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…152153155157158…325

Comments

  • #4622
    aloyisious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,979 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    I'd prefer not having to engage with NO-side campaigners, so I have this picture hanging on the wall near the door as a visible hint to them. Saves the voice and leaves them flummoxed. Please feel free to download it and hang it near your door.


  • #4623
    _Kaiser_
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,285 ✭✭✭✭_Kaiser_


    xrp wrote: »
    There is a lot of moral hysteria going on on both sides and I find the country is not a particularly pleasant place to live in at the moment with people going around trying to weed out each other. Any hint of disagreement and colleagues no longer speak, friends are lost and families hurt.

    Really? I can honestly say it's not come up among either my friends or colleagues at all.

    It could be that as I work in a multinational where the majority of staff are not from Ireland, that it doesn't feature because (1) they can't vote in it anyway and (2) they think it's quaint that this is an issue at all here?

    Maybe it's assumed that everyone will vote Yes by default, maybe most people just aren't that bothered (unless directly affected either personally or via a relative/close friend), but in any case I've yet to hear anyone ask or express an opinion on it.

    It'll be interesting to see what the turnout is on the day anyway,


  • #4624
    xrp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 166 ✭✭xrp


    _Kaiser_ wrote: »
    Really? I can honestly say it's not come up among either my friends or colleagues at all.

    It could be that as I work in a multinational where the majority of staff are not from Ireland, that it doesn't feature because (1) they can't vote in it anyway and (2) they think it's quaint that this is an issue at all here?

    Maybe it's assumed that everyone will vote Yes by default, maybe most people just aren't that bothered (unless directly affected either personally or via a relative/close friend), but in any case I've yet to hear anyone ask or express an opinion on it.

    It'll be interesting to see what the turnout is on the day anyway,

    Even if you are voting NO, playing along with the YES side at the water cooler is probably a good political move. Many large US multinationals are now attempting to influence government on social issues (as well as economic issues as they've always done). Mozilla and Apple are the two examples that spring to mind. You can discriminate against someone based on their political views or declared political intentions. You can't discriminate against someone who visits boiler houses at the weekends.


  • #4625
    Flem31
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭Flem31


    K4t wrote: »
    Tolerance of intolerance is not tolerance. That's very polite of you but don't think you are morally superior or more sensitive than someone who rips up the leaflet or calls the person out on their views. It's nice to be nice but when someone is canvassing and calling around to people's houses, they bloody well deserve and should expect a response and for people to call them out on their views and exchange criticisms of each other's arguments.

    I don't think for one moment that I am morally superior. Just try to treat people with dignity and hope that I get it in return, and if I don't so be it


  • #4626
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    Flem31 wrote: »
    I don't think for one moment that I am morally superior. Just try to treat people with dignity and hope that I get it in return, and if I don't so be it

    If somebody is actively campaigning for a vote which would maintain the second-class status of same sex relationships they are not treating me with dignity, no matter how polite they are while they're doing it.


  • Advertisement
  • #4627
    aloyisious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,979 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    xrp wrote: »
    Even if you are voting NO, playing along with the YES side at the water cooler is probably a good political move. Many large US multinationals are now attempting to influence government on social issues (as well as economic issues as they've always done). Mozilla and Apple are the two examples that spring to mind. You can discriminate against someone based on their political views or declared political intentions. You can't discriminate against someone who visits boiler houses at the weekends.

    Woo: you know about the boilerhouse as well?


  • #4628
    galljga1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,938 ✭✭✭galljga1


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    It would be the best interests of Catholicism in this country if bigots stopped using their religion as a shield for their intolerance.

    Are IONA and those priests and bishops tolerating all views and treating all humans with compassion and respect? No. They're throwing out lies and guilt trips left right and centre in order to ensure a minority remains at a lesser status than the rest of society.

    Was going to respond but could not be bothered. Thanks for doing it for me.


  • #4629
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    xrp wrote: »
    If you believe in universal truth (like Catholics do), you don't have this problem. Catholics tolerate all views and treat all humans with compassion and respect - it's the job of followers of Christ to lead people to the truth. Some entrenched gays and gay activists will bring their beliefs to their death beds, but it's important to never give up on the person and never give up on what is right and just.

    Someone better let lolek ltd know about this then, they've been running around as if they never heard of this.


  • #4630
    xrp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 166 ✭✭xrp


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    It would be the best interests of Catholicism in this country if bigots stopped using their religion as a shield for their intolerance.

    Are IONA and those priests and bishops tolerating all views and treating all humans with compassion and respect? No. They're throwing out lies and guilt trips left right and centre in order to ensure a minority remains at a lesser status than the rest of society.

    Again, this kind of stuff does your side no favours. What word do you use to describe real bigots like KKK members?

    And what lie has an Irish bishop uttered?

    Homosexuals have the same rights (and responsibilities) as everyone else in society. It's nobody's "right" to walk up the isle of a private church. I don't see the fascination with having homosexual unions blessed by the HSE. Is there some high level human meaning to such blessings (which for some reason attempt to mimic all the pomp and ceremony of a church wedding) that I'm missing? If two men or three men or whatever lesbians want to live their lives together and want to grow old and wrinkly in each other's arms (or whatever it is they do nowadays), that's great. I don't see the point of it and frankly, the world has bigger things to be worrying about than what a tiny number of decadent metropolitan white people get up to. It does become problematic for Catholics when innocent children are used as pawns to cap these unions and socially legitimise them.

    Even if the NO side were to pass, it doesn't really matter. It will just encapsulate the 20+ years of social destruction that has already taken place in Irish society. If YES passes, it would only mark the beginning of our admission that something is wrong and represent the start of the process of repairing the damage.


  • #4631
    Flem31
    Closed Accounts Posts: 341 ✭✭Flem31


    Isabelle Shy Villain wrote: »
    If somebody is actively campaigning for a vote which would maintain the second-class status of same sex relationships they are not treating me with dignity, no matter how polite they are while they're doing it.

    Tell them you are not interested and slowly shut the door.


  • Advertisement
  • #4632
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    Flem31 wrote: »
    I don't think for one moment that I am morally superior. Just try to treat people with dignity and hope that I get it in return, and if I don't so be it
    In my view you'd be treating them with more dignity if you offered them a reply or a rebuttal, rather than simply saying "no thanks" while secretly disagreeing with them.

    It's how things change. Otherwise we'd all just ignore each other and any opinion that doesn't conform to our own, both good and bad. Dangerous behaviour.


  • #4633
    xrp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 166 ✭✭xrp


    Flem31 wrote: »
    Tell them you are not interested and slowly shut the door.

    A perfectly reasonable response.

    However, you couldn’t be more wrong. What hysterical YES voters see is an act of HATE, in which a PERSON OF PRIVILEGE hatefully DISRESPECTS a member of a HISTORICALLY OPPRESSED minority, for the hateful purpose of hatefully maintaining the hateful structure of BIGOTRY and OPPRESSION by the EVIL Catholic Church who believe DINOSAURS never existed.


  • #4634
    Trudiha
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 235 ✭✭Trudiha


    xrp wrote: »
    Why don't you lock your front gate then? Or wear your politics on your arm and put a little note up saying YES-only campaigners. If a NO campaigner sees that you're so entrenched in your opinion, they will leave pretty sharpish as they'd be wasting their time considering all the undecideds which is where any sensible NO campaigner would be focussing their efforts on.

    Anyway, I haven't seen any evidence of these Young Earth Creationist, dinosaur-denying NO campaigners that YES campaigners are so fond of perpetuating myths about.


    I hadn't even mentioned the Sounds of Sodomy flyer but as you've brought it up, some of the No folks do seem a bit unusual but what harm? When they knock, I'm going to pass on asking them about the dinosaurs and the age of the planet, I'm a firm believer in religious freedom and I wouldn't dream of mocking views that didn't impinge only own personal freedoms. Obviously, I wouldn't want it taught as fact to the kiddies, they deserve to be protected from That Sort of Thing.

    And I will answer the door because I'm living in a democracy so I get to politely and respectfully challenge anyone who comes to my door campaigning. I get to ask them questions about their views and pick them up on misleading my neighbours.


  • #4635
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,160 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    He must be exhausted from gathering so much straw to build straw men out of.


  • #4636
    xrp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 166 ✭✭xrp


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    I'm not sure how the degree of bigotry comes into it. A bigot is a bigot. My comment isn't aimed at the lay catholic, it's aimed at the higher ups using their position of power to influence a vote and 'people' like that creature Quinn who can't engage in any bit of honest debate.

    If NO voter = bigot is the extent of your critical faculties, then it gives me even more optimism. There are many non-religious folks who are honest with themselves who are voting NO and have arrived at this position using purely secular reasoning.

    The Catholic Church is perfectly entitled to lobby for social change. Do you think trans-national corporations shouldn't use their power of influence too? It's just Catholics exercising their freedom you have a problem with, yeah?
    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    They perhaps haven't lied directly, but they're using their religion to hide a personal prejudice, and to influence others to vote in accordance with said prejudice. If they weren't, they'd also be pushing for people to follow all the other batshit crazy rules from leviticus. But we don't see that, do we?
    Not only are you an expert on what Catholics believe, you also appear to be an expert on theology, history, philosophy and sociology. I suppose you know better than the Pope himself too?
    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    State marriage =/= religious marriage. The children part has been covered too many times in this thread already.
    If NO passes, any lingering semantics will be well and truly severed. A HSE blessing is not marriage in the eyes of the church and if someone told me they were "married" in such a way I'd just smile at them and move on.
    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    Genuinely confused as to what you mean by this, can you clarify?
    You seem to be confused about a lot of things. Three statistics that are frightening is i) the number of illegitimate children ii) the increasing age of mothers and iii) the number of Irish women procuring abortions. That's "progress" according to you?


  • #4637
    bodice ripper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,681 ✭✭✭bodice ripper


    xrp wrote: »
    A perfectly reasonable response.

    However, you couldn’t be more wrong. What hysterical YES voters see is an act of HATE, in which a PERSON OF PRIVILEGE hatefully DISRESPECTS a member of a HISTORICALLY OPPRESSED minority, for the hateful purpose of hatefully maintaining the hateful structure of BIGOTRY and OPPRESSION by the EVIL Catholic Church who believe DINOSAURS never existed.

    Sounds about right.


    Anyone who knocks into my gaff pushing for a no vote will be told to **** off. At high volume. They may be invited to die roaring.


  • #4638
    xrp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 166 ✭✭xrp


    bodice ripper wrote: »
    Sounds about right.


    Anyone who knocks into my gaff pushing for a no vote will be told to **** off. At high volume. They may be invited to die roaring.

    Moral outrage -induced violence is not a legitimate form of violence. All they're asking is for your vote. I suggest you lock your gate.


  • #4639
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    Flem31 wrote: »
    Tell them you are not interested and slowly shut the door.

    I would tell them the reasons why I have no interest in their bigotry. I would not be rude (unless provoked), but I would have absolutely no concern for their feelings. If it comes to shutting the door in their face I would have no problem with that. If they feel that me explaining why my same sex relationships have been exactly the same as my heterosexual relationships is rude and confrontational then that's their own problem.

    And if I was feeling bold I might go into graphic detail.


  • #4640
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,160 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    xrp wrote: »
    You seem to be confused about a lot of things. Three statistics that are frightening is i) the number of illegitimate children ii) the age of mothers and iii) the number of Irish women procuring abortions. That's "progress" according to you?

    The average age of first-time mothers is, as of 2013, 32.1 years in this country, and it has been steadily increasing since records began being recorded on an annual basis in 1988. CSO


  • #4641
    xrp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 166 ✭✭xrp


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    The average age of first-time mothers is, as of 2013, 32.1 years in this country, and it has been steadily increasing since records began being recorded on an annual basis in 1988. CSO

    Do you believe starting a family at 32 is healthy?


  • Advertisement
  • #4642
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    xrp wrote: »
    If NO voter = bigot is the extent of your critical faculties, then it gives me even more optimism. There are many non-religious folks who are honest with themselves who are voting NO and have arrived at this position using purely secular reasoning.

    Secular but misguided/uninformed. If you take religion out of it there's no reason, even leaving religion in there's no reason to deny people civil rights on the basis of religious conviction.


  • #4643
    rainbow kirby
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,928 ✭✭✭✭rainbow kirby


    xrp wrote: »
    Do you believe starting a family at 32 is healthy?

    Absolutely, there are no increased health risks at that age compared to your 20s.


  • #4644
    Rickmansworth High Street
    Site Banned Posts: 1 ✭Rickmansworth High Street


    The world is fuked up enough without letting these freaks have their way. A no for me.

    Mod edit: poster banned. Don't reply to this.


  • #4645
    xrp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 166 ✭✭xrp


    Isabelle Shy Villain wrote: »
    Secular but misguided/uninformed. If you take religion out of it there's no reason, even leaving religion in there's no reason to deny people civil rights on the basis of religious conviction.

    Equally, there are many YES voters who will vote for uninformed reasons. But hey, that's democracy for ya. Some will vote YES because Mary McAleese has an unexamined PhD thesis and the woman on RTE said all the cool kids are voting YES.


  • #4646
    sdanseo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,276 ✭✭✭sdanseo


    xrp wrote: »
    Do you believe starting a family at 32 is healthy?

    My mum was 32 when she had me. I turned out alright.




    I think.


  • #4647
    Trudiha
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 235 ✭✭Trudiha


    xrp wrote: »
    It does become problematic for Catholics when innocent children are used as pawns to cap these unions and socially legitimise them.

    You seemed all fine and reasonable up until this point, the point where the hateful bile started. Hateful, misleading, imprecise, insulting and intolerant. You've let yourself down.
    Even if the NO side were to pass, it doesn't really matter. It will just encapsulate the 20+ years of social destruction that has already taken place in Irish society. If YES passes, it would only mark the beginning of our admission that something is wrong and represent the start of the process of repairing the damage.

    To me this is a really strange view, I don't know where you live but here in Ireland, we haven't gone to hell in a handcart. I live in a nice community, in a country with the lowest divorce rate in Europe, where neighbours look out for each other and no one is fornicating in street. There might be a couple of people fiddling the dole but I'm not convinced that it's a result of the gay agenda, women working or free access to contraception.


  • #4648
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,160 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    xrp wrote: »
    Do you believe starting a family at 32 is healthy?
    rainbow kirby wrote: »
    Absolutely, there are no increased health risks at that age compared to your 20s.

    ^ What they said.


  • #4649
    xrp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 166 ✭✭xrp


    rainbow kirby wrote: »
    Absolutely, there are no increased health risks at that age compared to your 20s.

    I don't believe you when you attempt to definitively state that "there are no increased health risks [in starting a family at 32]". Anyway, it's neither here nor there. Gays can't reproduce with each other so I'm happy to not press you for evidence.


  • #4650
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,249 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    xrp wrote: »
    Do you believe starting a family at 32 is healthy?

    My wife and I started ours when she was 35. But in your eyes we're not even married.

    Nobody cares any more what people like you think.
    Nobody cares any more what the catholic church thinks.

    We won the divorce referendum.
    Now we are going to win the marriage equality referendum.

    Time to start building a bridge...


  • Advertisement
  • #4651
    pq0n1ct4ve8zf5
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,070 ✭✭✭✭pq0n1ct4ve8zf5


    xrp wrote: »
    Equally, there are many YES voters who will vote for uninformed reasons. But hey, that's democracy for ya. Some will vote YES because Mary McAleese has an unexamined PhD thesis and the woman on RTE said all the cool kids are voting YES.

    Think it's more because they have gay friends and relatives and realise that these relationships and families deserve equal status.

    I haven't noticed any massive upswing in people saying they'll vote yes since McAleese came out (:D) in favour of it. It's eerily like people are making their decision on their experience and morals rather than based on liberal media bias. Almost TOO eerie...


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement