vote yes?Three Lesbian Women In Massachusetts “Marry” Each Other

mayway

elfy4eva wrote: »

www.refcom2015.ie

All the exact same literature is there. What an age we live in....

Yes, but it's supposed to be delivered to every home in the country. If anyone doesn't receive it with plenty of time to review then NO is the only answer.

C14N

mayway wrote: »

Yes, but it's supposed to be delivered to every home in the country. If anyone doesn't receive it with plenty of time to review then NO is the only answer.

Why would you vote no if you hadn't read the thing?

oscarBravo

C14N wrote: »

Why would you vote no if you hadn't read the thing?

Hush, you. Don't you know an "I've found a specious reason for a no vote!" post when you see one?

mayway

Because the constitution should be protected at all costs. It's up to the proposer of the changes to explains what the changes are and why they're proposing them.

In this case no literature found it's way to my door so, regardless of the issue, the answer is NO.

I suspect anyway that less than 1% actually read up on what the referendum was actually about and most people voted YES because they felt intimidated or thought it would be "cool". Either way, marriage has now been wrecked for the citizens of Ireland.

PopePalpatine

How exactly has it been "wrecked"? For you lot it's been wrecked ever since the marriage bar was done away with

Ave Sodalis

mayway wrote:

I suspect anyway that less than 1% actually read up on what the referendum was actually about and most people voted YES because they felt intimidated or thought it would be "cool". Either way, marriage has now been wrecked for the citizens of Ireland.

I would consider myself incredibly well informed on this and still voted yes... am I cool now? has your marriage fallen apart because of this? Has anyone else's? Do you feel threatened? And more importantly, why the feck is this still being talked about?

Penn

mayway wrote: »

Because the constitution should be protected at all costs.

The Constitution was written by people and is changed on a regular basis by way of public vote to update it to reflect changes to society.

The Constitution is a document, which is in no way infallible or taken to be correct simply because it's the Constitution. It can, and should be changed, as needs must.

mayway

It's wrecked as it's rendered meaningless. No, my relationship hasn't fallen apart, it's just that the overriding covenant of marriage has been rendered meaningless which is regretful. And pointless. But that's what happens I suppose.

mayway

Bad Horse wrote: »

The Constitution was written by people and is changed on a regular basis by way of public vote to update it to reflect changes to society.

The Constitution is a document, which is in no way infallible or taken to be correct simply because it's the Constitution. It can, and should be changed, as needs must.

Absolutely agree. However, as I pointed out, the onus is on the proposer of the changes to explain what they are and why they are proposing them. I received no documentation on this so the answer must be NO.

PopePalpatine

mayway wrote: »

Because the constitution should be protected at all costs. It's up to the proposer of the changes to explains what the changes are and why they're proposing them.

I take it you're still butthurt over the RCC losing its "special status" in our constitution?

Ave Sodalis

mayway wrote:

It's wrecked as it's rendered meaningless. No, my relationship hasn't fallen apart, it's just that the overriding covenant of marriage has been rendered meaningless which is regretful. And pointless. But that's what happens I suppose.

So you consider your marriage pointless now? Was the point of marriage always to deny other people the right to marriage or is this a new point? Is your marriage really now meaningless because some other people can get married? I think that says more about your marriage to be honest...

Penn

mayway wrote: »

Absolutely agree. However, as I pointed out, the onus is on the proposer of the changes to explain what they are and why they are proposing them. I received no documentation on this so the answer must be NO.

No, the onus is on the voter to ensure they make themselves aware of what the vote is for. The Referendum Commission help facilitate this to as great an extent as they can by disseminating information in an unbiased manner to as many people as is feasibly possible, but they are ultimately not responsible for what information people do or do not receive/read.

Billy86

mayway wrote: »

Absolutely agree. However, as I pointed out, the onus is on the proposer of the changes to explain what they are and why they are proposing them. I received no documentation on this so the answer must be NO.

Because they want to get married for social as well as economic equality, and same sex unions existed ling before that Jesus fella. It's been a year or so and we have yet to hear one single solid argument as to why that shouldn't be allowed. Hence the landslide vote.

Keep crying though, it's just faaaaabulous.

gctest50

mayway wrote: »

If it's not in a church it's not a marriage so I can't see the point of bothering to be honest.

according to who ?

K-9

mayway wrote: »

Because the constitution should be protected at all costs. It's up to the proposer of the changes to explains what the changes are and why they're proposing them.

In this case no literature found it's way to my door so, regardless of the issue, the answer is NO.

I suspect anyway that less than 1% actually read up on what the referendum was actually about and most people voted YES because they felt intimidated or thought it would be "cool". Either way, marriage has now been wrecked for the citizens of Ireland.

Just back from a siteban and you resurrect this bloody thread!