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

Shrap

SpaceTime wrote: »

I've seen this in other far less personalised referenda and it really is dangerous for democracy.

That's what we get for having zero policy about what can be said on referendum posters. If sides were required to stick to the facts of the referendum, we wouldn't be having this debate at all. It's dangerous right enough

Zubeneschamali

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe anyone who's voting NO is intimidated here and is not prepared to get into a battle about what is their opinion and their right to cast a vote.

It is not unusual in some environments for the losers in an argument to announce that the winners are all meany-heads and they are going home to tell their Mam.

But it is not very convincing in a civic debate on a Constitutional amendment.

SpaceTime

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Oh please....

This is getting tiresome now.

ABNORMAL
SOCIAL EXPERIMENT
PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE

Are the 'polite' terms that have been applied in this very thread to same-sex families.

The less polite terms saw people banned.

Our families have had to read reams of 'opinion' as to why we are lesser. Why we are selfish. Why we are threatening the very fabric of society because some of us want to get effin married. Married. Just married. Married like every straight couple have the opportunity to do without anyone discussing their 'lifestyle choice' or debating their parenting skills.

There are handwritten Vote No posters being put up by cowards in the middle of the night in West Cork that are about to become the subject of investigation under the Incitement to Hatred Act ( 3 in Clon were taken down yesterday and more appeared near Dunmanway last night)

Who attempting to bully who exactly?

While there are perfectly reasonable people on the No side debates around extending LGBT rights will inevitably bring out a % of scary extreme homophobia too.
I was horrified at what happened in France during their debates. There was a sharp rise in physical attacks on gay people.

I'm not blaming this on the normal, moderate people on the No side who I simply do not agree with but, I just think we need to be careful that because of the debate itself that we risk giving a actually homophobic stuff a degree of legitimacy it normally doesn't have.

It's easy enough (as seen in France) for a reasonable debate to have completely scary people at the extreme fringes.

I don't think we'll see as much in Ireland because I don't think Irish society has the same issues with the extreme right but, I would still keep a close eye out for any extreme developments and I thin the No campaigns should be keeping an eye on this too. It's in nobody's interest to spark that kind of thing off.

All I'm saying is there are some strange people out there and given the debate that's going on, just be careful of your personal safety and if you do get any personal threats definitely report them to the Gardai.

I just remember speaking to one prominent gay guy who was telling me about getting religious items through the letter box in the 1990s and early 00s.

I'm just a little concerned that the referendum might "wake the sleeping nutters"...

MrWalsh

SpaceTime wrote: »

......because of the debate itself that we risk giving a actually homophobic stuff a degree of legitimacy it normally doesn't have.

This is definitely happening. People are expressing homophobic opinions with a wide eyed "oh but I just want to debate this in light of the referendum" get out clause. Worse are the ones who are pretending its about concern for children or concern for the institution of marriage etc....

Some rhetoric Ive seen online is like a training course of "how to pretend not to be homophobic".

If you took some posts in this thread and replaced the work gay with the word traveller people would be outraged with them.

smash

I've recently been shown a few facebook posts where people have been saying they're voting no and their given reasons have mainly been "Think of the children" style ramblings. What shocked me most about the posts are that they've come from business owners in a country town (not even a small country town). Two have stuck out in my head... One being a solicitor and another being a pub owner. They can't even see how they're potentially damaging their businesses!

SpaceTime

I got this yesterday from a taxi driver!

This is partly why I'm in such a bad mood for the last couple of days.

He went on a rant about "the q----rs" and implying they were unsafe around children then accused me of bullying him when I didn't agree with him.

I ended up having a massive argument and actually getting out of the cab in the rain and walking off.

Grayditch

It must be pretty hard to come up with a reason for a No Vote that doesn't come off as homophobic in some sense. You'd end up typing in circles and leaving a huge hole in your reasoning. Then it would probably best to say you were being bullied.

That's what I've learned from the thread, anyway.

gravehold

gravehold wrote: »

I am voting for YES GAY MARRIAGE not YES EQUALITY. I have huge issues with the slogan they went with as it's not equality as they are pushing

I try not to look at the slogans on any issue. They are always going to be over simplified sound bites designed to catch the attention or spread a meme. They are targeted at people who might not think too deeply on an issue. If you are someone who reads into the issues - then simply ignore the slogans. You have no use for them - and no benefit in getting annoyed by them.

Ignore the slogans and vote on the issue. But to answer your original question I myself have been annoyed by very little from the yes camp - the slogans least of all.

noway12345

Children are better off with a mum and a dad. This is not homophobic and this is why most of the no voters will vote that way. Get over it.

noway12345

noway12345 wrote: »

Children are better off with a mum and a dad. This is not homophobic and this is why most of the no voters will vote that way. Get over it.

It may not be homophobic - but it IS A) Baseless assertion that has not been backed up once by anyone on this forum claiming it and entirely irrelevant red herring use to derail this thread - and this referendum - by no voters who have no actual arguments against SSM to make. So the getting over it might be more relevant to your friend in the mirror really

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

This. It happens in every referendum. I don't understand how people can take issue with 'Yes for equality' yet be fine with 'no because children' though, and that isn't a smart assed remark, I genuinely don't get it.

I guess because no one wants to risk being painted as someone who has got anything against anything to do with children - even red herring off topic slogans about children. As soon as anyone has been painted as standing for children - even falsely or irrelevantly - they politically put others on thin ice in debunking or assailing their position.

Grayditch

SpaceTime wrote: »

I got this yesterday from a taxi driver!

He went on a rant about "the q----rs" and implying they were unsafe around children then accused me of bullying him when I didn't agree with him.

I always pretend I'm gay in those situations and just say "Yeah, I'm gay" I'd rather an awkward silence for the rest of the journey than listen to that ****e.

MrWalsh

noway12345 wrote: »

Children are better off with a mum and a dad. This is not homophobic and this is why most of the no voters will vote that way. Get over it.

Sigh.....children have nothing to do with this referendum.

Sigh.....there is no reason why children are better with a mum and a dad versus two mums or two dads or a single parent family or being raised by grandparents etc... In fact, in some societies throughout human history children have done very well being raised communally.

Your opinion that a mother and a father is a better situation is simply homophobic - and misleading for this referendum.

VinLieger

noway12345 wrote: »

Children are better off with a mum and a dad. This is not homophobic and this is why most of the no voters will vote that way. Get over it.

It is homophobic whether you like it or not as you have ZERO facts to back up your assertion so it's based on an opinion you have of homosexual people. it's also incredibly insulting to single parent families and ignorant considering the amount of awful mother and father couples out there as well which proves absolutely that in many cases children are not always better of with a mum and dad what they are better off with is plain and simply a loving family, also again your derailing the argument as this referendum has nothing to do with children

Bannasidhe

noway12345 wrote: »

Children are better off with a mum and a dad. This is not homophobic and this is why most of the no voters will vote that way. Get over it.

You are wrong.

Perhaps it is, perhaps it isn't. It certainly has nothing to do with the Referendum.

Get over it.

noway12345

Deleted User wrote: »

It may not be homophobic - but it IS A) Baseless assertion that has not been backed up once by anyone on this forum claiming it and entirely irrelevant red herring use to derail this thread - and this referendum - by no voters who have no actual arguments against SSM to make. So the getting over it might be more relevant to your friend in the mirror really



I guess because no one wants to risk being painted as someone who has got anything against anything to do with children - even red herring off topic slogans about children. As soon as anyone has been painted as standing for children - even falsely or irrelevantly - they politically put others on thin ice in debunking or assailing their position.

It's why most will be voting no. Not many really care about gay people marrying, get over yourselves. It's the future of kids that people care about.

noway12345

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Of course it's homophobic, you're implying a same sex couple can't do as good of a job as an opposite sex one. It's not very homophobic, it isn't at all the same thing as wanting homosexuality criminalized or going around beating up gay folk, but it's still homophobic.

Also, for the 1432524513442323214324324th time, this referendum has nothing to do with Children. Except maybe those that are gay will be able to get married when they grow up.

It isn't homophobic in the slightest. Single parents can't do as good a job as a mum and a dad either.

noway12345

noway12345 wrote: »

It's why most will be voting no. Not many really care about gay people marrying, get over yourselves. It's the future of kids that people care about.

Nothing in your post here replied to anything in my post. You appear to be playing your record without any reference to the posts you actually hit reply on.

noway12345 wrote: »

Single parents can't do as good a job as a mum and a dad either.

Except yes they can. You might be able to cite some demographics showing that at times they do NOT do as well - but I have never once ever seen a single arguments supporting the claim they CAN not. Least of all from you.

Ave Sodalis

noway12345 wrote: »

It's why most will be voting no. Not many really care about gay people marrying, get over yourselves. It's the future of kids that people care about.

Which has nothing to do with the referendum!

noway12345

MrWalsh wrote: »

Sigh.....children have nothing to do with this referendum.

Sigh.....there is no reason why children are better with a mum and a dad versus two mums or two dads or a single parent family or being raised by grandparents etc... In fact, in some societies throughout human history children have done very well being raised communally.

Your opinion that a mother and a father is a better situation is simply homophobic - and misleading for this referendum.

It's why many people will be voting no so it is part of the referendum.

smash

noway12345 wrote: »

It's why most will be voting no. Not many really care about gay people marrying, get over yourselves. It's the future of kids that people care about.

So what's it got to do with marriage equality? Go on, explain yourself... because the marriage equality vote has nothing to do with children AT ALL!

I'm sick of saying this.

Ash.J.Williams

noway12345 wrote: »

It isn't homophobic in the slightest. Single parents can't do as good a job as a mum and a dad either.

what if the single parent is a great parent and both married parents are child abusers? there's one example.

SireOfSeth

noway12345 wrote: »

Children are better off with a mum and a dad.

Fixed that for you...

Children are better off in a loving environment.

osarusan

Once again:

osarusan wrote: »

Fair play noway12345, in three threads, about: a parking fine, the middle-class nature of boards, and now this one, you have had multiple posters poised at their keyboards, just waiting for another post to reply to. Hundreds of responses in mere minutes.

I salute you.

Make that 4 threads.


Also:

humanji wrote: »

MOD: noway12345 won't be trolling this thread any more so you don't have to reply to them.

P_1

noway12345 wrote: »

It isn't homophobic in the slightest. Single parents can't do as good a job as a mum and a dad either.

We're not voting on what the ideal family is, if that was the case we'd be being asked to vote on the mandatory construction of white picket fences

MrWalsh

noway12345 wrote: »

It isn't homophobic in the slightest. Single parents can't do as good a job as a mum and a dad either.

Then I think we should take babies away from single girls and place them with married heterosexual parents. Best to put the single girls away in some home first, just to keep it all out of sight.

And if your wife dies, dont worry, you can start again, because we'll take your kids away and place them in a home with married heterosexual parents.

Magenta

noway12345 wrote: »

It isn't homophobic in the slightest. Single parents can't do as good a job as a mum and a dad either.

Fred and Rose West would be delighted with your compliment I'm sure.

Ash.J.Williams

There are kids out there now being raised well by same sex couples, the ref if passed will give those kids stability. It's not about stealing kids.

seamus

noway12345 wrote: »

Single parents can't do as good a job as a mum and a dad either.

That's a complete and utter lie. An absolute falsehood.

Magenta

noway12345 wrote: »

It's why many people will be voting no so it is part of the referendum.

If I think straight parents are better at football than gay ones, does that mean football is part of the referendum too?

JamJamJamJam

noway12345 wrote: »

Children are better off with a mum and a dad. This is not homophobic and this is why most of the no voters will vote that way. Get over it.

Based on what? Children are better off in a stable environment with decent role models. Plenty of the most fantastic people I know have grown up without a relationship with one parent. Similarly, just because a mam and dad are married doesn't mean their kid won't be a prick, and I know plenty of those examples, too. But that's anecdotal. Anecdotes are worth nothing.

Statements of the American Psychological Association (APA) carry more validity than my opinions. In 2012, the APA said:

“On the basis of a remarkably consistent body of research on lesbian and gay parents and their children, the APA and other health professional and scientific organizations have concluded that there is no scientific evidence that parenting effectiveness is related to parental sexual orientation. That is, lesbian and gay parents are as likely as heterosexual parents to provide supportive and healthy environments for their children.”

I'd say you're right that it's not homophobic to be under the impression that having straight parents is in the best interest of the kid. But, based on the "remarkably consistent" evidence, the suggestion doesn't translate to reality.