Lolek Ltd, Trading as 'The Iona Institute'

Turtwig

I don't know aren't the broadcast guidelines being changed so that schooling an interviewee on facts is unfair play now? Iona will get a soapbox to spout whatever sh*t they like.

Mardy Bum

Just listening to Breda O'Brien now. She should stick to the teaching. Peter Boylan was very reserved in distilling her bullshit but did it very well.

Galvasean

Linkage?

Turtwig

Galvasean wrote: »

Linkage?

Here you go good sir enjoy!*


*I will not be held responsible for any head trauma that may occurr as a result of frustrated headdesking.

Corkfeen

oStarts at around 26/27 minutes. Breda actually tried to dispute Dr Peter Boylan's analysis, she seems to be claiming expertise on the issue.... She apparently views on legislating for X to be an ideological issue for Boylan even though legally the government was required to do so decades ago. It was a facepalm moment. I'm so grateful that none of my teacher's were a member of the Iona institute.

Nodin

A transcript, to lessen noise pollution....
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/04/21/dr-peter-boylan-and-breda-obrien-the-transcript/

Sierra 117

It was fantastic that he didn't let her away with anything. It was sad how she tried to twist the facts to suit herself even though she obviously didn't grasp the facts in the first place.

lazygal

Sierra 117 wrote: »

It was fantastic that he didn't let her away with anything. And she tried to twist the facts to suit herself even though she obviously didn't grasp the facts in the first place.

She's used to being allowed to speak with authority on whatever rights she wants to deny others, so it was glorious to hear her lack of expertise and obvious bias being so clearly picked apart.

Turtwig

Sierra 117 wrote: »

It was fantastic that he didn't let her away with anything. It was sad how she tried to twist the facts to suit herself even though she obviously didn't grasp the facts in the first place.

Fantastic for everyday folk maybe, but for himself I suspect the smear brush will have ordered extra paint. He could come in for a very torrid time, not to mention hate mail.

lazygal

Jernal wrote: »

Fantastic for everyday folk maybe, but for himself I suspect the smear brush will have ordered extra paint. He could come in for a very torrid time, not to mention hate mail.

Ronan Mullen made similar comments after the expert group report and Boylan was quick to ask him to withdraw them. I think its a standard Iona tactic.

Sarky

Blimey, she started off with a blatant lie and just went downhill from there.

lazygal

Sarky wrote: »

Blimey, she started off with a blatant lie and just went downhill from there.

I think that's her usual MO.

Galvasean

Jernal wrote: »

I don't know aren't the broadcast guidelines being changed so that schooling an interviewee on facts is unfair play now? Iona will get a soapbox to spout whatever sh*t they like.

Apparently sanity prevailed (for a change) and that's not going ahead.

Turtwig

Galvasean wrote: »

Apparently sanity prevailed (for a change) and that's not going ahead.

Well obviously because sanity requires a head.

I shall go and hang my head in shame in the corner now:o

PopePalpatine

Mardy Bum wrote: »

Just listening to Breda O'Brien now. She should stick to the teaching.

Aw, hell no! The last thing this country needs is fundies in schools.

Brian Shanahan

Cork Boy wrote: »

Re Arkell v. Pressdram (1971)

Back when the press had a pair and were not full of churnalists.

The Eye's pair is still bigger than the UK, you'll be glad to hear.

Pherekydes

Jernal wrote: »

Well obviously because sanity requires a head.

I shall go and hang my head in shame in the corner now:o

Whoever thought atheists would be thankful for a sanity clause?

the culture of deference

lazygal wrote: »

She's used to being allowed to speak with authority on whatever rights she wants to deny others, so it was glorious to hear her lack of expertise and obvious bias being so clearly picked apart.

We need to allow Iona reps on the airwaves just to see them and their arguments demolished effectively.

Do Iona support some terminations now... ?

Dr Patricia Casey, of Catholic think-tank the Iona Institute, said if all the recommendations were implemented they would “act to ensure that this situation of multiple systems failures doesn’t occur again”.
She said she had “no difficulty” with the call for the Medical Council to clarify when an intervention should take place to save the life of a mother.

Also

A government-appointed group has recommended a public referendum in Ireland on whether the Irish constitution should be altered to allow gay “marriage.”

David Quinn, a spokesman for the Catholic lobby group The Iona Institute, said that the committee had ignored the rights of religious organisations.

Arming himself with as much rhetorical mud as he could muster, Senator Ronan Mullen said the debate was a “flawed process” in which conniving politicians had tricked unsuspecting delegates into voting in favour of the proposition.

The obvious inference was that delegates, who had carefully listened to both sides of the debate before reaching their decision, were too stupid to comprehend the import of the issue. Given his insistence that the voting was somehow rigged, one wonders how Mr Mullen can explain the results of successive opinion polls, which have consistently revealed a large majority of Irish people endorse same-sex marriage.

Were those results also “flawed” or emblematic of some kind of malevolent left- wing conspiracy? The Iona Institute’s David Quinn tweeted that he had witnessed, “group-think at work yet again among many of the politicians”.

Sounds very sinister, doesn’t it? Until you realise that what Mr Quinn is actually describing is a democratic voting process in which the majority group happens to disagree with his minority view.

The caustic comments from Mr Quinn and Mr Mullen also beg another question: why did they persist in partaking in the convention if they were so convinced it was a charade? The implication must be that, having lost the debate; their only remaining option was to undermine the bone fides of the result.

Nodin

Transcript of Patricia Casey on RTE today. The reason for the italics will become clear after you read the two links at the bottom.

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/04/22/iona-lot-of-airtime/

Sarky

Oh now that's interesting. I wonder where she got the cash to settle out of court. I'd love to think it had been Iona money, but more likely the hospital she's attached to.

lazygal

Sarky wrote: »

Oh now that's interesting. I wonder where she got the cash to settle out of court. I'd love to think it had been Iona money, but more likely the hospital she's attached to.

More likely to be the insurance most medical consultants take out.

Galvasean

It makes me worry that such wacky and seemingly incompetent people can achieve such positions of power like senator or psychiatrist...

lazygal

Galvasean wrote: »

It makes me worry that such wacky and seemingly incompetent people can achieve such positions of power like senator or psychiatrist...

At least a senator has no control over medical decisions made on behalf of vulnerable people who may not be able to make decisions themselves.

recedite

"By caring for the sick...we participate in the healing ministry of Jesus Christ"
(from the mission statement of the Mater Miseryblahblah (publicly funded) hospital)
Its like that midwife in the Galway hospital who had to apologise in court for saying "This is a catholic country dearie". What she should have said is; "This is a catholic hospital dearie".
You can blame it all on that infamous little word; ethos.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

You can blame it all on that infamous little word; ethos.

I really do dislike that word quite intensely.

Galvasean

recedite wrote: »

"By caring for the sick...we participate in the healing ministry of Jesus Christ"
(from the mission statement of the Mater Miseryblahblah (publicly funded) hospital)
Its like that midwife in the Galway hospital who had to apologise in court for saying "This is a catholic country dearie". What she should have said is; "This is a catholic hospital dearie".
You can blame it all on that infamous little word; ethos.

Shocking that the midwife was made apologise and scolded for stating the bleedin' obvious.

the culture of deference

This weeks deluded ramblings of Breda O brien, she has found a single study from the other side of the world that she can twist. Beware the full article contains 80% BS filler.

Christians and other believers are often derided for believing in a God or gods on faith alone.

However, thoughtful believers say they make a leap of faith based on a reasonable, though not definitive, level of proof. They don’t endorse blind faith or dogma that flies in the face of evidence, a stance they consider to be fideism, not faith.

Scientists and rationalists pride themselves on avoiding faith-based dogma by strenuously adhering only to empirical evidence.

Yet we have the extraordinary situation where people who believe that abortion should be available in Ireland are ignoring the best available scientific evidence, in favour of a faith-based dogma that abortion is somehow good for women when they are in crisis.

Doctors have a professional duty to practise evidence-based medicine. You cannot invent a new treatment and test it on unsuspecting women because you have a hunch that it might be good for them, particularly when research shows there is no benefit at all, and some risk of harm.

Shift goalposts
In recent times, we have seen prominent psychiatrists shift the goalposts. Confronted with scientific evidence that abortion has no mental health benefits, they have decided that there is a category of women who are not mentally ill, but who are suicidal because they are pregnant. Removing the pregnancy will remove the desire to die by suicide, they declare.

To date, no psychiatrist has endorsed that “solution”, to my knowledge, but when the solution is to eliminate the child before birth, it is somehow acceptable and humane? You could only contemplate that terminal “solution” if you reject the unborn child’s right to life, and if you refuse to accept that doing something as irrevocable as taking her child’s life could also have a severe impact on a woman’s mental health. But people acting on faith do not need to provide evidence that abortion helps. They just know.

The evidence these doctors are choosing to ignore is found in the peer-reviewed study by David Fergusson and others in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry this month. “However, it is our view that the growing evidence suggesting that abortion does not have therapeutic benefits cannot be ignored indefinitely, and it is unacceptable for clinicians to authorise large numbers of abortions on grounds for which there is, currently, no scientific evidence.”

Suicidal ideation
We in Ireland, who have avoided the trap of legislating on grounds such as suicidal ideation, are about to do so just as conclusive evidence emerges that there is no mental health justification for abortion. In fact, there are small to moderate increases in issues such as depression, anxiety and suicidal ideation after abortion.

It does not matter if you set up panels with six doctors, or 600: there is no mental health benefit to abortion, and suicidal intent should never be a ground for permitting abortion. Will politicians be able to let go of the “there is no alternative” (Tina) and psychiatrists in favour of abortion be able to let go of their blind faith that this will benefit women and join their 113 colleagues who accept the evidence that it won’t? For the sake of the mental health of women, and the survival of unborn children, let us fervently hope they can.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/evidence-showing-no-mental-health-benefit-to-abortion-cannot-be-ignored-1.1374415

PopePalpatine

She's obviously warming up for the inevitable moment when John Waters gets Alzheimer's.

recedite

the culture of deference wrote: »

This weeks deluded ramblings.........

To be fair to O'Brien, she is being rational enough about it. She cites a reputable study.
Heres a link to the abstract of the study, as the IT link seems to be broken.
If you have evidence to contradict the study, Fergusson's e-mail address is there, and you can contact him directly.

IMO when prospective parents have too much choice in the timing of procreation they tend to leave it too late in life. If people who were depressed about the onset to puberty could choose to delay it, we would all have done so.
There are probably some women for whom motherhood will bring great joy, and others who will be greatly inconvenienced. The latter will seek abortions, but will not necessarily be feeling suicidal. They will most likely plan it in a rational way.
Of those who are suffering from depression, you can't tell whether motherhood will improve their outlook on life or not. That is the gist of the study.

Turtwig

Folks digs or snipes at a person's marital status are totally out of bounds.
Sorry. Posts deleted.