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…323324326328329…335

Comments

  • Options
    #9752
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Gravehold is a Yes voter, remember? We are just arguing amongst ourselves at this stage.
    I'm not sure sure I believe that claim. This isn't devil's advocate any more... it's spouting lies


  • Options
    #9753
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    smash wrote: »
    I'm not sure sure I believe that claim. This isn't devil's advocate any more... it's spouting lies

    It never was, the devil would come up with much more logically consistent arguments.


  • Options
    #9754
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    eviltwin wrote: »
    People might take you more seriously if you told us what your concern over gay adoption is. Why should a child be denied a loving, caring, responsible parent just because they are gay?

    Why should a should be denied the opportunity of a married "mother and father", should they be available ? Why should they be skipped in favour of any other group?

    Oh, wait, let's deny everything, shout out homophobe because it doesn't suit the agenda


  • Options
    #9755
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Maximus Alexander wrote: »
    So, nothing, no? We're just going to dodge these?

    I am not, I have the problem of the yes side being dishonest. The yes side should be fight to show why they need these constitutional protection and what a yes vote will really mean for them and their family.

    When no say this will effect adoption they should be saying yes it does and here is why and gay couples should get the same constitunal protection.


  • Options
    #9756
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,548 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Why should a should be denied the opportunity of a married "mother and father", should they be available ? Why should they be skipped in favour of any other group?

    People are skipped for more suitable people...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9757
    jimdublin15
    Registered Users Posts: 244 ✭✭jimdublin15


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Yep, unmarried father's would really totally dig that if their rights (what ever they still have or maintained) will be shoved to one side

    So true they would be upset if that happened, but a yes vote to SSM is not going to cause that despite what the No side think or believe. The rights of the children and best interest of the children is primary that will not change.


  • Options
    #9758
    Not a NSA agent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Yep, unmarried father's would really totally dig that if their rights (what ever they still have or maintained) will be shoved to one side
    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Why should a should be denied the opportunity of a married "mother and father", should they be available ? Why should they be skipped in favour of any other group?



    You dont appear to understand what this referendum is about. Fathers rights and adoption priority will no be changing.


  • Options
    #9759
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users Posts: 7,548 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    gravehold wrote: »
    I am not, I have the problem of the yes side being dishonest. The yes side should be fight to show why they need these constitutional protection and what a yes vote will really mean for them and their family.

    When no say this will effect adoption they should be saying yes it does and here is why and gay couples should get the same constitunal protection.

    Over and over and over it has been shown to you exactly why you're wrong here and yet over and over and over you state this as if you've just ignored absolutely everything everyone has said.


  • Options
    #9760
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Maximus Alexander wrote: »
    It never was, the devil would come up with much more logically consistent arguments.

    Nah, if you're just arguing for the sake of argument, you don't need to be consistent, you are just challenging everything.


  • Options
    #9761
    Bannasidhe
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Bannasidhe wrote: »

    Just - in plain English - what specific harm will children come to if they are raised by a same-sex couple that they could not also suffer if raised by a married heterosexual couple. ?

    Can anyone from the No side please answer this???


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9762
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    gravehold wrote: »
    I am not, I have the problem of the yes side being dishonest. The yes side should be fight to show why they need these constitutional protection and what a yes vote will really mean for them and their family.

    It will in no way affect anyone's family unless they have a gay child or sibling, in which case it will grand them more rights. Equal rights.


  • Options
    #9763
    Hyzepher
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 4,662 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hyzepher


    gravehold wrote: »
    I am not, I have the problem of the yes side being dishonest. The yes side should be fight to show why they need these constitutional protection and what a yes vote will really mean for them and their family.

    When no say this will effect adoption they should be saying yes it does and here is why and gay couples should get the same constitunal protection.

    How does this referendum affect adoption when that legislation is controlled by other means.


  • Options
    #9764
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,574 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    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.

    Probably not a good idea now, but I'll ask you....given what you've written above, do you see your son as un-normal?

    This is personal now, AND IT'S NOT REQUIRED OF YOU THAT YOU ANSWER IT:--- If you do see your son as un-normal/not normal, is it linked to what you wrote in your sentence about woman/might or might not be female?


  • Options
    #9765
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Can anyone from the No side please answer this???

    I think they've left the building, and there's only Yes voters left, with some of them arguing No for the crack.


  • Options
    #9766
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    sup_dude wrote: »
    Over and over and over it has been shown to you exactly why you're wrong here and yet over and over and over you state this as if you've just ignored absolutely everything everyone has said.

    Yes wins constitunal protection very strong if a conservative government wins, marraige, adoption the family very strongly protected.

    NO wins atm you can still adopt, family is there but a conservative government comes they can easily rip it all away.

    Yes are not showing why being married is important for adoption and family they are scared and are saying no you can't talk about it won't effect it which is untrue. Be honest what effects being married will have on other aspects of irish life


  • Options
    #9767
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    Hyzepher wrote: »
    Untrue.

    Really? Sure about that?

    If they allowed a gay person have a big say in the welfare of a child born to their gay partner and , a bloody sperm donor..... imagine what happens if it involves a proper biological father. Sure, they will have some rights, but why on earth should they be answerable to the gay non biological " parent"


    http://www.supremecourt.ie/Judgments.nsf/60f9f366f10958d1802572ba003d3f45/a6dc1f1e70fed713802576880031aacb?OpenDocument

    You have no basis for saying that is untrue. Unmarried father's rights are extremely week as it is. Another group skipping the que


  • Options
    #9768
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    gravehold wrote: »
    I am not, I have the problem of the yes side being dishonest. The yes side should be fight to show why they need these constitutional protection and what a yes vote will really mean for them and their family.

    When no say this will effect adoption they should be saying yes it does and here is why and gay couples should get the same constitunal protection.

    Anyone with an understanding of the proposed change will never say this. The amendment will have no effect on adoption, which is dealt with in legislation. You're presenting a false premise - that if the government for some inconceivable reason wanted to restrict gay adoption, they would no longer be able to - and using it to brand people who disagree as dishonest. They're not dishonest, you're just wrong about this.


  • Options
    #9769
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Hyzepher wrote: »
    How does this referendum affect adoption when that legislation is controlled by other means.

    Being a married couple gives constitutnal protection which they won't have if Conservative government decides to change that legislation


  • Options
    #9770
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Really? Sure about that?

    If they allowed a gay person have a big say in the welfare of a child born to their gay partner and , a bloody sperm donor..... imagine what happens if it involves a proper biological father. Sure, they will have some rights, but why on earth should they be answerable to the gay non biological " parent"


    http://www.supremecourt.ie/Judgments.nsf/60f9f366f10958d1802572ba003d3f45/a6dc1f1e70fed713802576880031aacb?OpenDocument

    You have no basis for saying that is untrue. Unmarried father's rights are extremely week as it is. Another group skipping the que
    Go lobby for the cause in a different place. This referendum is not about that.


  • Options
    #9771
    Hyzepher
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 4,662 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hyzepher


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Really? Sure about that?

    If they allowed a gay person have a big say in the welfare of a child born to their gay partner and , a bloody sperm donor..... imagine what happens if it involves a proper biological father. Sure, they will have some rights, but why on earth should they be answerable to the gay non biological " parent"


    http://www.supremecourt.ie/Judgments.nsf/60f9f366f10958d1802572ba003d3f45/a6dc1f1e70fed713802576880031aacb?OpenDocument

    You have no basis for saying that is untrue. Unmarried father's rights are extremely week as it is. Another group skipping the que

    But it's not another group - it's just an extension of an existing group that already have preference over unmarried fathers. mothers marrying another man has the same affect.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9772
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    sup_dude wrote: »
    People are skipped for more suitable people...

    Gays more suitable than mother and fathers now? Right, cute .


    Looking forward to the class actions the gays will bring , if there seems a "disproportionate" amount of adoptions favouring married hetrosexual couples. I am sure the argument about "more suitable people" will be ignored then.


  • Options
    #9773
    BizzyC
    Registered Users Posts: 3,010 ✭✭✭BizzyC


    gravehold wrote: »
    They don't get preference a married couple does.

    Ok, assuming that's true, then that would mean that the fact that gay people are adopting children as an individual at all indicates that either a) straight couples applying are not suitable or b) there are more children in need of parents than couples applying.

    So either way, married gay couples being able to apply togethor wont impact adoption rates for straight couples.


  • Options
    #9774
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    gravehold wrote: »
    Yes wins constitunal protection very strong if a conservative government wins, marraige, adoption the family very strongly protected.

    NO wins atm you can still adopt, family is there but a conservative government comes they can easily rip it all away.

    Yes are not showing why being married is important for adoption and family they are scared and are saying no you can't talk about it won't effect it which is untrue. Be honest what effects being married will have on other aspects of irish life

    So essentially your argument boils down to - if you vote no and if a conservative government decides, there might be a change to a completely different act?

    Youre talking in if's and maybe's. Fairytales. Pie in the sky.

    If my aunty had balls she'd be my uncle you know?


  • Options
    #9775
    Hyzepher
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 4,662 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hyzepher


    gravehold wrote: »
    Being a married couple gives constitutnal protection which they won't have if Conservative government decides to change that legislation

    if the referendum is passed then any legislation that affects adoption will jointly affect all married couples equally.


  • Options
    #9776
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Looking forward to the class actions the gays will bring , if there seems a "disproportionate" amount of adoptions favouring married hetrosexual couples. I am sure the argument about "more suitable people" will be ignored then.

    This will probably never need to happen because the AAI work off facts and junk, instead of preconceived ideas about classes of people.


  • Options
    #9777
    Not a NSA agent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Gays more suitable than mother and fathers now? Right, cute .


    Looking forward to the class actions the gays will bring , if there seems a "disproportionate" amount of adoptions favouring married hetrosexual couples. I am sure the argument about "more suitable people" will be ignored then.

    Now you are just making stuff up.

    Where are same sex couples being given priority in adopting children?
    How is this or fathers rights relevant to the upcoming referendum? Might as well start complaining about abortion.


  • Options
    #9778
    BizzyC
    Registered Users Posts: 3,010 ✭✭✭BizzyC


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Gays more suitable than mother and fathers now? Right, cute.
    It depends on the people.

    Just because you have a certain set of genitalia doesn't mean you're a better parent.


  • Options
    #9779
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Hyzepher wrote: »
    if the referendum is passed then any legislation that affects adoption will jointly affect all married couples equally.

    Excatly hence if you don't wan't gay adoption a no vote and voting for a government to change the legislation is your best chance


  • Options
    #9780
    Hyzepher
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 4,662 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hyzepher


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Gays more suitable than mother and fathers now? Right, cute .

    The fact that these kids are up for adoption means that they no longer have a mother or father.

    If you really mean male and female then would you be on favour of a gay man and a gay woman adopting as a couple?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #9781
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    Hyzepher wrote: »
    But it's not another group - it's just an extension of an existing group that already have preference over unmarried fathers. mothers marrying another man has the same affect.

    Yes, true, and how on earth does this extension in anyway improve the position of unmarried fathers? It means more people in the group to contend with. Not every mother is reasonable and can use the child as a weapon (same can be said about the fathers, some of whom go fighting for custody etc but haven't the remotest interest of really taking the parental duties seriously, just causing trouble for the mother)

    So, not only did society say, that in an ideal world, it's best if there is a mother and father, whether married or not, but preferably married; now we will be saying, ah, sure, even though there is still a mother and father, father take a hike, Mary is more "suitable" to take up responsibilities with the mother, Ann

    Oh of course, daddy will still have to play a role in paying the bills.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement