Is David Norris Toast?

beagle001 · 02-08-2011 02:38AM

murfa wrote: »

beagle001 wrote: »

That's fairly sad to be honest in all seriousness maybe it's why so many enjoy city life better.
I always thought it was a wind up.
I stand corrected on that

No it's not sad to be honest, it's fine. It usually ends up in some pub or cafe anyway. It's an outlet for meeting people. Yes city life is of course better.

The way the other poster is describing meetings it sounds like some old shed or community hall with people sitting around in anoraks and mac coats all hush hush talking about taboo subjects.

northkildare · 02-08-2011 02:38AM

I brought my straight friend to a meeting and she was told we dont have anymore room, if you are not known they ask you at the door if you are gay and told no room if your straight which is wrong.

they just dont want straight people seen what is talked about and what goes on in the car park afterwards.

This put me off going after that night, felt so bad for my friend to be treated that way.

beagle001 · 02-08-2011 02:41AM

northkildare wrote: »

I brought my straight friend to a meeting and she was told we dont have anymore room, if you are not known they ask you at the door if you are gay and told no room if your straight which is wrong.

they just dont want straight people seen what is talked about and what goes on in the car park afterwards.

This put me off going after that night, felt so bad for my friend to be treated that way.

That is nasty what goes on in the car park like rabbits.

northkildare · 02-08-2011 02:51AM

beagle001 wrote: »

That is nasty what goes on in the car park like rabbits.

i find it so unfair the way they treat people who turn up like your a spy or sumtin,

as for what goes on outside afterwards there is not much respect for the passers by, be they young or old.

jill_valentine · 02-08-2011 02:52AM

Uh huh. :rolleyes:

northkildare · 02-08-2011 02:56AM

the meetings are no different to david norris, if you dont agree how they do things your treated badly.

when a young man emails the centre looking for help they read out his email and say how they have invited him to come to the next one,

i remember one guy shouting did he send a pic and everyone laughed.

i have a problem with this and its pretty common

RayM · 02-08-2011 04:23AM

ResearchWill wrote: »

Picture of guy who broke the story, a graduate of Griffith College http://thesystemworks.wordpress.com/2011/02/page/2/

Just looking at his (probably quite carefully and self-consciously assembled for the purpose of the photo) book collection (Friedrich Hayek, Ayn Rand, Adam Smith, etc) and the list of predominantly right-wing websites he frequently visits, he seems like the kind of person who doesn't like subjecting himself to anything that might threaten, challenge or contradict his very rigid, narrow views/prejudices. I find cranks like that pretty tedious and impossible to take seriously, whatever their political agenda.

Also, he seems like a very sneaky little individual, trying in a very underhand manner, to imply (without providing a shred of evidence) that his alleged source is connected to Michael D. Higgins, thus linking Higgins with this nasty little smear campaign.

jank · 02-08-2011 08:58AM

RayM wrote: »

Just looking at his (probably quite carefully and self-consciously assembled for the purpose of the photo) book collection (Friedrich Hayek, Ayn Rand, Adam Smith, etc) and the list of predominantly right-wing websites he frequently visits, he seems like the kind of person who doesn't like subjecting himself to anything that might threaten, challenge or contradict his very rigid, narrow views/prejudices. I find cranks like that pretty tedious and impossible to take seriously, whatever their political agenda.

Also, he seems like a very sneaky little individual, trying in a very underhand manner, to imply (without providing a shred of evidence) that his alleged source is connected to Michael D. Higgins, thus linking Higgins with this nasty little smear campaign.

To me he seems to be a try-hard but I would not label Ayn Rand or Adam Smith right wing.

Judgement Day · 02-08-2011 09:07AM

hotmail.com wrote: »

And he's a Protestant too, a LOT people get bothered about that.

Is that why both Douglas Hyde and Erskine Childers were elected as Presidents?

boatbuilder · 02-08-2011 09:17AM

I think a lot of people are breathing a sigh of relief that this is all over now.
I believe that there is a silent majority that would never have voted for him anyway.

Pompey Magnus · 02-08-2011 09:21AM

boatbuilder wrote: »

I believe that there is a silent majority that would never have voted for him anyway.

Not according to the early polls.

boatbuilder · 02-08-2011 09:23AM

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Not according to the early polls.

Yes, true, but it is possible that people say one thing and do another at the polling booth for fear of being branded homophobic etc.

Pompey Magnus · 02-08-2011 09:31AM

boatbuilder wrote: »

Yes, true, but it is possible that people say one thing and do another at the polling booth for fear of being branded homophobic etc.

Why would a person being polled be worried about naming a different candidate when asked by a pollster? If someone didn't intend to vote for Norris they could just name another candidate when asked and nobody would assume that the reason was because they were homophobic.

HarryPotter41 · 02-08-2011 09:49AM

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Not according to the early polls.

75% in the last opinion poll weren't going to vote for him, pretty thumping silent majority to me

Fuinseog · 02-08-2011 09:57AM

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

75% in the last opinion poll weren't going to vote for him, pretty thumping silent majority to me

the majority will do as they are told. Norris just needs to stress that he is openly gay, would be the first gay president and not to vote for him would be immature and a sign that we are still shackeled to the oppressive roman catholic church.

Pompey Magnus · 02-08-2011 09:58AM

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

75% in the last opinion poll weren't going to vote for him, pretty thumping silent majority to me

Well fair enough, but he had the smallest "silent majority" opposition of any candidate, rendering the argument meaningless.

anymore · 02-08-2011 10:06AM

anymore wrote: »

Regarding the Irish Independent article referenced above, I see that it says " They first crossed paths in Dublin in December 1975, and soon began a relationship that would last for 10 years. "
That would imply the relationship ended some time around say 1985/87 which is well before the incident. However in the Joe Jackson interview, it is said " True, but I’ve weathered it before and I’ll weather it again” he muses, which brings us to another great loss in Norris’ life – his former lover, Ezra. He and David broke up last January after 26 years ".
http://joejacksonjournalist.com/2010/09/06/david-norris-the-joe-jackson-interview/
That interview was in Feb 2002 so if the relationship lasted " 26 years" then that measn the relationship was ongoing since since around 1975. The articlwe does mention " David also felt “devastated” the first time he discovered Ezra was “inclined to stray” ten years into their relationship."

So there seems to be confusion on this matter.

Well the Irish Independent has finally figured out that Norris and Erza were a couple for 30 years ! Maybe they read Boards.ie

" David Norris had a relationship with convicted rapist Ezra Yitzhak Nawi for almost 30 years and the couple were together until 2001 – four years after his partner’s conviction for having sex with a 15-year-old Palestinian boy." http://www.independent.ie/ The length of time the relationship lasted is important though the article doesnt say this or explain why it is important. One of the things that have puzzled about coverage of this affair is what people/ commentators are not saying.

Duke Leonal Felmet · 02-08-2011 10:19AM

anymore wrote: »

Well the Irish Independent has finally figured out that Norris and Erza were a couple for 30 years ! Maybe they read Boards.ie

" David Norris had a relationship with convicted rapist Ezra Yitzhak Nawi for almost 30 years and the couple were together until 2001 – four years after his partner’s conviction for having sex with a 15-year-old Palestinian boy." http://www.independent.ie/ The length of time the relationship lasted is important though the article doesnt say this or explain why it is important. One of the things that have puzzled about coverage of this affair is what people/ commentators are not saying.

Reminds me of The Simpsons.

Lisa: You have to listen to the notes shes not playing.

Man: Pff, I can do that at home.

anymore · 02-08-2011 10:28AM

Duke Leonal Felmet wrote: »

Reminds me of The Simpsons.

Lisa: You have to listen to the notes shes not playing.

Man: Pff, I can do that at home.

Indeed. Mr Norris's explanation that his comments on the ancient Greek practice of pederasty was an academic discussion needs to be looked at agan. The reality is that when he had this discussion with HLB, it appears he was still in a relationship with a man who had a conviction for sex offences against a fifteen year old and he himself had intervened to influence the sentencing court.

Side Show Bob · 02-08-2011 10:31AM

Fuinseog wrote: »

Israel is not mature enough to accept gays. Ezra Yizhak Naw did his best to educate the fifteen year old in the ways of love. Its not his fault that the boy proved to be unwilling to learn.

what poor old Ezra did was not child abuse because only the catholic church are involved in that. if a secular gay man does it its part of the boys education.

Norris was right to support his lover and its only the ill educated and immature paddies who cannot understand that.

It's part of the boys education to Rape him?
Norris was right to support his friends rape of a 15 year old?

Holy mother of god! The poor uneducated and immature paddy! what next?

HarryPotter41 · 02-08-2011 10:37AM

Fuinseog wrote: »

Israel is not mature enough to accept gays. Ezra Yizhak Naw did his best to educate the fifteen year old in the ways of love. Its not his fault that the boy proved to be unwilling to learn.

what poor old Ezra did was not child abuse because only the catholic church are involved in that. if a secular gay man does it its part of the boys education.

Norris was right to support his lover and its only the ill educated and immature paddies who cannot understand that.

Horrific post

HarryPotter41 · 02-08-2011 10:37AM

Fuinseog wrote: »

the majority will do as they are told. Norris just needs to stress that he is openly gay, would be the first gay president and not to vote for him would be immature and a sign that we are still shackeled to the oppressive roman catholic church.

Equally horrific post

HarryPotter41 · 02-08-2011 10:38AM

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Well fair enough, but he had the smallest "silent majority" opposition of any candidate, rendering the argument meaningless.

I assume you mean your argument is rendered meaningless because I don't see how it negates mine

hestia · 02-08-2011 10:39AM

tayto lover wrote: »

Well does he really deserve it now. He has sullied the name of Senator by intervening on behalf of a sex abuser. I have serious doubts on some of the stuff he tried to get the Israelis to believe i.e. a guilty plea to sex abuse would likely lead to a non-custodial sentence. I just don't buy that at all especially in this case where the boy was 15 and the abuser 40. I would like him to tell us about these cases as i simply do not believe this.

they are two different issues. i have stated my clear objection to his action in previous posts.

however, i believe it is fundamentally wrong and undemocratic that his suitability for president is determined by a handfull of senators and/or county councils with a large number of the latter under the despicable direction of block-voting fine gaelers. the electorate should ultimately decide.

his personal decision to step-down is separate matter again. personally, i feel it may be the wisest one. but it should be for his own conscience to decide, not a tiny minority.

anymore, i agree with you on the need for an open discussion on pederasty and sexual maturity. i fear, reading the startling assumptions posted here so far, this won't be the thread it'll happen.

anymore · 02-08-2011 10:50AM

hestia wrote: »

they are two different issues. i have stated my clear objection to his action in previous posts.

however, i believe it is fundamentally wrong and undemocratic that his suitability for president is determined by a handfull of senators and/or county councils with a large number of the latter under the despicable direction of block-voting fine gaelers. the electorate should ultimately decide.

his personal decision to step-down is separate matter again. personally, i feel it may be the wisest one. but it should be for his own conscience to decide, not a tiny minority.

anymore, i agree with you on the need for an open discussion on pederasty and sexual maturity. i fear, reading the startling assumptions posted here so far, this won't be the thread it'll happen.

When the electorate approved the Republic's Constitution, it did decide on the method of selection of Presedential candidates in view of recent events, thank goodness it did.

anymore · 02-08-2011 10:53AM

Fuinseog wrote: »

Israel is not mature enough to accept gays. Ezra Yizhak Naw did his best to educate the fifteen year old in the ways of love. Its not his fault that the boy proved to be unwilling to learn.

what poor old Ezra did was not child abuse because only the catholic church are involved in that. if a secular gay man does it its part of the boys education.

Norris was right to support his lover and its only the ill educated and immature paddies who cannot understand that.

Anally abusing a fifteen year old boy is not education - it is vile abuse - it has nothing to do with love but everything to do with perverse lust.

Fuinseog · 02-08-2011 10:55AM

anymore wrote: »

Indeed. Mr Norris's explanation that his comments on the ancient Greek practice of pederasty was an academic discussion needs to be looked at agan. The reality is that when he had this discussion with HLB, it appears he was still in a relationship with a man who had a conviction for sex offences against a fifteen year old and he himself had intervened to influence the sentencing court.

at least we can see his true colours before he gets into the Aras so people know what they are voting for.

bobby Molloy resigned over something similar, but Norris probably does not think there is anything to even apologise for.

n32 · 02-08-2011 10:57AM

this whole norris for president thing is getting ridiculous. if he was a straight man there is no way he could have survived the recent scandals. the only reason he is still in the race is because people are afraid to say he s in the wrong and should pull out in cas they are branded as homophobes/catholic diehards or narrow minded biggots.

in the name of christ the man should be judged by the same standards as a straight man would be. just because he is the first openly gay candidate for the presidency does not mean we should overlook his flaws.

how can the media be so damning in their criticism of the catholic hierarchy for excusing child abuse and then go easy on norris using the resources of the state to try and get his friend off a similar charge.

would people ever wake up and have a bit of cop on

hestia · 02-08-2011 10:59AM

Any constitution worth its salt is subject to periodic review and revision. I'm not a lone voice of dissent in calling the present system of selection undemocratic. We, the people, should decide. Do you also thank goodness for the undermining block-voting antics involved?

Pompey Magnus · 02-08-2011 10:59AM

HarryPotter41 wrote: »

I assume you mean your argument is rendered meaningless because I don't see how it negates mine

Because the claim was that this supposed silent majority would "never" vote for Norris and homophobia mentioned as the specific reasoning behind this decision. It is ridiculous to claim such a thing for the one man who was showing himself most popular in the polls and the argument is based on nothing other than some prejudice against the ordinary Irish person.

Is David Norris Toast?

Comments