Iris Completes The Hat-Trick
The outbreak of Foot in Mouth syndrome (here and here) that has been identified in the Robinson household continues with today’s Belfast Telegraph reporting comments made by the First Minister’s wife and Strangford MP/ MLA, Iris Robinson, comparing homosexuals to child abusers. Her subsequent ‘clarification’ didn’t impress two prominent gay political figures on today’s Talkback either. The original comments carried in the paper: “there can be no viler act, apart from homosexuality and sodomy, than sexually abusing innocent children” (my italics.) And today’s, clarified, comments: ”
“I clearly intended to say that child abuse was worse even than homosexuality and sodomy.” (my italics.) For her part, Mrs. Robinson is claiming to have been ‘misrepresented’ in the Offical Parliamentary Report.
UPDATE: Two of our commenters, Mark Simpson and Sammy Morse, have had it confirmed by Hansard that, after replaying the audio record of the relevant committee meeting, the parliamentary body is satisfied that Iris Robinson has not been misinterpreted by their staff, as she had earlier claimed. Also, leading British parliamentary observer, Iain Dale, has labelled Mrs. Robinson as “the most anti-gay MP in the House of Commons” on his blog here.
Dave
No-one’s saying Iris isn’t entitled to her views.
It’s just that we think they stink.
“We need morals and ethics in society”
Dave,
And how precisely are the “correct” morals and ethics going to be “imposed” as you are clearly not happy with the ethical stances posited by many contributors to this site?
Who will decide what these morals and ethics are given such diversity in society?
I am no fan of illiberal laws or interpretations of laws but I would seek to have these changed through reasoned argument that persuades rather than insults. Vitriol and words expressed publicly in anger will get Iris nowhere and actually detracts from the real arguments over rights that need to be had in this society in particular.
I would have thought that prudishness over private sexual behaviour is the last place to start such a necessary discussion.
“Libertarianism promotes selfishness and individualism, failing to grasp that the society is a collective which requires that restraints are imposed on individual freedoms in the interests of the collective”
The DUP follows an economic agenda akin to Thatcherism who, famously, believed that “there is no such thing as society”. How can this economic neo-liberalism be squared with the above comment or is sexual preference just an easier sin on which to pass judgement?
I just noticed the Google as is advertising Man Central Free Gay Dating, my irony detector just exploded.
Once again we see yet another defender of Iris call her attackers fascist. I really implore you to actually look that word up in a dictionary as the irony is astounding. Jews weren’t the only minority the ultimate fascists rounded up if you care to check your history.
You want morality? What is immoral about two consenting adults doing what ever they want in the privacy of their own home? Imposing your believs and attitudes on someone who doesn’t want them, thats immoral and unchristian.
How can any person even attempt to compare that to the hurt, pain and suffering caused by a child molester.
Gay Pride is Saturday week. Kicking off from Customs House Square. You don’t need to be gay to take part, but if you really do deplore what Iris and her ilk are spreading show up and show your support and prove that Robinson’s attitude isn’t the norm in this great country..
[I]s sexual preference just an easier sin on which to pass judgement?
I’ve seen it suggested by some Christian commentators that a major reason homosexuality is such an apparent obsession with the likes of Iris is that it’s one sin nobody’s going to accuse *them* of, so they can rant away to their hearts’ content. Precious few of us can put our hands on our hearts and say they we never been guilty of wrath, pride, lust, gluttony and suchlike – but it’s clear that Iris has never had a sapphic dalliance in her life, so it becomes something she happens to feel on very safe ground condemning.
dodrade
I hope you have expressed your view to Iris, because she feels that every vote for her is a fundamentalist vote.
@Dave
A plague on both your houses. I agree that ethics and morality should guide society, but it is not the job of the government to use the law to prevent immorality at the point of a gun and the threat of detention at Her Majesty’s Pleasure. It is the job of the government to protect Peter from being harmed by Paul or to prevent Peter being coerced into doing what Paul wants against his freely given consent. That that also punishes immorality is true, but it is not the same thing and should not be confused with punishing morality in general.
If you want to change morality in the society around you then the proper way to do so is through the medium of the marketplace of ideas, not through the medium of the courts or the prison service. That’s not what they’re there for. Both using them against consensual “sodomy” or against anti-homosexual “hate speech” would be an abuse.
The PC people you describe are not libertarian but anti-libertarian, and indeed for the very reasons you spell out. They want the government to not just prevent harm or coercion but to enforce their view of morality at the point of a gun. The fact that your morality is different, does not make you different in principle just in specifics.
Morality used to be the job of the church, or perhaps more accurately the churches. But there should be seperation between church and state not because the churches preached bad morality but because it’s not the legitimate job of the church to use state power to impose their moral values on those who disagree with them on what constitutes “the good life” whether they be “Four Poofs and a Piano” or the Amish. These PC faux-secularists don’t want to separate church from state, they want to REPLACE the church with their own moral compass and join it at the hip to the state. A choice about as attractive as having to decide whether to be ruled under Hitler or Mao.
Probably true Joe and it’s also one that be easily “turned”, according to Iris.
I disagree with those who think that Iris needs to keep quiet. I hope that Iris continues to extoll her views and ensure that there can be no ambiguity about where she stands. As in Jeremiah 50:2, “Declare ye among the nations, and publish, and set up a standard; publish, and conceal not: say, Babylon is taken”.
I have to say that the comparision between homosexuality – namely a relationship between two people which may not even involve sex at all – and paedophilia is a new low.
And there is of course that embarassing bit about Hansard and the apparent discontinuity between her version of events and that reported by the editors at Hansard who have confirmed that the official report recorded her words accurately. This does create a bit of a problem with the ninth commandment, as someone else pointed out. Aren’t politicians supposed to uphold God’s law ?
‘I can only hope that she doesn’t turn up next on the next celebrity Big Brother dressed in a leotard, as modelled by that other great controversalist MP, George-Boy Galloway. ‘
Peat Bog
Actually she is scheduled for the Graham Norton show
This is the end for her (thank fuck). While the docile ‘Ulster’ media and parliament have to date allowed her to get away with this sort of vile wank there is no way in hell she will survive at Westminster. My money’s on some sort of ‘reduce my workload, re-focus my talents, give more time to the assembly etc. – type resignation. Peter Robinson is unlikely to allow his political currency to be further tarnished by this mental, swivel-eyed bitch (agree with previous posters – can you imagine being married to this puritanical, hate-filled, joyless sow????). Have to say that prior to today my view had been that while she was plainly deranged she nonethless had the clear right to express her deranged views in public. This outburst has however crossed the line – mercifully it’s now curtains.
WHAT’S an IRIS?
A NEW COMPETION CATEGORY IN THE SLUGGER AWARDS!!!!
Please read below (from Wiki).
It could happen here ya know.
Santorum is a sexual neologism proposed by American humorist and sex-advice columnist Dan Savage in 2003 to “memorialize” then US Republican Senator Rick Santorum from Pennsylvania due to the controversy over his statements on homosexuality. Savage asked his readers to submit new definitions for the term; the winning definition was “that frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex.”[1] The word became a successful Google bomb when Savage created a website for it, which unseated the Senator’s official website as the top search result for his surname on the Google search engine
In an interview with the Associated Press published April 20, 2003, Senator Santorum grouped gay sex together with incest, polygamy, and zoophilia as deviant sexual behavior threatening society and the family.[3] The Senator further stated that he believed consenting adults do not have a constitutional right to privacy with respect to sexual acts.
Dan Savage, who is openly gay and has had a history of political activism on behalf of gay rights, angrily addressed the Senator’s comments in an op-ed published in the New York Times on April 25 titled “G.O.P. Hypocrisy”. He linked Sen. Santorum’s comments to the broader agenda of his party, saying “Mr. Santorum, who holds the No. 3 position in the Senate leadership, was only repeating what many Republicans have already said.”[5] Savage next handled the matter in his sex-advice column, Savage Love on May 8, saying:
Striking down an insulting, discriminatory, unconstitutional law will not, as Santorum fears, open the doors to incest, adultery, bigamy, and bestiality. Straight people blew those doors off their hinges long, long ago.
Savage then proceeded to answer a letter about incest, which he opposes.[6]
Letters on the Santorum controversy began to arrive, “assuming correctly that the incident was right up Savage’s sex-politics alley”, according to Liz Spikol of the Philadelphia Weekly.[7] One writer lamented, under the pseudonym “Sex and Rick Santorum,” that the controversy seemed to already be forgotten, and urged Savage to organize a reader contest to determine a definition for the word “santorum”. The reader reasoned that since Santorum had invited himself into the bedrooms of homosexuals, they should be “inclusive” and name a gay sex act for him. Savage agreed, saying
There’s no better way to memorialize the Santorum scandal than by attaching his name to a sex act that would make his big, white teeth fall out of his big, empty head.
Savage noted that the column had previously succeeded in creating a sexual slang word, “pegging”, by getting the definition to begin appearing in dictionaries of sexual slang.[8] “I threw it out there to my readers,” Savage later said.[7]
Savage published several definitions suggested by readers in subsequent columns. The winning definition was submitted by “Wipe Up That Santorum, Anal Pokers” in the May 29 column.[9] Votes were collected by e-mail, and the winning definition was announced June 12[10]; Savage concluded by asking for questions about santorum, and urged his readers to get the word out.[1] Savage has said that the winner was a “perfect fit”, as there was no prior name for it. Santorum, he explained, is “unwelcome. If you’re doing [anal sex] right, it’s not gonna happen, and if it happens, it’s a bit of a killjoy, which is what it would be if the actual senator strolled into the room.”[
Bemused. Agreed, this is curtains and the sooner the better.
Aside:
I think this is the only thread of Chris’ that I have ever read where he hasn’t been accused of some sinister Republican plot.
I’m beginning to think yer man Dawkins is right – and I’m someone who has always been a supporter of Christianity, Protestant or Catholic.
As I get older, I’m getting to the stage where I’ve had enough of it – it’s usually the other way round, isn’t it: you’re supposed to get more religious as you grow older, aren’t you?
Iris – I can’t stand the sight of the woman now – is doing her part, along with the fundamentalists of all shades, some Popes and all, to undermine what I was brought up to believe.
I feel sorry for her as I believe she has issues.
I think her and Peter would need to sit down and talk because sooner or later she will break the law.
“I think this is the only thread of Chris’ that I have ever read where he hasn’t been accused of some sinister Republican plot.”
Joe,
I think the silence of her DUP collegaues says it all.
There isn’t anyone that could construct a rationale argument in support of what she said, how she said it, and where she said it, without being tarnished by association.
These boys know where their next expenses cheque is coming from a too hell with avowed principle.
Call me a cynic.
Bemused,
If only it were the case that she was going to be finished by this but I severely doubt it. Unfortunately this kind of offensive tripe is common currency in the DUP and I have no doubt will be supported by many of its members. Every so often we have to read the inevitable story about why a unionist pact would be great or why unionism should come together. Well this is why there are different unionist parties. The DUP may be trying to change their image but it won’t survive scrutiny. The fact of it is that most members of the DUP are living in a world view that produces this kind of crap. There are many of us in the unionist community that think differently. So we don’t vote DUP and won’t ever vote DUP.
As far as banning her comments I subscribe to the marketplace of ideas approach and would not want to restrict her from saying whatever she wants to, I hope that among the voters of Strangford it will make some of them wonder if her obnoxious views are something they wish to vote for anymore but I seriously doubt it would be enough to cost her the seat. In fact I hope that members of the DUP keep this kind of thing up so that the wider public can learn a bit more about the kind of people and attitudes they are voting for when they tick the box for the DUP.
“This is the end for her (thank fuck).”
Bemused,
If this is the end for her as far as the Health Committee is concerned (and I doubt it), I guess that she can always console herself with the fact that both she, and Ian Junior, can bring it up the rear on the DUP back benches.
Now that was funny, Peat Blog.
Am I the only one who sees the delicious irony that in mythology Iris was both a messenger of the gods, and the very personification of the rainbow, they archtype symbol of Gay Pride!
Maybe her parents caused her issues at the font!
Agreed with Duncan, and others. If we were in a civilized country, of course Iris would be out of office. Sadly we are not, and Iris’ views are representative of a significant proportion of the electorate. It would be wonderful if the voters chose to send her a message, but I sincerely doubt it.
It’s not just Iris’ prejudices that are bad, it’s her rank lack of strategic political sense. She’s just tried to accuse Hansard of misquoting her, and BBC has now got the story that they emphatically deny any such thing. She accuses the people who give her airtime of twisting what she says, and then goes back on air to give them more ammunition. She just comes across as someone who hasn’t thought things through very well.
She is entitled to hold and to express any opinion that she wants.
Oh really?
And where does this entitlement spring from exactly?
Don’t be stupid Dave, no one has any such entitlement, we are all bound by the laws of the land, and this includes a limitation on our free speech.
There can be no such thng as absolute liberty as long as there is more than one person, we will always be in a situation whereby one person’s liberty impinges upon anothers. The trick is in getting the balance right.
CS I suspect she is reacting in a petty way because she is defensive. I can quite believe she didn’t mean to imply that homosexuality was actually worse than child abuse. A bigger person would simply have apologised and said that she didn’t mean to say that. If she had done that then this would have been much more limited in its damage to her reputation.
I suspect that Iris is probably frigid and that if she ever uncrossed her legs (which are probably clamped together with irons), the room temperature would drop below freezing point. She does seem to have a fixation on sodomy, associating it with disgust, probably resulting from an unpleasant experience or a tendency to fart during the act (we mustn’t speculate). At any rate, perhaps her husband’s contrariness results from her practice of placing mousetraps down her pyjamas in case he gets frisky while she’s sleeping? Ad Hominem, as opposed to ad homo, I know.
However, she is entitled to dislike gays as much as she likes – just as gays are entitled to dislike others for whatever reasons they have. Iain Dale (usually sensible) is foolish to link freedom of speech to attacks on gays, since Iris has not said that anybody should be assaulted. And where this flawed logic to be followed by PC-mongers (who promote it), then they should censor their own attacks of Christians lest Christians are assaulted.
Just to reinforce Pounder’s point, the Belfast Pride Dander is on Saturday week and it would be great to see as many faces, gay and straight, there as possible. A great fun, family friendly, day out and you can turn Iris Robinson and her ilk green! Please don’t feel you have to be gay to join in the parade, everyone
I also wouldn’t let Iris put me off my faith; she isn’t worth it!
Greetings from the Library Duncan! Hope you’re well. I agree with your analysis – I just think that as far as Westminster is concerned, she’s crossed a line. It’ll be interesting to see what Peter does next. One assumes there’ll be an urgent gagging order placed on her but even that’s not going to be enough to put this mess to bed. People are now entitled to ask whether or not the de facto PM of Northern Ireland agrees/disagrees with his wife’s views. My strong inkling remains that her career in England is over.
P.S. Hope all’s well with you – you were a rare beacon of sense and decency in a political movement which held little or no natural attraction for me.
I’m a tad disappointed that a non-extreme Fundamentalist Slugger Blogger, and former DUP supporter, hasn’t joined this debate.
Bemused
She was the most annoying DUP MP on the 42 days vote, holding up 9 fingers in a smug way designed to annoy everyone. She was annoying on her personal comments against the Health Minister, and she comes across in a very petty way. I doubt howeever if her Westminister career is over unless people vote her out. And that is something that could happen if she keeps her loony comments up. Remember what happened to the DUP on Ballymena council when they made those embarrasing comments about the ELO?
Good point slug – I’m just wondering (and I should know this but don’t) – presumably there is a mechanism for a summary removal/expulsion from the House. If for instance an independent MP (i.e one who did not have a party to de-select or otherwise discipline him or her) was to state in the house that “all jews are paedophilic cockroaches” – presumably he or she would be subject to some form of immediate, draconian and terminal sanction? Any constitutional/parliamentary procedural lawyers still up at this time of night?
Well, I think the Telegraph got it wrong. They even said that was her photo. Was it not Heath Ledger as The Joker?
I can’t help but think of Peter Robinson’s unionist academy idea, one of the aims being to promote the unionist cause in the “mainland.” As if that wouldn’t be an uphill struggle to begin with, Mrs. Robinson pretty much shot a gaping hole in that whole concept… Up till now I figured the Iris controversy was going to remain one of those things mainstream British media/public dismiss as a typical “northern irish” thing. But now with Iris determined to dig herself a deeper hole on what seems like a daily basis…
I actually think the most effective tactic at this point would be for Sinn Fein (or any combination of parties) to sponsor an official Stormont reception for the “sodomites”. Anyone recall the criteria for these things? Aren’t they subject to a cross-community vote if they are “official” receptions? That would put the whole DUP on the spot, rather than allow Iris to continue her solo wicked witch routine with apparent impunity.
Bemused,
It will be interesting to see how it impacts her in England but my sense of it is that most NI MP’s are seen as the lunatic fringe in the house anyway so nobody listens to them. I think that goes double for the DUP. I live in hope that the wider electorate will perhaps over time reward those politicians in NI who are not living in the 17th century and will promote to prominence those who would fit into the wider UK mainstream with more ease. It might even be nice if we could send people to Westminster who could make an intellectual contribution, although to be fair the way that parliament operates nowadays there is not really room for that. Personally I see this kind of social issue as the wedge to drive between the DUP and UUP. I don’t believe that the average NI unionist is a raging, bigoted, homophobic, creationist in fact I think that whilst NI is a somewhat more conservative society it is not eons behind general social attitudes in the UK. We are all exposed to the same general social cues and media socialization and I think the average person in NI is basically fair minded and tolerant within the context of their own national and community identity. At least I want to believe that and I would like to see the UUP express itself and its identity to a community like that. Probably not going to happen soon though. All credit to Reg for delivering internal reform it was badly needed but the UUP will still need its Cameron like character to shake off the past associations and right now it really doesn’t have one available. As cheesy as Cameron can be I think it’s necessary for a party to have a personification of its identity at its head and the UUP will need a leader who can sell a different political personality to the wider electorate. Time will tell I suppose. Anyway all a bit of a Tangent from Iris.
On a personal note I am back from the USA and living with family in England while I figure out what to do with myself next. I went through a very painful and emotionally difficult divorce and I have needed some time to process that and to rebuild. I have been looking for work in NI and if I can find something I hope to move back some time later this year. I am sure the boys in Cunningham House will be cock a hoop at that piece of news! LOL.
Yes Sammy Morse but you left out one important thing….
Not only should as many supporters as possible turn up to The Pride Dander next Saturday they should join in the spirit of things like the British Embassy in Latvia: – bring and fly the Rainbow Flag.
Show Your Solidarity (With The British Embassy In Latvia)
http://www.amazon.co.uk/PRIDE-RAINBOW-DOUBLE-STITCHED-FLAG/dp/B000V4JFWY/ref=sr_1_102?ie=UTF8&s=kitchen&qid=1216686765&sr=1-102
Put It Up And Keep It Up!!
(you never know when Iris
and the DUPers will do ‘it’ again)
From Pillar To Post
Special offer on Pride Bunting to Slugger Posters:
Flag-Gay-Pride-Rainbow-Bunting/dp/B00153AHMW/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=kitchen&qid=1216687665&sr=8-4]
just go to Amaz
For The Times They Are A Changing..
Don’t be stupid Dave, no one has any such entitlement, we are all bound by the laws of the land, and this includes a limitation on our free speech.
TAFKABO: Please point to the law you are talking about.
David.
There are laws which prohibit one from saying things that could be seen as an incitement to violent acts.
These laws have resulted in jail terms very recently when some people went on a march and carried banners which supported the idea of Jihad against British citizens.
There are any number of legal limits on free speech: libel, slander, contempt of court, malicious falsehood, incitement offences. I think blasphemy is still on the books too.
You’re being a tad disingenuous, Taf, since you replied to a post that had this in it: “PC-mongers would take great delight in reporting Ms Robinson to the police for committing a thought-crime under racial hatred legislation that they supported without any concept of the sublime irony.”
That makes it clear that free speech is a qualified right by law since it, rather obviously, references a law that qualifies that right.
Extracting a statement from that post and then replying to it as if it meant there was no restriction on free speech rather than meaning that Ms Robinson did not break any law and, ergo, there was no restriction of her free speech creates the misleading impression that there is such a restriction. Which, I think, is why David asked you what that restriction was.
To Wild turkey.
Definition af “iris”: “Upon withdrawal of the penis during the act of anal intercourse, instead of viewing a closed sphincter, one may often see a wide open gaping Iris“
Duncan
“I have been looking for work in NI and if I can find something I hope to move back some time later this year.”
Sorry to hear about your divorce. Glad to hear you are thinking of living in NI and if you do then welcome back!
Bemused, I don’t see how Iris is finished in Westminster, and I can’t see her husband moving against her or supporting people trying to have her removed.
Slug, I can’t see Iris comments as a mistake. That’s because she repeated them; you have the comment in Westminster, then you have the article in the Telegraph which was presumably proof-read and checked by someone.
No Dave you’re wrong.
I took one statement from your post which was: She is entitled to hold and to express any opinion that she wants.
And I addressed that point.
I asked you where she gets the entitlement to say whatever she wants from, and I went on to explain that no one has this entitlement in the UK.
You’re clutching at straws by trying to stretch the points I was addressing to include other points I made no mention of.
Taf, she gets her ‘entitlement’ from the lack of any applicable law preventing her from exercising her free speech.
Unless you are claiming there is a law that would prevent her from giving her opinion, then we are left with only your demand that she remain silent because you do not wish to hear her opinion. Too bad, Taf: that’s free speech for ya.
CS do you really think that she thinks homosexuality is actually viler than child abuse?
Even her first “clarification” to the Belfast Telegraph suggests she does not think that (though it says they are “comparable” which is still a terrible thing to say).
This initial clarification in the BT. I don’t think it could have been proof read nor does it seem like something that was written down. It was itself bizarre and sounded like something defensive she said down the phone to justify her earlier comments, before engaging brain and thinking about what her position is.
I think a real problem with her is that she is not at all careful or thoughtful in terms of what she says and then when challenged she is inflexible and unable to admit she said something unwise. She isn’t good at the quick thinking needed for political interviews. She should not have risen above councillor in my opinion.
Contrast her actions with those of David Healy. He perhaps didn’t really need to apoligise but did and has come out well. She did need to apologise but didn’t and has come out miles worse.
We have seen this inflexibility when she was expelled from Stormont after being unparliamentary to the Health Minister. It’s a problem because she is now developing a bad reputation and the press are after her. Not expecting her to lose her seat but I expect but she will lose votes and if the UUP were to field a strong candidate they could make inroads. People don’t want an embarrasing MP.
Dave.
I’m not even sure that you know what point it is you’re trying to make here.
Your intial point that she could say what she wants is, by your own admission, a qualified right, which was exactly what I said.
As for your comment about my demand that she remain silent, wherever did I make such a demand?
Try sticking to what it is I have said, and I’ll do the same for you.
It never ceases to amuse me that people who express disgust and repugnance at the very idea of some human sexual practices often first profess shock and horror that “such things could be happening” and very soon afterwards regale one with the most salacious down ‘n’ dirty details albeit accompanied by snorts of contempt.
On such occasions I simply wait until they have run out of steam and, with a kindly, concerned look in my eye, quietly ask them if they were so troubled by this behaviour why did they simply not give it up.
Come back Sigmund Freud! We have much need of you in this dark hour.
She’s a very silly woman, but-
1.Why do people insist on asking whether Punt shares her views? Aren’t wives allowed to thin for themselves?
2. She’s entitled to dislike certain types of behaviour – including homosexuality- even if that puts her out of step with modern mores- Christianity has many more such beliefs out of step with the 21st century- condemning adultery wouldn’t play too well with the one parent families in Tullycarnet
3. Her words are silly, but hardly going to incite any nutter to go out to burn someone’s house, and the law circumscribes all the executive’s (in)actions. If you ignore them she’ll go away. She’s a lightweight, engaged on a campaign that she can’t possibly win.
Iris may well ending up costing the DUP the ‘gifts’ it was promised by Brown in return for 42 days. He certainly cannot now give the DUP any noticeable concessions – his generally socially liberal party and supporters would crucify him if he gives the DUP aanything at all for months to come. Basically, she scored a heroic own goal.
Darth Avades:
“Her words are silly, but hardly going to incite any nutter to go out to burn someone’s house, ”
No but to assume that there is no connection is also an error the DUP took up the gay bashing in earnest after the UVF issued death threats in 2006 to gay men in Coleraine. Loyalist then began a witch hunt – abuse burning and violence were the result.
The DUP’s activity on Lisburn council in 2007 also involved arrests of gay men who were ‘dogging’ – so far two of them have committed suicide.
Opinions are one thing consequences another.