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

1303133353682

Comments

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


    I've met some trolls in my time but seriously. Where does that guy get the time or energy?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭Phill Ewinn


    AerynSun wrote: »
    Are you saying that you are encountering artificial outrage on this forum/thread?

    That news to you? The faux-homophobia thats being used to guilt trip peole into changing the foundations of scoiety isn't fooling most people FYI.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Phill, you still haven't provided a single rational reason to oppose SSM. Are you ever going to bother?


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


    That news to you? The faux-homophobia thats being used to guilt trip peole into changing the foundations of scoiety isn't fooling most people FYI.

    I'm not seeing any artificial outrage - I'm seeing genuine outrage. I'm also not seeing faux-homophobia - I'm seeing homophobia. I don't see anyone trying to guilt trip anyone into 'changing the foundations of scoiety' (whatever you imagine that to mean), and I don't believe that anyone on this thread is trying to fool anyone.

    Also, I do find your tone to be somewhat condescending, which is not all that helpful for a meaningful exchange of ideas. I'm not sure whether the condescension is intended? Am I reading you wrong?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Sarky wrote: »
    Phill, you still haven't provided a single rational reason to oppose SSM. Are you ever going to bother?
    Trolls tend not to provide rational reasons for anything.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,007 ✭✭✭Phill Ewinn


    AerynSun wrote: »
    I'm not seeing any artificial outrage - I'm seeing genuine outrage. I'm also not seeing faux-homophobia - I'm seeing homophobia. I don't see anyone trying to guilt trip anyone into 'changing the foundations of scoiety' (whatever you imagine that to mean), and I don't believe that anyone on this thread is trying to fool anyone.

    Also, I do find your tone to be somewhat condescending, which is not all that helpful for a meaningful exchange of ideas. I'm not sure whether the condescension is intended? Am I reading you wrong?

    Many people are simply not capable of the level of hate shown by some posters here. No I'm not being condescending. I'm explaining to you my position using the most basic.of terms that I can.

    Do I want to censor you? No.
    Am I being condescending? No.
    Am I homophobic? No.
    Do I want a better society? Yes.

    People being outraged. People acting out their hatred against other people and their opinions IS whats happening here. Thats very obvious. I want no part in that.


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


    AerynSun wrote: »
    Are you saying that you are encountering artificial outrage on this forum/thread?
    Well, right now I'm saying I've never seen a thread where I've had so many "responses" that just repeat what I've posted.


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


    Endlessly ignoring questions asked and repeating the same nonsensical unlogic is the very definition of troll phill


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 515 ✭✭✭tawnyowl


    Not sure whether to put this here or in the Waters thread:

    Paul Murphy is another politician willing to speak out about this injustice. (I think he may be covered against lawsuits by EU Parliamentary Privilege.)

    In other news, Graham Norton has offered support to Panti:
    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/graham-norton-offers-support-to-panti-bliss-as-rte-homophobe-row-rumbles-on-29975142.html

    And the Huffington Post is covering the controversy:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/03/panti-noble-oppression_n_4717909.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices

    This is going international - I don't think Iona and Waters can sue everyone involved!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    Seems to be a recurring theme with Irish scandals and the like; the best place to hear about them is non-Irish media. Then when the coverage goes global, the Irish media might finally cover it as if it hadn't broken a month or three ago.


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


    Well, right now I'm saying I've never seen a thread where I've had so many "responses" that just repeat what I've posted.

    Well I can't speak for the other posters, but in my case I am asking clarifying questions because I wouldn't want to make a wrong assumption about what you meant.

    I'm from another culture, I'm not Irish - so there's a whole lot of scope for me to misinterpret if I don't check with you whether I've understood your meaning. I do appreciate your willingness to clarify your meaning, to help me better understand your views.


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


    Many people are simply not capable of the level of hate shown by some posters here. No I'm not being condescending. I'm explaining to you my position using the most basic.of terms that I can.

    I think a lot of people are capable of a great many things - that's why homophobia and racism exist. People who have been hurt by these things are likely to have strong feelings and speak with passion. That you find the comments hateful? I'm sorry about that. Perhaps you'd like to help us better understand how people's rightful anger about the injustices they have suffered is difficult for you to hear?
    Do I want to censor you? No.
    Am I being condescending? No.
    Am I homophobic? No.
    Do I want a better society? Yes.

    I think that some of the trouble is that your idea of a 'better society' is one where some of us have to bow to ideals that suit you better than they suit us? I don't think a society that discriminates against me on the grounds of my gender or my sexuality is the kind of society that I want.
    People being outraged. People acting out their hatred against other people and their opinions IS whats happening here. Thats very obvious. I want no part in that.

    Can you give me some examples to help me understand what you mean when you say that people here are acting out their hatred against other people and their opinions? Are you saying that people who oppose homophobia are acting out their hatred on people who oppose marriage equality?


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


    You remind me a lot of David Quinn and Breda O Brien. On the surface you try to appear reasonable and you preface most of your commentary with reasonable phrases in order to take the sting out of the objectionable comments that follow.
    Could you be more specific? What are these objectionable comments? I am genuinely curious about which of my opinions people are reporting and want censored rather than discuss them as I don't believe anything I've said could have offended anyone.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    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.


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


    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?

    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.
    I know nothing of your personal situation and have not once said that Gay parent(s) would make bad parents. In fact, I actually said that based on my own observations that gay parents, if anything, would make better parents. I'm sure your child/children are very lucky to have you

    The top post is an example of what I am referring to -

    Tell me, should we have tests/studies to determine the effect of mixed race parents on children?

    Should mixed race couples be barred from child rearing until the studies are in?

    Should we have thread after thread of people saying - oh, I don't mind if 'they' marry but is it fair for them to have children as some sort of social experiment? The children could be a different colour to one of their parents and be bullied for that...

    Should everyone be allowed to comment no matter how hurtful/offensive that comment that is??

    What about couples adopting children from a different ethnic backgrounds? Are they not just victims of a social experiment too?

    *obligatory anecdotal 'evidence' * I mean I have a friend who is ethnically Korean but she was adopted by Irish Protestants and never really felt like she was really from Cork like -why was this allowed to happen without reams of studies being done? They should have left her in the orphanage in Korea so she could be adopted by Koreans. Ok, the Korean war left a lot of orphans and the orphanages were over crowded but 'social experiment'.... :eek:



    I mean gays being parents like Hell everybody gets to comment on that like - and men and women are different shure we all know that. So, are all men alike and all women alike (which is really going to piss off my brother because he really won't like being like our father) and therefore blah blah blah.

    Let me be perfectly clear - it is not my 'personal situation' - this is my life and in my life I am/have been many things including a biological mother and when people make pronouncements about/question the suitability of gay people to be parents I take that personally because it is part of who I am and how very dare all of you!

    How very ****ing dare you!

    Yes - they are real life children and you are calling them social experiments????

    How very ****ing dare you!

    My son is a grown man with a boards account - how do you think he feels reading that he is a 'victim' of some 'social experiment' and his childhood maybe wasn't good because he didn't have a Daddy to be different to his Mammy??

    How very ****ing dare you! All of you.

    Do you think I had him on a whim? A cool accessory perhaps?

    He was no 'accident', not the result of an unfortunate (possibly drunken) one night stand, not the result of failed contraceptives . He was planned for and wanted - (would that every child could say the same).

    How very ****ing dare people discuss the suitability of complete strangers to be parents based only on their sexual orientation.

    My son was denied the legal protection of having two parents because some people don't think 'the gays' can raise children but heterosexuals who I wouldn't let mind my dog for an hour - well, that's different different because man/woman different so we don't need to talk about them over and over and over thread after thread after thread.

    Yes. I am now officially very bloody angry :mad:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,559 ✭✭✭✭AnonoBoy


    Without a shadow of a doubt in years to come we will look back on the gay marriage debate and read the opinions of those who were against it and treat them with the same disbelief and ridicule with which we now treat the opinions of those who were against the decriminalisation of homosexuality in the nineties.

    Here's the by now infamous Susan Philips letter against the decriminalisation of homosexuality which last week while debating gay marriage she conveniently forgot she wrote:

    SusanPhilipsLetter.jpg

    What a complete nonsense.

    Mark my words, the writings of Waters, O'Brien and the various folk of the Iona Institute will be regarded in the same "did people really ever buy into this crap?" light in years to come.

    While they're welcome to express their opinions, their intention to stifle any criticism of those opinions is laughable. They're dinosaurs, looking up at the approaching comet and trying to stop it with prayers and bible quotations.

    They will find that this is completely useless.


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


    You should ban yourself.
    Nope, Phill, I think I'll ban you for ignoring a direct mod instruction.

    See you next week.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    I presume that includes you? You should ban yourself. You have clearly excluded yourself from any rational debate whatsoever. Trying to justify your postion by using threats is now the level you have come to. Do you imagine that is acceptable? Do you believe in debate or democracy at all?

    The OP has asked what has happened to free speech. Let me tell you.

    Its been censored. Any gay man, woman, any straight man or woman from whatever background or race is not allowed to disagree with this mob. This mob will try justify their censorship as mobs do. Using threats, abuse and bullying to get their will.

    Is this the forum equivalent of suicide by cop or something? It seems like you want to be some sort of deluded of internet martyr. Maybe that's some sort of reverse psychology trick so I wouldn't ban you? It almost worked too. Only thing is I applied the ban based on the first sentence. I didn't even bother to read all your post until I quote it and felt like a bit of a rant. So thanks for letting me get that off my chest.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    robindch wrote: »
    Nope, Phill, I think I'll ban you for ignoring a direct mod instruction.

    See you next week.

    Wait who got there first?
    *Checks log*

    Hah! I did.
    (I banned him for a month too. You're nicer than me rob. :( )


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


    Bannasidhe wrote: »

    Tell me, should we have tests/studies to determine the effect of mixed race parents on children?

    Let me be very clear on this. Nobody has right to be given a child by the state just because they want one. The child's welfare is always the priority. This is separate from a consenting man and a consenting woman creating life and raising it. No state has the right to interfere in this natural process until the child's welfare becomes an issue. The priority is still the child's welfare.
    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Should mixed race couples be barred from child rearing until the studies are in?
    Please understand that I never said that gay adoption should be barred. I said that the world outside this bubble is likely to treat the child differently and this creates a moral dilemma for me, but not to the point where banning gay adoption is the solution. The children are going to have to take the brunt of it until it becomes normalised in our society. How can you see this as a slur against gays when it is being critical of non-gays and their treatment of homosexuals?


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


    I have a question. Are the National Association of Black Social Workers "racist" for being of the opinion that the best home for a black child is with black parents?

    http://www.nabsw.org/mserver/AdoptionExchange.aspx


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    I have a question. Are the National Association of Black Social Workers "racist" for being of the opinion that the best home for a black child is with black parents?

    http://www.nabsw.org/mserver/AdoptionExchange.aspx

    Daniel-Bryan-Yes-Cheer.gif


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Please understand that I never said that gay adoption should be barred. I said that the world outside this bubble is likely to treat the child differently and this creates a moral dilemma for me, but not to the point where banning gay adoption is the solution. The children are going to have to take the brunt of it until it becomes normalised in our society. How can you see this as a slur against gays when it is being critical of non-gays and their treatment of homosexuals?
    The point you are missing is that the people you are defending do oppose gay adoption.
    You agree that banning mixed race adoption is profoundly racist and bigoted.
    So wanting to ban gay adoption for any reason, logical or not, is similarly bigoted and homophobic.

    The fact that these people who are so concerned about the plight of adopted children are not campaigning for mixed race adoption shows that they are more concerned that the parents are gay, not because of the bullying the children would get.
    Why is this if they are not homophobic/bigoted against gay people?

    So why exactly does the effects of gay adoption need to be studied in your opinion? Is there a possibility of danger?


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


    Fintan o toole has waded in. At last. I'd elect this guy tomorrow if he ran. And not just for this. http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/full-equality-often-has-to-wait-while-mainstream-opinion-catches-up-1.1678007?page=1


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


    I have a question. Are the National Association of Black Social Workers "racist" for being of the opinion that the best home for a black child is with black parents?

    http://www.nabsw.org/mserver/AdoptionExchange.aspx

    You're absurdly good at undermining your own position. Now At least i know for sure you're just trolling.


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


    King Mob wrote: »
    The point you are missing is that the people you are defending do oppose gay adoption.
    You agree that banning mixed race adoption is profoundly racist and bigoted.
    So wanting to ban gay adoption for any reason, logical or not, is similarly bigoted and homophobic.

    The fact that these people who are so concerned about the plight of adopted children are not campaigning for mixed race adoption shows that they are more concerned that the parents are gay, not because of the bullying the children would get.
    Why is this if they are not homophobic/bigoted against gay people?

    So why exactly does the effects of gay adoption need to be studied in your opinion? Is there a possibility of danger?

    You tell me.
    logo-hor-left_424x140.gif
    Public Discourse




    home | about | archives | contact | support


    Growing Up With Two Moms: The Untold Children’s View

    by Robert Oscar Lopez
    within Marriage

    August 6th, 2012

    The children of same-sex couples have a tough road ahead of them—I know, because I have been there. The last thing we should do is make them feel guilty if the strain gets to them and they feel strange.



    Between 1973 and 1990, when my beloved mother passed away, she and her female romantic partner raised me. They had separate houses but spent nearly all their weekends together, with me, in a trailer tucked discreetly in an RV park 50 minutes away from the town where we lived. As the youngest of my mother’s biological children, I was the only child who experienced childhood without my father being around.


    After my mother’s partner’s children had left for college, she moved into our house in town. I lived with both of them for the brief time before my mother died at the age of 53. I was 19. In other words, I was the only child who experienced life under “gay parenting” as that term is understood today.


    Quite simply, growing up with gay parents was very difficult, and not because of prejudice from neighbors. People in our community didn’t really know what was going on in the house. To most outside observers, I was a well-raised, high-achieving child, finishing high school with straight A's.
    Inside, however, I was confused. When your home life is so drastically different from everyone around you, in a fundamental way striking at basic physical relations, you grow up weird. I have no mental health disorders or biological conditions. I just grew up in a house so unusual that I was destined to exist as a social outcast.


    My peers learned all the unwritten rules of decorum and body language in their homes; they understood what was appropriate to say in certain settings and what wasn’t; they learned both traditionally masculine and traditionally feminine social mechanisms.


    Even if my peers’ parents were divorced, and many of them were, they still grew up seeing male and female social models. They learned, typically, how to be bold and unflinching from male figures and how to write thank-you cards and be sensitive from female figures. These are stereotypes, of course, but stereotypes come in handy when you inevitably leave the safety of your lesbian mom’s trailer and have to work and survive in a world where everybody thinks in stereotypical terms, even gays.


    I had no male figure at all to follow, and my mother and her partner were both unlike traditional fathers or traditional mothers. As a result, I had very few recognizable social cues to offer potential male or female friends, since I was neither confident nor sensitive to others. Thus I befriended people rarely and alienated others easily. Gay people who grew up in straight parents’ households may have struggled with their sexual orientation; but when it came to the vast social universe of adaptations not dealing with sexuality—how to act, how to speak, how to behave—they had the advantage of learning at home. Many gays don’t realize what a blessing it was to be reared in a traditional home.


    My home life was not traditional nor conventional. I suffered because of it, in ways that are difficult for sociologists to index. Both nervous and yet blunt, I would later seem strange even in the eyes of gay and bisexual adults who had little patience for someone like me. I was just as odd to them as I was to straight people.


    Life is hard when you are strange. Even now, I have very few friends and often feel as though I do not understand people because of the unspoken gender cues that everyone around me, even gays raised in traditional homes, takes for granted. Though I am hard-working and a quick learner, I have trouble in professional settings because co-workers find me bizarre.
    In terms of sexuality, gays who grew up in traditional households benefited from at least seeing some kind of functional courtship rituals around them. I had no clue how to make myself attractive to girls.



    When I stepped outside of my mothers’ trailer, I was immediately tagged as an outcast because of my girlish mannerisms, funny clothes, lisp, and outlandishness. Not surprisingly, I left high school as a virgin, never having had a girlfriend, instead having gone to four proms as a wisecracking sidekick to girls who just wanted someone to chip in for a limousine.


    When I got to college, I set off everyone’s “gaydar” and the campus LGBT group quickly descended upon me to tell me it was 100-percent certain I must be a homosexual. When I came out as bisexual, they told everyone I was lying and just wasn’t ready to come out of the closet as gay yet. Frightened and traumatized by my mother’s death, I dropped out of college in 1990 and fell in with what can only be called the gay underworld. Terrible things happened to me there.


    It was not until I was twenty-eight that I suddenly found myself in a relationship with a woman, through coincidences that shocked everyone who knew me and surprised even myself. I call myself bisexual because it would take several novels to explain how I ended up “straight” after almost thirty years as a gay man. I don’t feel like dealing with gay activists skewering me the way they go on search-and-destroy missions against ex-gays, “closet cases,” or "homocons."
    http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/08/6065/


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


    david75 wrote: »
    You're absurdly good at undermining your own position. Now At least i know for sure you're just trolling.
    It was a serious question. My wife is mixed race, more black than white. She was adopted from South America into a white family into an exclusively white environment. She loves her parents and they love her but she had a hard time growing up being so obviously "different" compunded by abandonment issues that I think all orphans have. It would have been easier for her to be adopted by a black family. So I think these social workers have a point. I don't think they are being racist at all. I don't see the difference between these people and people who would see the traditional family setup being the ideal environment for a child. all else being equal.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    I know a guy who eated a banana once and almost died. So, then this thing called science came along and said that for most people bananas were harmless. Investigation closed. Some people will experience ill effects with bananas, gay parents, or straight parents but, you know, for most people it makes no single bit of a difference.

    Emotional anecdotes are good for evoking reactions. Would you like to hear about the kid raised by straight parents who felt like he was a recluse?

    Anecdotes, are rubbish for establishing a sequence of successive approximations to the truth.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    Jernal wrote: »
    I know a guy who eated a banana once and almost died. So, then this thing called science came along and said that for most people bananas were harmless. Investigation closed. Some people will experience ill effects with bananas, gay parents, or straight parents but, you know, for most people it makes no single bit of a difference.

    Emotional anecdotes are good. Would you like to hear about the kid raised by straight parents who felt like he was a recluse?

    Anecdotes, are rubbish for establishing a sequence of successive approximations to the truth.

    Indeed, can we have some studies please? Where they cover a selection of people? Something approximating to the scientific method?


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


    You're married BB? To your keyboard, or what?
    If on two legs, your mrs must really get angry at you spending all your time at the computer. Almost Like you're married to it


    Or maybe she isn't :)


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


    obplayer wrote: »
    Indeed, can we have some studies please? Where they cover a selection of people? Something approximating to the scientific method?
    There was one linked to by the Professor who wrote that last piece
    http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/06/5640/


Advertisement