David Quinn v Ivana Bacik on Pat Kenny this morning

glic71rods46t0 · 09-07-2012 09:53AM #1

Just listened to David Quinn (Irish Independent) debate the issue of gay marriage with Ivana Bacik of the Labour Party.
I was very impressed with Quinns points. He won the debate hands down and nailed Bacik over her campaign for gender quotas in politics and the implication of her pro gay marriage position which essentially sees no need for a gender balance when it comes to parenting.
She just had no answer to it despite coming across as a lecturing school teacher. Anyone else listen to it?

DrumSteve · 09-07-2012 09:55AM

bgwovl1f0948sy wrote: »

Just listened to David Quinn (Irish Independent) debate the issue of gay marriage with Ivana Bacik of the Labour Party.
I was very impressed with Quinns points. He won the debate hands down and nailed Bacik over her campaign for gender quotas in politics and the implication of her pro gay marriage position which essentially sees no need for a gender balance when it comes to parenting.
She just had no answer to it despite cominga cross as a lecturing school teacher. Anyone else listen to it?

Is it online yet? Not a fan of Bacik to be honest.

glic71rods46t0 · 09-07-2012 09:57AM

I dont know if its online yet - I listened to it live. And yeah, Bacik is not very likeable to be honest

Dave! · 09-07-2012 10:04AM

Heard it too, and thought Quinn probably won the debate also.

I thought that Pat was a bit tougher on Bacik than on Quinn.

Poor Leo Varadkar in the next segment wasn't sure if he was allowed to give his opinion

(he said in the end that he would probably vote Yes)

byronbay2 · 09-07-2012 10:13AM

David Quinn nailed Ivana Bacik?? Aargh - there's an image that will be in my mind for the rest of the day!!!:(

Dirk Gently · 09-07-2012 10:14AM

Bacik does more harm than good tbh, there's a reason why no one votes for her. Didn't hear the debate but it wouldn't be difficult to catch out Bacik. Gender quotas are a good way of catching out someone who believes in gender quotas. Sounds like a good ambush.

glic71rods46t0 · 09-07-2012 10:17AM

Dave! wrote: »

Heard it too, and thought Quinn probably won the debate also.

I thought that Pat was a bit tougher on Bacik than on Quinn.

Poor Leo Varadkar in the next segment wasn't sure if he was allowed to give his opinion (he said in the end that he would probably vote Yes)

On reflection I agree with you, Pat probably was tougher on Bacik. I sense that he is personally against gay marriage (not that that should be allowed to influence his refereeing of the debate).
I think that Pat didnt like Bacik's preaching and forceful style. He made a good point on a "hierarchy" of parenting that Bacik didnt deal with effectively - she just tried to side step it and it weakened her position but I think it was Quinn who landed the sucker punch!

iptba · 09-07-2012 12:58PM

bgwovl1f0948sy wrote: »

Just listened to David Quinn (Irish Independent) debate the issue of gay marriage with Ivana Bacik of the Labour Party.
I was very impressed with Quinns points. He won the debate hands down and nailed Bacik over her campaign for gender quotas in politics and the implication of her pro gay marriage position which essentially sees no need for a gender balance when it comes to parenting.

I'm not convinced Ivana Bacik really believes much in the importance of gender balance, in that, if there are few or no men on a board, etc, that she would have a major problem with it.

Fenian Army · 09-07-2012 01:03PM

Bacik is probably the least likable senator there is... and thats saying something. I've met her a number of times and she always come across as arrogant and smarmy.

This comes across strongly in media appearances especially when she is under pressure.

I find myself instantly sympathetic to the other side... despite agreeing with her on lots of things (gender quotas etc).

Generally she is an asset to the "other side" in debates.

K-9 · 09-07-2012 01:21PM

Fenian Army wrote: »

I find myself instantly sympathetic to the other side... despite agreeing with her on lots of things (gender quotas etc).

David Quinn is probably about the only person that would make me sympathetic towards Ivana!

Zulu · 09-07-2012 01:23PM

no sign of it on RTE yet, anyone know anywhere else it might be?

Fenian Army · 09-07-2012 01:25PM

K-9 wrote: »

David Quinn is probably about the only person that would make me sympathetic towards Ivana!

Saw a funny comment on p.ie... throw in twink and you have the guest list from hell

jonniebgood1 · 09-07-2012 03:15PM

I thought Pat did play more of a part in the debate than a neutral host should. If Quinn was struggling he took up his points and agreed with them. I would be wary of Quinns controlling wishes and that came through in the debate also. Actually both participants have a way of making you agree with the other side of the argument when they speak. Is'nt Quinn part of the ultra conservative IONA institute-

The Iona Institute promotes the place of marriage and religion in society. We defend the continued existence of publicly-funded denominational schools. We also promote freedom of conscience and religion.

The Iona Institute is headed by religious and social affairs commentator, David Quinn. http://ionainstitute.ie/index.php?id=75

Enough said- he as leader of IONA is in favour of segregation of children from 4 years old.

iptba · 09-07-2012 03:21PM

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Enough said- he as leader of IONA is in favour of segregation of children from 4 years old.

I've heard some feminists argue it would be better for girls if they had single-sex education. And many people of all sorts* seem to make this choice in Ireland.

* well, mainly Catholics because others don't generally have the choice, but I'm not sure it's a choice that would be restricted to this group otherwise, or at least I'm not sure it's a choice necessarily inspired by the parents' Catholic views - I think it's more they believe it might lead to more L. Cert points.

spank_inferno · 09-07-2012 04:08PM

I agree, Quinn shaded it.

Bacik was stumped on the gender quotas in politics vs parenting point.

However the best moment came later when Pat asked Leo V his opinion and he was not sure if he was allowed to do so

daltonmd · 09-07-2012 04:18PM

Fenian Army wrote: »

Bacik is probably the least likable senator there is... and thats saying something. I've met her a number of times and she always come across as arrogant and smarmy.

This comes across strongly in media appearances especially when she is under pressure.

I find myself instantly sympathetic to the other side... despite agreeing with her on lots of things (gender quotas etc).

Generally she is an asset to the "other side" in debates.

I think that given the selection of political females we have in this country, she is one of the better ones, actually I am trying to see who comes across better.

Claire Daly?
Lucinda Creighton?
Averil Power?

secman · 09-07-2012 04:35PM

I listened to the debate live, when you get totally opposing far right and far left people debating such topics you can get switched off by their extreme views. I would prefer to hear a debate by middle ground people on both sides, would be a less "preachy" type debate.

On a personal note there was a time when I would have vehemently opposed same sex marriage but I now have a beautiful grandson by my lovely daughter who happens to be in a "same sex" releationship. I have copped on big time, God the views I used to have ............

Secman

iptba · 09-07-2012 10:11PM

This point doesn't relate to gay marriage specifically: Something I noticed was Senator Bacik's objection to the suggestion that there might be a hierarchy in the circumstances that are best for a child to be brought up in. She seemed to be suggesting (at least for some of the interview) she didn't want it to be discussed as it might be insulting to other parents or children. Maybe her stance was a bit more nuanced that that at other stages (I didn't fully catch an aside from her) but this approach is something I don't like i.e. we shouldn't discuss something because it might insult somebody or, more particularly, your opinion is incorrect or shouldn't be said because it might insult somebody (rather than the more important point, the merits or otherwise of the points raised).

I have no idea whether the research shows outcomes for gay parents are as good as, or even better than, two biological parents. But I think discussing the best circumstances for a child to be raised seems an important part of a discussion like this. And it seems reasonable to talk about a hierarchy to at least some extent i.e. that research might show some average trends, some of which might show some pronounced differences e.g. that being with raised by your two biological parents in a loving relationship gives better results on average than, say, being raised by a single grandparent. Anyway, my general point is that I don't like discussions being stifled. Thankfully anonymous internet discussion boards mean this is more difficult to do.

poeticseraphim · 10-07-2012 04:51AM

iptba wrote: »

This point doesn't relate to gay marriage specifically: Something I noticed was Senator Bacik's objection to the suggestion that there might be a hierarchy in the circumstances that are best for a child to be brought up in. She seemed to be suggesting (at least for some of the interview) she didn't want it to be discussed as it might be insulting to other parents or children. Maybe her stance was a bit more nuanced that that at other stages (I didn't fully catch an aside from her) but this approach is something I don't like i.e. we shouldn't discuss something because it might insult somebody or, more particularly, your opinion is incorrect or shouldn't be said because it might insult somebody (rather than the more important point, the merits or otherwise of the points raised).

I have no idea whether the research shows outcomes for gay parents are as good as, or even better than, two biological parents. But I think discussing the best circumstances for a child to be raised seems an important part of a discussion like this. And it seems reasonable to talk about a hierarchy to at least some extent i.e. that research might show some average trends, some of which might show some pronounced differences e.g. that being with raised by your two biological parents in a loving relationship gives better results on average than, say, being raised by a single grandparent. Anyway, my general point is that I don't like discussions being stifled. Thankfully anonymous internet discussion boards mean this is more difficult to do.

Not all people who marry want to become parents. It is a separate debate.

Also gay people must adopt or use some artificial means and can currently do so but must go through a single adoption rather than a joint one. Marriage laws have not stopped people having children ..especially for women...but they do make it so that it must be a single adoption..one parent adopts and the other is not considered a parent legally.

So not being able to marry does not affect whether they have children or not.

If you wanted to prevent gay couples having children you would have to address current adoption laws and regulation regarding reproduction using artificial means. Those are the only laws affecting whether they have kids.

This is about gay marriage.

It would enable joint adoptions together (Irish law does not allow non married couples straight or gay to adopt together ..but one parent can adopt as a singole parent the other parent has no legal rights though ) they already can adopt ..it would just make stable probably and give rights to both parents..

But not all gay people who marry want kids

Legislate on the issues separately
Stopping one does not stop the other ..nor does allowing one allow the other
I support gay marriage and gay adoption btw

Anyway we have single parent families and single parent adoptions...so i dont know how you can argue that we enforce gender balance for gay people not not straight people

And
'Sexual orientation of parents has no bearing on children's emotional, behavioral or psychosocial adjustment, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.'

Studies show that children raised by gay parents are similar in emotional health statistically as children raised by heterosexual parents.

poeticseraphim · 10-07-2012 04:54AM

Interesting...the rest of the world is changing

A few days ago

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18690348

France gives gay couples the right to marry, adopt, etc, equally.

Pride Fighter · 10-07-2012 05:13AM

David Quinn belongs in the stone age with the rest of his fanatical ideas. He is a danger to society, a homophobic misogynist that wants women back in the kitchen and non-Catholics sent to a gulag.

aggresso · 10-07-2012 08:48AM

bgwovl1f0948sy wrote: »

Just listened to David Quinn (Irish Independent) debate the issue of gay marriage with Ivana Bacik of the Labour Party.
I was very impressed with Quinns points. He won the debate hands down and nailed Bacik over her campaign for gender quotas in politics and the implication of her pro gay marriage position which essentially sees no need for a gender balance when it comes to parenting.
She just had no answer to it despite coming across as a lecturing school teacher. Anyone else listen to it?

Sometimes it's very effective to come across as a school teacher, particularly when your debating partner leaves himself open to being portrayed as a rude teenager.

Judge for yourselves, people:

http://www.rte.ie/radio/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=9%3A3339832%3A133%3A%3A

Kinski · 10-07-2012 11:57AM

Did I just listen to the same debate as the OP? Quinn was atrocious, entirely devoting his opening statements to strawmaning, and baselessly asserting that marriage should be/is primarily by about the rights of children, despite also acknowledging that there were marriages in which children play no part - how can he reconcile those positions? The gender quota point flows from that faulty assertion, and is anyway, as Bacik points out, a comparison between institutions which are in no way alike.

On the topic of gay marriage more generally, an opinion poll by Red C taken in February placed support for a constitutional recognition of same-sex unions at 73%. This in Ireland, where less than 20yrs ago a proposal to legalise divorce just squeaked through...conservatives have lost this one already; IMO it's just a matter of time before gay couples enjoy the same rights as heterosexual ones.

iptba · 10-07-2012 01:15PM

poeticseraphim wrote: »

Anyway we have single parent families and single parent adoptions...so i dont know how you can argue that we enforce gender balance for gay people not not straight people

This is not an issue I follow much. I would have thought social workers when deciding which is a more secure environment, would choose a married couple over a single person in general.

The Corinthian · 10-07-2012 01:38PM

Bacik came out badly in that discussion not because Quinn had the better overall argument, but because of flaws in Bacik's own views that were all too easy to expose.

Gender quotas as a form of positive discrimination are designed to essentially redress an imbalance where one gender is grossly underrepresented. If you support gender quotas on this basis, you are setting yourself up for where gender quotas can end up being employed in ways you would prefer weren't.

And that's where he got her, not on the strength of his own position but the weakness of hers.

poeticseraphim · 10-07-2012 06:27PM

iptba wrote: »

This is not an issue I follow much. I would have thought social workers when deciding which is a more secure environment, would choose a married couple over a single person in general.

You would be wrong.
Not all the time ....about 1/5 of adoptions in Ireland are single parents..i think thats only Irish children not foreign adoptions.

As far as i know this is the situation...although correct me please if anyone knows differently
Irish children are nigh on impossible to adopt ...all couples and singles are usually talking about a foreign adoption.

Plenty of single people adopt in Ireland....they go to their HSE foreign adoption office to start the process.
As far as i know they must satify the criteria for adoption here in Ireland after for it to be recognised.
If adopting an Irish child unless the child is related to the couple or single person they must prove it is in the inetersts of the child to an adoption board.

A lot of the time the child may have been in the care of that single person or couple for a long time due to a family death or whatever.

There decision is based on that child and that situation....

They have no agendas other than the welfare of that child....

Adoption takes years and they will choose the best situation.

And they are happy for single people to foster....infact the system would probably be in a worse state without single foster parents with 6000 kids in care right now.

The only goal is to do whats best for the child...if a board feels putting a child with a single parent rather than a couple is i the best interests of that child they will do so and visa versa

Foreign adoption is different though ...and it is the most common form of adoption in Ireland.

But they actually don't go in with any other agenda than current legisation and what is best in each situation and individuals...and it is a board that makes the decision.

iptba · 10-07-2012 06:42PM

poeticseraphim wrote: »

iptba wrote:

I would have thought social workers when deciding which is a more secure environment, would choose a married couple over a single person in general.

You would be wrong.
Not all the time ....about 1/5 of adoptions in Ireland are single parents..i think thats only Irish children not foreign adoptions.

As far as i know this is the situation...although correct me please if anyone knows differently
Irish children are nigh on impossible to adopt ...all couples and singles are usually talking about a foreign adoption.

Plenty of single people adopt in Ireland....they go to their HSE foreign adoption office to start the process.
As far as i know they must satify the criteria for adoption here in Ireland after for it to be recognised.
If adopting an Irish child unless the child is related to the couple or single person they must prove it is in the inetersts of the child to an adoption board.

A lot of the time the child may have been in the care of that single person or couple for a long time due to a family death or whatever.

There decision is based on that child and that situation....

They have no agendas other than the welfare of that child....

Adoption takes years and they will choose the best situation.

And they are happy for single people to foster....infact the system would probably be in a worse state without single foster parents with 6000 kids in care right now.

The only goal is to do whats best for the child...if a board feels putting a child with a single parent rather than a couple is i the best interests of that child they will do so and visa versa

Foreign adoption is different though ...and it is the most common form of adoption in Ireland.

But they actually don't go in with any other agenda than current legisation and what is best in each situation and individuals...and it is a board that makes the decision.

You seem to be answering a different question: who actually currently adopts. That's not the same thing as whether if the social workers/those on the adoption board had a "clean case" (i.e. where there was nobody who had previously cared for the child interested in adopting them), whether they would be more likely to choose a married couple over a single person.

(But thanks for taking the time to give information)

RedRightHand · 10-07-2012 07:44PM

Pride Fighter wrote: »

David Quinn belongs in the stone age with the rest of his fanatical ideas. He is a danger to society, a homophobic misogynist that wants women back in the kitchen and non-Catholics sent to a gulag.

David Quinn's views on same sex marriage are no different to Peter Thatchell's views on it about a decade ago. The campaign for marriage rights is more about routing out dissenters than equality.

Pedant · 10-07-2012 07:45PM

If you want to win a debate on marriage equality, you don't mix gay marriage in with militant feminism and gender quotas. That only makes moderates uncomfortable.

If you want to a debate in marriage equality, let it be about marriage equality and nothing else.

I for one am vehemently against gender quotas, but at the same time I vehemently support marriage equality and equal rights for same-sex couples in the adoption process. I don't like the terms "gay marriage" and "gay adoption". In a sense, calling it "gay marriage" makes it look as something different to ordinary marriage, which it isn't and shouldn't.

poeticseraphim · 11-07-2012 12:25AM

iptba wrote: »

You seem to be answering a different question: who actually currently adopts. That's not the same thing as whether if the social workers/those on the adoption board had a "clean case" (i.e. where there was nobody who had previously cared for the child interested in adopting them), whether they would be more likely to choose a married couple over a single person.

(But thanks for taking the time to give information)

It would depend on other factors earning ability and economic socio status....pyschological assement etc...i am not saying that relationship staus would play a part but it might not be the most important factor at all. If a couple are smokers .etc and a single parent is not ...it might chnage the way each case wouuld be processed giving the single person preference.

But it actually does not work that way...there are so few Irish babies to adopt you would be waiting years and years and still possibly not get to adopt either as a single parent or a couple.

The vast amount of adoptions are foreign adoptions...and there is a different ratio of children to parents...especially for disabled or older children...it might be a little more challenging than for a couple..but once they get through the hoops i don't know that is a deciding factor..

China for instance limits the number of dossiers it accepts eah year from single parents but if it accepts a dossier then the application goes through as normal

Ethiopia is happy to accept single parent applications as they have many orphans..likewise with Guatamala are very single parent friendly...
Foreignadoptions are most common and Finances are really the deciding factor..it can be expensive...and you have to understand..there are a lot of orphans in the world...

For foreign adoptions to be recognised here...the board has to approve you and be convinced it's in the child's best interests. But in a foreign adoption case they cannot offer a couple the child if a single parent has financed it so the orphaned child would go back ..it becomes about simply whether or not they meet the criteria to be a fit parent etc

There may very few Irish child adoptions per year....but 6000 in foster care ...and thousands of orphans abroad .....
In reality adoption boards spend most of their time simply recognising foreign adoptions where no matter who the parent is it is them or the child goes back home....thats the reality. So if they feel the adoptive parent is a safe suitable parent and background checks are done etc then they recognise the adoption as far as i know...there is no option to have a diff couple ..it's that person or nothing....it's usually all done in advance

Finance is the real clincher. And being a safe suitable parent.And if the country is hague convention complient.

Most countries will happily adopt to single women and there may not be that long a waiting list....however single men or gay men often not ..for obvious reasons...although some say its a firewall against gay adoption ..

Again i hope i got all of this right. Anyone correct me if i am wrong.

But the vast majority of adoptions are foreign ...it is a choice of waiting years and years here with no garantee or months with an intercountry adoption. But whoever inititates the foreign adoption is the only choice applicant the Irish board will see.. so it's approve them really or don't approve them and stop the adoption if the person is not a fit parent.. rather than choose..

MadsL · 11-07-2012 12:38AM

I look forward to the replay of this interview in 20 years, when David Quinn's opinions will be viewed with the same distaste as watching this interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFA8V61m1Xc

David Quinn v Ivana Bacik on Pat Kenny this morning

Comments