SSM Referendum Spring 2015

padd b1975

_Redzer_ wrote: »

I'll also add that I get regular STD checks, regardless if I think I don't need them. I'm clean.

Of the 3 lads I mentioned, they had only had checks done when they showed symptoms, the rest had never had one, even though they've been sexually active for years.

I notice that's actually a common trend for many straight lads.

Not as common for the gay lads I meet who are conscious of it because everyone is telling us we're diseased.

Thing is, I still don't hold anything over my straight friends. I wouldn't go banning them from marriage or something equally as moronic and stupid.

Good for REdz.

From your experiences in the gay community, do you ever meet any gay guys that couldn't care less about marriage and what it brings to a relationship?

At a guess, I would say the numbers who feel that way could be surprisingly high.

jimgoose

Agent Smith wrote: »

The state shouldn't be in the marriage business full stop.

This is time and energy that could be used plotting, planning and waging a war against a country that couldn't possibly defend itself :pac:

Finally - someone with sense. It's high time we went and kicked the shít out of the Canary Islands, annexed the territory and declared it part of Caaark, biy. :cool:

RobertKK

Daith wrote: »

No it's being changed to allow gay couples to adopt jointly.

And to stop people confusing marriage with parenthood.

It is being changed because of the referendum.

Enda Kenny yesterday: “There are a number of other legal issues that need to be dealt with, including elements of adoption which are necessary.”

Daith

padd b1975 wrote: »

From your experiences in the gay community, do you ever meet any gay guys that couldn't care less about marriage and what it brings to a relationship?

Have you met any straight people who couldn't care less about marriage?

rainbow kirby

padd b1975 wrote: »

From your experiences in the gay community, do you ever meet any gay guys that couldn't care less about marriage and what it brings to a relationship?

At a guess, I would say the numbers who feel that way could be surprisingly high.

Plenty of straight people feel the same way...

Daith

RobertKK wrote: »

It is being changed because of the referendum.

Enda Kenny yesterday: “There are a number of other legal issues that need to be dealt with, including elements of adoption which are necessary.”

It's being changed so people don't confuse marriage and parenthood.

What's your reason why gays shouldn't be able to marry again?

Woodville56

rainbow kirby wrote: »

That's a lot of words to say "Play nice and we might give you what you want, if you're really lucky".

No, it's about saying let's have a calm reasoned debate, is that too much to expect ?

Daith

Woodville56 wrote: »

No, it's about saying let's have a calm reasoned debate, is that too much to expect ?

From both sides?

_Redzer_

padd b1975 wrote: »

Good for REdz.

From your experiences in the gay community, do you ever meet any gay guys that couldn't care less about marriage and what it brings to a relationship?

At a guess, I would say the numbers who feel that way could be surprisingly high.

Yeah, of course you'd guess that alright for no reason whatsoever.

I haven't spoken to every gay guy about marriage, but of the ones I have they were obviously all for it. Sure why wouldn't they.

Of course there is a fringe population, which I've never actually met, that wouldn't be in favour, but that was the case with giving women rights -some women weren't in favour of it.

Nonsense, I know, but some people just have no clue.

padd b1975

_Redzer_ wrote: »

You seem to be quite the gay expert. Wouldn't be surprised, you seem obsessed with anything to do with gay sex or anything gay related.

Some definite red flags here and I've noticed them for years on here.

Far from an expert, just throwing my tuppence worth into the mix like everyone else.


No red flags at all Chief!

Definitely not:cool:

_Redzer_

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Plenty of straight people feel the same way...

Funnily enough, whenever threads like this pops up there's a heap of straight lads on here bitching and ranting about marriage in general. Many, many in fact.

Guess we'll be abolishing straight marriage too. There's obviously too much against the idea, not to mention the durty promiscuous, diseased bastards shouldn't have gotten it in the first place.

P_1

padd b1975 wrote: »

Good for REdz.

From your experiences in the gay community, do you ever meet any gay guys that couldn't care less about marriage and what it brings to a relationship?

At a guess, I would say the numbers who feel that way could be surprisingly high.

Quite a lot of people, while not desiring marriage for themselves, wouldn't like to keep the choice to marry away from others.

_Redzer_

padd b1975 wrote: »

Far from an expert, just throwing my tuppence worth into the mix like everyone else.


No red flags at all Chief!

Definitely not:cool:

Oh, but I'm extraordinarily good at spotting flags and exploiting them.

A remnant of being a red blooded teenager in a rural area where if you didn't learn to adapt to subtleties, you'd never get your leg over.

eviltwin

padd b1975 wrote: »

Good for REdz.

From your experiences in the gay community, do you ever meet any gay guys that couldn't care less about marriage and what it brings to a relationship?

At a guess, I would say the numbers who feel that way could be surprisingly high.

And your point is? You really are clutching at straws now. People with no interest in marriage won't marry, it won't be compulsory. That's common enough in the straight community too. Its not a reason to deny the right to those who do want it.

floggg

denhaagenite wrote: »

I never said she was offended by it, why the hell would she have gone to see a drag show if that would offend her?? Panti had a captive audience that went to see a lighthearted, fun show and instead got dragged into a political movement.

I am in a minority, and I have faced adversity and xenophobia. Don't presume to know anything about my level of empathy or understanding for other people. I just wouldn't fancy going to see Tommy Tiernan live and having him rant at me about being able to take turf out of his own bog or something about wells in the West of Ireland. Or water charges!!

Em, Panti's speech was given as the Noble Call - a speech after a performance of the play "The Risen People" in the Abbey.

That's a play about the 1913 labour lock out in Dublin. While I haven't seen it, it's most certainly not a drag show - nor is it a light hearted fun show.

They offer various speakers to give a short speech at the end of every performance by way of the Noble Call. Panti just happened to be invited that night (don't know if it was publicised).

Moreover, even if she had gone to a drag show (which it wasn't) or to see Panti, she should have known what to expect. Drag Queens have always been involved in gay rights issues and Panti herself has been very much involved in gay rights issues in Ireland (has spoken at Pride and other events on a number of occasions). It was not at all unexpected to Panti to address it.

So it seems either you are mischaracterising the situation (understandable I guess if you weren't there) or your friend really had no clue what she was going to - and so shouldn't really complain if it didn't match her expectations.

denhaagenite

Muise... wrote: »

"The Risen People" is a lighthearted, fun show now?

The whole idea of the "noble call" speeches after the curtain was to draw lines of social awareness and solidarity between 1913 and now.

My apologies, I was under the impression that she had gone to see a drag show (obv I'm more prejudiced than I thought, presuming that a lesbian was at the Abbey for a drag show:/).

My opinion stands though, Rory O Neill can be an activist as long as he's not feigning hysteria and painting everyone gay, lesbian, trans, bi, drag with the same brush and chucking any opinion or say that straight people have in issues to do with gay rights out because of their sexuality. I'm sure he's experienced prejudices, but a lot of us have and sometimes for the most minute of things. I felt that some of what he had to say was important for gay people to hear, but some of it was trying to separate himself to make himself "special". Also I'm sure it didn't do his business any harm.

And again, "Drag Queen" is not a sexuality, it is a preference. Gay, straight, bi are sexualities. Male, female, transgender are genders.

Off topic though, I am for gay marriage but definitely think that a lot of the reason that it hasn't yet been implemented is that these things take time legally. I grew up in Ireland in the 80s and left 7 years ago. Now living in a country where homosexuality is totally accepted, where gay marriage has been in place for years, where there is gay sex education is taught in schools I can see that Ireland has a long way to go but general consensus towards gay people has been good for a while and will continue to improve. I'm often almost ashamed of Irish society for a lot of things but from my own experience I'm quite proud of the level of acceptance of homosexuality in urban Ireland, all things considered. We're not going to get anywhere by screaming at homophobes for being homophobic.

seamus

padd b1975 wrote: »

From your experiences in the gay community, do you ever meet any gay guys that couldn't care less about marriage and what it brings to a relationship?

At a guess, I would say the numbers who feel that way could be surprisingly high.

That's still irrelevant. Even if there were only one gay couple on the entire planet who wanted to marry, the right should still exist.

I have no interest in becoming a paediatric nurse, but if I was told that I was banned from becoming one just because I was a man, I'd fight that bigotry.

RobertKK

Daith wrote: »

It's being changed so people don't confuse marriage and parenthood.

What's your reason why gays shouldn't be able to marry again?

I explained earlier.

_Redzer_

RobertKK wrote: »

I explained earlier.

Are you still pleading nature and biology to marriage, which is a man-made, artificial concept?

Scientists all over the world really would weep for you.

RobertKK

_Redzer_ wrote: »

Funnily enough, whenever threads like this pops up there's a heap of straight lads on here bitching and ranting about marriage in general. Many, many in fact.

Guess we'll be abolishing straight marriage too. There's obviously too much against the idea, not to mention the durty promiscuous, diseased bastards shouldn't have gotten it in the first place.

The state's role in all marriage should be abolished.

Ghost Buster

padd b1975 wrote: »

Good for REdz.

From your experiences in the gay community, do you ever meet any gay guys that couldn't care less about marriage and what it brings to a relationship?

At a guess, I would say the numbers who feel that way could be surprisingly high.

We could save a lot of time here if you would stop failing to make a coherent argument and simply admit that you find the idea of male gay sex icky, it makes you uncomfortable and your religious views also influence you.
annnnnnnnnnd GO

floggg

padd b1975 wrote: »

It's what happens when the harsh reality of married life sets in that concerns me.
A lot of gay men may find it difficult to switch off from their previous lifestyle.


I feel they could marry because it's fashionable or trendy or because they want an attention-seeking party. Marriage and the commitment it brings is something that is totally alien to the gay community.

I honestly have no idea.

Just one while I was married, wish I could say the same for the wife though!

Please stop telling us what the gay community are, how we think or what we may or may not value.

It's just absurdly ignorant to think the gay community, or any other minority or community, all think and act the same way or share the same values. It's absurd, so stop it.

It's also ignorant, arrogant and absurd for you to be posting here telling the gay posters what the gay community is. You don't know us and you don't know out values, so don't try and tell us you do.

What great insight do you think you have?

And most of all, your views are based on such cartoonishly naive and ignorant stereotypes and caricatures. Honestly, the suggestion that we'll all go out and get married just because it's fashionable or "in" without knowing what it means is one of the stupidest things I read on this thread.

Apart from suggesting we are all shallow giddy school kids, you're also suggesting we are all too stupid to appreciate the legal and moral commitments and responsibilities that go with marriage. Grow up.

And do you think we all just hatched from eggs or something as adults. Most of us were born to wedded parents, and we either saw the realities of daily married life for them, or had to go through a loss of one or more parents or a divorce or family break up. We know full well what it entails.

RobertKK

_Redzer_ wrote: »

Are you still pleading nature and biology to marriage, which is a man-made, artificial concept?

Scientists all over the world really would weep for you.

Nature and biology is the primary reason for marriage coming about as a stable place to have and rear children.

Same sex marriage is just a modern thing, which we are told we must support and say yes to pollsters or be viewed as a bigot or a homophobe.

floggg

RobertKK wrote: »

It is being changed because of the referendum.

Enda Kenny yesterday: “There are a number of other legal issues that need to be dealt with, including elements of adoption which are necessary.”

No, it's being changed because it's the right thing to do independent or not of whether the referendum passes.

floggg

denhaagenite wrote: »

My apologies, I was under the impression that she had gone to see a drag show (obv I'm more prejudiced than I thought, presuming that a lesbian was at the Abbey for a drag show:/).

My opinion stands though, Rory O Neill can be an activist as long as he's not feigning hysteria and painting everyone gay, lesbian, trans, bi, drag with the same brush and chucking any opinion or say that straight people have in issues to do with gay rights out because of their sexuality. I'm sure he's experienced prejudices, but a lot of us have and sometimes for the most minute of things. I felt that some of what he had to say was important for gay people to hear, but some of it was trying to separate himself to make himself "special". Also I'm sure it didn't do his business any harm.

And again, "Drag Queen" is not a sexuality, it is a preference. Gay, straight, bi are sexualities. Male, female, transgender are genders.

Off topic though, I am for gay marriage but definitely think that a lot of the reason that it hasn't yet been implemented is that these things take time legally. I grew up in Ireland in the 80s and left 7 years ago. Now living in a country where homosexuality is totally accepted, where gay marriage has been in place for years, where there is gay sex education is taught in schools I can see that Ireland has a long way to go but general consensus towards gay people has been good for a while and will continue to improve. I'm often almost ashamed of Irish society for a lot of things but from my own experience I'm quite proud of the level of acceptance of homosexuality in urban Ireland, all things considered. We're not going to get anywhere by screaming at homophobes for being homophobic.

Again, did you listen to the speech. It was a very nuanced and measured speech, which resonated with so many gay people across the world, and which contained no "hysteria" (why is that word always thrown at gay people) and wasn't trying to make himself feel special.

It's beauty was how he broke it down to the simple and ordinary ways homophobia can feel oppressive.

Honestly, it's like you decided your narrative and don't care whether the facts fit them. The criticisms you have of the noble call speech just don't fit at all.

RobertKK

floggg wrote: »

No, it's being changed because it's the right thing to do independent or not of whether the referendum passes.

The referendum is why it is being changed whether people accept the fact or not.

_Redzer_

RobertKK wrote: »

Nature and biology is the primary reason for marriage coming about as a stable place to have and rear children.

Same sex marriage is just a modern thing, which we are told we must support and say yes to pollsters or be viewed as a bigot or a homophobe.

Then you're actually hugely, hugely ignorant about the origin of marriage and the actual fact that heterosexually exclusive marriage is a modern thing brought about by organised religions, like Christianity, that originated in the Middle East.

Ancient Rome, Mayan and Aztec culture, as well as Viking culture all practiced same sex marriage. That's only naming a few.

Also homosexuality is profoundly found in pack animals, and social animals. Our second closest cousins, the bonobo, is exclusively bisexual -this has evolved to give them an evolutionary advantage as it resolves conflict in times of food shortage when tempers run high.

Also, humans are pack animals. Having gay members in the pack at as back ups, ensuring more food for the rest because they're not waited down with children of their own, so they can help increase survival rates and strengthen the group. It is very apparent having homosexual members gives a strong advantage.
Look at some of the greatest people in history, Leonardo da Vinci is one example of possibly one of the greatest minds that has ever existed.

Never claim to knew what you're talking about without any deep understanding of evolution and history that stretches beyond the 1000 year marker you're stuck at.

Homophobia and prosecution of gay people is an entirely modern thing which was brought in by religion in order to better control the population for their own gain by eradicating avenues where there wouldn't be children -as they needed all the children they could get to lead to greater power and influence.

I guess you're not a student of history, as well as biology, either?

eviltwin

RobertKK wrote: »

The referendum is why it is being changed whether people accept the fact or not.

Regardless of the outcome of the ssm referendum the adoption issue is being dealt with so you can park that strawman right there.

Links234

Following on from the logic of some posters here, there are higher rates of HIV in sub-saharan african countries, would that be an acceptable reason for someone to be for anti-miscegenation laws?

Annasopra

padd b1975 wrote: »

Generally speaking....

A freewheeling attitude to sexual promiscuity, a lot of gay men would have little or no concept of monogamy and the figures for HIV/ AIDS amongst gays are beyond shocking-they are a disgrace with the amount of info and precautions freely available.


Obviously I accept there are exceptions, but unless attitudes to the above change drastically amongst gays, (can't see it happening myself any day soon) I will be voting no.

Hilarious. You would vote no anyway.