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

Lt J.R. Bell · 12-05-2015 10:35PM

El Weirdo wrote: »

Here's one.

It's not called marriage. Can you justify that?

You and your pals are the ones trying to claim discrimination, let ye go now and prove yer case

So, you and your friends are refusing to answer the question put to you, but still will persist on making statements that you won't back up when questioned. Not surprising.

Marriage is justified as an exclusive institution, because, is it used to promote a certain family insititution, man and women. They and only they, unlike other family units, regardless of new developments in society, have a unique role. That in no way tries to make other family units inferior

There are many other forms of family units, they don't cry discrimination about Article 41 Constitution.

If you are not going to address the 160 differences, then, don't waste your time with this particular post. You have made your intentions clear. It is not like I am claiming that there are no legal differences. I suppose you and your pals would prefer to stick to challenging the usual religion guff..

Fr_Dougal · 12-05-2015 10:35PM

efb wrote: »

Canvassing again tonight quite split - Alot of support from younger people - hope they turn out to vote!

Young people generally don't vote, it's the pensioners that vote.

I reckon the Yes vote will win, but it will be a much closer vote than people expect.

StewartGriffin · 12-05-2015 10:39PM

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

Just wondering, have any celebrities come out on the 'No' side?

That dude from Argentina, very famous, gets a lot of cheering crowds, not Messi, likes to wear a white hat. Oh, what's his name again..?

efb wrote: »

Canvassing again tonight quite split - Alot of support from younger people - hope they turn out to vote!

Have you noticed a change in the last few days?

efb · 12-05-2015 10:40PM

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Young people generally don't vote, it's the pensioners that vote.

I reckon the Yes vote will win, but it will be a much closer vote than people expect.

It will be quite tight

efb · 12-05-2015 10:42PM

StewartGriffin wrote: »

That dude from Argentina, very famous, gets a lot of cheering crowds, not Messi, likes to wear a white hat. Oh, what's his name again..?

Have you noticed a change in the last few days?

No pretty much the same

StewartGriffin · 12-05-2015 10:44PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

And what have the Jews to do with this do you think? Care to clarify why you felt the need to question gay peoples involvement in the holocaust? Or do you just want to slur the travelling community again?

In a previous post you wrongly accused this guy of "Denying the Holocaust," a criminal offence in many countries. Maybe you should be the one coming up with an apology?

Lt J.R. Bell · 12-05-2015 10:46PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

And what have the Jews to do with this do you think? Care to clarify why you felt the need to question gay peoples involvement in the holocaust? Or do you just want to slur the travelling community again?

Same as Catholics, atheists, Protestants, Muslims, Jevohas etc who make up this State.

You want to go back and read what I said for start. No denial and, no question of gays involvement in the Holocaust. It was spelt out in posts subsequent to the one that you hit on. There is nothing to clarify. Nice try

So, by all means, proceed with your defamatory suggestions and intentional misinterpretation, which, you were already warned about.

On the other hand, I take it, you to are refusing to address the question questions put to you all. Imagine that. Cry about discrimination, argue about legislative differences (ie everyday stuff) but refuse to actually specify what it was that caused the real problems

Oh, and, there are some differences between a knacker and a traveller by the way. Not all travellers are knackers.less of the faux out rage

captbarnacles · 12-05-2015 10:48PM

efb wrote: »

It will be quite tight

Paddypower odds haven't budged in last week. No still 5-1.

(I agree with you btw - it will closer than they think)

Sheldons Brain · 12-05-2015 10:49PM

I'm a part of this society. For the most part I'm like everyone else. My reasons for wanting to marry are the same as most peoples, my relationship is like most good relationships.

Most people who marry, are partly motived by a wish to have children with their partner, or perhaps reflecting that they have children with their partner.
This is true for zero percent of same sex relationships, so there is a material difference in the two things.

efb · 12-05-2015 10:50PM

captbarnacles wrote: »

Paddypower odds haven't budged in last week. No still 5-1.

(I agree with you btw - it will closer than they think)

Only a big bet will move PP odds- it's a cheap stunt really

sunshine and showers · 12-05-2015 10:52PM

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

Most people who marry, are partly motived by a wish to have children with their partner, or perhaps reflecting that they have children with their partner.
This is true for zero percent of same sex relationships, so there is a material difference in the two things.

Not necessarily. Not all heterosexual couples marry to have children and not all homosexual couples don't want/don't have children.

There's more than one way to make a family.

Lt J.R. Bell · 12-05-2015 10:55PM

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

If he doesnt care about the substance of the issue, is he not better advised to vote Yes ?
Whether you care one way or another about SSM, it will affect how Ireland is seen internationally. If yes, then not much comment. But a No vote will make the country look backwards with its legislation and culture still heavily influenced by religion. Time to shake of that perception.

Whether Ireland votes yes or no, it is completely disingenuous to be worrying about what the rest of the world thinks.

You think big business, looking for tax grants etc are going to care if they can make a buck or three here

We should take no lecturing from other countries who themselves have their own issues.

Ireland had spent far too long worrying about what other countries think of us.

Ireland had all sorts of backward ideas as recent as 1995. Never stopped Germans coming over here to fish, or Americans coming over here to find their Roots. If we have better corporate tax and IFSC before the 1990s we might have had a decent economy before the 1990s. I don't thinK bans on abortion or divorce concerned too many people outside.

It's as bad as the IBEC tosh about X (any subject) being good for business

Whatever is to be decided, we should vote for what we want, not what other countries want (most of whom never put these matters to the people anyway due to their systems)

What legislation is still "heavily influenced by religion"

I might be very wrong here, and I know parts of Germany is religious, but, our Constitution is very similar as to what makes up the family (our Constitution was mote influenced by the Weimar Republic actually)

Not a NSA agent · 12-05-2015 10:59PM

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

Most people who marry, are partly motived by a wish to have children with their partner, or perhaps reflecting that they have children with their partner.
This is true for zero percent of same sex relationships, so there is a material difference in the two things.

A same sex couple can marry with the intention of raising a child. They would need help to get a child but the same is true for many opposite sex couples.

PopePalpatine · 12-05-2015 11:00PM

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

Most people who marry, are partly motived by a wish to have children with their partner, or perhaps reflecting that they have children with their partner.
This is true for zero percent of same sex relationships, so there is a material difference in the two things.

Oh boy, it's Mr Misnomer.

Sheldons Brain · 12-05-2015 11:03PM

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Oh boy, it's Mr Misnomer.

Does my name offend, Your Holiness?

El Weirdo · 12-05-2015 11:04PM

Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »

Marriage is justified as an exclusive institution, because, is it used to promote a certain family insititution, man and women. They and only they, unlike other family units, regardless of new developments in society, have a unique role. That in no way tries to make other family units inferior

But why shouldn't we allow homosexual couples to get married? What is it that makes them less deserving of marriage?

Lt J.R. Bell · 12-05-2015 11:04PM

MrWalsh wrote: »

By the looks of things there are a number of them posting on this site.

Who would that be so,?

You are so sure of yourself that most of the No voters are in anyway connected with Iona or the Catholic Church? Wow, you may be in for a surprise.

So, which of ye lads are being backed by various LGB groups to post up? See how ridiculous your statement is?

sunshine and showers · 12-05-2015 11:06PM

Lt J.R. Bell wrote: »

Who would that be so,?

You are so sure of yourself that most of the No voters are in anyway connected with Iona or the Catholic Church? Wow, you may be in for a surprise.

So, which of ye lads are being backed by various LGB groups to post up? See how ridiculous your statement is?

It's LGBT. Thanks.

PopePalpatine · 12-05-2015 11:06PM

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

Does my name offend, Your Holiness?

I'm going to guess you named yourself after Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory. I'm yet to read anything from you that could be described as intelligent, just the same old "marriage is for making babies, la-la-la-la, I can't hear you!"

Lt J.R. Bell · 12-05-2015 11:07PM

El Weirdo wrote: »

But why shouldn't we allow homosexual couples to get married? What is it that makes them less deserving of marriage?

They do not play the same role as a majority of the married hetrosexual couple. (or even a hetro sexual non married group)

Get rid of the word marriage in the Constitution, and give Article 41 a more inclusive meaning to include other family units that are just as "deserving", then the opposition would only be with the church boys. Until then, let the legislators continue improving the Civil Partnership Act in a way that it won't affect other groups ie discriminate against eg De facto groups

Lt J.R. Bell · 12-05-2015 11:12PM

Not a NSA agent wrote: »

A same sex couple can marry with the intention of raising a child. They would need help to get a child but the same is true for many opposite sex couples.

Do all opposite sex couples need help in the same manner as same sex couples?

G_R · 12-05-2015 11:29PM

Mod:

PopePalestine, Sheldons Brain

Quit the bickering and petty name calling. Ye're not children

Sheldons Brain · 12-05-2015 11:31PM

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I'm going to guess you named yourself after Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory.

Right, first time.

I'm yet to read anything from you that could be described as intelligent,

Perhaps it exceeds your understanding. The character I am named after has that problem a lot too.

just the same old "marriage is for making babies, la-la-la-la, I can't hear you!"

Well some posters seem not to have noticed. This is indeed an important part of marriage and why No is the only responsible vote in this referendum.

sunshine and showers · 12-05-2015 11:33PM

Procreation is an important part of the continuation of the human race.

It is not an important part of marriage.

G_R · 12-05-2015 11:33PM

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

Perhaps it exceeds your understanding. The character I am named after has that problem a lot too.

/clears throat

Grand_Rajnah wrote: »

Mod:

PopePalestine, Sheldons Brain

Quit the bickering and petty name calling. Ye're not children

Sonics2k · 12-05-2015 11:35PM

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

Right, first time.

Perhaps it exceeds your understanding. The character I am named after has that problem a lot too.

Well some posters seem not to have noticed. This is indeed an important part of marriage and why No is the only responsible vote in this referendum.

My parents are two women, they raised me exactly the same as my cousins straight parents. Your opinion is, frankly and as politely as possible, wrong.

This referendum does not change anything in terms of LGBT people having and raising children, but will give them the same rights of inheritence and tax that I have with my partner and my children.

Now, say it with me. "This referendum has nothing to do with gay people raising children, because they already can and do."

Marriage, as defined by our State, does -not- mean you have to have children, or even plan on it in the future. My best friend has been married for some 6 years now, and has no intention of having children.

efb · 12-05-2015 11:39PM

Civil Partnership v Marriage

Pherekydes · 12-05-2015 11:46PM

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Easy to generalise when you know your own flock so well.

Generalisations are always wrong.

Except that one.

frostyjacks · 12-05-2015 11:53PM

Sonics2k wrote: »

My parents are two women, they raised me exactly the same as my cousins straight parents. Your opinion is, frankly and as politely as possible, wrong.

Your parents are two women? How did that happen? Aren't you forgetting about someone?

eviltwin · 12-05-2015 11:55PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

Your parents are two women? How did that happen? Aren't you forgetting about someone?

Your parents aren't just the people who contributed to your DNA. Your parents are the people who raise you.

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

Comments