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…282283285287288…325

Comments

  • #8522
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    gravehold wrote: »
    But the persons religious freedom is a perfectly valid readon to vote NO

    Yes and no. Yes in that nobody has the right to stop them voting No based on religious beliefs. No in that their right to religion doesn't expand to enforcing that religion and their beliefs on others.


  • #8523
    floggg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    SpaceTime wrote: »
    We're not having a referendum about polygamy!

    Nor are we having a referendum about banning the serving of overcooked Brussels sprouts.

    If people want to keep throwing in concerns about topics that we are not voting on, it's going to make this whole debate a total farce.

    Which is exactly what they are trying to achieve.


  • #8524
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    sup_dude wrote: »
    Yes and no. Yes in that nobody has the right to stop them voting No based on religious beliefs. No in that their right to religion doesn't expand to enforcing that religion and their beliefs on others.

    Their not they can't do anything to get you to vote your way just,like you can't force your morals on them everyone will vote for what they believe is their moral choice and in the end democracy will decide.


  • #8525
    munchkin_utd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,960 ✭✭✭munchkin_utd


    floggg wrote: »
    No, marriage isn't 100% about kids.

    I don't have any intention of having kids but I don't see my relationship as any less deserving of recognition, vindication or protection as a married couple who do.

    And that would go equally for a heterosexual couple who either chose not to or are unable to have kids.
    sorry, what I wrote there was in response to someone who said marriage had "nothing" at all at all to do with kids, so my "100% relevant" was meaning that it is very relevant, in both the definition of marriage being the start of a family and the knockon advantages that kids of a same sex marriage will then gain.

    To quote the constitution again
    The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack.
    to say that same sex marriage is nothing to do with family or kids is contraditory to what is already defined in the constitution.

    If you want to define marriage as the hollywood ideal of 2 people declaring love for each other, then fine, theres a bit of that in marriage all right, but in terms of the effects of this vote, it brings legal advantages and priviledges to same sex couples, and their children, as a family recognised equally to hetrosexual couples.

    Is that not why we should vote yes ?


  • #8526
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    gravehold wrote: »
    Their not they can't do anything to get you to vote your way just,like you can't force your morals on them everyone will vote for what they believe is their moral choice and in the end democracy will decide.

    Of course they are. By voting No, they're attempting to have everyone live by their beliefs.


  • Advertisement
  • #8527
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    gravehold wrote: »
    Their not they can't do anything to get you to vote your way just,like you can't force your morals on them everyone will vote for what they believe is their moral choice and in the end democracy will decide.

    Thanks for explaining how a referendum works.


  • #8528
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    sup_dude wrote: »
    Of course they are. By voting No, they're attempting to have everyone live by their beliefs.

    And by voting yes your attempting to have everyone live by your beliefs, democracy will decide which is the one most irish people want


  • #8529
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    Claiming it is connected to this referendum, as the poster is also doing, is also lying.

    My head hurts . . . when people here post about posters it is not clear any more whether the posters they post about are posting here or are posted up on lamp-posts.

    Can we find another word for the poster on a post, so as not to confuse it with the poster behind a post?


  • #8530
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    gravehold wrote: »
    And by voting yes your attempting to have everyone live by your beliefs, democracy will decide which is the one most irish people want

    Do you genuinely believe that yes voters want to make you marry someone of the same sex?


  • #8531
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Maximus Alexander wrote: »
    Thanks for explaining how a referendum works.

    Your welcome some people don't seem to understand and think their vote is the only one that matters


  • Advertisement
  • #8532
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    munchkin_utd wrote: »
    to say that same sex marriage is nothing to do with family or kids is contraditory to what is already defined in the constitution.

    If you want to define marriage as the hollywood ideal of 2 people declaring love for each other, then fine, but in terms of the effects of this vote it brings legal advantages and priviledges to same sex couples, and their children, as a family recognised equally to hetrosexual couples.

    I didn't say it had nothing to do with family. I said family isn't defined and by that I mean in the Constitution. It may or may not include children. Yes, this referendum will bring protection to same sex couples with children but that's more happenstance. The referendum is about marriage. You do not need children to be married therefore the referendum is not about children.


  • #8533
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    gravehold wrote: »
    And by voting yes your attempting to have everyone live by your beliefs, democracy will decide which is the one most irish people want

    Yes just like when we voted in favour of permitting divorce every married couple were rent asunder.


  • #8534
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Maximus Alexander wrote: »
    Thanks for explaining how a referendum works.
    You could understand that grammar?


  • #8535
    TwoShedsJackson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    gravehold wrote: »
    And by voting yes your attempting to have everyone live by your beliefs, democracy will decide which is the one most irish people want

    Should this referendum pass, you know what will change in your life? Nothing.

    You're not going to be forced to marry another person of the same sex. The only difference will be that two people of the same sex who wish to get married, may do so.


  • #8536
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Maximus Alexander wrote: »
    Do you genuinely believe that yes voters want to make you marry someone of the same sex?

    They believe a yes vote will allow degeneracy into the constitution and goes against their moral beliefs. Already cake shops are forced to make cakes which go against their beliefs. They are voting to protect those beliefs as is their rights


  • #8537
    floggg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    Zen65 wrote: »
    I know, which is why I only referenced MAFM, and not First Families First.

    While JW has indeed earned a pedigree in fighting for Fathers, his opposition to this referendum appears to be based around his disillusionment with that rather than on the issue at hand. From the TV debate the best I could ascertain from his argument was "why use the constitution to implement this?" . . . suggesting that simple legislation could do the trick instead. Whether he is right or not (and I suspect not) is irrelevant. The constitution is being used for it, so either back it for what it's trying to do or put up a logical reason to oppose it.

    No, he's clearly a [word we can't say without fear of legal action].

    He claims the only reason lgbt want to marry is to destroy heterosexual marriage.

    He's just a big [redacted] prick.


  • #8538
    Not a NSA agent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    gravehold wrote: »
    And by voting yes your attempting to have everyone live by your beliefs, democracy will decide which is the one most irish people want

    Can you point out where it says I wont be able to marry someone of the opposite sex?


  • #8539
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    gravehold wrote: »
    They believe a yes vote will allow degeneracy into the constitution and goes against their moral beliefs. Already cake shops are forced to make cakes which go against their beliefs. They are voting to protect those beliefs as is their rights

    This doesn't answer my question, and doesn't follow from the previous statement you made upon which that question was based.


  • #8540
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    TwoShedsJackson wrote: »
    Should this referendum pass, you know what will change in your life? Nothing.

    You're not going to be forced to marry another person of the same sex. The only difference will be that two people of the same sex who wish to get married, may do so.

    Actually I could marry my bf I guess which I can't do atm. Trans women can't marry men here yet until the birth cert stuff get sorted


  • #8541
    SireOfSeth
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 340 ✭✭SireOfSeth


    gravehold wrote: »
    Yes there is and it's "it's against my my religious or moral beliefs" that a credible reason to vote no.

    People mightn't like that reason but it's perfectly valid.

    Remember that this is a vote on "civil marriage", not the religious ceremony (and, therefore, does not impact on religious freedoms in any way).


  • Advertisement
  • #8542
    VinLieger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,007 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    gravehold wrote: »
    Their not they can't do anything to get you to vote your way just,like you can't force your morals on them everyone will vote for what they believe is their moral choice and in the end democracy will decide.

    The people who vote no are forcing their morals on everyone else


  • #8543
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    gravehold wrote: »
    They believe a yes vote will allow degeneracy into the constitution and goes against their moral beliefs.
    *not bigots...
    gravehold wrote: »
    Already cake shops are forced to make cakes which go against their beliefs.
    I would have thought the beliefs of a cake shop was to create a cake?
    gravehold wrote: »
    They are voting to protect those beliefs as is their rights
    If all beliefs were protected then society would not function.


  • #8544
    floggg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    munchkin_utd wrote: »
    sorry, what I wrote there was in response to someone who said marriage had "nothing" at all at all to do with kids, so my "100% relevant" was meaning that it is very relevant, in both the definition of marriage being the start of a family and the knockon advantages that kids of a same sex marriage will then gain.

    To quote the constitution again

    to say that same sex marriage is nothing to do with family or kids is contraditory to what is already defined in the constitution.

    If you want to define marriage as the hollywood ideal of 2 people declaring love for each other, then fine, theres a bit of that in marriage all right, but in terms of the effects of this vote, it brings legal advantages and priviledges to same sex couples, and their children, as a family recognised equally to hetrosexual couples.

    Is that not why we should vote yes ?

    I would agree with your sentiment - though your phrasing and language is unhelpful.

    A family doesn't mean children - myself and my fiancé will be a family within the constitutional sense once married.

    Kids aren't required to make that happen, nor do they make a marriage more complete.

    But of course if there is a child based argument in all this its one in favour of a Yes vote - which should be clear from the fact that every child welfare group in the country has endorsed a Yes.


  • #8545
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    gravehold wrote: »
    Yes there is and it's "it's against my my religious or moral beliefs" that a credible reason to vote no.

    Consider the difference between

    a) this is a against my religious or moral beliefs, so it should be illegal

    and

    b) this is against my religious or moral beliefs, so I should not do it, but that is no reason to force my religious or moral beliefs on this subject on everyone else.

    Murder is an a). You don't want people murdering other people, regardless of their religion or moral beliefs.

    Gay marriage is very obviously in category b): it has absolutely no, zero impact on hetero couples, or even on Bad Catholic gay people who don't want to marry. It's against your religion? Don't get gay married! End of problem.


  • #8546
    floggg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    gravehold wrote: »
    And by voting yes your attempting to have everyone live by your beliefs, democracy will decide which is the one most irish people want

    You know we won't force anybody to get married to a member of the same sex.

    We considered it, but then realised that one of us would end up with David Quinn :(


  • #8547
    A_Sober_Paddy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,221 ✭✭✭A_Sober_Paddy


    gravehold wrote: »
    They believe a yes vote will allow degeneracy into the constitution and goes against their moral beliefs. Already cake shops are forced to make cakes which go against their beliefs. They are voting to protect those beliefs as is their rights

    A business is not allowed by law to discriminate, so if you feel so slowly then don't enter business


  • #8548
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Consider the difference between

    a) this is a against my religious or moral beliefs, so it should be illegal

    and

    b) this is against my religious or moral beliefs, so I should not do it, but that is no reason to force my religious or moral beliefs on this subject on everyone else.

    Murder is an a). You don't want people murdering other people, regardless of their religion or moral beliefs.

    Gay marriage is very obviously in category b): it has absolutely no, zero impact on hetero couples, or even on Bad Catholic gay people who don't want to marry. It's against your religion? Don't get gay married! End of problem.


    They don't have to support it though so a no vote is perfectly valid for them


  • #8549
    floggg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    gravehold wrote: »
    They believe a yes vote will allow degeneracy into the constitution and goes against their moral beliefs. Already cake shops are forced to make cakes which go against their beliefs. They are voting to protect those beliefs as is their rights

    Yea, nobody has a right to discriminate. Nor should they.


  • #8550
    Hyzepher
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 4,678 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hyzepher


    gravehold wrote: »
    They don't have to support it though so a no vote is perfectly valid for them

    Why would you vote no if it will have no affect on your beliefs - surely abstaining might be more appropriate?


  • Advertisement
  • #8551
    VinLieger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,007 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    gravehold wrote: »
    They don't have to support it though so a no vote is perfectly valid for them

    Even though voting no is forcing your morals on others which you previously said is wrong?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement