Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

SSM Referendum Spring 2015

1…4344464849…69

Comments

  • #1352
    _Redzer_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    fran17 wrote: »
    no but f**k people was the last time I checked

    Ah, sex then. Why are you feigning offence?

    Is this a ploy to ignore the rest oft post?


  • #1353
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    fran17 wrote: »
    no but f**k people was the last time I checked

    The word **** is believed to come from a german verb, to breed. In this context the person is using its original definition to say to have sex with someone.


  • #1354
    PeteFalk78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 762 ✭✭✭PeteFalk78


    I'm neither religious nor in favour of SSM. It's turning a moral wrong into a civil right and violates natural evolutionary law.


  • #1355
    _Redzer_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    The word **** is believed to come from a german verb, to breed. In this context the person is using its original definition to say to have sex with someone.

    Exactly. I'm being traditional.

    I thought Fran, who is all about tradition would appreciate that.


  • #1356
    _Redzer_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    PeteFalk78 wrote: »
    I'm neither religious nor in favour of SSM. It's turning a moral wrong into a civil right and violates natural evolutionary law.

    Back to biology class with you boyo.


    Maybe you'll learn marriage is a man- made, not natural concept along the way


  • Advertisement
  • #1357
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    PeteFalk78 wrote: »
    I'm neither religious nor in favour of SSM. It's turning a moral wrong into a civil right and violates natural evolutionary law.

    What?

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #1358
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    PeteFalk78 wrote: »
    I'm neither religious nor in favour of SSM. It's turning a moral wrong into a civil right and violates natural evolutionary law.

    Since when does the man made invention that is marriage have anything to do with evolution


  • #1359
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    PeteFalk78 wrote: »
    I'm neither religious nor in favour of SSM. It's turning a moral wrong into a civil right and violates natural evolutionary law.

    If you don't mind me asking, what do you consider a moral wrong and why?


  • #1360
    fran17
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,262 ✭✭✭fran17


    _Redzer_ wrote: »
    Sorry what was your question? The one where you said who better to legislate on marriage than Jesus?

    Well Jesus actually never ever mentioned gay people or marriage.

    The stuff that makes you against gay people comes from Leviticus. You know, where it allows for killing/stoning and slave keeping and all the nice stuff you ignore for no reason, yet keep the gay basing thing as fact from god.

    i'll answer the question for you.there was no mention of ssm until the early roman empire,in particular the emperor Elagabalus.and this was widely believed to be mere rumours started by enemies of him.
    your right that Jesus never mentioned homosexuality because the word was only coined in the late 1800's,this is a regular red herring used.the word fornication was used in reference to homosexuality.ie jude 1:7


  • #1361
    fran17
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,262 ✭✭✭fran17


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    The word **** is believed to come from a german verb, to breed. In this context the person is using its original definition to say to have sex with someone.

    lets be adult about this or not at all


  • Advertisement
  • #1362
    _Redzer_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    fran17 wrote: »
    i'll answer the question for you.there was no mention of ssm until the early roman empire,in particular the emperor Elagabalus.and this was widely believed to be mere rumours started by enemies of him.
    your right that Jesus never mentioned homosexuality because the word was only coined in the late 1800's,this is a regular red herring used.the word fornication was used in reference to homosexuality.ie jude 1:7

    There's documented evidence my archeologists and historians about same sex marriage in history. You believing it never happened doesn't make it magically disappear.

    Any evidence to show homosexuality in Rome, which was very well documented, were nothing but rumours?

    Also, I wouldn't take the bible as fact for anything. It was written by man and contains far too many things that would break the laws of physics and nature, and would be deemed "magical". Walking on water, talking snakes, talking bears etc, etc.


  • #1363
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    Please can we avoid bringing bible verses into this. Religion has nothing to do with this referendum and introducing it to the debate can only really serve to muddy the waters


  • #1364
    _Redzer_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    P_1 wrote: »
    Please can we avoid bringing bible verses into this. Religion has nothing to do with this referendum and introducing it to the debate can only really serve to muddy the waters

    I allowed myself to get caught up in that even though religion has got nothing to do with civil marriage and is worthless and irrelevant in this debate.


  • #1365
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    fran17 wrote: »
    i'll answer the question for you.there was no mention of ssm until the early roman empire,in particular the emperor Elagabalus.and this was widely believed to be mere rumours started by enemies of him.
    your right that Jesus never mentioned homosexuality because the word was only coined in the late 1800's,this is a regular red herring used.the word fornication was used in reference to homosexuality.ie jude 1:7


    Who cares ? There was no mention of democracy womens rights and slavery torture and crucifixion were all ok , times change and we move on.

    Lets get with the right millennium at least .


  • #1366
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    fran17 wrote: »
    lets be adult about this or not at all
    Explaining the origin of a word is not being adult? At least youq stopped talking about ambushes when I proved that wrong.

    You are a big fan of unchanging definitions, thought it would interest you.


  • #1367
    jbv
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 258 ✭✭jbv


    Where it this world going?
    What it was considered good and moral it's wrong now, old stuff.
    Looking forward for the future!!!


  • #1368
    Smartly Dressed
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 555 ✭✭✭Smartly Dressed


    Like other heterosexual people, my life won't change if this referendum passes.

    However, I don't understand how some people - who ultimately support SSM - feel so impartial and indifferent about it. Do they feel no sense of civic duty? Is there no element of their consciousness that urges them to support the rights of their fellow citizens? Do people not want to contribute to building a better nation for everyone, and not just engage when something specifically concerns them?

    The ''oh it doesn't really affect me so I don't care that much'' attitude is dreadful imho.


  • #1369
    _Redzer_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,056 ✭✭✭_Redzer_


    jbv wrote: »
    Where it this world going?
    What it was considered good and moral it's wrong now, old stuff.
    Looking forward for the future!!!

    I know, right?

    Stupid women out of the kitchen, voting and, worst of all, working!

    Society really is doomed.


  • #1370
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    _Redzer_ wrote: »
    I know, right?

    Stupid women out of the kitchen, voting and, worst of all, working!

    Society really is doomed.

    Tbh it all went downhill when we allowed white and black people to marry. Should just stay in their own race instead of giving children the non preferred life. Nature put them on separate continents for a reason.

    Fed up being thought of as a racist for thinking this, why wont people be tolerant of my beliefs.

    (Note: I dont actually think this, Im not a racist)


  • #1371
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    jbv wrote: »
    Where it this world going?
    What it was considered good and moral it's wrong now, old stuff.
    Looking forward for the future!!!

    i hear ya, it was all downhill once we started giving women, children and non whites equality. We can't make the same mistake again. Homosexuals know your place. Long life the white male.


  • Advertisement
  • #1372
    RDM_83 again
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,116 ✭✭✭RDM_83 again


    _Redzer_ wrote: »
    There's documented evidence my archeologists and historians about same sex marriage in history. You believing it never happened doesn't make it magically disappear.

    Any evidence to show homosexuality in Rome, which was very well documented, were nothing but rumours?

    _Redzer_ wrote: »
    So how does thousands of other cultures practising same sex marriage, even big fearsome cultures like the Romans, Greeks, Aztec, Mayans, Incas, Vikings, Native American tribes, and even cultures of Ancient Ireland, strengthen your point.

    If anything it just destroys it, because it shows actual traditional marriage allows for same-sex marriage, it's your religion that are breaking tradition in the eyes of history.
    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Marriage is a legal mechanism where two people not connected by a close blood relationship become legally a 'family unit' - two people joined by law and pre-dates Jesus by thousands of years.

    There is no logical reason why two people of the same gender cannot be legally recognised as a 'family unit' in law in exactly the same way as two people of opposite genders can.

    Not trying to draw this thread massively of topic because
    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Why does it matter what happened over 2000 years ago

    But in relation to this and I am really not an expert in at this so I fully expect to be corrected, but in the case of the Romans weren't the same sex relationships actually a form of concubinage rather than Marriage apart from a few cases where its mentioned as a negative to disparage the Masculinity of who the commentators were talking about.
    Like there was "Traditional Marriage" which created the family unit which were (apart from during Nero's reign possibly:confused: and his actions were often viewed as breaking tradition) between different genders, then there was concubinage and other states which were between people of different social status which in the case it was ok for the person of the higher status to be the Active partner but to be passive in a homosexual relationship was an unacceptable reduction of their masculinity.
    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Lastly, many Christians - such as Desmond Tutu - would not agree with you that Jesus would be anti- SSM.

    Agree completely not a religious expert but sometimes some of the USA (and Ulster Hardline) Christianity seems to be closer to Orthodox Judaism than being what others would interpret Christianities message as.


  • #1373
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,178 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    fran17 wrote: »
    profanities only lower debate.

    So would the terms:
    fran17 wrote: »
    completely one sided with gay boys and fag hags having a rant about the pillars our society have been built on for thousands of years.

    You seem like a disgruntled Jugendschutzer.


  • #1374
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,178 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    jbv wrote: »
    Where it this world going?
    What it was considered good and moral it's wrong now, old stuff.
    Looking forward for the future!!!

    I know, right? It used to be totally legal to send your slutty daughter to a Magdalene Laundry seemingly run by escaped SS officers.


  • #1375
    PeteFalk78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 762 ✭✭✭PeteFalk78


    eviltwin wrote: »
    Since when does the man made invention that is marriage have anything to do with evolution

    I wasn't talking biological.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_morality


  • #1376
    floggg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    fran17 wrote: »
    the problem with that is that bloody thing called democracy getting in the way again

    We don't have a simple democracy where the will of the majority outweighs the rights of the minority.

    We have a modern liberal democracy where the rights of the minority are protected by law. So this referendum, which is putting minority rights to a popular vote, actually violates the basic principles on which our political system is founded.


    So it would be naive to say that this referendum is about democracy. It's only need due to legal doubt as to the interpretation of a specific provisos of out constitution, which is itself unusual amongst modern constitutions and (I believe) was included as a result of meddling by the Catholic Church in the constitutional drafting process.


  • #1377
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    PeteFalk78 wrote: »
    I'm neither religious nor in favour of SSM. It's turning a moral wrong into a civil right and violates natural evolutionary law.

    There is nothing immoral or unnatural about homosexuality, or gay people marrying.


  • #1378
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    PeteFalk78 wrote: »
    I wasn't talking biological.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_morality

    Morality isn't static, it changes. It wasn't so long ago it was immoral for a married couple to separate or for a couple to have a child outside marriage. There was a time it was immoral for a woman to show her ankles. We've evolved as a race, we can look at other cultures not quite so socially advanced and what do we see? Women treated as little more than property of their husbands and fathers, poor people denied access to basic human rights because who cares right, gay people sentenced to death for the "crime" of just being who they are. Do you want to live in a society like that? Your entitled to your own views of course and if the idea of two people of the same sex having intimate relations is immoral to you then so be it but thankfully the rest of the country has moved on.


  • #1379
    PeteFalk78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 762 ✭✭✭PeteFalk78


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    There is nothing immoral or unnatural about homosexuality, or gay people marrying.

    That's your opinion and although it may be the opinion of the majority of people here, it still isn't the opinion of everybody.

    I have my opinion, I don't preach homophobia, I don't hate homosexuality and I don't try to throw my opinion down other peoples throats.

    Am I a bad person because on my moral compass homosexuality doesn't sit right with me?


  • #1380
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,948 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    PeteFalk78 wrote: »

    Am I a bad person because on my moral compass homosexuality doesn't sit right with me?
    Bad person? I can't say.

    But I believe your moral compass is pointing you in the wrong direction on this issue.


  • Advertisement
  • #1381
    P_1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,681 ✭✭✭✭P_1


    PeteFalk78 wrote: »
    That's your opinion and although it may be the opinion of the majority of people here, it still isn't the opinion of everybody.

    I have my opinion, I don't preach homophobia, I don't hate homosexuality and I don't try to throw my opinion down other peoples throats.

    Am I a bad person because on my moral compass homosexuality doesn't sit right with me?

    No and anybody who suggests so is doing you a disservice. However I do think that a bit of a retune of your moral compass wouldn't do you much harm.


Advertisement