Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

March 8th - What’s your vote? **Mod Note In Post #677**

1202123252645

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,134 ✭✭✭H_Lime


    Exactly, and it's no coincidence in the timing of the change of referendum. They fear a legal precedent.

    There's far too many well meaning voters out there who are asleep at the wheel. They're bad fcuking actors this govt.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,160 ✭✭✭realdanbreen




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme


    Voting YES for both

    How did you not anything on the term durable relationship? There has been lots of information about it. Here's one from the Chair of the Electoral Commission...


    There have been a few cases in the courts in the last few years, judgments from the Supreme Court and some judgments from the High Court, which have identified the various indicators as to durability in a relationship.”


    “There are all kinds of things, some of them are subjective and some of them are objective. So subjectively, a relationship is durable, if committed, if it presents itself as committed, if it means to be committed, if it intends to be committed.


    “Its durability can sometimes be how you are treated by other people. Are you are you invited as a couple to weddings? Do people send Christmas cards to both of you? These are the indicators of your commitment to each other,” she added.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,329 ✭✭✭adocholiday


    Voting NO for both

    Yeah I do appreciate that, but I suppose I wasn't trying to convince anyone else with my post I was just making a point about my own vote.

    All in all I genuinely would have liked to have supported these amendments but I just feel that I couldn't in their current form without a lot more information that wasn't provided either in the literature or in debate.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 8,447 ✭✭✭MrMusician18


    Voting NO for both

    Who has come out with that shite? If No is carried then nothing changes obviously.

    Anyway, I've cast my no-no vote. As I have said previously, easiest No ever.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme


    Voting YES for both

    If the vote went through she would have a different, arguably stronger case though.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,329 ✭✭✭adocholiday


    Voting NO for both

    That's still not a well worded definition, it's far too subjective. I know they're just two off the cuff examples she gave and not to be taken literally as definition but that's simply her opinion and provides no scope. If we have examples from previous high court cases why not use them to illustrate the point? The answer is that they didn't want to because it's too vague. You can't leave it up to the regular voter to go hunting down legal decisions, put it in front of them.

    What I would have liked to have seen was a document or something that said when you are being asked to vote, a durable relationship can be considered as... and then a list of potential things that could be characteristic of a durable relationship. In the absence of that certainty I had to vote no.



  • Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 14,542 Mod ✭✭✭✭JupiterKid


    Voting NO for both

    Mod:-

    As people (and boards posters) go out to vote today, please be mindful of being civil to each other on this thread and not to resort to angry, spiteful or childish tactics. Failure to be civil will result in threadbans being doled out.


    JK



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,690 ✭✭✭dmakc


    Voting NO for both

    Helen said it on the debate Wednesday night as her closing punchline



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,739 ✭✭✭✭Red Silurian


    Voting YES for both

    This has been one of the most confusing referendums of my lifetime. We seem to be making a big hullabaloo over something that will make minimal effect to the daily lives of anybody in our country. The disinformation is rife and exacerbated by the confusion. For this reason I accept peoples reasons for voting no in either or both referendums.

    With that being said I will be voting yes/yes for the following reasons

    All political parties, bar Aontú, are for yes/yes

    The Irish bishops are calling for no/no

    The views of neither Aontú nor the Irish bishops have aligned with my views in the past



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 327 ✭✭Ronald Binge Redux


    Voting YES for both

    I voted Yes Yes. Up here it's only Aontú campaigning so even if I hadn't already made up my mind that certainly wouldn't change it. Two factors have impacted votes towards No, I was shown a video claiming that divorcing women who worked in the home would have no rights over the family home. Clearly scaremongering but my reply was "who would legislate for that, even if it was possible through a loophole? The other is the muddying of the waters around the care referendum. I was a (male) carer for my parents before their deaths, and afaic the wording is an improvement.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,017 ✭✭✭StrawbsM


    Voting NO for both

    I made an exit poll in current affairs. Hope I covered all options. There is a max of 10!




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,473 ✭✭✭Jinglejangle69


    Voting NO for both

    Leo and Helen I’ve heard.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,998 ✭✭✭✭Rothko


    It amazes me how many people are making a decision based purely on how someone else is voting. It's so stupid, regardless of what way they're voting.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 29,769 ✭✭✭✭_Kaiser_


    Voting NO for both

    This is the world we live in now.

    Decisions are made based on the messenger rather than the message, and polarisation of debate has led to a nonsense situation where many seem to think that just because someone is for or against a particular issue, that they must be on the same "side" for all other issues, related or not.

    It's incredibly dangerous for debate and democracy in general - once again an example of importing America's divisive culture politics and Republican/Democrat divide.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,998 ✭✭✭✭Rothko


    Yeah, it's all about what team they are on. Political issues are just a game or sport to them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,137 ✭✭✭✭Sadb


    Voting YES for both

    I’m confused about that case- essentially the argument is not about the carers allowance but rather that carers allowance should not be means tested? As an extension of that, if the wording of the constitution remains as is, mothers should be able to claim an allowance for the work they do at home regardless of the means that are already coming into the home?

    Maybe I’m misunderstanding the case but I cannot see how that could possibly be won.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭Hawkeye123


    Voting NO for both

    I voted early. No X 2.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭Hawkeye123


    Voting NO for both

    I am what Leo would call "far right", i.e. a normal person. But, I would concede I am not a leftist. Consequently Aontú were never on my radar, but fair play to them for standing up for what they believe in. Aontú are an unusual combination of leftism and moral conservatism. I reckon both referendums will be defeated and Aontú will rightly claim to be more atune with the Irish people than any of the parties that supported the referendum.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,916 ✭✭✭✭average_runner


    Voting NO for both

    Voting NO for both

    Nothing against the government, i think they are doing the right thing, but only did it half arse.

    Things like this needs to be air tight and I feel the language is too vague to go into our constitution and open to legal attacks



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,739 ✭✭✭✭Red Silurian


    Voting YES for both

    Aontú are the result of Peadar Toibín splitting from Sinn Fein over the referendum to repeal the 8th so yeah they would be economically left and agree with a lot of what the leftist parties would sing about from that point of view while at the same time being quite conservative in other matters



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 8,447 ✭✭✭MrMusician18


    Voting NO for both

    If a No-No vote is returned, it would be first major break with the social liberal consensus since divorce was rejected in 1986.

    Still too close to call imo.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,291 ✭✭✭✭Thelonious Monk


    Voting YES for both

    It's funny, if you look at the thread on this on reddit Ireland, the majority are all yes/yes or at least yes/no, with the posters there generally being younger and more liberal compared to boards. Goes to show that the few remaining posters here are all male and conservative, so I'm not sure this thread is a good indication of the result, but I still wouldn't be surprised if No/No is the outcome, it will be very close I think.



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 14,444 Mod ✭✭✭✭pc7


    Voting NO for both

    I'm not male and conservative, I voted yes in last two referendum



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,320 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    theres clearly a problem here in regards communication, im not alone in understanding whats actually been asked here, i went no no, but ive no clue if that truly is how i feel, this has been a dreadful referendum



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,017 ✭✭✭StrawbsM


    Voting NO for both

    same as you PC.

    Nice that on International Women’s Day of all days, us women are seen as invisible on here by some.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,690 ✭✭✭dmakc


    Voting NO for both

    You no more have a clue on the demographics/beliefs of voters than you do of which way this will go.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,909 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    Voting YES for both


    Prior to the last General Election the National Party did very well in the Boards.ie poll of who people were going to vote for. So yeah it's a lot more right-wing than the population.

    That being said I reckon these referenda really are in trouble. Won't be surprised to seem them both get rejected. The government deserve all the blame if that happens. They failed to make the case to the general population for why they were holding them or why people should vote for them. I've never seen such a lackluster campaign.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 393 ✭✭KevMayo88


    Voting NO for both

    I know several people, people who I would consider your typical 'liberal', who don't find these amendments liberal or progressive in the least and are voting no, to my surprise.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,629 ✭✭✭Augme


    Voting YES for both

    The mother took the case against the Minister of Social Protection arguing that the Minister has acted unlawfully by not making regulations under section 186(2) of the Social Welfare consolidation Act. Section 186 (2) says the Minister may make regulations to allow people who do not satisfy the conditions of the careers allowance to receive the careers allowance and this section also allows the Minister to make regulations to vary the payment of carers allowance to vary according to needs(this is the section the womna is claiming on). The Minister hasn't made regulations under this section and the woman has claimed that the Minister is legally obliged to and referenced Article 40.1, 40.3, 41.2, 42A and 43 of the Constitution as the rational that the section of the social welfare act is unconstitutional.


    I would be surprised if she wins too, but will be interesting to see what the Supreme Cpurt do say.



Advertisement
Advertisement