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?

1353638404166

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Good question.

    Civil partnership legislation is perfectly adequate for same sex couples.

    Ah? Someone should let the thousands of same sex couples and individuals campaigning for full equality know. They'll be relieved.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Good question.

    Civil partnership legislation is perfectly adequate for same sex couples.


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


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 651 ✭✭✭AboutaWeekAgo


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Good question.

    Civil partnership legislation is perfectly adequate for same sex couples.

    Why should a civil partnership be enough? Do you think it would be perfectly adequate for male/female couples as well?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,394 ✭✭✭Sheldons Brain


    Why should a civil partnership be enough? Do you think it would be perfectly adequate for male/female couples as well?

    Male and Female couples are critical for family formation and as such a fundamental unit society and supported as such by every society on earth. Other, non fundamental, relationships exist in this societies as they do in Ireland, but they are not the business of the government.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,991 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    Male and Female couples are critical for family formation and as such a fundamental unit society and supported as such by every society on earth. Other, non fundamental, relationships exist in this societies as they do in Ireland, but they are not the business of the government.

    I'm pretty certain you don't have sheldons brain.

    This is an error called post hoc ergo propter hoc. It translates as "after
    this, therefore because of this". You think that because two things are related one leads to the other. Yes married people have children but...


    1) Unmarried people do to. Marriage is not a necessary step in having children or a family.
    2) There are many people who are married who don't have children.
    3) there are family units composed of same sex couples.

    Marriage = Children is not a tautology.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,991 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    david75 wrote: »
    Something i do have trouble with, and its probably stupid but speaking as a gay man in a long term relationship(8 years..) i dont get why we march on gay pride, the whole idea of pride being to celebrate our uniqueness and other qualities, then we march for marriage equality..we celebrate being different then demand the right to be the same..i think the normalisation process is good but its a double edged sword too..probably not explaining myself very well, just something I wonder about..

    Lets put if this way. What if you weren't allowed to march because you're gay? That would be annoying because you wouldn't have the same rights as straight people.

    Gay don't have to get married. passing marriage equality legislation won't force people to get married but it will make sure they can if they want to.

    Besides there's a million different types of relationships. Everyone should be able to choose one they want. Just so long as it works, makes them happe and doesn't directly hurt someone.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    Grayson wrote: »
    Lets put if this way. What if you weren't allowed to march because you're gay? That would be annoying because you wouldn't have the same rights as straight people.

    Gay don't have to get married. passing marriage equality legislation won't force people to get married but it will make sure they can if they want to.

    Besides there's a million different types of relationships. Everyone should be able to choose one they want. Just so long as it works, makes them happe and doesn't directly hurt someone.

    as a great man i know once said, if the gays demand equality and the right to be as miserable as the rest of us dopes who chose to get married, let them have it..misery for all:)

    but i take your point. and as to 'as long as it works', we are watching right now the galactically sized balls this government made of abortion legislation..no doubt in my mind they'll make the same balls of this, if not an ever bigger set..


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    padd b1975 wrote: »

    Civil partnership legislation is perfectly adequate for same sex couples.
    why?

    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



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


    a person. wrote: »
    Rev. Bernice King led a march to her father’s graveside in 2005 while calling for a constitutional ban on gay marriage.

    During a speech at a church meeting in New Zealand, she said her father “did not take a bullet for same-sex marriage.”

    King viewed homosexuality as a cultural and psychiatrc problem that could be solved :

    While writing an advice column for “Ebony Magazine,” Dr. King responded to a young “gay” man looking for guidance. Here is the exchange in its entirety:

    I wonder who knew him better - his wife, or the daughter who has but a child when he died.

    There is little point speculating though - neither of them, let alone us, can speculate what he might believe. We have no idea what he would think of an issue that nobody in the 60s and 70s would have thought possible.


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


    a person. wrote: »
    None of that was stated in the posts.

    Equality should apply to all people, if you are truly intrested in equality, you don't seek equality for just certain government approved straight and gay couples.

    I'm sorry. I didn't really to state the obvious for you.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,256 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    a person. wrote: »
    Winne Mandela disproves that claim

    Disproves what claim?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,863 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    why?

    Why have so many gay couples availed of the legislation if it's not?

    Should they not have ignored it on a point of principle if the overwhelming consensus amongst gays is that the legislation is inadequate?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,940 ✭✭✭20Cent


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Why have so many gay couples availed of the legislation if it's not?

    Should they not have ignored it on a point of principle if the overwhelming consensus amongst gays is that the legislation is inadequate?

    Anyone I know who did it said it was better than nothing and hoped full equality would eventually come.


  • Posts: 4,824 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Why have so many gay couples availed of the legislation if it's not?

    Should they not have ignored it on a point of principle if the overwhelming consensus amongst gays is that the legislation is inadequate?

    I would assume because, as flawed as the civil partnership legislation is, it's still better than nothing at all. Civil partnership offers SOME of the same benefits and legal protections of civil marriage, and it's better to have those than to have none at all.

    But civil partnership doesn't offer ALL the same benefits and legal protections, and thus is not, as you seem to think "perfectly adequate".

    http://www.marriagequality.ie/getinformed/missingpieces.html


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    padd b1975 wrote: »
    Why have so many gay couples availed of the legislation if it's not?

    Should they not have ignored it on a point of principle if the overwhelming consensus amongst gays is that the legislation is inadequate?

    Yes but why?

    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



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


    Does it? If you claim it does and there is no difference then why are we wasting money on this referendum?

    Someone already put up a link with the differences between the two. I could see civil partnership getting a lot of the stuff anyway. Why waste time and not just make it marriage for everyone?

    Are people really stupid enough to sit there and think that its ok, its not called marriage so my personal beliefs are safe?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,499 ✭✭✭porsche959




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    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



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,499 ✭✭✭porsche959


    Zillah wrote: »
    Anyone advocating denying gay people equal rights is a homophobe, calling them one is not unfair and wrong. There's no non-batshit reason to vote no.

    I'm sorry if your outdated prejudice is leaving you increasingly isolated from the developed world.

    See, it's exactly this kind of shouting and bullying from the liberal left that I find troubling.

    "We have the correct set of opinions to hold, and if you differ in anyway, then you're just wrong, and also a bigot."

    Do you know many of the early gay rights campaigners were against gay marriage? Some still are to this day, though understandably, in the current environment they tend to keep their opinion to themselves.


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


    porsche959 wrote: »
    See, it's exactly this kind of shouting and bullying from the liberal left that I find troubling.

    "We have the correct set of opinions to hold, and if you differ in anyway, then you're just wrong, and also a bigot."

    Do you know many of the early gay rights campaigners were against gay marriage? Some still are to this day, though understandably, in the current environment they tend to keep their opinion to themselves.

    You find that troubling but some of the stuff said about gay people isnt? Theres having the wrong opinion (which is very difficult to have a wrong opinion) and there is being wrong based on facts.


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


    porsche959 wrote: »
    See, it's exactly this kind of shouting and bullying from the liberal left that I find troubling.

    "We have the correct set of opinions to hold, and if you differ in anyway, then you're just wrong, and also a bigot."

    I find this victimhood campaign technique really fascinating. People who say horrible, hurtful and nasty things get called out on it and then suddenly they claim victimhood status. It's really really fascinating. It says to me that they often feel very uncomfortable when they are called out on what they say so instead of holding their ground and attempting to stand by their opinion they turn the tables. They turn things on their head and claim they are the victims. Yet you never see a lot of these people condemning the nasty hurtful things the no side say. It's an attempt to covertly change the agenda and divert the debate from the actual issues. It's really a fascinating tactic that those of us of the yes side need to be aware of.

    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



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,499 ✭✭✭porsche959


    I find this victimhood campaign technique really fascinating. People who say horrible, hurtful and nasty things get called out on it and then suddenly they claim victimhood status. It's really really fascinating. It says to me that they often feel very uncomfortable when they are called out on what they say so instead of holding their ground and attempting to stand by their opinion they turn the tables. They turn things on their head and claim they are the victims. Yet you never see a lot of these people condemning the nasty hurtful things the no side say. It's an attempt to covertly change the agenda and divert the debate from the actual issues. It's really a fascinating tactic that those of us of the yes side need to be aware of.

    If any and all arguments against gay marriage are automatically equated to "saying horrible, hurtful and nasty things" , then I'm afraid we have lost touch with logic and reasoning itself.

    As Richard Waghorne argues here:
    One is as likely to hear both that the Irish public desires the introduction of gay marriage and that the Irish public harbours a dangerous degree of homophobia.
    Rose draws on both claims, yet they are clearly self-contradictory.
    Separately but similarly, Rose says summarily “the court of public opinion has spoken”. This constitutes an attempt to shut down the debate on gay marriage.

    https://richardtwaghorne.wordpress.com/2012/04/20/irish-liberalism-the-gay-marriage-debate/


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


    porsche959 wrote: »
    If any and all arguments against gay marriage are automatically equated to "saying horrible, hurtful and nasty things" , then I'm afraid we have lost touch with logic and reasoning itself.

    As Richard Waghorne argues here:



    https://richardtwaghorne.wordpress.com/2012/04/20/irish-liberalism-the-gay-marriage-debate/

    Where has it been said that the Irish public are homophobic?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    porsche959 wrote: »
    If any and all arguments against gay marriage are automatically equated to "saying horrible, hurtful and nasty things" ,

    who said that? I certainly did not.

    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



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


    who said that? I certainly did not.

    It was probably the liberals because somehow they are involved in this along with the Illuminati.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 53 ✭✭a person.


    porsche959 wrote: »
    Paddy Manning


    Richard Waghorne.

    At last a bit of balance, brave lads to speak out about it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    I am not straight and don't think anyone should be married. Is that helping anyone's point? Feel free to take it if you need it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,882 ✭✭✭Saipanne


    To be against gay marriage is to believe that:

    "Some animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    a person. wrote: »
    At last a bit of balance, brave lads to speak out about it.

    Could you get back to me on this please? Thanks.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=93520028&postcount=1197


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,611 ✭✭✭Valetta


    Saipanne wrote: »
    To vote against gay marriage is to believe that:

    "Some animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others"

    There's not going to be a vote for (or against) gay marriage.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement