More from Roderic O'Gorman (MOD NOTE IN OPENING POST)

ronivek

I only detailed the recent legislative history of the Gender Recognition Act; it has its true origins in the European Convention of Human Rights which was signed in 1950 by the Council of Europe of which Ireland was a founding member.

It was only in 2003 that the European Convention of Human Rights Act (http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2003/act/20/enacted/en/print.html) was enacted in Ireland; enshrining these rights into Irish law. Essentially until that point the only obligation on Ireland w.r.t. the Convention was that we had to abide by any rulings of the European Court to which Ireland was party.

In 2007 the High Court via Mr. Justice William McKechnie issued a 'Declaration of Incompatibility' (http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEHC/2007/H470.html) which stated that Irish Law was incompatible with the European Convention of Human Rights; and instructed the Government to remedy the situation.

The Government (Bertie Ahern's Fianna Fail led coalition) appealed the High Court decision to the Supreme Court; but before the case could be heard the new Government (Brian Cowen's Fianna Fail led coalition) committed in the 2009 Programme for Government (https://www.socialjustice.ie/sites/default/files/attach/policy-issue-article/3291/2009-10-10-renewedprogrammeforgovernment1.pdf) to: "... introduce legal recognition of the acquired gender of transsexuals. " The Government would subsequently withdraw its appeal to the Supreme Court in 2010.

Which led us to the FG/Labour coalition under which Joan Burton finally got the Gender Recognition Act enacted. So I'm not sure any claims about this being some sort of new fangled phenomenon perpetrated by the new 'loony leftists' hold much water.

I also quite like Mr. Justice William McKechnie's words from his judgement:

For those persons affected with this condition, and in particular those who have undergone gender reassignment surgery, there seems to be a burning desire to have their new sexual identity recognised, not only socially but also legally. This urge to have that identity fully and in all respects accepted by the law is at the core of the transsexuals plight. This explains why so many, often after painful surgical procedures, are still driven to publicly embark on a fight for legal identity which frequently is humiliating and unsuccessful. Those at the forefront of such a quest many years ago, faced a public and a legal system which was much less sympathetic and must less understanding than hopefully what it is today. Everyone as a member of society has the right to human dignity, and with individual personalities, has the right to develop his being as he sees fit; subject only to the most minimal of State interference being essential for the convergence of the common good. Together with human freedom, a person, subject to the acquired rights of others, should be free to shape his personality in the way best suited to his person and to his life.

Eric Cartman

so it turns out being sacked for a minor transgression in the past and a lacklustre apology for such is now the done thing with Barry Cowen gone. So when is Eamon Ryan going to pull the plug on OGorman ?

Snake Plisken

Eric Cartman wrote: »

so it turns out being sacked for a minor transgression in the past and a lacklustre apology for such is now the done thing with Barry Cowen gone. So when is Eamon Ryan going to pull the plug on OGorman ?

Sooner the better give him agriculture as he would be a better fit there

Eric Cartman

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Sooner the better give him agriculture as he would be a better fit there

You can't give the Green Party agriculture unless you want a load of slurry tankers patrolling Kildare street spraying Leinster house.

VillageIdiot71

ronivek wrote: »

I only detailed the recent legislative history of the Gender Recognition Act; it has its true origins in the European Convention of Human Rights which was signed in 1950 by the Council of Europe of which Ireland was a founding member.

And that material is interesting, too, because it does indeed explain these issues have been developing over a long period, and are not just a particular interest of a particular new Minister.

I think it still leaves a gap where a debate might have been necessary. For me, the part that stands out in that material is

.... in particular those who have undergone gender reassignment surgery ... often after painful surgical procedures ....

The judge makes his decision, in a situation where he sees "in particular" people who have "often" taken painful steps to express an identity.

We then, seamlessly as far as public deliberation is concern, slide towards a situation where such steps are only taken by a minority. Which, inevitably, causes quite a few to say "wtf"? And reopens the question.

I can utterly appreciate that folk who undergo surgery to alter their bodies are struggling with something deep. But do we say to women who want FGM "off you go"? Or do we just prohibit the practice because we feel, whatever a person says, that's not a rational choice?

I see, to some extent, the practical steps that took us to this point. The coherence still eludes me, I'm afraid.

Snake Plisken

Eric Cartman wrote: »

You can't give the Green Party agriculture unless you want a load of slurry tankers patrolling Kildare street spraying Leinster house.

Ah sure Roderick would just call the farmers far right and homophobic and the media would back him 100%

iebamm2580

some crazy tweets he has put out and nothing about it in the meida, in one he replies "if you see her again, break her legs and call me".

Eric Cartman

iebamm2580 wrote: »

some crazy tweets he has put out and nothing about it in the meida, in one he replies "if you see her again, break her legs and call me".

more of this please ? any screenshots.

iebamm2580

Eric Cartman wrote: »

more of this please ? any screenshots.

Just look up his name on twitter, it was in relation to a bike he had robbed in 2011 i think.

Acosta

Eric Cartman wrote: »

so it turns out being sacked for a minor transgression in the past and a lacklustre apology for such is now the done thing with Barry Cowen gone. So when is Eamon Ryan going to pull the plug on OGorman ?

Maybe they'll organise another rally at the weekend. Justin could put in a call to Germany and get some of his mates in the NDP to come over and help bolster the numbers

iebamm2580

Acosta wrote: »

Maybe they'll organise another rally at the weekend. Justin could put in a call to Germany and get some of his mates in the NDP to come over and help bolster the numbers

think we all agree justin barrett is a racist fruit loop.

Eric Cartman

iebamm2580 wrote: »

think we all agree justin barrett is a racist fruit loop.

and most of us can agree that Justin Barrett being a racist fruitloop does not make concerns about the childrens minister , past associations and his continued support for radical hate groups like BLM, his pushing of change of gender for kids legislation any less valid.

"Justin barrett is a racist" is the most whataboutery defence of O'Gorman possible.

Snake Plisken

Eric Cartman wrote: »

and most of us can agree that Justin Barrett being a racist fruitloop does not make concerns about the childrens minister , past associations and his continued support for radical hate groups like BLM, his pushing of change of gender for kids legislation any less valid.

"Justin barrett is a racist" is the most whataboutery defence of O'Gorman possible.

Barrett shouldn't have been invited to that protest much like Gemma as it just gave the Antifa/Government media shills something to latch onto. But it was great to see the little Antifa protest backfire on them as the headline I saw around international commentators was Antifa cointer-demo an anti pedo demonstration. Well-done Leah Doherty Well-done

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

and most of us can agree that Justin Barrett being a racist fruitloop does not make concerns about the childrens minister , past associations and his continued support for radical hate groups like BLM, his pushing of change of gender for kids legislation any less valid.

"Justin barrett is a racist" is the most whataboutery defence of O'Gorman possible.

Thing is, the vast majority of Irish people don't hold your view on blm. The legislation around changing gender comes from the previous government. The picture with Tatchell amounted to a storm in a teacup. They can go on about indefinitely but O'Gorman isn't remotely damaged by the story cause it was tenuous.

Eric Cartman

Deleted User wrote: »

Thing is, the vast majority of Irish people don't hold your view on blm. The legislation around changing gender comes from the previous government. The picture with Tatchell amounted to a storm in a teacup. They can go on about indefinitely but O'Gorman isn't remotely damaged by the story cause it was tenuous.

I would say the majority of Irish people have no idea who BLM are , of those that do know theres a small number who wilfully and ignorantly support their violent actions, theres a larger proportion that abhor their violent actions and then theres the portion who go along with it because its popular on the internet or the others who would like to pretend its about equal rights and sunshine and rainbows.

that last category is the one I suspect O'Gorman has fallen into, can't see the wood for the trees, but I think he should know better or atleast have an advisor say to him "ehh they are looting and damaging everything and their supporters are anti white racists, maybe you shouldn't retweet that"

Acosta

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Barrett shouldn't have been invited to that protest much like Gemma as it just gave the Antifa/Government media shills something to latch onto. But it was great to see the little Antifa protest backfire on them as the headline I saw around international commentators was Antifa cointer-demo an anti pedo demonstration. Well-done Leah Doherty Well-done

Anti fascists, the government and the Irish media don't need to worry about some moronic, brainwashed Trump support on twitter give their hot take that the video on Saturday was actually demonstrators protesting an anti peodophile rally, because anyone with half a brain can see it was a group of loutish homophobic fascist thugs attack a peaceful counter protest of 4 people.

Snake Plisken

Acosta wrote: »

Anti fascists, the government and the Irish media don't need to worry about some moronic, brainwashed Trump support on twitter give their hot take that the video on Saturday was actually demonstrators protesting an anti peodophile rally, because anyone with half a brain can see it was a group of loutish homophobic fascist thugs attack a peaceful counter protest of 4 people.

Sickener you lost the deposit on that sweet Speaker system.

Annasopra

VillageIdiot71 wrote: »

And that material is interesting, too, because it does indeed explain these issues have been developing over a long period, and are not just a particular interest of a particular new Minister.

I think it still leaves a gap where a debate might have been necessary. For me, the part that stands out in that material isThe judge makes his decision, in a situation where he sees "in particular" people who have "often" taken painful steps to express an identity.

We then, seamlessly as far as public deliberation is concern, slide towards a situation where such steps are only taken by a minority. Which, inevitably, causes quite a few to say "wtf"? And reopens the question.

I can utterly appreciate that folk who undergo surgery to alter their bodies are struggling with something deep. But do we say to women who want FGM "off you go"? Or do we just prohibit the practice because we feel, whatever a person says, that's not a rational choice?

I see, to some extent, the practical steps that took us to this point. The coherence still eludes me, I'm afraid.

You cant seriously be comparing FGM with SRS? Entirely different issues, practices that have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Its just off the wall comparison.

Annasopra

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Sickener you lost the deposit on that sweet Speaker system.

So you are supporting fascist violence now?

Acosta

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Sickener you lost the deposit on that sweet Speaker system.

Lol you actually think I was one of them?

TomTomTim

Acosta wrote: »

Anti fascists, the government and the Irish media don't need to worry about some moronic, brainwashed Trump support on twitter give their hot take that the video on Saturday was actually demonstrators protesting an anti peodophile rally, because anyone with half a brain can see it was a group of loutish homophobic fascist thugs attack a peaceful counter protest of 4 people.

You people are such hypocrites. You bang the drum of taking Antifas names literally, which of course is idiotic. Yet when another group use a similar tactic, you reject a literal interpretation. You can't keep applying different standards to different groups, it leaves the world in a confused mess.

TomTomTim

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I would say the majority of Irish people have no idea who BLM are , of those that do know theres a small number who wilfully and ignorantly support their violent actions, theres a larger proportion that abhor their violent actions and then theres the portion who go along with it because its popular on the internet or the others who would like to pretend its about equal rights and sunshine and rainbows.

that last category is the one I suspect O'Gorman has fallen into, can't see the wood for the trees, but I think he should know better or atleast have an advisor say to him "ehh they are looting and damaging everything and their supporters are anti white racists, maybe you shouldn't retweet that"

Or the fact that the "leaders" of said movement are explicitly Marxists, as you can see here: https://nypost.com/2020/06/25/blm-co-founder-describes-herself-as-trained-marxist/

paw patrol

Acosta wrote: »

Anti fascists, the government and the Irish media don't need to worry about some moronic, brainwashed Trump support on twitter give their hot take that the video on Saturday was actually demonstrators protesting an anti peodophile rally, because anyone with half a brain can see it was a group of loutish homophobic fascist thugs attack a peaceful counter protest of 4 people.

i don't get people like you.

Who cares who shows up? Id march arm in arm with Hitler and Stalin on an anti-peado march. I've been on marches with the far left - who I really don't like on the basis we'd a common aim.



Opposing it , makes you look like a peado apologist or worse.


The notion that petty right/left political spectrum rows supercede the safety of kids.
That would be funny if it's wasn't so tragic.

endacl

paw patrol wrote: »

Opposing it , makes you look like a peado apologist or worse.

It doesn't really. Political polyps like Justin Barrett will opportunistically insert themselves into a question that doesn't exist, in an attempt to place themselves on the right side of a binary question that they manufacture.

So, Roderic O'Connor (not a fan myself, for clarity) was photographed with Peter Tatchell. This provides the opportunity. Switch flicks on in Barrett's withered little brain. "Aha! Now we can be the ones who oppose paedophelia! Anybody who opposes us will, ipso facto, support paedophelia! We can't lose!"

Snake Plisken

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

So you are supporting fascist violence now?

Anti Peado equals fascist now Joey does it? What about your sister in arms Leah Doherty and her laced milk shakes or the Antifa violence that took place in the free speech demo you were at?
Btw only some lads speakers took an auld kick there at the weekend #SpeakersLivesMatter

Snake Plisken

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Anti Peado equals fascist now Joey does it? What about your sister in arms Leah Doherty and her laced milk shakes or the Antifa violence that took place in the free speech demo you were at?
Btw only some lads speakers took an auld kick there at the weekend #SpeakersLivesMatter

Justin Barrett is a fascist, his supporters are fascists. It was a promotion exercise for fascists like himself and grand Torino. Who you appear to sympathise with.

Acosta

paw patrol wrote: »

i don't get people like you.

Who cares who shows up? Id march arm in arm with Hitler and Stalin on an anti-peado march. I've been on marches with the far left - who I really don't like on the basis we'd a common aim.



Opposing it , makes you look like a peado apologist or worse.


The notion that petty right/left political spectrum rows supercede the safety of kids.
That would be funny if it's wasn't so tragic.

Who's the paedophile they're protesting against? I've said this previously but the minister already clarified that he in no way supports what the guy he was pictured with apparently said. He clarified this several days before the rally, so what was the point of it?

I genuinely pity anyone who doesn't support these far right groups that was taken in by this desperate attempt to gain some support. But I'd guess you could count theses people with your two hands.

Groups of people who whinge how liberal Ireland has become, who harp on about a return to the day's when bishops, priests and nuns were a law onto themselves destroying the lives of thousands of children up and down the country. I've never heard Herman, Justin, Gemma and co speak up for the survivors of clerical abuse and Magdalene etc in their desperate attempts for justice.

king_of_mayo

TomTomTim wrote: »

You people are such hypocrites. You bang the drum of taking Antifas names literally, which of course is idiotic. Yet when another group use a similar tactic, you reject a literal interpretation. You can't keep applying different standards to different groups, it leaves the world in a confused mess.

Yeah it's a strange one. A few weeks ago, we were told that a group's name was directly tied to their beliefs.

Criticism of an "anti-<something>" group meant that you were, by definition, pro-<something>.

This has been posted here a load of times, even moreso when Trump defined Anfita as a terrorist group. Go back, read the threads.

But now we're in the future. That logic no longer applies. It might again in a few weeks, we'll see. But definitely not now.

This comes to you from the same people who insist that statements are not what they read. "Defund the police," doesn't mean that. Except when it does. Hell even saying nothing is now tantamount to "violence".

It's a funny old world. I wonder what Truth they will decide on next week?

VillageIdiot71

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

You cant seriously be comparing FGM with SRS? Entirely different issues, practices that have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Its just off the wall comparison.

Both surgical interventions that are unconnected to physical health.

For me, it highlights the issue as one that should give pause for thought.

excludedbin

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Anti Peado equals fascist now Joey does it? What about your sister in arms Leah Doherty and her laced milk shakes or the Antifa violence that took place in the free speech demo you were at?
Btw only some lads speakers took an auld kick there at the weekend #SpeakersLivesMatter

What paedophile were they protesting, Snake? Ye keep banging that drum but funnily enough none of ye can say who it was.