osarusan wrote: » Can you link to that post please?
terryduff12 wrote: » if the bill gets passed! shouldn't that be the next step
osarusan wrote: » Flem31, I am still waiting. I am sure that you will give me the link, polite and courteous as you are.
Flem31 wrote: » There are legal restrictions on who is entitled to enter into to marriage that apply to all citizens regardless of their sex. The same basic criteria apply to everyone regardless of their sex, and then there is the one criteria that is discriminatory -
assuming that all possible redefinition ends on the 22nd May.
osarusan wrote: » This was OneEyedJack's post:http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95125021&postcount=720 I am sure he will be happy to comment on how you have used his post to make the argument that the yes side believe that all issues of equality will be solved by this referendum, and that they are
floggg wrote: » Pfft. Who are all those internationally recognised medical, psychiatry and social services groups compared to a daily mail link.
indy_man wrote: » Lend some weight to the minorityhttp://keepmarriage.org/reasons-to-vote-no-irish-marriage-referendum.html
Flem31 wrote: » OneEyedJack has responded to several of my posts yesterday Nice try at stirring it up
PopePalpatine wrote: » Fran is using LifeSiteNews to support his views on LGBT people - I might as well use RT and other Kremlin-aligned bullsh*tters to form my opinion about Glorious Putin.
fran17 wrote: » No actually,I'm using first hand accounts from adults who have been raised in this abnormal situation.They are left to deal with the psychological damage,the byproduct of these experiments.If you can break away from your comic books and crayons for half an hour look it up.There's literally hundreds of stories out there.
Flem31 wrote: » best of luck to the Yes side and I will be voting yes. Goodbye
Flem31 wrote: » This has been very educational over the past 24 hours re people's views. This upcoming referendum is about equality but perhaps it wont end at that. As we become more a la carte in our approach to life and to the laws and institutions that are there to guide us, this very individualistic approach will make us question more and more the very foundations on which we live our lives. I think that is a good thing as being ruled by restrict rules and how to act or behave hasn't done us any favours. Marriage will change with time, and how it will no one knows. I am open to the idea that it will change and as long as it doesn't do any harm then why not implement it. Perhaps in our quest to lead our lives the way we want, we miss the concept that although I may find something very disturbing, if enough people are in favour of it and who am I to stand in the way of progress. I am not referring to the current referendum re the repulsive comment but more so long overdue referendums that we may have in the coming years such as euthanasia and abortion. Over the past 24 hours I have thought a lot about the upcoming referendum and I will be voting yes. In that time, the numerous posts have convinced that as one large group of people, we are all equally broad minded or narrow minded depending on the issue. Posters when faced with a new piece such as marriage of blood relations automatically assumed the worst and incest etc was quickly used. Is that really any different from the no side when they refer to what they perceive to be the worst aspects of LGBT life. The yes side have restored my faith in humanity, being liberal depends on circumstances and if we have no prior experience on a topic, we are more likely to think the worst. I won't be posting again. I opened this account primarily to help with the decision making re this referendum and that is now done. Having seen some of the comments we make to each other on threads such as this and others, I am happy to close my account and leave the extreme attitudes and nastiness for someone else to look at. best of luck to the Yes side and I will be voting yes. This has been thought provoking and intriguing but wouldn't ever call it a fun. Goodbye
TwoShedsJackson wrote: » Reason 5: Keep Ideology Out of Schools Honestly, I cannot comprehend the sheer hypocrisy or brass neck it takes for a Catholic group to list this as a reason to not do something.
A woman raised by two mothers has admitted the experience was "damaging and confusing," and has warned of the potential for "irreparable, long-term damage to a child." Hetty Baynes Russell, 58, said her unconventional parental setup fostered "a life of confusion and a lack of emotional security,"
Jean-Dominique Bunel, opposes the bill opening adoption to homosexual couples. He has decided to break the silence to tell how his life was affected by the fact of having two mothers.
Charles Mitchell and two brothers were adopted as infants by two men. He called same-sex adoption “a tragic social experiment” and said, “homosexuality destroyed a normal way of life for us.” Often, the homosexual parents shown in the media are straight-laced, responsible men. Mitchell said that his “dad” and “uncle” weren’t unlike that. But “it’s not just the two people involved; it’s the environment.”
After my parents’ separation, my sister and I began spending every other weekend with my father in the city. He shared a condo with a man who had also left his wife and children. The man’s two daughters seemed to have adjusted to the situation. It was as if everything was "normal." But I felt anything but normal. It was as if I had fallen asleep and woken up in a bizarre alternate reality. At the end of the day, my father would not walk into the bedroom with my mom, like he had done only weeks before. Instead, he headed off to bed with a man I had met only days before.
