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

hynesie08 · 02-05-2015 11:00AM

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not againsts men marrying men, or women marrying women if thats what they want.

Deleted User wrote: »

ehhhhh?? I'm not against marriage. You're right. But only heterosexual marriage. So I'm voting no. How does that not add up?

Ehh.....

You might not agree but this is a democracy and I'm entitled to my opinion and my vote. Why are you so worried anyway.......the YES vote will win this by a mile.

You are entitled to your opinion, should probably figure out what it is though.

Bannasidhe · 02-05-2015 11:01AM

Riverireland wrote: »

As I said I am not voting!

But yes I do regard this whole thing as a bit of a side show and a distraction from serious issues like unemployment and the major housing crisis this country is experiencing.

Couldn't care less if it's yes or no, just blue in the face with such a big deal being made of a day out and a legal piece of paper!

Hey Gay People of Ireland.

Your second class status is just a side show and there are far more important things so shut up k!

Discrimination by the State is always important and no amount of whataboutry will ever change that.

02-05-2015 11:05AM

hynesie08 wrote: »

Ehh.....

You are entitled to your opinion, should probably figure out what it is though.

Ha yeah you're right.....I actually meant in my 2nd comment that I am for heterosexual marriage.....and gay marriage too. I am just concerned about children being raised by same sex parents and the long term implications. Maybe thats crazy as someone already pointed out people are already doing that......

dont have the energy to continue this .... there's more important things in life and I'm kinda tired of the non stop debate.

One eyed Jack · 02-05-2015 11:07AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

ehhhhh?? I'm not against marriage. You're right. But only heterosexual marriage. So I'm voting no. How does that not add up?

You might not agree but this is a democracy and I'm entitled to my opinion and my vote. Why are you so worried anyway.......the YES vote will win this by a mile.

Maggie I'm actually confused as to what your point is about voting against the referendum which would allow people who are LGBT to enter into marriage, and what that has to do with preventing people who are LGBT from raising children?

The fact is that there aren't going to be waves of people who are LGBT getting married in the morning. It will just mean that the opportunity is there for them, just like not all heterosexual couples get married, neither will all homosexual couples. Just like not all heterosexual couples choose to have children; not all homosexual couples will choose to have children.

Both couples are exactly the same in all respects, except that one couple is prohibited from the protection of the State provided by the institution of civil marriage. Some couples choose not to avail of that protection, but at least they know the option is there for them. Surely as equal citizens of the State, people who are LGBT should have the option available to them too?

Otherwise, they're not equal citizens at all in respect of having their families protected in the same way as heterosexual families.

El_Duderino 09 · 02-05-2015 11:08AM

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not a "special snowflake" whatever that is?? I lost my little daughter to cancer, my marriage broke up years ago as a result, reared my other 2 kids alone. As a woman I do all the jobs, cut grass, bins, fix the car, electrician, plumber ....then cooking, housework etc etc..plus I have work outside home too. I know what it takes to rear kids and I think men and women can do equally good jobs.

I'm not talking about mum going out to work and dad staying at home scenario. I am simply saying that over the period of a lifetime of a child I PERSONALLY think its better to have a male and a female role model. I think I am entitled to my opinion and like all of us this opinion is based on experience.)

Of course everyone's entitled to their opinion. I'm asking you about your opinion, not stopping you having one.

If you accept that men and women can do an equally good job of raising children that whats the problem?

You took on a role and jobs that you might not have done if it weren't for your circumstances so what makes yo think a gay couple wouldn't do the same as you did? Are your children messed up because they didn't have a male role model? I suspect you made sure they had adult male role models in their lives like uncles, cousins and family friends. You are in a position remarkably similar to a gay couple in that your children were raised by one gender and not the other and you made it work so why would a gay couple not do the same?

It's hard not to comment on the irony of you banging on about your amazing female empathy and then completely failing to empathise with people in a similar position to yourself.

marienbad · 02-05-2015 11:15AM

mucksavage1985 wrote: »

There is no such thing as equality! This is a false idealism! The only thing that we all do equally Is we are born and then we die. The paths we take in life are certainly not equal. I was in hospital one day and waiting to see consultant. There was a pile of patient files on the table and every time a patient was called there file was taken. I knew my file was next in line so I was happy I was next. Then this next pile of files appeared and they were seen before me. I was then told that this was the private patients and they get seen first. So I'm thinking if we are all looking for equality then why should money make a difference. There is certainly no equality in our health service. The government of course is the advocating equality when it comes to marriage though. Sure look at Ireland we are a great little country. We have to do this to make it look good in the world stage. But also we can take investment from China who has very little human rights. But this can be hush hush. Also Russia too. Its all about the one thing power and money. Government goes with public mood and gets all vote next election. Ispcc of course won't go against government as where does main funding come from? It's laughable.

So because you were queue jumped in a doctor's waiting room you are going to vote no ?

Hammer Archer · 02-05-2015 11:18AM

Riverireland wrote: »

For the record I won't be voting in this election but if I were it would be a no mostly due to the ott campaign run by the yes side.

Just so we're clear, you feel that the yes side is OTT, but the no side comparing gay people to paedophiles, calling them unnatural, insulting their parenting skills and their children, as well as insulting single parents and adoptive parents is OK?

smash · 02-05-2015 11:19AM

It is precisely because marriage is different from civil partnership that No campaigners are so strongly opposed to sharing it with lesbian and gay couples. The leading No spokespersons are actually the most eloquent exponents of the difference between civil partnership and marriage. The more they speak of how marriage is special as a foundation of our society and of the importance of the constitutional recognition the more they emphasise the distinction.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/noel-whelan-what-s-the-difference-between-civil-partnership-and-marriage-1.2195514

eviltwin · 02-05-2015 11:27AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Ha ha - "enforce" my opinion??
its not going to make a whit of difference....the YES side have this in the bag......so CHILL !!
you dont have to "explain" over and over again......this isn't school.

I'm entitled to my opinion and my vote.

I'm tired of this - I've made my point..... off for a walk on the beach with the dog :P

Maybe you'd feel differently if it affected someone you love. It's harder to be abstract when the people involved are people you know. You are entitled to your vote of course, it's just a shame it's such an uneducated one. And don't assume the yes side have it in the bag, nothing is certain.

jimdublin15 · 02-05-2015 11:32AM

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not a "special snowflake" whatever that is?? I lost my little daughter to cancer, my marriage broke up years ago as a result, reared my other 2 kids alone. As a woman I do all the jobs, cut grass, bins, fix the car, electrician, plumber ....then cooking, housework etc etc..plus I have work outside home too. I know what it takes to rear kids and I think men and women can do equally good jobs.

I'm not talking about mum going out to work and dad staying at home scenario. I am simply saying that over the period of a lifetime of a child I PERSONALLY think its better to have a male and a female role model. I think I am entitled to my opinion and like all of us this opinion is based on experience.
I also respect that man who's 4 children I'm minding..... this is what he needs for his kids after the death of their mum. Its his choice.

I dont understand the vitriol.....the YES side are light years ahead in the polls. You are going to wipe us No's. So a little less antipathy. We are all entitled to an opinion. We have all had different life experiences.

Maggie, with regards to loosing your daughter to cancer, I' can't even imagine, and I hope never to have to experience what you did as a parent.

However everything you have said has no baring on the upcoming referendum/ the question at hand. This is simply regarding extending marriage rights to same sex couples. It will change nothing for the children involved either way. I'm parent myself and I know that nothing in this vote will change anything for the children except for when they grow up if are homosexual I will know that they have the same opportunity to marry as anyone else's child.

Maximus Alexander · 02-05-2015 11:47AM

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not a "special snowflake" whatever that is?? I lost my little daughter to cancer, my marriage broke up years ago as a result, reared my other 2 kids alone. As a woman I do all the jobs, cut grass, bins, fix the car, electrician, plumber ....then cooking, housework etc etc..plus I have work outside home too. I know what it takes to rear kids and I think men and women can do equally good jobs.

I'm not talking about mum going out to work and dad staying at home scenario. I am simply saying that over the period of a lifetime of a child I PERSONALLY think its better to have a male and a female role model. I think I am entitled to my opinion and like all of us this opinion is based on experience.
I also respect that man who's 4 children I'm minding..... this is what he needs for his kids after the death of their mum. Its his choice.

I dont understand the vitriol.....the YES side are light years ahead in the polls. You are going to wipe us No's. So a little less antipathy. We are all entitled to an opinion. We have all had different life experiences.

I'm very, truly sorry for the loss of your daughter. I can't imagine how hard that must be and I wish you and your other two children long and happy lives.

But, and I don't know how to put this without sounding callous, it has nothing to do with the referendum. We are entitled to our opinions, but whether or not same-sex couples are as good at parenting as opposite sex couples is not a matter of opinion.

There is no measurable difference, and this has been shown time and time again by psychologists, mental health professionals and researchers across the globe. I think you have a duty to educate yourself about that before you go out and cast a vote that will have a real, negative and lasting effect on so many of your fellow citizens, instead of relying on your gut feeling - which in this case is wrong.

I would urge you to do this - to take your personal opinions out of the equation and go and investigate the facts - because there are real human beings out there who are affected by this.

There is a reason, for example, why all of the children's charities in the country are asking you to vote yes. It's not because of their personal opinions, it's because of data. It's because, even though this referendum is not about children, a yes vote is in their best interests.

smash · 02-05-2015 11:48AM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm not a "special snowflake" whatever that is?? I lost my little daughter to cancer, my marriage broke up years ago as a result, reared my other 2 kids alone. As a woman I do all the jobs, cut grass, bins, fix the car, electrician, plumber ....then cooking, housework etc etc..plus I have work outside home too. I know what it takes to rear kids and I think men and women can do equally good jobs.

Your own experiences have nothing to do with what we're voting on what so ever, but at least you can acknowledge that both men and women can do equally good jobs in rearing children.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm not talking about mum going out to work and dad staying at home scenario. I am simply saying that over the period of a lifetime of a child I PERSONALLY think its better to have a male and a female role model.

Well I personally think it's better for a child to have role models who will teach them good values disregarding their gender. But again, that's not what we're voting on.

6am7f9zxrsjvnb · 02-05-2015 11:50AM

22 years ago homosexuality was a criminal act in this country.As a straight guy in his 30's I find that incredible.I have genuine pity for the gay men and women who had to skulk around this country in shame and fear.

But 22 years is a blink of an eye when one considers that homosexuality has been taboo for hundreds and hundreds of years in the western world.

Gay people of an older vintage must be delighted at the extraordinary progress that has been made in the last two decades.

The battle will be won in three weeks and this is a good thing.What baffles me is the inability many YES voters have in comprehending why many people will be voting NO.

SpaceTime · 02-05-2015 11:57AM

This trying to play the victim card by the No side is really pathetic.

The conservative church type organisations have and had enormous and totally inappropriate power here. It's ludicrous to suggest that they're the poor victims here.

They're unable to put forward a compelling argument against the proposal so, anyone who argues against them is being accused of attempting to censor them or close down debate.

Ironic claim really given the history of Irish censorship and the fact that the only legal or quasi legal action to close down debate have been by the No side against RTE.

The Panti interview and BAI complaint against Derek Mooney for expressing his personal views.

jimdublin15 · 02-05-2015 11:59AM

Louise Gentle Gem wrote: »

22 years ago homosexuality was a criminal act in this country.As a straight guy in his 30's I find that incredible.I have genuine pity for the gay men and women who had to skulk around this country in shame and fear.

But 22 years is a blink of an eye when one considers that homosexuality has been taboo for hundreds and hundreds of years in the western world.

Gay people of an older vintage must be delighted at the extraordinary progress that has been made in the last two decades. .

Sure a lot of progress has been made in such a short amount of time, not only on the topic of homosexuality. Take the last 100 years so much have changed for the better for so many.

Louise Gentle Gem wrote: »

What baffles me is the inability many YES voters have in comprehending why many people will be voting NO.

What baffles me is the ability of many NO voters and campaigners to say the things they are saying with a "straight" face. lol.

What also baffles me is why the NO side have to make this into a debate and argument about everything other than what it is truly about, by mentioning kids and family when were not voting on that.

mikemac1 · 02-05-2015 12:00PM

I'm after glancing the referendum commission site and tbh I don't see why this referendum is even needed

http://refcom2015.ie/marriage/

There is nothing in Article 41 preventing SSM. So why didn't they just introduce legislation

I'm well aware I've missed the boat on this question and this was resolved back in 2014. And I'm no legal eagle

SpaceTime · 02-05-2015 12:01PM

Largely because of a constitutional ambiguity that would have resulted in legal cases and uncertainty like in the U.S. at present.

Honestly, I think if it passes it's also a major watershed for the acceptance of the LGBT community too. It's not legislation it's popular support by the people.

On the other side of it, if it doesn't pass it will be a rather horrible slap in the face that will probably cause a deep sense of hurt and rejection for a lot of people and would send out a very backwards image of Ireland.

There's more riding on this than just marriage rights in terms of the positivity or negativity it could send out.

Maximus Alexander · 02-05-2015 12:06PM

mikemac1 wrote: »

I'm after glancing the referendum commission site and tbh I don't see why this referendum is even needed

http://refcom2015.ie/marriage/

There is nothing in Article 41 preventing SSM. So why didn't they just introduce legislation

I'm well aware I've missed the boat on this question and this was resolved back in 2014. And I'm no legal eagle

Legislation could simply be enacted which would explicitly allow same-sex marriage, but it could (and indeed would) be subject to a legal challenge which may, or may not (but probably would) succeed in having it overturned.

A change to the constitution will mean that it cannot be challenged.

osarusan · 02-05-2015 12:06PM

"The referendum is going to pass easily anyway so why don't you just leave us alone and stop picking our opinions apart" is a new and annoying variant on a theme, particularly on a voluntary discussion board.

VinLieger · 02-05-2015 12:44PM

mikemac1 wrote: »

I'm after glancing the referendum commission site and tbh I don't see why this referendum is even needed

http://refcom2015.ie/marriage/

There is nothing in Article 41 preventing SSM. So why didn't they just introduce legislation

I'm well aware I've missed the boat on this question and this was resolved back in 2014. And I'm no legal eagle

I agree and so do many others however the supreme court didnt and recommended a referendum instead of legislation

One eyed Jack · 02-05-2015 12:53PM

Louise Gentle Gem wrote: »

22 years ago homosexuality was a criminal act in this country.As a straight guy in his 30's I find that incredible.I have genuine pity for the gay men and women who had to skulk around this country in shame and fear.

But 22 years is a blink of an eye when one considers that homosexuality has been taboo for hundreds and hundreds of years in the western world.

Gay people of an older vintage must be delighted at the extraordinary progress that has been made in the last two decades.

The battle will be won in three weeks and this is a good thing.What baffles me is the inability many YES voters have in comprehending why many people will be voting NO.

They do seem to be an overlooked voting demographic in the campaign for marriage equality, and I think it's a shame that people are under the impression that "oh all the blue rinse brigade, set in their ways", etc, I don't think the people making those sort of dismissive comments are aware of just how many elderly people in this country who are homosexual.

I'm talking people in their 70's and 80's, people who had no education in sex and sexuality growing up, who can barely get their heads around concepts of homosexuality and bisexuality, let alone trying to help them understand what it means to be a person who is transgender. Some elderly people just never gave it much thought, and some elderly people have lived with their secrets for decades, envious of barely legal to vote teenagers who have much greater freedom to express their sexual identity and what they wish could have been the same understanding shown to them in their youth.

Having talked to some of these elderly people, many of them cannot wait to vote YES, reason being that they would never want anyone to experience the same feelings of having to hide who they are just to be able to live in harmony with people around them, just to be able to fit in with what they felt was expected of them.

I have no problem understanding why people are voting no, and I've met a good many young people who would vote no if they could vote no, because these people reject anything which interferes with or threatens their world view. For them they don't care about equality, they outright reject anyone who they feel is in any way inferior to them.

It's almost impossible to overcome that prejudiced attitude in some people.

ScumLord · 02-05-2015 12:54PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I am simply saying that over the period of a lifetime of a child I PERSONALLY think its better to have a male and a female role model.

And all children regardless of the makeup of their parents, or even if they have no parents at all will have male role models and female role models. Why do parents assume their the centre of their childrens universe? People have all kinds of role models throughout their lives for different reasons, while parents make a significant contribution to a person's view of the world, it's not always a positive one, or one that the child will agree with. Even if there are no parents the child will still find plenty of role models to look up to.

While the ideal may be for a child to have a male parent and a female parent the world rarely ever works out ideally, we have to adapt and compromise. Thinking that we can apply our own temporary morals and ideals to the natural world is just silly.

The bottom line for any child is it's better to have parents, an extended family and a good community. The sex of the parents isn't as important as the other two being in place. Having one parent is more than enough for any person as long as there's backup in place (family and friends) that one parent can be male or female, it doesn't seem to matter. So I don't see how adding another person is going to make things worse just because their the same sex. It makes zero sense.

eviltwin · 02-05-2015 12:59PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They do seem to be an overlooked voting demographic in the campaign for marriage equality, and I think it's a shame that people are under the impression that "oh all the blue rinse brigade, set in their ways", etc, I don't think the people making those sort of dismissive comments are aware of just how many elderly people in this country who are homosexual.

I'm talking people in their 70's and 80's, people who had no education in sex and sexuality growing up, who can barely get their heads around concepts of homosexuality and bisexuality, let alone trying to help them understand what it means to be a person who is transgender. Some elderly people just never gave it much thought, and some elderly people have lived with their secrets for decades, envious of barely legal to vote teenagers who have much greater freedom to express their sexual identity and what they wish could have been the same understanding shown to them in their youth.

Having talked to some of these elderly people, many of them cannot wait to vote YES, reason being that they would never want anyone to experience the same feelings of having to hide who they are just to be able to live in harmony with people around them, just to be able to fit in with what they felt was expected of them.

I have no problem understanding why people are voting no, and I've met a good many young people who would vote no if they could vote no, because these people reject anything which interferes with or threatens their world view. For them they don't care about equality, they outright reject anyone who they feel is in any way inferior to them.

It's almost impossible to overcome that prejudiced attitude in some people.

It's amazing as well how many older people just don't care anymore about what other people do. My mother in law is voting yes and all the ladies in her active retirement are voting yes. My mother in law is in a rural area, the kind of place that's a ghost town when mass is on, it's easy to assume they will be very conservative so it's refreshing to hear their views.

Irish Aris · 02-05-2015 01:39PM

Although I am not an Irish citizen, people I socialize with (colleagues at work, acquaintances) ask me why they should vote yes in the upcoming referendum, give them the gay man's perspective.
They ask me why civil partnership is not enough.
Some of them do raise the question regarding children.

I go on to explain to them that there are a lot of differences between civil partnership and civil marriage and I mention those that I consider important, e.g. the "family home" status, the tax/financial implications.
I tell them that in relation to adoption, there is a separate law that makes provision for that and that the referendum doesn't address this issue (bar some small adjustment on guardianship as a result of the civil marriage concept).
I stress this is just in relation to the civil marriage, and has nothing to do with the religious aspect of the wedding.

But mainly I tell them that for me it would be a confirmation that people don't consider me a second class citizen. That they accept me for what I am, a man with various personality traits, which one of them is my sexual orientation.
I tell them that everyday life isn't going to change: same sex couples will continue to live their lives as before, waking up in the morning, going to work, spent a lovely evening at their home or go out with friends, having a loving and caring relationship together.
The only thing that will change is that if a same sex couple wishes so, they will have the option of getting married and recognized by the State as a married couple.
I tell them that, for me, this referendum is about dignity, about equality, about love.

I often find that these concepts hit home with people.

El_Duderino 09 · 02-05-2015 01:52PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I lost my little daughter to cancer, my marriage broke up years ago as a result, reared my other 2 kids alone. As a woman I do all the jobs, cut grass, bins, fix the car, electrician, plumber ....then cooking, housework etc etc..plus I have work outside home too. I know what it takes to rear kids and I think men and women can do equally good jobs.

I also respect that man who's 4 children I'm minding..... this is what he needs for his kids after the death of their mum. Its his choice.

I've been wondering about whether or not to say this because it's harsh but I also think it's true so I'm going to say it.

I've read Sweetmaggie on this thread and I've just seen the debate on the Late Late. In both cases there are single mothers backing the 'No' side because they think it's important for children to have parents of both genders. Obviously being a parent is tough and being a single parent is tougher still. I think its clear that it's their own insecurity in their non-ideal situation. They are recognising that they are stretched and might not be able to provide for all their children's needs and are expressing that through the 'No' vote.

Imagine if it were possible to double Sweetmaggie and now there are 2 Sweetmaggies. Now she has twice the hours in the week, twice the earning potential. One Sweetmaggie could have a full time job and the other could stay at home or have a part time job and look after the children. One Sweet maggie can babysit while the other goes for lunch with her peers and gets a break for a few hours or does the housework and cuts the grass. An adult to talk to and blow off steam with. Is there any way the the children of 2 Sweet maggies would not be better off than the children of one Sweetmaggie trying to do it all on her own?

No offence to Sweetmaggie. I'm sure shes doing the best she can in a difficult circumstance but after looking back at her posts she seems more like Bittermaggie. Bitter that a gay couple might be able to offer the same kind of parenting arrangement that she's offering but they might do it better.

After all she's arguing that 2 same sex parents couldn't do the job that she does on her own which really doesn't make sense unless shes acknowledging that shes not doing the job very well.

Bannasidhe · 02-05-2015 01:55PM

Soooo.... there is NO comparison between the Civil Rights Movement and Marriage Equality you say.... hummmmmm...

11205128_810493909027927_3315132294189198984_n.jpg?oh=e0bb41b948688fa9ac2a1a0c33fab48f&oe=55993802&__gda__=1440873694_f9417a5d0c4f837ed6e8b4357065b360

11205128_810493909027927_3315132294189198984_n.jpg?oh=e0bb41b948688fa9ac2a1a0c33fab48f&oe=55993802&__gda__=1440873694_f9417a5d0c4f837ed6e8b4357065b360

Zen65 · 02-05-2015 01:56PM

Riverireland wrote: »

Marriage does not actually change the relationship between two people.

Nobody is asking to have their relationship changed. They are asking to have their relationship protected in exactly the same way that heterosexual relationships are protected. That's what the change to the constitution will do. Nothing more.

dashcamdanny · 02-05-2015 01:56PM

ScumLord wrote: »

And all children regardless of the makeup of their parents, or even if they have no parents at all will have male role models and female role models. Why do parents assume their the centre of their childrens universe? People have all kinds of role models throughout their lives for different reasons, while parents make a significant contribution to a person's view of the world, it's not always a positive one, or one that the child will agree with. Even if there are no parents the child will still find plenty of role models to look up to.
.

Are we talking about children or teenager's. Parents are usually , nearly always the center of any childs life. Who else will wipe your arse and spoon feed ya.

Bannasidhe · 02-05-2015 02:00PM

dashcamdanny wrote: »

Are we talking about children or teenager's. Parents are usually , nearly always the center of any childs life. Who else will wipe your arse and spoon feed ya.

And we are saying that parents are the people who do that and it doesn't matter if the person wiping the arse or holding the spoon has a penis or a vagina or passed on any chromosomes - the act of wiping the arse, holding the spoon is part of the act of parenting and is completely different to the act of procreating.

lazygal · 02-05-2015 02:06PM

dashcamdanny wrote: »

Are we talking about children or teenager's. Parents are usually , nearly always the center of any childs life. Who else will wipe your arse and spoon feed ya.

Wiping arses comes easily to both of us as parents. Obviously only I can do the breastfeeding as I'm doing right now but we didn't do any spoonfeeding as our children were able to feed themselves when we weaned them. I wonder are we married at all.

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

Comments