrick Cleburne
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 141 ✭✭Patrick Cleburne


    dlofnep wrote: »
    I wasn't doing so with an agenda to attack Unionists at all, wise up. It just so happens that homophobia is a huge issue within Unionist parties with a broad range of Unionist politicians. There is a huge difference between Unionist parties and a Unionist population, and I'd expect you to know the difference.

    I created this thread to highlight the comments made with regards to homophobia. The fact that it was a Unionist politician is a matter of fact, and isn't something I can change or omit from an article just to suit your conspiracy theories.
    So what? Get over it. They have traditional views from the Bible and they stick to them. If you don't like it, don't read or listen to such views. And you certainly don't have to vote for them.

    I say well done to the man for expressing his view and he is entitled to it. It won't harm the Unionist cause at all.


  • Options
    #33
    junder
    Registered Users Posts: 2,706 ✭✭✭junder


    walshb wrote: »
    Nothing suprising here. The most bigoted and hateful people up the north are many of these unionists. Horrible crowd!

    I remember reading an article about Johnny Adair doing charity work in Africa. You couldn't make it up.

    It never ceases to amaze me the myopia that some republicans seem to display. I mean surly you can see it. Honestly you accuse unionists of being bigoted by making a bigoted statement yourself. Talk about illogical


  • Options
    #34
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 54,641 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    junder wrote: »
    It never ceases to amaze me the myopia that some republicans seem to display. I mean surly you can see it. Honestly you accuse unionists of being bigoted by making a bigoted statement yourself. Talk about illogical

    Unionists have shown many times that they are bigoted. Nothing illogical with me saying this. Read up on the history of the troubles for one god source. Or, read about one particlular incident, the Holy Cross dispute!


  • Options
    #35
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    So what? Get over it. They have traditional views from the Bible and they stick to them. If you don't like it, don't read or listen to such views. And you certainly don't have to vote for them.
    And we don't have to hear his stone-age views in silence either. The irony of you complaining about the complaints is apparently beyond you.
    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    I say well done to the man for expressing his view and he is entitled to it. It won't harm the Unionist cause at all.
    Except of course in the eyes of people who live in the 21st century.


  • Options
    #36
    Patrick Cleburne
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 141 ✭✭Patrick Cleburne


    Monty Burnz wrote: »
    And we don't have to hear his stone-age views in silence either. The irony of you complaining about the complaints is apparently beyond you.

    Except of course in the eyes of people who live in the 21st century.
    It is this shock horror mentality that this guy is not possibly allowed to say these things which is the real joke in this. As if he isn't allowed to possibly be against homosexuality.

    Not everyone is a liberal and left leaning Republican. At least he is backed up by many thousands of people in Ulster who would have a similar type of view which they get from the Bible and the values they hold.

    Thank goodness the Ulster Protestant is still willing to speak out and say what he/she thinks.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    walshb
    Registered Users Posts: 54,641 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    It is this shock horror mentality that this guy is not possibly allowed to say these things which is the real joke in this. As if he isn't allowed to possibly be against homosexuality.

    Not everyone is a liberal and left leaning Republican. At least he is backed up by many thousands of people in Ulster who would have a similar type of view which they get from the Bible and the values they hold.

    Thank goodness the Ulster Protestant is still willing to speak out and say what he/she thinks.

    That bible is really ****ing messed up, isn't it?


  • Options
    #38
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    It is this shock horror mentality that this guy is not possibly allowed to say these things which is the real joke in this. As if he isn't allowed to possibly be against homosexuality.
    Sure, he's allowed to be against it. Sure aren't people against blacks, and women and all sorts of things?
    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    Not everyone is a liberal and left leaning Republican. At least he is backed up by many thousands of people in Ulster who would have a similar type of view which they get from the Bible and the values they hold.
    As a non-left leaning liberal Republican, I'm well aware of that. I don't particularly care whether they get their views from their own interpretation of the Bible, from Grimm's Fairytales, or any other collection of fairy stories as long as they don't denigrate other people.
    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    Thank goodness the Ulster Protestant is still willing to speak out and say what he/she thinks.
    And thank goodness the Ku Klux Klan is doing the same in the USA, with the same book of fairy stories in their hands.


  • Options
    #39
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    So what? Get over it.

    Get over what exactly? Misinformed bigotry? Hate-speech? No thanks.
    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    They have traditional views from the Bible and they stick to them.

    I don't care where they get their views, or how traditional they are deemed. It doesn't make them valid, or correct.
    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    If you don't like it, don't read or listen to such views. And you certainly don't have to vote for them.

    Kind of hard not to hear such views when they are aired on a well renowned radio station, now isn't it? He can air his views if he likes - and I can, and will challenge said views.
    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    I say well done to the man for expressing his view and he is entitled to it. It won't harm the Unionist cause at all.

    So - Well done to a man who equated homosexuality with having sex with animals? You champion such rhetoric? It may not harm the Unionist cause - but it does harm the cause of society, which I'm afraid is far more important than national politics.


  • Options
    #40
    Denerick
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,488 ✭✭✭Denerick


    whitelines wrote: »
    I'm afraid that it was The Democrats that held sway in Dixie until relatively recently...

    Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

    'Built what is NOW the republican party in the US'

    He is still correct. Those voters merely migrated to the Republicans once the Democrats grew a set of balls and passed the civil rights act in 1964.


  • Options
    #41
    Patrick Cleburne
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 141 ✭✭Patrick Cleburne


    Monty Burnz wrote: »
    Sure, he's allowed to be against it. Sure aren't people against blacks, and women and all sorts of things?

    As a non-left leaning liberal Republican, I'm well aware of that. I don't particularly care whether they get their views from their own interpretation of the Bible, from Grimm's Fairytales, or any other collection of fairy stories as long as they don't denigrate other people.

    And thank goodness the Ku Klux Klan is doing the same in the USA, with the same book of fairy stories in their hands.
    Well he just did and what can you do about it? Face up to it, he give a view which many people have and express. You might not like it but he is entitled to air it and nothing can change that.
    So - Well done to a man who equated homosexuality with having sex with animals? You champion such rhetoric? It may not harm the Unionist cause - but it does harm the cause of society, which I'm afraid is far more important than national politics.
    I said he is entitled to that view point. That is all. It isn't a crime to hold such views because if it was, no one would air such views in public which is not the case.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    Well he just did and what can you do about it? Face up to it, he give a view which many people have and express. You might not like it but he is entitled to air it and nothing can change that.
    Well actually you can do something to change it - hate speech can be prosecuted in the UK, and as I understand it he lives in the UK, no? We'll see how smart he is when the CPS are knocking on his door.

    Many people express hatred for Jews and black people and Unionists too - it doesn't make it right, does it?


  • Options
    #43
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    dlofnep wrote: »
    He can air his views if he likes - and I can, and will challenge said views.

    Well said. The absolute worst thing we can do is passively accept homophobic rubbish as a legitimate viewpoint. It's a viewpoint, it is entitled to be aired, but it has no legitimacy and needs to be denigrated and ridiculed as much as possible.


  • Options
    #44
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    I wonder is he as virtuous as Iris the Virus?


  • Options
    #45
    Patrick Cleburne
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 141 ✭✭Patrick Cleburne


    Monty Burnz wrote: »
    Well actually you can do something to change it - hate speech can be prosecuted in the UK, and as I understand it he lives in the UK, no? We'll see how smart he is when the CPS are knocking on his door.

    Many people express hatred for Jews and black people and Unionists too - it doesn't make it right, does it?
    And yet what gets done about it? Nothing. You know it and I know it, he give a view which is held by a hell of a lot of people in society and you know he won't get prosecuted.

    I would be very surprised if he was anyway.
    Section 74 and Schedule 16 came into force on 23 March 2010. However, only days later (12 April) Cumbria Police chose to ignore the Waddington Amendment when they arrested and charged street preacher Dale Mcalpine for telling a gay PCSO that according to the Bible homosexuality was a sin. When Mcalpine pointed out that the arrest was unlawful (citing Paragraph 14 of Schedule 16, though wrongly attributing it to Lord Carey) the arresting officer refused to listen. Charges were eventually dropped and the police made a formal apology
    Well I suppose that answers that.


  • Options
    #46
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    And yet what gets done about it? Nothing. You know it and I know it, he give a view which is held by a hell of a lot of people in society and you know he won't get prosecuted.

    I would be very surprised if he was anyway.
    This is brilliant - your defence for homophobic hate-mongering is 'a lot of people do it'. Superb defence. I guess that works for child abusers too?

    "Well your honour, a hell of a lot of us do this stuff."

    "Really? Case dismissed!"


  • Options
    #47
    Patrick Cleburne
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 141 ✭✭Patrick Cleburne


    Monty Burnz wrote: »
    This is brilliant - your defence for homophobic hate-mongering is 'a lot of people do it'. Superb defence. I guess that works for child abusers too?

    "Well your honour, a hell of a lot of us do this stuff."

    "Really? Case dismissed!"
    I didn't defend what he was saying, I said he is entitled to express such views. Perhaps you should read the posts properly.

    It was you who brought prosecution into it but we know that won't happen. If that was the case, then hundreds of preachers up and down the country would be in trouble every day.


  • Options
    #48
    Monty Burnz
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    I didn't defend what he was saying, I said he is entitled to express such views. Perhaps you should read the posts properly.
    Yes, he's entitled to express his views, and we are entitled to point out that he is talking stone-age poppycock. Then you turn up and complain that we are criticising him...where is our freedom of speech?


  • Options
    #49
    telly_lover
    Site Banned Posts: 105 ✭✭telly_lover


    The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »
    Pretty much, there is a section of religious unionism which is quite comparable to the civil rights / gay rights bashing republicans in the US.

    Having said that, I much prefer to have this man laughed at for his outdated views then having anti-gay opposition that is encountered in many parts of catholic Africa or Catholic Eastern Europe where homosexuals are physically and not just verbally under attack. Orthodox Russians and Greeks ain't too fond of gay people either. Either are the Muslim countries come to think of it.

    The man's views are crazy but at least in Ireland, the UK and America, there is some progression and opposition is mainly verbal and the standards of equality for all has a chance. We are decades above the standards of much of the world and that should continue and for every old fashioned religious nut who appears on radio, that will benefit not his views but the views of equality for all as he is shown as a loser and bigot.


    its more than that , ulster scots were the cornerstone of the social conservative wing of the republican party back in the day and still are to a large degree


  • Options
    #50
    Patrick Cleburne
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 141 ✭✭Patrick Cleburne


    Monty Burnz wrote: »
    Yes, he's entitled to express his views, and we are entitled to point out that he is talking stone-age poppycock. Then you turn up and complain that we are criticising him...where is our freedom of speech?
    Complain away Monty, it won't make much difference but you are entitled to complain. I just hope people understand he is entitled to hold such views, as are you in disagreeing with him.


  • Options
    #51
    telly_lover
    Site Banned Posts: 105 ✭✭telly_lover


    whitelines wrote: »
    I'm afraid that it was The Democrats that held sway in Dixie until relatively recently...

    Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

    i wouldnt go that far , the democrats used to be a significant force in the south


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    Patrick Cleburne wrote: »
    I didn't defend what he was saying, I said he is entitled to express such views. Perhaps you should read the posts properly.

    I read your posts properly, and it absolutely looks like you were defending what he was saying. You stated that it won't harm the Unionist cause. You assured us that his views were held by a large portion of people in society. You then shared with us that you congratulated him for expressing his views. Would you come into a random thread to do such a thing if you weren't defending his views?

    Don't come in here and try to masquerade as some sort of objective commentator. You're very clearly in support of his outburst - which isn't a matter of opinion, or a matter of having views. It's misinformed, ignorant nonsense that has no scientific or logical grounding.


  • Options
    #53
    Patrick Cleburne
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 141 ✭✭Patrick Cleburne


    dlofnep wrote: »
    I read your posts properly, and it absolutely looks like you were defending what he was saying. You stated that it won't harm the Unionist cause. You assured us that his views were held by a large portion of people in society. You then shared with us that you congratulated him for expressing his views. Would you come into a random thread to do such a thing if you weren't defending his views?

    Don't come in here and try to masquerade as some sort of objective commentator. You're very clearly in support of his outburst - which isn't a matter of opinion, or a matter of having views. It's misinformed, ignorant nonsense that has no scientific or logical grounding.
    Then you read wrongly and that is not my problem.

    I said he was entitled to his views, it won't harm Unionism (it won't) and I am a supporter of free speech and people using the liberty they have to express views even if some people don't like them. I might not like what you have to say but I will defend your right to say it. That is what my point was.

    I haven't even posted my actual opinion on homosexuality.


  • Options
    #54
    Solair
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,230 ✭✭✭Solair


    This is the very kind of thing that will frighten off inwards investment in Northern Ireland.

    Do you seriously think that some trendy IT company's going to invest somewhere supposedly 'main stream' politicians come out with this kind of nonsense.

    Northern Ireland already has a harder sell than most places given that it has to overcome the perception that it's an active war zone that many people still have.

    This kind of thing just does yet more damage to its reputation.

    Do these guys want to plunge NI into the dark ages or what?!


  • Options
    #55
    Brer Fox
    Registered Users Posts: 244 ✭✭Brer Fox


    dlofnep wrote: »
    If you don't favour homosexuality, don't engage in same-sex relations. You have no right or business to tell what consenting adults do in their own private affairs. But such a view is mild in comparison to comparing homosexuality to bestiality like this politician did. How on earth two people coming together who love in each in marriage changes in anyway because they are the same sex is beyond me. It's merely the icing on the cake for a couple - to cement their commitment to each other.

    If the thing was kept private that would be a different matter. But the problem is that some people want homosexual 'marriage'. That will impact on everyone, because little children will be taught it in schools, churches will be forced to conduct ceremonies (despite assurances that this won't happen in the UK, look at Denmark) and so on. This affects everyone.
    seamus wrote: »
    There's also a portion of public opinion which believes that black people should be "sent home" and women shouldn't be allowed work.

    Just because these opinions exist, doesn't mean it's OK for a politician to reflect them.
    The man reflects the opinions of many.
    Monty Burnz wrote: »
    Well actually you can do something to change it - hate speech can be prosecuted in the UK, and as I understand it he lives in the UK, no? We'll see how smart he is when the CPS are knocking on his door.

    Many people express hatred for Jews and black people and Unionists too - it doesn't make it right, does it?
    You can't bully or threaten people to make them agree with you or silence them. People can freely hold that gay sex is wrong and that's that.


  • Options
    #56
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Brer Fox wrote: »
    If the thing was kept private that would be a different matter. But the problem is that some people want homosexual 'marriage'. That will impact on everyone, because little children will be taught it in schools, churches will be forced to conduct ceremonies (despite assurances that this won't happen in the UK, look at Denmark) and so on. This affects everyone.

    You cannot be taught to be homosexual.

    The man reflects the opinions of many.

    Yes he does, not just many unionists, but many ignorant and confused people with many creeds and causes. Popularity of an opinion (and I'd hope this opinion is the minority) doesn't make it right, especially when its an ill informed opinion.
    You can't bully or threaten people to make them agree with you or silence them. People can freely hold that gay sex is wrong and that's that.

    They shouldn't be threatened but they should be challenged to defend their position. Why is gay sex wrong?


  • Options
    #57
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    Nodin wrote: »
    Away ye go.

    http://www.jimallister.org/default.asp?blogID=1326

    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ghost-of-dups-past-reappears-as-gay-rights-row-haunts-party-16028497.html

    http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/09/03/uup-contender-tom-elliott-says-he-wont-attend-gay-pride-marches/

    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/iris-robinsons-gay-outburst-leads-to-street-protests-official-complaints-and-calls-to-quit-13918085.html

    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/first-minister-peter-robinson-backs-wifes-view-that-gays-are-an-abomination-14023693.html

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/6705637.stm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Save_Ulster_from_Sodomy

    http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/02/16/no-gays-on-speakers-conference-but-dup-preacher-is-appointed/

    So you giving 8 cases of people (who happen to be unionists) giving personal opinions against homosexual marriage constitutes some special homophobic mantra embedded in unionist politics? Those sources are individuals opinions and based on religious grounds not political/unionist. There is nothing inherently homophobic about a unionist politician.

    'Tom Elliott told the Belfast Telegraph: “I have indicated at party meetings that whilst some members of our party would go to gay pride marches or GAA matches, I wouldn’t go.'

    It is not a party position, it just so happens that many party members may also share religious ideas that they'd have if they were unionists, republicans, french or dutch. It is unacceptable.

    Him being unionist has as much to do with this thread as him being from Northern Ireland or him being a man. His personal religious beliefs and ignorance on the subject are what have informed his views


  • Options
    #58
    Brer Fox
    Registered Users Posts: 244 ✭✭Brer Fox


    Laminations wrote: »
    You cannot be taught to be homosexual.

    There is a learned aspect to homosexuality. It can be reinforced by repetition. What might begin as insecurity or curiosity can, if acted on, lead to an attachment to the behaviour.

    Homosexuality is not something that little children normally conceive unless it is introduced to them. Doing so is manipulative and abusive.

    Gay sex is not open to life nor does it respect the complementarity of the human persons created male and female. Gay sex is wrong because it is a mockery of the intentions of the Creator. I think most sensible people intuit this, even as they have been silenced by the media campaign waged over the last couple decades, such that now, to express what was the normal view until recently, can carry a heavy cost for the individual concerned, such as loss of employment or ruined chances of promotion.


  • Options
    #59
    Ambersky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,220 ✭✭✭Ambersky


    Homosexuality is not wrong. It is only wrong to be a practicing homosexual.
    But if you keep practicing you will eventually get very good at it and then you will no longer be a practicing homosexual.


  • Options
    #60
    BluntGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭BluntGuy


    Brer Fox wrote: »
    ...because little children will be taught it in schools...

    Heaven forbid children being brought up without prejudice against homosexuals.
    You can't bully or threaten people to make them agree with you or silence them.

    But it's okay to bully people by telling them they can't get married or that expressing their sexuality is "unnatural" because a piece of 2000 year old tat allegedly says so.
    There is a learned aspect to homosexuality. It can be reinforced by repetition. What might begin as insecurity or curiosity can, if acted on, lead to an attachment to the behaviour.

    Evidence?
    Homosexuality is not something that little children normally conceive unless it is introduced to them. Doing so is manipulative and abusive.

    Teaching kids that being gay or bisexual is somehow wrong is manipulative and abusive.
    Gay sex is wrong because it is a mockery of the intentions of the Creator.

    "The Creator" shouldn't have created gay people then.
    ...to express what was the normal view until recently, can carry a heavy cost for the individual concerned, such as loss of employment or ruined chances of promotion.

    And rightly so. Just as "normal views" that were previously held in decades past about black people, immigrants, women etc. would result in the same.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Laminations
    Registered Users Posts: 4,693 ✭✭✭Laminations


    dlofnep wrote: »
    I created this thread to highlight the comments made with regards to homophobia. The fact that it was a Unionist politician is a matter of fact, and isn't something I can change or omit from an article just to suit your conspiracy theories.

    The fact he is northern irish is a matter of fact, the fact he is a man is a matter of fact, the fact he is white is a matter of fact but none of these facts led you to generalise his views to people who share those characteristics. People can be against homosexual marriage but not homosexuality, and they can be against it for many different reasons (none of which I agree with). Others, like this eejit can be against homosexuals fullstop. Equating politicians (unionists or otherwise) who have ever said anything negative (likely ignorant comments) about homosexuality with this guy and his really ignorant and vile comments like Nodin has tried to do with all of his links to other 'statements' is broad brushing and an attempt to make this an issue about unionism rather than this fool and his views.

    How does wanting Northern Ireland to remain part of the UK have anything inherently homophobic about it?

    It is like suggesting that people who attend college attain high marks, when the real predictor is not attendance but independent study. These are called mediating variables. Religious views would be the important variable I'd imagine.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement