Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Iris claims Hansard “misquoted” her child abuse comments

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. lets hope this is the beginning of her downfall :)

    Lee

  2. Lets hope this the beginning of her downfall.

  3. I hope this is the beginning of her downfall :)

    Lee

  4. I cant wait to hear the the result of the recording – lets hope its been reported correctly by Hansard and this is the beginning of her downfall.

    Lee

  5. Oh surprise surprise,she is back tracking, this is the begining of the end for the evil hypocrital mother…… she will roast for this. Bring it on, its about time she was thrown out on her lying hateful arse.

  6. What a load of crap! She’s obviously panicking because of the backlash against her vile statement. No doubt the poor dear thought she’d receive applause for her comment. Nevermind, I have the name of a good psychiatrist who can help her deal with her fantasies and her bizarre fascination with what other people do in bed.
    I hope she’s squirming. This pathetic attempt to defend herself has made my day. But maybe God likes liars almost as much as he likes bigots, eh?

  7. Mirjam Bader 22 Jul 2008, 2:49pm

    Misquoted!? My arse! (And you can quote me on that)

  8. “While I will be seeking to check the committee recording, what I clearly intended to say was that child abuse was worse even than homosexuality and sodomy.”
    To paraphrase John Cleese in “Life of Brian”,

    “Oh, it’s alright siblings, aparently child abuse is EVEN worse than homosexuality. Well, that’s alright then. Sit down. Have a scone. Make yourself at home. You KLUTZ. You stupid bird-brained, flat headed…”
    That has to be the most half arsed, ineffectual retraction ever. If she thinks that goes any way to resolving the animosity we feel towards her, she’s sorely mistaken.

  9. The only thing you missed, Iris, was the bus!

  10. Federico Podeschi 23 Jul 2008, 1:17pm

    The Human Rights Act enforces that in the UK, we all have the right to voice our opinions in any way we please, whether verbally, in writing or both. We also have the right to be heard and to hear the opinions of others without being obliged to believe what they say.

    However, the one thing that no government can legislate for is the minds of the people; it is our right to have our own political opinions, religious beliefs and attitudes about certain things, but it is not our right to force our opinions on others and prevent them from exercising their right to equality.

    The Human Rights Act also specifically prohibits the breaking of domestic laws and limits the exercise of this freedom to those activities that would not threaten public security and would not infringe on the rights of others who may not hold the same beliefs.
    Speaking on BBC Radio Ulster’s Nolan Show last month, Mrs Robinson was asked to comment on a homophobic assault that took place in Newtownabbey. Stephen Scott, 27, was attacked by a gang of youths and suffered head and leg injuries. The police are calling the incident homophobic in nature. Mrs Robinson suggested that he should consider therapy to “cure” him of his homosexuality.
    You would not suggest to someone whose skin colour was different from yours to go and get it tinted or suggest to a wheelchair user to get up and walk, so why should you be less prepared to accept someone whose sexual orientation differs from yours?

    This appears to be simply a matter of differential treatment and when it comes to this opinion coming from a government official, it seems quite clear that not tackling this transparent breach of Human Rights legislation the government could be seen to be corporate in discriminating against people on the grounds of sexual orientation.

    When it comes to Mrs Robinson in particular, she is using her position as an official to impose her views and should also be seen to trying to prevent people from exercising their right to equality rather than merely exercising their right to freedom of expression.

    Furthermore, it appears that her opinion is discriminatory contravening the Human Rights Act and should therefore limit her freedom of speech in any case.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all