Hotel Cancels Pro life event due to Intimidation.

Richard Bingham · 23-09-2017 08:31PM

It's just as well that there are very few members of boards in government.

The comments on here justifying this show an astonishing level of ignorance.

Whatever happened to;

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Evelyn Beatrice Hall

That's how democracy works.

I used to think that the right to free speech in the US was dangerous but what is going on in Ireland at present is far more dangerous. We're in danger of sleepwalking into any one of a number of bad scenarios and afterwards we'll all be able to say that we knew it was wrong but we couldn't speak up as we had lost our right to express an opinion.

I would love if any one of you who has posted here in favour of taking away the right to free speech would tell me, who is this select group of infallible people who are going to decide which side is right on the issue of the day, so that the common man whose taxes keep society ticking along, doesn't have to have an opinion on how society should be run.

Of course if you can't answer my comment can always be deleted by the Thought Police.

Anyone who thinks that this is how to run a democracy is an ape.

ohnonotgmail · 23-09-2017 08:41PM

Richard Bingham wrote: »

It's just as well that there are very few members of boards in government.

The comments on here justifying this show an astonishing level of ignorance.

Whatever happened to;

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Evelyn Beatrice Hall

That's how democracy works.

I used to think that the right to free speech in the US was dangerous but what is going on in Ireland at present is far more dangerous. We're in danger of sleepwalking into any one of a number of bad scenarios and afterwards we'll all be able to say that we knew it was wrong but we couldn't speak up as we had lost our right to express an opinion.

I would love if any one of you who has posted here in favour of taking away the right to free speech would tell me, who is this select group of infallible people who are going to decide which side is right on the issue of the day, so that the common man whose taxes keep society ticking along, doesn't have to have an opinion on how society should be run.

Of course if you can't answer my comment can always be deleted by the Thought Police.

Anyone who thinks that this is how to run a democracy is an ape.

are people not allowed to voice their opposition to these anti-abortion groups who spread dangerous lies?

DickSwiveller · 23-09-2017 08:42PM

Why is anyone surprised by this? The pro "choice " campaigners, with the backing of 99 per cent of the media, are the nastiest, coldest people I have ever come across. They have become what they claim to despise: intolerant bigots. Whenever I hear about these people I'm reminded of Bob Dylan's song: My back pages:

"With a soldiers stance I aimed my hand at the mongrel dogs who teach
Fearing not I'd become my enemy in the instant that I preach"

Wibbs · 23-09-2017 08:50PM

Richard Bingham wrote: »

It's just as well that there are very few members of boards in government.

I dunno R, when I look at some government decisions...

I would love if any one of you who has posted here in favour of taking away the right to free speech would tell me, who is this select group of infallible people who are going to decide which side is right on the issue of the day, so that the common man whose taxes keep society ticking along, doesn't have to have an opinion on how society should be run.

Me. earlier in response to a post that suggested some things shouldn't be debatable wrote: »

That's a worrying position IMO and historically not such a healthy one. Moral positions are extremely fluid. About the only thing one can say about them is that sooner or later they will change. Moral positions, particularly those held up as givens by any group in society should be challenged. All of them.

Put it another way Tig if you lived in 1950's Ireland you would almost certainly have been anti choice and would have held that position just as firmly and there's the attendant little doubt that you would have also considered it "unworthy of debate".

Today you're pro choice(I believe?) and the only reason you are is because the "undebatable" was debated and the moral compass of enough people shifted to accommodate a new moral viewpoint. This is the case with slavery, equal rights, democracy for all, gay rights, damned near any moral positions we hold dear and true today. Moral viewpoints you have inherited second hand from a quite small minority of people who made enough of a case in those debates. Who is to say that the moral pendulum on this and other matters you hold to be so true today won't swing the other way in the future? By avoiding debate one could argue it makes that pendulum swing more likely.

That's the thing, just throw a couple of twists over time into culture and the moral position and status quo changes, as does the "select group" of talking heads in the media and in wider power. People really do seem to a) forget this and b) are as convinced by their position as many of those in the past and today they are.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

are people not allowed to voice their opposition to these anti-abortion groups who spread dangerous lies?

Well I'd not load the question that much myself, though I do see where you're coming from. The problem with that angle is that it presupposes that because you feel your position is right, any anti to your position is automatically likely to be spouting a dangerous lie. In divisive debates like this it's a given that both positions are two cheeks of the same arse in how they view their opponents and what they accuse them of doing(I've heard the anti abortion groups level the same accusation of lies).

Wibbs · 23-09-2017 09:00PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

But one of the great things about living in Ireland is that the dominant view doesn't silence anyone. Everyone still has the same right to freedom of expression as everyone else. Nobody however, has the right to have anyone else agree with them.

I would agree and disagree OeJ. There are different forms of silencing. There's the obvious hard state type tyranny of silence that you note, but there is also the softer type.

It can depend for example on the position(and it matters not what position we might discuss) a mainstream media takes particularly in a small local culture like Ireland, where they tend to sing from the same hymn sheet. If the media takes position A, then the companies that advertise on said media will be wary of anyone they're connected to taking Position B. QV the recent George Hook case. As the media pressure built up, the advertisers saw which way the wind was blowing and fell over themselves to make public statements distancing them and their products. Large enough companies themselves can wield quote extensive soft power. After all, who has more power over your actual everyday life, the state, or the company you work for? Other softer forms can be religion and lord knows we Irish know how that can wield power to keep a status quo. Small but vocal groups, who have more of an ear with the media than other small but vocal groups can also push soft power.

ohnonotgmail · 23-09-2017 09:07PM

Wibbs wrote: »

Well I'd not load the question that much myself, though I do see where you're coming from. The problem with that angle is that it presupposes that because you feel your position is right, any anti to your position is automatically likely to be spouting a dangerous lie. In divisive debates like this it's a given that both positions are two cheeks of the same arse in how they view their opponents and what they accuse them of doing(I've heard the anti abortion groups level the same accusation of lies).

"Abortions cause breast cancer". is that not a dangerous lie?

DickSwiveller · 23-09-2017 09:10PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

"Abortions cause breast cancer". is that not a dangerous lie?

Yes, and it's also a lie to claim that a human baby is a blob of jelly. Everyone lies. Get over it.

ohnonotgmail · 23-09-2017 09:26PM

DickSwiveller wrote: »

Yes, and it's also a lie to claim that a human baby is a blob of jelly. Everyone lies. Get over it.

you're right, it is a lie to claim that a human baby is a blob of jelly. Good job nobody has made that claim then.

Wibbs · 23-09-2017 10:12PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

"Abortions cause breast cancer". is that not a dangerous lie?

It is a lie alright. Full term pregnancy appears to increase the risk alright, albeit by a small amount, miscarriage and induced abortion seem to have no appreciable effect.

The thing about "dangerous lies" is that the only way to fight them is not by appearing to "censor" such opinions, but to expose them to the light of inquiry and reason. Like I said before there have been many "dangerous lies" in the past that were taken as truths, until society exposed them to that light. If you automatically go to ridicule as a defence against such positions, you are far more likely to cause the believer to dig their heels in. It's a natural observable human reaction.

hatrickpatrick · 23-09-2017 10:17PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

are people not allowed to voice their opposition to these anti-abortion groups who spread dangerous lies?

Why do people insist on equating "voicing opposition to a group" with "lobbying everyone to make it difficult for a group to organise"? They are very different things. Both legal, but while the former is an admirable participation in the democratic process, the latter is just utterly scummy.

Grayson · 23-09-2017 10:33PM

DickSwiveller wrote: »

Yes, and it's also a lie to claim that a human baby is a blob of jelly. Everyone lies. Get over it.

Nobody has ever called a baby a blob of jelly. Nobody. Ever.

And pro choice are intolerant and dangerous? How many bombs have been planted by pro choice Vs pro life? How many pro choice campaigners in Ireland have been found guilty of harassment.

Discuss abortion rights and the campaigners on both sides but don't fcuking make **** up.

ohnonotgmail · 23-09-2017 10:55PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why do people insist on equating "voicing opposition to a group" with "lobbying everyone to make it difficult for a group to organise"? They are very different things. Both legal, but while the former is an admirable participation in the democratic process, the latter is just utterly scummy.

and the anti-choice crowd dont lobby either? get real

ohnonotgmail · 23-09-2017 10:57PM

Wibbs wrote: »

It is a lie alright. Full term pregnancy appears to increase the risk alright, albeit by a small amount, miscarriage and induced abortion seem to have no appreciable effect.

The thing about "dangerous lies" is that the only way to fight them is not by appearing to "censor" such opinions, but to expose them to the light of inquiry and reason. Like I said before there have been many "dangerous lies" in the past that were taken as truths, until society exposed them to that light. If you automatically go to ridicule as a defence against such positions, you are far more likely to cause the believer to dig their heels in. It's a natural observable human reaction.

the anti-choice crowd never engage in reasoned debate. nobody has been censored.

Sweetemotion · 23-09-2017 11:00PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the anti-choice crowd never engage in reasoned debate. nobody has been censored.

What is reasoned debate?

ohnonotgmail · 23-09-2017 11:05PM

Sweetemotion wrote: »

What is reasoned debate?

if you need that explained to you then you are beyond my help.

Sweetemotion · 23-09-2017 11:06PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

if you need that explained to you then you are beyond my help.

Try and help me. Just for laughs.

Maybe I can help you?

ohnonotgmail · 23-09-2017 11:07PM

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Try and help me. Just for laughs.

why not try and educate yourself before bothering others.

hatrickpatrick · 23-09-2017 11:09PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

and the anti-choice crowd dont lobby either? get real

I have never suggested that. The very reason I grew up as a leftie was because in the '90s and early '00s, it was always the right who were advocating for censorship and trying to shut down debates. The left is currently engaging in it, and I condemn just as vehemently as I've always condemned the right for doing so.

I find it difficult to believe that there are so few people whose views on free expression, free speech and free association are non-partisan in nature - people who believe that these rights, the application of them, and opposition to those attempting to disrupt them, are important enough to transcend political loyalties to other issues. I can't be unique in this regard. I highly suspect that many on the left are simply wary of speaking up - because defending somebody's right to say vile things now makes one, in the eyes of the Twitterati, a valid target for harassment, doxxing, and the "ruin life tactics" ironically first made popular by 4chan and Anonymous as tools for trolling in the late 2000s.

I'd love to see more people openly stating themselves to be left wing, pro-choice, anti social norms etc - but still desiring to see those opposed allowed to state their opposition freely. I'd love to see people who have a prominent platform, like Una Mullally and Louise O'Neill, come out publicly and staunchly opposed to the no-platforming espoused by those particular writers. I can only guess as to why it's not happening, but I firmly do not believe that it's because people who hold these views are so few in number as to be a negligible force in politics. For one reason or another, people who hold these views are keeping quiet about them instead.

Sweetemotion · 23-09-2017 11:11PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

why not try and educate yourself before bothering others.

Why not try to educate people yourself, rather than just shouting them down.

Wibbs · 23-09-2017 11:12PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the anti-choice crowd never engage in reasoned debate. nobody has been censored.

It's hardly the case that the pro choice lobby are innocent of non reasoned debate. It's all about what starting position you hail from. One man's reasoned debate is another man's mindless ranting.

ohnonotgmail · 23-09-2017 11:12PM

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Why not try to educate people yourself, rather than just shouting them down.

you haven't said anything to shout down. all you have done is try to score cheap points. i have no intention of entertaining you.

ohnonotgmail · 23-09-2017 11:14PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I have never suggested that. The very reason I grew up as a leftie was because in the '90s and early '00s, it was always the right who were advocating for censorship and trying to shut down debates. The left is currently engaging in it, and I condemn just as vehemently as I've always condemned the right for doing so.
.

there is no censorship. you need to stop with that nonsense.

Sweetemotion · 23-09-2017 11:18PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you haven't said anything to shout down. all you have done is try to score cheap points. i have no intention of entertaining you.

I've asked you too explain how anti pro choice never engage in reasoned debate. They are your words not mine.

How did you and you alone decide that?

Sweetemotion · 23-09-2017 11:21PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

there is no censorship. you need to stop with that nonsense.

Loafing Oaf · 24-09-2017 12:40AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I have never suggested that. The very reason I grew up as a leftie was because in the '90s and early '00s, it was always the right who were advocating for censorship and trying to shut down debates. The left is currently engaging in it, and I condemn just as vehemently as I've always condemned the right for doing so.
.

there is no censorship. you need to stop with that nonsense.

and if you don't stop you should be banned from boards.ie.ðŸ˜›

The Legend Of Kira · 24-09-2017 02:26AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I have never suggested that. The very reason I grew up as a leftie was because in the '90s and early '00s, it was always the right who were advocating for censorship and trying to shut down debates. The left is currently engaging in it, and I condemn just as vehemently as I've always condemned the right for doing so.
.

there is no censorship. you need to stop with that nonsense.

Pro life campaigners had their placards taken off then by Gardai in Kilkenny in July over some complaints by people involved with repeal movement, then some in repeal pressure a hotel into canceling a pro life conference & some people say " there is no censorship " ? there certainly is censorship & its censorship targeted at people with pro life views .

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/prolife-campaigners-gravely-concerned-they-wont-get-a-fair-debate-during-abortion-referendum-35971224.html

Nabber · 24-09-2017 03:15AM

This is nothing new...
Has been and always will be with humans. Shut down the opposition.

Pro-choice excludes the the father!

The Legend Of Kira · 24-09-2017 03:57AM

I note that the Aisling hotel which canceled the pro life conference is due next week to host a meeting by a Humanist group on the touchy subject of assisted suicide ( see screensave ) .

Now what if for the sake if some people were to try pressure the Ashling hotel into canceling this meeting on assisted suicide being held at their venue, should they concede to such pressure ? or should they not concede to pressure ? surely in what,s supposed to be a democratic society we can publicly debate & publicly discuss issues which may be touchy or sensitive ?

SterlingArcher · 24-09-2017 05:02AM

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

I note that the Aisling hotel which canceled the pro life conference is due next week to host a meeting by a Humanist group on the touchy subject of assisted suicide ( see screensave ) .

Now what if for the sake if some people were to try pressure the Ashling hotel into canceling this meeting on assisted suicide being held at their venue, should they concede to such pressure ? or should they not concede to pressure ? surely in what,s supposed to be a democratic society we can publicly debate & publicly discuss issues which may be touchy or sensitive ?

Anyone that haunts venues with the aim to shut down any event they disagree with is a loser. Anyone that hangs around outside clinics to shout at people using the clinics is a loser. Anyone that cannot accept free speech is a loser.

Hey feel free to use your free speech to stand outside a clinic or protesting a venue for holding an event. You're just expressing your right to show what a loser you are.

Wibbs · 24-09-2017 08:13AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

there is no censorship. you need to stop with that nonsense.

Not sure if serious

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I find it difficult to believe that there are so few people whose views on free expression, free speech and free association are non-partisan in nature - people who believe that these rights, the application of them, and opposition to those attempting to disrupt them, are important enough to transcend political loyalties to other issues. I can't be unique in this regard.

Not unique HP, but I would be of the opinion that the number of people who actively think like this are small enough in number. The vast majority of people are usually not invested enough or too busy trying to get by that they simply don't care either way. Right up to a tipping point where something affects them directly. And even then.

I highly suspect that many on the left are simply wary of speaking up - because defending somebody's right to say vile things now makes one, in the eyes of the Twitterati, a valid target for harassment, doxxing, and the "ruin life tactics" ironically first made popular by 4chan and Anonymous as tools for trolling in the late 2000s.

I'd certainly agree with that. What you listed there is a good rundown of the kind of "soft" censorship I mentioned earlier that movements, philosophies and politics can bring to bear and they're just as effective a tyranny as any government one. They can be harder to fight as there's no central authority to fight and they can have real world consequences for anyone who questions their Correct Think. And all movements, philosophies and politics have been guilty of this down the years.

Hotel Cancels Pro life event due to Intimidation.

Comments