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

marienbad

frostyjacks wrote: »

I'm not approaching it from a religious POV, it's just pure common sense. Two people of the same sex cannot do the same job as an opposite sex couple, however much the gay lobby try and spin it. It doesn't need proving, the thing proves itself. Why pretend otherwise?

So what ? what is the connection , marriage isn't only about children ? Lots of marriages don't have kids, Lots of marriages don't have kids naturally .

marienbad

frostyjacks wrote: »

I've answered it. A yes vote will say one's marriage is equal to something that it clearly isn't.

All marriages are equal , but they are not all the same , some are Church weddings some are just civil , some are first time, some include divorcees etc

You are confusing equality with sameness .

padd b1975

Bannasidhe wrote: »

You're telling me I didn't think what I thought?

wow. Such arrogance.

I'm telling you what you thought couldn't possibly be true.

And there was me thinking the "yes" side were incapable of tossing out snide red herrings.

Wow. Such innocence on my part:rolleyes:

CiDeRmAn

Deleted User wrote: »

Indeed - there is likely a lot more of it going on in my relationship that in many gay relationships. It is not only not exclusive to homosexual men - it is not even a requirement on homosexual men. Many of them do not engage in it at all.

I have read posts by users who seem to genuinely believe homosexuality and anal sex are direct synonyms of each other.

I think there is a fear bedded (no pun intended) into men concerning being feminised in a relationship, being the one being pursued by a partner, being seduced, seeing sexuality and sex from a female perspective, as in a form of being dominated by a man, not that I believe that is the nature of a straight relationship, certainly not in my experience.
But I think that fear, a form of percieved emasculation, is at the root (no pun intended yet again!) of men's fears of homosexuality.
I do think it will, in many cultures, die out and the idea of a relationship with whomever you choose will become normalised, but for the time being there is too much power to be had in maintaining a scapegoat for conservatism to see it accepted in the near future world wide.
I don't get the impression that women who are gay are quite seen in the same light as men, and that is quite telling.

If only we could all see into each others heads and get a picture of what really turns us on, what our fantasies are, we would probably balk less, understand more, at the things we all have in common.

wetfoot

frostyjacks wrote: »

Two people of the same sex cannot do the same job as an opposite sex couple, however much the gay lobby try and spin it. It doesn't need proving, the thing proves itself. Why pretend otherwise?

It is true that a same sex couple cannot do one of the things that an opposite sex couple can. Despite my best efforts and much effort and experimentation, I have been utterly unable to impregnate my missus.

Other than that I can't really see what a same sex couple can't do. Especially as the type of people who give out that argument are usually the same people asking which one of us is 'the man'. Thereby proving that their rationale around the lack of opposite sex role models is flawed.

CiDeRmAn

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

If only we could all see into each others heads and get a picture of what really turns us on, what our fantasies are, we would probably balk less, understand more, at the things we all have in common.

Not sure if a look inside MY head would divest you of that hope

Nodin

wetfoot wrote: »

It is true that a same sex couple cannot do one of the things that an opposite sex couple can. Despite my best efforts and much effort and experimentation, I have been utterly unable to impregnate my missus.

Other than that I can't really see what a same sex couple can't do. Especially as the type of people who give out that argument are usually the same people asking which one of us is 'the man'. Thereby proving that their rationale around the lack of opposite sex role models is flawed.

I'd suggest trying to take a run up.

It's a known fact that gay couples cannot garden, cut turf or own large dogs.

Bannasidhe

padd b1975 wrote: »

I'm telling you what you thought couldn't possibly be true.

And there was me thinking the "yes" side were incapable of tossing out snide red herrings.

Wow. Such innocence on my part:rolleyes:

Next you will tell me that it couldn't possibly be true that most of what Mullen was saying couldn't possibly be true.

Complain about snide remarks by making a snide remark. I see your :rolleyes: and raise you a .

PopePalpatine

padd b1975 wrote: »

I'm telling you what you thought couldn't possibly be true.

And there was me thinking the "yes" side were incapable of tossing out snide red herrings.

Wow. Such innocence on my part:rolleyes:

That's a bit rich on your part, that's all you ever do in threads like this.

OldNotWIse

wetfoot wrote: »

It is true that a same sex couple cannot do one of the things that an opposite sex couple can. Despite my best efforts and much effort and experimentation, I have been utterly unable to impregnate my missus.

Other than that I can't really see what a same sex couple can't do. Especially as the type of people who give out that argument are usually the same people asking which one of us is 'the man'. Thereby proving that their rationale around the lack of opposite sex role models is flawed.

Probably something like "mammy talking to the girls about periods and daddy talking to the boys about cars" :P Ann has a doll, Barry has a lorry yadda yadda blah blah...... How will you know you're a boy if you don't have a parent with a willy? How will you know you're a girl if you don't have a parent without one? Think of the mass confusion


My mother never did a single night feed. She had post natal depression and my dad heard that some other woman on our road with PND had tried to flush her kid down the toilet. So, he did every night feed because he was afraid of what she would do if woken up :P He was on bath duty too as far as I remember and the world didn't implode because it wasn't my mother. He brought me shopping for a dress for my first school disco. In some ways he is my best friend. So with the greatest respect....gender roles my backside

Do these people not realise (well, aside from the fact that this referendum does not actually affect the ability of gay couples to have or adopt children), that there are already thousands of "unconventional" families in existence? Single parents, gay parents, step-parents, foster parents etc....

ixoy

frostyjacks wrote: »

I understand perfectly what equality means. That's why I'm voting no.

I was at a discussion panel on SSM last week in Clontarf and there was a guy there who couldn't wrap his head around the concept of equality from a legislation and civil perspective either. It was explained to him multiple times but it just wouldn't sink in. That wasn't your good self was it?

AtomicHorror

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Do these people not realise (well, aside from the fact that this referendum does not actually affect the ability of gay couples to have or adopt children), that there are already thousands of "unconventional" families in existence? Single parents, gay parents, step-parents, foster parents etc....

Yep, they know it but folks like frostyjacks consider them to be "lesser" relationships.

One eyed Jack

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

I think there is a fear bedded (no pun intended) into men concerning being feminised in a relationship, being the one being pursued by a partner, being seduced, seeing sexuality and sex from a female perspective, as in a form of being dominated by a man, not that I believe that is the nature of a straight relationship, certainly not in my experience.
But I think that fear, a form of percieved emasculation, is at the root (no pun intended yet again!) of men's fears of homosexuality.
I do think it will, in many cultures, die out and the idea of a relationship with whomever you choose will become normalised, but for the time being there is too much power to be had in maintaining a scapegoat for conservatism to see it accepted in the near future world wide.
I don't get the impression that women who are gay are quite seen in the same light as men, and that is quite telling.

If only we could all see into each others heads and get a picture of what really turns us on, what our fantasies are, we would probably balk less, understand more, at the things we all have in common.

I think your sig actually sums up people's objections to marriage equality perfectly tbh.

Don't mind if I do

Fear of the unknown.

They are afraid of new ideas.
They are loaded with prejudices, not based upon anything in reality, but based on… if something is new, I reject it immediately because it’s frightening to me. What they do instead is just stay with the familiar.
You know, to me, the most beautiful things in all the universe, are the most mysterious.

Dr Wayne Dyer / A Einstein
(as heard in Day&Night, a short from Pixar)

OldNotWIse

ixoy wrote: »

I was at a discussion panel on SSM last week in Clontarf and there was a guy there who couldn't wrap his head around the concept of equality from a legislation and civil perspective either. It was explained to him multiple times but it just wouldn't sink in. That wasn't your good self was it?

Would it have been willful blindness perhaps? I find it hard to believe that evolution has not taken care of such stupidity by now.

wetfoot

Nodin wrote: »

I'd suggest trying to take a run up.

I shall give that a go tonight and report back.

galljga1

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Probably something like "mammy talking to the girls about periods and daddy talking to the boys about cars" :P Ann has a doll, Barry has a lorry yadda yadda blah blah...... How will you know you're a boy if you don't have a parent with a willy? How will you know you're a girl if you don't have a parent without one? Think of the mass confusion


My mother never did a single night feed. She had post natal depression and my dad heard that some other woman on our road with PND had tried to flush her kid down the toilet. So, he did every night feed because he was afraid of what she would do if woken up :P He was on bath duty too as far as I remember and the world didn't implode because it wasn't my mother. He brought me shopping for a dress for my first school disco. In some ways he is my best friend. So with the greatest respect....gender roles my backside

Do these people not realise (well, aside from the fact that this referendum does not actually affect the ability of gay couples to have or adopt children), that there are already thousands of "unconventional" families in existence? Single parents, gay parents, step-parents, foster parents etc....

Despite your protestations, methinks there is wisdom in there somewhere.

OldNotWIse

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Yep, they know it but folks like frostyjacks consider them to be "lesser" relationships.

A kind of "wont someone please think of the children....no not that one just this one" argument? Gotcha

sjb25

imitation wrote: »

I have a bad feeling that silent majority of older voters might get a no vote through. Theres good represntation among younger voters, but to be honest turnout is often crap.

I have the same feeling as you for some reason I hope I'm wrong but I think a lot of the people who say they will vote yes etc May not turn up on the day to vote and will be the first ones on social media outraged with the result realy hope I'm wrong
And il be voting yes myself

AtomicHorror

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Would it have been willful blindness perhaps? I find it hard to believe that evolution has not taken care of such stupidity by now.

Evolution does only two things: vary and select. Change is not guaranteed. If you've got an organism in a niche where change is selected against, the organism will remain the same perpetually until the niche and the selection criteria are changed.

We're lucky that some of us have the agency to change without evolution's help. For the rest, we're going to have to change the niche. Which is exactly what we're about to do.

AtomicHorror

OldNotWIse wrote: »

A kind of "wont someone please think of the children....no not that one just this one" argument? Gotcha

(Selectively) thinking of the children is an important skill if you want to survive on the far right. Unborn? Treat them like privileged citizens no matter the cost! Born? Ah they'll be grand, whatever.

galljga1

AtomicHorror wrote: »

(Selectively) thinking of the children is an important skill if you want to survive on the far right. Unborn? Treat them like privileged citizens no matter the cost! Born? Ah they'll be grand, whatever.

Yeah, well, sadly the workhouse/forced adoption route is no longer available.

Bannasidhe

Nodin wrote: »

I'd suggest trying to take a run up.

It's a known fact that gay couples cannot garden, cut turf or own large dogs.

However gay individuals can do all of these things.

P_1

So the turf accountants have had their say. 1/10 Yes, 5/1 no with the line being set at 61.5... My inner statto is suggesting a wee flutter on the under is looking tempting I have to say. I'll imagine it'll pass but I can't see there being more than 10 points in it.

HalloweenJack

Won't be voting as I live abroad but would easily vote Yes.

Was talking to my ma last night and was disappointed that she's still "undecided", especially considering as she she's a fairly open-minded person and would be very much to the left of the political spectrum. I've inherited a lot of my views on things from her, mostly my views on treating people equally and not judging people before getting to know them.

When I said I thought that people who vote no or doing so out of prejudice and not out of any logical argument, she said "That's why people are afraid to say they're voting No!". It worries me a tad.

LordSutch

sup_dude wrote: »

There's a poll on the front page

Yeah I know, but its closed isn't it?

TLOA72

I am not registered yet but after discussing this topic with the mother in law, I can't get on the list quick enough and vote yes. Old school Catholic brainwashed bull sh$ite ranting. I am here ripping, sitting on my bed while she is downstairs asking my wife why I am avoiding her. So close to telling her and the father in law to get the fck out.

padd b1975

PopePalpatine wrote: »

That's a bit rich on your part, that's all you ever do in threads like this.

Lol.

padd b1975

LordSutch wrote: »

Yeah I know, but its closed isn't it?

There's another under announcements.

folamh

I saw a TV show where a girl had 2 dads and she ended up clocking some ****er with a snooker cue. I'm voting no.

maximoose

It would have been a 'yes' vote, but double checking the register this morning I realised I can't vote in this, only allowed to vote in poxy elections.

Was looking forward to joining the adult world, damn.