Is David Norris Toast?

anymore · 04-08-2011 05:18PM

Godge wrote: »

I hate references to the "gay" community or to the "straight" community. We should be all one community and there should be a divergence of views among all. Just because you are straight/gay doesn't mean you should hold certain views.

It always seems to me that it is the extremists on either side of the argument who try to put such labels and they tend to be extreme on all issues. There is nothing wrong with holding strong views on this subject or that subject (for example, as a parent of teenagers, I have very strong views about the appropriateness of sexual relations between older men and teenagers) but holding such views to an extent that leads you to label yourself or others leaves you open to being blinded by the strong views rather than continually debating and reassessing them.

Well I agree with your views on the one community but in practice it doesnt seem to work that way - I have certainly been made to feel in conversations with gay acquaintances over the years that if my views on certain issues do not correspond with theirs, then mine arent welcome or it ' is none of my business' So I learned to self censor. Well to hell with it now, if i am not part of the community or I have to self censor, so be it. And if I am to be accused of being homophobic becaue I am not on message on the Norris issue, to hell with that too.

acer1000 · 04-08-2011 07:05PM

Say you were having a heart attack and there were a few possible available candidates to take you to the hospital. However, the route has many obstacles to do with traffic congestion, road works, one-way streets, etc. It’s best that you have a daring, courageous, maybe somebody with a quick intellect to take a calculated risk of going down that one-way street, because you really have no time to spare. In addition, for the role it would be best to have somebody who likes you enough, even loves you, to take on a risk for you, that he would even consider putting himself in danger.

Four of the possible candidates are each in their own way nice and safe, but the fifth guy fits the requirements outline above. Who do you go with? Wouldn’t you be a fool not to go with the guy because you just found out that that guy once gave a character reference to a guy who was convicted of a questionable offence in a questionable country, who had political affiliations that ran contrary to mainstream political stances of that country? That’s not even taking into account that the fifth guy put himself on the line out of love for this other guy. But then on further thought, you know that this guy has a track record of taking a stand out of principle regarding what he feels is right and proper.

Isn’t Ireland currently that heart patient?

As a country we are caught up in situation that we have been lead into by a bunch of dumbass, visionless, corrupt, unprincipled lying scum such as Ahern & Cowen. With an unhelpful international backdrop, Ireland is in a very precarious position. We may well see mainstream soup kitchens in Dublin, even if we don’t, we all know it’s not going to be a rosy picture for the next few years, at least. That’s why we need a head of state, who has a towering intellect, well read, principles for which we know he’s big enough to suffer for, a love of Ireland for which he clearly has. And just like in the manner of how he acted in the defence of that person he loved, we could expect the same with regard to the country he loves. Isn’t that just what we’re crying out for?

Safe, nice and mediocre is just no good, we deserve better.

Debate about legal age etc, is beside the point, there is no way that David Norris would condone rape. I think if we don’t get our public offices filled with people of Norris’s calibre, we are going to condemn our 15 yr olds and most of the rest of us to a fate and a future far worse than if we were actually raped.

On second thoughts, isn’t it that, that has happened to us, in a way?

Is there any chance, that he will get back in the game?

Sunnyisland · 04-08-2011 07:39PM

He hasn't a hope of getting back into the presidential race.He is out that's it. We should all concentrate on who is left or who is running now for the position.

HarryPotter41 · 04-08-2011 08:15PM

acer1000 wrote: »

Say you were having a heart attack and there were a few possible available candidates to take you to the hospital. However, the route has many obstacles to do with traffic congestion, road works, one-way streets, etc. It’s best that you have a daring, courageous, maybe somebody with a quick intellect to take a calculated risk of going down that one-way street, because you really have no time to spare. In addition, for the role it would be best to have somebody who likes you enough, even loves you, to take on a risk for you, that he would even consider putting himself in danger.

Actually I want the guy who will get me there in one piece without killing me along the way by being daring and exciting and revelling in his own wonderfulness.

Godge · 04-08-2011 08:47PM

acer1000 wrote: »

Say you were having a heart attack and there were a few possible available candidates to take you to the hospital. However, the route has many obstacles to do with traffic congestion, road works, one-way streets, etc. It’s best that you have a daring, courageous, maybe somebody with a quick intellect to take a calculated risk of going down that one-way street, because you really have no time to spare. In addition, for the role it would be best to have somebody who likes you enough, even loves you, to take on a risk for you, that he would even consider putting himself in danger.

Four of the possible candidates are each in their own way nice and safe, but the fifth guy fits the requirements outline above. Who do you go with? Wouldn’t you be a fool not to go with the guy because you just found out that that guy once gave a character reference to a guy who was convicted of a questionable offence in a questionable country, who had political affiliations that ran contrary to mainstream political stances of that country? That’s not even taking into account that the fifth guy put himself on the line out of love for this other guy. But then on further thought, you know that this guy has a track record of taking a stand out of principle regarding what he feels is right and proper.

Isn’t Ireland currently that heart patient?

As a country we are caught up in situation that we have been lead into by a bunch of dumbass, visionless, corrupt, unprincipled lying scum such as Ahern & Cowen. With an unhelpful international backdrop, Ireland is in a very precarious position. We may well see mainstream soup kitchens in Dublin, even if we don’t, we all know it’s not going to be a rosy picture for the next few years, at least. That’s why we need a head of state, who has a towering intellect, well read, principles for which we know he’s big enough to suffer for, a love of Ireland for which he clearly has. And just like in the manner of how he acted in the defence of that person he loved, we could expect the same with regard to the country he loves. Isn’t that just what we’re crying out for?

Safe, nice and mediocre is just no good, we deserve better.

Debate about legal age etc, is beside the point, there is no way that David Norris would condone rape. I think if we don’t get our public offices filled with people of Norris’s calibre, we are going to condemn our 15 yr olds and most of the rest of us to a fate and a future far worse than if we were actually raped.

On second thoughts, isn’t it that, that has happened to us, in a way?

Is there any chance, that he will get back in the game?

First point is that Norris was running for President not for Taoiseach. So he wouldn't be driving the ambulance. In your example he would be the gold trimmings or the alloy wheels on the ambulance or the fancy siren. A President is there to represent the country, to make it look good and not to put his foot in it. If you believe it likely that Norris is daring, that means he is the one likely to say something outragreous to the Saudis or the Chinese. So definitely not suited for President.

Second point is that David Norris has condoned statutory rape (or unlawful carnal knowledge as it is otherwise known).

Third point shows your ignorance of the effects of rape. Suggesting that a few years of mild suffering for the country compared to say Ethiopia is worse than everybody being raped beggars belief. Have you ever talked to somebody who was raped and helped them afterwards? As for soup kitchens in Dublin, what planet are you living on? Even if we cut our social welfare rates by 40% tomorrow, they would be high enough to avoid soup kitchens (might have to forego the holiday abroad though)

Finally, I don't believe Norris has a towering intellect. He has an academic interest in things Georgian and academic qualifications in English literature but his attempts to explain the Helen Lucy Burke article and his support of his partner showed up the severe limits to his intellectual ability and his lack of understanding of the real world. Do we really want somebody as President who thinks he knows everything but in reality is something else?

Sunnyisland · 04-08-2011 08:55PM

Godge wrote: »

Second point is that David Norris has condoned statutory rape (or unlawful carnal knowledge as it is otherwise known).

Third point shows your ignorance of the effects of rape. Suggesting that a few years of mild suffering for the country compared to say Ethiopia is worse than everybody being raped beggars belief. Have you ever talked to somebody who was raped and helped them afterwards?

100 %

MadsL · 04-08-2011 08:56PM

Second point is that David Norris has condoned statutory rape

He has? Did he make a statement on the matter? Did you alert the media?

Last I knew he wrote a letter. :rolleyes:

You are aware that Ezra Yizhak Nawi has said that he was assured by this boy that he was over 16.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/i-am-not-a-paedophile-says-norris-expartner-2839306.html

Sunnyisland · 04-08-2011 09:28PM

MadsL wrote: »

You are aware that Ezra Yitzhak Nawi has said that he was assured by this boy that he was over 16.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/i-am-not-a-paedophile-says-norris-expartner-2839306.html

That's what they all say.

From wikipedia.Secondary victimization is the retraumatization of the sexual assault, abuse, or rape victim through the responses of individuals and institutions. Types of secondary victimization include victim blaming and inappropriate post-assault behavior or language by medical personnel or other organizations with which the victim has contact.[18] Secondary victimization is especially common in cases of drug-facilitated, acquaintance, military sexual trauma and statutory rape

tayto lover · 04-08-2011 10:56PM

MadsL wrote: »

He has? Did he make a statement on the matter? Did you alert the media?

Last I knew he wrote a letter. :rolleyes:

You are aware that Ezra Yizhak Nawi has said that he was assured by this boy that he was over 16.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/i-am-not-a-paedophile-says-norris-expartner-2839306.html

More straws.
Will you people ever begin to realise that it is never an excuse to "believe someone was underage". Publicans have used that excuse and were fined and closed.Apart from that it is not right for a 40 plus year old man to chase young people for sex even if they were 15,16, 17. It is just not right. Would you like your daughter, sister or brother at those ages to have a 40 year old sniffing around them. Its dirty and horrible.

MadsL · 04-08-2011 11:23PM

No, this is the straw - "David Norris has condoned statutory rape" - incredible how twisted by the media and by his critics his actions have been.

This is like saying that Mitchell "Condoned murder" or Kathleen Lynch "condoned the rape of two sisters" - can we get some perspective?

HarryPotter41 · 04-08-2011 11:34PM

MadsL wrote: »

No, this is the straw - "David Norris has condoned statutory rape" - incredible how twisted by the media and by his critics his actions have been.

This is like saying that Mitchell "Condoned murder" or Kathleen Lynch "condoned the rape of two sisters" - can we get some perspective?

Has he not gleefullly discussed how wonderful the concept of pederasty is on Morning Ireland, a scary concept in itself. Thankfully we have been save the possiblity of him discussing that one over dinner on State visits.

MadsL · 04-08-2011 11:51PM

Has he not gleefullly discussed how wonderful the classical concept of pederasty is on Morning Ireland,

FYP

HarryPotter41 · 05-08-2011 12:01AM

MadsL wrote: »

FYP

Its okay, I understand why you would wish to avoid that Morning Ireland interview.

MadsL · 05-08-2011 12:36AM

Here's the interview, not avoiding - found it easily.

http://www.rte.ie/news/morningireland/player.html?20110609,2974227,2974227,flash,257

HarryPotter41 · 05-08-2011 12:38AM

MadsL wrote: »

Here's the interview, not avoiding - found it easily.

http://www.rte.ie/news/morningireland/player.html?20110609,2974227,2974227,flash,257

I am well aware of what is in the interview, you are still avoiding his gleeful discussion. he actually had to be told he was not running in ancient Greece, this is 21st century Ireland.

MadsL · 05-08-2011 12:42AM

Avoiding?

Explain.

ultain · 05-08-2011 12:43AM

Makes you wonder why it took Norris (one of those bird yokes from "The Dark crystal") running for president to have all these dark skeletons fall from his wardrobe (ignored really, not hidden) if he wasn't running for pres none of this would have been brought to light!! this country is just as bad morally as it ever was

HarryPotter41 · 05-08-2011 12:59AM

MadsL wrote: »

Avoiding?

Explain.

It seems to be one point you don't have a view on.

acer1000 · 05-08-2011 01:03AM

Godge wrote: »

First point is that Norris was running for President not for Taoiseach. So he wouldn't be driving the ambulance. In your example he would be the gold trimmings or the alloy wheels on the ambulance or the fancy siren. A President is there to represent the country, to make it look good and not to put his foot in it. If you believe it likely that Norris is daring, that means he is the one likely to say something outragreous to the Saudis or the Chinese. So definitely not suited for President.

Second point is that David Norris has condoned statutory rape (or unlawful carnal knowledge as it is otherwise known).

Third point shows your ignorance of the effects of rape. Suggesting that a few years of mild suffering for the country compared to say Ethiopia is worse than everybody being raped beggars belief. Have you ever talked to somebody who was raped and helped them afterwards? As for soup kitchens in Dublin, what planet are you living on? Even if we cut our social welfare rates by 40% tomorrow, they would be high enough to avoid soup kitchens (might have to forego the holiday abroad though)

Finally, I don't believe Norris has a towering intellect. He has an academic interest in things Georgian and academic qualifications in English literature but his attempts to explain the Helen Lucy Burke article and his support of his partner showed up the severe limits to his intellectual ability and his lack of understanding of the real world. Do we really want somebody as President who thinks he knows everything but in reality is something else?

So, you would consider the roles of the 2 Marys as akin to gold trimmings and alloy wheels. They stretched that role and made the job more than anybody had previously conceived of what it could be. Likewise, DN was the only candidate who was capable of doing the same, in his own way, in very changed times.

How has such a docile attitude taken hold that nobody must speak up for fear of offending some entity that we perceive as greater than ourselves, even though there was never as much need to say what needs to be said, by somebody capable of saying it.

Soup kitchens could be a reality in Dublin if the euro collapses with the resulting chaos that would ensue. Read what David McWilliams is lately saying. 40% of a valueless, or at best a heavily devalued currency ain’t going to buy much. There may be no way out of present difficulties without greater difficulties resulting in a reordered world with calamity and chaos in the meantime. Currency wars, leading to real wars, etc,etc. It mightn’t get that bad, nobody knows, but you seem to have your head still in the sand. I fear we will be like headless chickens if real calamity breaks out, and won’t 3 more necessary austere budgets be calamitous enough of itself, without any further hiccups from abroad?

The point being a president of DM’s calibre could redefine, re-imagine, interpret, or at least help us navigate what we as a country are about in such tumultuous times. If nothing else, at least he wouldn’t be boring, he might give us a laugh, because that might be all we’d have at the end of the day.

Whatever you may say regarding the HL Burke interview, the polls gave the public’s opinion on that, and I bet his support wouldn’t be that much reduced in light of the last controversy.

I’m inclined to think that official Ireland is behind the curve on this issue, just as they have been with many other issues. The general public are a hell of a lot more sophisticated than what official Ireland likes to think they are. There just aren’t enough elected officials with even half the courage that he has, to give him the support he needs. Ireland’s loss, I suppose.

anymore · 05-08-2011 01:21AM

acer1000 wrote: »

So, you would consider the roles of the 2 Marys as akin to gold trimmings and alloy wheels. They stretched that role and made the job more than anybody had previously conceived of what it could be. Likewise, DN was the only candidate who was capable of doing the same, in his own way, in very changed times.

How has such a docile attitude taken hold that nobody must speak up for fear of offending some entity that we perceive as greater than ourselves, even though there was never as much need to say what needs to be said, by somebody capable of saying it.

Soup kitchens could be a reality in Dublin if the euro collapses with the resulting chaos that would ensue. Read what David McWilliams is lately saying. 40% of a valueless, or at best a heavily devalued currency ain’t going to buy much. There may be no way out of present difficulties without greater difficulties resulting in a reordered world with calamity and chaos in the meantime. Currency wars, leading to real wars, etc,etc. It mightn’t get that bad, nobody knows, but you seem to have your head still in the sand. I fear we will be like headless chickens if real calamity breaks out, and won’t 3 more necessary austere budgets be calamitous enough of itself, without any further hiccups from abroad?

The point being a president of DM’s calibre could redefine, re-imagine, interpret, or at least help us navigate what we as a country are about in such tumultuous times. If nothing else, at least he wouldn’t be boring, he might give us a laugh, because that might be all we’d have at the end of the day.

Whatever you may say regarding the HL Burke interview, the polls gave the public’s opinion on that, and I bet his support wouldn’t be that much reduced in light of the last controversy.

I’m inclined to think that official Ireland is behind the curve on this issue, just as they have been with many other issues. The general public are a hell of a lot more sophisticated than what official Ireland likes to think they are. There just aren’t enough elected officials with even half the courage that he has, to give him the support he needs. Ireland’s loss, I suppose.

Well if you think of a middle aged man infatuated with a younger man who prefers chasing after younger guys again, then that is kinda funny alright.

MadsL · 05-08-2011 08:30AM

if you think of an internet poster infatuated with an older politician , then that is kinda sad alright.

n32 · 05-08-2011 08:52AM

acer1000 wrote: »

The point being a president of DM’s calibre could redefine, re-imagine, interpret, or at least help us navigate what we as a country are about in such tumultuous times. If nothing else, at least he wouldn’t be boring, he might give us a laugh, because that might be all we’d have at the end of the day.

Whatever you may say regarding the HL Burke interview, the polls gave the public’s opinion on that, and I bet his support wouldn’t be that much reduced in light of the last controversy.

I’m inclined to think that official Ireland is behind the curve on this issue, just as they have been with many other issues. The general public are a hell of a lot more sophisticated than what official Ireland likes to think they are. There just aren’t enough elected officials with even half the courage that he has, to give him the support he needs. Ireland’s loss, I suppose.

that is a ridiculous statement. if the country was in melt down as you said with soup kitchens on the streets of dublin and the euro having collapsed, do you honestly think people would give a **** what a pompous little intellectual like norris was telling us from his comfortable house in the phoenix park? come off it, he s not that great

anymore · 05-08-2011 08:59AM

n32 wrote: »

that is a ridiculous statement. if the country was in melt down as you said with soup kitchens on the streets of dublin and the euro having collapsed, do you honestly think people would give a **** what a pompous little intellectual like norris was telling us from his comfortable house in the phoenix park? come off it, he s not that great

Well theSenator has already told us that he wouldnt agree to a cut in salary because a President from a working class backfround might need the money and if I am right was there some suggestion of putting a gate in the square where he lived to keep it private ?

Pompey Magnus · 05-08-2011 09:11AM

anymore wrote: »

Well theSenator has already told us that he wouldnt agree to a cut in salary because a President from a working class backfround might need the money and if I am right was there some suggestion of putting a gate in the square where he lived to keep it private ?

That's true, he originally applied to prevent the plebs any access to North Great Georges Street by making it residents only, after that failed he attempted to gate the street off to traffic.

n32 · 05-08-2011 09:16AM

anymore wrote: »

Well theSenator has already told us that he wouldnt agree to a cut in salary because a President from a working class backfround might need the money and if I am right was there some suggestion of putting a gate in the square where he lived to keep it private ?

yerra, sure those comments were probably taken out of context by some reporter trying to stitch him up and sure in ancent greece putting a gate outside your property meant you were a philanthropist who wanted to help all the ordinary people:D

anymore · 05-08-2011 09:37AM

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

That's true, he originally applied to prevent the plebs any access to North Great Georges Street by making it residents only, after that failed he attempted to gate the street off to traffic.

And who in the media brought hat issue up in the last few weeks. One of the more disturbing issues around this whole affair has been the sychopantic cowardice of the mainstream irish media.
If Senator David Norris had been a Bishop D. Norris, what would the reaction have been ?
Well we all know the answer. Liberal Ireland doesnt exist, it is not that it died, but that it never existed.

InigoMontoya · 05-08-2011 10:24AM

acer1000 wrote: »

Say you were having a heart attack and there were a few possible available candidates to take you to the hospital. However, the route has many obstacles to do with traffic congestion, road works, one-way streets, etc. It’s best that you have a daring, courageous, maybe somebody with a quick intellect to take a calculated risk of going down that one-way street, because you really have no time to spare. In addition, for the role it would be best to have somebody who likes you enough, even loves you, to take on a risk for you, that he would even consider putting himself in danger.

Four of the possible candidates are each in their own way nice and safe, but the fifth guy fits the requirements outline above. Who do you go with? Wouldn’t you be a fool not to go with the guy because you just found out that that guy once gave a character reference to a guy who was convicted of a questionable offence in a questionable country, who had political affiliations that ran contrary to mainstream political stances of that country? That’s not even taking into account that the fifth guy put himself on the line out of love for this other guy. But then on further thought, you know that this guy has a track record of taking a stand out of principle regarding what he feels is right and proper.

Isn’t Ireland currently that heart patient?

As a country we are caught up in situation that we have been lead into by a bunch of dumbass, visionless, corrupt, unprincipled lying scum such as Ahern & Cowen. With an unhelpful international backdrop, Ireland is in a very precarious position. We may well see mainstream soup kitchens in Dublin, even if we don’t, we all know it’s not going to be a rosy picture for the next few years, at least. That’s why we need a head of state, who has a towering intellect, well read, principles for which we know he’s big enough to suffer for, a love of Ireland for which he clearly has. And just like in the manner of how he acted in the defence of that person he loved, we could expect the same with regard to the country he loves. Isn’t that just what we’re crying out for?

Safe, nice and mediocre is just no good, we deserve better.

Debate about legal age etc, is beside the point, there is no way that David Norris would condone rape. I think if we don’t get our public offices filled with people of Norris’s calibre, we are going to condemn our 15 yr olds and most of the rest of us to a fate and a future far worse than if we were actually raped.

acer1000 wrote: »

Soup kitchens could be a reality in Dublin if the euro collapses with the resulting chaos that would ensue. Read what David McWilliams is lately saying. 40% of a valueless, or at best a heavily devalued currency ain’t going to buy much. There may be no way out of present difficulties without greater difficulties resulting in a reordered world with calamity and chaos in the meantime. Currency wars, leading to real wars, etc,etc. It mightn’t get that bad, nobody knows, but you seem to have your head still in the sand. I fear we will be like headless chickens if real calamity breaks out, and won’t 3 more necessary austere budgets be calamitous enough of itself, without any further hiccups from abroad?

The point being a president of DM’s calibre could redefine, re-imagine, interpret, or at least help us navigate what we as a country are about in such tumultuous times. If nothing else, at least he wouldn’t be boring, he might give us a laugh, because that might be all we’d have at the end of the day.

First of all, I think you're exaggerating the role that any Irish president can play in alleviating our current situation.

Secondly, I think you're exaggerating (gushingly so, really) the calibre and stature of David Norris.

The reality is that his credibility has been undermined not only by his actions in the "Ezra letter" debacle, but also by his attitudes to underage sex, which he has failed to clarify to the satisfaction of many people. Perhaps he was a little unfortunate in that the Cloyne report/Kenny's criticism of the Vatican had made people particularly sensitive to this issue at the moment, but he has only himself to blame for the failure of his campaign.

Godge · 05-08-2011 03:45PM

MadsL wrote: »

He has? Did he make a statement on the matter? Did you alert the media?

Last I knew he wrote a letter. :rolleyes:

You are aware that Ezra Yizhak Nawi has said that he was assured by this boy that he was over 16.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/i-am-not-a-paedophile-says-norris-expartner-2839306.html

Ok, I will correct myself.

By persistently eulogising the concept of classical pedastry, by claiming that he may have liked to have been approached by an older man when a young boy, by abusing his position to seek clemency for his ex-partner who was convicted of statutory rape and finally by continuing in said relationship for a number of years after that conviction, Norris has condoned statutory rape indirectly through his actions and words. That clear enough for you?

As for the second point re the claim by Nawi that the boy said he was overage, that is a classic pathetic excuse used by abusers the world over. Did he deserve it the way he was dressed? Was he looking for it? Was he flashing? You know, quite a few priests have used the same excuses over the years. It is always the fault of the abused not the abuser.

Godge · 05-08-2011 03:52PM

acer1000 wrote: »

So, you would consider the roles of the 2 Marys as akin to gold trimmings and alloy wheels. They stretched that role and made the job more than anybody had previously conceived of what it could be. Likewise, DN was the only candidate who was capable of doing the same, in his own way, in very changed times.

How has such a docile attitude taken hold that nobody must speak up for fear of offending some entity that we perceive as greater than ourselves, even though there was never as much need to say what needs to be said, by somebody capable of saying it.

Soup kitchens could be a reality in Dublin if the euro collapses with the resulting chaos that would ensue. Read what David McWilliams is lately saying. 40% of a valueless, or at best a heavily devalued currency ain’t going to buy much. There may be no way out of present difficulties without greater difficulties resulting in a reordered world with calamity and chaos in the meantime. Currency wars, leading to real wars, etc,etc. It mightn’t get that bad, nobody knows, but you seem to have your head still in the sand. I fear we will be like headless chickens if real calamity breaks out, and won’t 3 more necessary austere budgets be calamitous enough of itself, without any further hiccups from abroad?

The point being a president of DM’s calibre could redefine, re-imagine, interpret, or at least help us navigate what we as a country are about in such tumultuous times. If nothing else, at least he wouldn’t be boring, he might give us a laugh, because that might be all we’d have at the end of the day.

Whatever you may say regarding the HL Burke interview, the polls gave the public’s opinion on that, and I bet his support wouldn’t be that much reduced in light of the last controversy.

I’m inclined to think that official Ireland is behind the curve on this issue, just as they have been with many other issues. The general public are a hell of a lot more sophisticated than what official Ireland likes to think they are. There just aren’t enough elected officials with even half the courage that he has, to give him the support he needs. Ireland’s loss, I suppose.

So official Ireland is behind the curve on this issue while the general public support the idea of pedersatry and 40-year olds having sex with 15-year old boys and girls. Really? Are you sure? We will be making saints of those Cloyne priests yet.

As for your dire warnings about calamity, why don't you build yourself a bunker and stock up in it. Don't forget David McWilliams was the man who wrote a book claiming credit for his brilliant idea of the bank bailout (Brian Lenihan chewing garlic in his kitchen) until he realised about a year later that it wasn't such a good idea after all. Keep listening to him.

anymore · 05-08-2011 04:51PM

InigoMontoya wrote: »

First of all, I think you're exaggerating the role that any Irish president can play in alleviating our current situation.

Secondly, I think you're exaggerating (gushingly so, really) the calibre and stature of David Norris.

The reality is that his credibility has been undermined not only by his actions in the "Ezra letter" debacle, but also by his attitudes to underage sex, which he has failed to clarify to the satisfaction of many people. Perhaps he was a little unfortunate in that the Cloyne report/Kenny's criticism of the Vatican had made people particularly sensitive to this issue at the moment, but he has only himself to blame for the failure of his campaign.

You make a good point in relation to E Kenny to which I would add, if a conservative catholic taoiseach, from a rural constituency, can step up and denounce the Vatican, is it asking too much to ask both prominent liberals and people prominent in the gay community to at least address seriously some of the many questions arising from this whole affair ?

Is David Norris Toast?

Comments