Will you vote in the gay marriage referendum?

Nodin · 22-12-2014 07:44PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Like many people, I will speak in the polling booth. This thread is a complete joke. Anyone who is against homosexual "marriage" is subjected to personal abuse. Bans are handed out unjustly by overzealous and biased moderators. It is also a haven for people who seem incapable of understanding basic English. There's a big difference between describing homosexual relationships as inferior and describing homosexuals as inferior. But then that's the media agenda and the agenda of the majority who inhabit forums like this.

....sure why would that get anyones back up.....

david75 · 22-12-2014 07:44PM

i posted this over at that poll page

and still havent gotten a rational response to any of these questions..

Why do these people get to tell me that I cant celebrate my love and have my love for my boyfriend of 8 years recognised under law in marriage? We’re all guaranteed equal rights and recognition in the eyes of the law in Bunracht na hEireann
how does it threaten ‘family’? We want to have one! how does us wanting to have a family, threaten the idea of family? how does our getting married, threaten the institution of marriage?
simple questions that it’s heartbreaking to have to even ask, and have yet to be answered rationally by any opponent of marriage equality and equal rights.i’ve yet to encounter.

Larry Wildman · 22-12-2014 07:57PM

VinLieger wrote: »

Go on whats the difference that isn't incredibly insulting and based on illogical hate? Cant wait to hear this one.......

I am not falling for your traps...any of you.

The same trick over and over again. Bombard someone with questions (too many to answer) and then berate and report them when they fail to deal with all of them.

The people will speak when there's a referendum. Until then we'll have to endure the liberal bias in the media and on forums such as this.

Nodin · 22-12-2014 07:59PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

I am not falling for your traps...any of you.

The same trick over and over again. Bombard someone with questions (too many to answer) and then berate and report them when they fail to deal with all of them.

The people will speak when there's a referendum. Until then we'll have to endure the liberal bias in the media and on forums such as this.

Grand. We'll just assume your reasoning is insulting and based on illogical hate. Somehow I doubt we'll be proved wrong.

Larry Wildman · 22-12-2014 08:01PM

david75 wrote: »

i posted this over at that poll page

and still havent gotten a rational response to any of these questions..

Why do these people get to tell me that I cant celebrate my love and have my love for my boyfriend of 8 years recognised under law in marriage? We’re all guaranteed equal rights and recognition in the eyes of the law in Bunracht na hEireann
how does it threaten ‘family’? We want to have one! how does us wanting to have a family, threaten the idea of family? how does our getting married, threaten the institution of marriage?
simple questions that it’s heartbreaking to have to even ask, and have yet to be answered rationally by any opponent of marriage equality and equal rights.i’ve yet to encounter.

Why do you crave society's endorsement? Why should your behaviour be endorsed? Why should it be normalised?

Larry Wildman · 22-12-2014 08:02PM

Nodin wrote: »

Grand. We'll just assume your reasoning is insulting and based on illogical hate. Somehow I doubt we'll be proved wrong.

Do you believe that it's natural or appropriate for a man to sodomise another man?

shruikan2553 · 22-12-2014 08:03PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

I am not falling for your traps...any of you.

The same trick over and over again. Bombard someone with questions (too many to answer) and then berate and report them when they fail to deal with all of them.

The people will speak when there's a referendum. Until then we'll have to endure the liberal bias in the media and on forums such as this.

Yeah, all that bias of facts with backing instead of pulling stuff out of nowhere and lies.

Billy86 · 22-12-2014 08:05PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Do you believe that it's natural or appropriate for a man to sodomise another man?

Yes, because it exists in nature among many, many species of animals including humans.

Now carry along in your hunt for attention.

Nodin · 22-12-2014 08:08PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Do you believe that it's natural or appropriate for a man to sodomise another man?

Yep, whatever yer into. I fail to see the harm.

You know that heterosexuals practice sodomy also?

And is that your objection to gay marriage?

david75 · 22-12-2014 08:09PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Why do you crave society's endorsement? Why should your behaviour be endorsed? Why should it be normalised?

Why should slavery be rejected as an evil?
why do you get to say 'my behaviour' is wrong?
who gives you the right?

these arent hard questions. Be amazed if you can answer them without sounding homophobic or bigoted.

david75 · 22-12-2014 08:10PM

Laughable the way the bible brigade are always utterly unchristian in their opposition to gay rights:)

Larry Wildman · 22-12-2014 08:11PM

Billy86 wrote: »

Yes, because it exists in nature among many, many species of animals including humans.

Now carry along in your hunt for attention.

Yes, because internet forums like this are so representative of society. You actually believe these polls that claim that homosexual "marriage" is inevitable, don't you? You're ignoring the fact that the moral normal majority generally keep their views to themselves. The people will speak.

I also find it hilarious that you think that because some blind male retarded Peruvian goat had a homosexual experience once, it makes homosexuality "okay".

It doesn't.

The people will vote no.

marienbad · 22-12-2014 08:12PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Why do you crave society's endorsement? Why should your behaviour be endorsed? Why should it be normalised?

To be honest I don't think the LGBT community give a fcuk about society's endorsement , but due to a potentially divisive constitutition they have to 'bend the knee' just one last time to have it removed and then they can rightlyfully tell the rest of us to stuff our objections.

Just like Catholics in 1829 and women in 1918 provided they were over the age of 30 !

Why should anyone's behaviour be endorsed ( to use your curious phrase) ?

Mark Tapley · 22-12-2014 08:13PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Why do you crave society's endorsement? Why should your behaviour be endorsed? Why should it be normalised?

It is a matter of perspective. In my view you are the one exhibiting aberrant behaviour. Is it a media bias or people's sense of fair play that will make them vote yes.

Ash.J.Williams · 22-12-2014 08:15PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Do you believe that it's natural or appropriate for a man to sodomise another man?

you are protesting far too much

marienbad · 22-12-2014 08:16PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Do you believe that it's natural or appropriate for a man to sodomise another man?

DO you believe pornography is natural ? or sex toys , or oral sex , or a man sodomising a woman ?

It all depends on your view on so many things - why single out male sodomy ?

Larry Wildman · 22-12-2014 08:19PM

david75 wrote: »

Why should slavery be rejected as an evil?
why do you get to say 'my behaviour' is wrong?
who gives you the right?

these arent hard questions. Be amazed if you can answer them without sounding homophobic or bigoted.

Evil is a bit strong.

It is certainly wrong.

If I call it or you a "deviant" you or someone else will probably report me but that's what your behaviour is. It is deviant behaviour literally because you are deviating from the norm. The homosexual lobby feel they can hijack phrases like "deviant", "abnormal" and "abomination" and brand them as homophobic. Even the term "homophobic" is vile and pregnant with the vitriol of the homosexual lobby - Someone can be against homosexuality and neither fear nor loath homosexuals.

I neither fear nor loath you. However, I pity you and I believe that your influence should be limited. I also believe that children should be made aware that your behaviour and lifestyle are fundamentally wrong and deeply unhealthy and undesirable.

david75 · 22-12-2014 08:19PM

I'd really love if someone like Larry could explain their point of view without sounding so hateful..i'd listen just to try and understand and address his fears and objections..they're never very open to even listening though..which is a shame.

Knasher · 22-12-2014 08:22PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

I also find it hilarious that you think that because some blind male retarded Peruvian goat had a homosexual experience once, it makes homosexuality "okay".

Truly spoken like somebody who didn't grow up on a farm.

eviltwin · 22-12-2014 08:23PM

david75 wrote: »

I'd really love if someone like Larry could explain their point of view without sounding so hateful..i'd listen just to try and understand and address his fears and objections..they're never very open to even listening though..which is a shame.

Good luck with that. You won't get a single coherent argument out of Larry or others like him. Far easier for him to just insult everyone.

david75 · 22-12-2014 08:24PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Evil is a bit strong.

It is certainly wrong.

If I call it or you a "deviant" you or someone else will probably report me but that's what your behaviour is. It is deviant behaviour literally because you are deviating from the norm. The homosexual lobby feel they can hijack phrases like "deviant", "abnormal" and "abomination" and brand them as homophobic. Even the term "homophobic" is vile and pregnant with the vitriol of the homosexual lobby - Someone can be against homosexuality and neither fear nor loath homosexuals.

I neither fear nor loath you. However, I pity you and I believe that your influence should be limited. I also believe that children should be made aware that your behaviour and lifestyle are fundamentally wrong and deeply unhealthy and undesirable.

Larry, what do i have to do with children? how am i a risk? i want to have my own someday, and theyll be raised with open minds and the best education possible..

Pity? i have a brilliant life and i'm incredibly lucky and grateful to be in a long term relationship...

how is that
a. pitiable?
b. any of your business?

i've no interest in judging or limiting how you live, so why are people like you so obsessed with doing that to others?

You're trapped in a self imposed and uninformed cage of hate, it's only hurting you, it's not bothering me t all, so let some other information in. Educate yourself. You'll be happier.

Billy86 · 22-12-2014 08:26PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Yes, because internet forums like this are so representative of society. You actually believe these polls that claim that homosexual "marriage" is inevitable, don't you? You're ignoring the fact that the moral normal majority generally keep their views to themselves. The people will speak.

I also find it hilarious that you think that because some blind male retarded Peruvian goat had a homosexual experience once, it makes homosexuality "okay".

It doesn't.

The people will vote no.

You're a funny one, always seeking to provoke so people will notice you. You know you can achieve that through actually having thought out arguments and not ever-so-desperately trying to get a reaction at every opportunity.

Now allow me to define "natural" for you as per the dictionary.

natural
ˈnatʃ(ə)r(ə)l/Submit
adjective
1.
existing in or derived from nature; not made or caused by humankind.
"carrots contain a natural antiseptic"
having had a minimum of processing or preservative treatment.
"natural food"
synonyms: unprocessed, organic, pure, wholesome, unrefined, pesticide-free, chemical-free, additive-free, unbleached, unmixed, real, plain, virgin, crude, raw
"her policy of using fresh, natural produce"
(of fabric) having a colour characteristic of the unbleached and undyed state; off-white.

...and now nature...

nature
ˈneɪtʃə/Submit
noun
1.
the phenomena of the physical world collectively, including plants, animals, the landscape, and other features and products of the earth, as opposed to humans or human creations.
"the breathtaking beauty of nature"
synonyms: the natural world, the living world, Mother Nature, creation, the world, the environment, the earth, Mother Earth, the universe, the cosmos, natural forces; More

So yes, sodomy and homosexuality are, by their very definition, natural; the retarded Peruvian goat is right and you are wrong. Your argument is with your grasp of the English language.

shruikan2553 · 22-12-2014 08:28PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Evil is a bit strong.

It is certainly wrong.

If I call it or you a "deviant" you or someone else will probably report me but that's what your behaviour is. It is deviant behaviour literally because you are deviating from the norm. The homosexual lobby feel they can hijack phrases like "deviant", "abnormal" and "abomination" and brand them as homophobic. Even the term "homophobic" is vile and pregnant with the vitriol of the homosexual lobby - Someone can be against homosexuality and neither fear nor loath homosexuals.

I neither fear nor loath you. However, I pity you and I believe that your influence should be limited. I also believe that children should be made aware that your behaviour and lifestyle are fundamentally wrong and deeply unhealthy and undesirable.

You would be against interracial marriage too then?

david75 · 22-12-2014 08:31PM

Was about to ask Larry his views on people of different religious beliefs and ethnic origins..

I have a feeling the answer would be telling..

Wont prejudge though

Larry Wildman · 22-12-2014 08:31PM

Billy86 wrote: »

You're a funny one, always seeking to provoke so people will notice you. You know you can achieve that through actually having thought out arguments and not ever-so-desperately trying to get a reaction at every opportunity.

Now allow me to define "natural" for you as per the dictionary.

natural
ˈnatʃ(ə)r(ə)l/Submit
adjective
1.
existing in or derived from nature; not made or caused by humankind.
"carrots contain a natural antiseptic"
having had a minimum of processing or preservative treatment.
"natural food"
synonyms: unprocessed, organic, pure, wholesome, unrefined, pesticide-free, chemical-free, additive-free, unbleached, unmixed, real, plain, virgin, crude, raw
"her policy of using fresh, natural produce"
(of fabric) having a colour characteristic of the unbleached and undyed state; off-white.

...and now nature...

nature
ˈneɪtʃə/Submit
noun
1.
the phenomena of the physical world collectively, including plants, animals, the landscape, and other features and products of the earth, as opposed to humans or human creations.
"the breathtaking beauty of nature"
synonyms: the natural world, the living world, Mother Nature, creation, the world, the environment, the earth, Mother Earth, the universe, the cosmos, natural forces; More

So yes, sodomy and homosexuality are, by their very definition, natural; the retarded Peruvian goat is right and you are wrong. Your argument is with your grasp of the English language.

No, I'm actually a conservative and my issue is that far more people are than let on (for fear of the kind of abuse that you see on threads like this).

I agree with civil partnerships but believe that homosexual "marriage" is a step too far.

You've come a hell of a long way - 30 years ago homosexuals were hiding in bath houses. Why not be thankful that you're no longer criminals?

One eyed Jack · 22-12-2014 08:31PM

Billy86 wrote: »

If an LGBT youth who just finished their leaving cert is claiming everyone should be forced into gay marriage, that same sex marriage should not be allowed, that straight people have something wrong with them and are inferior to gay people, etc... yes, yes you should. Funny enough, nobody from the 'yes' side of the debate has been claiming that.

You implied that their age somehow "explained a lot". The point I was making is that you were dismissing their opinion because of their age, not because they were simply talking out their arse holes.

You are aware that I am talking about the two posters claiming homosexuality is "a choice", an illness caused by bad parenting and having no friends of the opposite sex, something that can and should be 'cured', that refer to homosexuality as 'unnatural' when that is impossible as it literally exists all over nature, that try to answer this by claiming speak to God and God tells them that all the animals worship him (which does nothing to explain gay animals), that blame the fall of empires and civilizations being wiped out on homosexuality, and that have thrown out plenty of other random assertions they flat out refuse to back up when pressed. Tell me what part of any of that makes sense?

I'm aware of what they posted. They posted as much wind-up material as they thought they could safely get away with that could almost look like a legitimately held opinion. NONE of it made sense, and yet even though you knew none of it made sense, you and other posters still chose to rise to the bait instead of ignoring them, leading to one vital 'yes' campaigner also earning themselves some time out. The wind up posters aten't interested in a discussion, and are even less interested in your opinion. They wanted to illicit a reaction, and they achieved that. What did anyone who engaged with them achieve? Nothing anyone didn't know already.

And if someone has posted almost nothing but gay bashing in the last six months (apart from going on about "fantasising about lesbians", showing their hypocrisy and immaturity for all to see), of course it should be brought up when people keep chiming in that it is "unfair" to call certain parts of the 'no' vote that I was referring to as homophobes. Because that is clearly what they are. That's not someone who has a worthwhile opinion for others to consider in an issue such as this, just as a gay person who hates all heterosexuals wouldn't - would you listen to a neo Nazi over a debate of if Jews should be given equal rights?

If I were a Jew whose future depended on it, I'd be choosing my words carefully and making sure I didn't come off like a knob, especially when I would consider that what's at stake is bigger than just getting one up on a bunch of neo-nazis, and when I knew I had 80% support, I wouldn't want to do anything that would turn that support into apathy.

The immature thing to do is to celebrate thinking you've given wind-up merchants an Internet smackdown as if you've actually achieved anything significant. You haven't. They're still going to vote the same way they always were, and all you've done is ignored the people you should be supporting, the people you need to come out and vote.

Look at how much of a clusterfcuk this thread has been already, with the few remaining die-hards and the wind-up merchants. Can you imagine what this crap for the next six months in the run up to the referendum is going to do to people? It's going to wear people out, physically, mentally and emotionally, there's going to be nobody left feeling positive about going to the voting booths come referendum day.

We keep asking them for a single valid reason why same sex civil marriage should not be allowed, we keep getting given the same invalid reasons which have been covered dozens of times. If you have been following the thread you will see I have responded to several posts from the no side or people asking questions, but the thing is I have got as good as no responses from them, only for them to disappear for a few hours and come right back to post what they did in the first place, over and over and over again. This is the same with many who have been posting on the 'yes' side - we're all for debate, but the no side are not and eventually get shown up for what they are which is why a number of them have been banned from the thread.

Again, consider this an open offer for anyone to give a valid reason why same sex marriage should not be passed.

The onus isn't on anyone who is opposed to marriage equality to justify themselves to anyone else. That is the default position of the State already. If nobody turns up on referendum day, then society will remain governed by the same laws that currently offer a sub-standard level of protection to LGBT couples in relationships, and the children of those couples in LGBT relationships. If those people who said they would support marriage equality are too exhausted to turn up, or simply don't care any more, or become complacent that the vote will be carried in their absence, then the discriminatory laws stay as they are.

The onus is on anyone who advocates for marriage equality to ensure that this doesn't happen. The only way to achieve that is to support each other, not to get distracted from that by arguing with people who you know are only on a wind-up! It's a waste of time and energy and it's taking your attention away from people who really need your support.

david75 · 22-12-2014 08:32PM

do you believe God created the world in 7 days or do you accept the undeniable fact of evolution and how our universe came to be?

Annasopra · 22-12-2014 08:39PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

Do you believe that it's natural or appropriate for a man to sodomise another man?

I feel genuinely sorry for you that you are so consumed with hatred.

The Masculinist · 22-12-2014 08:41PM

I'l be voting in favour of freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Debate in relation to this issue is stiffled by too many do gooders.

Billy86 · 22-12-2014 08:42PM

Larry Wildman wrote: »

No, I'm actually a conservative and my issue is that far more people are than let on (for fear of the kind of abuse that you see on threads like this).

I agree with civil partnerships but believe that homosexual "marriage" is a step too far.

You've come a hell of a long way - 30 years ago homosexuals were hiding in bath houses. Why not be thankful that you're no longer criminals?

Again, the constant search for attention through provocation, you're quite the one trick pony, Larry... funny how you automatically assume I'm gay! :pac:

Good to see you've given up trying to argue that homosexuality and sodomy are unnatural, though.

Will you vote in the gay marriage referendum?

Comments