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

Bannasidhe · 11-05-2015 06:10PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well, personal taste and all that. By all means dress whatever way he wants, but in just the same way as I'd say a girl who puts on her make-up with a trowel looks ridiculous, so too does a man who dresses up like a conservative middle aged woman, who puts her make-up on with a trowel.

Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Panti spoke for anyone who has ever felt the urge to check themselves and said it like it is.

RobertKK · 11-05-2015 06:11PM

eviltwin wrote: »

Says it all really. They know themselves how wrong they are.

No, they can't be bothered having to defend themselves.

Like having the Jehovah Witnesses visit, you say nothing and just pass them off, as it is less hassle.

RobertKK · 11-05-2015 06:13PM

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

A win is a win but won't be recognised in most countries.

frostyjacks · 11-05-2015 06:17PM

It's still 10/1 on with Paddy Power, that's about as nailed on certainty as you can get. Dubs are 6/1 on to win Leinster in comparison.

A few celebrity endorsements wouldn't go amiss on the Yes side, seeing as how Enda isn't bothered. All I've seen so far is the guy off Westlife and Aiden Gillen. Where's everyone else?

Santa Cruz · 11-05-2015 06:17PM

RobertKK wrote: »

A win is a win but won't be recognised in most countries.

Will they change the marriage vow to say
"With this rim I thee wed"

kunst nugget · 11-05-2015 06:17PM

RobertKK wrote: »

A win is a win but won't be recognised in most countries.

Tbf, I only care about it being recognised in this country at the moment.

jobbridge4life · 11-05-2015 06:21PM

RobertKK wrote: »

A win is a win but won't be recognised in most countries.

And your point is?

Guy:Incognito · 11-05-2015 06:21PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

It's still 10/1 on with Paddy Power, that's about as nailed on certainty as you can get. Dubs are 6/1 on to win Leinster in comparison.

A few celebrity endorsements wouldn't go amiss on the Yes side, seeing as how Enda isn't bothered. All I've seen so far is the guy off Westlife and Aiden Gillen. Where's everyone else?

This just popped up on my timeline.

Seriousness of the subject matter aside, I couldnt help laugh as I was reading it cos all I could hear was Keanes voice

Robbie Keane wrote:

7 mins ·
Although I am currently working and living outside of the country, I have been following the commentary and debate on the upcoming Referendum on same-sex marriage.
While, unfortunately, I will not be home to vote on 22nd May, I am strongly supporting a ‘YES’ vote.
Most of us will have friends or family who, up to now, have been denied to right to marry their loved ones or have been made to feel excluded because of their sexuality. To me, this feels wrong.
I am a very proud Irishman and it is important to me that our country does, and is seen to, treat all of its’ citizens on an equal footing.
As a sportsman, fairness is key.
My own personal view is that changing our Constitution on this issue is the right decision as it will give people the choice and opportunity to marry, irrespective of the fact that they may wish to marry someone of the same gender.
Marriage equality is an easy answer for me and will show the world that Ireland is a compassionate country that recognises and accepts diversity, and most importantly treats its’ citizens equally.
The rules of the game should be the same for all, no matter what team is right for you.
Robbie Keane – 6th May 2015

eviltwin · 11-05-2015 06:21PM

RobertKK wrote: »

A win is a win but won't be recognised in most countries.

So?

Ave Sodalis · 11-05-2015 06:23PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

A few celebrity endorsements wouldn't go amiss on the Yes side, seeing as how Enda isn't bothered. All I've seen so far is the guy off Westlife and Aiden Gillen. Where's everyone else?

Snow Patrol have given the Yes side permission to use their song "Just say Yes" for the campaign, to show their support. A few celebs have come out to support it

B_Wayne · 11-05-2015 06:24PM

RobertKK wrote: »

A win is a win but won't be recognised in most countries.

We're likely to see DOMA struck down in the US in the coming months and I'm happy to be part of one of the first nations to vote in favour of equality on the matter.

Dimithy · 11-05-2015 06:28PM

smash wrote: »

So many of the no side won't admit to the fact over fear of how they'll be branded.

Yes, hopefully once this all blows over they will be able to come out of the NO closet and declare their choice without fear of discrimination, without having to listen to people tell them they are unfit to raise children or that there is something wrong with them.

We will finally be able to say that its not ok to disagree discriminate against someone just because of their skin colour sexuality publicly voiced opinions.

frostyjacks · 11-05-2015 06:30PM

sup_dude wrote: »

Snow Patrol have given the Yes side permission to use their song "Just say Yes" for the campaign, to show their support. A few celebs have come out to support it

Came out of the closet? Who?

Ave Sodalis · 11-05-2015 06:32PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

Came out of the closet? Who?

Har har :P

RobertKK · 11-05-2015 06:35PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

And your point is?

You read the point, others on the yes side read the point and didn't act stupid.
That is what I get from your reply.

Huntergonzo · 11-05-2015 06:39PM

I honestly don't understand what No voters are concerned about, they don't like being called homophobic so let's park that one but also I don't buy for one second the red herring of children in this debate so genuinely what is the worry if Yes wins?

I mean throughout history there was opposition to the abolition of slavery, opposition to women getting the vote, opposition to divorce in this country etc etc and incredibly the 1st referendum even failed. Ok I understand that change can be scary but when we look back at those things now we laugh that they were ever opposed and when they passed nothing happened accept more people had more rights, that's all, the sky didn't fall in, the planet didn't explode etc etc nothing, so please do your bit and vote for same sex marriage, vote Yes.

One eyed Jack · 11-05-2015 06:42PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

You must hang around with some pretty wild looking conservative middle aged women…

Well, normally I wouldn't comment at all on someone's appearance, but when they make their living based on how they choose to present themselves to the public, their appearance matters every bit as much as their message if they want people to take them seriously, and I have no problem admitting I make judgements about people based on their appearance and their behaviour.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Panti spoke for anyone who has ever felt the urge to check themselves and said it like it is.

I'll respectfully agree to differ on that one tbh. Even if I got past the bad make-up job and the whole lack of any dress sense, even if I got past the whole shudder inducing stage name, Panti Bliss wasn't speaking for me for one, and I can't begin to tell you how many times I've had to "check myself" in company. I've never felt oppressed by it though, because I understand that everyone is self-conscious about themselves at some level. We wouldn't be self-conscious without being self-aware, and I have never felt "oppressed" to be aware of how I am perceived by other people.

Fine line between a person checking themselves and coming off like a narcissist who thinks the world should revolve around them.

floggg · 11-05-2015 06:42PM

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Surrogacy has nothing to do the SSM ref according the Irish Times:
http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/why-surrogacy-has-nothing-to-do-with-same-sex-marriage-1.2189717

But then this leads to ask the question what is the situation where a SS female couple have a baby?
For example
http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/dil-wickremasinghe-pregnant-online-bullying-1983965-Mar2015/ (She was the victim of bullying in this article I do not agree with the harrasment she recieved by the way)

What if following the passing of the SSM ref Dil Wickremasinghe decides to marry her partner?

What are the legal implications for the child? What if the father turns up looking for his say? Or vice versa where there are two male partners what rights will the surrogate mother have if they the SS couple marry?

I will admit that the picture of Dil Wickremasinghe pregnant with her female partner shocked me.

But if this is the way of the future following (a likely yes vote) in the SSM ref what will it mean for a SSM couple and the child in this situation.

I know it has been said that surrogacy has nothing to with the same sex marriage ref. But surely there are implications if a SS couple get married in this situation? Sucession rights and god knows what else?

This is what I meant by surrogacy minefield in a previous post. Surrogacy will have something to with the SSM ref if a SS couple who have availed of surrogacy get married legally following the referendum.

No - it won't.

Surrogacy will have to be legislated for separately - and whatever rules they develop will be of general application and not dependant on marital status.

The same issue will fall to be determined whether the people involved are single, married or civil partnered (if still around).

The same issues already present themselves in the context of heterosexual relationships - and the issue is to be resolved no matter how the referendum goes.

You are assuming a problem into being without clearly giving it any thought. The issue has zero relevance to the vote - as has been confirmed by the Law Society, the Ministers for Justice and Health and others.

Bannasidhe · 11-05-2015 06:43PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well, normally I wouldn't comment at all on someone's appearance, but when they make their living based on how they choose to present themselves to the public, their appearance matters every bit as much as their message if they want people to take them seriously, and I have no problem admitting I make judgements about people based on their appearance and their behaviour.

I'll respectfully agree to differ on that one tbh. Even if I got past the bad make-up job and the whole lack of any dress sense, even if I got past the whole shudder inducing stage name, Panti Bliss wasn't speaking for me for one, and I can't begin to tell you how many times I've had to "check myself" in company. I've never felt oppressed by it though, because I understand that everyone is self-conscious about themselves at some level. We wouldn't be self-conscious without being self-aware, and I have never felt "oppressed" to be aware of how I am perceived by other people.

Fine line between a person checking themselves and coming off like a narcissist who thinks the world should revolve around them.

Have to check yourself often do you?

RobertKK · 11-05-2015 06:45PM

Huntergonzo wrote: »

I honestly don't understand what No voters are concerned about, they don't like being called homophobic so let's park that one but also I don't buy for one second the red herring of children in this debate so genuinely what is the worry if Yes wins?

I mean throughout history there was opposition to the abolition of slavery, opposition to women getting the vote, opposition to divorce in this country etc etc and incredibly the 1st referendum even failed. Ok I understand that change can be scary but when we look back at those things now we laugh that they were ever opposed and when they passed nothing happened accept more people had more rights, that's all, the sky didn't fall in, the planet didn't explode etc etc nothing, so please do your bit and vote for same sex marriage, vote Yes.

Most no voters just believe marriage is a man/woman thing and nothing to do with sexuality or equality.
They aren't voting no to equality or against people, they are voting for what they believe marriage to be.
Then others view marriage as the basis for starting a family together.

The thing is no voters won't believe in same sex marriage whatever the vote, that will not change how they view marriage.

floggg · 11-05-2015 06:47PM

B_Wayne wrote: »

We're likely to see DOMA struck down in the US in the coming months and I'm happy to be part of one of the first nations to vote in favour of equality on the matter.

DOMA is dead. Full marriage equality is before the Supreme Court now.

traprunner · 11-05-2015 06:48PM

surrogacy is not an issue relating to this referendum. It is a much bigger issue that affects both straight and gay couples. For those who forget what the implications of this referendum are here is what the independent Referendum Commission state.

I'm quite certain that a few here don't want to read this.

Not a NSA agent · 11-05-2015 06:49PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Most no voters just believe marriage is a man/woman thing and nothing to do with sexuality or equality.
They aren't voting no to equality or against people, they are voting for what they believe marriage to be.
Then others view marriage as the basis for starting a family together.

The thing is no voters won't believe in same sex marriage whatever the vote, that will not change how they view marriage.

They dont have to believe. If they wont consider it marriage then there is no problem. Only the state matters when it comes to recognising marriage.

eviltwin · 11-05-2015 06:50PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Most no voters just believe marriage is a man/woman thing and nothing to do with sexuality or equality.
They aren't voting no to equality or against people, they are voting for what they believe marriage to be.
Then others view marriage as the basis for starting a family together.

The thing is no voters won't believe in same sex marriage whatever the vote, that will not change how they view marriage.

Says a lot about them that they will refuse to acknowledge a legal marriage.

gormdubhgorm · 11-05-2015 06:51PM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well, normally I wouldn't comment at all on someone's appearance, but when they make their living based on how they choose to present themselves to the public, their appearance matters every bit as much as their message if they want people to take them seriously, and I have no problem admitting I make judgements about people based on their appearance and their behaviour.

I'll respectfully agree to differ on that one tbh. Even if I got past the bad make-up job and the whole lack of any dress sense, even if I got past the whole shudder inducing stage name, Panti Bliss wasn't speaking for me for one, and I can't begin to tell you how many times I've had to "check myself" in company. I've never felt oppressed by it though, because I understand that everyone is self-conscious about themselves at some level. We wouldn't be self-conscious without being self-aware, and I have never felt "oppressed" to be aware of how I am perceived by other people.

Fine line between a person checking themselves and coming off like a narcissist who thinks the world should revolve around them.

This is very well put. But I would not have been able to say this without the usual ridicule from some sections on this site. Personally out of the "telly gay fellas" I think the the likes of Donal Og Cusack there is a fella that talks sense and the general population would listen to.No histrionics.

jobbridge4life · 11-05-2015 06:53PM

RobertKK wrote: »

You read the point, others on the yes side read the point and didn't act stupid.
That is what I get from your reply.

What? Forgive me if I am stupid but I seriously don't understand the relevance of what other countries would recognize. Can you please explain?

Huntergonzo · 11-05-2015 06:54PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Most no voters just believe marriage is a man/woman thing and nothing to do with sexuality or equality.
They aren't voting no to equality or against people, they are voting for what they believe marriage to be.
Then others view marriage as the basis for starting a family together.

The thing is no voters won't believe in same sex marriage whatever the vote, that will not change how they view marriage.

Well look everybody is entitled to their opinion of course, but I would simply say to those who see marriage as strictly between a man and a women that we humans invented marriage so we can define it and redefine it as we wish, it isn't an unbreakable law of physics that can't be changed.

As for No voters not recognizing a potential Yes win well I can't imagine homosexual people will be too bothered by that, I mean if the majority votes yes that means they have the backing of the majority and the state will recognize their marriage also, anything after that shouldn't really matter.

RobertKK · 11-05-2015 06:54PM

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

They dont have to believe. If they wont consider it marriage then there is no problem. Only the state matters when it comes to recognising marriage.

The state are not the only ones involved in marriage, the state only matters for civil marriage.

Ave Sodalis · 11-05-2015 06:59PM

RobertKK wrote: »

The state are not the only ones involved in marriage, the state only matters for civil marriage.

Which this referendum is about. Also, a religious marriage is not recognised legally with the civil part.

smash · 11-05-2015 07:01PM

Got home to find my first bit of propoganda from Iona in my letter box... I needed more toilet paper though!

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

Comments