SSM Referendum - Has Anyone Actually Changed Their Mind? MOD Warning 1st Post

Merry Prankster

SSM is obviously an emotive issue that has generated much debate online. However, it seems that proponents on either side are merely preaching to the converted. Has anyone actually changed their mind due to reading threads on Boards (or other places)?

I fully intend to vote yes, and I've not heard one argument from the 'no' side yet that has caused me to question my preference.

MOD WARNING
This is a thread with the discussion on whether your mind has been changed. That is all.
Other general discussion should go into the larger SSM thread -> http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057426700

scdublin

I'm in the same position as you. Always intended to vote yes and no "no" argument has made me rethink that decision.

I did however change my mind on lowering the age of the presidential candidate. I had decided to vote no originally but after debating it on here I'll be voting yes.

Mint Aero

I'll be voting no as no yes side arguments has caused me to change my mind.

Social media voting class 101.

green n gold

Hasn't changed my mind, im staying straight, but good luck to them all

Kiwi in IE

There is nothing that could make me change my mind. The wrong side of history is not the place for me!

http://thesaltcollective.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/protest.jpg

Bob24

Doubt anyone has changed their mind. Both campaigns are pretty much portraying themselves has having a monopoly on morality and describing others as monsters. Not the kind of arguments that would convince anyone - more like annoy them and widen the gap.

Miall108

My opinion has gone from Yes to a very very soft Yes and the next step is No just to spite a lot of the bigotry going on the Yes side . Everyone is entitled to their own free opinion and the right to vote in this country. But its because of the abuse and intimidation tactics from a lot of people on the Yes side especially are receiving for having just that is an absolute disgrace. I mean that case about the young girl being egged for having a No Poster and then her mother being subjected to online abuse for standing up for her daughter is disgusting.

Some people would want to cop on

keeponhurling

Did people really start out in the Yes or No camp before the debate even started, or precise wording of the proposed amendment confirmed?

I moved from Don't Know to No during the debate

desertcircus

Miall108 wrote: »

My opinion has gone from Yes to a very very soft Yes and the next step is No just to spite a lot of the bigotry going on the Yes side . Everyone is entitled to their own free opinion and the right to vote in this country. But its because of the abuse and intimidation tactics from a lot of people on the Yes side especially are receiving for having just that is an absolute disgrace. I mean that case about the young girl being egged for having a No Poster and then her mother being subjected to online abuse for standing up for her daughter is disgusting.

Some people would want to cop on

Could you explain exactly what aspects of the Yes campaign have been bigoted? Everything I've seen of the Yes campaign has been dignified, positive and appealing to a sense of fairness and equality. Everything I've seen of the No campaign, by contrast, has been an absolute ****storm of nasty fictions that prey on fear (gay couples will be entitled to surrogacy! This change will allow gay adoption!), insult vast swathes of the electorate (not having a mother and a father is so awful we need to keep the gay marriage ban!), and just outright lie in the hope that they'll frighten enough people into voting No (children raised by gay couples suffer! This change will abolish heterosexual marriage! Churches will be forced to conduct gay weddings!).

I've been watching, and in the entirety of this campaign I've seen not one relevant and true argument from the No campaign. I mean that: every single point they've raised has either been irrelevant (this referendum won't impact on adoption by gay people), untrue (there's no such thing as a constitutional right to surrogacy) or both. I haven't seen a single argument made by the No side that's both relevant and true. Literally not one; everything has been a mountainous tirade of venomous lies and misdirection, pumped out by a campaign characterised by a vicious contempt for the Irish electorate. They know that in a fairly conducted campaign, they'd lose heavily thanks to the basic sense of fairness possessed by the Irish electorate, but they reckon enough people are gullible enough to buy into their garbage. That's their modus operandi in this campaign - they think they can lie their way to victory. The Iona Institute made no submissions when the wording of this amendment was being discussed, despite professing to care a great deal about it; they knew that if they showed their hand, they'd have no case to run with, so they kept their mouths shut and waited while less dishonest contributors worked on it. They made no contribution so that they could lie to the Irish people when the referendum came.

Bob24

keeponhurling wrote: »

Did people really start out in the Yes or No camp before the debate even started, or precise wording of the proposed amendment confirmed?

I moved from Don't Know to No during the debate

I did start as a don't know as well ... but I guess it is fair that some people feel strongly about this one way or the other and didn't need a debate to make up their mind (isn't it always how politics work: knowing you have an existing base of voters and doing debates to convince the undecided part of the electorate).

keeponhurling

desertcircus wrote: »

Everything I've seen of the No campaign, by contrast, has been an absolute ****storm of nasty fictions that prey on fear
I've been watching, and in the entirety of this campaign I've seen not one relevant and true argument from the No campaign. I mean that: every single point they've raised has either been irrelevant (this referendum won't impact on adoption by gay people), untrue (there's no such thing as a constitutional right to surrogacy) or both. I haven't seen a single argument made by the No side that's both relevant and true. Literally not one; everything has been a mountainous tirade of venomous lies and misdirection, pumped out by a campaign characterised by a vicious contempt for the Irish electorate. They know that in a fairly conducted campaign, they'd lose heavily thanks to the basic sense of fairness possessed by the Irish electorate, but they reckon enough people are gullible enough to buy into their garbage. That's their modus operandi in this campaign - they think they can lie their way to victory. The Iona Institute made no submissions when the wording of this amendment was being discussed, despite professing to care a great deal about it; they knew that if they showed their hand, they'd have no case to run with, so they kept their mouths shut and waited while less dishonest contributors worked on it. They made no contribution so that they could lie to the Irish people when the referendum came.

Come down off that fence now, and tell us what you really think.
Yes or No ??

duffman13

I'm voting Yes because I believe we should all have the same votes regardless of sexual orientation. I've no real belief in religion or that marriage can only be between a man and a woman. I feel the Yes campaign is actually hurting itself taking down no posters by a minority of idiots.

I'm also voting yes to the presidential voting for the same reasons. If your good enough your old enough to be president and it's ageist to vote no IMO.

keeponhurling

^ and was your mind made up by the debate?
Originally you were leaning towards No?

frostyjacks

Flirted with the idea of voting yes, but I'm sticking to my guns on this one. No side have planted some seeds of doubt in my mind.

MrWalsh

Personally think it's madness we have to vote at all, equality should just "be".

But yes, I was always yes, and I still haven't seen a no argument that isn't rooted in homophobia or simply irrelevant to the issue at hand.

Miall108

desertcircus wrote: »

Everything I've seen of the Yes campaign has been dignified, positive and appealing to a sense of fairness and equality.

Im not getting into an argument about the No Campaign because there is just no point as some of their grounds for voting No are simply backwards and reaks of scare mongering.

And as for the Yes side, as what started out as a campaign that was going to have an emphatic victory has been harmed only by themselves and the Polls will back that claim up. Their campaign has unnecessarily descended into one of bullying, intimidation and harassment of those who express their right to Vote No however full of holes that particular campaign is. But thats my point, People have a right to Vote No too not to be chastisised and intimidated just because they wish to exercise that right

StewartGriffin

Was definitely going to vote yes because of the extra rights married couples have over civil partnership couples. But, having discovered recently that these difference are almost non existent, will probably abstain from this one.

sunshine and showers

frostyjacks wrote: »

Flirted with the idea of voting yes, but I'm sticking to my guns on this one. No side have planted some seeds of doubt in my mind.

What kind of seeds?

I have no problem with people changing their minds based on information they have received from either side. I'll even grit my teeth and accept your change of heart when the stuff you've been told isn't even true.

But these (unfounded) accusations of bigotry and people voting no to teach the yes side some kind of lesson? No. Fúck you. You're actually an idiot. A random eejit throwing an egg that happens to hit a young girl is not a reason to vote no - it's a reason for a random eejit to be done for assault. Being "sick of hearing about" the referendum is not a reason to vote no - it's a reason to have a good long think about your priorities. You live in a democracy. You have a vote. We are so lucky to be able to take a stance on issues at the ballot box and have our voices heard.

Please, please use your vote properly and actually vote on the issue of Same Sex Marriage. That's all. After that, vote yes or vote no based on your feelings on the issue . At least then, whichever way the result goes, you'll be able to look every Irish LGBT person you meet in the eye and know you respected and appreciated the fact that you made a decision that greatly impacts on them and their lives. that you didn't just deny them of something based on the fact you were sick to the back teeth of seeing Facebook statuses and newspaper articles about the referendum.

Edit: this post is not personally aimed at anyone. It's general.

mickstupp

Miall108 wrote: »

Some people would want to cop on

And yet you're thinking of voting no out of spite...?

I started out as Yes because I couldn't see any rational reason to vote no. Haven't seen a single rational argument to vote no since then.

castletownman

I'm voting no and have stuck to my convictions from day one.

It's ridiculous even considering lowering the presidential age

frostyjacks

sunshine and showers wrote: »

What kind of seeds?.

Seeds of doubt, uncertainty. If I'm not sure about the consequences of changing the constitution then I'll reject it. I don't think the burden of proof has been reached by the Yes camp, but it'll still pass so you've nothing to worry about.

desertcircus

Miall108 wrote: »

Im not getting into an argument about the No Campaign because there is just no point as some of their grounds for voting No are simply backwards and reaks of scare mongering.

And as for the Yes side, as what started out as a campaign that was going to have an emphatic victory has been harmed only by themselves and the Polls will back that claim up. Their campaign has unnecessarily descended into one of bullying, intimidation and harassment of those who express their right to Vote No however full of holes that particular campaign is. But thats my point, People have a right to Vote No too not to be chastisised and intimidated just because they wish to exercise that right

What bullying and intimidation? One tosser throwing an egg doesn't discredit an entire campaign.

CaveCanem

I was undecided but now intend to vote yes.

I do sympathise with those alienated by the Yes campaign though and its strategy of demonising dissent, emotional manipulation and shaming.

Even if some or all arguments are factually incorrect, this is different from being morally contemptible and motivated by homophobia. We don't shame and punish everyone who fails to get 100% in a knowledge test. If their intent is truly to protect the interests of children against the pursuit of self gratification by adults, and it is sincerely held, then I feel terrible that they are being slandered as bigots. This applies even if they are just mistaken.

There is also a section of society who are just conservative by nature. All that means is that they are inherently skeptical of the ability or willingness of social engineers to know the full consequences of their radical proposals, even if their intentions began as well intended.

Some people will vote no because of the behaviour of sections of the Yes campaign. This isn't entirely irrational, if you were hitching a lift home and a drunk driver offered you a lift you wouldn't say to yourself 'well I was going in that direction anyway' and you certainly wouldn't get in if they started verbally abusing you for rejecting their offer to take you on the right path. Some people feel the Yes side is drunk on its own self-righteousness, and while they have no huge feelings on the issue at hand they are not happy to go along with the way it is being pursued. Polarising society will also generate needless discrimination and alienation.

RhubarbCrumble

I planned to vote yes on SSM from the start and haven't changed my mind.

Re the presidential age, I'm not quite sure yet. More likely to vote yes than no though.

darkpagandeath

Other half got mobbed last night by a large intimidating group of Yes people all quite young. Said they came across as quite aggressive. Basically blocking the whole footpath so you had to talk to them.

Bubbaclaus

The No side bringing children into an argument about something that has nothing to do with children has turned me into an even stronger yes than what I was

darkpagandeath

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

The No side bringing children into an argument about something that has nothing to do with children has turned me into an even stronger yes than what I was

It's in the family section of the constitution not he equality part. Just pointing that out.

Minderbinder

this whole campaign is absurd if we're honest. the 'yes' side have sabotaged themselves because they want a fight worth winning. walkover victories are never as much fun. to me, it just looks like they're looking for an argument. they don't actually want everyone to agree with them. psychologically it's quite interesting that people can get so carried away with the idea they're an oppressed minority that the only way they can get people to argue with them is, ironically, through their own form of intolerance.

now, perhaps the referendum will be closer than originally expected? and that will probably make the victory sweeter and in some ways reinforce the notion (in their own minds) that a sizable portion of the country are 'anti-gay'.

Specialun

I was yes but at the moment im leaning towards no

Tbh im really disapointed in the ref as a whole. I dont think its been very balanced

darkpagandeath

Minderbinder wrote: »

this whole campaign is absurd if we're honest. the 'yes' side have sabotaged themselves because they want a fight worth winning. walkover victories are never as much fun. to me, it just looks like they're looking for an argument. they don't actually want everyone to agree with them. psychologically it's quite interesting that people can get so carried away with the idea they're an oppressed minority that the only way they can get people to argue with them is, ironically, through their own form of intolerance.

now, perhaps the referendum will be closer than originally expected? and that will probably make the victory sweeter and in some ways reinforce the notion (in their own minds) that a sizable portion of the country are 'anti-gay'.

The well know fact is they are in the minority. But it's good to have a villain under the hedge or around every corner.

darkpagandeath

Specialun wrote: »

I was yes but at the moment im leaning towards no

Tbh im really disapointed in the ref as a whole. I dont think its been very balanced

To much emotive language on each side makes the whole thing a bit childish to be fair.