Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Iona vs Panti

1…2122242627…82

Comments

  • #692
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    BB, calling a gay relationship "playing house" does this or does this not meet your definition of a homophobic comment?


  • #693
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,029 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    ???

    How can you make such a judgement? What did he say at all against gay people? He is speaking for the rights of orphaned children as an orphaned child.

    He is campaigning against gay adoption. He makes a generalisation that adoptive children all want a mother and father. What about gay/lesbian children? Why shouldn't the child be allowed decide if they want to be adopted by a same-sex couple?

    The guy in the video is taking his own preference and saying everyone has to agree with him, by virtue of not allowing gay adoption.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #694
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    SW wrote: »
    He is campaigning against gay adoption. He makes a generalisation that adoptive children all want a mother and father. What about gay/lesbian children? Why shouldn't the child be allowed decide if they want to be adopted by a same-sex couple?

    The guy in the video is taking his own preference and saying everyone has to agree with him, by virtue of not allowing gay adoption.

    Your inability to quote him on ANYTHING that he said that is homophobic goes a long way to prove my point.

    Which was "People can be opposed to gay marriage for reasons that are logical in their opinion and it can have nothing to do with any homophobia."


  • #695
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Your inability to quote him on ANYTHING that he said that is homophobic goes a long way to prove my point.

    Which was "People can be opposed to gay marriage for reasons that are logical in their opinion and it can have nothing to do with any homophobia."


    Serial killers murder repeatedly because its logical In their opinion. Doesn't make it right.


  • #696
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    BB, calling a gay relationship "playing house" does this or does this not meet your definition of a homophobic comment?
    Yes, it is IMO mildly homophobic term, more patronising than anything else, but in the interests of accuracy, fairness and balance the comment needs to be put into context.

    Waters was writing about a gay father of a child who had been denied by the guardians and the courts of access to his own child in favour of a lesbian couple. He didn't describe ALL lesbian couples in this way but this particular couple and child relative to the actual father of the child.


  • Advertisement
  • #697
    swampgas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,615 ✭✭✭swampgas


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Your inability to quote him on ANYTHING that he said that is homophobic goes a long way to prove my point.

    It's more that it's that you seem to be oblivious to the sometimes subtle, sometimes not-so-subtle homophobia expressed in JW's writing and speeches.

    Are you expecting a quote where he says something like "Round up the gays and burn them" ?


  • #698
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    david75 wrote: »
    Serial killers murder repeatedly because its logical In their opinion. Doesn't make it right.
    Why are you comparing this formerly orphaned child to a serial killer for their opinion?


  • #699
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,029 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Your inability to quote him on ANYTHING that he said that is homophobic goes a long way to prove my point.

    Which was "People can be opposed to gay marriage for reasons that are logical in their opinion and it can have nothing to do with any homophobia."

    he is in favour of barring homosexuals from adopting because he wants a mother and father. That means both prospective gay parents (and children who want to be adopted by them) are discriminated agaonst.

    Its based entirely on his personal preference rather than the well being of the children.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #700
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    SW wrote: »
    he is in favour of barring homosexuals from adopting because he wants a mother and father. That means both prospective gay parents (and children who want to be adopted by them) are discriminated agaonst.

    Its based entirely on his personal preference rather than the well being of the children.
    His motive is for the good of the child, which he makes very clear. How is this homophobic? To want the state to do what is best for orphans in their opinion?


  • #701
    Links234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,944 ✭✭✭✭Links234


    A lot of what's being lost in the "gay adoption" discussion is that as it stands, for the great many gay couples who are already raising children, one of those parents is from the state's standpoint is in effect a stranger to their own children.


  • Advertisement
  • #702
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,029 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    His motive is for the good of the child, which he makes very clear. How is this homophobic? To want the state to do what is best for orphans in their opinion?

    so a child being raised by a biological parent and gay parent shouldn't be allowed to be adopted by the partner? How is that in the childs best interest?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #703
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    SW wrote: »
    so a child being raised by a biological parent and gay parent shouldn't be allowed to be adopted by the partner? How is that in the childs best interest?
    Not sure what you are talking about so I'll just rephrase the question.

    If this kid, who was orphaned and adopted into a husband and wife family thinks the best environment for a fellow orphan to be raised in is an environment with both a mother and father how is this homophobic, as you've already labelled him?


  • #704
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,850 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Yes, it is IMO mildly homophobic term...
    I guess, based on your utter insistence on applying a specific dictionary definition, mild homophobia is a mildly extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people.


  • #705
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,228 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Links234 wrote: »
    A lot of what's being lost in the "gay adoption" discussion is that as it stands, for the great many gay couples who are already raising children, one of those parents is from the state's standpoint is in effect a stranger to their own children.
    And also that the state is disgracefully harming that childs right to have a legal relationship with both his or her parents

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #706
    kylith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,739 ✭✭✭✭kylith


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    His motive is for the good of the child, which he makes very clear. How is this homophobic? To want the state to do what is best for orphans in their opinion?

    His motive is for the good of himself; he wants a mother and a father, but it may not be the best choice for other children. If the choice is between an excellent home with a gay couple and an adequate home with a straight then surely the logical choice is the excellent home, provided that the child is happy to go there.


  • #707
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,029 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Not sure what you are talking about so I'll just rephrase the question.

    If this kid, who was orphaned and adopted into a husband and wife family thinks the best environment for a fellow orphan to be raised in is an environment with both a mother and father how is this homophobic, as you've already labelled him?

    I labelled him homophobic because he doesn't want gays to be able to adopt. He can think what he wants, but once he supports discriminating against homosexuals then he is behaving in a homophobic manner.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #708
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    kylith wrote: »
    His motive is for the good of himself; he wants a mother and a father, but it may not be the best choice for other children. If the choice is between an excellent home with a gay couple and an adequate home with a straight then surely the logical choice is the excellent home, provided that the child is happy to go there.
    Yes, I agree with you on the last part FWIW though this is just both our opinions. Why should he be labelled and demonised for not sharing our opinion? He only thinks that for an orphan to have best chance in life then they should be raised by both a mother and a father. He is putting the child before the "parents", how is this in any way homophobic?


  • #709
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    SW wrote: »
    I labelled him homophobic because he doesn't want gays to be able to adopt. He can think what he wants, but once he supports discriminating against homosexuals then he is behaving in a homophobic manner.
    No, lets not beat around the bush, he cannot "think what he wants". You labelled him with a loaded term in a knee-jerk response by just listening to him speak for 5 minutes.

    All this is despite you being unable to quote him on a SINGLE THING that he said that is homophobic.


  • #710
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I guess, based on your utter insistence on applying a specific dictionary definition, mild homophobia is a mildly extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people.
    I think you might be confusing me with someone else. I haven't done this.


  • #711
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,029 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    No, lets not beat around the bush, he cannot "think what he wants". You labelled him with a loaded term in a knee-jerk response by just listening to him speak for 5 minutes.
    he is homophobic because he actively campaigns against gay adoption because he feels that man and woman is best for everyone.
    All this is despite you being unable to quote him on a SINGLE THING that he said that is homophobic.
    feel free to explain where i have misrepresented what he said in the video.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Advertisement
  • #712
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    SW wrote: »
    he is homophobic because he actively campaigns against gay adoption because he feels that man and woman is best for everyone.
    No. Let us be accurate. He feels it is better for the adopted children. So how is this "homophobic"?
    SW wrote: »
    feel free to explain where i have misrepresented what he said in the video.
    I've asked you to quote him on he said that could be considered "homophobic". Not an unreasonable request considering your accusation is based solely on his words within that 5 minute speech.


  • #713
    Doctor DooM
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 25,872 Mod ✭✭✭✭Doctor DooM


    SW wrote: »
    he is homophobic because he actively campaigns against gay adoption because he feels that man and woman is best for everyone.

    feel free to explain where i have misrepresented what he said in the video.

    What's the name of that type of apologetics argument where you don't have any intention of trying to win an argument, you just try to draw by focusing on an impossible to prove but ultimately irrelevant minute point?


  • #714
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,029 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    No. Let us be accurate. He feels it is better for the adopted children. So how is this "homophobic"?
    I never said that it was.
    I've asked you to quote him on he said that could be considered "homophobic". Not an unreasonable request considering your accusation is based solely on his words within that 5 minute speech.

    why are you dismissing what I've given as my reason?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • #715
    SpaceTime
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,088 ✭✭✭SpaceTime


    A lot of kids are raised in non-conventional homes anyway and seem to turn out just fine.

    Same kind of arguments were being made to take kids away from single parents in the past as are being made about gay adoption now.

    Life doesn't conform to the a 1950s white picket fences idealised conservative society. It's a LOT more complicated.


  • #716
    Obliq
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,371 ✭✭✭Obliq


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    People can be opposed to gay marriage for reasons that are logical in their opinion and it can have nothing to do with any homophobia.

    This is what everyone seems to be ignoring and instead would rather make this a thought crime.

    "and they would like it to have nothing to do with any homophobia" is perhaps a more reasoned way of putting someone's irrational to most (but logical to them) opposition to gay marriage.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    No, lets not beat around the bush, he cannot "think what he wants". You labelled him with a loaded term in a knee-jerk response by just listening to him speak for 5 minutes.

    All this is despite you being unable to quote him on a SINGLE THING that he said that is homophobic.

    To address your notion of "thought crimes" above there underlined, people truly are entitled to think what they like. I cannot enter your head and change your mind, and nor should I ever be given that right. However, if your thoughts are put into practice and by your actions I am denied some basic human rights, then yeah....that's criminal in my book. That's when I'd start labelling someone who advocates (an action) a no vote for SSM as homophobic, as I would label someone racist who advocates (an action) denying immigrants the same human rights as native people to Ireland enjoy - even if their attitudes are born out of a lack of education.

    If I call someone homophobic/racist, it would be for bloody good reason and I expect them to check their own reasoning and come back with some reasons I shouldn't use those words towards them.


  • #717
    AerynSun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 544 ✭✭✭AerynSun


    Doctor DooM wrote: »
    What's the name of that type of apologetics argument where you don't have any intention of trying to win an argument, you just try to draw by focusing on an impossible to prove but ultimately irrelevant minute point?

    Can't think of the English word now, but in Afrikaans it's "kakpraatery".


  • #718
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,850 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I think you might be confusing me with someone else. I haven't done this.
    You're open to the idea that homophobia can be a subtle thing, rather than being hidebound by a dictionary definition?


  • #719
    Obliq
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,371 ✭✭✭Obliq


    AerynSun wrote: »
    Can't think of the English word now, but in Afrikaans it's "kakpraatery".

    Sounds a bit ruder than nit-picking, which was what I came up with. Kakpraatery.......an excellent word! Love it :)


  • #720
    GCU Flexible Demeanour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,257 ✭✭✭GCU Flexible Demeanour


    Links234 wrote: »
    A lot of what's being lost in the "gay adoption" discussion is that as it stands, for the great many gay couples who are already raising children, one of those parents is from the state's standpoint is in effect a stranger to their own children.
    But, in fairness, adoption is something of an issue in its own right - and that issue is around the interests of children. In that context, a statement like "a stranger to their own children" is just polemics.

    Adoption by non-family members is quite rare these days. That's why this practice of adopting children from abroad has become so popular. Whether taking children from their cultural milieu in this manner is acceptable, when we so rarely do it with children from our own society, is moot.

    Now, that does leave an issue around the situation where one partner has child; one of the most common remaining uses for adoption is situations where a woman with a child marries a man who is not the father, and they adopt that child as a couple. Again, not that frequent an occurance - and you can think of reasonable arguments for saying that, however the obligation and rights between adult and child should be in that situation, adoption is not necessarily an obvious model.

    All of which pointless wandering is really just to say that I find something wrong in discussions that assume that children are available for adoption, and the issue should hinge on the right of adults to snap them up.


  • Advertisement
  • #721
    rughdh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 278 ✭✭rughdh


    Obliq wrote: »
    Sounds a bit ruder than nit-picking, which was what I came up with. Kakpraatery.......an excellent word! Love it :)

    Kak is my favourite Afrkiaans word. :)


Advertisement