Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
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.

Will you vote in the gay marriage referendum?

1…910121415…66

Comments

  • #332
    arybvtcw0eolkf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,608 ✭✭✭✭arybvtcw0eolkf


    Of course I'll vote... I wouldn't block the passage of any Bill.. :pac:


  • #333
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,442 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    S.R. wrote: »
    I will vote. Of course against.

    Fair play. Good stuff. And such a well reasoned an argued post too. Well. That's my mind changed. I'm impressed. Very impressed. Well done.


  • #334
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,367 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    S.R. wrote: »
    I will vote. Of course against.

    Your "of course" seems to assume a self evident nature to your position that is not shared by the majority of the posters on this thread. You might find therefore you are expected to adumbrate your rationale behind this. Do not be surprised.


  • #335
    Penny Tration
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,687 ✭✭✭✭Penny Tration


    1123heavy wrote: »
    Daith I expressed my opinion on family life, what is the issue ? It appears you and those of a similar mentality aren't happy and feel the need to demonise those who aren't of the "Teletubby happy" mindset. I want what's best for the future of Ireland and its children, I do not feel voting yes will serve Ireland's best interests and therefore will not be doing so. I should not have to answer to anyone or accept abuse.
    Take your hate filled intimidating posts (that only seek to make those of different opinions outcasts) elsewhere.

    What is the issue? You called gay parents child abusers! That's an issue.


  • #336
    kunst nugget
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭kunst nugget


    S.R. wrote: »
    I will vote. Of course against.

    Shít must be getting serious if Yoda's getting involved.


  • Advertisement
  • #337
    fran17
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,262 ✭✭✭fran17


    Grayson wrote: »
    Yes, marriage is a religious ceremony. Except for the ones in registry offices of course.

    And gay people have a huge aversion to religion. that can easily be seen by all the gay men who joined the church.

    And marriage is defined as a union of men and women. except for when it isn't. And except for when the definitions of words change. And they change literally all the time. I can say that because the definition of literally changed last year to include both the literal definition and a figurative definition. So even if I'm wrong about the definitions of words changing, I'm right because the definition of that word changed.

    But yeah. I'm with you man. It's a gay conspiracy to take down the church. FIGHT THE POWER. (especially when that power is a traditionally oppressed minority)

    Between the sarcasm you actually make a couple of good points.Yes marriage is a religious ceremony,traditionally has been and after this silly little storm has blown over will continue to be.Also your right that the whole gay union argument is built of the changing and redefining of words because to use the true meanings would leave you falling flat on your face.


  • #338
    floggg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    ebbsy wrote: »
    What the Yes camp would need to be careful of is accusing people of discrimination just because they have a different opinion.

    They might get a nasty shock next year.

    But it is discrimination. It's saying "Your relationship is not worthy of or entitled to the same rights, protections, and privileges as mine. It is ubequal and undeserving".

    That is nothing if not discrimination - particularly given the absence of any compelling reason for the differing treatment.


  • #339
    ZiabR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,574 ✭✭✭ZiabR


    S.R. wrote: »
    I will vote. Of course against.

    Why, can i ask?


  • #340
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,277 ✭✭✭Daith


    fran17 wrote: »
    whole gay union argument is built of the changing and redefining of words because to use the true meanings would leave you falling flat on your face.

    Show me the definition of marriage in our constitution?


  • #341
    1123heavy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,054 ✭✭✭1123heavy


    What is the issue? You called gay parents child abusers! That's an issue.

    No I did not. I said it would be child abuse to put children through such a horrific upbringing and mess with their minds in such a disturbing way as to give them 2 of the same parent (there is a difference). I honestly think some of you are having me on in claiming that it's perfectly acceptable for two "fathers" to raise a child while in a SSM.


  • Advertisement
  • #342
    S.R.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 667 ✭✭✭S.R.


    endacl wrote: »
    Fair play. Good stuff. And such a well reasoned an argued post too. Well. That's my mind changed. I'm impressed. Very impressed. Well done.

    If you think I am here to change your mind then you are wrong.
    I am not here to change minds of RWD cars fans. :D


  • #343
    Shrap
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    fran17 wrote: »
    Between the sarcasm you actually make a couple of good points.Yes marriage is a religious ceremony,traditionally has been and after this silly little storm has blown over will continue to be.Also your right that the whole gay union argument is built of the changing and redefining of words because to use the true meanings would leave you falling flat on your face.

    You do rather insist on marriage being traditionally a religious ceremony, when all the evidence you have been provided with shows that BEFORE your religious definition existed it was a contract that was entered into between a man and the father of a girl who was effectively sold in exchange for property or goods? Religion just prettied up the ceremony a bit. We managed to change the "tradition" a number of times in the meantime. And we'll do it again, to reflect the current social norms.


  • #344
    Penny Tration
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,687 ✭✭✭✭Penny Tration


    1123heavy wrote: »
    No I did not. I said it would be child abuse to put children through such a horrific upbringing and mess with their minds in such a disturbing way as to give them 2 of the same parent (there is a difference). I honestly think some of you are having me on in claiming that it's perfectly acceptable for two "fathers" to raise a child while in a SSM.

    You're saying that them having two parents of the same sex is child abuse. So the two parents are abusing the child, in your opinion. Don't back track now.


  • #345
    S.R.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 667 ✭✭✭S.R.


    1123heavy wrote: »
    No I did not. I said it would be child abuse to put children through such a horrific upbringing and mess with their minds in such a disturbing way as to give them 2 of the same parent (there is a difference). I honestly think some of you are having me on in claiming that it's perfectly acceptable for two "fathers" to raise a child while in a SSM.


    You are right. No to 2 fathers, No to 2 mothers.


  • #346
    Flem31
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭Flem31


    floggg wrote: »
    It's not an attempt to win a debate. It's just a response to words and actions.

    This isn't a political or fiscal issue being debated, it's people's rights and relationships. Many of us find arguments in favour of continued discrimination morally reprehensible.

    We don't call out people or their arguments as bigoted just to be mean or bully them. It's because we feel that advocating discrimination is bigotry - especially when there appears to be no basis for it other than contempt and dislike.

    It's not name calling for the sake of it - it's a challenge to that bigotry. You can't challenge it unless you acknowledge it.

    Pretending that their arguments and attitudes are deserving of equal respect or are simply a difference opinion old give them undue weight and falsely imply that they are a reasonable position to hold.

    Believing that somebody is less equal than others or less deserving of legal protection and privileges granted to others is never a reasonable position to hold - and you cannot hold such believes without there being a black mark on your character.

    I know that the word Bigot has become the buzzword here over the last hour......did you look it up before posting

    "a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions"




    As a more general comment and as I have said before, I am undecided.......but if the posts over the past two hours are indicative of how the Yes campaign will conduct their campaign, I believe it will not be popular with the large number of undecided voters like me.
    Trying to win a campaign by repeated name calling is unlikely to succeed......stick to the rational arguments about fairness and equality and the chances of success are far greater.


  • #347
    eyescreamcone
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,562 ✭✭✭eyescreamcone


    fran17 wrote: »
    Between the sarcasm you actually make a couple of good points.Yes marriage is a religious ceremony,traditionally has been and after this silly little storm has blown over will continue to be.Also your right that the whole gay union argument is built of the changing and redefining of words because to use the true meanings would leave you falling flat on your face.

    Marriage is a religious ceremony and/or a legal ceremony. It's amazing how some people just don't want to get this FACT!

    Because some gay people would like to get LEGALLY married - how does this actually affect the lives of the "vote NO brigade".

    Just imagine the YES vote won.
    What is the worst fear of the NO voters?
    Give us your nightmare scenario as to how we will all be affected.


  • #348
    S.R.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 667 ✭✭✭S.R.


    Jingle Balls were you Jingle Bells before visiting Chernobyl?


  • #349
    TwoShedsJackson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    1123heavy wrote: »
    No I did not. I said it would be child abuse to put children through such a horrific upbringing and mess with their minds in such a disturbing way as to give them 2 of the same parent (there is a difference). I honestly think some of you are having me on in claiming that it's perfectly acceptable for two "fathers" to raise a child while in a SSM.

    Why isn't it acceptable and what proof can you offer that the upbringing would be horrific and mess with their minds?

    Furthermore, what's your opinion on marriages between a man and a woman where the children are abused or have a hellish upbringing, or does that not happen?


  • #350
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    1123heavy wrote: »
    No I did not. I said it would be child abuse to put children through such a horrific upbringing and mess with their minds in such a disturbing way as to give them 2 of the same parent (there is a difference). I honestly think some of you are having me on in claiming that it's perfectly acceptable for two "fathers" to raise a child while in a SSM.

    Im assuming you have something to back this up with?


  • #351
    Penny Tration
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,687 ✭✭✭✭Penny Tration


    S.R. wrote: »
    Jingle Balls were you Jingle Bells before visiting Chernobyl?

    Is that meant to be a joke? Seems to be missing the punch line.


  • Advertisement
  • #352
    1123heavy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,054 ✭✭✭1123heavy


    Jingle_Balls wrote: »
    You're saying that them having two parents of the same sex is child abuse. So the two parents are abusing the child, in your opinion. Don't back track now.


    Rest assured I am not backtracking. I stand by everything I've said as it is true. You know it and so does everyone. This happy happy gay world that everyone wants to force down us will lead to destruction.


  • #353
    dark crystal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,962 ✭✭✭✭dark crystal


    I'll be voting yes, not out of spite for the CC, but because I believe in equality for all.

    I don't understand why anyone would vote against equality in this day and age, tbh. It makes me sad to think not everyone feels this way about their fellow human beings.


  • #354
    ZiabR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,574 ✭✭✭ZiabR


    S.R. wrote: »
    If you think I am here to change your mind then you are wrong.
    I am not here to change minds of RWD cars fans. :D

    But you are not explaining why you have the view you have?


  • #355
    S.R.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 667 ✭✭✭S.R.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPlSB8MPM-c


  • #356
    EazyD
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,207 ✭✭✭EazyD


    1123heavy wrote: »
    No I did not. I said it would be child abuse to put children through such a horrific upbringing and mess with their minds in such a disturbing way as to give them 2 of the same parent (there is a difference). I honestly think some of you are having me on in claiming that it's perfectly acceptable for two "fathers" to raise a child while in a SSM.

    Having you on? We live in the 21st century buddy so unfortunately for people like yourself things are changing and people are now able to make choices they probably never dreamed of having in their lifetime. Should have happened earlier but better now than never. You know because we live in a civilised society where everyone should get the same liberties as the next person.


  • #357
    kunst nugget
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭kunst nugget


    1123heavy wrote: »
    This happy happy gay world that everyone wants to force down us will lead to destruction.

    Aye, the miserable bollix straight world is the only way to go.


  • #358
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,173 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    It's the cultural legacy in Afghanistan for women to be stoned to death, do you think this cultural legacy should be done away with?

    It was also our "cultural legacy" to lock up pregnant unmarried mothers. No doubt Manach is just drive-by posting as usual.


  • #359
    Ken79
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 94 ✭✭Ken79


    It makes them happy and costs me nothing. It's a no-brainer.

    I'll vote and I really hope you do to. You might say this form of discrimination doesn't effect you personally but discrimination tarnishes all who tolerate it and some day you may find yourself needing others to stand up for you.


  • #360
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    mikemac1 wrote: »
    Sharing of tax credits for all!

    Isn't that why couples get married? :p

    CP already have the same tax credits


  • Advertisement
  • #361
    eyescreamcone
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,562 ✭✭✭eyescreamcone


    1123heavy wrote: »
    Rest assured I am not backtracking. I stand by everything I've said as it is true. You know it and so does everyone. This happy happy gay world that everyone wants to force down us will lead to destruction.

    Destruction?

    Please clarify

    Will we all be turned into a pillar of salt by "the imaginary friend"

    Destruction!!! - is this the type of crap we're going to have to put up with for the next few months?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement