Equality of marriage and love

Nodin

Cabaal wrote: »

Same-sex marriage bill passed (then blocked) in Northern Ireland
Four previous attempts to introduce same-sex marriage in Stormont were narrowly defeated.

http://www.thejournal.ie/northern-ireland-bill-same-sex-marriage-2421535-Nov2015/



The great defenders of the moral high ground continue to preach hatred,

Ironically aided by the DUP, who torpedoed it after it passed. Isn't it wonderful to see hands across the religious divide.

MrPudding

Nodin wrote: »

Ironically aided by the DUP, who torpedoed it after it passed. Isn't it wonderful to see hands across the religious divide.

What does the D in DUP stand for again...? It is disgusting that they are using a mechanism put in place to prevent laws being passed to the detriment of minorities to discriminate against a minority in something that the best part of 70% of the population support.

MrP

Cabaal

http://www.thejournal.ie/alan-hughes-proposed-live-ireland-am-2-2423129-Nov2015/

IRELAND AM PRESENTER Alan Hughes proposed to his boyfriend Karl Broderick live on the show this morning, during a discussion of marriage equality.

The longtime morning presenter asked the question on the Ireland AM sofa – apparently surprising even the other guests for the item.

If it was RTE they'd likely decide not to renew his contract for next year....yeah...errr...the format doesn't work...yeah thats it.

After all didn't they decide to not renew a previous presenters (Anna Nolan) contract after she refereed to going on holidays with her girlfriend on live tv, Or atleast thats what I've heard a few times.

Peregrinus

According to the Wikipedia article on Nolan, on RTE she has "investigated the sexual possibilities of the internet, attended a fetishist club to discuss bondage discipline sado-masochism (BDSM) with a male person and interviewed an anonymous man who was accompanied by the caption 'Individual Addicted to Porn'." I don't get the sense that they'd be bothered by a reference to going on holidays with her girlfriend.

The Randy Riverbeast

Cabaal wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/alan-hughes-proposed-live-ireland-am-2-2423129-Nov2015/



If it was RTE they'd likely decide not to renew his contract for next year....yeah...errr...the format doesn't work...yeah thats it.

After all didn't they decide to not renew a previous presenters (Anna Nolan) contract after she refereed to going on holidays with her girlfriend on live tv, Or atleast thats what I've heard a few times.

Can they do that without a member of Iona being present to tell them they are ruining children's lives?

Annasopra

Peregrinus wrote: »

According to the Wikipedia article on Nolan, on RTE she has "investigated the sexual possibilities of the internet, attended a fetishist club to discuss bondage discipline sado-masochism (BDSM) with a male person and interviewed an anonymous man who was accompanied by the caption 'Individual Addicted to Porn'." I don't get the sense that they'd be bothered by a reference to going on holidays with her girlfriend.

what?

Peregrinus

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

what?

Well, to put it more plainly, I think the evidence suggests that Cabaal's persecution fantasies bear little relationship to observed reality.

Last week I got my invitation to my Aunt's wedding in Ireland, date set in December.

I remember being about 6 years old and being introduced to her ex 'housemate' / 'friend' and thinking that it made loads of sense for her to share a house because she had no family and would be lonely otherwise.

Happily now we're grown up (both myself and the country's laws) she can marry her partner and hopefully never even have to consider 'child proofing' or being careful with the truth about her life again.

robindch

Ulster Says No. Again.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/11/03/world/europe/northern-ireland-assemblys-vote-to-approve-same-sex-marriage-is-blocked.html

NY Times wrote:

A majority of members of the Northern Ireland Assembly voted on Monday to legalize same-sex marriage in the British-ruled region, but the majority Democratic Unionist Party immediately invoked a parliamentary maneuver to veto the measure. It was the fifth such vote on marriage equality in the local Parliament over the past three years — the previous four failed to garner enough support among assembly members. This time, of the 105 members, 53 voted in favor of the measure and 51 against. One member abstained.

The motion was supported by members of the nationalist parties along with a number of unionists and independents. It was opposed by the D.U.P., which has a strongly conservative Protestant ethos. Under Northern Ireland’s complex power-sharing arrangements, any legislative amendment must command sufficient cross-community support. The D.U.P. used this so-called petition of concern mechanism to impose a veto.

A petition of concern requires at least 60 percent of assembly members to vote for a motion, with at least 40 percent of both unionist and nationalist representatives present and voting. In this case, it effectively means that same-sex marriage legislation will remain prohibited as long as the D.U.P., which holds 38 seats in the Assembly, opposes it. Northern Ireland is the only part of the United Kingdom where civil marriage between same-sex couples is not recognized. It was legalized in England, Wales and Scotland last year.

Last week, the Republic of Ireland ratified same-sex marriage legislation after a referendum on the issue that passed overwhelmingly in May. The first such marriages are expected to take place there before Christmas. Peter Weir, a veteran D.U.P. Assembly member, told reporters after the vote that he did not regard it as a defeat or a demand for change. “If it requires a process of attrition to alter a result, it does not demonstrate a great deal of force behind the argument of those who have brought forward the proposal on each occasion,” he said.

However, Patrick Corrigan, Amnesty International’s Northern Ireland director, told Attitude magazine that the failure of politicians to legislate on the issue would make a legal challenge inevitable. “It is a tragedy that same-sex couples are forced to ask the courts to fulfill a responsibility which has been abdicated for too long by too many politicians,” he said. Two separate challenges to the ban are expected to come before the High Court in Belfast in the coming months.

recedite

..the British-ruled region..

Unusual choice of words, but accurate nonetheless.

alan partridge aha

5 times in 3 years is that some kind of record.

Cabaal

Dublin’s planned new ‘Rainbow Walks’ could be in place by next summer

http://www.thejournal.ie/rainbow-walks-dublin-2434985-Nov2015/

The holy statue's will be out in force against this :pac:

alan partridge aha

Cabaal wrote: »

Dublin’s planned new ‘Rainbow Walks’ could be in place by next summer

http://www.thejournal.ie/rainbow-walks-dublin-2434985-Nov2015/

The holy statue's will be out in force against this :pac:

For crying out loud when is this going to stop!

Cabaal

http://www.thejournal.ie/campbells-ad-star-wars-facbeook-troll-2-2435107-Nov2015/

Damn gay lobby at it again!

Campbells soup advert in the USA now has a gay couple...how dare they!
some people ain't happy about it



Good response, but they were still upset



and still not happy

Peregrinus

Cabaal wrote: »

Dublin’s planned new ‘Rainbow Walks’ could be in place by next summer

http://www.thejournal.ie/rainbow-walks-dublin-2434985-Nov2015/

Why is the Gay Lobby working like this to marginalize zebras, and drive them into the closet? Are they zebraphobes?

Going Strong

Well, I for one think that zebras with their buttoned down black and white appearance need to get with the times. It's the 21st century and multi-coloured is the way to go. If God had meant all animals to be only black, white or a combination of the two, then it would be mentioned in The Bible. Joseph would have looked pretty drab in his coat of only two colours and wouldn't have a musical written about him either.

Kev W

Peregrinus wrote: »

Why is the Gay Lobby working like this to marginalize zebras, and drive them into the closet? Are they zebraphobes?

Of course a lot of these zebraphobes are secretly zebras themselves. They're just afraid to come out of the savannah.

Penn

Looks like David Quinn, Michael Kelly et al have picked their newest agenda; it's not enough that every debate should be absolutely perfectly balanced to the point that the media is completely shackled to the point of absurdity, but now there should be quotas to ensure there are plenty of conservative presenters in the media to balance out all the liberal presenters.

efb

Its all done, now to get Dav to marry me, so I can seize control of the boards empire....


/evil laugh

Nodin

Good jaysus tonight.....





"Utah state child welfare officials on Wednesday were wrangling with a ruling by a juvenile court judge who ordered a baby to be taken from lesbian foster parents and instead placed with a heterosexual couple, saying it was for the child’s wellbeing.
Judge Scott Johansen’s order on Tuesday raised concerns at the Utah Division of Child and Family Services, said agency spokeswoman Ashley Sumner.
Its attorneys plan to review the decision and determine what options they have to challenge the order.

The ruling came during a routine hearing for April Hoagland and Beckie Peirce. They are part of a group of same-sex married couples who were allowed to become foster parents in Utah after a US supreme court ruling made gay marriage legal across the country, Sumner said.
State officials estimate there are a dozen or more foster parents who are married same-sex couples.
Hoagland and Peirce told KUTV they were distraught after the ruling, which called for the baby girl they have been raising for three months to be taken away within a week."
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/nov/12/utah-judge-orders-baby-taken-away-from-lesbian-foster-parents

frostyjacks

I think this is separate to the issue of gay marriage. The judge cited research that proves children are better off being raised by a mother and a father. So even if it was two heterosexual women raising the baby it would have been taken off them. He's putting the child's interests first.

PopePalpatine

I wonder if it was that bullsh*t Regnerus study, or at the very least cited it.

Peregrinus

frostyjacks wrote: »

I think this is separate to the issue of gay marriage. The judge cited research that proves children are better off being raised by a mother and a father. So even if it was two heterosexual women raising the baby it would have been taken off them. He's putting the child's interests first.

No, he isn't.

The rule in child welfare cases is that the paramount consideration is the best interests of this child, not of children generally. The research that "proves children are better off being raised by a mother and a father" is, as you know, contentious. To put it no higher, not everyone would agree that it does prove that. But that's irrelevant; the question is not whether children generally are better off being raised by mixed-sex couples, or whether mixed-sex couples generally are more successful parents than same-sex couples. The question is whether this child is better off being raised by this couple or by that couple. Averages aren't of much help here. The judge should be looking at how this child is doing in the care of these foster-parents.

volchitsa

frostyjacks wrote: »

I think this is separate to the issue of gay marriage. The judge cited research that proves children are better off being raised by a mother and a father. So even if it was two heterosexual women raising the baby it would have been taken off them. He's putting the child's interests first.

I'm not aware of serious research that shows that to be the case.
There are, at best, a couple of disputed studies. The Regenerus one was mentioned not just now, and that's probably the best of them, which is not saying much.

There is far more reliable research that shows that children are better off being raised in high income families, accepted by all the experts to be sound research (unlike Regenerus). So should a judge remove a child from a lower-income family based only on the research and regardless of how that child is doing in that family?

Annasopra

frostyjacks wrote: »

I think this is separate to the issue of gay marriage. The judge cited research that proves children are better off being raised by a mother and a father. So even if it was two heterosexual women raising the baby it would have been taken off them. He's putting the child's interests first.

What research proves that?

robindch

As a legislative prerequisite for entering visa-free travel between the EU and Ukraine, the Ukrainian Parliament - after some huffing and puffing, it has to be said - votes in favour of scrapping Soviet-era labour laws which permit discrimination in the workplace on grounds of religious or political beliefs, as well as sexual orientation:

http://www.kyivpost.com/content/kyiv-post-plus/ukrainian-finally-passes-anti-bias-law-a-prerequisite-for-visa-free-travel-to-eu-401906.html

frostyjacks

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

What research proves that?

It didn't say in the article. If a judge is satisfied with it, that's good enough for me.

Kev W

frostyjacks wrote: »

It didn't say in the article. If a judge is satisfied with it, that's good enough for me.

It shouldn't be.

Penn

frostyjacks wrote: »

It didn't say in the article. If a judge is satisfied with it, that's good enough for me.

Yes, because if a judge says something, it must be true.

Apart from, you know, the insane amount of bullsh*t some of them do

Worth a watch:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poL7l-Uk3I8

PopePalpatine

Scott N. Johansen, the judge in question, previously made headlines for ordering a mother to cut off her daughter's ponytail in court back in 2012. o_O

He also has a law degree from Brigham Young University, which requires students to abide by the rules of Mormonism (including sexual abstinence), so draw your own conclusions.