How will you vote in the Marriage Equality referendum? Mod Note Post 1

cruais · 28-01-2015 05:03PM

I saw a fitting picture collage today. The first picture was of Britney Spears and a guy she married for a total of 52 hours. Second picture was of another ''celeb'' who was married for 72 hours and the last picture was of the guy from how I met your mother, who is married and together with his part for 9 years, except the caption states ''marriage not valid''.

Talk about double standards.

What harm will it do anyone if gay people want to get married?

jobbridge4life · 28-01-2015 05:06PM

cruais wrote: »

I saw a fitting picture collage today. The first picture was of Britney Spears and a guy she married for a total of 52 hours. Second picture was of another ''celeb'' who was married for 72 hours and the last picture was of the guy from how I met your mother, who is married and together with his part for 9 years, except the caption states ''marriage not valid''.

Talk about double standards.

What harm will it do anyone if gay people want to get married?

Britney's next marriage might only last however long it takes to get through the drive-thru at McDonalds?

Ave Sodalis · 28-01-2015 05:06PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I think point may have been missed it isn't an actual thing I'm going to do :rolleyes:

Well in a nutshell your exactly right the world turns at different speeds for different people and just as your moral right for marriage has to be respected , you have to respect people who are a bit slower than the modern world.

Im one of those people thats personal limit is in the sanctity of marriage between man and wife and I've no problems standing here and engaging with everyone of you in a respectful a manner as possible (which I have been trying to do).

I'm under no illusions that marriage equality wont come to Ireland either but it does not mean I have to support it.

I don't think I can come to terms with someone who acknowledges his backwards thinking in respect to a certain aspect, yet not only refuses to do anything to change it, actively persues the backwards thinking.
It's like saying you're going to hit a puppy. You know it's wrong and that you're going to cause hurt and pain but you're going to do it anyway because you use your way of thinking as an excuse.

You'll have to excuse me if I cannot respect that. I don't respect people who purposely refuse to do right and hide behind some nonsense reason in order to justify it.

Ctrl Alt Delete · 28-01-2015 05:07PM

sup_dude wrote: »

I may be wrong but this just sounds to me like you're insisting on having your mentality in order to prove a point, as opposed to really believing it. .

I don't vote like sheeple

sup_dude wrote: »

Would you really vote no just because you wanted to show people that others think like this and nobody managed to convince you otherwise? I'm really hoping I'm wrong here..

No I vote no because its something I believe in

eviltwin wrote: »

Yes things have moved forward a huge amount but why should gay people settle for that? We live in a country that claims to value each of its citizens equally except if your gay and want to marry. You would think we were voting to bring back the death penalty or something. It's just going to let people marry, it's not taking anything away from those who don't agree with it. There are no losers here just a lot of people you could make really happy.

Gay people shouldn't settle for it (and nor will you either

) which is why I said I'm of belief its a matter of when not if it comes to Ireland.

I get your last point and im really not trying to be offensive here but can you not see that for people who believe in the sanctity of marriage then having gay people being allowed marry does take away from them and their beliefs and is grossly offensive to them?

Just as much as it is grossly offensive to you that I am voting No on this.

Ctrl Alt Delete · 28-01-2015 05:08PM

sup_dude wrote: »

You'll have to excuse me if I cannot respect that. I don't respect people who purposely refuse to do right and hide behind some nonsense reason in order to justify it.

That's absolutely fine you do not respect that but I still respect your opinions

Daith · 28-01-2015 05:10PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Just as much as it is grossly offensive to you that I am voting No on this.

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

That's absolutely fine you do not respect that but I still respect your opinions

As long as you stop pretending you support equal rights for gay people.

Ctrl Alt Delete · 28-01-2015 05:10PM

cruais wrote: »

I saw a fitting picture collage today. The first picture was of Britney Spears and a guy she married for a total of 52 hours. Second picture was of another ''celeb'' who was married for 72 hours and the last picture was of the guy from how I met your mother, who is married and together with his part for 9 years, except the caption states ''marriage not valid''.

Talk about double standards.

I cant think of a non offensive way to say what I want to so I will simply say that I hold this type of stuff in contempt as well.

Daith wrote: »

As long as you stop pretending you support equal rights for gay people.

If I was to use a race analogy again (purely hypotethical but just to try and show my point of view a bit better), how would you define a person like this:

Seat segregation on buses: 100% disagree
Integration in School: 100% agree
Right to Vote: 100% agree
Black President: Can't stretch that far just yet

Is the above person a racist or are they someone like out of American History X going through an "attitude adjustment"

floggg · 28-01-2015 05:10PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

The reason I started posting in this thread was to simply point out that should you wish to win this referendum then my mentality (like it, lump it, confused by it whatever) is what you are going to be dealing with and having to over come and it is more widespread mentality than you would think.

In otherwords I'm all for gays but for me personally marriage is a step to far at this time.

So your point is that we need to overcome unsubstantiated and baseless prejudicial attitudes held by people who recognise that their opinion is unsubstantiated and baseless, but will nevertheless try to enforce that opinion on the ballot box, but who definitely aren't prejudiced because they know some gay people who they think don't deserve to be treated as full equals, and who should be thankful we decriminalisation homosexual acts and who better shut up about their rights and stop taking it all so personally in case we decide to recriminalise homosexual acts out of spite?

bodice ripper · 28-01-2015 05:12PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Well it was meant to exemplify both progress and the reasons for lack of progress in the one post, wasnt meant as a threat

perhaps a ghostwriter is in order.

Bannasidhe · 28-01-2015 05:13PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I don't vote like sheeple

No I vote no because its something I believe in

Gay people shouldn't settle for it (and nor will you either ) which is why I said I'm of belief its a matter of when not if it comes to Ireland.

I get your last point and im really not trying to be offensive here but can you not see that for people who believe in the sanctity of marriage then having gay people being allowed marry does take away from them and their beliefs and is grossly offensive to them?

Just as much as it is grossly offensive to you that I am voting No on this.

That's fine.

Be grossly offended at the thought that lesbians and gay men might be equally allowed to get married just like a straight couple, that is your prerogative. But do us all a favour and drop the BS about believing in equality for gay people because you don't. You really don't and claiming you do is grossly offensive to people who you will vote to keep as second class citizens.

Daith · 28-01-2015 05:18PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

If I was to use a race analogy again (purely hypotethical but just to try and show my point of view a bit better), how would you define a person like this:

Seat segregation on buses: 100% disagree
Integration in School: 100% agree
Right to Vote: 100% agree
Black President: Can't stretch that far just yet

Oh, I won't define it. I'll let someone else. As I said, I don't support separate but equal.

“ Segregation of white and colored children in public schools has a detrimental effect upon the colored children. The impact is greater when it has the sanction of the law, for the policy of separating the races is usually interpreted as denoting the inferiority of the Negro group...Any language in contrary to this finding is rejected. We conclude that in the field of public education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal. ”
—Earl Warren, Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court

jaja321 · 28-01-2015 05:18PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I cant think of a non offensive way to say what I want to so I will simply say that I hold this type of stuff in contempt as well.

If I was to use a race analogy again (purely hypotethical but just to try and show my point of view a bit better), how would you define a person like this:

Seat segregation on buses: 100% disagree
Integration in School: 100% agree
Right to Vote: 100% agree
Black President: Can't stretch that far just yet

Someone who inherently sees black people as different to white people - otherwise why would they care if there was a black president or not? As long as they were suited for the job.

Daith · 28-01-2015 05:20PM

If you don't support equal marriage for gay people, you don't support equality for gay people.

That's fine but at least be honest with your opinion and not shield it with children or separate but equal arguments.

Ctrl Alt Delete · 28-01-2015 05:21PM

jaja321 wrote: »

Someone who inherently sees black people as different to white people - otherwise why would they care if there was a black president or not? As long as they were suited for the job.

OK guys I give up , in trying to discuss

Best of luck in the referendum, try not to round on everyone who disagrees with your point of view.

Unfollowing thread now

Tasden · 28-01-2015 05:21PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

If I was to use a race analogy again (purely hypotethical but just to try and show my point of view a bit better), how would you define a person like this:

Seat segregation on buses: 100% disagree
Integration in School: 100% agree
Right to Vote: 100% agree
Black President: Can't stretch that far just yet

Is the above person a racist or are they someone like out of American History X going through an "attitude adjustment"

Racist tbh

Zubeneschamali · 28-01-2015 05:22PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

can you not see that for people who believe in the sanctity of marriage then having gay people being allowed marry does take away from them and their beliefs and is grossly offensive to them?

Hey, I've got a perfect solution for those people: mind your own business.

Tishball · 28-01-2015 05:32PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Voting no, it is not about equality, it doesn't allow polygamy or bigamy. It doesn't cater for bisexuals who may want to marry a person from both sexes.
If people want marriage redefined, why not allow multiple husbands or wives?
We are told it is about love and equality, but then prevents a woman from having both a husband and wife, or more, or a man having both a husband and wife or more if he wanted.
Does this referendum want bisexuals to have people whom they are married to and a mistress or another man involved in the marriage whom they are not married to?

Surely the current wording doesn't go far enough for the LGBT lobby groups? It doesn't cater for bisexuals.

Voting no as I would rather a whole new system of marriage without state involvement.

That is hardly the question, if the people you speak of don't want to commit to one individual then just don't get married, however if they do want to commit then they should be allowed to regardless of the sex of their partner. simples

28-01-2015 05:35PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

OK guys I give up , in trying to discuss

You are? Your ignoring my entire last post to you would seem to suggest otherwise.

bodice ripper · 28-01-2015 05:43PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

OK guys I give up , in trying to discuss

Best of luck in the referendum, try not to round on everyone who disagrees with your point of view.

Unfollowing thread now

No doubt someone else will be along shortly to say "I am thinking of voting no, you gays had better be real nice to me and then maybe I will vote to let you live your lives in peace."

shruikan2553 · 28-01-2015 05:49PM

bodice ripper wrote: »

No doubt someone else will be along shortly to say "I am thinking of voting no, you gays had better be real nice to me and then maybe I will vote to let you live your lives in peace."

Or claim that when they get handed a child after the wedding ceremony that childs life will be ruined because reasons that they wish not to discuss.

Nodin · 28-01-2015 06:21PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Plenty, to be honest in principle I have no problems with equal rights for gay couples and indeed have close friends who are struggling with many aspects of equality after herself and herself got married up North so I do understand the various complexities gay couples have in terms of recognition of many different things with the State.
.

Theres no gay marriage in the north.

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

But heres the thing, as I have many close gay friends of both sexes I do not agree with the doors and issues that it will open up in the future particularly with regard to adoption of children..

Gay couples will be allowed adopt regardless of whether gay marriage is passed or not.

jobbridge4life · 28-01-2015 06:24PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

OK guys I give up , in trying to discuss

Best of luck in the referendum, try not to round on everyone who disagrees with your point of view.

Unfollowing thread now

You never remotely tried to discuss it. If anything you did your utmost to avoid in engaging in discussion. In future don't expect a group of people who you have openly declared you feel do not deserve the same rights as yourself to just clap for your bravery in avoiding the 'gay agenda' or voting like a 'sheeple'

floggg · 28-01-2015 06:25PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I don't vote like sheeple

No I vote no because its something I believe in

Gay people shouldn't settle for it (and nor will you either ) which is why I said I'm of belief its a matter of when not if it comes to Ireland.

I get your last point and im really not trying to be offensive here but can you not see that for people who believe in the sanctity of marriage then having gay people being allowed marry does take away from them and their beliefs and is grossly offensive to them?

Just as much as it is grossly offensive to you that I am voting No on this.

I personally find that people who use terms like "sheeple" rarely actually think for themselves, though they have just absorbed a message at odds with the mainstream.

I think you exemplify that - you are clinging faithfully to your belief, yet you acknowledge that there is no basis for it and are unable to articulate any argument in support for it other than its what you believe.

And honestly, I have little sympathy for somebody who would claims they would be offended by my relationship being treated as a marriage on equal terms to the rest of the country if they can't even articulate why it would be offensive.

Sofiztikated · 28-01-2015 06:31PM

One thing to note, from CTRL ALT Deletes view though, there are still many people that will vote no, and are not able to articulate why they are voting no.

floggg · 28-01-2015 06:32PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

OK guys I give up , in trying to discuss

Best of luck in the referendum, try not to round on everyone who disagrees with your point of view.

Unfollowing thread now

In fairness, nobody rounded on you. We tried to establish your position and elucidate your reasoning.

Turns out you don't have any reasoning and just don't think lgbt people are (fully) equal.

jobbridge4life · 28-01-2015 06:33PM

Sofiztikated wrote: »

One thing to note, from CTRL ALT Deletes view though, there are still many people that will vote no, and are not able to articulate why they are voting no.

Oh they can. They just don't want to.

floggg · 28-01-2015 06:33PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I cant think of a non offensive way to say what I want to so I will simply say that I hold this type of stuff in contempt as well.

If I was to use a race analogy again (purely hypotethical but just to try and show my point of view a bit better), how would you define a person like this:

Seat segregation on buses: 100% disagree
Integration in School: 100% agree
Right to Vote: 100% agree
Black President: Can't stretch that far just yet

Is the above person a racist or are they someone like out of American History X going through an "attitude adjustment"

The saddest thing about your stance is the you kind of seem to know your position is wrong, have no reason to stick to it and yet steadfastly refuse to even countenance changing it.

eviltwin · 28-01-2015 06:42PM

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

OK guys I give up , in trying to discuss

Best of luck in the referendum, try not to round on everyone who disagrees with your point of view.

Unfollowing thread now

No one rounded on you. If you are stating you think it's okay to deny equality then be prepared to back it up. Despite being repeatedly asked to explain your rationale you didn't. Sorry if you felt ganged up on but at least you can ignore the thread. The people you are against don't have the option to just shrug off inequality. And I don't believe for one second you have ever been near Pride, let one volunteered with that attitude.

reprise · 28-01-2015 06:45PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Oh they can. They just don't want to.

Does this post mark another full circle to the sound of anal sex leaflet and Iona conspiracy theories?

floggg · 28-01-2015 06:46PM

floggg wrote: »

I don't agree with his stance, but he has respectfully set it out and engaged in it (to a limited extent) without showing any animus or disrespect.

Show him the same respect. Badgering him and taking pot shots isn't going to get you anywhere. I

I apologise Daith.

I thought by posting his position he was intending to engage in an open minded debate about his stance.

Turns out I'm very naive.

How will you vote in the Marriage Equality referendum? Mod Note Post 1

Comments