So it appears the feckless cowards at RTE are not only craven enough to apologise immediately to Iona for allowing somebody to express their honest opinion about the discrimination they face in Irish society, but they are also paying damages to the supposed “injured” parties.
This sets a terrible precedent where people won’t be able to speak honestly about the abuse or discrimination they suffer. People will be able to behave in the most discriminatory manner knowing that nobody will be allowed to classify their actions as sexist, racist, bigoted, homophobic etc. And if they did, sure they will receive a grovelling apology and a bit of taxpayer money from the national broadcaster.
In a newsletter released today Iona committed a classic fallacy: the strawman.
Accusations of ‘homophobia’, which are made with great regularity in the debate about same-sex marriage and adoption, are precisely an attempt to demonise and impute the worst of motives to those who believe that marriage is the sexual and emotional union of a man and a woman by definition, and that children deserve the love of both a mother and a father whenever possible.
The accusations are an attempt to bring the debate to an end.
It is similar to what sometimes happens in the abortion debate when extremists on both sides attribute nothing but the worst possible motives to their opponents.
It should be noted that no-one can ever point to a quote from The Iona Institute that can be any stretch be called genuinely abusive or ‘homophobic’.
The problem is that merely believing that marriage is the sexual union of a man and a woman, and that children deserve the love of both a mother and a father whenever possible is automatically deemed to be ‘homophobic’ by those wishing to close down this debate.
Nobody that I have read or talked to has ever called Iona homophobic for simply opposing equal marriage. In fact, many have equivocally stated that opposing equal marriage isn’t necessarily a homophobic position.
When labels such as homophobe, racist, sexist etc. are used to describe somebody they should be qualified detailing exactly what they have done or said which makes them deserving of the labels. In regards to Iona, their homophobia has been qualified extensively. Here I explain in detail exactly what Iona have said and done to be categorised as homophobic. I have duplicated the conclusion;
In short, the below points are homophobic tendencies which have been displayed by Iona, Breda O’Brien and John Waters.
- Blatantly misrepresent research to portray homosexual parenting as inferior to heterosexual parenting;
- Ignore decades of scientific research;
- Invent reasons to negate the studies such as “small sample-size” even though it is the preferred methodology;
- Accept and promote research by somebody who was paid to ensure a preset conclusion to use in an argument against equal marriage;
- Ignoring the true intentions for why homosexuals want to get married;
- Attach malicious motivations;
- Fear-monger by saying homosexuals only want to destroy marriage;
- Employ rationale against equal marriage when even if realised still wouldn’t stop homosexuals wanting to get married;
- Ignore the fact that these issues effect heterosexuals more;
- Using the issue of equal marriage in a vain attempt to achieve part of their goal instead of tackling the issue as a whole;
- Sacrificing the happiness of homosexuals in an attempt to achieve objectives which could be achieved without denying equality.
All the above are homophobic, some more than others but they are certainly homophobic. This isn’t simply “opinion” or “ethos” or “tradition”, this is research manipulation, this is fear-mongering, this is mistrust, this is using homosexuals as patsies to achieve wider aims, this is homophobia.
As you can see, not one of the points calls them homophobic for simply opposing equal marriage, there are a myriad of other reasons. However, Iona have refused to acknowledge any criticism of these actions and like to pretend these actions are not homophobic. Worse again is no media outlet is willing to discuss these criticisms in detail lest Iona set their lawyers on them.
The most telling aspect is how Iona and its defenders haven’t been willing to tackle the criticisms at all. They decry the use of the word homophobic but ignore the criticisms of their actions and words which qualify them as homophobic. They frequently employ the strawman that people call them homophobic for simply disagreeing with equal marriage, or believing in traditional marriage even thought that isn’t the case. People call them homophobic due to their research manipulation, refusal to accept a scientific consensus, fear-mongering, mistrust, promoting pseudoscience etc.
Iona can sue who the like and receive whatever payments they like, but their actions will ensure that they will be remembered as homophobic, despite the cowardice of our national broadcaster.