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

K4t · 14-05-2015 01:45PM

The worst part for me is the resulting claims of democracy prevailing by Iona and so on that will ensue if it's a no vote. It will be democracy in action alright, but the very worst part of democracy. And no, that's not just because I disagree with the outcome no voters in this thread. The outcome will blatantly continue on the discrimination and inequality inherent in our marriage laws. Oh well, thankfully it will most likely be a yes vote.

Tenz · 14-05-2015 01:45PM

endacl wrote: »

Yes I would. A club that excludes is still an exclusive club. Fair enough in golf (if a bit sad), but unacceptable in society.

I'd be in favour of extending the option of civil partnership to straight couples, btw.

So is it fair to say that it's about feeling accepted by society? And nothing other than it being called marriage, will feel like acceptance?

Kiwi in IE · 14-05-2015 01:46PM

StewartGriffin wrote: »

I wasn't referring to you, hence why I quoted another post, see it above my comment.You'll get the hang of this place yet.

The sequence of posts was as follows;

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I was talking about it with my 6 year old and he looked confused as well and replied "but that's really silly" (gay people being unable to marry).

StewartGriffin wrote: »

Mentioned it to my four year old. He didn't know what the hell I was talking about.

Peist2007 wrote: »

Course he didnt. Sure his parents are terrified of gay people.

Cue "i know loads of gay people" retort.

StewartGriffin wrote: »

No, he's actually severely disabled.

How dare you make a personal attack on my child!!

You will get the hang of this place yet.....

Roger_007 · 14-05-2015 01:46PM

PopePalpatine wrote: »

The problem is that an Act of the Oireachtas can be repealed/replaced by another one, without a referendum. If, gods forbid, marriage equality was passed by an Act of the Oireachtas (or at least civil partnerships were made truly equal to marriage in all but name), if there's a sizeable contingent of TDs elected to the next Dáil who oppose marriage equality and have wet dreams about 1940s Ireland (*COUGH* Ronan Mullen *COUGH*) and they're needed to form a majority coalition, they could make the repeal of marriage equality/"separate but equal" civil partnerships a red line issue for forming a government.

And of course, they'd probably want another referendum to overturn the X Case.

Most countries deal with this issue by way of legislation. If Irish people elect a bunch of backwoods men and women, then they deserve everything they get.

frostyjacks · 14-05-2015 01:47PM

galljga1 wrote: »

The award for ridiculous post of the day.....or maybe it's too early to close nominations on this thread.

How do you feel about children growing up fatherless?

K4t · 14-05-2015 01:47PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

Would it not be better in this instance not to vote?

You could apply that logic to all No voters and their many illogical arguments for voting No.

osarusan · 14-05-2015 01:47PM

Tenz wrote: »

So is it fair to say that it's about feeling accepted by society? And nothing other than it being called marriage, will feel like acceptance?

It's fair to say it's about equality. And nothing other than it being given equal constitutional status and protection to current marriages, will feel like equality.

Tenz · 14-05-2015 01:49PM

endacl wrote: »

Yes I would. A club that excludes is still an exclusive club. Fair enough in golf (if a bit sad), but unacceptable in society.

I'd be in favour of extending the option of civil partnership to straight couples, btw.

All in favour of them dropping the price anyway! They can call it whatever they like. But 200 quid to get my tax affairs sorted out....I call it robbery, not marriage

endacl · 14-05-2015 01:49PM

Tenz wrote: »

So is it fair to say that it's about feeling accepted by society? And nothing other than it being called marriage, will feel like acceptance?

I'm a straight white male. I've no problems in that regard!

I'd just like to see a level playing field for all, in as many areas as possible, insofar as that is possible where consensus allows. We've come a long way.

kunst nugget · 14-05-2015 01:50PM

Tenz wrote: »

So is it fair to say that it's about feeling accepted by society? And nothing other than it being called marriage, will feel like acceptance?

'Okay, guys. We've come up with this civil partnership which is the exact same as marriage! What? Are we calling it marriage? Ah, no… we couldn't be doing that. Why? Ah, em... it's because you're gay and we're only going to let straight people use that term. Why? Because we only want straight people to be able to say their married. Why? Because gay people saying they're married has a bit of a weird ring to it. But don't worry! Your civil partnership will just be as special! We're just nixing the whole marriage thing but thumbs up and yay for the gays and all that!'

endacl · 14-05-2015 01:51PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

How do you feel about children growing up fatherless?

You're a the bottom of a hole that was dug in record time. Time to stop digging?

kunst nugget · 14-05-2015 01:54PM

K4t wrote: »

You could apply that logic to all No voters and their many illogical arguments for voting No.

Tbf, he doesn't seem to have any ideological problem with gay marriage, from what I can gather, but with the actual institute of marriage and its enshrinement in the Constitution. His vote is not going to affect marriage as a whole but just a section of society who would want to get married.

mickstupp · 14-05-2015 01:54PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

How do you feel about children growing up fatherless?

For some of my friends that would've been heaven on earth. For others, they may as well not have had one for all they saw him and for all he bothered to pay attention. Can't take it for granted that the existence of a father, or mother, is automatically an intrinsically good thing.

Kiwi in IE · 14-05-2015 01:55PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

How do you feel about children growing up fatherless?

I grew up in a single (straight) parent household. Did that have something to do with gay people?

Merry Prankster · 14-05-2015 01:55PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

It's too depressing to think of children growing up without a father.

I grew up without a father and I turned out ok. I used to live near kids who were savagely beaten by their drunken father regularly. That's the kind of thing that should depress you.

Boom_Bap · 14-05-2015 01:55PM

MOD NOTE

Cut out the nonsense on this thread please. Discussing how to use boards is not the subject of this thread. Discussing other posters family members is not cool.

floggg · 14-05-2015 01:56PM

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.

While that might be your experience, I still want the same opportunity to do so as you had.

Marriage means something to me. Something very important.

When I was younger, right up to me mid-20's, I fought desperately against the idea of being gay. I didn't want it.

I wanted to have a normal life - to marry, to be able to have my relationship accepted, recognised, valued. To be accepted as the same as everybody else.

And I wanted to be able to find somebody special, to commit to them, to spend my life with them, to be theirs, and they to be mine.

Unfortunately, the only way to do that was to be married.

Even when Civil Partnership came in, it granted me the ability to commit - but not the ability to be accepted as equal. To be seen as the same. As long as I was gay, I would also be different. On the margins. Accepted - but always with an asterisks.

I have found the person I want to spend my life with now, and he has brought a lot of happiness into my life. One way or another I want to stand in front of my family and friends and commit my life to him.

But when I do, I would like it to be without the asterisks. I would like to be able to stand there and have our relationship, our commitment and our value accepted as the same as any heterosexual couple. I would like to be able to introduce him without having to explain what our relationship is as a matter of law.For it to be understood and accepted by everybody as equal to their own, rather than be something that merely resembles it.

So even if you don't want to re-marry, please give me the opportunity to do so if I wish.

Tenz · 14-05-2015 01:56PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

'Okay, guys. We've come up with this civil partnership which is the exact same as marriage! What? Are we calling it marriage? Ah, no… we couldn't be doing that. Why? Ah, em... it's because you're gay and we're only going to let straight people use that term. Why? Because we only want straight people to be able to say their married. Why? Because gay people saying they're married has a bit of weird ring to it. But don't worry! Your civil partnership will just be as special! We're just nixing the whole marriage thing but thumbs up and yay for the gays and all that!'

No need for the sarcasm!

Just trying to understand how a word can mean so much.

But I think I get it. Unless society says yes, we'll call your relationship 'marriage', then homosexuals will feel rejected/dismissed/hurt.

It can be hard to understand for straight people like myself maybe, as I couldnt give a rats ass if they call my relationship civil partnership, marriage, or living in sin. Just as long as they get my tax credits sorted....

SireOfSeth · 14-05-2015 01:57PM

Tenz wrote: »

Probably been asked on here already, but would really appreciate someone answering this.

If all the legislative differences between civil partnership and marriage were ammended (i.e. making 'marriage' and 'civil partnership' different only in their gender makeup, but equal in all other respects), would you still campaign for another referendum to introduce SSM. If yes, why?

You could sum it up along the lines...
"Sit down at the back Rosa, sure aren't you lucky you were let on the bus at all?"

kunst nugget · 14-05-2015 01:58PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

How do you feel about children growing up fatherless?

I thought the problem was that we were getting rid of the mothers. Ah, I can't keep up…

Merry Prankster · 14-05-2015 01:58PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

How do you feel about children growing up fatherless?

I'd prefer kids growing up with just a mother who was a kind, loving, nurturing person, than with a mother and father who were absolute bastards. Like most sane people, I recognise that the character of the parent(s) is the most important thing.

frostyjacks · 14-05-2015 01:59PM

Our prisons are full of people from well balanced families, aren't they?

Montgolfier · 14-05-2015 02:01PM

Maybe marriage doesn't have to be just between 2 people. With suragacy a popular option for the future, plus the costs entailed in having a 2 parent family it would make more sense to have a wider base 3 parent family unit.

By changing yes to change you will marginalise others in society. It's not just all about gay people.
If we are going to change the constitution let's include all, until then I vote no.

floggg · 14-05-2015 02:01PM

StewartGriffin wrote: »

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.

Ah, thanks for putting things into perspective. Sure, we are not fully accepted fully by our country, but sure there's place where we would be accepted less.

How dare we expect to be seen as equal so. We should probably thank Iona for only wanting to deny us marriage. Sure they could be throwing us off a building like them ISIS chaps. When you think about, Iona really are swell that they only dislike us a little bit.

Yea, **** right off.

endacl · 14-05-2015 02:02PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

Our prisons are full of people from well balanced families, aren't they?

Are you using some kind of random post generator? Or getting confused between two entirely different threads that you're posting on?

Either way, you're kind of hard to follow.

AtomicHorror · 14-05-2015 02:03PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

Our prisons are full of people from well balanced families, aren't they?

Nice.

Are they full of people from gay families? If not, this is a dead end implication.

Bannasidhe · 14-05-2015 02:03PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

Our prisons are full of people from well balanced families, aren't they?

Welll... if having a mammy and a daddy is the 'norm' and how the vast majority grew up then logically the majority of the prison population....

Merry Prankster · 14-05-2015 02:03PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

Our prisons are full of people from well balanced families, aren't they?

I think you'll find that the demographic of the prison population is primarily determined by economic factors.

A question: If you had to give up your kids for adoption and you had to choose from the following parents, who would you choose?

2. An extremely wealthy, well educated heterosexual couple who were cold-hearted bastards.

1. A gay couple of less than average means and education who were kind, loving people.

kunst nugget · 14-05-2015 02:05PM

Tenz wrote: »

No need for the sarcasm!

Just trying to understand how a word can mean so much.

But I think I get it. Unless society says yes, we'll call your relationship 'marriage', then homosexuals will feel rejected/dismissed/hurt.

It can be hard to understand for straight people like myself maybe, as I couldnt give a rats ass if they call my relationship civil partnership, marriage, or living in sin. Just as long as they get my tax credits sorted....

The point really wasn't about being sarcastic but to show how specious that argument is - same but different is still different. You might not care what they call your relationship but then you're not being shut out of a form of relationship which is available to the vast majority of your peers. Rights and privileges probably mean a lot more when you don't have them.

floggg · 14-05-2015 02:05PM

Roger_007 wrote: »

If the referendum is passed, as seems likely, then everyone WILL have that choice. But just remember that marriage is a lot easier to get into than to get out of. I know that virtually nobody gets married with intention of getting a divorce later on. But the reality is that many marriages break down and the constitution makes it very difficult to resolve the situation.

My view is that there should be no reference to marriage in the constitution at all; it should be a matter for legislation by the Oireactas.

That is why I will be voting NO.

But a no vote won't achieve that in the slightest. it will just ensure that some of us are less entitled than you.

So your position makes no sense at all, and achieves nothing other than to cause hurt and harm. You won't better anybody's position but you will prejudice.

So can I ask you whether you have actually really thought through that position, and whether you are happy with the collateral damage you do to gay people and with no obvious benefit in doing so.

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

Comments