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

Rubik. · 08-06-2011 10:02PM

sesna wrote: »

Listening to Marc Coleman and his panel talking about Norris's outrageous comments. It's been said several times that Norris refused to show up and defend himself. No surprise !

Having heard Colemans opening diatribe with Billy Joels "honesty" as a very loud backing track - how can anyone take that show seriously?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuFScoO4tb0

:rolleyes:

sesna · 08-06-2011 10:06PM

Daily Mail headline tomorrow -

NORRIS: " I dont believe in an age of consent".

"The senator yesterday insisted on standing over disturbing interview with the mail from last year (not Magill magazine) that there should be no age of consent."

Biggins · 08-06-2011 10:09PM

sesna wrote: »

Interesting discussion on Marc Coleman. The panel find it ludicrous the defence being presented by Norris that this is somehow all a smear, and that those who question Norris are homophobic.

Christine Buckley, survivor of child sexual abuse, questioned how Norris could have an intellectual, academic discussion about paedophilia with no moral context, and said that Norris did not consider the moral responsibility in relation to paedophilia.

Christine Buckley, OFFERED the OPINION that Norris discussed the historical matter in an intellectual, academic method with no moral context.
Norris having previous (and rightly in my opinion) stuck to the pertinent facts as they were in prior historic times.
Christine Buckley is entitled to her opinion - however others still have the right too to offer up details without having to re-write historical matter for the sake of people wanting opinions to add to the heart of the matters involved.
We start twisting/rewriting matters for the sake of placating present/future opinions, what are we saying?
That all opinionated views on whats gone on before is ALL correct?

zuroph · 08-06-2011 10:13PM

sesna wrote: »

Daily Mail headline tomorrow -

NORRIS: " I dont believe in an age of consent".

"The senator yesterday insisted on standing over disturbing interview with the mail from last year (not Magill magazine) that there should be no age of consent."

Nice work Daily Mail. thankfully, more people loath the paper than like it. good to have them on the opposition.

RachaelVO · 08-06-2011 10:14PM

zuroph wrote: »

Nice work Daily Mail. thankfully, more people loath the paper than like it. good to have them on the opposition.

Thanks for answering that, I just couldn't of been arsed!

sesna · 08-06-2011 10:18PM

In his Daily Mail interview, Norris said he does not believe in an age of consent. When asked "Would you believe in an age of consent?," Norris responded " No, I wouldn't - I believe in a principle of consent".

He also argues for the legalisation of abortion. 68% of the Irish population are not in favour of abortion. Norris's views are at odds with the majority of the Irish population.

His Seanad colleagues have called on him to come to the house and explain himself.

This is being discussed on Vincent Browne tonight later on. VB has said he does not personally believe it is that compromising for DN.

My name is URL · 08-06-2011 10:24PM

They're talking about the candidates and the presidency on Vincent Browne atm.. Isn't it remarkable...

Mark200 · 08-06-2011 10:26PM

sesna wrote: »

When asked "Would you believe in an age of consent?," Norris responded " No, I wouldn't - I believe in a principle of consent".

Why is it phrased in as 'would you', as if the context is about something hypothetical?

sesna wrote: »

He also argues for the legalisation of abortion. 68% of the Irish population are not in favour of abortion. Norris's views are at odds with the majority of the Irish population.

1. Where did you find that 68% of the population are not in favour of abortion?

2. Is Norris supposed to agree with the majority on every single issue?

3. He has more power over abortion legislation as a Senator than as a President, so why is that only a big deal now?

sesna · 08-06-2011 10:30PM

Mark200 wrote: »

Why is it phrased in as 'would you', as if the context is about something hypothetical?

1. Where did you find that 68% of the population are not in favour of abortion?

2. Is Norris supposed to agree with the majority on every single issue?

3. He has more power over abortion legislation as a Senator than as a President, so why is that only a big deal now?

Red C Poll http://www.cinews.ie/article.php?artid=8166

It's an issue when many of his fundamental views are at odds with the majority, including those on the age of consent, etc.

Mark200 · 08-06-2011 10:32PM

sesna wrote: »

Red C Poll http://www.cinews.ie/article.php?artid=8166

It's an issue when many of his fundamental views are at odds with the majority, including those on the age of consent, etc.

Interesting poll:

A Red C poll, commissioned by the Pro Life Campaign (PLC)

sesna · 08-06-2011 10:33PM

Mark200 wrote: »

Interesting poll:

So you're questioning the impartiality of Red C Research and Marketing now? They are the ones who carried out the poll. This messenger shooting is becoming laughable.

Biggins · 08-06-2011 10:35PM

sesna wrote: »

This is being discussed on Vincent Browne tonight later on. VB has said he does not personally believe it is that compromising for DN.

All discussions can be interesting views but lets not be fooled.
They are just that, views, opinion and unless they clearly say so, are not speaking for the man and his thoughts.
They are stating their own opinions.

I can only state what others have already - but your not willing to hear.
Its on previous record as to Mr Norris's opinion as to how he feels about under-age sex and how he finds it totally wrong.
He has stated this now many times and whats more, works to make sure such abuses don't occur.
His longer standing actions and words - the full version - speak for themselves - to those willing to hear.
Obviously there is some that want to be deaf or twist the full truth for the sake of selling papers, magazines, be sensationalist or just plain self-promotion.
Then there is the followers of such fools that add to the dirtying of any remaining accurate facts!
They should be treated with the contempt they deserve.

jaffa20 · 08-06-2011 10:35PM

Ugh, where is the ignore button? Think you all know who i want to add to it.

Mark200 · 08-06-2011 10:37PM

sesna wrote: »

So you're questioning the impartiality of Red C now? This messenger shooting is getting laughable.

The poll was commissioned by a pro-life group. The group tells Red C what to ask, and they ask it. I'm questioning the impartiality and the bias in the questioning.

Look at the question asked:

"Are you in favour of, or opposed to, constitutional protection for the unborn that prohibits abortion but allows the continuation of the existing practice of intervention to save a mother’s life in accordance with Irish medical ethics"

That is not an impartial question. That is a question that clearly takes a side. For example, you could easily use a different question that would take the side of pro-choice:

"Are you in favour of, or opposed to, increased choice for mothers ... etc etc"

It's all about how you phrase the question. That question is clearly not impartial. Red C most likely were not involved in deciding the question. They were just paid to ask it.

sesna · 08-06-2011 10:37PM

Biggins wrote: »

I can only state what others have already - but your not willing to hear.
Its on previous record as to Mr Norris's opinion as to how he feels about under-age sex and how he finds it totally wrong.

That's at odds with many comments he has made in the public domain. Can you blame people for asking for proper clarification?

Mark200 · 08-06-2011 10:38PM

sesna wrote: »

That's at odds with many comments he has made in the public domain. Can you blame people for asking for proper clarification?

They have gotten proper clarification, but they have just ignored it.

K-9 · 08-06-2011 10:41PM

sesna wrote: »

Red C Poll http://www.cinews.ie/article.php?artid=8166

It's an issue when many of his fundamental views are at odds with the majority, including those on the age of consent, etc.

You not that think that's a bit, you know, just throwing this out there, biased?

Biggins · 08-06-2011 10:42PM

sesna wrote: »

That's at odds with many comments he has made in the public domain. Can you blame people for asking for proper clarification?

The people are not asking for it.

The muckrakers are.
The sensationalist media is.
The deaf are! (if only to try keeping this rubbish alive like you are).

He has answered - just the deaf doesn't want to listen.
...Well until at least they can get an answer they can possibly use and twist to their satisfaction!

sesna · 08-06-2011 10:43PM

Mark200 wrote: »

They have gotten proper clarification, but they have just ignored it.

In the Magill article Norris advocated no age of consent, and now we see from an interview last month with the Daily Mail that he also advocated the same viewpoint. This makes a mockery of the "clarification" he gave on Pat Kenny last week when there was media pressure on him as result of the Liveline programme.

Badgermonkey · 08-06-2011 10:44PM

Oh Jesus no.

Boyd-Barrett is also supporting Norris.

Makes me most uncomfortable to be in agreement with that guy.

Mark200 · 08-06-2011 10:45PM

sesna wrote: »

In the Magill article Norris advocated no age of consent, and now we see from an interview last month with the Daily Mail that he also advocated the same viewpoint. This makes a mockery of the "clarification" he gave on Pat Kenny last week when there was media pressure on him as result of the Liveline programme.

He didn't advocate no age of consent, he said that consent is more important than age and he was speaking in relation to a law that was just passed that allowed judges to take a lenient view on people who were just under the age of consent who had consensual sex with each other. They're talking about it on Vincent Browne now, they've explained it in a bit of detail.

RachaelVO · 08-06-2011 10:46PM

Badgermonkey wrote: »

Oh Jesus no.

Boyd-Barrett is also supporting Norris.

Makes me most uncomfortable to be in agreement with that guy.

Aw, please Badgermonkey, don't let that change your mind! I know Boyd-Barrett is a bit... well erm... cringeworthy, but... stay with us

Biggins · 08-06-2011 10:48PM

Mark200 wrote: »

He didn't advocate no age of consent, he said that consent is more important than age and he was speaking in relation to a law that was just passed that allowed judges to take a lenient view on people who were just under the age of consent who had consensual sex with each other. They're talking about it on Vincent Browne now, they've explained it in a bit of detail.

Indeed but sesna yet again twists the truth and heart of the matter.
I'd like to think its due to misunderstanding - but I am of the opinion that its for different bigoted reasons trying to hid behind what is eventually false opinions and not actual facts.

sesna · 08-06-2011 10:50PM

Biggins wrote: »

Indeed but sesna yet again twists the truth and heart of the matter.
I'd like to think its due to misunderstanding - but I am of the opinion that its for different bigoted reasons trying to hid behind what is eventually false opinions and not actual facts.

Did you get your reasoning from the pathetic Irish Times "homophobia, smear campaign" editorial !

RachaelVO · 08-06-2011 10:52PM

sesna wrote: »

In the Magill article Norris advocated no age of consent, and now we see from an interview last month with the Daily Mail that he also advocated the same viewpoint. This makes a mockery of the "clarification" he gave on Pat Kenny last week when there was media pressure on him as result of the Liveline programme.

Jesus wept, this is old ground.

The Magill article - Fcuk all to back it up, except a journalist and subeditor trying to cover their own arses, who intentionally or otherwise give Enoch Burke credence.

The Daily Mail... Toilet paper is less fecking well expensive and a helluva lot less sensationalist.

He was honest on PK and gave a good account of himself...

NEXT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Badgermonkey · 08-06-2011 10:54PM

RachaelVO wrote: »

Aw, please Badgermonkey, don't let that change your mind! I know Boyd-Barrett is a bit... well erm... cringeworthy, but... stay with us

He was a few years ahead of me at school, remember him wearing tartan trousers one day and the priests being too shocked to even admonish him.

Perhaps they also were attracted to the bad boy look?

sesna · 08-06-2011 10:54PM

RachaelVO wrote: »

Jesus wept, this is old ground.

The Magill article - Fcuk all to back it up, except a journalist and subeditor trying to cover their own arses, who intentionally or otherwise give Enoch Burke credence.

The Daily Mail... Toilet paper is less fecking well expensive and a helluva lot less sensationalist.

He was honest on PK and gave a good account of himself...

NEXT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is a major issue which has probably blown Norris's campaign. You'll have to do better than try to sweep it under the carpet.

zuroph · 08-06-2011 10:55PM

also, on the clearly leading question from the pro life campaign, regardless, 32% of those people surveyed still said they were in favour... that's one third of the country that he agrees with, hardly a scandal. people have differing opinions on topics, shock horror, I'm surprised you didnt realise this already, considering how this thread is going for you sesna.

zuroph · 08-06-2011 10:56PM

sesna wrote: »

This is a major issue which has probably blown Norris's campaign. You'll have to do better than try to sweep it under the carpet.

it hasn't. No matter how many times you try to say it has, it hasnt affected his poll ratings.

sesna · 08-06-2011 10:57PM

zuroph wrote: »

also, on the clearly leading question from the pro life campaign, regardless, 32% of those people surveyed still said they were in favour... that's one third of the country that he agrees with, hardly a scandal. people have differing opinions on topics, shock horror, I'm surprised you didnt realise this already, considering how this thread is going for you sesna.

What a pathetic point - this thread is not about me, it's about Norris. Also, I wonder what percentage of Irish people advocate no age of consent

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

Comments