We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
YESTERDAY’S RULING BY the Broadcasting Authority of Ireland has set a new and worrying standard for the media and for the nature of debate and discussion on all issues of current affairs across the airwaves in Ireland. In a response to a complaint, the BAI has ruled that any discussion by lesbian and gay people about their status and aspirations as Irish citizens can no longer be broadcast without being directly challenged on the same programme at the same time. The ruling sets a dubious standard for providing “balanced” broadcasting that forces broadcasters to turn every discussion into an argument.
Does this now mean that contributors to a broadcast programme may not now talk about possible future constitutional change on any issue, unless the programme segment has opposing views? This would turn any national debate on any issue into a sequence of adversarial contests, all in the name of fairness. This can only be detrimental for the quality of national debate.
A climate of conflict
The ruling raises serious questions about what kind of discussions we want on current affairs in Ireland. Providing balance is about ensuring that all sides get a fair hearing, not ensuring all sides get a fair thumping.
So for example in print media, newspapers employ commentators with a wide ranging and often opposing set of opinions. This allows the reader access to perspectives on an issue from both sides and people are intelligent enough to then draw their own conclusions. We don’t believe that every article written with a clear opinion must be accompanied on the same day and on the same page by another article opposing their viewpoint. This would make for a national debate built on the principle that all ideas and political aspirations can only exist in a climate of conflict where the destruction of all proposals isn’t just good but a prerequisite part of public discussion.
We believe that Irish people are capable of pulling together all the information on an issue from a variety of sources over a period of time and coming to a personal conclusion. We believe that people do not make up their minds on constitutional issues on the basis of a three minute interview. We have more faith in the intelligence and fairness of the Irish people.
No date has been set for a referendum
There already are strong rules in place which take effect when an election or referendum is called and which ensures that there is a strict balance on the airwaves on any discussions about the issues, arising from the McKenna and Coughlan judgements. While this is in itself a contentious issue, this BAI ruling has been made where no date has been set for a referendum on civil marriage. This is why the ruling raises serious concerns for the nature of public debate in Ireland.
The ruling has significant implications for lesbian and gay people and for any discussion or representation of their lives in the public sphere. Can lesbian and gay people not now talk about their lives and their aspirations as Irish citizens on the airwaves, or about their experiences of love and commitment, without it being a requirement that they be challenged directly? That is an unacceptable attack on a person’s dignity.
Does this ruling now apply all people who are or want to be married, gay, straight or lesbian?
Will heterosexual couples be challenged?
A national discussion that has been ongoing for years about marriage and whether lesbian and gay people should be allowed access to civil marriage and afforded the same constitutional status as other married couples. It is a debate about marriage, not about “gay marriage”. Does the ruling now imply that every heterosexual couple who talks about the importance of their love and commitment to each other on the airwaves will be forced to endure someone challenging the nature of their relationship or their entitlement to that status?
This ruling overregulates the nature of our public discourse by insisting that all public utterances on an issue that may be subject to constitutional change in the future must be carried out in an adversarial format. It sends a chilling message to lesbian and gay people that their lives, aspirations and love can now never go unchallenged on the airwaves. It presumes the Irish people are incapable of engaging in a public discourse which is balanced on the whole, rather than on a minute by minute stopwatch.
Tiernan Brady is an MA in International Relations and one of the directors of GLEN –The Gay and Lesbian Equality Network.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
This ruling is the type of shite that really pisses me. It gives the impression that every issue has two equally worthy positions.
They don’t.
Brilliant Ruling ,
Over the past 20 years , we’ve seen so much one-sided coverage on issues within the Irish Media , in particular in relation to EU referendums where you open a newspaper and all you read is Journalists repeatedly telling you to vote yes , you turn on your tv and all you see are celebrities in your face telling you to vote yes .
Its about time , we had open and fair debate in Ireland , although , I dont think this ruling will make much difference , you will still have uneven panels , with three in favour of something liberal and one against .
“Its about time , we had open and fair debate in Ireland”
OK then, in the interest of balance let’s have Dara O’Briain appear after the Sunday mass on RTE and say “everything that lad at the alter said isn’t actually true.”
Typical patriarchy – pit one group against the other- and so many fall into the trap.
Just refer to people as human beings, simple.Their sexuality is nobody’s business but their own.
Unless they choose to make issue of it on television.
Does the ruling extend to the Print Media ?
@Dave: The hint is in who gave the ruling – the *Broadcasting* Authority of Ireland.
You really aren’t making any kind of a valid point – RTÉ’s remit is to reflect “the democratic, cultural and social values of the Irish people, and to preserve pluralism in the media”. RTÉ is very arguably reflecting the shifting social values on this topic in Ireland, you just happen to be one of the stragglers with their head in the sand.
There is a very strong school of thought that civil rights should not be something that the majority votes on in the first place – rarely if ever in history has social equality been achieved by leaving it up to the majority to debate “fairly” upon whether to better the lot of the minority. Slavery, Apartheid, Universal Suffrage, a Equal Pay. None were ushered in by a “fair” debate held and voted upon on by the public. We’d all still be waiting if they were!
Good man John. Agree totally
Dave, every time the angelus is played, can I appear on tv and explain that there is no god, that it’s all just fairy stories and a fear of the unknown. If the BAI want balance, they can have balance
Ailbhe, I’m annoyed to hear the angelus so I mute the TV or switch radio channels. If the airwaves are promoting a view which is up for national vote next year then it is right and proper that there is equal time on that programme for the opposing view otherwise the impression offered is totally one sided. Simple and sound logic. Don’t complicate it.
Deerhound, the strongest opposition to marriage equality is from a christian standpoint. If christian values are being broadcasted without any contradicting viewpoint, why can anti-christian ideals not be broadcast without opposition.
The presence of blasphemy in our constitution may be up for debate, as well as the presence of a woman in the hom, in the same referendum. Does that mean that any time a woman talks about working beyond marriage, that somebody has to be drafted in to shout ‘chain them to the sink’?
If the catholic church argues on a catholic broadcast that blasphemy should remain, should somebody be drafted in every time to shout blasphemous abuse?
Derek Mooney airs his very strong opinions on anything at all at the drop of a hat. Fancy this particular one being the only one complained about? Hmmm
People who care about what other people do in their own time on their own patch worry me. Let folks do what they want yis clowns.
Ailbhe ,
again , just like your Journal team mates , you use the catholic card to press forward your propaganda
the journal uses peoples annoyance with what happened in the catholic church to move them to the opposite side of whatever stance the catholic church takes .
so , if the catholic church says the sky is blue , we are all supposed to say , no , its actually orange
the Irish Media has mastered this technique of progaganda over the past 20 years , its time , irish people woke up and took their country back from the media .
Ailbhe, you might want to link religious ideology and standards to this issue but you haven’t a leg to stand on. I think it’s a red herring. It’s a bit like the common assumption that most child sex abusers and peadophiles are priests, which is nonsense too. Do you really believe if the church remained silent on the issue that the public would have a different view? I don’t think so as individuals have free minds and don’t rely on the church to tell them how they to think.
Ailbhe,
At the Constitutional Convention on the issue of removing blasphemy from the Constitution there was some difficulty in getting people/organisations to speak on keeping it in the Constitution.
In the end the only body that spoke for its retention was the Islamic Cultural Centre and one individual.
How are RTE etc supposed to balance the debate on blasphemy if a referendum goes ahead. The Islamic Cultural Centre cannot be on every programme so in order to create a balance during the debate on blasphemy a broadcaster must give support to blasphemy.
Oh Dave, conspiracy bullshite again. You never seem to tire. It’s amaxing how quickly you discredit yourself and how you try to but fail to turn the argument around. I do not bring the catholic church into anything. The strongest opposers to my civil rights are Iona, Catholic comment and the Catholic Church. If somebody else wants to fight harder that these bunch of bigoted crackpots, I’ll discuss them too.
Dave, you seek to deny me equal rights, for no other reason than selfishness and greed. If you want to be so negative, hurtful and greedy, go ahead. I’ll let ya know when the wedding is and send you an invite. Early 2016 ish, so keep your schedule free ;)
Ailbhe ,
You say I deny you equal rights , yet you want to bring in a situation whereby children will be legally forced by the State into accepting same sex parents , you probably have a mum and dad right ? , yet you would deny this to others , why ?
If anybody is denying anybody anything , its you , I have no problem with gay people , they are very good people , but as you are well aware this Referendum is much more than equality .
Everything is about you Ailbhe , isn’t it
Dave I consider my position, as would you if you were denied rights. Should I not have concern for my own legal rights?
If that is all you can post in response, then you’re cleatly at a loss.
If you begrudge somebody their rights and then make out that they are selfish for considering how this lack of rights affects them, your brain works in a VERY odd way.
Nigerian King, do you disagree with adoption, or just adoption for same sex couples?
Adopting to same sex couples is no worse than to opposite sex couples. Research has shown that such children actually do better.
I wonder what a child would prefer, two mammies or a mammy and daddy ? Same sex parenting is ludicrous.
Blasphemy is a victimless crime.
Homophobes and hatemongers don’t offer an opposing view. They provide prejudice, hatred, ignorance, bullshit, lies, and and mendacity in their fight against the civil homosexual. This isn’t simple and has no sound logic. It is complicated. And deehounddog you are a moron.
Best comment I’ve read on this “Sun”wannabe site, most of the commenters on this subject do have an axe to grind that is totally unrelated to the issue at hand.
So does this mean that if a children’s TV programme is teaching the kids about basic science like the fact that the earth is a sphere, that we have to have someone on who insists it’s flat?
No, you say, because thats just stupid. Is this any less stupid?
No date has been set for this absurd referendum, nor should it be set. We should not be having a majority vote on minority rights in the first place. There is no gender definition on marriage in the constitution of Ireland, the High Court cannot be allowed to project things into the text that simply are not there. Instead of this stupid referendum, which is, after all, just a pale excuse for Labour to do something ‘progressive’ socially because they’ve lost the bottle to do anything progressive economically, they should pass a gender neutral marriage bill through the Oireachtas, ask the President to refer it to the Supreme Court, and settle this once and for all.
If they rule it’s constitutional, then it’s over and one, and every crank conservative reactionary won’t be able to challenge it.
If they rule it’s not, then we still should not have a vote on just same sex marriage. We ought to do an omnibus amendment, just like the second amendment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland
…and instead of all the focus just being on gays, lets remove ALL of the dated nonsense from the bible all over:
-The womans place within the home
-The Holy Trinity in the preamble
-The ‘worship due to almighty God’ (he can stand up for himself without a constitutional provision, he is the omnipotent, omniscient creator of the universe after all)
-Insert a clause saying any institution receiving state funding cannot discriminate on ANY of the nine grounds and if a policy so discriminates their funding shall be terminated.
…all that garbage gone. Keep or even strengthen the protections of religious freedom. Then at least were not having a majority vote on minority rights were having a wider vote on secularizing our constitution to reflect the more complex society we now have.
@Ryan I like the cut of your jib… in a manly way. That is quite a lot of sense to digest. Could it really be that simple?
EXCELLENT post, lovin your work!
yes, it is that simple.
Completely agree Ryan.
Ryan, the voice of reason, as ever.
I hope you do get to go into politics Ryan – we could do with some common sense like that in the Dail..
Ryan, you should get a job with the journal :)
have you heard of the flat earth society !! as does exist
We’ve seen in Countries such as the UK and France with the success of UKIP and Front National that there is massive support against the Liberal Agenda .
UKIP and Front National who are both conservative in nature and oppose Gay Marriage / Adoption , Immigration and the EU crowned themselves KING of the European Elections in Both the UK and France winning more seats than any other Political Parties accross Europe.
This goes to show that there is massive resistance to Gay Marriage / Adoption , the EU and many other Liberal Issues not Just in Ireland but accross the Continent.
Everybody should be entitled to equal Air Time , regardless of wether they are in a minority view or in a majority view , this is how democracy is supposed to function .
The suggestion here on the Journal that we should suppress certain viewpoints while at the same time constantly complain about Russia and Putin is mind bending
Lol – Dave, the reason for the pick up in UKIPs popularity is due to euro skepticism, and they’re not anti gay because they’ve expelled party members for expressing such views.
The nationalists are supported by racist people paranoid about being invaded by other cultures, so if you wish to align yourself with them that’s of course your choice.
The reason people were giving out about Putin is largely (but by no means all) down to his ban on “homosexual propaganda” whatever the hell that’s supposed to mean..
The support for people being treated like people rather than abominations is far stronger than you seem to want to admit.
Giz
in the UK , an Election expert, Professor John Curtice, says UKIP has gained support from voters who are socially conservative on issues like gay marriage
polls by ComRes leading up to uk elections showed that all three main parties lose votes because they support the redefinition of marriage
Nice weasel wording there Dave.. Issues LIKE, and no indication of the percentage..
This does not indicate that this was the cause of a majority, just that it was among the reasons.
Giz ,
People who oppose Gay Marriage / Gay Adoption are not anti Gay , Indeed many Gay People themselves oppose such things , the only people that want them are LGBT , who want to rule over Ireland and dictate to everybody how Ireland should be ruled with their partners in the EU
And why on earth would someone oppose equal rights for someone if they weren’t “anti” them?
Have you ever stopped to think about what you’re saying Dave?
Why do you want to deny someone the same protections afforded to couples who are of the opposite sex, simply because they’re the same sex? It doesn’t make any sense unless you take issue with homosexuality and in that case – no matter how you try to weasel out of it – you have issues with gay people.
Why not just admit it? At least then you’re owning your prejudice rather than trying to claim it’s anything else.
And ps – thumbing yourself up is seriously pathetic..
Shanti , I have no issue with Gay People , most of them are very good , decent people , however I believe that the state should not be legally able to force a child into a situation whereby they must accept same sex parents , man and womans body where designed to have children together , therefore , I assume it was also the intention that they raise said children , I know gay people who dont agree with gay adoption , they have chosen a lifestyle , they realise that they have mothers and fathers and so it would be unfair to deny this to anybody else
@Dave: this is not a valid point – the referendum on marriage equality had NO bearing on the issue of children growing up in heterosexual/homosexual households.
The Government has clearly stated stated this.
The Minister for Justice has emphasised out that amending Family / Adoption Law (to deal with your very question) is a matter for the Oireachtas, not a Referendum. One will not affect the happening of the other. The referendum on marriage equality will go ahead, irrespective of whether the Oireachtas amends adoption law or not.
To repeat. If you reject marriage equality at the voting booth, you will NOT be voting to “protect a child” (the Oireachtas have the FINAL say on that). You’ll just be voting to deny the minority gay population a civil right to enter into civil marriage – a right that the majority straight population take for granted in Ireland.
Now, your concerns allayed, can we all put you down as a Yes for the Marriage Equality Referendum, Dave?
Not true ,
Gay Marriage will give Gay couples all the same rights and entitlements as married couples including adoption of children .
most people understand this , there is a lot of mis-information being put out there by the Media and Government Forces to try and push this through for their masters in the EU.
@Dave: Not true Dave. And just because you say it doesn’t make it so. You are the one mis-informing and being mis-informed. It is a matter of Dáil record that the two are unrelated. Except in your head.
A straight couple do not get the “right” to adopt upon marriage. A straight couple have always had that right, distinct and separate from whether they are married or not. The distinction for gay people is that one gay person CAN adopt, a gay couple cannot. Adoption law has to change for this to be permitted.
The Marriage Equality referendum is not about Children’s’ Rights. Those are firmly a matter for Family and Adoption Law.
I can only argue rationally with a rational person. Your depiction of our elected representatives as “government forces” indicates that you hold a much more pervasive distrust of the Nation State. I’d rather not spend my Saturday afternoon pointlessly dispelling your sinister and irrational concerns.
@Dave: My final engagement with you, to allay anybody’s concerns that your mis-information is somehow fact, is to leave you with this Journal article, from January of this year (long before the Government committed to holding a referendum of Marriage Equality):
The idea that there is no need for a referendum is a bloody stupid one. If you have a problem with the need for a referendum, I suggest you talk to GLEN (and many other pro-equality campaigners), who called for and support the referendum.
http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/bai-marriage-equality-ruling-1621869-Aug2014/?utm_source=shortlink
Ryan Carrol, I also suggest you familiarize yourself with how constitutional law works in this country, but in short, just because you don’t see specific reference to something in the Constitution, it doesn’t mean that something is or isn’t constitutional. If the Supreme Court makes a ruling on the basis of their interpretation of the Constitution, then that has the same effect as if it were written in the Constitution. So, if you want to say whether something is constitutional or not, you must also familiarize yourself with the rulings of the Supreme Court before you are in a position to say whether or not a referendum is required on a particular matter.
Sorry – link should have been
http://www.iccl.ie/news/2013/11/05/campaign-groups-welcome-government-commitment-to-marriage-referendum.html
Winding ,
a simple glance at the citizens information website will tell you that you more or less need to be married in order to adopt a child , Gay Marriage will enable Gay people to adopt children , no doubt about that , at the moment unmarried couples and single people are not lucked on favouribly in relation to adoption of children , so gay marriage is not about equality , its about adoption of children.
here read it for yourself , I only deal in facts winding
The following persons are eligible to adopt according to citizens information
A married couple living together.
A married person alone. The other spouse’s consent to adopt must be obtained unless the couple is living apart and separated under a court decree or a deed of separation, or the other spouse has deserted the prospective adoptive parent or the other spouse’s conduct has resulted in the prospective adoptive parent, with just cause, leaving the other spouse.
The mother, father or relative of the child (relative meaning a grandparent, brother, sister, uncle or aunt of the child and/or the spouse of any such person, the relationship to the child being traced through the mother or the father).
A widow or widower.
A sole applicant who is not in one of the categories listed above may only adopt where the Adoption Authority is satisfied that, in the particular circumstances of the case, it is desirable. It is not possible for two unmarried persons to adopt jointly.
Too simple, it would never work in Ireland
To the best of my knowledge, there is legislation currently being prepared that will make it possible for gay couples to adopt, regardless of whether we have a referendum or not.
Dave. Check out how adoption works..
In order to adopt you have to jump through numerous hoops in order to be deemed “suitable”, and when you are selected as adoptive parents it will be because you are the best possible match for the child in question.
Adoption isn’t about the wannabe parents – it’s about the best interests of the child. So if a gay couple are selected, it will be because they were deemed the best fit – not because they’re married.
This is always the way it has worked, and allowing marriage equality will not make one iota of difference to it. The only difference now will be that if a gay couple *have* kids, as many do right now – their partner will be permitted to adopt those kids and give them a stable home with two parents. That’s all.
You don’t get to demand children if you’re married you know.
And besides – what does it have to do with marriage? It’s adoption. They are two very separate things, the only people trying to conflate them are the likes of Iona who simply don’t want to come out and admit that their issue is with gay people being treated as equal on the eyes of the law.
Bob, it was a high court ruling, not a Supreme Court one. That is the tiny detail which sorta dismantles your point and shows what Ryan said to make sense.
A Supreme Court ruling is binding on all other courts, but high court rulings can be overruled by the Supreme Court.
shanti ,
As already explained to you in my post which was quoted from the citizens information office , at the moment only married couples can adopt children , it says QUOTE ” It is not possible for two unmarried persons to adopt jointly” -http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/adoption_and_fostering/adopting_a_child.html
you keep replying to yourself with the same false and untrue statements , it is a fact that Gay Marriage will allow for Gay Adoption. This referendum is not about equality , its much more complex than that and you know it , dont you .
Shanti – marriage has been defined by the High Court as being between a man and a woman. Until that is over-ruled by the Supreme Court, it is the constitutional definition.
This means that if the Oireachtas were to legislate for marriage equality, it would likely be successfully challenged by Iona etc. All equality organizations lobbied for a referendum. The only people against it are those who oppose it and misguided people like you.
Dave,
Single people of either sexual persuasion can adopt as single people.
Married couples can adopt.
So – one half of a couple can adopt but this means that their partner has no legal ties to the child. Which can prove pretty messy, as any unmarried couple with children can attest to.
The person who said two single heterosexuals can adopt was mistaken – I said single people can adopt even if they are gay which is true.
Bob – I don’t oppose the referendum, I realise that due to the separation of powers the government cannot simply overturn a court ruling – Ryan has suggested a way around that, did you not read what he said? He said pass the legislation to Michael D to refer to the Supreme Court – who are above the high court, so that they may rule on it’s constitutionality.
This may well be a way around it, but I say being on the referendum – as morally wrong as it may be to have a majority rule on the rights of a majority.
I have no doubts that it will pass. I don’t think we have that many people who wish to deny others the right to the same protections they would marry for. And as for the adoption issue – it’s a separate issue, and it seems to be the backbone of the argument against – which shows just how weak an argument it is..
Shanti, people have argued the Government should just throw it out and see what happens before with other issues like this. That’s simply not how the legislature should behave: the Government should only pass legislation it believes to be Constitutional.
Again, all the pro-equality groups called for and welcomed the announcement of the referendum. Arguing about the need for it is a childish red herring, we are having it and most people believe we need it for marriage equality to be put on a sound legal footing. The referendum will also be a statement by the Irish people of where they stand on the issue.
I totally agree with the last paragraph. In a sense it will be great to see that resounding yes chime out so that certain groups may realise how far off base their perception of the Irish nation actually is. Perhaps then they will stop presuming to talk for the rest of us (although, they are prone to ignoring referendum results when it suits them so maybe they won’t!)
So when any Tom, Dick or Harry homophobe decides to deride gay people on the public airwaves, would the broadcaster be entitled to throw in a fag to counter the bigotry. Or is this only for homophobes to attack?
The BAI ruling was a farce due to a single complaint by a right wing ultra Catholic. Can it be challanged?
Yup, a media outlet just has to break it, be sued, and take the case to the high court and win..
However having dealt with them professionally, RTE are absolutely paralyzed by the fear of losing a defamation suit
Looks like Ireland needs a U.S.-style first amendment. Doesn’t this ‘ruling’ contravene the principles of free speech?!
Why are some people so afraid to give gay people equal rights
If gay people are allowed get married
unless you are gay or want to marry a gay person
your life will not change one bit
not in the slightest
If anything it will double your pleasure
instead of hating a single gay person
you get to hate a gay couple
DamoDeMan “If gay people are allowed get married”
Why do they need permission?
Did we need permission in olden Eire? No.
There was only a contract between the 2 sovereign beings and no third party- church or state.
With a 3 rd party in the contract – who will never default- who would want to contract with church/state?
Sometimes Catherine, you make complete sense. Then sometimes you talk about total conspiracy theories, opus dei etc etc. I worry
@Damo you are talking complete sense but the poor Christians are afraid they will wake up someday with one of those sneaky gays chained to them for life. Anyone objecting to equal opportunities for all citizens should move to Saudi Arabia or some similar country.
RTÉ need to put their money where their sellotaped-mouth is and bring this BAI ruling before the High Court for a judicial review.
RTÉ have a remit to reflect the society to which they broadcast; and it is absolutely in the wider public interest to obtain legal clarity on this.
The real issue is that there is an ultra-conservative Catholic minority in this country that are organised and make regular formal complaints to the BAI – if you look at the the complaints here http://www.bai.ie/?page_id=183 you will find that a disproportionate number are made by individuals who have some connection to these conservative groupings (even when they are made in the name of one individual). It is profoundly undemocratic as they are warping our national media by scrutinising every single programme to ensure that their view has been represented and making formal complaints when it is not – tying up the BAI and our national broadcaster with the burden of having to investigate each of these complaints, and ensuring that journalists and presenters would have to be extra careful to ensure their views are aired.
The only thing I can think of is that many different groups need to counter this by doing the same, or else we all just need to boycott RTE.
I think I will start a campaign to have mass removed from sundays on rte as we need a counterbalanced hour of atheistic reflection.
If the catholics can do it, then lets see of the atheists can.
Conor, I’m with you on that.
Not only must both sides of every argument view be aired but apparently both sides of every argument now possess equal weight. I can’t wait till child protection laws need updating. That’ll make for some interesting, enforced debates!
The abolition of blasphemy is also due for a referendum! That’s gonna pit the Catholic Church against some very determined atheists! Could be quite an entertaining / shocking debate!
This is one of the times we need Europe to step in and tell the BAI to shut the fook up and stop being bigoted asholes
Not an EU competence.
‘This is one of the times we need Europe to step in’ Thye EU was incapable of stepping in, when genocide was being committed on it’s doorstep. This is something we should be capable of dealing with ourselves.
“‘This is one of the times we need Europe to step in’ Thye EU was incapable of stepping in, when genocide was being committed on it’s doorstep”
Blah blah blah, here goes Scopio again with his narrow knowledge of history. Should be pointed out that the bombing in Kosovo was to expand NATO towards Russia. The result is what’s happening in Ukraine. This is common knowledge now. But this has nothing to do with the BAI being a-holes and with Derek Mooney for being sound and discussing current issues.
so if they show a mass on tv or the radio , someone can come on afterwards and have good laugh at the nonsense the priest was spewing?
no because we live in a theocracy not a democracy, as our media now often make clear
Says the fella with a flag of a group who impose sharia law on people and who hate gays. Ironic.
Listen its hard to get it perfect all the time. I dont nor have I ever support Sharia law, but I do condemn the genocide by the Israelis of the Palestinian people. That is far as my support goes cheers .
Moreover you sound a bit like you are an apologist for Christian practices (also evil and widespread. )
Wesole just pops up everywhere supporting Israel. I’m going to report him to the BAI for not being balanced.
I noticed some mass was being broadcast this morning for the feast of the assumption..
The Catholics have their own channel. That EWTN thing yeah? So why not let them broadcast their masses on there? If Catholics want to watch it they can, same way if an evangelical Christian wants to watch their TV channel – they can.
Why is one denomination of one religion being given preference by the national broadcaster?
They’re not broadcasting Jewish services, or Muslim or pagan or anything else so why just Catholic? After all, atheists and non Catholics are expected to fund this broadcast..
don’t forget that dammed angelus every single day Shanti – where is the balance in that ?
Agreed. They don’t play the sounds at midday to encourage Muslims to face Mecca.. Of course – if they did we would have a load of xenophobic twunts complaining that we were being forced to live under sharia law..
Oddly enough, due to the case-law of the Supreme Court, Muslims would have a better chance of getting a call to prayer broadcast (under equality of religion) than Atheist Ireland would of having the Angelus removed (Ireland is not constitutionally a secular state.)
The minority religious communities should do it, as it’d be worth the pure rage Iona would experience.
How many F@cking times have we heard radio interviews in this country where the only opinions aired are those of priests or whack jobs from the Iona institute on this issue? It has only been in recent years that anyone else has been given an opportunity to air an opposing opinion and now we’re being told that, not only can that not happen unchallenged, but even a gay couple can appear and discuss their wish to be married without an opposing being presented!
This is outrageous and is completely out of step with modern Irish society.
I really wonder at what point it was that John Waters and David Quinn realised how far separated they were from Irish society. It was only 7 or 8 years ago that they were still taking for granted that the majority of the Irish populace agreed with them on this issue and others (within reason) that would align with the traditional catholic view. I remember Waters in 2007 laughing about the fact that he got an email from an atheist who was bothered by Waters’ assertion that society needs religion to be moral. It’s a fair concern because it implies that atheists are immoral. A short few years later he was crying bloody murder over the bloggers and online writers because of the mean things they were saying about him.
I think that it was around 2007/2008 that we got to a point where just about everyone had broadband. The media and politicians finally started taking public opinion expressed online seriously. Surprisingly to them much of that online opinion was in support of things like marriage equality and against the church. This prompted Berty’s tirade against aggressive secularism too.
I don’t know when public opinion turned in favour of marriage equality, but I do know there was a very long delay between the time that public opinion had turned and politicians and media finally realised that it had.
True. Considering the amount of air time people like those at the Iona ‘institute’ have had over the years surely the pro equality side should be due about 40 or so years worth of unchallanged air time to present their side of the argument.
@John the problem is that every time the rest of you tick ”catholic” on the census you are giving these people the illusion that you share their opinions.
They will hurl this at us in debates over and over and over ”the vast majority of this country is catholic” and ”catholic doctrine is against homosexuality” ergo so is the country.
It’s a logical fallacy of course but many don’t see that.
Stop ticking it. Tick ”other” or whatever other alternative options there are if you believe in a God or afterlife but don’t believe in this dated social dogma, there are other options you don’t have to choose between Catholic and Atheist, if you are against these dated doctrines you’re no longer a catholic anyway.
They pull this same nonsense stunt with the schools, ”catholic ethos” well judging by the rock boys, zaga boys, pres boys and all the other catholic boys and catholic girls I’ve seen at schools with a supposed catholic ethos doing very much non catholic approved things me thinks the ethos thing is pure nonsense anyway.
Not sure if that was supposed to be aimed at me. If so, I am an Atheist and have never ticked the catholic box. I also agree whole heartedly with your sentiments.
The BAI should fcuk off.
Being gay or straight does it matter? Who says you can’t be gay? Oh sorry,my Catholic Church priest believes that gays need “God”.
This is the response of the politically correct. The Beigeists as Billy Connelly would call them. Someone needs a wake up call – in court.
. Someone needs a wake up call – in court.
The court corporation is controlled by Opus Dei brigade
Annual Red Mass for court judges etc in Dublin and still people sleep and believe in justice.
The BAI is mandating that future episodes of The Graham Norton show be heavily censored whenever Graham comments or offers his opinion on anything or matters relating to his personal life, lest it should lead any Irish viewers astray or to consider becoming gay themselves.
The only way any opposing argument for gay marriage for example to be any way valid in anyway would be for the opposing opinion to be coming from a Gay person . Its none of our business what gay people do , we have no right under any constitution or international law to decide their future .
They’re douches, past divisions and this one have proven such! Who’s on the board of the BAI and who appoints them? Heard that John Waters brothers on it, can only assume he has similar views… And is there an appeals process by an independent authority?
(Also can someone argue against me below, just incase they come after me…)
*decisions
In that case shouldn’t every mass give a chance for people who don’t subscribe to supernatural ramblings to say a few words about their position???
How come the angeulas go on every day with no dissenting arguments????
Swap the word gay with black. Imagine how outrageous it would be for the BAI to rule that for every black Irish person who wants to talk about their aspirations and hopes for Ireland that an opposing (racist) view is required on air. Unbe-fking-lievable. Isn’t this the institution that homophobe John Waters was a member until he got publicly challenged for the hateful bigoted shite he is.
Anyone outspoken about gay people have to be hiding in the closet , its the only logical conclusion to their fears and concerns. Jebus hung around with 12 men apparently most of his adult life “praying” on their knees with hardly any women at all …. Just saying
Yes, Dublinjohnny. And there’s been speculation about Jesus’ leanings in that direction after the letter found by Morton Smith. Go Google it. It’s very interesting.
Not that I necessarily believe Jesus was inclined either way. I’m inclined to believe he was too interested in helping everyone round him to have an exclusive relationship either personal or sexual with any one person.
Jesus Never Existed – sorry to disappoint- He was a created super hero.
Look at the names of the apostles. Are they regional names? No
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/creation.html
Tacitus, who as a civil servant had access to the Imperial archives mentions him as does Suetonius, myriad pagan and Jewish writers (and not in a complimentary way either), and most importantly, Josephus, a Galillean like Jesus who was involved in the Jewish War of 60 AD and who mentions James (Jacob), Jesus’ brother and nephews and cousins.
Well every time there’s something on the TV about god or jebus I want to be there spreading the story of Satan!! Let’s get a debate on that!! F@cking Ned Flanders patrol!!
TBH. Satan has never really had the chance to tell his side of the story. All we ever hear is the ‘god botherers’ side of things. According to the BAI ruling should we not be allowed to hear both sides ? There if a referendum on blasphemy comming up after all.
It’s only right and proper, I’m also sick of every discussion about paedophiles being so one sided as well, we never hear any pro paedophile contributors on air
This is ridicules, so why are there no anti religious arguments in the same fashion. Next time I hear the angelus play at 6 I better have an atheist bell to turn too at the same time. Ding dong human rights are nothing to this country. Personally I don’t agree with an equal right to arguments seems as gay and lesbian rights aren’t even strong enough in this country to stand against conservative views. We have a long way to go. Every two or three steps forward is met by yet another leap backwards. Congratulations Ireland and those of you against liberal views, your perfect world is maintained as the minorities yet again deal with this utter bullshit. Equality isn’t supposed to include a definite argument. That’s not equality. Just to think it’s 2014 and this shit is still an issue.
@ Nicholas .. In years to come , we can look back hopefully and see how ridiculous and wrong it is , I feel sorry for any gay person in this country , they are really in for a fight against the ignorance in society , especially the church … Fortunately it is only a minority , the majority of us want equal rights whether it’s gay , lesbian or transgender .
Graham, if you are going to link to a study, best not to link to a study that was published in 2002 and was subsequently torn assunder by professionals across the board. Most certainly don’t link to a study by Steve Baldwin. And never, EVER pretend that a study that starts with the follow line is even close to scientific.
“Lately, the gay movement seems to be making large gains in its war
on America’s Judeo-Christian culture. “
Are you Irish nuts? This is not a political election issue where candidates must be counter-balanced with equal time for their individual controversial issues!! This is discriminative segregation and amounts to a hate crime in its intent.
Who do the BAI think they are ? Do they honestly think that this debate is going to be won of lost on RTE. Considering the amount of media most of us have access to I would imagine that RTE or indeed Irish broadcast media is not very influential in the forming of many peoples opinion.What sanctions can they impose besides fines? If Mr Mooney continues to voice his opinion while refusing to engage with biggots what are they or RTE going to do ? Sack him? Drag him from the microphone live on air? I personaly would like to see them try. The publicity it would generate around the world would make Panti’gate’ look like a flash in the pan.
The BAI are a relic of the type of censorship that belongs in the 50′s with McQuaid and his crew.
Im not sure I understand this or im just missing something. Does this mean every nutter in th counrty from youth defence to lord haw haw will b wheeled out nightly to entertain an offend
This is a clear case of a bias towards fairness, not every situation has two sides, the piece wasn’t about marriage it was about civil partnerships.
More ridiculous paranoia from elements within the gay community that want to continue to portray themselves as victims. It’s hysterical that one of the most privileged groups in society needs to cling to this kind of nonsense.
Are we living in the same country? LGBT folk here can’t even get married. How exactly are they “one of the most privileged groups in society”?
Keith, the Catholics cried fowl. They whinged when one radio show discussed a topic from the presenters point of view. They played victim. Open your eyes anf ear Keith, you might actually learn something
Yes, yes you can. Marriage is a legal contract. If a same sex couple signs said contract and it is recognised by the law of the land, they are therefore legally married.
Simple. Take a VERY basic contracts course and you will understand.
There’s a reason opposing opinions on this aren’t required..
It’s because they’re all utter tosh, I mean seriously lads – look at yourselves.. Between having absolutely no concept of what the term “privilege” means, and the complete lack of understanding of what marriage *is*, I’m not sure you guys should be even allowed on the Internet without adult supervision..
I’m dying to know about these privileges of ours. Can you list them please?
The BAI’s Manichean ruling is potentially great. Those favouring Marriage Equality can represent Love and those against it can speak for Hate.
Is this in view of the referendum, if so, there is a reasonable argument for it , otherwise it’s nuts
This is bloody ridiculous , we are not in the dark ages anymore , we need to wake up , Christianity is falling while Islam is growing rapidly .. The church needs to change it’s stance quick by accepting gay & lesbians , also allowing priests to marry . All educated ppl should know that religion is a fairy tale made up to keep society in order , times are changing & the church needs to change with it .
Christianity is failing precisely because it dilutes the message of God and succumbs to false human ideas. The Church should start following Jesus Christ’s advice and make sure its yes is yes and no is no. In other words, the only salvation for the Church and for our civilization is to revert to traditional values before sin and corruption destroy us.
Yeah, because the church are just fine examples of virtue aren’t they?
@att .., on the 24th December each year , if u look up in the night sky , u will see Orion’s Belt which is 3 small bright stars that are known as ” the 3 kings “, these stars on the 24th come in direct line with star in the east , which comes in direct line with the place the sun rises . Now please think about this , open your mind , ask yourself .. ” does this sound fimiliar ” ???
If all the many people on the journal that think this BAI ruling is ridiculous and grossly unfair, complaints to the BAI about mass and the Angelus being on RTE so frequently with no counter- balancing, etc etc, it would be very interesting to see what their response will be.
Lets play the bigots at their own game
I for one am going to do this
I think the BAI have got it spot on this time.
(Not truly my view but just in case the journal get in trouble for a one sided article)
You don’t have to scratch the veneer of tolerance very hard to reveal the blatant bigotry of the government. Shame on them for allowing such a narrow minded ruling in 2014.
Dorothy the BAI is independent from government
Great! That’s why I love Ireland, there is still hope for this place that it won’t succumb to sin and hatred for normal families.
These comments should be posted on the BOI Facebook page and emailed to them. They will no doubt ignore them but at least it would be doing something. Great article by the way
Is there any one of the posters on this subject who actually listened to the program in question.
I really am not interested in what people do or not do in their personal lives but do I want to listen to someone on the radio who appears to be hell bent on promoting a pink agenda on the airwaves?
No, I don’t.
Change the station. I do whrn mass comes on…
The complaint had nothing to do with the discussion of lifestyle, in fact the bits of the ruling that have been printed show that the Authority had no issue with the topic.
The complaint, once again, was the lack of professionalism in the RTE presenter, and his inability to do his job without bringing his personal prejudices into the studio.
It was the same with Mr Panti, his contribution to that program was not the issue, it was the crass stupidity of the presenter.
Not that the actual truth will prevent the author of this garbage from jumping on any story that suits his agenda, and twisting the facts into any hysterical hyperbole that suits the bullshit he is looking to sell.
My own view here is that we are ALL asking the wrong bloody question! Its my view that there shouldn’t be any form of State recognised marriage of ANY description, gay or straight. Marriage is a false construct, originally designed simply as a method of formalising inheritance and property issues.
So, to hell with marriage of any description. Its none of the State’s damn business.
FFS this ruling was about an obnoxious, opinionated, biased & tetchy presenter sharing a less than objective opinion something he has been getting away with for far too long. The Irony of course being he denied or certainly avoided the question about his own sexuality.
Hypocritical and so blatantly unfair of RTE, even by their own standards, but what else could I expect of them given their track record in this area? Not that I ever really watch/listen to RTE much anyway. Why would I when there are so many quality channels out there? I only wish my €160 licence fee went to the Brits; the BBC is infinitely superior and is what I watch more of anyway.
as a supporter of SSM, I have to say that the BAI are right on this. RTE is the national broadcaster, it is funded by the license-payer, and it should be obliged to represent the views of all kid emcee-payers, not simply those on one side of the upcoming referendum.
RTE are often, quite justly criticized for propagandizing for a minority of the population, i.e. The government and those the government favours. It’s hypocritical to criticize RTE for favoritism in one case and then to criticise the BAI for taking action against RTE’s favoritism in another.
Being the national broadcaster obliges them to present the viewpoints of all factions within the nation, at least in issues important enough to warrant a referendum.
And on that point – if balance and true inclusion is indeed their obligation to the license payers, then for the sake of balance and inclusion either they ditch all the catholic stuff or they include atheist, humanist and every other religion too.
After all – non Catholics are required to fund the catholic broadcasts, and will be fined or jailed if they refuse.
This is my testimony about the good work of a man who helped me..My name is Olivia Jane Mike, and I base in London.My life is back!!! After 8 years of marriage, my husband left me and left me with our three kids. I felt like my life was about to end,and was falling apart. Thanks to a spell caster called papa Justus who i met online. On one faithful day, as I was browsing through the internet, I was searching for a good spell caster that can solve my problems. I came across series of testimonies about this particular spell caster. Some people testified that he brought their Ex lover back, some testified that he restores womb, some testified that he can cast a spell to stop divorce and so on. There was one particular testimony I saw, it was about a woman called grace,she testified about how papa Justus brought back her Ex lover in less than 72 hours and at the end of her testimony she drop papa Justus e-mail address. After reading all these,I decided to give papa a try. I contacted him via email and explained my problem to him. In just 3 days, my husband came back to me. We solved our issues, and we are even happier than before. papa Justus is really a talented and gifted man and i will not to stop publishing him because he is a wonderful man…If you have a problem and you are looking for a real and genuine spell caster to solve that problem for you. Try the great papa Justus today, he might be the answer to your problem. Here’s his contact:
drabeljustus@gmail.com Thank you great Justus. Contact him for the following:
(1)If you want your ex back.
(2) if you always have bad dreams.
(3)You want to be promoted in your office.
(4)You want women/men to run after you.
(5)If you want a child.
(6)[You want to be rich.
(7)You want to tie your husband/wife to be yours forever.
(8)If you need financial assistance.
(9)Herbal care
10)Help bringing people out of prison
(11)Marriage Spells
(12)Miracle Spells
(13)Beauty Spells
(14)PROPHECY CHARM
(15)Attraction Spells
(16)Evil Eye Spells
(17)Kissing Spell
(18)Remove Sickness Spells
(19)ELECTION WINNING SPELLS
(20)SUCCESS IN EXAMS SPELLS
(21) Charm to get who to love you.
(22)Business spell.
Contact him today on:
drabeljustus@gmail.com,
+2347033354868.
You can also CONTACT HIM ON whatsApp on the number.
have your say