Ian Durrant - Neanderthal Bigot

[Chic Murray]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It’s complete different in this context. I’m a catholic, and I moved from Edinburgh aged 6 to the West Coast (happily returned now.) I was in primary school late 80s/early 90s, and showing up to PE in Hibs shorts was enough to be berated as a ‘Fenian’ in a predominantly hun non-dom school. Primary school!

In the hun context, he’s not attacking Pope Francis as a person, but as the leader of the Catholic Church. I’m not looking to be offended, but it’s all about context. People don’t say **** Donald Trump because he’s the leader of the states - they say **** Donald Trump because he’s an arse hole!

Scotland has a serious, deep rooted problem with sectarianism, and with the huns, it’s all about living in the past, harking back to the days where razor gangs prowled the streets of Glasgow attacking Irish Catholics (as they sing about.)

if someone outside of Scotland said ‘**** the pope’ the chances are, it wouldn’t be considered as offensive - here however, it sadly has a different meaning.

Durrant is a complete knuckle dragger in my view, and it shows he’s really bought in to the Rangers bigoted psyche.

How does it have a different meaning?

I detect an element of one sidedness on your part. Are you seriously suggesting the only victims of sectarianism are Catholics?

I used to know a lady, who would accompany her friend on Tom Farmer's annual pilgrimage to Lourdes. Her friend was Catholic, she was Protestant. She was there as her friend's carer, and had a good relationship with most of the pilgrims.

She made the mistake of wearing Orange jeans on the 12th of July. She had no idea what the significance of that date was. Others in the party were quick to make sarcastic remarks about what she was wearing, sarcastic as in warnings that is.

There will be many more examples that would support the argument that neither side has much to crow about on this subject.

[Chic Murray]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It’s not though. It won’t be personally at the guy who the pope is just now it’s aimed at the head of the Catholic Church.

And many may say that he is fair game in a free society.

[Pretty Boy]

I think this is another example of people misunderstanding freedom of speech and expression. Neither of those things mean you can just say what you like without consequence or challenge.

Had Durrant said something along the lines of:

'I reject the idea of Papal infallibility. I find the position of Primate of Rome to suggest a conduit between man and God and I reject that. I also find the Catholic theological belief in the consecration and transubstantiation of the Eucharist to be flawed.'

Then his position would have been a reasoned argument that could have been debated. Instead he said:

'**** the Pope'

I can't help feel that's just an expressiom of his own ignorance and if there are repercussions it's him to blame and no one else.

[Greenfly]

What's the surprise? It was Ian Durrant - simply confirming his unreconstructed knuckle dragging views. The sadder thing is that he had a full audience who loved it because he's one of their own - a blue nosed, orange tinted bigot like the rest of them.

By the way, why do people say "****** the Pope?" Because it's easier to say than "****** the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland" ... and as a Communicant member of that august body I think I can get away with saying that.

[Jack Hackett]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

More imporant things to be worrying about

Shouting FTP at a Rangers dinner was it?

Who cares

A 4 page thread... so far... would suggest a few do. How does the saying go? 'If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem'

Too many people look the other way in Scotland

[Smartie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think this is another example of people misunderstanding freedom of speech and expression. Neither of those things mean you can just say what you like without consequence or challenge.

Had Durrant said something along the lines of:

'I reject the idea of Papal infallibility. I find the position of Primate of Rome to suggest a conduit between man and God and I reject that. I also find the Catholic theological belief in the consecration and transubstantiation of the Eucharist to be flawed.'

Then his position would have been a reasoned argument that could have been debated. Instead he said:

'**** the Pope'

I can't help feel that's just an expressiom of his own ignorance and if there are repercussions it's him to blame and no one else.

I would have loved it if his apology had included that passage by way of a justification though.

Shame he isn't even just a wee bit smarter.

[Greenfly]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think this is another example of people misunderstanding freedom of speech and expression. Neither of those things mean you can just say what you like without consequence or challenge.

Had Durrant said something along the lines of:

'I reject the idea of Papal infallibility. I find the position of Primate of Rome to suggest a conduit between man and God and I reject that. I also find the Catholic theological belief in the consecration and transubstantiation of the Eucharist to be flawed.'

Then his position would have been a reasoned argument that could have been debated. Instead he said:

'**** the Pope'

I can't help feel that's just an expressiom of his own ignorance and if there are repercussions it's him to blame and no one else.

Exactly right. He's not a theologian - he's a d**k-head.

[malcolm]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think this is another example of people misunderstanding freedom of speech and expression. Neither of those things mean you can just say what you like without consequence or challenge.

Had Durrant said something along the lines of:

'I reject the idea of Papal infallibility. I find the position of Primate of Rome to suggest a conduit between man and God and I reject that. I also find the Catholic theological belief in the consecration and transubstantiation of the Eucharist to be flawed.'

Then his position would have been a reasoned argument that could have been debated. Instead he said:

'**** the Pope'

I can't help feel that's just an expressiom of his own ignorance and if there are repercussions it's him to blame and no one else.

I am happy to say ’**** all religion’ without need to worry that it is not holding out any points for debate, I’ve done all my intelligent internal debating a long time ago. I guess you could say my derision is about the structures, beliefs, organisation and effects of religion whilst the likes of the durrant’s of the world are aiming at the people rather more than their faith. I also know that that such as he (and the discrimination it represents) are not just on the side of the line that most umbrage here is directed.

[Pretty Boy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I am happy to say ’**** all religion’ without need to worry that it is not holding out any points for debate, I’ve done all my intelligent internal debating a long time ago. I guess you could say my derision is about the structures, beliefs, organisation and effects of religion whilst the likes of the durrant’s of the world are aiming at the people rather more than their faith. I also know that that such as he (and the discrimination it represents) are not just on the side of the line that most umbrage here is directed.

But you still gave an explanation for your feelings which is more than Durrant managed. It also seems evident your opinion on religion is shaped by a coherent thought process rather than an 'I hate feenyuns' mentality.

And I'd feel the same if Durrants comments had been aimed at Anglicans, Lutherans, Muslims, Scientologists or whoever else. I just don't like bigots.

[WhileTheChief..]

'I reject the idea of Papal infallibility. I find the position of Primate of Rome to suggest a conduit between man and God and I reject that. I also find the Catholic theological belief in the consecration and transubstantiation of the Eucharist to be flawed.'

Takes way too long to shout as an insult. I preferred Durrant’s version

[Tornadoes70]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How does it have a different meaning?

I detect an element of one sidedness on your part. Are you seriously suggesting the only victims of sectarianism are Catholics?

I used to know a lady, who would accompany her friend on Tom Farmer's annual pilgrimage to Lourdes. Her friend was Catholic, she was Protestant. She was there as her friend's carer, and had a good relationship with most of the pilgrims.

She made the mistake of wearing Orange jeans on the 12th of July. She had no idea what the significance of that date was. Others in the party were quick to make sarcastic remarks about what she was wearing, sarcastic as in warnings that is.

There will be many more examples that would support the argument that neither side has much to crow about on this subject.

Never seen many wearers of them going about very thankfully. Should be arrested for a crime against fashion. Orange jeans .

Mon the Cabbage!!!

[Sir David Gray]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think this is another example of people misunderstanding freedom of speech and expression. Neither of those things mean you can just say what you like without consequence or challenge.

Had Durrant said something along the lines of:

'I reject the idea of Papal infallibility. I find the position of Primate of Rome to suggest a conduit between man and God and I reject that. I also find the Catholic theological belief in the consecration and transubstantiation of the Eucharist to be flawed.'

Then his position would have been a reasoned argument that could have been debated. Instead he said:

'**** the Pope'

I can't help feel that's just an expressiom of his own ignorance and if there are repercussions it's him to blame and no one else.

Durrant would struggle with how to pronounce transubstantiation, never mind fitting it into a sentence.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

And many may say that he is fair game in a free society.

And so is signing about Neil Simpson's tackle... i wonder if Durrant thinks thats ok?

[barcahibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think this is another example of people misunderstanding freedom of speech and expression. Neither of those things mean you can just say what you like without consequence or challenge.

Had Durrant said something along the lines of:

'I reject the idea of Papal infallibility. I find the position of Primate of Rome to suggest a conduit between man and God and I reject that. I also find the Catholic theological belief in the consecration and transubstantiation of the Eucharist to be flawed.'

Then his position would have been a reasoned argument that could have been debated. Instead he said:

'**** the Pope'

I can't help feel that's just an expressiom of his own ignorance and if there are repercussions it's him to blame and no one else.

I agree and disagree.

100% agree that with freedoms and rights come responsibilities which too many dismiss.

But criticism of religion - and any power structure - should always be valid and protected. I don't need to leave room for debate in my opinions on religion - they're settled, valid (to my mind) and not going to change. Others can challenge my view if they wish, but I'm under no obligation to listen.

I also should be able to say f@*# the Pope in the same way I can say f@*# the head of any power structure/organisation that I feel is damaging to the society/world I live in.

A religious figure shouldnt have any special protections, if someone wants to say anything about them they absolutely must have the right to do so.
If they dont have that right then that's how we end up in the position where the church (of many flavours of course, not just Catholic) is allowed to abuse its privileged position - and much of that abuse is well within living memory.

But at the same time, while I've got the right to stand in a crowded room and shout f@*# the Pope without repercussion, I've got the responsibility to know that that action will affect others - even hurt others - and that I should carefully choose when and if to exercise my right.

This goes double for those whose actions and statements will be widely circulated and used by others.

Tldr

He's got a right to do it but it was a bloody stupid thing to do.

[SouthsideHarp_Bhoy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No it doesn't.

Those same Americans voted for Bush, but F Bush wasn't a thing.

The woman who had the Trump is a C*** banner was referring to the man, not nearly half the US electorate.

Lilly Allan may have disagreed...😁

[Sir David Gray]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I agree and disagree.

100% agree that with freedoms and rights come responsibilities which too many dismiss.

But criticism of religion - and any power structure - should always be valid and protected. I don't need to leave room for debate in my opinions on religion - they're settled, valid (to my mind) and not going to change. Others can challenge my view if they wish, but I'm under no obligation to listen.

I also should be able to say f@*# the Pope in the same way I can say f@*# the head of any power structure/organisation that I feel is damaging to the society/world I live in.

A religious figure shouldnt have any special protections, if someone wants to say anything about them they absolutely must have the right to do so.
If they dont have that right then that's how we end up in the position where the church (of many flavours of course, not just Catholic) is allowed to abuse its privileged position - and much of that abuse is well within living memory.

But at the same time, while I've got the right to stand in a crowded room and shout f@*# the Pope without repercussion, I've got the responsibility to know that that action will affect others - even hurt others - and that I should carefully choose when and if to exercise my right.

This goes double for those whose actions and statements will be widely circulated and used by others.

Tldr

He's got a right to do it but it was a bloody stupid thing to do.

I honestly doubt Ian Durrant has the mental capacity to have thought that deeply about why he would shout such a thing.

I would doubt if he could expand on why he dislikes the Pope beyond saying "fenian *******".

[WhileTheChief..]

He did it to feel popular and to be one of the people.

Typical herd / mob mentality really.

Someone touched on Traimspotting earlier, that scene in the club with them singing about no more Catholic’s probably sums them up.

[PatHead]

I can’t believe anyone on this thread seems to think it is okay to say things about anyone for their sex, race,colour or religion.

In 21st century Scotland that is totally unacceptable.

[Brizo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think this is another example of people misunderstanding freedom of speech and expression. Neither of those things mean you can just say what you like without consequence or challenge.

Had Durrant said something along the lines of:

'I reject the idea of Papal infallibility. I find the position of Primate of Rome to suggest a conduit between man and God and I reject that. I also find the Catholic theological belief in the consecration and transubstantiation of the Eucharist to be flawed.'

Then his position would have been a reasoned argument that could have been debated. Instead he said:

'**** the Pope'

I can't help feel that's just an expressiom of his own ignorance and if there are repercussions it's him to blame and no one else.

This isn't someone delivering a cogent or considered critical assessment of Catholicism. Its Ian Durrant indulging in lowest common denominator behaviour to appeal to a The Rangers support at a The Rangers do where some form of FTP flavoured content is expected. As others have said its Trainspotting 2 "No more Catholics" , but in real life.

For anyone to suggest that Durrantys motivation for his FTP might be based on anything deeper than that would undoubtedly be giving him to much credit.

[judas]

Far worse things happen.

I also think the Popes a twat.

[The 90+2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Far worse things happen.

I also think the Popes a twat.

What’s he personally done?

[angus hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I can’t believe anyone on this thread seems to think it is okay to say things about anyone for their sex, race,colour or religion.

In 21st century Scotland that is totally unacceptable.

Spot on. And shameful that all of the authorities in the country do absolutely nothing about the sectarian singing that goes on every week.

[cabbageandribs1875]

**** Durrant
**** all the bigoted sectarian filthbags that laughed and clapped at the goats ignorance
**** all the bigoted sectarian filth that follow follow that vile institution




and **** barry ******* ferguson as well

[BILLYHIBS]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Far worse things happen.

I also think the Popes a twat.

You would though Judas! 😂

[CMurdoch]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This isn't someone delivering a cogent or considered critical assessment of Catholicism. Its Ian Durrant indulging in lowest common denominator behaviour to appeal to a The Rangers support at a The Rangers do where some form of FTP flavoured content is expected. As others have said its Trainspotting 2 "No more Catholics" , but in real life.

For anyone to suggest that Durrantys motivation for his FTP might be based on anything deeper than that would undoubtedly be giving him to much credit.

That's it in a nutshell.
Durrant is an uneducated hard of thinking fool. Riordan was the same singing his refugee song. Donald Findlay .....oh wait he is an educated bigot.

Footballers can have rocks in their heads as long as they have cultured feet.
The agents of many should probably prevent them speaking in public.

[Smartie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You would though Judas! 😂

You should hear what he's got to say about Jesus.

[Dashing Bob S]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I honestly doubt Ian Durrant has the mental capacity to have thought that deeply about why he would shout such a thing.

I would doubt if he could expand on why he dislikes the Pope beyond saying "fenian *******".

He’s so slow it took him five seasons to realize Neil Simpson had ended his career.

[Lancs Harp]

Whats a fenian Ian?...... er a celtic fan innit.

[neil7908]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's certainly a move forward on the issue of celibacy amongst the clergy.



Now, that's logic I can relate to, "as long as they ***** in our shoes, we'll piss in their Bovril".

What I can't take is all the righteous indignation on the subject. I happen to know of one ex Celtic player who has been barred from several pubs in Airdrie for stupid sectarian remarks.

I also happen to know of a Scottish actor who has international status, who will openly come out with anti Orange statements when watching the Old Firm game with pals.

We've tried to legislate against this, and we got nowhere. At the end of the day, people should be free to say whatever they want, and the only court that would matter is the opinion of decent people.

On your last paragraph, what does this actually mean? What do you think should happen if I say something horrendously sexist or racist at a football game? Or at work? What if I threaten someone?

I honestly don't understand what you mean by "the opinion of decent people" and how this will stop racist abuse.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

On your last paragraph, what does this actually mean? What do you think should happen if I say something horrendously sexist or racist at a football game? Or at work? What if I threaten someone?

I honestly don't understand what you mean by "the opinion of decent people" and how this will stop racist abuse.

And "decent people" is hugely subjective.

Everyone thinks that people with similar views to themselves are decent.