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

walshyn93 · 14-02-2015 04:16AM

aloyisious wrote: »

OK, I can understand the rationale of saying that the image of two bearded men hugging and kissing might upset some people, but there is a strong chance that the same people might have had a pre-existing aversion to any image of two bearded men hugging and kissing, and getting upset when they saw the image was the cover image for an article on SSM would not have out of the norm for them.

Saying that the magazine should not have used the image as it could sway some voters from ticking the YES box on the referendum paper is not really fair to the publisher. IMO any voters who would vote NO because of a national newspaper's magazine cover photo were likely to have voted that way anyway.

If anyone wants to win a referendum they need to learn to see things from the perspective of a No voter/swing voter. If you refuse to do that then don't be surprised if things don't go your way.

Over 90% of people who will vote in this referendum were alive when homosexuality was illegal. Don't expect them to unlearn their inadvertent prejudices between now and May.

Sometimes shielding sensitive people away from material they find objectionable is the best way to get them to assent to something that won't really effect them anyway.

Nodin · 14-02-2015 04:26AM

walshyn93 wrote: »

..............

Sometimes shielding sensitive people away from material they find objectionable is the best way to get them to assent to something that won't really effect them anyway.

That's why I keep me fly zipped when I'm on the pull at least.

aloyisious · 14-02-2015 10:07AM

walshyn93 wrote: »

If anyone wants to win a referendum they need to learn to see things from the perspective of a No voter/swing voter. If you refuse to do that then don't be surprised if things don't go your way.

Over 90% of people who will vote in this referendum were alive when homosexuality was illegal. Don't expect them to unlearn their inadvertent prejudices between now and May.

Sometimes shielding sensitive people away from material they find objectionable is the best way to get them to assent to something that won't really effect them anyway.

yes well, interesting phrase "inadvertent prejudices" - something like fixations of an obstinate, unreasonable or intolerant nature learned at the kitchen table? Kind'a like not finding breast-feeding in public to one's taste, best kept behind closed doors - down with this sort of thing.

Hopefully the Irish voter has seen enough of prejudice to recognize and bin it. I think the 90% of voters would have a very large number of sensible people amongst them by now, rather than sensitive souls. The image of the return of prayer-groups at public buildings praying for the saving of the nation's soul is disturbing.

dr.fuzzenstein · 14-02-2015 10:48AM

^^^^^^
What, pray the gay away kind of thing? Where?

aloyisious · 14-02-2015 11:10AM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

^^^^^^
What, pray the gay away kind of thing? Where?

Occasionally a certain family protesting against SSM outside Leinster House on Kildare St. They'd be carrying placards.

Annasopra · 14-02-2015 11:16AM

I shed a few tears listening to this 67 year old man come out yesterday

https://m.soundcloud.com/todaysor/pat-carey-speaks-to-sean

fran17 · 14-02-2015 11:54AM

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

I shed a few tears listening to this 67 year old man come out yesterday

https://m.soundcloud.com/todaysor/pat-carey-speaks-to-sean

I don't see the reasons for tears to be honest.The man clearly said that it wasn't difficult to keep his private life private for so long,its usually the same for all of us.He also clearly stated that his speaking to the media is to give another perspective to the upcoming referendum if he can,so its partly political based.
Its all there in the audio Joey,you just have to listen harder

B_Wayne · 14-02-2015 12:01PM

fran17 wrote: »

I don't see the reasons for tears to be honest.The man clearly said that it wasn't difficult to keep his private life private for so long,its usually the same for all of us.He also clearly stated that his speaking to the media is to give another perspective to the upcoming referendum if he can,so its partly political based.
Its all there in the audio Joey,you just have to listen harder

He spent the vast majority of his life feeling that it was best to hide his sexuality. He's pretty clear that it's very much because of the generation he was born into that he had to hide it. He would never have kept his job, let alone been elected if he came out.

Also based on the interview on news last night, only came out to colleagues four years ago. What he described prior to that, sound like incredibly lonely years where he had to hide from his orientation. Yep, so I can totally get why joey found it to be an emotional listen.

Fudge You · 14-02-2015 12:50PM

`

This is George Hook on the debate, on the late late show a few years ago.
Everything he says, I agree with.

"Marriage must be a fundamental human right, for everybody."

Zubeneschamali · 14-02-2015 03:31PM

walshyn93 wrote: »

If anyone wants to win a referendum they need to learn to see things from the perspective of a No voter/swing voter.

Nope, we just need more Yes then No. If the Nos go away bitching and moaning, all the better.

osarusan · 14-02-2015 03:32PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

If the Nos go away bitching and moaning, all the better.

I think the perfect expression here is "butthurt".

floggg · 14-02-2015 03:35PM

walshyn93 wrote: »

I think there's a difference between the long game and the short game. The Pride movement just opened the minds of the younger generation while the older generations died out. It didn't necessary change individual minds. But the vote will be in a few months so we can't count on the older generation dying out.

It most definitely did change minds.

The basic premise of the Pride movement was to public declare you sexual orientation and that you felt no shame over it. It encouraged LGBT people to come out to their friends, family and colleagues and show them what gay people were actually like.

It was only once people started to realise they had gay friends, family members and co workers who were ordinary decent folks like everybody else that they began to realise all the nonsense they believed about gay people was wrong.

floggg · 14-02-2015 03:40PM

walshyn93 wrote: »

I haven't seen any of these men but I know they exist. I think people should take it as a sign that there is no right or wrong answer because no answer to this debate is value free. If you want to claim to be an open minded person you need to consider the possibility that there's something someone else knows that you don't.

I am quite convinced that any argument that my relationship is less deserving of equal recognition, protection and rights by and from the state as anybody else's is wrong.

And I make no apologies for that.

I refuse to accept the idea that I am less than as a reasonable position.

floggg · 14-02-2015 03:48PM

K4t wrote: »

He's attempting to look outside of this thread at the wider picture, Joey. And it's a noble endeavour on a thread where 99% are pro-ssm. It makes us remember that this is the same country where homosexuality was criminalised only 20 years ago as you obviously know. We could all come in here and say this should obviously pass and the NO side are loons! But in the real world, with real voters (and those who may not bother to vote - 100 won't votes on boards is alarming imo) the consensus on the referendum is not necessarily the same as on here; nor the general outlook on life or concern for equal rights in a country where most young people have never experienced prejudice or inequality. Older folk and women especially will have but you could also assume they are more likely to be more conservative, perhaps conservative enough not to actively support ssm.

Arguments that gay people should not be "visibly gay" if they wanted to be granted equality are almost as offensive as saying we don't deserve it equality.

I'm sure you are both coming for a. Good place, but I can tell you it's incredibly insulting and frustrating to be told repeatedly that we either need to plead politely and respect intolerance and lies spouted about us, or that we should only behave or represent ourselves in a manner deemed acceptable to the majority if we want to be granted equality.

Please stop pretending that it's reasonable that we should be asked to plead for equality on other peoples terms

floggg · 14-02-2015 04:04PM

fran17 wrote: »

I don't see the reasons for tears to be honest.The man clearly said that it wasn't difficult to keep his private life private for so long,its usually the same for all of us.He also clearly stated that his speaking to the media is to give another perspective to the upcoming referendum if he can,so its partly political based.
Its all there in the audio Joey,you just have to listen harder

Takes a special kind of person not to be able to find anything sad about a man having to keep his private life a secret from family, friends and colleagues for 60 odd years.

david75 · 14-02-2015 04:12PM

So did anyone hear the marriage ref. debate on Claire Byrne today?

Say what you like about Shatter, he actually called Ben conroy out on the ionablather & their purposeful mangling & twisting of the whole debate...he made sh!t of the Bishop on too...

fran17 · 14-02-2015 04:18PM

B_Wayne wrote: »

He spent the vast majority of his life feeling that it was best to hide his sexuality. He's pretty clear that it's very much because of the generation he was born into that he had to hide it. He would never have kept his job, let alone been elected if he came out.

Also based on the interview on news last night, only came out to colleagues four years ago. What he described prior to that, sound like incredibly lonely years where he had to hide from his orientation. Yep, so I can totally get why joey found it to be an emotional listen.

Maybe.Or maybe Joey was chopping onions at the time :pac:

Mr.Carey's arrogance towards the end of the interview was unhelpful,he
"forgives" everyone for being uneducated,crude hicks.I guess you can take the man out of the ministerial role but you'll never take the minister out of the man.Enjoy your 165,000k and your 45,000k lifetime pension Pat.

STADEdeLUC · 14-02-2015 04:23PM

Referendum is a joke in my view, marriage my arse heard some bellend on the radio last week saying he will finally move to another level of society now be can be married, load of tripe if you ask me I know loads of people who aren't married have kids and there by no means at a lesser level than anyone else, civil partnership/marriage all the same real issue should be sorting out adoption and surrogate laws

walshyn93 · 14-02-2015 04:25PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Nope, we just need more Yes then No. If the Nos go away bitching and moaning, all the better.

Okay, you're definitely a hateful person.

bodice ripper · 14-02-2015 04:26PM

walshyn93 wrote: »

Okay, you're definitely a hateful person.

I do hate the people who would hold me down.

walshyn93 · 14-02-2015 04:27PM

floggg wrote: »

Arguments that gay people should not be "visibly gay" if they wanted to be granted equality are almost as offensive as saying we don't deserve it equality.

I'm sure you are both coming for a. Good place, but I can tell you it's incredibly insulting and frustrating to be told repeatedly that we either need to plead politely and respect intolerance and lies spouted about us, or that we should only behave or represent ourselves in a manner deemed acceptable to the majority if we want to be granted equality.

Please stop pretending that it's reasonable that we should be asked to plead for equality on other peoples terms

Strawman.

Whether or not it is incredibly insulting is irrelevant really. You didn't honestly think you could get through this campaign with your feelings intact did you?

Ave Sodalis · 14-02-2015 04:30PM

STADEdeLUC wrote: »

Referendum is a joke in my view, marriage my arse heard some bellend on the radio last week saying he will finally move to another level of society now be can be married, load of tripe if you ask me I know loads of people who aren't married have kids and there by no means at a lesser level than anyone else, civil partnership/marriage all the same real issue should be sorting out adoption and surrogate laws

They're sorted. All that will be in place before the referendum happens.

Straight couples have the choice of getting married, whether they want to or not. Gay couples don't have that choice. Not all gay couples will want to get married but the choice would be there.

Ave Sodalis · 14-02-2015 04:35PM

walshyn93 wrote: »

Strawman.

So you say that gay people shouldn't be public during the referendum but when someone calls you out on that, it's a strawman? I'm honestly quite confused at this stage.

walshyn93 · 14-02-2015 04:38PM

bodice ripper wrote: »

I do hate the people who would hold me down.

How do you expect the world to accept you if you hate a large portion of the world?

walshyn93 · 14-02-2015 04:40PM

sup_dude wrote: »

So you say that gay people shouldn't be public during the referendum but when someone calls you out on that, it's a strawman? I'm honestly quite confused at this stage.

Another strawman.

How do you expect there to be a high level of debate wherein people can say their piece without being ignorant or deliberately insulting if you can't do anything other than put words in my mouth?

bodice ripper · 14-02-2015 04:40PM

walshyn93 wrote: »

How do you expect the world to accept you if you hate a large portion of the world?

Not by kissing the ass that's ****ting on me, that's for sure.

walshyn93 · 14-02-2015 04:42PM

bodice ripper wrote: »

Not by kissing the ass that's ****ting on me, that's for sure.

No one's asking you to kiss ass. Just to act like a grown up.

Ave Sodalis · 14-02-2015 04:43PM

walshyn93 wrote: »

Another strawman.

How do you expect there to be a high level of debate wherein people can say their piece without being ignorant or deliberately insulting if you can't do anything other than put words in my mouth?

I'm not purposely putting words in your mouth. That is what you came across as saying to me and evidently, to the rest of the posters here.

How do you expect to have a high level of debate when someone asks you a question and tries to figure out where you're coming from and they're automatically greeted with an angry response that doesn't even try to explain. Every response you have given, even in my query about your first post, has been defensive and unhelpful in explanation.

bodice ripper · 14-02-2015 04:45PM

walshyn93 wrote: »

No one's asking you to kiss ass. Just to act like a grown up.

So you can act like a condescending teen, but I have to pander to homophobia and general twattery? Nuts to that.

walshyn93 · 14-02-2015 04:50PM

sup_dude wrote: »

I'm not purposely putting words in your mouth. That is what you came across as saying to me and evidently, to the rest of the posters here.

How do you expect to have a high level of debate when someone asks you a question and tries to figure out where you're coming from and they're automatically greeted with an angry response that doesn't even try to explain. Every response you have given, even in my query about your first post, has been defensive and unhelpful in explanation.

I've already laid everything out on the table, and other posters have expressed agreement.

Who's angry? Not me, anyway. I'm just not going to let your strawmen arguments go without saying something.

If you want to know where I'm coming from ask something a little bit more insightful than, "so you want gays to be invisible?"

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

Comments