Jiving at the authoritarian crossroads. John Waters launches his latest moral crusade

Another nutty pressure group

First Families First.

That’s what the latest pressure group is called, fronted by John Waters, who has finally recovered from the emotional pain he endured when an openly gay man said he was homophobic.

John Waters showed considerable moral fortitude in getting over over such a savage attack — an assault most of us would never recover from, even with the application of forty or fifty grand from RTE.  I don’t know how he managed it, but he did, and fair play to him for being so strong.

He’s back, bigger and badder than ever, and still beating the same old drum that he bought from Sinéad O Connor all those years ago.

Mothers and Fathers don’t matter any more.  First Families are what it’s all about these days.  Opus Dei is so last week.

When I heard this name, I thought it was a joke. Was it about the American First Family? Was it a spoof on Battlestar Galactica? Was it some kind of Enid Blyton parody? The First Family Goes Mad on Yokes.

But then I remembered that John Waters does not do humour.  If his name was attached to this thing, we’d better take it seriously or he’d start quoting people like Heidegger and Teilhard de Chardin.  Nobody could stand up to that.

John’s latest pressure-group / ego-vehicle is called First Families First, consisting of nothing more than himself, Kathy Sinnott and one Gerry Fahey, a man I’m sure I should have heard of but can’t quite call to mind offhand.

Interestingly, in the video of Waters’s stumbling speech introducing the latest pressure group, we notice — of all people — David Quinn.  Who’d have guessed it?

Dave is flanked by Enda Sherlock, a man with UKIP connections, of whom more another time.

John Waters David Quinn 001

No.   Wait a minute.

Let’s talk about him now.  Here’s Enda with everyone’s favourite xenophobe.

farage1 sherlock

Now why on earth would David Quinn, founder of the Iona Institute pressure group, be associated with a known UKIP sympathiser, and more to the point, why would he turn up at this launch?

This man has more powers of bilocation than Padre Pio, since he also has to fulfil his onerous duties with Mothers and Fathers Matter, also known as Opus Dei, and also with Legatus, the international organisation of Catholic businessmen.

Would it suggest to any thinking person that this is yet another sock-puppet for Quinn?

More to the point, how did it come about that an organisation consisting of three people gained national media coverage?

To the best of my knowledge, neither John Waters, Kathy Sinnott nor Gerry Fahey have ever achieved any national recognition as people whose opinion is of more than average weight.  Waters might have gained a certain profile as someone who managed to get a job as an opinion writer, and Sinnott might be known as a failed politician, but other than that, it’s hard to see why the private opinions of these three constitute news.

Off the top of my head, I could think of not three but a hundred and three people who hold equally interesting and challenging views on both sides of the discussion.

Is it simply that John Waters knows people in the media and is therefore considered more worthy of reporting than anyone else?

And is it simply a coincidence that David Quinn should happen to be sitting there as Waters announced his manifesto, such as it is, complete with mumbling and grunting.

Boiled down to its basics, the manifesto Waters laid out appears to be based on his anger towards the mother of his child, combined with the absurd and inarticulate notion that the constitution requires an irrelevant addition.

John Waters wants something in the constitution about “natural procreative activity”.

In his world, this is a real thing, and furthermore, it has something to do with marriage equality.

What on earth is going on in this man’s mind?

More interestingly, what is going on in David Quinn’s mind as he watches Waters mumbling such tosh?

3 thoughts on “Jiving at the authoritarian crossroads. John Waters launches his latest moral crusade

  1. what if you were divorced and had remarried? does the second family not count? sounds like discrimination to me.
    actually sounds like an attempt to rerun the children referendum again.

  2. Hey bock .I think the man standing in the photo is actually Leo Sherlock. He’s the guy that runs theliberal.ie a clone of the journal.ie with a right wing flavour.

Leave a Reply

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