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

Please explain this picture to me

Options
124

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,745 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    If you wish to continue mocking a service organised by and for victims of child abuse go ahead...

    where exactly in the thread has this happened?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #93
    mcmoustache
    Registered Users Posts: 7,236 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    Jellicoe wrote: »
    + 1, and his hit and run succeeded nicely

    This was no hit and run. The OP participated actively in this thread since it started.


  • Options
    #94
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    koth wrote: »
    where exactly in the thread has this happened?
    The image in the OP is a scene from a service organised by abuse victims.
    mcmoustache wrote: »
    Err, I haven't got in on the church-bashing on this thread yet - not that it matters. But don't let that stop you from bashing me over the head with abuse victims.
    Apologies so. It's not a case of bashing anyone over the head tbh I just think it is classless to find/look for comedy in a scene that is taken from an actual service for people who were sexually abused as children. I personally would be ashamed to do it myself but if someone else can justify it to themselves good luck to them.


  • Options
    #95
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,745 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    The image in the OP is a scene from a service organised by abuse victims.

    that still doesn't explain which posts were mocking the service. The jokes weren't posted because the picture was from a service for abuse victims. They were posted purely based on the image, which could have happened in a service not for abuse victims.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #96
    Bannasidhe
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    The image in the OP is a scene from a service organised by abuse victims.

    Apologies so. It's not a case of bashing anyone over the head tbh I just think it is classless to find/look for comedy in a scene that is taken from an actual service for people who were sexually abused as children. I personally would be ashamed to do it myself but if someone else can justify it to themselves good luck to them.

    How very self-righteous of you.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    koth wrote: »
    that still doesn't explain which posts were mocking the service. The jokes weren't posted because the picture was from a service for abuse victims. They were posted purely based on the image, which could have happened in a service not for abuse victims.
    Which was fine, completely fine, until it was pointed out that it is in fact a service for victims of sexual abuse. A fact that doesn't change regardless of how it is dressed up.


  • Options
    #98
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    How very self-righteous of you.
    I just think it is classless to find/look for comedy in a scene that is taken from an actual service for people who were sexually abused as children.
    You disagree?


  • Options
    #99
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Apologies so. It's not a case of bashing anyone over the head tbh I just think it is classless to find/look for comedy in a scene that is taken from an actual service for people who were sexually abused as children. I personally would be ashamed to do it myself but if someone else can justify it to themselves good luck to them.

    What are you on about, BB?

    Every joke has been about the priests lying down, not about the victims, nor the service, nor about what happened to the victims. Stop making a mountain out of a molehill, and keep your smug, faux self-righteous indignation to yourself. You're the one using the victims and the service in an attempt to gain some kind of moral high ground; everybody here has been making jokes about a pair of priests planking and nothing more. Your fake outrage is nothing short of cringe worthy.


  • Options
    #100
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,745 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Which was fine, completely fine, until it was pointed out that it is in fact a service for victims of sexual abuse. A fact that doesn't change regardless of how it is dressed up.

    so you're essentially complaining that people didn't delete their posts after you informed them about the source of the image? Even though none of the jokes actually mock the service.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #101
    Bannasidhe
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    You disagree?

    Given that there is nothing in the image posted by the OP to indicate where or when it was taken, yes I disagree and think that you are simply galloping around on a high horse of faked indignation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    ..... I personally would be ashamed to do it myself but if someone else can justify it to themselves good luck to them.


    ...yet despite this supposed attitude, you're still here, posting in this thread.


  • Options
    #103
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Yes, and it has now been established that the priests were lying down in a service that was organised for and by victims of child abuse. Too seek out comedy from this service is wrong IMO. That is all I am saying.


  • Options
    #104
    IT-Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 514 ✭✭✭IT-Guy


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    The image in the OP is a scene from a service organised by abuse victims.

    Does it matter what service the photo was taken at? Your repeating that it's for abuse victims changes nothing, there's no link between the OP and abuse yet you've imagined one into existence, mental gymnastics at their finest


  • Options
    #105
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Is there a "victims of child abuse" forum you could post on to look for support and then get shot down by the people you're trying to claim to speak for?


  • Options
    #106
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    koth wrote: »
    so you're essentially complaining that people didn't delete their posts after you informed them about the source of the image? Even though none of the jokes actually mock the service.
    1. It's a photograph of the service.
    2. I obviously have no issue with people making fun of two priests laying on the ground when they didn't know the context.


  • Options
    #107
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Yes, and it has now been established that the priests were lying down in a service that was organised for and by victims of child abuse. Too seek out comedy from this service is wrong IMO. That is all I am saying.


    Well done you. You're the best fucking defender a strawman never needed.

    You going to keep crapping on about it still?


  • Options
    #108
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Sarky wrote: »
    Is there a "victims of child abuse" forum you could post on to look for support and then get shot down by the people you're trying to claim to speak for?
    My mother was a victim of child abuse if you must know.


  • Options
    #109
    Bannasidhe
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Yes, and it has now been established that the priests were lying down in a service that was organised for and by victims of child abuse. Too seek out comedy from this service is wrong IMO. That is all I am saying.

    Personally I think for the RCC to have a service for the victims of their clergy and their self-protecting hierarchy while still trying to dodge admitting responsibility and paying damages is wrong. Do you disagree? If not, why don't you trot over to the Christianity forum and tell them that instead of trying to equate mocking the clergy of the RCC with mocking their victims.


  • Options
    #110
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    My mother was a victim of child abuse if you must know.

    I don't recall demanding to know that. It still doesn't give you the right to get entirely the wrong end of the stick.


  • Options
    #111
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Nodin wrote: »
    Well done you. You're the best fucking defender a strawman never needed.

    You going to keep crapping on about it still?
    Hopefully not. I have nothing else to add other than my already stated opinion.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    IT-Guy
    Registered Users Posts: 514 ✭✭✭IT-Guy


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Yes, and it has now been established that the priests were lying down in a service that was organised for and by victims of child abuse. Too seek out comedy from this service is wrong IMO. That is all I am saying.

    And you're wrong, that's all I'm saying...


  • Options
    #113
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,745 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    1. It's a photograph of the service.
    2. I obviously have no issue with people making fun of two priests laying on the ground when they didn't know the context.

    excellent. so you have no issue with the content of this thread then seeing as most, if not all of the jokes, happened prior to revelation of the source of the picture.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #114
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Personally I think for the RCC to have a service for the victims of their clergy and their self-protecting hierarchy while still trying to dodge admitting responsibility and paying damages is wrong. Do you disagree? If not, why don't you trot over to the Christianity forum and tell them that instead of trying to equate mocking the clergy of the RCC with mocking their victims.
    To be clear: Mock the clergy all you want. I am not "trying to equate mocking the clergy of the RCC with mocking their victims". I am simply saying that IMO it is extremely bad taste to seek out comedy from a service that is for sexual abuse victims.


  • Options
    #115
    Jellicoe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 492 ✭✭Jellicoe


    I wonder did the OP know where the pic was from, if so why did he use that one ?


  • Options
    #116
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    To be clear: Mock the clergy all you want. I am not "trying to equate mocking the clergy of the RCC with mocking their victims". I am simply saying that IMO it is extremely bad taste to seek out comedy from a service that is for sexual abuse victims.


    What happened to "I have nothing else to add other than my already stated opinion. Today 20:55"


  • Options
    #117
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    koth wrote: »
    excellent. so you have no issue with the content of this thread then seeing as most, if not all of the jokes, happened prior to revelation of the source of the picture.
    Yes, that is true. I pointed out the context to the OP and asked him given the revelation if he/she would continue to joke about it and then the usual pack hunt kicks off here.


  • Options
    #118
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    IT-Guy wrote: »
    And you're wrong, that's all I'm saying...
    Then clarify:
    Yes, and it has now been established that the priests were lying down in a service that was organised for and by victims of child abuse. Too seek out comedy from this service is wrong IMO.


  • Options
    #119
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Nodin wrote: »
    What happened to "I have nothing else to add other than my already stated opinion. Today 20:55"
    I think you are confusing me with Oscar Wilde.
    Sarky wrote: »
    I don't recall demanding to know that. It still doesn't give you the right to get entirely the wrong end of the stick.
    As much as you get on my bristols it wasn't fair to drop that on you like that and apologise.


  • Options
    #120
    Northclare
    Closed Accounts Posts: 724 ✭✭✭Northclare


    IT-Guy wrote: »
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Yes, and it has now been established that the priests were lying down in a service that was organised for and by victims of child abuse. Too seek out comedy from this service is wrong IMO. That is all I am saying.

    And you're wrong, that's all I'm saying...

    Brown Bomber if I were you I'd ignore them,some are descent and others have as much empathy as a shoal of hungry piranhas who have just encountered an animal thrashing about in the Amazon.

    Your entitled to your opinion so are they but I wouldn't bother with them....

    I'll probably be red flagged for sticking up for ya.....

    But it's only a forum,some react on an emotional level,others respond with a more laid back style and put principles before personalities....

    I'll get it next lol


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    As much as you get on my bristols it wasn't fair to drop that on you like that and apologise.

    And for getting the wrong end of the stick?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement