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…314315317319320…325

Comments

  • #9482
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Some of the issues may not affect childless couples, but do affect those that do have children, the majority.

    Again, this is untrue.


  • #9483
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    gravehold wrote: »
    Religious freedom?

    You are really clutching at straws here, you think throwing out a soundbite is presenting a reason?


  • #9484
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    gravehold wrote: »
    Religious freedom?

    This should hold no bearing to the referendum. It does not affect religious freedom.


  • #9485
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    MrWalsh wrote: »
    OUT OF DATE.

    New one is not in force yet that is current one and in the future the new one can be reverted.


  • #9486
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    The Round and Round the Garden is making thread dizzy.

    Yet - despite the whole blah blah gays can adopts and poor baby with no biological mammy and daddy not one poster who claims it's baaaad if gays adopt has cared to explain why... Since repeating ourselves is apparently the way to go:



    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. ?

    What is it ye are all skirting around but don't have the guts to say?


    Why is there an obsession with refusing to accept that Gays are different to hetrosexaul couples, and they both play different roles in society? Why can't ye just accept that ? There is no shame in it. How is engineering society going to make them feel more warm and fuzzy inside? Why do gays, clearly feel that hetrosexual couples are not more suitable to raising children? This notion of second class citizens and being inferior is self inflicted

    No one is stopping a gay person raising their own biological child..........


    Let us face it, the minute anyone says that they really think (even if it actually undermines their arguments), they get banned from these sites. Free Speech is only allowed so long as it suits certain people's agendas


    Face, it, even if they come out with an arguable case, which you won't agree with anyway, you are dying to shout; hater, homophobe etc and play the victim .


  • Advertisement
  • #9487
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Why is there an obsession with refusing to accept that Gays are different to hetrosexaul couples, and they both play different roles in society? Why can't ye just not accept that ? There is no shame in it. How is engineering society going to make them feel more warm and fuzzy inside? Why do gays, clearly feel that hetrosexual couples are not more suitable to raising children?

    No one is stopping a gay person raising their own biological child..........

    That did not answer the question asked.

    In fact - it didn't answer any question at all.


  • #9488
    One eyed Jack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,677 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


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


    You do understand that gay and lesbian mothers and fathers already exist in Ireland, right?

    Looking forward to the class actions the gays will bring , if there seems a "disproportionate" amount of adoptions favouring married hetrosexual couples.


    There's no class action system in Ireland. Each case would be dealt with on an individual basis, and even then, I'm not sure how a civil suit would address any concerns about disproportionate amounts of adoptions favouring anyone? The criteria under which a couple, or even an individual are assessed for suitability for adoption are much broader and more in-depth than simply the person's gender, sex, or sexual orientation.
    I am sure the argument about "more suitable people" will be ignored then.

    The only people ignoring any criteria other than the person's gender, sex, or sexual orientation when discussing the issue of adoption. There are many more criteria on which a couple are assessed for their suitability to adopt children. As I have already pointed out previously, the 2010 legislation prohibited unmarried couples from applying as a couple regardless of their sex, gender or sexual orientation. They could always apply individually.


  • #9489
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    gravehold wrote: »
    New one is not in force yet that is current one and in the future the new one can be reverted.

    Irrelevant.

    It's been signed into law, so it will be in force shortly. No matter what, the new one can be altered in the future. I don't know why I'm bothering.

    (I also don't know why we're making things giant)


  • #9490
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    smash wrote: »
    Again, this is untrue.

    When you educate yourself with what Article 41 and 42 says, come back to us.

    Of perhaps spell out what is "untrue". Saying something without standing your ground doesn't really wash

    Children play a huge role in most Marriages. Children are indirectly an issue when we talk about marriage. There are rights that married couples have, regarding children, that unmarried couples, do not enjoy automatically


  • #9491
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    gravehold wrote: »
    New one is not in force yet that is current one and in the future the new one can be reverted.

    Oh for god sake, its been passed, it is going to be law.

    Yes and in the future my aunty can have a sex change and be my uncle, but if you vote based on if's and maybe's you are a moron.


  • Advertisement
  • #9492
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Why do gays, clearly feel that hetrosexual couples are not more suitable to raising children?

    They believe the evidence, which says heterosexual couples are not more suitable to raising children.


  • #9493
    humanji
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    This notion of second class citizens and being inferior is self inflicted

    Same could be said about fathers and their rights. I mean, they're clearly not equal to women when raising children, right...?


  • #9494
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »

    Face, it, even if they come out with an arguable case, which you won't agree with anyway, you are dying to shout; hater, homophobe etc and play the victim .

    Ironic comment is ironic.

    Since that was aimed at me either demonstrate where I have called someone 'hater, homophobe etc' or withdraw your insulting hyperbole.

    You might also answer the question.

    I'll even rephrase it to make it easier:

    What harm do you believe only gay parents (adoptive or biological) will do to children that renders them, en mass, unsuitable?


  • #9495
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Why is there an obsession with refusing to accept that Gays are different to hetrosexaul couples, and they both play different roles in society? Why can't ye just accept that ? There is no shame in it. How is engineering society going to make them feel more warm and fuzzy inside? Why do gays, clearly feel that hetrosexual couples are not more suitable to raising children? This notion of second class citizens and being inferior is self inflicted

    This paragraph does not make the remotest element of sense and contradicts itself. One the one hand you claim that the notion of second class citizen status/being inferior is self inflicted but in the preceding sentences you ask why can't gay people accept their different position in society and that heterosexual couples are superior in raising children (a completely unsubstantiated claim). You can't even make sense to yourself.

    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Let us face it, the minute anyone says that they really think (even if it actually undermines their arguments), they get banned from these sites. Free Speech is only allowed so long as it suits certain people's agendas


    Face, it, even if they come out with an arguable case, which you won't agree with anyway, you are dying to shout; hater, homophobe etc and play the victim .

    Says the individual who in the preceding paragraph claimed that they are being silenced by some conspiracy to prevent people from speaking. LoLgasm.


  • #9496
    TwoShedsJackson
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,438 ✭✭✭TwoShedsJackson


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    What harm do you believe only gay parents (adoptive or biological) will do to children that renders them, en mass, unsuitable?

    I don't think any of them are just going to come out with what's festering at the back of their minds: they think a gay couple are more likely to be paedophiles and/or will turn the child gay, as if that was even possible.

    Come on, surely one of you can just come out and say it?


  • #9497
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Saying something without standing your ground doesn't really wash

    Interesting phrasing there:
    GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »
    I'm afraid, standing back from the issue with a nice soundbite doesn't wash.


  • #9498
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    When you educate yourself with what Article 41 and 42 says, come back to us.
    I already have thanks.
    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Of perhaps spell out what is "untrue". Saying something without standing your ground doesn't really wash

    your post is untrue "Some of the issues may not affect childless couples, but do affect those that do have children, the majority." that's a blatant lie.
    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Children play a huge role in most Marriages. Children are indirectly an issue when we talk about marriage.
    Only an issue if they exist within a marriage.
    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    There are rights that married couples have, regarding children, that unmarried couples, do not enjoy automatically
    So what's your point?


  • #9499
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    TwoShedsJackson wrote: »
    I don't think any of them are just going to come out with what's festering at the back of their minds: they think a gay couple are more likely to be paedophiles and/or will turn the child gay, as if that was even possible.

    Come on, surely one of you can just come out and say it?

    I'll admit modern family has given me cause to think gay adoption might be bad, I know it's a show but shows a horrible place for a child to get adopted into I would hope real life gay couple wouldn't be anything like that.


  • #9500
    Sofiztikated
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Sofiztikated


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Why do gays, clearly feel that hetrosexual couples are not more suitable to raising children? This notion of second class citizens and being inferior is self inflicted

    What exactly is it that you think a hetero couple does to a child, that a homo couple can do to a child?

    And by the by, I can think of loads of hetero couples that, I think, should have no business having children, BUT, I wouldn't deny them A) the right to have children, and B) providing the same protection to them, under the constitution, if they are married.


  • #9501
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    You do understand that gay and lesbian mothers and fathers already exist in Ireland, right?

    no **** sherlock , get away

    From what I recall their children were born from a previous hetrosexual relationship.

    Nice way to try and cause diversions. "mother and father" clearly meant as one unit

    Don't think Tom and Harry could be considered "mother and father"



    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    There's no class action system in Ireland. Each case would be dealt with on an individual basis,

    I beg your pardon, you are right about "class action". What I should have said was a group of affected individuals (affected by decisions) pooling together resources and initiating a case together , fighting for their own "rights".

    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    and even then, I'm not sure how a civil suit would address any concerns about disproportionate amounts of adoptions favouring anyone? The criteria under which a couple, or even an individual are assessed for suitability for adoption are much broader and more in-depth than simply the person's gender, sex, or sexual orientation.

    Hey doesn't stop them classing themselves as Second Class Citizens :rolleyes:No doubt someone would try it

    One eyed Jack wrote: »
    The only people ignoring any criteria other than the person's gender, sex, or sexual orientation when discussing the issue of adoption. There are many more criteria on which a couple are assessed for their suitability to adopt children. As I have already pointed out previously, the 2010 legislation prohibited unmarried couples from applying as a couple regardless of their sex, gender or sexual orientation. They could always apply individually.

    And, what are the results so far, which class of families are getting better results ?


  • Advertisement
  • #9502
    Not a NSA agent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    humanji wrote: »
    Same could be said about fathers and their rights. I mean, they're clearly not equal to women when raising children, right...?

    Fathers arent even mentioned, its all about the importance of mothers in the home. The men are there to just pay the bills. I would vote yes to changing the constitution to value both mothers and fathers but until some other group are sorted I will vote no. Cant have them skipping the queue can we.


  • #9503
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    gravehold wrote: »
    I'll admit modern family has given me cause to think gay adoption might be bad, I know it's a show but shows a horrible place for a child to get adopted into I would hope real life gay couple wouldn't be anything like that.

    I know what you mean. I watched Breaking Bad and ever since I'm convinced that neither school teachers, nor cancer sufferers should be allowed to have kids.


  • #9504
    eviltwin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,495 ✭✭✭✭eviltwin


    gravehold wrote: »
    I'll admit modern family has given me cause to think gay adoption might be bad, I know it's a show but shows a horrible place for a child to get adopted into I would hope real life gay couple wouldn't be anything like that.

    All this because of a piece of fictional television?? Wow.


  • #9505
    GCU Flexible Demeanour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,257 ✭✭✭GCU Flexible Demeanour


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Interesting phrasing there:
    If you're suggesting we're the same poster, I'm afraid that doesn't wash.


  • #9506
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    Sofiztikated wrote: »
    What exactly is it that you think a hetero couple does to a child, that a homo couple can do to a child?

    And by the by, I can think of loads of hetero couples that, I think, should have no business having children, BUT, I wouldn't deny them A) the right to have children, and B) providing the same protection to them, under the constitution, if they are married.

    Your "loads" of examples are without a shadow of a doubt a serious minority of cases. How does that in any way support the argument for gays. If a hetrosexual couple are unfit to raise their child, the State shall intervene. No reason that the child could not be given a adopted mother and father


  • #9507
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    no **** sherlock , get away

    From what I recall their children were born from a previous hetrosexual relationship.

    You recall incorrectly.

    Never had a heterosexual relationship yet here I am, a biological mother and grandmother.

    And I'm far from being the only one.

    You really have no idea what you are talking about do you.


    What harm do you believe only gay parents (adoptive or biological) will do to children that renders them, en mass, unsuitable?


  • #9508
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Maximus Alexander wrote: »
    I know what you mean. I watched Breaking Bad and ever since I'm convinced that neither school teachers, nor cancer sufferers should be allowed to have kids.

    I am pretty sure breaking bad is not trying to paint the meth dealer in a good light as a parent. I said I know it's a show but it if this gay propaganda of a good outcome of a gay couple adopting it really gives me pause. I know I shouldn't let propaganda effect me but that family is so bad while it's meant to be a good thing


  • #9509
    Ave Sodalis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,555 ✭✭✭Ave Sodalis


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Your "loads" of examples are without a shadow of a doubt a serious minority of cases. How does that in any way support the argument for gays. If a hetrosexual couple are unfit to raise their child, the State shall intervene. No reason that the child could not be given a adopted mother and father

    No reason that the child could not be given an adopted father and father, or mother and mother.


  • #9510
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,453 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Your "loads" of examples are without a shadow of a doubt a serious minority of cases. How does that in any way support the argument for gays. If a hetrosexual couple are unfit to raise their child, the State shall intervene. No reason that the child could not be given a adopted mother and father

    OK.

    And..... <ignore>.

    There. That's better. :)


  • Advertisement
  • #9511
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    Hyzepher wrote: »
    Your issue has more to do with the spouse of a woman who has had a child with a man than it has to do whether that spouse is gay or not

    Eh, no. The issue is the importance of the a child being raised by a hetrosexual couple , ideally the biological parent as oppose to new "father" . Now, even people of the same sex as the mother will be stepping ahead of the biological father , more people, more problems


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement