Gay Marriage/Marriage Equality/End of World?

Hotblack Desiato

ShooterSF wrote: »

But that's my point. They are campaigning to the church leaders to change their stance but that doesn't change the stance of their god does it? It just hides it. Hide's their god's view on the subject because they don't agree with it. Unless they are claiming that the opinions of their omniscient deity are changeable by human debate. Yes it won't be the first time but the notion of human beings, lest they be prophets, debating changing the teachings of a church is absurd because the teachings are based on the views and rules of a supernatural being.

You should know by now that scriptures mean whatever the believer concerned wants them to mean. Their god is created in their image and, oddly, has all the same biases and prejudices they do, too.

Blowfish

So apparently Dublin Airport has gotten a bit nuts:

recedite

The gay pigeons are coming home to roost?

Hotblack Desiato

Blowfish wrote: »

So apparently Dublin Airport has gotten a bit nuts:

Jaysus. That brings a tear to me japs eye.

Jung people off Eyerland, I laff you.*





* does nobody get the reference? we need to know the past to understand how it f**ks up our lives today.

It was HHTP JPII. Some people thought it would herald a new age of liberalism in the RCC :pac: that was before JPII deployed the Ratzinger. Friend of mine approx 10 years older than me went to the "youth Mass" in Galway in 1979 - said the campsite was littered with used condoms from the good catholic pilgrims

Hotblack Desiato

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

Well they finally showed their true colours, in Limerick at least, with their latest poster.

Bright yeller and black it is emblazoned with the stirring rallying cry:

"DON'T BE SILENCED

VOTE NO"

With the stupid heart shape in the O of vote, as if pretending to be touchy feely will in any way disguise the true nature of their campaign and what drives it, homophobia.

Sadly these yokes have been all over major routes in Dublin for a week now.

Long Mile Road in particular is plastered in them, not a lamppost left unmolested.

horseburger

ShooterSF wrote: »

But that's my point. They are campaigning to the church leaders to change their stance but that doesn't change the stance of their god does it? It just hides it. Hide's their god's view on the subject because they don't agree with it. Unless they are claiming that the opinions of their omniscient deity are changeable by human debate. Yes it won't be the first time but the notion of human beings, lest they be prophets, debating changing the teachings of a church is absurd because the teachings are based on the views and rules of a supernatural being.

As far as I am aware, there is no definite teaching by Jesus against homosexuality in the bible. As I understand it, Jesus is not said to have said anything about being against homosexuality.

According to reporter Anderson Cooper in this clip at the 6 minute 10 second mark, Jesus "spoke about divorce, he never said anything about gay people"

horseburger

An item from The Pensive Quill by Sean Mallory about the issue of freedom of conscience based on religious beliefs, with reference to Ashers Bakery

http://thepensivequill.am/2015/05/outside-box-take-14.html

The Black Oil

The way some in the No camp have made this so much about children you'd swear marriage needed some sort of informal neighbourhood watch committee.

How are you getting on?
Ah shure, grand. Yourself?
Not a bother.
How's the marriage these days?
Ah grand, yeah. Running at about 80% capacity.
We're at 70%. Once the mortgage is paid off we'll be sorted.
Grand.
We timetable every minute outside of school to ensure the kids get balanced mammy and daddy time.
How about the wans in number 37, I hear they're running at about 50%.
Jaysus, maybe one of them is a gay.
And the wans in number 29, married two years, I believe. No kids.
Fuppin' hell.
Any longer and we'll have to call the Marriage Protection Hit Squad.

Hotblack Desiato

Do not neglect yizzer democratic duty today, ladies and gents.

Delirium

David "not a homophobe" was invited onto Vincent Browne after vote show.

https://twitter.com/Donal_OKeeffe/status/601512098892414977

Peregrinus

Vote, you bastards! Vote!

[Peregrinus cracks whip and fires revolver in the air.]

Pherekydes

Voted at 0705hrs with the wife.

Hope tomorrow is not too busy. I want to lounge in front of the telly while the No side are wheeled in to give excuses and moan.

Cabaal

Pherekydes wrote: »

Voted at 0705hrs with the wife.

Hope tomorrow is not too busy. I want to lounge in front of the telly while the No side are wheeled in to give excuses and moan.

Don't worry, they'll start looking at their legal options to appeal the ref outcome

lazygal

If the referendum is passed, how soon should I expect the married gays to apply to adopt my children to vindicate their right to procreate?

Cabaal

lazygal wrote: »

If the referendum is passed, how soon should I expect the married gays to apply to adopt my children to vindicate their right to procreate?

Around the same time as the four horsemen show up, I think it's on the same day as the anniversary of the ice age ending.... July the 19th

Pherekydes

lazygal wrote: »

If the referendum is passed, how soon should I expect the married gays to apply to adopt my children to vindicate their right to procreate?

Before the Eurovision. They want to have their lifestyle accessories in place before they settle down to watch that gayfest.

Peregrinus

lazygal wrote: »

If the referendum is passed, how soon should I expect the married gays to apply to adopt my children to vindicate their right to procreate?

Well, if my experience is anything to go by, don't hold your breath. Since 1996, I've been eagerly expecting hordes of lust-crazed gold-digging floozies bent on seducing me away from my wife and child. So far, not a single floozie. And I was promised!

Bannasidhe

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, if my experience is anything to go by, don't hold your breath. Since 1996, I've been eagerly expecting hordes of lust-crazed gold-digging floozies bent on seducing me away from my wife and child. So far, not a single floozie. And I was promised!

Ah.

But soon lust-crazed gold digging floozies will be bent (badum tish) on seducing your wife away from you - you can keep the child as apparently it's only gay men who want children.

Nodin

lazygal wrote: »

If the referendum is passed, how soon should I expect the married gays to apply to adopt my children to vindicate their right to procreate?

Well presuming you have two, you'll have to let them have one, and fly off to England to abort the other. If you've one it's a coin toss.

lazygal

Nodin wrote: »

Well presuming you have two, you'll have to let them have one, and fly off to England to abort the other. If you've one it's a coin toss.

But they both survived the abortion mills. Where to go for abortion of 3 or nearly two years old?

Going Strong

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, if my experience is anything to go by, don't hold your breath. Since 1996, I've been eagerly expecting hordes of lust-crazed gold-digging floozies bent on seducing me away from my wife and child. So far, not a single floozie. And I was promised!

I'm still waiting to be conscripted into an EU army and be sent off to enforce unasked for abortions at the point of a bayonet. I know it's true as Iona told me that's what voting "yes" to Lisbons I & II would bring about.

I wish I still had that leaflet they put through my door back then as it was an aluminium plant's annual production output worth of tinfoil-hatted lunacy. Still, it's not like they're still the same sort of scaremongering types these days eh?

Nodin

lazygal wrote: »

But they both survived the abortion mills. Where to go for abortion of 3 or nearly two years old?

Top of a cliff?

seamus

Be interesting tomorrow to hear if there's any substance to the allegation that some "No" groups made an eleventh-hour attempt to have today's vote deferred by the courts on the basis that it was going to be placed in the "wrong" part of the constitution.

If so, it would go to prove that these groups have no interest in democracy whatsoever.

Going Strong

seamus wrote: »

Be interesting tomorrow to hear if there's any substance to the allegation that some "No" groups made an eleventh-hour attempt to have today's vote deferred by the courts on the basis that it was going to be placed in the "wrong" part of the constitution.

If so, it would go to prove that these groups have no interest in democracy whatsoever.

Well, it'll be either that or, if it's a "Yes" victory, all talk of them being cash-strapped will go out the window as they launch a series of unsuccessful legal challenges to the result.

wp_rathead

Going Strong wrote: »

Well, it'll be either that or, if it's a "Yes" victory, all talk of them being cash-strapped will go out the window as they launch a series of unsuccessful legal challenges to the result.

I can see them challenging in relation to "Voter Fraud"

https://twitter.com/TheEvertBopp/status/601683198335184896?s=09

jooksavage

wp_rathead wrote: »

I can see them challenging in relation to "Voter Fraud"

https://twitter.com/TheEvertBopp/status/601683198335184896?s=09

Ugh. Depressingly predictable.

seamus

The thing with that is you'd need to prove either that there was an organised campaign of voter fraud, or that a sufficient number of voters committed fraud.

So either prove that an organisation actually arranged the flights home (a hashtag on twitter can't be called "organised"), or drag everyone who used the hastag into court, find out if they voted, and whether they were eligible to.

The U.S. evangelicals have deep pockets, but I don't think they're deep enough to fund a "Hail Mary Pass" like that.

Zubeneschamali

Even if you could show that a ton of ineligible people voted, how would you show that they voted for one side or the other and affected the result?

robindch

The Chief High Ionanist says yes-voting catholics aren't really catholics. And he names names. And points fingers.

I'm wondering when the Hierarchy is going to start pushing back against Quinn and company.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/iona-institute-chair-criticises-catholics-calling-for-yes-vote-1.2221187

Irish Times wrote:

The chair of the Iona Institute’s board of directors Dr John Murray has questioned whether those prominent Catholics who have called for a Yes vote in the same-sex marriage referendum, including priests and theologians, had rejected their faith. He expressed “astonishment and disappointment at those theologians and prominent Catholics who support a Yes vote” in the referendum.

“People such as ex-president Mary McAleese, Fr Peter McVerry, Prof Linda Hogan, Fr Gabriel Daly, Angela Hanley, and Sr Stanislaus Kennedy, and others had not made the slightest reference in their promotion of same-sex marriage to the clear teaching of our Lord,” he said. Mr Murray said “that God has founded marriage as a natural reality on our being created male and female. In every case that I have read or heard, none of these people has referred to the actual teaching of Jesus on marriage”, which was “surely the foundation of any theological or faith-shaped response to this referendum”, he said.

Mr Murray also said, in the letter to the Irish Catholic newspaper: “We need to ask Catholics who promote a vote to change our constitutional and legal understanding of marriage: Do you consider the church’s practice and understanding of the sacrament to be discriminatory?” He said that if they believed it was seriously unjust to treat same-sex relationships as in any significant way different from opposite-sex unions with regard to marriage and family and children, and wanted this enshrined in the Constitution, “then how can they not consider the sacrament to be discriminatory and wrong? And thus reject their Catholic faith and the gospel of Christ?”

Patrick McCrystal, director of Human Life International - Ireland, has said the marriage referendum was “about whether or not the Irish people accept God’s law and, irrespective of the outcome, the law of God remains immutable”. He said that former president Mary McAleese “has missed the point”. “The Catholic curch teaches the sexual conjugal act is the exclusive preserve of man and woman as husband and wife; it is an act designed by God to be exercised by no one else . . . Premarital acts, extramarital acts, heterosexual, homosexual, solitary acts or with others - all seriously jeopardise the eternal welfare God created us for, to enjoy with him in heaven.” He said that everyone “is called to chaste self-mastery, according to their state; married or single, heterosexual or homosexual. There is no discrimination in this statement. We shouldn’t even be having this referendum. If we, as an Irish nation, chose to accept the amendment, we turn away from God and his laws. We seriously dissolve any claim we have to expect God’s blessing and protection as a nation. Mr McCrystal said: “How can we, with integrity, write into our Constitution recognition for homosexual pairings, in a document that invokes the authority of the Blessed Trinity and our obligations to Jesus Christ in its preamble?”

lazygal

Some people should start looking for their payouts from Iona. I mean, Breda and David needed cash to get over other people expressing views on the kind of people they are.