Still Waters No Longer Running, Derp.

Brian Shanahan

magicbastarder wrote: »

breda didn't get the easiest of interviews on newstalk this morning:

http://www.newstalk.com/reader/47.301/45184/0/

I was listening to that this morning, it was glorious. Between her slap down from Chris Donoghue and my ranting at her open and vicious gay-bashing I was set up for the day.

shruikan2553

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Yes, they complain on their twitter feeds and in their weekly national newspaper columns about how they are being silenced :rolleyes:

Never understood it, every time I see some mention of being silenced Im just thinking "how the **** are you saying/writing this then?" I suppose if the spend most of the time complaining about being silenced they can maybe get some sympathy points rather than talk about the referendum and be seen as idiots.

TwoShedsJackson

robindch wrote: »

Given that McAleese appears to have commented rather than intervened, one can only hope that BOB isn't a teacher of English.

Anyhow, what does BOB teach? One hopes religion, where her talents at conjuring things up out of thin air can be put to some use.

http://ie.ratemyteachers.com/breda-o-brien/1054-t

Religious Studies.

pauldla

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

http://ie.ratemyteachers.com/breda-o-brien/1054-t

Religious Studies.

Read the comments!

Very knowledgeable. Explained how humans came into existence about 150 years ago, fully formed and clothed, just outside of Macroom. Told us to put a telephone directory underneath us if we were going to sit on a boy's lap. We didn't know what a telephone directory was but it sounded like a good idea.

Not my fav. Kept asking me if i'd like to marry my mother.
Kept pestering class to make donations to the Iona institute.

And an endorsement of her English teaching skills...

yeh totally i mean dis teacher IS my life-i look forward to her classes!!!!!! U ROCK MY WORLD!!!! well done! yes yes yes! best english teacher out dere! WOOP WOOP! I ADORE U!!!! WELL DONE!!!!!

silverharp

The comments were funny but all the really negative ones are from this year , her comments going back to 2005 seem positive on the whole. Id guess the later ones are spoof postings

P_1

This popped across my old bukeface this morn...

https://www.change.org/p/irish-government-revoke-the-tax-exempt-charity-status-of-the-iona-institute

Probably means diddly squat in the big scheme of things but no harm highlighting nonetheless...

Nodin

P_1 wrote: »

This popped across my old bukeface this morn...

https://www.change.org/p/irish-government-revoke-the-tax-exempt-charity-status-of-the-iona-institute

Probably means diddly squat in the big scheme of things but no harm highlighting nonetheless...

....signed nonetheless.

Shrap

P_1 wrote: »

This popped across my old bukeface this morn...

https://www.change.org/p/irish-government-revoke-the-tax-exempt-charity-status-of-the-iona-institute

Probably means diddly squat in the big scheme of things but no harm highlighting nonetheless...

That petition is up to over 5,500 signatures in 15 hours. I signed it at around midday and it was under 1,000! Quite impressive.

shruikan2553

If a charity isn't meant to take part in political campaigns then I dont see how lolek could be considered one. Of course paying tax means they are being silenced.

recedite

silverharp wrote: »

The comments were funny but all the really negative ones are from this year , her comments going back to 2005 seem positive on the whole. Id guess the later ones are spoof postings

Add one if you like...I did :pac:

The Black Oil

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/breda-o-brien-question-of-pizza-for-a-gay-wedding-sparks-death-threats-1.2171879

Pizza, the KKK, Apple, and gay incest by surrogacy. Sounds even more deranged when summarised like that

:rolleyes:

Breda just doesn't get it at all. The public increasingly does regard homophobes (whether they use religion as a cloak for their bigotry or not) as equivalent to racists, and why not?

robindch wrote: »

Uh, Dolce and Gabbana, uh, George Orwell’s thoughtcrime!

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/breda-o-brien-dolce-gabbana-face-boycott-over-synthetic-babies-comments-1.2147588

What on earth is she trying to foam about today? I couldn't read past the first sentence in which she invokes "Martina Navratilova's dustbin".

Is it not getting a bit weird at this point? I get the philosophical underpinnings she goes for, oh those bad liberals, thought crime, blah blah. But, surely she must sometimes sit at her keyboard and say 'my professional writing career - ugh, gay cakes, pizzas and fashion designers, again'.

Nodin

The Black Oil wrote: »

Is it not getting a bit weird at this point? I get the philosophical underpinnings she goes for, oh those bad liberals, thought crime, blah blah. But, surely she must sometimes sit at her keyboard and say 'my professional writing career - ugh, gay cakes, pizzas and fashion designers, again'.

You're looking for deep water fish in a shallow pool.

seamus

Nodin wrote: »

You're looking for deep water fish in a shallow pool.

This is pretty much what I'm thinking on it.

Occupying a rather niche opinion in Irish society means that whenever a newspaper or TV programme is looking for someone to provide "balance" in the debate, they only have a pool of 4 or 5 people to operate from. Thus, David, Breda and John are guaranteed a steady stream of work to keep their name in the public domain.

Creativity or ground-breaking journalism are not what they want to achieve. Attention and money are more important.

endacl

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

http://ie.ratemyteachers.com/breda-o-brien/1054-t

Religious Studies.

Very highly regarded too, judging by the comments...

"Very knowledgeable. Explained how humans came into existence about 150 years ago, fully formed and clothed, just outside of Macroom. Told us to put a telephone directory underneath us if we were going to sit on a boy's lap. We didn't know what a telephone directory was but it sounded like a good idea."

Nodin

endacl wrote: »

Very highly regarded too, judging by the comments...

"Very knowledgeable. Explained how humans came into existence about 150 years ago, fully formed and clothed, just outside of Macroom. Told us to put a telephone directory underneath us if we were going to sit on a boy's lap. We didn't know what a telephone directory was but it sounded like a good idea."

Never the yellow pages though....not thick enough.

endacl

Nodin wrote: »

Never the yellow pages though....not thick enough.

The yellow pages could be handy to hide little 'excitement leaks' though...

BuilderPlumber

seamus wrote: »

This is pretty much what I'm thinking on it.

Occupying a rather niche opinion in Irish society means that whenever a newspaper or TV programme is looking for someone to provide "balance" in the debate, they only have a pool of 4 or 5 people to operate from. Thus, David, Breda and John are guaranteed a steady stream of work to keep their name in the public domain.

Creativity or ground-breaking journalism are not what they want to achieve. Attention and money are more important.

Exactly it. I believe 100% opinions can be bought. In other words, he who pays the piper calls the tune! I have come across a lot of vile, mostly rightwing, bordering on fascist intolerant journalism and have found most of the perpetrators of it belong to some hardline group or think tank hiding behind a fancy name. For example:

Breda O'Brien, David Quinn (The Iona Institute).
John Waters (Communion and Liberation).
Ruth Dudley Edwards (Centre for Social Cohesion).
Ian O'Doherty (Atheist Ireland).

While their religious beliefs often are radically different (some are atheists, others are traditional Catholics), their hardline views on certain things such as being pro-Iraq war and anti-socialist are the same. All of these clearly are writing for organisations who either pay them or aid their careers. Another I discovered was Mark Humphrys, a teacher and researcher in DCU who has a page dedicated to hardline rightwing agendas. Once again, this probably makes him look good with the US academic neocons thus giving him access to lucrative funding opportunities for his research.

At the end of the day, do we want organisations like the fancy named but ultimately hardline Iona Institute having so much of a say? Or if that does not work, the equally hardline and similar bar religion atheist groups? We need to get behind the opinionated journalism and we need to take note of this seemingly gentle attempt to brainwash us.

PopePalpatine

Wait, Ian O'Doherty is a member of Atheist Ireland? Every time he mentions atheists in his columns (well, as of a month or two ago, I can't be bothered keeping up with him) he brings up the "militant atheist" stereotype every time.

MaxWig

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Wait, Ian O'Doherty is a member of Atheist Ireland? Every time he mentions atheists in his columns (well, as of a month or two ago, I can't be bothered keeping up with him) he brings up the "militant atheist" stereotype every time.

Well, they are funny.

If an atheist doesn't believe in god - cool.

But there's so very little to say about that.

To borrow the analogy - I don't believe in a tea-pot orbiting Saturn.

Not sure I can add anything to that.

pauldla

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Wait, Ian O'Doherty is a member of Atheist Ireland? Every time he mentions atheists in his columns (well, as of a month or two ago, I can't be bothered keeping up with him) he brings up the "militant atheist" stereotype every time.

He's one of them there anti-atheist atheists, is he? God I hate them.

Nodin

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Wait, Ian O'Doherty is a member of Atheist Ireland? Every time he mentions atheists in his columns (well, as of a month or two ago, I can't be bothered keeping up with him) he brings up the "militant atheist" stereotype every time.

Anything to sneer at will be sneered. Its because hes edgy. Really.

BuilderPlumber

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Wait, Ian O'Doherty is a member of Atheist Ireland? Every time he mentions atheists in his columns (well, as of a month or two ago, I can't be bothered keeping up with him) he brings up the "militant atheist" stereotype every time.

Yes. I think he is a very politicised writer who makes sure he gets his political views in no matter what. Ironically, militant atheists and militant religious types often share the same rightwing, self righteous attitude: one often cannot differentiate between the tone of religious writers like Waters from the likes of IOD. I guess just like the extreme right and left meet full circle, so too does political militant atheism and religious fanaticism. Because each basically represents a view of the world that does not allow tolerance of any other view.

Politics and religious beliefs (whether they follow a religion or are atheist ones) should always be separate. The Iona Institute in this day and age should not have such a say or Dr Selim Ali's crowd either or some militant atheist either. A lot of these are not moderate and are fanatics dressed up in fancy named organisations.

endacl

Nodin wrote: »

Anything to sneer at will be sneered. Its because hes edgy. Really.

You spelt 'an ar5ehole' wrong, dude.

Nodin

The philosopher has turned lawyer, though just for the purposes of dragging adoption into the referendum on marriage
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/not-exactly-what-it-says-on-the-tin-31153652.html

shruikan2553

Nodin wrote: »

The philosopher has turned lawyer, though just for the purposes of dragging adoption into the referendum on marriage
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/not-exactly-what-it-says-on-the-tin-31153652.html

The booklet makes clear that the passing of the amendment would mean that a marriage between two people of the same sex would have the same status and be entitled to the same constitutional protections as a family comprising a married man and woman. But there is no reference at all to the question of children

Ah so if they won't take part in your purposefully misleading the public they are biased.

fisgon

Nodin wrote: »

The philosopher has turned lawyer, though just for the purposes of dragging adoption into the referendum on marriage
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/not-exactly-what-it-says-on-the-tin-31153652.html

Of course, there is so much nonsense in this "article" that it is hard to pick out just one thing, but this is what struck me...

Waters quotes the Referendum Commission Chairperson, Mr Justice Kevin Cross, when he says....
""The only effect [of the same-sex marriage amendment] is that the entitlement to marriage will be broadened from a man and a woman to include same-sex relationships. It will have no impact on existing marriages."

Waters' reply to this is that.... "These assertions could be described as matters of opinion, matters to be discussed and debated, matters to be decided by the electorate."

But of course, that is simply not true. Over and over again No campaigners fail to provide one single example of how heterosexual marriages will be effected in any way by same-sex marriage. Over and over again they assert that marriage will be changed fundamentally, and over and over again they fail to show how. Waters is no different here.

CramCycle

Loosely related to the above comment is that Sen. Ronan Mullens will be hosting a one sided debate where the No side will present there argument in UCD this Wednesday.

Pherekydes

CramCycle wrote: »

Loosely related to the above comment is that Sen. Ronan Mullens will be hosting a one sided debate where the No side will present there argument in UCD this Wednesday.

What about balance? I thought the No side loved balance?

CramCycle

Pherekydes wrote: »

What about balance? I thought the No side loved balance?

Taken from their e-mail:

The UCD Newman Group cordially invites you to "Redefining Marriage: The Human Rights case for Voting No"

Speakers: Senator Rónán Mullen
(Politician, Lecturer in Law)

Dr John Murray
(Lecturer in Ethics)


(Next) Wednesday 22 April 2015 7.30 pm Theatre P UCD Newman Building (Belfield, Dublin 4)


Acknowledging UCD’s position as a key centre of learning and debate in Ireland, this seminar is intended to present the case against the redefinition of marriage, focusing on human rights issues. This may be your only chance to hear the arguments from those calling for a No vote in the upcoming Referendum on Marriage.

All are most welcome.

A question and answer session will follow.


Further information: newman.group@ucd.ie

Only chance to hear the NO side apparently :rolleyes: I hear too much of them as it is, I have heard very little from the YES side. I hear **** loads from the NO side that they have lots of valid reasons to vote NO but they are being silenced, obviously poorly

Pherekydes

Hmm, Human rights. I wonder whose human rights are being trampled now?