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

mikemac · 10-06-2011 10:44AM

Vote Michael D!

The people of Ireland demand poetry with every speech :cool:

Paparazzo · 10-06-2011 10:53AM

mikemac wrote: »

I'd never heard about this Nazi comment until last night when I read it here

A quick google gets me

Bit of a cheap shot.
Ratzinger was 14 at the time and required to join up by law.
Either that or risk your family getting attention from the authorities.Or maybe skip to Switzerland perhaps.

A 14 years does what they're told, they're not going to run away to join underground resistance

Considered Ratzinger moved around paedos so they could rape more kids, tried to cover up child abuse, discourages condom use in aids ravaged countries, says condoms increase the spread if aids and preaches that condoms are immoral as is gay sex - Norris had plenty of ammo, he didn't need to pull the "hitler youth card"

zuroph · 10-06-2011 10:59AM

Paparazzo wrote: »

Considered Ratzinger moved around paedos so they could rape more kids, tried to cover up child abuse, discourages condom use in aids ravaged countries, says condoms increase the spread if aids and preaches that condoms are immoral as is gay sex - Norris had plenty of ammo, he didn't need to pull the "hitler youth card"

true. was a weak moment of debating.

Min · 10-06-2011 11:08AM

RachaelVO wrote: »

Hmmmmmm, coincidences are just ripe on this thread so!

John Water said in todays times that he didn't understand why more national press didn't pick up on what he wrote. Lots of celebs do the same thing, I think it's called fame whoring! Why would anyone give him any credibility, he's turning into Piers Morgan, fueling sensationalist fires. This coming from the man who can so easily be mis quoted, coming form the sub-editor or magill the time the article was published. Lots of ars3 covering going on, and he's using the times as his own personal shield

Ireland is becoming a more and more secular nation, I don't know many people who go to mass more than once a year (if even), frankly anyone who says anything honest about the catholic church gets my vote. Not even taking into consideration the child abuse scandals, their stance on womens positions in the church alone give them the deserved criticism and any titles that have been thrown at them. They have controlled Irish politics for far too long, and now there is a chance we'll have a gay president and a proddy to boot! Must be cracking the remaining catholic hierarchy up.

You're right (miracles do happen) Ireland has had enough of paedophilla. However there is not doubt, David Norris, like YOU, find it abhorrent! Not perception, just fact!

Before you start throwing accusations around, why don't you find a good and proper reason not to vote for Norris, as opposed to the sensationalist, right wing catholic, fundamental christian rhetoric (Enoch Burk et al). When you leave that out of it, then and only then have you made an informed decision!

You simply have an over reactive imagination, I post on other sections of this forum. I did not have time to contribute here as well.

I remember reading the original article, I was surprised then that David Norris was let off the hook. It has only really become an issue now as it is the general public that is being asked to vote for him rather than the narrow electorate of the Seanad.
The fact is we don't need a controversial president, whatever anyone says he has made comments more than about classic paedophilia in ancient Greece, the stuff about incest but exceptions where a pregnancy could result, the legalisation of prostitution and illegal drugs.
I just cannot vote for someone who has these views, we don't share similar views, I don't care about his sexuality but he wants us to judge him on his public record, but it seems the public record must exckude public statements and interviews he has given that are however they are dressed up are controversial.

I am waiting to see who is going to be on the ballot paper. I don't get this 'I'm voting for David Norris' or anyone else for that matter. At the moment there is no one that excites me, when the campaign proper starts I will decide when on the candidates are the field.

You mentioned someone else was banned and it came across that you would like this to happen to me because someone else was, and you believed I might be someone else.
The mods here can tell you that I am my own person with one account and only ever had one account.
It feels sometimes on AH that only certain views are acceptable to certain people, one should be liberal and be on the left.
I do think if a priest or a teacher of children was quoted exactly the same way as David Norris the same people would be condemning the priest or teacher, I think there would be double standards applied, not saying by you but in general.

Min · 10-06-2011 11:22AM

Paparazzo wrote: »

Considered Ratzinger moved around paedos so they could rape more kids, tried to cover up child abuse, discourages condom use in aids ravaged countries, says condoms increase the spread if aids and preaches that condoms are immoral as is gay sex - Norris had plenty of ammo, he didn't need to pull the "hitler youth card"

He took control of the cases in 2002 from another cardinal.

A study shows:

So in 1992, when the worst was over, the rate was 15 incidents of reported abuse per 100,000 confirmations. By 2001 it had dropped to of 5 incidents of abuse per 100,000 confirmations in the Catholic Church. There was a similar drop in American society as a whole but less steep and from a consistently higher rate.
For comparison, the Swedish figures for reported sex crimes against all children under 15 was 142/100,000 children in 1992, and 169/100,000 in 2001.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2011/may/21/child-abuse-catholicism-johnjayinstitute

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/nov/21/condoms-pope-benedict-ban-overturned

Maybe you are out of touch with reality.

Joey the lips · 10-06-2011 11:23AM

Jesus i thought his interview yesterday on Q102 was awful. He cannot answer a straight question. Mind you the radio station had inuendo flying.

it was awful

zuroph · 10-06-2011 11:28AM

Min wrote: »

He took control of the cases in 2002 from another cardinal.

A study shows:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2011/may/21/child-abuse-catholicism-johnjayinstitute

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/andrewbrown/2010/nov/21/condoms-pope-benedict-ban-overturned

Maybe you are out of touch with reality.

lol at this line while defending a religious group. :pac:

How recent were the letter from Vatican to Irish bishops telling them not to report sex abuse cases to the gardaí as it would get in the way of their own due process?

EDIT: Found it, 1997.

mikom · 10-06-2011 11:33AM

Stall the ball.
Along comes a righteous cowboy with a white hat to save the town from ruin..........

Gay Mitchell has confirmed that he is to seek the Fine Gael nomination for the Presidency.

In a statement this morning, he said wished to advance his Christian Democratic ethos in public life and he saw the Presidency as a way of doing this.

Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mitchell-confirms-plan-to-seek-fg-nomination-for-presidency-508501.html#ixzz1Os6499K6

If you saw it in a Hollywood movie you would say the script was shite.

Biggins · 10-06-2011 11:34AM

Jeasus!!!

Gay Mitchell - no steps forwards and ten steps back! Fcuk no!
If he's elected I'll never see him as representing me or the Irish people. I'll piss on him before that.

montane · 10-06-2011 11:34AM

Joey the lips wrote: »

Jesus i thought his interview yesterday on Q102 was awful. He cannot answer a straight question. Mind you the radio station had inuendo flying.

it was awful

got a link?

starryeye · 10-06-2011 11:35AM

Why doesn't David Norris sue the magazine for libel?

zuroph · 10-06-2011 11:35AM

gay bashing is strictly prohibited on this thread :pac:

Biggins · 10-06-2011 11:36AM

zuroph wrote: »

gay bashing is strictly prohibited on this thread :pac:

mikom · 10-06-2011 11:40AM

Biggins wrote: »

Jeasus!!!

Gay Mitchell - no steps forwards and ten steps back! Fcuk no!
If he's elected I'll never see him as representing me or the Irish people. I'll piss on him before that.

Conservative pro-Europeans are the way forward dontcha know.
Yes to Lisbon, yes to jobs.

prinz · 10-06-2011 11:43AM

RachaelVO wrote: »

Before you start throwing accusations around, why don't you find a good and proper reason not to vote for Norris, as opposed to the sensationalist, right wing catholic, fundamental christian rhetoric (Enoch Burk et al). When you leave that out of it, then and only then have you made an informed decision!

Perhaps you could do the same thing and drop the anti-Catholic shíte that's completely irrelevant?.... and we had a Protestant president back in the day when the RCC were far more controlling in Irish society and politics than they are today...

They have controlled Irish politics for far too long, and now there is a chance we'll have a gay president and a proddy to boot! Must be cracking the remaining catholic hierarchy up.

Crackng them up completely I am sure.

RachaelVO · 10-06-2011 11:44AM

Min wrote: »

You simply have an over reactive imagination, I post on other sections of this forum. I did not have time to contribute here as well.

I remember reading the original article, I was surprised then that David Norris was let off the hook. It has only really become an issue now as it is the general public that is being asked to vote for him rather than the narrow electorate of the Seanad.
The fact is we don't need a controversial president, whatever anyone says he has made comments more than about classic paedophilia in ancient Greece, the stuff about incest but exceptions where a pregnancy could result, the legalisation of prostitution and illegal drugs.
I just cannot vote for someone who has these views, we don't share similar views, I don't care about his sexuality but he wants us to judge him on his public record, but it seems the public record must exckude public statements and interviews he has given that are however they are dressed up are controversial.

I am waiting to see who is going to be on the ballot paper. I don't get this 'I'm voting for David Norris' or anyone else for that matter. At the moment there is no one that excites me, when the campaign proper starts I will decide when on the candidates are the field.

You mentioned someone else was banned and it came across that you would like this to happen to me because someone else was, and you believed I might be someone else.
The mods here can tell you that I am my own person with one account and only ever had one account.
It feels sometimes on AH that only certain views are acceptable to certain people, one should be liberal and be on the left.
I do think if a priest or a teacher of children was quoted exactly the same way as David Norris the same people would be condemning the priest or teacher, I think there would be double standards applied, not saying by you but in general.

He was never let off the hook, when he returned from Asia, where he was looking into human rights issues (from children being sold to prostitution), and how to bring some help to those areas he dealt with the issue, and said exactly then what he says now!

We need a president who will stand out from the crowd, controversial might just be a good thing, it will keep those who DO make the decisions on their toes! Norris will have no party line to tow, and will represent this country internationally with respect and dignity. He might just help us rebuild our international reputation, he is extremely well respected especially in Europe.

It could also be Michael D in fairness, he too would be a great president, I just happen to support Norris over Michael D. I think if the two of them are on the ballot it will be a very close thing. We have always know who will be on the ballot, the names have been knocking around since last year, it might not be all the names on the ballot, but we still know.

Frankly I don't want to see anyone banned, what I'd prefer is, is to get off the same old merry go round, that we are constantly on. So by my reckoning dragging up stuff we have already discussed in depth is doing that, and there are pages of it, which you will see if you go back through the entire thread.

Biggins · 10-06-2011 11:45AM

mikom wrote: »

Conservative pro-Europeans are the way forward dontcha know.
Yes to Lisbon, yes to jobs.

Yes - its worked so far! :pac:

(I know you jest)

prinz · 10-06-2011 11:47AM

RachaelVO wrote: »

.. he is extremely well respected especially in Europe. ...

By who might I ask? Perhaps by people who run in his own circles (academics, LGBT groups, that sort of thing) but the wider population? Eh, no, I'd say the vast majority of people have no clue who he is.

RachaelVO · 10-06-2011 11:47AM

Biggins wrote: »

Jeasus!!!

Gay Mitchell - no steps forwards and ten steps back! Fcuk no!
If he's elected I'll never see him as representing me or the Irish people. I'll piss on him before that.

Could ya imagine... Sweet Christ we'll be back in the good ol days of the Magdelene Laundries before we could blink.

Ya know when ya get hit in the nose and it brings tears to your eyes, that exactly what that the idea of Gay Mitchell being president has done to me!

prinz · 10-06-2011 11:49AM

RachaelVO wrote: »

Could ya imagine... Sweet Christ we'll be back in the good ol days of the Magdelene Laundries before we could blink..

Oh looky, there we go again..

Before you start throwing accusations around, why don't you find a good and proper reason not to vote for Norris, as opposed to the sensationalist, right wing catholic, fundamental christian rhetoric (Enoch Burk et al). When you leave that out of it, then and only then have you made an informed decision!

RachaelVO · 10-06-2011 11:53AM

prinz wrote: »

By who might I ask? Perhaps by people who run in his own circles (academics, LGBT groups, that sort of thing) but the wider population? Eh, no, I'd say the vast majority of people have no clue who he is.

He's well known and respected in the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg, particularly with his work with ECHR. He is also well known in Den Hague and has some very strong political and judicial contacts there.

starryeye · 10-06-2011 11:54AM

If Norris sued for libel and gave his compensation to victims of sexual abuse he may not have all this bad press attempting to damage his campaign!

RachaelVO · 10-06-2011 11:54AM

prinz wrote: »

Oh looky, there we go again..

Right wing and right wing not wanted and your point is what exactly?

prinz · 10-06-2011 11:56AM

RachaelVO wrote: »

He's well known and respected in the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Germany, Belgium and Luxembourg, particularly with his work with ECHR. He is also well known in Den Hague and has some very strong political contacts there.

LOL. He's anonymous amongst the public in Germany I have convassed. Even amongst academics working in the area of Irish literature that have been asked his name doesn't mean a thing. Me thinks this international reputation is being greatly exaggerated.

tayto lover · 10-06-2011 11:57AM

Biggins wrote: »

Jeasus!!!

Gay Mitchell - no steps forwards and ten steps back! Fcuk no!
If he's elected I'll never see him as representing me or the Irish people. I'll piss on him before that.

Ditto for Norris.

prinz · 10-06-2011 11:58AM

RachaelVO wrote: »

Right wing and right wing not wanted and your point is what exactly?

If you want people not to pull the 'Right Wing Catholic' card against Norris perhaps you could do others the favour of not pulling the same card out against others. Perhaps you don't see the irony in it though.

RachaelVO · 10-06-2011 11:59AM

prinz wrote: »

LOL. He's anonymous amongst the public in Germany I have convassed. Even amongst academics working in the area of Irish literature that have been asked his name doesn't mean a thing. Me thinks this international reputation is being greatly exaggerated.

The general public don't even know who Mary Mcaleese is.

Try the contacts he has made, and the people who have any sway and power. They are the people he knows, they are the people who like him. They have talked about it a great deal on dutch television, on politically influential programmes since the beginning of 2011.

prinz · 10-06-2011 12:00PM

RachaelVO wrote: »

Try the contacts he has made, and the people who have any sway and power. They are the people he knows, they are the people who like him. They have talked about it a great deal on dutch television, on politically influential programmes since the beginning of 2011.

Ah so he's well known and respected by the people who actually know him personally. Good stuff.

RachaelVO · 10-06-2011 12:03PM

prinz wrote: »

Ah so he's well known and respected by the people who actually know him personally. Good stuff.

Smart, insightful, well thought out response. Well done you :rolleyes:

tayto lover · 10-06-2011 12:03PM

RachaelVO wrote: »

The general public don't even know who Mary Mcaleese is.

Try the contacts he has made, and the people who have any sway and power. They are the people he knows, they are the people who like him. They have talked about it a great deal on dutch television, on politically influential programmes since the beginning of 2011.

On the contrary, the general public know, respect and love Mary McAleese as do the foreign leaders of nearly every country. She is highly respected, which will never be the case for D.N.

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

Comments