David Norris for President....would you vote for him?

zuroph · 31-05-2011 10:36PM

sesna wrote: »

In terms of classic paedophilia, as practised by the Greeks for example, where it is an older man introducing a younger man or boy to adult life, I think there can be something to be said for it.

Your post is malicious.

no, yours is. I was introduced to adult life by my father. doesnt mean he had sex with me, but he bought me a beer.

Sonnenblumen · 31-05-2011 10:37PM

Nodin wrote: »

...but he's a GAY!!!!!!!!!!.

More than can be said for you.

sesna · 31-05-2011 10:37PM

zuroph wrote: »

also, a younger man/boy is not neccesarily a young boy. a 17 year old is a boy, for example.

Your posts are malicious and misattributing comments to me. It's a disgrace you're a moderator.

They are clearly sexual

"In terms of classic paedophilia, as practised by the Greeks for example, where it is an older man introducing a younger man or boy to adult life, I think there can be something to be said for it. And in terms of North African experience this is endemic.
Now again, this is not something that appeals to me, although when I was younger it would most certainly have appealed to me in the sense that I would have greatly relished the prospect of an older, attractive, mature man taking me under his wing, lovingly introducing me to sexual realities, and treating me with affection and teaching me about life - yes, I think that would be lovely; I would have enjoyed that."...

Ben Hadad · 31-05-2011 10:38PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Certainly seems good at sticking up for minority opinions on certain issues anyway.

Yep that is precisely what I was trying to say, I think it was clear in my original post but I suppose it can't be over said.

Minorities tend to have minority opinions and often they do not get listened to, and can be unable to influence the decisions that may ultimately affect them. I personally don't think this is always fair. As you pointed out Norris does appear to be good on certain issues anyway, all I really know of his work is that he over turned an obviously unfair law that was in Ireland in the European Supreme Court. Everything else I have heard in this thread has been utter hearsay unfortunately.

oppenheimer1 · 31-05-2011 10:39PM

zuroph wrote: »

no, yours is. I was introduced to adult life by my father. doesnt mean he had sex with me, but he bought me a beer.

But one would hope he didn't introduce you to "sexual realities".

David Norris wrote:

Although when I was younger I would have greatly relished the prospect of an older, attractive, mature man taking me under his wing, lovingly introducing me to sexual realities, treating me with affection, teaching ...

zuroph · 31-05-2011 10:41PM

sesna wrote: »

Exactly, did I say different.

Your posts are malicious and misattributing comments to me. It's a disgrace you're a moderator.

They are clearly sexual

"In terms of classic paedophilia, as practised by the Greeks for example, where it is an older man introducing a younger man or boy to adult life, I think there can be something to be said for it. And in terms of North African experience this is endemic.
Now again, this is not something that appeals to me, althoughwhen I was younger it would most certainly have appealed to me in the sense that I would have greatly relished the prospect of an older, attractive, mature man taking me under his wing, lovingly introducing me to sexual realities, and treating me with affection and teaching me about life - yes, I think that would be lovely; I would have enjoyed that."...

im not a moderator here. Just a regular poster. My opinions on politics have no effect on my ability to talk about magic tricks.

I highlighted the context for you, you missed it. the opinion he is putting forward in the bit you highlighted is the opinion he says he WOULD have had WHEN he was younger.

K-9 · 31-05-2011 10:45PM

sesna wrote: »

They have the tape and were looking for the correct dictaphone to play it. They didnt' play it then because of the obscenity. Or maybe they need to consult their lawyers due to previously unreleased content. It was announcted on the preview to liveline today, then it wasn't mentioned

We'll see on that one, but no doubt if they don't find it, your opinion wont change a jot.

zuroph · 31-05-2011 10:45PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

But one would hope he didn't introduce you to "sexual realities".

well he bought me a book called boy talk, and had the birds and the bees chat with me when i was 12, so yes, he did introduce me to sexual realities. when i was 12. PERVERT, eh?!

Terry · 31-05-2011 10:45PM

zuroph wrote: »

Maybe he's not litigious, or didnt fancy suing a woman with little means? Not suing is not evidence of guilt in any way.

where did you get the comment that the tape "was too obscene"???? Because this evening she says she may have lost it when her roof collapsed.

Spot on.
I've been knocked down a few times over the years, but was never seriously injured.
I could have quite easily claimed for compensation, but didn't because it was fairly pointless. I was never seriously hurt.

People in this this country are far too litigious, and it boils down to greed most of the time. People make claims for the slightest of things.
Kudos to Norris for not partaking in this shameful pastime.

sesna · 31-05-2011 10:47PM

zuroph wrote: »

well he bought me a book called boy talk, and had the birds and the bees chat with me when i was 12, so yes, he did introduce me to sexual realities. when i was 12. PERVERT, eh?!

This is called grasping at straws.

sesna · 31-05-2011 10:47PM

K-9 wrote: »

We'll see on that one, but no doubt if they don't find it, your opinion wont change a jot.

I'll listen to what Norris has to say over the coming days.

zuroph · 31-05-2011 10:48PM

sesna wrote: »

This is called grasping at straws.

no its called pointing out how comments can be misconstrued. Norris had no father figure when he was in his teens. he is speaking from personal experience of his opinion at the time, which he now has an opposing opinion.

oppenheimer1 · 31-05-2011 10:49PM

zuroph wrote: »

well he bought me a book called boy talk, and had the birds and the bees chat with me when i was 12, so yes, he did introduce me to sexual realities. when i was 12. PERVERT, eh?!

Do you think Norris meant the same as you when he said "lovingly introducing me to sexual realities"? Do you think he was talking about learning the birds and the bees in book format? Really?

Ben Hadad · 31-05-2011 10:49PM

But when I was a teenager I fantasised about older women doing exactly what Norris is saying, and I too would have enjoyed it...Who wouldn't??

Note that Norris states that he would never do that to a younger person, and neither would I do it to a female teenager now... who would??

zuroph · 31-05-2011 10:50PM

Terry wrote: »

Spot on.
I've been knocked down a few times over the years, but was never seriously injured.
I could have quite easily claimed for compensation, but didn't because it was fairly pointless. I was never seriously hurt.

People in this this country are far too litigious, and it boils down to greed most of the time. People make claims for the slightest of things.
Kudos to Norris for not partaking in this shameful pastime.

I currently have a chipped bone in my right hand from someone landing a go kart on top of me in RDS last week. me not suing is apparently a admission that I was at fault for being under the kart.

sesna · 31-05-2011 10:50PM

"In my opinion, the teacher, or Christian Brother, who puts his hand into a boy's pocket during a history lesson, that is one end of the spectrum. but then there is another: there is the person who attacks children of either sex, rapes them, brutalises them, and then murders them. But the way things are presented here it's almost as if they were all exactly the same and I don't think they are. and I have to tell you this -- I think that the children in some instances are more damaged by the condemnation than by the actual experience." David Norris.

Anyone got a context for this?

zuroph · 31-05-2011 10:52PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Do you think Norris meant the same as you when he said "lovingly introducing me to sexual realities"? Do you think he was talking about learning the birds and the bees in book format? Really?

you're still ignoring that he said it was soething he WOULD have liked when he was younger, but NOW he's against that opinion.

I'd have loved to get the ride with an older bird when i was young. who wouldnt?! but now I'm older, i wouldnt be trying to get the leg over with a 15 year old.

zuroph · 31-05-2011 10:53PM

sesna wrote: »

"In my opinion, the teacher, or Christian Brother, who puts his hand into a boy's pocket during a history lesson, that is one end of the spectrum. but then there is another: there is the person who attacks children of either sex, rapes them, brutalises them, and then murders them. But the way things are presented here it's almost as if they were all exactly the same and I don't think they are. and I have to tell you this -- I think that the children in some instances are more damaged by the condemnation than by the actual experience." David Norris.

Anyone got a context for this?

yes, there is a sliding scale in ALL crimes.

jaffa20 · 31-05-2011 10:53PM

Terry wrote: »

Spot on.
I've been knocked down a few times over the years, but was never seriously injured.
I could have quite easily claimed for compensation, but didn't because it was fairly pointless. I was never seriously hurt.

People in this this country are far too litigious, and it boils down to greed most of the time. People make claims for the slightest of things.
Kudos to Norris for not partaking in this shameful pastime.

True, but if he read some of the last few pages on this thread over this latest "controversy", you wouldn't blame him sueing for defamation of character.

oppenheimer1 · 31-05-2011 10:58PM

zuroph wrote: »

yes, there is a sliding scale in ALL crimes.

Like not all rape is serious rape. Funny how Ken Clarke rased the ire of the left last week with that remark. Luckily DN is not Ken clarke and can get away with saying almost anything it seems.

mikemac · 31-05-2011 10:59PM

Terry wrote: »

Yes.

You were doing well until the "outside Dublin" comment.

Fair enough, not everyone wants to vote for Norris, and that doesn't make them a bigot, but people really need to get over the Dublin Vs the rest of Ireland stuff.

You support Michael D. That's great. He's a good politician, and is probably the only one in the running who has a chance against Norris. There's no need to divide the the country into an us vs them scenario though.

I'm from Leinster, but not Dublin and I support Norris. However, I do not think that everyone who doesn't support him is a bigot.
You may not know Dublin too well if you believe that everyone who lives there is all for equality.

It's my opinion that saying everyone from Dublin thinks the rest of the country is bigoted if they don't vote for a gay man is bigoted itself. You're basically saying that you think that everyone from Dublin is pro-gay (I didn't want to have to go to the bother of typing out homosexual).

You're tarring everyone from Dublin with the same brush. Do you not see that you are bigoted yourself?

I'll correct myself, sorry for any misunderstanding and as I understand you are in Kildare

My reference was to a post in 2010 in Politics forum that caused uproar. And I quoted a post on this thread too but that wasn't the main issue
Well to me anyway and a few posters still remember it

A poster strolled in and said if you support Norris you are a young urban sophisticate from Dublin.
And the knuckle dragging bible thumping boggers would be too backward to support Norris

I don't get involved in Dublin vs the rest posts, not my intention

I'll never vote for Norris as I reckon Michael D is a better candidate and I've meet him a few times.

But even in this thread and the ones in politics there are posts that if oppose Norris you've your mind made up and somehow you are bigoted

zuroph · 31-05-2011 11:00PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Like not all rape is serious rape. Funny how Ken Clarke rased the ire of the left last week with that remark. Luckily DN is not Ken clarke and can get away with saying almost anything it seems.

rape is one point along a long line of crime, starting at sexual harrassment, and ending with violent multiple rape/murder.

Discodog · 31-05-2011 11:02PM

David Norris is too intelligent for the Irish public. He makes a genuine attempt to discuss issues that Ireland is not ready or able to discuss. His presidency would do so much good for Ireland. He has a genuine human compassion & is probably the only candidate who understands that the presidency is not political. He would be a great sign that Ireland is growing up is is ready to become a sophisticated country.

Now everyone is going to pull out disjointed quotes & attach their own meaning to them. This is a common tactic in the dirty world of politics. Norris was not a target until every poll showed him as the likely winner. Now certain sections of our society will want to stop him. But I think that the majority know the real David Norris. His qualities shine for all to see & people know a witch hunt when they see one.

oppenheimer1 · 31-05-2011 11:03PM

Terry wrote: »

Spot on.
I've been knocked down a few times over the years, but was never seriously injured.
I could have quite easily claimed for compensation, but didn't because it was fairly pointless. I was never seriously hurt.

People in this this country are far too litigious, and it boils down to greed most of the time. People make claims for the slightest of things.
Kudos to Norris for not partaking in this shameful pastime.

In the case of Norris, him taking action wouldn't be seen as litigious but protecting his reputation. I assume his run for the Aras is not a recent flight of fancy and has been thinking about it for many years. With that in ming protecting his reputation should have been of the utmost importance.

He'd have nothing to worry about wrt costs if he had been libelled. Winning such an action would have greatly enhanced his standing too.

Ben Hadad · 31-05-2011 11:04PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Like not all rape is serious rape. Funny how Ken Clarke rased the ire of the left last week with that remark. Luckily DN is not Ken clarke and can get away with saying almost anything it seems.

Sorry you just can't be going around saying "like not all rape is serious rape" and attributing that to what the previous quotation was on. That is a totally distorted view of what the quotation is saying. To be honest the standard of editorial control on this thread is staggering. If I had said what Norris had said and you responded with that in type, I would sue you. Truly staggering. Listen nobody is going to be stupid enough to actually think that Norris was trying to say that not all rape is serious rape. Nobody. I would still sue you though.

sesna · 31-05-2011 11:04PM

http://www.rte.ie/podcasts/2011/pc/pod-v-30051138m17slivelinedavidnorris-pid0-2297928.mp3

oppenheimer1 · 31-05-2011 11:06PM

zuroph wrote: »

you're still ignoring that he said it was soething he WOULD have liked when he was younger, but NOW he's against that opinion.

I'd have loved to get the ride with an older bird when i was young. who wouldnt?! but now I'm older, i wouldnt be trying to get the leg over with a 15 year old.

Do you think there is anything to be said for such behaviour?

cosmicfart · 31-05-2011 11:07PM

time to do away with the presidents role altogether I dont see the point in employong someone to act like a queen or king waste of money tbh

mikemac · 31-05-2011 11:08PM

This week or in the next few weeks or even the next months it's certain he'll be asked why he rushed to defend Cathal Ó Searcaigh and also called for the RTÉ documentary report to be postponed.

So fair warning to him now. And he knows this himself, an intelligent man

He better have an answer ready and the questions on this will come.
And it won't be a witch hunt or smear campaign when the question gets asked.

It might be a few months off but it's certain journalists will bring this up.
Will I be reading the same defensive smear campaign comments?

Discodog · 31-05-2011 11:09PM

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

In the case of Norris, him taking action wouldn't be seen as litigious but protecting his reputation.

I originally thought this but, on reflection, it would just be a protracted period of bad publicity. The interesting thing would be to find out why this has all emerged now & who is really behind it.

David Norris for President....would you vote for him?

Comments