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

Daith

COYVB wrote: »

The law in Ireland doesn't extend to balanced TV discussions afaik - the courts have a bit more to be worrying about than that

It's the BAI code for broadcasting.

Ctrl Alt Delete

K4t wrote: »

They have the right to vote and influence others as best they can. Nobody is obliged to give them a platform in the interest of balance. If the Iona institute didn't exist and nobody wanted to argue for a NO vote, would the YES side be obliged to argue against a YES vote every time they are given airtime in the interest of balance? The answer is no. It would be ridiculous. People make up their own minds in a referendum, especially one on equal rights. 1 Man/Woman 1 vote.

I'm going to regret coming back here but this is a good gem and showing your ignorance / bias for trying to shout down alternative opinions as the majority of people do in this thread so blatantly and hypocritcaly.

The Broadcasting Authority of Ireland have set down guidelines on this that it has to be 50/50 because unfortunately there are people (many of which in this thread) who will shout down and round on anyone with an alternative opinion and given their way would not let them air their views.

Direct link to the guidelines --->> here and if you don't want to read that link heres a real quick article

Zubeneschamali

Daith wrote: »

I think media should look for others that are not Iona. Do they represent the entire No side?

I suspect that Iona are the only crew on the No side who wouldn't trip over the Prohibition of Incitement to Hatred act in the first 10 seconds of a broadcast.

Daith

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I'm going to regret coming back here but this is a good gem and showing your ignorance / bias for trying to shout down alternative opinions as the majority of people do in this thread so blatantly.

Rubbish, your opinion is that gay people shouldn't be equal. You can't actually debate that.

Just because alot of people disagree with you on a discussion board it doesn't mean you're being shouted at.

spikeS

COYVB wrote: »

The law in Ireland doesn't extend to balanced TV discussions afaik - the courts have a bit more to be worrying about than that

I thought they brought it in last referendum, if they didn't I am surprised Rte show yes side stuff, they know the no side is their audience I am surprised they don't just pander to them

bodice ripper

spikeS wrote: »

I thought they brought it in last referendum, if they didn't I am surprised Rte show yes side stuff, they know the no side is their audience I am surprised they don't just pander to them

that is not at all fair.

Ctrl Alt Delete

bodice ripper wrote: »

that is not at all fair.

It's not fair that both yes and no sides get same amount of time on air ???

I hope the irony of the fact this referendum is on equality isn't lost on you

seamus

techdiver wrote: »

Even though I disagree with what they say, I still believe all viewpoints should be given airtime (no matter how unpalatable).

There has to be a limit to this right? Because there will also be viewpoints out there that homosexuality is a disease engineered by the lizard people to reduce the human population and SSM is an attempt to dilute the institution of marriage and as a result cause less babies.

The BAI requires that debates are "balanced", which usually means finding the most reasonable/respectable groups from both sides of the debate.

The problem with SSM is that the "most reasonable" group on the anti-side are still absolutely bat**** crazy and irrational, but because balance is required, RTE have to provide them with airtime. I'm not sure if the Catholic church itself has refused to provide a spokesperson on this matter, as it would seem to me that if you were looking for a group who is opposed to SSM but capable of some level of decorum and reason, it would be the church rather than Iona.

spikeS

bodice ripper wrote: »

that is not at all fair.

The youth don't watch Rte, I know plenty of us that don't pay tv license fee cause Rte has nothing for us, they only care for the old age pensioner market and they don't even have to pay for the stupid licence.

Daith

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I hope the irony of the fact this referendum is on equality isn't lost on you

Funny, I thought it was about one's personal beliefs and nothing to do with equality.

Ctrl Alt Delete

Daith wrote: »

Funny, I thought it was about one's personal beliefs and nothing to do with equality.

You confusing the issue at hand with the reasoning for a decision.

spikeS

seamus wrote: »

There has to be a limit to this right? Because there will also be viewpoints out there that homosexuality is a disease engineered by the lizard people to reduce the human population and SSM is an attempt to dilute the institution of marriage and as a result cause less babies.

The BAI requires that debates are "balanced", which usually means finding the most reasonable/respectable groups from both sides of the debate.

The problem with SSM is that the "most reasonable" group on the anti-side are still absolutely bat**** crazy and irrational, but because balance is required, RTE have to provide them with airtime. I'm not sure if the Catholic church itself has refused to provide a spokesperson on this matter, as it would seem to me that if you were looking for a group who is opposed to SSM but capable of some level of decorum and reason, it would be the church rather than Iona.

Church are smart enough to know if they where pushing no on tv it would hurt the no side, they can push no inside the church on Sunday and let others do a more rounded job on tv

K4t

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I'm going to regret coming back here but this is a good gem and showing your ignorance / bias for trying to shout down alternative opinions as the majority of people do in this thread so blatantly and hypocritcaly.

I don't believe there should be a debate at all. I'd rather have the vote tomorrow and be done with it it and move on to real, important issues.

The Broadcasting Authority of Ireland have set down guidelines on this that it has to be 50/50

That is unfortunate.

because unfortunately there are people (many of which in this thread) who will shout down and round on anyone with an alternative opinion and given their way would not let them air their views.

That's their business. I don't suppress anyone's right to freedom of speech and expression. That does not mean they should have the right to a platform.

Daith wrote: »

Rubbish, your opinion is that gay people shouldn't be equal. You can't actually debate that.

Just because alot of people disagree with you on a discussion board it doesn't mean you're being shouted at.

This applies to a referendum on equal rights too. There does not need to be a debate, and RTE are under no obligation to provide one. There are real issues in the world that need debating.

Ave Sodalis

I think if either side are getting air time, neither should be allow to lie or spread mistruths about their side.

Daith

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

You confusing the issue at hand with the reasoning for a decision.

My reasoning is that gay couples deserve the same equal rights as straight couples.

I'm not confused at all about that.

spikeS

Daith wrote: »

My reasoning is that everyone gay couples deserve the same equal rights as straight couples.

I'm not confused at all about that.

I think he means the bai not this referendum, if next referendum you where on the smaller side would you prefer if you could not put you point across?

Daith

spikeS wrote: »

I think he means the bai not this referendum, if next referendum you where on the smaller side would you prefer if you could not put you point across?

No, I brought up the BAI code already.

Daith wrote: »

It's the BAI code for broadcasting.

spikeS

Daith wrote: »

No, I brought up the BAI code already.

But you are arguing with him that the bai is a bad thing, most people will say bai is a very good thing overall

Ctrl Alt Delete

sup_dude wrote: »

I think if either side are getting air time, neither should be allow to lie or spread mistruths about their side.

is that not the purpose of a debate for the other side to show how the alternative view is incorrect.

Like I said yesterday these debates should be actively sought by the yes side because if some of the religious nuts get on air your jobs a he'll of a lot easier

Daith

spikeS wrote: »

But you are arguing with him that the bai is a bad thing, most people will say bai is a very good thing overall

No, I'm not

bodice ripper

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

It's not fair that both yes and no sides get same amount of time on air ???

I hope the irony of the fact this referendum is on equality isn't lost on you

I was saying that it isn't fair to describe RTE's viewers a No voters, but feel free to stick your oar in.

spikeS

Daith wrote: »

No, I'm not

Ok so we all agree bai is good and iona getting airtime is a necessary evil

Daith

spikeS wrote: »

On so we all agree bai is good and iona getting airtime is a necessary evil

I didn't say it was good or bad, just that it's the current Broadcast rules.

Ctrl Alt Delete

spikeS wrote: »

But you are arguing with him that the bai is a bad thing, most people will say bai is a very good thing overall

Indeed it is it ensures equality on the issue being decided.

It would be a safe Bet to say most here would be happy if say 90% of air time went to the pro side. But on flip side if your looking for your right to equality and were only rreceiving 10% of air time those same people wouldn't be so supportive

Sleepy

I'll be voting yes and quite happily. It'll be nice to vote for something that's good as opposed to selecting the lesser of two (or more) evils.

Ctrl Alt Delete

bodice ripper wrote: »

I was saying that it isn't fair to describe RTE's viewers a No voters, but feel free to stick your oar in.

misunderstood what you meant, apologies :o

Lyaiera

Equality... Not a real issue...

bodice ripper

Don't underestimate the pensioners. My grandmother is 90 years old, from the depths of Mayo, and a practicing Catholic. She sees no reason gay people should not be married, arguably in part because she knows me. But more and more people have an out memeber of their family, or the family of close friends.

spikeS

Daith wrote: »

I didn't say it was good or bad, just that it's the current Broadcast rules.

But what reason would you have for it to be bad, why would you be against it?

floggg

K4t wrote: »

They have the right to vote and influence others as best they can. Nobody is obliged to give them a platform in the interest of balance. If the Iona institute didn't exist and nobody wanted to argue for a NO vote, would the YES side be obliged to argue against a YES vote every time they are given airtime in the interest of balance? The answer is no. It would be ridiculous. People make up their own minds in a referendum, especially one on equal rights. 1 Man/Woman 1 vote.

Broadcasters are required to give equal representation to both sides of the debate under broadcasting rules.

While it is a sound idea in theory, it's execution is deeply flawed at the minute. For example, there have been a number of radio segments which have had complaints upheld against them by the BAI for presenters expressing support for the referendum, or for failing to have No campaigners present when interviewing people at Pride.

It also leads to the facial situation where climate denier nuts have to be included on panels on global warming for "balance".