nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Lolek Ltd, Trading as 'The Iona Institute'

lazygal

Does anyone know anything about this organisation? Where it is funded from and by whom? Who runs it? Why it gets such a platform? I've been digging around a bit but its very difficult to find out anything about it.

I'm also mystified as to why David Quinn appears so often representing a relatively new body which seems to be largly self-appointed and why he is allowed such a platform.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

pauldla

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

All irrelevant.

Marriage in our society is between a man and a woman.

Not irrelevant at all. Marriage in society is a contruct of society, as nicely illustrated by Bannasidhe above. Why should gay marriage be forbidden?

Doctor Strange

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

The devaluation of the special position marriage has in our society...

Britney Spears and high school friend Jason Allen Alexander, 2 days; Dennis Rodman and Carmen Electra, 9 days; Gregg Allman and Cher, 9 days; Rudolph Valentino and Jean Acker, 6 hours; Robert Evans and Catherine Oxenberg, 12 days; Jeremy Thomas and Drew Barrymore, 29 days; Ethel Merman and Ernest Borgnine, 38 days; Janet Jackson and James DeBarge, 4 months.

Yeah, it's gay marriage that will destroy the sanctity of marriage :rolleyes:

NuMarvel

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

The devaluation of the special position marriage has in our society...

Marriage is special by way of the commitment it symbolises and the rights, protections, and responsibilities it brings to those who makes those commitments. None of those characteristics change when gay couples have the right to marry.

Silvio.Dante

lazygal wrote: »

What special position?

As enshrined in our Constitution...

Silvio.Dante

koth wrote: »

Not irrelevant at all as you you stated that marriage is an institution between a man and woman with no additional qualifiers.

Correct...

NuMarvel

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

As enshrined in our Constitution...

And where does the Constitution state that marriage is a man and a woman?

Bannasidhe

ironingbored wrote: »

Do you have a blog (i.e. something we can share externally on this)?

Sorry, no- a blog would be another procrastination tool and I need another one of them like a hole in the head.

A lot of this is in a book called Women in Early Modern Ireland (eds) Mac Curtain M and O'Dowd M.

Also in From Kings to Warlords by Simms, Katherine (very very academic work!)

Interestingly Margaret Mac Curtain who along with Ken Nicholls lead the charge in discussing what Gaelic Irish society was really like (as opposed to the nationalist Catholic crap we are taught) is a Dominican nun and an all round very cool person.

Good bio of her here http://www.wic.org/bio/mmaccurt.htm

Delirium

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Correct...

So why did you initially state that the post was irrelevant?

Bannasidhe

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

As enshrined in our Constitution...

Since when do you give a flying about what is in our Constitution?

And no - it does not specify marriage is between a man and a woman.

eyescreamcone

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

As enshrined in our Constitution...

Big fan of the constitution when it suits ya

robindch

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

They want it all and want it now while not giving damn for the cost to society.

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

The devaluation of the special position marriage has in our society...

Can you also please (a) explain what you mean by the word "special" in the sentence above and (b) explain how extending marriage to gay couples "devalues" it?

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Marriage in Ireland and indeed the vast majority of the Western World has always between a Man and a Woman.

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

All irrelevant.

Silvio -- the posts by oldrnwisr and Bannasidhe are, unfortunately for you, highly relevant since they convincingly rebut the unsourced and completely inaccurate point you made.

In dialectic debate, when a point has been rebutted, the person who made the original claim is expected either to refute the rebuttal, or concede that the original claim was wrong.

Which one will you do?

lazygal

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

As enshrined in our Constitution...

Can you quote the relevant article on heterosexual marriage in the 1937 constitution?

Silvio.Dante

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Big fan of the constitution when it suits ya

Of course...

eyescreamcone

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Of course...

Indeed...

lazygal

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Of course...

You'll have no trouble finding the reference to heterosexual marriage so.

Silvio.Dante

NuMarvel wrote: »

And where does the Constitution state that marriage is a man and a woman?

Article 41 states quite clearly the basis of marriage in thie country. An Adam and Steve marriage would be incompatibale... Don't take my word for it. Ho Chi Quinn agrees with me...:)

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0710/328518-gay-marriage-referendum/

eyescreamcone

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Article 41 states quite clearly the basis of marriage in thie country. An Adam and Steve marriage would be incompatibale... Don't take my word for it. Ho Chi Quinn agrees with me...:)

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0710/328518-gay-marriage-referendum/

If gay marriage requires a referendum and if that referendum was passed...
Would you accept the result???

History would suggest you might not

Corkfeen

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Article 41 states quite clearly the basis of marriage in thie country. An Adam and Steve marriage would be incompatibale... Don't take my word for it. Ho Chi Quinn agrees with me...:)

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0710/328518-gay-marriage-referendum/

It still doesn't specify heterosexual. It would be going to a referendum and going by all the recent polls, it would be likely to pass when it does eventually go to a referendum. Would this be another one of those scenarios where you would find it necessary to ignore the will of the people and referendum results would be lobbed into the bin?

You've accused people that don't agree with you of being liberal fascists(and communists). You have no arguments against same sex marriage and your only point is that we should maintain the status quo. Slavery, civil rights, the bans on sodomy, contraceptives etc would all still be present in different western nations if we ran by your idea of rule(just a sampler). I'd prefer for evil fedora wearing liberalistas to attempt to influence policy than basking in the status quo. Society should adapt and grow rather than neglecting citizens who should have rights equal to yours or mine.

NuMarvel

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Article 41 states quite clearly the basis of marriage in thie country. An Adam and Steve marriage would be incompatibale... Don't take my word for it. Ho Chi Quinn agrees with me...:)

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0710/328518-gay-marriage-referendum/

My Constitution must be different to yours. What parts of A.41 enshrine marriage as being between a man and a woman?

Bannasidhe

NuMarvel wrote: »

My Constitution must be different to yours. What parts of A.41 enshrine marriage as being between a man and a woman?

Article 41

1. 1° The State recognises the Family as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.

2° The State, therefore, guarantees to protect the Family in its constitution and authority, as the necessary basis of social order and as indispensable to the welfare of the Nation and the State.

2. 1° In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.

2° The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.

3. 1° The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack.

http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/attached_files/html%20files/Constitution%20of%20Ireland%20(Eng)Nov2004.htm

Where does it specify the composition of 'the family'?

Where does it state marriage is only between a man and a woman?

More importantly - why am I being obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of my duties in the home????

Wages For Housework - It's my Constitutional Right!

lazygal

I gotta take a constitutional challenge. I'll be neglecting my duties in the home after my maternity leave ends in a few weeks. Any barristers care to take the case?

Silvio.Dante

In the immortal words of Albert Reynolds... "Thats women for you..."

lazygal

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

In the immortal words of Albert Reynolds... "Thats women for you..."

What's that got to do with the discussion?

Bannasidhe

lazygal wrote: »

What's that got to do with the discussion?

I suspect that Silvio is looking to be banned again...saves him having to deal with all those awkward facts.

ShooterSF

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Well the Right to Travel is there for anyone who wishes to avail of it...:)

Great. And when Ireland legislates for same sex marriage and abortion we'll have a nice big leaving party for ya! If you're heading for Asia don't forget to bring sunscreen.

ShooterSF

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Indeed. Prior to the Conquest (completed in the mid 17th century) Gaelic Ireland was a highly secular society where marriage was seen as a one of several options to ensure allies. It was political.....

I know your post is hardly going to change Silvio's mind or anyone like them but I do hope you continue to make such posts. Nothing like a free history lesson you weren't expecting during a Saturday afternoon!

Sarky

*peeks into thread*

Oh, Silvio is being proven incorrect on everything again, and he's resorting to asinine insults and running away from facts instead of examining his faulty belief. Back to my weekend away, then.

*cracks open a beer*

opinion guy

Sarky wrote: »

*peeks into thread*

Oh, Silvio is being proven incorrect on everything again, and he's resorting to asinine insults and running away from facts instead of examining his faulty belief. Back to my weekend away, then.

*cracks open a beer*

mmmmmm........beeeerrrr............

lazygal

Sarky wrote: »

*peeks into thread*

Oh, Silvio is being proven incorrect on everything again, and he's resorting to asinine insults and running away from facts instead of examining his faulty belief. Back to my weekend away, then.

*cracks open a beer*

Crack me one there too please.

Silvio.Dante

ShooterSF wrote: »

Great. And when Ireland legislates for same sex marriage and abortion.

I wouldn't bank on it dude...:)