How will you vote in the Marriage Equality referendum? Mod Note Post 1

yvo8hzxb9fku3e wrote: »

The problem with outbursts like that ....

Excuse me? What WOULD you say to people who said those things about you? If you were actually the subject of the hate speech....if YOUR CHILDREN were being told that they must be lacking something emotionally or psychologically or socially because of who you are....?

What in Christ's effing name would YOU say to those people? Is there nothing that makes you see red? Cos I can tell you that I'd see red if my kids were said to be missing any love, care, attention, respect or education due to who I was or my family set up. (Oh wait, I'm a lone parent. That's happening for my kids too.)

I actually don't know how LGBT people aren't actually flipping out at the ignorance displayed towards them. Hmm. Perhaps they have SO MUCH to lose that they still have to bite their tongues, poor bastreds. :mad:

Ps. BTW, by voting no or abstaining, a person is essentially saying all those things about LGBT people. There is no soft voting. There is only Yes or No. Abstaining under these circumstances when it's so touch and go is the same as a No vote.

yvo8hzxb9fku3e wrote: »

You call that being Mz Nice Lesbian? I don't think I'd like to meet Mz Mean Lesbian!

The problem with outbursts like that is that you are equating everyone who has any misgivings at all as equal to the most extreme views on the No side - that's offensive!
While I have moved from yes to a soft yes, my idea of soft yes would be to abstain or vote yes - obviously I haven't decided yet

There's no nuance to a referendum. The polling card won't ask you why you're voting one way or the other. You either vote yes or you vote no. When the votes are counted, it doesn't really matter why you voted the way you did. A person moght vote no because they're confused about surrogacy or adoption, they might vote no because they think gays should be burned alive; it doesn't matter. Their votes amount to the same thing.

Be grateful you have the option of abstaining, you'll lose nothing regardless of the result. That's true for the vast majority of the people who'll be voting. The same can't be said for me. That's precisely why having a referendum on the rights of a minority is a stupid, stupid idea.

yvo8hzxb9fku3e wrote: »

You call that being Mz Nice Lesbian? I don't think I'd like to meet Mz Mean Lesbian!

The problem with outbursts like that is that you are equating everyone who has any misgivings at all as equal to the most extreme views on the No side - that's offensive!
While I have moved from yes to a soft yes, my idea of soft yes would be to abstain or vote yes - obviously I haven't decided yet

I'm equating... ummmm... want to think about that for a second?


This is Mz Effed Off Lesbian because people are flip flopping as to whether they will support all citizens being equal under the law (as it states we should be in the Constitution!) because other people got annoyed at blatant, hateful lies and did something that has happened in every election ever - they took down posters. They were rude to the opposition. The yes campaign has pleaded for calm. It has asked that the posters be left up. But that, apparently isn't good enough.


When someone says 'ohhhh... i might not vote because some people are being numpties...' That sounds to me like 'Ohhh... I don't think I will support Dr King cos I don't like the look of that X fella!'.

You believe the cause is just or you don't.

If you do and fail to vote because 'numpties' that makes me Mz Disappointed in my fellow citizens who couldn't be asked doing the right thing Lesbian.

frostyjacks wrote: »

To be fair Shrap, the children of lesbians are lacking something. It's called a father. You may not like them, but they're the reason you can have kids in the first place.

As a matter of fact many children of lesbians have a relationship with their biological fathers.
Many children of heterosexual women don't - and that includes ones who were married when they had those children. Ever hear of the term 'dead beat Dad'?

Do stop pretending you give a rats arse about children. All you care about is that adults conform to your view of how they should live their lives.

Links234 wrote: »

Some posters here have the patience of saints, I don't know how you can put up with all this and still remain relatively cool. Not just cool, but level headed, articulate and strength of character answering quite a lot of venemous material. Hell, I don't even know how I'm doing it.

This old dyke remember when these views were the norm, not the exception. These people used to be brave enough to spit at me in the street (I've never been terribly good at checking myself), now all they can do is type nonsense at me.

frostyjacks wrote: »

To be fair Shrap, the children of lesbians are lacking something. It's called a father. You may not like them, but they're the reason you can have kids in the first place.

Let me try this again, using reason and not emotion.

The children of lesbians have a father, who may or may not be present in those children's lives. That is normally by general consent (which is more than can be said of the vast majority of parents who split up where one of them is a very bad influence on the children's lives) and the children are NOT missing a father or mother because they have no lack of love.

There is no lack in a child's love and care when the parents (of any gender) do the job right.

frostyjacks wrote: »

This is one of the reasons I'm voting no. The hysterics, emotional blackmail. I pity them.

Sorry, who do you pity? I'm not sure what you're saying by that.

I am not hysterical, I am angry. There is a massive difference.

Show me where I have blackmailed you in any way, including emotionally.

Mint Aero wrote: »

Considering AH is usually completely wrong with polls and referendums, is it safe to say that we will have a no vote?

I had to have a look back but yeah, the AH poll on the seanad referendum was pretty close to the actual outcome.

AH- 58% no
Actual result -51.7% no.

So here is hoping AH get's it right again.

frostyjacks wrote: »

This is one of the reasons I'm voting no. The hysterics, emotional blackmail. I pity them.

You're voting no because you don't think LGBT people should be allowed to marry.

You can dress it up any way you want to and make all kinds of excuses in order to make yourself feel like a better person or that your reasoning is just but the only person you're fooling is yourself.

It's your vote so you should use it the way you want to but don't keep blaming the gays for your prejudice. We're too loud, too stroppy, too out, too much. It's always the last defence of the empty argument from people who just want us to go away and go our gaying behind closed doors in secrecy and shame.

Equality is, to use a cliche, an idea whose time has come and I'm not going to apologise for that. The no voters want us to go back behind those closed doors and the irony is it's them that's hiding. Hiding behind arguments about children or family or surrogacy when the simple truth is is that they can't bear the idea that our love might become as legitimate as theirs.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lz_granderson_the_myth_of_the_gay_agenda

Have to share this. It's brilliant and really just shows the ridiculousness of it all.

bikerjohn wrote: »

No

Why?