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

Gay Marriage/Marriage Equality/End of World?

Options
24567…325

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users Posts: 8,237 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    Actor wrote: »

    We discourage cohabiting couples by incentivising them to get married (vis-a-vis inheritence rights), so why shouldn't we disincentivise sodomy?

    No we don't.

    In fact as a society, parents often encourage their children to live with their partner for sometime before they decide to get married, so they can get a real and full idea of what the person is like.

    What century are you living in exactly?


  • Options
    #33
    Actor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 348 ✭✭Actor


    koth wrote: »
    so when do we start removing children from hetero couples that also engage in sodomy?

    I agree. It's a logically consistent rationale. Do you think kids would be safe adopted by parents who go to "S&M" parties or so-called "saunas"? What if the parents decided to host one of these "parties" in the family home?


  • Options
    #34
    Gbear
    Registered Users Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    MetalDog wrote: »
    I say this as someone who is opposed to religious influence/interference on this island and fully supportive of gay marriage: if the Govt called a referendum tomorrow, you can bet that the fundies would be out in force.

    David Quinn, Waters, Coir, Youth Defence; ie the usual shower of catholic **** - they'd be quite happy being stuck in 1932 and would certainly do their shrill best to hinder any progress on it.

    I don't think you're giving our country enough credit.

    Unless the likes of Enda were being serious cynical and cowardly c*nts about it, they'd put their weight behind equal marriage rights and the majority of voters would fall in line.

    I think if there was a referendum tomorrow it would overwhelmingly go in favour of marriage equality.


  • Options
    #35
    Actor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 348 ✭✭Actor


    Sonics2k wrote: »
    No we don't.

    In fact as a society, parents often encourage their children to live with their partner for sometime before they decide to get married, so they can get a real and full idea of what the person is like.

    What century are you living in exactly?

    There's a word for that - fornication. A word that has been conveniently air-brushed out of society. I strive for ideals. Legalising gay marriage is not an ideal - it's a compromise to suit angry sodomites.


  • Options
    #36
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,713 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Actor wrote: »
    I agree. It's a logically consistent rationale. Do you think kids would be safe adopted by parents who go to "S&M" parties or so-called "saunas"?

    Yes.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Bloodwing
    Registered Users Posts: 881 ✭✭✭Bloodwing


    Actor wrote: »
    gvn wrote: »
    What a poetic use of words, Actor: it paints a wonderful image.

    Not that I'm for sodomy--I'm indifferent--but what have you against it? Give an argument. Simply because you find the idea of it displeasing means absolutely nothing. Besides, this thread isn't about those who partake in sodomy adopting children; it's about giving equal marital rights to all. Simple.

    You're right. It's not a pretty picture. Is it? But that's the reality of what they do to each other. Sodomy is what this is about - it should be discouraged, if not outright banned.

    We discourage cohabiting couples by incentivising them to get married (vis-a-vis inheritence rights), so why shouldn't we disincentivise sodomy?

    So can I take it from your post that you have no issue with two women getting married? Seen as it's all about the sodomy with you?


  • Options
    #38
    Actor
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 348 ✭✭Actor


    koth wrote: »
    Yes.


    The adoption agencies wouldn't take too kindly to reports of such behaviour.


  • Options
    #39
    Gbear
    Registered Users Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    Neilos wrote: »
    So can I take it from your post that you have no issue with two women getting married? Seen as it's all about the sodomy with you?

    No. I think the bee in his bonnet is about people enjoying themselves and the religious begrudgery that goes with it.

    "Fornication" is always a dead giveaway.


  • Options
    #40
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Actor wrote: »
    You're right. It's not a pretty picture. Is it? But that's the reality of what they do to each other. Sodomy is what this is about - it should be discouraged, if not outright banned.

    We discourage cohabiting couples by incentivising them to get married (vis-a-vis inheritence rights), so why shouldn't we disincentivise sodomy?

    No, it's not a pretty image, nor is it an accurate image. You're attacking an exaggerated image of sodomy, not sodomy itself. I'm pretty certain that all instances of sodomy do not end in what you describe. Less of the hyperbole, please.

    Anyway, tell me, why should it be banned? If two consenting adults want to partake in sodomy--homosexual or heterosexual--then what of it? You've skirted around my question: give me an argument against sodomy that doesn't rely upon your own, personal opinions of it, or upon your particular religion telling you that it's wrong or immoral. I'm sure that you can't do this, can you? You just find the idea of it disgusting, so you attempt to convince others that, because of this, sodomy is wrong. In effect you're attempting to force others to live by your own idea of what's right and wrong, good and bad, moral and immoral. That you find something disgusting doesn't mean everybody finds it disgusting.


  • Options
    #41
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,842 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    fitz0 wrote: »
    I posted this in MrP's thread about his thesis.

    [wall o' text]

    I really don't get the opposition to gay marriage, I genuinely can't see why two people in a loving committed relationship are forbidden from making that loving, committed relationship official.
    I love how the priest's name is Tit. :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Delirium
    Moderators Posts: 51,713 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    Actor wrote: »
    The adoption agencies wouldn't take too kindly to reports of such behaviour.

    who said anything about adoption? :confused:

    Are you proposing that all hetero parents should be interviewed regarding their sex life to determine whether their children should be removed?

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Options
    #43
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users Posts: 8,237 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    Actor wrote: »
    There's a word for that - fornication. A word that has been conveniently air-brushed out of society. I strive for ideals. Legalising gay marriage is not an ideal - it's a compromise to suit angry sodomites.

    So, no problem with lesbians are the -vast- majority of gay men who don't like sodomy?


  • Options
    #44
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Actor wrote: »
    it's a compromise to suit angry sodomites.

    Bring out your angels Lot, so taht we may 'know' them! :pac:

    Seriously though, if the views represented by this 'Actor' guy are the best the anti gay marriage side can come up with then it is a truly pathetic and pitiful one indeed...


  • Options
    #45
    MetalDog
    Registered Users Posts: 904 ✭✭✭MetalDog


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    That would be one worry of mine if it went to a referendum. It would simply be a campaign of disinformation against it. It could easily turn the tides. Surprised that nobody has arrived with a biblical argument against it. (Twelves minutes after this post...) :pac:

    They would use outright lies as part of said disinformation, remember that YD get a lot of money from the States, so in the event of a referendum expect American style scare tactics from them and the rest of the Irish taliban.


  • Options
    #46
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Actor wrote: »
    Society should do everything in it's power to prevent people from rupturing one another.

    Society does plenty to prevent such ruptures by making sexual lubricants widely available.

    If you and/or your partner are experiencing "rupturing" or any other kind of discomfort, then I suggest you purchase some. However if that doesn't fully work, try a variety of different positions until you find one you're both comfortable in. Most importantly, go slow... sex is best when it's a marathon, not a sprint.
    Actor wrote: »
    You're right. It's not a pretty picture. Is it? But that's the reality of what they do to each other. Sodomy is what this is about - it should be discouraged, if not outright banned.

    It was banned, well between two consenting adult men anyway. Then it was unbanned. Somehow, society managed to keep it together. Yaaaay society!!
    Actor wrote: »
    I agree. It's a logically consistent rationale. Do you think kids would be safe adopted by parents who go to "S&M" parties or so-called "saunas"? What if the parents decided to host one of these "parties" in the family home?

    Honest question - how much time per day do you spend picturing and imagining the various sexual activities of consenting male adults? You seem quite versed. I admire your dedication to researching that which you claim to despise so vehemently.


  • Options
    #47
    MetalDog
    Registered Users Posts: 904 ✭✭✭MetalDog


    Gbear wrote: »
    I don't think you're giving our country enough credit.

    Unless the likes of Enda were being serious cynical and cowardly c*nts about it, they'd put their weight behind equal marriage rights and the majority of voters would fall in line.

    I think if there was a referendum tomorrow it would overwhelmingly go in favour of marriage equality.

    You're right. I'm not giving the country enough credit at all. Because I'm a cynical bastard.
    There are still a lot of conservative, church brainwashed bigots out there, in addition to plenty of macho redneck types who "doin't like dem queeeorrs" (their words not mine).
    Also, elderly people are also more likely to vote, referenda have usually a low turnout, and so on.
    I of course would like to see same sex marriage introduced without a referendum if possible, but in the event that it did go to a referendum, nothing could be taken for granted. I don't know if it would be as close - run as the Divorce referendum though, we've moved on a lot since then (1995), but bigotry, conservatism and religious "influence" could still rear their heads.


  • Options
    #48
    Bannasidhe
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Interesting historical fact - there were no laws against sodomy in Ireland - or England and Wales - until they were introduced by that poster boy for the sanctity of heterosexual marriage Henry VIII.

    Yup Henry reckoned it was ok to marry your sister-in-law, have your wives executed on dodgy legal grounds, send your fiancée back when she turned out to be not as good looking as you were led to believe (as a grossly obese man with open weeping ulcers on his legs and what was euphemistically referred to as the 'cock rot' requiring the invention of the cod piece Fat Hal Tudor was every girl's dream catch), declare your female children illegitimate and break with Rome while simultaneously burning Protestants but buggery was a step too far.


  • Options
    #49
    fitz0
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭fitz0


    All this talk of sodomy is a bit odd, can you think of nothing else Actor? Are images of men poking each other crowding your thoughts? Do you find yourself dwelling on entrance through the back door?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCcaMIcwz30


  • Options
    #50
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Actor wrote: »
    There's a word for that - fornication. A word that has been conveniently air-brushed out of society. I strive for ideals. Legalising gay marriage is not an ideal - it's a compromise to suit angry sodomites.

    Are people who assemble every week in a building to chant ok to raise kids?


  • Options
    #51
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Actor wrote: »
    I agree. It's a logically consistent rationale. Do you think kids would be safe adopted by parents who go to "S&M" parties or so-called "saunas"? What if the parents decided to host one of these "parties" in the family home?


    ....why would that involve children....? Or just gay people....?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    coffee_cake
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,310 CMod ✭✭✭✭coffee_cake


    only gay people like s&m apparently

    i also wonder how much time this person spends fantasising about these things


  • Options
    #53
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIbcqgXh5-4


  • Options
    #54
    housetypeb
    Registered Users Posts: 1,182 ✭✭✭housetypeb


    Actor wrote: »
    You're right. It's not a pretty picture. Is it? But that's the reality of what they do to each other. Sodomy is what this is about - it should be discouraged, if not outright banned.

    We discourage cohabiting couples by incentivising them to get married (vis-a-vis inheritence rights), so why shouldn't we disincentivise sodomy?

    Can you imagine it? Actor. go on, go on you know you want to, imagine it.

    Father Ted springs(get it,Actor?)to mind.
    MRS. DOYLE: I met a couple there last year, and it did them a world of good. They were a bit obsessed with the old S-E-X. God, I'm glad I never think of that type of thing, Father, that whole sexual world. God when you think of it, it's a dirty, filthy thing, isn't it, Father? Can you imagine, Father, looking up at your husband and him standing over you with his lad in his hand, wanting you to degrade yourself? God almighty, can you imagine that, Father? Can you picture it there, Father? Oh, get a good mental picture. Can you see him there, ready to do the business?


  • Options
    #55
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    MetalDog wrote: »
    I of course would like to see same sex marriage introduced without a referendum if possible,

    I don't see why there would be a need to have a referendum ona human rights issue. I mean, they are called 'rights' for a reason.


  • Options
    #56
    Sierra 117
    Registered Users Posts: 629 ✭✭✭Sierra 117


    There is absolutely no reason that same sex marriage shouldn't be introduced as soon as possible. I've never heard so much as one credible argument for opposing it.


  • Options
    #57
    MetalDog
    Registered Users Posts: 904 ✭✭✭MetalDog


    Galvasean wrote: »
    I don't see why there would be a need to have a referendum ona human rights issue. I mean, they are called 'rights' for a reason.

    I say this as a realist:

    Do not misunderstand me, I fully support same=sex marriage, and ideally would like to see it legislated for without a referendum.

    But:

    If it was legisltated for and subsequently passed into law, no doubt the God Squad or one of their pressure groups would take it upon themselves to bring it to the Supreme Court i.e. a constructional challenge, and we'd end up back at referendum time......just with the added cost to the state of having to defend itself in the Supreme Court and more time lost to getting this normalized/legal in society.
    As I've said before, these guys will go out of their way to keep the country in the 1930's, and there are also plenty of conservative catholics in the legal profession as well as the higher echelons of the Civil Service.


  • Options
    #58
    krudler
    Registered Users Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    Actor wrote: »
    It's not about gay "marriage". It's about sodomy. Society should do everything in it's power to prevent people from rupturing one another. People with these kinds of sexual vices should not be allowed to adopt children AFAIC.

    What about straight people who enjoy it?


  • Options
    #59
    token56
    Registered Users Posts: 2,601 ✭✭✭token56


    I would be hopefully that if there was a referendum tomorrow on making it legal it would pass. However it would be pretty divisive I think, particularly between the younger and older generation. Unlike something like ticking your religion/lack of on the census I would be pretty sure this is something the majority of the younger generation would care and think more about because of the increasing openness about sexuality among young people and the number of young people with gay/bisexual friends.


  • Options
    #60
    fitz0
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭fitz0


    token56 wrote: »
    I would be hopefully that if there was a referendum tomorrow on making it legal it would pass. However it would be pretty divisive I think, particularly between the younger and older generation. Unlike something like ticking your religion/lack of on the census I would be pretty sure this is something the majority of the younger generation would care and think more about because of the increasing openness about sexuality among young people and the number of young people with gay/bisexual friends.

    Divisive, yet there would be no material change in our day to day straight lives. Funny hoe that works.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Galvasean wrote: »
    I don't see why there would be a need to have a referendum ona human rights issue. I mean, they are called 'rights' for a reason.


    ...because its thought that the consititution legally confines marriage as being between a man and a woman, and thus would need to be changed (via a referendum). AFAIK.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement