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

endacl · 14-05-2015 12:28PM

Vote yes or I'll beat you up and take your lunch money: Bullying.

That point you made there is invalid. Please respond with a valid point: Not bullying.

iDave · 14-05-2015 12:29PM

Never felt so strongly about a referendum and I'm not even a member of the LGBT community.

For No voters I wont 'bully' you but I urge you to reconsider.

arayess · 14-05-2015 12:32PM

iDave wrote: »

Never felt so strongly about a referendum and I'm not even a member of the LGBT community.

For No voters I wont 'bully' you but I urge you to reconsider.

should have been more proactive and gotten Bono to shut his hole then.

Merry Prankster · 14-05-2015 12:34PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

You are, if you think that a no vote = hate for you. There's a persecution complex going on with the yes side which I don't feel they should be doing to themselves, it's not healthy for the mind and it's not reality.
Even if the vote goes 60/40 in your favor that means on your thinking that every 4 out of 10 people you pass in the street hates you. Where's the victory in that?

Persecution complex? Are you kidding me? The no side aim to preclude a whole section of society from having a constitutional right to marriage based purely on their sexual preference. Gays have every right to feel persecuted.

And the whole 'denying children the right to a mother and father' is a whole load of specious nonsense. The individual character of the parents is the most important factor, not gender. Even if one agrees that in an 'ideal world' a mother and father would be preferable, that doesn't automatically mean that gays are unsuitable for parenthood.

The 'denying children the right to a mother and father' argument is just a cowardly way of saying that you believe that gays are unsuitable as parents. Quite how anyone can determine someone's suitability for parenthood without meeting them, based purely on their sexual preference, is beyond me.

Bannasidhe · 14-05-2015 12:34PM

arayess wrote: »

should have been more proactive and gotten Bono to shut his hole then.

drunkmonkey · 14-05-2015 12:34PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

do you not think it would not feel like a kick in the teeth to gay people that the majority of their countrymen and women felt they weren't deserving of that privilege. I'd imagine you wouldn't be feeling the love from your fellow man in that instance.

Either way your going to have a side that isn't giving it seal of approval, whether that's 40%/50%60% even a win is a loss in a way as it actually puts a figure on the amount of like/dislike for the side.
Your going from a situation where nobody is judging you to a place where there's a quantifiable figure on the dislike/hate. I don't think outside a general election that countrymen have been pitted against each other like this if it simply boils down to do you believe gays are equal yes/no. No winners here the more I think about it.

Hammer Archer · 14-05-2015 12:37PM

endacl wrote: »

That point you made there is invalid. Please respond with a valid point

STOP SILENCING ME!!!!

MrWalsh · 14-05-2015 12:39PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Either way your going to have a side that isn't giving it seal of approval, whether that's 40%/50%60% even a win is a loss in a way as it actually puts a figure on the amount of like/dislike for the side.
Your going from a situation where nobody is judging you to a place where there's a quantifiable figure on the dislike/hate. I don't think outside a general election that countrymen have been pitted against each other like this if it simply boils down to do you believe gays are equal yes/no. No winners here the more I think about it.

Nope - the last divorce referendum was quite equally divided.

Afterwards those who had voted no did not hate on divorced people - in fact, they disappeared back into the woodwork and stopped trying to enforce their own backward ideas on the rest of us. Society didnt fall apart.

The "winner" here will only occur if a Yes vote goes through. Otherwise we continue to have legal discrimination.

Shrap · 14-05-2015 12:40PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Either way your going to have a side that isn't giving it seal of approval, whether that's 40%/50%60% even a win is a loss in a way as it actually puts a figure on the amount of like/dislike for the side.
Your going from a situation where nobody is judging you to a place where there's a quantifiable figure on the dislike/hate. I don't think outside a general election that countrymen have been pitted against each other like this if it simply boils down to do you believe gays are equal yes/no. No winners here the more I think about it.

While I get what you're saying, a yes vote by no matter how slim a margin would put the democratic seal of approval on gay people being equal to hetero people. Once equality in law is there, then over time (possibly generations) equality will become a given and LGBT folk can grow up knowing that their country considers them to have every right to be who they are. At present, that is not the case.

kunst nugget · 14-05-2015 12:41PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Either way your going to have a side that isn't giving it seal of approval, whether that's 40%/50%60% even a win is a loss in a way as it actually puts a figure on the amount of like/dislike for the side.
Your going from a situation where nobody is judging you to a place where there's a quantifiable figure on the dislike/hate. I don't think outside a general election that countrymen have been pitted against each other like this if it simply boils down to do you believe gays are equal yes/no. No winners here the more I think about it.

Before this referendum nobody judged gay people? Nonsense…

There's been several referendum that have dealt with social issues, including divorce and right to life - this isn't the first issue that has been contentious and it definitely isn't going to be the last. It isn't pretty but it's necessary.

floggg · 14-05-2015 12:43PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Article 18 of the UN universal declaration of Human Rights:
Article 18.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

You want this right denied.

You actually don't understand freedom of speech or freedom of religion.

You are free to say and believe what you want - and (subject to the law) nobody is entitled to restrain you from holding and/or expressing any belief you want.

However the fact that you are free to say and believe what you want doesn't mean your views have to be listened to, respected, validated or accepted.

Just as you have a right to express beliefs and opinions, those with opposing views have a right to express their own. That of course includes opinions on your opinions.

The expression of a rebuttal, or a commentary on your stated views is not an attack on your right to hold or express them. Its is disagreement and an exercise of free speech.

If the "Je suit Charlie" movement thought us anything it's that the right to criticise, insult or attack others religious views is an important part of free speech.

It is therefore rather disingenuous of you to try and now invoke freedom on conscience and freedom of religion to try and prevent any criticism of your stated views and try and set them aside as untouchable or beyond reproach.

drunkmonkey · 14-05-2015 12:44PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

Before this referendum nobody judged gay people? Nonsense…

They were never asked to judge before, they might have personally but they didn't get to vote on it.

Kiwi in IE · 14-05-2015 12:44PM

traprunner wrote: »

That should probably be a referendum. Allow change when it discriminates.

I'd like a referendum of rewriting the whole constitution!

SireOfSeth · 14-05-2015 12:44PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Either way your going to have a side that isn't giving it seal of approval, whether that's 40%/50%60% even a win is a loss in a way as it actually puts a figure on the amount of like/dislike for the side.
Your going from a situation where nobody is judging you to a place where there's a quantifiable figure on the dislike/hate. I don't think outside a general election that countrymen have been pitted against each other like this if it simply boils down to do you believe gays are equal yes/no. No winners here the more I think about it.

What planet are you on?

Bannasidhe · 14-05-2015 12:48PM

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I'd like a referendum of rewriting the whole constitution!

Or tweak the 1922 Constitution to update it (what with us being a 'republic' now) and bring that back.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1922/en/act/pub/0001/print.html

kunst nugget · 14-05-2015 12:50PM

MrWalsh wrote: »

Nope - the last divorce referendum was quite equally divided.

Afterwards those who had voted no did not hate on divorced people - in fact, they disappeared back into the woodwork and stopped trying to enforce their own backward ideas on the rest of us. Society didnt fall apart.

The "winner" here will only occur if a Yes vote goes through. Otherwise we continue to have legal discrimination.

The upshot is that if you tried to get rid of divorce now there would be uproar. People can be resistant to change initially but if the laws get passed, even by slimmest majority as in the divorce referendum, people become much more accepting of it over the years.

StewartGriffin · 14-05-2015 12:50PM

He was responding to point made by a poster that every No vote is a vote for Iona and a personal insult to Gay people.

Therefore of the vote passes by a huge majority but 40,000 people vote no, by that posters flawed logic, that's still 40,000 "fellow countrymen" who hate you guys.

floggg · 14-05-2015 12:53PM

RobertKK wrote: »

The problem is you are associating a no vote as being somehow being against gay people. ok it will be for some, but for a lot it isn't.
I don't think Paddy Manning is against gay people or Keith Mills for that matter. They are just going with what they believe.
On the 22nd I am voting number 1 for Paddy McKee an openly gay man who is voting yes, but I'm voting no in both of the other polls.
I vote for what I believe, it is not about being against something. We all have to live with ourselves, and for the mind doing what you believe is the best way to treat life.
I had a very strong Catholic upbringing, it is a part of whom I am. Was never told to hate anyone, but to be nice to other people. Marriage was always then a man/woman thing. I can't help it that is what I believe, same sex marriage didn't exist when I was younger.
I can't help I am set in my ways, change is hard and not something that can be done overnight.
The best a parent can do is bring up their child not to hate anyone and whatever their position on marriage to show that child love, because that is what the child needs and if they are gay, whether a yes or no voter, it should be a 'so what, it changes nothing, I still love you'.

You might not view it as a vote against gay people.

But it is a vote which shows that you view our rights as secondary to your beliefs.

You say you are voting No because that's how marriage always was. But that doesn't mean it should be.

You are voting no to maintain tradition for traditions sake (unless you have another undeclared reason). You haven't pointed to any objective benefit to that - just that it's your belief and that's how it is.

You see that as more important to you than my right to be an equal citizen - to have the same rights and opportunities as others.

It tells me you don't see the rights of gay people as that big a deal. You can't empathise with us or have regard for our position. You would prefer to keep the status quo just for the sake of it, even knowing that it causes us hurt to do so. (and believe me, a No vote will hurt like nothing I have ever felt before).

So will you may not have animosity towards us, it certainly doesn't feel like you have any love either.

That_Guy · 14-05-2015 12:55PM

Been thinking more about this referendum and now that it's so close, imagine having to try and gain votes to be treated equally.

It's pretty upsetting and disturbing when you think about it.

Would you go to a voting station and vote whether you believe those with a disability should be treated differently and are deemed unequal?

Doubtful.

A few weeks back I would have taken the stance that those voting no should be free to do so without judgement but I just can't for the life of me think why anybody would vote no.

I've seen a few reasons from people such as:

"Voting No because a Yes vote is being shoved into my face everywhere"
"Sure they have civil partnership. What's the difference?"
"It's unfair on the kids"

All reasons that are incredibly narrow minded and unrational thinking.

I've lost a lot of respect for friends of mine over this thing and I'm not even gay myself.

If their argument was voting no was because they're a homophobe I'd probably have a teeny-tiny bit of respect for being honest instead of hiding behind bullshít "arguments".

I'd feel very uncomfortable living in a country that can't show an ounce of compassion to same sex couples who are deemed as unequal citizens.

Kiwi in IE · 14-05-2015 12:56PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

The upshot is that if you tried to get rid of divorce now there would be uproar. People can be resistant to change initially but if the laws get passed, even by slimmest majority as in the divorce referendum, people become much more accepting of it over the years.

I was using this as an analogy yesterday when trying to talk to a particularly religiously entrenched no voter. She voted no to divorce, however she is delighted her son was able to divorce the person he was married to, but if there was another divorce referendum tomorrow she would still vote no

kunst nugget · 14-05-2015 12:57PM

StewartGriffin wrote: »

He was responding to point made by a poster that every No vote is a vote for Iona and a personal insult to Gay people.

Therefore of the vote passes by a huge majority but 40,000 people vote no, by that posters flawed logic, that's still 40,000 "fellow countrymen" who hate you guys.

But if there's a majority vote in favour of Yes, gay people will know there's a majority of people that cared enough to vote in favour of giving them the same ability to marry as heterosexuals have. I'm sure most would be happy to concentrate on the positive than focus on the negative.

SireOfSeth · 14-05-2015 12:58PM

RobertKK wrote: »

The problem is you are associating a no vote as being somehow being against gay people. ok it will be for some, but for a lot it isn't.
I don't think Paddy Manning is against gay people or Keith Mills for that matter. They are just going with what they believe.
On the 22nd I am voting number 1 for Paddy McKee an openly gay man who is voting yes, but I'm voting no in both of the other polls.
I vote for what I believe, it is not about being against something. We all have to live with ourselves, and for the mind doing what you believe is the best way to treat life.
I had a very strong Catholic upbringing, it is a part of whom I am. Was never told to hate anyone, but to be nice to other people. Marriage was always then a man/woman thing. I can't help it that is what I believe, same sex marriage didn't exist when I was younger.
I can't help I am set in my ways, change is hard and not something that can be done overnight.
The best a parent can do is bring up their child not to hate anyone and whatever their position on marriage to show that child love, because that is what the child needs and if they are gay, whether a yes or no voter, it should be a 'so what, it changes nothing, I still love you'.

Was this also back in the day when a husband could rape his wife? Are you unhappy that society (and the law) has progressed? Should it not progress further as society evolves?

kunst nugget · 14-05-2015 12:59PM

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I was using this as an analogy yesterday when trying to talk to a particularly religiously entrenched no voter. She voted no to divorce, however she is delighted her son was able to divorce the person he was married to, but if there was another divorce referendum tomorrow she would still vote no

Tbf, her son was a special case. That wife of his was an awful burden. I heard she was from a rough family. Never did a tap around the house and let herself go something rotten.

The rest of the people looking for divorce are wife swapping sodomites so I can understand her stance.

Roger_007 · 14-05-2015 01:00PM

I don't see what the big attraction of marriage is. I have been married and divorced. My marriage broke up before the divorce referendum was passed. So I was in a legal limbo for a long time. I eventually got divorced when it became possible to do so. It was a tortuous process which I would never like to repeat.
There is no way I'd ever get married again even though I'm in a long term relationship.
Civil Partnership is a much better option. If things go wrong in a relationship, as they often do, the resolution is so much simpler and less less painful and less costly with Civil Partnership than with marriage.
My advice would be, whether you are gay or straight, is: Don't get married.

jobbridge4life · 14-05-2015 01:01PM

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Either way your going to have a side that isn't giving it seal of approval, whether that's 40%/50%60% even a win is a loss in a way as it actually puts a figure on the amount of like/dislike for the side.
Your going from a situation where nobody is judging you to a place where there's a quantifiable figure on the dislike/hate. I don't think outside a general election that countrymen have been pitted against each other like this if it simply boils down to do you believe gays are equal yes/no. No winners here the more I think about it.

The logic of this post is 'wouldn't it have been better that you uppity gays realised your place and didn't go provoking people by asking to be treated the same'

Bannasidhe · 14-05-2015 01:01PM

StewartGriffin wrote: »

He was responding to point made by a poster that every No vote is a vote for Iona and a personal insult to Gay people.

Therefore of the vote passes by a huge majority but 40,000 people vote no, by that posters flawed logic, that's still 40,000 "fellow countrymen" who hate you guys.

The poster who said that (me) was talking about how people in the Gay Community are feeling right now.

However, I stand by my comment - a No vote is to all intents and purposes a vote in support of Iona (and their tactics ) who will have no problem claiming it as such.

The crux is what is the level of 'support' Iona will be claiming?

If the Referendum fails Iona will take that as validation as they, and their off shoots, are very much the voice of the No Campaign- so the question becomes... who will they target next?

Try and repeal the Children and Family Relationship Act so the small gains therein for unmarried fathers will begone? They have already said they want to do that...

Roll back on the legislation (finally) introduced after the X Referendum? They never gave up trying to do that...

Single parents - after all - 'every child needs a mother and father'?

Hyzepher · 14-05-2015 01:02PM

Roger_007 wrote: »

My advice would be, whether you are gay or straight, is: Don't get married.

At the moment not everyone has that choice

jobbridge4life · 14-05-2015 01:02PM

Roger_007 wrote: »

I don't see what the big attraction of marriage is. I have been married and divorced. My marriage broke up before the divorce referendum was passed. So I was in a legal limbo for a long time. I eventually got divorced when it became possible to do so. It was a tortuous process which I would never like to repeat.
There is no way I'd ever get married again even though I'm in a long term relationship.
Civil Partnership is a much better option. If things go wrong in a relationship, as they often do, the resolution is so much simpler and less less painful and less costly with Civil Partnership than with marriage.
My advice would be, whether you are gay or straight, is: Don't get married.

Cool beans but I'd still like to be able to make that choice for myself okay? Vote yes.

seamus · 14-05-2015 01:03PM

RobertKK wrote: »

The problem is you are associating a no vote as being somehow being against gay people. ok it will be for some, but for a lot it isn't.
I don't think Paddy Manning is against gay people or Keith Mills for that matter. They are just going with what they believe.

The idea that voting "No" cannot be anti-gay because some gay people are voting "No" is a logical fallacy.

There are many examples throughout recorded history of individuals fighting against their own personal good. Be that black men fighting with the anti-abolitionists in the US civil war or women campaigning against universal suffrage, there is no rule that says that one cannot be prejudiced against oneself. The very heart of oppression is in convincing oppressed people that they are deserving of that oppression.

Paddy Manning is on the record as admitting that he believes gay couples should not be parents. Despite being a gay man himself, he believes that gay people are inferior.

Therefore Paddy Manning is against gay people. Not completely, but in some way. Despite what he may or may not have done in the past and the rights he fought for in the past, he still believes that as a gay man, he is inferior to a heterosexual man.
For a man who has struggled so long and bravely against gay oppression, to get so close to the end and give up and believe the lies he's been told about himself, is just sad.

StewartGriffin · 14-05-2015 01:03PM

That_Guy wrote: »

I'd feel very uncomfortable living in a country that can't show an ounce of compassion to same sex couples who are deemed as unequal citizens.

This has come up a lot in the past few pages. Even if the vote is No on May 22, take a look around the Global politics and you will find Ireland is close to the top on gay rights.

If people were to leave, where would you go?

Remember that just because a country has introduced a measure like Gay Marriage, it is unlikely to have been voted on by it's people, and so does not correlate with a lower rate of homophobia amongst the general population.

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

Comments