Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Hotel Cancels Pro life event due to Intimidation.

1…2223252728…42

Comments

  • #722
    Grayson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,153 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    This is proof that some people want pro life groups no platformed/silenced.

    Its not views being given a platform, its women who have being raped in the past telling their stories & these communists object to it.

    It's views being given a platform. It's about rape and abortion and specifically three pro life women talking about abortion from a pro life stance. It's not unbiased and it's disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise.

    And they're not being silenced. They can say whatever they want. However it's ok to let a hotel know what type of people they are involved with. If the hotel looks at them and says that the group is dodgy and they don't want to be associated with them, that's fair.

    Businesses are allowed make informed decisions. You seem to be suggesting that they should not be informed as to the character of the organisations they work with. Considering how much you talk about free speech it seems strange that you're against a hotel hearing something negative about a client.


  • #723
    Army_of_One
    Closed Accounts Posts: 258 ✭✭Army_of_One


    I wonder if the chief zombie worshipper will time his visit to Ireland just before the referendum? Has he set a date yet?


  • #724
    The Legend Of Kira
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 726 ✭✭✭The Legend Of Kira


    Grayson wrote: »
    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    This is proof that some people want pro life groups no platformed/silenced.

    Its not views being given a platform, its women who have being raped in the past telling their stories & these communists object to it.

    It's views being given a platform. It's about rape and abortion and specifically three pro life women talking about abortion from a pro life stance. It's not unbiased and it's disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise.

    And they're not being silenced. They can say whatever they want. However it's ok to let a hotel know what type of people they are involved with. If the hotel looks at them and says that the group is dodgy and they don't want to be associated with them, that's fair.

    Businesses are allowed make informed decisions. You seem to be suggesting that they should not be informed as to the character of the organisations they work with. Considering how much you talk about free speech it seems strange that you're against a hotel hearing something negative about a client.
    Im against Unelected groups like the Connolly youth movement who represent no one except themselves trying to dictate to the general public who can & who can,t speak at public venues, I oppose no platforming/silencing people & I make no apology for it, if someone is prevented from speaking in a public forum they themselves booked & paid for with their own money then yes they are being silenced.


  • #725
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    I just can't make sense of this post.
    I'll make sense of it for you - you wanted to smear a poster for calling your nonsense claim out for what it was (I'm linking to it for the explicit reason that I don't trust you to fail to acknowledge it otherwise). Then you tried to claim the moral high ground due to the other posters response displaying anger, after you yourself were very dishonest, which was pretty vile behaviour. It's all quite transparent, hence my linking to the post above, despite your best efforts.


  • #726
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,129 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Gees if you are a reflection of the pro choice membership ye really are an angry, intolerant, obnoxious mob.

    intolerant of stupidity. cheerio now.


  • Advertisement
  • #727
    The Legend Of Kira
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 726 ✭✭✭The Legend Of Kira


    Ulysses Gaze wrote: »
    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    A second meeting by ( Unbroken ) has got canceled following threats.

    https://twitter.com/john_mcguirk/status/913087627842211840

    That,s three pro life public meetings canceled over the last week, we are gonna have a upcoming referendum on the topic of the 8th amendment, between taking posters trying to silence rape victims & pressuring venue to cancel public meetings, it seems to me that some people are afraid of open democratic debate, where both sides can be equally heard out .

    If this is true, the Pro-Choice side have learnt nothing from Trumps election.

    All they will achieve is pissing off those who are sitting on the fence on this issue.
    Two of the speakers made a video & uploaded it to facebook confirming a second meeting of theirs got canceled .

    https://www.facebook.com/Savethe1/videos/1415907298528726/?hc_ref=ARQerVGOKF4zRtHNJ1u3ce3e9efutMRbREY-aAyS234EpGkuCpQBJHVLJhg8rlNTkU0&pnref=story

    This FB status was posted in the last hour also.


    429097.png


  • #728
    WinnyThePoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,417 ✭✭✭WinnyThePoo


    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    Im against Unelected groups like the Connolly youth movement who represent no one except themselves trying to dictate to the general public who can & who can,t speak at public venues, I oppose no platforming/silencing people & I make no apology for it, if someone is prevented from speaking in a public forum they themselves booked & paid for with their own money then yes they are being silenced.

    This is hilarious. You only only see free speech going one way, and don't you.


  • #729
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    This is such f*cking bullsh!t. God almighty. Do these idiots want to lose the referendum campaign by energising their opponents in this manner? Clearly they've learned nothing from Brexit or Trump.


  • #730
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,726 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    Billy86 wrote: »
    I'll make sense of it for you - you wanted to smear a poster for calling your nonsense claim out for what it was (I'm linking to it for the explicit reason that I don't trust you to fail to acknowledge it otherwise). Then you tried to claim the moral high ground due to the other posters response displaying anger, after you yourself were very dishonest, which was pretty vile behaviour. It's all quite transparent, hence my linking to the post above, despite your best efforts.

    I don't believe I am smearing anybody. Where was I dishonest?
    Maybe you don't want to understand the arguments because they would force you to accept that debate is being stifled by one side.



    The poster said "nobody is stopping them from assembling".

    If someone is removing posters notifying people that an assembly is taking place then of course they are preventing the assembly.

    You say in respect of my posts, it's all quite transparent.
    I take that as a compliment.
    Your justifications for free speech against free speech is just nonsense, it is literally mob rule, where only those who can shout the loudest can be heard.
    Yet your campaign claims to wish to give a voice to the silent, demand respect, equality and dignity. Hypocrite.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • #731
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    Army_of_One wrote: »
    I wonder if the chief zombie worshipper will time his visit to Ireland just before the referendum? Has he set a date yet?

    That's a very childish and offensive thing to say. Grow up.


  • Advertisement
  • #732
    The Legend Of Kira
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 726 ✭✭✭The Legend Of Kira


    WinnyThePoo wrote: »
    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    Im against Unelected groups like the Connolly youth movement who represent no one except themselves trying to dictate to the general public who can & who can,t speak at public venues, I oppose no platforming/silencing people & I make no apology for it, if someone is prevented from speaking in a public forum they themselves booked & paid for with their own money then yes they are being silenced.

    This is hilarious. You only only see free speech going one way, and don't you.
    WinnyThePoo wrote: »
    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    Im against Unelected groups like the Connolly youth movement who represent no one except themselves trying to dictate to the general public who can & who can,t speak at public venues, I oppose no platforming/silencing people & I make no apology for it, if someone is prevented from speaking in a public forum they themselves booked & paid for with their own money then yes they are being silenced.

    This is hilarious. You only only see free speech going one way, and don't you.
    If they choose to protest outside the venue to express their disagreement with the group, fine ok Im not opposed to them doing so, in the past there has been protests outside political party conferences to express disagreement, they could choose to do likewise, what I completely oppose is attempts to stifle democratic debate on an upcoming referendum issue which is what certain groups are trying to do .


  • #733
    tomwaterford
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,768 ✭✭✭✭tomwaterford


    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    Im against Unelected groups like the Connolly youth movement who represent no one except themselves trying to dictate to the general public who can & who can,t speak at public venues, I oppose no platforming/silencing people & I make no apology for it, if someone is prevented from speaking in a public forum they themselves booked & paid for with their own money then yes they are being silenced.

    Is it not up to the hotel whether they want to host it or not....same as a travellers wedding...maybe they don't want the hassle/be associated with it?


  • #734
    The Legend Of Kira
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 726 ✭✭✭The Legend Of Kira


    tomwaterford wrote: »
    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    Im against Unelected groups like the Connolly youth movement who represent no one except themselves trying to dictate to the general public who can & who can,t speak at public venues, I oppose no platforming/silencing people & I make no apology for it, if someone is prevented from speaking in a public forum they themselves booked & paid for with their own money then yes they are being silenced.

    Is it not up to the hotel whether they want to host it or not....same as a travellers wedding...maybe they don't want the hassle/be associated with it?
    Not the same thing as Travellers weddings at all, when was the last time a political public meeting descended into physical fights ?


  • #735
    WinnyThePoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,417 ✭✭✭WinnyThePoo


    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    If they choose to protest outside the venue to express their disagreement with the group, fine ok Im not opposed to them doing so, in the past there has been protests outside political party conferences to express disagreement, they could choose to do likewise, what I completely oppose is attempts to stifle democratic debate on an upcoming referendum issue which is what certain groups are trying to do .

    Nope. They have every right to contact the hotel.

    The hotel took the decision. That's who you should contact with your concern.


  • #736
    tomwaterford
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,768 ✭✭✭✭tomwaterford


    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    Not the same thing as Travellers weddings at all, when was the last time a political public meeting descended into physical fights ?

    Hmm....maybe they don't want to associated with complete bullsht science and the type it attracts?


    As is there right as a business,to refuse business/serve anyone?

    If I had a hotel,I wouldn't want them trasping about scaring off normal customers like??

    Or risk a protest mob forming outside....if it's too much hassle...let someone else deal with em


  • #737
    Army_of_One
    Closed Accounts Posts: 258 ✭✭Army_of_One


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    That's a very childish and offensive thing to say. Grow up.
    does he not worship a re-animated corpse and also practices a convoluted version of cannibilism every sunday? If I'm wrong , I'm open to correction.


  • #738
    tomwaterford
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,768 ✭✭✭✭tomwaterford


    Army_of_One wrote: »
    does he not worship a re-animated corpse and also practices a convoluted version of cannibilism every sunday? If I'm wrong , I'm open to correction.

    WTF
    :confused:


  • #739
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    Army_of_One wrote: »
    does he not worship a re-animated corpse and also practices a convoluted version of cannibilism every sunday? If I'm wrong , I'm open to correction.

    You are wrong, and very childish.


  • #740
    The Legend Of Kira
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 726 ✭✭✭The Legend Of Kira


    WinnyThePoo wrote: »
    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    If they choose to protest outside the venue to express their disagreement with the group, fine ok Im not opposed to them doing so, in the past there has been protests outside political party conferences to express disagreement, they could choose to do likewise, what I completely oppose is attempts to stifle democratic debate on an upcoming referendum issue which is what certain groups are trying to do .

    Nope. They have every right to contact the hotel.

    The hotel took the decision. That's who you should contact with your concern.
    So you think its ok to stifle democratic debate from taking place in the run up to the referendum ?


  • #741
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,726 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    Army_of_One wrote: »
    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    That's a very childish and offensive thing to say. Grow up.
    does he not worship a re-animated corpse and also practices a convoluted version of cannibilism every sunday? If I'm wrong , I'm open to correction.

    Off course and Mohamed is a peodophile and Buddha, well Buddhas just a fat b@stard.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Advertisement
  • #742
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    tomwaterford wrote: »
    Is it not up to the hotel whether they want to host it or not....same as a travellers wedding...maybe they don't want the hassle/be associated with it?

    And that shouldn't be allowed. Political speech should be protected under discrimination laws.


  • #743
    The Legend Of Kira
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 726 ✭✭✭The Legend Of Kira


    tomwaterford wrote: »
    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    Not the same thing as Travellers weddings at all, when was the last time a political public meeting descended into physical fights ?

    Hmm....maybe they don't want to associated with complete bullsht science and the type it attracts?


    As is there right as a business,to refuse business/serve anyone?

    If I had a hotel,I wouldn't want them trasping about scaring off normal customers like??

    Or risk a protest mob forming outside....if it's too much hassle...let someone else deal with em
    From your username I take it you re from Waterford ? just because a hotel or venue hosts a meeting doesn,t mean they endorse the group, in 2011 a certain pub in Waterford hosted public meetings by the freeman on the land group, just because the pub hosted their meetings didn,t mean they endorsed  the group, hotels know political meetings can be met by protests outside as seen before when government ministers visited conferences.


  • #744
    WinnyThePoo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,417 ✭✭✭WinnyThePoo


    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    So you think its ok to stifle democratic debate from taking place in the run up to the referendum ?

    You don't like free speech when it's not on par with your bias.


  • #745
    tomwaterford
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,768 ✭✭✭✭tomwaterford


    The Legend Of Kira wrote: »
    From your username I take it you re from Waterford ? just because a hotel or venue hosts a meeting doesn,t mean they endorse the group, in 2011 a certain pub in Waterford hosted public meetings by the freeman on the land group, just because the pub hosted their meetings didn,t mean they endorsed  the group, hotels know political meetings can be met by protests outside as seen before when government ministers visited conferences.

    The only risk of protests from freemen meeting was when they are asked to pay :D:D



    But yes,if a business can refuse custom as is there right...I don't see anything wrong with this?

    If I had a shop/pub,I deffo would refuse some people service like?


    This hotel has obviously decided it doesn't want the hassle if it,maybe the next hotel will be happy to accommodate them and I wish them.all the well for doing so :)

    It's a free country like


  • #746
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    tomwaterford wrote: »
    The only risk of protests from freemen meeting was when they are asked to pay :D:D



    But yes,if a business can refuse custom as is there right...I don't see anything wrong with this?

    If I had a shop/pub,I deffo would refuse some people service like?


    This hotel has obviously decided it doesn't want the hassle if it,maybe the next hotel will be happy to accommodate them and I wish them.all the well for doing so :)

    It's a free country like

    Were the hotel threatened or were they asked nicely?


  • #747
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    I don't believe I am smearing anybody. Where was I dishonest?
    Right here in the post I already cited - you have yet to show where gail apparently claimed "there is nothing wrong with removing posters for meetings that you disagree with?"
    You say in respect of my posts, it's all quite transparent.
    I take that as a compliment.
    There, you're at it again and just proving my point exactly. I said they are transparent depsite your best efforts, including this one.
    Your justifications for free speech against free speech is just nonsense, it is literally mob rule, where only those who can shout the loudest can be heard.
    It is literally what unquestioned free speech for all is, actually. I'm not pushed on if these guys have their talk or not, and I say that as someone who does not believe in unquestioned free speech for all - because that concept is, as I have pointed out, a logical fallacy.
    Yet your campaign claims to wish to give a voice to the silent, demand respect, equality and dignity. Hypocrite.
    Despite the fact as I said I don't mind these people getting to speak, what campaign am I in again?


  • #748
    tomwaterford
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,768 ✭✭✭✭tomwaterford


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    Were the hotel threatened or were they asked nicely?

    I dunno....they havnt come out and said??



    I heard someone gave in box of sweets and robbed the nice ones though....such meanies :(


  • #749
    pjohnson
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,591 ✭✭✭✭pjohnson


    tomwaterford wrote: »
    WTF
    :confused:

    Its AH. Cant have a thread without someone posting Anti-Catholic rubbish.


  • #750
    DickSwiveller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,697 ✭✭✭DickSwiveller


    tomwaterford wrote: »
    I dunno....they havnt come out and said??



    I heard someone gave in box of sweets and robbed the nice ones though....such meanies :(

    If the anti-life crowd threatened them with negative publicity if they hosted the pro-life group, would you think that was wrong?


  • Advertisement
  • #751
    tomwaterford
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,768 ✭✭✭✭tomwaterford


    DickSwiveller wrote: »
    If the anti-life crowd threatened them with negative publicity if they hosted the pro-life group, would you think that was wrong?

    Only if it was lies?


    Either way,if this was the case...you could understand hotel running a mile from em


Advertisement