Gay marriage

Dudess · 08-11-2008 10:56PM

Aw sweet... my certificate in typing was worth something! :P

philologos · 08-11-2008 10:58PM

jill_valentine wrote: »

That's fair enough, but I just don't understand how banning gay marriages helps the Latter Day Saints, say, or any of the other lobby groups that ran anti Prop 8 campaigns. If it was an issue that would directly impact their living circumstances then, by all means, vote religiously, but it wasn't.

The Prop 8 thing just bothers the hell out of me because it had nothing to do with them. It wasn't their lives, it wasn't their wedding, it wasn't their lovers. But they still decided that Their Personal Views > Other People's Happiness. They decided that it was their place to make the rules for a bunch of strangers' relationships. That's just beyond my comprehension.

I don't think it's fair to blame the Mormons or any other religious group over the result of Proposition 8, it was clear that the majority wanted to marriage to remain the same. The people are clear that they don't want marriage to go any further than it's current definition, when there is a democratic mandate like that it is to be respected. I was watching on CNN the No camp to Proposition 8 demonstrating outside the LDS church in Los Angeles. These people don't represent the vote of the people, or the Mormons actually.

The Proposition 8 to me is welcome, this decision does affect other people, and it will affect how the family unit will be in the future if it was rejected (Yes to Proposition 8 was the vote to ban gay marriage). I don't think it is fair to say that when something is put to a referendum that people are not entitled to let their view be known the the government. If we are to talk democracy, this is what has to happen.

SeekUp · 08-11-2008 11:11PM

CreepingDeath wrote: »

I'm not paying for a lifestyle choice which has absolutely no benefit to Irish society other than the needs of those two people. It's worthless to Irish society in general.

Wouldn't creating equality for everyone in a society be worth something to you? Regardless of whether or not you agree with the way they choose to live, if they're law-abiding, taxpaying citizens, why shouldn't they be entitled to the same rights as you or your neighbor? People feeling equal to one another and valued equally in the eyes of the law is certainly beneficial to society.

CreepingDeath wrote: »

I begrudge a cent of my money towards what I see as a what one of the previous posters said was a mockery of marriage. . . . There isn't really a family there, and the roles are completely different.

I love how we've come to think of male-female marriage as the epitome of righteousness. What about the number of divorces/annulments performed each year? What about adultery? What about the number of cases in which one member of a marriage has to assume both roles (whether or not they have children) because the other partner has absolutely no regard for his/her vows? These things are what make a mockery of marriage. These things are what cause harm to a family unit. No one is arguing - at least I don't think anyone is arguing - the benefits of having a positive and constant male and female role model in a child's life. That's great, and if those role models come in the form of a parent, even better! But it's no secret that that is not what many families look like anymore. So then we have to take a step back and understand what is at the core of a good and happy family. It might not have, as someone pointed out, a mother, father, 2.4 children, and a dog who all love and support each other very much. It might have a white Irish mommy, a Latino Canadian mommy, an adopted black Hatian child, and a cat, who all love and support each other very much. Who's to say that one isn't as much of a family as the other?

CreepingDeath wrote: »

Adopt kids? Only if there isn't a suitable heterosexual couple available. Children need a good psychological balance of male and female role models. . . . I agree an orphan is better in a family than in an orphanage, but homosexual couples should be ranked lower than heterosexual couples.

Cunny-Funt wrote: »

I'm also of the opinion that its a bit selfish on the part of a gay couple to want to raise kids (and no I'm not retarded enough to think that it'll make the kids gay, just that its healthier to have a female mother and male father)

Same argument as above -- only I'd like to add that I think it's a bit selfish of someone who's not experiencing a lack of a loving family to say that it's "right" for certain people and not others to raise children. Meanwhile, there are children who getting bounced around from foster home to foster home while waiting to be adopted. Adopting is wonderful -- but the supply is greater than the demand. Especially with the growing frequency of international adoptions. Why go through all of the red tape when you can go halfway around the world to adopt an abandoned Chinese baby girl? For the record, I think anyone who is willing to take in a child who isn't their flesh and blood, assume responsibility for the child, and raise him/her as their own is amazing. I just think that right should be available to anyone who meets the criteria, which should be based on whether or not the adopter(s) has the means and environment to raise a child well; not based on whom the adopter(s) finds sexually attractive.

ninty9er wrote: »

There are plenty of dysfunctional families out there with unloved kids headed by a man and a woman. People seem to use man and woman = best parenting practice....2 parents and a close extended family is best practice, but many convnetional families fall short on this. I don't see why gay people should be allowed to be just as dysfunctional.

I agree -- except for that last bit . . . Because for every homosexual or heterosexual dysfunctional family, there are other happy ones. And why shouldn't that be so? We should be working harder to help the dysfunctional families and prevent them (if possible) from falling apart . . . not preventing the unions of people who might end up functional and successful and happy and end up reflecting that success in their own communities and, in turn, society.

Religion aside - because imho, that's a different can of worms - I just can't see the harm in banning someone from legally being joined to someone else. Pick up a newspaper any day of the week -- Seems to me that we allow a lot worse things to happen to each other.

jaffa20 · 08-11-2008 11:15PM

As a gay person, I'm quite amazed, shocked and upset at some of the comments that have appeared since i last looked here. Creepingdeaths comments are totally illogical. I pay taxes and if i was to marry, i would expect to avail of the same rights as a heterosexual couple.

To say we bring nothing to society because we cant have kids is ridiculous. I'm a young educated man and bring a lot to society with the taxes i pay.

Jakkass, although he disagrees with adoption has been less insulting and less homophobic than creepingdeath has appeared so i respect his opinions as a christian man.

i've been living with my partner for the last 3 years and i hope that Ireland moves forward in the years to come to accept us as couples.

MagicMarker · 08-11-2008 11:15PM

Dudess wrote: »

Well lettuce IS wrong - no two ways about it. Tastes hideous!

no no no!!! Lettuce is fine!! It's brussel sprouts you're thinking of, they're the roma/pole/gay/drug taker of the vegetable society.

Danimalito · 08-11-2008 11:18PM

yea well, sometimes democracy leads to stupid results, if you'd poll the D4s I'm sure they'd like to build giant fences around Tallaght/Dolphins barn/Ballymun a la escape from new york. Actually that wouldnt be such a bad idea.

Sure if the christians/moslems/jews fancy keeping marriage between men and woman, I'm all for it, as long as the gays and the lesbos get to enjoy the same legal benefits as married couples, if they want to.

Hell, why not call it "civil union" or the like, will keep everyone happy.

Dudess · 08-11-2008 11:19PM

As a cooked vegetable, certainly. But it doesn't fit into the hideous raw vegetable category - although maybe some people like to Brussels sprouts raw, which is frankly warped...

jaffa20 wrote: »

I pay taxes and if i was to marry, i would expect to avail of the same rights as a heterosexual couple.

But jaffa, it's WRONG - there's no two ways about it!

philologos · 08-11-2008 11:23PM

jaffa20 wrote: »

Jakkass, although he disagrees with adoption has been less insulting and less homophobic than creepingdeath has appeared so i respect his opinions as a christian man.

i've been living with my partner for the last 3 years and i hope that Ireland moves forward in the years to come to accept us as couples.

Don't get me wrong, I don't do this due to homophobia. Although many may dispute that, and if so you are entitled to do so. However, this is about how far we should go, and how far it is safe to go for society. Not about anything else.

Danimalito · 08-11-2008 11:34PM

jaffa20 wrote: »

As a gay person, I'm quite amazed, shocked and upset at some of the comments that have appeared since i last looked here. Creepingdeaths comments are totally illogical. I pay taxes and if i was to marry, i would expect to avail of the same rights as a heterosexual couple.

To say we bring nothing to society because we cant have kids is ridiculous. I'm a young educated man and bring a lot to society with the taxes i pay.

Jakkass, although he disagrees with adoption has been less insulting and less homophobic than creepingdeath has appeared so i respect his opinions as a christian man.

i've been living with my partner for the last 3 years and i hope that Ireland moves forward in the years to come to accept us as couples.

Man, this has fcuk all to do with taxes or makin babies. Create a poll "Do you find gays an aberration to society, yes/no", you'd get the same results. Your problem is that you're a minority, and you're an easy minority to push around due to the fact that 2 lads snogging is just not very pleasing on the eye.

Find a way to turn the majority of fellas gay and your problems are solved. I'd suggest a nationwide circulation of a pic of Mary Harney eating cake in the buff . Bound to turn some of the more borderline cases.

apathetic84 · 08-11-2008 11:36PM

jill_valentine wrote: »

I'm all for gay marriage. I mean, there's no logical reason to oppose it.

well said!!

Dudess · 08-11-2008 11:37PM

Danimalito wrote: »

2 lads snogging is just not very pleasing on the eye.

I'd beg to differ :pac:
Well two queens wouldn't do it for me, but two manly men (e.g. Brokeback Mountain)... oh yeah!

jill_valentine · 08-11-2008 11:44PM

I would support the Mary Harney thing, provided I don't have to endure it.

rainbow kirby · 08-11-2008 11:44PM

jill_valentine wrote: »

I would support the Mary Harney thing, provided I don't have to endure it.

I think anything to do with Mary Harney in the buff might turn me straight.

jaffa20 · 08-11-2008 11:45PM

Danimalito wrote: »

Man, this has fcuk all to do with taxes or makin babies. Create a poll "Do you find gays an aberration to society, yes/no", you'd get the same results. Your problem is that you're a minority, and you're an easy minority to push around due to the fact that 2 lads snogging is just not very pleasing on the eye.

Find a way to turn the majority of fellas gay and your problems are solved. I'd suggest a nationwide circulation of a pic of Mary Harney eating cake in the buff . Bound to turn some of the more borderline cases.

Exactly! But that's what others on this thread have made it out to be about so i had to have my word or two.

As for the Mary Harney image, you just ruined my liking for cakes. Don't think i'll be able to look at one again without thinking of her!!:eek::p

Gummy Panda · 08-11-2008 11:48PM

You have to ride Mary Harney to prove you're straight these days??

ffs, where's my deluxe pack of black bin liners for the occasion

eVeNtInE · 08-11-2008 11:50PM

This post has been deleted.

SeekUp · 08-11-2008 11:51PM

Danimalito wrote: »

Your problem is that you're a minority, and you're an easy minority to push around due to the fact that 2 lads snogging is just not very pleasing on the eye.

What about lesbians? I'll even go a step further and say femme lesbians . . . everyone loves to look at that.

:rolleyes:

jill_valentine · 08-11-2008 11:56PM

I'd rather watch lesbians make out than Mary Harney doing anything.

jill_valentine · 08-11-2008 11:57PM

Gummy Panda wrote: »

You have to ride Mary Harney to prove you're straight these days??

Yes. Too many people take straightness for granted. If you can't Ride The Gauntlet, you don't get to be straight anymore. You can just choose to be gay - because it's that easy - and be done with it.

Gummy Panda · 09-11-2008 12:03AM

jill_valentine wrote: »

Yes. Too many people take straightness for granted. If you can't Ride The Gauntlet, you don't get to be straight anymore. You can just choose to be gay - because it's that easy - and be done with it.

This is going to be as life changing as the CAO.

/puts on snorkel

jill_valentine · 09-11-2008 12:13AM

Good luck, and God speed.

Just lie back and think of the tax breaks, good man.

ciano1 · 09-11-2008 12:27AM

Gay Marriage leads to only ONE thing

GAY DIVORCE !

Zillah · 09-11-2008 12:33AM

CreepingDeath wrote: »

I begrudge a cent of my money towards what I see as a what one of the previous posters said was a mockery of marriage.

Homosexuality is harmless enough in society in general, but that doesn't mean it deserves the same recognition in marriage.

Gay marriage is a joke. That's the truth of it.
There isn't really a family there, and the roles are completely different.

Adopt kids ? Only if there isn't a suitable heterosexual couple available.
Children need a good psychological balance of male and female role models.

I know 3 girls who have grown up without fathers (early deaths).
They all had similar traits, lack of confidence, clearly their personalities were skewed to be more girly, anxiety problems etc.

I agree an orphan is better in a family than in an orphanage, but homosexual couples should be ranked lower than heterosexual couples.

You're a staggeringly awful human being. I've seen people like you in movies but I never thought I'd actually interact with one directly. At least you're starting to be more honest with your vile homophobic/sexist rantings.

Cunny-Funt · 09-11-2008 12:49AM

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't think it's fair to blame the Mormons or any other religious group over the result of Proposition 8, it was clear that the majority wanted to marriage to remain the same. The people are clear that they don't want marriage to go any further than it's current definition, when there is a democratic mandate like that it is to be respected. I was watching on CNN the No camp to Proposition 8 demonstrating outside the LDS church in Los Angeles. These people don't represent the vote of the people, or the Mormons actually.

The Proposition 8 to me is welcome, this decision does affect other people, and it will affect how the family unit will be in the future if it was rejected (Yes to Proposition 8 was the vote to ban gay marriage). I don't think it is fair to say that when something is put to a referendum that people are not entitled to let their view be known the the government. If we are to talk democracy, this is what has to happen.

Do you also have a problem with women/black people being able to vote?

Wibbs · 09-11-2008 12:51AM

I would be of a more right wing bent in general. In fact if I wasn't pretty much constantly reined in by the boards middle way consensus filter, some here may get an attack of the vapours at some of my private views, but.....

I find it difficult to reconcile a law that prevents someone, anyone being allowed to legally express a lifetime of commitment to love and companionship. It simply makes no sense to me.

Among the most committed and long term healthy relationships I know, a very rare thing in of itself, two of them are gay couples. It's obviously a subjective thing but those two aforementiond couples deserve marriage more than two thirds of the straight couples I know. They are among the most "christian" people I know too, in actions

philologos · 09-11-2008 12:56AM

Cunny-Funt wrote: »

Do you also have a problem with women/black people being able to vote?

Why on earth would I? I don't have a problem with anyone voting. I do have a problem with people badmouthing Mormons or anyone of any faith due to a vote which was passed by a majority (51%) not going the way they want it to go.

CreepingDeath · 09-11-2008 01:30AM

Zillah wrote: »

You're a staggeringly awful human being. I've seen people like you in movies but I never thought I'd actually interact with one directly. At least you're starting to be more honest with your vile homophobic/sexist rantings.

I do believe that personal abuse isn't tolerated on boards.

Someone else has a different opinion than you so you then attack them personally ? Lovely. Usually that's grounds for reporting a post.

I know I'm not a special minority group but I am still very much entitled to have a different opinion.

As I said over and over again, which you completely failed to listen to, I wouldn't be against gay marriage if it didn't cost the Irish taxpayer anything. It's harmless, let them do what they want. I've said it about 3 or 4 times now, let me know when it sinks in.

I also backed up my opinion about gay couples adopting.
I firmly believe that children should have a primary male and female role models/guardians. I've seen the effects on friends who grew up in single parent families (good middle class backgrounds). Their personalities were clearly biased by the gender of their parent. That's not healthy and it is quote reasonable to assume that it may bias them towards homosexuality. In the same way that kids growing up with parents who smoke are more likely to smoke themselves. Humans and children specifically are excellent mimics, that's how we learn.

Feck sake, first you want the all the legal and financial entitlements of a marriage, then you want the state to give you children that your own relationship choices have denied you ?

You don't ask for much do you ?

jill_valentine · 09-11-2008 01:34AM

I have problems with the LDS well beyond that, Jakkass, I have considerably more respect for your own church for what it's worth.

ninty9er · 09-11-2008 01:41AM

CreepingDeath wrote: »

As I said over and over again, which you completely failed to listen to, I wouldn't be against gay marriage if it didn't cost the Irish taxpayer anything. It's harmless, let them do what they want. I've said it about 3 or 4 times now, let me know when it sinks in.

Why should someone who wants to commit to a relationship legally with their boy/girlfriend in a same sex union not be entitled to have the same benefits as I would if I got married?

CreepingDeath wrote: »

I also backed up my opinion about gay couples adopting.
I firmly believe that children should have a primary male and female role models/guardians. I've seen the effects on friends who grew up in single parent families (good middle class backgrounds). Their personalities were clearly biased by the gender of their parent. That's not healthy and it is quote reasonable to assume that it may bias them towards homosexuality. In the same way that kids growing up with parents who smoke are more likely to smoke themselves. Humans and children specifically are excellent mimics, that's how we learn.

No we learn from different personalities. I know plenty of shy people with 2 extroverted parents, gay people who have strong male role model fathers. There's no research that can disprove the life choices of people I know.

Quite frankly there's kids out there that would have a much better chance in life with a stable gay couple than some of the married scum out there.

CreepingDeath wrote: »

Feck sake, first you want the all the legal and financial entitlements of a marriage, then you want the state to give you children that your own relationship choices have denied you ?

How is that any different from a hetrosexual couple?? and why should it be. Get over yourself. You are not better than gay people and you are not morally entitled to more if you get married than they would be if they could get "married".

ninty9er · 09-11-2008 01:44AM

ciano1 wrote: »

Gay Marriage leads to only ONE thing

GAY DIVORCE !

And so what if it does....the results are unlikely to be any different to a straight divorce....the courts system may even learn something and stop almost automatically awarding custody of children to mothers if it didn't have the option in some cases.

Gay marriage

Comments