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

Will you vote in the gay marriage referendum?

1…5253555758…66

Comments

  • #1622
    Baggy Trousers
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,816 ✭✭✭Baggy Trousers


    thaidad wrote: »
    What's next for progess, multi wifes, no species marriage, furries getting to not be human but the species of their choice?

    Yeah ok.


  • #1623
    tayto lover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 54,560 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    There have been many great posts supporting SSM on this thread and I believe that it will become law with the proposed Referendum so I have been searching for some of the reasons why people might object to SSM and came up with some articles just to see the opposite views. Some are interesting --

    http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26634214

    http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=if04g01

    http://www.tfpstudentaction.org/politically-incorrect/homosexuality/10-reasons-why-homosexual-marriage-is-harmful-and-must-be-opposed.html

    http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/10/13/4231139_reasons-to-oppose-nc-gay-marriage.html?rh=1

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/06/18-arguments-made-against-gay-marriage-house-lords


  • #1624
    Willfarman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,239 ✭✭✭Willfarman


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    I am straight and am applying for Irish citizenship (which I'm entitled to but haven't bothered to get until now) specifically so I can vote in that referendum. Sorry if that blows your theory out of the water.

    That wouldn't even blow my theory close to land. You only have one vote?


  • #1625
    The Masculinist
    Closed Accounts Posts: 331 ✭✭The Masculinist


    endacl wrote: »
    This is the third time I've posted the above. I'm just gonna presume you've nothing for point 3. Freely speak away there.

    ;)

    My reasons are quoted below, care to read them if you would like. Thanks.
    The Masculinist wrote: »
    I will be voting no for two reasons;

    1. A protest vote. I disagree how people who have a different viewpoint are labelled as biggots, hate filled and soforth. Surely in a free society we can listen to eachothers views and debate in a civil, logical manner.
    2. I have a very different view on marriage. Depending on how mature posters are here I may elaborate on this later. I think that it is pretty controvertial and certainly unconventional.

    I have no issue with homosexuals being in relationships, forming civil partnerships and soforth. I do have a problem how debate is stiffled in relation to this topic and it is making me veer towards the no side as a result.
    The Masculinist wrote: »
    Quite simple really buddy! I believe that marriage is deeply flawed. I believe that it is overhyped in Ireland and many people feel forced into marriage due to age constraints and societal norms. In effect, I believe that it causes many problems when things go sour which leads to extra undue hardship. Anyone who has been through a divorce will trstify to this. Indeed, I believe that there are not enough arguements supporting the simple idea of marriage and the benefits it actually offers couples (straight or gay) to begin with. I believe that there are benefits in very specific situations which I am happy to go in to if you would like.

    Hence, I believe that there is no reason to change the scope of marriage to include homosexuals as I believe marriage is flawed to begin with. Hence, I don't want to change the consititution when I believe marriage, as it currently stands, is flawed as is.


  • #1626
    Kiwi in IE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    thaidad wrote: »
    You won't be voting it will take more then 3 months to go though.

    Application is already in process.


  • Advertisement
  • #1627
    thaidad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 33 ✭thaidad


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    Application is already in process.

    Did you start 6 months ago?


  • #1628
    Kiwi in IE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    Willfarman wrote: »
    That wouldn't even blow my theory close to land. You only have one vote?

    Yeah but you seem to be of the opinion that all straight people are apathetic. I'm sure I'm not the only one who is not.


  • #1629
    B_Wayne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,039 ✭✭✭B_Wayne


    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?
    This is like saying to a person seeking equality for black people, 'sure,you were slaves before, why can't you be thankful you're not a slave?'
    The Masculinist wrote: »
    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.
    We aren't voting on freedom of speech....
    The Masculinist wrote: »
    I will be voting no for two reasons;

    1. A protest vote. I disagree how people who have a different viewpoint are labelled as biggots, hate filled and soforth. Surely in a free society we can listen to eachothers views and debate in a civil, logical manner.
    2. I have a very different view on marriage. Depending on how mature posters are here I may elaborate on this later. I think that it is pretty controvertial and certainly unconventional.

    I have no issue with homosexuals being in relationships, forming civil partnerships and soforth. I do have a problem how debate is stiffled in relation to this topic and it is making me veer towards the no side as a result.
    That's a pretty terrible example of a protest vote. As a straight male, I can marry. If I were gay, I could not marry. The logical conclusion is a gay person should also have this right. It does everything from protecting the rights of your children and also recognises your next of kin as your partner. You wish to protest this?
    The Masculinist wrote: »
    I posted that I had a problem with how this topic was being debated and that I was voting for free speach. When I said this, many people jumped in making assumptions in relation to my views and soforth. Also, emotive terminology, such as "bigoted" and "hate filled" is being used when referring to the no side. Hence, I believe debate is being stifled.
    Masculinist, nobody is limiting your freedom of speech. However a large proportion of those opposed to same sex marriage in this thread are very much hateful. One man has stated, be grateful you're no longer a criminal and basically views gay people as mentally defective. Another poster has a long history of complaining about gay people at any given opportunity. Not one of these individuals has put forward a rational argument against it and rather hateful.
    The Masculinist wrote: »
    It is my Constitution too, so this referendum will affect me. Personally, I think there are better ways to show love to one's partner than by simply marrying them. I believe marriage is flawed and has very little purpose in modern society, hence I don't think the scope needs to be changed.

    PS I am happy for you and your boyfriend, I wish you happiness for many years to come :)

    The fact is, it won't affect you. Marriage is unlikely to cease be a thing and provides legal protection that are very necessary for those in a long term relationship.


  • #1630
    Kiwi in IE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    thaidad wrote: »
    Did you start 6 months ago?

    I started a few months ago.


  • #1631
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    119 pages, and not one valid argument against marriage equality.


  • Advertisement
  • #1632
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Willfarman wrote: »
    That wouldn't even blow my theory close to land. You only have one vote?

    Meh... your theory is nonsense

    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



  • #1633
    Willfarman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,239 ✭✭✭Willfarman


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    Yeah but you seem to be of the opinion that all straight people are apathetic. I'm sure I'm not the only straight person who is not.

    No all straight people aren't apathetic with regard to this... I said most.
    The religous nuts have strong opinions on it. Referendums are notorious for poor turnouts in this country in the last decade.


  • #1634
    fran17
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,262 ✭✭✭fran17


    david75 wrote: »
    clearly you never liked spinach or anal sex as a child...(that was a joke you wont get but applies to you)

    While you're busy googling, google prostate orgasm. Ah gwan.. you might learn something.

    You really are the epitome of every reason to vote no.How anybody could give somebody,or some generation with your clear lack of morals or respect any legal recognition is beyond me.The anger and self loathing in your posting is fascinating.


  • #1635
    thaidad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 33 ✭thaidad


    RayM wrote: »
    119 pages, and not one valid argument against marriage equality.

    Not valid readon as a straight person I should care about SSM

    There should also be a poll

    Yes
    No
    Could not be arsed to vote


  • #1636
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    fran17 wrote: »
    You really are the epitome of every reason to vote no.How anybody could give somebody,or some generation with your clear lack of morals or respect any legal recognition is beyond me.The anger and self loathing in your posting is fascinating.


    your posting history would suggest you don't need a reason....


  • #1637
    B_Wayne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,039 ✭✭✭B_Wayne


    fran17 wrote: »
    You really are the epitome of every reason to vote no.How anybody could give somebody,or some generation with your clear lack of morals or respect any legal recognition is beyond me.The anger and self loathing in your posting is fascinating.

    Fran, he hasn't displayed a lack of morals. Some questionable humour but not a lack of morals. Do you view all gay people to be lacking in morals?


  • #1638
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    The Masculinist wrote: »
    I will be voting no for two reasons;

    1. A protest vote. I disagree how people who have a different viewpoint are labelled as biggots, hate filled and soforth. Surely in a free society we can listen to eachothers views and debate in a civil, logical manner.
    2. I have a very different view on marriage. Depending on how mature posters are here I may elaborate on this later. I think that it is pretty controvertial and certainly unconventional.

    I have no issue with homosexuals being in relationships, forming civil partnerships and soforth. I do have a problem how debate is stiffled in relation to this topic and it is making me veer towards the no side as a result.

    Let me understand this - you go on quite a few times about 'mature posters are ' and by interference how mature you are compared to the rest of us .

    Yet you are going to vote no on a simple Civil Rights issue because you don't like the quality of some of its supporters ?

    Would you like to revisit what 'mature' actually means ?


  • #1639
    Kiwi in IE
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    Willfarman wrote: »
    No all straight people aren't apathetic with regard to this... I said most.
    The religous nuts have strong opinions on it. Referendums are notorious for poor turnouts in this country in the last decade.

    I think a lot of people are fed up with conservative, archaic, illogical, religious based laws which restrict their rights and the rights of others.


  • #1640
    Willfarman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,239 ✭✭✭Willfarman


    I would be inclined to vote yes if it were an online poll now from the comfort of my chair. but I'd say when the day comes I'll be inclined to not bother..


  • #1641
    thaidad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 33 ✭thaidad


    marienbad wrote: »
    Let me understand this - you go on quite a few times about 'mature posters are ' and by interference how mature you are compared to the rest of us .

    Yet you are going to vote no on a simple Civil Rights issue because you don't like the quality of some of its supporters ?

    Would you like to revisit what 'mature' actually means ?

    SF being pro thos is enough for someone to vote no.


  • Advertisement
  • #1642
    Bridge93
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,018 ✭✭✭Bridge93


    For what it's worth in UCD over the last two months or so the LGBT society were going around ensuring people registered to vote. Something like 4000 students were unregistered but are now. If even a pessimistic 50% of those actually vote that is still 2000 more voting and they will all be voting yes (why else would they have registered when the LGBT asked them to)

    There have been few referendums I have been so keen to pass, this is up there with the abortion one of the recent past for me.

    Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and I'm not going to start trying to argue or convince no voters. But in my own personal opinion it is disgusting and medieval to deny a portion of society happiness and equality for any reason you may have. I've read most the thread over the last few days and have been shocked and disappointed at some of the views and reasons expressed. Whatever about opposing Same Sex Marriage the protest voters are the most disturbing bunch I've come across.


  • #1643
    Willfarman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,239 ✭✭✭Willfarman


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    I think a lot of people are fed up with conservative, archaic, illogical, religious based laws which restrict their rights and the rights of others.

    I hope you are right, I'd love to believe you are right but I don't think you are.


  • #1644
    The Masculinist
    Closed Accounts Posts: 331 ✭✭The Masculinist


    marienbad wrote: »
    Let me understand this - you go on quite a few times about 'mature posters are ' and by interference how mature you are compared to the rest of us .

    Yet you are going to vote no on a simple Civil Rights issue because you don't like the quality of some of its supporters ?

    Would you like to revisit what 'mature' actually means ?

    Responses with emotive terminology are generally less mature in my view.


  • #1645
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    fran17 wrote: »
    You really are the epitome of every reason to vote no.How anybody could give somebody,or some generation with your clear lack of morals or respect any legal recognition is beyond me.The anger and self loathing in your posting is fascinating.


    Im too busy laughing at this to reply properly. And even after all that Fran, you still havent constructed a single sentence detailing why i should be lesser than you in the eyes of the state or its laws..
    and clearly i was joking and thats kinda the worst humour youll hear, laden with and information also.

    Ive yet to see you give us a single fact..only an uninformed opinion..


  • #1646
    thaidad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 33 ✭thaidad


    Bridge93 wrote: »
    For what it's worth in UCD over the last two months or so the LGBT society were going around ensuring people registered to vote. Something like 4000 students were unregistered but are now. If even a pessimistic 50% of those actually vote that is still 2000 more voting and they will all be voting yes (why else would they have registered when the LGBT asked them to)

    There have been few referendums I have been so keen to pass, this is up there with the abortion one of the recent past for me.

    Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and I'm not going to start trying to argue or convince no voters. But in my own personal opinion it is disgusting and medieval to deny a portion of society happiness and equality for any reason you may have. I've read most the thread over the last few days and have been shocked and disappointed at some of the views and reasons expressed. Whatever about opposing Same Sex Marriage the protest voters are the most disturbing bunch I've come across.

    Your pro baby murder too?


  • #1647
    VinLieger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,060 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Willfarman wrote: »
    I hope you are right, I'd love to believe you are right but I don't think you are.

    If you really meant that you might think about walking down to your polling station come referendum day?


  • #1648
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    Willfarman wrote: »
    I would be inclined to vote yes if it were an online poll now from the comfort of my chair. but I'd say when the day comes I'll be inclined to not bother..

    I suspect a lot of those who would be inclined not to vote yes won't bother either. Very, very few people are actively opposed to it.


  • #1649
    B_Wayne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,039 ✭✭✭B_Wayne


    thaidad wrote: »
    SF being pro thos is enough for someone to vote no.

    Every single mainstream party are in favour of same sex marriage...... Plus the only argument you have provided so far is that people will want to marry animals which is a pretty rubbish argument.


  • #1650
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,344 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    Well aren't you just precious. Yet from that same post you quoted, it seems you missed this bit Turns out I was mistaken, because here you are behaving like a dick.

    Well arent you precious getting all uppity over nothing. Only one of us here throwing out insults I notice.
    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    No thanks, at least not if you don't want to tank the whole campaign. The reason there's been no response is simply because posters couldn't be arsed, not because there were any points made worth refuting.

    Ah the old "I can not refute a thing - so I will pretend there is nothing to refute" trick. No one ever tries that one on here do they. Fail.

    The fact is however you have posted on the thread moaning about one up manship and the kind of petty sniping we see. And the fact is that he has managed to school every no voter on the thread with posts that contain not a shred of the thing you moan about. so what do you now do? call people a "dick" in just the kind of behavior you pretended to be moaning about in the first place.

    Lets stay on topic then - rather than this meta analysis of how others have posted - has there been a single "no" side argument that poster has not addressed? If so what? Or has there been a single "no" side argument that that poster has addresses - but you feel his rebuttal has failed?

    Why do I feel answers on either of these are not going to be forthcoming?


  • Advertisement
  • #1651
    david75
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,611 ✭✭✭david75


    If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal

    this attitude and apathy in general, is the one big opposition we face. The naysayers are a dying breed...thankfully.

    lets not be complacent..lets drag Ireland forward :)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement