Do you think the Iona Institute are homophobic?

Zubeneschamali · 07-02-2014 04:52PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I think it is perfectly fine for Iona to champion Catholic views, and if they want to go on RTÉ seven nights a week and buy ad time to urge Catholics not to get get same sex married, not to adopt as a gay couple and to steer clear of bum sex, I'd have no issues at all with them, I can always use a laugh.

Gay people in general could point and laugh, and I suppose gay Catholics could vote against Iona in Church Elections for Pope or whatever it is goes on inside the catholic Church to decide policy.

But that isn't what they are doing. They are trying to hijack the State to enforce their mad moral ideas on the rest of us.

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 04:53PM

Daith wrote: »

No of course not. The teacher is picked by the school through an interview process and is brought on based on the school believing they are the best person for that job.

If the teacher "comes out" as hetrosexual ("myself and the girlfriend headed to the cinema") nothing will happen.

If the teacher "comes out" as homosexual they can be fired based on their sexuality.

Seems fair yes?

I don't see why any of them would need to come out.

Happyman42 · 07-02-2014 04:54PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Roman Catholicism is homophobic. Their beliefs are outdated and wrong just like their onetime belief Gallileo was wrong and that other one where they believed women where inferior and had to be 'cleansed' after giving birth.
They catch on eventually, they are now being asked to catch up again.

Daith · 07-02-2014 04:54PM

No

RobertKK wrote: »

I don't see why any of them would need to come out.

So you believe in a school with work colleagues no one can mention their private lifes?

Cabaal · 07-02-2014 04:54PM

No

RobertKK wrote: »

Only if you think the St Vincent de paul should tax on it's donations to help the poor.
The Franciscans in Dublin who provide food, clothes, a shower to those who need it should pay tax on the good donated to them that they hand out.
If you think money raised in church for disasters like in the Philippines, tsunamis. earthquakes, Syria should be taxed.
If you think aid organisations like trocaire which is a Catholic charity should have money to donated to help the poor of the world should be taxed.

Maybe you don't care about the poor and needy?

You appear to be confused, let me make it simpler for you.

There's a difference between a charity such as trocaire and the actual catholic church in Ireland.

The actual catholic church in Ireland doesn't pay tax,
It also refuses to compensate abuse victims, so seems pretty fair to tax the catholic church.

Corkfeen · 07-02-2014 04:55PM

No

RobertKK wrote: »

I don't see why any of them would need to come out.

So one should hide their sexuality for the remainder of their lives or potentially be fired. You sir are an idiot.

Daith · 07-02-2014 04:56PM

No

Corkfeen wrote: »

So one should hide their sexuality for the remainder of their lives or potentially be fired. You sir are an idiot.

In fairness he is saying both should hide their sexuality and talk about work all the time.

floggg · 07-02-2014 04:57PM

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.

Explain to us why that's wrong.

Give us a logical, reasoned, evidence based argument against marriage equality.

If you can give is one that stands up to basic scrutiny, I'll tip my hat to you and acknowledge my error.

aidan24326 · 07-02-2014 04:58PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

So it's all ok then? Once again we invoke 'it's my religious belief' and that makes everything alright?

Well no it doesn't.

If I posted here that all queers should burn in hell (kind of along the lines of what a fair few religious people think) then I should not be allowed to simply hide under the umbrella of religion as though any view or belief is valid once we attach the religious label to it.

This is what Richard Dawkins correctly described as 'undeserved respect', this nonsensical idea that you have to give all religious beliefs equal credence and respect however ridiculous they may be. It's time people called a spade a spade. What's nonsense is nonsense, and what's wrong is just plain wrong. It can be dressed up in religious mumbo-jumbo til the cows come home and that fact will never change.

Cabaal · 07-02-2014 04:58PM

No

RobertKK wrote: »

I don't see why any of them would need to come out.

You don't see a need for a person to live their life normally and not lie about something they are doing which is in no way illegal in the Irish state?

Bottom line is being gay in this state is not illegal, as such being gay should have zero impact on your employment prospects.

Its discrimination to say you should have an impact,

darced · 07-02-2014 04:58PM

This post has been deleted.

Corkfeen · 07-02-2014 04:59PM

No

Daith wrote: »

In fairness he is saying both should hide their sexuality and talk about work all the time.

Except being gay outside of work could also allow for being fired.

road_high · 07-02-2014 04:59PM

No

RobertKK wrote: »

Only if you think the St Vincent de paul should tax on it's donations to help the poor.
The Franciscans in Dublin who provide food, clothes, a shower to those who need it should pay tax on the good donated to them that they hand out.
If you think money raised in church for disasters like in the Philippines, tsunamis. earthquakes, Syria should be taxed.
If you think aid organisations like trocaire which is a Catholic charity should have money to donated to help the poor of the world should be taxed.

Maybe you don't care about the poor and needy?

Don't give me the "Catholic Church" do-gooder line. A visit to the splendour of the Vatican quickly exposes that lie.
Plenty of good organisdations such as SVDP and the like that do good work, but have nothing to do with the "Church" as it stands to me i.e. the one that the UN had to give a dressing down for protecting known child abusers, the one that refuses to accept any wrong doing for decades of the most vile abuse of children and woman, and the same one that stole babies from woman destroying families. So please spare the rubbish about the "poor and needy".....

darced · 07-02-2014 04:59PM

This post has been deleted.

Cabaal · 07-02-2014 05:00PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If you were against a black person marrying a white person I'd call you a racist.

This is no different,

Corkfeen · 07-02-2014 05:01PM

No

darced wrote: »

Plenty of gay people disagree.

Paddy Manning doesn't constitute 'plenty'.

Sarky · 07-02-2014 05:01PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That little old lady IS racist. That someone getting icked out by two men kissing IS a homophobe. I'm sure this has been covered many, many times already, but everyone has prejudices. Just being "a little bit homophobic" doesn't excuse you. How is this so hard to understand?

Daith · 07-02-2014 05:01PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Someone who campaigns against a black person having equal rights is what I'd call a racist. Someone who believes that a black person is not equal to a white person is what I'd call a racist. Someone who believes that two black people should not adopt is what I'd call a racist. Someone who believes that black people should not be able to marry and settle for an inferior relationship to white people is what I'd call a racist.

eyescreamcone · 07-02-2014 05:05PM

No

You seriously don't believe that a black couple could adopt a white child though, do you?

Cabaal · 07-02-2014 05:06PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Plenty?
Name 10 in Ireland, hell name 5 gay people that disagree in Ireland

Just because they disagree doesn't mean they are right, as I've stated a number of times...women campaigned against women getting the right to vote.

I guess that means the right to vote is wrong, should we perhaps get rid of this right?

70% of Catholics surveyed by the catholic church in Ireland want marriage equality, the survey sample included priests by the way

Bannasidhe · 07-02-2014 05:07PM

No

RobertKK wrote: »

Only if you think the St Vincent de paul should tax on it's donations to help the poor.
The Franciscans in Dublin who provide food, clothes, a shower to those who need it should pay tax on the good donated to them that they hand out.
If you think money raised in church for disasters like in the Philippines, tsunamis. earthquakes, Syria should be taxed.
If you think aid organisations like trocaire which is a Catholic charity should have money to donated to help the poor of the world should be taxed.

Maybe you don't care about the poor and needy?

Can I just point out that those worthy causes are NOT using the RCC's money. They are redistributing the money/goods donated to them by the general public including Non-Catholics like myself.

Piliger · 07-02-2014 05:07PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yes they are.

A homophobe and a sad excuse for a human being.

Cabaal · 07-02-2014 05:11PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yeah, just like a person who hates a black person standing beside them is not racist
:rolleyes:

Montjuic · 07-02-2014 05:12PM

When a country with over 400K unemployed; another 400K struggling to survive and many thousands forced out through emigration why are the politicians and media focusing such energies and attention on an issue that effects very few people in the scheme of things?

Why is all this energy and pure waste of time not directed at the SSM issue before when the Celtic Tiger was roaring? Why now in the middle of a terrible recession when there are way more pressing issues? Sure Labour of course have kick started a liberal assault and concentrated on that while leaving the working class and unemployed to rot but FG should remember who is larger in this coalition and TDs who are uncomfortable with all this and there are many need to start making this known.

Why is such time being wasted on this? Let the SSM marriage bandwagon do a poll at dole queues around the country? Do they think the majority of middle Ireland gives a dam about this. Civil partnership was quite sufficient.

It would be better to hold a referendum now since the SSM side actually don't want a debate although Una Mullally and her ilk want any opposing views shut down so you couldn't really call it a debate.

So let the government hold it! It will be defeated! Bring it on!

There are two similarities compared to the Seanad referendum which points to this being defeated:

1. The polls are way too high even to the SSM proponents with any modicum of sense this must ring alarm bells. These polls are skew ways and cannot be trusted. The fact they are coming out as 80% in favour is a red flag that this can't be accurate - it is way too high in favour. If it was 55% - 60% it would look more trustworthy. The exact same situation occurred in the Seanad referendum.

2. The politicians will not be able to mobilize their party machines behind this apart from Labour and even then rural Labour TDs will only do this half half heartedly. The Labour party does not have the countrywide reach that FF/FG do.The TDs will pay lip service to it in favor since unfortunately they are now not allowed to speak against it since the vociferous liberal lefties will rip them to shreds. Enda Kenny is lukewarm about this and most of the FG TDs are being railroaded into this but would be against it hand on heart.

Any one who thinks the average FF/FG branch member is going to actively campaign on this knows nothing about politics. There will be little to no campaigning by the average political party member on the ground on this issue. Most of FF voted against the abortion legalization this is a pointer on what opinion they hold on the SSM issue apart from I'm so liberal, progressive and trendy Averil Power cause it gets me publicity. Well this particular Senator should recognize Sen. Jim Walsh's opinion is the opinion of most FF members whether she likes it or not.

The TDs on the government side will probably say they are in favour with some so called renegades being filleted again if they are brave enough to disagree with the current group think same as the abortion referendum. Like the Seanad referendum government TDs and Senators will do sweet FA on the ground in terms of campaigning on it and will not bother getting canvassers out in the rain for this and putting up posters. This is where referendums are won and lost. It is a fact that most party members are older and more conservative especially in FF/FG.

Do the SSM bandwagon really see Mr. Panti convincing them.

The liberal lefties may believe its a dead cert but that's easy to think as you sip a craft beer in Whelans at some obscure gig. Just because you surround yourself with people of a similar view does not mean the country at large holds this view but since they refuse to countenance any other opinion they are convinced there is greater support out there than there actually is.

Hold the referendum; drag out the drag queens to canvass in small towns and to conservative families in Dublin and Irelands major cities let's see how that goes? Sorry but if they think Panti in a full drag costume canvassing Seamus the local FF/FG member in South Kerry in his farmyard is going to win the day they need to get real about this.

In fact it is great the more hysterical and fanatical the SSM cabal become the more they are turning people off.

Connected to my above point re over estimation of the polls which the SSM camp are trotting out - just bear in mind the last great "gay de jour" in an electoral context in his last outing a la Mr. David Norris. His polls were way over estimated and were primarily media driven.

Let him out again - please do he would give a great boost in making sure this referendum will be lost!

Homophobia and discrimination is always wrong and must be condemned but there is no entitlement to marriage or forcing children into gay adoption. This is not a human right like Amnesty now purports. Amnesty used to be into campaigning for prisoners on death row - now its a gay campaign agency when did this happen?

Corkfeen · 07-02-2014 05:15PM

No

Grand job,human rights issues should be forgotten during recessions and everything should be thrown to the wayside. I hope you feel better after getting your rant about the lefties out.

floggg · 07-02-2014 05:16PM

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.

A few queries for you in order to understand your position. I would appreciate an answer for once.

What is the precise nature of your objection to state marriage?

Do you think the State should provide tax and legal protections and benefits or not?

If yes, how does it decide what marriages should count?

Should there be a free for all where the state should recognise every self declared marriage - even where there may be moral or public policy objections to the particular form of marriage (e.g. Due to age or mental capacity).

If they state shouldn't give any protections etc to marriage, how does the institute of marriage protect or help families - which you said previously was the aim/benefit of marriage (or something similar).

If marriage is simply a (non- legally) binging arrangement, what's to stop people declaring themselves married or divorced at will - rendering the whole thing a farce?

Given your opposition to civil marriage, will you vote ok to marriage equality even if it won't affect the status of heterosexual marriages or bring about their end?

If you will vote no, what would that achieve?

How do you square away the resulting inequality as a matter of law whereby gay couples are disadvantaged compared to straight couples?

Should you opposition of civil marriage trump the right of those couples to equality?

What would the benefit/gain for you and for society as a whole which you think justifies the resulting inequality?

I look forward to your response.

Daith · 07-02-2014 05:17PM

No

Corkfeen wrote: »

Grand job,human rights issues should be forgotten during recessions and everything should be thrown to the wayside. I hope you feel better after getting your rant about the lefties out.

Of course all gay people are working and none have ever emigrated too.

maximoose · 07-02-2014 05:17PM

No

Montjuic wrote: »

It would be better to hold a referendum now since the SSM side actually don't want a debate although Una Mullally and her ilk want any opposing views shut down so you couldn't really call it a debate.

So let the government hold it! It will be defeated! Bring it on!

I'm amazed by your confidence

Is it time for a poll?

Happyman42 · 07-02-2014 05:18PM

No

Montjuic wrote: »

When a country with over 400K unemployed; another 400K struggling to survive and many thousands forced out through emigration why are the politicians and media focusing such energies and attention on an issue that effects very few people in the scheme of things?

Why is all this energy and pure waste of time not directed at the SSM issue before when the Celtic Tiger was roaring? Why now in the middle of a terrible recession when there are way more pressing issues? Sure Labour of course have kick started a liberal assault and concentrated on that while leaving the working class and unemployed to rot but FG should remember who is larger in this coalition and TDs who are uncomfortable with all this and there are many need to start making this known.

Why is such time being wasted on this? Let the SSM marriage bandwagon do a poll at dole queues around the country? Do they think the majority of middle Ireland gives a dam about this. Civil partnership was quite sufficient.

It would be better to hold a referendum now since the SSM side actually don't want a debate although Una Mullally and her ilk want any opposing views shut down so you couldn't really call it a debate.

So let the government hold it! It will be defeated! Bring it on!

There are two similarities compared to the Seanad referendum which points to this being defeated:

1. The polls are way too high even to the SSM proponents with any modicum of sense this must ring alarm bells. These polls are skew ways and cannot be trusted. The fact they are coming out as 80% in favour is a red flag that this can't be accurate - it is way too high in favour. If it was 55% - 60% it would look more trustworthy. The exact same situation occurred in the Seanad referendum.

2. The politicians will not be able to mobilize their party machines behind this apart from Labour and even then rural Labour TDs will only do this half half heartedly. The Labour party does not have the countrywide reach that FF/FG do.The TDs will pay lip service to it in favor since unfortunately they are now not allowed to speak against it since the vociferous liberal lefties will rip them to shreds. Enda Kenny is lukewarm about this and most of the FG TDs are being railroaded into this but would be against it hand on heart.

Any one who thinks the average FF/FG branch member is going to actively campaign on this knows nothing about politics. There will be little to no campaigning by the average political party member on the ground on this issue. Most of FF voted against the abortion legalization this is a pointer on what opinion they hold on the SSM issue apart from I'm so liberal, progressive and trendy Averil Power cause it gets me publicity. Well this particular Senator should recognize Sen. Jim Walsh's opinion is the opinion of most FF members whether she likes it or not.

The TDs on the government side will probably say they are in favour with some so called renegades being filleted again if they are brave enough to disagree with the current group think same as the abortion referendum. Like the Seanad referendum government TDs and Senators will do sweet FA on the ground in terms of campaigning on it and will not bother getting canvassers out in the rain for this and putting up posters. This is where referendums are won and lost. It is a fact that most party members are older and more conservative especially in FF/FG.

Do the SSM bandwagon really see Mr. Panti convincing them.

The liberal lefties may believe its a dead cert but that's easy to think as you sip a craft beer in Whelans at some obscure gig. Just because you surround yourself with people of a similar view does not mean the country at large holds this view but since they refuse to countenance any other opinion they are convinced there is greater support out there than there actually is.

Hold the referendum; drag out the drag queens to canvass in small towns and to conservative families in Dublin and Irelands major cities let's see how that goes? Sorry but if they think Panti in a full drag costume canvassing Seamus the local FF/FG member in South Kerry in his farmyard is going to win the day they need to get real about this.

In fact it is great the more hysterical and fanatical the SSM cabal become the more they are turning people off.

Connected to my above point re over estimation of the polls which the SSM camp are trotting out - just bear in mind the last great "gay de jour" in an electoral context in his last outing a la Mr. David Norris. His polls were way over estimated and were primarily media driven.

Let him out again - please do he would give a great boost in making sure this referendum will be lost!

Homophobia and discrimination is always wrong and must be condemned but there is no entitlement to marriage or forcing children into gay adoption. This is not a human right like Amnesty now purports. Amnesty used to be into campaigning for prisoners on death row - now its a gay campaign agency when did this happen?

Should you not have sent that to the editor of the Irish Times John?

Cabaal · 07-02-2014 05:18PM

No

Montjuic wrote: »

Homophobia and discrimination is always wrong and must be condemned but there is no entitlement to marriage or forcing children into gay adoption. This is not a human right like Amnesty now purports. Amnesty used to be into campaigning for prisoners on death row - now its a gay campaign agency when did this happen?

So your claiming something is wrong but yet you think discrimination is ok? Seriously?

Lets go back in time abit,

Racism and discrimination is always wrong and must be condemned but there is no entitlement to marriage between a black person and a white person and allowing children to be forced to be born of mixed race

The above when it comes to black people was the same sort of view that existed in 1950's America, a view which we call racist.

We hang our heads in shame at these backward views of black people and in only a few short years from now we'll hang our heads in shame because of people's backward views when it comes to gay people.

Do you think the Iona Institute are homophobic?

Comments