Same Sex Marriage Referendum Mega Thread - MOD WARNING IN FIRST POST

sjb25 · 08-05-2015 09:12PM

engineerbrah wrote: »

For all those having a go at me:

We are talking about school children here, they do not have the maturity to 'respect' SSM. Having a male & female role model is ideal for every child and you know it. Kids adopted into gay 'families' will be teased and no amount of 'acceptance' lectures for 10 years old will change that.

Think long & hard what you are voting for instead of jumping on the bandwagon.

Not having a go at you I'm not gay I do have a child I'm engaged aswell

I'm voting yes not because I'm jumping on a bandwagon but because I THINK it's the right thing to do everybody has the right to do what they want and be happy including gay people and once they look after any kids they come to have in a family (which is a dam lot more than some straight couples) then I have no problem what so ever

08-05-2015 09:15PM

engineerbrah wrote: »

We are talking about school children here, they do not have the maturity to 'respect' SSM.

No - they are oblivious to the divide. My 4 year old daugther plays wedding all the time now with her toys and dolls since we took her to a real wedding. And she plays same sex wedding as often as opposite sex wedding when she does it. She even has a funny little routine where dads give two brides away.

What is "maturity" then? The children just see the love - the ceremony - the fun - the glamor - the sweet kiss. So what will maturity bring them? The tendency to judge and hate that they do not have now? The loss of looking at the world merely happy that two people have come together in love to celebrate and model that love?

You can keep your maturity.

engineerbrah wrote: »

Having a male & female role model is ideal for every child and you know it.

Except I know no such thing. What are the "roles" you feel need to be modeled exactly? Tell me of these roles. The archaic roles of gender divide that we left behind in the 50s but people still cling to?

engineerbrah wrote: »

Kids adopted into gay 'families' will be teased and no amount of 'acceptance' lectures for 10 years old will change that.

I do not share the same crystal ball you appear to own. Here in the present reality however - I can tell you that we have lots of knowledge about how bullys select their target. And it is not how you paint it here.

engineerbrah wrote: »

If it was, nature would have let it happen.

Ah yes nature - says the guy using the internet to communicate - likely under an electric light - with a belly full of food you cooked - perhaps even drinking alcohol - all of which you paid for with money - a purely human concept that is a meta level of trade - using language through the form of letters and numbers - all the while talking about a formal human institution that only actually exists on paper - which we call "marriage".

Yeah - clearly what NATURE lets happen dictates all we should be doing - huh?

engineerbrah · 08-05-2015 09:17PM

El Weirdo wrote: »

This is bollocks. My daughter is 11 and she absolutely has the maturity to respect SSM.

Do you know why? Because she has parents that brought her up properly and aren't fucking bigoted homophobes.

ETA: If you have kids that you don't trust not to bully other kids because of their family make-up (or indeed, anything), then you need to take a long, hard look at your parenting skills because, frankly, they mustn't be up to much.

Oh aren't you the righteous individual just looking out for everyone's well being. Anyways I personally believe a gay household isn't a suitable place to raise kids in. If it was, nature would have let it happen.

Stop being so aggressive because I don't share the same opinion as you do. Culture dictates what is right and wrong and it changes the whole time, in reality humans can never know what the divine meaning of right and wrong is because we are not all knowing. You are just the product of your environment.

In 100 years time they may look back at this and think we were crazy, who knows.

jimdublin15 · 08-05-2015 09:17PM

engineerbrah wrote: »

For all those having a go at me:

We are talking about school children here, they do not have the maturity to 'respect' SSM. Having a male & female role model is ideal for every child and you know it. Kids adopted into gay 'families' will be teased and no amount of 'acceptance' lectures for 10 years old will change that.

Think long & hard what you are voting for instead of jumping on the bandwagon.

Your entitled to your feelings and thoughts and to vote as you please and if you want to debate SSM that’s why (most) of us are following the thread and share options to talk about it. So you have posted something I have taken the time to read it and respect your entitled to it. However I do disagree, that is not having a go it’s called a different point of view.

The Bandwagon …… What bandwagon in relation to kids ?
Many Gay people already do have kids be that one is the biological parent or both the biological parent and I am sure some will adopt. This will continue, no matter how anyone votes they will have kids and live their lives. Some will have a longer road to travel to have kids than other gay parents but voting “No” as you suggested to save kids from being teased about gay parents sound delusional to me. Do you really think that you have any say whether or not Gay people can have kids by voting no on the Marriage referendum ? Sorry you don’t, and I'm sorry to upset you but you never will.

Gay households, be that with two Gay people or single Gay person or just one being the biological parent or both and even adopted with kids will continue as we did before the 22nd of May no matter what way the vote goes.

As for saving the kids from being teased about having a gay parent or gay home, kids will be kids and tease each other – Fact , stopping Gay marriage will not change that , kids will always find something. Thank goodness grow-ups look after them and will deal with it. However If you want a debate on parenting in relation to teasing and schools we could start a new thread if you like ? I’ll be happy to join to get you started on the new thread (I was teased for being the tallest when I was a boy)

In short Voting Yes or No to "SSM" will not change kids 10 year olds from teasing each other, so no need to think about it as an issue in this debate but please vote as you wish.

One eyed Jack · 08-05-2015 09:18PM

engineerbrah wrote: »

For all those having a go at me:

We are talking about school children here, they do not have the maturity to 'respect' SSM. Having a male & female role model is ideal for every child and you know it. Kids adopted into gay 'families' will be teased and no amount of 'acceptance' lectures for 10 years old will change that.

Think long & hard what you are voting for instead of jumping on the bandwagon.

Have you thought (not even long and hard), but has it occurred to you at all that there are already children in Ireland who are being raised by parents who are the same sex?

The only protection those children lack, that the children bullying them have (the children that following your logic are the children of opposite sex parents... think about that one

), is the protection of the State, because their parents are denied the opportunity to enter into the marital contract, which means those children will never be considered by the State, as being part of a family, recognised by the State.

El Weirdo · 08-05-2015 09:23PM

engineerbrah wrote: »

Oh aren't you the righteous individual just looking out for everyone's well being. Anyways I personally believe a gay household isn't a suitable place to raise kids in. If it was, nature would have let it happen.

So you must be against infertile couples adopting then, because nature dictates that they can't have children?

engineerbrah wrote: »

Stop being so aggressive because I don't share the same opinion as you do. Culture dictates what is right and wrong and it changes the whole time, in reality humans can never know what the divine meaning of right and wrong is because we are not all knowing. You are just the product of your environment.

Yes, and I'd like the environment where my children grow up is one where all different types of families are "normal" and kids aren't bullied because they've been taught that there's something wrong with having two mums or two dads.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 08-05-2015 09:31PM

On the bullying thing, a girl I went to secondary school with has been posting some pretty vehement stuff in favour of a yes vote on facebook. She was probably the most popular girl in our year, great craic, everyone wanted to be her friend etc. I was wondering why she felt as strongly as she clearly did, just remembered there her mam is gay

We all must have forgotten to bully her I suppose.

jimdublin15 · 08-05-2015 09:32PM

engineerbrah wrote: »

Oh aren't you the righteous individual just looking out for everyone's well being. Anyways I personally believe a gay household isn't a suitable place to raise kids in. If it was, nature would have let it happen.

Well your free to feel as you wish and that is up-to-you.

However on the "nature" part, just to clarify nature did give me two kids. Lots of gay parents do have kids thanks to nature as you put it.

engineerbrah wrote: »

Stop being so aggressive because I don't share the same opinion as you do.

Yeah debating or discussing stuff with people of opposite views and parents in particular can be heated, after all I can understand some are getting a bit jumpy. Look at it this way if your being called unnatural and people saying let's not vote yes because the gay might have kids, it tends to get to some of us. Particularly gay parents.

silverfeather · 08-05-2015 09:34PM

Maryam Chilly Genius wrote: »

On the bullying thing, a girl I went to secondary school with has been posting some pretty vehement stuff in favour of a yes vote on facebook. She was probably the most popular girl in our year, great craic, everyone wanted to be her friend etc. I was wondering why she felt as strongly as she clearly did, just remembered there her mam is gay

We all must have forgotten to bully her I suppose.

I wonder do the NO camp live in a different world were they have no gay friends etc in their circle or something. From the way they view the world it seems like they do. It's an Ivory tower.

jimdublin15 · 08-05-2015 09:37PM

silverfeather wrote: »

I wonder do the NO camp live in a different world were they have no gay friends etc in their circle or something. From the way they view the world it seems like they do. It's an Ivory tower.

I think some (not all) of the No votes feel a bit left out and a tad lonely.
Perhaps if the Yes side would promis to still hug them after the vote we could get a few No voters to change to a yes vote.

eviltwin · 08-05-2015 09:40PM

silverfeather wrote: »

I wonder do the NO camp live in a different world were they have no gay friends etc in their circle or something. From the way they view the world it seems like they do. It's an Ivory tower.

I wonder that too. Life must be hard when your a self appointed moral guardian. They seem to live in a very bland grey world.

1hnr79jr65 · 08-05-2015 09:44PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by engineerbrah View Post
Oh aren't you the righteous individual just looking out for everyone's well being. Anyways I personally believe a gay household isn't a suitable place to raise kids in. If it was, nature would have let it happen.

And you seemed to have missed the memo that nature allows for straight parents to have gay children. As you probably have never lived in a gay household as you put it, how can you gauge such a family is not suitable using facts and not conjecture ?

traprunner · 08-05-2015 09:57PM

Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »

So, the poster that you referred to ,is miserable, because

he expressed an opinion different to yours, about a situation that maybe no more than hypothetical , and remote. Who knows, attitudes might even change after realising but getting on with the disappointment of not seeing grand children from the said child...etc

What do you know about him? He might be far from miserable

On the other hand, some gays talk about being miserable and suicidal and not coming to terms with themselves and how society treats them (hey straight people have issues too)

Whose's shoes would you rather be in?

Funny, if anyone made such a comment as you have to another, there would be an notice from the mods telling them that they are being threatened with a ban or actually would be banned , for being "uncivil" etc

Keep that stuff up. No doubt it will remove doubt about gay marriage for those who are not sure how to vote.

Being disappointed in your kids obviously would make a person miserable to some degree. Obviously disappointment does not make one run around celebrating. So what do you know about him/her to know that they are not miserable??

So I get special treatment from the mods? Hahahaha

Maybe I should also have put a

after my post since it is after hours??? Or maybe is should get a list of your requirements to ensure that my posts are up to your high virtual back seat modding standards.

Anyway back to the topic....who are any of us to dictate to the minority what makes them happy?

engineerbrah · 08-05-2015 09:58PM

El Weirdo wrote: »

So you must be against infertile couples adopting then, because nature dictates that they can't have children?

No I'm not against that, that problem is out of the couples control and they should not be punished for it. A fertile person who enters a same sex marriage obviously doesn't want to procreate, because marriage is meant to be for life. I don't see why they would want to adopt a child.

El Weirdo wrote: »

Yes, and I'd like the environment where my children grow up is one where all different types of families are "normal" and kids aren't bullied because they've been taught that there's something wrong with having two mums or two dads.

It's a shame that kids from gay parents will get bullied but it's still gonna happen.
And like I said you can't claim this is the right thing to do because you are not a beacon of true wisdom, you believe it because TV and your peers tell you it is right. What's socially acceptable is based on the opinion of "intellectuals" & subjective research.

Zubeneschamali · 08-05-2015 09:59PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

It's not the natural atomic family unit so I don't agree with it.

I used to like the Jetsons, but they weren't as good as the Flintstones.

So Cretaceous families are better than Atomic ones.

Ave Sodalis · 08-05-2015 10:00PM

engineerbrah wrote: »

No I'm not against that, that problem is out of the couples control and they should not be punished for it. A fertile person who enters a same sex marriage obviously doesn't want to procreate, because marriage is meant to be for life. I don't see why they would want to adopt a child.

It's a shame that kids from gay parents will get bullied but it's still gonna happen.
And like I said you can't claim this is the right thing to do because you are not a beacon of true wisdom, you believe it because TV and your peers tell you it is right. What's socially acceptable is based on the opinion of "intellectuals" & subjective research.

And research says there's nothing wrong with same sex couples as parents.

Regardless, the referendum has nothing to do with children or adoption.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 08-05-2015 10:00PM

engineerbrah wrote: »

No I'm not against that, that problem is out of the couples control and they should not be punished for it. A fertile person who enters a same sex marriage obviously doesn't want to procreate, because marriage is meant to be for life. I don't see why they would want to adopt a child.

It's a shame that kids from gay parents will get bullied but it's still gonna happen.
And like I said you can't claim this is the right thing to do because you are not a beacon of true wisdom, you believe it because TV and your peers tell you it is right. What's socially acceptable is based on the opinion of "intellectuals" & subjective research.

Please think about that sentence for a couple of minutes.

Zubeneschamali · 08-05-2015 10:03PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

No but it depends on what rights you mean. I want the right to do and have lots of things. Doesn't mean i'm going to get it.

Hardly releveant to this Referendum, since gays are going to get the right to marry in less than a month.

Sofiztikated · 08-05-2015 10:03PM

engineerbrah wrote: »

Oh aren't you the righteous individual just looking out for everyone's well being. Anyways I personally believe a gay household isn't a suitable place to raise kids in. If it was, nature would have let it happen.

What exactly happens in a gay household that isn't suitable? Is it the show tunes, or the rampant and multiple orgies?

In 100 years time they may look back at this and think we were crazy, who knows.

People are looking at you now, and thinking you are crazy, no need to wait 100 years.

1hnr79jr65 · 08-05-2015 10:04PM

engineerbrah wrote: »

No I'm not against that, that problem is out of the couples control and they should not be punished for it. A fertile person who enters a same sex marriage obviously doesn't want to procreate, because marriage is meant to be for life. I don't see why they would want to adopt a child.

It's a shame that kids from gay parents will get bullied but it's still gonna happen.
And like I said you can't claim this is the right thing to do because you are not a beacon of true wisdom, you believe it because TV and your peers tell you it is right. What's socially acceptable is based on the opinion of "intellectuals" & subjective research.

Obviously you don't read the news where parents of a child who is gay were attacked by a bunch of teens, the parents are straight. Bullying happens regardless for all variations of families, sexual orientations and race so your statement nonsense.

Zubeneschamali · 08-05-2015 10:06PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

They should not have the same marriage rights as heterosexual couples.

The Constitution already disagrees with you:

1 All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law.

N.B. This is a trick post. Go on, I dare you.

Zubeneschamali · 08-05-2015 10:07PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

If I had kids

Thank goodness.

swampgas · 08-05-2015 10:09PM

engineerbrah wrote: »

It's a shame that kids from gay parents will get bullied but it's still gonna happen.

But if the kids are going to get bullied anyway, as you suggest, why object to their (same sex) parents getting married?

The kids are already out there, blocking marriage equality won't make them disappear. And allowing their parents to get married will give them extra protection under the law.

Zubeneschamali · 08-05-2015 10:10PM

Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »

I do not think anyone would stop or try to stop a gay person from raising or playing a role in the life of their own flesh and blood.

By stopping them getting married, for example?

08-05-2015 10:11PM

engineerbrah wrote: »

For all those having a go at me:

We are talking about school children here, they do not have the maturity to 'respect' SSM. Having a male & female role model is ideal for every child and you know it. Kids adopted into gay 'families' will be teased and no amount of 'acceptance' lectures for 10 years old will change that.

Think long & hard what you are voting for instead of jumping on the bandwagon.

Gay couples already have children ... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
omg understand this, they can adopt as individuals!

Ave Sodalis · 08-05-2015 10:13PM

222233 wrote: »

Gay couples already have children ... !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
omg understand this, they can adopt as individuals!

And from next week, as a couple

1hnr79jr65 · 08-05-2015 10:15PM

sup_dude wrote: »

And from next week, as a couple

And as straight man decent human being i will be voting yes to support this.

Zubeneschamali · 08-05-2015 10:17PM

Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »

You know that if anyone answered that properly, they would be banned from this site.

A bit like my old great aunt, who could never say it straight out, but everyone understood her. When Shirley Bassey was on TV: "Doesn't she have a wonderful voice? Pity, all the same."

Ave Sodalis · 08-05-2015 10:18PM

Sour Lemonz wrote: »

And as straight man decent human being i will be voting yes to support this.

That's what's being said though, the adoption doesn't need support. It's a Bill, it's already written into law and we don't have a choice in it. The referendum will have no influence on it. It's the referendum that needs supporting :P

1hnr79jr65 · 08-05-2015 10:19PM

sup_dude wrote: »

That's what's being said though, the adoption doesn't need support. It's a Bill, it's already written into law and we don't have a choice in it. The referendum will have no influence on it. It's the referendum that needs supporting :P

Shoulda clarified im supporting the SSM part, but hey ho ill support anything that goes for equality.:pac:

Same Sex Marriage Referendum Mega Thread - MOD WARNING IN FIRST POST

Comments