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

jobbridge4life · 15-05-2015 01:23PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes her timing, she chose the timing.

She gave Brian Lenihan no choice.

Devious lesbian! It all makes sense now doesn't Robert? Hounding that poor straight man!

floggg · 15-05-2015 01:24PM

aloyisious wrote: »

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 they are disinformation, and lies

That should be interesting.

Shatter should hopefully be able to dispel any legal myths put forward by the No side. He is an undoubted expert. He wrote the book on Family Law - literally!

RobertKK · 15-05-2015 01:25PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

You must eat so many lemons.

Nothing to do with lemons, just haven't liked her since she gave Brian Lenihan no choice when she broke his pancreatic cancer story, given we know pancreatic cancer is up there among the very worst cancers to get, and it was her basically announcing Brian Lenihan was dying.
Now she is looking for compassion, when she had none herself.
I just think it is hypocrisy.

jobbridge4life · 15-05-2015 01:25PM

floggg wrote: »

That should be interesting.

Shatter should hopefully be able to dispel any legal myths put forward by the No side. He is an undoubted expert. He wrote the book on Family Law - literally!

He also tends to come across as aloof and condescending at he best of times.

aloyisious · 15-05-2015 01:25PM

tigger123 wrote: »

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

There's a National Canvass Day event - 11AM - at the GPO< Dublin. You might like the link below...

http://www.yesequality.ie/canvass.

ProfessorPlum · 15-05-2015 01:28PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Yes her timing, she chose the timing.

She gave Brian Lenihan no choice.

But she didn't really. She would like to have been able to come out years ago. While the issue wrt Brian Lenihan is absolutely nothing to do with the current debate and very much off topic (distraction tactic perhaps), and weather you agree with it or not, there is an argument to be made that a serious health issue affecting the finance minister at a time of unprecedented financial crisis is a matter of public interest. I'm sure she thought long and hard before she broke the story.

Hyzepher · 15-05-2015 01:33PM

Not sure Alan Shatter did a good job there.

Same old misdirection from the No side but Alan needed to be more aggressive.

gandalf · 15-05-2015 01:35PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Nothing to do with lemons, just haven't liked her since she gave Brian Lenihan no choice when she broke his pancreatic cancer story, given we know pancreatic cancer is up there among the very worst cancers to get, and it was her basically announcing Brian Lenihan was dying.
Now she is looking for compassion, when she had none herself.
I just think it is hypocrisy.

She broke a story of National importance. If Lenihan was an ordinary citizen I would understand where you are coming from. However he was one of the most powerful politicians in the country during an economic crisis. If you want to be angry you should direct that anger at the other members of the government at that time who left a terminally ill man in a position of great stress unnecessarily. It makes you wonder whether decisions would have been different with a Finance Minister who wasn't terminally afflicted like Lenihan was.

Ursula Halligan did her job, she broke a story of national significance at a time of crisis in this country.

Bannasidhe · 15-05-2015 01:43PM

Hyzepher wrote: »

Not sure Alan Shatter did a good job there.

Same old misdirection from the No side but Alan needed to be more aggressive.

Is there some law that states the impartial moderator is not allowed to say 'can you please answer the question you were asked?'

RobertKK · 15-05-2015 01:46PM

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

But she didn't really. She would like to have been able to come out years ago. While the issue wrt Brian Lenihan is absolutely nothing to do with the current debate and very much off topic (distraction tactic perhaps), and weather you agree with it or not, there is an argument to be made that a serious health issue affecting the finance minister at a time of unprecedented financial crisis is a matter of public interest. I'm sure she thought long and hard before she broke the story.

It was her choice to not be open about her sexuality, before now. There is a relevance to her and how she gave a man with cancer no choice when she outed his illness.
She had a big story and she announced it at Christmas time on the 26th December.
Here is the Indpendent story the following day about the compassionate Ursula Halligan...

A senior government source said: "TV3 was a total disgrace, at one stage speaking of the minister in the past tense. That was the most disgraceful broadcast I have ever heard."

The station's political editor Ursula Halligan reported: "It's shocking news for members of the public. Brian Lenihan was... eh, is regarded as one of the more popular members of the Government."

A spokesman for the Department of Finance last night felt obliged to issue a statement on the health of Mr Lenihan as a result of mounting speculation throughout the day that he is seriously ill.

Several of Mr Lenihan's Cabinet colleagues did not want to publicly comment on the manner in which TV3 News handled the report because, they said, the Finance Minister had not yet publicly confirmed the nature of his illness, reported by TV3 to be pancreatic cancer.

Andrew Hanlon, TV3 Director of News, last night defended the broadcast.

"We held it for two days to enable him to inform his family," he said.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/public-anger-at-tv3-intrusion-into-lenihans-serious-illness-26594581.html

So Ursula Halligan today using the media looking for compassion about her own situation, but gave Brian Lenihan two days to tell his family over Christmas Eve and Christmas day.
The problem I have is the hypocrisy from Ursula.

Not adding anymore on this, I have said what I wanted to.

tigger123 · 15-05-2015 01:48PM

RobertKK wrote: »

It was her choice to not be open about her sexuality, before now. There is a relevance to her and how she gave a man with cancer no choice when she outed his illness.
She had a big story and she announced it at Christmas time on the 26th December.
Here is the Indpendent story the following day about the compassionate Ursual Halligan...

So Ursula Halligan today using the media looking for compassion about her own situation, but gave Brian Lenihan two days to tell his family over Christmas Eve and Christmas day.
The problem I have is the hypocrisy from Ursula.

Not adding anymore on this, I have said what I wanted to.

She's telling her personal story, and how the referendum has helped her in her personal life.

Did you read the article?

Bannasidhe · 15-05-2015 01:49PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Not adding anymore on this, I have said what I wanted to.

Several times.

ProfessorPlum · 15-05-2015 01:53PM

RobertKK wrote: »

It was her choice to not be open about her sexuality, before now. There is a relevance to her and how she gave a man with cancer no choice when she outed his illness.
She had a big story and she announced it at Christmas time on the 26th December.
Here is the Indpendent story the following day about the compassionate Ursula Halligan...

So Ursula Halligan today using the media looking for compassion about her own situation, but gave Brian Lenihan two days to tell his family over Christmas Eve and Christmas day.
The problem I have is the hypocrisy from Ursula.

Not adding anymore on this, I have said what I wanted to.

You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm sure there are people who agree with you and found the breaking if the story distasteful, but you surely must see the difference here. It was very much in the public interest, and tbh, many news outlets would have broken the story on Christmas Eve. That's all.

SafeSurfer · 15-05-2015 01:54PM

I am an undecided voter. I abhor discrimination but I believe this issue has been cynically prioritised. Why has Atlantic Philanttophies, an organisation controlled by an American billionaire funded the yes campaign to the tune on over €4 million and lobbied to move the issue to the top of the political agenda?

MrWalsh · 15-05-2015 01:56PM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I am an undecided voter. I abhor discrimination but I believe this issue has been cynically prioritised. Why has Atlantic Philanttophies, an organisation controlled by an American billionaire funded the yes campaign to the tune on over €4 million and lobbied to move the issue to the top of the political agenda?

Linky?

jobbridge4life · 15-05-2015 01:57PM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I am an undecided voter. I abhor discrimination but I believe this issue has been cynically prioritised. Why has Atlantic Philanttophies, an organisation controlled by an American billionaire funded the yes campaign to the tune on over €4 million and lobbied to move the issue to the top of the political agenda?

So the gays can take over irish society have it primed for the coming invasion of by Chuck Feeny and all his evil do-goodery.

BTW Atlantic Philanthropies has funded half of everything in this country including building UL so chill out on the conspiracy theories.

Furthermore you know where the yes campaign got its money, but IONA and co won't tell you were they got theirs. You worried about that?

ixoy · 15-05-2015 01:57PM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I am an undecided voter. I abhor discrimination but I believe this issue has been cynically prioritised. Why has Atlantic Philanttophies, an organisation controlled by an American billionaire funded the yes campaign to the tune on over €4 million and lobbied to move the issue to the top of the political agenda?

Priority is a question for another time : the question now is about same sex marriage.

As to funding, it doesn't change the nature of what's being asked and shouldn't alter your answer. I would be equally interested in the No funding for example but that's not important right now.

If you hate discrimination then it should be a yes from you and have the politics examined another time.

SafeSurfer · 15-05-2015 01:57PM

MrWalsh wrote: »

Linky?

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/breda-o-brien-asking-questions-about-funding-for-referendum-campaign-1.2205469

Maximus Alexander · 15-05-2015 01:58PM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I am an undecided voter. I abhor discrimination but I believe this issue has been cynically prioritised. Why has Atlantic Philanttophies, an organisation controlled by an American billionaire funded the yes campaign to the tune on over €4 million and lobbied to move the issue to the top of the political agenda?

Why do you think that matters? You're being asked what you're being asked. If you have a problem with the reasons it's being asked, surely that's a separate issue?

What I mean is, if you genuinely abhor discrimination, you have an opportunity to do something about it - so do!

Then, separately from that, you can protest the issue you perceive with how the government goes about its business. Not voting for them in the next General Election would be a good start, for example.

sunshine and showers · 15-05-2015 01:58PM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I am an undecided voter. I abhor discrimination but I believe this issue has been cynically prioritised. Why has Atlantic Philanttophies, an organisation controlled by an American billionaire funded the yes campaign to the tune on over €4 million and lobbied to move the issue to the top of the political agenda?

Please explain how civil rights can be cynically prioritised. I'd love to know what we should be doing instead of trying to grant LGBT citizens equality.

traprunner · 15-05-2015 01:58PM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I am an undecided voter. I abhor discrimination but I believe this issue has been cynically prioritised. Why has Atlantic Philanttophies, an organisation controlled by an American billionaire funded the yes campaign to the tune on over €4 million and lobbied to move the issue to the top of the political agenda?

People will always ahve different priorities. Your local TD's would probably be able to explain exactly why they proportioned above your priorities.

RE: Atlantic Philanthropies
Firstly, what is your source? I honestly haven't heard it. EDIT: I saw someone post a link but I can't read it. IT want me to pay

Secondly, if true I dunno....maybe they believe in equality?

RobertKK · 15-05-2015 01:58PM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I am an undecided voter. I abhor discrimination but I believe this issue has been cynically prioritised. Why has Atlantic Philanttophies, an organisation controlled by an American billionaire funded the yes campaign to the tune on over €4 million and lobbied to move the issue to the top of the political agenda?

Atlantic Philanthropies also provide some funding for Tusla, who cut funding towards Accord's marriage courses.
Surely this funding also gives some influence?

SafeSurfer · 15-05-2015 01:59PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

So the gays can take over irish society have it primed for the coming invasion of by Chuck Feeny and all his evil do-goodery.

BTW Atlantic Philanthropies has funded half of everything in this country including building UL so chill out on the conspiracy theories.

Furthermore you know where the yes campaign got its money, but IONA and co won't tell you were they got theirs. You worried about that?

I am concerned when a very wealthy foreign individual sets the Irish political agenda.

osarusan · 15-05-2015 01:59PM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I am an undecided voter. I abhor discrimination but I believe this issue has been cynically prioritised. Why has Atlantic Philanttophies, an organisation controlled by an American billionaire funded the yes campaign to the tune on over €4 million and lobbied to move the issue to the top of the political agenda?

I can understand why this issue has come to the top of the political agenda. Maybe more people think it's important. Maybe there are better lobby groups involved. Maybe they are better funded. I can also understand why people question this - there are other worthy topics to be discussed also.

But - why would that make a difference to your vote? If you aabhor discrimination, this is a chance for you to vote to eliminate discrimination against same sex couples.

What would voting no achieve, except perpetuate the discrimination you abhor.

The referendum is here, and it deals with discrimination. Please vote Yes.

Hyzepher · 15-05-2015 01:59PM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Is there some law that states the impartial moderator is not allowed to say 'can you please answer the question you were asked?'

The whole debate process is fcuked up in Ireland. Broadcasters are afraid to look like they are coming down hard on one side or the other - regardless of what type of sh1t they come out with.

MrWalsh · 15-05-2015 01:59PM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/breda-o-brien-asking-questions-about-funding-for-referendum-campaign-1.2205469

Whats the issue with it? Its a organisation that funds whatever it chooses.

MrWalsh · 15-05-2015 01:59PM

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I am concerned when a very wealthy foreign individual sets the Irish political agenda.

He is Irish American.

RobertKK · 15-05-2015 02:00PM

sunshine and showers wrote: »

Please explain how civil rights can be cynically prioritised. I'd love to know what we should be doing instead of trying to grant LGBT citizens equality.

If it is about equality, why is the legislation in the family section of the constitution and not the equality section?

sunshine and showers · 15-05-2015 02:00PM

That Breda O'Brien article also claims that the Iona Institute has never received American money.

That is a biased information source, undecided voter.

jobbridge4life · 15-05-2015 02:01PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Atlantic Philanthropies also provide some funding for Tusla, who cut funding towards Accord's marriage courses.
Surely this funding also gives some influence?

Accord a 'charitable' organisation offering Catholic marital advice at the cost of 200 euro a pop for the compulsory pre-marriage course. One wonders why they needed money from anyone at all especially as they are part of the one of the richest organisations on the planet.

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

Comments