nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Marriage redefinition and Childrens rights

indy_man

If you get to watch all this are you still 100% sure redefining marriage in our constitution is the correct thing to do? It would be best if you watched it before slamming it, if you don't watch it at all probably best not comment.

Find more posts tagged with

iona lick me gee

Quick Links

Comments

oldrnwisr

To Need a Woman wrote: »

No! What it ultimately boils down to is children... because the homosexual couples will want to adopt. Civil partnerships give the gays all the rights they want, expect to be allowed to raise a kid in an 'experiment'

OK, let's get a few things straightened out shall we?

Firstly, adoption is not the only means by which a same-sex couple can have a child and is actually less common than IVF.

Secondly, single gay people have been able to adopt children since the Adoption Act in 1991.

Thirdly, with the recent introduction of the Children and Family Relationships Act, gay couples can now apply to adopt as a couple.

Fourthly, children being raised by same-sex couples is not new and is not an experiment. Same-sex couples have been raising children for a long time. We've been studying its effects for over forty years now and the conclusions of all the research that has been done (and this can't be repeated often enough) is that THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE between children raised by gay couples and those raised by straight couples. This issue has been studied in every way possible from longitudinal studies tracking the children's development through to adulthood to large nationally representative surveys and even meta-analyses combining the data obtained from the many smaller studies out there. The evidence that same-sex couples are just as good parents as straight couples is about as robust as any evidence from any other field of science. If you'd like to find out more you can read the research here:

LGBT Parenting Research

Finally, civil partnership does not confer all the rights that civil marriage does. In fact there are 160 statutory differences between civil partnership and civil marriage. You can read them for yourself here:

List of differences between civil partnership and civil marriage

galljga1

To Need a Woman wrote: »

No! What it ultimately boils down to is children... because the homosexual couples will want to adopt. Civil partnerships give the gays all the rights they want, expect to be allowed to raise a kid in an 'experiment'

Good God, get educated before making idiotic statements.

One eyed Jack

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Oh boy, another obnoxious No voter.

Aye, they really do give that impression alright -

"I know I'm wrong, I don't care, I'm going to have my say"...

Willful ignorance or just outright misdirection to waste people's time.

floggg

fran17 wrote: »

I really do not understand why you continue to avoid reprimand for the grossly uncivil language you use against people in this thread.

And I really do not understand why you continue to duck even basic questions on your posts, many of which are grossly offensive and without any basis.

You might find my language uncivil, but the difference between my posts and yours is that mine are demonstrably true based on the facts and evidence before us.

Edit - great. now Fran will get to further his martyr complex, when in reality they were some of the most odious and personal comments I've ever read on here.

G_R

To Need a Woman wrote: »

Obviously... homosexual adoption. After all, it's pretty much the only difference between a marriage and a civil partnership

The children and family relationships bill which was recently passed by the dail/Seanad will fix this - so marriage will have no impact on a person's right to adopt.

Under the bill, co habiting (gay or straight) partners will be able to jointly adopt, regardless of whether the referendum passes or not

Kiwi in IE

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/call-for-radical-amendment-to-proposed-child-bill-1.2107097

“I love my kids but I could not do my wife’s job. I could not be a mother. I could not give my children what their mother gives them,” Professor Ray Kinsella, Mothers and Fathers Matter

I think Professor Kinsella would do well to reflect on these opinions and examine why he believes this is the case. The fact he believes he can not give his children what their mother gives them most likely results from either a belief that he is an inadequate parent, or from his marriage being stuck in archaic, socially constructed gender roles. Either way it is sad if he feels inadequate as a parent but no reason to set up a campaign to try and promote these views as the social norm.

osarusan

To Need a Woman wrote: »

No! What it ultimately boils down to is children... because the homosexual couples will want to adopt. Civil partnerships give the gays all the rights they want, expect to be allowed to raise a kid in an 'experiment'

This post must set a record for how many ways it is possible to be incorrect in so few words.

PopePalpatine

Oh boy, another obnoxious No voter.

To Need a Woman

osarusan wrote: »

what is the point?

Obviously... homosexual adoption. After all, it's pretty much the only difference between a marriage and a civil partnership

To Need a Woman

bluewolf wrote: »

This isn't about children it's about people in love getting married

No! What it ultimately boils down to is children... because the homosexual couples will want to adopt. Civil partnerships give the gays all the rights they want, expect to be allowed to raise a kid in an 'experiment'

osarusan

To Need a Woman wrote: »

This has got nothing to do with child abuse. Stop avoiding the point

what is the point?

To Need a Woman

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Well, if anyone is qualified for that its hardline Catholics.

This has got nothing to do with child abuse. Stop avoiding the point

hotmail.com

efb wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/article31153701.ece

Niamh not coming over all Team Breda...

Breda says gays should abstain from sex like all married couples. She is off her rocker.

She also wouldn't say what percentage of the rte money she got went to charity. Probably very little.

Kiwi in IE

Further on from that, if my OH was gay and little Kiwi were the result of me acting as surrogate for him and his husband, I cannot think of any way that Little Kiwi would be disadvantaged so long as the husband provided the same level of parenting as I do. There is not one thing that I can think of that I provide my child as a mother that a man with similar emotional connections to him could not do. And as I say that, I consider myself to be a very good mother.

EoghanIRL

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

No

Fill out an rfa2 form. Get it stamped by Gardai. Post the form to your local council.

http://www.checktheregister.ie/PublicPages/AppForms.aspx

Turns out I need to fill this out too.
First time voting and might as well seeing as if it does come down to one vote then I would like to think mine would count. Would hate for it to be a no vote and think that I did nothing!

I used to think that this referendum doesn't affect my life at all in any way but if it makes other people find happiness in life then I'm all for it!

Kiwi in IE

indy_man wrote: »

OK, I have many views lending to a no vote but the main one is that every child is entitled to a mothers love. Even better is the love of both a mother and a father.

To be honest I find this harping on about the special, separate virtues of mothers slightly patronising. Because we give birth to the child does not automatically make us better parents or make our love for our children superior to that of their father. My OH is actually the better parent in many respects in our relationship, he has more patience and more imagination when playing by a long way, he is more even tempered in the face of adversity and more pleasantly responsive to issues that occur between 1 and 7am.

I find that this argument from the no side insults both mothers and fathers. It is both reminiscent of a time when women were supposed to be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen and it is insulting to all the fathers who are excellent parents.

Annasopra

The Adversary wrote: »

I was 18 in March but haven't registered to vote yet, Is it too late to register at this stage to be able to vote in the referendum?

No

Fill out an rfa2 form. Get it stamped by Gardai. Post the form to your local council.

http://www.checktheregister.ie/PublicPages/AppForms.aspx

The Hill Billy

The Sindo wrote:

At that stage Breda wondered if it was all worth it, because, as she puts it: "It was having an impact on the people whom you love very much."

Oh, the irony...

Bannasidhe

The Adversary wrote: »

Nice one :cool: Many of my friends are being quite apathetic about the whole thing despite supporting marriage equality. Don't want to be one of those hypocritical young people! Can't wait to exercise my democratic right and I'm happy this is going to be the first thing i'll be able to vote on. Roll on May 22nd and Yes, Yes, Yes

Ah - the excitement of your first time.

My first time grew up to become the 8th Amendment

efb

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/article31153701.ece

Niamh not coming over all Team Breda...

WoolyJumper

terryduff12 wrote: »

if the bill gets passed! shouldn't that be the next step

It's been about 8 years since I left school...and even longer since I did SPHE in 1st/2nd year. But homosexual relationships/homosexuality were part of the curriculum (a very small part) Though my teacher spent as little time as she possible could on that section and refused to answer any questions about it (i assume by her red face she was embarrassed).

Anyway I sure they are ready discuss things like same sex relationships in school.

The Adversary

osarusan wrote: »

Not too late, you can join the supplementary register up to and including May 5th.

Nice one :cool: Many of my friends are being quite apathetic about the whole thing despite supporting marriage equality. Don't want to be one of those hypocritical young people! Can't wait to exercise my democratic right and I'm happy this is going to be the first thing i'll be able to vote on. Roll on May 22nd and Yes, Yes, Yes

osarusan

The Adversary wrote: »

I was 18 in March but haven't registered to vote yet, Is it too late to register at this stage to be able to vote in the referendum?

Not too late, you can join the supplementary register up to and including May 5th.

efb

Niamh Horan interviews Breda O'brien in the Sindo tomorrow /grabs popcorn

The Adversary

I was 18 in March but haven't registered to vote yet, Is it too late to register at this stage to be able to vote in the referendum?

One eyed Jack

You started this thread with this -

indy_man wrote: »

If you get to watch all this are you still 100% sure redefining marriage in our constitution is the correct thing to do? It would be best if you watched it before slamming it, if you don't watch it at all probably best not comment.

And now, what, nearly 80 pages of discussion later when those opposed to marriage equality are fairly thin on the ground, you still come out with this -

indy_man wrote: »

OK, I have many views lending to a no vote but the main one is that every child is entitled to a mothers love. Even better is the love of both a mother and a father.

Now I'm not suggesting you're simply trolling or anything, but your point has been addressed at least, at least ten times and more in your own thread already.

Bannasidhe

indy_man wrote: »

OK, I have many views lending to a no vote but the main one is that every child is entitled to a mothers love. Even better is the love of both a mother and a father.

What exactly does that have to do with two people of the same gender getting married?

Regardless of the outcome of the Referendum gay couples in a civil partnership will be able to adopt.
So your no vote will make absolutely ZERO difference to that.
soz.

What about lesbian couples? Double the mother love no?

Would you advocate that in no circumstances should a father ever be given sole custody of a child?

What about if the mother dies in childbirth - should the child be immediately adopted by a heterosexual couple?

Have you actually thought this soundbite through?

Bridge93

indy_man wrote: »

OK, I have many views lending to a no vote but the main one is that every child is entitled to a mothers love. Even better is the love of both a mother and a father.

And every person isn't entitled to have their relationship treated equally in the eyes of the State? Bearing in mind as has been said a million times at this stage that gay couples can already raise children and this referendum will not change this either way. And has nothing to do with this referendum.

Zaph

indy_man wrote: »

OK, I have many views lending to a no vote but the main one is that every child is entitled to a mothers love. Even better is the love of both a mother and a father.

So are you suggesting that the love of two mothers is the best of all?

shruikan2553

indy_man wrote: »

OK, I have many views lending to a no vote but the main one is that every child is entitled to a mothers love. Even better is the love of both a mother and a father.

How will voting no prevent same sex couples raising children?