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

Bannasidhe · 16-05-2015 01:30AM

littlemouse22 wrote: »

I'm sorry to ignore your point but which way are you swaying towards this vote? In your first reply I got a completely different input to now.

Me?

I'm a Yes voter - just trying to explain some of the thinking behind the No Campaign.

Kiwi in IE · 16-05-2015 01:38AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

According to Breda O Brien of the Iona Institute (perhaps someone can supply a link - I refuse to go near the Independent) gay people should be celibate.

In fact, no one should have sex outside marriage and as she (and Iona) also believes gay people should be allowed to get married...
That is also the official position of the RCC - it's the whole love the sinner. Hate the sin mantra.

Gay sex might no longer be illegal but some people consider it a sin - these same people also consider themselves the nation's moral guardians. These same people are the main opponents to Marriage Equality.

She equated it as being the same level of 'sin' as lying. I linked it a few pages back. So when we all go to hell for supporting/preforming homosexual 'sins', Breda, David, Ronan and friends will be there too for the equivelant sin of lying. That's something to look forward to!

Dimithy · 16-05-2015 01:39AM

I apologise if anyone feels bullied by this post.

littlemouse22 · 16-05-2015 01:43AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Me?

I'm a Yes voter - just trying to explain some of the thinking behind the No Campaign.

So you're tring to understand the madness behind the no vote, fair play, because it seems absolutely bizarre to me, despite your points given, which by all means were decent, but still in no way relates to marriage of homosexuals. It is a genuine disgrace that this country is trying to pone this vote towards children/adoption as they know majority of our country will always look to protect a child's right etc.. when in retrospect this vote for homosexual marriage in fact has absolutely nothing to do with adoption, nor will it change a child's well being/protection. This is not a vote towards homosexuals adopting, It's for marriage. I mean it is discriminating to children who have grew up without a father/mother? Who's to say that two fathers/mothers will not be better than a mother and a father, there are single parents, abusive parents, deceased parents which involve a parent raising a child alone. So genuinely f*k the debate on a child deserves a mother and father because it is an absolute disgrace/insult to any single parent/widower and has nothing to do with homosexual marriage.

Bannasidhe · 16-05-2015 01:52AM

littlemouse22 wrote: »

So you're tring to understand the madness behind the no vote, fair play, because it seems absolutely bizarre to me, despite your points given, which by all means were decent, but still in no way relates to marriage of homosexuals. It is a genuine disgrace that this country is trying to pone this vote towards children/adoption as they know majority of our country will always look to protect a child's right etc.. when in retrospect this vote for homosexual marriage in fact has absolutely nothing to do with adoption, nor will it change a child's well being/protection. This is not a vote towards homosexuals adopting, It's for marriage. I mean it is discriminating to children who have grew up without a father/mother? Who's to say that two fathers/mothers will not be better than a mother and a father, there are single parents, abusive parents, deceased parents which involve a parent raising a child alone. So genuinely f*k the debate on a child deserves a mother and father because it is an absolute disgrace/insult to any single parent/widower and has nothing to do with homosexual marriage.

Oh I agree. I think the No side are being completely dishonest making it about children - I reckons it's because they know Vote No cos It's a SIN wouldn't work in Ireland any more, thank God (:p)

But then I am a lesbian mother so I may be biased.

aloyisious · 16-05-2015 01:58AM

littlemouse22 wrote: »

I understand your point, but it is not illegal for homosexual couples to have sex, yes I agree people have beliefs about marriage and heterosexual couples having sex to make babies, but that is not the definition of marriage? I mean people do not marry to have sex and babies. There is no valid reason that homosexuals cannot marry, it has absolutely nothing to do with having sex. It is of anything that I'm aware of to devote yourself forever to that person through love and holy matrimony. My point is that we are voting purposely for heterosexual couples to have the right to marry, not to have sex, not to adopt children, just to marry.

Some of the "vote NO" side claim that marriage in our constitution is solely between a man and a woman (as per our courts ruling on the topic) and that two person unit is the family mentioned in the constitution, as (in their opinion) a family consists of a Mum (woman) and a Dad (man).

That includes the belief that marriage includes a WE MUST PROCREATE factor and as only a two person heterosexual family can procreate and produce a child by themselves without third partner assistance, that is, in their eyes, proof that only heterosexual couples can be the families in the constitution.

Homosexual couples cannot procreate by themselves alone, so clearly (in the opinion of Iona) homosexuals do not have any right or reason to marry.

I take it you meant Homosexual couples, (rather than heterosexual couples) voting purposely --- to have the right to marry.

littlemouse22 · 16-05-2015 02:02AM

Apologies in my post before, I meant our purpose in voting is that Homosexual have the right to marry, got a little excited in that post, keyboard happy, you know how it is

WoolyJumper · 16-05-2015 02:07AM

Has this been posted here yet, pretty funny parody...honestly

Not a NSA agent · 16-05-2015 02:16AM

WoolyJumper wrote: »

Has this been posted here yet, pretty funny parody...honestly

Well it makes as much sense as anything else Ive seen. Gay people have hurricanes, dont redefine tornadoes. Vote NO!

haveringchick · 16-05-2015 07:48AM

thegreatescape wrote: »

How appropriate the words you used are. Unable to express themselves? You mean like gay people getting married? Hiding their opinions away in some sort of closet? Like gay people are made feel until they're comfortable to share their sexuality? Feel sorry for those of us who have felt this turmoil for a lot longer than this referendum speak began, not those apposing equality.

You don't get irony at all do you? It just goes right over your head.
God what is that like?

iDave · 16-05-2015 08:04AM

Yes still on 70% this morning. On mobile so cant link. Read it on Irish Times app. Encouraging as I felt their had been a swing to no in the last few weeks. Is there any Irish precedent for such a strong lead getting turned around in a week?

CiDeRmAn · 16-05-2015 08:55AM

I know people who are voting no and every one of them are dragging unrelated things like surrogacy and children into it, so Iona and their bigoted mates have had some measure of success.
I would also say that each of those people also have issue generally with the notion of equality with homosexuality, the idea that it isn't a market of something wrong in a child and that it is a thing to be endured, a cross to bear for the sufferer.
What they don't get is that this burden of a non majority sexual orientation is entirely down to the continuum of intolerance towards homosexuals, from people who express reservations about their rights to be parents, to those who tell the occasional off colour gay jokes and use derogatory terms to describe them and ask the way to straight or homophobic scum, who spread hate and fear. They are all on a line, not as severe perhaps but all contributing to generating an atmosphere where the gay citizens of this country know they are unwelcome and treated unequally at least, abused and assaulted and worse at the other extreme.
The problem is that this referendum seems to legitimise homosexuality and there are many who oppose it, fearing somehow it will wind up promoting this to vulnerable children and adults resulting in it being taught in schools, kids allowed to read about how to sodomise others, social order breaking down, and so on.
The fringe group of teachers who protested recently would be just this sort of bigot, and they all contribute to making our gay brothers and sisters feel like they are broken and wrong, certainly contributing to the number of teenage suicides over the past decades.

I'll be voting yes, for my family, friends and colleagues, for everyone I know and don't know in my circle who is gay and wants to have the same rights as everyone else, so no one had to hide who they are, so families in the future don't have to fear that their boy or girl will have a tough life because of a sexual orientation they didn't choose.

mylefttesticle · 16-05-2015 08:58AM

Usually i just vote with my own conscience and in this case it was always a yes vote. I usually don't try to argue or try to validate this decision or rally for more votes to the one way i am voting but i am for this referendum and this is due to the disgusting rhetoric that is being put forward as fact by those campaigning for the No vote.

Redefining marriage. I say yes because it needs redefining and its needs to incorporate EVERYONE and it needs total inclusion. Acceptance is something this country has failed at for so long and now is the moment to change that and no longer should anyone have to hide or be ashamed or isolated because of their sexual orientation.

I am not anti church. I have no faith in organised religion but i fully support the right for religious people to have beliefs in what they choose and have the right to practice those beliefs without discrimination. But the church and state should be separate and the church should not have any input into how our country is run or operates or indeed legislated for.

I fully and truly believe all human beings should have the same rights of equality and if this means changing how we do things and if it means changing things to implement this then that is what we must do and we must view this as a healthy and vibrant thing. With understanding comes better changes, with an open mind comes a healthy and happier world.

To change one mind for the better is awesome but to change one countries stoic views so it becomes a open, warm and fully accepting to changing ways and practices is a truly beautiful thing and one that is and should be achieved.

I sat down and went through the ugly nature that is the YES & NO sides arguments and like a lot of people i had several emotions, funny, sad, angry and downright perplexed. So i did what any person should do and i put myself in a situation that would personally affect me and i came up with this: I have a son and if my son was told he could not do what the majority of people are allowed to do because he was somehow deemed lesser because of how he chose to live his life then i would be a very angry parent and i would be a disappointed and an ashamed person of society for letting this ideology remain.

Embrace change and don't fear it, equality should not come in different degrees it should be whole and it should be wholesome.

aloyisious · 16-05-2015 10:13AM

Gunslinger92 wrote: »

The poll on this thread was saying that 76% were intending to vote yes, it's now down to 70%.

I'm seriously considering going out canvassing next week if I can. The thought of it scares the shi1te out of me but I want to do more than just convince my mom to vote yes. (She wasn't going to vote at all though so that's a small victory )

G'wan, g'wan, g'wan, you know you want to do it. Today is national "Canvass For Yes" day. Check the list in the link below and see if you can get to the nearest venue.

@shrap: no, you don't need glasses, t'is brand new. Maybe we could round up people who voted in the old one, all for the sake of balance

Bannasidhe · 16-05-2015 10:38AM

To all those who say they switched to voting No because the Yes 'side' are bullies who illegally took down No posters - now you can come back to the Yes side.

Seems some No campaigners illegally took down a €1,000 Yes banner from Cork's North Main Street and stole it. It was hung between two buildings with the permission of the owners, no complaints were received from local traders but at 7:45 am on Monday three individuals took it upon themselves to interfere with private property and remove the banner. Unfortunately for them they were caught on CCTV and identified.

Following the Yes campaign contacting the thieves, the banner was returned Friday and once it is checked for damage it will be placed back where it has permission to be.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/yes-banner-to-be-restored-after-removal-from-corks-north-main-street-330961.html#.VVcKsNDsBnQ.facebook

Specialun · 16-05-2015 10:51AM

People who say that this is just about equality to a minority, yes the vote is a simple yes or no but that doesnt mean that the outcome wont affect other laws afterwards

VinLieger · 16-05-2015 10:57AM

Specialun wrote: »

People who say that this is just about equality to a minority, yes the vote is a simple yes or no but that doesnt mean that the outcome wont affect other laws afterwards

Can I ask where you got your law degree from? Cus the referendum commission which is a neutral body and all have one say it won't, the law society of ireland who also all have them also say it won't.

So I'd love to know what your qualifications are for disagreeing with this many other VERY qualified and experienced professionals and where you got them

CiDeRmAn · 16-05-2015 11:06AM

I suppose another way to look at the no votes is by remembering the scene from The Life of Brian
"I want the right to have babies"
"But you can't have babies Reg, you haven't got a uterus, where are you going to gestate the foetus, in a bucket?"
Very funny

But in truth this is really about equality, and as wiser minds have pointed out, is there a happily married couple who would trade in their marriage for a civil partnership? No, so why expect a single sex couple to accept it either?
Its not going to change anything for the straight population of the country, except to make non straight orientations that bit less alien and that but more acceptable.
I have an 11 year old son.
I don't know if he's gay or straight but I'd like to imagine, by the time he's 18 it won't matter and he can have a happy and fulfilled life with a loved one of either sex and not feel he is dirty, wrong, sinful or second class.
I'd like to think that, if he and his loved one, for whatever reason, are prohibited from having their own biological children, that they'll face no censure for adopting, fostering or having children by any other method legal in this state. A loving home isn't dependent on your sex genes, a supportive environment is, at this stage, only dependent on you being capable of giving a secure and warm home, be you a father, mother, grandparent, aunt or other person dedicated to the health and well being of a child.
No special interest group should have the right to portray the work of "non traditional" parental arrangements as being unsuitable, not good enough or, worse still, as something grubby and filthy.

Not a NSA agent · 16-05-2015 11:06AM

Specialun wrote: »

People who say that this is just about equality to a minority, yes the vote is a simple yes or no but that doesnt mean that the outcome wont affect other laws afterwards

I await for the day where a person provides examples.

Lots of people must have struggled with leaving cert english. Examples and quotes? pfft, just take what I say as truth.

Specialun · 16-05-2015 11:09AM

VinLieger wrote: »

Can I ask where you got your law degree from? Cus the referendum commission which is a neutral body and all have one say it won't, the law society of ireland who also all have them also say it won't.

So I'd love to know what your qualifications are for disagreeing with this many other VERY qualified and experienced professionals and where you got them

I dont have a law degree, i wasnt quoting any law act. I find it very difficult to believe that a yes wont change any laws here now or else in the short term. Im far from an expert and last time i checked this was a discussion. In other countries it has changed laws and also terms..ie i read that in canada the terms around "parent" changed after

Oh and please dont put words in capital to signify importance...im well able to read without the CAPS thanks

Anita Blow · 16-05-2015 11:09AM

Specialun wrote: »

People who say that this is just about equality to a minority, yes the vote is a simple yes or no but that doesnt mean that the outcome wont affect other laws afterwards

What sort of laws will it affect? Why would affecting them be a bad thing?
No laws will be changed, but any existing laws relating to married couples will now be interpreted as included same-sex married couples too. No really the end of the world

Optimalprimerib · 16-05-2015 11:13AM

So I am voting yes. That is not debatable. But some of the yes campaigners are doing a sterling job at trying to change my mind defacing no posters.

If this is a vote for equality as they are aggressively penning (which it isn't) this action is very hypocritical. People have a right to vote how they choose.

Anita Blow · 16-05-2015 11:13AM

Specialun wrote: »

I dont have a law degree, i wasnt quoting any law act. I find it very difficult to believe that a yes wont change any laws here now or else in the short term. Im far from an expert and last time i checked this was a discussion. In other countries it has changed laws and also terms..ie i read that in canada the terms around "parent" changed after

Oh and please dont put words in capital to signify importance...im well able to read without the CAPS thanks

I had a Google there and I couldn't find anything about SSM legalisation changing the definition of parent in Canada. Do you have a link?

Specialun · 16-05-2015 11:14AM

Anita Blow wrote: »

What sort of laws will it affect? Why would affecting them be a bad thing?
No laws will be changed, but any existing laws relating to married couples will now be interpreted as included same-sex married couples too. No really the end of the world

I didnt say it was or wasnt a bad thing

Bannasidhe · 16-05-2015 11:15AM

Optimalprimerib wrote: »

So I am voting yes. That is not debatable. But some of the yes campaigners are doing a sterling job at trying to change my mind defacing no posters.

If this is a vote for equality as they are aggressively penning (which it isn't) this action is very hypocritical. People have a right to vote how they choose.

And the No side are climbing up the front of buildings and stealing expensive banners - damaging them in the process.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/yes-banner-to-be-restored-after-removal-from-corks-north-main-street-330961.html#.VVcKsNDsBnQ.facebook

RobertKK · 16-05-2015 11:15AM

iDave wrote: »

Yes still on 70% this morning. On mobile so cant link. Read it on Irish Times app. Encouraging as I felt their had been a swing to no in the last few weeks. Is there any Irish precedent for such a strong lead getting turned around in a week?

70% if you exclude don't knows, otherwise the poll says 58% yes.

The children's referendum had polls saying about 80% yes.
The actual poll was 58% yes.

Specialun · 16-05-2015 11:16AM

Anita Blow wrote: »

I had a Google there and I couldn't find anything about SSM legalisation changing the definition of parent in Canada. Do you have a link?

I think it was a radio debate i heard it on. It was relating to the term "natural parent" or something like that... I cant recall the exact term tbh

Bannasidhe · 16-05-2015 11:17AM

Specialun wrote: »

I think it was a radio debate i heard it on. It was relating to the term "natural parent" or something like that... I cant recall the exact term tbh

Do you remember who said it?

Specialun · 16-05-2015 11:18AM

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Do you remember who said it?

I cant sorry

Anita Blow · 16-05-2015 11:18AM

Specialun wrote: »

I think it was a radio debate i heard it on. It was relating to the term "natural parent" or something like that... I cant recall the exact term tbh

I'd watch out for stuff like that tbh. It's very easy for people in debates to make throwaway remarks which are wrong or deliberately lies. A quick google shows SSM legislation in Canada had no impact on parental definition or parental rights.

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

Comments