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…161162164166167…325

Comments

  • #4892
    Mark Tapley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,193 ✭✭✭Mark Tapley


    haveringchick wrote: »
    How fickle am I! I've changed my mind again! It's yes for me! I mean, I'd hate to be considered uncool by all the terribly clever witty learned well read superior anonymous cool kids on a chat room! Please let me into your gang!

    I think there is a wider demographic of yes voters than you imagine. I for instance am a fifty year old straight man who believes in equality, definitely not one of the cool kids.(Don't think I ever was). The no voters seem to present a weak point and when it isn't accepted they claim they are being bullied.


  • #4893
    Mark Tapley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,193 ✭✭✭Mark Tapley


    haveringchick wrote: »
    How fickle am I! I've changed my mind again! It's yes for me! I mean, I'd hate to be considered uncool by all the terribly clever witty learned well read superior anonymous cool kids on a chat room! Please let me into your gang!

    I am wondering if you are not serious and just playing up to your username.


  • #4894
    blatantrereg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭blatantrereg


    Basic ethics compells me to vote yes. It's annoying because I shouldn't have to vote on something like this at all, and I prefer to continue my state of ennui and apathy regarding political matters that has served me comfortably for 17 years of adult life.

    I know the issue has caused fierce debate and probable fallings out within a particular conservative religious minority. I've heard some of the more outrageous 'no' arguments. One involved comparing gay marriage to marrying a farm animal - I'm 90% sure that this was obscenely homophobic, and not that he was trying to come out as being sexually attracted to farm animals.


  • #4895
    floggg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    Zaph wrote: »
    Sorry? What? Communism? Was the guy you were talking to called Joseph McCarthy by any chance? That's the first time I've heard Communism used as an argument in the whole debate, and let's face it it's hardly a political force in Ireland now, is it? There are many people of various political persuasions who have no time for organised religion, but I'd imagine the number who would consider themselves communists would be minuscule.



    You do realise that we've been "messing about" with the constitution for years, don't you? Since the foundation of the state there have been 33 amendments made to it, with a bunch more proposed but failing to gain a yes vote in the referendum. You can find the complete list here.

    I was waiting to see would anybody tackle this.

    Of all the reasons I've seen offered to vote no, and there has been some doozies, this is up there!


  • #4896
    StewartGriffin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭StewartGriffin


    folamh wrote: »
    There are 160 statutory differences between marriage and civil partnership. This vote is for equal rights.

    Most of the 160 are legal minutiae. It is about equal rights, upgrading already existing civil partnership to full partnership, there is no major resistance to it, so likening this campaign to the suffragette struggle, or to the breaking down of apartheid in the USA, is overly dramatic, and more than a little disrespectful to the dangers those people went through.


  • Advertisement
  • #4897
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    StewartGriffin wrote: »
    Most of the 160 are legal minutiae. It is about equal rights, upgrading already existing civil partnership to full partnership, there is no major resistance to it, so likening this campaign to the suffragette struggle, or to the breaking down of apartheid in the USA, is overly dramatic.

    No. It isn't.

    The fact is that all Irish citizens are not currently equal under the law.
    One minority group is denied access to special privileges based only on the very thing that makes them a minority group.

    Women were denied the vote due to their gender - which at the time they could do nothing about even if they wanted to.

    Apartheid in the U.S. was based on skin colour as defined by ancestry not actual colour of skin as one could look 'whiter' than Doris Day but still be defined as 'black'.

    In Ireland homosexuals are denied access to the privileges conveyed by the State on married couples because of their sexual orientation.

    We are either all equal or we are not.

    That is what this referendum is about.

    Is Ireland a country that values all citizens equally or is it a country that excludes some citizens based on something they have no control over such as gender, ethnicity or sexual orientation.

    Doesn't get more civil rights than that.


  • #4898
    StewartGriffin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭StewartGriffin


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    No. It isn't.
    .

    Women were denied the vote due to their gender - which at the time they could do nothing about even if they wanted to.

    Apartheid in the U.S. was based on skin colour as defined by ancestry not actual colour of skin as one could look 'whiter' than Doris Day but still be defined as 'black'.

    In Ireland homosexuals are denied access to the privileges conveyed by the State on married couples because of their sexual orientation.

    We are either all equal or we are not.

    Yes, but these women and Americans had to fight, endure prison and sometimes death, to achieve their justice. We're having a referendum, preceded by a bit of a debate which is more comical than controversial at times.

    The point I'm making is that the struggle for same sex marriage in Ireland is not comparable with the struggles of the Suffragettes or of the US civil rights movement in the 1960s. Anyone who says it is, is just daydreaming.


  • #4899
    folamh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 787 ✭✭✭folamh


    Mark Tapley wrote: »
    I think there is a wider demographic of yes voters than you imagine. I for instance am a fifty year old straight man who believes in equality, definitely not one of the cool kids.(Don't think I ever was). The no voters seem to present a weak point and when it isn't accepted they claim they are being bullied.

    The demographic is further widened by people who vote because it's important to a loved one. I know a 68 year old conservative catholic woman who would probably vote No, but she's voting Yes because her son is gay. About 2-3% of people in Ireland are openly gay, so chances are that you'll have one or more such people in your network who want the option to get married someday.


  • #4900
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    StewartGriffin wrote: »
    Yes, but these women and Americans had to fight, endure prison and die to achieve their justice. We're having a referendum, preceded by a bit of a debate which is more comical than controversial at times.

    The point I'm making is that the struggle for same sex marriage in Ireland is not comparable with the struggles of the Suffragettes or of the US civil rights movement in the 1960s.

    So David Norris didn't have to take Ireland to the ECHR?
    In my lifetime men could be jailed for having sex with other men.
    People are not being beaten on our streets because they are homosexual?
    It only counts if people die? People like Declan Flynn?

    You have completely missed the point I made - the point is does Ireland deny some of it's citizens access to special privileges based only on the fact that they are members of a minority group?

    Would it be ok if people with physical disabilities were barred from entering into a civil marriage with each other? I mean, some of them might not be able to conceive 'naturally'...

    What about Jews? Would it be ok to say Jews can't marry each other in Ireland?
    Sure it's not like we have pogroms (anymore) or anything...Jews can be equal in every other regard, we will even enact legislation to ensure they are not treated unfairly in areas like employment but no... they can't marry because Marriage is a christian sacrament and must not be redefined.
    Would that be a civil rights issue?

    If the answer to that is affirmative then removing that discrimination is a civil rights issue. ANY discrimination against ANY minority based only on their membership of the minority is discrimination.
    One doesn't have to be murdered or jailed to be discriminated against...


  • #4901
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    folamh wrote: »
    The demographic is further widened by people who vote because it's important to a loved one. I know a 68 year old conservative catholic woman who would probably vote No, but she's voting Yes because her son is gay. About 2-3% of people in Ireland are openly gay, so chances are that you'll have one or more such people in your network who want the option to get married someday.

    My 82 year old father is voting yes. As is my 80 year old mother - because their daughter and granddaughter are gay.
    My 78 year old aunt and her 84 year old husband are voting yes because they have a gay granddaughter and grandson.
    My 95 year old Great Grand Uncle is voting yes because he fought against Fascism and believes all human beings should be equal under the law.


  • Advertisement
  • #4902
    StewartGriffin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭StewartGriffin


    Bannasidhe wrote: »

    You have completely missed the point I made

    No, you have completely missed mine, and I suspect the reason is that you just enjoy reading your own long overly-dramatic speeches.


  • #4903
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    StewartGriffin wrote: »
    No, you have completely missed mine, and I suspect the reason is that you just enjoy making long dramatic speeches.

    Why don't you address the point I made rather than making dismissive remarks.

    You say it is not a civil rights issue because no one had been murdered for being gay. Declan Flynn was murdered for being gay.

    You say no one has gone to jail - have you anything to back that up as male homosexuality was illegal until 1993 - can you show that not one person was jailed under either the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, and the 1885 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act before that time?

    Why did the European Court of Human Rights rule against Ireland if there wasn't a civil rights issue?

    Are you claiming that the State discriminating against certain minority groups is not a civil rights issue?


  • #4904
    StewartGriffin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭StewartGriffin


    StewartGriffin wrote: »
    It is about equal rights, upgrading already existing civil partnership to full partnership, there is no major resistance to it, so likening this campaign to the suffragette struggle, or to the breaking down of apartheid in the USA, is overly dramatic, and more than a little disrespectful to the dangers those people went through.
    StewartGriffin wrote: »
    Yes, but these women and Americans had to fight, endure prison and sometimes death, to achieve their justice. We're having a referendum, preceded by a bit of a debate which is more comical than controversial at times.

    The point I'm making is that the struggle for same sex marriage in Ireland is not comparable with the struggles of the Suffragettes or of the US civil rights movement in the 1960s. Anyone who says it is, is just daydreaming.
    StewartGriffin wrote: »
    No, you have completely missed mine, and I suspect the reason is that you just enjoy reading your own long overly-dramatic speeches.
    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Why don't you address the point I made rather than making dismissive remarks.

    You say it is not a civil rights issue because no one had been murdered for being gay. Declan Flynn was murdered for being gay.

    You say no one has gone to jail - have you anything to back that up as male homosexuality was illegal until 1993 - can you show that not one person was jailed under either the 1861 Offences Against the Person Act, and the 1885 Criminal Law (Amendment) Act before that time?

    Why did the European Court of Human Rights rule against Ireland if there wasn't a civil rights issue?

    Are you claiming that the State discriminating against certain minority groups is not a civil rights issue?

    Look, here are the posts I have made, take a moment and have a read. Next, compare what you say I have said to what I actually said.

    You are like an angry bee buzzing around wanting to sting somebody.
    Do me a favour and buzz off.


  • #4905
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    StewartGriffin wrote: »
    You are like an angry bee buzzing around wanting to sting somebody.
    Do me a favour and buzz off.

    No need for the aggression. I have not insulted you in any way shape or form nor have I been disrespectful.

    I addressed the points you made which lead you to say this is not a civil rights issue and showed that all of the thing you claimed do not happen have happened and, in the case of 'gay-bashing', still do happen.

    You have completely failed to explain why when the State treats a minority differently to the majority that discrimination is not a civil rights issue.
    What is it then?


  • #4906
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    StewartGriffin wrote: »
    Look, here are the posts I have made, take a moment and have a read. Next, compare what you say I have said to what I actually said.

    You are like an angry bee buzzing around wanting to sting somebody.
    Do me a favour and buzz off.



    I wasn't convinced of your argument at all but that cracker really sold it for me :P


  • #4907
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,855 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    You have completely failed to explain why when the State treats a minority differently to the majority that discrimination is not a civil rights issue.
    What is it then?
    I don't think they ever said it is not a civil rights issue.


  • #4908
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    No need for the aggression. I have not insulted you in any way shape or form nor have I bean disrespectful.

    I addressed the points you made which lead you to say this is not a civil rights issue and showed that all of the thing you claimed do not happen have happened and, in the case of 'gay-bashing', still do happen.

    You have completely failed to explain why when the State treats a minority differently to the majority that discrimination is not a civil rights issue.
    What is it then?



    Apparently it's a "mere referendum" with "a little debate" beforehand and a "few parties" after.


    ...and you were accused of being disrespectful...


  • #4909
    StewartGriffin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭StewartGriffin


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    No need for the aggression. I have not insulted you in any way shape or form nor have I bean disrespectful.

    I addressed the points you made which lead you to say this is not a civil rights issue and showed that all of the thing you claimed do not happen have happened and, in the case of 'gay-bashing', still do happen.

    You have completely failed to explain why when the State treats a minority differently to the majority that discrimination is not a civil rights issue.
    What is it then?

    I didn't say it isn't a civil rights issue, I said the struggle is not comparable with the Suffragette struggle, or the US Civil Rights Movement.

    Just to clarify- I didn't say it isn't a civil rights issue.

    Didn't say it.

    It is a Civil Rights issue.

    Didn't say it wasn't, (a Civil Rights issue.)


  • #4910
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    osarusan wrote: »
    I don't think they ever said it is not a civil rights issue.
    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    I might be missing something but I don't think StewartGriffin said it's not about civil rights?

    Not as such.

    Apparently it's just about legal minutia and calling it a civil rights issue is an insult to the Suffragettes and American Civil Rights Movement because gays in Ireland haven't died (they have), been imprisoned (they have) or suffered enough to qualify.

    Stewart may not have said 'it is not a civil rights issue' but he used terms which downplay the importance of the issue and told Irish homosexuals that, basically, we could have had it worse all things considered. Stewart's comments read to me as a variation on the 'well, the gays here aren't being thrown off cliffs like or executed so they don't have it that bad comparatively speaking...'

    It's an invalidation of the real life experiences of Irish homosexuals growing up knowing they are regarded as 'lesser' by the State.


  • #4911
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    StewartGriffin wrote: »
    I didn't say it isn't a civil rights issue, I said the struggle is not comparable with the Suffragette struggle, or the US Civil Rights Movement.

    Just to clarify- I didn't say it isn't a civil rights issue.

    Didn't say it.

    It is a Civil Rights issue.

    Didn't say it wasn't, (a Civil Rights issue.)

    Apologies for saying you said it wasn't.

    What you did do was invalidate - and possibly this was not your intention - the hard, long, bitter and frankly at times scary struggle to secure gay rights in Ireland by making a false, and inaccurate, comparison to other struggles.

    We have died at the hands of other or our own when we couldn't take the societal imposed shame.
    We have been imprisoned.
    We needed to appeal to Europe to end the threat of jail.
    We have been sacked from our jobs.
    We have been thrown out of our houses.
    We have fled to other countries.
    We have been disowned by our families.

    Please do not dismiss our history of struggle by referring to legal minutia - celebrate that we have come so far while acknowledging that lives were destroyed to achieve this.


  • Advertisement
  • #4912
    StewartGriffin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭StewartGriffin


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    I'm not quite sure what the relevance of the distinction from those other civil rights issues are. You're right, people aren't going through as much in order to secure this referendum but...so what? That doesn't make the issue at stake less important.

    I was referring to several posts implying that this campaign is on a level with the Suffragettes, US Civil Rights, etc. In my opinion, such comparisons, in relation to this referendum, are overly dramatic.

    That's all really.


  • #4913
    StewartGriffin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭StewartGriffin


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Apologies for saying you said it wasn't.

    What you did do was invalidate - and possibly this was not your intention - the hard, long, bitter and frankly at times scary struggle to secure gay rights in Ireland by making a false, and inaccurate, comparison to other struggles.

    We have died at the hands of other or our own when we couldn't take the societal imposed shame.
    We have been imprisoned.
    We needed to appeal to Europe to end the threat of jail.
    We have been sacked from our jobs.
    We have been thrown out of our houses.
    We have fled to other countries.
    We have been disowned by our families.

    Please do not dismiss our history of struggle by referring to legal minutia - celebrate that we have come so far while acknowledging that lives were destroyed to achieve this.

    Allright. Point taken. I'm logging off now. Going for a lie down.


  • #4914
    Daith
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,259 ✭✭✭Daith


    StewartGriffin wrote: »
    I was referring to several posts implying that this campaign is on a level with the Suffragettes, US Civil Rights, etc. In my opinion, such comparisons, in relation to this referendum, are overly dramatic.

    That's all really.

    That's interesting because alot of arguments against same sex-marriage are the same used to deny women the vote and interracial marriage.

    It certainly doesn't affect as many people but there are similarities.

    Vote NO to protect the family. Suffragette, US Civil Rights or Same Sex marriage? Or all three.


  • #4915
    haveringchick
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,380 ✭✭✭haveringchick


    OldNotWIse wrote: »
    Apparently it's a "mere referendum" with "a little debate" beforehand and a "few parties" after.


    ...and you were accused of being disrespectful...

    It's hardly Selma either though is it?


  • #4916
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    haveringchick wrote: »
    It's hardly Selma either though is it?



    No.


    What's your point?


  • #4917
    folamh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 787 ✭✭✭folamh


    StewartGriffin wrote: »
    I was referring to several posts implying that this campaign is on a level with the Suffragettes, US Civil Rights, etc. In my opinion, such comparisons, in relation to this referendum, are overly dramatic.

    That's all really.
    I didn't mean to imply that the marriage referendum is on the same level of urgency as women's suffrage, just that in both cases there was/is a denial of equal rights, and in both cases there were people in power who didn't like the tactics nor the tone of those who wanted their rights.


  • #4918
    OldNotWIse
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,468 ✭✭✭✭OldNotWIse


    folamh wrote: »
    I didn't mean to imply that the marriage referendum is on the same level of urgency as women's suffrage, just that in both cases there was/is a denial of equal rights, and in both cases there were people in power who didn't like the tactics nor the tone of those who wanted their rights.



    Some people are labouring under the idea that the two are in competition with each other. They can't accept the fact that they are two distinct issues.


  • #4919
    S.O
    Closed Accounts Posts: 397 ✭✭S.O


    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    And yet you make a comment about one person representing all yes voters.

    Are you the only one allowed to make generalisations?

    I checked a few of the yes to equality campaign pages on social media earlier, I can,t find any of them condemn the removal of posters so far, likewise a similar reaction when youth defence website got hacked last week, now Im not going so far as to say this represent all yes campaigners as a whole, as a small few were against both actions, in my view the organisers of these yes groups should condemn any wrongdoing by anyone on the yes side, the removal of posters + along with the hacking of the youth defence website kinda sends out a message of if you dare disagree with us we will seek to silence you.


  • #4920
    S.O
    Closed Accounts Posts: 397 ✭✭S.O


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    No. It isn't.

    The fact is that all Irish citizens are not currently equal under the law.
    One minority group is denied access to special privileges based only on the very thing that makes them a minority group.

    Women were denied the vote due to their gender - which at the time they could do nothing about even if they wanted to.

    Apartheid in the U.S. was based on skin colour as defined by ancestry not actual colour of skin as one could look 'whiter' than Doris Day but still be defined as 'black'.

    In Ireland homosexuals are denied access to the privileges conveyed by the State on married couples because of their sexual orientation.

    We are either all equal or we are not.

    That is what this referendum is about.

    Is Ireland a country that values all citizens equally or is it a country that excludes some citizens based on something they have no control over such as gender, ethnicity or sexual orientation.

    Doesn't get more civil rights than that.

    I came across this picture on facebook in recent days, it makes a good case against the argument that struggle for civil rights in the 1960s is equal to the struggle for same sex marriage rights.

    https://www.facebook.com/254097721362053/photos/pb.254097721362053.-2207520000.1429625799./554440971327725/?type=3&theatre


  • Advertisement
  • #4921
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,941 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    S.O wrote: »
    I checked a few of the yes to equality campaign pages on social media earlier, I can,t find any of them condemn the removal of posters so far, likewise a similar reaction when youth defence website got hacked last week, now Im not going so far as to say this represent all yes campaigners as a whole, as a small few were against both actions, in my view the organisers of these yes groups should condemn any wrongdoing by anyone on the yes side, the removal of posters + along with the hacking of the youth defence website kinda sends out a message of if you dare disagree with us we will seek to silence you.


    Or perhaps they should, you know, just concentrate on putting their point across and forgetting all the other nonsense?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement