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…2627293132…82

Comments

  • #842
    GCU Flexible Demeanour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,257 ✭✭✭GCU Flexible Demeanour


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I don't have a bullying argument. Surely you must agree that the welfare of the child comes before any consideration of an adults "want" to be parents?
    I don't think it's even necessary to get into that. The point is that this hits the agenda as an adult equality issue. It doesn't hit the agenda as a child welfare issue. The issue isn't stated as "children are being harmed as their de facto parents can't obtain legal recognition". It's stated as "certain de facto parents are miffed that the law won't recognise their status".

    If our starting position was child welfare, how long would it take before we'd identify gay marriage as a priority action? How many priority actions would have identified before we got there? For the sake of argument, would action relating to the educational attainment of Traveller children be a higher or lower priority?
    Cabaal wrote: »
    Lets not forget that there were women AGAINST giving women the right to vote in numerous countrys around the world, would you dream of saying that these women were in anyway right?
    Would a man have the authority to tell them they were wrong?


  • #843
    AerynSun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 544 ✭✭✭AerynSun


    GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »
    Would a man have the authority to tell them they were wrong?

    A man's authority is besides the point. Of course it's not any man's right to tell a woman what to think or feel - but if you're suggesting that because a woman has internalised society's sexism to the extent that she is herself sexist and agrees with the dominant view that women are inferior... that doesn't mean that more enlightened men should now "shut up" and not say something about what has happened to that woman because they have no right to counter or influence all of the erroneous messages she has been subjected to previously. By that argument, if the sexists got there first and implanted their warped message first, then by gosh that's the message she now needs to keep. Doesn't make any kind of sense.


  • #844
    GCU Flexible Demeanour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,257 ✭✭✭GCU Flexible Demeanour


    AerynSun wrote: »
    A man's authority is besides the point.
    No, it's the absolute point and you've a profound degree of arrogance to think you can dismiss people's views on the basis of your analysis of how they came to form them.


  • #845
    AerynSun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 544 ✭✭✭AerynSun


    GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »
    No, it's the absolute point and you've a profound degree of arrogance to think you can dismiss people's views on the basis of your analysis of how they came to form them.

    My arrogance is actually anger: anger that a man can be so arrogant as to think his authority is any point of order where women are concerned. Anger that straight folk think they have a right to decide anything for LGBT people. Anger that white folks think they deserve an award for being in anyway nice to black people.


  • #846
    GCU Flexible Demeanour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,257 ✭✭✭GCU Flexible Demeanour


    AerynSun wrote: »
    My arrogance is actually anger: anger that a man can be so arrogant as to think his authority is any point of order where women are concerned. Anger that straight folk think they have a right to decide anything for LGBT people. Anger that white folks think they deserve an award for being in anyway nice to black people.
    Your anger is clouding your ability to think straight, and you are unfortunately descending into parody.

    But I wouldn't dream to telling you what you should do next.


  • Advertisement
  • #847
    AerynSun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 544 ✭✭✭AerynSun


    GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »
    Your anger is clouding your ability to think straight, and you are unfortunately descending into parody.

    But I wouldn't dream to telling you what you should do next.

    Thank you for your reasoned, compassionate input. I'm so grateful for it. I don't feel at all patronised. Because us wimmin do let our emotions make a fool of us, while the stable rational men always know better because they don't let their feelings get in the way of 'thinking straight'.

    p.s. If I'm not straight... is it possible for me to 'think straight' ever, anyway?


  • #848
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,569 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »
    Would a man have the authority to tell them they were wrong?

    yes,
    If a women wants to be self destructive against her own sex by saying she is inferior to a man when it comes to rights such as voting, workplace etc then yes its perfectly ok for a man to call her out on that.

    Do you think its wrong for a man to want women to be treated as equal to them?


  • #849
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,458 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Folks, cudgels away plz.

    kthnx&bye


  • #850
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,758 ✭✭✭weisses


    Links234 wrote: »
    This'll brighten your day: http://www.chrisdidthis.com/send-a-message-to-rte-and-iona/

    That is great

    Hopefully The same response will be displayed when it comes to islamofobia


  • #851
    AerynSun
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 544 ✭✭✭AerynSun


    Cabaal wrote: »
    yes,
    If a women wants to be self destructive against her own sex by saying she is inferior to a man when it comes to rights such as voting, workplace etc then yes its perfectly ok for a man to call her out on that.

    He has the right to call her out and challenge her thinking (and if he does it with compassion, he might actually be successful), but he doesn't have the authority to tell her what to think. He'd also be ill advised to patronise her when he calls her out - because he'd be perpetuating the sexism that she already believes she deserves. A bit of an own goal on the man's part, if he did that.


  • Advertisement
  • #852
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,228 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I don't have a bullying argument. Surely you must agree that the welfare of the child comes before any consideration of an adults "want" to be parents?
    Of course. And that is why we have stringent checks if prospective adoptive parents. The bullying argument is irrelevant.

    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



  • #853
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    This is a claim based on the assumption that gay parents are somehow deficient. This is a homophobic assumption that is shown to not be true.
    It can also be based on the opinion that the combination of a male and female parent gives the balance in a parenting team. Men and women are different. This is a fact. This is not homophobic.


    Why do you think adoption agencies try to make an ethnic match with the child and adoptive parents? Please answer this.
    King Mob wrote: »
    And here's the thing. Why does it need to be tested? (ignoring the fact it has been extensively and shown to be no worse than other couples.)
    Wow! Why does it need to be tested? Really? These are real life children we are talking about, not some statistics.
    King Mob wrote: »
    The fact you think there is some doubt about it is the result of some subtle homophobic ideas, the exact ones that Panti was referring to.
    Oh I didn't realise panti has said so, that changes everything. Do you and Panti also think the medical professional and social scientists are homophobes for testing the impact of gay parenting of children?
    King Mob wrote: »
    So then since opposing gay marriage is bigoted, do you agree that the Iona Institute holds bigoted ideas? Does John Waters?
    You've done this a number of times now. Please stop putting words in my mouth. Opposing gay marriage because you are anti-gay is bigoted. This is what I've said. Opposing gay marriage for perceived logical conclusions which have nothing to do with homophobia is not bigoted.


  • #854
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,029 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    It can also be based on the opinion that the combination of a male and female parent gives the balance in a parenting team. Men and women are different. This is a fact. This is not homophobic.
    Aside from the obvious physical differences, what is lacking in men that only a mother can do (and vice versa)?

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



  • #855
    Qs
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 579 ✭✭✭Qs


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Wow! Why does it need to be tested? Really? These are real life children we are talking about, not some statistics.

    Indeed. We can't just go around believing things without any proof at all, right?


  • #856
    Zayn Numerous Pinkeye
    Posts: 0 ✭ Zayn Numerous Pinkeye


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Opposing gay marriage for perceived logical conclusions which have nothing to do with homophobia is not bigoted.

    Sorry if this has been gone over before, but I can't find any real examples of this within this thread or within the media as a whole. I know you are using perceived above as you aren't actively agreeing with any of the logic people are using to justify their views, and I'm not asking/accusing you of doing so.

    I'd just like to know, even in bullet point form, what any of these conclusions are, as I think if we discuss these conclusions in public debate, instead of being caught up in the minutiae of legal definitions etc, that the issue might become a little more accessible without need for "firing arrows across the bows" etc.

    Could you, or anyone, please summarize any of the perceived logical conclusions which anyone has used to oppose same-sex marriage?


  • #857
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,569 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    It can also be based on the opinion that the combination of a male and female parent gives the balance in a parenting team. Men and women are different. This is a fact.

    I guess this was the same apparent fact that the catholic church used for decades to stigmatize unmarried mothers and to force them to put up their kids for adaption.

    After all its better for a mammy and daddy to raise the child isn't it?
    :rolleyes:


  • #858
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,247 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »
    Your anger is clouding your ability to think straight, and you are unfortunately descending into parody.

    But I wouldn't dream to telling you what you should do next.

    I haven't seen you around [this forum] for a while. Good to see you're back to peddle your very own brand of sophistry.


  • #859
    Absoluvely
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,323 ✭✭✭Absoluvely


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    It can also be based on the opinion that the combination of a male and female parent gives the balance in a parenting team. Men and women are different. This is a fact. This is not homophobic.

    The opinion that it is the genitals or chromosomes of parents that gives the balance in a parenting team is laughable. Replace "genitals" with "the state's register of sex" if you want to be pedantic.


  • #860
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    It can also be based on the opinion that the combination of a male and female parent gives the balance in a parenting team. Men and women are different. This is a fact. This is not homophobic.
    But claiming that homosexual parents are less capable and are less effective in raising children is homophobic.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Why do you think adoption agencies try to make an ethnic match with the child and adoptive parents? Please answer this.
    Why is banning interracial adoption racist?
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Wow! Why does it need to be tested? Really? These are real life children we are talking about, not some statistics.
    Lol do you really think any buys your fake outrage?

    So yes why does it need to be tested in your opinion. Do you think there is a chance that gay parents are harmful?
    If so, then that is because of the subtle homophobia people are talking about.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Oh I didn't realise panti has said so, that changes everything. Do you and Panti also think the medical professional and social scientists are homophobes for testing the impact of gay parenting of children?
    No. Because myths and misinformation like the idea that gay parents are harmful needs to be debunked.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    You've done this a number of times now. Please stop putting words in my mouth. Opposing gay marriage because you are anti-gay is bigoted. This is what I've said. Opposing gay marriage for perceived logical conclusions which have nothing to do with homophobia is not bigoted.
    But you have not provided a single instance of an argument from anyone (let alone the people in question) that is logical or isn't based on some kind of homophobia.

    Do you think that the Iona Institute is Anti-gay?


  • #861
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Cannot believe that the flagship current affairs programme of our 'national' broadcaster hasn't covered this today.


  • Advertisement
  • #862
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,247 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    'tis amusing. The prevalence of single parenthood, particularly single motherhood, is far greater than that of current or prospective same-sex parenthood. We seem to have stopped imprisoning single mothers and taking children off widowers. And why?

    Because it's wrong.

    Silly examples of adopted kids who were unhappy? What about all the unhappy kids living with their own biological (and abusive) parents? What about the many happy children of same-sex couples?


  • #863
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,569 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Cannot believe that the flagship current affairs programme of our 'national' broadcaster hasn't covered this today.

    Won't happen,
    They'd rather leave the debate to a incompetent man who did a excellent job of disrespecting and making like of what happened to the two women from pussy riot,


  • #864
    vitani
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,824 ✭✭✭vitani


    Cabaal wrote: »
    how could they report on it?
    RTE can't even accurately report on the number of people protesting against them

    http://www.broadsheet.ie/2014/02/03/go-figure-4/

    It's RTE that are saying 2,000. The Irish Times say 750.


  • #865
    Stark
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,176 ✭✭✭✭Stark


    If it was YD protesting, the figure quoted would probably be more like 100,000.


  • #866
    J_E
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,734 ✭✭✭J_E


    vitani wrote: »
    It's RTE that are saying 2,000. The Irish Times say 750.
    Certainly looked like more than 750 from my view. The street was packed.


  • #867
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,458 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Pherekydes wrote: »
    What about the many happy children of same-sex couples?
    18.5 million views and counting:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLZO-sObzQ


  • #868
    swampgas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,615 ✭✭✭swampgas


    vitani wrote: »
    It's RTE that are saying 2,000. The Irish Times say 750.

    Unfortunately, neither can be considered to be unbiased at this point, especially the Irish Times - they do have two members of the Iona Institute writing regular columns for them.

    So much for the standard of Irish journalism.


  • #869
    GCU Flexible Demeanour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,257 ✭✭✭GCU Flexible Demeanour


    Cabaal wrote: »
    yes,
    If a women wants to be self destructive against her own sex by saying she is inferior to a man when it comes to rights such as voting, workplace etc then yes its perfectly ok for a man to call her out on that.
    Would you expect that you'd find the argument presented like that? Or would you expect that someone might approach the argument in a way that doesn't accept the implicit assumptions you've made about them?
    Cabaal wrote: »
    Do you think its wrong for a man to want women to be treated as equal to them?
    I've absolutely no idea what's right or wrong in terms of personal aspirations. But if someone expects that everyone will respond to them in the terms they want, and assumes anyone who doesn't is inferior, I'd suspect they've someone to learn.


  • #870
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    This is for Brown bomber
    Excellent read
    http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/01/30/what_is_homophobia_why_straight_men_are_right_to_be_afraid_of_homosexuality.html


  • Advertisement
  • #871
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,458 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    david75 wrote: »
    Excellent read
    Slate wrote:
    men are not allowed “complex” sexualities; once the presumption of straightness has been shattered, a dude is automatically gay.
    As the author says, if, as a guy, "being gay" is something that you can start, but not stop, then hysterical aversion to being seen to be a gay man, including open hatred of gay men, makes a sad kind of sense.


Advertisement