Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

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

18990929495327

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 849 ✭✭✭WoolyJumper


    efb wrote: »
    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/confused-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-marriage-referendum-1.2212840?utm_content=sf-man


    Here is the Referendum Commission clarification of the muddied waters


    In relation to comments on Social media on marriage equality we can't control the human emotions being conveyed by those that are hurt by the announcements and spin from the No side-by-side they probably aren't used to as much hostility as us gays that grew up in a less tolerant age.

    It would be nice if Prime Time, Claire Byrne Live or even the 6 news did just an interview with Justice Kevin Cross to clear up the issues around the referendum, rather than having any more debates.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    It would be nice if Prime Time, Claire Byrne Live or even the 6 news did just an interview with Justice Kevin Cross to clear up the issues around the referendum, rather than having any more debates.

    I think that's this evening


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    I think the debates are b*llocks anyway - say what you want RTE won't correct you


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 849 ✭✭✭WoolyJumper


    efb wrote: »
    I think that's this evening

    ohh I didnt hear about it. Of course there is one more debate on Tuesday, so it will be another chance for some scare mogering and muddying the waters.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,895 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    efb wrote: »
    I think that's this evening

    Yeah, just ended with him making things pretty damn clear. Good stuff.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 11,628 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hammer Archer


    osarusan wrote: »
    Yeah, just ended with him making things pretty damn clear. Good stuff.
    Will it be good enough to mean an end to the lies being spouted by Iona/MAFM and the like for the next week? It will in me hole.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Will it be good enough to mean an end to the lies being spouted by Iona/MAFM and the like for the next week? It will in me hole.

    They won't accept the answers


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 369 ✭✭walkingshadow


    Uugh, just saw an advert for YET ANOTHER RTE referendum debate next week.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    If its a religious issue and a person really feels that voting yes in the referendum would compromise their beliefs, abstaining is surely the kindest, most ethical, humane course of action rather, than voting no.

    If LGBT marriage is against your religious beliefs and you believe that something bad will happen, or your god will somehow punish a person for getting gay married, why are you worrying about it when you are not going to get gay married? It's not you who your god will punish. Can you not let it be between the person who wants to get married and your god? Why does it need your intervention?

    So it's against your beliefs? Fine. You are not going to compromise your beliefs by marrying a person of the same gender so you have nothing to worry about. Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but this is not really something that should be asked of the public, it's not fair. Please don't vote if you can't vote yes! This really won't affect you in any way.

    Iona and co may say that they are representing your religion, but do you really think that they are? Because they seem to me to be very cold, heartless, divisive, lacking in empathy, inhumane and unkind.


  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 18,047 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    Oh this guy's a hoot! An article in the Irish Times claims scientific institutions have been taken over by gays for the "gay cause" (excellent job by us gay people given we're a piddling percentage of the population). He compares us to alcoholics and even Godwin's the whole thing by making Nazi links.

    He was a speaker for the Catholic Alliance for the Defence of the Family and Marriage group.
    So that's the sort of people they like to listen to.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    ixoy wrote: »
    Oh this guy's a hoot! An article in the Irish Times claims scientific institutions have been taken over by gays for the "gay cause" (excellent job by us gay people given we're a piddling percentage of the population). He compares us to alcoholics and even Godwin's the whole thing by making Nazi links.

    He was a speaker for the Catholic Alliance for the Defence of the Family and Marriage group.
    So that's the sort of people they like to listen to.

    Don't worry I am sure his ilk will have you all wearing pink stars soon when they take over the asylum (Ireland)!!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,218 ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    ixoy wrote: »
    Oh this guy's a hoot! An article in the Irish Times claims scientific institutions have been taken over by gays for the "gay cause" (excellent job by us gay people given we're a piddling percentage of the population). He compares us to alcoholics and even Godwin's the whole thing by making Nazi links.

    He was a speaker for the Catholic Alliance for the Defence of the Family and Marriage group.
    So that's the sort of people they like to listen to.
    He said wealthy organisations were interested in imposing homosexuality on the world and included the abortion movement, feminism, and freemasonry international

    Well that explains the strange urge I have to roll up one trouser leg every time I put on an apron*



    *butch chef's apron obvs cos gender blah blah


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    LOL talking about Freemasonry when Opus Dei are the driving force behind the No campaign. Talk about hypocrisy of the highest order.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    Maybe you think marriage should be left as it is, nothing got to do with your views on LBGT or any other group that isn't a man and a woman. There's nothing homophobic about a no vote unless you use your vote to vote no just because your homophobic.

    Why should do? If you can't offer any meaningful reason why, then your position is without basis and you are arbitrarily and unfairly denying rights.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    BlitzKrieg wrote: »
    That article made me more angry then all the no posters and campaign leaflets put together...I am genuinely infuriated with the entire tone and attitude of that group's statement the sheer gymnastics of the word 'preferential' just elevated to one of the words I despise in public statement.


    I am livid

    There entire objection is that they won't be allowed to discriminate if this passes.

    And for some reason, not only are we not allowed call this out as homophobic and prejudicial, it's actually being treated as if it's a reasonable position to hold.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    ixoy wrote: »
    Oh this guy's a hoot! An article in the Irish Times claims scientific institutions have been taken over by gays for the "gay cause" (excellent job by us gay people given we're a piddling percentage of the population). He compares us to alcoholics and even Godwin's the whole tHhing by making Nazi links.

    He was a speaker for the Catholic Alliance for the Defence of the Family and Marriage group.
    So that's the sort of people they like to listen to.

    Again, to the no voters who are voting due to religious reasons, is the above and this http://www.ionainstitute.ie/, really how you want your religion to be portrayed in society?

    As an athiest, I am not in a position to speak for your religion, but I thought that Christianity was supposed to be about love, kindness and refraining form judging others. These groups represent the very opposite of those qualities. Please think about that and please think about abstaining. I'm not trying to tell you what to do, and I'm not asking you to compromise your beliefs or change them, but please think about whether these groups who are telling you to vote no are truly representative of what your religion means to you.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭frostyjacks


    Car crash of a debate on Vinb now. Not marref but still good.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,095 ✭✭✭MonkeyTennis


    I think lots of people will no as a 'safety' vote because of the language used in the 'no' campaign.

    It makes me sad.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 140 ✭✭wallywhittle


    Dont usually agree with the iona institute but they are the only ones talking sense in this referendum. The yes side are nothing short of BIGOTS. SOME OF THEIR BEHAVIOUR IS ABSOLUTELY ROTTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



    RANT OVER


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    I can fully see your point of view and the world isn’t fair for most people. Many laws could be changed to make the world/country fairer and fair play for doing your part to improve your situation.

    You can feel/do whatever you want, my point is that the Yes side coming across as snide, angry, or self-righteous isn’t going to change any No or undecided’s minds. I’m expecting the election to be an easy win for the Yes side but what I’ve seen creeping the social media campaign over the last week isn’t helping the cause. Saying the No side made you angry isn’t an excuse that a lot of people who are in the category you want to vote the Yes way will accept.

    You know that's a really dismissive response to what was a pretty honest and genuine post.

    No, the world isn't fair but for you to ignore the insulting and hurtful statements by the No side and then criticise us for how we react when wounded is really just adding to the unfairness of it all.

    So you can say that the behaviour of the Yes is turning you against our cause, but when you only choose to scrutinise the behaviour of one side of the debate (and ignore the context), it becomes rather difficult for them to come out of it looking good.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,063 ✭✭✭Kiwi in IE


    Dont usually agree with the iona institute but they are the only ones talking sense in this referendum. The yes side are nothing short of BIGOTS. SOME OF THEIR BEHAVIOUR IS ABSOLUTELY ROTTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



    RANT OVER

    The Iona institute are lying, manipulating and misleading the public. I don't think those are supposed to be Christian qualities, which they also claim to represent!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,169 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Dont usually agree with the iona institute but they are the only ones talking sense in this referendum. The yes side are nothing short of BIGOTS. SOME OF THEIR BEHAVIOUR IS ABSOLUTELY ROTTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



    RANT OVER

    David Quinn, is that you?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 140 ✭✭wallywhittle


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    The Iona institute are lying, manipulating and misleading the public. I don't think those are supposed to be Christian qualities, which they also claim to represent!

    EXPLAIN


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,516 ✭✭✭paleoperson


    floggg wrote: »
    There entire objection is that they won't be allowed to discriminate if this passes.

    And for some reason, not only are we not allowed call this out as homophobic and prejudicial, it's actually being treated as if it's a reasonable position to hold.

    That's because you're stupidly conflating discrimination between people for judgement and decision-based purposes (eg. who would be better suited to take care of adopted children all else being equal) and discriminating against them for civil and human right purposes.

    When "discrimination" is used as a general term, people don't mean on things like that. They don't mean for example that we shouldn't be able to distinguish between against a convicted murderer and a person with an impeccable record. inb4 "omg you're comparing gay people to convicted murderers".


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    efb wrote: »
    I think the debates are b*llocks anyway - say what you want RTE won't correct you

    I'm kind of hoping they were waiting until they had their own interview with the Ref Com and their panel of experts before they would actually accept the Ref Com's findings.

    Pathetic, but at least it would mean they wouldn't continue to let them get away with such blatant lies.

    Here's hoping.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,284 ✭✭✭StewartGriffin


    Kiwi in IE wrote: »
    Again, to the no voters who are voting due to religious reasons, is the above and this http://www.ionainstitute.ie/, really how you want your religion to be portrayed in society?

    As an athiest, I am not in a position to speak for your religion, but I thought that Christianity was supposed to be about love, kindness and refraining form judging others. These groups represent the very opposite of those qualities. Please think about that and please think about abstaining. I'm not trying to tell you what to do, and I'm not asking you to compromise your beliefs or change them, but please think about whether these groups who are telling you to vote no are truly representative of what your religion means to you.


    That's a tricky one, Kiwi. You see, if they genuinely in their hearts believe gay marriage is a bad thing, then to abstain is the wrong thing to do.

    The much used quote often attributed, (possibly wrongly,) to Edmund Burke is relevant here: "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing."

    If you honestly believe it is an evil thing, then it is your moral and correct duty to vote no.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 781 ✭✭✭Not a NSA agent


    That's because you're stupidly conflating discrimination between people for judgement and decision-based purposes (eg. who would be better suited to take care of adopted children all else being equal) and discriminating against them for civil and human right purposes.

    When "discrimination" is used as a general term, people don't mean on things like that. They don't mean for example that we shouldn't be able to distinguish between against a convicted murderer and a person with an impeccable record. inb4 "omg you're comparing gay people to convicted murderers".

    So you agree its discrimination then?

    Given that the only thing to suggest that homosexual parents are damaging to children is peoples prejudice.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,516 ✭✭✭paleoperson


    Yes I believe a man and a woman are better suited than two men or two women. It's not in any way prejudice as I understand the term.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,027 ✭✭✭sunshine and showers


    Yes I believe a man and a woman are better suited than two men or two women. It's not in any way prejudice as I understand the term.

    This would be super fascinating if it had anything to do with the civil marriage referendum we're discussing.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,821 ✭✭✭floggg


    Dont usually agree with the iona institute but they are the only ones talking sense in this referendum. The yes side are nothing short of BIGOTS. SOME OF THEIR BEHAVIOUR IS ABSOLUTELY ROTTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



    RANT OVER

    Good story brah.
    Yes, but not really


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement