Do you think the Iona Institute are homophobic?

efb

And if so do you think it's acceptable. Would people be allowed have racist views and not be allowed be challenged on this? And to call them racist is stifling debate???

Femme_Fatale

Being opposed to gay marriage isn't necessarily = homophobia. There are people who don't believe in same-sex marriage due to viewing the institution of marriage as being only for a man and a woman, but don't have a problem with people being gay/civil partnerships.
There are no doubt people in the Iona Institute who disapprove of homosexuality though.

eviltwin

No

I heard that RTE had to issue an apology to them last night. Funny how a group who make a living out of making rude and hurtful comments about others get so sensitive when someone else does it. Yes they are homophobic and the media shouldn't give them, or similar groups a platform.

P_1

No

They should be free to publish what they wish but people should also be free to cal them out on what they publish and to mock them without having to fear them getting legally upset.

pragmatic1

Em. I'm going to go with yes.

gctest50

They are everything-except-their-very-narrow-approved-list-of-crazy-phobic


Their god works in mysterious ways though apparently

Links234

No

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Being opposed to gay marriage isn't necessarily = homophobia.

You know, I've heard a lot of people say that, but I still haven't heard of any arguments against marriage equality that are not stemming from homophobia. Were people who were opposed to interracial marriage (like around the time of Loving vs Virginia, etc) not necessarily racist?

Not that being homophobic makes someone a bad person exactly, homophobia stems from ignorance in most cases I think and is very much learned.

Frank Lee Midere

They object, I think, to the term homophobia - a phobia being an irrational hatred. Certainly that term is used, as we see here, to curtail debate but then they also curtail debate by bringing in the lawyers. The latter is worse than the former.

Manach

They constitant portray a balanced pro-family traditional world view and provide material to discuss the issues within a conservative framework on the sanctity of marriage and the norms of historical morally. They seem as well not to dwell on the cliche and sound-bite speech of their some of their progressive opponents who seek to clamp down on the debate by seeking to denigrate their opponents by applying any amount of tags, such as being homophobic.

Nodin

No

efb wrote: »

And if so do you think it's acceptable. Would people be allowed have racist views and not be allowed be challenged on this? And to call them racist is stifling debate???

I reckon they are. When you look at the various linked individuals and organisations, you start to see a far more conservative and extreme outlook than Iona lets on to in its media friendly moments.

Nodin

No

Manach wrote: »

They constitant portray a balanced pro-family traditional world view and provide material to discuss the issues within a conservative framework on the sanctity of marriage and the norms of historical morally. They seem as well not to dwell on the cliche and sound-bite speech of their some of their progressive opponents who seek to clamp down on the debate by seeking to denigrate their opponents by applying any amount of tags, such as being homophobic.

.....no non "pro creative" sex within marriage, no contraception......no thanks.

_Redzer_

No

Manach wrote: »

They constitant portray a balanced pro-family traditional world view and provide material to discuss the issues within a conservative framework on the sanctity of marriage and the norms of historical morally. They seem as well not to dwell on the cliche and sound-bite speech of their some of their progressive opponents who seek to clamp down on the debate by seeking to denigrate their opponents by applying any amount of tags, such as being homophobic.

No they don't. They're incredibly biased and lie constantly to people.

Corkfeen

No

It's simply a statement of fact. I can also comfortably say that those who opposed the civil rights movement were racist. They rely on debunked studies to back themselves, proof enough of their prejudice.

Teyla Emmagan

No

I think they're a bunch of loopers.

That's my considered input into the debate.

Femme_Fatale

Manach wrote: »

They constitant portray a balanced pro-family traditional world view and provide material to discuss the issues within a conservative framework on the sanctity of marriage and the norms of historical morally. They seem as well not to dwell on the cliche and sound-bite speech of their some of their progressive opponents who seek to clamp down on the debate by seeking to denigrate their opponents by applying any amount of tags, such as being homophobic.

Dude, proof-read. And there's a way of saying the above in much simpler English. They DO dwell on clichés and soundbites btw though (their own).

efb

No

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Being opposed to gay marriage isn't necessarily = homophobia. There are people who don't believe in same-sex marriage due to viewing the institution of marriage as being only for a man and a woman, but don't have a problem with people being gay/civil partnerships.
There are no doubt people in the Iona Institute who disapprove of homosexuality though.

If people think there cannot be interracial marriage are they racist?

drunkmonkey

efb wrote: »

And if so do you think it's acceptable. Would people be allowed have racist views and not be allowed be challenged on this? And to call them racist is stifling debate???

Judging only based on this video, I'd say no.

I don't agree someone wanting to protect marriage (family environment) is being homophobic. Being not pro the destruction of traditional marriage does not make you a gay hater, or scared of gays.
I can completely understand why people will fight to keep it as it is.

Racisms and Pro Marriage can't be really thrown together as easy as your doing it.

efb

No

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Judging only based on this video, I'd say no.

I don't agree someone wanting to protect marriage (family environment) is being homophobic. Being not pro the destruction of traditional marriage does not make you a gay hater, or scared of gays.
I can completely understand why people will fight to keep it as it is.

Racisms and Pro Marriage can't be really thrown together as easy as your doing it.

What traditional marriage? Women being property of men? No divorce?

How does marriage equality extended to gays undermine Hetro marriage?

efb

No

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Judging only based on this video, I'd say no.

I don't agree someone wanting to protect marriage (family environment) is being homophobic. Being not pro the destruction of traditional marriage does not make you a gay hater, or scared of gays.
I can completely understand why people will fight to keep it as it is.

Racisms and Pro Marriage can't be really thrown together as easy as your doing it.

I'm pro marraige I WANT TO GET MARRIED

eviltwin

No

Protecting marriage? We're not voting to abolish it you know. You would think the best way to protect marriage would be to make it accessible to more people.

AerynSun

No

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

They object, I think, to the term homophobia - a phobia being an irrational hatred. Certainly that term is used, as we see here, to curtail debate but then they also curtail debate by bringing in the lawyers. The latter is worse than the former.

Actually, a phobia is not an 'irrational hatred', but an 'irrational fear'.

I quite like the quote from the old Tweets From God page that put it so nicely:

"I hate the word homophobia. It's not a phobia. You're not scared; you're an asshole."

:pac:

Links234

No

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Being not pro the destruction of traditional marriage does not make you a gay hater, or scared of gays.

Calling marriage equality "The destruction of traditional marriage" is a pretty homophobic thing to say though.

ahnowbrowncow

No

efb wrote: »

What traditional marriage? Women being property of men? No divorce?

How does marriage equality extended to gays undermine Hetro marriage?

Omg, it just does, ok!

Stop asking questions that have no rational answers.

20Cent

No

I think they are.

amdublin

No

I think they are complete Loonies who need to fek off out of other people's business.

Concentrate on your own marriage and stop worrying about other people's.

P_1

No

Personally I think anybody who fears that same sex marriage would destroy marriage as an institution needs to have a listen to this speech made in the New Zealand parliament,

RobertKK

I think some so called liberal people want everyone to think the same on all issues and have problems with people from the Iona Institute because it gives a different viewpoint, then they need to look down on the person with an opposing opinion.

If people view marriage as something between a man and a woman or a best place for a child is with parents who are male and female, it is an opinion that is not homophobic, but for some it is homophobic as they have a different opinion and can't understand why someone doesn't want change.

If we live in a free society then people should be allowed to have different opinions without needing to put the person into a box.
If each side allows free speech, then there is no problem. Some would rather those whose opinion they don't like was silenced, which would be a backward step.

efb

No

RobertKK wrote: »

I think some so called liberal people want everyone to think the same on all issues and have problems with people from the Iona Institute because it gives a different viewpoint, then they need to look down on the person with an opposing opinion.

If people view marriage as something between a man and a woman or a best place for a child is with parents who are male and female, it is an opinion that is not homophobic, but for some it is homophobic as they have a different opinion and can't understand why someone doesn't want change.

If we live in a free society then people should be allowed to have different opinions without needing to put the person into a box.
If each side allows free speech, then there is no problem. Some would rather those whose opinion they don't like was silenced, which would be a backward step.

Nobody here is challenging their right to air their views, but people have a right to challenge them. Like the BNP are racist and should be exposed and identified as such.

Karl Stein

Should the state be in the business of discriminating against/for anyone who decides to sprinkle themselves in magical 'we're married' fairy dust?

RobertKK

Links234 wrote: »

Calling marriage equality "The destruction of traditional marriage" is a pretty homophobic thing to say though.

If everyone can marry what sex they want, then surely traditional marriage is destroyed by it, given marriage was only between a man and a woman.

efb

No

RobertKK wrote: »

I think some so called liberal people want everyone to think the same on all issues and have problems with people from the Iona Institute because it gives a different viewpoint, then they need to look down on the person with an opposing opinion.

If people view marriage as something between a man and a woman or a best place for a child is with parents who are male and female, it is an opinion that is not homophobic, but for some it is homophobic as they have a different opinion and can't understand why someone doesn't want change.

If we live in a free society then people should be allowed to have different opinions without needing to put the person into a box.
If each side allows free speech, then there is no problem. Some would rather those whose opinion they don't like was silenced, which would be a backward step.

Silenced like Walters, O'Brien, Quinn and Casey silenced Rory O'Neill's view on RTE???