Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Complaint upheld against Derek Mooney for 'supporting same-sex marriage' on air

Options
1…78101213…24

Comments

  • Options
    #272
    A Neurotic
    Registered Users Posts: 3,779 ✭✭✭A Neurotic


    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    Why would gay people have to do that? Could they not have sex with someone to get children?

    ...and that's a wrap on any semblance of logical debate on this thread folks. Let's call it a day. Good hustle. Let's try again some time.


  • Options
    #273
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    He is on the radio so he has to remain impartial in his views and opinions expressed, especially in discussions relating to what he is making comment on. Otherwise his obvious bias will show and may have an effect on peoples decisions in any upcoming referendum on gay marriage. Better get the complaints dealt with now than after the referendum when Mooney's loose lips could nullify or otherwise take from a good result.

    I don't know how they could not uphold the complaint because that Mooney show is just too over the top whenever anything to do with civil partnerships or gay marriage is brought up. He is not up to much as a presenter and should stick to the bird/nest watching and stay away from more serious topics.


  • Options
    #274
    StudentDad
    Registered Users Posts: 1,495 ✭✭✭StudentDad


    The ghost of Mrs. Whitehouse is out and about in Ireland it seems.

    The sooner we have marriage equality in Ireland the better!

    SD


  • Options
    #275
    krudler
    Registered Users Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    This is hilarious, time and time and time again on this site when this topic comes up the same posters trot out the same things about kids. We're not talking about kids. at all. We're talking about a gay couple being able to be marry and be afforded the same legal and equality status as a straight couple.

    That's it.

    Soooo, instead of whinging about liberals, so called bullying and other nonsense to try worm your way out of a discussion..someone, ANYONE, give a rational reason why they'd oppose two people being denied the same legal rights as me simply because of their sexuality.
    Forget about kids and the idea that marriage is for making babies, cos plenty of people make kids without ever been married and plenty of people get married without ever making kids. I doubt anyone trotting that out would tell a married couple who dont ever want kids that their marriage isnt for it's real purpose?


  • Options
    #276
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    krudler wrote: »
    This is hilarious, time and time and time again on this site when this topic comes up the same posters trot out the same things about kids.

    Let's give DX credit. Of all the discussions about marriage that I've participated in, read, listened to, or watched, this is the first time someone's asked why gay people can't just have sex with people of the opposite sex to have kids. That's definitely one for the history books. :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #277
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    People have been accused of being homophobic because they will not support the campaign to legalise gay marriage. It's a political issue and the very fact that it is being put to a referendum should demonstrate that there is more than one political opinion out there.

    It's only a political issue because the SC said the constitution had defined marriage


  • Options
    #278
    dxhound2005
    Registered Users Posts: 21,046 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    Let's give DX credit. Of all the discussions about marriage that I've participated in, read, listened to, or watched, this is the first time someone's asked why gay people can't just have sex with people of the opposite sex to have kids. That's definitely one for the history books. :D

    It could be a couple where one or both are bisexual. And apparently the law is being changed to accommodate existing gay biological parents. How did they manange to get those children?


  • Options
    #279
    takamichinoku
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,110 ✭✭✭takamichinoku


    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    It could be a couple where one or both are bisexual. And apparently the law is being changed to accommodate existing gay biological parents. How did they manange to get those children?
    Right, and if they aren't?
    ...or what if the other partner has issues with their partner, who is attracted to the opposite sex, getting it on with a member of the opposite sex?
    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    How did they manange to get those children?
    You genuinely think they do something like have a coin toss over which of them has to has to have sex with this another person? How exactly do you think sperm donors work?:rolleyes:


    :confused:


  • Options
    #280
    mrsbyrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,228 ✭✭✭mrsbyrne


    I stopped listening to DM the day I heard him deny the existence of such a thing as boiled egg and soldiers.Such a broadcaster should be expunged Pronto.


  • Options
    #281
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    My girlfriend used to think she had fertility problems but I better go explain to her that she is stupid for thinking that as we are a heterosexual couple and they can all reproduce with ease. Thanks dxhound for letting me know.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #282
    Banjo String
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Banjo String


    Is Derek Mooney gay:confused:


  • Options
    #283
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    It could be a couple where one or both are bisexual.

    You specifically spoke about gay people (emphasis added):
    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    Why would gay people have to do that? Could they not have sex with someone to get children?

    Like I said, it's the first time I've ever seen someone ask why gay people can't have sex with someone of the opposite sex to have children.
    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    And apparently the law is being changed to accommodate existing gay biological parents.

    No, the law is being changed to account for ALL children being raised by one or more non-biological parent, be they gay, hetero, or bi. The only part of the Child & Family Relationship Bill that's specific to gay couples is the part that allows civil partners to jointly adopt. And that's only to fix the anomaly that a child adopted by a gay couple doesn't have the protections of a legal relationship with both parents.
    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    How did they manange to get those children?

    The stork delivered them.


  • Options
    #284
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,072 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    efb wrote: »
    It's only a political issue because the SC said the constitution had defined marriage

    Not quite.

    The high court said the legislature had had defined marriage.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #285
    AudreyHepburn
    Registered Users Posts: 5,673 ✭✭✭AudreyHepburn


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    He is on the radio so he has to remain impartial in his views and opinions expressed, especially in discussions relating to what he is making comment on. Otherwise his obvious bias will show and may have an effect on peoples decisions in any upcoming referendum on gay marriage. Better get the complaints dealt with now than after the referendum when Mooney's loose lips could nullify or otherwise take from a good result.

    I don't know how they could not uphold the complaint because that Mooney show is just too over the top whenever anything to do with civil partnerships or gay marriage is brought up. He is not up to much as a presenter and should stick to the bird/nest watching and stay away from more serious topics.

    That's just silly....no-one on earth has an impartial view of anything. We all land on one side of the fence or the other, even those in the public sphere.

    The things people complain about make me laugh. The man is allowed to have an opinion and to share it, regardless of occupation.


  • Options
    #286
    Kiwi in IE
    Registered Users Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    It could be a couple where one or both are bisexual. And apparently the law is being changed to accommodate existing gay biological parents. How did they manange to get those children?

    So you think that with a straight couple where one partner is infertile, the other partner should go and have sex with a third party in order to get a child? They are straight after all so why should it be a problem if they have sex with another straight person other than their partner?


  • Options
    #287
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    So you think that with a straight couple where one partner is infertile, the other partner should go and have sex with a third party in order to get a child? They are straight after all so why should it be a problem if they have sex with another straight person other than their partner?

    DO NOT TRY THIS. I tried to recommend having sex with her hot friend. I got a dirty look at "it's what's best for society" did not help.


  • Options
    #288
    Barely There
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,481 ✭✭✭Barely There


    AudreyHepburn wrote: »
    That's just silly....no-one on earth has an impartial view of anything. We all land on one side of the fence or the other, even those in the public sphere.

    The things people complain about make me laugh. The man is allowed to have an opinion and to share it, regardless of occupation.

    No he's not.
    Have a read of the 2009 Broadcasing Act.


  • Options
    #289
    ebbsy
    Registered Users Posts: 6,874 ✭✭✭ebbsy


    The same sex brigade are really gettin on my tits with their constant whining.


  • Options
    #290
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Every time someone is on the radio being interviewed from now on, they should be asked their view on the upcoming referendum, and then the presenter should say "The BAI obliges me to offer some balance to that view, so I must point out that the Bible says gay men should be stoned to death, not married.".


  • Options
    #291
    Shenshen
    Registered Users Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭Shenshen


    The complainant also said the show’s guests, former RTE news reader Michael Murphy and Tiernan Brady from the Gay and Lesbian Equality Network, had also made comments supporting same-sex marriage and that there were no voices heard opposing same-sex marriages. - See more at: http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/radio/complaint-upheld-against-derek-mooney-for-supporting-samesex-marriage-on-air-30508819.html#sthash.fchvtQMH.dpuf

    Ok, so the issue is that the presenter gave his own opinion, and that there were no opposing opinions on the show?

    I understand there is going to be a referendum next year on changing language in the constitution that is discriminatory to women.
    Will all shows on the subject have to have people on them who hold the opinion that women should not have equal wages for equal work? In the interest of balance and fairness? Honestly?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #292
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Shenshen wrote: »
    Ok, so the issue is that the presenter gave his own opinion, and that there were no opposing opinions on the show?

    I understand there is going to be a referendum next year on changing language in the constitution that is discriminatory to women.
    Will all shows on the subject have to have people on them who hold the opinion that women should not have equal wages for equal work? In the interest of balance and fairness? Honestly?

    Didn't this cause problems with a referendum involving courts? I think they couldn't find anyone against it so were unable to discuss it.


  • Options
    #293
    TwoShedsJackson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    ebbsy wrote: »
    The same sex brigade are really gettin on my tits with their constant whining.

    Great, another brigade for you to lump a whole section of society into. Why not called them whiny lefty bleeding-heart liberal PC do-gooders while you're at it?


  • Options
    #294
    Shenshen
    Registered Users Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭Shenshen


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    Didn't this cause problems with a referendum involving courts? I think they couldn't find anyone against it so were unable to discuss it.

    That's absurd enough to be a Monty Python sketch!!!


  • Options
    #295
    Barely There
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,481 ✭✭✭Barely There


    Shenshen wrote: »
    I understand there is going to be a referendum next year on changing language in the constitution that is discriminatory to women.
    Will all shows on the subject have to have people on them who hold the opinion that women should not have equal wages for equal work? In the interest of balance and fairness? Honestly?

    Probably not, given that is not what the current constitution states.


  • Options
    #296
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Shenshen wrote: »
    Ok, so the issue is that the presenter gave his own opinion, and that there were no opposing opinions on the show?

    I understand there is going to be a referendum next year on changing language in the constitution that is discriminatory to women.
    Will all shows on the subject have to have people on them who hold the opinion that women should not have equal wages for equal work? In the interest of balance and fairness? Honestly?

    It's actually the "women in the home" provision and there are women like Nora Bennis who oppose change. She'll be everywhere.
    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nora_Bennis


  • Options
    #297
    Shenshen
    Registered Users Posts: 9,453 ✭✭✭Shenshen


    Barely There wrote: »
    Probably not, given that is not what the current constitution states.

    I understand that this is what the referendum will be about, though - adding this to the constitution.
    Although, since it hasn't been announced yet, it's a little speculative.
    Let's just assume they'll copy the article from the German Grundgesetz to include to the constitution : Art.3,Par.2, "Men and women have equal rights".

    Will they have to have someone argueing against this in order to be allowed to air any debates?


  • Options
    #298
    I Heart Internet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,678 ✭✭✭I Heart Internet


    Sensible decision.

    It doesn't suggest that anyone not be able to have a casual radio chat about their great marriage or their wedding or their civil partnership.

    It just says that IF the radio presenter or their guest CHOOSES to wade into current affairs, political discussion and/or the subject of an upcoming constitutional referendum, then he needs to be gently discouraged or a balancing argument given.

    If I went on radio to talk about my new book and got talking about my lovely wife, that would be fine. If I then went on, unopposed by the host, to say that my hetrosexual marriage was the only possible "good" marriage and we should all vote No in the referendum then the radio host would be failing in their job.


  • Options
    #299
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    It's a sad state of affairs when equality is treated as a political hot potato that needs to be balanced with views from those who oppose it.


  • Options
    #300
    I Heart Internet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,678 ✭✭✭I Heart Internet


    lazygal wrote: »
    It's a sad state of affairs when equality is treated as a political hot potato that needs to be balanced with views from those who oppose it.

    Changing the constitution is a serious matter. It deserves to be treated as such.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #301
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    I Heart Internet wrote: »
    Changing the constitution is a serious matter. It deserves to be treated as such.

    So is equality. It's sad that we need to change our constitution so people can be treated equally.


Advertisement