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…4647495152…82

Comments

  • #1442
    Cabaal
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional South East Moderators Posts: 28,569 Mod ✭✭✭✭Cabaal


    SW wrote: »
    Did BB not answer that here?

    thanks, must have missed that :)


  • #1443
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    If we apply the same wishy-washy definition to racism as we are apparently supposed to accept where anything and everything can be attributed to racism/homophobia then yes these people appear to be racist.

    If we apply actual definitions where the definitions have actual meaning, as I would prefer then no, "racist" is not the word that best describes this group.

    You have put an interesting comparison in my head though to gay adoption -busing.

    In the US, in the 70s the authorities with the very best of intentions and for the right reasons to decided that in the interests of equality that some white kids should not be allowed to go to the school in their own majority white neighbourhoods and instead should be forced-bussed into schools in hispanic neighbourhoods and and black neighbourhoods and so on. The same thing would happen in the black and hispanic neighbourhoods with them being bussed to schools outside their neighbourhoods.

    While all this was great in theory, it didn't take into account the reality of the situation or consider the children who were on the front line of this experiment. it was a complete failure, with the children of all races being the victims as mini race wars erupted and violence ensued.

    Ugh.

    This is compete BS.

    Forcing millions of kids to be bused into nearby school districts is not the same as treating gay, married couples the same as straight, married couples.

    The opposite of allowing gay adoption isn't "all the kids get adopted by perfect straight parents" it's "many kids never get adopted".

    Pretending that a gay couple and a straight couple are exactly the same is wrong, but pretending they deserve equal rights, isn't.

    No one is forcing anyone to be adopted, or to lower standards for who's allowed to be adopt.

    That is unless you think gay couples are worse than the worst straight couples.

    And knowing you, who knows what you ACTUALLY think.


  • #1444
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Beruthiel wrote: »
    You must first complain to RTE with regards to the withdrawal of Rory's comments on the player.

    When they respond (unsatisfactorily), you send a complaint to the BAI (including a copy of the e-mail that RTE sent you) stating the code of conduct that RTE has breached.

    They will send you a complaint form which you must fill out.

    I believe the following code was broken:

    2. Principles Underpinning the Fairness, Objectivity and Impartiality Rules.

    I sent that to them yesterday and am waiting for a reply.

    /Edit.

    Here are the e-mails again for anyone who wishes to do the same:


    complaints@rte.ie
    complaints@bai.ie (broadcasting authority)

    Email sent.

    I'd suggest a separate thread for this!


  • #1445
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Prejudice, hate and discrimination is wrong no matter who it is against.

    I completely agr..

    Wait, what? WTF?


  • #1446
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    I completely agr..

    Wait, what? WTF?

    Denial for the sake of denial because he doesn't really like this forum. :D


  • Advertisement
  • #1447
    Beruthiel
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 42,361 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beruthiel


    Jim Walsh this morning....
    A Fianna Fail Senator has referred to what he described as “dangerous, vicious elements within the gay ideological movement”.

    "Can we have a debate on freedom of speech. Can we have the Minister for Communications in and can we deal with these dangerous, vicious elements within the gay ideological movement.

    Calling him a neanderthal would be an insult to all right thinking neanderthals.


  • #1448
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    SW wrote: »
    Yes, there are. Numerous posters are at pains to try and get you to understand that.
    My position is backed up by evidence: The RTE memo. Whereas yours is just an assumption. Why exactly should I take your assumption over the evidence?


  • #1449
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Jernal wrote: »
    Assuming those views aren't bots and repeat viewers, of course.

    Dont underestimate the attention span on the next is like 4 seconds or something…Dancing cute pussy cats gets millions of views and likes..


  • #1450
    FanMahBrow
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15 ✭FanMahBrow


    BB, your reading skills are showing.

    Would you mind expanding on just what you think the phrase "such a defence" refers to in the following? You've already ignored this at least once.
    RTE Statement wrote:
    However, based on the facts of what was broadcast, and having regard for broadcasting compliance issues, the seriousness of the legal complaints, and the decision by the complainants not to accept RTÉ’s proposed remedies, we decided that a settlement was the most prudent course of action. Senior counsel was consulted and confirmed that the legal position was far from clear.

    As a dual-funded public body, RTÉ should not knowingly progress to defend an action when it is advised, internally and externally, that such a defence is unlikely to succeed before a jury.

    RTE statement is here.


  • #1451
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,016 ✭✭✭✭jank


    SpaceTime wrote: »

    We don't have freedom of speech! That's been demonstrated very clearly..


    Maybe you missed the last 10 days but this is not an issue about free speech, it is an issue about libel and defamation. The conversation must be in that scope.


  • Advertisement
  • #1452
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,029 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    My position is backed up by evidence: The RTE memo. Whereas yours is just an assumption. Why exactly should I take your assumption over the evidence?

    My assumption is just as valid as yours with the current available evidence. You don't have to take my position, but you can't say there's no evidence for an opinion that isn't in line with yours.

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



  • #1453
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    Ugh.

    This is compete BS.

    Forcing millions of kids to be bused into nearby school districts is not the same as treating gay, married couples the same as straight, married couples.

    The opposite of allowing gay adoption isn't "all the kids get adopted by perfect straight parents" it's "many kids never get adopted".

    Pretending that a gay couple and a straight couple are exactly the same is wrong, but pretending they deserve equal rights, isn't.

    No one is forcing anyone to be adopted, or to lower standards for who's allowed to be adopt.

    That is unless you think gay couples are worse than the worst straight couples.

    And knowing you, who knows what you ACTUALLY think.



    First of all, you do not know me. If you want to know what I think all you have to do is ask. I have been extremely open and frank in this discussion. I have all but admitted that I, myself, would not be a suitable candidate for becoming an adoptive parent due to my history of drink and drug abuse.


    I have never said that gay couples are "worse" than straight couples. In fact I have said the opposite many times. My point in relation to busing is that since gay couples are "different" by definition, something you agree on then we cannot discount the possibility of gay parenting having an adverse effect on innocent children relative to the traditional upbringing which has been the norm throughout civilisiation. I even provided the account of a US professor who was raised by two lesbians, one of them being his actual birth mother who felt quite damaged by this.


    All I am saying is that when it comes to adoption there is more to consider than simply the "rights" of the would-be parents, the child must be considered equally if not more so.


  • #1454
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    SW wrote: »
    My assumption is just as valid as yours with the current available evidence. You don't have to take my position, but you can't say there's no evidence for an opinion that isn't in line with yours.
    I'm not making an assumption. The legal experts consulted by RTE considered that in their professional opinions they would be unable to prove Waters and Iona as homophobes, and therefore agreed to pay compensation for the damaging remarks.


    They say exactly this in the memo.


  • #1455
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,247 ✭✭✭Daith


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I'm not making an assumption. The legal experts consulted by RTE considered that in their professional opinions they would be unable to prove Waters and Iona as homophobes, and therefore agreed to pay compensation for the damaging remarks.


    They say exactly this in the memo.

    No they don't

    "Senior counsel was consulted and confirmed that the legal position was far from clear."


  • #1456
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    FanMahBrow wrote: »
    BB, your reading skills are showing.

    Would you mind expanding on just what you think the phrase "such a defence" refers to in the following? You've already ignored this at least once.



    RTE statement is here.

    The hypothetical defense that would-be if RTE didn't apologise and pay compensation.


  • #1457
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    jank wrote: »
    Dont underestimate the attention span on the next is like 4 seconds or something…Dancing cute pussy cats gets millions of views and likes..



    Is your signature a coincidence?


    "The bigoted defamation of an opposite opinion, rather than a willingness to listen to it or pay any attention to it. Liberal bigotry is the worst of all, as it thinks it's so enlightened."


  • #1458
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,029 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I'm not making an assumption. The legal experts consulted by RTE considered that in their professional opinions they would be unable to prove Waters and Iona as homophobes, and therefore agreed to pay compensation for the damaging remarks.


    They say exactly this in the memo.

    Nowhere in the memo does it say that. If you have evidence that it says exactly that in the memo, please provide it.

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



  • #1459
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Daith wrote: »
    No they don't

    "Senior counsel was consulted and confirmed that the legal position was far from clear."

    It does.



    "As a dual-funded public body, RTÉ should not knowingly progress to defend an action when it is advised, internally and externally, that such a defence is unlikely to succeed before a jury."


  • #1460
    FanMahBrow
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15 ✭FanMahBrow


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    The hypothetical defense that would-be if RTE didn't apologise and pay compensation.

    Nul points for reading comprehension, I'm afraid.


  • #1461
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,144 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Is your signature a coincidence?


    "The bigoted defamation of an opposite opinion, rather than a willingness to listen to it or pay any attention to it. Liberal bigotry is the worst of all, as it thinks it's so enlightened."

    That sig is so far up it's own arse. I'm willing to bet some moron from a right-wing media outlet coined it.


  • Advertisement
  • #1462
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,029 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I'm not making an assumption. The legal experts consulted by RTE considered that in their professional opinions they would be unable to prove Waters and Iona as homophobes, and therefore agreed to pay compensation for the damaging remarks.


    They say exactly this in the memo.
    Daith wrote: »
    No they don't

    "Senior counsel was consulted and confirmed that the legal position was far from clear."
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    It does.



    "As a dual-funded public body, RTÉ should not knowingly progress to defend an action when it is advised, internally and externally, that such a defence is unlikely to succeed before a jury."

    You haven't shown the memo says what you claim. You're making an assumption as to their thinking behind the idea "such a defense is unlikely to succeed before a jury."

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



  • #1463
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,247 ✭✭✭Daith


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    It does.



    "As a dual-funded public body, RTÉ should not knowingly progress to defend an action when it is advised, internally and externally, that such a defence is unlikely to succeed before a jury."

    Then RTE are contradicting themselves because it says both.


  • #1464
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    First of all, you do not know me. If you want to know what I think all you have to do is ask. I have been extremely open and frank in this discussion. I have all but admitted that I, myself, would not be a suitable candidate for becoming an adoptive parent due to my history of drink and drug abuse.


    I have never said that gay couples are "worse" than straight couples. In fact I have said the opposite many times. My point in relation to busing is that since gay couples are "different" by definition, something you agree on then we cannot discount the possibility of gay parenting having an adverse effect on innocent children relative to the traditional upbringing which has been the norm throughout civilisiation. I even provided the account of a US professor who was raised by two lesbians, one of them being his actual birth mother who felt quite damaged by this.


    All I am saying is that when it comes to adoption there is more to consider than simply the "rights" of the would-be parents, the child must be considered equally if not more so.

    You compared forced integration to gay adoption. You tried to.

    It's not a meaningful comparison.

    No one is FORCING adoption agencies to LOWER standards, unless you consider gay to be a lower standard than straight.

    Which you might - who really knows.

    I have also seen you repeatedly and deliberately behave in ways that I would not call honest in this thread, but instead would liken to trolling.

    So, I have little sympathy for your desire to be treated as an honest broker.

    If gay vs straight is NOT a issue of "better vs worse" then there's no comparison to be made to busing.

    The fact that you think there IS a comparison to me made either means you're woefully confused, wilfully dishonest, or harbouring some homophobia yourself.


  • #1465
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 52,029 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Rory posted this in a comment to this post on his PantiBliss page (It's a video clip of RTE news reporting on the settlement with Iona+Waters).
    His "legal advice" story has changed little be little since yesterday to suit him. At first "legal advice was unclear" and now it's "legal advice was that they were unlikely to succeed before a jury".

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



  • #1466
    SpaceTime
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,088 ✭✭✭SpaceTime


    jank wrote: »
    Maybe you missed the last 10 days but this is not an issue about free speech, it is an issue about libel and defamation. The conversation must be in that scope.

    You don't think libel, defamation and free speech are related issues?!


  • #1467
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    CqabdVI.jpg


  • #1468
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,758 ✭✭✭weisses


    MilanPan!c wrote: »
    CqabdVI.jpg

    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Baja%20Panti

    I knew it ... I was on that team for years


  • #1469
    MilanPan!c
    Site Banned Posts: 4,415 ✭✭✭MilanPan!c


    weisses wrote: »
    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Baja%20Panti

    I knew it ... I was on that team for years

    Bwahaahah


  • #1470
    brimal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,221 ✭✭✭brimal


    Glen Killane (MD of RTE) was on The Last Word yesterday. I haven't had a chance to listen to it yet but here is the link to listen to it:

    http://www.todayfm.com/player/listen_back/7/9221/05th_February_2014_-_The_Last_Word_with_Matt_Cooper_Part_2

    Skip to 12:30 on the clip.


  • Advertisement
  • #1471
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    [-0-] wrote: »
    What an idiotic thing to say.

    Equal rights is a global issue and deserves global attention.

    No it is not idiotic -(great way to debate by the way - don't deal with what I said just dismiss it as 'idiotic' :rolleyes:)

    We here in A&A have often made much of the fact that it is believed that Iona, YD etc are funded by Americans and we have decried this time and time again.

    What exactly is the difference between Fundy dollars and Pink dollars at the end of the day?

    Is it a case of - you yanks, we don't agree with you so feck off how very dare you interfere in our National Debate but you other yanks we like you so plz send much dosh?

    Are we to become nothing but the latest American funded battleground in the war between fundamentalism and social liberalism?



    What strikes me as 'idiotic' is to critics our opponents for their foreign funding while accepting it ourselves with no discussion as to the ethics of doing so.


Advertisement