John Waters quits BAI

SpaceTime · 23-01-2014 5:56pm

efb wrote: »

https://m.facebook.com/notes/broadcasting-authority-of-ireland-bai/statement-on-the-resignation-of-john-waters-from-bai/657017111011413

After pantigate Waters resigns. Martyrdom awaits...

Is there any link that doesn't require a Facebook account to view it ?

Shakti · 23-01-2014 5:59pm

It is a good thing he has gone, I also think Patricia Casey's position/s is equally untenable

mikom · 23-01-2014 6:03pm

bluewolf wrote: »

'This is really a kind of satire on marriage which is being conducted by the gay lobby,' Waters said. ‘It’s not that they want to get married; they want to destroy the institution of marriage because they’re envious of it;
‘This is really an attempt to discredit an institution, the nominative institution on which society and human civilization is founded. If you do that there will be consequences, and one of them is that marriage will become a nothing;

‘It is a deliberate sabotage of the culture and the relishing of the destruction as a result. Gay marriage is a satire"

Read more: http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Columnist-John-Waters-in-a-Panti-twist-over-anti-gay-claims.html#ixzz2rEqbnjOs
Follow us: @IrishCentral on Twitter | IrishCentral on Facebook

Now if you'll excuse me I just have to nip off and have a child outside of marraige with Sinead O'Connor, which will in no way discredit the institution.

Ps. here is a sexy pic of me........... http://cf.broadsheet.ie/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/watersnip.jpg

J_E · 23-01-2014 6:05pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

I don't read JW. I'm not aware he is a homophobe. Isn't his ex wife bi-sexual?

That kind of reasoning is along the same lines as "I'm not racist, I have a black friend"

Phill Ewinn · 23-01-2014 6:07pm

Cydoniac wrote: »

That kind of reasoning is along the same lines as "I'm not racist, I have a black friend"

??

Nodin · 23-01-2014 6:08pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

JW article like?

Point out the homophobic bits too!

" It's a bit rich of Waters to attempt to silence mild criticism of himself when he offers startlingly anti-gay criticism of others. It says a lot actually. In advocating against marriage rights for gay people in 2012 Waters famously found himself reduced to the specious old YOUR doughnut is making ME fat argument in a discussion with the College Tribune, based in University College Dublin.

'This is really a kind of satire on marriage which is being conducted by the gay lobby,' Waters said. ‘It’s not that they want to get married; they want to destroy the institution of marriage because they’re envious of it;

‘This is really an attempt to discredit an institution, the nominative institution on which society and human civilization is founded. If you do that there will be consequences, and one of them is that marriage will become a nothing;

‘It is a deliberate sabotage of the culture and the relishing of the destruction as a result. Gay marriage is a satire…. But sometimes you have to allow things to happen for the consequences to become obvious...'

Read more: http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Columnist-John-Waters-in-a-Panti-twist-over-anti-gay-claims.html#ixzz2rFKXliHW
Follow us: @IrishCentral on Twitter | IrishCentral on Facebook

J_E · 23-01-2014 6:11pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

??

You're suggesting that he can't be a homophobe if he had a bisexual wife.

This could be a reasonable debate if you didn't ignore every bit of evidence before you and conveniently forgetting to back up your own statements. Shame.

efb · 23-01-2014 6:11pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

JW article like?

Point out the homophobic bits too!

Have you your name calling quotes?

Nodin · 23-01-2014 6:11pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

I don't read JW. I'm not aware he is a homophobe. Isn't his ex wife bi-sexual?

What ex-wife?He's never married.

23-01-2014 6:14pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

I don't read JW. I'm not aware he is a homophobe. Isn't his ex wife bi-sexual?

How is his ex-wife's orientation anyway relevant? Vladimir Putin says he has gay friends: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25799499 Do you honestly think Putin is not a homophobe?

Homophobic people using the "But I have a gay friend (or bisexual wife in this case)" line is pretty much the equivalent of "I'm not a racist but......"

Corkfeen · 23-01-2014 6:16pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

JW article like?

Point out the homophobic bits too!

Older Irish Times articles are behind a pay wall.

However the post that Nodin linked to is perfectly illustrative of homophobia. He believes that same sex marriage will be exceedingly damaging and describes it as a satirical plot by a gay lobby(who don't wish to marry) to bring doom upon us all.

It's up there with antisemites blaming the wall street crash on Jews. Neither view has a rational grounding and all tend to be founded in bigotry. He has no facts to backup his views so instead relies on propaganda of doom.

Phill Ewinn · 23-01-2014 6:17pm

Nodin wrote: »

" It's a bit rich of Waters to attempt to silence mild criticism of himself when he offers startlingly anti-gay criticism of others. It says a lot actually. In advocating against marriage rights for gay people in 2012 Waters famously found himself reduced to the specious old YOUR doughnut is making ME fat argument in a discussion with the College Tribune, based in University College Dublin.

'This is really a kind of satire on marriage which is being conducted by the gay lobby,' Waters said. ‘It’s not that they want to get married; they want to destroy the institution of marriage because they’re envious of it;

‘This is really an attempt to discredit an institution, the nominative institution on which society and human civilization is founded. If you do that there will be consequences, and one of them is that marriage will become a nothing;

‘It is a deliberate sabotage of the culture and the relishing of the destruction as a result. Gay marriage is a satire…. But sometimes you have to allow things to happen for the consequences to become obvious...'

Read more: http://www.irishcentral.com/opinion/cahirodoherty/Columnist-John-Waters-in-a-Panti-twist-over-anti-gay-claims.html#ixzz2rFKXliHW
Follow us: @IrishCentral on Twitter | IrishCentral on Facebook

The last few lines were badly put. About what I expect from the Indo!

Are you saying he's homophobic because he objects to gay marriage or are you saying he's homophobic because he hates gay people?

Plenty of gay people don't want gay marriage like.

marienbad · 23-01-2014 6:18pm

Shakti wrote: »

It is a good thing he has gone, I also think Patricia Casey's position/s is equally untenable

Patricia Casey ? Is she involved with the BAI ?

J_E · 23-01-2014 6:19pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Plenty of gay people don't want gay marriage like.

That's such a weak argument! Some gay people don't want marriage but it's not for those reasons and they wouldn't begrudge others. You're completely unreasonable but that's no surprise given the discussions so far.

Nodin · 23-01-2014 6:21pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

The last few lines were badly put. About what I expect from the Indo!.

It's not from the Indo.

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Are you saying he's homophobic because he objects to gay marriage or are you saying he's homophobic because he hates gay people? !.

We'll try again

'This is really a kind of satire on marriage which is being conducted by the gay lobby,' Waters said. ‘It’s not that they want to get married; they want to destroy the institution of marriage because they’re envious of it;

‘This is really an attempt to discredit an institution, the nominative institution on which society and human civilization is founded. If you do that there will be consequences, and one of them is that marriage will become a nothing;

‘It is a deliberate sabotage of the culture and the relishing of the destruction as a result. Gay marriage is a satire…. But sometimes you have to allow things to happen for the consequences to become obvious...'

He's saying Gays are trying to destroy marriage, essentially out of spite.

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Plenty of gay people don't want gay marriage like.

Plenty of straight people don't believe in marriage. No reason to ban it for everyone.

Phill Ewinn · 23-01-2014 6:21pm

Cydoniac wrote: »

That's such a weak argument! Some gay people don't want marriage but it's not for those reasons and they wouldn't begrudge others. You're completely unreasonable but that's no surprise given the discussions so far.

What's a weak argument?

I asked a question and put it into context

Corkfeen · 23-01-2014 6:24pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

What's a weak argument?

I asked a question and put it into context

You've yet to illustrate why his distinctly conspiratorial quotes aren't homophobic.

SpaceTime · 23-01-2014 6:33pm

Hmm...

I get the impression this gay marriage referendum (despite opinion polling showing a lot of support) is going to have a lot of sparks flying!
Should be an interesting period of Irish political history.

The Government have set the date way too far into the future though. Are they hoping both sides tire each other out and the population votes rationally by the time the day actually arrives?

i'd rather have seen the referendum happen much more quickly. This is just going to drag it out for a whole year +

Nodin · 23-01-2014 6:33pm

SpaceTime wrote: »

Hmm...

I get the impression this gay marriage referendum (despite opinion polling showing a lot of support) is going to have a lot of sparks flying!
Should be an interesting period of Irish political history.

The Government have set the date way too far into the future though. Are they hoping both sides tire each other out and the population votes rationally by the time the day actually arrives?

....they're not that far gone.

Phill Ewinn · 23-01-2014 6:33pm

Corkfeen wrote: »

You've yet to illustrate why his distinctly conspiratorial quotes aren't homophobic.

Are you saying gay people who oppose gay marriage are homophobic? His language was OTT. As I said, about what I expected from the Indo.

J_E · 23-01-2014 6:34pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Are you saying gay people who oppose gay marriage are homophobic? His language was OTT. As I said, about what I expected from the Indo.

You're assuming they oppose gay marriage because of gay people. This is 99% not the case.
They are not out in force campaigning against it either.

Nodin · 23-01-2014 6:38pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Are you saying gay people who oppose gay marriage are homophobic? His language was OTT. As I said, about what I expected from the Indo.

It's not from the Indo.

His language was not "OTT", and his meaning was clear.

Corkfeen · 23-01-2014 6:40pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Are you saying gay people who oppose gay marriage are homophobic? His language was OTT. As I said, about what I expected from the Indo.

He described it as an actual plot to cause immense damage to the fabric of society. He was fairly clear. HE doesn't even write for the Indo and it was from an interview.

Foxhound38 · 23-01-2014 6:41pm

efb wrote: »

https://m.facebook.com/notes/broadcasting-authority-of-ireland-bai/statement-on-the-resignation-of-john-waters-from-bai/657017111011413

After pantigate Waters resigns. Martyrdom awaits...

Why do we have to put "gate" after every "scandal" (I use the term loosely - John Waters making a general pillock of himself is hardly news to anyone at this stage) that happens in Ireland?

As for Waters - if there was a government project to fire him into the sun I'd gladly pay a tax increase towards it...

NuMarvel · 23-01-2014 6:43pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Are you saying gay people who oppose gay marriage are homophobic? His language was OTT. As I said, about what I expected from the Indo.

Yeah, saying letting gay people marry will destroy the institution of marriage, and by extension, society and human civilisation is just being over the top. Totally not homophobic. :rolleyes:

If he said that about a racial minority, he'd be branded a racist. I see no reason why those comments shouldn't be classified as homophobic.

humanji · 23-01-2014 6:44pm

Foxhound38 wrote: »

Why do we have to put "gate" after every "scandal" (I use the term loosely - John Waters making a general pillock of himself is hardly news to anyone at this stage) that happens in Ireland?

I'm just surprised people missed out on "Watersgate".

Phill Ewinn · 23-01-2014 7:08pm

Nodin wrote: »

It's not from the Indo.

His language was not "OTT", and his meaning was clear.

That's nice etc

Now, are you going answer my question?

J_E · 23-01-2014 7:12pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

That's nice etc

Now, are you going answer my question?

You're definitely trolling now :pac:

Nodin · 23-01-2014 7:18pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

That's nice etc

Now, are you going answer my question?

O look, Phills dodging

No, they are not nessecarily homophobic.

Annasopra · 23-01-2014 7:21pm

Cydoniac wrote: »

They are not out in force campaigning against it either.

3 or 4 of them are unfortunately

Phill Ewinn · 23-01-2014 7:23pm

Nodin wrote: »

O look, Phills dodging

No, they are not nessecarily homophobic.

But all straight people who object to gay marriage are homophobes.

This still afterhours or has this thread been moved to conspiracy theories yet?

Nodin · 23-01-2014 7:29pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

But all straight people who object to gay marriage are homophobes.

This still afterhours or has this thread been moved to conspiracy theories yet?

Nobody said that Phill.

You still seem to be dodging around Waters statement. Obviously you've never had the nerve to make your own views clearly known, but I'm surprised your so shy about a fellow traveller.

Hootanany · 23-01-2014 7:29pm

I see nothing wrong with same sex people marrying if they love Simone let them at it.

J_E · 23-01-2014 7:29pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

But all straight people who object to gay marriage are homophobes.

I object to lots of things. I don't go out of my way to harm and stop it when it hardly affects me though.

Phill Ewinn · 23-01-2014 7:35pm

Nodin wrote: »

Nobody said that Phill.

You still seem to be dodging around Waters statement. Obviously you've never had the nerve to make your own views clearly known, but I'm surprised your so shy about a fellow traveller.

I post on threads like this all the time. You post on the ones about the introduction of massive rates of abortion. I don't assume you get off on infanticde. Why do you assume I'm homophobic?

Isn't it true that you look upon me with hatred? Like you look upon so many people? Who's the 'phobe Nodin. I don't carry the weight of hatred like you you know.

_Redzer_ · 23-01-2014 7:40pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

I post on threads like this all the time. You post on the ones about the introduction of massive rates of abortion. I don't assume you get off on infanticde. Why do you assume I'm homophobic?

Isn't it true that you look upon me with hatred? Like you look upon so many people? Who's the 'phobe Nodin. I don't carry the weight of hatred like you you know.

You ALWAYS do this. Dodge the questions, taking over-the-top offence to inoffensive remarks and make yourself out to be the victim

Nodin · 23-01-2014 7:42pm

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

I post on threads like this all the time. .

And never explain yourself. why is that phill? Why can't you refer to waters comments?

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

You post on the ones about the introduction of massive rates of abortion. I don't assume you get off on infanticde..

Theres never been a thread about "the introduction of massive rates of abortion" phill. There have been threads on Abortion though.

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Why do you assume I'm homophobic?..

Well, call it a guess. Prove me wrong though - explain your reasons for objecting to gay marriage in detail.

humanji · 23-01-2014 7:47pm

Folks, there's no need to have a go at each other. Stick to the topic.

_Redzer_ · 23-01-2014 7:50pm

Nodin wrote: »

And never explain yourself. why is that phill? Why can't you refer to waters comments?

Theres never been a thread about "the introduction of massive rates of abortion" phill. There have been threads on Abortion though.

Well, call it a guess. Prove me wrong though - explain your reasons for objecting to gay marriage in detail.

He's just going to ignore you or kick up a fuss to avoid the question.

Then put you on his ignore list

Skylinehead · 23-01-2014 7:57pm

humanji wrote: »

I'm just surprised people missed out on "Watersgate".

donspeekinglesh · 23-01-2014 9:31pm

Hootanany wrote: »

I see nothing wrong with same sex people marrying if they love Simone let them at it.

Does Simone get a say in it?

Annasopra · 23-01-2014 9:36pm

donspeekinglesh wrote: »

Does Simone get a say in it?

I was wondering earlier who Simone was?

:P

Femme_Fatale · 24-01-2014 12:05am

The same four or five people leap on every thread that concerns gay people, to make swipe after swipe after swipe at gay people - and then play innocent when their homophobic leanings are challenged.
So cowardly. If they just said "Look, I have a problem with homosexuality" it would be way less pathetic.

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Just watched that interview. I would be really surprised if that lad didn't end up in a court room over that.

Disgraceful rant was disgraceful. Should have counted to ten before he said anything.

There was no rant, he just made a comment based on John Waters' own behaviour. You know this fully - your comment is pointless.

JupiterKid wrote: »

Waters was a self-styled "right on" liberal back in circa 1975 but now he's just a right wing dinosaur reactionary

"Look at me everyone - I've done an illogical u-turn on my views; what a maverick I am!" sums him up.

The Gimp of Dundalk · 24-01-2014 1:18am

I welcome this development.

expectationlost · 24-01-2014 1:57am

if you read the transcript http://www.broadsheet.ie/2014/01/16/wisdom-is-bliss/ you see that Rory/Pantibliss called everyone (a llittle bit) homophobic (which is okay aslong as your are aware of it and work against it).

so i won't deny but can I sue?

Rory did name waters and breda earlier but it was Brendan O'Conner who raised whether about Waters was homophobic and I thought Rory was actually fairly careful in generalising it, so much so that he called everyone homophobic, thus we can all sue him?

Manach · 24-01-2014 3:13pm

The withdrawal of Mr. Waters, an excellent and insightful writer- means that the conservative and moderate voice is even less heard in the context on the downturn of the morals in Modern Ireland and the surge of growth of the extremist secular life and the culture of relativity.
As for being called homophobic, surely a badge of honour as it betokens not following the same progressive group-think that emerges when there is any criticism of homosexual behaviour.

J_E · 24-01-2014 3:21pm

Manach wrote: »

The withdrawal of Mr. Waters, an excellent and insightful writer- means that the conservative and moderate voice is even less heard in the context on the downturn of the morals in Modern Ireland and the surge of growth of the extremist secular life and the culture of relativity.
As for being called homophobic, surely a badge of honour as it betokens not following the same progressive group-think that emerges when there is any criticism of homosexual behaviour.

Not sure what your stance/point is to be honest. Bit of an irrational statement. I don't think anyone said he was a bad writer, just that he has some very jarring views on various things. I don't think being allowed to love someone is a downturn of morals in Ireland. I don't see gay people screaming abuse walking up the likes of Abbey St.

Being discriminatory is hardly a badge of honour to anyone, would you get a hold of yourself?

mikom · 24-01-2014 3:23pm

Manach wrote: »

As for being called homophobic, surely a badge of honour as it betokens not following the same progressive group-think that emerges when there is any criticism of homosexual behaviour.

Group-think,
I must ask my catholic priest about that..........

Corkfeen · 24-01-2014 3:24pm

Manach wrote: »

The withdrawal of Mr. Waters, an excellent and insightful writer- means that the conservative and moderate voice is even less heard in the context on the downturn of the morals in Modern Ireland and the surge of growth of the extremist secular life and the culture of relativity.
As for being called homophobic, surely a badge of honour as it betokens not following the same progressive group-think that emerges when there is any criticism of homosexual behaviour.

Right... Is it 420 today or something ? Cause that was pretty nonsensical.

Femme_Fatale · 24-01-2014 3:31pm

Surely the moderate voice would be one that's live and let live?

Even plenty of conservatives don't have a problem with same-sex marriage.

Proper christians certainly aren't judgemental and hate-filled.

John Waters is not remotely insightful - nothing he says is in any way interesting or new. It's the same rhetoric all that crowd resort to, just presented in an attention-grabbing/seeking way.

John Waters quits BAI

Comments