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

reprise · 12-02-2015 01:01PM

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

You won't vote Yes no matter how many arguments or points in favour you hear. Threads like this are about convincing the lurkers, the ones less 'entrenched' in their views to come down off the fence and vote Yes.

Or they can vote No, if anyone ever presents a cogent reason to do so.

Sure, we can merely pretend that excluding same sex in the definition of marriage was just some trivial oversight, somehow replicated globally.

Beats the homophobia and tin foil hat, conspiracy theory of universal discrimination in defining marriage.

Zubeneschamali · 12-02-2015 01:03PM

reprise wrote: »

Sure, we can merely pretend that excluding same sex in the definition of marriage was just some trivial oversight, somehow replicated globally.

Beats the homophobia and tin foil hat, conspiracy theory of universal discrimination in defining marriage.

You are not even pretending to respond to what people write anymore.

reprise · 12-02-2015 01:22PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

You are not even pretending to respond to what people write anymore.

You mean entertain the no bashing from people who don't want to give rational reasons to vote yes?

Flem31 · 12-02-2015 01:23PM

floggg wrote: »

I was responding to the assertion there will be no cost for a No vote. I'm not saying its something they won't get around, just that a yes vote is clearly preferable from a hiring perspective (particularly recruiting from abroad).

Again, it's not going to result in billions of investment, but just responding to the various posts saying it had no business impact. I think your posts recognise there will be some impact, even if you think its something which can be gotten around.

The rest of the post was a bit snarky (my bad, got frustrated reading pages of childish crap) but I think the underlying point is valid. Nobody is going to move to Ireland just because we don't allow marriage equality, because feels strongly about living in a country which discriminates against same sex couples has much better options out there.

We can compete on tolerance (but can still do better), but thankfully we would come in lost in the intolerance stakes.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree.

I agree that voting yes would be preferable, but disagree that the economic benefit is a justification for voting yes as the financial impact has not been proven.

I responded to the earlier post which brought up the Microsoft link as another reason for voting Yes. I believe this referendum would be better argued on social\equality grounds rather than economic.

Regarding your previous post, I had 3 other replies but deleted them as responding in kind does nothing for the purpose of this thread, which imo is meaningful debate and discussion. I hope you have a good day

Zubeneschamali · 12-02-2015 01:30PM

reprise wrote: »

You mean entertain the no bashing from people who don't want to give rational reasons to vote yes?

No, I mean your "response" was a complete non-sequitur, it does not address anything in TwoShedsJackson's post. It's as if you are just talking away to yourself, which is fine if that's what you want to do, but including quotes from other posters, as if your posts are somehow connected to them, which makes your stuff seem quite incoherent or "random" as the kids say these days.

humanji · 12-02-2015 01:31PM

MOD: Okay Reprise, you've been given more than enough chances to engage, but you just keep pulling out strawmen arguments or ramble in circles while refusing to engage. The thread is long past pointless, so you shouldn't be too hurt when I tell you to stop posting here now. There's going to be many more of these threads and if you're going to insist on acting like this in all of them, I'm going to have to ban you from any thread remotely related to the subject.

marienbad · 12-02-2015 01:32PM

Flem31 wrote: »

I think we will just have to agree to disagree.

I agree that voting yes would be preferable, but disagree that the economic benefit is a justification for voting yes as the financial impact has not been proven.

I responded to the earlier post which brought up the Microsoft link as another reason for voting Yes. I believe this referendum would be better argued on social\equality grounds rather than economic.

Regarding your previous post, I had 3 other replies but deleted them as responding in kind does nothing for the purpose of this thread, which imo is meaningful debate and discussion. I hope you have a good day

The head of a massive multinational corporation in Ireland says the lack of ssm is a competitive disadvantage and you disagree ?

Hmm that has me in a quandary - who to believe ???

floggg · 12-02-2015 01:35PM

Flem31 wrote: »

I think we will just have to agree to disagree.

I agree that voting yes would be preferable, but disagree that the economic benefit is a justification for voting yes as the financial impact has not been proven.

I responded to the earlier post which brought up the Microsoft link as another reason for voting Yes. I believe this referendum would be better argued on social\equality grounds rather than economic.

Regarding your previous post, I had 3 other replies but deleted them as responding in kind does nothing for the purpose of this thread, which imo is meaningful debate and discussion. I hope you have a good day

I think we actually agree - nobody is saying this should be the main reason for voting yes.

It is people who argued against this point that brought it front and centre in the debate - and said there was NO economic benefit. There will be one, but it will be insufficient to justify a Yes vote on its own - though it does serve as an extra argument to pad out the equality/social based arguments.

As I said, the snark was unnecessary (actually thought I had deleted the Duck Dynasty reference).

Flem31 · 12-02-2015 01:36PM

marienbad wrote: »

The head of a massive multinational corporation in Ireland says the lack of ssm is a competitive disadvantage and you disagree ?

Hmm that has me in a quandary - who to believe ???

Link please

marienbad · 12-02-2015 01:37PM

Flem31 wrote: »

Link please

You are joking surely ? it kicked off this sidetrack conversation and has been linked 2 or 3 times already

B_Wayne · 12-02-2015 01:39PM

reprise wrote: »

You mean entertain the no bashing from people who don't want to give rational reasons to vote yes?

Seems pretty rational to have a more fair and equal society. You earlier got annoyed because of slavery mention but Martin Luther King's wife Coretta viewed LGBT rights and marriage as a continuation of the civil rights movement..

In relation to if vote fails, I'm emigrating if it does. It would be a sign of an intolerant nation that I would not wish to be part of. However I think it will ultimately pass.

marienbad · 12-02-2015 01:39PM

But just for you here is the Belfast Telegraph

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/microsoft-and-twitter-support-samesex-marriage-law-change-in-ireland-30980800.html

Just one click on google

bb1234567 · 12-02-2015 01:39PM

reprise wrote: »

You mean entertain the no bashing from people who don't want to give rational reasons to vote yes?

The rationale is that we all deserve the same rights. I don't see how thats too complicated.

aloyisious · 12-02-2015 01:46PM

reprise wrote: »

You mean entertain the no bashing from people who don't want to give rational reasons to vote yes?

Or maybe the voting public citizenry seeing it is reasonable to change a obvious inequality in law, akin to how they saw there were "irreconcilable differences" in marriages and decided that there was something wrong with the ban on divorce in law here, and changed it. If people don't want to see what they don't want to see, it's their choice but it doesn't end in just law, it's not rational.

Flem31 · 12-02-2015 01:48PM

marienbad wrote: »

You are joking surely ? it kicked off this sidetrack conversation and has been linked 2 or 3 times already

This sidetrack (as you describe it) was created by a yes advocate.

You are unable to provide a link so I can only assume that you cannot back up your point.
If you are referring to the Microsoft link, the contributor also gave Germany the same competitive advantage as other countries that have SSM.

marienbad · 12-02-2015 01:56PM

Flem31 wrote: »

This sidetrack (as you describe it) was created by a yes advocate.

You are unable to provide a link so I can only assume that you cannot back up your point.
If you are referring to the Microsoft link, the contributor also gave Germany the same competitive advantage as other countries that have SSM.

I have provided a link , and Germany has already been explained to you - you know the massive industrial giant in the very heart of Europe ,

If you can't understand what the man says I can't help you .

Flem31 · 12-02-2015 02:16PM

marienbad wrote: »

But just for you here is the Belfast Telegraph

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/republic-of-ireland/microsoft-and-twitter-support-samesex-marriage-law-change-in-ireland-30980800.html

Just one click on google

No economic benefit can be assumed because companies support SSM.

Now if he had said "a Yes vote would be treated favourably with regard to future FDI" or "a yes vote would result in a higher ranking than a non SSM country"
then the economic argument has value.
What we get is corporations being PC as it doesn't cost them anything and everyone is happy(and rightly so) but to use that language as a justification that Ireland will benefit is imo being optimistic.

Flem31 · 12-02-2015 02:25PM

marienbad wrote: »

I have provided a link , and Germany has already been explained to you - you know the massive industrial giant in the very heart of Europe ,

If you can't understand what the man says I can't help you .

No you tried to explain away a gaff the contributor made in including Germany by saying other factors would compensate.
So likewise could apply in this country.
Not on size grounds, but low CT rates and lack of regulation that we do enforce. Many many factors behind any FDI decision.

K_user · 12-02-2015 02:31PM

I'm voting Yes because I don't understand why my right to get married is different to someone elses, despite being born in the same country, attending the same schools, working the same sorts of jobs. I don't understand why what a person does in their own time should effect their basic rights compared to mine.

Marriage has had an enormous effect on my life, for the better, why shouldn't others be allowed the same?

marienbad · 12-02-2015 02:59PM

Flem31 wrote: »

No you tried to explain away a gaff the contributor made in including Germany by saying other factors would compensate.
So likewise could apply in this country.
Not on size grounds, but low CT rates and lack of regulation that we do enforce. Many many factors behind any FDI decision.

And no one is saying different , and this is just one of those many factors . There was no gaff , you just don't seem to understand how these decisions are made.

Hyzepher · 12-02-2015 03:03PM

The reasons I'll be voting Yes - if any of the No camp want to debate these then I'd welcome it

1. The current definition of marriage that excludes same sex couples is prejudicial. The idea that a state marriage needs to conform to a single instance of sexual orientation is outdated.
2. Allowing SSM has no impact on existing marriages or the beliefs of others. If you don't agree with homosexuality then allowing them to marry has no impact on your life or your rights. Traditional marriage is not affected.
3. It has nothing to do with raising children - that's a debate for same sex adoption
4. It promotes equality, understanding and fairness within society
5. It's a big deal for SS couples and I feel it's the right thing to do

floggg · 12-02-2015 03:12PM

Flem31 wrote: »

No economic benefit can be assumed because companies support SSM.

Now if he had said "a Yes vote would be treated favourably with regard to future FDI" or "a yes vote would result in a higher ranking than a non SSM country"
then the economic argument has value.
What we get is corporations being PC as it doesn't cost them anything and everyone is happy(and rightly so) but to use that language as a justification that Ireland will benefit is imo being optimistic.

So you think a Yes vote might be viewed favourably for future foreign investment, but yet assert it has no economic benefit (ignoring the bit where you admitted a Yes vote might make it easier to attract better staff here for less, which is an economic benefit in itself).

Surely something which increases our chances of future foreign investment is a benefit - even if not in immediate monetary terms.

jimgoose · 12-02-2015 03:14PM

I have pondered this question deeply, considering among other things various outcomes of similar in other jurisdictions, and have concluded that I will be rejecting it.

TwoShedsJackson · 12-02-2015 03:18PM

K_user wrote: »

I'm voting Yes because I don't understand why my right to get married is different to someone elses, despite being born in the same country, attending the same schools, working the same sorts of jobs. I don't understand why what a person does in their own time should effect their basic rights compared to mine.

Marriage has had an enormous effect on my life, for the better, why shouldn't others be allowed the same?

Sadly you'll find that most of the No arguments boil down to either 'because the Bible says it's wrong', 'because marriage has always been between a man and a woman so that should never change' (ignoring the fact that it also used to be the case that a man could not rape his wife amongst many other anachronisms which are slowly being eradicated from society) and 'won't someone think of the children' (usually from someone who is still taking moral advice from the Catholic Church, some of whose members and/or employees spent entirely too much time thinking of the children).

TwoShedsJackson · 12-02-2015 03:20PM

jimgoose wrote: »

I have pondered this question deeply, considering among other things various outcomes of similar in other jurisdictions, and have concluded that I will be rejecting it.

Perhaps, in the interests of discussion on what is in fact a discussion forum and not a place for pronouncements, you could elaborate on your reasoning?

Zubeneschamali · 12-02-2015 03:21PM

jimgoose wrote: »

I have pondered this question deeply, considering among other things various outcomes of similar in other jurisdictions, and have concluded that I will be rejecting it.

I also reject same sex marriage. My reasons:

Firstly, I am already married to a lady, and I am a man, so same sex marriage does not apply since we are not of the same gender.

Secondly, even if I wasn't, I am not at all attracted to gentlemen of the male persuasion.

... but of course, I will vote Yes, so that same-sex couples are treated with equality.

jimgoose · 12-02-2015 03:23PM

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

Perhaps, in the interests of discussion on what is in fact a discussion forum and not a place for pronouncements, you could elaborate on your reasoning?

Sarcasm doesn't suit you.

TwoShedsJackson · 12-02-2015 03:24PM

jimgoose wrote: »

Sarcasm doesn't suit you.

How fortunate for me that that was a request and not sarcasm, then!

Flem31 · 12-02-2015 03:42PM

floggg wrote: »

So you think a Yes vote might be viewed favourably for future foreign investment, but yet assert it has no economic benefit (ignoring the bit where you admitted a Yes vote might make it easier to attract better staff here for less, which is an economic benefit in itself).

Surely something which increases our chances of future foreign investment is a benefit - even if not in immediate monetary terms.

Yes it might be viewed favourably by the multi nationals for future FDI but we just don't know and neither do you.

All the multi nationals are saying is Yes is a good thing and it makes sense, but have made no comment on whether a YES or a NO result will have any impact on any future decisions.

So as for the economic benefit for either YES or NO......we cannot make any assumptions other than multi nationals like the idea.

Flem31 · 12-02-2015 03:54PM

marienbad wrote: »

And no one is saying different , and this is just one of those many factors . There was no gaff , you just don't seem to understand how these decisions are made.

Including Germany was a gaff, if it had been excluded from the list then the statement would have been a strong signal that Microsoft sees countries with SSM as having a competitive advantage. But that didn't happen, and if the price is right, not having SSM in some countries is not that big a deal.

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

Comments