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

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

1…115116118120121…325

Comments

  • #3512
    floggg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    Nodin wrote: »
    I suggest you think it through again in relation to your example.

    That would be think it through for the very first time then...


  • #3513
    aloyisious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,006 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    Fintan O'Toole's piece in yesterday's paper: http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fintan-o-toole-hello-same-sex-marriage-bye-bye-mammy-could-be-no-campaign-message-1.2114313


  • #3514
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    joe912 wrote: »
    you make a valid point if most children who are abused are abused by a family member and most abuse is carried out by men then regardless of homosexuality, stastically a hild will be 50% more likely to suffer abuse if both its mammy and daddy are men.


    Isn't is straight males that are most likely to offend?


  • #3515
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    joe912 wrote: »
    the fact is children who are tall are small or who wear glasses or have read hair get abuse its unlikely that this comes from having small minded judgemental parents, children will bully people because of what they perceive to be not normal, having 2 mothers or 2 fathers isn't normal.


    What they perceive to be normal or not normal is heavily influenced by their upbringing. That's the point.


  • #3516
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    Cody montana wrote: »
    Why any gay person would want to get married in a church is beyond me?

    Why anyone would want to get married in an institution that protects and relocates paedophiles and views women as second class citizens is beyond me... but that is not a valid reason for depriving them of the right to do so if that is what they want. And as others have pointed out, the church thing is not really relevant anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • #3517
    floggg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    joe912 wrote: »
    I see you struggle with percentages then.

    Actually, I think its you that is struggling with percentages - in addition to facts, and statistics.
    50% greater risk is 1.5 times more likely, not twice as likely.


  • #3518
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,344 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    joe912 wrote: »
    you make a valid point if most children who are abused are abused by a family member and most abuse is carried out by men then regardless of homosexuality, stastically a hild will be 50% more likely to suffer abuse if both its mammy and daddy are men.

    Bit if a skewing of figures there from you - especially given your throw away comments about the mathematical and % abilities of others.

    First - all you did was assume that the only men in the child's life would be the parents. In other words you wrote the sentence "Most children are abused by a family member and most abuse is carried out by men" but the statistic you manufactured out of this was based on a different sentence like "Most children are abused by their parents and most abuse is carried out by men." Or put more simply - you simply swapped out "family member" for "parents".

    Second - it is even then not clear where you got 50% more likely from. It would be useful if you showed your workings. The only way to get 50% is to assume a very fixed ratio in the % differences between abuse by men and women - make assumptions about the parents actually being abusers - and more. Simply swapping a woman out for a man and declaring "50%" is pretty much nonsense.

    Third - you have not in any way normalized for the adoption effect. Which is that when a child is adopted by gay parents or any parents - the parents have in fact gone through a lot of hoops and effort to become parents. Their investment in being parents and their investment in the child are likely higher then - than a random cross section of the heterosexual public which will include parents who had unplanned pregnancies they did not want and more.

    Fourth - you are also not normalizing or accounting in your figures for the fact that the majority of abusers are heterosexual males. So you are comparing apples and oranges when you do a simple mathematical swap between a heterosexual couple with a member of each sex - and a gay couple with two males.

    Fifth - since the topic of gay adoption _as a whole_ includes gay female couples as well - what you are doing is cherry picking the data set for effect - by considering only the dynamic (two males) that you feel will massage the abuse figures in the direction you want. If you want to _honestly_ evaluate the effects of gay adoption on the likelyhood of a child or children being abused - you need to consider the data set as a whole.

    Statistics are by no means as simplistic as you attempted to paint above - especially - as I said - if you presume to do so while making posturing throw away snide remarks about such abilities in others.


  • #3519
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,344 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    joe912 wrote: »
    children will bully people because of what they perceive to be not normal, having 2 mothers or 2 fathers isn't normal.

    I corrected you on this error in a post you appear to have missed or ignored. But I am happy to correct you on it again. You are operating under a rather naive understanding of Bully Dynamics to expect they will.

    Go over to the Boards.ie AMA forum for a start where one of our very users brought up by two mothers experienced no such abuse. At all. If you have any trouble finding the thread - I can provide you a direct link.

    What is naive is thinking that bullies and abusive peers pick targets based on things like this. Such cowards pick targets first - and reasons second. They will pick a person who is vulnerable to abuse. Simple as that. Whether they happen to have glasses - a lisp - red hair - gay parents - a handicap - acne - or whatever else - is incidental data that comes second.

    Bullies pick targets first - they THEN search the targets features and background to find material to use in the bullying. And if that fails - they are quite happy to simply make it up too.


  • #3520
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Bit if a skewing of figures there from you - especially given your throw away comments about the mathematical and % abilities of others.

    First - all you did was assume that the only men in the child's life would be the parents. In other words you wrote the sentence "Most children are abused by a family member and most abuse is carried out by men" but the statistic you manufactured out of this was based on a different sentence like "Most children are abused by their parents and most abuse is carried out by men." Or put more simply - you simply swapped out "family member" for "parents".

    Second - it is even then not clear where you got 50% more likely from. It would be useful if you showed your workings. The only way to get 50% is to assume a very fixed ratio in the % differences between abuse by men and women - make assumptions about the parents actually being abusers - and more. Simply swapping a woman out for a man and declaring "50%" is pretty much nonsense.

    Third - you have not in any way normalized for the adoption effect. Which is that when a child is adopted by gay parents or any parents - the parents have in fact gone through a lot of hoops and effort to become parents. Their investment in being parents and their investment in the child are likely higher then - than a random cross section of the heterosexual public which will include parents who had unplanned pregnancies they did not want and more.

    Fourth - you are also not normalizing or accounting in your figures for the fact that the majority of abusers are heterosexual males. So you are comparing apples and oranges when you do a simple mathematical swap between a heterosexual couple with a member of each sex - and a gay couple with two males.

    Fifth - since the topic of gay adoption _as a whole_ includes gay female couples as well - what you are doing is cherry picking the data set for effect - by considering only the dynamic (two males) that you feel will massage the abuse figures in the direction you want. If you want to _honestly_ evaluate the effects of gay adoption on the likelyhood of a child or children being abused - you need to consider the data set as a whole.

    Statistics are by no means as simplistic as you attempted to paint above - especially - as I said - if you presume to do so while making posturing throw away snide remarks about such abilities in others.


    Excellent post. Sadly, your logic and clear thinking are wasted on the hysterical "bye bye mammy" brigade who deal in scare mongering and fact twisting to conceal their homophobic agenda.


  • #3521
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 7,344 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    Excellent post. Sadly, your logic and clear thinking are wasted on the hysterical "bye bye mammy" brigade who deal in scare mongering and fact twisting to conceal their homophobic agenda.

    Perhaps - but I learned from another much wiser than me poster on boards.ie that the purpose of replying to such people is not to affect the mind of person you are replying to - but anyone unconvinced - fence sitting - or more easily led astray by tricks and lies and errors. The purpose of replying to such people therefore is actually not to reply to THOSE people - but others who might be reading along.


  • Advertisement
  • #3522
    Baggy Trousers
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,816 ✭✭✭Baggy Trousers


    Vincent Brown had a good comment last night. He said if the Roman catholic bishops get involved, they could win it for the Yes side but equally if Enda and other senior cabinet members get involved, they would win it for the No side.


  • #3523
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    joe912 wrote: »
    you make a valid point if most children who are abused are abused by a family member and most abuse is carried out by men then regardless of homosexuality, stastically a hild will be 50% more likely to suffer abuse if both its mammy and daddy are men.

    Yes, but only if both men are heterosexual, and neither of them have brothers, or any other sons, and the grandparents are all dead or have no access to the child.

    If both men are homosexual, then, following your "logic", the probability of abuse is greatly reduced.


  • #3524
    joe912
    Closed Accounts Posts: 267 ✭✭joe912


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    Isn't is straight males that are most likely to offend?

    males are most likely to be straight. whats your point.


  • #3525
    joe912
    Closed Accounts Posts: 267 ✭✭joe912


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    What they perceive to be normal or not normal is heavily influenced by their upbringing. That's the point.

    or is it influenced by what's the norm or most common if you like


  • #3526
    floggg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    joe912 wrote: »
    or is it influenced by what's the norm or most common if you like

    Then why is it so many of us grew up with the ability to treat others with the dignity and respect they deserve regardless of any disability or their race or religion?

    I never needed to meet a black person to know that they were an equal person to me. Same for Buddhists or Muslims. And while there were people in school with disabilities I knew from a very early age it was wrong to treat them as lesser because of it.

    I'd give my parents credit in that regard - they did their job properly and raised me well.

    Still it's not as if they taught me to go against my discriminatory inclinations or anything though. Kids don't tend to naturally see those differences - they just see people. Prejudice isn't something kids are born with, it's something they are thought.

    Kids don't tend to have any issue with lgbt people or with people of different races at a young age - it's only when they grow up and learn to see the world the same way their immediate peers tell them to that they have a problem.

    So all a good parent needs to do is to reinforce their natural tendency towards tolerance. It's really not that hard.

    If there are kids out there who do see these differences as a reason to hate or to bully, then their parents need to have a good long hard think about the values the are instilling in their children.


  • #3527
    dickiehead
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7 ✭dickiehead


    Cant wait to vote NO !!!!!!!!!!
    Next gay couples will want to adopt kids ha !
    They can do what they want with their lives but dont destoy anothers !


  • #3528
    Shrap
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    dickiehead wrote: »
    Cant wait to vote NO !!!!!!!!!!
    Next gay couples will want to adopt kids ha !
    They can do what they want with their lives but dont destoy anothers !

    Gay people can already adopt kids. Straight people too. Neither can adopt as an unmarried couple until after the new bill is enacted, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the marriage referendum. Get it right, eh?

    In fear of you living up to your name in a big way, but I'll bite. How exactly would a gay couple "destoy anothers" life by adopting?


  • #3529
    dickiehead
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7 ✭dickiehead


    Shrap wrote: »
    Gay people can already adopt kids. Straight people too. Neither can adopt as an unmarried couple until after the new bill is enacted, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the marriage referendum. Get it right, eh?

    In fear of you living up to your name in a big way, but I'll bite. How exactly would a gay couple "destoy anothers" life by adopting?

    Kids should only have the right to both a mother and a father. Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve !!!
    Imagine the bullying these kids would encounter throughout their lives


  • #3530
    B_Wayne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,039 ✭✭✭B_Wayne


    dickiehead wrote: »
    Kids should only have the right to both a mother and a father. Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve !!!
    Imagine the bullying these kids would encounter throughout their lives

    Give this a read before you make conclusions about what will/will not happen in their lives.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057365334


  • #3531
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    joe912 wrote: »
    males are most likely to be straight. whats your point.


    Maybe when you've mastered basic maths you will see it.


  • Advertisement
  • #3532
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    dickiehead wrote: »
    Kids should only have the right to both a mother and a father. Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve !!!
    Imagine the bullying these kids would encounter throughout their lives

    By children of people like you?


  • #3533
    Aspiring
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,204 ✭✭✭Aspiring


    dickiehead wrote: »
    Kids should only have the right to both a mother and a father. Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve !!!
    Imagine the bullying these kids would encounter throughout their lives

    5 posts.. Definitely a troll (low standard one at that). Just another day on boards.

    Also, I will be voting yes.


  • #3534
    dickiehead
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7 ✭dickiehead


    B_Wayne wrote: »
    Give this a read before you make conclusions about what will/will not happen in their lives.
    http //www boards ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057365334

    Dont agree.... people get bullied every day its never going to stop. These kids will just get bullied times 10


  • #3535
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Stop abusing maths people! It hasnt done anything to you and it faces horrible mutilation everyday by stupid people.


  • #3536
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    Aspiring wrote: »
    5 posts.. Definitely a troll (low standard one at that). Just another day on boards.

    Also, I will be voting yes.


    It's scary to think that some of these people will be having kids, or might already have them. They are simply repeating the cycle of hatred by no doubt instilling homophobia into their progeny. They seem to think that because they have the requisite plumbing to get knocked up, that this will automatically make them good parents :) Congratulations, your mate let you shoot your beans up her muff. You are a father. Sperm donors with loudspeakers and very little going on upstairs, that's what they are :D


  • #3537
    gandalf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    dickiehead wrote: »
    Dont agree.... people get bullied every day its never going to stop. These kids will just get bullied times 10

    By people like you :rolleyes:


  • #3538
    B_Wayne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,039 ✭✭✭B_Wayne


    gandalf wrote: »
    By people like you :rolleyes:

    Well the fact he thinks gay people are ruining their lives by being gay, sounds about right.


  • #3539
    Shrap
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    dickiehead wrote: »
    Kids should only have the right to both a mother and a father.

    Why should they? My kids have a father (each) but I don't live with them. If I was then in a lesbian relationship and my partner was also parenting them, then they'd each have a father and two mothers. I fail to see your problem.


  • #3540
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    Being straight makes you a good parent...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2247397/Man-woman-charged-death-toddler-died-heroin-overdose-deny-manslaughter.html


  • Advertisement
  • #3541
    mzungu
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,310 Mod ✭✭✭✭mzungu


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    Being straight makes you a good parent...

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2247397/Man-woman-charged-death-toddler-died-heroin-overdose-deny-manslaughter.html

    Thats truly sickening.

    Been following this thread a good while, and at 241 pages long there has yet to be any kind of reasonable argument offered by the no side....a bit telling in itself really.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement