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

Ironé · 01-05-2015 06:51PM

marienbad wrote: »

Well if you have I don't see it , so can I ask once again and a straight yes or no will suffice

Will the concerns you have expressed still exist irrespective of this referendum ?

Just a straight answer please before you cut and run .

He's not capable.

smash · 01-05-2015 06:52PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

Same sex couples aren't having children together. This is impossible, AFAIK.

They are. You might mean conceive. But even at that, one party from the couple can conceive and they can then raise the child together.

frostyjacks wrote: »

Only heterosexuals can procreate.

100% untrue.

frostyjacks wrote: »

I know that really annoys the yes camp, but they need to get that chip off their shoulder

And you need to think before you type.

marienbad · 01-05-2015 06:53PM

Ironé wrote: »

He's not capable.

So it would appear .

frostyjacks · 01-05-2015 06:58PM

smash wrote: »

They are. You might mean conceive. But even at that, one party from the couple can conceive and they can then raise the child together.

100% untrue.

And you need to think before you type.

They're not having a child together though, are they? A third party needs to be involved. Show me a gay couple that have had a child together and I'll vote yes.

smash · 01-05-2015 06:58PM

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

You equivocating around the word "having". I'll clarify, and make your 'point' redundant.

It just never needs to deal with people of the same sex conceiving children together.And I'm not saying anything different to that.I have.

And it won't deal with that. Why would it? It's also not what we're voting on.

smash · 01-05-2015 07:00PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

They're not having a child together though, are they? A third party needs to be involved. Show me a gay couple that have had a child together and I'll vote yes.

But we're not voting on a couples ability to have children....

VinLieger · 01-05-2015 07:00PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

They're not having a child together though, are they? A third party needs to be involved. Show me a gay couple that have had a child together and I'll vote yes.

That's not what you said though is it? you specifically said

frostyjacks wrote: »

Only heterosexuals can procreate.

Your turning this into children again when it has nothing to do with them, marriage is not about producing children

aloyisious · 01-05-2015 07:01PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

Same sex couples aren't having children together. This is impossible, AFAIK. Only heterosexuals can procreate. I know that really annoys the yes camp, but they need to get that chip off their shoulder

The above is ever so partially wrong. Male and female homosexuals can procreation, only not to the Vote NO side's satisfaction except as below:

Homosexuals can legally marry and procreate, and start families - only with a partner not of the homosexual's choice - just the partner preferred by people that would never be part of the resulting marriage and family, and having no legal ties with the family either. This is known to the Vote NO campaign as the traditional family, their preferred choice when it comes to "allowing" homosexuals marry.

butterfly28 · 01-05-2015 07:05PM

It's quite sad that a country with dividing opinions (sadly with some based on 'Christian values') is the deciding factor on whether same sex couples can marry.....the Government should just outright allow for it.....a person's choice to marry should not come down to every other inhabitant's opinion...be it personal or political ðŸ˜ JFK said that 'Church and State should be kept separate' and rightly so ðŸ˜Š

smash · 01-05-2015 07:09PM

butterfly28 wrote: »

It's quite sad that a country with dividing opinions (sadly with some based on 'Christian values') is the deciding factor on whether same sex couples can marry.....the Government should just outright allow for it.....a person's choice to marry should not come down to every other inhabitant's opinion...be it personal or political

That's Ireland for you. Nanny state all the way. Want to get married? Got to be heterosexual! Want to get divorced? No... Wait 4 years and then we might let you!

aloyisious · 01-05-2015 07:10PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

They're not having a child together though, are they? A third party needs to be involved. Show me a gay couple that have had a child together and I'll vote yes.

Unfortunately i cannot recall the name of the transgender man (female to male) in the U.K. who kept the womb and vagina he had pre-op, became pregnant by his partner and gave birth to two (2) children within their relationship, and started a family. It made the papers big-time in the U.K. Maybe that gay couple is something you were not aware of? there was no third party to enabling the pregnancies come about. It's possible that other LGBT people here might be able to provide the man's name.

efb · 01-05-2015 07:15PM

What I did with repugnant Iona leaflet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LYoHIHrbUQ

kylith · 01-05-2015 07:18PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

Same sex couples aren't having children together. This is impossible, AFAIK. Only heterosexuals can procreate. I know that really annoys the yes camp, but they need to get that chip off their shoulder

1) Totally irrelevant to the referendum

2) So what?

One eyed Jack · 01-05-2015 07:27PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

They're not having a child together though, are they? A third party needs to be involved. Show me a gay couple that have had a child together and I'll vote yes.

Can you show me anywhere in Irish legislation it states that one of the prerequisites to marriage is that both parties in order to qualify for marriage, must be able to reproduce with each other?

If heterosexual couples are not held to that standard, then why do you hold homosexual couples to that standard?

Civil marriage is an institution of the State, and what it means to individuals, beyond what is conferred upon them in legislation, is completely up to that couple themselves. The State does not require nor expect that people who enter into civil marriage should be made to reproduce.

Zubeneschamali · 01-05-2015 07:42PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Can you show me anywhere in Irish legislation it states that one of the prerequisites to marriage is that both parties in order to qualify for marriage, must be able to reproduce with each other?

Never mind civil marriage, even the precious Catholic sacrament of Holy Matrimony is A-OK with infertile couples marrying.

bb1234567 · 01-05-2015 08:04PM

Is it illegal to cut down referendum posters? There are several No posters (filled with lies about surrogacy might I add) that are closely bunched together at a busy junction in clonskeagh and cycling by them to college everyday just annoys me . Its just so awful that these stupid posters will sway many people who would have originally voted yes into voting no as they've been fooled into thinking this is about surrogacy and gay adoption with the think of the children angle the NO side have taken as a last but effective resort.

DARK-KNIGHT · 01-05-2015 08:08PM

i cant believe there are so many no votes tbh...

ireland 2015 people i cant believe it tbh.....

bb1234567 · 01-05-2015 08:12PM

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

i cant believe there are so many no votes tbh...

ireland 2015 people i cant believe it tbh.....

If you think about all the old people who grew up in extremely homophobic environments and the super religious people who seem to find homosexuality offensive then its not really that hard to believe

DARK-KNIGHT · 01-05-2015 08:14PM

bb1234567 wrote: »

If you think about all the old people who grew up in extremely homophobic environments and the super religious people who seem to find homosexuality offensive then its not really that hard to believe

I was talking about the poll tbh how many crusties do you know that use boards regular?

bb1234567 · 01-05-2015 08:20PM

DARK-KNIGHT wrote: »

I was talking about the poll tbh how many crusties do you know that use boards regular?

Oh yeah I suppose theres probably not that many. But still Id say easily 20% of the country are quite religious, well in the over 30s.

B_Wayne · 01-05-2015 08:21PM

bb1234567 wrote: »

Is it illegal to cut down referendum posters? There are several No posters (filled with lies about surrogacy might I add) that are closely bunched together at a busy junction in clonskeagh and cycling by them to college everyday just annoys me . Its just so awful that these stupid posters will sway many people who would have originally voted yes into voting no as they've been fooled into thinking this is about surrogacy and gay adoption with the think of the children angle the NO side have taken as a last but effective resort.

I think the posters are negatively affecting the no campaign tbh. I would recommend against pulling down posters and donate to campaign instead.

NuMarvel · 01-05-2015 08:24PM

bb1234567 wrote: »

Is it illegal to cut down referendum posters? There are several No posters (filled with lies about surrogacy might I add) that are closely bunched together at a busy junction in clonskeagh and cycling by them to college everyday just annoys me . Its just so awful that these stupid posters will sway many people who would have originally voted yes into voting no as they've been fooled into thinking this is about surrogacy and gay adoption with the think of the children angle the NO side have taken as a last but effective resort.

The only people who can move those posters are the local council, the National Roads authority and the people who put them up.

The best way to counter those posters is to talk to people about voting yes. That can either be friends, family, co workers, etc, or join your local Yes Equality group to canvass. But don't touch the posters, because if nothing else, it feeds the No side's narrative of being victimised.

01-05-2015 08:25PM

I wish people would refer to this referendum as one for marriage equality, not "gay marriage".

All humans should have equal rights regardless of details such as sexual orientation.

I'm voting yes for marriage equality.

Edgarfrndly · 01-05-2015 08:28PM

Easy vote for me. My brother is gay and is the most genuinely nicest person in my life. I look forward to the day he gets married - All I want for him is to be happy.

It's heartwarming to see how far Irish society has come. If this was 20 years ago, this referendum would have had no chance at passing. I'm 32, and homophobia was rife in school when I was younger. Now I see stories of kids at school proudly supporting the yes campaign with pins.

RobertKK · 01-05-2015 08:41PM

bb1234567 wrote: »

Is it illegal to cut down referendum posters? There are several No posters (filled with lies about surrogacy might I add) that are closely bunched together at a busy junction in clonskeagh and cycling by them to college everyday just annoys me . Its just so awful that these stupid posters will sway many people who would have originally voted yes into voting no as they've been fooled into thinking this is about surrogacy and gay adoption with the think of the children angle the NO side have taken as a last but effective resort.

Here is a tweet to show where it could end up if you did.

https://twitter.com/breakingnewsie/status/594122185264001024

bb1234567 · 01-05-2015 08:46PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Here is a tweet to show where it could end up if you did.

https://twitter.com/breakingnewsie/status/594122185264001024

Oh so these No posters were approved by local councils or some kind of authority? how the hell were the No posters approved in the first place? They're completely irrelevant to the referendum and confuse and misinform people. its a disgrace.

GCU Flexible Demeanour · 01-05-2015 08:46PM

smash wrote: »

And it won't deal with that. Why would it? It's also not what we're voting on.

Ironé wrote: »

So in a nutshell you feel that your 'statement' that it is normal for a married straight couple to have kids naturally somehow explains why he is voting no for a referendum allowing same sex couples to get married??? Incoherent rambling nonsense.

When did I say this should influence how someone votes? Haven't I said, very clearly, that it's not an argument for or against legislating for SSM?

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

I didn't write the other post you attributed to me, but given your contribution so far in this thread it's hardly surprising you'd get something so simple mixed up.

This, children, is what we can pedantry.

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Yet you're surprised no one will take your argument in any way seriously.

I'm more vindicated by the demonstration that saying "it's perfectly normal for straight married couples to have children" gets half a dozen posters agitated. Ye are buzzing around, looking for something to refute.

aloyisious wrote: »

Is there somewhere i can find a YES argument for such legislation?

I've no idea, really. I'm just drawing out a point that I've noticed many Yes posters using on this site.

aloyisious wrote: »

re "Its perfectly normal for straight marriages to produce children without external assistance, and legislation needs to provide for that". why do you think that such legislation is needed?

Bear in mind, I'm not talking about anything particularly special, just things like the presumption of paternity that is a feature of many legal systems including our own. My point, recall, is more that such legislation is necessary for straight marriages, and totally irrelevant to SSM. You actually couldn't apply the presumption of paternity to SSM.

marienbad wrote: »

Well if you have I don't see it , so can I ask once again and a straight yes or no will suffice

And this, children, is what we call hubris. As Wikipedia says, when it offends the gods of ancient Greece, it is usually punished.

VinLieger · 01-05-2015 08:53PM

bb1234567 wrote: »

Oh so these No posters were approved by local councils or some kind of authority? how the hell were the No posters approved in the first place? They're completely irrelevant to the referendum and confuse and misinform people. its a disgrace.

Thats a good point how does one go about getting permission to erect posters so they fall under legislation making it illegal to remove them?

bruschi · 01-05-2015 08:56PM

bb1234567 wrote: »

Oh yeah I suppose theres probably not that many. But still Id say easily 20% of the country are quite religious, well in the over 30s.

But those that you mention there wouldnt be the typical user of boards, which is where this poll is. And as another example, to add to quite a few here already, my parents are both voting yes. They'd be religious, not madly or anything, but would go to mass regularly and a lot, lot older than 30. I was almost afraid to ask them what way they were voting as I didnt want to get into a discussion over it with them. But they said they were voting yes, why shouldnt gay people be able to marry and what business was it of theirs to deny other people their happiness.

to be honest, most of the people I know of or see online etc who are voting no, are neither religious, nor older than 40.

bb1234567 · 01-05-2015 08:59PM

VinLieger wrote: »

Thats a good point how does one go about getting permission to erect posters so they fall under legislation making it illegal to remove them?

I don't know if anything can make them illegal if that doesn't. The Yes side should put up posters saying enda kenny will personally reward each yes voter with a 20,000 euro cheque on may 22nd. Holds about as much truth as the No posters

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

Comments