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
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

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

1…6791112…327

Comments

  • #242
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    gravehold wrote: »
    That's is in the goverments site I posted above, was the flyer you got the government one or one from the yes side pushing the agenda and lying by omission again?

    Both of those highlighted articles have nothing to do with marriage. They do not specify married women. Just 'women'. They are also completely meaningless.

    One is basically an, outdated, nod to women to encourage them to stay at home.

    The other.. well.. can you point to where the State pays some form of wages for housework so women are not forced by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home?


  • #243
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    lisar816 wrote: »
    it's the booklet for the referendum they post in your door, half is in irish.

    Maybe contact them by email those are supposed to be unbiased

    lisar816 wrote: »
    Are they planning on removing this?

    They plan to gendered stuff to spouse from the site

    "There will be amendments to a number of Acts to replace the words “husband” and “wife” with the word “spouse”."

    So I would actually hope it gets removed it might give husbands a stronger case in courts to get the kids when the mother breaks up the family by cheating.


  • #244
    upinthesky
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,414 ✭✭✭upinthesky


    Bannasidhe wrote: »

    The other.. well.. can you point to where the State pays some form of wages for housework so women are not forced by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home?

    Maybe one parent family payment, there trying to get rid of that aren't they.


  • #245
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Both of those highlighted articles have nothing to do with marriage. They do not specify married women. Just 'women'. They are also completely meaningless.

    One is basically an, outdated, nod to women to encourage them to stay at home.

    The other.. well.. can you point to where the State pays some form of wages for housework so women are not forced by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home?

    Still the referendum will have an effect on that part of the constitution. Hence why they are on the unbiased site.


  • #246
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    lisar816 wrote: »
    Are they planning on removing this?

    That would require a referendum.

    Can't remember if the Constitution Convention recommended removal and can't seem to access their report due to crap rural broadband... either way... nowt to do with Referendum on the 22nd.


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    jimdublin15
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 244 ✭✭jimdublin15


    lisar816 wrote: »
    Maybe one parent family payment, there trying to get rid of that aren't they.

    There are changes from July I think, not related to the referendum BTW.

    http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/social_welfare_payments_to_families_and_children/transition_from_ofp.html


  • #248
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    lisar816 wrote: »
    Are they planning on removing this?

    Not in the current referendum.

    There are other recommendations from the Referendum Commission Convention, which may include the suggestion to remove the wording around women in the home. Any such recommendation would have to be put to a vote in another referendum.


  • #249
    upinthesky
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,414 ✭✭✭upinthesky


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    That would require a referendum.

    Can't remember if the Constitution Convention recommended removal and can't seem to access their report due to crap rural broadband... either way... nowt to do with Referendum on the 22nd.

    eh yes it has!

    The Referendum Proposal

    In the referendum, you are being asked to vote Yes or No to adding a clause to Article 41. If the referendum is passed, there will be a new Article 41.4 which will be as follows:

    4 Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex.

    The proposal is contained in the Thirty-Fourth Amendment of the Constitution (Marriage Equality) Bill 2015.

    http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2015/515/b5b15d.pdf


  • #250
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    That would require a referendum.

    Can't remember if the Constitution Convention recommended removal and can't seem to access their report due to crap rural broadband... either way... nowt to do with Referendum on the 22nd.

    They said themselves it would get reworded with this referendum
    There will be amendments to a number of Acts to replace the words “husband” and “wife” with the word “spouse”.


  • #251
    Steppenwolfe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 416 ✭✭Steppenwolfe


    The pollsters have egg on their face after the UK election. I've seen various explanations for their failure to predict the Tory majority. One is the 'Shy Tory' theory. Is there likely to be a 'shy no voter' factor to this referendum. If so how significant might that be?


  • Advertisement
  • #252
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    lisar816 wrote: »
    Maybe one parent family payment, there trying to get rid of that aren't they.

    Nope.

    It doesn't specify 'mothers' married or unmarried. Just says women. That could include adult daughters still living with their parent(s).

    It harks back to a time when women were actively discouraged from seeking paid employment outside the home and really should have been removed when the Marriage Ban was lifted.


  • #253
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Steppenwolfe wrote: »
    The pollsters have egg on their face after the UK election. I've seen various explanations for their failure to predict the Tory majority. One is the 'Shy Tory' theory. Is there likely to be a 'shy no voter' factor to this referendum. If so how significant might that be?

    Well if a person say they are voting no they get called bigots and homophobes so you can understand why there is a 'shy no'


  • #254
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    Steppenwolfe wrote: »
    Is there likely to be a 'shy no voter' factor to this referendum. If so how significant might that be?

    I think it's extremely likely, as has been seen in other countries.

    For that reason it is hugely important that people are not complacent about a win for the YES side. We need to motivate people to vote on the day.


  • #255
    Not a NSA agent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    gravehold wrote: »
    Well if a person say they are voting no they get called bigots and homophobes so you can understand why there is a 'shy no'

    A lot of the time when I see the words homophobe or bigot being used its from people saying that others will call them one rather than actually being called that.


  • #256
    upinthesky
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,414 ✭✭✭upinthesky


    well that little section that was left out has made me swing to the no vote, why leave that out, makes me think what else are they leaving out!


  • #257
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    gravehold wrote: »
    They said themselves it would get reworded with this referendum

    The wording in various Acts can be changed without a referendum, but the wording in the constitution cannot be altered without a referendum. The wording of acts cannot violate the principals set out by the constitution, which is why the current constitution referendum is needed.


  • #258
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    gravehold wrote: »
    They said themselves it would get reworded with this referendum

    Oh stop it.

    The words 'husband', 'wife' and 'spouse' do not appear in the Constitution.

    Those highlighted passages do and therefore will need a referendum to be removed/changed.

    Yes- legislation will be reworded if the Referendum is passed - this has nothing to do with the highlighted sections so stop the stirring and trying to conflate separate topics into one big B.S Woo C. T. .


  • #259
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    lisar816 wrote: »
    well that little section that was left out has made me swing to the no vote, why leave that out, makes me think what else are they leaving out!

    Nothing was left out!

    No change will be made, nor can be made, to the constitution without an explicit vote in a referendum.


  • #260
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    lisar816 wrote: »
    well that little section that was left out has made me swing to the no vote, why leave that out, makes me think what else are they leaving out!

    Fully read the unbiased site let that be your base, then the yes sites and then the no sites, make up you mind then vote. But yes the yes side are omitting a lot.


  • #261
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    gravehold wrote: »
    Still the referendum will have an effect on that part of the constitution.

    No, it will not.

    Whatever is unchanged is unchanged.


  • Advertisement
  • #262
    upinthesky
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,414 ✭✭✭upinthesky


    Zen65 wrote: »
    Nothing was left out!

    No change will be made, nor can be made, to the constitution without an explicit vote in a referendum.

    Well i must have got a really dodgy book then, because every other section in article 41 was in my book apart from the section i highlighted previously.

    Why leave out the very part they want changed?


  • #263
    Not a NSA agent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    gravehold wrote: »
    Fully read the unbiased site let that be your base, then the yes sites and then the no sites, make up you mind then vote. But yes the yes side are omitting a lot.

    What is being committed?

    A 4th clause will be added saying "Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex."

    Nothing more, nothing less.


  • #264
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    lisar816 wrote: »
    Well i must have got a really dodgy book then, because every other section in article 41 was in my book apart from the section i highlighted previously.

    Why leave out the very part they want changed?

    Lying by ommission get used to it, hence read everything from both sides


  • #265
    upinthesky
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,414 ✭✭✭upinthesky


    Zen65 wrote: »
    No, it will not.

    Whatever is unchanged is unchanged.

    Yes more than likely to be changed at a later date if there is a yes vote.


  • #266
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    gravehold wrote: »
    But yes the yes side are omitting a lot.

    Nonsense.

    The idea that some possible later change in legislation which may be needed in order to comply with the change in the constitution should be tabled at the time of the referendum is simply ridiculous and has never been done at the time of a referendum.

    The constitution is about principles, legislation is the means of putting those principles into law.


  • #267
    gravehold
    Closed Accounts Posts: 912 ✭✭✭gravehold


    Not a NSA agent wrote: »
    What is being committed?

    A 4th clause will be added saying "Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex."

    Nothing more, nothing less.

    Then gay couple get the rights and protections of all other parts of the constitution that references married couples so it has a far wider ramifications then just two people getting married


  • #268
    Zen65
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Zen65


    lisar816 wrote: »
    Yes more than likely to be changed at a later date if there is a yes vote.

    NO

    You cannot change any part the constitution without an explicit vote.

    Even spelling errors and grammar have been the subject of referenda in the past!!!!

    Apologies, I should not have said "spelling errors" but minor text changes have had to go through a referendum.


  • #269
    Not a NSA agent
    Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    gravehold wrote: »
    Then gay couple get the rights and protections of all other parts of the constitution that references married couples so it has a far wider ramifications then just two people getting married

    Thats the point. They would be able to get married, hence get all of the rights and protections from the constitution.


  • #270
    upinthesky
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,414 ✭✭✭upinthesky


    Zen65 wrote: »
    NO

    You cannot change any part the constitution without an explicit vote.

    Even spelling errors and grammar have been the subject of referenda in the past!!!!

    So is that not what this is about changing article 41?


  • Advertisement
  • #271
    Bannasidhe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    lisar816 wrote: »
    eh yes it has!

    The Referendum Proposal

    In the referendum, you are being asked to vote Yes or No to adding a clause to Article 41. If the referendum is passed, there will be a new Article 41.4 which will be as follows:

    4 Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex.

    The proposal is contained in the Thirty-Fourth Amendment of the Constitution (Marriage Equality) Bill 2015.

    http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2015/515/b5b15d.pdf
    lisar816 wrote: »
    well that little section that was left out has made me swing to the no vote, why leave that out, makes me think what else are they leaving out!

    Those articles on women in the home have nothing to do with marriage.

    They do not specify married women- just women. Marriage is not mentioned or impacted by them in any way.

    We are being asked to vote on whether or not same-sex couples can marry. That's it. To alter one specific article dealing with marriage not on whether or not women should work outside the home.

    It would be a shame if you felt that same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry because the government failed to ask if we also believed women should be encouraged to work outside the home.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement