SoundsRight wrote: » It's a gay rights symbol, same as a pink triangle and the rainbow flag. That's fact, not opinion. I'd keep an eye on it. I can understand it being promoted in non-faith schools, but there's stricter codes in Catholic schools.
gmisk wrote: » It is an opinion not a fact, the rainbow flag and pink triangle are ingrained in gay rights movement yes, a unicorn is not despite it popping up at protests mainly in the 70s and 80s. The pink triangle, employed by the Nazis in World War II as a badge of shame, was re-appropriated but retained negative connotations. The rainbow flag, previously used as a symbol of unity among all people, was adopted to be a more organic and natural replacement without any negativity attached to it. I am not sure you understand the history of the gay rights movement and the symbols involved, that is my opinion not a fact....I understand the difference. What is being promoted in non-faith schools? Unicorns or gay rights?
ohnonotgmail wrote: » The whole unicorn thing is very new. It is certainly not ingrained in the gay rights movements. Or at least it wasnt when i was out and about on the scene 25 odd years ago.
gmisk wrote: » but hey obviously Gemma O Doherty has a willing audience for her increasingly bizarre rants, it doesnt mean that people should be allowed to spout them as facts.
gmisk wrote: » I was going by a few things I read online, tbh I have never seen a unicorn anything at a pride parade that I can remember and I have been going to them for about 18 years on and off. Honestly I am not sure why I am even humoring this poster tbh, but hey obviously Gemma O Doherty has a willing audience for her increasingly bizarre rants, it doesnt mean that people should be allowed to spout them as facts. Also I do find it hilarious Gemma O Doherty wrote a fawning letter to Panti hoping for an endorsement for he presidential attempt lol.
gmisk wrote: » Honestly....what the heck are you on about? Were there unicorns involved? Gay ones? What is your point here, say what you actually mean?
SoundsRight wrote: » Don't take everything at face value. Of all the mythical creatures to choose from, why a unicorn?
mzungu wrote: » Why are you taking at face value the words of a somebody that thinks cutting a hedge is part of a worldwide conspiracy?
SoundsRight wrote: » I'm not saying it's subversive, I'm just saying I would question it, given the current climate.
Wibbs wrote: » Buggered if I know S. In classical mythology, actually I can't recall what they represented TBH, beyond rare fantastical creature that lives somewhere you don't type, no I swear I saw one in Asia, no really and men with eyes in their chests deal. By the medieval it became a Christian symbol of innocence, that would only approach and fall asleep in the arms of a virgin/Virgin Mary. It's been a Christian symbol for a loooong time.
Arthur Daley wrote: » Why are we cutting down trees in lots of parks and road sides. See also what has been done to Merrion square in recent years, as well as other public parks. We thought we need as many trees as we can get, what with climate change and all.
Grayson wrote: » You're not from the country are you? Every year at this time the hedges are trimmed. It looks like they've been ripped apart. A few months later they're all nice and bushy again.
seamus wrote: » Because unicorns and dragons are about the two best-known mythical creatures. Also, Gemma's issue here is not the gay agenda, but the implication that unicorns are mythical creatures that don't exist unless you believe in them. Since the Bible mentions unicorns a number of times in a factual context, it's a fairly large smoking gun that that the bible is just a big book of fantasy nonsense. The most ardent believers therefore reject the notion that unicorns are make-believe, instead asserting that they must have, at one time, existed. And any suggestion that unicorns are mythical, is an attack on the bible.Of course, given that the argument is about translation of translations of translations of a book of fairytales, it's fair to say that whatever a "unicorn" was when originally written, is not a unicorn in the 15th-century sense. But we're talking about conspiracy theorists and mythological creatures, so nothing need make coherent sense
pjohnson wrote: » Cutting them back so much actually encourages them to come back stronger.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » What climate would that be? The one that gemma and her cohort have imagined?
SoundsRight wrote: » Is it just their imagination? LGBT issues are set to be mandatory in UK primary schools from next year.
ohnonotgmail wrote: » You mean that children will be told that LGBT people exist? Are you afraid that will turn them all gay?
SoundsRight wrote: » Some people don't want young children indoctrinated with those ideas in school. If a parent really wants their child to learn about it, do it in their own time.
Odhinn wrote: » She's now saying "The people of Ireland have less than five years to save their country or else they consent to communism." I'll regret asking, but does anyone know where shes getting this timeline from or what it refers to?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e0a528cbc0a6c66fda22b51f3da0d9d1.svg)
