Pastor Steven Anderson banned from Ireland

pjohnson

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/anti-gay-preacher-is-first-ever-banned-from-ireland-under-exclusion-powers-1.3889848?mode=amp

Seems a proper decision given his track record. Cant imagine many will disagree so what do you think?

Did he deserve the ban or not?

Beechwoodspark

Banned from the whole of Europe it seems. That doesn’t happen by chance

stefanovich

pjohnson wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/anti-gay-preacher-is-first-ever-banned-from-ireland-under-exclusion-powers-1.3889848?mode=amp

Seems a proper decision given his track record. Cant imagine many will disagree so what do you think?

Did he deserve the ban or not?

He is banned cause he takes a literal interpretation of the Bible. What if it were another book?

gmisk

Good news.
I sat through one of his videos vile oul sh#te, glad we followed the rest of Europe in banning him.

francois

stefanovich wrote: »

He is banned cause he takes a literal interpretation of the Bible. What if it were another book?

Let the whataboutery commence!

B0jangles

stefanovich wrote: »

He is banned cause he takes a literal interpretation of the Bible. What if it were another book?

If he's a biblical literalist why is he wearing a polo shirt that is clearly some kind of heathen blend of fabrics???




Unclean! UNCLEAN!!!

Hector Savage

Strange the way they didn't ban the anti Gay preachers that were at Clonskeagh mosque.

Ah sorry it's Islam, Micheal D Higgins was out there shaking their hands and saying how great they all were ... carry on.

http://markhumphrys.com/clonskeagh.html#death

Deja Boo

*Waits until the secret life of Pastor Glass House, is publicly exposed.*

biko

It's complex
On one hand I am glad he cannot come here to stir **** up.
On the other, I don't like when the government big-brothers the citizenship

stefanovich

Deja Boo wrote: »

*Waits until the secret life of Pastor Glass House, is publicly exposed.*

Oh he is most definitely gay. :pac:

Deja Boo

stefanovich wrote: »

Oh he is most definitely gay. :pac:

"The pastor lady doth protest too much, methinks."

.

Ash.J.Williams

stefanovich wrote: »

He is banned cause he takes a literal interpretation of the Bible. What if it were another book?

Banned also I'd imagine

MrFresh

stefanovich wrote: »

He is banned cause he takes a literal interpretation of the Bible. What if it were another book?

I'd hope that if someone took a literal interpretation of Harry Potter they'd be getting mental health treatment.

Danzy

Hector Savage wrote: »

Strange the way they didn't ban the anti Gay preachers that were at Clonskeagh mosque.

Ah sorry it's Islam, Micheal D Higgins was out there shaking their hands and saying how great they all were ... carry on.

http://markhumphrys.com/clonskeagh.html#death

This, all day long, people multitudes more extreme than this man are regularly preaching and touring all over Europe yet are untouched.

Hurrache

stefanovich wrote: »

He is banned cause he takes a literal interpretation of the Bible. What if it were another book?

The holocaust wasn't in the bible.

biko wrote: »

It's complex
On one hand I am glad he cannot come here to stir **** up.
On the other, I don't like when the government big-brothers the citizenship

As you know yourself there's no such thing as an entitlement to free speech. This guy doesn't argue anything based on facts, so it's not like the government are 'protecting' us from some truth they don't want us to hear.

MrFresh

Danzy wrote: »

This, all day long, people multitudes more extreme than this man are regularly preaching and touring all over Europe yet are untouched.

When will the man with right wing views get his time to shine? When will the white heterosexual Christian man stand up to his oppressors?

tjhook

My opinion has swung over and back on this one.

TLDR: meh.

I don't know much about the lad, but what I've read makes him sound somewhat unhinged.

But I'm not comfortable with a minister deciding who can be heard, and that only "correct" opinions are allowed to be voiced. Surely stupid ideas should be open to ridicule. They shouldn't be feared.

But... in this case, I suppose the minister isn't actually preventing speech. He's denying entry to the country for an "undesirable" person who isn't entitled to be here and will add no value. If anything, we should be more picky about who does and doesn't enter the country.

Danzy

MrFresh wrote: »

When will the man with right wing views get his time to shine? When will the white heterosexual Christian man stand up to his oppressors?

?

Did you hope to hear this man preach or something?

Hurrache

Hector Savage wrote: »

Strange the way they didn't ban the anti Gay preachers that were at Clonskeagh mosque.

Ah sorry it's Islam, Micheal D Higgins was out there shaking their hands and saying how great they all were ... carry on.

http://markhumphrys.com/clonskeagh.html#death

Danzy wrote: »

This, all day long, people multitudes more extreme than this man are regularly preaching and touring all over Europe yet are untouched.

Nobody is stopping members of the Catholic church travelling.

But is it convenient for you two to ignore his issue with Jews?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

biko wrote: »

It's complex
On one hand I am glad he cannot come here to stir **** up.
On the other, I don't like when the government big-brothers the citizenship

incitement to hatred and promotion of violence. I've no problem with this.

stefanovich wrote: »

He is banned cause he takes a literal interpretation of the Bible. What if it were another book?

The exact same thing. You wanted consistency? You've got consistency.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

tjhook wrote: »

My opinion has swung over and back on this one.

TLDR: meh.

I don't know much about the lad, but what I've read makes him sound somewhat unhinged.

But I'm not comfortable with a minister deciding who can be heard, and that only "correct" opinions are allowed to be voiced. Surely stupid ideas should be open to ridicule. They shouldn't be feared.

But... in this case, I suppose the minister isn't actually preventing speech. He's denying entry to the country for an "undesirable" person who isn't entitled to be here and will add no value. If anything, we should be more picky about who does and doesn't enter the country.

He can still be heard. The very fact that we're discussing him proves this.

Minister just not providing him with a platform, and he has no obligation to provide him with anything.

Bob Harris

Where do I get a refund for two tickets?

whisky_galore

If he were let in, he wouldn't get anywhere to preach. No hotel in the country would have him.

Tbh think not being let in is a good idea, only recipe for trouble. See Love Ulster Parade.

Berserker

Nice bit of selective banning. Do not agree with his views but I do believe that he should have been subject to a ban either. Any idea where he was scheduled to speak in Dublin? Is there a Christian church in Dublin which supports such views?

whisky_galore wrote: »

If he were let in, he wouldn't get anywhere to preach. No hotel in the country would have him.

He was scheduled to speak on May 26th, so someone was willing to facilitate him.

Beechwoodspark

Berserker wrote: »

Nice bit of selective banning. Do not agree with his views but I do believe that he should have been subject to a ban either. Any idea where he was scheduled to speak in Dublin? Is there a Christian church in Dublin which supports such views?

He was banned from the entire rest of Europe and Ireland was the only EU country he could get into before he was banned. I’d say there’s more to it

Danzy

Hurrache wrote: »

Nobody is stopping members of the Catholic church travelling.

But is it convenient for you two to ignore his issue with Jews?

I haven't listened to much of him, what are his views on Jews.

His views on what I've heard are extreme so I presume he sounds like a Corbyn supporter on speed when it comes to Jews.

I presume they are reprehensible.

The point of him being challenged is fine, that countless others who will give sermons this Friday in Ireland, across Britain and Europe who have equal or more extreme views and often a history of backing that up are not.

valoren

He must really hate being gay.

Hurrache

Berserker wrote: »

Nice bit of selective banning.

You want everyone banned instead?

Hurrache

Danzy wrote: »

I haven't listened to much of him, what are his views on Jews.

It's there on the web.

tjhook

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

He can still be heard. The very fact that we're discussing him proves this.

Minister just not providing him with a platform, and he has no obligation to provide him with anything.

Definitely agree with the last bit, and would expand it to say that *this country* doesn't have any obligation to him. In the same way that if I want to spend a little time in Australia, they don't have any obligation to let me in either.

That was my point really, that the minister isn't preventing speech, he's just being (a little) picky about who can enter the country. I think we should be selective about who we allow here.

El_Bee

biko wrote: »

It's complex
On one hand I am glad he cannot come here to stir **** up.
On the other, I don't like when the government big-brothers the citizenship

very few countries actually have 100% free speech as a right, we have free speech as long as it doesn't breach public order, which can be stretched and moved to mean just about anything.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Hurrache wrote: »

Nobody is stopping members of the Catholic church travelling.

But is it convenient for you two to ignore his issue with Jews?

No one is stopping anyone from travelling. Only the US can place that kind of limit on him.

Berserker wrote: »

Nice bit of selective banning. Do not agree with his views but I do believe that he should have been subject to a ban either. Any idea where he was scheduled to speak in Dublin? Is there a Christian church in Dublin which supports such views?



He was scheduled to speak on May 26th, so someone was willing to facilitate him.

Who did they let in that you would have liked to see banned on the same criteria?

topper75

I would have thought that we could argue logically for gay rights and produce enough evidence of a holocaust against Jews to challenge his warped take and deride him.

Is the logic supporting these rights so fragile that we have to adopt tactics like this, tantamount to book-burning? Are we in some way afraid of him or his message? I'm certainly not.

Bad move I say. Awful, awful precedent.

gmisk

topper75 wrote: »

I would have thought that we could argue logically for gay rights and produce enough evidence of a holocaust against Jews to challenge his warped take and deride him.

Is the logic supporting these rights so fragile that we have to adopt tactics like this, tantamount to book-burning? Are we in some way afraid of him or his message? I'm certainly not.

Bad move I say. Awful, awful precedent.

Why should people have to? What makes you think people like him and his followers would listen to logic?
And what if he does come over here and some people buy into his guff, what good would that accomplish? Bar increasing the likelihood of hatred towards gay people/jewish people.


The rest of Europe have banned him from travelling, I am glad we have done the same.

sbsquarepants

topper75 wrote: »

Bad move I say. Awful, awful precedent.

This is my problem with it.

I don't care about this guy being banned, he's clearly a deranged asshole, but this does kind of have slippery slope written all over it.

Hector Savage

Hurrache wrote: »

Nobody is stopping members of the Catholic church travelling.

But is it convenient for you two to ignore his issue with Jews?

I don't ignore them, let him be banned, he seems an extreme dangerous fanatic, I just want consistency with who they ban.

Hurrache

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

No one is stopping anyone from travelling. Only the US can place that kind of limit on him.

Travelling into the country.

whisky_galore

Berserker wrote: »

He was scheduled to speak on May 26th, so someone was willing to facilitate him.

Campaigners would have made life very difficult for that venue, our own home grown nutter Gemma is finding a lot of closed doors these days.

Riesen_Meal

Can we stop G.O.D re-entering Ireland from her UK based hatred conference?

Hurrache

topper75 wrote: »

I would have thought that we could argue logically for gay rights and produce enough evidence of a holocaust against Jews to challenge his warped take and deride him.

Seriously. The evidence has been there since the 1940s.

Zaph

sbsquarepants wrote: »

This is my problem with it.

I don't care about this guy being banned, he's clearly a deranged asshole, but this does kind of have slippery slope written all over it.

The legislation has been in place since 1999 and he's the first person to be banned under it, so I'd say that one person in 20 years doesn't quite constitute a slippery slope just yet.

Ulysses Gaze

stefanovich wrote: »

He is banned cause he takes a literal interpretation of the Bible. What if it were another book?

It is far more beneficial for the security services to allow preachers of the "other" book into a country to preach as it allows them to monitor those that attend these event. They can then identify potential extremists.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Hurrache wrote: »

Travelling into the country.

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

It is far more beneficial for the security services to allow preachers of the "other" book into a country to preach as it allows them to monitor those that attend these event. They can then identify potential extremists.

Again: we talking about anyone specifically (and if so, who?) or hypothetically (and if so, ahhh, I seee )

sbsquarepants

Zaph wrote: »

The legislation has been in place since 1999 and he's the first person to be banned under it, so I'd say that one person in 20 years doesn't quite constitute a slippery slope just yet.

There is that!

Time will tell if it takes 20 more years to ban the next guy.

Meet you back here May 13 2039 to discuss, how's 12 O'Clock sound?

Hurrache

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Again: we talking about anyone specifically (and if so, who?) or hypothetically (and if so, ahhh, I seee )

I'm not sure if you're confusing or misreading the position I'm coming from?

Cordell

sbsquarepants wrote: »

this does kind of have slippery slope written all over it.

No, it doesn't. Or, it does, but no more than "today we jail criminals, tomorrow minor traffic offenders, the day after tomorrow innocents".

topper75

Hurrache wrote: »

Seriously. The evidence has been there since the 1940s.

OK. So we need not fear his challenge that it happened, right? And banning him from entry (first use of this power ever) is perhaps an over-the-top measure?
(Sorry - I'm unsure if you were bolstering or challenging the point I made.)

Cienciano

Give him 2 years and he'll be caught in a jacks somewhere giving someone a blowie

For Forks Sake

sbsquarepants wrote: »

There is that!

Time will tell if it takes 20 more years to ban the next guy.

Meet you back here May 13 2039 to discuss, how's 12 O'Clock sound?

Bring cans.

orourkeda1977

The thing I don't understand is where do you draw the line and who gets to decide.

Personally I'd much rather let someone in to express whatever vies they hold hold

Berserker

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

He was banned from the entire rest of Europe and Ireland was the only EU country he could get into before he was banned. I’d say there’s more to it

I would tend to agree. Would like to find out what that is.

mikemac2 wrote: »

There are plenty up north who will tell you the earth is 10,000 years old and they will stand outside rugby grounds on a Sunday shaming the fans going in

Why up north? There are plenty down south who would tell you the exact same thing. Strange that you opted to point the finger at N.I. on that front.