Is David Norris Toast?

Fuinseog · 03-08-2011 07:19PM

zuroph wrote: »

If someone wants to have anal sex, its none of your business. The anus is also perfectly capable of taking penetration. Your views on anal sex have no place in a political debate, but help us understand a lot about you

it really must mess up the indoor plumbing. no amount of blackmail and threats by the militant arm of the gay community will convince the straight community that it is a normal and natural practice.

skregs · 03-08-2011 07:42PM

Fuinseog wrote: »

Norris does not believe he did any wrong and that is the worrying thing. He led us to believe that having sex with a fifteen year old was an academic debate and when it does happen he comes out and defends it.
there is one set of values for straight people and another for the gay community.

Ah come on man, the gay community as a whole doesn't support paedophilia. There's just some dirty old gay men who want to cop off with 15 year old boys, just like there's some dirty old straight men who want 15 year old girls

Dr. Baltar · 03-08-2011 08:27PM

Fuinseog wrote: »

it really must mess up the indoor plumbing. no amount of blackmail and threats by the militant arm of the gay community will convince the straight community that it is a normal and natural practice.

I beg to differ.

zuroph · 03-08-2011 08:27PM

Fuinseog wrote: »

it really must mess up the indoor plumbing. no amount of blackmail and threats by the militant arm of the gay community will convince the straight community that it is a normal and natural practice.

it doesnt. and straight people do it too, some couples more regularily than vaginal intercourse.
It's shocking how repressed you are sexually. "it must mess up the indoor plumbing" shows a total lack of knowledge, and this iss confirmed by your presumption that its only the gay community that do it.

Bock the Robber · 03-08-2011 08:28PM

Any link yet to a first-hand report of the trial or are we still relying on the Indo?

Pompey Magnus · 03-08-2011 09:50PM

zuroph wrote: »

"it must mess up the indoor plumbing" shows a total lack of knowledge,

Is he not correct though? Regular anal sex can lead to a weakening of the anal sphincter muscles and scientific studies have shown results of up to a third of men sampled who receive anal sex eventually experience fecal incontinence.

I'm not criticising the act by the way and I disagree with Fuinseog's judgmental attitude with regard to it...but is he not technically correct on this point?

Edit: well not 100% correct as he says "it must" mess it up which isn't accurate, but it seem it is quite likely to mess it up eventually?

jill_valentine · 03-08-2011 09:56PM

Fuinseog wrote: »

it really must mess up the indoor plumbing. no amount of blackmail and threats by the militant arm of the gay community will convince the straight community that it is a normal and natural practice.

I hate to be the one to break this to you, but a fairly substantial chunk of the straight community are perfectly familiar with the practice themselves. Quite enthusiastically so, I'd even say.

Seriously though, is this really the standard of the debate now?

zuroph · 03-08-2011 09:57PM

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Is he not correct though? Regular anal sex can lead to a weakening of the anal sphincter muscles and scientific studies have shown results of up to a third of men sampled who receive anal sex eventually experience fecal incontinence.

I'm not criticising the act by the way and I disagree with Fuinseog's judgmental attitude with regard to it...but is he not technically correct on this point?

Edit: well not 100% correct as he says "it must" mess it up which isn't accurate, but it seem it is quite likely to mess it up eventually?

and depending on how often you do it...

tayto lover · 03-08-2011 09:57PM

zuroph wrote: »

it doesnt. and straight people do it too, some couples more regularily than vaginal intercourse.
It's shocking how repressed you are sexually. "it must mess up the indoor plumbing" shows a total lack of knowledge, and this iss confirmed by your presumption that its only the gay community that do it.

How do you know that ?
I can't imagine anyone knowing the sexual habits of loads of other people.
Seriously now.

zuroph · 03-08-2011 10:01PM

jill_valentine wrote: »

Seriously though, is this really the standard of the debate now?

pretty much. three posters, at least 2 vehemently opposed to Norris from the start, and coincidentally vehemently opposed to anal sex. Starting to join the dots.

zuroph · 03-08-2011 10:04PM

tayto lover wrote: »

How do you know that ?
I can't imagine anyone knowing the sexual habits of loads of other people.
Seriously now.

dont be so pathetic. Google it ffs, so you dont think there is lots of people having anal sex?

jill_valentine · 03-08-2011 10:04PM

Indeed.

tayto lover · 03-08-2011 10:06PM

zuroph wrote: »

dont be so pathetic. Google it ffs, so you dont think there is lots of people having anal sex?

Pathetic ??
Don't want my stomach turned.

zuroph · 03-08-2011 10:08PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Pathetic ??
Don't want my stomach turned.

then just take my word for it. I know a decent sample of single females myself who've enjoyed it

Fuinseog · 03-08-2011 10:09PM

skregs wrote: »

Ah come on man, the gay community as a whole doesn't support paedophilia. There's just some dirty old gay men who want to cop off with 15 year old boys, just like there's some dirty old straight men who want 15 year old girls

I find it sad that nobody in the gay community came out and said its great that a gay is running for presidency but his 'academic' support of paedophilia, support of sex tourists such as O Searcaigh or rapists such as his partner
( a person of great moral character according to his letter of support) is unacceptable.

his apologists would be unacceptable in the straight community, a sixty year old man grooming a fifteen year old Thai/ Nepalese girls for sex and trying to justify it just would not be acceptable, yet people are afraid to condemn Norris for fear of being labelled homophobe or God forbid Catholic. The man himself remain cheerfully unrepentent. Now if that were a Catholic bishop there would be church burnings.

jill_valentine · 03-08-2011 10:12PM

Fuinseog, I'm pretty sure gay people have been saying exactly that in either this very thread or its AH counterpart.

And Jesus Zuroph, you could have at least warned them to leave on SafeSearch?

Seriously though. Lookit. Hooray for anal. Anal FTW. Now lets all move on and pretend we're talking about politics rather than what is and is not a "natural sex organ".

Annasopra · 03-08-2011 10:13PM

tayto lover wrote: »

How do you know that ?
I can't imagine anyone knowing the sexual habits of loads of other people.
Seriously now.

http://www.esri.ie/UserFiles/publications/20061016131112/BKMNEXT084_Main%20Report.pdf

Department of Health research from 2006

C h a p t e r 8 : H e t e r o s e x u a l P r a c t i c e s

■ 11% of men and 8% of women have experienced anal sex

jill_valentine · 03-08-2011 10:14PM

jill_valentine wrote: »

Now lets all move on and pretend we're talking about politics rather than what is and is not a "natural sex organ".

Or on second thought, let's not. We might be on to something.

Pompey Magnus · 03-08-2011 10:17PM

zuroph wrote: »

and depending on how often you do it...

Link

The median frequency of anal sex in the study was 2.5 times per month.

Fuinseog · 03-08-2011 10:18PM

zuroph wrote: »

pretty much. three posters, at least 2 vehemently opposed to Norris from the start, and coincidentally vehemently opposed to anal sex. Starting to join the dots.

sorry, but this is not necessarily a pro gay thread or is it? Its unavoidable that if you mention Norris that someone will express an anti Norris opinion.

I bet there are traitors out there in the gay community who would not vote for Norris. it snot enough for everyone that the candidate is openly gay.

regarding anal sex it is straying somewhat from the topic, but it used to be a torture to stick a broom handle up the anal passage. maybe a penis, artificial or otherwise is more enjoyable.

Teclo · 03-08-2011 10:18PM

This is getting filthy, isn't there another forum for all this backdoor ****?

Harry Angstrom · 03-08-2011 10:27PM

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Link

The median frequency of anal sex in the study was 2.5 times per month.

Wow, I wonder what happens during that .5 time?

Seriously folks, this whole debate about anal sex is leading us up a back alley (pardon the pun). The fact of the matter is that Ezra received a custodial sentence for whatever he did with this 15 year old boy. I don't really think the ins and outs (pardon the pun again) of what went on are all that relevant.

C14N · 03-08-2011 10:28PM

Fuinseog wrote: »

Norris does not believe he did any wrong and that is the worrying thing. He led us to believe that having sex with a fifteen year old was an academic debate and when it does happen he comes out and defends it.
there is one set of values for straight people and another for the gay community.

You do realise that what Nawi did isn't even illegal in most European countries?

I'm getting annoyed at the over-vilification of Norris but I suppose its all over now. I hear people on the radio annoying the hell out of me throwing around words like "rape", "victim", "child", "paedophile" and many others, none of which are relevant. Just to make this clear, it was statutory rape, not rape. When Nawi was convicted, the judge deemed it consensual and he was given 1 month (afaik) in prison which is probably a fair penalty considering the age of consent in Israel is 16. I wish people would stop over sympathising with this guy who wanted to have sex with a 45 year old man. And no, I'm not a member of NAMBLA, I just think it's ridiculous that people are making such a big song and dance considering that if it happened in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Japan etc it wouldn't even be a crime.

The real crime was Norris using political power to try to sway a judge but decide for yourself how bad you think that is.

Fuinseog · 03-08-2011 10:42PM

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

Wow, I wonder what happens during that .5 time?

Seriously folks, this whole debate about anal sex is leading us up a back alley (pardon the pun). The fact of the matter is that Ezra received a custodial sentence for whatever he did with this 15 year old boy. I don't really think the ins and outs (pardon the pun again) of what went on are all that relevant.

Ezra did a lot to help the Palestinians so some people think that gives him the right to have his wicked way with minors.
how would we react if Ezra rogered a fifteen year old Dublin school boy, whether consentual or otherwise_ Our friend O Searcaigh tried to argue teh age of consent was lower in Nepal and more importantly he was giving the little buggers presents so he was entitled to a little fun.

Fuinseog · 03-08-2011 10:52PM

C14N wrote: »

You do realise that what Nawi did isn't even illegal in most European countries?

I'm getting annoyed at the over-vilification of Norris but I suppose its all over now. I hear people on the radio annoying the hell out of me throwing around words like "rape", "victim", "child", "paedophile" and many others, none of which are relevant. Just to make this clear, it was statutory rape, not rape. When Nawi was convicted, the judge deemed it consensual and he was given 1 month (afaik) in prison which is probably a fair penalty considering the age of consent in Israel is 16. I wish people would stop over sympathising with this guy who wanted to have sex with a 45 year old man. And no, I'm not a member of NAMBLA, I just think it's ridiculous that people are making such a big song and dance considering that if it happened in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Japan etc it wouldn't even be a crime.

The real crime was Norris using political power to try to sway a judge but decide for yourself how bad you think that is.

a fifteen year old, indeed a seventeen year old is a child and a minor. even if it were legal most people would find what Ezra did unpalatable .

if a 60 year old straight male politician were to head to the Wes disco and have sex with a fifteen year old or even 17 old that would be the end of his career.

Bobby Molloy used his power to influence a judge and resigned the next day. norris bowed out with a smile on his face. he is a morally questionable figure who does no know the difference between right and wrong.

ResearchWill · 03-08-2011 10:59PM

Fuinseog wrote: »

a fifteen year old, indeed a seventeen year old is a child and a minor. even if it were legal most people would find what Ezra did unpalatable .

if a 60 year old straight male politician were to head to the Wes disco and have sex with a fifteen year old or even 17 old that would be the end of his career.

Bobby Molloy used his power to influence a judge and resigned the next day. norris bowed out with a smile on his face. he is a morally questionable figure who does no know the difference between right and wrong.

Said 60 year old straight politician is The Italian PM. Still had his job well up until today, but I suppose what he did was ok the child was getting money for the sex.

Bock the Robber · 03-08-2011 11:01PM

This is pathetic.

Godge · 03-08-2011 11:02PM

C14N wrote: »

You do realise that what Nawi did isn't even illegal in most European countries?

I'm getting annoyed at the over-vilification of Norris but I suppose its all over now. I hear people on the radio annoying the hell out of me throwing around words like "rape", "victim", "child", "paedophile" and many others, none of which are relevant. Just to make this clear, it was statutory rape, not rape. When Nawi was convicted, the judge deemed it consensual and he was given 1 month (afaik) in prison which is probably a fair penalty considering the age of consent in Israel is 16. I wish people would stop over sympathising with this guy who wanted to have sex with a 45 year old man. And no, I'm not a member of NAMBLA, I just think it's ridiculous that people are making such a big song and dance considering that if it happened in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Japan etc it wouldn't even be a crime.

The real crime was Norris using political power to try to sway a judge but decide for yourself how bad you think that is.

I am sure there are plenty of priests in Cloyne and Ferns saying the same thing about their fourteen and fifteen year-old altar boys and girls,.....sure people wouldn't be making such a song and dance about it in France, Germany, Italy, Spain etc.

The point is that while most of those countries have lower ages of consent, they do try and protect teenage kids from exploitation by older men. It doesn't matter whether it was consensual or not, Nawi exploited the boy.

Harry Angstrom · 03-08-2011 11:02PM

Fuinseog wrote: »

Ezra did a lot to help the Palestinians so some people think that gives him the right to have his wicked way with minors.
how would we react if Ezra rogered a fifteen year old Dublin school boy, whether consentual or otherwise_ Our friend O Searcaigh tried to argue teh age of consent was lower in Nepal and more importantly he was giving the little buggers presents so he was entitled to a little fun.

Personally if I had a 15 year old son and I heard that a 40 year old man was interfering with him, I'd kick the shyte out of the 40 year old man. Even if my son was to say it was consensual, it wouldn't be a mitigating factor as far as I'd be concerned. A parent is responsible for his/her child until they reach the age of 18. If my son went off with this guy when he reached the age of 18 then there wouldn't be much I could do about it. And there's no way it's the same as a couple of 15 or 16 year olds messing around. A 40 year old man who takes advantage of a 15 year old kid is a predator and a deviant, whether it be a straight or gay situation.

C14N · 03-08-2011 11:04PM

Fuinseog wrote: »

a fifteen year old, indeed a seventeen year old is a child and a minor. even if it were legal most people would find what Ezra did unpalatable .

if a 60 year old straight male politician were to head to the Wes disco and have sex with a fifteen year old or even 17 old that would be the end of his career.

Bobby Molloy used his power to influence a judge and resigned the next day. norris bowed out with a smile on his face. he is a morally questionable figure who does no know the difference between right and wrong.

45=/=60 but that's not the point.

The point is that it's more or less a victimless crime. I agree that Nawi deserved his punishment as it was against the law of the land but considering it's not even a unanimous law amongst our own partners in Europe it's not that major a crime. If he actually raped someone or was tied up in drugs or something like that, it would be completely different.

It's true that if a 60 year old politician (or indeed a 45 year old) was found to have had sex with a 17 year old, he would probably be done with here but that is down to our own social norms, it's not a moral atrocity.

In any case, Norris did not do it himself, he simply asked for a lighter punishment for a close friend. It's not unlike having a friend or family member commit a crime and testifying on their behalf or even hiding evidence (which is wrong but something good people will do anyway). I doubt an Irish senator has much sway over an Israeli judge anyway.

I am sure there are plenty of priests in Cloyne and Ferns saying the same thing about their fourteen and fifteen year-old altar boys and girls,.....sure people wouldn't be making such a song and dance about it in France, Germany, Italy, Spain etc.

I didn't say it wasn't a crime. If the law deems it illegal then they should still be punished. Tbh, I don't know much about the Cloyne or Ferns report so I can't comment. Also, if it was a priest, then I would imagine there would still be a fuss in those countries, with it being against canon law and all.

Personally if I had a 15 year old son and I heard that a 40 year old man was interfering with him, I'd kick the shyte out of the 40 year old man. Even if my son was to say it was consensual, it wouldn't be a mitigating factor as far as I'd be concerned. A parent is responsible for his/her child until they reach the age of 18. If my son went off with this guy when he reached the age of 18 then there wouldn't be much I could do about it. And there's no way it's the same as a couple of 15 or 16 year olds messing around. A 40 year old man who takes advantage of a 15 year old kid is a predator and a deviant, whether it be a straight or gay situation.

Well sure, maybe you would. Same as if I had a wife and some guy had sex with her, I'd be pretty pissed off with him. But if it wasn't illegal and if I couldn't go to court about it, then there's not much I could do. Clearly you think 18 is the right age to decide for a person to decide to have sex with someone older and I'm not arguing about that but the fact is that there is no definite age where it can be said universally "now it's okay". Clearly some people think it should be 17, others 16, even as young as 13 in the likes of Spain or Japan.

Is David Norris Toast?

Comments