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

Bridge93

'Reasonable argument.' Someone hasn't been reading the threads.

folamh

folamh wrote: »

If you feel irked by a few anomalous murals, lesbians kissing in the park and Brokeback Mountain, think of how gay people must feel every day when they see heterosexuality depicted in nearly every aspect of the media.

I'm reminded of this TEDx talk Panti gave a few months ago in which he talks about how he's never casually held his partner's hand without consciously deliberating on the social risks of that little action (something straight couples can take for granted):

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

hIhsv18lrqY

Based on some of the attitudes seen in this thread alone, you can see why this is.

Banjo String

I'll be voting yes.

In 2015, it's a sad state of affairs that some people do not realise/care that two human beings, regardless of gender should be able to make the ultimate commitment to show their love for each other.

This govt are far from perfect (in fact, I criticise them regularly) but anyone voting down this referendum in order to get a dig in at the current Govt really need to stop being so selfish.

(posting as a heterosexual male btw)

Zubeneschamali

steamengine wrote: »

On another forum my posts were labelled as homophobic and equated with religious fundamentalism, which has only reinforced my resolve now to vote NO.

I hope you don't just regard the referendum as lost, but really get out there and tell people to vote no.

You can really help the Yes vote, thanks.

marienbad

haveringchick wrote: »

Boards posters who jumped from thread to thread insulting belittling and scoffing at the undecided and the misguided, and who helped to ruin reasonable argument by feeding the trolls, have persuaded me to sympathize with the No lobby and vote against the referendum.
How many more of me are there?
How many Dublin commuters looked at that mural and secretly felt irked?
How many people really are uncomfortable with such a major change to the status quo but are loathe to voice an opinion or even ask a question for fear of instant social exclusion akin to that visited on unmarried pregnant girls for decades on end?
I guess you'll find out in a few weeks.

As opposed to 5 or 6 individuals who appear to have unlimited access to the national airwaves and print media and continuously promulgate ideas that they know to be false ?

And do you see any disconnect in your example of the exclusion of those unmarried girls ? We are voting on an issue to redress the balance for another excluded minority and you are voting no because .... the yes campaigners aren't playing nice !


Does that trouble you at all ? The fact is though you were never voting yes .

Kiwi in IE

steamengine wrote: »

There are many more. A lot of people simply hold the traditional point of view that marriage is between a man and a woman only. On another forum my posts were labelled as homophobic and equated with religious fundamentalism, which has only reinforced my resolve now to vote NO.

What does that mean? Were you going to vote yes at some stage? From reading your comments in the other forum I think that was highly unlikely. You only get one vote, and since it was already going to be no, I am unsure what the result of your resolve to vote no being reinforced might be? Are you going to make a stronger, more forceful mark on the ballot paper now?

Bannasidhe

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

What does that mean? Were you going to vote yes at some stage? From reading your comments in the other forum I think that was highly unlikely. You only get one vote, and since it was already going to be no, I am unsure what the result of your resolve to vote no being reinforced might be? Are you going to make a stronger, more forceful mark on the ballot paper now?

Going to use a 6B pencil perhaps... or a biro... :eek:

Bridge93

The odd person comes on and has a go at Yes voters for being mean and rude etc yet don't mention the comments of the No side on here. Then expect people to believe that they were undecided? And then some claim they will vote no out of spite or protest for various reasons and wonder why people get upset on the Yes side.

One eyed Jack

hotmail.com wrote: »

But on the merits of the referendum itself, there is nothing demeaning or hurtful about it for Catholics, Protestants or Muslims?

Do you need a hand moving those goal posts or are you alright on your own?

Honestly, every time I give you an answer, you move further and further from what you originally said.

If you can't see that some people with an axe to grind against religion are missing the point of this referendum and instead of concentrating on solidifying support for the yes vote, they choose to allow themselves to be distracted by people on the no side who are using religion as a political tool to further their own agenda.

The people getting caught in the crossfire are seeing the worst of both sides because of the small minority of marriage equality advocates using this referendum to further their own agenda.

I really don't know how much clearer I can make that for you. All I was intending to point out is that there are people using this referendum to further their own agendas and they aren't taking into consideration the fact that you can't just apply single issue labels when you are advocating for people's lives.

The language people use in this referendum when they're putting their arguments across is going to either make or break people's opinions. It may not be what you want to hear, but if you're as hardened by politics as you claim to be, you'll be all too aware of how people are fickle and how changeable their opinions are and how insecure and spiteful they can behave when they feel slighted.

steamengine

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

What does that mean? Were you going to vote yes at some stage? From reading your comments in the other forum I think that was highly unlikely. You only get one vote, and since it was already going to be no, I am unsure what the result of your resolve to vote no being reinforced might be? Are you going to make a stronger, more forceful mark on the ballot paper now?

It's possible I would have abstained, not now thanks to the jibes and smart comments.

hotmail.com

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Do you need a hand moving those goal posts or are you alright on your own?

Honestly, every time I give you an answer, you move further and further from what you originally said.

If you can't see that some people with an axe to grind against religion are missing the point of this referendum and instead of concentrating on solidifying support for the yes vote, they choose to allow themselves to be distracted by people on the no side who are using religion as a political tool to further their own agenda.

The people getting caught in the crossfire are seeing the worst of both sides because of the small minority of marriage equality advocates using this referendum to further their own agenda.

I really don't know how much clearer I can make that for you. All I was intending to point out is that there are people using this referendum to further their own agendas and they aren't taking into consideration the fact that you can't just apply single issue labels when you are advocating for people's lives.

The language people use in this referendum when they're putting their arguments across is going to either make or break people's opinions. It may not be what you want to hear, but if you're as hardened by politics as you claim to be, you'll be all too aware of how people are fickle and how changeable their opinions are and how insecure and spiteful they can behave when they feel slighted.

The point I'm making is that the referendum itself is non-offensive and it's the No side that actively engage in being hurtful by their opposition to equal rights for same sex couples.

That should be the focus. Why not focus all your posts on their opposition to equal rights? I know you're entitled to your opinion, but I find the odd angry remark by a Yes campaigner as nothing compared to the wholescale opposition to equal rights for same sex couples.

The odd person on the Yes side who might use the referendum for other agendas will always happen and isn't relevant.

garra

jimboblep wrote: »

Had been thinking of voting yes but Im starting to think about voting no for the same reason some of the attitudes and comments from the yes side are really quite grating
and I dont think im the only one

Some of the arguments on both sides are quite grating. Perhaps best way forward is to examine the basic premise of what you are being asked and come up with your own view.

Marriage referendum: "This asks do you agree to putting a clause in the
Constitution which will allow two people to marry each other regardless of their sex."

More info here:
http://refcom2015.ie/english_guide.pdf

steamengine

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Going to use a 6B pencil perhaps... or a biro... :eek:

Hilarious :rolleyes:

shruikan2553

Bridge93 wrote: »

The odd person comes on and has a go at Yes voters for being mean and rude etc yet don't mention the comments of the No side on here. Then expect people to believe that they were undecided? And then some claim they will vote no out of spite or protest for various reasons and wonder why people get upset on the Yes side.

They have no problem with others referring to gay people as freaks. Somehow I doubt they were ever considering anything but a no.

hotmail.com

garra wrote: »

Some of the arguments on both sides are quite grating. Perhaps best way forward is to examine the basic premise of what you are being asked and come up with your own view.

Marriage referendum: "This asks do you agree to putting a clause in the
Constitution which will allow two people to marry each other regardless of their sex."

More info here:
http://refcom2015.ie/english_guide.pdf

What Yes side arguments are grating..what's the biggest one that particularly annoys you?

Bridge93

steamengine wrote: »

[/I][/B]

It's possible I would have abstained, not now thanks to the jibes and smart comments.

If you're unhappy with comments why don't you report them rather than potentially destroy certain people's chance at happiness?
Seems incredibly petty, selfish, unfair and most likely a smokescreen for the real reason you're voting no.

Cienciano

steamengine wrote: »

[/I][/B]

It's possible I would have abstained, not now thanks to the jibes and smart comments.

Wow, you really showed all the anonymous people on an internet forum.

Bridge93

It gets mentioned often that supposed debate keeps breaking down as the Yes side jumps down the throat of the No. If no one voting No has the balls to give the actual reason they're voting No how can there be any debate. It keeps going to 'I'm voting no as you're all obnoxious.'

steamengine

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

If I'm reading this correctly, and I genuinely hope I'm not, you're saying that you'd go out of your way to spite people at no cost to yourself, because some people made mean comments on the internet?

Attitudes like that would make me genuinely question democracy.

I wouldn't be spiting anybody by voting NO, as that would be my vote on principle. I might have abstained but why should I play ball, after the homophobic remarks ?

haveringchick

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Be at peace: the referendum will be a Secret Ballot, and the Gaystapo will never find out that you voted no.

They do have nice leather trench coats, though, don't they?

Good example here.
Was the objective of this post to
A. Persuade me to Chang my mind?
B. Make me look like an idiot or
C. Make the poster feel all smug and superior?

osarusan

haveringchick wrote: »

Good example here.
Was the objective of this post to
A. Persuade me to Chang my mind?
B. Make me look like an idiot or
C. Make the poster feel all smug and superior?

Would you mind answering the questions I asked earlier?

osarusan wrote: »

Can I ask again, what were the issues which had you wavering initially?

And, after reading the substance of the arguments of the Yes side, are you still wavering on these issues?

folamh

steamengine, I don't know whether you want to have children or whether that choice is even possible for you, but if you do make that choice someday, how would you feel if your gay son or daughter wanted to marry the person they love? Would you not feel that they should be entitled to have a wedding like their heterosexual friends, and be entitled to all the legal and financial benefits that go along with marriage? Or lets suppose that the referendum passes this May. Would you want an invitation to your child's wedding?

One eyed Jack

hotmail.com wrote: »

The point I'm making is that the referendum itself is non-offensive and it's the No side that actively engage in being hurtful by their opposition to equal rights for same sex couples.

That should be the focus. Why not focus all your posts on their opposition to equal rights? I know you're entitled to your opinion, but I find the odd angry remark by a Yes campaigner as nothing compared to the wholescale opposition to equal rights for same sex couples.

The odd person on the Yes side who might use the referendum for other agendas will always happen and isn't relevant.

I get your point. You're clearly still missing mine that the no side are going to say what they like, and the yes campaign instead of focusing on the positive aspects of what this referendum will mean to people, instead of working on solidifying support, are allowing themselves to become distracted by a tiny handful of people that most people have never bloody heard of! Every retweet, every criticism, every time the yes campaign "call them out" on their lies, you're doing their work for them.

You're focused on what you see as the "wholescale" opposition, but you're ignoring the wholescale potential support you could have.

I'm saying that we as part of the yes campaign, campaigning for equality in society, need to hold ourselves to a higher standard and maintain our dignity in the face of opposition, because anything less and we let ourselves down, and then we risk losing the campaign to a small band of hate-mongering liars.

Is that really what you want?

steamengine

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Because the vast majority of those actually affected by the referendum haven't made any such remarks.

I suggest they reign in their spokespersons on social media then. Could you imagine politicians getting voted in by utilising such hostile tactics ?

pl4ichjgy17zwd

haveringchick wrote: »

Good example here.
Was the objective of this post to
A. Persuade me to Chang my mind?
B. Make me look like an idiot or
C. Make the poster feel all smug and superior?

osarusan wrote: »

Would you mind answering the questions I asked earlier?

Also why someone would be irked by the mural?

folamh

Do you feel "irked" by this billboard? http://www.bridalguide.com/sites/default/files/blog-images/bridal-buzz/anniversary-billboard.jpg

Sonics2k

folamh wrote: »

Do you feel "irked" by this billboard? http://www.bridalguide.com/sites/default/files/blog-images/bridal-buzz/anniversary-billboard.jpg

It irks me to be honest, the type face and kerning are dreadful!

Zubeneschamali

haveringchick wrote: »

Good example here.
Was the objective of this post to
A. Persuade me to Chang my mind?
B. Make me look like an idiot or
C. Make the poster feel all smug and superior?

D. Point out that you are talking nonsense.

It's a secret ballot. You can vote No and nobody will ever know, so no bad things can ever happen to you because you vote no. No bad thing can ever be said to you because you vote no.

Nobody will ever know that you are a secret homophobe.

One eyed Jack

Ricardo Jealous Mimicry wrote: »

Also why someone would be irked by the mural?

There are a number of reasons why people could be irked by the mural:

1. Obvious homophobia and hatred of people who are LGBT.

2. It's aesthetically unpleasant for them (art can draw any number of positive and negative viewpoints).

3. PDA's and even such public depictions of PDA's, simply ain't everyone's cup of tea.

4. People feel uneasy with their personal lives being used for political purposes in such a public manner.


I'm going with 2, 3, and 4 myself as the most obvious reasons. Why do you think yourself that someone would be irked by the murals?

haveringchick

osarusan wrote: »

Would you mind answering the questions I asked earlier?

Sure no bother. Well for example I was very persuaded by a man I met who painted a very believable picture of yh links between the LGBT movement and Communism which in fairness would explain yhe propensity of yes voters to decry organized religions.Well on boards anyway.
Im a bit dodgy about messing with the constitution too. I mean whats next?