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…147148150152153…325

Comments

  • #4472
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Bobby Jones wrote: »
    Circa 5% of people are homosexual.

    Given the level of coverage homosexuals receive in the media, you'd swear it was 50%...

    If some people stopped making a big deal of it it you would rarely hear about


  • #4473
    Bobby Jones
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 45 ✭Bobby Jones


    freshpopcorn wrote: »
    So, if your son or daughter or sibling came out to you you'd yell them your not normal?

    I would feel very sorry for them going down such a dark road. I would still love them but I would not agree with nor approve of their way of life.


  • #4474
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Bobby Jones wrote: »
    I would feel very sorry for them going down such a dark road. I would still love them but I would not agree with nor approve of their way of life.

    Watch prayers for Bobby


  • #4475
    pwurple
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,449 ✭✭✭✭pwurple


    sup_dude wrote: »
    Both of these issues have already been discussed in depth in this thread though, and it was generally agreed upon that the family unit is seperate to marriage, otherwise there would be pressure on everyone married to have children, and those who have children to get married. It's a very old fashion way of thinking and marriage is not defined as it is to be about children and this referendum won't change that.

    You are mistaken here.... Marriage gives automatic guardianship to a child born in a marriage, whether they are the biological parents or not. So, while 95% of the rights of marriage are nothing to do with children (next of kin, inheritance consent etc), there is some impact, should children exist.

    It's why I am still on the fence to be honest. I have read the family bill, and there is nothing in there about a child's right to know who their biological parents are. This does happen in straight marriages too, either by anonymous gamete donation or closed adoption, and I think it's a gap there too, but it's the exception. In a gay marriage, any child will lose a biological parent. I just don't think that's the right thing to do without putting a set of rights in place for children first, to be able to identify their biological parents in the future.

    I only know a few adults who don't know their parents. They were adopted from the laundries, closed adoptions. It's awful what they went through. Every one of them has gone through hell wondering who their mum was, was she harmed, who was their dad. They tell me they think about it every single day. There are constant reminders even if they wanted to forget. Everytime they went to a doctor... What was their own medical history. Mother's maiden name questions on forms. No doubt people thought it was in the best interest of the kids at the time, but to me it is very cruel to leave people not knowing their biological background.

    It's a big gap for me. If that piece was there... I'd be 100% in favour, but at the moment, it looks like best of intentions, with the potential for some serious harm down the line.


  • #4476
    Bobby Jones
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 45 ✭Bobby Jones


    Look at the result of this poll for heaven's sake...Yes getting five times as many votes...ridiculous

    The real poll will be tight...says it all really about the Internet


  • Advertisement
  • #4477
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    pwurple wrote: »
    You are mistaken here.... Marriage gives automatic guardianship to a child born in a marriage, whether they are the biological parents or not. So, while 95% of the rights of marriage are nothing to do with children (next of kin, inheritance consent etc), there is some impact, should children exist.

    It's why I am still on the fence to be honest. I have read the family bill, and there is nothing in there about a child's right to know who their biological parents are. This does happen in straight marriages too, either by anonymous gamete donation or closed adoption, and I think it's a gap there too, but it's the exception. In a gay marriage, any child will lose a biological parent. I just don't think that's the right thing to do without putting a set of rights in place for children first, to be able to identify their biological parents in the future.

    I only know a few adults who don't know their parents. They were adopted from the laundries, closed adoptions. It's awful what they went through. Every one of them has gone through hell wondering who their mum was, was she harmed, who was their dad. They tell me they think about it every single day. There are constant reminders even if they wanted to forget. Everytime they went to a doctor... What was their own medical history. Mother's maiden name questions on forms. No doubt people thought it was in the best interest of the kids at the time, but to me it is very cruel to leave people not knowing their biological background.

    It's a big gap for me. If that piece was there... I'd be 100% in favour, but at the moment, it looks like best of intentions, with the potential for some serious harm down the line.

    None of this is any way affected by the results of the referendum though. Gay people can adopt as a couple now. If that's going to be an issue, then it's going to be an issue whether the couple is married or not. Plus, the referendum is not denying people their rights to know their biological parents.


  • #4478
    Bridge93
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,018 ✭✭✭Bridge93


    When I hear someone say they are going to vote No my first thought is 'are they trolling?'
    That is how hard I find it that any rational, considerate (dare I say 'Christian'?) person could find enough reason to vote against something that does not affect them and is so important to others.
    Obviously people are fully entitled to their opinions (I'd rather they back them up with fact and reason but there you go) but that is just my view on it.


  • #4479
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,779 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Bobby Jones wrote: »
    Circa 5% of people are homosexual.

    Given the level of coverage homosexuals receive in the media, you'd swear it was 50%...

    5% of the world's adult population of 5.5 billion is about 275,000,000 people. I;d consider that to be a lot.
    Bobby Jones wrote: »
    I would feel very sorry for them going down such a dark road. I would still love them but I would not agree with nor approve of their way of life.

    If we take the hetero/homo comparison you've emnbarked upon, plenty of heterosexual people go down a dark road. It's called lonliness. Lots of gay people find love and light on the dark road.

    The question is, do you want the road to be dark for them, or do you want to be the one to turn on the lights? Your call.

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



  • #4480
    pl4ichjgy17zwd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,053 ✭✭✭pl4ichjgy17zwd


    You can't legislate for a biological parent not wanting to be known. In situation where a child is borne from a heterosexual copulation, you can legislate for financial responsibility, but that's it. I was born of such a situation and my father doesn't want to know who I am or what I look like, never mind sharing any details of himself or his medical history. If people are donating eggs or sperm to an anonymous clinic, they've already made the choice to have it be anonymous.

    I would support a system where the donor could later add their details should they change their mind, in case the child wanted to look them up, but there really isn't a 'right' to know your biological parent or medical history in children of heterosexual couples as it stands either.


  • #4481
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    sup_dude wrote: »
    Is there something in the air today?

    A number of re-regs have taken to the thread again. Down with this sort of thing.


  • Advertisement
  • #4482
    Bobby Jones
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 45 ✭Bobby Jones


    Bridge93 wrote: »
    When I hear someone say they are going to vote No my first thought is 'are they trolling?'
    That is how hard I find it that any rational, considerate (dare I say 'Christian'?) person could find enough reason to vote against something that does not affect them and is so important to others.
    Obviously people are fully entitled to their opinions (I'd rather they back them up with fact and reason but there you go) but that is just my view on it.

    My view is simple. It is an affront to normal heterosexual relationships to even consider putting homosexual relationships on a par with them. We're talking about a perversion here, yet the media and the homosexual lobby want it on a par with the most natural thing in the world - A man and a woman and their children.

    I'm not even religious, but how in God's name has society allowed something that was in the bathhouses of San Francisco a couple of decades ago anywhere near the mainstream? Homosexuality was a crime in Ireland a wet week ago for heaven's sake!


  • #4483
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Bobby Jones wrote: »
    My view is simple. It is an affront to normal heterosexual relationships to even consider putting homosexual relationships on a par with them. We're talking about a perversion here, yet the media and the homosexual lobby want it on a par with the most natural thing in the world - A man and a woman and their children.

    I'm not even religious, but how in God's name has society allowed something that was in the bathhouses of San Francisco a couple of decades ago anywhere near the mainstream? Homosexuality was a crime in Ireland a wet week ago for heaven's sake!

    And now it's not a crime because people realised that it's a stupid law.

    It's not a perversion, and they don't want it on par with a man and a woman and their child. They want it on par with a man and a woman. That's what this referendum is about. A gay couple being legally recognised as such.

    There's no such thing as a normal relationship...


  • #4484
    Broxi_Bear_Eire
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,704 ✭✭✭Broxi_Bear_Eire


    Bobby Jones wrote: »
    My view is simple. It is an affront to normal heterosexual relationships to even consider putting homosexual relationships on a par with them. We're talking about a perversion here, yet the media and the homosexual lobby want it on a par with the most natural thing in the world - A man and a woman and their children.

    I'm not even religious, but how in God's name has society allowed something that was in the bathhouses of San Francisco a couple of decades ago anywhere near the mainstream? Homosexuality was a crime in Ireland a wet week ago for heaven's sake!

    Really a perversion you do know it is down to the make up of the human body. It is not a sickness these people are not perverted they are ordinary folk with feeling who should have the right to show their love and commitment by marriage


  • #4485
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    Bobby Jones wrote: »
    My view is simple. It is an affront to normal heterosexual relationships to even consider putting homosexual relationships on a par with them. We're talking about a perversion here, yet the media and the homosexual lobby want it on a par with the most natural thing in the world - A man and a woman and their children.

    How exactly is it an affront to me, in my heterosexual relationship, that a couple of guys want their love for each other to be recognised by the state?


  • #4486
    mikemac1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,395 ✭✭✭✭mikemac1


    Bobby Jones wrote: »
    Look at the result of this poll for heaven's sake...Yes getting five times as many votes...ridiculous

    The real poll will be tight...says it all really about the Internet

    Most of those posting here are not going to vote on the day


  • #4487
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    And thank feck for that :D

    I know, I've seen other couples. There's not a hope you're going to get myself and my boyfriend to perform PDAs. Ew.


  • #4488
    Bobby Jones
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 45 ✭Bobby Jones


    Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »
    Really a perversion you do know it is down to the make up of the human body. It is not a sickness these people are not perverted they are ordinary folk with feeling who should have the right to show their love and commitment by marriage

    Ordinary folk?

    Are you for real?

    Two fellas who want to roger the bejaysus out of each other?

    That's "normal", is it? That's "okay", is it?


  • #4489
    Bridge93
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,018 ✭✭✭Bridge93


    mikemac1 wrote: »
    Most of those posting here are not going to vote on the day

    Really? 'Most' here won't vote even though they have enough interest to discuss the subject? I would've said this is where you would find the highest concentration of those who will vote.


  • #4490
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    Bobby Jones wrote: »
    The real poll will be tight...


    Must . . . . resist . . . . obvious . . . tightness . . . . joke


  • #4491
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Bobby Jones wrote: »
    Ordinary folk?

    Are you for real?

    Two fellas who want to roger the bejaysus out of each other?

    That's "normal", is it? That's "okay", is it?


    Yes?


  • Advertisement
  • #4492
    Broxi_Bear_Eire
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,704 ✭✭✭Broxi_Bear_Eire


    Bobby Jones wrote: »
    Ordinary folk?

    Are you for real?

    Two fellas who want to roger the bejaysus out of each other?

    That's "normal", is it? That's "okay", is it?

    Oh I am for real if thats what they want who are you or I to say different. Jeez it is not the 1960's anymore. I can assure you having friends who are gay they know when someone else is in the main so you will be fine if they are all like my mates they are fussy ;)


  • #4493
    mikemac1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,395 ✭✭✭✭mikemac1


    Bridge93 wrote: »
    Really? 'Most' here won't vote even though they have enough interest to discuss the subject? I would've said this is where you would find the highest concentration of those who will vote.

    A referendum hasn't hit 60% turnout in 20 years and that was the divorce referendum in 1995 which had far more controversy and mud slinging and coverage than this. "Hello divorce, bye bye Daddy". Showing my age :o

    Most since then struggle to get 50% turnout, a lot of them down in the 30 - 40 range.

    Majority of posters of boards are youngish, not pension age I would guess. Not the group most known for voter turnout. And some won't be registered at all.

    I base it on that


  • #4494
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    mikemac1 wrote: »
    A referendum hasn't hit 60% turnout in 20 years and that was the divorce referendum in 1995 which had far more controversy and mud slinging and coverage than this. "Hello divorce, bye bye Daddy". Showing my age :o

    Most since then struggle to get 50% turnout, a lot of them down in the 30 - 40 range.

    Majority of posters of boards are youngish, not pension age I would guess. Not the group most known for voter turnout. And some won't be registered at all.

    I base it on that


    I'm not so sure. I mean, colleges are really taking an active role in this. UL are bringing in Gardai so people can register. There's campaigns everywhere, mainly by younger people. Many people registered specifically for this vote. I can see this gathering more of the younger generation than previous referendums. Will there be a high turn out though? Probably not, but I'd bet there'd be a lot more younger people than before.


  • #4495
    humanji
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    MOD: Folks, please don't feed trolls. When a "new" member starts saying outrageous stuff, just report the post. It's the one person over and over, which should be heartening to the yes side as it shows the no side consists of a couple of genuine humans and one f*ckwit troll.


  • #4496
    Bridge93
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,018 ✭✭✭Bridge93


    There will be a higher youth turnout. This is something tangible that affects some of them and their friends more than other referendums. As others have said the colleges are really getting involved. DCU have moved their exams to accommodate the vote. UCD LGBT society registered over 4,000 students who weren't registered to vote.

    It's the middle aged generations who may well be down on usual numbers.


  • #4497
    Sh1tbag OToole
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,973 ✭✭✭Sh1tbag OToole


    Dont believe in marriage so voting no


  • #4498
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Sh1tbag OToole wrote: »
    Dont believe in marriage so voting no

    But there are others who do believe in marriage and want to get married


  • #4499
    Sh1tbag OToole
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,973 ✭✭✭Sh1tbag OToole


    sup_dude wrote: »
    But there are others who do believe in marriage and want to get married

    They can go to Vegas and have a midget Elvis do the ceremony for them


  • #4500
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Sh1tbag OToole wrote: »
    They can go to Vegas and have a midget Elvis do the ceremony for them

    Or you could just vote yes, or not vote which is a lot easier than someone having to fly the whole way out to Vegas.

    I mean, if you don't agree with marriage, fair enough. Why go out of your way to stop others getting married?


  • Advertisement
  • #4501
    VinLieger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,006 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Sh1tbag OToole wrote: »
    Dont believe in marriage so voting no

    I failed to read the part that a no vote will lead to marriage being abolished, can you point out where it says this?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement