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

To Elland Back

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I havent seen any personal abuse to you?

I never said the attacks were directed at me, I never said I had only seen them on Boards and I was only giving an opinion on why some people might decide to vote no and that I might consider it myself in light of this

To Elland Back

sup_dude wrote: »

I think you're mixing the no side and the yes side up...

Nope, the no side are presenting their point of view in a calmer manner than the yes side in my opinion. I'm not commenting on the pros or cons themselves

jobbridge4life

To Elland Back wrote: »

I never said the attacks were directed at me, I never said I had only seen them on Boards and I was only giving an opinion on why some people might decide to vote no and that I might consider it myself in light of this

Then vote no and know that you chose to punish an entire subset of people based on the behaviour of a tiny minority of them. Be proud that you chose to vote to maintain the discrimination faced by innocent children based on the fact that their parents share gender.

jobbridge4life

To Elland Back wrote: »

Nope, the no side are presenting their point of view in a calmer manner than the yes side in my opinion. I'm not commenting on the pros or cons themselves

Perhaps that is because it is not their families and marriages that are being denigrated. Perhaps it is because they do not have to grovel and 'behave' for their rights to be recognised equally with the remainder of the country.

spikeS

To Elland Back wrote: »

I never said the attacks were directed at me, I never said I had only seen them on Boards and I was only giving an opinion on why some people might decide to vote no and that I might consider it myself in light of this

Well I will be voting YES, I am straight but my best friend is gay and he deserves to have the same rights as me.

Sometimes gay people might get heated on this but it's so important to them and who are you to say they are less then the rest of us.

bodice ripper

To Elland Back wrote: »

I never said the attacks were directed at me, I never said I had only seen them on Boards and I was only giving an opinion on why some people might decide to vote no and that I might consider it myself in light of this

please massa, can I live my life free from interference even though some people are butthurt?

rainbow kirby

It's incredibly petty and reflects incredibly poorly on people if they would vote against a civil rights issue just because some people on that side annoyed them.

Ave Sodalis

To Elland Back wrote: »

Nope, the no side are presenting their point of view in a calmer manner than the yes side in my opinion. I'm not commenting on the pros or cons themselves

Have you seen any logical argument presented by the no side? Any well presented, factual reason for voting no? I haven't.

There are people on the yes side getting heated, yes, but have you seen some of the arguments from the no side? I'm gonna guess not, or that you're chosing to ignore them because they can be far more vicious and nasty than the yes side. Why is this okay? Why are you supporting this?

K4t

Poll should be made public.

Astonishing that over 100 posters are against equal rights, and disappointing that 67 people don't care about it. It does explain why this country was held back for so long though.

spikeS

K4t wrote: »

Poll should be made public.

Astonishing that over 100 posters are against equal rights, and disappointing that 67 people don't care about it. It does explain why this country was held back for so long though.

Think of the positive with over 600 people voting yes, the no side has no chance

Ave Sodalis

spikeS wrote: »

Think of the positive with over 600 people voting yes, the no side has no chance

Unless people on the yes side don't vote

spikeS

sup_dude wrote: »

Unless people on the yes side don't vote

There was section for not voting all the yes votes here plan to vote in may.

Ave Sodalis

spikeS wrote: »

There was section for not voting all the yes votes here plan to vote in may.

I mean actually going out to vote. People may support it, and people may intend to vote yes but there may be a lot of " ah sure, they've plenty of support, I couldn't really be bothered going out to vote".

aloyisious

To Elland Back wrote: »

Nope, the no side are presenting their point of view in a calmer manner than the yes side in my opinion. I'm not commenting on the pros or cons themselves

This'll be my only post to this thread. I'll have a look at whatever reply that To Elland Back posts here to it. To me the No side are being mischevious and misleading in what any of them post about the single issue of equal Civil Marriage to both heterosexual and homosexual adult citizens here. Just because one presents one's point in a calmer manner than the other side doesn't make the deliberate lie and slap across the face any less insulting to the reader. It seem's like the sound of the orator's voice, and not it's message, is doing the trick.

To Elland Back

sup_dude wrote: »

Have you seen any logical argument presented by the no side? Any well presented, factual reason for voting no? I haven't.

There are people on the yes side getting heated, yes, but have you seen some of the arguments from the no side? I'm gonna guess not, or that you're chosing to ignore them because they can be far more vicious and nasty than the yes side. Why is this okay? Why are you supporting this?

We're going around in a loop here, so I'll try and summarise my thoughts as follows;

I intend to vote yes, as I don't see any legitimate reason to vote no.

I don't like bullies ranting personal abuse at those with different views and I can see why people might be swayed to cast their vote a particular way when they experience or witness it. I've seen more of it from the yes side, than then no side and much of it away from Boards

Finally, nobody has to justify to others why they vote a particular way in an election or a referendum.

Goodbye & Good Luck

spikeS

To Elland Back wrote: »

We're going around in a loop here, so I'll try and summarise my thoughts as follows;

I intend to vote yes, as I don't see any legitimate reason to vote no.

I don't like bullies ranting personal abuse at those with different views and I can see why people might be swayed to cast their vote a particular way when they experience or witness it. I've seen more of it from the yes side, than then no side and much of it away from Boards

Finally, nobody has to justify to others why they vote a particular way in an election or a referendum.

Goodbye & Good Luck

But you can understand why people might get heated at people that don't want them to have rights? Would you not be angry if treated like a second class citizen.

jobbridge4life

To Elland Back wrote: »

We're going around in a loop here, so I'll try and summarise my thoughts as follows;

I intend to vote yes, as I don't see any legitimate reason to vote no.

I don't like bullies ranting personal abuse at those with different views and I can see why people might be swayed to cast their vote a particular way when they experience or witness it. I've seen more of it from the yes side, than then no side and much of it away from Boards

Finally, nobody has to justify to others why they vote a particular way in an election or a referendum.

Goodbye & Good Luck

You'll still need to justify it to yourself.

Ave Sodalis

To Elland Back wrote: »

We're going around in a loop here, so I'll try and summarise my thoughts as follows;

I intend to vote yes, as I don't see any legitimate reason to vote no.

I don't like bullies ranting personal abuse at those with different views and I can see why people might be swayed to cast their vote a particular way when they experience or witness it. I've seen more of it from the yes side, than then no side and much of it away from Boards

Finally, nobody has to justify to others why they vote a particular way in an election or a referendum.

Goodbye & Good Luck

You still haven't answered why it's only the yes side you think shouldn't be allowed to say anything remotely angry, but the no side can rant and rave and say horrible things all they want but that's fine?

Annasopra

To Elland Back wrote: »

Nope, the no side are presenting their point of view in a calmer manner than the yes side in my opinion. I'm not commenting on the pros or cons themselves

Really? You mean like when some on the no side thrown around vile homophobic abuse and suggest strong links between all gay men and all pardophiles?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93940266&postcount=1016

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93894775&postcount=7

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93881431&postcount=134

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93892027&postcount=1

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93543281&postcount=1692

Ave Sodalis

That's not including the posts from other known posters who are actively anti-SSM, or anti gay in general

Flem31

rainbow kirby wrote: »

It's incredibly petty and reflects incredibly poorly on people if they would vote against a civil rights issue just because some people on that side annoyed them.

If someone described you as a base cretin would you still be inclined to vote in a way that favoured that person.
Some of phrases used by both sides goes beyond mere annoyance.

seenitall

Flem31 wrote: »

If someone described you as a base cretin would you still be inclined to vote in a way that favoured that person.

Probably not, but if you are a base cretin you were going to vote against people's civil rights anyway.

One eyed Jack

sup_dude wrote: »

You still haven't answered why it's only the yes side you think shouldn't be allowed to say anything remotely angry, but the no side can rant and rave and say horrible things all they want but that's fine?

Quite simple really -

Keep your temper. If you are in the right, you can afford to keep it.
If you are in the wrong, you can't afford to lose it.


I can only speak for myself when I say that it's been my experience that people who lose their temper, lose their audience. The people who object to marriage equality are all too aware of this, and they will use it to their best advantage in baiting those people who support marriage equality into reacting and coming off like a couple of unhinged nutbars.

It's an insidious tactic, but they use it because it works, and very effectively as has been witnessed time and again in these discussions.

It's absolutely not fine to insult other people, but do you think they care? Of course they don't. They just want you to sink to their level, because right now, as it stands, they have nothing to lose, but the yes campaign have everything to lose. That's the reality. The yes campaign are hoping to gain enough support to make a change to the Irish Constitution against people who would happily have it remain the way it's written now.

I hold the people campaigning for a yes vote to a higher standard, because I think it weakens our position when we fail to maintain our dignity in the face of adversity, cheapening the value of marriage equality to nothing more than a mud flinging match.

A mud flinging match is something people can do without. Let those people who are against marriage equality fling mud all they want. At the end of the day they'll be the only people left covered in shìt if people refuse to engage with them. Try and remember that there's far more support for marriage equality than there isn't. We don't need to resort to nastiness, we just need to support each other.

conorh91

Flem31 wrote: »

If someone described you as a base cretin would you still be inclined to vote in a way that favoured that person.
Some of phrases used by both sides goes beyond mere annoyance.

Dominic Hannigan, who is one of the few coalition TDs who speaks frankly in public, said on radio earlier that the Yes side has a preachy element within it, and this will be a problem.

I believe he was echoing a similar statement by Terri Prone, who probably knows a thing or two about public relations. I would paraphrase her comment as "stop shrieking at people from a high horse".

I am going to vote yes to the amendment, but I have tried to advance a few arguments against it, even just for the sake of a healthy debate. But not one of us can ever drive people away from same-sex marriage like the shrill cry of a lefty behind a keyboard, doing their best Martin Luther King impersonation, implying that any No voter is some sort of vile homophobe. Way to alienate people.

spikeS

conorh91 wrote: »

"stop shrieking at people from a high horse".

Jesus what a bigoted and stereotyping thing for a person to say

floggg

spikeS wrote: »

Think of the positive with over 600 people voting yes, the no side has no chance

Please don't say don't say such a thing. Voter apathy and complacency are the biggest risk to a yes vote.

We need everybody out to vote. the no side may be a minority, but they are a determined one who will mobilise. We need to mobilise the yes side in order to ensure the will of the majority is carried.

conorh91

spikeS wrote: »

Jesus what a bigoted and stereotyping thing for a person to say

I hope that's a joke. Otherwise, turn in your spurs and trot in another direction.

spikeS

conorh91 wrote: »

I hope that's a joke. Otherwise, turn in your spurs and trot in another direction.

The whole screeching nancy stereotype is one that needs to be done away with

Annasopra

spikeS wrote: »

The whole screeching nancy stereotype is one that needs to be done away with

Ah here. Seriously. Take offence at something offensive and cop on calling something like that bigotry.

conorh91

spikeS wrote: »

The whole screeching nancy stereotype is one that needs to be done away with

'Nancy' is an offensive word, and I didn't say it, nor would I ever use that language.

Shrieking is a term that refers to an angry noise which emits more volume than sense. I've previously used it elsewhere here (according to search) in relation to the Israel debate, anti-Garda rants, and anti-politician rants. It was not a homophobic remark.