VOTE NO

Not a NSA agent

gravehold wrote: »

Why not give CP the same rights as marraige but not change the constitution, that way if the next government want to stop gays adopting they can

The constitution has to be changed to make CP equal to marriage.

Preventing the second part is a good thing.

sunshine and showers

macker33 wrote: »

Its not that simple, a yes vote criminalises certain christian teachings, its slow erosion

Do elaborate.

Guy:Incognito

macker33 wrote: »

Buttsh1t

Maybe they just head out, get locked, find an equally drunk girl and have a rattle by some bins the way a lot of good , healthy straight people do? We must fight to protect good family values like that. (here, just in case you missed the tone ----> :rolleyes: )

Mark Tapley

macker33 wrote: »

Its not that simple, a yes vote criminalises certain christian teachings, its slow erosion

The Christians are advocating posting hate filled spew on message boards now?

macker33

RiseToMe wrote: »

However, "learning how to be man or woman" was a social construct really.

.

The man woman thing was never a construct, men were disposable, women werent

macker33

wow sierra wrote: »

Vote how you like in the Referendum - I just want to comment on the whole Freedom V Union Jack comment.
Roger Casement - he of Banna Strand fame -

Roger casement wasnt bent and i know all about the forged diaries etc.
Another case of ernie and bert

Penny Tration

Can someone please have the balls to just say 'im voting no because I don't agree with homosexuality/am homophobic/don't like gay people?'

It'd be really bloody refreshing to see some honesty from the no side.

macker33

Jenny Thalia wrote: »

You are a vile, disgusting little excuse for a human.

Em, false outrage aside, i'm not the gay who abused the kids under his care

The Moldy Gowl

Grand ol Saturday morning troll.


We could probably hear you better if you stopped deep throating fr o brien.

gravehold

RiseToMe wrote: »

However, "learning how to be man or woman" was a social construct really.

As a transsexual I find this really transphobic

macker33

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

If you were voting no to interracial marriage, would you be a racist?

Hey, a persons colour is nature, that cant be helped

Guy:Incognito

ibstar wrote: »

I'm not against gay relationships, I'm just firmly and strongly against them having children.

Setting aside the rest of the crap, why do you think a marriage licence gives them more ability to have children?

Infertile woman and sterile men cant have children naturally. Should they be barred from adopting too?

Since we're on the subject of unnatural things, flying is normally inserted in to the conversation now.............

Man made fibers arent natural. Hope you're not wearing any of those.

Not a NSA agent

Jenny Thalia wrote: »

Can someone please have the balls to just say 'im voting no because I don't agree with homosexuality/am homophobic/don't like gay people?'

It'd be really bloody refreshing to see some honesty from the no side.

Thats what the OP is doing. Or at least making it obvious. You cant use the word homophobe, of course they can accuse gays of being pedophiles but if you call him a homophobe its bullying.

El_Duderino 09

macker33 wrote: »

Its not that simple, a yes vote criminalises certain christian teachings, its slow erosion

It doesn't criminalise anything. I don't share your religious beliefs but I'd oppose any move towards criminalising religion.

It becomes complicated when religious beliefs become a reason to promote real harm. Some muslims want to be allowed to perform female genital mutilation. I oppose that practice in all circumstances.

The Catholic's will probably figure out how to reconcile gay marriage with their teachings. They opposed interracial marriage and inter faith marriage in the past. They figured out how to pretend it was always part of their teachings and in time they be saying they were never really opposed to gay marriage. They'll say it was just a few fringe extremists.

The Moldy Gowl

macker33 wrote: »

Em, false outrage aside, i'm not the gay who abused the kids under his care

Is that not being a pedophile?

Have girls ever been abused? Doubt it, us straight people are perfect

Guy:Incognito

macker33 wrote: »

Its not that simple, a yes vote criminalises certain christian teachings, its slow erosion

Did we criminalise stoning people to death at any stage? **** we better get that back before god gets angry (you know god right? That loving caring lads full of bile and hate whos word , if followed, would pretty much mean the human race would be extinct)

Penny Tration

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

Thats what the OP is doing. Or at least making it obvious. You cant use the word homophobe, of course they can accuse gays of being pedophiles but if you call him a homophobe its bullying.

Oh yeah, it's very obvious.

But I'd like to see just one have the balls to admit it instead of alluding to it.

Guy:Incognito

gravehold wrote: »

Why not give CP the same rights as marraige but not change the constitution, that way if the next government want to stop gays adopting they can

Why not remove marriage altogether and only give the option of civil partnership to everyone?

Why dont we stop straight people adopting? They're the ones that perpetrate the vast majority of abuse.

Wang King

macker33 wrote: »

No, I know some people fvck it up but i've actually figured out that whole appropriate holes thing,

Again, it's not your sexual proclivities I was alluding to, but do carry on.

Mr.Frame

Joeseph Balls wrote: »

I wasnt going to vote at all being honest, as it dosnt affect me (wrong attitude, I know), but the whole No Campaign has changed my mind. They are the best support for the yes vote there is imo. I'll be voting yes.

As a gay man I just want to say thank you, it means a lot

marienbad

ibstar wrote: »

I'm voting No, but not for religious reasons since I'm an atheist.
But it saddens me that my vote will be associated with people like OP
People voting Yes ether don't have children and don't know what it's like to raise them or they simply doing it out of guilt because they have a friend/relative who's gay.
I have colleagues who are gay with whom I get along fine and maintain professional relationship and can rely on in work, but that doesn't give me enough reasons to trust homosexual couples raising children they were never meant to have naturally.

Yes they can already adopt which is wrong imo, but ones the legislation passes (which unfortunately it will from what I'm observing), this will relax the rules towards adoption even more.

This country has enough problems with it's pedophile priests, now we're going to hear even more cases of domestic abuse, ether sexual or physical, because these so called same sex "parents", I repeat SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO ADOPT KIDS BECAUSE IT'S NOT NATURAL. I'm an atheist so no religious bias here. Just simple nature and biology.

I'm not against gay relationships, I'm just firmly and strongly against them having children.

It seems the Iona tactics do work, such a deeply saddening state of affairs .

Wang King

ibstar wrote: »

I'm voting No, but not for religious reasons since I'm an atheist.
But it saddens me that my vote will be associated with people like OP
People voting Yes ether don't have children and don't know what it's like to raise them or they simply doing it out of guilt because they have a friend/relative who's gay.
I have colleagues who are gay with whom I get along fine and maintain professional relationship and can rely on in work, but that doesn't give me enough reasons to trust homosexual couples raising children they were never meant to have naturally.

Yes they can already adopt which is wrong imo, but ones the legislation passes (which unfortunately it will from what I'm observing), this will relax the rules towards adoption even more.

This country has enough problems with it's pedophile priests, now we're going to hear even more cases of domestic abuse, ether sexual or physical, because these so called same sex "parents", I repeat SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO ADOPT KIDS BECAUSE IT'S NOT NATURAL. I'm an atheist so no religious bias here. Just simple nature and biology.

I'm not against gay relationships, I'm just firmly and strongly against them having children.

Extremely naive post in the extreme

Father Ted Crilly

Down With This Sort Of Thing.

Careful Now.

I don't care what other countries are doing. Gayness is wrong. I'm proud of my country and my religion. I don't want my country to be seen as something that can be manipulated by a small number of homofascists.
Besides, the way the country is now, the gay married couples will be harassed by hardcore Catholics.

VOTE NO INDEED.

Guy:Incognito

macker33 wrote: »

Hey, a persons colour is nature, that cant be helped

As is stupidity, but yet everyone is allowed to have kids.

FluffyAngel

macker33 wrote: »

Paedophile priests are what happens when gays become priests, correct me if i'm wrong but most of the abuse was male on male.
Yeah, gays didnt mess things up there at all.
And now you want gays to be able to adopt, i'm not being funny but would you trust your kids with a gay, i certainly wouldnt.

Sweet everything thats connected to everything ,are you for real?

its doesnt matter wether its male on male ,female to male or anything else in bewteen ,abuse is abuse

btw try having that agurment with the 55,000 women (and fathers ) whose children were adopted or any of the women in the laundrys

i would trust my kids with anybody who had morals and values,sexuality doesnt come into it

if you have kids or going to have kids at some stage ,i ask that you reconsider your views before your destroy their childhood

macker33

Jenny Thalia wrote: »

Yet another poster assuming gay people will abuse their children.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1522158/Gay-couple-jailed-for-abusing-their-foster-children.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2068731/Gay-couple-accused-abusing-adopted-sons.html
http://www.advocate.com/world/2014/06/03/abused-kids-placed-gay-couple-birth-parents-enraged
http://rt.com/news/australian-paedophile-us-jail-976/

Not assuming anything

The Black Oil

Ireland's cursed? I'll call the Winchester brothers.

Dunford

macker33 wrote: »

Ireland has been cursed because of how we carried on during the tiger years and now we risk being cursed again.

For the last 15 years all we have heard on the radio is progay nonsense from progay mouthpieces.
Anybody who says anything different to the progay friendly media push is immediately labelled a bigot by the homfacists, Its all completely one sided.

Are people so easily manipulated? Enda is an idiot who only cares about his legacy. A "first" for ireland.

Dont make christianity a criminal offence because progay and christianity cannot exist together.
Gay is a sin to christianity and christianity is a sin lo the libtards, You cant have both.
Gays have never done anything for ireland, We wouldnt even have an ireland if it wasnt for catholicism. The union jack would be flying over government buildings and not the tricolour.

Dont let your parish be a gay parish, vote no to "gay marriage"

what a vile post and attitude. seek help my friend.

Anyone who puts their faith in a group of child rapists and imaginary friends has no right to preach to us.

And also. who the hell gives you people the right to stick your bigoted nose into the affairs of other people? its none of your dam business if a person is gay or not.

FluffyAngel

ibstar wrote: »

I'm voting No, but not for religious reasons since I'm an atheist.
But it saddens me that my vote will be associated with people like OP
People voting Yes ether don't have children and don't know what it's like to raise them or they simply doing it out of guilt because they have a friend/relative who's gay.
I have colleagues who are gay with whom I get along fine and maintain professional relationship and can rely on in work, but that doesn't give me enough reasons to trust homosexual couples raising children they were never meant to have naturally.

Yes they can already adopt which is wrong imo, but ones the legislation passes (which unfortunately it will from what I'm observing), this will relax the rules towards adoption even more.

This country has enough problems with it's pedophile priests, now we're going to hear even more cases of domestic abuse, ether sexual or physical, because these so called same sex "parents", I repeat SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO ADOPT KIDS BECAUSE IT'S NOT NATURAL. I'm an atheist so no religious bias here. Just simple nature and biology.

I'm not against gay relationships, I'm just firmly and strongly against them having children.

have you heard what has happened when kind caring men and women of the cloth stepped in to fix our children of the nation?

trust me when i say that being gay had nothing to do with it ...

if you think that sexual abuse happened "back then" and doesnt happen now ,then your wrong
abuse of children and adults in care is a daily occurence and has nothing to do with sexuality

Not a NSA agent

If god doesnt like gays, why create gayness?

Father Ted Crilly wrote: »

I don't care what other countries are doing. Gayness is wrong. I'm proud of my country and my religion. I don't want my country to be seen as something that can be manipulated by a small number of homofascists.
Besides, the way the country is now, the gay married couples will be harassed by hardcore Catholics.

VOTE NO INDEED.

Its gotten to the point where I cant tell the difference between those who are sarcastic and those who are serious.