Do you think the Iona Institute are homophobic?

floggg · 07-02-2014 03:06PM

No

lazygal wrote: »

Why don't you support same sex marriage?

Do you want a reason or a sound bite?

If it's the former, prepare for disappointment...

lazygal · 07-02-2014 03:06PM

No

I so enjoyed Susan Phillips getting caught out on her views on the decriminalization of homosexuality on the show last Saturday.

aidan24326 · 07-02-2014 03:08PM

No

@Cydoniac

The 'deeper rooted thing' you're referring to would be the bible and religious dogma, and all the prejudices that go with that.

EVERYTHING Iona stand for on this subject is rooted in that.

darced · 07-02-2014 03:15PM

This post has been deleted.

FamousSeamus · 07-02-2014 03:16PM

No

Cydoniac wrote: »

If more people just came out and said 'Actually it's because I think gay people are unnatural' we'd avoid a lot of roundabout arguments.

Calling a spade a spade...

I've had this argument with a friend, he says there's no scientific proof that homosexuality is an actual thing or that it happens naturally and that people aren't really gay their just having this sex out of choice!! its an odd argument but after nearly 2 hours of arguments he still holds this belief

I guess some people just refuse to accept things!!

EDIT: a lot of replies came in before I finished writing this so i apologize if it derails things!!

road_high · 07-02-2014 03:19PM

No

FamousSeamus wrote: »

I've had this argument with a friend, he says there's no scientific proof that homosexuality is an actual thing or that it happens naturally and that people aren't really gay their just having this sex out of choice!! its an odd argument but after nearly 2 hours of arguments he still holds this belief I guess some people just refuse to accept things!!

EDIT: a lot of replies came in before I finished writing this so i apologize if it derails things!!

Conclusion; your friend is thick (I'm sorry to say).

FamousSeamus · 07-02-2014 03:20PM

No

road_high wrote: »

Conclusion; your friend is thick (I'm sorry to say).

Try saying that to him

he'll tell you he's morally and naturally right:D

road_high · 07-02-2014 03:22PM

No

FamousSeamus wrote: »

Try saying that to him he'll tell you he's morally and naturally right:D

So he created the universe and all natural beings in it? Unless he did then he's talking sh!te

Links234 · 07-02-2014 03:24PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Nobody is matching someone who 'disagrees' with gay marriage to someone who waits outside a club to beat someone because of their sexuality, or are saying they are equivalent, what people are saying is that both of these things stem from the same prejudice.

Piliger · 07-02-2014 03:33PM

No

road_high wrote: »

So he created the universe and all natural beings in it? Unless he did then he's talking sh!te

Is he a creationist too ? he sounds like he has all the talents

J_E · 07-02-2014 03:34PM

No

aidan24326 wrote: »

@Cydoniac

The 'deeper rooted thing' you're referring to would be the bible and religious dogma, and all the prejudices that go with that.

EVERYTHING Iona stand for on this subject is rooted in that.

See, there's my issue. It's okay to have your stance on marriage equality from a religious perspective. It's not okay to make a decision for everyone else based on that belief. No straight couple has had to ask permission from the country to get civil married, so why do it for gay people?

Links234 wrote: »

Nobody is matching someone who 'disagrees' with gay marriage to someone who waits outside a club to beat someone because of their sexuality, or are saying they are equivalent, what people are saying is that both of these things stem from the same prejudice.

Exactly...there are subtle degrees of prejudice, it doesn't mean you hate anyone.

Daith · 07-02-2014 03:38PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No see this is my issue. Homophobia is not about being opposed to equal marriage. Rory O'Neill never said this either.

It is infact Iona stating that they are being called homophobes because of their opposition to equal marriage. They are being called homophobes because they have constantly being against any form of equal rights for LGBT people not just marriage.

Homophobia as a word exists. However it is not accurate at all to say that you can only be called a homophobe if you beat up gay people. This was Rory O'Neill's actual point which has been missed.

road_high · 07-02-2014 03:41PM

No

I think giving them the money may have been the best thing RTE ever did;
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/war-of-words-breaks-out-between-john-waters-and-rte-29988714.html

Funny seeing Waters and his team now squirm their way out protesting now "oh, we never wanted the money" now that public opinion has turned and they are showed up for the money grabbing parasites they are. As a taxpayer I'm fuming over this...

floggg · 07-02-2014 03:41PM

No

FamousSeamus wrote: »

I've had this argument with a friend, he says there's no scientific proof that homosexuality is an actual thing or that it happens naturally and that people aren't really gay their just having this sex out of choice!! its an odd argument but after nearly 2 hours of arguments he still holds this belief I guess some people just refuse to accept things!!

EDIT: a lot of replies came in before I finished writing this so i apologize if it derails things!!

The simplest way to shut him up is to tell him if he wants to prove it's a choice he should go sleep with a guy.

If it's all the same and just a choice, then he should really enjoy it.

He should probably also get equally as excited seeing another man undress as he would with a lady.

If however he is only sexually stimulated by one or other gender, then it's pretty clear he is sexually orientated towards one or other gender.

J_E · 07-02-2014 03:44PM

No

FamousSeamus wrote: »

and that people aren't really gay their just having this sex out of choice!!

This is a message for your friend. Don't get me wrong, I am very happy with myself today and if they had made a pill to change my orientation I wouldn't accept it. I don't think I would have chose being gay if I had been given the choice younger though. Who chooses to have a harder life like that?

Stark · 07-02-2014 03:52PM

No

Maybe his friend went and redefined homosexuality so now it means something other than "has a preference for same sex". "They're not really homosexual, they just have sex with men because they like having sex with men".

Sometimes I long for the days of dictionaries.

Piliger · 07-02-2014 03:57PM

No

Cydoniac wrote: »

See, there's my issue. It's okay to have your stance on marriage equality from a religious perspective. It's not okay to make a decision for everyone else based on that belief. No straight couple has had to ask permission from the country to get civil married, so why do it for gay people?

Exactly...there are subtle degrees of prejudice, it doesn't mean you hate anyone.

No but it does mean they are bigoted and prejudiced against them. I don't accept that hiding behind scripture and religion makes them more cuddly, escaping responsibility. There may be degrees of prejudice but imho they are not so subtle.

timetogo · 07-02-2014 03:59PM

No

FamousSeamus wrote: »

I've had this argument with a friend, he says there's no scientific proof that homosexuality is an actual thing or that it happens naturally and that people aren't really gay their just having this sex out of choice!!

Does your friend have the internet?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals#cite_note-1

I saw a good quote on one of the papers.

"Homosexuality is found in over 450 species; homophobia is found in only one. Which one seems unnatural now?"

darced · 07-02-2014 04:01PM

This post has been deleted.

Corkfeen · 07-02-2014 04:04PM

No

darced wrote: »

It's been stated on this thread countless times that if you are opposed to gay marriage you are a homophobe.

Rory or panti was trying to justify calling every one a homophobe which suits his agenda.

It was also stated that seeking to fire teachers because of their sexuality is homophobic. Iona are doing that too. They're massively into discriminating against gay people. Like homophobic people are. Everyone saying that Iona aren't homophobic seem to ignore these aspects. Weird!

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 04:04PM

lazygal wrote: »

Why don't you support same sex marriage?

I know people think Paddy Manning is crazy - I don't but I have always viewed marriage as between a man and a woman.
Growing up it was always between a man and a woman, then I am told by some I must change my opinion because it is discriminating, but I never saw it as something that discriminated against anyone.
It was re-defined by some to make it appear discriminatory.

I don't go about hating anyone yet I was called a bigot, if against SSM you are a homophobe and so on. It doesn't convince me to change what I believe.

Another thing is I don't support civil marriage. To me marriage I would not count myself married if it was a registry office job. I would need a church wedding - personal.
That said about the redefinition of marriage and the above - we wouldn't need a referendum if civil marriage was abolished and people could just declare themselves married - heterosexual or homosexual whether in a religious or non religious service, and for any rights one could just go to their solictors and sign a form.
Rather than more civil marriage, I wish the referendum was to abolish all civil marriage.
I don't believe it is the state's role to define marriage.

Daith · 07-02-2014 04:05PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

And it suits your agenda and the Iona institute to not be called a homophobe unless you're beating up gay people.

Everyone on this thread is stating their opinion as there is no legal definition of homophobia. Ive given you my opinion and why I think the Iona crowd are homophobic which you've completely ignored.

Rory called everyone in the world a little bit racist. I doubt anyone thinks a racist is only someone who beats up people of a different race.

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 04:07PM

road_high wrote: »

I think giving them the money may have been the best thing RTE ever did;
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/war-of-words-breaks-out-between-john-waters-and-rte-29988714.html

Funny seeing Waters and his team now squirm their way out protesting now "oh, we never wanted the money" now that public opinion has turned and they are showed up for the money grabbing parasites they are. As a taxpayer I'm fuming over this...

On the otherside of that argument, RTE presenters are always promoting SSM and liberal views.

PopePalpatine · 07-02-2014 04:08PM

No

Corkfeen wrote: »

It was also stated that seeking to fire teachers because of their sexuality is homophobic. Iona are doing that too.

It's strange that Robert and darced are ignoring that. :rolleyes:

P_1 · 07-02-2014 04:09PM

No

RobertKK wrote: »

I know people think Paddy Manning is crazy - I don't but I have always viewed marriage as between a man and a woman.
Growing up it was always between a man and a woman, then I am told by some I must change my opinion because it is discriminating, but I never saw it as something that discriminated against anyone.
It was re-defined by some to make it appear discriminatory.

I don't go about hating anyone yet I was called a bigot, if against SSM you are a homophobe and so on. It doesn't convince me to change what I believe.

Another thing is I don't support civil marriage. To me marriage I would not count myself married if it was a registry office job. I would need a church wedding - personal.
That said about the redefinition of marriage and the above - we wouldn't need a referendum if civil marriage was abolished and people could just declare themselves married - heterosexual or homosexual whether in a religious or non religious service, and for any rights one could just go to their solictors and sign a form.
Rather than more civil marriage, I wish the referendum was to abolish all civil marriage.
I don't believe it is the state's role to define marriage.

That's fair enough but the state does define marriage and it has done so in the constitution, so really to do anything about it (abolish, redefine, whatever) a referendum needs to take place.

Steppenwolfe · 07-02-2014 04:11PM

Links234 wrote: »

Actually, I do agree with you, I don't think anyone is under any pretentions that people like Terry are merely hiding their inherent bigotry behind some creative language, continues to duck and weave around every point put to them, and just won't state what exactly they're for/against. All that big dance does is frustrate everyone by dragging things out to absurdity while we try to 'pin the tail on the donkey' to get to an actual argument, only for them to be banned for stating it. It's not a good precedent to set for other posters either, who feel they have to keep up a song and dance and stick to nebulous nonsense about 'defending' marriage, and never stating their actual point of view for fear of banning. It would save everyone's teeth from grinding if people like Terry would just make their argument from the get go and it can be debated.

That said, this is just my own interpretation, and he could've said/done something worse that we aren't privvy to. It's probably bordering on backseat modding, so I won't go on any further than that.

He didn't duck and weave in the post he was banned for. He stated his view on the subject clear enough without any abuse or name calling. He was banned for having that view and expressing it. So I wouldn't be too critical of others for being wary about expressing their opinion on here. You and others are free to call him and other ssm opponents bigots and worse. Many here see no problem with that. 'Call a spade a spade' is the usual arguement. However, don't expect a two sided debate on here. It will not be allowed to happen.

road_high · 07-02-2014 04:13PM

No

RobertKK wrote: »

On the otherside of that argument, RTE presenters are always promoting SSM and liberal views.

Really? Care to list all these and give examples?
By the way, delighted to hear that they do, it's only right and proper.

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 04:14PM

PopePalpatine wrote: »

It's strange that Robert and darced are ignoring that. :rolleyes:

What?

I don't know why teachers have to be open about their sexuality at school or in the workplace when it has nothing to do with their work.

It is like the whole St patrick's day parade fuss in the US as if sexuality was part of the parade, when the day has nothing to do with sexuality.

Yes we get, one is homosexual, one would think it was a disease given how some feel the need to talk about being homosexual as if there was something wrong with them.
Then talk about a harder life but choose to bring it on themselves when they could easily avoid it.

Schools can employ who they want in accordance with their ethos, may not like it but that is how it is.

Corkfeen · 07-02-2014 04:14PM

No

PopePalpatine wrote: »

It's strange that Robert and darced are ignoring that. :rolleyes:

Robert did acknowledge it, couldn't explain how it wasn't homophobic so I naturally concluded he believed they're homophobic. But no, Robert still leapt to their defense. Unable to explain how it isn't homophobic though. Robert is not homophobic though. He just wants to discriminate and supports groups that support such a position.

RobertKK wrote: »

What?

I don't know why teachers have to be open about their sexuality at school or in the workplace when it has nothing to do with their work.

It is like the whole St patrick's day parade fuss in the US as if sexuality was part of the parade, when the day has nothing to do with sexuality.

Yes we get, one is homosexual, one would think it was a disease given how some feel the need to talk about being homosexual as if there was something wrong with them.
Then talk about a harder life but choose to bring it on themselves when they could easily avoid it.

Schools can employ who they want in accordance with their ethos, may not like it but that is how it is.

Oh wait he addressed finally. Why do you think one should have to hide their sexuality even when not working for fear of losing job? Iona are actively campaigning against removing that allowance btw. So if one is gay, best not to become a teacher. Intolerant and horrible society to support tbh.

Turtwig · 07-02-2014 04:15PM

Steppenwolfe wrote: »

He didn't duck and weave in the post he was banned for. He stated his view on the subject clear enough without any abuse or name calling. He was banned for having that view and expressing it. So I wouldn't be too critical of others for being wary about expressing their opinion on here. You and others are free to call him and other ssm opponents bigots and worse. Many here see no problem with that. 'Call a spade a spade' is the usual arguement. However, don't expect a two sided debate on here. It will not be allowed to happen.

Unless you are the moderator of the forum or himself you have no idea what he was actually banned for.

Do you think the Iona Institute are homophobic?

Comments