Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Calls for Minister for Children Roderic O'Gorman to resign..

Options
12357…13

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Gemma is a hatemongering bigot. She is deliberately trying to homophobically muddy the waters about Minister O'Gorman. She tries to link LGBT and paedophilia all the time. Her hatemongering homophobia is clear on this. She is basically standing up and shouting gay man = paedophile.

    Have to fully diagree,

    Tatchell is well known for his views, I could pull out countless statements and quotes by him.

    The Minister of Children should not be associated or anywhere near such a man, sadly its not just the Minister, the Whole Green Party seem very fond of him.


  • Options
    #123
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    perhaps you should read the thread before commenting.

    Oh sorry, you mean the Minister of Children two years ago wasnt excited to be standing shoulder to shoulder with Tatchell?


    https://twitter.com/hermannkelly/status/1278002546007846913?s=20


  • Options
    #124
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    Deleted User wrote: »
    He favours reducing the age in combination with Romeo and Juliet laws. If there was more than a 3 year gap, it would be prosecutable. So no, it doesn't actually appear you understand it. It's specified right here.

    https://www.theguardian.com/comment/story/0,3604,530504,00.html

    In other words, not being prosecuted for having sex with a 13 year old.

    Are you defending sex with 13 year olds or something along those lines, because in my book this is legalised pedophillia from the age of 13.


  • Options
    #125
    paw patrol
    Registered Users Posts: 2,314 ✭✭✭paw patrol


    Gregor Samsa wrote: »
    He was the main activist in a group called OutRage! that campaigned for many years for gay rights in the UK. He used to be on British TV all the time - Question Time, that sort of thing.

    He helped organise Britain's first Gay Pride march in 1972, at a time when homosxuality was illegal in the UK. Which may go some way to why someone would have their photo taken with him at a Gay Pride march.

    He attempted a citizen's arrest on Robert Mugabe twice, which obviously got quite a bit of media exposure over there too.

    Regarding age of consent, his stated position is


    His stated position is at odds with other comments.
    he has unacceptable opinions on underage sex.


    As minister for children O'Gorman should clarify his position perhaps he (and his apologists here) may think it unfair but O'Gorman holds a unique position regarding children and Ireland is scarred by a history of industrial scale child sex abuse - the minister for children should be beyond reproach on these matter.


  • Options
    #126
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,240 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    redunited wrote: »
    In other words, not being prosecuted for having sex with a 13 year old.

    Are you defending sex with 13 year olds or something along those lines, because in my book this is legalised pedophillia from the age of 13.

    not being prosecuted if you are around the same age. if a 13 year old has sex with a 14 year old is a criminal prosecution the correct course of action?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Gregor Samsa
    Registered Users Posts: 8,941 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    redunited wrote: »
    In other words, not being prosecuted for having sex with a 13 year old.

    Are you defending sex with 13 year olds or something along those lines, because in my book this is legalised pedophillia from the age of 13.

    :rolleyes:

    Did you ever have a sexual encounter with one of your peers when you were between the age of 13-16? A kiss, a fondle? Does that make you a paedophile supporter, or even an actual paedophile? Under the law, it could make you a criminal.


  • Options
    #128
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    Tatchell has advocated lowering the age of consent to 14.

    Perhaps Tatchell's most controversial statement is the one he made in a letter to the Guardian in 1997. Images of this letter are shared below.

    The quality of either image isn't great but you can clearly see in the first paragraph he agrees with the statement that to challenge "the assumption that all sex involving children and adults is abusive" is courageous.



    cSEtOOI.jpg



    Anyone defeding sex with children or standing shoulder to shoulder with someone with those views are no better and certainly should not be in charge of the Department of Children.


  • Options
    #129
    Gregor Samsa
    Registered Users Posts: 8,941 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    redunited wrote: »
    Perhaps Tatchell's most controversial statement is the one he made in a letter to the Guardian in 1997. Images of this letter are shared below.
    [/IMG]

    The whole thread is debating that letter! You posting it now on page 4 isn't some big revelation. As was suggested, go back and read the thread.


  • Options
    #130
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    Gregor Samsa wrote: »
    The whole thread is debating that letter! You posting it now on page 3 isn't some big revelation. As was suggested, go back and read the thread.


    It comes down to this,

    Do you think the age of consent should be lowered to 13 as does Tatchell?

    Do you think the Minister of Children should be associated with someone with such views and opinions?


  • Options
    #131
    Necro
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 51,153 Mod ✭✭✭✭Necro


    The worst part about this whole thread is giving that insect Gemma any sort of acknowledgement.

    She feeds on this type of crap and we would be far better placed ignoring her and those who share her views.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    Necro wrote: »
    The worst part about this whole thread is giving that insect Gemma any sort of acknowledgement.

    She feeds on this type of crap and we would be far better placed ignoring her and those who share her views.

    Its people like you who keep mentioning Gemma, This is all over Social Media by plenty of well respected poeple, you are trying to divert attention away from the Minister and his association with Tatchell.

    How about as a Mod you stay on topic?

    Do you support the views and opinions of Tatchell?

    Do you think our Childrens Minister should dissociate himself of those same views and opinions?


  • Options
    #133
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    redunited wrote: »
    It comes down to this,

    Do you think the age of consent should be lowered to 13 as does Tatchell?

    Do you think the Minister of Children should be associated with someone with such views and opinions?

    Even in the letter you just posted, he literally explicitly says he doesn't condone paedophilia.


  • Options
    #134
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Even in the letter you just posted, he literally explicitly says he doesn't condone paedophilia.


    Do you support the views and opinions of Tatchell?

    Do you think the Minister of Children should be associated with someone with such views and opinions?


  • Options
    #135
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    redunited wrote: »
    Do you support the views and opinions of Tatchell?

    Do you think the Minister of Children should be associated with someone with such views and opinions?

    I think he's wrong in relation to a child not always being damaged by having sex with an adult. In relation to his stance on consent laws. I think they're pretty reasonable. I don't think there's any problem with being associated with him.


  • Options
    #136
    Gregor Samsa
    Registered Users Posts: 8,941 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    redunited wrote: »
    It comes down to this,

    Do you think the age of consent should be lowered to 13 as does Tatchell?

    Do you think the Minister of Children should be associated with someone with such views and opinions?

    I have absolutely no problem with Tatchell's stated position:
    My articles urging an age of consent of 14 are motivated solely by a desire to reduce the criminalisation of under-16s who have consenting relationships with other young people of similar ages. I do not support adults having sex with children. I do not advocate teenagers having sex before the age of 16. But if they do have sex before their 16th birthday, they should not be arrested, given a criminal record and put on the sex offenders register.

    And I've absolutely no problem with the Minister of Children having their photo taken standing beside the person who stated that position.


  • Options
    #137
    Necro
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 51,153 Mod ✭✭✭✭Necro


    redunited wrote: »
    Its people like you who keep mentioning Gemma, This is all over Social Media by plenty of well respected poeple, you are trying to divert attention away from the Minister and his association with Tatchell.

    Depends on your definition of 'well respected' I suppose


  • Options
    #138
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I think he's wrong in relation to a child not always being damaged by having sex with an adult. In relation to his stance on consent laws. I think they're pretty reasonable. I don't think there's any problem with being associated with him.

    Do you think someone who is Minister of Children should be "delighted" to be seen with such a person with such controversial views associated with Pedophilia?


  • Options
    #139
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    Its not just Tatchell, the Minister has posted some very strange things on his twitter account,

    The refereal to MAPS Porn is strange as MAPS is known as for Minor-attracted person (MAP) is an umbrella term for people with any condition that means they ... Pedophilia - attraction to pre-pubescent children.

    We then have him using sexual inuendo about a Cucumber.

    Lately, there is also him retweenting an tweet of a woman reimagining the famous pating of Saturn devouring his child.

    Just 1 of these things could be seen as odd (nothing to see here), but put them all togeather along with the Tatchell stuff and questions do need to be asked, above all, is the Minister fit to be Childrens Minister at all.

    In my view, he is not. Give him another Ministry but not Children. He needs to either distance himself from all of this by way of a statement or resign.


  • Options
    #140
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,240 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    redunited wrote: »
    Its not just Tatchell, the Minister has posted some very strange things on his twitter account,

    The refereal to MAPS Porn is strange as MAPS is known as for Minor-attracted person (MAP) is an umbrella term for people with any condition that means they ... Pedophilia - attraction to pre-pubescent children.

    We then have him using sexual inuendo about a Cucumber.

    Lately, there is also him retweenting an tweet of a woman reimagining the famous pating of Saturn devouring his child.

    Just 1 of these things could be seen as odd but nothing to see here, but put them all togeather along with the Tatchell stuff and questions do need to be asked, above all is the Minister fit to be Childrens Minister at all.

    In my view, he is not. Give him another Mniistry but not Children.
    ah would you cop with that nonsense. thats as bad as pizzagate. total gemma o'doherty territory.


  • Options
    #141
    Gregor Samsa
    Registered Users Posts: 8,941 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    redunited wrote: »
    Its not just Tatchell, the Minister has posted some very strange things on his twitter account,

    The refereal to MAPS Porn is strange as MAPS is known as for Minor-attracted person (MAP) is an umbrella term for people with any condition that means they ... Pedophilia - attraction to pre-pubescent children.

    We then have him using sexual inuendo about a Cucumber.

    Lately, there is also him retweenting an tweet of a woman reimagining the famous pating of Saturn devouring his child.

    Just 1 of these things could be seen as odd but nothing to see here, but put them all togeather along with the Tatchell stuff and questions do need to be asked, above all is the Minister fit to be Childrens Minister at all.

    In my view, he is not. Give him another Mniistry but not Children.

    You're literally reading from Gemma's playbook! This is all the stuff she's been tweeting.

    A picture of a map. An an actual map of Ireland: that's gay paedo code to you? Unbelievable.

    And that reenactment of the Goya painting was brilliant. I'd have retweeted that too if I had Twitter.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    ah would you cop with that nonsense. thats as bad as pizzagate. total gemma o'doherty territory.


    How do you know?

    Do you think its normal for a Politician to post "MAP PORN"
    Do you think its normal for a person to post images of children being eaten alive?
    Do you think its normal for a politican do be using sexual inuendo about a cucumber, with "white cream on the side"

    Then the Tatchell stuff.

    And this all found out in a matter of days, he in my viws needs to make a statement.

    The Job of Children's Minister should go to someone with Children, Gay, Straight or otherwise.


  • Options
    #143
    Carfacemandog
    Registered Users Posts: 2,042 ✭✭✭Carfacemandog


    Eric Cartman wrote: »
    Thatchell advocated for lowering the age of consent to 14 years old, not only in a 'Romeo and Juliet' laws scenario which would only make it legal if the older partner was under 18/21 etc... he just wants it opened up so that any dirty old pervert can pray on 14 year olds.
    I'm not too familiar with Thatchell and the quote a few posts down from the one I quoted is has worrying shades of Milo Yiannopolous to it, but your post here seems to manage to contradict itself as what that Romeo and Juliet law is explicitly in place so that 'any old pervert' cannot pray on the underage.


  • Options
    #144
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    redunited wrote: »
    Do you think someone who is Minister of Children should be "delighted" to be seen with such a person with such controversial views associated with Pedophilia?

    Where he explicitly said he doesn't condone it? And he supports consent laws that are uncontroversial. There's nothing wrong with that association.


  • Options
    #145
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    Gregor Samsa wrote: »
    You're literally reading from Gemma's playbook!

    A picture of a map. An an actual map of Ireland: that's gay paedo code to you? Unbelievable.

    And that reenactment of the Goya painting was brilliant. I'd have retweeted that too if I had Twitter.

    "Gay Pedo"

    Why bring up Gay? Are you a Homophobe?

    I said you need to put all of these issues togeather and ask yourself, is this normal, is this acceptable for someone working with Children, let alone someone responsabile for Children?

    Either a full investigateion should be laucnhed, or he should distance himself and apologise for posting such crude stuff and state he does not support Tatchells views on Children.


  • Options
    #146
    TomTomTim
    Registered Users Posts: 2,838 ✭✭✭TomTomTim


    Necro wrote: »
    The worst part about this whole thread is giving that insect Gemma any sort of acknowledgement.

    .

    I agree. Problem being, that many people seem to be incapable of view anything outside of the lens of Gemma. We've seen this on the Corona threads, where people who dislike her kept bringing her up when no one else was mentioning her. You see it on the Journal.ie too, people constantly randomly mentioning her. These people have a bizarre obsession with her, and mention her far more than her fans ever could.

    “The man who lies to himself can be more easily offended than anyone else. You know it is sometimes very pleasant to take offense, isn't it? A man may know that nobody has insulted him, but that he has invented the insult for himself, has lied and exaggerated to make it picturesque, has caught at a word and made a mountain out of a molehill--he knows that himself, yet he will be the first to take offense, and will revel in his resentment till he feels great pleasure in it.”- ― Fyodor Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov




  • Options
    #147
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Where he explicitly said he doesn't condone it? And he supports consent laws that are uncontroversial. There's nothing wrong with that association.


    Nothing wrong with being associated with someone who in many eyes condones Pedophilia, and supports sex between children of young years?

    Are you a parent, would you be happy to be associated with someone who suggests your 13 year old shoudl be able to have sex?


  • Options
    #148
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    If anything it shows O'Gorman is not too bright and he is the Irish Donald Trump when it comes to posting stupid stuff on Twitter.

    Clearly one way of another, he is not fit to be Minister of anything.


  • Options
    #149
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    redunited wrote: »
    Nothing wrong with being associated with someone who in many eyes condones Pedophilia, and supports sex between children of young years?

    Are you a parent, would you be happy to be associated with someone who suggests your 13 year old shoudl be able to have sex?

    He explicitly said he didn't condone it. So no I think you're you're entirely misrepresenting his stance. You'll find plenty of politicians do support Romeo and Juliet laws. The reality is thirteen year olds do have sex and if it happens with someone similarly aged, I don't think it should be a criminal offence. That is Tatchell's stance.

    I imagine most would be of a similar view. But sure continue to misrepresent.


  • Options
    #150
    redunited
    Registered Users Posts: 407 ✭✭redunited


    Deleted User wrote: »
    He explicitly said he didn't condone it. So no I think you're you're entirely misrepresenting his stance. You'll find plenty of politicians do support Romeo and Juliet laws. The reality is thirteen year olds do have sex and if it happens with someone similarly aged, I don't think it should be a criminal offence. That is Tatchell's stance.

    I imagine most would be of a similar view. But sure continue to misrepresent.


    Maybe plenty of politicians do support Romeo and Juliet laws, I dont however beleive the Minister of Children should or be associated with anyone who does.

    Too many quesitons to be asked im afraid, either he makes a statement or this is not going away.

    Lots of parents like me are disgusted in what we have seen and read.

    We need an explanation and some sort of reassurance from the Minister.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    um7y1h83ge06nx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,029 ✭✭✭um7y1h83ge06nx


    A lot of those Greens seem to be a bit strange


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement