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

ebbsy wrote: »

The Yes gestapo were at the door today, I left them out in the rain.

What are you, a 12-year-old CoD player? I seriously doubt the maturity of people who use terms like "gaystapo", "homofascist", "Yes gestapo" etc., especially considering that homosexuals were targeted by the Nazis and forced to wear pink triangles in concentration camps.

osarusan wrote: »

With respect, if you cannot understand, after being told multiple times, that this referendum has nothing to do with children, then I do not think you should be looking for something other than a simplistic argument.

If you vote No based on your current concerns, you will be voting no for reasons that completely unconnected to this referendum, a fact which you should by now be aware of.

Do you accept that?

No I don't i believe they are intrinsically linked although not every same-sex couple want children or have children. I would feel a terrible amount of guilt if i realised that by voting yes some same sex couples would be encouraged to adopt children or by surrogacy.

But if I vote no - I now will feel guilty over the rights of a child who is already with the parents of a same-sex couple.

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

No I don't i believe they are intrinsically linked although not every same-sex couple want children or have children. I would feel a terrible amount of guilt if i realised that by voting yes some same sex couples would be encouraged to adopt children or by surrogacy.

But if I vote no - I now will feel guilty over the rights of a child who is already with the parents of a same-sex couple.

Against adoption and surrogacy by everyone, or just people who aren't straight?

This goes some way to explaining what it must be like for our LGBT fellow citizens to live through this campaign . . .

frostyjacks wrote: »

How come Bono hasn't thrown us his two cents on this? I would have thought he'd be all over it.

Because we are too far away from Africa!

Or maybe because he could not think of many words to rhyme with marriage to write a song about it? :rolleyes:

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

But if I vote no - I now will feel guilty over the rights of a child who is already with the parents of a same-sex couple.

Commendable that you are so concerned for the child but the glaring fact is you are forgetting about the rights of the parents?! Do u think the child in the scenario above is doomed in this same sex family?

Would you prefer this child to be born or adopted in to a same sex civil partnership? Or a single-parent home? Would that be ok?

Or what about that child you are so willing to protect in childhood turns out to be gay?!?!? Does your protection of them just fly right out the window when you deny them the right to marry the person they love?

I would like to reiterate again that the referendum is not related to children.. Therefore this is, essentially, a tangent, unrelated-to-topic conversation!

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I would not be keen on surrogacy gay/straight as it is a complex mess which I do not envy the legislatures job on it. I also think it is a a step too far.

As for adoption I would think a child would fare better where the parents are not same sex. But where there are no other options they could be adopted by a gay couple.
(I know I will get slaughtered for that last comment as at the moment anyone can adopt a child. But I feel that straight couples should be given preference where possible)

You're just looking for attention now..

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

As for adoption I would think a child would fare better where the parents are not same sex.
)

Why?

In 2004, the APA Council of Representatives adopted a policy resolution including the following statement based on a review of the best available science:
There is no scientific evidence that parenting effectiveness is related to parental sexual orientation: lesbian and gay parents are as likely as heterosexual parents to provide supportive and healthy environments for their children (Patterson, 2000, 2004; Perrin, 2002; Tasker, 1999); See the full resolution on the Sexual Orientation, Parents, & Children webpage.

Blogatron52 wrote: »

Commendable that you are so concerned for the child but the glaring fact is you are forgetting about the rights of the parents?! Do u think the child in the scenario above is doomed in this same sex family?

Would you prefer this child to be born or adopted in to a same sex civil partnership? Or a single-parent home? Would that be ok?

Or what about that child you are so willing to protect in childhood turns out to be gay?!?!? Does your protection of them just fly right out the window when you deny them the right to marry the person they love?

I would like to reiterate again that the referendum is not related to children.. Therefore this is, essentially, a tangent, unrelated-to-topic conversation!

I don't believe it is a tangent I believe it is inextricably linked see Dil Wickremasinghe of Newstalk fame.It will encourage some same sex couples to get children.

I think the child will suffer disadvantages in a same sex family as a father and mother fulfill natural specific roles. I think there should be a hierarchy of adoption. As a last resort same-sex couples could adopt. I have no problem with the gay couple wanting to marry. But if the yes vote passes (it more then likely will) and if i vote yes I feel that I would have contributed to encouraging same-sex couples to add children to the "family".

I am not sure I would want to encourage that. if the child turns out to be gay that the same sex couple adopts what difference does not make? That is then a completely separate issue was it caused by nature or nurture?

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I don't believe it is a tangent I believe it is inextricably linked see Dil Wickremasinghe of Newstalk fame.It will encourage some same sex couples to get children.

I think the child will suffer disadvantages in a same sex family as a father and mother fulfill natural specific roles.

I see. And what would those be?

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Ok I decided to answer your question do I think that same-sex parents wll harm our children?

Absolutely not unless you happened to be some mad deranged person regardless of sexual ordination.

What is my concern? I feel that it is a further break down of the traditonal family unit. Everyone should be given the chance to have a Mam and a Dad as their family where possible.

There are already ready plenty of broken families in the hetrosexual world. This has the potential to further complicate things. Although the referendum will not change adoption it will change the rights of the child because the parents are now married.
Will there be a fad of the gay community wanting to "create families" as a result of this referendum to be a family.
Will the child get bullied at school because he/she has two mammy's or daddy's?
Will this result in hetrosexual surrogates been "farmed" for payments by the gay community to produce children.

Will this be the final nail in the coffin for the traditional family and the al a carte family will be come the norm?

This in turn could lead to the acceptance of genetically modified babies where requests are put in and the baby produced. As the necessity for natural procreation decreases. (I know this is far fetched but that is what I see the future as in about 100 years).

I understand that concern but in a way that horse has bolted and the stable burnt down.

And I think perhaps there is a hint of rose tinted glasses nostalgia for a time that didn't really exist - it was an illusion.

Back when I was a young wan 'everyone' had a Mam and Dad... but... there was no divorce, there was no lone parents allowance, there was no where to go and no way out of a terrible marriage for anyone. And there were terrible marriages. Violence, alcoholism, addiction, poverty - til death.

Men had some chance of 'escape' but women.... oh the shame of being a 'deserted wife'.

Even when the marriage wasn't terrible.. when they were just, well.. over, there was no escape. No chance to move on and start again for anyone in Ireland. Couples forced to live a lie with separate rooms and tension pervading the family home. Your future filled with a loveless marriage.

Or you went to England and divorced - but you couldn't come home because oh... the shame... so you stayed in England. You lived in some Irish ghetto like Kilburn and you mourned for an Ireland that was forever denied to you. If you had children - they were English. Nothing wrong with that but it's strange when your children are foreigners.

Everyone had a mammy and daddy - except they didn't. We just didn't see the ones who didn't because they were locked away in orphanages or industrial schools condemned to spend their childhoods in institutions if they weren't sent off to America or Canada or Australia to be adopted by a nice (as determined by the Parish Priest) wealthy but above all Catholic couple or dead and buried in an unmarked grave.

The pervasive traditional family unit of my childhood was the result of social engineering where those who couldn't or wouldn't conform got the boat or got locked up.

Now - in the 10 years from 2002 - 2012 over 30% of births in Ireland every year have been to unmarried mothers. That 246, 829 children born where there was no marriage - for many of those there is no daddy present in any real way (or any way at all) in their lives. These unmarried mother's are not 'gymslip' mothers on the whole - they are women in their 20s and 30s and 40s. Mature women who don't need to get married like back in the day. They might get married, they might not. They might marry the father of their children or they might not. Some of them are lesbians who would like to get married but aren't allowed.

Stats here: http://www.treoir.ie/policy-statistics.php#2

Marriage has become a choice not a necessity and it is more honest for that.

In the same 10 year period marriages per year tend to be over 20,000 (except 2011 for some reason) - 233, 013 marriages so as an institution I don't think it is under threat

Stats here: http://www.cso.ie/en/statistics/birthsdeathsandmarriages/numberofbirthsdeathsandmarriages/

The rights of the child - traditionally children had few rights in Ireland but now, slowly that is being changed and their rights should not be tied into the marital status (or sexual orientation) of their parents. They deserves to have rights as human persons separate from their parents. The impact of a Yes on children raised by same-sex couples is that if their parents marry the parents - and by extension the child - will become a constitutionally recognised and protected family. A No means this protection afforded to the Family will be denied to the parents - and by extension any children.

Why would you think there would be a fad? Good lord - do you think gay people are so shallow? I know you didn't mean it to be but that's quite insulting actually.

Straight couples can get married at 18 - does that mean there will be a 'fad' for teenage pregnancies?

Besides, there is no reason such a 'fad' couldn't happen now - the Referendum has no baring on that. One doesn't become fertile by signing a marriage contract.

Bullied... have you seen what is said about red haired people??? Should red haired couples be stopped from having children in case those children are bullied in school? What about fat parents....? Mixed race parents???
Do we deal with bullies by giving in to them? When does that stop?

Marriage became 'a la carte' when divorce came in - you no longer had to eat what was put before you but were free to not only chose a different dish - you could chose a different restaurant.

Genetically modified babies... do you mean like how some people want to find the gay gene so they can 'fix' it? Or do you mean where there is genetically inherited illness that can be fixed? Or do you think only gays are so fecking shallow that they would want to 'design' a baby? - also a bit insulting by the way.

Same goes for surrogacy...

Gay people do not want to destroy marriage - they want to participate in it because they value it -they value it a hell of a lot more than some heterosexuals who have serial marriages - now that's a la carte.

I can't help but notice a certain contradiction at play in your post - one one hand you seem to believe gay people are deeply deeply shallow but at the same time you are holding us to a far higher standard than heterosexuals.

By the way...'Ok I decided to answer your question do I think that same-sex parents wll harm our children'... 'our' children?!?!?!?