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…145146148150151…325

Comments

  • #4412
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    diddley wrote: »
    I'll be voting yes. My father and brother will be voting no 'because of the children'. They don't think it's fair that a child will be bullied because of having 2 same sex parents. In my mind they'll be contributing to that culture of possible bullying by preventing parents from marrying and told them as much but, neither of us influenced the others view.

    Do they know that gay people have children already and gay couple will be able to both be parents of a child even if they vote no?


  • #4413
    diddley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 330 ✭✭diddley


    I think so, ya. I hope the upcoming debates will heavily feature the people who we're talking about i.e. these children of same sex couples.


  • #4414
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    diddley wrote: »
    My father and brother will be voting no 'because of the children'. They don't think it's fair that a child will be bullied because of having 2 same sex parents.

    I can't help wondering if they're just trying to wind you up?

    People who make the argument "don't have kids bullied because of their same-sex parents" are well aware of the stupidity of their argument, but it has a ring of compassion about it so as to hide the blatant discrimination. Hitler used that very same tactic when he rounded up the Jews and put them in camps to protect them from discrimination. There will always be haters, apparently.


  • #4415
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,861 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Joined the supplement on Friday - one more YES vote.


  • #4416
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,034 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    diddley wrote: »
    I think so, ya. I hope the upcoming debates will heavily feature the people who we're talking about i.e. these children of same sex couples.

    Not to plug my own stuff, but maybe get them to have a read of this.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057365334


  • Advertisement
  • #4417
    Flem31
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭Flem31


    Zen65 wrote: »
    I can't help wondering if they're just trying to wind you up?

    People who make the argument "don't have kids bullied because of their same-sex parents" are well aware of the stupidity of their argument, but it has a ring of compassion about it so as to hide the blatant discrimination. Hitler used that very same tactic when he rounded up the Jews and put them in camps to protect them from discrimination. There will always be haters, apparently.

    No voters are comparable to Hitler :eek::eek::eek:


  • #4418
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    Flem31 wrote: »
    No voters are comparable to Hitler

    No, they are certainly not.

    But using the "vote no to protect the children from bullying" argument is akin to Hitler pretending that he was extending compassion to the Jews.


  • #4419
    Flem31
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭Flem31


    Zen65 wrote: »
    No, they are certainly not.

    But using the "vote no to protect the children from bullying" argument is akin to Hitler pretending that he was extending compassion to the Jews.

    But you are comparing them

    akin
    əˈkɪn/
    adjective
    adjective: akin
    1. of similar character.
      "something akin to gratitude overwhelmed her"
      synonyms:similar, related, close, near, corresponding, comparable, parallel, equivalent





  • #4420
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    Flem31 wrote: »
    But you are comparing them

    Not in the broad way that imply. I am comparing an action with an action, not a person with a person. The pretence that voting "no" is to show compassion to kids is comparable to many things, including
    • Pretending that Muslim practice of forcing women to wear a burka is to protect the woman
    • Pretending that a public vote among FF TD's is more transparent and honest than a secret ballot (the Haughey strategy)
    • Pretending that the hatred of homosexuals is actually extending God's love to them
    • Pretending that rounding up the Japanese living in the US during WW2 and putting them into camps was to protect them from public back-lash

    Pretence is pretence. If using Adolf's name gets the point across succinctly then I'm happy to use that.


  • #4421
    Flem31
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭Flem31


    Zen65 wrote: »
    Pretence is pretence. If using Adolf's name gets the point across succinctly then I'm happy to use that.

    The end justifies the means


  • Advertisement
  • #4422
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    Flem31 wrote: »
    The end justifies the means

    The means is appropriate and not dishonest. It engages the "WTF?" cells in the brain to examine the action and see the blatant flaw.

    Using cloning / Jurassic Park technology to bring back Hitler so we can all hate him again and so stop hating others would be inappropriate means, regardless of the altruistic end.

    ** Zen puts the hair follicles back into the freezer **


  • #4423
    custard gannet
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 426 ✭✭custard gannet


    Zen65 wrote: »
    No, they are certainly not.

    But using the "vote no to protect the children from bullying" argument is akin to Hitler pretending that he was extending compassion to the Jews.

    He never said anything remotely of the sort.
    QuinDixie wrote: »
    But I fear it will be a no in the referendum, Ireland is a very conservative country.
    Very few people would be honest and admit they are voting NO on this subject.

    Of course they wouldn't. Only a few weeks ago some senator came out and said he wasn't in favour of it. The first, top rated comment on jourrnal.ie was some guy posting the senators phone number and address.

    I reckon it will pass easily. Regardless of what percentage of people don't like the idea, they are much, much less likely to vote than the people who are strongly in favour of it, particularly younger, mostly men, who are opposed it. They may not like the idea but by and large they will not care enough to put pen to paper on the issue. Could be a near record low turnout, with those who care passionately about it putting the result in a landslide towards yes.

    As for the influence of old, religious ireland, only 34 percent of catholics attend mass weekly. About a million people. If 700,000 of them vote, and even if 500,000 of those vote no, it is hardly enough to push a no result. If we assume that most women aged about 45 and under will vote, and the vast majority of these will be voting yes, I fail to see how a no vote could come close to passing.


  • #4424
    Flem31
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭Flem31


    Zen65 wrote: »
    The means is appropriate and not dishonest. It engages the "WTF?" cells in the brain to examine the action and see the blatant flaw.

    Using cloning / Jurassic Park technology to bring back Hitler so we can all hate him again and so stop hating others would be inappropriate means, regardless of the altruistic end.

    ** Zen puts the hair follicles back into the freezer **

    Imo the means is inappropriate but do believe there is no dishonesty to your view.

    The "WTF" cells as you call them, yes they are engaged, but probably not as you intended. Tagging no voters as comparable to Hitler is extreme and also questions the rationale of a yes advocate to use such an extreme. It is a comparison that doesn't paint either Yes or No side in a particularly favourable way.

    To that extent, I questioned it, but you are entitled to your views as am I.


  • #4425
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Flem31 wrote: »
    Imo the means is inappropriate but do believe there is no dishonesty to your view.

    The "WTF" cells as you call them, yes they are engaged, but probably not as you intended. Tagging no voters as comparable to Hitler is extreme and also questions the rationale of a yes advocate to use such an extreme. It is a comparison that doesn't paint either Yes or No side in a particularly favourable way.

    To that extent, I questioned it, but you are entitled to your views as am I.

    But it was you who made the comparison. He specfically said "Hitler used the same tactic...".

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #4426
    Flem31
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭Flem31


    Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »
    But it was you who made the comparison. He specfically said "Hitler used the same tactic...".[/QUOTE]

    Thank you for proving my point :)

    The full quote was
    Hitler used that very same tactic when he rounded up the Jews and put them in camps to protect them from discrimination. There will always be haters, apparently.


    Don't let me stop you digging though :D


  • #4427
    Annasopra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 41,232 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    diddley wrote: »
    I'll be voting yes. My father and brother will be voting no 'because of the children'. They don't think it's fair that a child will be bullied because of having 2 same sex parents. In my mind they'll be contributing to that culture of possible bullying by preventing parents from marrying and told them as much but, neither of us influenced the others view.

    Part of my Yes Vote is a Yes for Children and the ISPCC statement this week is really strong.

    http://www.ispcc.ie/news-media/childrens-issues-in-the-news/ispcc-confirms-its-support-for-a-yes-vote-in-the-marriage-equality-referendum/12761

    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



  • #4428
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Flem31 wrote: »

    Thank you for proving my point :)

    The full quote was
    Hitler used that very same tactic when he rounded up the Jews and put them in camps to protect them from discrimination. There will always be haters, apparently.


    Don't let me stop you digging though :D

    I'm sorry, I thought you were saying he compared Hitler to no voters. Obviously this is not the case and you are aware that he was comparing the tactics alone.

    Fair enough.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #4429
    Flem31
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭Flem31


    This playing with words is interesting

    In Schindler's List, there was a tactic used by the German Army to round up all the Jews and send them away. They effectively used superior numbers to ensure that all people they didn't like were removed from Warsaw. In these threads, yes advocates usually post 4 or 5 to 1 against anyone with a different viewpoint to them and success is when they effectively silence them.

    I am making a comparison of the tactics alone not the people involved


  • #4430
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,861 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Wow, you're so smart with your wordplay. Well done.


  • #4431
    Flem31
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭Flem31


    osarusan wrote: »
    Wow, you're so smart with your wordplay. Well done.

    Thank you, although it really is a shared award :)


  • Advertisement
  • #4432
    TwoShedsJackson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    Flem31 wrote: »
    This playing with words is interesting

    In Schindler's List, there was a tactic used by the German Army to round up all the Jews and send them away. They effectively used superior numbers to ensure that all people they didn't like were removed from Warsaw. In these threads, yes advocates usually post 4 or 5 to 1 against anyone with a different viewpoint to them and success is when they effectively silence them.

    I am making a comparison of the tactics alone not the people involved

    By 'send them away' you mean 'exterminate' right?

    No supporters are not being shouted down, they are going to be fewer in number on on-line forums, but also cannot seem to advance a single cogent argument for a No vote. When requested to do so they ignore the questions and/or stop posting for a few days then return with the same old stuff e.g. fran17.

    No supporters are not being silenced, they're just not saying anything worth hearing, or cannot back up their arguments at all. It's all arguments from tradition or 'think of the children' stuff. Eventually they just say they're out of the thread and that's it.

    Vote No by all means, it's your democratic right, but it's other people's democratic right to vote Yes. Voter apathy is the only thing that will stop this from being passed.


  • #4433
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Flem31 wrote: »
    This playing with words is interesting

    In Schindler's List, there was a tactic used by the German Army to round up all the Jews and send them away. They effectively used superior numbers to ensure that all people they didn't like were removed from Warsaw. In these threads, yes advocates usually post 4 or 5 to 1 against anyone with a different viewpoint to them and success is when they effectively silence them.

    I am making a comparison of the tactics alone not the people involved

    Good for you.

    Of course, you're also describing a democrtatic tactic there used by many incumbents all over the world, more recently in the 2000 US general election.

    But I'm not, obviously, saying you're George W Bush.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #4434
    Bridge93
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,018 ✭✭✭Bridge93


    If I heard the result correctly, there was a mock election on this topic in UCD a number of months ago and it passed with around 98%.
    It was 93% in 2013.

    I see that a huge mural has gone up in Dublin too in support of SSM


  • #4435
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Bridge93 wrote: »
    If I heard the result correctly, there was a mock election on this topic in UCD a number of months ago and it passed with around 98%.

    Would it not have been a vote on if the SU supports SSM?

    NUIG had a vote too and had similar results I think.


  • #4436
    Flem31
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭Flem31


    TwoShedsJackson wrote: »
    By 'send them away' you mean 'exterminate' right?

    No supporters are not being shouted down, they are going to be fewer in number on on-line forums, but also cannot seem to advance a single cogent argument for a No vote. When requested to do so they ignore the questions and/or stop posting for a few days then return with the same old stuff e.g. fran17.

    No supporters are not being silenced, they're just not saying anything worth hearing, or cannot back up their arguments at all. It's all arguments from tradition or 'think of the children' stuff. Eventually they just say they're out of the thread and that's it.

    Vote No by all means, it's your democratic right, but it's other people's democratic right to vote Yes. Voter apathy is the only thing that will stop this from being passed.

    I agree voter apathy is the biggest threat and the second referendum scheduled for that day is hardly likely to boost numbers. Have posted before, not a No voter, and was never a No voter. Just see two sides who both use extreme language and the end apparently justifies the means. I won't be voting


  • #4437
    Bridge93
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,018 ✭✭✭Bridge93


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    Would it not have been a vote on if the SU supports SSM?

    NUIG had a vote too and had similar results I think.

    I'm not sure, I though it was some practice one of some kind to raise awareness of the vote if I remember right but you could have it.


  • #4438
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Bridge93 wrote: »
    If I heard the result correctly, there was a mock election on this topic in UCD a number of months ago and it passed with around 98%.
    It was 93% in 2013.

    I see that a huge mural has gone up in Dublin too in support of SSM

    Hardly scientific, though - it's a very specific demografic.

    The support is there, but whether it turns out or not is the question.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • #4439
    galljga1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,938 ✭✭✭galljga1


    custard gannet wrote: »

    I reckon it will pass easily. Regardless of what percentage of people don't like the idea, they are much, much less likely to vote than the people who are strongly in favour of it, particularly younger, mostly men, who are opposed it. They may not like the idea but by and large they will not care enough to put pen to paper on the issue. Could be a near record low turnout, with those who care passionately about it putting the result in a landslide towards yes.

    I would have thought that younger people would be mainly yes voters, men and women. Is this a personal opinion?


  • #4440
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 22,384 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    No.

    And the right to marry should be denied to heterosexuals too.

    It such a bloody stupid thing, when you think about it. Let's enter a contract to stay together, cos we need a contract or else we'd be out the door. It's such an artificial construct. Not sure why any group would lobby for it.

    Before the obvious is asked, course I'm married...


  • Advertisement
  • #4441
    custard gannet
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 426 ✭✭custard gannet


    galljga1 wrote: »
    I would have thought that younger people would be mainly yes voters, men and women. Is this a personal opinion?

    On my Facebook news feed, of all of those who have edited their profile photo to the yes equality thing, or been seen liking something to do with it, I think maybe a grand total of five of them were straight lads, with the rest being girls and the three gay lads and one lesbian I have among the 500 odd on the list. That is not to say that every one of the rest of them is opposed to it, more to say they don't want their friends to see them liking/ endorsing such an issue due to the ribbing they would get from their friends over it. Therefore I would imagine most of these lads would either vote no or, far more likely, not bother voting at all, even if they agree with the legislation. If you want to compare it to other issues lately, a lot more than five lads had no qualms about letting their views known on Facebook over issues such as the Gaza invasion, Irish Water, their endorsement of the explosion of the popularity of Sinn Fein in the last two or so years, and so on.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement