Hotel Cancels Pro life event due to Intimidation.

Stonedpilot

I don't really take sides on this whole debate I realized in life opinions well everyone has one and this is a very divisive issue.

What I have a problem with is the feminist/liberal/lefty movement shouting down indeed attacking anyone who disagrees with them, to such an extent hotels are in fear to hold event's where people oppose their views.

The irony of it is they say oh we despise Fascism yet are the biggest proponents of it. These people are so obsessed with their own opinions and self centered that they cannot even listen to an opposing view!. They cannot even let it be heard.

This is insane. I have a feeling these people will stop at nothing to stop others with opposing views. Most of the 'Worker's Rights' posters up by people before profit or anti austerity alliance or solidarity or whatever they will be called in the next few minutes is very heavy handed propaganda for pro abortion activists to get their message across. What happened to the workers rights mentioned on the poster?. Seen them scowl and jeer at a elderly woman whom was at one who didn't agree with them on abortion.
Extremely dangerous people those whom cannot even tolerate others views.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/antiabortion-group-left-fuming-after-hotel-cancels-their-booking-over-intimidation-36155799.html

El Weirdo

Stonedpilot wrote: »

I don't really take sides on this whole debate I realized in life opinions well everyone has one and this is a very divisive issue.

What I have a problem with is the feminist/liberal/lefty...

As far as I got.

frag420

Sure the Pro Life crowd have no issues intimidating women looking for health advice, holding up graphic placards, spitting on women, shouting at them...

I for one will be dropping into the Aisling Hotel and buying a few drinks there next time I am home!!

DEFTLEFTHAND

Churchill's prophecy coming true.

LirW

Mr McCrystal claimed it was "yet another example of censorship and is an attack on free speech".

LOL a bit strong coming from a pro-lifer, isn't it.

wes

Let look at what the article actually says:

However they claim that the event was cancelled after the venue received a large amount of negative emails, and social media posts.

"The manager himself spoke to me directly of 50 pages of commentary, emails and social media, that a Facebook page had been set up opposing the conference, as well as diatribe, intimidation, upset of his staff, personal visits to the hotel and threats of protest at the hotel if conference continues. In the interest of Health and safety of his staff, he had to cancel venue".

So people on the other side exercising there right to free speech, by contacting the hotel about how there against the event is perfectly valid. Free speech whether the Right likes it or not, is a 2 way street. You can say what you like, but so can the other guy.

If someone doesn't want to do business with a hotel in this case, due to there hosting an ideology they are against, that is there right. The same rights that the pro life group has as well.

Sorry, but your claims of people being silenced or there free speech being violated is simply untrue, and your basically saying people can't disagree with someone, which could also be called an attempt to silence people.

frag420

frag420 wrote: »

Sure the Pro Life crowd have no issues intimidating women looking for health advice, holding up graphic placards, spitting on women, shouting at them...

I for one will be dropping into the Aisling Hotel and buying a few drinks there next time I am home!!

The other side is wrong so by copying them we become more right?

OnDraught

Looks like the hotel made a business decision because they're a business.

riffmongous

LirW wrote: »

LOL a bit strong coming from a pro-lifer, isn't it.

Free speech is only an issue for certain types when they are the ones who can't spout off anymore

Galwayguy35

For a group of people who are always banging on about choice it's a bit strange that they don't want people with a different view to have any voice in the debate.

And before somebody starts with the opinion that anyone with balls has no right to talk on this it's worth noting that many on the pro life side are women.

dav3

Let me guess, someone will be along shortly to tell us they are a concerned tax paying citizen who doesn't take sides. They used to be vehemently pro-abortion. However, due to the behaviour of the liberal, lefty, main stream media and pro-choice crowd, they are now 100% anti-abortion and women should be locked up for even contemplating it.

wes

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

For a group of people who are always banging on about choice it's a bit strange that they don't want people with a different view to have any voice in the debate.

Boycott is a perfectly valid tactic, and a tactic that originates from Ireland to boot.

Galwayguy35

wes wrote: »

Boycott is a perfectly valid tactic, and a tactic that originates from Ireland to boot.

I'm well aware where the tactic came from, I went to school and learned the history of my country same as you.

mosi

This particular group shamelessly peddles lies with regard to abortion, contraception, vaccines etc. It is the Irish branch of an American, anti-science fundamentalist organisation that is quite dangerous. Human Life International has spread lies and conspiracies in developing countries that have undermined vaccination campaigns. They also continue to peddle the MMR/autism myth.

http://geoffsshorts.blogspot.ie/2013/03/anti-vaccination-group-flies-irish.html
http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/HLIweb2.pdf
https://africacheck.org/2016/05/25/analysis-why-does-an-old-false-claim-about-tetanus-vaccine-safety-refuse-to-die/

GLaDOS

From reading the report it seems the reports of intimidation are coming from the group who had their group cancelled, albeit they claim the manager told them this. They're hardly going to be unbiased. The hotel itself hasn't commented.

While I don't agree with bullying or intimidating people for having opposing views, people are entitled to let the hotel now they disapprove. Tis free speech ironically enough.

Stonedpilot

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

For a group of people who are always banging on about choice it's a bit strange that they don't want people with a different view to have any voice in the debate.

And before somebody starts with the opinion that anyone with balls has no right to talk on this it's worth noting that many on the pro life side are women.

+1.


Most people handing out pro life flyers are women.

RobertKK

If someone wants to put pressure on a hotel so the event can't go ahead, it is akin to burning books so they can't be read.
It is backwards and I don't know how anyone who does this can see this behaviour as being positive or progressive. In the past we had a conservatism that did and it was wrong. The people who call themselves liberal and who do this are no better than the extreme conservatism of the past.
It is backward, it is promoting censorship of views and it is bad for what is suppose to be a free society.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

WinnyThePoo

RobertKK wrote: »

If someone wants to put pressure on a hotel so the event cant't go ahead, it is akin to burning books so they can't be read.
It is backwards and I don't know how anyone who does this can see this behaviour as being positive or progressive. In the past we had a conservatism that did and it was wrong. The people who call themselves liberal and who do this are no better than the extreme conservatism of the past.
It is backward, it is promoting censorship of views and it is bad for what is suppose to be a free society.

Nope... It's free speech. The hotel made the decision. Maybe you should contact them and use your free speech.

super_furry

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

There’s only the word of the event organisers to go on there and frankly I wouldn’t consider them reliable. If the hotel confirmed that their staff were threatened, that would be a very different story.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

SafeSurfer

The shocking thing is that anyone is surprised.

Paul Murphy was on the Tonight Show last night. He said since the water protest is over Abortion is their next target. Asked why they were at 1% in the polls he said they were largely a street protest movement and as the street agitation died away they slumped in the polls.
We all know the tactics. Thuggery, intimidation, harrsssment.
Not debate, just abuse.

WinnyThePoo

mosi wrote: »

This particular group shamelessly peddles lies with regard to abortion, contraception, vaccines etc. It is the Irish branch of an American, anti-science fundamentalist organisation that is quite dangerous. Human Life International has spread lies and conspiracies in developing countries that have undermined vaccination campaigns. They also continue to peddle the MMR/autism myth.

http://geoffsshorts.blogspot.ie/2013/03/anti-vaccination-group-flies-irish.html
http://www.catholicsforchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/HLIweb2.pdf
https://africacheck.org/2016/05/25/analysis-why-does-an-old-false-claim-about-tetanus-vaccine-safety-refuse-to-die/

The pdf file.

'father Thomas eutener tenure as president took him from training as an exorcist to admitting to sexually abusing young women during exorcisms'

Da fuq

eviltwin

This isn't just a pro life meeting. It's a meeting to discuss the link between abortion and breast cancer, in other words junk science. I don't blame the hotel cancelling, who needs to have their name associated with quacks who believe God punishes women who have abortion with cancer.

Walter Bishop

Indo rag nonsense - only the claims of the conference organiser to go on, no comment from the hotel, no link to this supposed Facebook page etc. etc. That which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

January

This has nothing to do with 'free speech' or people not wanting a different view to theirs aired. The conference was perpetuating horrible mistruths that abortion raises the risk of breast cancer in women, which is simply not true and why people felt the need to speak up and say something. One of the women who went to speak to the hotel manager in person was shot down and actually screeched at in the hotel lobby by an assistant manager at the hotel (the manager has since apologised on her behalf to this person).

Funny how when it's the anti-choice crowd calling and dropping into venues to announce their displeasure at pro-choice meetings (Captain America's in Blanchardstown said they had numerous calls and drop-ins from people telling them they would never use the restaurant again but they let the meeting go ahead and Douglas and Kaldi in Ashtown cancelled the meeting because of the anti-choice crowd), there's no uproar online about it.

wes

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Yeah, according to the pro-life guy. I took everything he said with a pinch of salt, as its in his interest to exaggerate. He put his own spin on things.

People have the right to show up and express there opinion, and seeing as the hotel didn't call the guards, or have security remove them, they can't have been all that intimidating.

super_furry

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Because they want the whole thing to just go away I’d imagine. The people organising this event deal in lies and mistruths aimed at scaring women. This event itself was aimed at telling women that they’re going to get breast cancer if they have an abortion so I wouldn’t believe a single word from them.

SafeSurfer

wes wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Yeah, according to the pro-life guy. I took everything he said with a pinch of salt, as its in his interest to exaggerate. He put his own spin on things.

People have the right to show up and express there opinion, and seeing as the hotel didn't call the guards, or have security remove them, they can't have been all that intimidating.[/quote]

Victim blaming

eviltwin

It's possible the hotel probably didn't even know what the content of the meeting was going to be when it was booked. No wonder they ran a mile from it when it came out what the content was.

January

eviltwin wrote: »

It's possible the hotel probably didn't even know what the content of the meeting was going to be when it was booked. No wonder they ran a mile from it when it came out what the content was.

No, they knew. The assistant manager said so.

tigger123

eviltwin wrote: »

It's possible the hotel probably didn't even know what the content of the meeting was going to be when it was booked. No wonder they ran a mile from it when it came out what the content was.

Yeah, it's unlikely the hotel would interrogate the person booking to find out exactly what was being held there. Take the booking, take the deposit.

Wasn't there something similar recently where an anti-vaxxing 'documentary' was cancelled by venue at the last minute when they found out what was going to be shown?

suicide_circus

Don't allow debate. Close down those who disagree with you. Round and round we go.

kylith

Of course a hotel would book them, they're a business after all. However, if people make it clear to the hotel that they disagree with this group and the hotel becomes concerned that there may be a demonstration outside* then the hotel is allowed to decide that they don't want that publicity and hassle.

* And I'd have joined it cos that lot are an odious group of lying scaremongers

tigger123

suicide_circus wrote: »

Don't allow debate. Close down those who disagree with you. Round and round we go.

When you debate total b*lloxology you give it credence and a respect it doesn't deserve.

Not everything deserves to be debated.

The_Kew_Tour

I'm Pro Abortion (and will remain, don't worry), but this is not about a total side, it's a few angry heads who making twats of themselves

Army_of_One

mosi wrote: »

http://geoffsshorts.blogspot.ie/2013/03/anti-vaccination-group-flies-irish.html

Geoffsshorts is a great blog...have a read up about that other Irish muppet , The Girl Against Flouride.

January

Also the conference was the day of the annual March for Choice, that crowd knew exactly what they were doing booking such bolloxology the same day as the biggest pro-choice event of the year.

RobertKK

eviltwin wrote: »

This isn't just a pro life meeting. It's a meeting to discuss the link between abortion and breast cancer, in other words junk science. I don't blame the hotel cancelling, who needs to have their name associated with quacks who believe God punishes women who have abortion with cancer.

But how does intimidation of the venue that hosts it, change these views?

According to cancer.com, women who had a baby that does go full term before they are 20 years old have a lower risk of breast cancer than women who never had a full term pregnancy or who have their first full term pregnancy from the age 30 to 35 years old.
Having your baby when aged 30 or over is linked to a higher risk of cancer than never giving birth.
They go onto say that at this time, there is no evidence to support a link to abortion and higher risk of breast cancer.

January

Exactly, there is no evidence yet this crowd still spout their nonsense. The venue was not intimidated, people made contact with the hotel via social media and phonecalls to express their disappointment at the hotel giving a platform to such heinous untruths (it wasn't only the breast cancer link they were peddling, it was also that women who have abortions suffer severe mental health disorders because of them), similar to how anti-choicers have done to venues holding pro-choice meetings.

uck51js9zml2yt

suicide_circus wrote: »

Don't allow debate. Close down those who disagree with you. Round and round we go.

It's called "democracy"

We went the same way with water.65% paid the water charges but the minority didn't like it and got their way!

eviltwin

RobertKK wrote: »

But how does intimidation of the venue that hosts it, change these views?

According to cancer.com, women who had a baby that does go full term before they are 20 years old have a lower risk of breast cancer than women who never had a full term pregnancy or who have their first full term pregnancy from the age 30 to 35 years old.
Having your baby when aged 30 or over is linked to a higher risk of cancer than never giving birth.
They go onto say that at this time, there is no evidence to support a link to abortion and higher risk of breast cancer.

I don't agree with intimidation but I do think a business has the right to cancel an event if it thinks it will reflect badly on its reputation.

So far we only have one version of events here to go on and that source has already proven itself to be loose with the facts.

This kind of thing is scaremongering. It's not true and has no place in the abortion debate.

Achasanai

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Which would suggest that we just take the word of the organiser as gospel? Obviously most people would take his word as highly biased until we have further information. I would imagine you would feel the same if the politics were different.

dav3

The whole ' omg the hotel had to cancel because of intimidation, but if you put me on your radio show so I can give my side of the story…' spiel is getting a bit worn at this stage. No doubt there will be some radio host that shares this groups views interviewing them in the name of "free speech".

Let's get one thing clear, having your extremist views challenged does not mean you're being silenced. When far-right extremist Thomas Mair killed Jo Cox, he silenced her. When "pro-life" groups bombed abortion clinics, it was to silence them.

Just because someone challenges your extremist views and you end up banned from a forum or sacked from your job, yet you can still vent your bile on numerous platforms, you're not being silenced.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Berserker

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

I'm Pro Abortion (and will remain, don't worry), but this is not about a total side, it's a few angry heads who making twats of themselves

The RoI has done a complete u-turn in the 25 years I have been living here on social issues like this. One of my first memories, in terms of politics, was the conservative media, religious orders etc shouting down and intimidating those on the left who disagreed with them. The opposite appears to be the case now.

On a personal note, the RC priest used to address the primary school class I was in on such matters but us Prods and the Jewish lad had to stand in the corridor. Would have loved to know what he was saying a bunch of young children about social issues. We had more fun in the corridor, I suspect.

eviltwin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You know as well as I do that who you choose to do business with can reflect badly on you. This isn't just a normal pro life meeting, there are meetings held all over the country by pro life groups in hotels and other venues and they never escalate to this extent. Having a meeting where a doctor is going to make a ridiculous, unfounded claim that abortion causes breast cancer is a whole other level. The hotel have every right to reconsider.

freshpopcorn

I say we should see a referendum on the 8th amendment in the next year or so. It will be interesting to see the result. Originally I thought it would be repealed but lately I am having my doubts. Even out of my peer group. I am amazed at some of the people who are pro life.

January

eviltwin wrote: »

You know as well as I do that who you choose to do business with can reflect badly on you. This isn't just a normal pro life meeting, there are meetings held all over the country by pro life groups in hotels and other venues and they never escalate to this extent. Having a meeting where a doctor is going to make a ridiculous, unfounded claim that abortion causes breast cancer is a whole other level. The hotel have every right to reconsider.

This with bells on.

Berserker

eviltwin wrote: »

The hotel have every right to reconsider.

Surely, their primary concern should be filling the hotel, assuming that the activity is legal?

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I say we should see a referendum on the 8th amendment in the next year or so. It will be interesting to see the result. Originally I thought it would be repealed but lately I am having my doubts. Even out of my peer group. I am amazed at some of the people who are pro life.

Never ceases to amaze me. Contrary to the religious line that people try to spin, I know more non-religious people who are pro-life than religious people who are pro-life. My OH is a doctor and religious, solid pro-choice but many of her colleagues are not remotely religious and solid pro-life. I know one surgeon, who goes on and on about how nuts religion is, in private of course but he is passionately pro-life.