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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Claire Byrne Live (RTE1)

1…34689…249

Comments

  • #152
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,759 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    But - what do you call a union between a man and a women now.

    A bit daft - in fact, flawed logic to look for a marriage.

    Of course, a bill of additional equal rights would have been passed within the term civil partnership. But, telling people in a marriage , that they are not now in a marriage - is not going to be passed.

    Daft and confused logic.
    Missed opportunity.

    What are you talking about?

    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



  • #153
    Atlantic Dawn
    Registered Users Posts: 81,073 ✭✭✭✭Atlantic Dawn
    M


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    The overwhelming evidence of over 30 years of research into families and children parented by lesbian and gay couples paints a positive picture.

    Adoption assessors should assess based on ability to parent not on sexual orientation.

    Yes but from a kid of knows what's going on age (4 or 5 onwards) they are due to the media and the way they are currently schooled have an expectation of a mother and a father being male and female.


  • #154
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,759 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    But how can you redefine a union between a man and a woman.

    It is daft logic.

    And - I've a good feeling the public will not go for it.

    Yes give them full rights within a civil partnership.

    Again

    What are you talking about?

    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



  • #155
    BlaasForRafa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,020 ✭✭✭BlaasForRafa


    Atlantic Dawn wrote: »
    Yes but from a kid of knows what's going on age (4 or 5 onwards) they are due to the media and the way they are currently schooled have an expectation of a mother and a father being male and female.

    Then it's time the expectation was changed.


  • #156
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users Posts: 20,713 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    eviltwin wrote: »
    It's not redefining anything. Straight marriage remains unchanged. As someone who is married it won't affect my relationship. Why will it affect yours?

    Because - whilst people have a right to a civil partnership .

    A man and a woman have a right to a marriage, defined in law, history , religion , society , family , procreation. Why should their right to that be diluted or undermined for the folly and fun of others.

    Anyway - entirely flawed , it sounds like the child going " I want that too" Even when they have it already. But just wants the two of them.

    Honestly - think bringing the word marriage into it, was almost a folly.

    I'd be extremely progressive, but they have this totally wrong.

    Will be very surprised if passed.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Atlantic Dawn wrote: »
    Yes but from a kid of knows what's going on age (4 or 5 onwards) they are due to the media and the way they are currently schooled have an expectation of a mother and a father being male and female.

    Why do you think they won't have contact with their biological parents? Most adoptions in this country are family adoptions. An uncle or grandparents adopting a family members child. Most of those kids remain in contact with their parents of they are alive. They get to remain in their family. The outcome of the referendum doesn't change this.


  • #158
    Phibsboro
    Registered Users Posts: 1,349 ✭✭✭Phibsboro


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    Because - whilst people have a right to a civil partnership .

    A man and a woman have a right to a marriage, defined in law, history , religion , society , family , procreation. Why should their right to that be diluted or undermined for the folly and fun of others.

    Anyway - entirely flawed , it sounds like the child going " I want that too" Even when they have it already. But just wants the two of them.

    Honestly - think bringing the word marriage into it, was almost a folly.

    I'd be extremely progressive, but they have this totally wrong.

    Will be very surprised if passed.

    I think you may be misunderstanding the word progressive


  • #159
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    Because - whilst people have a right to a civil partnership .

    A man and a woman have a right to a marriage, defined in law, history , religion , society , family , procreation. Why should their right to that be diluted or undermined for the folly and fun of others.

    Anyway - entirely flawed , it sounds like the child going " I want that too" Even when they have it already. But just wants the two of them.

    Honestly - think bringing the word marriage into it, was almost a folly.

    I'd be extremely progressive, but they have this totally wrong.

    Will be very surprised if passed.

    It says a lot about you and your insecurities that you have a problem with it.


  • #160
    hotmail.com
    Registered Users Posts: 12,969 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    I wonder how many people previously opposed the civil partnership bill, but now support it and use this as an argument in the current debate?


  • #161
    small town girl
    Registered Users Posts: 682 ✭✭✭small town girl


    Atlantic Dawn wrote: »
    Yes but from a kid of knows what's going on age (4 or 5 onwards) they are due to the media and the way they are currently schooled have an expectation of a mother and a father being male and female.

    Using that logic the kid could also have an expectation that their parents are together, happily married and comfortably wealthy. As we all know that isn't always the case.

    Kids are more open minded and resilient than we sometimes give them credit for.

    Either way, I still think that the question of adoption/assisted parenting is being sensationalised to stir up our need to protect children. In my opinion we have no reason to protect children from gay parents


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    brevity
    Registered Users Posts: 8,462 ✭✭✭brevity


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    Because - whilst people have a right to a civil partnership .

    A man and a woman have a right to a marriage, defined in law, history , religion , society , family , procreation. Why should their right to that be diluted or undermined for the folly and fun of others.

    Anyway - entirely flawed , it sounds like the child going " I want that too" Even when they have it already. But just wants the two of them.

    Honestly - think bringing the word marriage into it, was almost a folly.

    I'd be extremely progressive, but they have this totally wrong.

    Will be very surprised if passed.

    Gay people don't have it already. That's why we are having the referendum.

    As someone who has recently got married I don't see how it will dilute or undermine my marriage?


  • #163
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,759 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    Because - whilst people have a right to a civil partnership .

    A man and a woman have a right to a marriage, defined in law, history , religion , society , family , procreation. Why should their right to that be diluted or undermined for the folly and fun of others.

    Anyway - entirely flawed , it sounds like the child going " I want that too" Even when they have it already. But just wants the two of them.

    Honestly - think bringing the word marriage into it, was almost a folly.

    I'd be extremely progressive, but they have this totally wrong.

    Will be very surprised if passed.

    Theres no diluting or undermining whatsoever merely extending the right!

    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



  • #164
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users Posts: 20,713 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    Well best of luck if that is how a referendum is going to be won.

    A marriage is a union between a man and a woman - that is it.

    Your going to have to try convince the public that it isn't - best of luck.


  • #165
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    Well best of luck if that is how a referendum is going to be won.

    A marriage is a union between a man and a woman - that is it.

    Your going to have to try convince the public that it isn't - best of luck.

    There was also a time marriage was for life and then we got divorce. How's that for redefining marriage.


  • #166
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users Posts: 20,713 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    And if it is because I am insecure - lol,

    This is a referendum to the public lads - need more info


  • #167
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users Posts: 20,713 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    eviltwin wrote: »
    There was also a time marriage was for life and then we got divorce. How's that for redefining marriage.

    Yes - a marriage between a man and a women could end. Was passed.

    A marriage is not a marriage.

    Best of luck with that one.


  • #168
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    Yes - a marriage between a man and a women could end. Was passed.

    A marriage is not a marriage.

    Best of luck with that one.

    So things can change and this is no different.


  • #169
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,759 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    Well best of luck if that is how a referendum is going to be won.

    A marriage is a union between a man and a woman - that is it.

    Your going to have to try convince the public that it isn't - best of luck.

    Thats just a non argument of "It is because it is"

    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



  • #170
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,759 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Atlantic Dawn wrote: »
    Yes but from a kid of knows what's going on age (4 or 5 onwards) they are due to the media and the way they are currently schooled have an expectation of a mother and a father being male and female.

    Then you just explain to the kid he has two mums or two dads. Simple really.

    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



  • #171
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,759 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    Yes - a marriage between a man and a women could end. Was passed.

    A marriage is not a marriage.

    Best of luck with that one.

    So the institution of marriage has changed and can change.

    Like when Irish law allowed 12 year old girls and 14 year old boys to marry.

    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



  • Advertisement
  • #172
    Mars Bar
    Registered Users Posts: 31,815 ✭✭✭✭Mars Bar


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    Because - whilst people have a right to a civil partnership .

    A man and a woman have a right to a marriage, defined in law, history , religion , society , family , procreation. Why should their right to that be diluted or undermined for the folly and fun of others.

    Anyway - entirely flawed , it sounds like the child going " I want that too" Even when they have it already. But just wants the two of them.

    Honestly - think bringing the word marriage into it, was almost a folly.

    I'd be extremely progressive, but they have this totally wrong.

    Will be very surprised if passed.

    Because no straight couple has ever got married for the folly and fun and then divorced when they got bored. There are many straight marriages out there who make an absolute mockery of the whole thing. I doubt a truly loved up homosexual couple is gonna make any more a mockery of the whole thing.


  • #173
    Atlantic Dawn
    Registered Users Posts: 81,073 ✭✭✭✭Atlantic Dawn
    M


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Then you just explain to the kid he has two mums or two dads. Simple really.

    That's all good but their friends, possibly teachers will mostly reject this as being normal (currently)


  • #174
    eviltwin
    Registered Users Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    Atlantic Dawn wrote: »
    That's all good but their friends, possibly teachers will mostly reject this as being normal (currently)

    No they won't. I think you underestimate kids, they are a lot more accepting than adults. And teachers don't really care about the family dynamics of their pupils.


  • #175
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users Posts: 20,713 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    Thats just a non argument of "It is because it is"

    So if we had a referendum that a bike is now called a car - and all that had a car must now have a bike , because the people who did not have a car felt it was unfair - so from now on all with a car should be on a bike only,

    Again - this is a referendum going to the Irish people.

    Coming with an attitude , not respecting the institution of marriage , saying , get over yourself we want that too. Your insecure :D

    This is in real trouble as an approach - watch this space.

    And also , if you question it - oh, your homophobic too :rolleyes:

    Is that honestly how the debate and referendum will be won.

    This is not like the X-Factor , you are trying to change a Union between a man and a woman , just because we want it too.

    Sorry lads , try harder.


  • #176
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,759 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Atlantic Dawn wrote: »
    That's all good but their friends, possibly teachers will mostly reject this as being normal (currently)

    Well no because schools now have codes to address homophobic bullying

    Anyway Conor Prendergast was never rejected because of his parents.

    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



  • #177
    BlaasForRafa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,020 ✭✭✭BlaasForRafa


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    And if it is because I am insecure - lol,

    This is a referendum to the public lads - need more info

    You certainly do.


  • #178
    hoodwinked
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭hoodwinked


    Atlantic Dawn wrote: »
    That's all good but their friends, possibly teachers will mostly reject this as being normal (currently)

    or they will have teachers who stay neutral and professional and keep their own feelings on families out of it, or they'll have friends like my daughter who we raise by telling her families come in different shapes and sizes, and that no shape or size of family is better than the other.

    we tell her just because she has a mom and a dad doesn't mean everyone has to, some people have just one mom or dad,some have no mom or dad, others have two moms or two dads....


    at 5 she seems to have a better understanding of this concept than some adults it seems, long may it continue.


  • #179
    BlaasForRafa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,020 ✭✭✭BlaasForRafa


    FixdePitchmark wrote: »
    So if we had a referendum that a bike is now called a car - and all that had a car must now have a bike , because the people who did not have a car felt it was unfair - so from now on all with a car should be on a bike only,

    Again - this is a referendum going to the Irish people.

    Coming with an attitude , not respecting the institution of marriage , saying , get over yourself we want that too. Your insecure :D

    This is in real trouble as an approach - watch this space.

    And also , if you question it - oh, your homophobic too :rolleyes:

    Is that honestly how the debate and referendum will be won.

    This is not like the X-Factor , you are trying to change a Union between a man and a woman , just because we want it too.

    Sorry lads , try harder.

    Did you originally write that post as a series of telegrams in 1947?


  • #180
    FixdePitchmark
    Registered Users Posts: 20,713 ✭✭✭✭FixdePitchmark


    I'd say it will be 40 % Yes - 60 % no


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    Sheldons Brain
    Registered Users Posts: 1,394 ✭✭✭Sheldons Brain


    Joeytheparrot wrote:
    So the institution of marriage has changed and can change.
    Like when Irish law allowed 12 year old girls and 14 year old boys to marry.

    Changes to the age of marriage is a mere technicality and of no relevance to this debate.
    Mars Bar wrote: »
    Because no straight couple has ever got married for the folly and fun and then divorced when they got bored. There are many straight marriages out there who make an absolute mockery of the whole thing. I doubt a truly loved up homosexual couple is gonna make any more a mockery of the whole thing.

    That's a bit like saying that there a lot of drunk drivers, so drug driving is OK. The present existence of people making a mockery of marriage is not a valid justification for allowing a further set of people to make a mockery of marriage.


Advertisement