Same-Sex Marriage — Anti-Equality Lobby Recruit The Brady Bunch

Gays can already adopt

Get used to the phrase Mum and Dad. You’re going to be hearing it a lot in coming months from the likes of the Iona non-Institute.

Every child has a right to a Mum and Dad.  Not a Ma and Da, mind you, or a Mammy and Daddy.  No.  Every child has the right to a nice, middle-class, Iona-approved Mum and Dad with a Qashqai for Mum and a Range Rover for Dad, a full orthodontics plan, an architect-designed town-house in Dalkey, three holidays a year and a place booked in the Rock.  Just like this Brady Bunch on the Iona website, the Ionanist genetically-approved überfamilie.

iona family

The Ionanists will be misquoting research, as they did at the Constitutional Convention.   They’ll be talking about children.  You’ll hear Iona shills on tv talk-shows insisting that marriage is all about the children, which is very bad news for post-menopausal women and men with vasectomies.  Obviously, to be consistent, the Ionanists should really be opposing such marriages too.  No wedding day for you, lads and lassies.

But of course, it’s all a distraction, since this new strategy by the anti-equality lobby is completely irrelevant.


Because right now today, single people can adopt children.  No Mammy and Daddy there.  Oops, sorry.  No Mum and Dad.

That’s the law today.  Right now.

And same-sex couples right now today can legally have IVF.

Let’s assume that the Ionanists already know this.  After all, they’re not fools, or at least, not in the conventional sense.

That forces us to the inescapable conclusion that they’re liars, trying to stir up hysteria against same-sex marriages because the very idea scares the emotionally-impaired daylights out of them.

Conclusion: next time you hear some anti-equality fundamentalist talking about children, tell them it’s too late.  Tell them the dreaded  queers can already adopt and they can already conceive.  That’s done.  That’s dusted.

Tell them this: You have a dog in the wrong fight, fool.



Action needed from government



What exactly is the Iona Institute?

Same-Sex Marriage, Iona Nonsense and the Constitutional Convention

Iona Institute Does Not Qualify as A Tax-Exempt Charity

Iona Institute and Miss Panti — Analysing the Anatomy of Defamation

Same-Sex Marriage: Rónán Mullen Accidentally States The Case Against Adoption

Official: John Waters Is Not Osama Bin Laden

Same-Sex Marriage

Misinformation Techniques

22 thoughts on “Same-Sex Marriage — Anti-Equality Lobby Recruit The Brady Bunch

  1. “Iona-approved Mum and Dad with a Qashqai for Mum and a Range Rover for Dad, a full orthodontics plan, an architect-designed town-house in Dalkey, three holidays a year and a place booked in the Rock.”

    Well said. As a ‘ma’, divorced from a serial cheater, raising two children alone, I too find the Iona’s idyll insulting. No full orthodontic plans or veneer toothed Dad returning home to me after a stressful day at the bank.

    So I say without sentimentality, fuck you Breda O’Brien and fuck your Cath Kidston apron wearing 1950s Mums and your unrealistic white toothed Dads.

  2. An alternative perspective: The Birds and The Bees:

    Social media is awash with what is known in Western media as the herd instinct.

    SSM is an example of this herd stampede in favour of LGBT marriage rights.

    One persons rights is anothers restriction of rights.

    Heterosexuals marry and create a family of children or not over time.

    Education in schools includes sex education on the birds and bees and baby bees.

    Text books contain explanations, graphics etc.about heterosexual sex.

    LGBTs are homosexual relationships, same sex relationships.

    There is civil partnership with all legal rights that marriage entails.

    why should LGBTs want anything to do with the heterosexual contract named marriage?

    LGBTs are in different relationships to heterosexuals.

    There is no reason for heterosexual marriage contracts to be changed by law to include LGBTs.

    The impact on marriage contracts by including LGBTs has extensive implications, all negative, for heterosexuals.

    To interfere in marriage contract hardly strenghtens participation for anyone involved including prospective new arrivals.

    Let us look at one aspect, sex education for school children.

    Making SSM legal in marriage requires sex education on LGBT sex in schools.

    Parents rushing to the polling booths will stampede to ensure that their children are instructed on LGBT sex.

    The politicians promoting SSM will explain and enlighten the adult voters on what L G B T means and how their loving relationships are expressed.

    The independent commission for referenda will explain exactly what the Irish citizen is being asked to vote on.

    There should be no assumption that the majority of the population are knowledgeable of LGBT sexual relationships.

    Enda and Joan might promise enlightenment, sunshine and flowers and LGBT text books on sex posted to every house in Ireland in 2015.

  3. Dandahan,

    If I wasn’t voting yes out of principal, then I would vote yes just to wind up fools like you. Sex education, is that the best you’ve got?

    My marriage will be the same before and after Armageddon (for the iona prayer group). Yours must be very weak if lesbians and gays getting married will affect it.

  4. When vocabulary fails and logical arguments are evasive some people resort to school yard name calling and insults.

    my contribution on this thread is an alternative perspective to the emotive calls for LG B T s to invade and occupy a space, an institution which is a heterosexual contractural agreement.

    This opens up opportunity for LGBTs to put counter arguments and this requires that LGBTs address each part of the content.

    Avoiding debate on this simple example given here hardly strenghtens the case for SSM.

    As I understand moderation on this site there is a case for removal of name calling and insulting posts.
    I would ask that such action not be taken.
    Unlike the blog host such language may be a common usage or means of expression.
    also spelling errors might be excused and the content/ message given oriority.

  5. I have no problem with same sex couples having the same rights in law in all respects in a civil union as a different sex couple have in marriage but I have a hang up – and I admit its a hangup – about calling it marriage. Since the word was “invented” marriage means a union between a man and a woman. To me calling a same sex union marriage is an abuse of language. I admit it may be trivial but can we not choose another word?

  6. Dandahan, you were called a fool. That’s not abuse. That’s the commenter’s sincerely-held opinion.

    You’ll need a thicker skin if you want to debate here.

  7. Like Haymoon I have no problem with same sex couples,and unlike Haymoon I do not have a problem calling it marriage.What I do have a problem with is the word gay to describe a homosexual person.Maybe it’s because I’m old and can remember my Mother using the word to describe something entirely different.Using it to describe a homosexual does’nt seem right to me.One other thing I do wish people would stop using the word institute and Iona in the same sentence.

  8. Thank you Bock.
    Did I not dismiss the name calling, ok once the caller is sincere about the name calling, and you Bock know this sincerely held as fact?

    And he the commenter knows about my marriage assuming also that I am married etc

    I dismissed and hinted that the debate is more substantial than personal insults.

    care to address the substantives Bock?

    I comment often across blogs of interest.

    my blog is the home base of course

    my rare response to commenters reflects a rare weakness asthis is the WWW not a text, email or phone communications system.

    writing makes impossible responses to personal communications.

    your piece of research on Iona Inst was very informative and I responded with some satire.
    Shooting to messenger is par for the course.

    And nil response may be best.

    My responses here are a compliment to your work on Iona Inst.

    Best to all who find their way to this blig.


  9. Bock
    you like a mirror reflection of Bock then.
    Why not stand in front of a mirror and talk to yourself.
    you don’t need a blog.
    you wiped my response to your support of sincerely held opinion.

    Very weak, shallow and hollowed out of you.

    With invasion of others heterosexual territory comes the same demands for scrutiny.

    LGBTs if legislated for under SSM will have scrutiny on school text books and adult information on LGBT sex.
    what it is and graphics to explain this gay relationships thing.
    Irish people will have to be informed by the referendum commission and the politicians.

  10. My error and congrats for not wiping.
    next time I visit the parish pump You might have addressed the substantive content.
    my space is in outer places …non PP and the crony neporism in our little Isle never ceases or reduces.
    The craw thumping religious political establishment are panic chasing this SSM because they see it as the politically correct way to go.
    The hypocricy last week of the Paris march of politicians with Neutral Ireland Kenny arm in arm with mass murderers of Arabs and Muslims has been noted. ( and our own Phoenix etc.

    Satire ok?

  11. I think I hold myself to reasonably high standards of writing, though you might well disagree with my opinion on this.

    However, I can hardly expect all commenters to be either rational or articulate.

  12. There’s a notification for another comment from Dan, but sadly, no sign of the comment. If all comes to all, I’ll copy and paste the notification, just in case he thinks he was deleted again. We’ll give it a few minutes in case it turns up.

    Lots of ego going on there, Dan.

  13. Bock
    Your penchant for insults does you a disservice .
    Your abilities to write and research are a given ref The Iona Institute.
    Personal attack is wasteful and infantile.
    To read and grasp the content of communications is almost a lost art.
    Emotive responses often with personalised insults reflects the skimming of content and selective interpretations which are transformed into hyper sensitive personalised side issues.
    Eg yours on the commenters name calling.
    Irrelevant and earlier dismissed by me.
    Read my content and write intelligent responses to each point.
    That is intellectual activity.
    Or not as you wish.
    I have more than paid my dues here for one useful piece on Iona.
    The tendency is for LGBTs and PC herd social media to hunt in packs…
    Time to leave for my own space
    Avoid mirrors…
    Best wishes

  14. Again the personalised snide snap
    “Lots of ego going on there ” says Bock.
    Try to desist from shooting the messenger …an Opus Dei MO.
    OD favoured method is character assassination.

    Re read and try to comprehend and then respond without distractions of personalising to strangers.
    We are all one of millions each commenting on the WWW.
    Life’s a Bitch and then you die…
    Make sense before death.
    Response to not understanding
    Try Philip Roth
    Tom Wolfe etc

  15. Why are all people on the No side of this debate raving lunatics? This Dan guy is clearly insane, who’s ridiculous opinion should be respectfully dismissed as the ravings of an idiot.

    My opinion on this referendum is it’s a shameful disgrace that there even is one.

    What right have I, or you, got to decide on the future happiness (or miserableness) of another human being?

    Gay people should simply just have the right to be as happy or as miserable as the rest of us.

  16. Opus Dei is being aped here.
    Attack the messenger and ignore the message.

    Name calling is not an argument but evidence of inability to articulate reasoned debate.

    when lost for words respond with insults.This is akin to self harm.
    not one respindent has addressed my original comment on this thread.

    Vilest insults are reserved for the latter stages of theseb debates.

    uninformed and misunderstanding and failure to read content when coupled with blind fanaticism in favour of SSM damages the argument for SSM.

    Here it is claimed that every heterosexual opposing SSM is a raving lunatic.

    not one reasoned point has been made on this little thread to convince voters that a vote for SSM might be the right vote.

    emotive abusive language directed at all heterosexuals who may appear to oppose SSM is not the best way to win the votes of the majority in Ireland.
    In the USA there are approx 2.5% of LGBTs in thepopulation.

    probably similar percentage in Ireland.
    and the 97.5 % majority are to be convinced byy what has been displayed here?

    what kind of election strategy is that?

  17. Iona could take a few lessons from Irish Water. They have just about the entire media brigade and the powers that be telling their lies for them.

  18. Right Dan. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you’re not a raving lunatic and address your post.

    Social media herd mentality etc. Your opinion and an easy way to try to discredit the majority.
    Gays restricting our rights. As a married man, gays getting married will in no way restrict my rights. Please explain.

    What does education have to do with it? Shouldn’t they already be teaching this in school considering gays will have sex regardless of marriage and the purpose of education in sexual matters is family planning and avoiding the spread of stds?

    The rest is rambling rubbish. Before you take the piss out of peoples spelling, learn how to construct a coherent sentence.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.