Referendum on Gender Equality (THREADBANS IN OP)

Heard him say that he was going to run for MEP and before we could celebrate , he said he would run in the next GE if he didn't get a seat in Europe !

The arrogance of it !

Jaysus, that's bitter.

Doesn’t fit in with your ignorant view does it?

Which doesn’t mean they were correct- just that they were clearly more articulate than those put forward to support the opposing view. This is an unfortunate reflection on the quality of public representation as opposed to any clarity on one position or another.

Wow,quoting Mattie !

You do know that's copy and paste bar the the bit "next week on Friday or Saturday " from his dail speeches every few weeks ?

I'd argud the basic facts absolutely do align. 734k voted against gay marragie, 723k voted against abortion. In a American analysis of peoples opinions on abortion, it found that 91% atheists considered themselves prochoice with 81% considering themselves strongly prochoice, for roman catholics it was 45% consider themselves prochoice, with just 25% identifying as strong prochoice. I think it's fair there's a correlation between the two, but I accept not 100% either. But in this case, not necessarily relevant either. Logically, people likely voted against gay marraige dud to their religious believes and feeling that the concept of marraige is between a a man and a woman. I would also likely think that they have similar beliefs/feelings in the concept of family being strongly liked to marraige.

I don't think it's a coincidence that nearly the exact same number of people voted against gay marraige and abortion either. When roughly those same 700k+ people were asked to vote on the proposal of widening the definition of family and including unmarried mothers I really don't think it'd that ludricious to suggest those same 700k people would be against that proposal for similar reasons/beliefs that they were against gay marraige.

If my view was that only religious people voted no, than maybe. But I never said that so I just had no idea why you were telling me you were atheist and what way you voted.

"Maria Steen ,smug elitist right wing lawyer and architect who worked for a few years( and Iona Institute ) only before she signed off to go to her well set up family home to birth her children and then stay at home homeschooling them ...be surprised if there isn't a nanny and a maid etc assisting her in her particular ' motherly duties ' ."

"worked for a few years only", "signed off", "birth her children" (strange way to phrase it), "stay at home"...

You disagree with Maria Steen's politics fair enough, but what's up with this weird disdain for these personal choices.

You did state that a majority no vote is evidence of strong religious groups. I don’t think that is true. Admittedly one can argue than most moral values have their origin in religious teachings, however I don’t believe the majority of no voters are following a dogma blindly, but instead are thinking about the issues at hand for themselves.

@Goldengirl It does sound bitter in fairness.

Even taking the line "Michael McDowell a Sad Angry man" he neither seemed sad nor angry. In fact he seemed quiet content in himself, and mellow before, during, and after the referendum.

I would argue McDowell was the most informed public figure in these two referendums on the yes or no side. And he was also the best at delivering his viewpoint backed up with copious examples including case law.

To the extent that I noticed ANYONE on the NO side started quoting his lines.

Was there anyone of that statute and gravitas on the YES side? There was not, it was all fluffy generalities.

Posts like this, is what's wrong with social media. Disagree with a person's point but debate the point, these personal character assassinations bringing up people's family is just nasty.

Again, I have no idea why you are equating voting no to this things because of "religious beliefs".

You're previous statement had percentages mentioned that were not accurate as a starting point for a thesis such as the one you've put forward.

I can't really think of anything else to say that would expand on it any more than I already have. The percentage was a very very rough guess based on no actual calculation attempt so I accept that's not going to be too accurate.

That's fine, you're perfectly free to state why you do think thr majority of people voted against these referendum. I'd be interested in hearing what you think the reasons were as to why thr majority of 734k voted no to gay marraige.

Its not necessarily that they arent a valid reason. I dont really know what does constitute a valid reason for voting on soemthing anyway. I do accept people are perfectly entitled to vote whatever way they want for whatever reason they want. But on the flip side, do I think a person's religious beliefs constitute a valid reason to ban gay marraige? No, I don't.

I wonder what this result says about the usefulness and relevance of Citizens Assemblies