Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

Options
1…4041434546…335

Comments

  • Options
    #1262
    Lyaiera
    Registered Users Posts: 5,818 ✭✭✭Lyaiera


    sup_dude wrote: »
    So it's only the legal thing that matters. That's what I meant with my last post. It's only discrimination if the law says it is?

    No. It's still discrimination. But it's ok because you're allowed to discriminate, legally.


  • Options
    #1263
    Ctrl Alt Delete
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Ctrl Alt Delete


    K4t wrote: »
    It's not all. Let the majority speak and make themselves known now through a vote and save all this money and time and the giving of national tv platforms to those would seek to deny others of equal rights.

    So in other words to suit your agenda lets treat the other side unequal and get our way via bully boy tactics and to hell with any process once I get what I want, exemplifying you cant understand the basic meaning of quality.

    Hopefully, you pop up on TV and radio making similiar points during a debate because it's really easy points.
    K4t wrote: »
    Look at the poll at the top of this page for a hint on what the result will be.

    To be plainly blunt. You are delusional if you think this poll will resemble the actual referendum result, at this stage I would feel safe in saying that the uphill part has to be done by the yes side.
    K4t wrote: »
    It's not about homosexuals or heterosexuals, it's about human beings. The majority of human beings will support the minority of human beings who are being treated unequally.

    But it is about homosexuals and being able or unable to marry, lets not convalute the issue.


  • Options
    #1264
    Ctrl Alt Delete
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Ctrl Alt Delete


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    What? At present straight couples are free to marry, the law discriminates against gay couples by not providing equal access.

    Its really not that difficult.

    It's like I asked yesterday. If a magic wand was waved and you had all the equal rights and standings of a married couple as civil partners would you be happy?


  • Options
    #1265
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,946 ✭✭✭Daith


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    But it is about homosexuals and being able or unable to marry, lets not convalute the issue.

    The issue is one of equality.

    For equality or against.

    That's it.
    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    It's like I asked yesterday. If a magic wand was waved and you had all the equal rights and standings of a married couple as civil partners would you be happy?

    No, separate but equal is not equal.


  • Options
    #1266
    floggg
    Registered Users Posts: 5,820 ✭✭✭floggg


    spikeS wrote: »
    But what reason would you have for it to be bad, why would you be against it?

    Climate change.

    Kn this debate, I'm OK with it because it's a referendum and both arguments should be put forward.

    But look at how the "need for balance" has resulted in fringe views like climate change deniers getting undeserved legitimacy by putting arm chair quacks on TV to debate real scientists who know what they are taking about, and giving the impression that both sides are equally credible.

    They way the BAI have applied the rules is also questionable, and has resulted in Broadcasters being censured for expressing their personal views or for not having opposing views represented at interviews conducted at Pride.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1267
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    It's like I asked yesterday. If a magic wand was waved and you had all the equal rights and standings of a married couple as civil partners would you be happy?

    That question was answered multiple times yesterday. The short answer: no.


  • Options
    #1268
    Ctrl Alt Delete
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Ctrl Alt Delete


    Lyaiera wrote: »
    No. It's still discrimination. But it's ok because you're allowed to discriminate, legally.

    Please show me the legal definition or where I am discriminating against gay people for not agreeing with them being allowed to marry ???


  • Options
    #1269
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    It's like I asked yesterday. If a magic wand was waved and you had all the equal rights and standings of a married couple as civil partners would you be happy?

    So in essence if civil partnership was the exact same institution as marriage but not the same name?


  • Options
    #1270
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    It's like I asked yesterday. If a magic wand was waved and you had all the equal rights and standings of a married couple as civil partners would you be happy?

    If they were allowed to take the bus as long as they stayed in their own section would it be equal?


  • Options
    #1271
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    Please show me the legal definition or where I am discriminating against gay people for not agreeing with them being allowed to marry ???

    That's our point. You're only going by what's legal but the world doesn't work like that. It's legal in some countries to stone a woman to death for having sex before marriage but for men, it's okay. Is this discrimination?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1272
    Ctrl Alt Delete
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Ctrl Alt Delete


    Daith wrote: »
    No, separate but equal is not equal.

    I would argue that it is equal standing but respects marriage being between a man and a woman.

    After all, you would have the same rights, privaliges as any married straight couple, legally being recognised as a civil partnership too so whats the problem ?


  • Options
    #1273
    Ctrl Alt Delete
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Ctrl Alt Delete


    sup_dude wrote: »
    That's our point. You're only going by what's legal but the world doesn't work like that. It's legal in some countries to stone a woman to death for having sex before marriage but for men, it's okay. Is this discrimination?

    No thats called Sharia law in Islam and has nothing to do with the topic really but it's their culture and their way of life. You argue people have no right to tell gays what to do surely it would be same here in that case no ?

    The rule of law is what the world turns on like it or lump it.

    Whats to stop you going up North and getting married and having the same rights under the Civil Partnership Bill in the South ?


  • Options
    #1274
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,946 ✭✭✭Daith


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    Please show me the legal definition or where I am discriminating against gay people for not agreeing with them being allowed to marry ???

    You're confusing legality and discrimination. Two different things.


  • Options
    #1275
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    I would argue that it is equal standing but respects marriage being between a man and a woman.

    After all, you would have the same rights, privaliges as any married straight couple, legally being recognised as a civil partnership too so whats the problem ?

    Why should we respect that when that's what we want to change?


  • Options
    #1276
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,946 ✭✭✭Daith


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    I would argue that it is equal standing but respects marriage being between a man and a woman.

    After all, you would have the same rights, privaliges as any married straight couple, legally being recognised as a civil partnership too so whats the problem ?

    I would argue that black people have to get one bus and white people another. They still have all the same things and get to where they are going.

    What's the problem?


  • Options
    #1277
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    No thats called Sharia law in Islam and has nothing to do with the topic really.

    Actually, you made it part of the topic. Is it only Irish law that determines what's discrimination?


  • Options
    #1278
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

    The rule of law is what the world turns on. Whats to stop you going up North and getting married and having the same rights under the Civil Partnership Bill in the South ?

    The fact that SSM doesn't exist in the North either?


  • Options
    #1279
    Ctrl Alt Delete
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Ctrl Alt Delete


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    If they were allowed to take the bus as long as they stayed in their own section would it be equal?

    No that's called segregation


  • Options
    #1280
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,946 ✭✭✭Daith


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    No that's called segregation

    Yes, two different institutes for two different groups.
    One based on colour and the other based on gender.

    Should we have had interracial civil partnerships and "same colour" marriages?


  • Options
    #1281
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    No thats called Sharia law in Islam and has nothing to do with the topic really but it's their culture and their way of life. You argue people have no right to tell gays what to do surely it would be same here in that case no ?

    The rule of law is what the world turns on like it or lump it.

    Whats to stop you going up North and getting married and having the same rights under the Civil Partnership Bill in the South ?

    It is also the law of the land in those countries, it may have nothing to do with the issue here but it does have relevance in so far as it challenges your absurd approach to discrimination.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1282
    Ctrl Alt Delete
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Ctrl Alt Delete


    sup_dude wrote: »
    The fact that SSM can't get married in the North either?

    civil partnership is the same thing no ?


  • Options
    #1283
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    civil partnership is the same thing no ?

    No it isn't there are numerous legal differences...


  • Options
    #1284
    Ctrl Alt Delete
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Ctrl Alt Delete


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    It is also the law of the land in those countries, it may have nothing to do with the issue here but it does have relevance in so far as it challenges your absurd approach to discrimination.

    And as such I respect the law of their land as is their sovereign right. You have to respect the current law of the land here equally.

    I mean after all there are plenty of countries around the world were gay marriage is legal , so why not just be equal and "go foreign" same way a straight couple would ?


  • Options
    #1285
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    Please show me the legal definition or where I am discriminating against gay people for not agreeing with them being allowed to marry ???

    So you're saying there was no such thing as discrimination until we adopted anti-discrimination legislation?

    Then why did we need the legislation?


  • Options
    #1286
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,551 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    civil partnership is the same thing no ?

    No.
    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    And as such I respect the law of their land as is their sovereign right. You have to respect the current law of the land here equally.

    I mean after all there are plenty of countries around the world were gay marriage is legal , so why not just be equal and "go foreign" same way a straight couple would ?

    Yeah, no bother! Sure everyone has thousands to spend on a foreign holiday to get married because their own country doesn't want them.


  • Options
    #1287
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    And as such I respect the law of their land as is their sovereign right. You have to respect the current law of the land here equally.

    I mean after all there are plenty of countries around the world were gay marriage is legal , so why not just be equal and "go foreign" same way a straight couple would ?

    Some countries allow child marriage, forgive me for not respecting their laws.

    Suppose they shouldnt change it, wouldnt want to change the definition of marriage.


  • Options
    #1288
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    And as such I respect the law of their land as is their sovereign right. You have to respect the current law of the land here equally.

    I have no respect for barbarous regimes that use medieval punishments no sorry. In relation to Ireland I am obligated to respect the law in so far as I am required not to break it, beyond that nothing.
    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    I mean after all there are plenty of countries around the world were gay marriage is legal , so why not just be equal and "go foreign" same way a straight couple would ?

    How would that remedy the discrimination in Ireland?


  • Options
    #1289
    floggg
    Registered Users Posts: 5,820 ✭✭✭floggg


    Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »
    Yep most definiely, I don't need anything to support my position I'm not on this thread to discuss merits of voting yes or no.

    As I said yesterday I'd hazard a (random) guess that 80-90% of voters already know their decision of voting yes or not (regardless of their reason / rationale) or voting yes or no.

    Discussion is going to do very little to sway either side as the fundamental question in this referendum is a massive gulf between yes and no sides.


    How exactly?

    You were asked for your reasoning and couldn't give any. Not only were people giving you the chance to set out your case, they were pleading with you to do so!

    Nobody refused to listen to you, or to engage with you. You were just unable to do so because you admitted to have no reason in particular for your stance.

    The only consequence was that people made their feelings known on your stance - which we all invite by contributing to a discussion board.

    But I don't know if there was even one post which could be described in any way as attempting to prevent you from expressing your opinions - quote the opposite.


  • Options
    #1290
    Ctrl Alt Delete
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Ctrl Alt Delete


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    Some countries allow child marriage, forgive me for not respecting their laws.

    Suppose they shouldnt change it, wouldnt want to change the definition of marriage.

    I'm not saying whether it's right or wrong with child marriage as cultures / laws lead them to different thinking.

    But at a simple fundamental it is still a legal marriage between male and female


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1291
    Ctrl Alt Delete
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 789 ✭✭✭Ctrl Alt Delete


    jobbridge4life wrote: »
    I have no respect for barbarous regimes that use medieval punishments no sorry.

    It's off topic but have you have ever seen a stoning video , the hole, the capping stone, the full tunic ???


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement