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…315316318320321…325

Comments

  • #9512
    Sofiztikated
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Sofiztikated


    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

    Do you have to buy special shoes for all that dodging?


  • #9513
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    gravehold wrote: »
    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

    Absolutely.

    That old guy who used to sell shoes is a terrible step-father.
    Ban old guys marrying younger women with children!


  • #9514
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    endacl wrote: »
    OK.

    And..... <ignore>.

    There. That's better. :)

    Good Man, / Women incapable of facing facts . Put the hands over the eyes and ears and scream na na na na na

    A bit like the gays argument for marriage , so


  • #9515
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    gravehold wrote: »
    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
    Why is it propaganda? It's a comedy show. And by design shows distorts everyday situations into farcical ones for comedic effect.

    You may as well say that Friends makes you think about whether extra marital sex should really be legal at all.

    Or that Father Ted provides evidence that religion should be outlawed.


  • #9516
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »
    If you're suggesting we're the same poster, I'm afraid that doesn't wash.

    A non-denial denial.


  • Advertisement
  • #9517
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    Sofiztikated wrote: »
    Do you have to buy special shoes for all that dodging?

    What dodging would that be?


  • #9518
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    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

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


  • #9519
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Good Man, / Women incapable of facing facts . Put the hands over the eyes and ears and scream na na na na na

    A bit like the gays argument for marriage , so

    'the gays'... You realise quite a number of those arguing for marriage access for same-sex couples are straight.

    More utter nonsense.


  • #9520
    Maximus Alexander
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    gravehold wrote: »
    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

    What are you talking about? Breaking Bad was blatant propaganda from the Terminal Cancer Schoolteacher Association of America. Their entire agenda was to try and paint themselves as people who would do anything to ensure the financial security of their families, but they ended up making themselves look like terrible parents in my view.


  • #9521
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Absolutely.

    That old guy who used to sell shoes is a terrible step-father.
    Ban old guys marrying younger women with children!

    Actually that family is prefectly good. Jay is a fine stepfather.


  • Advertisement
  • #9522
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,453 ✭✭✭✭endacl


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

    Show tunes. If we're talking 'en mass', then I have to pick a stereotype. Show tunes it is.


  • #9523
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Good Man, / Women incapable of facing facts . Put the hands over the eyes and ears and scream na na na na na
    You haven't brought facts to any argument. Just your twisted view of society and your made up interpretation of our constitution.
    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    A bit like the gays argument for marriage , so
    I really wish you'd stop this...


  • #9524
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    gravehold wrote: »
    Actually that family is prefectly good. Jay is a fine stepfather.

    I disgree, AND why about Peggy and his other kids eh???
    Dead beat Dad :mad:


  • #9525
    Sofiztikated
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Sofiztikated


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    What dodging would that be?
    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.

    I neatly bolded the bits you dodged. Because you had difficulty.


  • #9526
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Maximus Alexander wrote: »
    What are you talking about? Breaking Bad was blatant propaganda from the Terminal Cancer Schoolteacher Association of America.

    Actually, I think it was deep cover propaganda for Obamacare.


  • #9527
    aloyisious
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,979 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


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

    @frostyjacks: Yes, you are correct in that assertion.

    Like Tom for the NO Side mentioned at the Wynnes Hotel debate last week about marriage rights, there was an international meeting in Paris in 1948 about human rights, the international Human Rights Act of the United Nations. Tom mentioned it in how existing rights came about; debate and decision making. Peculiarly enough, what he apparently failed to see was that while the meeting was about extending existing rights, and laying down new rights and the laws/rules about recognizing all of them, IT WAS ALSO THAT THE RIGHTS WOULD BE OPEN TO ALL THE PEOPLE.

    Without that debate, the UN Declaration on Human Rights would not have decided upon and put out as the standard we all should judge ourselves by. There would have been NO extension of basic human rights.

    This debate ongoing here, and elsewhere, in our country, is about extending existing civil marriage rights here to a part of our society presently disbarred from those marriage rights. If you vote no, while you are using your vote franchise the way you choose to, you are continuing the denial of an existing civil right to a part of the society you live in.

    Let anyone who think's civil marriage is NOT a basic civil right step forward and make a coherent case for their point of view, and not merely write "because it say's so in our constitution". The argument of the Vote Yes side is that the right to civilly marry here should be extended to same sex couples as an Irish civil right. That in itself (IMO) is a self sufficient case in itself.

    Look at the person beside you and ask yourself this - Do I have a human right to say to that person "no, you are not entitled to the same civil right to marry that other people here have, that of a free choice to whom you can civilly marry". That (IMO) is what you will do if you vote NO on the 22nd. Regardless of how you see the result of your No vote, that is the end result of your vote.


  • #9528
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    gravehold wrote: »
    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

    You dont understand Breaking Bad at all. The original point is that Walt was trying to be a good parent and father by preventing his wife and children from being left crippled with medical bills debt after his death. He got into it FOR his family.

    The heterosexual couples in modern family are hardly good role models either. But this is all completely irrelevant to a real life Irish referendum.


  • #9529
    endacl
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,453 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    smash wrote: »


    I really wish you'd stop this...

    Hit the ignore button. Just in case stupid is contagious.

    :)


  • #9530
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    seamus wrote: »
    Why is it propaganda? It's a comedy show. And by design shows distorts everyday situations into farcical ones for comedic effect.

    You may as well say that Friends makes you think about whether extra marital sex should really be legal at all.

    Or that Father Ted provides evidence that religion should be outlawed.

    Are you saying the cast of friends where sluts there wasn't a huge amount of sex on that show. And modern family whole premise is propaganda that the normal family is not needed but that gay family is god awful, why do the other families on the show come out ok


  • #9531
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    Interesting phrasing there:

    A bit like saying "gays are second class citizens because they can't marry"

    Unless you can prove (should not be hard actually) the insinuation that you are making, I suggest to stop and get back to the issues


  • Advertisement
  • #9532
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    A bit like saying "gays are second class citizens because they can't marry"

    Unless you can prove (should not be hard actually) the insinuation that you are making, I suggest to stop and get back to the issues

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


  • #9533
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    gravehold wrote: »
    Are you saying the cast of friends where sluts there wasn't a huge amount of sex on that show. And modern family whole premise is propaganda that the normal family is not needed but that gay family is god awful, why do the other families on the show come out ok

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


  • #9534
    Lt J.R. Bell
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 679 ✭✭✭Lt J.R. Bell


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

    A child's best interest , when available, is to have the care and company of a mother and a father, who are perfectly capable of providing the love etc required


  • #9535
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    gravehold wrote: »
    Are you saying the cast of friends where sluts there wasn't a huge amount of sex on that show.
    :eek:

    Isn't it funny how you only see what you want to see?


  • #9536
    MrWalsh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,664 ✭✭✭MrWalsh


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    A child's best interest , when available, is to have the care and company of a mother and a father, who are perfectly capable of providing the love etc required

    That doesnt answer the question.

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


  • #9537
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,190 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    A child's best interest , when available, is to have the care and company of a mother and a father, who are perfectly capable of providing the love etc required
    Prove it.


  • #9538
    jobbridge4life
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    A child's best interest , when available, is to have the care and company of a mother and a father, who are perfectly capable of providing the love etc required

    That does not answer the question asked of you and once again you are asserting as fact something that is absolutely not fact. You can agressively repeat it as much as you like it won't make it a fact.


  • #9539
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    Unless you can prove (should not be hard actually) the insinuation that you are making, I suggest to stop and get back to the issues

    Another non-denial denial.


  • #9540
    GCU Flexible Demeanour
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,257 ✭✭✭GCU Flexible Demeanour


    Zubeneschamali wrote: »
    A non-denial denial.
    Oh, I deny it. You'll have no problems getting a clear "No" out of me there. I'd hate to be stealing someone else's thunder.


  • Advertisement
  • #9541
    Zubeneschamali
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,686 ✭✭✭✭Zubeneschamali


    Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »
    A child's best interest , when available, is to have the care and company of a mother and a father, who are perfectly capable of providing the love etc required

    So the courts would never have to take a child away from an available mother and father?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement