Do you think the Iona Institute are homophobic?

alaimacerc · 07-02-2014 10:16PM

mango salsa wrote: »

Actually that was the Actor Jeremy Irons

Isn't that what I said: a British Tory?

Actually, I think it was the semi-trained polecat himself I was thinking about.

floggg · 07-02-2014 10:17PM

No

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yes, you are either all the way racist or not at all. that's how that works.

Bannasidhe · 07-02-2014 10:40PM

No

David Norris - Late Late Show now.

Bannasidhe · 07-02-2014 10:50PM

No

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

It's not a subject I'm very aware of, so I have to ask those in the know: Is claiming to have a PhD in politics something similar to claiming to have a PhD in science? In other words something that no one who has one would actually say?

Well politics is hardly (an exact) science

.

I must admit the claim caught me by surprise given the tenor and composition of that particular poster's contributions. But perhaps the institution that awarded him his doctorate has different standards to any of the ones I have worked in....

It struck me as an attempt to convey authority on the subject - a subject that only that poster was interested in ranting about - perhaps in the belief that we would all be so overawed by Dr Montjuic's qualifications we would stop laughing.

Cos who de hell expects to find a PhD in AH.

RobertKK · 07-02-2014 11:04PM

I thought David Norris came across well, wish him the best of health.

floggg · 07-02-2014 11:18PM

No

I was really surprised to hear he had been gay bashed within the past few years, and both saddened and awed with the reason why he didn't publicise it before.

I personally think he can be hard to relate to for many irish people, but i think he deserves praise and recognition as somebody who spent his entire life fighting for what for equality.

It's actually extremely humbling to think that how much of a direct impact his work has had on my life as a gay man.

alaimacerc · 07-02-2014 11:21PM

rozeboosje wrote: »

That's a point I've brought up before (elsewhere). Sadly, "marriage" is such a loaded word that many people simply CANNOT think about the term without bringing their own, personal, religious ideology into the discussion. I have suggested before that the term "marriage" should simply be scrapped out of the legal statute books, and replaced with a completely different, secular term. Of course technically the terms would be synonymous and nothing would change "legally", but the actual word "marriage" would no longer be used.

I suspect this is no longer an option, politically speaking, because having been denied any such reasonable compromise or semantic finessing exercise up to this point, supporters of marriage equality are no longer in much of a mood to compromise by "surrendering ground" they've had to struggle over every inch of.

Leaves the polygamists somewhat shafted, of course, but the majority of them haven't been doing much to endear themselves to liberal thought, so they've rather brought that on themselves.

After that, the word "marriage" itself could be handed back to the religious people to abuse to their hearts' content, but no longer relevant to discussion about the legal status within the context of society as a whole.

Rather, the term "marriage" would be in the public domain for people to wink at or pedant over, according to taste!

alaimacerc · 07-02-2014 11:34PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

David Norris - Late Late Show now.

Storming performance from Norris, and rather moving in several respects. Sorry he didn't have gladder tidings to bring on the topic of his oncological prognosis...

Annasopra · 08-02-2014 12:52AM

No

Bannasidhe wrote: »

David Norris - Late Late Show now.

Missed it. Was it any good?

Montjuic · 08-02-2014 12:54AM

Corkfeen wrote: »

Here you go:
http://www.squareonemd.com/pdf/Crowl%20Ahn%20%20Baker%202008%20Same%20Sex%20Parenting%20Meta%20Analysis.pdf

It has been peer reviewed btw.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15504280802177615#.UvUX4h9O038

There has been many more studies since btw.

Those studies haven't been peer reviewed they have been queer reviewed.

Ideologically slanted biased nonsense!

Maximus Alexander · 08-02-2014 12:54AM

No

mango salsa wrote: »

Missed it. Was it any good?

He was excellent. A very charming man.

crazygeryy · 08-02-2014 12:55AM

alaimacerc wrote: »

Storming performance from Norris, and rather moving in several respects. Sorry he didn't have gladder tidings to bring on the topic of his oncological prognosis...

Is his cancer getting worse? I missed the interview.

Ghost Buster · 08-02-2014 12:59AM

No

Back to the Op. Anyone who can read KNOWS the Iona Institute are homophobic and if not then are themselves so.
Close it now!

Maximus Alexander · 08-02-2014 01:01AM

No

crazygeryy wrote: »

Is his cancer getting worse? I missed the interview.

On the contrary, he suggested that the doctors all seemed quite pleased with how things were progressing.

moxin · 08-02-2014 01:03AM

No

Iona and their ilk have played a massive own goal here. They've been the butt of jokes in my workplace even from colleagues who were neutral/no opinion on SSM. Just read and watched Panti's latest interview on Ch4, by god it was funny but in a way in that it puts IONA's views as a position to the centre of ridicule. Ya know what, Panti is becoming a mainstream celebrity in her own right out of this, go Panti!

http://www.thejournal.ie/panti-channel-4-1305825-Feb2014/?utm_source=facebook_short

Montjuic · 08-02-2014 01:04AM

floggg wrote: »

Clever tactic. There's just too much to pick apart for anybody to even begin to try.

I'll go with one very factual in accuracy. The polls in the presidential race changed constantly as the race evolved.

Yes, Norris was the early front runner but as the race developed his poll numbers fell. So it was never the case that the polling numbers didn't reflect the results - his votes reflected his expected position based on final polls.

It was actually just a case that the lead changes hands a number of times as the race developed - which was not helped in Norris' case with some underhanded tactics and regurgitating of old news.

The polls were always fairly accurate.

Also, you are being very offensive to rural people to suggest that they are all backward bigots.

Rural area may be somewhat more conservative, but still on the whole embrace the principal of equality.

Anyway, when it comes to a referendum I'd rather have Dublin on my side than Leitrim.

First I am as culchie as they come and proud of it. So I am well briefed on how Mr. Panti is going down outside of the D4 triangle.

Second speaking of major factual inaccuracies there is big hole in your statement re Norris. Norris was overestimated in polling same as in the SSM polls the more exposure he got and his ambivalence to his paedo boyfriend turned more off.

The more the Gay brigade shout as this so called debate runs the more people they are in turn going to turn off. Middle Ireland can't take a year and a half of this crap when the country is going down the tubes.

jill_valentine · 08-02-2014 01:08AM

No

Montjuic wrote: »

Those studies haven't been peer reviewed they have been queer reviewed.

Ideologically slanted biased nonsense!

You stay classy, San Diego.

Montjuic · 08-02-2014 01:10AM

Cabaal wrote: »

Hang on,

You stated

You also stated

Now you're ok with a single man adopting a child?

This goes against what you said about a mother raising a child, surely by your own logic a child should only ever be put with either a married man and women or a single mother,

Of course that itself brings its own issues because by your same argument the mother can't bring things to the child that the man would.

Its either a man and women or nobody by your own logic, anything else will not provide the best situation for the child.

It also means if you're happy for a single women or man to adopt then there is zero difference in a gay couple adopting.

If anything a gay couple would be more likely financially better off and as such better able to provide for the child then any single man or women would be able to, this in turn would provide a better standard of living for the child.

Nice line of reasoning there! Double income gay couple with more material wealth would be preferable than being minded by a single man or woman. What they would gain materially they would loose emotionally in such a skewed brain washed environment.

Rich gays can do as they want eh like Madonna or Angelina Jolie with African kids that's cool! Children are not flipping handbags buddy!

Ghost Buster · 08-02-2014 01:10AM

No

Montjuic wrote: »

First I am as culchie as they come and proud of it. So I am well briefed on how Mr. Panti is going down outside of the D4 triangle.

Second speaking of major factual inaccuracies there is big hole in your statement re Norris. Norris was overestimated in polling same as in the SSM polls the more exposure he got and his ambivalence to his paedo boyfriend turned more off.

The more the Gay brigade shout as this so called debate runs the more people they are in turn going to turn off. Middle Ireland can't take a year and a half of this crap when the country is going down the tubes.

Im similarly as culchie as they come and I see the total opposite attitude you. Do the Gay brigade have pink flashers on their engines btw?

BabysCoffee · 08-02-2014 01:10AM

No

Montjuic wrote: »

First I am as culchie as they come and proud of it. So I am well briefed on how Mr. Panti is going down outside of the D4 triangle.

Second speaking of major factual inaccuracies there is big hole in your statement re Norris. Norris was overestimated in polling same as in the SSM polls the more exposure he got and his ambivalence to his paedo boyfriend turned more off.

The more the Gay brigade shout as this so called debate runs the more people they are in turn going to turn off. Middle Ireland can't take a year and a half of this crap when the country is going down the tubes.

What crap exactly?

Ghost Buster · 08-02-2014 01:12AM

No

Montjuic wrote: »

Nice line of reasoning there! Double income gay couple with more material wealth would be preferable than being minded by a single man or woman. What they would gain materially they would loose emotionally in such a skewed brain washed environment.

Rich gays can do as they want eh like Madonna or Angelina Jolie with African kids that's cool! Children are not flipping handbags buddy!

Angelina is gay! That Brad Pitt is a lucky woman

moxin · 08-02-2014 01:14AM

No

Montjuic wrote: »

First I am as culchie as they come and proud of it. So I am well briefed on how Mr. Panti is going down outside of the D4 triangle.

Second speaking of major factual inaccuracies there is big hole in your statement re Norris. Norris was overestimated in polling same as in the SSM polls the more exposure he got and his ambivalence to his paedo boyfriend turned more off.

The more the Gay brigade shout as this so called debate runs the more people they are in turn going to turn off. Middle Ireland can't take a year and a half of this crap when the country is going down the tubes.

Look, decriminalisation of homosexuality occurred in 1993, it didn't affect "middle Ireland" in the recession then. Stop trying to link paedo's to Norris, it doesn't work and yes I didn't vote for him in the presidential election.

There is no Gay Brigade, its simply people you know(whether outed or not) who want equal rights, nothing wrong with that.

jill_valentine · 08-02-2014 01:15AM

No

Montjuic wrote: »

What they would gain materially they would loose emotionally in such a skewed brain washed environment.

Lad the council could work wonders with your gift for digging holes.

JackF1 · 08-02-2014 01:15AM

No

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Angelina is gay! That Brad Pitt is a lucky woman

So wait the gays are brainwashing people these days?

Montjuic · 08-02-2014 01:15AM

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Im similarly as culchie as they come and I see the total opposite attitude you. Do the Gay brigade have pink flashers on their engines btw?

Nope but someone thought I was some kind of ultra right wing urban dweller when I am far from that so was just setting them right. As a fellow culchie you should know it would be quite hard to believe that Seamus and Bridie down the road are going to go putting up Mr. Panti posters and they represent the majority of active voters and political party activists in FF/FG and to a lesser extent in Labour. This referendum is exactly like the Seanad referendum skewed polls over estimated support with no basis in fact and is dead in the water but the SSM lobby don't even realise it.

K-9 · 08-02-2014 01:16AM

Montjuic wrote: »

Those studies haven't been peer reviewed they have been queer reviewed.

Ideologically slanted biased nonsense!

Montjuic wrote: »

Children are not flipping handbags buddy!

I did smile, not a bad parody reg.

Montjuic · 08-02-2014 01:18AM

moxin wrote: »

Look, decriminalisation of homosexuality occurred in 1993, it didn't affect "middle Ireland" in the recession then. Stop trying to link paedo's to Norris, it doesn't work and yes I didn't vote for him in the presidential election.

There is no Gay Brigade, its simply people you know(whether outed or not) who want equal rights, nothing wrong with that.

Hold on buddy it wasn't so long ago his boyfriend was paedo fact he lobbied for him fact! I see he's been rehabilitated tonight but it doesn't change history. During that campaign he was the same as Una Mullaly he wanted no debate or questions on his support for his paedo ex boyfriend no attempt at linking there just fact!

JackF1 · 08-02-2014 01:24AM

No

Montjuic wrote: »

Hold on buddy it wasn't so long ago his boyfriend was paedo fact he lobbied for him fact! I see he's been rehabilitated tonight but it doesn't change history. During that campaign he was the same as Una Mullaly he wanted no debate or questions on his support for his paedo ex boyfriend no attempt at linking there just fact!

There is a gay brigade! It's a selection of men and women brave enough to stand up and try as best as possible to speak for a community that is often afraid to do so for various reasons I won't list

Montjuic · 08-02-2014 01:26AM

BabysCoffee wrote: »

What crap exactly?

Saturation level media coverage of a drag Queen shut down of debate by anyone who wishes to protect marriage and children. That kind of crap

Taco Chips · 08-02-2014 01:28AM

No

Montjuic wrote: »

Saturation level media coverage of a drag Queen shut down of debate by anyone who wishes to protect marriage and children. That kind of crap

I see this being repeated constantly by the anti-SSM side, but the fact remains that the only people that tried to shut down debate were Waters, O'Brien and the Iona shower by running crying to their solicitors when the game didn't go there way. Just because you keep repeating otherwise doesn't make it true.

Do you think the Iona Institute are homophobic?

Comments