How will you vote in the Marriage Equality referendum? Mod Note Post 1

Ozymandius2011

How do you plan on voting in the referendum on same-sex marriage. I will vote yes for the following reasons:

- I myself am a gay man and I want equality for Irish citizens regardless of sexual orientation before the law. Civil partnerships are not marriage. They differ from straight marriage in over 100 ways, including lack of inheritance rights which could potentially leave a civil partner homeless.

- Recent developments in the EU and US risk Ireland being left behind by the tide of human progress if we vote no. It would also be very damaging to our image as a country that respects human rights.

- Remarks by Iona members have further alienated me from their cause. On Morning Ireland a few days ago, Breda O'Brien compared same-sex marriage to a mother marrying her daughter. This reminds me of the rhetoric of the Christian Right in the US Deep South.

- The issue of children is separate because the new Family and Relationships Bill will legalise adoption by gay couples.

Mod note: drop the discussion of pedophilia. Cards are being handed out if it persists. It's not related to the topic at all.

fran17

Another thread.Really?

cloud493

I can't possibly think of a reason I would vote any way but yes. Thats as a practising catholic .

Sheep Lover

I will vote no in this referendum

bnt

Where's the "not eligible due to being a filfy furriner" option?

irishfeen

cloud493 wrote: »

I can't possibly think of a reason I would vote any way but yes. Thats as a practising catholic .

Same here - don't really understand why it would upset anyone.

Kevin McCloud

I will vote tactically.

tomwaterford

By right I shouldnt vote atal on this....doesn't ever affect me


But I always try to vote...so it'll be a yes....cant see any reason to vote no??

Lau2976

I haven't 100% decided but probably yes.

irishfeen

"Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex"

To be fair to the government they have worded the proposed ammendment very well. Simple and effective.

eviltwin

I'm voting Yes because it's the right thing to do but on a personal level I don't want to be in a society that sees my gay child as lesser than my straight child.

david65

It has to be a yes!

joe swanson

I will be voting no,

B_Wayne

I will be voting yes, the no side are currently in process of conflating issue with children. They won't even openly admit that they wish to dictate the rights of others because of their religious beliefs and nothing else. On a side note, there's a massive amount of research that shows there's no issue with same sex parents,so even if the referendum affected that which it will not. Still not an issue unless you openly lie to the public.

RobertKK

Voting no, it is not about equality, it doesn't allow polygamy or bigamy. It doesn't cater for bisexuals who may want to marry a person from both sexes.
If people want marriage redefined, why not allow multiple husbands or wives?
We are told it is about love and equality, but then prevents a woman from having both a husband and wife, or more, or a man having both a husband and wife or more if he wanted.
Does this referendum want bisexuals to have people whom they are married to and a mistress or another man involved in the marriage whom they are not married to?

Surely the current wording doesn't go far enough for the LGBT lobby groups? It doesn't cater for bisexuals.

Voting no as I would rather a whole new system of marriage without state involvement.

PopePalpatine

Yes, I don't see any reason to deny two loving, consenting individuals the right to marry each other.

tomwaterford

RobertKK wrote: »

Voting no, it is not about equality, it doesn't allow polygamy or bigamy. It doesn't cater for bisexuals who may want to marry a person from both sexes.
If people want marriage redefined, why not allow multiple husbands or wives?
We are told it is about love and equality, but then prevents a woman from having both a husband and wife, or more, or a man having both a husband and wife or more if he wanted.
Does this referendum want bisexuals to have people whom they are married to and a mistress or another man involved in the marriage whom they are not married to?

Surely the current wording doesn't go far enough for the LGBT lobby groups? It doesn't cater for bisexuals.

Voting no as I would rather a whole new system of marriage without state involvement.

Is that not illegal marrying more than one person??

archer22

I will vote no..the whole thing is ridiculous pointless and turning marriage into a joke.

DeJa VooDoo

I'll be voting no for 3 reasons.
1. I seen on another thread on this site how the homosexual posters ganged up on another poster, the end result being that she closed her account.
A cohort of people who demand to be treated equally and want tolerance seem to want to force their views on others by shouting the loudest and intimidating people.

2. I will not vote for anything this government proposes, Enda's due another wallop...

and

3. I believe that the ideal family unit is a married hetrosexual couple and their children.

Donkey Oaty

tomwaterford wrote: »

Is that not illegal marrying more than one person??

It used to be, if the first spouse was still alive, but now you can marry as many as you like as long as there are divorces or annulments in between.

anncoates

Need to see the list of candidates first.




Yes.

RobertKK

tomwaterford wrote: »

Is that not illegal marrying more than one person??

Only due to the role of the state in marriage.

dmc17

I'm gonna go to the polling station, mark my vote on the paper thingy and pop it into the box with all the other votes. Job done!

Pumpkinseeds

I will vote Yes. I hope that everyone who agrees with a Yes vote actually goes and votes so we can get equality on this matter. I'd hate to see the No voters win on this because people are too lazy to go and vote.

gandalf

I'll be voting yes to the referendum. It is a case of granting everyone equality and proper protection under the law.

I hope everyone makes the effort to vote as well. We need a big yes vote to show the world that we have moved away from the repressive theocracy that Ireland once was.

Venus In Furs

RobertKK wrote: »

It doesn't cater for bisexuals who may want to marry a person from both sexes...
We are told it is about love and equality, but then prevents a woman from having both a husband and wife, or more, or a man having both a husband and wife or more if he wanted.

If you're voting no, your opinion, but what the utter fup does the above mean? I mean, it's really terrible arguing - don't know if the blind thanking of it is worse.
It's same-sex marriage - to marry one person of the same sex, that's all. Why would a bisexual want to marry two people? Because they fancy members of both sexes? It doesn't work like that and you know it doesn't.
It doesn't "prevent" a woman from having both a husband and a wife and vice-versa because... it's same-sex marriage, it's for people who just want to marry one person of the same gender as them...
The logic of what you're saying as that heterosexual people should be able to marry more than one man or woman because they fancy others besides just one spouse.

Does this referendum want bisexuals to have people whom they are married to and a mistress or another man involved in the marriage whom they are not married to?

Seeing as you ask, I'll give you an answer; that answer being no.

Venus In Furs

DeJa VooDoo wrote: »

I'll be voting no for 3 reasons.
1. I seen on another thread on this site how the homosexual posters ganged up on another poster, the end result being that she closed her account.
A cohort of people who demand to be treated equally and want tolerance seem to want to force their views on others by shouting the loudest and intimidating people.

Oh dear, that's one hell of an impressionable reason not to vote for an issue affecting one hell of a broader group.

I will not vote for anything this government proposes, Enda's due another wallop

Very silly - even something you agree with?

I believe that the ideal family unit is a married hetrosexual couple and their children.

Ah, there we go. Why didn't you just say that?
(A view you're entitled to btw - it's annoying when the no voters come up with all these spurious terrible arguments; why not just say number 3, which I may not agree with it but at least it's not as woeful as the other "pointers").

BlaasForRafa

RobertKK wrote: »

Voting no, it is not about equality, it doesn't allow polygamy or bigamy. It doesn't cater for bisexuals who may want to marry a person from both sexes.
If people want marriage redefined, why not allow multiple husbands or wives?
We are told it is about love and equality, but then prevents a woman from having both a husband and wife, or more, or a man having both a husband and wife or more if he wanted.
Does this referendum want bisexuals to have people whom they are married to and a mistress or another man involved in the marriage whom they are not married to?

Surely the current wording doesn't go far enough for the LGBT lobby groups? It doesn't cater for bisexuals.

Voting no as I would rather a whole new system of marriage without state involvement.

I doubt you actually give a crap about polygamists or bigamists, it's just a thinly veiled justification to cover for your actual reasons.

I'll be voting yes in any case, not only because it's the right and fair thing to do but it's a big middle finger to close-minded bigots like Breeder O'Brien and the Ionians.

RayM

I'll be voting yes. Because there is no valid reason not to.

I'd actually have a tiny bit of respect for anyone who actually admits that they're voting against equality because they believe homosexuality is wrong or sinful. All these made-up reasons are tiresome...

"Oh, won't somebody please think of the children"

"What about polygamy?"

Urgh.

Ghekko

Will also be voting yes and am so fed up of people bringing up the subject of parenting/adopting etc when it is completely irrelevant to this issue (not necessarily on this forum). Gay people can already have children, so them being allowed to marry won't change that. I would hate to think that I would deny my children the right to their happiness should any of them be gay and want to marry in the future.

Lia_lia

RobertKK wrote: »

Surely the current wording doesn't go far enough for the LGBT lobby groups? It doesn't cater for bisexuals.

What are you on about?

shruikan2553

I'll be voting yes. Seeing as the no side have to lie to attempt to get voters there can't be any reasons not to.

dimsumss

nay

it will probably fail,apart from a few priests

the church is against it

yerwanthere123

Will be voting yes obviously. Quite simply, there's not a single legitimate reason why someone would vote no.

DeJa VooDoo

Venus In Furs wrote: »

Oh dear, that's one hell of an impressionable reason not to vote for an issue affecting one hell of a broader group.

Very silly - even something you agree with?

Ah, there we go. Why didn't you just say that?
(A view you're entitled to btw - it's annoying when the no voters come up with all these spurious terrible arguments; why not just say number 3, which I may not agree with it but at least it's not as woeful as the other "pointers").

See, another one trying to tell me how to think and what to say.....

0byme75341jo28

How someone can say they're a practicing Catholic just after saying they support gay marriage is beyond me. Way to contradict yourself..

Ghekko

Hence the reason I have stopped practicing!

Venus In Furs

DeJa VooDoo wrote: »

See, another one trying to tell me what to say.....

I'm not telling you what to say - I'm expressing my view on the silliness and pettiness of points 1 and 2.

Lia_lia

I will be voting yes, of course. I have many gay friends and can't see any reason why they shouldn't be allowed to get married.

And this "family unit" thing is so stupid. Do people who say this have a thing against single parent families also?

shruikan2553

Lia_lia wrote: »

I will be voting yes, of course. I have many gay friends and can't see any reason why they shouldn't be allowed to get married.

And this "family unit" thing is so stupid. Do people who say this have a thing against single parent families also?

Probably, its just they know the limits of what they can get away with saying. Same logic can be used about interracial couples too but being against those is racist.

Lau2976

The only reason I would vote no ( and as I've said I'll probably vote yes) is because I disagree with voting on rights for one group when others still don't have rights in areas that are life or death.

But equality is very important.

Ozymandius2011

Macavity. wrote: »

I will be voting no because Jehovah is my savior and Jesus is my prophet. Praise be the Lord!

Show me where Jesus said anything about homosexuality?

To paraphrase Madame Roland as she went to the guillotine : "Jesus, what nonsense is spoken in your name".

RobertKK

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I doubt you actually give a crap about polygamists or bigamists, it's just a thinly veiled justification to cover for your actual reasons.

I'll be voting yes in any case, not only because it's the right and fair thing to do but it's a big middle finger to close-minded bigots like Breeder O'Brien and the Ionians.

I just think those using the equality argument are staying rather silent on certain issues, and are voting for marriage restrictions to continue in other areas.
One could say the bigots are preventing polygamy, voting yes continues this given it specifically restricts marriage to two people.

Btw if marriage was taken out of state control it wouldn't be able to decide who you marry or how many are in the marriage, legal protection on the age of sexual consent would protect minors.

SEPT 23 1989

Anything that the far right catholic headbangers in this country are against i will vote for

entropi

I will vote in favour of same sex marriage. Marriage as a concept and practice would have been around before the most popular religions there are today, so there should be no problems (in theory). However, common sense does not always prevail with the voting numbers.

retro:electro

I will be voting in favour of marriage equality because although it won't directly make a difference to my life it will make a massive difference to the lives of others.

I find it amusing how all of a sudden Ireland is so concerned with the notion of an acceptable "family unit".

My name is URL

RobertKK wrote: »

Voting no as I would rather a whole new system of marriage without state involvement.

There'd be no need for the concept of marriage at all if the state had absolutely no involvement in it.

RayM

RobertKK wrote: »

I just think those using the equality argument are staying rather silent on certain issues, and are voting for marriage restrictions to continue in other areas.
One could say the bigots are preventing polygamy, voting yes continues this given it specifically restricts marriage to two people.

Btw if marriage was taken out of state control it wouldn't be able to decide who you marry or how many are in the marriage, legal protection on the age of sexual consent would protect minors.

You're quite religious, right? Rather than trying to muddy the debate with the whole "what about polygamy?" nonsense, would it not be easier to just admit that your opposition to equality for gay people stems from the fact that you believe homosexuality is a sin?

Gummy Panda

Not guilty

Tar.Aldarion

I'll be voting yes. Finally got me off my ass to move my voting address.
So that everyone has equality and proper protection under the law.


Some people think it doesn't affect them, but it affects us all, it is our society, our friends and our relations. Our fellow Irish men and women.

RobertKK

RayM wrote: »

You're quite religious, right? Rather than trying to muddy the debate with the whole "what about polygamy?" nonsense, would it not be easier to just admit that your opposition to equality for gay people stems from the fact that you believe homosexuality is a sin?

I don't believe homosexuality is a sin, the way someone is born is not a sin and it is not seen as a sin in the church either.

What I want caters for everyone, whatever belief or none they have.
I don't support heterosexual civil marriage, I simply believe the state has no role in the personal love lives of people.
Civil marriage gives the state a role and I don't support it.