Paisley, Question Time & Keeping up with the Jones’

Ian Paisley Jnr has caused a bit of a storm following his appearance on BBC Question Time earlier this week. His views on gay marriage (video clip here) provoked a twitter backlash (featured in yesterday’s Irish News) and led to several on air clashes with fellow contributors and members of the audience.

What Paisley Junior had to say was nothing new to people living here, but the British audience of the programme will not have been used to hearing the traditionalist view of marriage delivered in the typically strident Paisley style, which provoked the ire of Maajid Nawaz, who told the DUP MP that he was “yesterday’s news.”

Host David Dimbleby reminded the North Antrim MP and the audience of previous Paisley Junior comments on the matter, when he’d stated “I am pretty repulsed by gay and lesbianism. I think it’s wrong” and when he labeled homosexuality “Immoral, offensive and obnoxious.”

On the programme, Paisley Junior also took flak for stating that he believed “marriage is fundamentally about children. It’s about creating children who in turn create society…. and stability.”

His quip to fellow contributor, Gay Rights activist Peter Tatchell, that he wasn’t being discriminated against because “You can get married tomorrow, you just can’t get married to a man” didn’t do him many favours with panelists and viewers, and his somewhat cocky retort to a member of the audience (“Do I look like a guy under threat, mate?”) apparently got mategate trending on Twitter.

In this interview on a Christian TV station, Paisley Junior is more forthcoming about his religious views and on the primary influences throughout his life. Paisley Junior claimed in the interview that his election victories were a product of “doing the will of God” (helps having an overwhelmingly conservative and traditionally unionist electorate too…)

When asked who really made an impact on his life, he stated that he got most inspiration from other gospel preachers, citing Dr Bob Jones (Jnr) in particular. He claimed Dr. Bob Jones visited his household and “became like a second father…like a real loving uncle to us. He was a great man.”

Bob Jones Jnr was a controversial figure in the US. He inherited the position of President and chancellor of Bob Jones University from his father. The university did not allow black students until 1970 and banned interracial dating until 2000.

He once said of black people:

“I knew, as a boy, some devout and earnest black preachers of the Word of God. There were many. Today I know of very few and am personally acquainted with only two or three black preachers in this country who emphasize the Scripture, stress the necessity of the new birth, and are in any degree biblical in their convictions or their preaching. It is small wonder then that we are seeing a whole new generation of blacks come up in America who have little moral conviction.”

His views on catholicism should sound familiar to Paisley Junior:

“I am inclined to blame every evil on Romanism. Although I dislike everything about the harlot church, the so-called ‘Society of Jesus‘ is the most vicious creation of that religion of darkness and dead bones.”

Bob Jones University’s ban on interracial dating became a key theme for a short period of time during the 2000 US Republican Party Presidential Primary race, when George Bush Jnr was criticized for speaking at the university whilst the ban was in place and due to anti-catholic comments associated with Jones.

This transcript of a Larry King interview with Bob Jones III reveals the moment when the ban was effectively dropped on air following the furore, whilst it also reveals how the university had a Footloose style ban on its students dancing and holding hands on campus.

Bob Jones III’s views on homosexuals are a tad extreme:

“I’m sure this will be greatly misquoted but it would not be a bad idea to bring the swift justice today that was brought in Israel’s day against murder and rape and homosexuality. I guarantee it would solve the problem post-haste if homosexuals were stoned, if murderers were immediately killed as the Bible commands.”

Alas, time marches on and, as you can see from this 2012 report, an LGBT Support Group now exists at Bob Jones University.

But the most pertinent observation and comment on the Question Time programme was left to a member of the audience, who pointed out the hypocrisy of unionist politicians demanding to have their Britishness respected but seeking to have different laws in place on moral issues in Northern Ireland than Britain: “British when it suits them, Ulstermen when it doesn’t.  

Indeed.

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, ,

  • GavBelfast

    Being abroad at the moment, time and technological issues mean I don’t get to see much TV from home (online radio is MUCH easier to access!), but I did go out of my way to watch this.

    The awfulness of Paisley’s performance was only accentuated by it being apparent that he was so pleased with himself.

    I could only agree with the woman in the audience about Paisley-types being “British when it suits them”.

    However, nationalist-minded commentators shouldn’t fool themselves into thinking that ordinary British people in general in Northern Ireland feel that way, just as those who define their nationality as Irish presumably feel it in a “warts and all” way, too.

  • Red Lion

    Spot on GavBelfast

    I think it should be obvious to the UK-wide TV watchers of QT that the Belfast audience were very intelligent, modern, moderate, and not in agreement with Paisley.

    The sooner the people are more accurately reflected in our political representatives the better. The big swathe of middle ground here in Northern Ireland sits very easily with mainland mainstream British diverse and pluralist outlooks on life.

    It surely has to be only a matter of time before this crosses over into the political representatives we elect. C’mon Basil and John kickstart an acceleration toward modern British liberal ideals in our politics here in NI !!

  • Ulster Press Centre

    So we’re judging people based on the views and behaviour of their associates now, are we Chris?

    That’s not going to end well for someone like yourself who socialises with child killers, religious fundamentalist mass murderers and paedophile shelterers on a daily basis.

  • ArdoyneUnionist

    It seems Paisley will find good bed fellows here, and as we are associating people with others I do believe you work or worked as a teacher in a Roman Catholic school??? How did this fit in with your socialist/maxist shinner views on gay rights and the catholic certificate of education???

    http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/priesthood-crisis-dropped-amazoncom-uncovering-gay-sex-priesthood260513

  • iluvni

    A ‘twitter backlash’…….wow, that’ll have him worried.

  • Coll Ciotach

    Oh dear – did the luvvies get annoyed

  • Submariner

    UPC coming from a self confessed supporter of a murder gang which specialised in sectarian murder you really are the pot calling the kettle black. Catch your self on.

  • GavBelfast

    I think the moral of this thread is that compulsive point-scorers, of whatever hue, shouldn’t feed-each other such obvious material ….

  • BluesJazz

    IPJ was cringeworthy. I actually hoped this was not broadcast on the mainland.
    He came across as a spoilt little brat who was so full of hate and bile, but that was ok because he would get elected anyway, so backward and thick were his electorate.
    The BBC should have named his constituency clearly as not representative of Northern Ireland in general.
    At least Nick Griffin was educated.

  • Old Mortality

    There is no justification whatsover in labelling Paisley’s views as ‘unBritish’ when there is significant opposition to homosexual marriage everywhere in the UK.
    There were 161 votes against the proposal in the Commons and I doubt if many of them were courageously taking a stand against the wishes of their constituents. They included 15 Labour and 4 Lib Dems. A majority of Tory MPs voted against but then it’s just the largest party in the House so they must be ‘unBritish’ as well.

  • claudius

    a typical slugger argument whatever your hue. dont argue for or against the point, its who you associate with that matters.

  • Ulster Press Centre

    Submariner – 26 May 2013 at 6:39 pm
    UPC coming from a self confessed supporter of a murder gang which specialised in sectarian murder you really are the pot calling the kettle black. Catch your self on.

    I take it you meant to direct that at Chris Donnelly?

  • Sp12

    Ian Jr’s performance showed most noticeably, the generational gap on this issue. Spend a few days on social networks, see how ‘de kidz’ of whatever sexual persuasion love George Takei’s little memes and videos calling homophobes douchebags.
    Are we really going to end up at a situation where young people in NI find the south more progressive and less hindered by outdated religious dogma than somewhere that’s always harping on about civil and religious liberty for all?

  • ayeYerMa

    As I previously stated, I thought IPJ expressed the arguments against redefining marriage in one of the most succinct manners a that I’ve heard on UK-wide TV.

    He came across to me as much more eloquent and mannered than the usual loutish behaviour from the self-styled “progressives” who like make to shout-down with childish meaningless insult words and bully anyone to dares disagree with their naive skewed thinking and trendy straw-man arguments (such as this somehow being about “rights”, despite the fact Civil Partnerships are already in place).

    I wish the exellent David Starkey had been on the show again, as that is one gay man who would have put these aggressive and emotion-over-logic “progressive” bullies in their place.

    And the comment in the last sentence there being one of the most pathetic of all — as if such diversity of opinion doesn’t exist in the rest of the UK! You’d also think the DUP didn’t support devolution or something!

  • ayeYerMa

    sp12, I am not surprised given the amount of “progressive” propaganda output constantly on media targeted at da yoof such BBC3. Just look at a typical example of so-called comedy such as “Russell Howard’s Good News”: essentially a bit of childish schoolboy humour, mixed with mocking and laughing at anyone who doesn’t agree with his leftist views (with one “ism” or another being apparently the worst thing you could ever do), finished off with some emotional claptrap to show how wonderful he is.

  • Submariner

    No UPC I meant you but you already knew that.

  • paulG

    It is a measure of how controlling the Politically Correct Agendists have become in the media, that no political parties dare stand up to them on issues like Gay marriage and adoption and immigration etc. except for what has been portrayed as fringe extremists.

    At least Ian Jnr has the courage to say what he believes in and represent his electorate rather than mis-representing them.

    Marriage was created for the protection of children not for the indulgence of self obsessed adults. For me it’s a simple matter of weighing requirement against dangers. Many Lesbian couples have their own children, they need to be allowed to marry. Very few gay male couples have children – there is a very low requirement there. There is however a high level of danger as marriage is they key stepping stone to adoption and men have a bad record of child abuse – particularly with other peoples children, particularly when a woman is not present in the home and particularly with young boys (gay priests etc.).

    Gay married couples with adopted children (or even non Gay Paedophile men masquerading as Gay couples) could soon become the next child abuse holocaust.

    Have we learnt nothing from the abuses of children in the churches and other institutions that we would now deliver some of them to the Paedophiles houses.

    High time Nationalist parties got off the cosy smug PC bandwagon and put childrens safety first.

    Nobody’s always right and even Ian Jnr. is not always wrong – even if he does his best to alienate even the people who might agree with him.

  • GEF

    At least Ian Paisley Jnr cannot be accused of being anti Catholic on this particular subject. When the Catholic Church would be in total agreement with all that the MP for N Antrim said re the Gay marriage issue.

    Dare say his mum and dad will also be in the thick of all these goings on in the House of Lords.
    “Peers revolt on Gay Marriage”

    http://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/05/26/305549/british-peers-plan-gay-marriage-revolt/&sa=U&ei=ry-jUaT6OOim0wW444CgCw&ved=0CCUQqQIoADAA&usg=AFQjCNHQjLkUdUitAm5_1wYPtTB_JmpQnA

  • GEF

    More on Ian Paisley (Jun) . Rumours that the Paisley family have left the Free P Church may be more than just rumours

    “Gay marriage part of wider attack on society – Ian Paisley”

    “Mr Paisley also revealed that he has not been attending the church founded by his father since Dr Paisley’s retirement but now attends an Elim church with his wife.”

    http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/regional/gay-marriage-part-of-wider-attack-on-society-ian-paisley-1-5134187

  • gaygael

    Ok so lets start with some of the factual anomalies that are being perpetrated here by the Neanderthals.
    1 civil partnerships are not equal. Pension entitlement is not equal to that conferred by marriage. Sammy Wilson confirmed this at the assembly recently and marriage equality campaigners have been arguing this point for a while. Additionally in Northern Ireland there are two other principle differences. One, that no element of faith could be included in a cp, or that cps can’t be held in faith premises, and are legally disbarred from being held there. Secondly upon entering into a civil partnership, my partner and I become disbarred from adoption. Either jointly or singly.
    2 its about religious freedom. If my faith group wishes to conduct a same sex marriage, as the Quakers, Unitarians, liberal and reform branches of Judaism, who all wish to, why can anyone else’s interpretation of faith prevent them from expressing their? It’s like the Catholic Church legally blocking divorce because they don’t agree with it. Catholics will never be forced to marry divorcees, and this is exactly how equal marriage will work. Those faith groups who wish, will and those who don’t will be protected to interpret marriage and conduct it according to their faith. We are on the side of religious freedom. Opponents are not.

    And as for the intolerant and casual homophobia here, particular Paula and that ill informed oul classic of linking homophobia and peadophilia get over yourself. The tide is turning. From criminals 31 years ago, to nearly full equal citizens, that’s not bad.
    http://www.stonewall.org.uk/documents/living_together_2012.pdf

    I would suggest that the changing opinion is because more a nd more people are related to, work with, have a neighbour or family member who they love and respect and that person is LGB. For the homophobes on here, o and talk to an LGB person in your family and look them in the eye and try trot out your opinions.

  • seamusot

    IPJ NUL points

  • paulG

    gaygael,

    1. I can’t see any reason why the pension entitlements shouldn’t be the same, that should be easy to get ammended. Being jointly or singly disbarred from adoption effectively leaves gay men where they were with other singles or pairs of straight men. Sounds like equality to me.

    2. Religious freedom is for the Church and it’s flock to exercise. Others have no right to force their view and practices upon them. eg ILGO forcing it way into St Patricks day Parades. Could Neo Nazi groups insist on being allowed into a Jewish procession if they had a Jewish or Israeli member?

    Not that I can understand any grown man still believing in any God let alone want to get married in a Church.

    From news reports I would guess that 4 times as many men have been convicted of Paedofilia against young boys than young girls. If I am ill informed then enlighten me. Why is that?

    Ps. I have heard many stories from gay friends and collegues and I have even been in a couple of gay clubs, and some are quite shocking. How about you look your family in the eye and tell them that all of these men are suitable to adopt children.

  • Jack2

    Jnr – ever the poster boy for Nepotism.

    The DUP is so rife with it , there is even a mention on wikipedia.
    “Northern Ireland

    Many Northern Irish politicians employ family members. In 2008, 19 elected politicians of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) directly employed family members and relatives constituted 27 of its 136 staff.[19]”

  • Starviking

    paulG

    From news reports I would guess that 4 times as many men have been convicted of Paedofilia against young boys than young girls. If I am ill informed then enlighten me. Why is that?

    You’ve got the duty to provide the evidence. “From news reports” is hardly hard evidence, unless you have a large collection of reports on all convictions over a significant period of time, perhaps a decade, which you’d like to share with us?

    Ps. I have heard many stories from gay friends and collegues and I have even been in a couple of gay clubs, and some are quite shocking. How about you look your family in the eye and tell them that all of these men are suitable to adopt children.

    I’ve heard of quite shocking behavior from people of many orientations and backgrounds – by your logic no-one is suitable for adopting children.

  • paulG

    Starviking,

    By proportion, man against boy Paedofilia should be 10 to 20 times less, given a 5 – 10 % Gay population. This could be because they are not linked or it could be because Gay sex in the past was already illegal so maybe there wasn’t the same jump to be made or because 35 -50 % of Catholic priests were repressed homosexuals who hads been Psycologically tortured and twisted by the Churches rules or other reasons – I’d like to know.

    It’s not critical to know whether it’s 2, 4 or 6 times the rate for abuse of girls instead of 10 to 20 times less. The fact is everyone knows it’s way off what was expected and this is the elephant in the room which needs to be addressed – particularly whether it was a function of the past or still a current danger.

    When it comes to adoption, the onus must always be on the prospective parents to prove that they are suitable and safe. I think the onus is on gay male community to prove their credentials in this regard – mainly because when you present as a single group (which they of course are not) you must be answerable for the group.

    Re: Everybody being guilty of some shocking behaviour – that’s probably true. Based on the pool of people I know, I would rate about a quater of the straight ones and half of the gay ones as not being suitable – mainly down to drug and alchohol abuse in both cases, but a least one of the (mid 40’s) gay men I know, on top of drugs, also indulges in S&M sex, sometimes with teenagers – though nobody else seems to think there’s much wrong with that. Fortunately he has no interest in adopting at the moment.

  • Skinner

    PaulG

    “…man against boy Paedofilia should be 10 to 20 times less, given a 5 – 10 % Gay population. This could be because they are not linked…”

    You should have stopped there.

    Alternatively produce evidence for the assumption on which it is mis-premised, that male paedophilia victims are over-repressented.

  • paulG

    Skinner

    I could have stopped there but I believe they are (or at least were) linked and I’m hoping someone can answer the question, confirming or debunking my opinion – I am open to either.

    I really don’t think it’s necessary to collate the figures from court cases, so obvious has the over-representation of boys been . Even if they were only the same numbers of boys and girls there’s still a factor between 10 to 20 that says there’s a question that need answering here.

  • gaygael

    1. I can’t see any reason why the pension entitlements shouldn’t be the same, that should be easy to get ammended. Being jointly or singly disbarred from adoption effectively leaves gay men where they were with other singles or pairs of straight men. Sounds like equality to me.

    2. Religious freedom is for the Church and it’s flock to exercise. Others have no right to force their view and practices upon them. eg ILGO forcing it way into St Patricks day Parades. Could Neo Nazi groups insist on being allowed into a Jewish procession if they had a Jewish or Israeli member?

    Not that I can understand any grown man still believing in any God let alone want to get married in a Church.

    Hi Paul g. Married couples are allowed to jointly adopt, civil partners are not either singly or together. That’s inequality and your previous posts were that cps provide the same as marriage. You are factually wrong so stop peddling your lies. Same with pensions. Glad you support equality.

    Secondly I am glad that you support religious freedom. My faith, whether Quaker, Unitarian, or Judaism wishes to conduct same sex marriages. I am glad you will be supporting their right to do so, and not standing in their way.

    Don’t try to obfuscate the matter with non comparable s over nazis and Judaism. It is a very simple point regarding freedom of religion and you are wrong.

    As for the peadophilia stuff. Wind your neck in and stop equating loving same sex couples wishing to get married to peadophilia. It’s horribly homophobic.

  • paulG

    Hi gaygael,

    My point was that no single man and no pairs of men whether gay or straight should be allowed to adopt children as we have a much worse record of child abuse than women – particulary when women are not around.
    I don’t think that gay married men should get special treatment when it comes to adoption as I think their past record is even worse than straight men.

    I do support religious freedoms and I do support your church’s right to marry gays and lesbians if that is the policy of the church. Apologies that I missed your point on that. I’m still angry about ILGO riding roughshod over the rights of the AOH to organise their own NY Catholic parade without having to include their oponents.

    Perhaps there’s a lesson there. Sometimes it is better to quit while you’re ahead. In this case you could take gay marriage and forget about adoption or push on and get adoption which could seriously backfire if I’m right there’s a spate of abuse cases resulting.

    How sure are you, that as with any successful revolution, the people driving it, whose whole lives are probably defined by it, will know when to – or be able to stop?

    The only problem I have with gay marriage is that I know it will be used as a battering ram to get adoption as a point of principle. If I’m wrong about the differential abuse rates, then there is still that group of purely Paedofile men neither gay nor straight , who have infiltrated churches, scouts, swim clubs, creche’s etc to get close to children, who will use this as a new route. You are aware of internet child porn circles etc. These people are organised.

    That’s too high a price to pay for a point of principle.

  • gaygael

    The law allows single gay men to adopt regardless of sexual orientation. Gay or straight, the process screens to identify what is the best interests of the child. There are just over 2600 kids in care in Northern Ireland. We adopt at a rate of just below 100 a year. At that current rate it will take 26 years before all those kids are placed in stable loving families. And that’s if no new children are out into care. The pool is simply not wide enough, and could you imagine if there weren’t over 40 women a week going to England for abortions, how many more kids would be in care?
    So if my partner and I, pass all the exceptionally strict criteria, and we are deemed capable of providing a safe stable environment, why should our sexual orientation prevent us? I just can’t see the logic, and the ministers homophobia is damaging kids, who could be placed with loving same sex couples.
    And I can’t bear you with your heterosexual privilege telling me what rights I am entitled to and not entitled to due to our own latent homophobia. I pay the same taxes, contribute to society, yet I am treated differently due to my sexual orientation. Lgbt people are not putting up with this any longer and our friends families and allies are standing shoulder to shoulder with us.
    I refuse to get involved with a discussion that equates my minority sexual orientation with peadophilia. That is a completely separate discussion I a happy to have elsewhere.
    This is about equal marriage and the state discriminating against me. It will not stand much longer. Lgbt people do not want special rights. We just want the same rights as out brothers and sisters who are heterosexual. It’s that simple.
    View this argument through the differential of sexual orientation.
    Did kids get bullied for being straight? Do people get cut off from their families for being straight? Do people get fired for being straight? Do people get refused services for being straight? No, no, no and no. Do these things happen to lgbt people? Yes, yes, yes and yes. That’s the core difference. We want full legal equality and to be treated the same as everyone else.
    31 years ago, I would be criminalised for my relationship. We have come a long way but we still have much to do.

  • Mark

    PaulG ,

    Have you discussed your views on gay adoptions with any of your gay friends ? I’d love to hear their response .

    And you’d have a problem with me ( a single parent ) adopting a child even if I had the means to support that child emotionally , financially …….

    You seem to change your tune with every post .

  • gaygael

    (such as this somehow being about “rights”, despite the fact Civil Partnerships are already in place).
    Ayeyerma
    Still waiting on you explaining either your outright lies or ingnorance of the true facts. I guess I will be waiting eh?

  • paulG

    Mark,

    Yes, as a straight, male single parent, I don’t think you should allowed to adopt (unless a neice or nephew or grandchild). I also don’t think single women should be able to adopt unless there aren’t enough married couples. As I understand it there are many more couples seeking to adopt than than children available, hence the foreign adoptions.

    Every child deserves the best possible placement available. Their rights have always come before mens rights and should continue to come before gay mens rights.

    I have read over my posts and I don’t see that I have changed my tune or contradicted myself.

  • Mark

    ( unless a niece or nephew or grandchild ) …..

    But what’s the difference if as you’ve claimed straight men and gay men are more likely to abuse children . If a peadophile is going to abuse a child , they don’t normally make a distinction .

    You never said if you had discussed your views with your gay friends .

    You did give me a laugh when you said you’d been to a gay club and found it shocking . What shocked you ?

  • paulG

    Mark,

    It wasn’t the clubs I was in that were shocking (they weren’t exclusively gay), though I did get a fright when a TV crew there wanted to record an interview of myself and my clearly gay friend as gay couple. “Still in the closet” was heard after i protestested my hetrosexuality and moved on.

    The most shocking story I heard was from a gay aquaintance who had been in a club in Spain where the male urinal consisted of a man in a gimp costume who would open his mouth for the patrons to urinate in, while downstairs a naked man was leaning over while another inserted his forearm up his arse and a circle of 20 – 30 men stood around watching and masturbating.

    He was pretty shocked too, as in Ireland he’d be more likely to be at home knitting on a Friday night than out clubbing.

  • paulG

    “( unless a niece or nephew or grandchild ) …..

    But what’s the difference if as you’ve claimed straight men and gay men are more likely to abuse children . If a peadophile is going to abuse a child , they don’t normally make a distinction .”

    Mark,

    I don’t think anything would stop a pure Paedofile, but I think family members would be less likely to be abused by men whose view of reality could be temporarily distorted by alchohol or drugs. (Though the opposite was reported in a scene in ‘The General’ – but I don’t know that was based on an actual event).

    My gay friends live in London now. I do have a family member who I often see who is gay and is in a great relationship and I think they would be very good parents as would my friends in London, and I’m sure they greatly outnumber the ones I wouldn’t like to see as parents but percentage wise it’s not enough to justify adoption, in my opinion.

    I prefer not to have that conversation with a family member, at least not before having my corners knocked off here.

    To be honest, I was expecting someone to post a link to some Criminal Psychologist who would explain exactly why they’re not linked. I’m starting to worry that I might be right now.

  • BluesJazz

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7234628.stm

    Should ‘born again’ christians be allowed to adopt? Given their track record of violence.

    The fact that many have been ‘converted’ from homosexuality should not be an issue. many DUP politicians have ‘bridged the gap’ so to speak.

  • Starviking

    PaulG,

    By proportion, man against boy Paedofilia should be 10 to 20 times less, given a 5 – 10 % Gay population.
    … It’s not critical to know whether it’s 2, 4 or 6 times the rate for abuse of girls instead of 10 to 20 times less. The fact is everyone knows it’s way off what was expected and this is the elephant in the room which needs to be addressed

    Where are your stats on pedophillia rates? All you’ve provides is hearsay – and that certainly is not enough to draw any conclusions, let alone valid ones.

  • Starviking

    PaulG,

    The most shocking story I heard was from a gay aquaintance who had been in a club in Spain where the male urinal consisted of a man in a gimp costume who would open his mouth for the patrons to urinate in, while downstairs a naked man was leaning over while another inserted his forearm up his arse and a circle of 20 – 30 men stood around watching and masturbating.

    And I’ve heard of straight guys getting a shower of female pee. Nothing you say above indicates that the homosexual community is more depraved than the herterosexual one. Arms up orifices is also performed by heterosexuals, and many also get aroused by watching lesbian sex.

  • paulG

    Starviking,

    There we disagree. I don’t think anything you’ve drawn on there is comparable and I don’t think you’d find anything like that for heterosexuals anywhere in the western world – simply because women wouldn’t do it and wouldn’t allow it. They have been the restraining force keeping heterosexual men from stepping over the line. The only line those lads in that Spanish club know is the Cocaine on the toilet seat.

  • gaygael

    Mark,

    Yes, as a straight, male single parent, I don’t think you should allowed to adopt (unless a neice or nephew or grandchild). I also don’t think single women should be able to adopt unless there aren’t enough married couples. As I understand it there are many more couples seeking to adopt than than children available, hence the foreign adoptions.

    Every child deserves the best possible placement available. Their rights have always come before mens rights and should continue to come before gay mens rights.

    Direct quote from you.

    So in response lets blow your hookum thinking and misinformation out of the water http://www.adoptionuk.org/information/103152/factsandfigs/#2
    26,06 in care. 60 adopted that finacial year. Scandalous.
    And as with any issue related to children, social workers will take account of the 5 ps when considering where is best placement for a child.
    Paromountcy
    Parental responsibility
    partnership
    prevention
    protection
    I dont believe everyone should have the right to apply to adopt. I belive that anyone who meets the exceptionally strict criterion should be considered, and not be barred because of their gender, sexual orientation of marital status. Our dinasour Minister for health feels otherwise.Your perceptions of some gay men do not tar an entire community. I might like to get pissed on by random strangers in a sex club, that doesnt neccessarily make me an unfit parent. I might like to stay at home knitting, the doesn’t neccessarily make me a fit parent. In both instances I will be weighed against the above, and hopefully anubiased decision will decide if I (and my partner) are fit.

  • gaygael

    Shoul read 2,606 not 26,606

  • gaygael

    And also Paulg regarding sexual proclivities of heterosexual people – just visit a local brothel (exclsuively female, exclusively for straight men) and ask those exploited women about ‘shocking’ sexual activities. This is on your doorstep in northern ireland, not some exotic gay sex club in spain. Its probably in your neighbourhood.

  • Mark

    PaulG ,

    Tried to respond to your reply last night but was having problems with my computer . I appreciate your frank and honest answer …re ” what shocked you about gay clubs ” .

    In Ibiza during the summer , the famous nightclub chain Manumission hold club nights on the island which used to include a live sex show at the end of the night / morning . There were maybe eight to ten thousand people at the event which is usually sold out . The sex shows seemed to be the most popular event on the night . At one show , a young lady gave birth on stage , at another a double jointed midget performed falashio on himself ….I could go on and on with more examples of how hetrosexuals get their kicks but I hope you get my drift .

    I wonder if you’ve ever seen the clip on youtube called ” two girls one cup ” . I’m not sure whether the clip has been pulled however it turns your theory about ” women wouldn’t do it or allow it ” on it’s head .

  • Mark

    gaygael ,

    I think you may have mixed PaulG and I up in your 11.35 am post this morning ……

  • GEF

    “Arms up orifices is also performed by heterosexuals, and many also get aroused by watching lesbian sex.”

    Here is little old me thinking the only humans who preformed such acts were vets checking out pregnant cows.

  • paulG

    Mark,

    That is truly dreadful stuff. This one was in Barcelona so I don’t think it was aimed to shock partying tourists in the way a club in Ibiza might.

    The woman in Manumission was paid so I wouldn’t class that as the same thing – though to be fair – i can’t say for sure that the gimp in the bath/urinal wasn’t paid, but he’d want to be on bloody good money if he wasn’t doing it for kicks.

    Fair enough, Spain is Spain, but there plenty of bondage, glory holes and drugs behind the counter, going on closer to home.
    I think you’d have to be extremely optimistic to make a glory hole in a straight club and expect there to be a woman on the other side to do anything even resembling something you would like.

    Others have made the point that some heterosexual men are as sexually depraved as some gay men. If so, then that really does support my view that a woman needs to be one of the adoptive parents.

  • paulG

    gaygael,

    Lesbians will have almost no need for adoption as they have two shots at fertility.

    If you think that the tiny proportion of the 5 % gay male population, who would want to have somebody else’s kids wreck their lives (and believe me, if they haven’t wrecked your old life, then you haven’t taken care of them properly) will make any difference to adoption rates then you are quite nieve. If a population with hundreds of thousands of heterosexual couples is only placing 60 children then it’s not a supply issue. There’s something in the procedures which makes it so.

  • Neil


    “In 1992, alarmed over claims made during a campaign for an anti-gay state constitutional amendment in Colorado, two physicians reviewed every case of suspected child molestation evaluated at Children’s Hospital in Denver over a one-year period. Of the 269 cases determined to involve molestation by an adult, only two of the perpetrators could be identified as gay or lesbian. The researchers concluded that the risk of child sexual abuse by an identifiably gay or lesbian person was between zero and 3.1%, and that the risk of such abuse by the heterosexual partner of a relative was over 100 times greater.[8]”

    http://www.robincmiller.com/gayles4.htm

    It’s worth bearing in mind the horde of social workers and government employees you’d be inviting into your home for years to come should you adopt a child. Surprise visits. School attendance and behavior monitored. And so on.

  • paulG

    Thank you Neil,

    That’s the kind of input that could help answer my question.

    As it happens I know Denver quite well. It is actually a centre for gays, being the biggest and most cosmopolitan city for nearly 1000 miles in any direction. They often flex their financial muscle there and rainbow flags are seen on apartment blocks in most areas. I was reliably informed that the major drug dealers there were serious partying gays who had long established their own supply routes for Cocaine and Ecstasy before they were in demand by the local straight youngsters. Used to be part of Mexico, a lot people from LA moved there laterly.

    The 1992 Denver figures won’t be anything like our 1992 figures due to a lower Catholic population (don’t think the Mexican community were as determined to send their gay sons to the priesthood) and a much less repressed/confused/closet gay community, but they could be more like our future figures.

    As with all figures, they can change dramatically depending on how you build them. If a gay priest abused a child would he be counted as gay in the figures? – probably not as officially he is just a priest – he may be the only person who knows what his orientation is. Fr. Buckley famously estimated that 40 % of the Catholic priesthood were gay. So in countries where there is a large Catholic population the figures could vary dramatically depending upon how you classify priests.

    .

  • GavBelfast

    So much rumour, hear-say, innuendo, etc, here.

    Entertaining stuff – if little else!

  • Starviking

    PaulG

    As it happens I know Denver quite well.

    Amazing coincidence!

    I was reliably informed that the major drug dealers there were serious partying gays who had long established their own supply routes for Cocaine and Ecstasy before they were in demand by the local straight youngsters.

    More hearsay. And again, any evidence to back that up?

  • Starviking

    Neil,

    thanks for providing some actual evidence into the debate!

  • Monty_Carlo

    Is this for real? I’m sitting here thinking to myself, this is 2013, so why are people still going on about Gay Marriage? A person in the audience of QT asked IPJ what difference it would make to him if two gay people got married (still waiting on the answer). I know this sounds like a cliché, but I have gay friends (I really do). I am a straight man that has been living in “sin” for years. I couldn’t give a fiddler’s elbow if a man married a man, or a woman married a woman. Why should I care? Or better still, why should a gay man or woman care? If two people love each other, why shouldn’t they get married if they want to do that? My partner (wife) and I have been together for over thirty years now (God I feel old!) and never felt the urge to get married. I wish this place would move on, I’ve seen mixed marriages (i.e. Catholic/ Protestant) black and white and all the inbetweens, when I see the likes of IPJ on tv, it just does my head in!

  • paulG

    Starviking,

    Yes it is something of a coincidence. I’ve spent about 5 months there over 5 visits.

    I have a very good friend who has lived there for 20 years. He’s a single guy who works centrally, goes out a lot, knows a lot of people, has no axe to grind.

    I take his word. if you don’t want to take mine then feel free to research it yourself.

  • Starviking

    paulG

    Yes it is something of a coincidence. I’ve spent about 5 months there over 5 visits.

    I’ll take your word for that then.

    I have a very good friend who has lived there for 20 years. He’s a single guy who works centrally, goes out a lot, knows a lot of people, has no axe to grind.

    I take his word. if you don’t want to take mine then feel free to research it yourself.

    Well, the problem is that you define hearsay as fact, and we have to research anything you say.

    That said, here are the results of my research. From the US Justice Department, http://www.justice.gov/archive/ndic/pubs7/7691/7961t.htm, we have:

    Mexican DTOs and criminal groups are deeply entrenched in Denver’s illicit drug trade. For example, Mexican DTOs and criminal groups control the transportation and wholesale distribution of powdered cocaine in Denver. Mexican criminal groups and local independent dealers are the primary retail distributors of powdered cocaine, and street gangs such as Sures 13, Gangster Disciples, Bloods, and Crips and local independent dealers distribute crack cocaine at the retail level. Mexican criminal groups control the transportation and wholesale distribution of most methamphetamine in the Denver area; these groups typically sell cocaine in addition to methamphetamine. Mexican criminal groups and Mexican and Caucasian local independent dealers distribute most of the methamphetamine available at the retail level in Denver

    Mexicans.

    Mexican DTOs control the transportation and wholesale distribution of heroin in Denver and supply heroin to Mexican criminal groups and local independent dealers for retail sale. Hispanic gangs such as Sures 13 also distribute heroin at the retail level. Mexican DTOs and criminal groups also control the transportation and wholesale distribution of Mexico-produced marijuana in Denver. These DTOs and criminal groups supply Mexico-produced marijuana to Mexican and Caucasian criminal groups, street gangs, and local independent dealers for retail distribution.

    Mexicans.

    Caucasian criminal groups dominate the transportation and distribution of Canada-produced marijuana in Denver. Caucasian criminal groups also are the primary transporters and wholesale distributors of MDMA, supplying local independent dealers with the drug for retail distribution. Asian street gangs, particularly Asian Pride and Viet Pride, increasingly distribute MDMA at the wholesale level. Caucasian local independent dealers are the primary distributors of other dangerous drugs including GHB and diverted pharmaceuticals. The Denver Police Department reports that illicit drugs are distributed from more than 100 open-air drug markets within the city’s six police districts.

    Caucasians and Asians.

    Once again, your statements of fact are shown to be incorrect.

  • paulG

    Starviking

    While I apprecite you bringing extra information to the discussion, it falls way short of of proving anything.

    The the gangs are described by ethnicity not sexual orientation.

    I was rererring to Cocaine and Ecstacy in the club scene, not Crack, Heroin or Marijuana.

    I also referred to the past tense. They probably started getting Ecstasy there 30 years ago. In the criminal world, it’s only a matter of time before somebody else moves in on a lucrative scheme.

    I only intended to provide background information to demonstate that the Denverite gay community were very well organised, confident, open and self sufficient in 1992 while a significant proportion of our gay community were still trapped in Clerical frocks, where their families had effectively sent them or were repressing themselves in the closet in some other way.

    Also, although I am not a fan of drugs, I was not suggesting not do I believe the gay community in Denver or anywhere else are responsible for the widespread availability of drugs.

  • Mark

    ” I was not suggesting not ( presume you mean nor ) do I believe the gay community in Denver or anywhere esle are responsible for the widespread availability of drugs ” – paulG 31/05/13 .

    ” I was reliably infromed that the major drug dealer there are serious partying gays who had long established their own supply for cocaine and ecstasy ” . – paulG 29/05/13

    paulG ,

    Paul , when I said you seem to change your tune on different posts ….that’s what I meant .

  • paulG

    There seems to an awful lot of nit-picking and failed attempts to disprove background information. Smells like an attempt from those suffering acute political correctness, to bury any debate in reams of ‘proofs’.

    So let me re-focus and re-phrase the question.

    Some child sexual abuse is carried out by straight men, some by gay men, some by Paedofiles who are only interested in children of either gender. A tiny amount by women. But in what proportions?

    When I was 8 a man is his 50’s tried to molest me in a public place. I got away before he got too far. My sense of him was that he was a pure Paedofile who was only interested in children, boy or girl – it wouldn’t matter.

    When I was 13 (and looked it) a young man, probably 18 or 19 had a crack at me. I declined, but even if I had accepted that would still have been statutory rape and child abuse. My opinon of him was that he was a young gay man, not many friends, limited options, thought he’d try his luck.

    Back in the day, boys were thought not to be at risk from these things but I’m sure they’re common enough experiences. Obviously, some didn’t get away so lightly.

    Little did we know what was happening in the back rooms of the Church’s and scouts/BB halls etc.

    The majority of child abuse victims seem to have been boys.
    Catholic Priests appear to have abused most of the victims.
    40 % of priests were reputed to be gay around that time.

    That’s only circumstantial evidence at best, but there’s a clear question there that should have been answered

    Burying the past is only a good idea if there’s nothing the future can learn from it. Surely, somebody must have thought it would be a good idea to find out why these men did it, what was their sexual preference and what made them deviate from that, if indeed they did deviate.

    I don’t see how a society can, in consience, have gay adoption without first investigating the past and being satisfied that what happened in that Church was not disproportionately perpetrated by gay priests, or if so, that those reasons don’t arise outside of the un-natural lifestyle of a priest.

    Maybe the lad who propositioned me was actually a just young Paedofile, maybe the gay priests were bed hopping in the Monastary and weren’t repressed at all, while the pure Paedofiles were doing all the damage and maybe they just preferred boys or the boys were easier to get at – I’d like to know. I’d like to think somebody knows.

    I hope the French know.

  • Jack2

    How a thread about our esteemed Paisley could descend into 2 girls – 1 cup and someone ranting about paedophiles, yet misspelling their nemesis numerous times is beyond me.

  • paulG

    Jack2,

    The Paisley’s may not be taking any chances on this one, after Ian Senior came in for critisism for not reporting the homosexual activities of his Orange mate , who turned out to be the ringleader of the notorious homosexual rape/child abuse ring which preyed on 15 to 18 year old boys in their care at Kincora House as well as inviting some Unionist politicians and a Red Hand Commando leader around to join in.

  • paulG

    Mark,

    ” I was not suggesting nor do I believe the gay community in Denver or anywhere else are responsible for the widespread availability of drugs ”

    The widespread availability of drugs is a response to a widespread demand, which other drugs gangs would have supplied if they had not.

    The gay drugs dealers certainly didn’t help, but what would you expect from criminals.

    Please note that the quote from the 29th describes some gay drug dealers, while the quote from the 31st clearly refers to the gay community as a whole.

    Those two statements you referrenced, are not contradictory.