Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Yes Equality Campaign

Options
135

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Riverireland
    Closed Accounts Posts: 833 ✭✭✭Riverireland


    Murt10 wrote: »
    Me too.

    Seems to be an awful lot of fuss about a relatively trivial thing, i.e. the name of the ceremony, calling it a marriage, or a civil partnership. What's the difference. Political Correctness gone mad.

    I honestly don't see the difference between a marriage and a civil partnership.

    As for the other referendum, the one that no one is talking about. "Jedward for President". Could the Government not have come up with something more serious for the citizens to vote on.

    We must have very little to occupy ourselves if these are the two most pressing and important issues that we have to worry about

    My sentiments exactly. Except, we do as a nation have serious pressing problems which are being ignored for this! I swear to God these gay weddings better be good!


  • Options
    #63
    BabysCoffee
    Registered Users Posts: 4,712 ✭✭✭BabysCoffee


    I find when I begin to question what is the big deal whether someone can get married or have a civil partnership, I relate it back to the struggle for black rights in the 1960'.

    Like you could say, what was Rosa Parks' issue when she was told to sit at the back of the bus - after all she had a seat on the bus so what was the big deal.........


  • Options
    #64
    amdublin
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 20,650 CMod ✭✭✭✭amdublin


    Murt10 wrote: »
    Me too.

    Seems to be an awful lot of fuss about a relatively trivial thing, i.e. the name of the ceremony, calling it a marriage, or a civil partnership. What's the difference. Political Correctness gone mad.

    I honestly don't see the difference between a marriage and a civil partnership.

    It's not the name of a ceremony at all.

    It's the fact that we have one ceremony called marriage which we don't allow some citizens access to. We give them something else, civil partnership, which is not exactly the same as marriage.

    It's an equal rights issue.



    Ps. If you are so unconcerned and honestly don't see the difference then I urge you to vote yes.


  • Options
    #65
    iatethepies
    Registered Users Posts: 46 ✭iatethepies


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    For the likes of you? WTF

    Youre clearly not an idiot, just lazy, get a sense of civic duty and do your own bloody research.

    The point I am trying to make is, I have done a moderate amount of research, I have discussed this with friends and family and I still don't really know what this vote is actually trying to achieve.

    Adoption is already an equal right and correctly so, nothing in this vote changes that. In my opinion Marriage and Civil Partnership are the same in all but name. I just don't feel passionate about this and I would think the only risk to a yes vote will be voter apathy.

    I appreciate that many people feel this is incredibly important, I don't mean to come across as cold but on the 22nd May, if I have to work late or if I am away from home I won't be going out of my way to vote based on what I know now.


  • Options
    #66
    shooterjay
    Site Banned Posts: 40 ✭shooterjay


    Gaspode wrote: »
    True, first real no-brainer referendum for a while.

    There's mountain of reasons for voting yes but really only 2 reasons for voting no:
    1. You're a homophobe because your religion of choice tells you to be
    2. You're a homophobe because you're a bit of a dick.

    It should be a clear-cut decision, but you never know with the people of this country!:D

    hey i think i fall into your no 2, i am a homophobe, and i am a dick..... but ill still vote yes caus if im free to be a homophobic dick then they (gays) shouldbe free to be gay and marry their loved ones.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    househero
    Registered Users Posts: 1,094 ✭✭✭househero


    Murt10 wrote: »

    We must have very little to occupy ourselves if these are the two most pressing and important issues that we have to worry about

    How about...

    Do you want a water tax?
    Yes or No

    And

    Should we lower income tax?
    Yes or No

    #whatThePeopleWant


  • Options
    #68
    househero
    Registered Users Posts: 1,094 ✭✭✭househero


    househero wrote: »
    How about...

    Do you want a water tax?
    Yes or No

    And

    Should we lower income tax?
    Yes or No

    #whatThePeopleWant

    Does somebody have the technical know how to start a pie chart vote on these two questions on here?


  • Options
    #69
    January
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,865 ✭✭✭✭January


    Murt10 wrote: »
    Me too.

    Seems to be an awful lot of fuss about a relatively trivial thing, i.e. the name of the ceremony, calling it a marriage, or a civil partnership. What's the difference. Political Correctness gone mad.

    I honestly don't see the difference between a marriage and a civil partnership.

    As for the other referendum, the one that no one is talking about. "Jedward for President". Could the Government not have come up with something more serious for the citizens to vote on.

    We must have very little to occupy ourselves if these are the two most pressing and important issues that we have to worry about


    There's plenty of differences between marriage and civil partnership...

    http://www.marriagequality.ie/marriageaudit/full-list


  • Options
    #70
    Zaph
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,274 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    househero wrote: »
    Does somebody have the technical know how to start a pie chart vote on these two questions on here?

    These have nothing to do with this thread so please stay on topic. If you wish to discuss these issues you can try the Politics forum or, if you prefer a slightly less intellectual discussion, the Politics Cafe.


  • Options
    #71
    KD345
    Registered Users Posts: 1,179 ✭✭✭KD345


    Murt10 wrote: »
    Me too.

    Seems to be an awful lot of fuss about a relatively trivial thing, i.e. the name of the ceremony, calling it a marriage, or a civil partnership. What's the difference. Political Correctness gone mad.

    I honestly don't see the difference between a marriage and a civil partnership.

    As for the other referendum, the one that no one is talking about. "Jedward for President". Could the Government not have come up with something more serious for the citizens to vote on.

    We must have very little to occupy ourselves if these are the two most pressing and important issues that we have to worry about

    Finding out the differences between civil partnership and marriage is very easy. Make an informed decision when you go to vote. Ignorance or laziness is not an excuse to dismiss the importance of this referendum to many people.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Fuseman
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 158 ✭✭Fuseman


    The YES side took a hammering on Prime Time last night. The Yes campaign is a bunch of bandwagon jumpers who talk about equality and fail to understand the knock on effect for society and families


  • Options
    #73
    BabysCoffee
    Registered Users Posts: 4,712 ✭✭✭BabysCoffee


    Fuseman wrote: »
    The YES side took a hammering on Prime Time last night. The Yes campaign is a bunch of bandwagon jumpers who talk about equality and fail to understand the knock on effect for society and families

    What will be the knock on effect for society and families?


  • Options
    #74
    Larbre34
    Registered Users Posts: 23,797 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Fuseman wrote: »
    The YES side took a hammering on Prime Time last night. The Yes campaign is a bunch of bandwagon jumpers who talk about equality and fail to understand the knock on effect for society and families

    That wasn't a hammering, it was a load of extraneous noise from David Quinn and John Waters. Mind you if its extraneous noise you need, Waters is your man.

    They are being very disingenuous. The other important societal issues surrounding children and family rights are being modernised and dealt with in other, quite separate, legislation.

    Thats not to say the extension of marriage to people of the same gender is simplistic.

    This is the best explanatory guide I have been able to find

    http://www.marriagequality.ie/marriageaudit/full-list


  • Options
    #75
    ThisRegard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,834 ✭✭✭✭ThisRegard


    Fuseman wrote: »
    The YES side took a hammering on Prime Time last night. The Yes campaign is a bunch of bandwagon jumpers who talk about equality and fail to understand the knock on effect for society and families

    I'm not quite sure we watched the same program.


  • Options
    #76
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    Fuseman wrote: »
    The YES side took a hammering on Prime Time last night. The Yes campaign is a bunch of bandwagon jumpers who talk about equality and fail to understand the knock on effect for society and families

    So what of the bandwagons? if anything it shows a spike in popularity of the particular subject everyone is jumping on. Is that a bad thing because you've been so hardset against it prior to it becoming pop culture? If the No Vote was able to get such a swarm of popularity behind it, would you be so opposed to the bandwagon?

    I'm well aware of the knock on effects for society. Inclusion is something some people never got their head around. Me, I don't see the point in exclusion or clauses which lead to'em for no righteous reason and one solely based on opinion is not enough to dissuade me on it. My opinion alone should have no baring on the life of others, once their choice has no baring on anyone but themselves. Any issues with families are within those households to be honest. All society can do is grant them privacy or provide support when required.

    Other than your "beginning of time institution," what is it that's stirring you up on this? You've provided nothing other than attempting to be a blunt source of conflict. I find it baffling you choose to do so in a regional forum, that typically won't get much traffic on the topic.


  • Options
    #77
    Fuseman
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 158 ✭✭Fuseman


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    So what of the bandwagons? if anything it shows a spike in popularity of the particular subject everyone is jumping on. Is that a bad thing because you've been so hardset against it prior to it becoming pop culture? If the No Vote was able to get such a swarm of popularity behind it, would you be so opposed to the bandwagon?

    I'm well aware of the knock on effects for society. Inclusion is something some people never got their head around. Me, I don't see the point in exclusion or clauses which lead to'em for no righteous reason and one solely based on opinion is not enough to dissuade me on it. My opinion alone should have no baring on the life of others, once their choice has no baring on anyone but themselves. Any issues with families are within those households to be honest. All society can do is grant them privacy or provide support when required.

    Other than your "beginning of time institution," what is it that's stirring you up on this? You've provided nothing other than attempting to be a blunt source of conflict. I find it baffling you choose to do so in a regional forum, that typically won't get much traffic on the topic.

    The Equality bandwagon. Any person who knows anything about family, know that if at all possible, the best place for a child to be raised is by its own biological mother and father. I have gay friends and they respect my opinion even on this.

    There should be provisions to make sure that Civil partnerships get as much cover from our laws but it should not be called Marriage and should not be in Article 41 of the constitution which is about the Family.

    Another point, by allowing SSM you will be denying the right of a child to know its biological father/mother through surrogacy. If you are buying cattle these days you have to fill in details of the bull and cow from which the cattle came from for traceability reasons. Imagine this will not be the case for children if SSM is passed ! :eek:


  • Options
    #78
    January
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,865 ✭✭✭✭January


    Fuseman wrote: »
    The Equality bandwagon. Any person who knows anything about family, know that if at all possible, the best place for a child to be raised is by its own biological mother and father. I have gay friends and they respect my opinion even on this.

    There should be provisions to make sure that Civil partnerships get as much cover from our laws but it should not be called Marriage and should not be in Article 41 of the constitution which is about the Family.

    Another point, by allowing SSM you will be denying the right of a child to know its biological father/mother through surrogacy. If you are buying cattle these days you have to fill in details of the bull and cow from which the cattle came from for traceability reasons. Imagine this will not be the case for children if SSM is passed ! :eek:

    What utter bull****.

    You do know that SSM has NOTHING to do with adoption/surrogacy, don't you? That's all already been written into law. Look at the Children and Family Relations Bill 2015. If you vote no in the election on the 22nd of May then what you are claiming will still happen. It won't come into effect then because it's already in effect now.


  • Options
    #79
    Fuseman
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 158 ✭✭Fuseman


    January wrote: »
    What utter bull****.

    You do know that SSM has NOTHING to do with adoption/surrogacy, don't you? That's all already been written into law. Look at the Children and Family Relations Bill 2015. If you vote no in the election on the 22nd of May then what you are claiming will still happen. It won't come into effect then because it's already in effect now.

    What utter bull****.


  • Options
    #80
    Toto Wolfcastle
    Registered Users Posts: 25,005 ✭✭✭✭Toto Wolfcastle


    I didn't realise that surrogacy was so bloody common in this country. It was certainly never mentioned to us in the fertility clinic we attended, nor is it mentioned in their literature. Not that that has anything to do with the referendum, obviously.

    On the issue of posters, I don't believe in people removing posters they disagree with, but I'd happily support the council in removing posters that are based on lies, or that are inappropriately placed on poles. The Anti Austerity Alliance in particular seem to be unable to find a ladder to put the posters up at an appropriate height.


  • Options
    #81
    amdublin
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 20,650 CMod ✭✭✭✭amdublin


    Fuseman wrote: »

    Another point, by allowing SSM you will be denying the right of a child to know its biological father/mother through surrogacy. If you are buying cattle these days you have to fill in details of the bull and cow from which the cattle came from for traceability reasons. Imagine this will not be the case for children if SSM is passed ! :eek:

    This is happening already.

    By allowing SSM marriage it will continue to happen. By not allowing SSM marriage it will continue to happen


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Gaspode
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Regional East Moderators, Regional Midlands Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators, Regional North Mods, Regional West Moderators, Regional South East Moderators, Regional North East Moderators, Regional North West Moderators, Regional South Moderators Posts: 8,007 CMod ✭✭✭✭Gaspode


    @fuseman, I am finding it hard not to believe you are just trolling to get a rise out of people. The fact that you are posting the same stuff word for word elsewhere doesn't help.

    Try to stick to discussion of the marriage equality referendum (that's what this thread is about), not surrogacy or the lineage of farm animals.


  • Options
    #83
    Gaspode
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Regional East Moderators, Regional Midlands Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators, Regional North Mods, Regional West Moderators, Regional South East Moderators, Regional North East Moderators, Regional North West Moderators, Regional South Moderators Posts: 8,007 CMod ✭✭✭✭Gaspode


    Fuseman wrote: »
    Any person who knows anything about family, know that if at all possible, the best place for a child to be raised is by its own biological mother and father.

    So by adopting my son he has suffered a less than ideal upbringing? What complete and utter tosh.


  • Options
    #84
    January
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,865 ✭✭✭✭January


    Gaspode wrote: »
    So by adopting my son he has suffered a less than ideal upbringing? What complete and utter tosh.

    And by that logic my cousins would be better off with their alcoholic emotionally abusive mother. But it's fine because they'd be with their mother.


  • Options
    #85
    Dobbit
    Registered Users Posts: 322 ✭✭Dobbit


    This unpleasantness was at Coolmine this morning:

    http://www.broadsheet.ie/2015/05/08/take-my-card/


  • Options
    #86
    Gaspode
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Regional East Moderators, Regional Midlands Moderators, Regional Midwest Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators, Regional North Mods, Regional West Moderators, Regional South East Moderators, Regional North East Moderators, Regional North West Moderators, Regional South Moderators Posts: 8,007 CMod ✭✭✭✭Gaspode


    Dobbit wrote: »
    This unpleasantness was at Coolmine this morning:
    http://www.broadsheet.ie/2015/05/08/take-my-card/

    Unpleasant indeed, but anyone resorting to quoting the bible to justify their unwillingness to accept equality has no credibility whatsoever.

    I've yet to hear a logical or plausible reason for a No vote yet, it's disappointing in a way that nobody can actually come up with something. Considering the resources and money behind them you'd think they could make some sort o reasonable case.


  • Options
    #87
    Omackeral
    Registered Users Posts: 32,956 ✭✭✭✭Omackeral


    Reason Number 5 quotes the Bible. Then they have the audacity to say reject this nonsense. Not a slight on religious people here but basing your argument on taking your lessons from a burning bush or listening to talking snakes or whatever is insanity in my eyes. Best of luck with your drive!

    Edit- just saw Gaspode made the same point.


  • Options
    #88
    Hammer Archer
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 11,386 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hammer Archer


    Yes canvassers were out in force in the estates in Carpenterstown today. Fair play to them.

    Unfortunately the No camp weren't brave enough to knock on the doors and simply dropped flyers through letterboxes. Hoping some do call round and see if they're able to defend their reasoning with me.


  • Options
    #89
    5uspect
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 10,515 Mod ✭✭✭✭5uspect


    We had some pamphlets from Iona (Lolek Ltd) shoved through our letterbox this evening. I followed the guy down the road and handed them back to him and told him I didn't want his rubbish. He just took them and walked away with his head down.


  • Options
    #90
    Zaph
    Registered Users, Subscribers Posts: 47,274 ✭✭✭✭Zaph


    That just means he has an extra one to stuff in someone else's letterbox. In our house they just go straight from the hall floor to the recycling bin where at least they'll be of some use.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    5uspect
    Moderators, Arts Moderators Posts: 10,515 Mod ✭✭✭✭5uspect


    I don't think they'll have an issue printing more, especially if they can afford to pay the rent in Merrion Square. They're a sinister little group of religious nutters with seemingly unfettered access to the media to lie to the public. I wanted to provide the confrontation they tried to avoid, however little it was.


Advertisement