SSM Referendum Spring 2015

Sonics2k wrote: »

Elton John is not all gay people.

Also, why do these debates always focus on gay men, and not women?

Because two men riding is sick, but two women riding is a fantasy.

Complete hypocrisy, but I always get a laugh embarrassing my mates when I loudly shout out in public I've found their gay porn stash when I borrow their laptops in college :pac:

Nodin wrote: »

There is also the "fact" that gay men are inherently sleazy fellows, unlike we hetero men, and our fastidious, noble and pure ways.

It's true, ye're sick bastards altogether

_Redzer_ wrote: »

It's true, ye're sick bastards altogether

Lies!!!!! I have never ever ever ever ever ever envisaged using my manly man parts except in the manner nature intended to bring about a new generation.




And you cannot prove otherwise.

Chance The Rapper wrote: »

That's fair enough, can someone please link a source?

As requested
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland#Adoption_and_parenting

Thank you, that'll be handy for convincing some family members to vote yes.

This is taken from http://www.broadsheet.ie/2014/07/04/look-me-in-the-eyes-and-tell-me-why-i-cant-marry/ so save myself having to type out a lot of quotes.

Ciara McCDonagh: “Senator Ronan Mullen has joined us. Ronan, is it fair to say you are against marriage equality and why?”

Straight into it, she asks if he is against marriage equality and why. Unless he didn't know he will be talking about SSM this is not an ambush. The answer to this is "Yes/no because....."

Ronan Mullen: “That’s where we have to start, getting the language right so that we have a respectful debate. There are hundreds of thousands of people Ciara in this country who see that marriage equality is itself a loaded term, who see that this is a debate about whether we should keep the current definition of marriage or whether we should change it. Equality is a great thing, but, you know the mere use of the word equality can take us into situations that don’t work at all, so for example you take for example you know under age persons who are completely equal in dignity and right to protection of law and in every respect for example a crime against a child is actually worse than a crime against an adult in most people’s eyes but for example there isn’t absolute equality in terms of voting rights in that situation because an issue of maturity arises in that situation.”

So people see it as a loaded term, how and why? He then talks about the "definition of marriage". Marriage is a cultural universal, nearly every culture has it in some form so what definition is he talking about? We allowed divorce, we have changed marriage already. It doesnt seem like we are going to find out because off we go and talk about equality. Equality is good but not everyone has it which is true. The issue of maturity is what prevent children having the right to vote and make their own decisions, I would agree with this. Are gay people not mature enough to be treated equal when it comes to marriage? We have reasons for why children aren't treated as equals, what are the reasons behind gay people not being treated equally? Why is equality being mentioned at all if this is not about equality? We still dont know if he is for or against.

McDonagh: “But that’s slightly different, you’re talking about equality of adults…”

I would agree with this, SSM is about 2 consenting adults. We decided that children arent able to consent to things until they are older so why not allow SSM? We havent gotten to any reasons why not yet.

Mullen: “Of course it’s slightly different and this is where we have to get our issues clear and this is where journalists like yourself will, will really have to engage with the hard questions for both sides on a day to day basis. I have to say coming off a European election campaign this isn’t the burning issue for Irish society. That isn’t to say we shouldn’t deal with it, but I suppose on a day to day basis this isn’t the issue I’m dealing with with people whose kids have been forced to emigrate, who cant earn a decent living…”

Admits it is different, then I dont know where the **** that is going.

McDonagh: “Well, that’s fair enough but the Taoiseach has announced it is going to happen in spring so we’re going to have to debate it now, the onus is on the politicians and the media to air all these arguments, so what we want to know is why you’re not in favour of marriage equality.”

Tries to bring it back, she assumes he is against it. I think it is pretty well known anyway but probably should have worded it more like her previous question.

Mullen: “No I want you to stop using marriage equality because that’s a biased term.”

Is against a very common term used as made clear earlier, doesn't answer the question...again

McDonagh: “Well why would you be opposed to this referendum?”

Tries to word it in a way that he might actually answer.

Mullen: “Would you ask me why do I support the current definition of marriage, are you happy with that formulation?”

**** sake, again has to bring in this magical "definition of marriage"

McDonagh: “If the referendum gives people in same sex relationships the right to get married why are you against that, can you sum it up?”

Tries it another time. Is the ambush she wont play with his definition of marriage speech?

Mullen: “Simply because I favour the current definition of marriage, it’s not the biggest issue for me, it’s easy for me to say yes to what everybody wants. I just have to say in all honesty and having looked at the issues as they come up from time to time that I believe that current definition of marriage has a particular social role, the role that is around the protection of children and that is why I am from the start inviting the media to ensure the highest debate. You have to realise that there are hundreds of thousands if not more decent people in our country…”

Well **** you anyway, Im giving my definition of marriage speech whether you like it or not. So everyone wants it but he decides differently. Protection of children. An very flawed argument, having a child is not a requirement and SSM would bring in some protection to children of SS couples. We have people with children who are not married and we have people who are married but no children. Earlier he said "There are hundreds of thousands of people Ciara in this country who see that marriage equality is itself a loaded term, who see that this is a debate about whether we should keep the current definition of marriage or whether we should change it." and now says "You have to realise that there are hundreds of thousands if not more decent people in our country…"
Decent people are those who appose the changing of a definition we dont know.

McDonagh: “There are millions of decent people.”

This is noticed, tries to point out there are a lot more than hundreds of thousands of decent people in the country.

Mullen: “If you don’t turn it into a debating argument with me we will get more answers. The point I was trying to make, I haven’t finished the sentence, is that there are at least hundreds of thousands of decent people who have loved ones who may be in same sex relationships, for example, but who don’t feel they have to change their stance on whether marriage should be allowed or not.”

More answers? Could get more blood from a stone. Oh he is trying to make a point....wait, what point? Im not racist because I have black friends? Lets all pack up people. He is saying that there are people who know someone who is gay and dont want them to get married. We could ask those who are gay themselves but nah.

McDonagh: “But we have to give them the option of deciding it.”

Makes sense, how about we let someone decide if they want to get married or not.

Mullen: “The people? Yes, those people, and I think many of those people will take the view that the definition of marriage works for a particular social reason, that the meaning of marriage itself has to do with the relationship between men and women because that is a socially preferred context for the upbringing of children. With great respect for other situations, that something we want to protect.”

Again children and "socially preferred context", let just pack all single mothers off to a laundry. If you dont have a child within 1 year of getting married it should be annulled.

McCDonagh: “So you’re talking about people in same-sex relationships, gay and lesbian people being parents, that sort of thing? And possibly you’re raising concerns about that children in that situation? What evidence do you have that there’s any negative effect on those children?”

Questions claim that marriage is between a man and a woman because of preferred way to raise children. In fact there is evidence produced by science (yes, that science, not just a feeling but cold hard facts and numbers)

Mullen: “No you’re putting words in my mouth, you probably are putting words in my mouth because if you look what the current Constitution currently says there is a reason why marriage has been defined in a particular way and the definition of marriage, it seems to me what our Constitution says is that the State pledges to guard with special care the definition of marriage on which the family is founded there is this idea that the family is somehow founded on marriage.”

Isnt claiming that he has concerns about a child raised by a SS couple, instead talk about the family and marriage, no idea what the point is there. A married SS couple with a child are a family too, no idea what he thinks.

McDonagh: “Ok, but Ronan, because we don’t have a lot of time here, do you have any evidence that same-sex marriage will have an impact on the family?”

Asks for evidence.

Mullen: “The first impact that same sex marriage would have, or redefining marriage..”

Weeeeee. All aboard the tangent train!

McDonagh: “But on the family?”

Tries to ask what affect it will have on the family.

Mullen: “Just let me finish. Let me finish the point please.”

McDonagh: “Just asking the question.”

Oh great, he is on the point train, wil it stop off in tangentsville?

Mullen: “What I have noticed already is that you haven’t been cross-examining John in the same way, and I’m trying to take the media on a journey here, it’s a journey…”

Yup, 10 minute break in tangentsville. Still hasnt told us the effects of SSM on the family

McDonagh: “John and I had a few minutes before you got here.”

Mullen: “And did you grill him?”

McDonagh: “Yes. Did you hear it?”

Mullen: “No, but..”

McDonagh: “We’re very short on time Ronan.”

More waffle, tries to get him back on track.

Mullen: “No I’m going to answer your first question. The definition of marriage works because the international supported evidence is that the, the preferred context, with great respect for other situations is the two biological parents. That’s what the data says. I think we lose this if we go changing the definition of marriage that may, frankly, deprive a child of their rights starting off. We can’t go talking about children’s rights after they’re born if we don’t care about the circumstances in which they’re brought into the world.”

People have children with our without marriage. Still hasnt explained what effects SSM has on the family. Talks about depriving a child of having an at least average upbringing, the horror. Should give the child to 2 straight drug addict Catholics for the best context.

McDonagh: “Right. Ronan, one more question. John is sitting across the table from you. He currently doesn’t have the opportunity to marry the person he loves. Can you tell me why, and why that should be the case.”

Mullen: “Well…”

Lyons: “You can try and look at me, Ronan, when you answer it. I’m a human being, I’m a human being here.”

Mullen: “Don’t demonise me, John. I smile at you and address you every day of the week in Leinster house, and what I’m not going to let happen during this debate, no matter whom I debate it with, good people like you John and Ciara and anybody else, ‘m going to insist on professionalism on all sides and I’m also going to insist that nobody’s demonised. The suggestion that I can’t look you in the eye and smile at me is a lie, John, because I’ve always treated you with the utmost courtesy.You’ve come to my door canvassing a vote and Ive always treated you with the utmost courtesy. So please don’t try to send out a message or paint…”

Lyons: “I most certainly wouldn’t Ronan. I think you know me better than that.”

He is a poor victim, they're trying to talk about why a SS couple cant raise a child and they just attack him. Still no answer as to why Lyons shouldnt be allowed to marry.

Mullen: “No I don’t you see, and I’m trying to set down the ground rules for this debate to make sure it has to be respectful. I’m a tough nut, you see, and I’m not doing this for myself, I’m doing this to make sure decent people aren’t frightened out of this debate because they’re being made to look like bad people….”

Decent people, dont want them to look bad, non man and woman families are bad which is ok to say.

McDonagh: “That’s something I raised with John before you came in and I’m going to ask you it as well. The tone of this debate, we have about nine months, what are we going to do to make sure that it doesn’t descend into accusations of homophobia?”

Mullen: “Well that’s out of the question now because we know that that’s libellous, presumably we’ve learned from what happened in RTE…”

Next up, lawsuit for calling the KKK a racist followed by a person who doesnt eat meat a vegetarian.

Lyons: “I think we’ll have quite a decent and respectful debate on this and it will be honest and frank and robust I presume, and people should be challenged on their views.”

Mullen: “Exactly, it’s all about playing the ball not the man or woman isn’t it. Honour one another’s right to have a particular philosophical, moral, social, view. I see the view I have as coming from the protection of children, about the presumption that children should be ideally brought into the world in a father mother biological situation. Other people will disagree with that but’s a fair argument.”

Same as above, you have the right to want SSM just not to have it.

Lyons: “The debate in fairness from Ronan’s perspective has been moving away from what the Taoiseach has said already. The referendum itself will be on one point and on one point only and it will be exceptionally clear and none of the other things you’ve brought into it Ronan are going to be part of the debate. Will Irish society, will Irish society, will Irish people afford the right to civil marriage to people of same sex?”

Mullen: “Your emphasis on civil is good because this isn’t a religious matter.”

McDonagh: “Ronan, excuse me , we don’t know wording of this referendum at the moment. For now we have absolutely run out of time John Lyons, Labour TD for Dublin North West, Independent Senator Ronan Mullen, thank you both very much…”

Oh look, it isnt a religious matter. Finally some sense.

In the end lots of tangents, very few straight answers (hehehe, get it?), lots of children and no ambushes. A gay person can already adopt and soon a gay couple can adopt whether or not they are married so any talk of children is pointless as that is going to happen anyway.

Daith wrote: »

The children. The children.

Once again no one has any argument against equal marriage bar just don't like it"

I seriously doubt that anyone talking about SSM to the public doesn't know about the legislation being brought in. The result of the vote, even if 100% no, will not change a same sex couple having children. It is being purposely misleading in order to try and gain votes. This fact is something that needs to be pointed out any time someone thinks of a child as the no side pretend that by voting no you are protecting children.