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

galljga1

Deleted User wrote: »

No.

And the right to marry should be denied to heterosexuals too.

It such a bloody stupid thing, when you think about it. Let's enter a contract to stay together, cos we need a contract or else we'd be out the door. It's such an artificial construct. Not sure why any group would lobby for it.

Before the obvious is asked, course I'm married...

Cue five negative posts.

eviltwin

Deleted User wrote: »

No.

And the right to marry should be denied to heterosexuals too.

It such a bloody stupid thing, when you think about it. Let's enter a contract to stay together, cos we need a contract or else we'd be out the door. It's such an artificial construct. Not sure why any group would lobby for it.

Before the obvious is asked, course I'm married...

Maybe you don't see a point to it but lots of people do. Its not a contract to stay together, you can do that without marriage and post marriage can still leave...its about financial and legal protection that is not given to you if you are just cohabiting.

galljga1

custard gannet wrote: »

On my Facebook news feed, of all of those who have edited their profile photo to the yes equality thing, or been seen liking something to do with it, I think maybe a grand total of five of them were straight lads, with the rest being girls and the three gay lads and one lesbian I have among the 500 odd on the list. That is not to say that every one of the rest of them is opposed to it, more to say they don't want their friends to see them liking/ endorsing such an issue due to the ribbing they would get from their friends over it. Therefore I would imagine most of these lads would either vote no or, far more likely, not bother voting at all, even if they agree with the legislation. If you want to compare it to other issues lately, a lot more than five lads had no qualms about letting their views known on Facebook over issues such as the Gaza invasion, Irish Water, their endorsement of the explosion of the popularity of Sinn Fein in the last two or so years, and so on.

Yeah, sad but probably true. Personally I am on the yes side and have no qualms about voicing my support but that's because I no longer give a sh!t what people think. Not sure I ever did.

kylith

custard gannet wrote: »

On my Facebook news feed, of all of those who have edited their profile photo to the yes equality thing, or been seen liking something to do with it, I think maybe a grand total of five of them were straight lads, with the rest being girls and the three gay lads and one lesbian I have among the 500 odd on the list. That is not to say that every one of the rest of them is opposed to it, more to say they don't want their friends to see them liking/ endorsing such an issue due to the ribbing they would get from their friends over it. Therefore I would imagine most of these lads would either vote no or, far more likely, not bother voting at all, even if they agree with the legislation. If you want to compare it to other issues lately, a lot more than five lads had no qualms about letting their views known on Facebook over issues such as the Gaza invasion, Irish Water, their endorsement of the explosion of the popularity of Sinn Fein in the last two or so years, and so on.

Really? I know few gay people, but my newsfeed is full of straight people, of both genders, voicing their support for the yes side and among those liking posts about it is my mum.

eviltwin

custard gannet wrote: »

On my Facebook news feed, of all of those who have edited their profile photo to the yes equality thing, or been seen liking something to do with it, I think maybe a grand total of five of them were straight lads, with the rest being girls and the three gay lads and one lesbian I have among the 500 odd on the list. That is not to say that every one of the rest of them is opposed to it, more to say they don't want their friends to see them liking/ endorsing such an issue due to the ribbing they would get from their friends over it. Therefore I would imagine most of these lads would either vote no or, far more likely, not bother voting at all, even if they agree with the legislation. If you want to compare it to other issues lately, a lot more than five lads had no qualms about letting their views known on Facebook over issues such as the Gaza invasion, Irish Water, their endorsement of the explosion of the popularity of Sinn Fein in the last two or so years, and so on.

Maybe they need to find new friends. Are they quite young/immature? Most of my friends on FB are happy to show their support.

QuantumP

galljga1 wrote: »

I would have thought that younger people would be mainly yes voters, men and women. Is this a personal opinion?

I'm a 23 year old straight male strongly in favour of marriage equality and I don't know any of my peer group who are opposed to it. Maybe we'd be less vocal about it but that isn't the same as being opposed. I would have thought the over 50s would be the most conservative demographic.

custard gannet

eviltwin wrote: »

Maybe they need to find new friends. Are they quite young/immature? Most of my friends on FB are happy to show their support.

And that loaded question hits the nail on the head. Someone either sits on the fence or opposes your view and it makes them immature?

eviltwin

custard gannet wrote: »

And that loaded question hits the nail on the head. Someone either sits on the fence or opposes your view and it makes them immature?

No but making jokes at someone who happens to show support for ssm is immature.

galljga1

QuantumP wrote: »

I'm a 23 year old straight male strongly in favour of marriage equality and I don't know any of my peer group who are opposed to it. Maybe we'd be less vocal about it but that isn't the same as being opposed. I would have thought the over 50s would be the most conservative demographic.

I am 48 and am surprised at some of my similarly aged peers who are on the no side, a lot actually due to misconceptions. If they bring up adoption, I am happy to discuss. If they mention 'the cornerstone of the family unit' or 'family valuuuuuus', exit stage left.

K4t

Deleted User wrote: »

No.

And the right to marry should be denied to heterosexuals too.

It such a bloody stupid thing, when you think about it. Let's enter a contract to stay together, cos we need a contract or else we'd be out the door. It's such an artificial construct. Not sure why any group would lobby for it.

Before the obvious is asked, course I'm married...

Right..so you're voting no because you're against marriage altogether, yet you are married yourself and your vote will still allow men and women to marry each other. The only thing your no vote will do is continue the discrimination against certain people to get married.

Why not just vote yes and continue to hold your belief about marriage and campaign for marriage to be eradicated altogether? It's all the same to you, but your yes vote will make life a hell of a lot easier and happier for a significant number of people. Even abstaining would make more sense for the argument you put forward.

K4t

K4t wrote: »

Right..so you're voting no because you're against marriage altogether, yet you are married yourself and your vote will still allow men and women to marry each other.

I'm actually not sure what way I'll vote tbh.

But I found this interesting.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/why-ill-be-voting-no-to-samesex-marriage-even-though-im-gay-30953906.html

Links234

It would much more fair if it wasn't just same sex marriage that was being voted on, and that a No vote would invalidate all heteroexual marriages, so either everyone can marry or nobody can.

Ave Sodalis

Deleted User wrote: »

But I found this interesting.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/why-ill-be-voting-no-to-samesex-marriage-even-though-im-gay-30953906.html

Both of these issues have already been discussed in depth in this thread though, and it was generally agreed upon that the family unit is seperate to marriage, otherwise there would be pressure on everyone married to have children, and those who have children to get married. It's a very old fashion way of thinking and marriage is not defined as it is to be about children and this referendum won't change that.

jaysblades

sdanseo wrote: »

I can't stand that ****e. Say what you mean and mean what you say.

I've made no secret of my opinions on (and initially against) this issue but part of the reason I decided to vote in favour is through educating myself - in part through forums like this.

If people can't be honest education like that becomes impossible.

Alas, it's the internet, and wishing for honesty may as well be wishing for it to rain money. Ah well.

We'll ye pissy little wnker ?

Anita Blow

custard gannet wrote: »

On my Facebook news feed, of all of those who have edited their profile photo to the yes equality thing, or been seen liking something to do with it, I think maybe a grand total of five of them were straight lads, with the rest being girls and the three gay lads and one lesbian I have among the 500 odd on the list. That is not to say that every one of the rest of them is opposed to it, more to say they don't want their friends to see them liking/ endorsing such an issue due to the ribbing they would get from their friends over it. Therefore I would imagine most of these lads would either vote no or, far more likely, not bother voting at all, even if they agree with the legislation. If you want to compare it to other issues lately, a lot more than five lads had no qualms about letting their views known on Facebook over issues such as the Gaza invasion, Irish Water, their endorsement of the explosion of the popularity of Sinn Fein in the last two or so years, and so on.

I don't think that's representative at all. The most recent poll puts support for SSM at 85% Yes to 10% No among 18-24 year olds.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/poll-shows-same-sex-marriage-referendum-could-be-close-1.2154967

galljga1

Two basic reasons why I am voting yes:

Is allowing SSM going to harm/disadvantage me or my family in any way? No. Is it going to extend a currently denied right to others? Yes. Vote yes.

If we have to suffer through marriage why shouldn't gays. Vote yes.

Simple.

seenitall

Links234 wrote: »

It would much more fair if it wasn't just same sex marriage that was being voted on, and that a No vote would invalidate all heteroexual marriages, so either everyone can marry or nobody can.

Well, if you're gonna put it like that... it would be even more fair again if no one was entitled to vote on anyone else's civil rights... pity world isn't a fair place really.

sdanseo

jaysblades wrote: »

What did I say that was dishonest ?

jaysblades wrote: »

We'll ye pissy little wnker ?

I was agreeing with you, caught out of context. The "****e" I was referring to was people saying one thing and doing another, not what you said.

As for being a pissy litte wnker, I'll let you away with that pending a grovelling apology. Mods might not.

unfortunately

Bridge93 wrote: »

If I heard the result correctly, there was a mock election on this topic in UCD a number of months ago and it passed with around 98%.
It was 93% in 2013.

I see that a huge mural has gone up in Dublin too in support of SSM

It was a referendum to make support for marriage equality a policy of the UCD students union. It was a 97% YES vote. The absolute votes were YES=3105, NO= 96. An excellent result - it was broken down by each school building and the lowest support for a YES was 88% in the Agriculture building - still a massive level of support from a school which would have a large number of supposedly more conservative rural population. Young people are definitely behind this referendum. The Union of Students in Ireland (USI) revealed 20,120 new voters were registered in college campuses not including UCD which registered the most with 4,500 new voters.

Zen65

custard gannet wrote: »

He never said anything remotely of the sort.

Er, yes, he did. This:

My father and brother will be voting no 'because of the children'. They don't think it's fair that a child will be bullied because of having 2 same sex parents.

K4t

My father and brother will be voting no 'because of the children'. They don't think it's fair that a child will be bullied because of having 2 same sex parents.

And what does that say to the child who is gay?! The thousands of them in this country..Christ. I nearly have more respect for the Iona argument concerning children. This kind of thinking is only perpetuating the apparent divide between people because of their sexuality and helps nobody tbh. Terribly sad that these attitudes exist, especially under the illusion of attempting to protect children.

Bobby Jones

I'll be voting no...I agree with civil partnerships and the decriminalisation of homosexuality. But I disagree with the agenda to "normalise" homosexuality. It is not normal. The media should not be allowed to set the agenda as they are currently doing.

Ave Sodalis

Is there something in the air today?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Bobby Jones wrote: »

I'll be voting no...I agree with civil partnerships and the decriminalisation of homosexuality. But I disagree with the agenda to "normalise" homosexuality. It is not normal. The media should not be allowed to set the agenda as they are currently doing.

The whole point of media is to set agendas - case in point, Abbot's eelction in Australia.

Homosexuality is already normal to a lot of people and accept as so (or it would still be banned), but it's a moot point in any case.

eviltwin

Bobby Jones wrote: »

I'll be voting no...I agree with civil partnerships and the decriminalisation of homosexuality. But I disagree with the agenda to "normalise" homosexuality. It is not normal. The media should not be allowed to set the agenda as they are currently doing.

Tell me this, who decides what is or is not "normal"?

freshpopcorn

Bobby Jones wrote: »

I'll be voting no...I agree with civil partnerships and the decriminalisation of homosexuality. But I disagree with the agenda to "normalise" homosexuality. It is not normal. The media should not be allowed to set the agenda as they are currently doing.

So, if your son or daughter or sibling came out to you you'd yell them your not normal?

Bobby Jones

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

The whole point of media is to set agendas - case in point, Abbot's eelction in Australia.

Homosexuality is already normal to a lot of people and accept as so (or it would still be banned), but it's a moot point in any case.

Define "a lot of people".

I would contend that the media do not represent the view of the majority of Irish citizens.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Bobby Jones wrote: »

Define "a lot of people".

I would contend that the media do not represent the view of the majority of Irish citizens.

You want a number there or something? Pretty much every gay person worldwide, I would imagine, but I have no idea what that number is. I'd imagine it to be a lot people though.

The media point is pretty much irrevlant. I disagree with yoru stance on homosexuality being normal but I agree with your discription of the media.

Ave Sodalis

Bobby Jones wrote: »

Define "a lot of people".

I would contend that the media do not represent the view of the majority of Irish citizens.

I would contend your contention with regard to this particular topic, given that the media have thus far published polls.

Bobby Jones

Circa 5% of people are homosexual.

Given the level of coverage homosexuals receive in the media, you'd swear it was 50%...