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

1969799101102327

Comments

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


    upinthesky wrote: »
    I still don't know how i am going to vote yet, i was yes but tilting towards no because i feel the government have not giving out enough information as to what exactly will be changed, and also as i said already this should not be number 1 priority but why is it?

    A lot of the changes have already been made via the Children and Family Relationship Act but I would say that currently the narrow definition of family is outdated.

    Personally I'd like to see the protection of marriage clause removed completely - it wasn't in the 1922 Constitution - but I am enough of a realist to know that is unlike to pass in a referendum.

    While there are other issues that urgently need to be addressed - unmarried parents having equal status as parents for example and the repeal of the Guardianship of Children Act 1964 - most of these things are legislative not Constitutional.

    Extending who can enter into a contract of Marriage is, according to government legal advisors, a Constitutional matter and so we need to have a referendum on it. That is the issue currently before us but no one is saying it is the only issue. I am sure we will see more referendums in the near future following on from the recommendations of the Constitution Convention.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    upinthesky wrote: »
    And where is the rest that needs to be changed if this is added? see, your just like the government, i didn't ask for what we are voting for, i want to know what needs to be changed as a result of this sentence added!

    Apologies. I'll list the required changes:


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


    endacl wrote: »
    I'm not reading that. IIRC, it was you that linked the 'sootikin' article ages ago. You're not to be trusted.

    :p

    ah yes - Sootikins... :D

    I'm summerise for you:

    McQuaid 'tampons are bad m'kay because gals will be ruined'.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    You appear to be suggesting that we should use statistics as some kind of foolproof evidence, yet in the exact same part of the post you've stated that if the statistics supported the ideal man-woman scenario that even one exception to it would make it discriminatory and therefore inadmissible.

    No, there's no contradiction here. The statistics are being presented to refute the repeated claim being made that a generalised difference exists. That's a purely scientific argument. To use the statistics to judge a specific person or couple- positively or negatively AND on the basis of a trait not demonstrably causal- is discriminatory. Similarly when it comes to legislation. That's a moral/ethical argument and not a scientific one.
    I'm tired of all this nonsense tbh, come back when you grow a brain.

    Can't. I would have nowhere to store it. Know anyone with a vacant skull?


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


    upinthesky wrote: »
    I still don't know how i am going to vote yet, i was yes but tilting towards no because i feel the government have not giving out enough information as to what exactly will be changed
    What kind of things?

    I think they've been fairly specific the benefits it will have for same sex couples, and specific about the (lack of) relevance of things like adoption and surrogacy. Is there something else?
    upinthesky wrote: »
    and also as i said already this should not be number 1 priority but why is it?
    That is hardly a reason to vote no, though, is it?


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


    Apologies. I'll list the required changes:

    While this might seem like a glib answer, it's actually true.

    The only thing that is required is an update of our marriage laws to reflect the new reality - which is already planned and will hopefully be ready for rollout once it passes. See the heads of the relevant legislation here:http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/General%20Scheme%20of%20the%20Marriage%20Bill%202015.pdf/Files/General%20Scheme%20of%20the%20Marriage%20Bill%202015.pdf

    A Yes vote will have no other impact other than to enable me to marry the man I love. How can that be a bad thing?

    Will it solve all the problems in our laws on family and relationships? No.

    But it will solve one of them, and these things can only be solved one at a time.

    So a no vote does not achieve anything at all. It won't bring any benefit to anybody, but it will do harm by continuing to deny myself and others like me the same rights the rest of the country takes for granted.

    So I ask you to please please please vote yes.

    And once we tackle this, we can move on to the next issue and keep trying to make this a better country for all of us. :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,414 ✭✭✭upinthesky


    Apologies. I'll list the required changes:

    It's answers like this that worry me....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,887 ✭✭✭traprunner


    upinthesky wrote: »
    It's answers like this that worry me....

    I'd certainly trust The Referendum Commission on this. They are the legal experts and are neutral.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,435 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    Can't. I would have nowhere to store it. Know anyone with a vacant skull?

    It occurs to me that a paleoperson might also be referred to as a caveman?

    I'm rambling again. Don't mind me...


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


    traprunner wrote: »
    I'd certainly trust The Referendum Commission on this. They are the legal experts and are neutral.
    Indeed. It is (or should be) notable that one thing the No side do not do is encourage people to find out more from places like the referendum commission (or look for any extra information from anywhere, really).


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 340 ✭✭SireOfSeth


    floggg wrote: »
    While this might seem like a glib answer, it's actually true.

    The only thing that is required is an update of our marriage laws to reflect the new reality - which is already planned and will hopefully be ready for rollout once it passes. See the heads of the relevant legislation here:http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/General%20Scheme%20of%20the%20Marriage%20Bill%202015.pdf/Files/General%20Scheme%20of%20the%20Marriage%20Bill%202015.pdf

    A Yes vote will have no other impact other than to enable me to marry the man I love. How can that be a bad thing?

    Will it solve all the problems in our laws on family and relationships? No.

    But it will solve one of them, and these things can only be solved one at a time.

    So a no vote does not achieve anything at all. It won't bring any benefit to anybody, but it will do harm by continuing to deny myself and others like me the same rights the rest of the country takes for granted.

    So I ask you to please please please vote yes.

    And once we tackle this, we can move on to the next issue and keep trying to make this a better country for all of us. :)

    I hope for a day when you can marry the man you love. I the exact same way that the majority of us (heterosexuals) have enjoyed for so long.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,088 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    osarusan wrote: »
    Indeed. It is (or should be) notable that one thing the No side do not do is encourage people to find our more from places like the referendum commission (or look for any extra information from anywhere, really).

    Yet when questioned they constantly refute anything the refcom say like justice cross's comments from yesterday which they basically dismissed


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    osarusan wrote: »
    Indeed. It is (or should be) notable that one thing the No side do not do is encourage people to find out more from places like the referendum commission (or look for any extra information from anywhere, really).

    I suspect what they'd like to do is claim the Commission are biased. But that won't play well now, and they'd be unable to substantiate it later. The Commission are legally answerable to any such claim, so the likes of Iona would have to either push it and fail or drop it and look bad.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,346 ✭✭✭✭homerjay2005


    floggg wrote: »
    It may have colloquially been called a wedding, because anybody entering a CP doesn't see any difference between their commitment and a straight couple's. But it is not a marriage in the eyes of the state - and not given the same constitutional protection (which means the state can and must treat a CP less favourably than marriage).

    You might say "because we want equality" isn't a substantive reason, but it really is.

    Imagine your are in the position that gay people are in now - that as a matter of law your relationship is classified differently from everybody else's. You are told you can make a commitment to your gf/bf, but that as a matter of law you cannot call it the same or equal to other people's. The state has determined your relationship should be treated as differently and labelled as such.

    And that no valid reason is offered for doing, but you must just accept your different status and the knowledge that you own country sees your relationships as less equal or worthy than your brother's or sisters.

    Wouldn't that make you feel hurt? Angry? Offended?

    It certainly makes me feel that way.

    I am engaged, and plan to stand before my friends and family and commit to my bf for life. But if the referendum fails, I won't have the right to make the same commitment as they can. I'll have to accept the separate, lesser form of commitment that the state has decided is all I should be allowed.

    It will really hurt me standing there knowing I am not considered worthy of the real deal, particualrly I will been at the marriage of those same friends and family - who's entitlement to full marriage was entirely without question. I will have to stand before them knowing that my commitment is seen as different and lesser than their.

    So while you might not feel that equality offers any substantive benefit, try putting yourself in my shoes and you will see that inequality hurts a lot - particularly when there is zero credible reason offered for maintaining it.

    So again, I please ask you to vote Yes.

    thanks very much...first time ive seen somebody actually give a more detailed version as opposed to just saying "because we want it".

    i wish you the best of luck and that for you, the referendum gives you the right result!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    upinthesky wrote: »
    It's answers like this that worry me....

    It's answers like "Let's desperately search for reasons to vote no, regardless of how tenuous or nonsensical they may be, despite all the experts telling us that there are none" that worry me.


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


    thanks very much...first time ive seen somebody actually give a more detailed version as opposed to just saying "because we want it".

    The No side would infer these differences didn't exist. The problem on the Yes side is you can't easily sum that up on a poster whilst also combating all their other assertions.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 54,778 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    floggg wrote: »
    It may have colloquially been called a wedding, because anybody entering a CP doesn't see any difference between their commitment and a straight couple's. But it is not a marriage in the eyes of the state - and not given the same constitutional protection (which means the state can and must treat a CP less favourably than marriage).

    You might say "because we want equality" isn't a substantive reason, but it really is.

    Imagine your are in the position that gay people are in now - that as a matter of law your relationship is classified differently from everybody else's. You are told you can make a commitment to your gf/bf, but that as a matter of law you cannot call it the same or equal to other people's. The state has determined your relationship should be treated as differently and labelled as such.

    And that no valid reason is offered for doing, but you must just accept your different status and the knowledge that you own country sees your relationships as less equal or worthy than your brother's or sisters.

    Wouldn't that make you feel hurt? Angry? Offended?

    It certainly makes me feel that way.





    I am engaged, and plan to stand before my friends and family and commit to my bf for life. But if the referendum fails, I won't have the right to make the same commitment as they can. I'll have to accept the separate, lesser form of commitment that the state has decided is all I should be allowed.

    It will really hurt me standing there knowing I am not considered worthy of the real deal, particualrly I will been at the marriage of those same friends and family - who's entitlement to full marriage was entirely without question. I will have to stand before them knowing that my commitment is seen as different and lesser than their.

    So while you might not feel that equality offers any substantive benefit, try putting yourself in my shoes and you will see that inequality hurts a lot - particularly when there is zero credible reason offered for maintaining it.

    So again, I please ask you to vote Yes.

    Very good post Flogg and made without insulting anyone elses opinons, the way it should be done.
    Hope it's a big YES for you.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,080 ✭✭✭✭Maximus Alexander


    ixoy wrote: »
    The No side would infer these differences didn't exist. The problem on the Yes side is you can't easily sum that up on a poster whilst also combating all their other assertions.

    The major problem as I see it, is that the more dishonest and misleading you're prepared to be, the easier it is to run a campaign that will manipulate people.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,435 ✭✭✭✭endacl


    The major problem as I see it, is that the more dishonest and misleading you're prepared to be, the easier it is to run a campaign that will manipulate people.

    That's the difference, I suppose, between manipulating people and convincing people.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58 ✭✭jameskil


    floggg wrote: »
    Beautiful and moving. Well done.

    Now go canvass!

    Thank you and i intend to :)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,607 ✭✭✭tigger123


    Anyone know you go about getting involved in the Yes Equality canvassing? I live in Dublin City Centre.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,775 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    It is good that Ursual Halligan got to have her say and at her timing, unlike what she did to Brian Lenihan and his cancer diagnosis.


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


    tigger123 wrote: »
    Anyone know you go about getting involved in the Yes Equality canvassing? I live in Dublin City Centre.

    go to Facebook and type in Yes Equality Dublin. That should give you a list of pages for different areas in Dublin.

    There is one for Dublin central:
    https://www.facebook.com/pages/Yes-Equality-Dublin-Central/1625570837664451?fref=ts

    Go to yesequality.ie and to the canvas page:
    https://www.yesequality.ie/canvass/


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,174 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    Alan Shatter and Dr Tom Finegan debate the issue shortly on RTE Radio 1.

    I've been thinking about some of the comments here about how the "yes side" has been losing out on the polls and at doorsteps, that the public has started turning against a "yes" vote on the issue and have come to the conclusion that it is disinformation posted with the intent to demoralize people on the "vote yes" side.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,816 ✭✭✭ProfessorPlum


    RobertKK wrote: »
    It is good that Ursual Halligan got to have her say and at her timing, unlike what she did to Brian Lenihan and his cancer diagnosis.

    At 'her timing'? I'm thinking she would have come out decades ago if it wasn't for the 'shame', stigma and fear of being marginalised


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


    thanks very much...first time ive seen somebody actually give a more detailed version as opposed to just saying "because we want it".

    i wish you the best of luck and that for you, the referendum gives you the right result!

    I hope that means you'll vote Yes :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,759 ✭✭✭jobbridge4life


    RobertKK wrote: »
    It is good that Ursual Halligan got to have her say and at her timing, unlike what she did to Brian Lenihan and his cancer diagnosis.

    You must eat so many lemons.


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


    tigger123 wrote: »
    Anyone know you go about getting involved in the Yes Equality canvassing? I live in Dublin City Centre.

    https://www.yesequality.ie/

    There's details on how to contact all the local groups there.

    There are a couple of groups you could canvass with depending on where you live.

    I know that the Dublin South Central Group will be flyering at Hueston this evening (more details on their Facebook page). You can just show up and join in.

    Equally, the Dublin Bay South Group are meeting at 7 at Spencer Dock Luas Station. Again, more info on the Facebook page.

    Both groups will be canvassing morning and evening next week.

    There's also a national day of canvassing tomorrow. I think there's a big photo OP on O'Connell St from 10.45.

    For people in other areas and counties, there will be lots of stuff going on over the weekend and next week.

    We need all the help we can get, so please do what you can.

    And also make sure to talk to family and friends and encourage them to canvass.

    Remember, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,775 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    At 'her timing'? I'm thinking she would have come out decades ago if it wasn't for the 'shame', stigma and fear of being marginalised

    Yes her timing, she chose the timing.

    She gave Brian Lenihan no choice.


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


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Yes her timing, she chose the timing.

    She gave Brian Lenihan no choice.

    No relevance whatsoever to anything connected to anything related to anything connected to this referendum. Just a shallow, pointless, bitter dig.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement