Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE BACKLIT SIGN sign on the front of Dublin nightspot Pantibar is to remain in place after An Bord Pléanala agreed that there were “exceptional circumstances” in the case.
The 3.5m long sign on the Capel Street gay bar was erected last year but has been the subject of a number of planning objections.
Under planning rules for the area, signs that project outwards are not permitted except in “exceptional circumstances”.
Designers acting on behalf of bar owners Rory O’Neill and Jonathan Bourke had argued that this was indeed an exceptional case as the bar is “considered a place of cultural, social and artistic merit.”
Earlier this year, Dublin City Council had rejected an application to keep it up but an appeal was lodged with An Bord Pleanála.
Today, the bar has confirmed that An Bord Pleanála have granted permission for the sign to stay after it agreed that exceptional circumstances apply in this case.
“The sign is integral to the social, historical and cultural significance of the current use of the premises,” An Bord Pleanála said, according to Pantibar.
Objections to the sign had argued that it was “unsightly” and ”extraordinarily obvious when lit at night.”
Fight for equality. Then claim you’re different.
What a clever synopsis of the events that have occurred… Nothing says “intelligent” like playing the jaded smart arse.
Nothing says “intelligent” like playing the perpetually offended know-it-all.
@James Odin: Nothing says “moron” like supporting Trump ardently on an Irish website by parroting campaign talking points rather than actually debating the issues.
Thanks, im both.
I am clearly not offended, do you just have “offended” ready to go for anyone who disagrees with you? Like what you said had nothing to do with my point. Dense as fcking tungsten.
@chinaski:
Literally, 10 times the reply of The Trump Licker…
What has Trump got to do with a LED sign article ???
Struggling to work out what the Donald has to do with an article about a sign on Capel Street.
James Odin is Trump’s resident toilet paper.
@chinaski: Very true. Equality if its on your terms isnt really equality is it. Titus. Do you think the US will be different under that battle axe Clinton? She is as bad as Trump only she is a seasoned politician aka bullshit artist. Not that it has anything to do with this thread.
@Vincent Wallace:
Do I think trump is worse than Clinton? Obviously yes, but I’m not talking about this here. It was literally about yer man, Odin and the Trump love.
Don’t see your point chinaski. Putting up signs or anything is done quite often with planning permission around our fair city, and this is not the only time that the order to remove it was overturned after an appeal. It happens all the time.
@meatyslaps: *without planning permission
@meatyslaps: Yes, meaty, we all know this but there’s an important factor here – THE GHAYS!!!! They and their agenda are out to get us and must be stopped, It begins with neon signs.
Also SWJ and libtard. These seem to be need to be said for some reason.
Nothing says Phil like the word “moron”.
@Margie Murph: F__k off you pathetic little pest.
@Termaz Fx: i’ll play the role of Phil if you like.
ahem…
“You’re all a bunch of racists. How dare you make assumptions on what should never be assumed. No one knows what is happening except me. Your stupid and i’m smart. Christians are worse than muslims.. ever hear of the Crusades??
Don’t know if you saw this yesterday….so funny! The jinxeffect is so spot on.
A clear win for sensibility, not too often you see that.
@Margie Murph: You’re about as funny as cancer.
@Margie Murph:
Last two comments,…….. hilarious!
@Margie Murph: very good. Spot on.
@LITTLEONE: thanks guys, but full credit for the second one goes to Thejinxeffect. Just too good not to reproduce when our Phil goes into full histrionic, SJW mode.
@Titus Groan: Yes, he always uses double crepe, because he sends a copy of everything he produces to the Trump Führerbunker.
@chinaski: Exactly.
@chinaski:
Fair point…..equality or special treatment….make up your minds. Cant stand for both
Rhythm is a dancer.
@LITTLEONE: Ah look Marg and Little – journals’s bigoted empty vessels. Sad little creeps.
“Personal insults are the last refuge of the intellectual coward.”
Exceptional circumstances are what? Big bright light that allows this bar something others don’t have. A big bright exceptional circumstance light. Ok so
Everyone else should now go and get one since it’s ok to have it.
Just cite some historical event and it will be ok. After all all bars are social and cultural in some way.
So bitter…
@Sean: nothing bitter about it. I don’t live in Dublin so it’s irrelevant to me . I don’t see it but maybe explain why this sign should be classed as being allowed because of historical, social, cultural significance of the use of the premises. It’s a Dublin nightspot like many others.
@Little
Pantibar was like the epicentre of possibly, the largest event of social progression Ireland has ever had. Even if you don’t like Panti, that speech and what happened with it changed the entire landscape of what it meant to be gay in Ireland. I’m for it, personally.
@Titus Groan: that was a historical fantastic social progression that happened here in Ireland and that accolade goes to all the people of Ireland but certainly not to one Dublin nightspot because the owner was involved in something that changed all of Ireland.
The historical event was the people voting to legalise gay marriage, not the p1ss-up and live apparition of Vincent Browne in the bar.
Little, have you seen Capel St recently. It’s full of neon signs. The complainants only took issue with one and we all know why!
More than just involved, the owner (again, no matter how one feels about it) was the icon of what happened. Accidentally, of course but I don’t see why that renders the bar unimportant. Listen, I’m a liberal and as such I don’t comment on thejournal for approval, but it’s hard to argue that if you were to pin point somewhere that represents what happened it would likely be Pantibar.
@LITTLEONE: A Christian extremist group ‘Christian Concern’ were the ones making the complaint,
The sign is not out of line with the rest of that street.
But with the hatred that is typical of Christianity, these wackjobs target the only gay business on the street.
They are sinister freaks.,
A bloke in a dress who made a rousing speech that was talked about world wide. But yeah, don’t let that get in the way of your “PC gone too far” stance.
So Trump is a genius who’ll make America great again, but Panti is just a bloke in a dress.
@Titus Groan: to be honest I didn’t even hear the speech and even if I had . It would have made no difference to how I voted in the referendum because it was a decision people took themselves on what was the right thing to do. Not because someone gave a speech or were very vocal on the issue. The icon of what happened was every gay person standing up for what was an historic moment for all involved and giving accolades and icon status to one person in this issue us something I don’t believe in. I think the accolade goes to everyone.
Yes Graham one owns a successful billion dollar transnational conglomerate the other is a bloke in a dress who owns a a moderately successful bar with a tacky sign outside.
Successful? Not according to his leaked tax returns.
@Stiofain Murray: as I said I don’t live in Dublin and it has been many years since I was down capel street so I will take all your word that it’s the norm and their were reasons behind the complaint.
@Titus Groan: A bloke in a dress who made a rousing speech that was talked about world wide” Are you being serious?.
Hope no one picks me up wrong. I have nothing against panti or the bar but am only going on the story above and in previous stories about the sign.
I’m not doubting there were people who would have made the right decision, regardless, but that still doesn’t detract that a not insignificant amount of people were spurred in to action by what was a fabulous speech that all of us could relate to, even if not gay but particularly if you are (I would imagine). Almost every revolution has a figurehead and Panti became this ones. Am I saying Panti was responsible for the whole thing, no, and I don’t think I’ve implied that. I’m saying as visual representation of the movement, Panti fits the bill.
You ever notice when anything about homosexuality is mentioned on here, even tenuously, the same names appear, frothing at the mouth arguing against it while attempting to sound like reasonable humans – but always failing.
I don’t like the sign. I think it’s pretty ugly. It doesn’t offend me that much. I think the complaints were vexatious and motivated by homophobia. On the pure grounds of the complaints made I think there was reason to order the sign’s removal. But am delighted this was overturned because it angers sad little bigots like Littleone so much.
On and don’t bother replying, not even once. never mind your usual multiple stream of conscious replies, I’m not interested in you angry ranting you sad, sad, little man.
@Con O Sullivan:
Oh I’m sorry, I must have dreamt I saw Panti on BBC World News and American News Outlets. My fault.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/03/panti-noble-oppression_n_4717909.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-26075280
You really should get out more.
@Titus Groan: A bloke in a dress? A priest, bishop, cardinal, pope?
Con – I thought that men in dresses were a thing of yours, you know, all very Maynooth.
@Phil Blanc: you want to keep your own bigoted remarks to yourself. None of my remarks were bigoted. Maybe learn to read properly and read my comments. If you just want to attack me personally. Be a man about it and stop hiding behind Bullshit. Your some piece of work.
See Phil blanc. Wrong on so many counts . It’s Mrs actually but not the first Time you haven’t a clue what your on about
Has anyone even seen Capel Street? Picturesque it is not. I like the sign and the fact that it upsets the offended lads here is icing on the cake.
@LITTLEONE:
I don’t think Phil was actually referring to you. You’re a pretty reasonable dude who, unfortunately, has a similar point of view to some reprobates.
@Titus Groan: oh he definitely was . As evidenced by his tirade.
But am delighted this was overturned because it angers sad little bigots like Littleone so much
Which can be read in his comment above.
But you know what Titus obviously he has some issues but that’s his problem
My comments were about the light and whether the planning permission should have been overturned because the nightspot was classed as historical, social and cultural. It had no bigoted comments and to suggest they had is out of order . I even agreed with people that because I hadn’t been in the area for awhile that these signs are the norm that I would take their word for it.
@LITTLEONE:
Who’s the sad, bigot?? I personally think you’re cool. I don’t agree with you on this but I don’t think you’re mentally disturbed. So that makes a nice change…
Ohhhh now I see. I didn’t read his comment properly. I actually think you’re pretty reasoned….
@Titus Groan. Likewise. As I said I didn’t hear the speech panti gave, believe it or not but I am sure it inspired many and that’s maybe why I don’t see eye to eye with you on just that one aspect. You are coming from having heard his speech etc and I am not . As for all the rest on the entire nature of what happened being a historical momentous occasion. We are both in agreement on that however it came about.
” the largest event of social progression Ireland has ever had” Really? more important that allowing women to vote?
@Con O Sullivan: A drag artist who made a speech that was in a way a landmark in oratory. The speech, at the end of a performance of a play at the Abbey, certainly made thousands of people understand better what it is like to be a gay person in a society where far too many people are still homophobic.
You can listen to it yourself on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXayhUzWnl0
That video has had over 800,000 hits and others millions between them. POanti is certainly better known internationally than David Quinn, Breda O’Brien or any other of our leading homophobes.
Panti’s speech was given very extensive coverage and comment in newspapers and TV programmes worldwide.
And why don’t you call the Pope “A bloke in a dress”?
@Titus Groan: So Britain ans USA is the world. and the Huffing Post and The BBC is the voice of those places
@Con O Sullivan: “A bloke in a dress who made a rousing speech that was talked about world wide” I was quoting from what Titus Groan wrote.. The play in the Abbey was about the the 1913 lockout and poverty at that time, and the suffering endured by the poor . This was followed up by a lecture from a wealthy publican in fancy dress. You call Quinn and company homophobes, but let me refresh your memory. This character O neill/ Panti Bliss called this group homophobes on RTE and after the hammering RTE got in the Father Reynolds case in court they settled the care in favour of Quinn and co. So this loudmouth costs the licence payers a lot of money.
@Con O Sullivan:
The news reached far and wide is my point, but I’m sure you knew that, you’re just being obtuse and using semantics where it suits. How dull.
So have the planning laws been broken or not?
Shouldn’t this virtuous owner and bastion of noble selfless principles, be looking for equality before the law……
Couldn’t care either way, but there appears to be an obvious contradiction here……
@HelloGoogleTracking!: There was a complaint, a decision an appeal and a revised decision. That’s the process everyone can follow in this sort of case and that’s available to everybody.
No contradiction, obvious or otherwise, at all.
@Phil Blanc:
Depends on the basis of the appeal and the basis of the revised decision.
If it is the case that he deliberately broke the planning laws erecting the sign, that is point 1.
Then if he appealed the decision on the basis that he is gay, and is deserving of special treatment as a result, that is point B.
If point A is true, and point B is true…….then it follows that he does not want equal treatment before the law, but in fact special treatment.
Logic.
@Phil Blanc:
Point 1 = point B before you correct me :)
@Titus Groan: yeah but why does panti represent what it means to be gay. A grotesque characture of a female or in the words of PC and victimhood, sexual or cultural appropriation. In any other group identity political sphere, it would be called “blackface”. I
@Margie Murph:
Based i think on publicly labelling people homophobes on national television, resulting in large payouts of our taxes to the aggrieved parties, and wearing a dress to get attention too…….
While it could be argued that he had a cause, then manner in which he went about seeking publicity was very heavy handed and contrary to the law, slander and libel are serious….
The following speech he made was at best ok, effectively labelling everything homophobic….and oppression. By the guy who wears a dress for a living = not oppressive.
The entire point was for equality – before the law.
Which is why then demanding special treatment based on sexual orientation is a contradiction, and undermines his integrity……from an objective analysis. But of course being objective is homophobic.
Most likely granted special treatment out of fear, fear of being branded homophobic by a loose cannon.
@HelloGoogleTracking!:
“Depends on the basis of the appeal and the basis of the revised decision.”
Right… the complaint was vexatious to begin with, but however…
“If it is the case that he deliberately broke the planning laws erecting the sign, that is point 1.”
But you don’t know if that’s true. It may have been deliberate or it may have been inadvertent. But we’ll assume for the sake of bigotry that because he’s gay that it was the worse of the two.
“Then if he appealed the decision on the basis that he is gay, and is deserving of special treatment as a result, that is point B.”
Well he didn’t, he appeal on the grounds that the bar was “considered a place of cultural, social and artistic merit.” ABP agreed.
“If point A is true, and point B is true…….”
Well it was point 1 and point b, but you haven’t established that point 1/A was true and point B wasn’t true.
“then it follows that he does not want equal treatment before the law, but in fact special treatment.”
There’s no provision in the planning acts for special treatment owing to sexual orientation.
“Logic.”
If only I believed you understood the meaning of that word.
@Phil Blanc:
A. he didn’t even bother to check the law before erecting sign = irresponsible
or
B. He checked and did it anyway.
C. After initial ruling he knew he was breaking the law
Then
D. He decided to apply for special treatment….based on his profile, and notoriety as being reckless in calling people homophobic
E. The judgement was reversed
If A and C were true and he was a man of principle and equality, he would have accepted the ruling and apologies for a honest mistake.
If B and C and D are true then he wanted special treatment based on sexual orientation and the implied fear of being labeled homophobic. And of course the resultant free publicity for his business where he is profiting from it….
Logic again.
@Phil Blanc:
Finally E cannot be achieved without C and D being true.
Planning law permits a like for like replacement. In this case the sign did replace a preexisting sign, however the council did not agree that the replacement was like for like (which is fair enough considering the difference in style and size), but arguably being a bespoke designed sign it had more merit being there than a cheap, ubiquitous, beer company logo sign. Your A, B, C argument doesn’t seem to acknowledge this point.
@Graham Kavanagh:
Fair enough, Ill modify A
A. It is now, he assumed it would be taken as a like for like replacement, but didn’t check in advance, and was unaware it was breaking planning rules, but should have checked
@HelloGoogleTracking!:
The rest I think remain valid
So one set of rules for the homosexual business community and a different set of rules for the rest of the business community. Sounds fair /s.
James, not exactly a good day for you with the gays is it? Do you still believe that AIDS is a gay only illness?
@James Odin:
I guess some are considered to be more equal than others. Go equality!!!!
Dave please cite where I said AIDS is a gay only disease.
Hahaha. I love it when ye wee angry loners get angry. Makes my day.
“gay AIDS treatment” your exact words earlier today
James – well unless you were suggesting that the homosexual community receive a different treatment for AIDS then it is you who are being disingenuous. Suck it up sugar tits.
Actually James, the bigots that complained about the sign ignored all the other MANY non-LGBT businesses with signs of the same nature. It’s same rule for all, but you keep up you BS
@James Odin: James – do you not find it relevant that Christian extremists were behind the complaints about the sign?
You can’t prove one way or the other who was behind complaints. You can only speculate.
Can you point out a complaint made about any of the other signs on the street?
@James Odin: “You can’t prove one way or the other who was behind complaints”
Yes you can, their names appeared in the original articles about this whole debacle.
http://www.thejournal.ie/pantibliss-sign-2775549-May2016/
Brendan Hade was one, and he is a pastor for some church. Google is your friend
@Take a Shrill Pill: How do you know that there are not other businesses run by LGBT people in the street . To be gay does not mean you have to put make up on and a long dreee and gad about the city.
Gay people are like non gay people, they do not go about in fancy dress. How do you know that gay people are not running other businesses in Capel St
@Con O Sullivan: Their point was that Panti Bar is a gay bar. The only business directly catering for LGBT people on Capel Street.
There are no other businesses on the street that are like that. Believe me, I live there.
@meatyslaps: Does that mean that non gay people are not served in Capel St. Or the other businesses do not serve LGBT people.?. Too much fuss is made out about this Panti person. He is not superior either the non LGBT or their LGBT friends and neighbours who go about their business their business without fuss looking after each other as best they can.
@Con O Sullivan: Not it doesn’t mean any of that. I don’t know the sexuality of every business owner but Panti happens to be a prominent LGBT person, known nation-wide (and in a lot of other countries) since the Marriage Equality referendum campaign. The complaints made about this sign were only done because it is owned by Panti.
Nobody said he is superior, so I have no idea where the last sentence of your comment comes from..
@meatyslaps: Maybe if more people dressed in fancy and called ourselves a bizarre they would also become famous. This characator was hidden away from campaign for marriage equality. I went out campaigning for marriage equality and no one mentioned this person. He /she has nothing in common with ordinary LGBT people.
@Con O Sullivan: Again, I’ve no idea where this comment is coming from either…?
“This characator was hidden away from campaign for marriage equality.”
Are you living under a rock?
“I went out campaigning for marriage equality”
Sure you did ;)
@Con O Sullivan: “Gay people are like non gay people, they do not go about in fancy dress.”
Speak for yourself, Con, but just because you do not dress in a certain way doesn’t mean that other gay people do not. As you must know, “drag” shows are an important aspect of gay culture. Men dressing up as women, singing, dancing and joking are an art form, a popular entertainment and the best “drag artistes” are immensely famous and wealthy. Think of Danny La Rue or Sweden’s fabulous After Dark drag show.
Then, if you still think Panti – one of the most acclaimed drag artistes in the world today – is ridiculous, just ask yourself would you be prepared to pay €100 for a ticket to a good drag show. I did that in Helsinki last winter and counted myself lucky to be able to get tickets for myself and my better half.
@Fintan Oflaois: Panti “one of the most acclaimed drag artistes in the world today” and comparing him to Danny La Rue shows you are not being serious. Comparing Danny La Rue to this characator
is akin to comparing Rembrandt to Rolf Harris. Danny La Rue was a devout Catholic all his life and lovwww.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article…/Comic-frock-Danny-La-Rue-dies.htmled .
Of course Panti cost the Irish TV licence payers a lot of money with his loud mouth slandering innocent people.
Con, why did you just compare Panti to a paedophile?
@meatyslaps: Yes I did, and yes he was.
@Dave O Keeffe: Did I compare Panti to a paedophille, maybe you can show where I said that. Remember before Harris was exposed for his horrible deeds he was a singer but also a painter. I was comparing his artistic talent with the artistic talent of Vermeer. Now have I made myself clear
Is Rolf Harris a paedophile? Did you compare Panti to Rolf Harris? Also you idiot you didn’t compare him to Vermeer. Can’t even reproduce your own nonsense without twisting it. Con, you’re disgusting.
I hope Jack Nealon’s across the road do the very same.
To all the far-right homophobes,ha ha!
But of an ironic statement coming from a proud Muslim.
@Martin Flood: I hope they don’t use a similar tacky design
LED signs are historic – right in keeping with Viking & medieval Dublin. Very consistent there alright…
Where exactly do you see the LEDs on this sign? Do you even know what a LED is?
Says it in the headlines to the story there. Neon or LED either way it’s another tacky eye sore bolted onto Dublin’s neglected city centre.
light emitting diode
Graham> The letters are made up of LEDs. Not sure you know what LEDs are if you can’t see them
And yet if you look at the sign you will see incandescent style bulbs, not LEDs.
Graham> Look likes doesn’t mean is. The LEDs have a casing to look like incandescent bulbs but they are and remain LED
Well I’m open to correction. I remember when the story first broke several months ago we were being told that it was a neon sign.
Graham> You aren’t open to correction as you would accept it is LED at this point. The original stories I believe said “neon like”. It is LED! I have seen the sign they have been around for years. You have been now corrected.
I would accept it at this point? Because you said so? Are you an authority on the matter?
A heated debate about light bulbs. Fair play, lads.
Where do you stand on the LED/incandescent/neon light fiasco, Neal?
Graham can’t tolerate being wrong about anything.
Oh I’ve been wrong on lots of things James, but not on thinking that you’re an odious, smarmy little scrote.
Graham – is the correct answer, now a bonus for 10, why is James such a hateful individual?
Graham> Having seen the sign it means I know something you don’t. You started by saying the article is wrong. It isn’t you are. I am corroborating the article.
I’ve also seen the sign Kal, but unless you’ve taken it apart I’m not sure how you would determine whether or not it is lit by incandescent bulbs or LEDs encased in a bulb resembling an incandescent bulb.
By the light quality and how it is made to look like incandescent. Look like is not the same as identical.
Delighted with this news. Brings a bit of character to an otherwise dull rundown street.
@Concerned Citizen: are you for real Capel St is one of the dew in dublin that doesn’t have many shitty high end shops with no character
Excellent decision!
Would anyone care about the result if it wasn’t am LGBT issue?
@Dave O Keeffe: Not particularly but that is the reason it is still up there, hence the discussion. If a sign/building/alteration is made with no planning permission it is illegal – it is the reasons cited for the exemption that is unusual. There is nothing wrong with the sign (IMO) at all but it is correct to question this.
Austin, If something is done without planning permission that does not mean it has to come down. Owners can apply for retention
@Dave O Keeffe: No. The premises is a public house that sell alcohol.
And the bearing on applying for retention of a sign is?
Ah yes got to love consistency – put a shopping center on a 1916 site
but a neon signs have historic significance.
Let’s remember that the 3 people who objected to the sign were members of a Christian evangelical group called ‘Christian Concerrn.’
This group could be classed as a religiously extremist group.
Homophobia was the motive for the complaint.
This group is even more homophobic than the hate group The Iona Institute.
One of those complainants said that the sign was a nuisance to tenants of his building. The sign isn’t even visible from his building.
@Graham Kavanagh: The complaint was a nuisance complaint.
It was made as an act of harassment.
Bigotry and hatred are clearly Christian values.
I’m aware of that – hence the comment about the sign not being visible from the building.
@Graham Kavanagh: I know.
I just wanted to emphasise that the complainants were religious extremists engaged in a campaign of harassment.
Typical of the Journal… jumping up and down towards a Gay Bar and ignoring #guccifer 2.0
Clearly none of those fallaciously claiming that the permission given by An Bord Pleanala is related to the sexual-orientation of the customers of Pantibar have followed this story.
Firstly, the original objections lodged against the sign – which led to this process – were submitted by a tiny clique of anti-gay agitators.
Secondly, these whiny, anti-gay commenters are either being disingenuous or they are simply ignorant of the streetscape of Capel street and it’s current and historic signage.
And lastly, 734,300 voters chose not to see their fellow LGBT citizens as equal and now we all have fun to observing how the comment section of any article with “gay” in its headline acts like a bug-light, drawing swarms of indignant, uninformed, buzzing comments.
I presume that venting in this vacuous fashion soothes righteous fury, hence the conspiracy theory that this sign’s approval was down to unfair positive discrimination.
Garish, loud, lurid, Over the top, tasteless, crude, tacky.
No class.
Anyway.,,, enough about the proprietor.
I was surprised at how compact the sign is. It’s quite small to what I’d been led to believe because of the protests. There are bigger signs on Capel St and up the road on Henry St/Mary St. Storm in a Tea Party type teacup!
@Daisy Chainsaw:
Just to reiterate.
The sign was completely fine and in keeping with the street.
It was a nuisance complaint by Christian extremist bigots to harass a gay business.
Absolutely Delighted! Anyone that knows Capel St knows that there are several signs up and down the street (as well as most other Dublin streets) that are of a similar size to the PantiBar one. Why weren’t they objected to and taken down? It’s homophobia plain and simple. Can’t let the gays be seen can we (tongue firmly in cheek)?! They are legally entitled to appeal the original planning decision and were well within their rights to do so. I’m delighted that permission to re-install has been granted!
The Irish Catholic sign on the building at the top of Gardner Street near Busaras cannot be removed either
Even though the Irish Catholic newspaper went out of business years ago, the sign was deemed culturally important, so the present occupants of the building cannot remove it.
So it was a no-brainer than the Panti sign would be kept.
You can’t have double standards for hate groups like the catholic cult.
@Stiofain Murray: The Irish Catholic Newspaper is not out of business and is published each week. As for your comment about the Catholic Cult being a hate group, maybe you could provide the evidence that “The Catholic Cult” objected to the Panti Bar sign. If you want to discuss “hate cults” we can discuss the murderous activities of you atheist brethren in The Soviet Union, China and North Korea.
@Con O Sullivan: Brendan Hade is a pastor for some church. His name, and the 2 other complainants names, were mentioned in the original article about this whole thing.
@meatyslaps: No doubt a Catholic Priest I suppose?
@Con O Sullivan: I don’t know about catholic, but they are christians: http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/church-with-18m-debt-loses-appeal-over-three-properties-1.2245857
@meatyslaps: No it is not a Catholic Church or the clergyman concerned is not a Catholic Priest. That will take the wind out of the sails of the Anti RC cohorts.
@Con O Sullivan: Good for you – this silly story cannot be blamed on your beloved catholic church.
But I do think that a complaint over a sign pales in comparison to what the Catholic Church and its clergymen have done on this island, and abroad. Won’t take much wind out of our sails.
@meatyslaps: Maybe you should learn what your atheist brethren did in The Soviet Union, China and North Korea.
http://www.katyn.org.au/
library.flawlesslogic.com/massrape.htm
What nice people your brethren were
@Con O Sullivan: Yeah, yeah, I’ve read all of your comments about this before. You’ve posted it numerous times.
People are people, mate, and some are evil bast*rds, regardless of their religious beliefs. I’m not going to get into an argument with you about this. You just refuse to accept that anyone who calls themselves catholic can be just as bad and constantly try to deflect away from the crimes perpetrated by the catholic church, in THIS country, and it’s boring.
@meatyslaps: It was you who started the insults and brought up about Catholics and when I turned the tables on you you sulked. I never condoned crimes committed by Catholics and if you have evidence that I condone such criminality come and show it. For too long the crimes committed by your atheist brethren has been hidden. It is now exposed now. So off you go and sulk.
@Con O Sullivan: I didn’t actually bring up the catholics, Stiofain did. I just linked it to a religious pastor who was the instigator of the complaints against this sign.
But I’ve seen enough of your comments on these boards, although it’s my first time interacting with you (a pleasure, lol), to know you have a thing against atheists and you love deflecting any time anybody mentions anything against the catholic church and what it did here in Ireland.
Trying to link all atheists with the acts under Stalin, Mao etc. is just ludicrous by the way, considering atheists are not linked together with some shared morality – they just don’t believe in a god. And whether or not people believe in a god, they still have the capacity to carry out awful acts.
@Con O Sullivan: And I never sulked, either matey! You’re just boring me :)
@Con O Sullivan: The Irish Catholic no longer occupies that building though.
So their vulgar sign advertising their hate-rag really ought to be removed.
It must be kept.
Just as the Paniti sign must be kept.
Religious extremist hatemongers like Christian Concern or The Irish Catholic cannot expect special treatment.
@Con O Sullivan: “Maybe you should learn what your atheist brethren did in The Soviet Union, China and North Korea.”
Many of us are well educated and read and know of many atrocities and war crimes committed by many different totalitarian regimes. Some were atheists, others were Christians of many stripes, Muslims, Jews, Hindus —
You are getting so terribly boring with your repetitive nonsense. Now, before you give us a rant on Sweden the rape capital of Europe, ROFLMAO, can I ask you again why you have so many selfies of yourself with young wans on your Facebook page, and why you took down that picture of your African “princess” in a bikini when I mentioned it?
You can count to countless crimes committed by “atheists” (your word for non-Catholics?) all over the world, but they do not excuse the crimes committed against Irish children by priests or the coordinated efforts by their cult to cover up these crimes.
@meatyslaps: I have non thing against atheists. All I pointed out was that some atheists were not squeaky clean in their behaviour during the 20th century. That it was notion that Catholics and other religious people who committed terrible crimes against humanity. I have provided some facts to educate people who believed that. I am glad you acknowledged that it was Stiophain that brought into the discussion and that you added to it.. If you can tell me that Stalin, Mao, Lenin, Trotsky and co were not atheists I would be delighted to hear your evidence. I asked you for evidence that I condoned abuses by members of The Catholic Church and you have failed to answer my question. I wonder why?
@Fintan Oflaois:No when I mention atheists I am not talking about non Catholics. Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Trotsky were atheists. Comrade wrote in his essay on religion that “Atheism is a natural and inseparable part of Marxism” . These are the words written by your hero. Of course I would never condone crimes committed by Catholic Priests in this country, or make excuses for that evil. Still we should not conveniently forget the crimes committed by your atheist brethren either, which I havebrought to light on these treads
@Stiofain Murray: You should get your facts before you sit at your computer about the Irish Catholic Newspaper. I see no hatred in the Irish Catholic, still since you thought that it was defunct you have never read it. Still as the The 18th century poet Thomas Gray wrote “where ignorance is bliss, ’tis folly to be wise.” As for Panti Bliss and her/her pub sign I never never complained about the sign. As for religious extremist hatemongers. I would think you are an atheist extremist hatemonger
@Con O Sullivan: And nobody has ever denied this! But the truth is, in this country, most of the more horrific abuses were carried out by the Catholic Church and those influenced by it.
I also never said you condoned it – can you point me to where I said this? – I just said that you always try to deflect from it whenever it is mentioned. And it’s boring, and repetitive.
Cultural significance ????
@Meow:
Well If that Irish Catholic sign is…?
Nothing like a mention of Panti to get some peoples knickers in a twist!
Elections outside a gay bar. If I were on the appeal committee I would want to move along the agenda quickly also.
Typical bit of fame and you can get away with should be made to take it down if it breaks planning. Like plenty of other businesses have to.
@ed w: All other businesses can appeal and apply for planning permission afterwards if something was put up without it.
Political correctness gone mad.Call yourself a minority and no laws apply
Just two simple questions for all and any who wish to answer:
1. Are gay people a group who seek special treatment or protection, distinct and apart from the remainder of society?
2. Does the promotion of ‘gay rights’ and ‘marriage equality’ have a detrimental affect/effect upon the majority heterosexual portion of society?
No and no. Panto has a sign, like the majority of businesses on that street. People complained but only about this sign (very selective bunch) the board saw it for what it was, juvenile harassment.
Hallelujah all is saved, may my fellow homosexual brethren be drawn to it like a star shining brightly in the night promising Bacardi and Diet Cokes and bad Drag….
Panti played a big role in the success of the Marriage Equality referendum, which is why anything to do with her sticks in the craws of our resident homophobes and Holy Joes and Holy Biddies. I knew they’d be wallowing in self-pity and licking their wounds for a fair while after their latest defeat, but it’s very gratifying to see it lasting so long. It’s been a year and four months now and a lot of them are clearly still smarting. LOL
Poor old delusional Con O’Sullivan – the Walter Mitty man from East Cork – still doesn’t get it what an international celebrity Panti has become, but just look at her Facebook page to see what a lot of travelling she has been doing and giving performances all over the world.
And, incidentally, doing her bit to promote the gay tourism that is estimated to bring over a billion euro into the Irish economy each year.
https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=panti+bliss++pantibar
@Fintan Oflaois: Since I campaigned and voted for marriage equality your comment does not refer to me. I notice that all around Europe during the Summer circuses appear appear in cities and small towns and many people go to see the clowns so it is also with Panti Bliss. As for the success in the referendum, Panti was hidden and never went out canvassing really Panti was gagged and only appeared when the results were announced surrounded by a bunch of Luvvies in Dublin. As for tourism maybe some of the people that come expect to see all Irish Gays dressed in fancy dress. The bus driver, the check out lady, the doctor, the farmer all arrayed in fancy dress. “International star” thanks for the laugh
I canvassed with Rory. Twice.
The rest if the time I was in Dublin Mid West, not his home turf.
@Take a Shrill Pill: Not with Panti. No fancy dress so. I canvassed in Youghal.
@Con O Sullivan:
When did someone’s work clothes become fancy dress?
@Anne Marie Devlin:
AND the same group who say that there is no problem with racism in the US as 94% of black people are killed by other black people and therefore the problem is black violence but THEN when the obvious fact is mentioned that men make up 95% of murderers NOOOO. It’s not a male violence problem, it’s “society, feminism, other excuse that makes it an “individual problem, not a gender issue”.
Picking and choosing their statistics to be conscious over.
That will make her hole weak.
I hope the homophobic extremist hatemongers from Christian Concern, who made the nuisance complaint about the Panitibar sign for the sole reason of harassing a gay business, lost lots of money on lawyers’s fees.
An Bord Pleanala really ought to issue a fine to the complainants for time-wasting motivated solely by homophobic, Christian extremism.
@Stiofain Murray:
You’re coming across as rather totalitarian there Stiofain……if you don’t mind me saying so.
Well I have never enjoyed reading the comments on an article on the journey so much before. 200 comment on a sign outside a bar. Most of which are bi***y little rants of disapproval. One would swear it was something of national importance. If the article was a about a sing outside any bar other than a gay bar I doubt that there would be ten comments. The usual homophobic commenters are out in force on this one. Hardly still bitter about the results of the equality referendum. No never???
Pantibar is Rabit Nap backwards? O God Bunny boilers lol.
The trouble with signs is when they shine into your bedroom winder… What did the neighbours say?
They had no objection. The objection came from a far right false Christians group with a chip on their shoulder since a particular referendum didn’t go their way.
It’s a joke. Everyone is just so concerned about being seen as “politically correct” that they no longer care about being “legally correct”. The sign is of no significance to the establisment and is considered an eye-sore to the sorrounding establisments, not to mention the legality of it.
The 3.5m long erection, thejournal is getting worse…
have your say