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

Gay Marriage - needs proper legislation and recognition

  • 07-04-2010 11:24PM
    #1
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭


    There is on the thread on the proposed Civil Partnership legislation and its affects on heterosexual co-habiting couples.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=65302166#post65302166

    The legislative proposals are a bit of a mess.

    I believe people have a right to a civil marriage,whatever their orientation. I dont support the co-habitation proposals as marriage or civil partnership should be a voluntary commitment between too people.

    We need simple legislation to address this issue and the current proposals are a real mess.


«13

Comments

  • #2
    Dr_Phil
    Closed Accounts Posts: 711 ✭✭✭Dr_Phil


    CDfm wrote: »
    I believe people have a right to a civil marriage,whatever their orientation.
    I hope you don't mind...? I believe that people who are naturally and physically unable to keep the entire society going (mainly by procreation) should not be given the same rights like the ones who give birth, raise children, etc. or those disabled by ilness (as we all know homosexuality is NOT an ilness, so...). Marriage and family are not just a joint bank account, reliefs in Revenue and free sex anytime you want, "one of the primary functions of the family is to produce and reproduce persons—biologically and socially".


  • #3
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    Fair enough Dr Phil - I am not talking about recreateing society here and digging up the whole adoption thing and disco dancing.

    Just saying, right we have a gay population where some want to marry and be a legally and socially recognised couple and live ordinary monogamous lives with a 3 bed semi and a dog and provide for their old age. Simple legislation would achieve that without all this complex social engineering. Let them have it and arrange their affairs legally without all this complex bull**** arguments that accompany this sort of thing.

    Thats all.


  • #4
    Dr_Phil
    Closed Accounts Posts: 711 ✭✭✭Dr_Phil


    Well, it makes sense if you think about it... But I bet that the next step will be adoption and all this crap I am totally against, so I think that maybe it's better to leave things the way they are. But obviously my opinion means nothing, I am not even gonna protest if such law comes through. I am absolutely against discrimination/slagging/harrassing homosexuals and find it stupid and cruel, but on another hand it's good to know when to say "enough". That's all from me in this matter.


  • #5
    Herbal Deity
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,397 ✭✭✭Herbal Deity


    Why do people fear gay marriage and adoption so much?

    You don't see people opposed to gay marriage on the basis of marriage being the foundation of the family unit opposing marriage between infertile couples.

    You don't see people opposed to gay adoption on the basis that every child has the right to a mother and a father opposing single parents, or any other non-traditional family setup.

    I've never, ever heard an argument against either that made any sense.


  • #6
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    Dr Phil -these things normally get sidelined and defined by extremists.

    You need simple definitions not hidden agendas and social engineering. If its civil partnerships and pre-nups then legislate for it. Get on with it. The legislation thats proposed is an embarressment.

    Deal with adoption at another time -there are very few irish kids up for adoption anyway and its expensive foreign adoption the incidence will be so small its laughable. Thats the reality. Most heterosexual couples kids are unplanned and those that adopt have difficulty doing so. Gay adoption is a non issue.

    @herbal deity -the argument is from a childs point of view they want normality. I am a divorced Dad and i can honestly say thats what kids want-traditional unit cos thats what their friends have. Its an argument against single parenthood too.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Nervous Wreck
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,115 ✭✭✭✭Nervous Wreck


    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    I hope you don't mind...? I believe that people who are naturally and physically unable to keep the entire society going (mainly by procreation) should not be given the same rights like the ones who give birth, raise children, etc. or those disabled by ilness (as we all know homosexuality is NOT an ilness, so...). Marriage and family are not just a joint bank account, reliefs in Revenue and free sex anytime you want, "one of the primary functions of the family is to produce and reproduce persons—biologically and socially".


    So, for example, women who have undergone hysterectomies before baring a child or men who have fertility problems or vasectomies should be told on arrival at the registry office that their physical/biological/social conditions simply aren't conducive to marriage and, well, better luck next life? How very sound.


  • #8
    Herbal Deity
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,397 ✭✭✭Herbal Deity


    I think he stuck in the "or those disabled by illness" (by which I presume he means infertile people) to avoid that retort.

    My question would be, why would you let those who are "disabled by illness" and can't have kids marry?


  • #9
    Dr_Phil
    Closed Accounts Posts: 711 ✭✭✭Dr_Phil


    Herbal Deity wrote: »
    Why do people fear gay marriage and adoption so much?
    I don't know, maybe someone who fears will be able to answer this question.

    Herbal Deity wrote: »
    You don't see people opposed to gay marriage on the basis of marriage being the foundation of the family unit opposing marriage between infertile couples.
    Being infertile if you are heterosexual is a medical condition that people can and try to cure. Homosexuality - as was proudly announced and it's being repeted quadrillions of times - is NOT an ilness and is impossible to "cure" - simply because there is nothing to "cure". This is just a slight difference some people don't see. Following this, you are comparing people with medical condition (who want and try to get "fixed") with homosexuals, who claim they are absolutely normal.

    Herbal Deity wrote: »
    You don't see people opposed to gay adoption on the basis that every child has the right to a mother and a father opposing single parents, or any other non-traditional family setup.
    Sign up your kids for such experiments, I will not risk fcuking up ones mental health/personality to please 3% sexual minority. I was raised by my mother only and I never dreamed of having 2 mothers just to keep the numbers in order (2 instead of 1).

    Herbal Deity wrote: »
    I've never, ever heard an argument against either that made any sense.
    Simply they are the same as yours: you say White i say Black. You give me an argument, why for God's sake would I let for a child to be taken by 2 men/women acting (playing roles) like ma and da instead of let the kid go to normal* family? Why gay? There are no heterosexual couples looking to adopt kids anymore? Better fcuk up kid's life at start? Would you like to have 2 dads?

    * Homosexuality is natural, but not normal. If it was normal, they would have a way to reproduce and it would be us, hetero in a few % minority, trying to convince homosexuals that the opposite sex is normal and cool - even if it doesnt give children who keep the whole life going.

    Also, mate of mine who's homosexual is against adoption too. Haven't asked him for a detailed reason though...



    EDIT: NervousWreck - I believe you missed the last words by mistake..? "I believe that people who are naturally and physically unable to keep the entire society going (mainly by procreation) should not be given the same rights like the ones who give birth, raise children, etc. or those disabled by ilness (as we all know homosexuality is NOT an ilness, so..."


  • #10
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    Hey guys -lets not get sidetracked by adoption. Its not in the proposed legislation.

    You have a bastardised piece of legislation going thru the Dail thats not doing what its supposed to do with all sorts of ****e about cohabiting couples when it is supposed to be dealing with same sex couples.

    Its a total shambles and does not match up with irish divorce laws either but what its not doing is what people want and thats providing a legal framework for homosexuals to organise their relationships around.

    The legislators must have been popping some quare stuff when they came up with their proposals.


  • #11
    Herbal Deity
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,397 ✭✭✭Herbal Deity


    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    Being infertile if you are heterosexual is a medical condition that people can and try to cure.
    What if there is absolutely NO chance of an infertile couple getting cured?

    Like, are you against people in their 60s getting married?
    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    Sign up your kids for such experiments, I will not risk fcuking up ones mental health/personality to please 3% sexual minority.
    Should my future wife and I pass away leaving children behind I would absolutely have no problem with them being adopted by same sex parents.

    Thousands of kids have been raised by same sex parents, and no studies have consistently shown there to be no negative reprecussions:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting
    Scientific research has shown that lesbian and gay parents are as fit and capable as heterosexual parents.[8][9][10] Research has documented that there is no relationship between parents' sexual orientation and any measure of a child's emotional, psychosocial, and behavioral adjustment.[8][9][10][11] American Psychological Association also states that "the results of some studies suggest that lesbian mothers' and gay fathers' parenting skills may be superior to those of matched heterosexual parents." [12] The literature indicates that parents’ financial, psychological and physical well-being is enhanced by marriage and that children benefit from being raised by two parents within a legally-recognized union.[8][9][11]
    Dr_Phil wrote: »
    Simply they are the same as yours: you say White i say Black. You give me an argument, why for God's sake would I let for a child to be taken by 2 men/women acting (playing roles) like ma and da instead of let the kid go to normal* family? Why gay? There are no heterosexual couples looking to adopt kids anymore? Better fcuk up kid's life at start? Would you like to have 2 dads?
    You automatically jump to the conclusion that homosexual parents = ****ed up mental health, when all the evidence is on the contrary. I would not mind having 2 dads.

    Logically, I would conclude that a suitable environment for raising children would be one where they are loved and cared for, have security, and have the influence of a couple who love and respect each other. I don't really see how gender comes in to this.

    Legally, single people can adopt. Do you agree with this?


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 2,960 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    CDfm wrote: »
    We need simple legislation to address this issue and the current proposals are a real mess.


    Any change to the definition of marriage would require a referendum to amend the constitution. I dont think the general population of Ireland would be in favour of it. Although, given the divorce referendum and the Lisbon treaty, we only need to be asked twice :)


  • #13
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Any change to the definition of marriage would require a referendum to amend the constitution.
    I dont think the general population of Ireland would be in favour of it.

    I dont think the general population would care about same sex civil partherships or unions or whatever you would decide to call it.

    Where it weirds people out is when people start talking about adoption and church weddings and all the other side issues that go with it.

    I am a divorced guy with kids and wonder why they would want the hassle but then again its the social and legal recognition of the relationship.
    Although, given the divorce referendum and the Lisbon treaty, we only need to be asked twice :)

    I am sure that in the current recession we would vote for whatever Europe asked. For the right money we would add things on :p


  • #14
    myflipflops
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,817 ✭✭✭myflipflops


    I'm a hetero-sexual, single guy in my late twenties with a pretty centrist political/social outlook.

    For the life of me, I can't see ANY reason in the world why civil partnerships between same sex couples shouldn't be allowed.

    There is no religious connotations to it as it is a civil thing. People deserve the right to choose for themselves.

    Same sex adoption is a much more difficult issue and should be kept as a separate debate.


  • #15
    MagicSean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    I think that we should leave marraige as a religious thing and have civil partnership as the legal partnership. Completely seperate the two. If you want to be with someone under the law you get a civil partnership. And if you are religious you can have a seperate religious ceremony. No rights should be conferred on those that get married. All rights should be attached to the civil partnership. That way the legal "marraige" can be open to everyone and the church "marraige" can be restricted to those that fall within the rules of that religion.


  • #16
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    k_mac wrote: »
    I think that we should leave marraige as a religious thing and have civil partnership as the legal partnership. Completely seperate the two..

    I can never for the life of me understand the we want a church wedding thing and the people that put it forward.

    Its like asking for yellow coloured guinness -it does not come in that colour. Some christian churches do blessings and others dont.

    However, while I dont know this for certain , my feeling is that those that ask for this is a fringe group,whereas, the majority are looking for the social and legal recognition to be brought forward so they can arrange their lives together - home, pension etc.


  • #17
    MagicSean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    CDfm wrote: »
    I can never for the life of me understand the we want a church wedding thing and the people that put it forward.

    Its like asking for yellow coloured guinness -it does not come in that colour. Some christian churches do blessings and others dont.

    However, while I dont know this for certain , my feeling is that those that ask for this is a fringe group,whereas, the majority are looking for the social and legal recognition to be brought forward so they can arrange their lives together - home, pension etc.

    I can't understand it either. Why would someone want to get married in a church where they would be considered lesser people by those marrying them?


  • #18
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    k_mac wrote: »
    I can't understand it either. Why would someone want to get married in a church where they would be considered lesser people by those marrying them?

    Its one off those things that a person has to accept as part of life.

    The civil aspect is different and even though homosexuals are a minority they should be entitled to the dignity and respect in their relationships as heterosexuals are in ours.

    Thats inclusion as opposed to the social engineering of some advocates.


  • #19
    sopick
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46 ✭sopick


    i thinks its wrong a child having 2 fathers kissing and sh*t that would not be healthy for that child leave em get married or whatever but leave kids out of it they dont deserve that full stop:mad:


  • #20
    Reflector
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 380 ✭✭Reflector


    sopick wrote: »
    i thinks its wrong a child having 2 fathers kissing and sh*t that would not be healthy for that child leave em get married or whatever but leave kids out of it they dont deserve that full stop:mad:

    Wrong, grow up, two guys kissing is a part of being gay and there's nothing unhealthy about it. you're projecting your own problem with it here.
    Kids deserve a loving and stable home environment.


  • #21
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    sopick wrote: »
    i thinks its wrong a child having 2 fathers kissing and sh*t that would not be healthy for that child leave em get married or whatever but leave kids out of it they dont deserve that full stop:mad:
    Reflector wrote: »
    Wrong, grow up, two guys kissing is a part of being gay and there's nothing unhealthy about it. you're projecting your own problem with it here.
    Kids deserve a loving and stable home environment.

    I suppose the jury is still out on this one. I certainly don't know.Yet you hear of homosexual men successfully fostering boys from troubled backgrounds.

    But there seems not to be a different standard concerning two mothers does there not.

    It is easier for a woman to get a sperm donor than a man to get a surrogate mother.

    I also seem to remember a case where a lesbian couple sued their homosexual sperm donor for maintenance when they split up and won the case.No access for him and he pays I believe.

    So I suppose its more relevant to worry about the situation where there are serial partners.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Sleepy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 24,749 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    I'd be all for extending the definition of marriage to include any two consenting adults that wish to marry each other and believe a referendum on this will pass within my lifetime (though my infant daughter will probably be of voting age before enough of the small-minded have died out to let it pass).

    The civil partnership legislation worries me as an unmarried man cohabiting with a dependent partner. I don't like the idea that the government can decide I'd be liable for alimony payments in the event of her deciding to run off with another guy. While it's admittedly very unlikely unless Robert Pattinson comes calling, I believe any form of marriage or civil partnership should be entered into through the couple's decision rather than circumstance.

    Boards.ie need your help to survive, subscribe here



  • #23
    Beruthiel
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 42,361 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beruthiel


    sopick wrote: »
    i thinks its wrong a child having 2 fathers kissing and sh*t that would not be healthy for that child

    In your opinion.
    For a child who knows no different, it would be a natural, loving display of affection and nothing more.

    I live in my semi-d with my fella.
    Next door to us are an excellent gay couple. The best neighbours I've ever had.
    None of us intend to have kids.
    Yet I'll be marrying my fella next September.
    Even though the neighbours have been together 10 year, they can't.

    Seems some people are more equal than others in Ireland.


  • #24
    Saint Ruth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 143 ✭✭Saint Ruth


    Reflector wrote: »
    Kids deserve a loving and stable home environment.
    Kids should have a mammy and a daddy...


  • #25
    Kooli
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Kooli


    Saint Ruth wrote: »
    Kids should have a mammy and a daddy...

    Sure if that were possible for every kid wouldn't life be great?

    Seeing as it's not, we'd better make sure that single parents have their kids taken off them so we can hand them over to a married couple.


  • #26
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    Come on people.

    This thread is about simple legislation allowing same sex couples to organise themselves legally as each others partners or next of kin.

    The legislative proposals before the Dail muddled what was a simple issue into all kinds of social proposals that have diverse groups objecting to it who otherwise would be tolerant or neutral on the issue. The IFA is against the legislation but AFAIK have no objection to voluntary same sex civil union.

    So cmon -dont derail my thread folks

    I started the thread to discuss this issue.

    If people want to discuss gay and lesbian parenting or bi-sexual parenting or religious beliefs on marriage then those are other topics.

    I am not gay or bisexual but one of my reasons for starting this thread was to filter out those arguments and also allow others to express their support or otherwise on the basic issue.

    As this is tGC maybe gay or lesbians or relatives/friends of same may want to use the anonymous posting feature on tGC. Just a thought.


  • #27
    iptba
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,952 ✭✭✭iptba


    I'm perfectly happy for gay couples to have next-of-kin rights in hospitals, etc.

    And also if they want to register their relationship so that one can claim money of the other if the relationship breaks down, like with a divorce, I'm fine with that.

    However, I am not convinced that it is the best use of precious tax resources to allow them tax breaks e.g. on inheritance. An exception might be if a registered gay adopted a child, in such a scenario they get the full tax breaks that married heterosexual couples enjoy.

    But, as CDfm said, gay adoption is rare so it seems a bit odd to give tax breaks designed to provide a supportive relationship for children to be brought up, for the rare cases where gay couples adopt.

    It's of course easier to say X tax is mean e.g. inheritance tax is mean - people shouldn't have to pay it; stamp duty is mean - people shouldn't have to pay it; income tax is a disincentive to work, etc. But you have to get tax income from somewhere and reliefs should be targeted I think.

    But this is not a PC position to make so I suspect most politicians won't make it on behalf of those who hold such views.

    Anyway, it's not something I feel that strongly about. Evidence of this is that I have complained about the opt-out part of the cohabiting legislation to some politicians (see: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055862413 for more on this), but not the tax breaks for gay marriage.


  • #28
    Beruthiel
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 42,361 Mod ✭✭✭✭Beruthiel


    iptba wrote: »
    However, I am not convinced that it is the best use of precious tax resources to allow them tax breaks e.g. on inheritance.

    I find that comment incomprehensible. If they work and pay taxes just like I do, how are they not entitled to the same benefits as me?
    My neighbours have lived in their house for nearly 10 years, are you saying if one dies, the other is not entitled to inherit the house?


  • #29
    CDfm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,649 ✭✭✭✭CDfm


    Beruthiel wrote: »
    I find that comment incomprehensible. If they work and pay taxes just like I do, how are they not entitled to the same benefits as me?
    My neighbours have lived in their house for nearly 10 years, are you saying if one dies, the other is not entitled to inherit the house?

    in fact if anything they are penalised as they pay thru theit taxes for a whole manner of things like education etc for children they dont benefit from but pay into the pot like everyone else

    on inheritence tax the big issue is tax on the property transfer on death of one partner and that should be exempt and go to the survivor -if that is their wish

    if anything civil partnership will affect their qualification for jobseekers/unemployment assistance housing etc if one of them is not working so thereare swings and roundabouts

    (in fact, I hadnt thought on how the current legislation proposal will also affect long term co-habiting heterosexual couples and benefits -as if anything this is a major issue as a consequence of the legislation)


  • #30
    ChocolateSauce
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,892 ✭✭✭ChocolateSauce


    I'm of the immovable opinion that civil unions are a bad thing, and should be opposed, because they create a second class of citizen- those who aren't fit for marriage but need to be "recognised".

    Full equality for gays is the only acceptable situation. Marriage should be between two people, and the state should not only not care about their gender, but should go to lengths to ensure that civil servants carry out their duties equally with every couple they wed.


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    liah
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,750 ✭✭✭liah


    I'm actually shocked that people still think like this in 2010.

    Why do people think they have the right to make decisions for anyone else due to a personal, completely unfounded belief that homosexuality will have a negative effect on the kids?

    Here's a thought: maybe if you got your heads out of your arses and stopped looking down on homosexuals as if they're aliens and taught your kids that homosexuals are just normal people too, the homosexual couple's kids wouldn't be made fun of as their situation would be commonplace and accepted.

    The reason of "oh but think of the children!" is ridiculous. You're not thinking of the children. You're thinking about your own bigotry. The children would be fine as long as they have caring parents, regardless of gender, and heterosexual parents teaching their kids that homosexuality is okay would eliminate the issue completely.

    Way too much bullshít and unfounded hatred in this thread for my liking. I'm out. This is disgusting.


Advertisement
Advertisement