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

Options
1…316317319321322…335

Comments

  • Options
    #9542
    jimdublin15
    Registered Users Posts: 244 ✭✭jimdublin15


    drunkmonkey wrote: »
    I feel that marriage > parenthood should be at the top as the ideal as the way it is now. Something else should be just something else not the ideal but none the less a worthwhile pursuit but not the ideal for society to be promoted.

    I'm sure children from single families would like to some day get married and start a family, just because there from a single parent house doesn't mean there going to see there family as the ideal.

    anyway, time for sleepy town.

    Cool. well as it happens to be I'm what most people would consider Gay, and I am married (as it is now) and I have kids so i'm the ideal. Perfect lets promote that.

    All joking aside, I understand but I think we will always disagree at that's okay were not all the same. So just to let you know why I disagree it is with what you call "ideal" and " marriage > parenthood"

    Ideal for me you see is promoting tolerance towards other "family" dynamics and the ideal that we should promote (i feel) is that "family" or "home" situation should be loving/caring and supportive no matter what that dynamic/structure of that "home" might be.


  • Options
    #9543
    silverfeather
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,154 ✭✭✭silverfeather


    smash wrote: »
    What? Now discriminating against homophobes?

    Oh remember we can't call them that it's offensive *rolls eyes*


  • Options
    #9544
    dubscottie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 854 ✭✭✭dubscottie


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SW0W7L4vRc


  • Options
    #9545
    Wulfie
    Registered Users Posts: 161 ✭✭Wulfie


    I will be voting no.
    The more you normalise homosexuality, the more normal it will become.
    As a parent of a gay son, who despises me. What looks like a woman , might or might not be female.
    I think , society has given lots of rights since decriminalisation .

    This debate should take place in 50 years time.

    It's all a devisionary tactic by the civil service .

    Ffs ........,. VOTE NO.


  • Options
    #9546
    Wulfie
    Registered Users Posts: 161 ✭✭Wulfie


    The vote yes peoples were referring to the other side as mouth breathers . Is that a term for a breeder ?

    Was it to prompt a name calling ? Like Stabbers and packers .


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9547
    dubscottie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 854 ✭✭✭dubscottie


    Wulfie wrote: »
    I will be voting no.
    The more you normalise homosexuality, the more normal it will become.
    As a parent of a gay son, who despises me. What looks like a woman , might or might not be female.
    I think , society has given lots of rights since decriminalisation .

    This debate should take place in 50 years time.

    It's all a devisionary tactic by the civil service .

    Ffs ........,. VOTE NO.


    I am glad I am not your son.. Wakeup.. its 2015 not 1915..
    Give him a call and mend bridges FFS.. Life is too short!


  • Options
    #9548
    DrGreenthumb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 720 ✭✭✭DrGreenthumb


    To accommodate the estimated turnout, polling stations will be letting people in the rear door


  • Options
    #9549
    dubscottie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 854 ✭✭✭dubscottie


    And as a gay person.. I hate children.. I don't want them.

    So I am not going to steal your kids..

    But I would like to get married as after 15 years of living together.


  • Options
    #9550
    Fran1985
    Registered Users Posts: 470 ✭✭Fran1985


    Wulfie wrote: »
    I will be voting no.
    The more you normalise homosexuality, the more normal it will become.
    As a parent of a gay son, who despises me. What looks like a woman , might or might not be female.
    I think , society has given lots of rights since decriminalisation .

    This debate should take place in 50 years time.

    It's all a devisionary tactic by the civil service .

    Ffs ........,. VOTE NO.

    I call shenanigans on this post. And if im wrong then your son is right to despise ya.


  • Options
    #9551
    Wulfie
    Registered Users Posts: 161 ✭✭Wulfie


    dubscottie wrote: »
    And as a gay person.. I hate children.. I don't want them.

    So I am not going to steal your kids..

    But I would like to get married as after 15 years of living together.
    Do you think civil partnership is not enough , for now ?


    I'm sure it was a crime up.to 20yrs ago.

    All parties in the daíl want us to vote yes.

    That's enough reason to vote no.

    This should be shelved . As for the vote yes for ogra FG presidency .

    I'd.like to have on the ballot paper as well:
    Do you want a civilian army ? Y N.
    Do you want a general election tomorrow?
    Would you like British troops to go back to their own island and defend their own borders ?
    They can take the loyalists back too?
    Does Ireland need a new Capitol city ?

    More important stuff. Like.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9552
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 41,044 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Wulfie wrote: »
    I will be voting no.
    The more you normalise homosexuality, the more normal it will become.
    As a parent of a gay son, who despises me. What looks like a woman , might or might not be female.
    I think , society has given lots of rights since decriminalisation .

    This debate should take place in 50 years time.

    It's all a devisionary tactic by the civil service .

    Ffs ........,. VOTE NO.

    I genuinely feel sorry for your Son

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #9553
    Pherekydes
    Registered Users Posts: 16,135 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    Wulfie wrote: »
    Was it to prompt a name calling ? Like Stabbers and packers .

    C'mon the Packers!!

    Never heard of the Stabbers?! :confused:

    LA Stabbers? Pittsburgh Stabbers?


  • Options
    #9554
    Shanotheslayer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,191 ✭✭✭✭Shanotheslayer


    Wulfie wrote: »
    Do you think civil partnership is not enough , for now ?


    I'm sure it was a crime up.to 20yrs ago.

    All parties in the daíl want us to vote yes.

    That's enough reason to vote no.

    This should be shelved . As for the vote yes for ogra FG presidency .

    I'd.like to have on the ballot paper as well:
    Do you want a civilian army ? Y N.
    Do you want a general election tomorrow?
    Would you like British troops to go back to their own island and defend their own borders ?
    They can take the loyalists back too?
    Does Ireland need a new Capitol city ?

    More important stuff. Like.

    You think Ireland needing a new Capital is more important than people's right?

    The stupidity is strong.


  • Options
    #9555
    frostyjacks
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭frostyjacks


    Shanotheslayer wrote: »
    You think Ireland needing a new Capital is more important than people's right?

    The stupidity is strong.


    There is no right to marry someone of the same sex.


  • Options
    #9556
    frostyjacks
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭frostyjacks


    Pherekydes wrote: »
    C'mon the Packers!!

    Never heard of the Stabbers?! :confused:

    LA Stabbers? Pittsburgh Stabbers?

    Limerick Stabbers


  • Options
    #9557
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    frostyjacks wrote: »
    There is no right to marry someone of the same sex.

    Indeed. Hence the forthcoming referendum....,,,,,,.............!


  • Options
    #9558
    Ghost Buster
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 5,172 ✭✭✭Ghost Buster


    Wulfie wrote: »
    I will be voting no.
    The more you normalise homosexuality, the more normal it will become.
    As a parent of a gay son, who despises me. What looks like a woman , might or might not be female.
    I think , society has given lots of rights since decriminalisation .

    This debate should take place in 50 years time.

    It's all a devisionary tactic by the civil service .

    Ffs ........,. VOTE NO.

    Not sure I totally get your post as its kinda oddly phrased and punctuated but:
    Homosexuality is normal throughout the natural world. Its only the human species that has an issue with it.
    If the debate will, in your mind, be ok in 50 years time then why not now?


  • Options
    #9559
    frostyjacks
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭frostyjacks


    Ghost Buster wrote: »
    Indeed. Hence the forthcoming referendum....,,,,,,.............!

    I would say it's more of a privilege than a right. It's not like you could sue someone for refusing to marry you.


  • Options
    #9560
    mickstupp
    Registered Users Posts: 1,764 ✭✭✭mickstupp


    Wulfie wrote: »
    It's all a devisionary tactic by the civil service .

    wat?


  • Options
    #9561
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Wulfie wrote: »
    I will be voting no.
    The more you normalise homosexuality, the more normal it will become.
    As a parent of a gay son, who despises me. What looks like a woman , might or might not be female.
    I think , society has given lots of rights since decriminalisation .

    This debate should take place in 50 years time.

    It's all a devisionary tactic by the civil service .

    Ffs ........,. VOTE NO.

    This is by far the single saddest post in this thread. I really hope you're trolling.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9562
    Bannasidhe
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    frostyjacks wrote: »
    I would say it's more of a privilege than a right. It's not like you could sue someone for refusing to marry you.

    You could up to 1981. It could be argued that this 'redefined' marriage by making a promise to enter a contract of marriage no longer legally binding. :P

    Interestingly enough one can sue a couple for not getting married if they don't return gifts...

    http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/getting_married/legal_implications_of_a_broken_engagement.html


  • Options
    #9563
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Just got a fair point in another thread, CP and gay adoption while here atm are not constitutionally protected so can be changed by the next government so gays cp couples can no longer adopt. By voting no you are making it so gay adoption can be removed again at a future point but if you voted yes the gay couple are married and constitutally cannot be seen as different then a straight couple.


    If you are against gay adoption no will at least make it so they cannot adopt in the future if a government decides that.


  • Options
    #9564
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    gravehold wrote: »
    If you are against gay adoption no will at least make it so they cannot adopt in the future if a government decides that.

    Thats the fifth time youve said it and its an irrelevant point.

    Regardless of same sex marriage the Children and Family Act may be overturned by a later government. Adoption is not constitutionally protected.


  • Options
    #9565
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,549 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    gravehold wrote: »
    Just got a fair point in another thread, CP and gay adoption while here atm are not constitutionally protected so can be changed by the next government so gays cp couples can no longer adopt. By voting no you are making it so gay adoption can be removed again at a future point but if you voted yes the gay couple are married and constitutally cannot be seen as different then a straight couple.


    If you are against gay adoption no will at least make it so they cannot adopt in the future if a government decides that.


    You may wanna keep reading the other thread...


  • Options
    #9566
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    gravehold wrote: »
    Just got a fair point in another thread, CP and gay adoption while here atm are not constitutionally protected so can be changed by the next government so gays cp couples can no longer adopt. By voting no you are making it so gay adoption can be removed again at a future point but if you voted yes the gay couple are married and constitutally cannot be seen as different then a straight couple.


    If you are against gay adoption no will at least make it so they cannot adopt in the future if a government decides that.
    That's actually debateable. I know Iona came up with it yesterday - "if gay marriage is legal in our constitution then it will not be possible to discriminate against gays in future" - but it doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.

    The argument is that if gay couples can get married, then in future if someone wanted to remove their ability to adopt, this wouldn't be possible since they would be equal to all other married couples.

    But this isn't correct, since adoption law already allows for discrimination against married couples on the basis of age, and a whole pile of other factors. So in the event that it was found that gay couples posed a serious risk to children, there is no reason why the law couldn't be changed to restrict access to adoptive services.

    The constitution does not guarantee the right of married couples to have or to adopt children, so there is no real link between marriage and adoption.


  • Options
    #9567
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    MrWalsh wrote: »
    Thats the fifth time youve said it and its an irrelevant point.

    Regardless of same sex marriage the Children and Family Act may be overturned by a later government. Adoption is not constitutionally protected.

    Exactly so a conservative government chould give pirioty to married couples again and as gays can't marry they can no longer adopt.


  • Options
    #9568
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    gravehold wrote: »
    Exactly so a conservative government chould give pirioty to married couples again and as gays can't marry they can no longer adopt.

    Gay people have always been able to adopt. As individuals. It is the Children and Family Relationship Act that has changed this.

    Same sex marriage will not make any difference.


  • Options
    #9569
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    gravehold wrote: »
    Exactly so a conservative government chould give pirioty to married couples again and as gays can't marry they can no longer adopt.

    Married couples have never been given priority for adoption. Single people could always apply to adopt.

    Why dont you go and research adoption in Ireland before you continue to post irrelevant nonsense.


  • Options
    #9570
    Riverireland
    Closed Accounts Posts: 833 ✭✭✭Riverireland


    Ghost Buster wrote: »
    Not sure I totally get your post as its kinda oddly phrased and punctuated but:
    Homosexuality is normal throughout the natural world. Its only the human species that has an issue with it.
    If the debate will, in your mind, be ok in 50 years time then why not now?

    Have to prefix this with I have no problem with gay humans. But, I have spent my entire life dealing with animals and have never come across homosexuality in any other species, please elaborate and give examples?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9571
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,549 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Riverireland wrote: »
    Have to prefix this with I have no problem with gay humans. But, I have spent my entire life dealing with animals and have never come across homosexuality in any other species, please elaborate and give examples?

    The most obvious animal that takes part in homosexual acts are cows amongst many others.

    The ones that have the emotional intelligence to make a decision to do so are chimps and dolphins.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement